FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

Both of those are good. I used the FSA.

[G161]

Will a Fox Float X2 fit on this frame??

[casual_build]

Will a Fox Float X2 fit on this frame??

It doesn't fit on the FM1002, which has the same suspension design. The non-trunnion side that sticks up is too big and hits the frame on the seat tube.

[helmat]

I'm thinking about ordering a FM1001 XL, how happy is everyone with their bikes? How's the rear suspension working, how's the climbing performance? Open mode sufficient or lockout necessary? How does the bike feel going downhill?

[Neb]

I really like mine. I don't touch the lockout (partly because I can't reach it!) but also I don't feel it is needed. The bike climbs well without the lockout.

The descending is very good, my frame is currently set up for 120mm suspension and it feels like much more. I'm selling my other bike, a 160mm cotic rocket, as I prefer the Fm1001 for descending.

[mdc302]

I’m currently re-working the FM1002 setup, and putting miles on the FM1001. All around I’m absolutely loving the all around ability of the FM1001 (150mm RS Lyrik Ultimate fork)! It’s taking a beating through 200 miles of East TN black diamond stuff. Climbs well, descends well, and I’m happy. I’m 6’3” and both are XL frames, which are actually more like a Large sizing and fit. I do need to try a longer stem than the current 50mm to further adjust the reach with the 40mm rise bars. Can’t go wrong with either of these frames

[binaryagent]

This frame's geometry is almost exactly the same as my FM10 except that the reach is about 0.5" shorter and the effective top tube length is 1.5" shorter. Also I had a 140mm travel fork on the FM10 vs 150mm on the FM1001. The FM10 felt like riding a chopper at times when I first got it. This bike feels completely different and seems to have a shorter turning radius. A few times going down drops the front wheel has gotten a little squirrely since my weight was so far forward on the fork. The steering is much more responsive all around and I'm still learning to use the improvement in control. Beyond that the change from X-Fusion to top tier Rockshox has been the biggest difference. The ability to lay down power over rocks and roots makes the ride much more relaxed and saves energy. I have more confidence in keeping traction through rough turns and the load on my arms and shoulders has decreased significantly.   
I added the RWC roller bearing to the top shock mount. The drag on the suspension was surely insignificant to the shock response but it just bugged me.
It's around 28.4 lbs with pedals.

[carbonazza]

This frame's geometry is almost exactly the same as my FM10...

Aren't the hoses entering the frame a bit too short?
If you fall and the steerer goes right the frame there will be tension.
And you didn't want to have the front brake hose inside between the wheel and the fork? I guess to not be grabbed by a branch or any obstacle.

[binaryagent]

Aren't the hoses entering the frame a bit too short?
If you fall and the steerer goes right the frame there will be tension.

The bars go way past 90 degrees but there is tension at that point. Now I'll probably do the next ones a little looser.

And you didn't want to have the front brake hose inside between the wheel and the fork? I guess to not be grabbed by a branch or any obstacle.

That's the route Rockshox intended and the same way everyone else routes it?

I do need to trim the steerer tube a little and round the carbon spacer at the top. There's a razor sharp edge that could slice skin easily and the protruding steerer tube could do some puncture damage to the chest.

[carbonazza]

The bars go way past 90 degrees but there is tension at that point. Now I'll probably do the next ones a little looser.
That's the route Rockshox intended and the same way everyone else routes it?

I do need to trim the steerer tube a little and round the carbon spacer at the top. There's a razor sharp edge that could slice skin easily and the protruding steerer tube could do some puncture damage to the chest.

Yes, next time, aiming for a tight 180º maybe safer 

Not sure if there is a reason for the inner wiring, except protecting it to be teared off easily.
Rockshox has usually a tightening plate and screw to attach the hose inside.
Just a quick search on pictures on forks and found this one: https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/mountain-bike/a31684408/rockshox-sid-ultimate-review/

[Swolie74]

It's around 28.4 lbs with pedals.

What size frame? I was a little sad when my 936 came in around high 27's with full XT, carbon rims and rekon race tires... but I got the standard layup not superlight. I was a little sad until I remembered that my trail bike is 36lbs lol.

[FullCarbonAlchemist]

Aren't the hoses entering the frame a bit too short?
If you fall and the steerer goes right the frame there will be tension.
And you didn't want to have the front brake hose inside between the wheel and the fork? I guess to not be grabbed by a branch or any obstacle.

I run substantially shorter cables than that on my FM1002 with no problem. Have been twisted around a couple of times in low-speed stumbles, zero issues.

[carbonazza]

I run substantially shorter cables than that on my FM1002 ...

It can be indeed a great way to prevent the bar going over the top tube if you crash 

[binaryagent]

What size frame?

Large. The 19" FM10 was 29 lbs with the same components.

[brex]

That's the route Rockshox intended and the same way everyone else routes it?

When you say it is the way everyone routes it, who do you mean by that? I have seen exactly nobody ever route their brake hose external to the fork. If you do a Google search for rockshox lyrik, you won't find a picture of the brake hose routed external, all of them internal. As rockshox intended.
Which brings me to that other point - when you say it is the route rockshox intended, what do you mean by that? Because if you look at the rockshox guide you will see that is the opposite of what they suggest.