Bird Aeris owners thread

Author Message
Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 13:32 Quote
Thorjensen wrote:
Arierep wrote:
V3?

Should be a V2 but with the RRR linkage and some decal removal

I had been of the understanding that:

1. RRR linkage
2. Cleared for 160mm forks (sure I read that on here)
3. Graphics stay the same (even though Aether graphics are miles better)
4. I didn't know about seat tube being shorter.

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 13:53 Quote
What's the source of that info?
Can't find anything from Bird, even on their Instagram comments, not even about the fork length thing

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:14 Quote
I pretty sure wing span , height and inside leg are accurate. Not too sure about torso length. To measure torso length is it the lump at the top of your back to the imaginary line between your hips? I ridden the large and the extra large
Dont want to buy the large and then grow out of it is the problem. Which is why I'm considering sizing up to xl.

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:16 Quote
Torso remeauring is actually more like 18.5 to 19 inches

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:19 Quote
Arierep wrote:
What's the source of that info?
Can't find anything from Bird, even on their Instagram comments, not even about the fork length thing

Was told over an email with bird

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:20 Quote
Connie2003,

I have to be honest, this sizing process is all over the map. Your numbers are unreliable, your desired bike handling amounts to "the best of everything", and you're still growing. As much as I'm sure we all want you to be happy with your purchase, I don't think we can give you a definitive answer.

Try a few test rides and you'll know with more certainty than anyone can provide from behind our keyboards.

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:24 Quote
Ok well thanks for your help anyway. Those numbers really are right. Its seems very odd but I've measured multiple times with a couple of different methods and gotten the same numbers.
My trousers have to be extra long and arms on large jumpers arms are too short but the body is are too long. Frown

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 14:43 Quote
Connie2003 wrote:
Ok well thanks for your help anyway. Those numbers really are right. Its seems very odd but I've measured multiple times with a couple of different methods and gotten the same numbers.
My trousers have to be extra long and arms on large jumpers arms are too short but the body is are too long. Frown

If you really are confident in the numbers this time, then you have the legs and arms of a very tall individual and the back of a man who's shorter than average. Your long legs will put your saddle very high and will move your centre of mass rearward, so your current size would probably be ML with a very long stem or Large with a moderately long stem. Unusual bodies lead to unusual fits.

If you choose the XL as insurance against outgrowing it, be prepared for the bike to feel very stable and less maneuverable than what you may be used to. The downside is that trails that used to be easy, but still fun, may become rather boring and getting the bike through tight trails may feel like a wrestling match. The upside is that you'll feel much more in control on fast and rowdy trails.

Posted: Apr 1, 2020 at 16:51 Quote
Connie2003 wrote:
Ok well thanks for your help anyway. Those numbers really are right. Its seems very odd but I've measured multiple times with a couple of different methods and gotten the same numbers.
My trousers have to be extra long and arms on large jumpers arms are too short but the body is are too long. Frown

Get a large. You are not thaaat tall, and since you are a 16 year old in the uk, you probably do a lot more pissing about in the woods than the average rider. By the time you are fully grown at 18/19 you will probably be replacing the bike anyway. I am 6'1" and I ride a large, the 500mm reach is still longer than a vast majority of bikes on the market. I don't really subscribe to the whole; measure every aspect of your body and adjust your bike to fit ideology. In the real world, everyone has different riding positions, styles and preferences, some ride fast tracks and some ride slow, tight tracks.

My advice would be to get a large unless you plan on riding flat out rough trails all the time, in which case go up a size.

Posted: Apr 2, 2020 at 1:49 Quote
piersgritten wrote:
Connie2003 wrote:
Ok well thanks for your help anyway. Those numbers really are right. Its seems very odd but I've measured multiple times with a couple of different methods and gotten the same numbers.
My trousers have to be extra long and arms on large jumpers arms are too short but the body is are too long. Frown

Get a large. You are not thaaat tall, and since you are a 16 year old in the uk, you probably do a lot more pissing about in the woods than the average rider. By the time you are fully grown at 18/19 you will probably be replacing the bike anyway. I am 6'1" and I ride a large, the 500mm reach is still longer than a vast majority of bikes on the market. I don't really subscribe to the whole; measure every aspect of your body and adjust your bike to fit ideology. In the real world, everyone has different riding positions, styles and preferences, some ride fast tracks and some ride slow, tight tracks.

My advice would be to get a large unless you plan on riding flat out rough trails all the time, in which case go up a size.

Thanks you. Your right I do do alot of pissing about in the woods. Thanks for the help.

Posted: Apr 2, 2020 at 2:17 Quote
The L AM9's 500mm (or 495mm if you use a 160mm fork) reach tends to be in between many brands L and XL. At 6'2 you'd also be somewhat in between most brands recommendations for L and XL. So, without knowing you or your riding habits, I guess the safe option would in fact be a L.

I'm a touch under 6'1 (184cm) with monkey arms and always felt I was on the lower end of the AM9 L scale. On really step, technical sections I had to move around a lot, specially on surprise drops and such. On the other hand it was a rocket going in a straight line and the most comfortable bike ever for climbing and all day pedals.

A piece of advice (in this case do as I say not as I do), don't overthink things or fall into paralysis by analysis. Like it or not, most MTB frames, specially those used hard, are transient things for their owners. For several reasons, you tend to rarely keep the same frame for more than 2 or 3 years.
Because of that, and particularly if you haven't tried a good deal of different frames, it's not worthy to waste too much time on the decision to get the "perfect" or your "forever" bike, because there isn't such thing.
Every bike has a compromise of some sort, and best case scenario you'll learn about things you like, worst case scenario about things you don't like or would like to try differently on your next bike

Posted: Apr 2, 2020 at 2:35 Quote
Arierep wrote:
The L AM9's 500mm (or 495mm if you use a 160mm fork) reach tends to be in between many brands L and XL. At 6'2 you'd also be somewhat in between most brands recommendations for L and XL. So, without knowing you or your riding habits, I guess the safe option would in fact be a L.

I'm a touch under 6'1 (184cm) with monkey arms and always felt I was on the lower end of the AM9 L scale. On really step, technical sections I had to move around a lot, specially on surprise drops and such. On the other hand it was a rocket going in a straight line and the most comfortable bike ever for climbing and all day pedals.

A piece of advice (in this case do as I say not as I do), don't overthink things or fall into paralysis by analysis. Like it or not, most MTB frames, specially those used hard, are transient things for their owners. For several reasons, you tend to rarely keep the same frame for more than 2 or 3 years.
Because of that, and particularly if you haven't tried a good deal of different frames, it's not worthy to waste too much time on the decision to get the "perfect" or your "forever" bike, because there isn't such thing.
Every bike has a compromise of some sort, and best case scenario you'll learn about things you like, worst case scenario about things you don't like or would like to try differently on your next bike

Thanks for your help. I think I'll order a large. Was definitely the more fun bike to ride.

Posted: Apr 5, 2020 at 4:56 Quote
Has anyone ridden the new Aether 7? What do you think about it? Is the low BB a problem in technical trails?

Also, best shock? Air or coil?

Posted: Apr 5, 2020 at 12:36 Quote
KaiserBajser wrote:
Has anyone ridden the new Aether 7? What do you think about it? Is the low BB a problem in technical trails?

Also, best shock? Air or coil?

Haven't ridden, but have reviewed the kinematics and the geometry.

• Motion ratio is moderately progressive and will work with air or coil.
• Static BB height should be lower for bikes with less travel, as they don't sink down as far. Pedal strikes usually occur somewhere in the middle of the travel. In that context, the Æther 7 is low, but not crazy low.

Posted: Apr 6, 2020 at 1:29 Quote
R-M-R wrote:

Haven't ridden, but have reviewed the kinematics and the geometry.

• Motion ratio is moderately progressive and will work with air or coil.
• Static BB height should be lower for bikes with less travel, as they don't sink down as far. Pedal strikes usually occur somewhere in the middle of the travel. In that context, the Æther 7 is low, but not crazy low.

Thanks! How much will a 150 mm fork raise the BB? A few mm?

If I want a trail bike that could also do bike park (intermediate tracks), is the Aether better than Aeris 145?


 
Your subscriptions
no posts

Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.006471
Mobile Version of Website