Forum menu
I like my ASR-5 for climbing, it's definitely pretty nice compared to other stuff I've ridden but I don't really claim to be an authority on the matter. I think this is partly because it's so stiff - it really encourages you to crank out the climbs as it feels very direct. It's very dependent on sag though, run more than 30% sag and it does wallow a bit, run too little and it sometimes loses traction.
As for Pro-pedal, it seems to work very well at eliminating bob on my 2012 RP2 (only has two PP settings - on or off), but I never use it for technically difficult climbs. The extra grip afforded by a rear wheel that's glued to the ground is worth more IMO than a slight increase in pedalling efficiency. On the other hand for road climbs / fireroads I sometimes flick the PP on.
Proto front ends for mavericks,Mmmm! I would rather try this than anything on the market right now.
Funny you mentioned about going up to a large. I typed out something along the lines of going onto a large with a shorter stem earlier on but I deleted it. I went over to the maverick site and noticed the size large seat tube was around an inch longer than the medium but I couldnt think straight (what with getting this computer/internet sorted out) and convinced myself that even with a longer seat tube,it wouldnt sort my problem out.. and 5 foot 8 on a large was just being a bit silly,even with a short stem.
When the durance came out I think I remember craig from Extra taking one up to Laggan demo day years ago. I never took note of the seat tube (never knew they had changed it) but wouldnt mind trying one out sometime if I ever spot one out on the trails.
Mavericks are glorified URT's. I can't believe they're still going.
I like the idea of ditching un-needed weight but is their an actual benefit of removing the granny ring over just never using it? I need my big ring as this regularly in use (I ride down too) so I guess it would be 2x9 as the cost to replace the shifters, cassette etc wont be pleasant.Good. So ditch the granny then! Go 1x10...
Any benefits really?
How do you physically work that out? Is there a mathematical formula?Though your Rush when in the middle ring isn't far off neutral to be fair.
The best climber I have ever demoed is the epic carbon 29 ER. Ok only 100m but big wheels make it feel more. Raced up the hills.
This. I tested the Epic 29r as well as the ASR 5, Ibis Mojo SL, Orange 5 and Transistion Covert. There is one short technical climb and the Epic is the only bike I have ever cleared it on, to be fair that was when it was dry last year and it's a boggy mess now, but at the time all was equal including my fitness and strength so it was a good comparison. I remember thinking that the Epic was an unbelievable all day XC bike. Light, fast, comfortable and a brilliant climber.
As it happens I bought a Five because it suits my riding more; in a completely different league when on singletrack or descending. The ASR 5 was superb, sort of split the Epic and Five in terms of riding style and TBH it was only the fact that I was singlemindedly lay after a great downhill experience that made me buy the Five. A mate has an ASR 5 with full XTR and it's very nice.
To answer the OPs original question the Specialized 'brain' it the key, it completely removes bob and works a treat. Yes It's a sticking plaster but all suspension designs are - can't comment on the ugly duckling that is the Maverick but wow... that's a hideous piece of kit and you'd have to be really keen... 😉 and yes, a Five is much prettier.
My three to test based on experience would be the Epic, an ASR5 and something else...!
2 other efficient options in my book - Blur XC carbon and Gary Fisher (RIP) HiFi Pro. Neither need Propedal at all most of the time.
The SC superlight I tried was pretty lossy climbing compared to a 5 spot and a Trance X I was trying at the same time.
Maybe it's ok if you play with propedal but I have no interest in touching the propedal lever other to ensure that it is off.
I can't deal with levers either - I always always forget.
I've just been off my Maverick for a few months (riding an 80mm hardtail) and got back onto it for the first time last weekend for an uplift day.
Loved it. Such a hard bike to replace.
Surely a lot of the ugly comments come from the forks? no? I like mine, but I always thought that most people would like its looks with single crown forks on it.
I've got a Kona Hardtail and a Trek Fuel Ex 9.8 both with the same tyres, similar gearing and not far off the same fork.
Not exactly a scientific test but on the flat stuff they both climb about the same, but when it gets rough I lose a lot less traction on the Trek.
Without intending to troll, aren't all XC (or is it AM, I can't tell anymore) full sussers about the same these days as long as you stick an RP23 on it and don't get something tooo rad-sick?
😆"The motor on a motorcycle is a very predictable machine, the motor on a suspension bike is about the most unpredictable machine imaginable (especially on a woman’s specific models)"
The SC superlight I tried was pretty lossy climbing compared to a 5 spot and a Trance X I was trying at the same time.
Can't let SC Superlight bashing go on 😉 What I would say is that a single pivot is more sensitive to correct shock set up. Also I am a strong believer that test riding bikes is largely pointless since the feel of the frame/ bike is highly influenced component spec/ cockpit setup/ suspension set up etc.. basically lots of personal things that are hard to replicate in a one off ride.
Without intending to troll, aren't all XC (or is it AM, I can't tell anymore) full sussers about the same these days as long as you stick an RP23 on it and don't get something tooo rad-sick?
My thoughts exactly!
Proto front ends for mavericks,Mmmm! I would rather try this than anything on the market right now.
Yup, just imagine, could put everything where you wanted on it, not have to run a silly road front mech (now direct mount front mechs are commonplace on MTB's), could even make a monolink with ISCG mounts!
convinced myself that even with a longer seat tube,it wouldnt sort my problem out.. and 5 foot 8 on a large was just being a bit silly,even with a short stem.
Maverick's are long bikes anyway, it's all in the seat angle rather than the seat tube height. For people of slightly stumpy proportions shall we say, those longer in the body than the leg, they're ideal cos at the height they have the saddle, it is significantly further forward than for you or me. Just needs a slight tweaking of the seat tube angle, not by much, to make it more usable for everyone. The older ML7's were worse, and the Klein Palomino's and the Seven Duo's were almost laughable for their slacker angles!
When the durance came out I think I remember craig from Extra taking one up to Laggan demo day years ago. I never took note of the seat tube (never knew they had changed it) but wouldnt mind trying one out sometime if I ever spot one out on the trails.
You wouldn't notice it necessarily by eye, but it's definitely notable in the ride. Welcome if ever our paths cross to stop me and have a go on mine, though I suspect we live some distance apart... Incidentally, Craig left extra and bought all the Maverick spares off them, I buy anything I need off him now... Top bloke!
Mavericks are glorified URT's. I can't believe they're still going.
Oh god here we go... There's a science to it, it's all about the axle path. They are NOT a URT, they have a fully floating drivetrain, which is required to maintain the axle path that was desired and also to eliminate pedal induced suspension movement (or bob as it is also known). Yes, the BB isn't on the mainframe, and yes the suspension stiffens very slightly (about 6%) when the rider is stood over seated, but IMO this is actually desirable as if I'm stood up pedalling hard, I'm probably putting more power through the pedals anyway so slightly more resistance from the back end is no bad thing. Certainly, if you've ever ridden a proper URT bike (I had one, years ago) and a Maverick, you'd see they're night and day apart.
Incidentally, the "still going" bit is in debate. Paul Turner bought the name back a few months ago, and the company has ceased trading. Waiting to see what happens and he does with the name now he's bought it back, in the meantime Ethan who owned it for a while before Paul bought it back is still, off his own back, helping out and providing spares and knowledge for those Maverick owners in the world that need it. Many Maverick owners are so devout in their allegiance, because beyond the way the bikes ride, the guys who have run it are so passionate about it, and will go out of their way to help owners. I've emailed Ethan in the past, explaining I bought one 2nd hand, but that didn't matter to him. He answered my questions in detail, and all within a few hours (despite the 6hr time difference or whatever). They're a company that has always wanted its customers to be out enjoying their bikes, more than anything else!
I like the idea of ditching un-needed weight but is their an actual benefit of removing the granny ring over just never using it? I need my big ring as this regularly in use (I ride down too) so I guess it would be 2x9 as the cost to replace the shifters, cassette etc wont be pleasant.
Any benefits really?
OK, if you use the big ring then fair enough. Could go 2x9 or 2x10, but you'd need to select your ratios carefully. Because...
How do you physically work that out? Is there a mathematical formula?
No mathematical formula at all. It's all to do with the single most important thing on just about any full sus design. The main pivot placement.
On the Rush, the Main pivot is place pretty much in line with the top of a conventional middle (32T) chainring. Which is why it will pedal well in the middle ring. In the granny ring (try it next ride), you will notice it bobs a small amount. And in the big ring, if you pedal hard, it will compress slightly, but it's much harder to put significant torque through the drivetrain in the big ring due to the ratios you're using so it's barely noticable. In the granny ring, bob can be quite pronounced though, but not as much as on bikes with higher or more forward pivot placements, such as old school Orange Sub 5's, Santa Cruz Bullit's etc. The Rush is an example of good pivot placement for an XC bike for sure. It's all a compromise, but IMO in line with the middle ring for an XC bike is the best compromise.
Back to gear ratios... If you went for a 2x setup up front, if you fitted something like a 26/38 or 28/40 which are common now, you'd bring a very small amount of bob back into the equation due to the inner ring being slightly smaller than the 32T you use now.
Maybe if you're happy as you are, keep all 3 rings. I said go 1x up front cos I never find I need a taller gear than 32/11 myself, but others might.
To answer the OPs original question the Specialized 'brain' it the key, it completely removes bob and works a treat. Yes It's a sticking plaster but all suspension designs are - can't comment on the ugly duckling that is the Maverick but wow... that's a hideous piece of kit and you'd have to be really keen... and yes, a Five is much prettier.
Any "clever" shock is a sticking plaster indeed. To aid with an inherently inefficient design in one way or another. In the case of Specialized with the Epic, 4 bar bikes are inherently very active/supple and good at dealing with bumps. But they are very prone to pedal induced movement (or bob) too, which is not ideal. Hence the Brain came about. There are better suspension platforms than 4 bar for short travel XC bikes IMO.
And Orange 5's aren't pretty, not by a long shot! They too are form follows function.
Loved it. Such a hard bike to replace.Surely a lot of the ugly comments come from the forks? no? I like mine, but I always thought that most people would like its looks with single crown forks on it.
I don't think I could replace mine. I'd miss it too much! No other suspension rides the same. And I think most of the "looks ugly" comments come from the bendy seat tube arrangement from experience, rather than the dual crown forks.
I'm not sure Paul Turner 'bought' back the Maverick brand, I think that it was always his to licence. Could be wrong, but I've never heard of an exchange of money.
BTW did you hear Ethan say on MTBR that the new suspension redesign kept the monolink, but used a rocker and a conventional shock? Would have been interesting to see that. Shame it hasn't been shared.
Unfortunately, because of a few headline 'faults', many are quick to dismiss the Maverick, but further investigation would show that most of those 'faults' are non-events.
The downsides? You decide... But lots of people think an orange 5 is a good looking bike, but the Maverick is ugly! And looks sell bikes in the UK (ever seen a Mondraker on the trails? Or a Mongoose full sus? Me either!), not performance in general...
Indeed, the Orange Five sells purely because of it's stunning beauty. Those fools would be much better off importing a Maverick from god knows where, and hoping the ACME shocks have no issues.
I think you'll find "having a distributor" sells bikes in the UK, something Maverick seem completely incapable of being able to sort out.
There's a science to it, it's all about the axle path.
Yes, the BB isn't on the mainframe, and yes the suspension stiffens very slightly (about 6%) when the rider is stood over seated, but IMO this is actually desirable as if I'm stood up pedalling hard, I'm probably putting more power through the pedals anyway so slightly more resistance from the back end is no bad thing
What I like most about full suspension, whatever the outcome it's easy to quote it as a positive! FSRs/4-bars are more active while climbing for more traction! Single pivots tighten up under pedalling pressure due to the chain pulling the swingarm!
It's good to hear the right answer to suspension has been calculated with SCIENCE. I personally really got on with single pivots, found 4 bars too bouncy and Maestro/DW boring and dead feeling. Clearly the wrong answer. What colour grips would make me go faster?
if I'm stood up pedalling hard, I'm probably putting more power through the pedals anyway so slightly more resistance from the back end is no bad thing.
If I'm stood up, I'm probably descending......
[url= http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/seven-duo-titanium-frame-set-and-fox-fork-/251080829792?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item3a75956b60 ]Seven duo ti ebay[/url]
any takers?
(not mine)
Oh god here we go... There's a science to it, it's all about the axle path. They are NOT a URT, they have a fully floating drivetrain, which is required to maintain the axle path that was desired and also to eliminate pedal induced suspension movement (or bob as it is also known). Yes, the BB isn't on the mainframe, and yes the suspension stiffens very slightly (about 6%) when the rider is stood over seated, but IMO this is actually desirable as if I'm stood up pedalling hard, I'm probably putting more power through the pedals anyway so slightly more resistance from the back end is no bad thing. Certainly, if you've ever ridden a proper URT bike (I had one, years ago) and a Maverick, you'd see they're night and day apart.
I would say they have a 'semi' floating drivetrain. Like the Moongoose and the I-Drive. The BB (your feet) are not 100% independent from the rear axle. You might think you don't feel it but the BB migrates in an arc up and back under compression. Consequently the suspension will never have the suppleness of other designs especially over high frequency stuff. It just can't react fast enough with that much mass linked to the swingarm.
That said, on smooth climbs it'd stuff most designs.
I've found that a single front 34t combined with an 11-36 induces unpleasant amounts of pedal bob into my trance.
I personally really got on with single pivots, found 4 bars too bouncy and Maestro/DW boring and dead feeling.
::moves along to the next thread:::