Enduro/AM - The Weight Game

PB Forum :: Pinkbike Groups
Enduro/AM - The Weight Game
Author Message
flag seraph
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:26 Quote
Kidklayko wrote:
The Last Tarvo frame weighs 4.5 lbs and complete bikes weigh 25.6 lbs and it's an enduro! Just stupidly expensive

Ok.
photo
flag tbeezle
O+
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:27 Quote
seraph wrote:
tbeezle wrote:
seraph wrote:


frame is said to fit a 2.5, i feel there is room for it. fork i think can clear a 2.5 as well

Sick build. Will the Hei Hei fit a bigger tire than the 2.3 you're running?

Hmm that's super tempting. Time to make geometry charts! What size frame are you running and how tall are you?

I'm running an XL and I'm 6'5" I could in theory raise the post maybe an inch for a proper pedal stroke with a 210mm dropper. Which was very appealing being able to get the big dropper all the way in the frame.

I really like the spacious front triangle too, with the horizontal shock, 2 bottles for endurance xc rides, but could also do make a custom frame pack for an awesome timber trail bike.

the cable routing is kinda funky but easy with the park tool kit or a magnet, it routes down the downtube, then up the seat tube exiting to transfer the housing to the rear triangle on the seat stays, making bleeding a little bit of a rotation based method, so i wouldn't put any brakes on it that bleed with a cup.
flag sherbet
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:28 Quote
I really want to make a new heihei into a gleny bike. Ride out to the local XC night 30km away, do a couple 10/15km laps, ride home. It's not rough enough there to need a flat bar, and drops help with passing when it's busy. Just a lot of money to sink into a bike like that.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:29 Quote
Kidklayko wrote:
The Last Tarvo frame weighs 4.5 lbs and complete bikes weigh 25.6 lbs and it's an enduro! Just stupidly expensive

Yeah, I wanted to suggest the Tarvo, but it's not the travel and geometry seraph is looking for. Ironically, the Tarvo is a lot lighter that something like the Banshee Phantom, which would be a great choice, and a similar weight to the Carbon FM936.
flag tbeezle
O+
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:30 Quote
sherbet wrote:
iirc the new heihei is around 5lbs or just under it. It's a stupidly light frame.

I just went through my phone and was shocked I didnt find a picture, It is very light though, and i think i could lose 100g by updating to the sidlux, I bought this a few months ago but its a 2020 model, i liked the paint on this frame option more than the 2021 but the only difference is the shock
flag dingus
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:33 Quote
sherbet wrote:
I really want to make a new heihei into a gleny bike. Ride out to the local XC night 30km away, do a couple 10/15km laps, ride home. It's not rough enough there to need a flat bar, and drops help with passing when it's busy. Just a lot of money to sink into a bike like that.

What's a gleny bike? Did a quick google and it came up with the Last Glen and cycle routes for Scottish glens...
flag notsosikmik
O+
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:40 Quote
scotteh wrote:

My thought is that the head/seat tube angles wouldn't be drastically different in the low setting with a 170mm fork than in the high setting with a 180mm fork. However, the bb would be lower as both slack mode and shorter fork would drop the bb. I'm guessing a 10mm decrease in fork length would result in a 3-5mm drop in bb height, so as long as it doesn't already have a super low bb in slack mode, it should be fine. I don't think the change in the feel of the rear travel would be too crazy unless the bike has some weird design where all of the progression/ramp up occurs in the last 1.5mm of shock stroke, which seems unlikely.

EDIT: Plus what the dolphin said ^

Yeah the BB height in low setting is listed at 348mm so a couple mm lower than that should not be a big deal I think.

Thanks
flag captainbringdown
Mod
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:45 Quote
whattheheel wrote:
seraph wrote:
sherbet wrote:
iirc the new heihei is around 5lbs or just under it. It's a stupidly light frame.

Very tempting indeed... temptinger and temptinger.

I have been eye humping the hell out of one after my buddy bought one. Now if I could order one...

Is the shop keyboard too tall for you to reach?
flag captainbringdown
Mod
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:48 Quote
tbeezle wrote:
seraph wrote:
tbeezle wrote:

Hmm that's super tempting. Time to make geometry charts! What size frame are you running and how tall are you?

I'm running an XL and I'm 6'5" I could in theory raise the post maybe an inch for a proper pedal stroke with a 210mm dropper. Which was very appealing being able to get the big dropper all the way in the frame.

I really like the spacious front triangle too, with the horizontal shock, 2 bottles for endurance xc rides, but could also do make a custom frame pack for an awesome timber trail bike.

the cable routing is kinda funky but easy with the park tool kit or a magnet, it routes down the downtube, then up the seat tube exiting to transfer the housing to the rear triangle on the seat stays, making bleeding a little bit of a rotation based method, so i wouldn't put any brakes on it that bleed with a cup.

You should be way more active, superb build. Your string of 3 or 4 posts has given more to this thread than WTH ever has. The open frame concept is appealing, did you by chance weigh the XL as frame only?

Do you have a pic of the rear tire clearance?
flag R-M-R
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:49 Quote
isaacschmidt wrote:
Curious why not Ikon? the Booster reminds me of like a rekon race/ spec eliminator.

In the 2.6" width, the Booster is lighter. In the absence of rolling resistance data, that's all I have to go on.


Circe wrote:
I’m sold on 2.5/2.6” and 35mm rims. It’s all I run. However, the cool guys don’t think they’re cool. Why is 2.3 or 2.4” cool, but 2.6” not? [ ... ] Is it the side to side deflection when cornering? Is it the plus size thing?

Deflection isn't a problem with a wide rim, so yes, I think it's because Plus got a reputation as being a crutch for novices. Shame about that, as I think wide tires still have potential to be an improvement for most riders.

Plus was executed terribly. People - maybe just product managers - were scared of the weight, so most tires were just fat XC race tires, often mounted on 30 mm rims. It should've been obvious that an 800 g, 3" XC race tire on a too-narrow rim will only work for novice riders or on trails with nothing that can puncture a tire, the latter negating the value of having larger volume.

By the time we saw 2.8" and 3" tires with adequate casing and tread and 510 g, 45 mm wide rims, the negative perception of Plus was already set.

If anyone remembers the terrifying failure rate of carbon components in the early 1990s, Plus has suffered a similar setback, but the upside is still there.
flag whattheheel
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:50 Quote
isaacschmidt wrote:
whattheheel wrote:
seraph wrote:


Very tempting indeed... temptinger and temptinger.

I have been eye humping the hell out of one after my buddy bought one. Now if I could order one...

Is the shop keyboard too tall for you to reach?

I demand retribution from Pinkbike for this!! Impeach Isaac!!!!!!!!!
flag tbeezle
O+
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:50 Quote
isaacschmidt wrote:
tbeezle wrote:
seraph wrote:


Hmm that's super tempting. Time to make geometry charts! What size frame are you running and how tall are you?

I'm running an XL and I'm 6'5" I could in theory raise the post maybe an inch for a proper pedal stroke with a 210mm dropper. Which was very appealing being able to get the big dropper all the way in the frame.

I really like the spacious front triangle too, with the horizontal shock, 2 bottles for endurance xc rides, but could also do make a custom frame pack for an awesome timber trail bike.

the cable routing is kinda funky but easy with the park tool kit or a magnet, it routes down the downtube, then up the seat tube exiting to transfer the housing to the rear triangle on the seat stays, making bleeding a little bit of a rotation based method, so i wouldn't put any brakes on it that bleed with a cup.

You should be way more active, superb build. Your string of 3 or 4 posts has given more to this thread than WTH ever has. The open frame concept is appealing, did you by chance weigh the XL as frame only?

Do you have a pic of the rear tire clearance?

Thanks, I will chime in more. I am kicking myself because I know I weighed it, but I never recorded it or took a picture, I will get a rear tire picture for you in a few, I can get one in a few
flag whattheheel
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:51 Quote
isaacschmidt wrote:
tbeezle wrote:
seraph wrote:


Hmm that's super tempting. Time to make geometry charts! What size frame are you running and how tall are you?

I'm running an XL and I'm 6'5" I could in theory raise the post maybe an inch for a proper pedal stroke with a 210mm dropper. Which was very appealing being able to get the big dropper all the way in the frame.

I really like the spacious front triangle too, with the horizontal shock, 2 bottles for endurance xc rides, but could also do make a custom frame pack for an awesome timber trail bike.

the cable routing is kinda funky but easy with the park tool kit or a magnet, it routes down the downtube, then up the seat tube exiting to transfer the housing to the rear triangle on the seat stays, making bleeding a little bit of a rotation based method, so i wouldn't put any brakes on it that bleed with a cup.

You should be way more active, superb build. Your string of 3 or 4 posts has given more to this thread than WTH ever has. The open frame concept is appealing, did you by chance weigh the XL as frame only?

Do you have a pic of the rear tire clearance?

Jared is going to make himself a couple bags out of the vinyl for RV skirts. I want one too now!
flag tbeezle
O+
Posted: Jan 28, 2021 at 14:52 Quote
isaacschmidt wrote:
ah, makes sense.

I found a weight of 2570 in my spreadsheet, no idea if thats the real one or not

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.046434
Mobile Version of Website