Author Topic: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb  (Read 28822 times)

mtber79779

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #15 on: November 26, 2014, 10:48:54 PM »
 ;DNice! please let us know how you are liking the m9000 brakes and if it would be worth going 180mm on the front?
love the wheels! :)

Sussed.

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2014, 03:42:29 AM »
A Franktastic build ! Nicely done, love it !


carbonazza

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #17 on: November 27, 2014, 05:52:34 AM »
Great build!

I didn't know Ritchey's pedals.
When my eggbeaters will fall appart(they probably will), I could switch to them.
They are light and come at a reasonable price.
I'm very interested in your feedback.

Cnasta

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2014, 05:55:36 AM »
Nice!! (but pls redo you front QR :) ) More pics please :)

Sjon7283

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2014, 10:41:02 AM »
Looks great! Interested in how your drilling of the rear cablestopt was
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 10:47:30 AM by Sjon7283 »

frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2014, 12:23:58 PM »
First Ride Impression: Wow! Game changing fast...

http://app.strava.com/activities/223879465



Climbing: Stiff frame. Responsiveness apparent jumping out of the saddle. Feels much closer to my road bike (Tarmac SL4). Excellent rear-end traction even with a completely bald RaRa on the rear. Despite a nasty head cold my climb times were near PRs at only about 85% throttle.

Found myself climbing more out of the saddle. On the road, I mix about 50:50 in and out of the saddle. I attribute the out of saddle efficiency to the high stiffness and reduced weight. Love the remote lock out. The Specialized Brain never seems to lock when you need it to be stiff, or plush through bumps.

Fork: Butter! Second single track descent was extremely bumpy due to cattle abuse from the previous winter. Could carry much more speed due to the efficiency of the fork. I never touched the damper. Felt about right though. Can only get better with some tuning. Ran at 100psi (what I use my SJ Sid). Did not get near max travel. Will lower pressure if travel holds after today's ride.

Brakes: Bled the rear yesterday morning before the ride. Lever felt a little soft compared to the front. On the trail it had no power at the start. On the first descent I focused on bedding in the front pads. Good bite by the time I got to the bottom. Rear lever was soft. No power. Second descent was steep twisty single track. Needed to use the rear for steering purposes. Confusingly, the rear lever felt firmer than the front at the end of the ride. Did some air settle up into the master cylinder reservoir? Bite on both brakes good at the end of the ride. Since I have never used Shimano brakes before, I have nothing to reference as far as what is "right". It will take some trail time to get used to them. May take them to LBS for a once over.



Descending: Felt up to speed by the second descent. In fact, I had more confidence on the trail than I have ever experienced. I could point the light front end exactly where I wanted it. Even with consciously trying to "go easy" I was near PR times on most downhills. Good compliance on the rear-end. With a bald rear RaRa I swung the tail out huge a couple times, but never felt out of control. Excellent brake modulation and predictability. Will throw a long steep decent at the brakes today. Benchmark for power and fade resistance.

Wheels: So far so good. Stiff. Light. Tires extremely difficult to mount. Part of the beadhook-less design? More traction noticeable due to wider rim. More tire compliance (and grip) because of increase tire volume.

Pedals: Cranked down the retention springs to max force. Initially, my shoes had some vertical play (lifting off the pedal, very annoying) but that problem somehow corrected itself later into the ride. Float and pedal retention felt similar to my m560 pedals on my SJ.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2014, 10:33:09 AM by frankR »

frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2014, 12:38:22 PM »
Additional Photos

Pre-ride, never will be this clean again! :(




frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2014, 12:40:25 PM »
More additional photos




frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2014, 12:44:18 PM »
Rear Brake Bleed (must be done on the bike).

Gravity bleed

Caliper bleed port must be highest point of the caliper.

Get master cylinder (lever) as high as possible.

That was the idea...


frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2014, 12:45:34 PM »
Rotor wear question:

Does this look right?

Wear on front pads looks even.




frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2014, 12:46:55 PM »
Front / rear caliper mounting





frankR

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2014, 12:50:30 PM »
Only annoyance was brake hose slap in the frame.

Has anyone attempted to mitigate this? With foam pipe insulation of the appropriate diameter maybe?

MTB2223

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #27 on: November 28, 2014, 01:37:19 PM »
I used foam pipe and attached some cord to the foam pipe.

carbonazza

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2014, 02:10:48 PM »
My bike looks as good as yours, but my woods around look ridiculous now  :'(

Sjon7283

Re: IP-256SL XC Racer Build 18.5lb
« Reply #29 on: November 29, 2014, 06:00:17 AM »
Can you tel me how you did the cable drilling for the RD?