Author Topic: IP-256SL by MTB2223  (Read 52654 times)

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #30 on: July 25, 2014, 08:40:57 AM »
My build is on hold. I send back my wheelset. Don't like the glossy black finish of the rims. I'm ordering now a carbon wheelset at Peter. These wheels are a little bit heaver, but 30mm width and stronger.

About the top bearing. I think I've got the same as you. Both bearing don't fit tight in the cups. The bottom bearing drops out when I don't hold it. And when I turn the frame up  side down, the top bearing drops out.

I hope the magical 10kg is possible, but it will a close call ...

adym

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #31 on: July 25, 2014, 09:01:46 AM »
If you aren't under 10kg, ride for a while and then see if a 1x10 set up is possible, that will save you around 300-400g :) I am a bit of a weight weenie :P

carbonazza

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2014, 09:53:32 AM »
I think having read somewhere but can't find it back.
That integrated headset have a 45 degree conic cup.
When you tighten the fork, with the stem and caps, the headset bearings find their place centered in the cups.

Carbon_Dude

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2014, 10:00:14 AM »
Yes, I would have expected the 45 deg taper to take out any movement you would otherwise have in the headset, however, this has not been the case for my IP-036.  My IP-056 is fine however.

I thought about this earlier, and it is possible that I have a mismatch in the taper angles, there are both 45deg and 36deg bearings out there.  Wondering if XMIplay got either the wrong integrated cup or bearing and my real problem is a mismatch of the taper angles.
2019 Stumpjumper Expert 29/27.5+
2017 Santa Cruz Stigmata
2017 Trek Stache 9.8 (29+)
2016 Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Carbon Comp 6Fattie (27.5+) (Sold)
2016 Trek Stache 9 (29+) w/upgrades (Sold)
2014 -036 Full Suspension Chiner (Sold)
2013 -057 Hardtail Carbon Chiner (Sold)
Atlanta, GA

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #34 on: August 31, 2014, 02:57:23 AM »
Finally started with the build of my bike.

Now I'm on a point where I've got doubts.

I'm using a direct mount FD. When I'm looking to the position of the cable on the FD. I've got my concerns about the durability. The angle of the cable is to sharp ime.  I think it will damage the exit hose/pipe in no time.

Do I something wrong? Do I forget something ?

« Last Edit: October 27, 2014, 06:12:59 AM by MTB2223 »

brmeyer135

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #35 on: August 31, 2014, 03:29:44 PM »
That doesn't look right.
What derailleur is that?
Is it bottom pull?
Also, are the 256s supposed to have a high or low mount derailleur?

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #36 on: August 31, 2014, 03:36:01 PM »
It's a Shimano FD-M785-E2 XT Front Derailleur 2x10 (E-Type). It's a dual pull, can be used as bottom pull or as top pull.

This FD is the one that fits on the direct mount of the frame. I don't know if there are different versions of the FD-M785-E2. I thought this is the only FD that fits this frame by using the direct mount.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 05:06:23 PM by MTB2223 »

brmeyer135

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #37 on: August 31, 2014, 06:32:18 PM »
Looked and the E2 is the model you want...it is the low direct mount.

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2014, 12:07:25 AM »
So, it looks like a design failure for the IP-256SL?

adym

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2014, 09:50:23 AM »
As it's dual pull perhaps trying going up and over making it a top pull? Or just run it 1x ;) problem solved :P

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2014, 09:57:00 AM »
Running it 1x is not an option. :)

But it cannot going up and then going down to act like a top pull. That is not possible. There is no bolt or something to hook up.

Found one guy who's riding the bike with 3x10. Got the same problem, but replaced the plastic pipe with an aluminium one.

I'm searching all over the internet, but didn't find a solution. And Peter told me it's not a design failure.

Carbon_Dude

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #41 on: September 01, 2014, 10:03:42 AM »
What about using a flexible cable housing?  I put one of these on my IP-036 to more easily route the cable for the rear shock.

http://www.diacompe.com.tw/product_View.asp?nid=875


2019 Stumpjumper Expert 29/27.5+
2017 Santa Cruz Stigmata
2017 Trek Stache 9.8 (29+)
2016 Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Carbon Comp 6Fattie (27.5+) (Sold)
2016 Trek Stache 9 (29+) w/upgrades (Sold)
2014 -036 Full Suspension Chiner (Sold)
2013 -057 Hardtail Carbon Chiner (Sold)
Atlanta, GA

carbonazza

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #42 on: September 01, 2014, 12:48:24 PM »
May be try it for a few rides like it is.
Then if you see some wear on that tube.

You could try to find a small metal hose ferrule with the appropriate diameter.
And put it at the end of the hose to strengthen its end.

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #43 on: September 01, 2014, 03:14:24 PM »
Tomorrow I'm going to the LBS, maybe they know a better way. Maybe a direct mount from SRAM?

Otherwise I'm put a small ring around the tube to prevent wear in the frame and looking after each ride if there is wear on the tube.
If there will be a lot if wear, I'm going to replace the tube with a external cable hose

carbonazza

Re: IP-256SL by MTB2223
« Reply #44 on: September 02, 2014, 03:35:59 AM »
For your information, the tube is a single plastic piece with the cable rails.
The two rails, you can see when you open the bottom hatch.

Since I don't have a front derailleur and run a full hose for the rear shifter, I removed it.
And plugged the hole.