|   My new frame and some other tidbits... | AZ-X
May 25, 2002 6:04 PM | | Here it is. Finally. Sadly, I think it's heavier than it looks. I couldn't get the damned thing balanced on the scale and the scale also needs a new battery. I'll figure it out and get a good reading to post later, but it looks like it could be a few grams over 2500. That's unfortunate, but a small price to pay for better handling and a stiffer frame than the Giant. I still project that the weight could be below 22lbs for the whole bike with the aluminum rotors. All of the "extra light" parts that I'm using have helped keep the weight down...
Here are some pics taken earlier in the week of some of my other parts.
Here's my 34.9mm XT front derailleur with two well greased Al bolts:
This is the Extralite "The Clamp" that Sergio Riva specially anodized blue for me to match some other parts:
.jpg)
My Extralite UltraPush riser bar:
Here is the front wheel that B4Me built with 32, 3x Marwi Ti spokes, Synergy Asym rim and Am. Classic disc hub. It came in at 677g before tape and rimstrip for Stan's. This pic shows it with the tape, rimstrip, and skewer installed. Yah, it's pretty damned light:
My RaceFace Turbine LP ISIS cranks with TA and Cannondale 44/29t rings. In this pic, the Truvativ M15 aluminum crank bolts are installed. The Truvativ bolts have a copious amount of grease on them too (that's just for you, pedalAZ!):
 |
| Oh and... | AZ-X
May 25, 2002 6:12 PM | | Here are a couple of pics of my '01 Mars Elite with no brake studs, Enduro seals instead of boots and stock seals, steerer cut to 210mm, and star nut installed. I will probably have to cut the steerer down a bit more because the headtube of the small Racer X is tiny and my headset has a very low stack height:
Again, just for you Pedal, well lubed with Prep-M grease! :o) |
| Also... | AZ-X
May 25, 2002 6:33 PM | | I'm not sure if you can see the weight of 118g in this pic, but I will be testing my Martas whith the JT Imports 160mm rotors and stock pads this week and the next as well. The entire front and rear set with my aluminum and titanium bolt kit weighs in at 576g with these rotors: |
| Hey AZ-X about the enduro seals | Re-Pete
May 26, 2002 1:27 AM | | Where did you get them and are they availiable bor the Black line
About the black I'm thinking of getting rid of my duck race and going for the Black elite 80/100
I cant get more than 65mm travel out of the duke and have been trying to convince myself I like it while contemplating a Marz MXC ECC
Then my mate goes and gets a Mars elite and I find out about active forks its amazing
So I'm having a hard time convincing myself anymore and I cant aford the elite air and I kinda like the slacker angle of the 100mm and I want stiff so I'm thinking Elite 80/100
I see you spent some time on the Black so what do you think Is there no substitute for coil |
| Hey, Pete... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:23 AM | | See my answer to Aesop Rock's questions below about the fork seals. As far as availability for the Blacks, you can check out this news page from Angry's website as well. I don't know anymore than he does, but it appears that they should be available soon for several forks, including the Marathon: http://www.angryasian.com/main.cfm .
I actually owned a Black Super Air, not a Black Elite. I know that Answers nomenclature for these forks is VERY confusing! All the Blacks with the external Rapid Travel Adjust are coil forks. The Elite Air and Super Air are the only air forks in the Black lineup so far. PedalAZ has an Elite Air and he seems to like it a lot. I loved the Super Air, but it was just too heavy (it is a 100/120mm internally adjustable fork that weighed 1650g in the 100mm, disc only setup) and I didn't want to be stuck at 100mm all the time. 80mm is more optimal for my general riding needs. If they would just come out with a mid-way 80-100mm Black Air, I would be on it in a second!
The Black coil forks are better in the longer travel mode. So if you are getting an Elite 80/100, don't expect it to be as plush in the 80mm setting. The Blacks have not fixed the problem of the spring rate change in the lower setting as is much better executed with the Rockshox U-Turn technology on the Psylos (they'll have it on the new coil-sprung Dukes next year too). It is also heaveir than the Super Air at over 4 pounds... I also actually like the feeling of the Black Air forks better. They are even more plush than the Mars line, if you can imagine that, and you get travel that feels like it is more than the rated travel when on the trail.
Don't you have a Giant? That frame already has a slightly slack head angle... I'm not sure that it would be a good idea to go to a 100mm Black because it has a medium-high axle to crown height. Your bike will feel very tall up front and the steering will be much slower in fast, tight singletrack. You may want this, but I would go and ride an NRS or other Giant at a store that has a Black Elite 80-100mm on it (NRS2?) in 100mm mode and see how that feels on tight turns compared to your bike. Who knows, you may like it.
Again, you should go ride a couple first. There are also good sales here on MTBR.com and on Ebay every once in a while. I saw an Elite Air go for as little as $200 a few months ago and there was one this month advertised here on MTBR that was only $280. Look around for the deals. They should also start clearing the current model year forks out by the fall. |
| Yeah AZ- X I've got the SE2 | Re-Pete
May 26, 2002 2:07 PM | | You gave me some advice when I was buying it
Too bad I almost ordered it with the Mars but followed the crowd to Rockshox
Im going to do a bit more fiddleing with the duke but dont think Ill get the feel of the mars
I've got a 2001 100m Z5 on the bike now and its great downhill and rails backed turns but I'm hesitant to go 100mm because of the way it climbs but for single track its ok I just have to ride it through corners rather than steer it
Thats why I was thinking about a MXC ECC but I think if I like the Manitou feel I'll be better of getting one otherwise I might get the Marz and still not be happy
So at this stage its either an Elite 80/100 or a Mars (although I think this has an even shorter axle to crown than the duke which I dont want) or save up for the elite air
Anyway thanks for the help
Pete |
| what size bolts for the xt deraileur?..more | Aesop Rock
May 25, 2002 9:07 PM | | also where did you get the clamp, or where can I find a really light seatpost clamp? Also where did you get the enduro seals and bolts? Thanks |
| They're M5 bolts, about 10mm long for the cable bolt... | DeeEight
May 25, 2002 10:08 PM | | and 15mm for the clamp band. I got a couple dozen Ti bolts for shimano
front derailleurs in stock. |
| XT Front Derailleur = 1*M5x15 / 1*M5x7... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:04 AM | | I ordered the alu bolts from Racebolts.com. An M10 would have to be ground down because it is too long for the cable anchor bolt that it replaces.
I got the Enduro seals from James "the AngryAsian" Huang: http://www.angryasian.com/main.cfm . They cost me $20.00 shipped to Arizona. They work with both Rockshox and Manitous with 28.6mm stanchions. Be warned that the Enduros are a very tight fit. Be sure to use some low viscocity oil on the inner surface of the seals when installing. There may be a bit of stiction on the initial downstrok if the fork has been sitting idle or locked out at first, but this smooths out within a few seconds. To me, it is worth it to have almost a water/dust tight seal between my sliders and stanchion tubes. The newer Mars and Blacks of this summer should be upgraded with an improved triple-lipped seal that may also allow you to run successfully without the boots. The newer mini boots hardly weigh anything though, in comparison to the old ones. It may not be worth it to remove them... I also think the Enduros are cool because they come in blue. ;o) |
| put something below the frame to make it stay upright... | nino
May 25, 2002 11:06 PM | | and press the RESET button again.that`s how you will be able to see your frames weight.
BTW: NICE parts!
what about the rest? |
| Thanks, Nino...! | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:41 AM | | Will that really give an accurate reading? Anyway I'll try it after I replace the battery and get the camera again later this week. I got an Ultimate repair stand and some more tools so it will not be a huge deal for me to strip it and weigh it later if I complete it before then... I also have a Cane Creek Cloud 9 shock to try that is a bit lighter than the stock Fox Float. For the record it is a 7.875" eye to eye length with a 2" stroke. As pictured below with the bushings zip tied to the shock.
I'll post the rest very soon. I'm still waiting for a couple of items. |
| That's a 200mm eye to eye for our Euro friends... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:59 AM | | I'm sure you could figure that out on your own, Nino, but I just thought I'd b courteous.
Aren't there some 200mm shocks coming--like the one from DT Swiss--that are supposed to be significantly lighter? |
| Hey AZ-X... | Green Giant
May 26, 2002 7:15 AM | | ... please be sure to give us a good comparison of the cloud nine and the fox on the Racer X. I've been kicking around trying one. Interested to hear your ride comparisons. Thanks. |
| I will... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 7:17 AM | | be writing a full review after I've had some significant time on both. |
| AZ-X, you can use the tare feature on the MyWeigh.... | wfl3
May 26, 2002 8:29 AM | | ...Just put whatever tou're gonna use to keep the frame stable on the scale then hit the tare button and it'll go back to zero, add your frame and you'll get an accurate weight.
You can test the tare's accuracy on your scale by weighing an object normally then remove it and put another object on there hit tare and add the original object - you should get the original weight. |
| I did that and it was fluctuating between 2530+ and 2490+... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 8:55 AM | | I weighed some other stuff at that point to see what was happenning, but then it refused to zero properly. That's when I realized that the battery needed to be replaced. |
| That should be an amazing bike, regarless of the 2500g+ frame | eric wictor
May 26, 2002 1:42 AM | | Two questions:
I have the exact same cranks w/ a full set of TA rings. I've found problems with the spacing of the rings (the middle ring isn't exactly in the middle) and have had to use washers. Sound familiar?
You've used a 44/32/20 setup with a road cassette, right? How does 2x9 compare in practice? I've had to go back to a mountain cassette and a 22t granny because of shifting problems. That's added about 78g to my drivetrain! :0(
Maybe 2x9 is an option for me now, but I would like to know how that setup compares for real backcountry riding. The top gear ratio 29/34 seems a little steep for extreme climbing, but I just don't know. Sections I ride in 20x27 I can also do in 20x23, so I wonder...What are your experiences with it? |
| Definitely a familiar problem... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:53 AM | | The TA rings shift great, but I also had those problems (as I'm sure you remember) with shifting. I too am using washers between the rings and that pictured weight above includes those. I tried them out with a road cassette in tripple configuration as well and I didn't like it as much. I'm just used to not having to shift that often anymore. It's true, as Nino and others say, that the transitions between gears are not so easy on your legs when doing long climbs with the road cassette setup, but the amount of shifting you have to do isn't worth it to me. My bike (especially my wheels with Stan's old system and latex) where light enough that I rarely even used the 29/34 combo at all. Much of my ability to stay out of the granny seams to depend on traction--and low weight, but grippy treads at lower pressure (in addition to efficient full suspension) makes a great climbing combo on rough, loose terrain. I don't think you'll miss the smaller gear much, and I think you'll get used to the larger jumps between gears. More time to concentrate on hammering rather than what gear you are in anyway. :o)
By the way, it seems that the silver TA rings that JD or someone else posted a few weeks ago are even lighter than the black ones. His 44t ring was a full 8g less than mine(72g compared to 80g for mine). That's fairly significant for a chainring. Not sure why... |
| Just to clarify... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 7:16 AM | | That one sentence should have read, "It's true, as Nino and others say, that the transitions between gears are not so easy on your legs when doing long climbs AS with the road cassette setup, but the amount of shifting you have to do isn't worth it to me."
Sorry. Also, "triple" not "tripple." :o) |
| Thanks. One note | eric wictor
May 27, 2002 7:32 AM | | As for the climbing, ever noticed that on a really long, steep climb, the only difference after shifting to a lower gear is your speed drops? Your hart rate is just as high, the pain in your legs is just as bad, and you feel equally miserable. Maybe 2x9 is a good thing...
I also thing 2x9 is more reliable. The less you shift, the less chance there is of problems with your chain, anything from falling off too worse. I have had my chain lying around the BB shell waaaay too often, so if I can solve this I'd be an even happier man.
As soon as I get the cassette thing sorted out - 34t may be incompatible with my Plasma derailleur :o - I will give 2x9 a try. I've set my commuter MTB up with a 2x8, and I love it! |
| Yes, you have to watch out about that 34t cog... | AZ-X
May 27, 2002 8:14 AM | | That is why I had to ditch my first 9.0sl nine speed reard derailleur for the heavier 2001 (white) model. The older one would not work with a 34t cog and I was convinced--even back then--that 2x9 was the best for me. I sacrificed the 50g+ and changed to the heavier derailleur and was very happy with it. Now I have the X.0 and I've gained nearly the entire weight penalty back AND I have a beautiful, stronger and smoother derailleur. I haven't even had a chance to ride mine yet, but a couple of the guys that come into the shop have them setup and it is REALLY smooth. I can actually say slightly even better than my 9.0sl.
I know that you are on a budget (I am finally getting to the end of the line with MTB spending too!), but the X.0 system may be for you. Maybe you can find some extra parts lying around to sell off as I did to get some of my parts...
Good luck and keep us posted. |
| Yeah | eric wictor
May 27, 2002 10:30 PM | | I have spent just waaay too much money on bikes - my friends and teammates have even elevated me to the freak satus - so I want to keep spending a bit low. I've started riding marathons this season, which costs an unbelievable amount of money...
As for the X.O., I like it, and have had a feel of the X.O. shifters which were very nice, but I want to keep my Plasma setup alive as long as possible. I'm very happy with the shifting, and just love the looks. I'm waiting for AndyStrike10's shifters at the moment, to add to my collection of Sachs part, so it may be a while before I switch derailleurs.
My bike now weighs 25.6 lbs (argh!) which is a full 2lb. more than last year (w/out the discs and standard drivetrain), so I've lost all hope of getting back to that weight anyway... |
| AZ--about grease on bolts. | TNC
May 26, 2002 7:49 AM | | Have you tried using anti-seize instead of grease for bolt thread application? I've had much better luck with anti-seize as an anti-strip and damping agent over grease. It seems grease tends to naturally dry out or break down more quickly--especially in wet or muddy conditions. The anti-seize tends to retain its lubricative qualities even when it appears dry--the suspended "metal" components I guess. I noticed this most on certain types of rear suspension components on off road motorcycles where the drive of the rear wheel tries to "pressure wash" the back of the bike with mud and water. I also have noticed that anti-seize always gives a smooth bolt/nut torquing ability during installation. Removal of the same bolts/nuts always seems more consistent over a grease medium. Obviously different types of grease would make better or poorer candidates than others, but I've not used a grease that was superior to anti-seize for the aforementioned application. No argument here--just wondering if you've tried it and had issues with it. I work at a shop part-time to pay for my habit, and the other guys have all switched to anti-seize over a period of time because of the issues I've mentioned. |
| I guess part of it depends on which anti-sieze you use...? | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 8:06 AM | | The silver anti-sieze is supposed to be used for aluminum/aluminum aplications, is it not? No I haven't tried it except when I used to work in a shop and used it specifically for threading Al BB cups into aluminum frames or Al bolts into Al parts. I actually also use blue Loc-Tite now for some applications such as chainring bolts and my aluminum rotor bolts (don't worry, I use alternating aluminum and titanium rotor bolts--not all aluminum). It seems to stop any siezing action, but also helps with parts that tend to work themselves loose.
It may be worth a try.
I was mentioning the grease because people have grossly overestimated the difference in weight that grease makes when putting your bike together. I just wanted to give people an understanding that it really isn't all that significant. If people REALLY want to know, srip down and clean all the parts that are greased and lubed, weigh your lube tubes, tubs and bottles; lube, grease and reinstall your parts, then weigh the containers afterward. You'll see that grease does NOT account for that "phantom extra 1/2-1 pound" that your bike seems to "gain" when weighed from a hanging scale completely assembled. On most bikes, it is usually far less than 40g in my experience--unless you are adding grease to completely dry parts that use grease ports or something.
I suspect that the "extra weight" really comes from the way that the bike is hung from the scale as well as other factors. When I had someone in Northern Arizona weigh my old Jamis FS bike, it came out to be 1/2 pound LESS than what I had calculated by weighing the parts in chunks on a 5lbs scale--and I had not cleaned or regreased any parts at all that time... |
| I guess part of it depends on which anti-sieze you use...? | TNC
May 26, 2002 5:54 PM | | The kind of anti-seize I use isn't metal-to-metal specific. It's a high-temp (unnecessary), high-pressure thread lube and damper. I use two brands interchangably--NeverSeize and Permatex 133K. I would assume the lubrication and damper qualities are the real benefits to bike parts. I haven't used loctite in awhile since going to anti-seize some years ago. You're probably aware that blue loctite isn't really a thread locker as much as it is a thread "damper". I've used it on all kinds of automotive, motorcycle, and bicycle applications. The most critical application where we see its superiority over grease is on BBs. The occurence of creaking BBs with anti-seize during the installation is rare compared to grease. Anyway, I was just wondering how your experience with any anti-seize products had gone. Good luck with the new bike. I'd love to try one of their polished Switchblades. |
| I've never used any type of anti-seize but the metal to metal... | AZ-X
May 26, 2002 6:08 PM | | type on a bike before. That may be a good idea--especially in the crank/BB interface area, as well as the frame/BB shell area as you say.
Yes the blue Loc-Tite helps to stop the rotor bolts and chainring bolts from vibrating loose. I've heard more than one rider complain that they lost a rotor bolt out on the trail. Truvativ even recommends the use of Loc-Tite for their aluminum ISIS crank bolts.
I'll check the NeverSeize and Permatex out on your recommendation.
Good riding to you! |
| sounds like the stuff that comes on new Race Face BB cups (nm) | VT Mike
May 26, 2002 9:16 PM | | |
| Well on your way, AZ | pedalAZ
May 27, 2002 7:01 PM | | It is really nice to see so many parts on the scales before the build so we will know that the finished bike really weighs what is claimed!
That fork is plenty light.
Sounds like that XO derailleur is going to be a nice upgrade. |
| Looks beautiful... | Metroid
May 28, 2002 6:28 AM | | You're going to love it. Almost all of the post offices have a digital scale for weighing packages. I took my frame and fork there to weigh it right after unpacking it. |
| JT Rotors | 40 Acres
May 28, 2002 3:43 PM | | AZ-X,
Gorgeous frame dude. Can't wait to see pics of the bike in its fully-assembled glory. Looks like you haven't tried the JT rotors yet. I put about 100 miles on the rotors over the past couple of weekends, and I'm not thrilled. In all fairness, 100 miles isn't an exhaustive test run and I haven't tried any alternatives to my stock Hayes sintered metallic pads, so take my comments for what they're worth.
First the good news. Braking performance was acceptable. Probably a little weaker than stock, but fine. They shed heat very efficiently, and they are pretty quiet. With my metallic pads, the rotors only squealed when I rocked the bike back and forth at a full stop . . . not unlike V-brakes.
Now for the bad news. The rotors don't seem to be well designed. My pads ground through the matte gray "coating" almost instantly. If that coating was designed to serve a purpose, oh well. I'd be underwhelmed even if the coating were purely cosmetic. More importantly, the rotors don't fit very well. They are slightly thicker than the stock steel ones, so I found it pretty tough to tune out the free running drag. Compounding this problem, the rotors seemed to be slightly out of true as a result of the stamping process.
I like the idea of Al rotors, but I'm not happy with the JT's. I haven't tried Stan's, but I get the impression that he's put more effort into the design and build. |
| |
