|   turner 5 spot | Damon
Nov 7, 2002 5:45 PM | | Ok people here goes, I'm looking for a new frame, and fork. Thinking about the Turner 5 spot, and a fox fork 125 mm rlc. Looking for som input about the bike. Have seen pics of it but its still to new to really get any info on it |
| re: turner 5 spot | DGC
Nov 7, 2002 10:45 PM | | The 5 spot is a bike created from the RFX (5" or 6" inch travel) where riders were setting it up as a 5" travel xc type set up trail bike......I'm one of those guys.
The 5 spot also gets a lot lighter than a RFX was. The 5 spot is a very comfortable long travel xc freeride trail bike, not a hucker or DHer, thats what the Lucky 7 is. But rest assured it is built strong. I swear by this bike as my go anywhere do anything bike up here in Lake Tahoe. I think the bike hits the middle ground of climbing and decending-extremely efficient and fun at both disciplines, I've raced both xc and dh with it in the past, but now I do lots of rides where you have to climb to get to the fun downhills, yet long xc rides are no problem with this bike either. The guys who have ridden mine rave about how it pedals so well and outclimbs and outdecends their bikes which are bikes in the same travel range. I also have had other 5 inch travel forks, and prefer the Fox Vanilla over any other for this bike, matches so well. |
| pic #2 | DGC
Nov 7, 2002 10:47 PM | | with an AVA air ahock. |
| Whoah, what is that thing? | Tscheezy
Nov 8, 2002 12:06 AM | | The head tube gussets and seat tube brace are typical RFX /Lucky 7, the rocker is typical 5 Spot/RFX (5 inch). What is that thing? It really looks like an RFX, but if you say it is a 5 Spot I will believe you. The only difference between the RFX and the 5 spot is a geometry tweak and slightly lighter tubes (although with that head tube gusset I wonder.).
Cool. My main question is have you spent any appreciable time on an XCE and do you notice the steering being any slower on your "5 Spot"? Most of us XCE owners are thrilled with the handling of our rides and are just a little afraid of what may happen with the steering slowed down (by a 69º head angle).
Thanks for the pics!
tscheezy |
| its a RFX | DGC
Nov 8, 2002 8:09 AM | | My bike is a RFX, the 5 spot is very similar but with a few very slight changes such as a smaller support running from seat tube to the top tube, but mine pictured is a 2001 RFX. I have ridden the XCE a lot, as one of my employees has a XCE. The XCE feels much more xc than mine. Depends on your riding if the longer travel and slower steering is needed. My RFX is slower steering and for flatter and tight twisty xc trails, the 69 degree head angle will feel sluggish.
My riding is steep, loose, technical trails so the RFX suits me better, but if i were doing less of that and more rough xc trails, I'd own a XCE too. |
| Can you expand on that a bit? | Zag
Nov 8, 2002 12:01 PM | | Since you have spent a fair amount of time on both the RFX and XCE, could you describe the differences in a bit more detail? I am on the verge of buying an XCE, but with the 5 Spot coming out, and not weighing much (if any) more than the XCE, I am wondering if that may be a better choice.
I am wondering about a couple of things. One, how much difference does the extra inch of travel make in the rear in regards to comfort. I don't ride aggressively enough to "need" the extra travel, but I live in NW Washington, and the trails are covered with 2"-6" roots, so if the extra travel would do a noticeably better job of smoothing out this type of terrain at low to medium speeds, it is something I think I should consider.
How is climbing with the 69 deg head angle, and how does it compare to the XCE? I am not talking about long smooth climbs, I am thinking of steep technical climbs with switchbacks (and again with lots of roots). I think my biggest concern is that I would find the front end of the 5 Spot a bit too "floppy" for my type of terrain. I rented a Kona Bear DeeLux for a day in Chamonix, and it was noticeably "floppy". I did not really like the way the front end felt, and I had trouble with some of the technical climbs (that I think I could have easily cleaned on my own bike). The head angle of the Bear (according to the specs) is only 70 deg, and it had a Fox Float 100, so which really is not that tall of a fork, so I was a bit surprised at how bad the front end felt. Perhaps the 80mm stem had something to do with it as well, but it is something I am really concerned about.
Have you ever ridden your RFX with a 100mm fork? I know, kind of a strange question, but I am thinking that the RFX/5 Spot with a 100mm fork might handle a bit like the XCE with a 100mm fork, so perhaps if I opted for the 5 Spot, I could go to a 100mm fork if I didn't like the handling, and still get the benefit of the extra inch of travel in the rear.
Anyway, any insight you could give me would be much appreciated. Buying a bike has a bit more stressfull than I would have imagined. |
| According to the numbers... | Tscheezy
Nov 8, 2002 1:45 PM | | the 5 Spot is an atrophied RFX. The head angles, travel, and just about everything else are the same. The tt might be 0.2" longer on the 5 Spot. People say the 5 Spot is the new incarnation of the XCE, but it really seems to be a lightened RFX to me. As the numbers are almost the same (minus some weight) I would read RFX reviews to get a feel for how the 5 Spot might ride.
All these bikes are points on a continuous spectrum running from light xc to big-hit freerider. All the Turners seem to have slid one-half notch towards the freeride end of the spectrum for 2003. The Burner is halfway between the old O2 and the XCE, the 5 Spot halfway between the XCE and the RFX, and the Lucky 7 took one hop to the right of the old RFX.
If I am right ( and we won't know until the new bikes get some saddle time and people report in) then the XCE may be sorely missed as the RFX (or new 5 Spot?) may not be as good as a trail bike.
If you are thinking about an epic riding rig or a rough XC bike, the XCE would be very hard to beat. I would be extremely hesitant to order a 5 Spot until I could test one or could get lots of feedback from others for the singular reason that it may turn out to ride like the RFX (which is not bad if a pure freerider is what you want). DGC notwithstanding, the general concensus is that the RFX is not a general riding rig.
Only time will tell.
I have a question for DGC: What is the stroke on the AVA shock? The Turners have called for a 1.75" stroke shock (until the new Romic rockers came out). Did it lower the rear end much? |
| Oh, and another thing... | Tscheezy
Nov 8, 2002 1:49 PM | | I remember reading that putting a lower travel fork on the front of an RFX didn't speed the handling up, just made it twitchy and weird. Be very careful about tweaking the geometry with shock changes. It usually doesn't turn out the way you want. |
| shocks...... | DGC
Nov 8, 2002 9:47 PM | | My AVA is a 2 inch stroke with 7.5" eye to eye, same as spec'd Fox Vanilla on all past RFX's so the geometry is exactly intact. A Turner 02 uses a 6.5 length eye by a 1.5" stroke shock, the XCE uses the same eye to eye but a 1.75" stroke. With the Romic on a XCE the rockers are longer to get the 4" travel with a 1.5" stroke Romic, so the BB height should be basically the same as with the Fox shock. |
| Thanks. | Zag
Nov 10, 2002 11:05 AM | | Yeah, I called and talked to the guys at Turner about the 5 Spot. They said the 5 Spot was actually the predecessor to the RFX. However, Turner decided he wanted to go with something a bit heavier at the time, thus the current RFX. Apparently most of the guys at Turner (including Dave himself) have been riding 5 Spots for the past 3 years, so the bike has been thoroughly tested and dailed in. At least thats what I was told. They also said the bike climbed good with the 69 degree head angle. However, I am not sure that the type of climbing they are doing in southern cal will be the same as I would be doing in NW washington. What I would really like to see, is a slightly lighter version of the XCE. The Burner will be close, but unfortunately it is limited to 3.5" of travel, and I want at least 4" and would prefer a bit more than that. |
| Zag and Tscheezy | DGC
Nov 8, 2002 9:29 PM | | First off, my RFX is a lighter tubeset than a stock RFX. I wanted a lighter 5 inch travel bike 2 years ago instead of a heavier one, so Dave Turner was willing to look into it and make me a custom RFX, after which I was coming off of the first generation RFX. Some of the small high end frame manufacturers are willing to do customs for a little more $$$. The geometry of mine vs. a stock RFX at 5" is basically the same, mine weighs more than a 5 spot will, and less than a stock RFX does. Making mine a bit more of a do anything general bike than a stock RFX, but thats for me and I like to have fun decending and climbing to get to the cool decents are just fine with me. Most of our riding here leans more towards rough rocky loose technical and DH if not a combination to some extent.
For my riding in Tahoe this is what I wanted and am extremely happy with it. IN GENERAL.....a 4 inch travel bike will be easier to climb than a 5 inch bike, less weight, lower front end, less rear suspension sag during steep climbs, different geometry etc... The XCE I ride from time to time proves this, an XCE is not a freeride bike it is a heavy duty xc trail bike that loves to be ridden hard and it rocks in its element. Turns quicker, less weight to toss side to side in tight woods, very solid secure feel. For a 5 inch travel bike, my RFX pedals very efficient and climbs quite well but again for a 5 inch travel bike...... its more sluggish for sure than a XCE, but more stable too when pushed at speeds going down.
I can tell you this, many of our locals here who are real MTBers, the ones who are into it for the adrenalin side of mountain biking not just the work out or after work fitness cruise, that used to swear by their 3 inch travel xc bikes have moved up to 4 and 5 inch travel bikes and have been happy to deal with the added weight or slower climbing and steering traits for the added comfort and fun factor, it seems more and more its not how many miles you did or can do, its how many smiles per mile that seems to count, and i tend to agree. But that is our area, everywhere is a little different.
The stock RFX is not a general riding rig-its a freeride and DH big hit bike, but you need to look at how the average rider sets it up and how it was being used, most went close to a full DH set up. Look into what the average local in Moab, Utah ride. If you want to compare, then you need to look at 5" set up RFX's with xc parts on them to get an idea how a 5 spot would ride and realize the 5 spot will be more xc capable. Mine is set up xc, I'm 40 years old, ex racer, manage a bike shop, married.....etc and so on.......fun is what it needs to be for me, and i still love to go fast downhill and especially be challenged by technical decending so a light 5 inch travel bike works best for me, and comfort is a must for my beat up body.
Oh and i had a Marzocchi Z-1 with ECC and did not like the wierd feel when I had the ECC locked down very much from full extension, except for super steep pavement climbs, and I rode a 6 inch RFX with a 5 inch single crown on it, and it too had the wierd twitchy unbalanced feel. Turners are more specific to forks used, designed around a forks ride height, makes for a sweet balanced ride when set up according to Turner specs. The lower BB height with a shorter than spec fork will be an issue while climbing ledges and obstacles where you need chainring clearance also.
Call Dave Turner and ask question about the bikes, he will likely be more than happy to talk with you. |
| Great summary. Thanks for setting me straight on the shock... | Tscheezy
Nov 9, 2002 11:13 AM | | lengths. It is easy to become an arm-chair engineer when interacting online. A little dirt-time goes a long way.
Where in Tahoe are you? I have spent a lot of time around Tahoe City. I lived just south of Caspian state park below Eagle Rock. I love Tahoe!
Nice day here. We're going rabbit hunting and will climb a peak and look for mountain goats.
See ya.
tscheezy |
| RFX RFX RFX | Turner RFX Rulz
Nov 9, 2002 6:17 PM | | I have an RFX with a 5" travel fork and all I can say is that it is the best bike I have EVER ridden! Yeah it is a bit heavy but it climbs technical trails with no problem. And when I say technical I mean 2-3 foot steps up boulders to rock to boulder to rock and then when the time comes to go down "FORGET ABOUT IT". I drop, run cross country, dirt jump, and the bike asks for more. Seriously I never thought a bike could make such a difference. ALso get a Romic with it, that baby is sweet. Not super plush on small stuff but that in my opinion is not wat the idea of a fully is.
Go RFX, I do not think the 5 Spot with the lighter tubing sounds too good and then 7 inches of travel seems to be TOO much. ALso once Marz comes out witha 6 inch single crown you open up a world of new possibilities.
OK I am rambling but then I just drank some coffee. BUY IT and if you do not like it I will refund your money............. |
| Great summary. Thanks for setting me straight on the shock... | DGC
Nov 9, 2002 9:51 PM | | I live in South Lake Tahoe. Go check out the pictures I just poseted near top of Passion today under "The Tahoe Report". |
| Thanks nm | Zag
Nov 10, 2002 11:06 AM | | nm |
| |
