I’m using (and enjoying) some dual position 120/150mm Revs on an old (2006) Five. I like the way you basically get a good climbing bike at 120mm and a good descending bike are 150mm (two bikes for the price of one).

In my idle moments I quite fancy a Rocket. It should work nicely with the Revs at 150mm, but can you still drop the forks to 120mm and improve climbing, or would that make the (already quite low) bottom bracket too low?

Cheers

Andy

If you want the rocket frame, they will be great at 150, with or without the option of dropping to 120. If you can drop them to 120, and improve the climbing without bashing pedals every stroke, that’s a bonus. If not, bike is as designed at 150. Not ridden one – they do look very desirable – currently on a Titus FTMc and a 456C. I have 140/120/100 Talas, and I’ve only gone to 120 once on the trail!

If it climbs well at 150mm then I guess it’s not an issue, but I find it handy being able to steepen then angles on the Five when the trail points up.

Cheers

Andy

Can’t see an issue personally…I run a Hemlock with 100-120-140 Talas forks (sometimes Lyrik with 115-160 U-Turn) and they probably spend most of the time at 100mm, only run 140 on the downs.

I doubt you’d ever use it, on the demo ride I did i never felt the need for shorter forks, they climb superbly.

Hi
I ran mine with Fox 36 Talas for a while and only dropped to 130 for really steep stuff, rest of the time ran it at 160.
Now swapped to Fox32 150 travel and its spot on all the time.
Cheers
Steve

This is all good news. My rocket arrives today. Hubba hubba. Won’t be able to build it up until next week but I’ll be using 120 / 150 Talas forks.

I’ll report back on the climbing as soon as I’ve done some.

Lex

Thanks. When people say that the Rocket climbs well, does that mean smooth fire roads or loose rocky tracks I wonder and does it really climb well or is it just not as bad as you’d expect a very slack 150mm bike to be?

Cheers,

Andy

Before I got my Talas (160 – 120) I heard a lot of people say they never used the lower position, but personally I find it really useful.

Not for fireroads; I can happily spin up even a steep fireroad with them at 160; it’s when you’re climbing a steep, technical and rocky trail it really helps to drop the front otherwise you often simply stall out on the larger rocks and the bike gets pushed back rather than bumping up, over the obstacle.

Thanks. That’s exactly what I find with the 120/150 Revs on the Five. I actually prefer climbing fire roads at 150mm, but when it gets steep and technical I find the 120 position really helps (and I need all the help I can get).

I notice that, while my 2006 Five was designed to handle forks from 120 to 150mm, the newer slacker Fives are “only” rated for forks from 140-160mm and the Rocket seems to come with a similar recommendation. So, I was wondering whether there was some reason why 120mm wouldn’t help (temporarily, for climbing) with these slacker frames.

Cheers,

Andy

I think it still helps, you are correct though the low BB can be a problem. Mine is really low, and with the fork at 120mm obviously slightly lower than at 160mm. It’s IMHO the price you pay for a bike that descends confidently, you just have to watch your pedal strokes on the tight rocky bits.

I was wondering whether there was some reason why 120mm wouldn’t help (temporarily, for climbing) with these slacker frames

Lowering the front travel will also lower the bottom bracket and its already pretty low on the rocket as it is.

I find the method of determining optimum shock pressure is by setting it at 30% sag then adding a bit on the trail to minimise pedal strike i.e. when you no longer strike you’ve got it 😀

Having taken a Rocket up the Firmounth climb at Glen Tanar (which I think is about 500m difference in elevation and, hence, takes a fair while) I never once thought I wanted the front lower. It climbs much better than a Soda at 100mm! (IME obviously). Now I’m not saying that I managed to cycle it all the way but I’ve got as far up as any bike I’ve ridden on it over the years. So I’d say it was really, really good climbingwise.

just my 0.02 worth.

Thanks. When people say that the Rocket climbs well, does that mean smooth fire roads or loose rocky tracks I wonder and does it really climb well or is it just not as bad as you’d expect a very slack 150mm bike to be?

It climbs well in terms of it being a stable suspension platform. But the geometry is what it is. It is a handful on rutted ascents. I think dropping the suspension helps a lot in this regard, I had marzocchi forks on mine that would drop to 130mm. It was definitely a bit easier like that, I now have Bos 160mm and just have to suck it up. You get used to it to be honest.