Forum menu
I think that this is what I need for most of my riding, enough travel for most uk stuff, but stable and fun too. I also have a ti 456, and think that is an awesome bike.
Currently on trance x, with uturn revs. Rides ok with those tuned to 150mm but means the front end is too high. I have tried a small meta 4x which is nice, but a bit heavy and the front mech fitting is a bodge. Tried an anthem x with 120mm on the front. Ok too, but too steep. mmmmmmmmmmmm, anything else??
If your trance has a 44mm semi integrated headset you could just fit a Cane Creek angleset to slacken the head angle by up to 1.5degress.Simples.
They use longer forks than 4" but rear wise:
Hemlock (120mm)
ST4 (100mm)
Spitfire (125mm)
Or could you fit flatter bars and a lower angled stem?
Fit a 24" rear wheel?
rorschach, liking that idea. Will investigate further.
New ST4 looks good, 110mm on rear, and 68 deg ha.......
The normal response to these questions is find a Blur 4X. I'll sell you mine for £1m. It might actually be worth that... its flippin brilliant!
As DBW said, find a Blur 4X, flippin' love mine! And no you can't have it.
[url= http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5241/5297508263_18c48da66c_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/le_grande_momo/5297508263/ ]P1000149[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/le_grande_momo/ ]le_grande_momo[/url], on Flickr
Yeti ASR-sl - mine has just seen a new lease of life 🙂
Specialized Camber is 120mm/4.7in but quite slack for the travel - have ridden the missus' M Elite and it's really nice and stable.
I've been speculating that on my Fuel ex (the older one with a single pivot and rocker linked shock) you coulf fit a slightly shortened rear shock to drop the botttom bracket and firm up the rear
My Blur 4X (in the background!):
[img] 
[/img]
I've now got a 150mm fork on my TranceX. What sag have you got (25-30%)? I have a low rise bar and a 65mm stem on directly ontop of the headset.
I recall that the bike came with a 120mm fork and a big stack of spacers under the stem, so the bar height now is lower than the setup it came with. What made a significant difference is the rear shock sag. I had to reduce it a bit by putting more air in, raising the the BB, in order to "equalise" the suspension action front and back.
{I realise position is a very personal thing, so what works for me may not work for you}
[img] 
[/img]
Bit more than 4 inches but anyway 🙂
The new Rift Zone is 100mm both ends with a 69 deg head angle and from what I can gather is built to take a fair bit of abuse. I don't think there are any in depth reviews yet but it looks quite promising.
I've got a santa cruz superlight setup with 120mm reba maxles on the front. About a 68 head angle I think, 100mm out back. Riding with a 70mm stem, wide bars and uppy downy post. Perfect for pretty much everything. Fast on the ups and heaps of fun on the way down. Reckon it sounds right for what you're after.
I considered the new ST4 too... looks great, but not all that light and quite pricey compared to the SL.
Apparently the Commencal Super 4 is quite slack. There was a cheap one for sale on the merlin site last week, dont know whether its still there (I didnt buy it in the end)
Here she is... though has since had the 80mm stem replaced with 70mm, carbon easton bars replaced with RaceFace Atlas (725mm) and wheels replaced with 819 tubeless for stiff and lightness.
[code][url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4148/5009493330_bbb40b0fe8.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/stooopotter/5009493330/ ]Santa Cruz Superlight[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/stooopotter/ ]StoooPotter[/url], on Flickr[/code]
Cove Hooker MX.
Pricey though.
Commencal Mini DH?
mk1fan - MemberCommencal Mini DH?
That'll be 6"
Transition Double - 80-100mm adjustable travel.
[img] 
[/img]
Umm my S/L @ 115mm feels **** all like my Prophet on it's 67.5 setting (which in my book is starting point of slackness). I wouldn't suggest the SL was the slightest bit slack even @ 120mm IMO of course.
Anyway's this arguement was totally thrown for me by Brant when he said his frames are measured with fork sag taken into account, now I have no idea wheither the SL or Prophet have this taken into account in their figures... or anyone elses...
that transition is lush.... but heavy....
thought about sl with 120s,
super 4 is 69.5 with 120mm fork.
been looking at the spitfire too, looks ideal, cheap (ish) and adjustable...
I had a ti456 and it felt great. When I bought this.
http://www.evanscycles.com/products/lapierre/x-control-310-2010-mountain-bike-ec020981
I felt at home straight away, to my mind it felt like a f/s 456. I don'y know if the figures ad up, but thats how it felt like to me.
Another suggestion for Blur 4X. Some guys have put shorter length, revalved shocks on to Blur LT's to acheive a 4X type bike but a bike that is current available ( http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=572419)
What about a Hemlock (120mm rear)?
Mondraker something or rather . Rather nice looking 4" bike that rides an awful lot bigger , if the reviews are to be believed .
Touch heavy on the wallet , but look bling , so they must be good!
[url= http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1336/5129662976_4258dcacb4.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/40403929@N04/5129662976/ ]IMG00045-20101029-1018[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/40403929@N04/ ]kimberley robinson[/url], on Flickr
I went from a 456 to this after briefly trying a giant reign inbetween. I run the pikes at 140mm and the sag at around 30%.
Ive always thought it a bit daft when people talk about some bikes being "faster" than others, until i got this. Its a rocket. I love it, and its all in the angles.
^ mmmm, nice ST4.
Same with mine, seems to be one of those bikes that at first just feels "like a 'right' bike", but the faster/steeper/rockier it gets the more this bike seems to fly and feel great.
I run it as suggested with little sag in the rear, and it feels great.
[img] 
[/img]
a smaller Trance with a 50mm stem and <120mm upfront.. I'd bet it''s not the step HA that's holding you back.
Trances are plenty stable...
He'd have landed that no bother if only they'd moved the landing a further 50ft down the hill first 😉
[url= http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5050/5319972111_3560883fc6.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexleigh/5319972111/ ]CwmCarn Jan 2011[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/alexleigh/ ]Alex Leigh[/url], on Flickr
+1 for PP. Just sold my Pace 405. Not been ridden since I've had my St4 (well 2 in fact, but that's a long story). Enough travel, enough stiffness, not heavy (not as light as an SL tho), slack, long, low = lovely 🙂
Yeah the frames are a chunk of cash, but to me it's worth it.
What is the Ha on those St4's?
I've the old model and with 120mm forks it measured 66.8 deg (2.3 tyre) (measured with an I phone spirit level app so tolerance of about -+.3 deg ish from memory
68 degrees unsagged
Pace 204? 100mm rear, 68.5deg with 100mm fork, 67.5deg with 130mm fork IIRC?
Commencal meta 4 with a 120mm fork.
i like the Transition..