[Closed] Maverick ml8, Yeti 575, Foes XCT 5, which one? or alternatives?

I love my 575 and it would fit your req. it climbs well decends better, weighs 28IB can be a bit wallowy tho-but i found that a few PSI makes a huge diffrence in ride so play with that as well.
I would demo them all if i were you - if you try a yeti go for a size below what you would normally have.

I loved my 575 but found the rear a little too flexy as I am over 16st. Now got a Mav ML7/5 which is much stiffer at the rear and climbs like no other full sus bike I have ever ridden

Pace rc405. I've tried everything. I don't ride my other bikes much now!

I'd say it would totally depend upon your ride preferences, but if you're after a long travel bike that climbs like no other, is lighter than just about everything else for its travel yet still very torsionally stiff, then get the Maverick.

I love my ML7, would love to change it for a new Durance if the budget allowed. The ML8 is basically more of the same. A pound heavier than the Durance, but another 1 1/2 inches of travel, yet climbs pretty much just as well.

Haven't ridden a 575, but nice as they look I've heard a lot about them being quite flexy at the back. I'm also not convinced that they'd be that great a climbing bike due to the main pivot position being quite low.

Foes are nice, but generally very expensive and very heavy for their travel. You are unlikely to break one, and unlikely to see another on the trails, but I'd steer clear. Also, the Curnutt shocks (well the ones I've ridden) are pretty notchy.

Go for the ML8, there's lots of bargains out there right now too. Can build with anything from a 140mm Pike or similar, through a Maverick DUC, right up to a Fox 36 etc. Also, Maverick owners back up is like no other. You have a problem, you send them an email, and Ethan (the guy that now owns Maverick) responds personally and usually within a few hours! VERY friendly bloke too, always happy to help out and dish out free advice.

hicksville- Posted on a classifieds thread about your SL's if still for sale?

The Yeti backend is flexi compared with the Maverick and IMO the mav will outclimb all the others. I have the Maverick Durance which is just fantastic. It weighs in at around 24lbs to.

a friend who has a Foes mentioned that the Carnutt shock needs a fair bit of riding to break it in, however once it is, its as plush as can be.

However its a bike that needs riding hard to get the most out of it.

Turner 5-spot or Orange 5?

Turner 5-spot or Orange 5?

Not in the same league imo.

Ventana El Ciclon.

sheldona - Member

Turner 5-spot or Orange 5?

Not in the same league imo.

A classic stw statement. Have you ridden the new Spots at length? Plus the Orange is a capable bike for anyone on this forum. (Except pro's like you of course).

[stw nobber statement on]

Mav's are just Expensive URT's

[stw nobber statement off]

Giant Reign, perhaps swapping standard 140mm fork for Talas 36.

I'm very pleased with mine.

How about a Chumba XCL 😉

Super stiff 140mm bike, very versatile, can be used with a 160mm or 120mm fork.

[img] [/img]

See here for details [url] http://www.progressive-bikes.co.uk [/url]

Oooo them chumbas are lovely

Turner 5-spot or Orange 5?

Not in the same league imo.

Well having seen first hand what Rowan Sorrell does to his 5 (and how light it is), they're a massively capable bike.

As a long term Turner owner, the customer service is fantastic (to the point of there being barely any other manufacturer I'd consider buying from), and the new DW versions seem to getting solidly positive reviews, and they're supposed to climb better than either the HL or TNT versions.

Nothing is in the same league as Maverick apparently.

Cheers for the comments so far, I have just sold a nicolai cc which i liked the suspension but hurt my back and neck due the shortish top tube and angles, I own a titus supermoto which I love climbs well and brill down but at 36/38 lbs after 4 or 5 hrs it wears me down a little, so given I will be riding some cat 1 road climbs in the pryennes it is just too burly but really looking for a similiar angles.
I have owned a 5 spot and loved it but new too expensive and second hand well still mega expensive, plus I could get a new frame for what people are asking for second hand but they are a great bike, never got on with the oranges or most single pivots. I will put the foes on the backburner as i am a fit and forget person, I do not ant to be fussing all the time
How do the mavericks size up? Chumba does look nice......Anyone ridden a Knolly?

Having ridden most of the FS bikes mentioned above I can say that the Mav is in a different league to the others mentioned, climbing wise I should of added though. The Giant Meastro is quite close but not quite as good IME. Unlike most numpties on here I will only make [b]informed[/b] statements about things like this not off the wall comments like some others.

hicksville the Mavs tend to come up quite large. I normally go for Large FS frames but have had 2 Med Mavericks which fit just right.

sheldona how tall are you and what size mav are you riding?????

Hora I wasn't selling a SL a nicolai yes but sold thanks

The comment about the curnutt's feeling notchy is right - but only in the car park test - once the bike is on the trail you cant notice it.

Ive only owned two bikes with the old style 3:1 ratio curnutts (fly and fxr) and they are by far the best shocks ive ridden. The platform works better than any other platform ive used and way better than propedal shocks. They are very plush and very progressive and the adjustments make a noticeable difference.

I havent used the new 2:1 ratio shocks but they are meant to be even more active in the first part of the stroke and much plusher over small bumps.

I've got a 575 and I can't say that I find the back end flexy.....but i'm 10 and a half stone.It does climb incredibly well,especially rooty ,technical stuff.
And for what it's worth I think Orange 5 is in the same league.

Hicksville, I'm about 6foot and fairly hefty :-0 riding a Med

[img] ?v=0[/img]
Mu old 7.5

[img] ?v=0[/img]

And the Durance

I ride with two groups,a relaxed Tuesday night gang and a more serious,(ie they're quicker and don't stop as much ) group on a Sunday. The Sunday group consists of Orange 5s,575s,assorted hardtails and a Maverick. We all get around pretty much the same.
I think any of your shortlist will be just fine.

Having ridden most of the FS bikes mentioned above I can say that the Mav is in a different league to the others mentioned, climbing wise I should of added though. The Giant Meastro is quite close but not quite as good IME. Unlike most numpties on here I will only make informed statements about things like this not off the wall comments like some others.

What sheldona says.

I've owned many different full sus bikes, ridden a whole lot more, and can wholeheartedly agree.

[img] [/img]

No other FS bike climbs as well as a Maverick, whether sat in the saddle or out of it honking like a trooper! I currently own an ML7.2 which is awesome, wouldn't replace it with anything except a new Durance. I also own a Giant Reign, which for its size and weight climbs brilliantly, but having ridden a Trance as well, the Maestro is a damned good suspension system but it doesn't climb quite as well as the Maverick Monolink. Of course the Giant Maestro system is still fully active when stood up though (Maverick stiffens a bit, only by about 8 or 10% though, nothing like as much as an old URT does).

Other suspension systems don't come close in my opinion for a longish travel, allround XC/All mountain full sus bike. I'm talking about a combination of climbing ability, descending ability, stiffness, lightweight, lack of pedal feedback etc. Of course bikes like the Orange 5 are plenty capable, and some people prefer single pivot too, but for me the Maverick beats everything else, with the Giant Maestro system coming a close second (I'm yet to ride a DW Link bike, but imagine the new Turners will be pretty damned good if a little overpriced).

FWIW, I'm 5ft 11 and my Maverick is a Medium. Maverick have changed their sizing a tiny bit though over the years, my 2004 frame is a tiny bit bigger than a current Medium is. We're talking a fraction of an inch in length, and about an inch on the seatpost, so nothing really. If you're about the same height as me, I'd try both the Medium and a Large, as Maverick reccomend a Large if you're 6ft or near enough. I've got a shortish torso for my height though, so prefer a shorter bike so would still ride a Medium in the new sizing anyway. But it's worth trying both if you can.

Hicksvillle - Marzocchi AM forks I meant! I own a Chumba XCL Racing frame- still in the getting to know you stage. It feel like it needs longer forks than my Pikes.

I'd recommend looking at the Heckler, old school but still. Another one (although heavy)- Merlin are doing' the new Commencal Meta 5 with 09 Revelations for 1k at the moment.

Lots more nice Mavericks here by the way...

[url] http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=247601 [/url]

I have a large and am 6ft. I like a stretched out cockpit. You have to be careful with mavs as if you buy one on the bigger size, due to the unusual seat tube angle, it can be difficult to get the seat far forward enough. Though I have mine as far back as it will go as the suspension is more active the further back you are.

Thanks Sheldona and all the maverick owners,seems what I am after to be honest just worried over the sizing issue I am 5ft 11 &1/2 or on a good day/ego day 6ft I have shrunk with age and injuries, so right on the border of most bikes. The Nicolai did not help my injury, just could not get comfy. Last year i had a ellsworth moment in medium which was great only sold it because I was not able to ride for a few months. have a 18inch/med Litespeed but the large Supermoto which are more or less the same size. I had a large Trance for the summer great bike but just a tad too big. Do you know if there are any demo bikes in the North of England? Ideally N/W or Yorks?

Hora apologies yes the Maz SLs are sold but pending payment.Did you not have a SC Blur LT or 4x what was that like?

Another vote for maverick here, had an ml8 since they 1st came out and it handles everything.
it really does climb amazingly and its not too bad going down either

sheldona - Member

Hicksville, I'm about 6foot and fairly hefty :-0 riding a Med

Cough 5 9" and fat.

Hello, Have you thought about a common or garden variety? I have a couple of boutique type bikes, but also have a massed produced shjtter, a trek ex9 which is fantastic all round,light, and a good buy, with a good spec, im 15stone and 5.11, im on a 18.5 with a 70mm stem, it looks tiny underneath me tho, it pedals very well even without the propedal on,if any thing goes wrong, the backup is second to none, and its not a urt! You could also get a demo bike quite easily id imagine.

[i]Hora apologies yes the Maz SLs are sold but pending payment.Did you not have a SC Blur LT or 4x what was that like?[/i]

If it falls through- let me know. Those would be perfect and I could collect- your in the Nwest?

I had a Blur 4x. On the first ride on a Blur 4x I rode down a rollin for the first time in years (where I had hurt myself previously). On the flipside I really didnt like how it reacted when you stood up and pedalled over rough stuff. It pedalled better (to me) when seated. SC have changed some aspects of the VPP system for 2009 though?

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/mountain/product/blur-lt-08-31093

[i]Significant changes to the VPP suspension (reducing its more radical leverage and chain growth character) produce a more neutral, rounded ride.

It still kicks hard under power for real launch out of corners or crux climbing moves, and it’s no wet blanket, but it’s definitely softer over the small stuff. There’s a more fluid and consistent rear wheel connection to the trail.

While it still gobbles up rocks, roots and other square-edged momentum-sappers without pausing, there’s no hint of excess wallow or over-travel in the centre of the stroke. It also feels fine in the granny ring – a previous no-go area for VPP bikes.[/i]

cheers

hora what is the chumba xcl like??????

are you based anywhere near scotland? or fancy a holiday? maverick were at the last Laggan demo day I went to, can't remember if yeti was and foes definitely wasn't but you might get to test at least one of them on some pretty fine terrain.

It's a great day out too.

Ooh, ooh, buy my [url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/fs-maverick-ml75-med ]ML7/5[/url]! It's lovely but I'm a pleb and don't appreciate it.

I reckon this kind of question is great for getting a list of possible bikes. The only way to decide is to demo though.
I demo'd tons before deciding on the 575 and after over 2 years, I don't think I could've made a better decision.
I would'nt've demod a Maverick though - 1. Too expensive, 2. Fugly.

Another vote for the 575 here. Climbs like a dream, descends even better. As others have said, slightly flexy back end but doesn't detract. Didn't think the orange was in quite the same league. Can't comment on the mavs- never ridden one. For what its worth I live in Cumbria and like to ride big rocky ups and downs.

ML8 info asked about a week or so ago - as an ex owner I commented on there (as did another ex owner, bike shop mechanic, who rides a lot of bikes).

Pace RC405 would be worth a demo with the others.

A vote for the H/L 5 spot here,with 5.5 rocker.IMO better than Orange 5 or 575, which I have owned. But at 16 stone I found the 575 a bit flexy.Orange was good mind.

people talking about 575 being flexy - are you referring to the new or old "knuckle" version ?

For all day riding even on big stuff I'd honestly look no further than a nice Ti hardtail, maybe a Cotic Soda or in my case a 456. Have had a lot of back problem myself but can ride the On-One all day long. Just did a big trip to the Lakes, was really the perfect bike. Also have a Blur LT which I love a lot but dont honestly ride so much now.

Like the guys say, go demo a few, take your time.

If You liked the Helius why not talk to them about a custom frame?

I like the Pace RC405 a lot. I actually own an ML7 as well, but it rarely sees the light of day now, the Pace climbs just as well if not better and kicks its butt pretty much everywhere else. Sorry. And even as a Maverick owner, I have to - belatedly - admit that it's pig ugly no matter how well it functions.

It's probably off to Maverick owner hell to me now - sorry Ego - but there, I've said it 🙂

And even as a Maverick owner, I have to - belatedly - admit that it's pig ugly no matter how well it functions.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, from the moment I first set eyes on a Maverick I wanted one, though I knew it would take years to afford one! And then I rode one, and wanted one even more!

Not ridden the Pace RC405, but have seen a couple in the flesh. They're very much form follows function just like a Maverick, but in my opinion, in a very much more industrial way. I don't think they're ugly, but I don't lust after one like I did the Maverick.

Mavericks are definite "Marmite" bikes though, you either love them or hate them with pretty much no feelings inbetween. I don't bother trying to convince people how good they are if they don't like the look of them, because it's already a lost cause...

I like riding the Maverick, but it's still not an attractive bike. The Pace looks pretty much like what it is, the front half of a hardcore-ish hardtail with a suspended rear triangle bolted to it. I never said the Pace was attractive though, just that the Maverick is pig ugly. In particular, the seat tube angle is an enduring crime against aesthetics.

If you fell in love with a Maverick because of rather than in spite of the looks then that's just plain weird. They ride great, but the looks? Vomit...