|   Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | TJohn
Jan 11, 2002 1:26 PM | | Why would you choose one over the other?? The SB is about 1/2 LB heavier than the 100x but you get more rear travel. I have been mired in analysis paralysis for about a year now trying to decide between the regular RacerX and the SB. But now I am thinking that the 100X looks like a good compromise. Should I just get the SB which really suits my riding style (trailbasher as opposed to XC racerboy) OR get the RX to complement my current bike (4"/4.5" fully that I intend to keep and ride) OR compromise between the two and get the 100x??? For those that think I should get the 100x, why would you pick it over the SB?? Thanks all!! |
| what's your current bike? | Green Giant
Jan 11, 2002 2:07 PM | | and what don't you like about it? |
| what's your current bike? | TJohn
Jan 11, 2002 6:13 PM | | My current ride is a Psycle Werks Wild Hare. It is 3 years old and it is time for a new ride. I have it set up w/ a XVert Super and Float RC, w/ full XTR and King/517 wheels and weighs in at 26.5 lbs. The only thing I don't like about my bike is that it climbs like a svelte pig. I know a lot of that has to do with the XVert up front but the another reason is that it squats quite a bit when the hill gets really steep. I would think the SB set up exactly like my WH would climb better because of less squat and shorter chainstays, but the question is how much better will it climb. Both WH and SB have 4.75" headtubes so it will be just as tall up front. Will I still be disappointed with the SB's climbing capabilities even though it will probably be a better climber than my WH??? Will I be disappointed in the 100x/RX's 3.7" of rear travel since I am used to 4.5" of plush travel??? Boy, what a dilema!!! BTW, how much is the 100x going for??? Thanks again to all! |
| some thoughts | Green Giant
Jan 12, 2002 7:00 AM | | The reason I asked is you stated you would be keeping your current bike. If it was a "lower end" bike I was going to tell you to just realize that you won't be riding it any more once you grab a sweet ride from a smaller MFG. BUT since you currently are on a very nice ride that may not be the case. Sounds to me other than the climbing you just have "new bike want" which isn't a bad thing, we all get it.
You won't notice much difference in the rear travel, since you have air shocks on both bikes you are considering. I don't see a reason to get the switchblade AND keep the wild hare. The SB will be a slightly better climber, but between that and the wildhare so much of it is set up.
Now, on to the RX/Hammerhead. I've got several years on the RX and just got a hammerhead. I've been on a wild hare several times. Regardless if you get the RX or Hammerhead I can definitively say that both will be better climbers than the WH (unless you do some real funky set-up). The hammerhead gets slightly more travel out of the rear than a stock RX, but I"ll be honest and say you won't notice it. It's less than 1/4 inch more. Both will be as stiff, if not stiffer than the WH. The hammerhead weighs a tad more than the RX due to a straight gauge downtube and boxed rear. The big difference is up front. I've stated before that I notice a lot more chance from 80 to 100 up front over 3 to 4 in the rear (unless you go from 3 air to 4 coil etc...). Oh yea, both the HH and RX will handle much quicker than the wildhare also.
Here is my gut feeling. If you get the Hammerhead set it up with an air shock up front and leave your wildhare as-is, the wild hare will end up sitting and you will sell it. Likely the same with the RX. Now, if you get the HH or RX and set it up light, then convert your wildhare to coil shocks front and rear, disc brakes and big ol tires as a more plush ride you may still ride both.
But it sounds like you want a better climber and a bit quicker bike. If I were you I would sell the wildhare, and then get a hammerhead and trick the living heck out of it. Fox Float up front, the new King Iso wheels, avid mech discs with ultimate levers etc... Just my 2cents. Oh yea, Charles at hammerhead is a great guy and will cut a sweet deal. |
| wild hare vs. quasi-moto | gordon
Jan 14, 2002 8:58 AM | | i had a wild hare build up almost exactly like yours. in a fit of lust for more travel, i got a quasi-moto (the switchblade wasn't available yet). i've since sold the wild hare, because i never rode it. i found that despite the extra weight, the quasi was quicker handling, a more efficient climber, and more stable on downhills. the wild hare has a relatively long wheelbase and top tube for such a light frame, which makes it's handling somewhat slugish. i guess the quasi's horst link makes it a better climber than the wh. since i don't do any real free-riding, i've recently put the quasi on a diet. i now run it with 4.5" of rear travel, an air shock, and a 100mm marathon up front. the bike now weights about 29lbs. i've lost a bit of downhill plushness, but it handles much better, and i can ride it all day long. i would expect that either the switchblade or hh 100, would be lighter, and better climbers, and quicker handling. |
| How do you like the Marathon 100??? | TJohn
Jan 14, 2002 10:24 AM | | Is it as stiff as you thought it would be?? Does it have the legendary Marzochhi plushness?? Do you know how much it actually weighs??? Thanks. |
| How do you like the Marathon 100??? | gordon
Jan 14, 2002 11:11 AM | | so far, i love it. i have only about 10 hrs. on it--we've had a lot of rain here in the bay area recently. i went from a 100m jr. t to 130mm z1/qr20. i liked the jr. t a lot. it was plush, stiff, but very heavy for a 100m fork. i never go use to the z1. it was very plush, and it's lateral stiffness was pretty good, but there seemed to be a lot of forward and back flex. it was hard to control the fork. the marathon doesn't have this forward and back flex at all, and feels much lighter. i'm not sure of the actual weight, though someone posted a few weeks back that theirs weighted 3.4lbs. i have a z2 x-fly on my single speed, and the marathon's plushness is much closer to the coil forks than it is to the x-fly. |
| Marathon weight..... | Ventanarama
Jan 15, 2002 7:56 PM | | it weighs 3.4lbs uncut. Very impressive fork, especially for the weight. Not quite as stiff as their previous forks but definitely stiffer than a SID. Good compromise between the light but flexy SID and forks like the X-Fly which are stiffer but 1/3lb heavier.
Larry Mettler
www.mtnhighcyclery.com |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | Spectre
Jan 11, 2002 2:15 PM | | I haven't ridden a Hammerhead 100, but the Racer X has a racier feel than the Switchblade. The best comparison that I can think of is that the RX is more of a rally car whereas the SB is the off road racing truck. The RX has a snappier feel when climbing and is also a quicker handling bike. I imagine that the Hammerhead 100 would feel similar to the RX, but with more travel. The SB is more of a freeride type bike whereas the Hammerhead 100 is a beefed up XC bike.
If you plan to keep your current bike, it seems like a SB would be more of the same. Do you race? If so, definitely get a Racer X. If not the Hammerhead 100 might be a nice all-around bike. Why do you want to get a new bike? What doesn't your current bike do well? Figuring this out might help you decide. |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | o2
Jan 11, 2002 2:38 PM | | I just ordered a 100X over both the SB and the RX. If its of any use (since we might not be looking for the same things, e.g., its going to be my only mtn bike), my rationale was:
-RX eliminated even though a premier XC racebike -- not my main goal. Also its handling supposedly isn't as good with a 100mm fork and its least good of the 3 at descending.
-100X chosen over the SB (at the 100mm setting) since its a bit lighter and (I'm hoping) it steers a bit quicker and bobs a bit less. 100x has been given high marks for stiffness by others on this board who already have one. Both are built by Titus, so thats high marks for both. Adjustability of the SB rear not a big deal for me since I'd keep it at the 4.5" setting. Likewise, the extra 0.7 inch SB rear travel doesnt outweigh my other criteria. Finally, I prefer the solid seat tube on the 100x over the SB seat tower (but that's just me.) Good luck finding your ideal.. |
| I feel your pain...... | The Squeaky Wheel
Jan 11, 2002 2:43 PM | | That was exactly my dilemma. SB or RX? I couldn't sleep, dropped my friends, gained 5#, dog wouldn't hang out with me....
Nah. It wasn't that tough.
My terrain is aggressive XC. Rock gardens, small drops, logs. Not race course groomed trails or fireroads. Typical northeast stuff. Definitely more trailbasher than XC racerboy. Had ridden the SB once & liked it, but the bike was too big for me so I didn't get a great feel for its capabilities. Couldn't get demos of either bike in my size since there are no local dealers.
I called Speedgoat. One person recommended the SB, the other the RX. That didn't help
Contacted Charles Coker & Alan at Titus. Both recommended the RX, specifically the Hammerhead. Their reasons essentially being that which you stated....lighter, snappier, better climber.
Actually, they said the Hammerhead & SB would be similar, with the HH getting the nod to weight, climbing, acceleration & quickness and the SB to stability at speed.
To paraphrase Alan & Chris, the SB is superior at faster speeds & bigger hits. Probably the bike of choice for West Coast fireroads. The RX/HH better at tighter technical trails. But the differences aren't that great.
One of my friends rides a SB through the same trails I ride my HH and he does just find. But I love my HH and I'm glad I followed the advice of Charles & Alan.
The Squeaky Wheel |
| RX/HH definitely better for East Coast singletrack | Spectre
Jan 11, 2002 3:21 PM | | Having lived on the East Coast, I can definitely say that the RX/HH would be the better choice for East Coast singletrack. The SB does feel less nimble. Out on the West Coast, it's not such a big deal, but if I were on the East Coast, there are many obstacles that would be much more rideable with a quicker handling bike. |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | Charles Coker
Jan 11, 2002 5:04 PM | | just a quick thanks for the positive, rational, and honest feedback and discussions on the various bikes here..
Charles |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | Quattro
Jan 13, 2002 4:36 PM | | Being in the same dilemma as the original poster and now
with HH 100 added into the pot,I still am also considering
the Tracer as a choice.I know that you recently added the
Intense line to your shop.Have you put one together for
yourself to ride? My thoughts is that the Tracer would be
only slightly heavier and be a little plusher than the HH
100.I know the Intense only uses two bearings at the main
pivot, but so does the M1.Any thoughts on the two as far
as a quality comparison and rigidity?The Hammerhead and the
Tracer are so close in weight and travel.The small Tracer
frame fits me better(tt) than the Titus would unless I went
for the custom Ti Racer X set up for a 100 mm fork.The
extra money could be used towards a really nice fork.Any
words of wisdom? |
| SB & RX owner ... | RP
Jan 11, 2002 6:11 PM | | I own a RX and a SB here on the West Coast. I've owned the RX for about 3 years and the SB for just over a year. My only complaint with the RX is that it doesn't handle the high speed fireroads very well. On the other hand you really have to be an aggressive rider to make the added travel and slacker geometry of the SB pay off. If the 100 performs as advertised I'd choose it over the SB because it seems a perfect balance between suspension and performance. |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | litephil
Jan 12, 2002 7:30 AM | | i've had my sb for about a month and i think its near perfect for me.
i have not ridden a hh but i did demo both the rx and the sb.my frend and i rode a familar trail for about an hour and then switched bikes.
we kept stopping and talked about the bikes and really compared them side by side.the rx really accelerated well and steered very quick and seemed to be the perfect race bike.i thoughtthe back end ramped up pretty quick though.twards the end of the ride we both wanted to ride the sb.it seems like i can ride it all day with out getting tired and the rx i rode more like a hard tail.the back end of the sb just seems bottom less and you can just hang this thing out on very rough big gear sections.(i really think i need both bikes).i'm getting ready to do a reveiw on it after a few more rides.you have a very hard dicission here and it took me about 2 months to decide.also charles and allan were alot of help.thanks guys and good luck |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | Concha
Jan 12, 2002 9:04 AM | | Where were you riding? I'm in the same dilemma (HH vs SB), and I'm going to be riding in Sacramento/Tahoe. It's sounding like the SB is better for those types of trails. |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | litephil
Jan 15, 2002 8:42 PM | | az.we have a good mix but a lot of rocky trails.my comparison was on a lot of fast single track and some pretty rocky climbs and ledges. |
| re: Switchblade vs. Hammerhead 100x | Charles Coker
Jan 12, 2002 7:46 PM | | a pic from today's ride
a short quicktime movie or two
http://www.hammerheadbikes.com/videos/DSCN0190.MOV
http://www.hammerheadbikes.com/videos/DSCN0194.MOV
the bike likes rocky stuff :)
Charles |
| regarding video clips.... | Charles Coker
Jan 13, 2002 7:49 AM | | for some reason..
right click on the link, save target to local drive, then launch..
view in "double size"
Charles |
| regarding video clips.... | cg
Jan 13, 2002 11:14 AM | | You'll also need QuickTime if you don't have it:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/
(the free version is near the bottom of the page)
cg |
| Same dilemna...SB vs. HH100x | KRob
Jan 13, 2002 8:42 PM | | I, like a lot of you, had been going through the same dilemna. In fact before frequenting this board, I'd decided the SB was definitely the way to go. I haven't ridden either bike, but from the comments on this board and after assessing my riding style (steep climbs, technical descents mixed with some high speed fire roads and single-track)I decided to order the HH100x. I live out west but wanted an all around bike that would do everything well and for a long time. I don't think I can justify another bike this expensive for awhile.
I worry a little bit about the posts that describe the HH as nervous at speed, but I'm not sure what they mean by that. I'm no downhill racer, but I do love a fast blast down a smooth not-too-tight single track or doubletrack. What swayed me is I rode a friend's five inch travel super plush freeride mount down some of my favorite trails and it was so non-dramatic it took the fun out of it. I realized that in order to get the same thrill I'd have to seek out or build all new steeper more radical trails which I wouldn't be able to pedal up. Also I'm coming off a hard tail, so the HH seemed like the ultimate way to go for me. I also like the looks better (continuous seat post vs interupted seat post design). It's just one clean looking bike. Also (ego) the exculsivity of it appealed. |
| Nervous? | The Squeaky Wheel
Jan 14, 2002 3:53 AM | | KRob,
You've got nothing to worry about. The HH is definitely not "nervous" at speed. It is quite stable.
The point made is that the HH is the nimbler bike through tight turns and the SB a bit more stable at speed. But both bikes excel in both categories.
Hold on tight until it arrives. You won't be disappointed.
The Squeaky Wheel |
| Cool | KRob
Jan 14, 2002 9:55 PM | | Squeaky Wheel,
Thanks for the input. Yeah,I assumed the posts about being less stable at speed were just splitting hairs over two very good bikes. Like I said,after assessing my riding style I decided "aggressive cross country" fit me better than "trailbike/freeride". I do have a HH100x on order, so I have made my decision. Thanks again for the reassurance. I can't wait. |
| Both are great bikes... | JBone
Jan 14, 2002 5:24 PM | | Havent tried the HH, but I own an SB. Looking at geometry, the HH would have the edge in negotiating slow speed (-25mph) singletrack, and would probably climb quicker. The SB is now slouch though (you can clear technical climbs you cant on a hardtail, and you can hammer out of the saddle), and would probably get the edge in ability to handle drops (no Im not talking about 10 footers, I mean the type you run into on hardcore xc trails, like 2-3ft), and speeds over 25mph. Its perfect for the more gnarly trails I ride (ZigZag, Soquel Demo Forest, Montara, Upper/Lower Hitler, Downieville), but the quicker steering would be better on some other trails I ride (Tamarancho, China Camp, Boggs Mountain). You cant really go wrong either way, Titus makes killer bikes. |
| I have a Switchblade but looking to get a 100X... | Metroid
Jan 14, 2002 6:58 AM | | I have been on the SB since last May. It's a sweet bike. Big improvement off my last bike, a Superlight with 100mm fork. The SB is much stiffer, more plush, no pedal feedback, more active while braking, etc... The SB handles about the same but with much better balance. I had to compromise on the fit though. I'm 6ft, normal proportions and chose the medium SB with a layback post. I would have preferred a 1/4" or 1/3" longer top tube with a straight post. I ride in the 4.5" mode with a Psylo set a 4". I would like a bit faster on the handling. I have to pull the front end around sometimes. At 6.4 lbs, the SB was a bit heavier than I had expected as well. The HH is much more reasonable. To get an idea of what the reduced travel would be like, I've tried the SB in it's 3.75" mode. I figured it's still plush enough but is much better for hammering.
I'm just hoping Charles has a 23.5" Hammerhead 100X available for me in his next batch.
Enough about me, let's talk about you. If you already have a trail basher that you want to keep, why would you want another one? I guarantee the Wild Hare will collect dust if you get the SB and maybe even the HH. With the 100X out, the only reason I see to get a Racer-X is if you plan to race. For just riding the trails for fun, the 100X is much more appropriate.
SB vs. 100X -- Which is more important: the plush travel and speed (+20mph) or the faster handling and lighter weight? That's the question you need to answer.
Good luck... |
| Actual weights HH100 and new RX??? | JsR
Jan 14, 2002 1:25 PM | | Anyone weigh these yet? |
| 5.8 # | The Squeaky Wheel
Jan 14, 2002 3:01 PM | | My 23" top tube HH weighed 5.8" naked.
The Squeaky Wheel |
| |
