Hi there,
Yes, I need your help. After 15 years of hardtail riding I want to try out a full suspension bike. I just want to get a frame, cause I have most of the other parts sitting around. I know that there are some parts that would be frame specific. But, in most part I am set with the parts.

Now I have been considering two full suspension frames. One is a brand new 2005/2006 Raleigh Phase II and the other one is the Sette Ace frame.

Raliegh Phase II (the one I am considering is a year older than this one)
https://www.raleighusa.com/items.asp?...=11&itemid=282


Seette Ace
https://www.pricepoint.com/detail/164...e-SL-R-Air.htm

and the last option I am considering is the

https://www.jensonusa.com/store/produ...+Frame+06.aspx

the only thing that I dont like about the Jamis is the angles of the seat and head tubes. I want to use this bike for XC/AM type of riding on root and rock infested trails in NY, PA, VT, MA and GA/TN.

As you can imagine that I am familier with the hardtails climbing efficiency. But due to my lower back problem I would have to give up that and go for something thats a bit gentle on my back and still climbs with decent efficiency. Although, I am getting more and more interested in small climbes and long rolling decents.....I dont do big jumps or drops (less than 2 ft).

Any comments about the suspension system (swinger 3-way, RP3, etc) and overall frame desing would be great.


thank you. thank you. thank you.

I want to thank dminor publicly. He had been very very helpful with some good insight on suspension desing and different options.

I'd probably go with the Raleigh or Sette. Jamis is too heavy at 7+ lbs. Ditto if the Raleigh is the same. Sette looks pretty nice, is light and has a nice shock. 07 too.

Are you not interested in the Sette Riddik? Considering the price of the shock, you basically get the frame for free. I think it has decent reviews on mtbr. It is heavier though.

All three bikes will ride slightly differently due to pivot placement, geo, etc., but fundamentally they all share the same suspension design.

Thanks for your input guys.

Gastro. would you please elaborate it a bit farther. which one do you think would be more tune towards AM riding? I know its a vague question...but i often find myself trying to make sense of a vague world around me...

are any of these suspension less prone to bobing?


"bsyptak"

yes I thought about the riddik too, but the design of the seat stay is kind of freaky. I dont know if and how it affects the riding quality...and riding position... anyone has any experience with this.

I am a bit cautious of mtbr.com review....according to some of their forums...IBEX is the best bike in the world.....I feel like the mtbr.com is online bike territory...

thanks a lot...

Define "All Mountain" please. Not trying to be a smart ass, but I honestly don't know what that term signifies, nor where it falls on the hierarchy of arbitrary mtb niche classifications.

I have no direct experience with any of the bikes you listed, so I can't answer that. However, since they are all the same design, I would guess no. The quality of the shock and the nature of its platform will most likely be what makes the most difference WRT pedal bob.

One thing I do take into account when looking at FS frames is the leverage ratio (rear wheel travel / shock stroke). Lower ratios typically make the shock's damping curve more tuneable.

Lots of FS bikes have odd shaped tubing. Take a look at the Yeti ASR-SL or Stumpjumper FSR.

Still, if you can afford the Ace, I'd go with that one.

Can't help you with shocks much. I've only ever ridden a Fox RP3 on a Stumpjumper. It works well but I have nothing to judge it against. It has a full open mode for descending or gnarly rock gardens, and a ProPedal mode for climbing and XC which helps prevent pedal bob but still absorbs just about everything. But a lot of people don't like adjustable shocks. They want a set and forget type shock, where they get it pumped up to their desired psi, set the rebound and leave it forever. I think that's what the Ace/Riddik frames have.

If you want all mountain, get the https://www.jensonusa.com/store/produ...+Frame+05.aspx


I have one and I love it to death. I kinda rode it beyond it's intended purpose and Jamis still stood behind it. Great ride, superb suspension. Slightly heavy for XC, but great for AM.

I used to be a HT rider. I've had 4 rigids, 6 HT front susp's, and 3 dually's. I love the Jamis over all that I've owned. I occasionally miss my hardtail on the occasional hill climb, but every time I throw a leg over my Jamis XLT...I forget all about it. The Dakar is still pretty well mannered on the climbs, and I love to smoke 'em on the rough stuff, flats, and DH sections.


Just my opinion, but the Jamis has treated me very well. You know it's a good bike when it broke once (got warranty'd) and I'm still willing to give it my full endorsement.

OK, I'm done now.

I think it is more appropriate to define AM as what it is not....rather than what it is.....

to me AM is....

-XC but not entirely. specially not the racing or high speed oriented. and in AM i definitely would want to stay away from signature XC 73/71 Geometry...I like the 69 head tube angle a lot...

- AM bike should be able to take a 100-130 fork and have a smooth handling capabilities. Not as twitchy as pure XC but not as slow as some of the other disciplines...

- AM frames should be burly enough to take more abuse than a pure XC bike but not stiff and heavy as like FR/Down hill bikes..

- AM set up should climb well (may be not as efficiently as an XC bike) and be stayable on the downhill sections. I strongly disagree with the implication that XC is devoid of down hills...but the fact that pure XC bikes are not as stayable and fun on rough downhill segments

I know AM is more fuzzy and confusing than any other riding style in Mountain Biking....but I am too lazy and fat to be able to confirm to any of the well defined riding styles...

now back to the bikes...

I have recently ridden a Kona Dawg....really liked the feel of the bike and the geometry...would any of these frame ride similar to that.....I guess a more appropriate question would be which one of these frames would have a similar riding quality as the Kona Dawg......if any...

thanks...

I, too have suffered from a back injury, so I agree a FS will help in that area. I have ridden a Trek fuel with the rocker arm design w/ an RP23 w/ propedal, and I didn't detect much bob at all in #2 position. I have a Santa Cruz Heckler w/ a DHX 5.0(air) w/ propedal, and even though it's a simple single pivot, it doesn't bob at all under power unless I'm standing an giving it hell(but I don't get out of the saddle unless I'm at the peak of the hill). Basically, I'd agree with Gastro, the shock/pedalling platform should determine how much bob you're going to get out of these suspension designs. Personally, I know the Fox 5.0 and RP23 shocks work well in controlling bob, even in single pivot suspensions!

I like your way of spelling 10-a-sea.......

Thank you for pointing out some reference bikes. That helps a lot.

Now, you pointed out three different suspension design/styles....would you be able to elaborate on how they perform...in a comparative manner......even a theoretical description would be helpful......also, would any one of these frames be a bit more suitable for my riding style than the others...

thanks for your help.

best.

ok here goes:
They are about 4-5 suspension designs,
1. Single Pivot
This is the earliest full suspension linkage (before 4 bar and etc) it only has a single pivot, it moves in
an arc when the suspension compresses which caused a few problems such as pedal kickback and etc.
Famous Single Pivot designers: Cannondale and a few more which I forgotten

2. Single Pivot Linkages AKA Faux Bar
This bike has more linkages then single pivot but the rear wheel travel still moves in an arc, I believe
its slightly better then a single pivot linkage because they could reduce the arc travel compared to
single pivot but some riders disagree. Anyway single pivot linkage bike has a pivot on the seat stay
and not on the chain stay. They are a lot of famous Faux Bar bikes.
Famous SPL designers : Turner, Kona, Trek, Rocky Mountain and a few others which I forgot again

3. Horst Link AKA 4 bars/true 4 bars
Horst Link is owned by Specialized and they have licensed it to some companies like Nicolai, Titus
etc, Horst Link is one of the best linkage in MTB industry, it has eliminated most of the problems of
a single pivot or single pivot linkage bike and its rear wheel movement doesnt move in a arc.
Another famous 4 bar is Ellsworth ICT, orginally created by Dave Turner (Turner bikes) but was
patented by Tony Ellsworth, ICT is very similar to horst link but after a few slight tweaking, they
manage to make ICT into their own patent, if Im not mistaken the difference between ICT and HL is
HL uses a strut style shock linkage while ICT uses rocker style shock linkage. HL and ICT has a pivot
on the chain stay. Another noticable true 4 bar is Rocky Mountain ETSX, really interesting concept and
I suggest you to check on their website for more info bout their 4 bar, www.bikes.com
Famous 4 bar's: Ellsworth, Titus, Specialized, Nicolai, Rocky Mountain and others.

4. Virtual Pivot Bikes
Virtual Pivot is Mountain bike latest suspension linkage design, the advantage of this is the
manufacturer doesnt need to pay Specialized or Ellsworth for their linkage and Virtual pivot linkage
could be designed to have a different wheel path for each wheel travel progression, eg: from
sensative to firm as the travel increases. VPP bikes is mostly recognizable by having a bar on the
front portion of the bike rear triangle. Famous VPP tech is DW-Link, Santa Cruz's VPP, Giant's Maestro
Famous company that uses VPP : Ibis, Santa Cruz, Iron Horse, Giant, Felt and etc.

Those 4 is the most commonly and available on the market now, below is a summarize of older linkage that are not commonly used anymore:

1. Soft Tails
This bike doesnt have a pivot near the bottom bracket area, instead they replace it with a elastomer
or some sort to make it bump absorbtion, the linkage mostly are used for XC bikes because XC doesn
need too much travel, this linkage style died out because the travel is limited. Cannondale still make
soft tails.
2. Monolink
They are still a few companies that uses monolink, the reason why people dont really like monolink
is because as the suspension absorbs bumps, the BB will move with the swingarm (monolink rear
triangle is attached to the BB which connects to the crankset) making your leg bend more. If im not
mistaken, Mongoose, GT and Maverick uses monolink.

Well basically that is all the suspension linkage that are available in the market nowadays, they might be more but I cant remember any and I might make some mistakes so feel free to correct me and sorry for making this post uber long .

not sure of your riding style, but you've got three very different bikes here...quite a difference in the BB height, but with 69, 70 and 71 degree head angles, handling characteristics will be very different, especially driven by your choice of fork travel...best to try out a few build options and see what works best for you

no way to know until you ride one

Now to answer ur riding style, I consider your riding style as a Trail riding, or light All Mountain, since you want it to be pedal efficient and able to absorb bumps, a VPP bike would really benefit you (Intense, Santa Cruz, Giant, BMC, Iron Horse, Ibis), second is with Specialized FSR Brain models (Stumpjumper(trail) and Epic(XC Race)) or Ellsworth Truth and faux bar (Turner Flux)

+1...I'm on an Id, wife rides a Blur, and my daughter is on a SJ FSR...all climb like goats and fly down the trails

I've been looking at the new Specialized Enduro recently...may have room for one in the stable...nice light AM bike

Would any of the frames that I have mentioned be comparable to the the Blur....

just to give you a picture of the set up...here is the component group I am going to put on this frame...

Fork: Rock Shox Tora 318 (u-turn, motion control)
Wheelset: Azonic Outlaw (white, QR)
Brake Set: Avid BB7 or Hayes HFX 9. still undecided.....I have used both. I think I like the BB7s a little better
Cranks Set + BB: Shimano LX
Front Derailleur: Simano LX
Rear Derailleur: SRAM X-9
Shifters: SRAM X-7
Handlebar: Azonic Strip Bar (or FSA FR-270)
Chain: SRAM PG 971
Stem: FSA FR-200
Headset: Cane Creak S-8 (but it will also depend on what frame I get
Pedals: Azonic Fusion
Cassettes: SRAM PG 971
SeatPost: have not decided yet. will depend on the frame
Grips: Sette Lock on

all of your frames are single pivot...the Blur has the VPP, or two pivots behind the BB...you can really tell the difference...wife won't part with hers, and my daughter's BF is looking to build a VP-Free

Both my daughter and I have the Shimano Hollow-Tech...I highly recommend these...

thanks jm01......

I have the LX cranks/BB on my current Haro V5...I like it a lot myself..

two interesting read

A review of Phase II
https://www.bikemag.com/gear/raleigh/

and a take on full suspension designs (thanks to dminor)
https://www.dreambike.com/suspension.htm

I own Shimano LX Cranks, my only complain is the noise coming out from the BB area, not sure if its the pivot or the cranks

sherpa if you have money to spend you should look at mavericks
https://www.maverickbike.com/main/do/Monolink_Technology
i dont own one but i wish i did

My GF has a Haro V2, it's rough on the trails compared to my FS, so I'm sure you'll benefit from a FS bike. I haven't ridden a VPP design like the Blur, but I hear it's VERY effecient, but VERY expensive frame. However, more linkages and pivots may mean more complications and maintenence in the future.

BTW, your build up seems pretty decent

hmm, more linkage doesnt mean more maintenance, more pivot is more maintenance.

Well I own a Maestro bike which is similar to VPP and like Quick Torch states, more maintenance around the pivots. It is efficient but with companies like Giant, I doubt its that very expensive. Im interested in riding a DW Link bike though, especially IBIS Mojo

Thanks for the input guys. $599 is probably the most I can spend right now. if there is something really exciting may be $600......ha ha ...

So, Santa Cruz is out of my range. The thing is, I am not trying to get rid of my hardtails. instead, I am trying to add a decent Full suspension to the line so that I would have an option if I need to. Also, I am not certain that I will like a full suspension bike (my lower back may like it, but thats just a part of my body. I am pretty democratic and in my house majority rules). That is why I dont want to invest a lot of money right now on a full suspension bike. May be a couple of years down the road I would get something like the Santa Cruz blur...

But, I want to get a decent full suspension. Cause I dont want to reject full suspension bike based on my riding experience on a poorly designed bike......

So, your input is helping me figure that out. and its a great learning process for me. keep it coming.

thank you.

also, what is the verdict. Does any of the bikes in my list stand out or a bit better than the others?

or should I keep on looking. the Phase II would be the cheapest for me. Actually about $250 cheaper than the Sette ACE. But the Phase II would not come with any warrenty, cause I would be buying it from a local guy. If the Ace is a decidedly better frame then I would get it, but if not I would save that $250 and probably spend that on the components...