They didn't come with the cranks that were installed on complete builds as far as I know. At least none of my buddies who have them had ever seen one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs
Printable View
They didn't come with the cranks that were installed on complete builds as far as I know. At least none of my buddies who have them had ever seen one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs
Well, that’s a bit of a stretch.Quote:
Originally Posted by HAB
Inelastic elongation is not stretch!
:p
Is that like an erection?
I actually bought a heavier spring a while ago for my dhx 2 and my fat ass, so not sure why this stirring in my head, but I can’t seem to truly make sense of this guide:
https://www.ridefox.com/fox17/help.php?m=bike&id=672
Specifically for the SLS springs, reading the first two charts on the page. My show is 230x65. So from the first chart it seems like with a 230 e2e, you could go with the spring that is as long as the 6.1” TLG. But that is for shocks that have 3” of travel. 65mm stroke (which I assume is what they are referring to in the “travel”) is about 2.56” which would point me towards the one with 2.75 inches or less and TLG of 5.5”- which makes me think the spring I have is too short?
Yeah generally a bit confused.
can someone explain it to me like I’m 8?
Edit: not to mention that the part numbers on fox site and ones most retailers have are different, and many out of stock, but I digress.
I'm no expert on coil shocks, but have kinda been going through the same shit recently, so here goes:
1. Fox springs made for 65mm stroke will fit in your 65mm stroke shock. That will always be the case. There will be a lot of thread exposed.
2. It's hard to find overall spring length when buying springs. You'd think this shit would be more standardized, but it's not really.
3. Changing springs to figure out your ideal spring rate gets annoying and expensive. Especially if they're orange, or yellow, or white. Or titanium.
4. To offset #3, Fox has done you a solid with their chart. If someone's got a spring that's made for a longer stroke shock (up to 76mm stroke) it'll still work. But there will barely be any threads showing. Maybe you can save some coin digging through parts bins and classifieds while you figure out your spring rate.
5. The shorter spring will be lighter. Because less material. But thanks to the magical linear properties of coil shocks, a longer spring with the same spring rate will still feel exactly the same.
6. You can also use springs from other companies since Fox shocks have a smaller diameter than others. But you'll need to buy a $15 adapter to get it to thread on right. Case in point, you could get a Cane Creek Progressive Spring. Warning: They're heavy fuckers.
Thanks man, glad I’m not alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by jm2e
And point 5 clears up a worry of mine that somehow the 74mm I have was wrong for my 65 stroke shock when there is a 67mm spring out there.
My bud snapped his derailleur off last weekend and the kook hadn't replaced his replacement hanger in his pack. So we turned it into a single speed to ride out. The biggest pia was breaking the master link. Aside from fumbling around by hand, does anyone carry a plier in their pack? Is there a multitool that does the trick?
I promptly throw the master link in the trash when I open up a new chain due to this. I carry a few extra links and my multitool has a chain tool that works well enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackstraw
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
String (shoelace) or a zip tie can work to undo a quick link.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackstraw
For a trailside fix, if I can't break the master link with my hands, I'll just punch a rivet in the chain (since I almost always carry a chain tool). If I have an extra master link with me, I'll shorten and rejoin the chain with that. Otherwise, I'll rejoin the chain the old fashioned way with the chain tool (which isn't strong, and is only a temp fix to get back to the car). I'll save the chunk of chain I removed and re-install with master links once I'm back in civilization.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackstraw
That's all very much a worst case scenario. Single speeding a full suspension bike with nothing to take up chain slack doesn't work well (at all) due to chainstay growth as the suspension compresses. You either have to leave the chain fairly slack, or expect it to effectively lock out your suspension (which is pretty hard on pretty much all of the affected components). In practice, I'll do everything I can to keep the chain running through the derailleur (even if the derailleur can't shift). Unless it's completely fuckered, I can usually bend things back into place enough to kinda sorta keep the drivetrain marginally functional as a single speed, but with the chain still running through the derailleur. And if it's less than a very long climb back to the car, I'll just take the chain off and treat the bike like a strider (or just walk).
I carry these on some bikes,
https://www.biketiresdirect.com/prod...iABEgLM__D_BwE
And these on others.
https://www.wolftoothcomponents.com/...ts/pack-pliers
Haven’t actually needed either since I started carrying them. The wolftooth has link storage, which is cool.
Right on. Yeah, we were laughing when making it a single. Either too tight or too loose. It worked, barely, and thankfully didn't break the chain.
Just saw the wolftooth, that seems like a good tool to have in the bag. thanks
Chains don't break as much as they used to. I still carry the tool. Broke two chains last year and rode it out with no chain. Suspension works even better with no chain BTW. Rippped downhill mostly.
Yeah, the Wolftooth one lives in my hip pack as well, haven't ever needed it since I got it, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by rideit
I'd agree with Toast, if the quick link doesn't go by hand then well, I'm carrying a chain tool for a reason. But, I carry the Wolftooth thing now after a couple incidents with riding partners that flatted and then couldn't get the tubeless valve out of their rim to put a tube in. People have a tendency to over-tighten that nut and then it seizes at the worst possible time, and you're left with a flat that's nearly impossible to fix. The Wolftooth plyers are perfect for giving you that little bit of extra leverage to get it apart. It's weird how many bike people don't have any kind of pliers in their packs. I rarely need them, but when I do, I need them really bad.
I carry the Plug & Pliers kit in my OneUp. If I didn't have that, I'd have some alternative. Kinda sucks that they don't break by hand anymore, but it's a couple-second operation with the tool, and popping a rivet almost always ends up with a snapped chain somewhere down the line cause I forget to replace with a master link.
OK,
Question
I've used both Time and Shimano style pedals. I find that the shimano I'm in now are a bit tougher to get out of mid bail. Now that I'm getting older, I like to be able to dump the bike and not try to hold on as long. What pedal cleat type is easiest to get out of during a fall?
I'm not married to any of them, and, looking back I think I liked my time pedals the best.
Shimano multi release cleats are probably the easiest to get out of.Quote:
Originally Posted by grskier
They'll let you out at all kinds of other inopportune times and generally try to kill you. But if you want ease of release, they're it.
They'll let you out at all kinds of other inopportune times and generally try to kill you. [/QUOTE]
I laughed.
I have a scar on my knee to prove it. Was pulling hard to get over a steep little spot, came out of the pedal and absolutely hammered my knee into the dropper lever. Saw stars and ruined the lever.
Probably proves I’m a hack but it fucking hurt.
Are you talking about the Shimano spd pedals used for mtn biking ?Quote:
Originally Posted by grskier
The spd tension can be set like a ski binding so how do you have them set ?
Crank Brothers are a great alternative if you want all of the random release awesomeness combined with pedals that explode too.Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
I broke a spoke on the same ride my friend snapped his hanger. We both had cheap pliers in the bag and in trying to snap the bent spoke off so we could slip it out of the classic hub we broke the pliers. We're freaking idiots. So, of course I have zip ties and just tied it to another spoke and continued the ride.Quote:
Originally Posted by cydwhit
I especially like the ‘hit a rock on the bottom, eject on top’ feature. Innovative.Quote:
Originally Posted by HAB
A Leatherman lives in my pack. Rare to need it, but very happy to have it when I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by cydwhit
I keep an extra master link taped to my shifter housing on all my bikes. That and a multitool that includes a chain tool has saved me a few times.Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
The taped-on master link is Jerome Clementz's trick.
https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...ke-check02.jpg
I have that until I use it and forget to replace it.Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C)
27.5 question: Deciding between a 2.4 and 2.6 for rear tire. DHR 2 with exact same casing and compound in both. Weight difference is negligible, less than 30 grams. Is there any reason to not go for 2.6 (besides frame being able to fit)? Am I missing something? Again, rear only, in this tire specifically. Have we proven that wider will roll faster? Acceleration?
2.4 DHR2 is not a fast tire. 2.6 is slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by volklpowdermaniac
Aside from that, it's just a question of whether you like how the 2.6 rides. More cush, and more traction in some situations. Less precise, and can feel slidier in some soft soils.
How wide is your rear rim?
2.4WT or 2.4?
Under 30 mm rim should run an non-WT casing, so your biggest option is the 2.4.
If your rim is over 30mm ID, then go for what fits inside your frame.
D’oh. Sorry, 30.5 id (I9 enduro 305)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs
And sorry yes, both tires I’m looking at are 3C/EXO+/WT
2.4WT and 2.6 WT.
I know the DHR isn’t a fast roller, but I ride terrain that trends on the wet/moist side so looking to move forward to a dhr2 from aggressor.
Spliting hairs then. You will not notice the difference as a rear tire. You want faster go with the 2.4
cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by simple
The massive difference you’ll feel is going from the aggressor to the DHR in either width. Both in performance and in fewer flats.
Wide tire up front will be more noticeable for grabby crawly brakey traction.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
For sure. Went 2.4, cheaper anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by jm2e
IME with the 2.3 aggressor that came on my Yeti 5.5 , it was a light & fast tire but it broke loose quite easily and there was not much traction in the wet,Quote:
Originally Posted by volklpowdermaniac
the 2.5 on the front has plenty of traction so I left that alone
I replaced the agressor with a 2.3 DHRII minion which has lots of traction
I went with the same 2.3 width cuz whatever I put back there I will have to turn over so i wanted the narrower lighter tire
2.3 is getting harder to come by these days. I'm fine running 2.3 dhr and dhf. I've actually got the dhf on the rear right now and it's fine. Tire I just bought for the back up is a 2.4 wt because it was available.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
[QUOTE=jackstraw;5953084Tire I just bought for the back up is a 2.4 wt because it was available.[/QUOTE]
That 2.4WT will lightbulb on you, if your rims aren’t wide enough.
Yeah, I'm right on the edge with Stans Flow MK3 rims. We'll see how it goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs
2.4”s were absolutely perfect on my (30mm ID) MK III’s. I wouldn’t worry about it on those.
what exactly is the aggressor for? ive got no skin left on my forearm from it breaking lose on me,
Sent from my SM-G973F using TGR Forums mobile app