Bird Aeris owners thread

Author Message
Posted: Feb 22, 2020 at 10:21 Quote
piersgritten wrote:
Come to think of it, I don't think I have ever seen a picture of a snapped bird frame? Has anyone?

I've got a snapped Aeris Mk1 sat in the shed. Both chainstays and the toptube/seat tube weld. It's a known issue with the early models. Bird have since moved to a different frame builder and have changed the tubeset spec from 6061-T6 to 6066-T6.

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 8:17 Quote
@R-M-R what’s your opinion of Trek; specifically the new Fuel Ex? I have the opportunity to get one for £1400 (rrp £2800) but reviews seem mixed.

I will probably get one just so I can sell the frame and shock and buy the 29er Aether Wink

My other option is to get a rolling chassis Aether from Bird and then sell off my Zero frame after. I take it the Aether is a better choice over the LT120?

As ever, thanks for you sage advice!

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 9:18 Quote
Quick comparison:

• Geometry: Fuel EX and 120 LT are fairly similar. Aether is slacker in the head-tube angle, steeper in the seat-tube angle, and has a shorter seat-tube. 120 LT BB height is average, Aether is slightly low, Fuel EX is high.
• Pedaling anti-squat: Birds are higher.
• Motion ratio: Aether is quite progressive, 120 is moderately progressive, Fuel EX is mildly progressive.
• Brake squat: Birds are high, Fuel EX is low.

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 9:22 Quote
its always convenient when your bird has a coil
Finally got the dvo jade fitted to the bird, very impressed with it. Tracks the ground so much nicer than my old deluxe did, spring curve matches the frame so much better. Would definitely recommend a coil shock to anyone with an am9.
p.s. sorry about the crappy photo

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 9:27 Quote
piersgritten wrote:
Would definitely recommend a coil shock to anyone with an am9.

Original link with a coil shock is very nice. 3R link is more versatile.

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 9:28 Quote
wrote:
I've got a snapped Aeris Mk1 sat in the shed. Both chainstays and the toptube/seat tube weld. It's a known issue with the early models. Bird have since moved to a different frame builder and have changed the tubeset spec from 6061-T6 to 6066-T6.
Did you get a warranty sorted on the Aeris??

Posted: Feb 23, 2020 at 15:47 Quote
(RICHULR)- I really dig these bikes for some reason. You CAN order one off their website and have it shipped to the states. In checkout, the VAT tax will automatically come off. I do believe you will have to pay some sort of import tax or fee when it gets to the states though. I am hoping some shop over here starts importing them soon. I just want a Miami Vice color frame option lol.

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 5:05 Quote
wrote:
hainman wrote:
I've got a snapped Aeris Mk1 sat in the shed. Both chainstays and the toptube/seat tube weld. It's a known issue with the early models. Bird have since moved to a different frame builder and have changed the tubeset spec from 6061-T6 to 6066-T6.
Did you get a warranty sorted on the Aeris??

Bird have been excellent. I've got a long term injury that is just about sorted now and they have been happy to wait (thus far) for me to heal, then sort out a replacement. They have offered various options but I think I'm going for a chuck of money off a full AM9 build.

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 5:37 Quote
Anyone has any experience with the bottle cage adapter they now offer at Bird?

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 6:02 Quote
Looks interesting, I was about to design and 3d print my own one. Would be tempted to give theirs a go first

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 9:17 Quote
simondean56 wrote:
Spoke to Bird and was told to use fine wire wool, worked a treat ????

A Dremel grit flap wheel and some fine steel wool to finish it off did the trick.

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 9:26 Quote
I see the Aether is now called the Aether 7 on the Bird site, so I guess a 29 will come eventually.

I went from a aeris 120 to the AM9, which I love but some days it feels a bit too enduro-y to my terrain, so am hoping for a shorter travel Aether9.
Just got the RRR link, but haven’t mounted it yet so looking forward to trying that out.

Putting on lighter wheels (~1700g) and tires (XR3/XR4) made it a lot more zippy. I love how it feels with a coil so I go back and forth on that and the RS deluxe depending on mood, new linkage gives me something new to puzzle with.

One thing I’ve been thinking is putting on a 230x60 shock to effectively turn it into a 138(.46) mm rear but with the same eye-to-eye length, this not altering the geo I enjoy but only the travel and rear behaviour. I guess that will compress the leverage curve(?), but perhaps not so bad with the rrr link. Or will it just make everything terrible?

Yes, I enjoy tinkering beyond my own good Smile

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 15:27 Quote
Jaays wrote:
One thing I’ve been thinking is putting on a 230x60 shock to effectively turn it into a 138(.46) mm rear but with the same eye-to-eye length, this not altering the geo I enjoy but only the travel and rear behaviour. I guess that will compress the leverage curve(?), but perhaps not so bad with the rrr link. Or will it just make everything terrible?

It will work, but slightly differently from how you think:

The leverage curve will not be condensed. Instead, you just chop off the last 9 mm of travel.

Geometry will not quite be preserved. Think of it this way: in the original configuration, the bike normally sits somewhere in the range of travel - usually near the sag point, but it can be anywhere from fully extended to fully compressed. Now imagine a 230 × 0 "shock" (rigid strut). The bike is now locked into the fully extended position. With the same eye-to-eye and less stroke, the bike will sit higher.

Ideally, you would use a shock with slightly shorter eye-to-eye and less stroke. It's not a big difference, just wanted to clarify it's not exactly the same geometry.

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 23:15 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
It will work, but slightly differently from how you think:

The leverage curve will not be condensed. Instead, you just chop off the last 9 mm of travel.

ah yes of course, since the linkage won't be able to move into its final "travel".

R-M-R wrote:
Geometry will not quite be preserved. Think of it this way: in the original configuration, the bike normally sits somewhere in the range of travel - usually near the sag point, but it can be anywhere from fully extended to fully compressed. Now imagine a 230 × 0 "shock" (rigid strut). The bike is now locked into the fully extended position. With the same eye-to-eye and less stroke, the bike will sit higher.

Ideally, you would use a shock with slightly shorter eye-to-eye and less stroke. It's not a big difference, just wanted to clarify it's not exactly the same geometry.

Also makes sense, thanks! I need to get better at thinking about geometry in terms of how it sits around the sag point and not always only about the static geometry table provided, since that's where it lives out on the trail.

Posted: Feb 24, 2020 at 23:47 Quote
Yes, exactly.

Jaays wrote:
I need to get better at thinking about geometry in terms of how it sits around the sag point and not always only about the static geometry table provided, since that's where it lives out on the trail.

This is especially insightful.

Most riders' analyses stop at the static geometry chart. The most common example is increasing front travel to slack out the bike. While this has the desired effect most of the time - albeit less than expected - it also allows a greater range of motion in pitch (front dive) and the geometry at bottom-out - when you really need the safety factor - is the same as with less travel.


 
Your subscriptions
no posts

Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.005859
Mobile Version of Website