Short summary after five month with my Carbonda FM936:
4033 Kilometer
101093 Meter altitude difference
No issue
I am absolutely satisfied with this Bike

That is pretty bloody good customer service right there. Just how long have you had the frame, time wise, not km's?

I spent months arguing with Felt over a cracked frame which they eventually denied.  fortunately for me I'm Aussie so as soon as I mentioned Department of Fair Trading to Wiggle they offered me a choice of two different frames.

Has anyone bent there upper shock mount? I did a search but could find anyone mentioning that. Its very slight so I'm hoping its just a bolt quality issue. All the other bolts in the linkage were torqued properly and no play at the bushing.

If anyone has I could use a link to what you replaced it with.
Thank you

If I summarize all the basic math:

1) most of the droppers does not have offset => saddle moves forward even a bit more
2) The main diff for the frame makes seat-angle and Saddle-BB distance is ~8cm diff from old geometry => it is the ~same diff like Road and TT bike saddle

^^^ all the things are the ~same on M and L frames, so the only important diff is Reach

I do not care about stack in terms of saddle-height - it is just 1.5cm diff. But in terms of handle-bar height, sometimes lower stack helps to lower the handlebar without slam it down too much.

And looks like the main diff is really only top-tube length, which is 61 or 64cm, and to compensate your saddle-handlebar distance all you need is stem which is 3cm longer or shorter. So, frame M+10cm stem = L+7cm stem or M+6cm = L+3cm. Looks simple - all I need is to decide stem length.

Small point that L frame adds 0.5cm _back_ to the saddle => to hold the same top-tube you should substract the 0.5cm from stem too.

If I go M => it is not very aggressive position compared to L, I can compensate it with stem, but, probably it is not idea on descend. and 3cm shorter wheelbase, which, probably makes it a bit more nimble, which is a plus for the long bike
If I go L => stem is shorter, and body position is a bit lower too, the only negative thing that stack increased, which prevents you from going lower with handlebar

How many people are running this frame with 120mm fork?  That would slack out the HTA to 66deg.  Which is slacker than my current 130/140mm trail bike.  Curious how ppl find it with 120mm.  Also I did notice the BB drop is pretty low on this bike, so the 120mm can help raise the BB.

Je reviens sur le sujet du verrouillage de l'amortisseur.
Personnellement je règle l'amortisseur avec beaucoup de sag pour que le vélo soit souple en descente et donc j'utilise souvent le verrouillage en montée (scott spark).
Donc question: la position de l'amortisseur "tête en bas" sur le FM936 ne positionne-t-il pas le levier de verrouillage trop loin? De la mon hésitation avec le FM909.
Merci

Ilya, do you use 170 or 175 mm cranks? And if 175, how it feels regarding hitting obstacles (I mean pedal strikes)?

Thanks! And don't worry about the delay, it is also covered in snow here in Oslo at the moment.

That is really helpful, thanks. If the real stroke on this one is 38mm, do you think you could have got away with a 165x45 one? Also, do you have any idea if the 165x40 one you have can be extended later to 165x42.5 (like other shocks) or if something about the nude set up means that is not possible? I like the idea of the nude shock but don't want to give up too much travel for it.

Also, let us know how you get one once you get to ride the bike with the new shock!

Thanks again for your super helpful feedback. So does that mean that the 40mm and 45mm are the same shock just with different spacers inside (as is the case for most other shocks)? And, if so, when you opened yours what size were the spacers? What I'm trying to work out is if there is a way of taking a 2.5mm spacer out to get back to the 42.5 I have with the DPS (I'm not having any issues with the rear triangle hitting the frame with 42.5).