Anyone ridden the Mojo Nicolai yet?

It's cool to watch this being developed! I do love my 29er, it will be interesting to see where this goes!

If you were to machine custom fork yolks and turn the forks round but leave the axle in the same position so the steering axis remains the same then you'd get the stanchions out of the way and you could drop the bars.

Admittedly it'd look very odd (kind of like an old Girvin Vector) but it would prove the point.

Stratos FR4/MX6/S8 used to have the stanchions out front with the axle directly underneath the lowers. Shifting the legs forward definitely affected the steering (was a looonnngggg time ago so cant remember exactly what went on)

shifting the legs forward does not affect steering.
chaining the steering axis to wheel axle dimensions will affect steering.
what you were experiencing is poor design.

thepodge - Member

shifting the legs forward does not affect steering.

If you've just moved (for example) 1.5kg forward off the front of the bike, at least 40mm or so to give the clearance you're looking for, it's going to have an effect

It's resolvable by using a shorter HT I think. and there is scope to do that, of course the problem is that not everyone wants to use a triple clamp 180mm 29er fork so its a properly niche market But also it's related to rider height.

CP is experiencing this problem on an XL bike at 6" tall which in theory is upsizing for him. He has said he'd still be happy riding Longest but likes the additional length, if we were talking a taller rider its less of an issue.

I think there is scope to drop the HT by 20mm min, possibly 30mm wihcih would solve the problem for Chris anyway but if a tall rider of 6'5' had the bike he might need a million spacers and/or would be fine with it as is..

The bar height isn't an issue with the 160mm Fox 36 29er fork, but CP would like to mod that....and prefers stiffness and curves of the 40 in general (when I last spoke to him anyway :wink:)

All of which means if it was you or I on a Longest who wanted to do this it would be fine. Given i'm currently on a 2016 GeoMetron I have an angleset in mine and a 40 which does lift the front by 15mm. IF I applied a 29 front wheel to a 2017 GeoMetron I Wouldn't need it as I would get the same angles with a slight compromise on seat angle.....

legend - If you've just moved (for example) 1.5kg forward off the front of the bike, at least 40mm or so to give the clearance you're looking for, it's going to have an effect

Chainline I know this might seen as heresy by some but has anyone tried a 27.5+ wheel in the back of a 29er Geometron? The slightly smaller overall diameter and extra grip may well be the sweet spot, slacker HA and lower BB worth a try surely? Probably running one of the newer 29x2.6" tyres that are starting to come on to the market now. This was the way I was thinking of going on my Enduro but I'm going to wait until I replace it now.

It'll be very interesting to see how you find the 29/27.5 combo.

Coincidently one of the problems finding a suitable replacement for me is the stack height. It seems virtually every manufacturer is trying to get the stack as low as possible. This might be great for most people but for us big and tall gentlemen we have to load the steerer with spacers reducing precious reach even further. A friend of mine who is taller than me suffers even worse with this issue so for us the higher the better. A super slack front end with decent height sounds perfect! 8)

As an aside DH bikes don't have an issue with bar height on dual crown forks. I run 40mm rise bars just get a reasonable height on my 27.5+ Glory. Why the need to pursue it on trail bikes, surely we are just riding up to go down again that being the fun part?

toofatty that is one sweet ride. I'd love try that, is it yours? 'nuff spacers under the stem too 😉

Get that prototype sorted out with CP Chainline. We are all watching with interest... 😈

In the world of tiny changes that don't really matter then yeah it makes a difference but in this case especially we've already moved half a bike over 40mm forwards versus an off the shelf bike and we're doing it to improve something (lower bars) so it's still a positive.

So 40mm change is or isn't a sizeable one? If it's barely worth mentioning then this thread is way longer than it should be.

We've also suggested that weight doesn't really matter as much as people think

We're not talking about an increase in weight, we're talking about a re-positioning of the majority of the weight of a fork ahead of the axle and steerer with the weight pivoting around a different part of the steering arc (this would change the movement of the fork legs to turn more left-right relative to the pivot point [steerer])

More than happy to be proved wrong when you build this fork.

stompweaver...yes, and I agree, I think you just suported my point abut the stack/HT, it is right for tall people which are the most likely to select such a large bike, CP is pushing the limits so some of the issues I've raised are specific to him.
On the G13, yes already checked it out, the 27.5 in the G13. It was an early plan. Not ridden yet but some concerns about the impact on SA and reach. The intention was to try it with a longer shock to reset the BB height and SA.
The 27.5 drops the rear by approx 10-15mm, putting in a 200x57 grabs about half of that back so the BB would be a bit low. May be able to compensate with the chip but don't really want to make it steeper, would want to add an angleset.....basically the conclusion was it's a less material change and easier to normalise in a Std GeoMetron than the G13.

I've asked Chris to write down some of his thoughts so far so they can be shared here and on the mtbr forum..

In the meantime, i'm working on subliminal messaging for a proto...

I don't understand any of that last bit, you don't pivot around an arc, you pivot around a point.

How does, what does, what is turn more left-right mean?

I'll cad it up when I get to work tomorrow... I presume you'll accept a virtual fork in place of a physical one.

Chainline - Yes my point was as far I and other riders who are 6' plus are concerned at least we don't want or need to be chasing lower and lower stack heights to get the bars as low as possible. There's a lot of rubbish written in the media about bar height and it's resulted in stack heights which aren't suitable for the majority of taller people. I understand we are veering slightly off on a tangent here but I know Chris doesn't do anything without serious technical consideration so it was more a thought out loud as to why he is so keen to get stack and bar height so low. If you could get him to jot down a few thoughts that would be great.

Regarding the 27.5 wheel in a G13 I was wondering if you had tried it with a 27.5+ wheel/tyre combo? So a 27.5x2.8 or 3.0 tyre to see what that did to the geo and ride. You'd gain back a bit of BB height, SA and reach but lose a little HA in the process.

Thanks again for taking the time to post such detailed and informative replies, it's a very interesting topic and is great to get info and feedback from someone who's out there experimenting.

I think CP does quite a bit without 'serious' technical consideration in my experience, sometimes just to try it, if it appears to work, it gets serious technical consideration!

the main perceived advantage of the 29/27.5 set up is that the additional rollover of the 29/rolling speed has the most effect on the front and that the rear is much less affected by hitting obstacles and the suspension becomes a bigger factor (in speed here remember) also that the smaller diameter rear has a tighter turning radius which in the absence of rear wheel steering in theory enables it to track the front more easily in a carve and thus reduce scrub and make the turn faster with more grip, when compared to two wheels the same size. Thats the theory.
Chris is also finding using narrower wheels to be more beneficia (again think speed)l in the back, i.e. sub 28mm internal (the front 29 he is using is pretty damn narrow, I'd be worried about using it and I'm waaaay slower!)

So I guess I'm saying that I don't think there is much advantage at all to using a bigger width/diameter tyre in the rear on the 29. That was the experience I had on my rigid bike in the end, but that was less obvious as there were comfort benefits that aren't applicable to the full suss.

Couldn't you just run a higher rise stem and bigger bars or are you already at the upper limit?

There's a splendidly strange parallel thread going on here!

Chainline soz for the thread drift, it's all interesting stuff though.

I'm glad to hear that Chris follows the same pattern of erm, messing about with stuff that we all do.

I understand the logic of the smaller rear wheel and the turning principle. It makes sense that the rear wheel would turn on a tighter radius if it has a smaller diameter. If the benefit of experience says that it isn't worth running a bigger tyre on the back then that's that proven.

I do like my wide-ish rims though being a clumsy lard, the increase in strength and traction is worth paying for with slower rolling for me.

Right what were talking about? Ahh the Geometron. Do carry on...

When are you getting your G13?

Liteville have been putting big wheels up front & small at the back for years. See here for an explanation of their "scaled sizing":

http://www.liteville.com/en/40/technology/

It makes sense but when I saw one in France it looked gopping.

Only a couple of years Mildred and for different reasons, as you point out theirs is size driven despite the bikes being quite small in other ways.

Stood next to Chris's bike it's quite hard to tell. I'll see if I have a pic from Spain.

Look what they've gone and done

http://ebike-mtb.com/en/exclusive-nicolai-ion-g16-eboxx-3-geolution-e-mtbs/

[img] [/img]

Wish they'd ban them already

Has anyone ridden the hardtail geometron? I had a 29er/650b hardcore soft tail (it's a tad bike niche), it was custom built for me, but it's much too short for me now (I had a serious spinal issue when I had it built, so it's got rather an upright position).

That being said, The 650b 29er combo really work for me so I'd like to give it a try in another bike, I just don't think I need as much travel as these monsters have.

As ebikes go I think it looks better than the rest. probably due to the length. Not my bag at the moment but I'm in good health so far....

Out of interest, why are you trying to lower bar height? The trend in Enduro has been towards a more relaxed and neutral, chest up moto style position to be able to look farther ahead down steep courses comfortably.

Again, tying in with my previous comments about the DH scene - that it's not seen anywhere near as crazy reach values - I think the Enduro racers have found "peak reach" and have started moving towards more DH focussed geometry and riding styles.

Tom, it depends to a large degree on what you are riding, the mix, so for less steep terrain more weight over the front required to maintain grip. More front height can be dialled in for steep terrain easily if you already have the scope in the chassis which in turn reduces reach.

WC DH is a different ballgame too, very steep all the time so yes, crazy reach (I wouldn't call it that of course) less applicable.

It does ultimately come down to personal preference , what you are used to etc etc.

If the front gets too high for a given rider height then driving the front is difficult unless it's steep and then that results in reduced grip, understeer and running wide.. not great.

Hi Chainline,

Bit of basic question here but on the tech sheets it says that the G13 has bottle cage bosses? Where are they on the frame? Please don't say on the underside of the down tube! must be room on the underside of the top tube near the seat tube junction?

quick sizing question...i´m 183cm tall, shall i pick 502 (m) reach, or 520 (l) reach?

Rollsroyce- I saw that on the Nicolai tech sheet as well but can confirm mine doesn't have any. Personally just use a 1l Source flexi bottle thing stuffed in some stash style bib shorts. Works well and you don't get cack all over it as you do with a bottle. If you can get them fitted then I suspect the only sensible space is under the downtube.

About a year ago I was inspired to get a Works -2 deg headset for my Spitfire, thanks to this thread. I got a bit distracted and started designing a hardtail and then put the headset into a production hardtail. Anyway, following some tweakery that headset ended up spare so it went into the Spitfire about a month ago. I shortened the fork at the same time to add a bit of reach too. It's far short of the Geometron reach but the head angle is now sitting at 64.1 deg in its slackest setting (the only way I've ridden it so far). This is a 150mm fork, 140mm rear 27.5 bike btw.

It seems to be better at everything like this, from woodland singletrack to rocky downhill tracks, down, along and up.

quick sizing question...i´m 183cm tall, shall i pick 502 (m) reach, or 520 (l) reach?

The reach on the 520 is spot on with a 31mm renthal stem and feels weirdly normal but is 70mm longer than my last Nicoloai! Are you anywhere near the North Lakes? You are welcome to swing a leg over mine for sizing if you like.

duir - Member

I am 182cm (6') and went for 520 longest but had to go custom through Nicolai as I didn't want the seat tube/top tube to be as high as the Mojo version. My leg is 34" and I found a 460mm seat tube to be spot on as it lowered the top tube nicely.

Seems Mojo agree, the current longest is 460 ST

http://geometron.mojo.co.uk/G16%20Geometry.html

The reach on the 520 is spot on with a 31mm renthal stem and feels weirdly normal but is 70mm longer than my last Nicoloai!

Yeah - my 26" Ion was a 440 reach with a 50 stem, now on 520 Longest with 32 and was blown away by how "normal" it all felt when I first sat on it.

M4k1 apologies, been away but as others have mentioned at 183cm I'd be going 520mm reach now as you can always bring it back with set up if too long but more difficult the other way around. That in the absence of testing for yourself as everyone has personal tastes.

The ST is lower now at 460mm as mentioned so much easier to manage.

Long term feedback - Still loving my Geometron Longest - and now it's even longer
I'm 6' 2.5" riding the Longest.

A year in and I am still loving the Geometron, I must say never had a real long lasting affair with a bike before. The grass has always been greener. it's not now. I did think I was happy with my Nicolai AM - until I rode one of these, IT FITS!

A couple of weeks ago I built up a new black frame with a -1 head cup from Works plus the longer travel rear end same as the_pilot. 5mm longer stays and a bigger shock this time with the Float compression lever for climbing.
I wouldn't say the lever is necessary but it certainly feels just a touch more direct when pedalling smooth fire roads uphill. The shock still has all the standard adjustments and range so there is nothing about the lever to not like. As long as I remember to switch climb mode off before I hit the gnar, that is.

It didn't take me long to get used to riding the Geometron on my local trails last year and, even though they are tight, tree lined, and pretty flat the Geometron handles them with ease. Including the steep climbs where it's traction is amazing. Got to say it’s the funnest bike I've ridden there and my XC FS 100m 29er has been hanging up since I first threw a leg over the Geometron last August..

So if you're thinking of it, don't hold back, I thought long and hard and for sure I made the right choice.

mudfish.
How long did it take to get the longer travel rear end from Mojo?

I have a Longest 155mm frame out of the first batch and an L G13, I'm 190cm tall. There is no reason why you have to go for the longest frame possible or run a low front end.

Does anyone in Sheffield have a Geometron?

I'd love to have a close look at one and a pedal around on it. It's 'new bike year' for me and I'm fascinated by this thing.

Picking up my 170 travel long rear ended longest on wednesday.
Should be up and running by next weekend. 😀

Green with envy Singlespeedstu!!! Look forward to seeing the pics!!

Nice one. DI'd you ever get your Fast Forward?

Fastforward should be here by the end of the month...
I've waited that long I'm kind of not bothered any more.

looking peoples thoughts I'm going to order a custom large geometron 29er should I go for 63 degree HA or 64? Will be my only bike so will want to for everything from flowy trails to uplift days. Would there be a big difference in feel between 63 and 64HA.

If it was going to be my only bike I would probably go for a G13 with 36s and an X2.

If you're set on the Geometron then I would say go for the slacker head angle. I would love to try the big 29er.

The drawings I have been send out seem to based on the G13 but with a lowered top tube and seat tube, reach is 490mm and seat tube angle is slightly steeper at 77.7 to allow 157mm rear travel. Going for a 160mm 36 and X2. Always have preferred 29ers but never tried anything as slack, but from what I can gather from this forum and reading about people putting anglesets to slacken their pole evolink 140 64.5HA I'm inclined to go for 63HA. I just don't want to end up with something that I cannt get turned.

singlespeedstu - Member
Fastforward should be here by the end of the month...
I've waited that long I'm kind of not bothered any more.

They do complement each other well.... the wait is crazy though

Here's another idea which I've been thinking about for a while. Lower c.o.g. Is better as it improves stability right? And currently limited in part by pedal strike? So shorter cranks, which appear to be accepted by those th at have tried them (including me) mean you can drop the bb without lowering the pedals. Would make no difference if you had your outside foot down, but with pedals flat you could have a 10mm lower bb if going from 175 to 165 cranks. Unfortunately I've already offset bush my bike so cannot drop mine any more....

Whichever you go for you can always stick an angleset in to change it up and down