- Turner Sultan compared to "nu skool" (ahem) 29ers?
Love my Sultan but have to admit to being curious about how it compares to the new geometry 29ers – longer reach, lower BB, slacker head angle and in particular shorter chainstays. I’m thinking Stumpy Evo, Transition Smuggler, Kona Process 111, Trek Remedy 9 etc. Anyone ridden any of the others that can offer a comparison? I guess if there’s anything I’d change about the Sultan it would have slightly shorter chainstays to make it a bit more nimble in tight turns and also it could do with being a bit “poppier” off lips and stuff. Oh, and a couple of pounds lighter in an ideal world.
Yes, I am bored at work.Posted 4 years ago
Nice. My back is too ruined d for a hardtail now, much as I’d like a Sherpa. I do enjoy the Sultan still but I’ve had it for two and a half years now. There’s so much to like about owning a Turner though…. Just fitted the mono link and like you said it is stiffer but yet to really test itPosted 4 years ago
Apologies wasn’t seeking to argue 🙂
Its relative though; to me a newer bike has to be a significant step change to justify me looking at it. But I think manufacturers realise this and attempt to exploit it, to make you think the latest 1 x 11 plus size wide axle eliptic oversize chainstay head angle carbon bling bling IS a game changer.
I have realised that I dont want to waste my time studying whats new, just concentrate on riding more. Maybe thats a reflection of how good a bike the Sultan is 8)
EDIT: While its being discussed – how often do people grease their zerks for what sort of usage?Posted 4 years ago
The thing is, long and low nu Skool is just another way of achieving something that works isn’t it? There’s a line in the (very good I thought) single track review of the sultan which alludes to the fact the long reach and short stem are not the only way to go and that a shorter cockpit allows significant and effective weight shifts fore and aft, which give a very manoeuvrable bike.
I think it really does come down to the old classic’what do you want it for?’ Dave turner has pretty much stated that the sultan in is current form is aimed at big country, un-groomed trail riding in proper mountains. It’s certainly how I use mine. On anything less challenging, it makes it all a bit boring, which is why I have the hardtail.Posted 4 years ago
Yeah I don’t use mine locally in the Chilterns, Surrey hills (well maybe sometimes 😳 ) or Swinley. But Alps, Wales and Scotland it is brilliant for me. A good bike is a good bike whichever skool. I had an Anthem for the local stuff but it seemed too similar to the Sultan so replaced it with a fat bike.
So back to zerk greasing. Every time I do it, it seems equivalent to losing 10 psi from the rear shock 😕Posted 4 years agoobelixMember
Always liked the look of the Sultan, even with all these new 29ers arriving on the market.
The shorter TT length would suit me, as I’ve had surgery on my lower back and need a slightly more upright riding position.
I’m 6’2″ so would a large frame suit me? I see they’ve got a labour day special running L & XL frames in the States, might just take advantage of that…Posted 4 years agoOnzadogMember
I’ve got a 6 pack. I’ll typically grease little and often. I use superlube now which is much lighter than m-prep and seems to need topping up more often but it’s a small price to pay for such a plush ride.
I’m looking at the new rfx but torn between sizes because of this whole nu/old skool thing.Posted 4 years agoTooTallMember
I rode a very good new Specialized carbon FS thingy at a demo day a couple of months ago. All pressures were properly set up for me by the mechanic and yes, it was a very good bike indeed.Posted 4 years ago
I then jumped straight on my Sultan and rode the same trails. There was not a 6 year & several $$$ difference between the 2 bikes (2009 Sultan). That gave me a lot of reassurance that the bike is still as good as I thought it was and it’s still far better at mountain biking than I am.
CS’s are very long compared to most and that anchors you back.
No it doesn’t, its give you stability at the cost of turning response. It also gives you better grip in rough, scrabbly climbs at the cost of the immediate responsiveness that a bike with a short rear end gives, and it helps you keep the front down on bastard steep climbs where you can’t afford to stand without loosing traction, or when the ground conditions are such that you can’t just stamp your way out of it.
It’s also dreadfully unfashionable.
As I’ve already said, it’s designed as a big mountain trail bike for ungroomed trails. Stability, ultimate grip and climbing tenacity in chunk come more to the fore for that kind of riding. If you compare it to a new school enduro ripper, it’s not the same, because it’s not meant for that.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Turner Sultan compared to "nu skool" (ahem) 29ers?’ is closed to new replies.