Author Topic: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts  (Read 497978 times)

sim.r

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1500 on: March 04, 2021, 01:04:56 PM »
I am 173cm and after a few rides I am confident that M and 45mm is right for me!
Thanks man!
I'm 170cm and wondering what to get, but I was leaning towards the S size with a "normal" stem to have it more racy

Pharaohollie

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1501 on: March 04, 2021, 01:46:03 PM »
On the upside, you now have all the knowledge on just about everything to look for on this frame (not too much IMO) when you get it so it should be trouble-free for quite a while for you.    ;D

Coincidentally, I did the first ride on mine just over 8 months ago.  Have a 1000 miles on it so far (ride 3 other bikes as well) and the only issue I've really encountered was that lower pivot pin being about 2-3mm over spec.  I has some pretty rough miles on it and still looks like new - some of the other parts not so much.

Agreed. I don't want to jinx it, but I am actually impressed with this frame. 10 months of hard riding on it and aside from the out-of-spec linkage (replacement sent by Carbonda) this thing is robust.

Overload

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1502 on: March 04, 2021, 05:22:29 PM »
I don't know if this has already been asked but the tread +100 pages and I can't find it so please bear with me.

Is it possible to fit a "normal" (as in none trunnion) 165mm shock upside down (of course with the required spacers/adapter) in order to easily reach the lockout/adjuster?
Or would it hit the linkage?

Seems like a simple enough solution if you can't/don't want to run a remote lockout on the handlebar. If it fit that is... 

sync1

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1503 on: March 04, 2021, 05:41:27 PM »
I don't know if this has already been asked but the tread +100 pages and I can't find it so please bear with me.

Is it possible to fit a "normal" (as in none trunnion) 165mm shock upside down (of course with the required spacers/adapter) in order to easily reach the lockout/adjuster?
Or would it hit the linkage?

Seems like a simple enough solution if you can't/don't want to run a remote lockout on the handlebar. If it fit that is...

Check this: http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,2079.msg24602.html#msg24602

carbonazza

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1504 on: March 05, 2021, 01:12:09 AM »
The 165 shock discussion, is just a bit earlier in the thread  ;)
http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,2079.msg24517.html#msg24517

Adalbert

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1505 on: March 05, 2021, 02:56:20 AM »
Thanks man!
I'm 170cm and wondering what to get, but I was leaning towards the S size with a "normal" stem to have it more racy

for 170cm for sure M with short stem...

carbonazza

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1506 on: March 05, 2021, 11:08:21 AM »
Frame SL version size M
10.55kg on photo...
No... I'm not jealous  ;)
What did you use to protect the chainstay ? A bar tape ?

Overload

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1507 on: March 05, 2021, 02:12:53 PM »
The 165 shock discussion, is just a bit earlier in the thread  ;)
http://chinertown.com/index.php/topic,2079.msg24517.html#msg24517

I think I messed up my question because no one seemed to understand what I meant.
I have seen people fit "normal" shocks in this fram instead of trunnion ones but my question was whether or not you could flip a "normal" shock so the big end with all the adjusters and lock out lever end up at the top? I have only seen pics of "normal" shocks mounted with the big end att the bottom ner the BB, like the trunnion ones mount.
 


VS.



The only reason for doing this would be for easier reach of the adjuster/lock out when your on the bike but it wouldn't be possible to do with a trunnion shock.

Hopefully this made it clearer?

Overload

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1508 on: March 05, 2021, 03:55:59 PM »
I think I have size anxiety...  ::)

I'm about to pull the trigger on a frame and after having read through a bunch of comments in this tread I was set on a size M.
But then I ran across this:



https://www.mtbmonster.com/ns-bikes-size-guide/

(I can't find any size recommendations on NS site but maybe I'm not looking in the right place?)

According to this chart I'm dead square in the "L"-camp...

I'm 178cm with a ~84cm inseam and have historically always been between size M and L.
One of the general tips I read is "compare it to you old bike and go with that", the problem with that is I haven't ridden MTB in donkeys years and my old bike is a 26" with V-brakes... (it's not even that it's low spec. (XT/XTR/CrossMax) it's just that old...) That bike is a size L (19").

Help anyone? 

theirishrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1509 on: March 05, 2021, 04:16:34 PM »
I think I have size anxiety...  ::)

I'm about to pull the trigger on a frame and after having read through a bunch of comments in this tread I was set on a size M.
But then I ran across this:

(I can't find any size recommendations on NS site but maybe I'm not looking in the right place?)

According to this chart I'm dead square in the "L"-camp...

I'm 178cm with a ~84cm inseam and have historically always been between size M and L.
One of the general tips I read is "compare it to you old bike and go with that", the problem with that is I haven't ridden MTB in donkeys years and my old bike is a 26" with V-brakes... (it's not even that it's low spec. (XT/XTR/CrossMax) it's just that old...) That bike is a size L (19").

Help anyone?
I don't know how accurate that chart is. According to that, im 185cm. I would be XL. I have long arms & legs, im 100% certain L is better than XL for me.  I'm running a 60cm stem FYI.  I can't tell you one is best for you sorry :(
« Last Edit: March 05, 2021, 04:23:21 PM by theirishrider »

carbonazza

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1510 on: March 05, 2021, 05:45:29 PM »
I think I have size anxiety...  ::)
...
I'm 178cm with a ~84cm inseam and have historically always been between size M and L.
...
I'm 178 with 89cm inseam and took a M.
I tried, briefly though, the one of my friend and it felt just right with a flat bar, no offset seatpost and a 50mm stem.
An L for you?

gbrnole

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1511 on: March 05, 2021, 07:08:57 PM »
Frame SL version size M
10.55kg on photo.

Wheels btlos i30as on ztto m1 hubs.



how is that fox rear shock working out? i have been considering one of those also.

albar

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1512 on: March 06, 2021, 01:33:26 PM »

The only reason for doing this would be for easier reach of the adjuster/lock out when your on the bike but it wouldn't be possible to do with a trunnion shock.

Hopefully this made it clearer?

I think you can do it without any problem. For standard 165x38 shocks direction doesn't matter. I fitted my same way as trunion only because of lockout direction.

KiwiKev

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1513 on: March 06, 2021, 05:00:09 PM »
The 42.5mm shock works well, it seems to give more than 100mm but as far as I know we don't know exactly how much travel but probably 110-120mm. It feels natural with this stroke size so no worries there.
The bike is being raced a national level (https://www.facebook.com/patxiciafanpage)  and was even in the recent XCO world champs so it's clearly capable. I'm going to be riding it with 120mm in the National Points Series (hopefully) here in Ireland and I'm going to be keeping the 120mm Sid Select rather than 100mm due to the terrain here. I wouldn't worry about the head angle, people said the same every time it gets slacker - You don't go slower ;D Where are you racing and what's the terrain like?
There is an easy method to work out wheel travel... it is the leverage ratio x the shock travel = wheel travel so to find the leverage ratio we do know that on the specs we have wheel travel is 100mm and shock travel is (165 x)40 so leverage ratio will be 100/40=2.5 so for 42.5 shock travel it will be 42.5x2.5=106.25 - not even 110 unless you can somehow fettle a 45mm stroke shock on there which will give you 112.5
I was hoping to get 120mm travel out of this frame but looks like I'll have to go with either the LCFS937/958 (cracking issues resolved?) or the FM1001 and forgo the flexstay kinematics...
« Last Edit: March 06, 2021, 06:25:01 PM by KiwiKev »

RobertRinAustin

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1514 on: March 06, 2021, 08:48:25 PM »
There is an easy method to work out wheel travel... it is the leverage ratio x the shock travel = wheel travel so to find the leverage ratio we do know that on the specs we have wheel travel is 100mm and shock travel is (165 x)40 so leverage ratio will be 100/40=2.5 so for 42.5 shock travel it will be 42.5x2.5=106.25 - not even 110 unless you can somehow fettle a 45mm stroke shock on there which will give you 112.5
I was hoping to get 120mm travel out of this frame but looks like I'll have to go with either the LCFS937/958 (cracking issues resolved?) or the FM1001 and forgo the flexstay kinematics...
I measured mine at about 118 mm of travel with a 42.5. Could have pushed a little more and probably gotten to 120 pretty easily.

NS list travel at 100 mm with a 37.5 and 120 with a 42.5. Based on my measurements, I see no reason to doubt them. I haven't tested a 37.5 or a 40, but I suspect the 37.5 would give you slightly more than 100 mm of travel.

Frame was mounted level, shock degassed, wheels off and a jack under the rear axle. Didn't push much beyond shock travel to get the 118 mm.