Show us your super bike (MTB)
m1kea – Member
Which Devinci is that?
I’ve been pleased with my Dexter but the lure of CF is always there.
seanthesheap – Member
@ phil56, what travel forks are you using? Thinking about one of those for myself.
It’s the Devinci Atlas Carbon. The forks are 140 travel Fox float 34 fit CTD. The rest of the spec is XX1 groupset, Sram Rise 60 carbon wheels, Avid four piston XO trail brakes, Reverb and mainly Loaded Components bars, stem etc.Posted 4 years agoStevelolMember
A ‘superbike’ (HORRENDOUS term btw) can be a ‘superbike’ regardless of how old it is, that Scott Genius up there is amazing considering the spec and weight.
Some of those carbon singlespeed hardtails are winning it for me at the moment though 😀 They’re so incredibly fast looking.Posted 4 years agoaracerSubscriber
that Scott Genius up there is amazing considering the spec and weight.
As orangeboy says, that crank/BB setup is lighter than any mainstream outboard bearing setup available at the time – and actually still lighter than a current XTR double. I did consider putting some Claviculas on, but decided I really couldn’t justify them. Despite the poor reputation of ISIS I find the bearings in that last far longer than the Octalink I had before (and when they wear out you can just replace the bearings), all I read suggests that HT2 is even less durable, so I’m quite happy with my “obsolete” setup.
2×9 is all very well if you don’t need a low bottom gear – even with 2×10 I’d lose the bottom gear which I do regularly use.Posted 4 years agonjee20Subscriber
Ooo, I used to lust after Claviculas! Must admit though they shot themselves in the foot somewhat by introducing a double with a 104mm BCD, so you had to run a 32t inner!
so I’m quite happy with my “obsolete” setup
a) You know I’m only kidding anyway as we’ve had plenty of ‘lightweight FS-offs’ over the years and b) not denying it’s a great set up, but it wasn’t ‘cutting edge’ 6 years ago.
This was what I was riding in 2007, weight was almost exactly the same as yours:
Posted 4 years agopasstherizlaMember
2×9 is all very well if you don’t need a low bottom gear – even with 2×10 I’d lose the bottom gear which I do regularly use.
eh? surely that just depends on what size rings you use on a 2 ring set up.
for example if I had a 44/32/24 and removed the 44 and replaced with say a bash guard, I have lost no Low gears.Posted 4 years agoaracerSubscriber
it wasn’t ‘cutting edge’ 6 years ago.
Most of it was – and even those cranks were if you were bothered about weight (ignoring Claviculas). The cranks and brakes actually came off the previous build though, so are a bit older.
for example if I had a 44/32/24 and removed the 44 and replaced with say a bash guard, I have lost no Low gears.
In which case you’ve lost the high gears I also use regularly. I’m assuming nick was using a 42/29 double setup or something very similar.Posted 4 years agonjee20Subscriber
On the Epic there it was just a 44/32 double. Then became a 42/30, then a 40/28 as I got more rubbish 🙁
The cranks and brakes actually came off the previous build though, so are a bit older.
Which was my sole point! It’s still among the lightest FS bikes on here after all!Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Show us your super bike (MTB)’ is closed to new replies.