Author Topic: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts  (Read 499851 times)

ilyamaksimov

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1020 on: November 10, 2020, 09:12:58 AM »
Anyone have a problem with suspension bolts and axles?

Yesterday I unscrewed the bolt in the rear triangle((

Colt__Seavers

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1021 on: November 10, 2020, 09:53:31 AM »
It may not be a new 936.  They may have paid for a custom rear triangle. Isn't that 2021 similar to the NS Synonym.
thought the same thing! Might be a private mold for the rear triangle and link like NS has. Asked Wing about it
« Last Edit: November 10, 2020, 09:56:18 AM by Colt__Seavers »

carbonazza

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1022 on: November 10, 2020, 10:18:26 AM »
thought the same thing! Might be a private mold for the rear triangle and link like NS has. Asked Wing about it

Maybe it is to be able to say yes to a 42.5mm shock, or crazy... a 45  8)
To get a real 120/120. If that is even a necessity for some.

helmat

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1023 on: November 10, 2020, 11:30:50 AM »
I'd really like to see real 120mm travel in the rear. That's presently more or less the only thing stopping me from ordering.

Roby13

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1024 on: November 10, 2020, 12:56:46 PM »
Hey - I'm late to the discussion, but I was between L/XL sizing and sized down for lots of the same reasons you are considering it. From all your replies you've given, I think you want to size to M and I think you should trust your intuition, which is based on some solid data and your gut feeling. Your point about size M on this bike being a L on most mainstream brands is exactly why I sized down as well. Have fun, after all this is riding bikes!

Thanks, definitely I'm going to get the M, it makes more sense to me. I just wanted to have some feedback, by no means to start a discussion.

RobertRinAustin

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1025 on: November 10, 2020, 02:20:14 PM »
thought the same thing! Might be a private mold for the rear triangle and link like NS has. Asked Wing about it
Let us know what they say.

Colt__Seavers

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1026 on: November 10, 2020, 11:26:30 PM »
Let us know what they say.
She says it's private mold

jimmyD

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1027 on: November 11, 2020, 05:38:20 AM »
Can anyone here clarify if i can use my Rockshox Monarch XX rear shox (with the full sprint remote too) in this frame?

Its a 165x38 shock my current frame is 100mm travel front and rear and plan to move all the parts over from it to this new frame.

Im mainly a roadie. Built the current 29er myself but that was 2015 so i'm not really up to speed with current suspension details like the difference between trunnion shocks and metric shocks etc.

theirishrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1028 on: November 11, 2020, 06:36:34 AM »
Can anyone here clarify if i can use my Rockshox Monarch XX rear shox (with the full sprint remote too) in this frame?

Its a 165x38 shock my current frame is 100mm travel front and rear and plan to move all the parts over from it to this new frame.

Im mainly a roadie. Built the current 29er myself but that was 2015 so i'm not really up to speed with current suspension details like the difference between trunnion shocks and metric shocks etc.
Has it got 1 eye or 2? Trunnions have 1 eye on one end and 2 bolt holes on the other end. 165x38 should work yes. Will give you closer to 100mm rather than 110mm (we've not quite worked it out exactly) that we get with the 165x42.5 fox :) .
 A metric shock is simply a shock that is in a whole number mm. Basically when there were trying to standardise shocks across all US(fox) and EU/Asian manufactures they decised theres going to be a range of options with intervals that frame makers can choose from.  Makes it easier for everyone. Although the tune of the shock can still make a difference (although the Giant Anthem shock that alot of us are using works great, despite being tunes for that bike).  https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fox-Performance-165-x-42-5-Shock-Giant-Anthem-27-5-Trunnion-Dps-Float/124273032134?epid=7026833371&hash=item1cef3ffbc6:g:rLEAAOSwRDJcCemV


I believe you can convert 2 eye shocks to trunnion: https://www.dirtlabs.com/products/trek-trunnion-mount-adapter-kit  Although i expect theres a cheaper one out there.

Risckys

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1029 on: November 11, 2020, 09:16:08 AM »
Thanks, definitely I'm going to get the M, it makes more sense to me. I just wanted to have some feedback, by no means to start a discussion.

I think if you could go with a size M, but with a lot of seatpost outside!
I am on a 75.5cm seat height in size M, the measurements of the frame are long!

Vipassana

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1030 on: November 11, 2020, 10:11:15 AM »
Hello friends

Here you have more information for the same FM936 frame, 2020 and 2021 model differences:

WRC Thunder 2020



WRC Dark 2021
 



The same geometry and different link and rear




https://www.conorbikes.com/es-es/wrcdark21/

It's clear they also changed the offset of the fork.  Likely from 55 to 44.  Look at the position of the stanchions relative to the headtube.

QuentinLL

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1031 on: November 11, 2020, 12:59:40 PM »
It is clear that they changed the front triangle A LOT : 67° seat angle and 77° head angle  ;D

theirishrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1032 on: November 11, 2020, 01:25:12 PM »
It is clear that they changed the front triangle A LOT : 67° seat angle and 77° head angle  ;D
Hahaha bazzinggaa!

RobertRinAustin

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1033 on: November 11, 2020, 01:39:25 PM »
It is clear that they changed the front triangle A LOT : 67° seat angle and 77° head angle  ;D
Maybe I'm not getting it, but the current FM936 has 67° and 77° STA and HTA. Both drop a degree when going to a 120/120.

adroitrider

Re: Carbonda fm936 Thoughts
« Reply #1034 on: November 11, 2020, 02:35:20 PM »
Maybe I'm not getting it, but the current FM936 has 67° and 77° STA and HTA. Both drop a degree when going to a 120/120.

There is a typo on their geometry image.