Carbonda fm936 Thoughts

[Medico]

I think you're trying to make this bike something that it isn't. It is a modern geometry, long wheelbase, slack headtube, cross country/down country frame. RAD might be ok for Trail and Enduro builds where you're hitting jumps and needing to pull the front end a lot, personally I think it makes no sense when you have no reference frame for angle, but this bike is closer to a road fit, long and low. I would definitely consider cutting your bars, running a stem that long with wide bars on this frame is going to give weird steering. The long wheelbase can also take time to get used to for maneuvering tight turns, but it is very much capable of them. I'm 188cm on a size large with a 60mm stem and 750mm bars that I might cut to 740, otherwise it the fit is great and no issue with steering.

Partly I agree, but cutting your bars is a bad advise if people have a wonky feeling, it will get worse. When tight corning is your problem sizing up won't help either, it makes it worse. Probably it's your skills...it needs to be turned more like a motorbike in titght cornes, lay the bike down instead of you.

And other thing, light compression demping with your length could also be an issue if you're +++kg's. The wont be supportive in cornering, so maybe using less sag?

Good luck

[emu26]

Before you cut the bars, move the grips and all of the controls in 10mm on either side and go for a ride. Focus on keeping your hands on the new position and see how it feels. Once you've cut them, you can't go back.
I presume your seat is already as far back as it will allow?

[Kactusdog]

Partly I agree, but cutting your bars is a bad advise if people have a wonky feeling, it will get worse. When tight corning is your problem sizing up won't help either, it makes it worse. Probably it's your skills...it needs to be turned more like a motorbike in titght cornes, lay the bike down instead of you.

And other thing, light compression damping with your length could also be an issue if you're +++kg's. The wont be supportive in cornering, so maybe using less sag?

Good luck

Thanks for the feedback, yes I was concerned about sizing up being too cumbersome in the first place. I’m open to changing my cockpit set up. From the start, I wished to avoid a bike that’s hard to maneuver (wheelbase) hence the Medium. I weight 78-79 kg, to prevent the suspensión from being too active, i have it pumped to about 230-250 psi i believe. I get lots of good small bump absorption, and the suspension works as intended everywhere else. Haven’t bottomed out either.

What I find strange though is that Vitus specs their top of the line size M with an 80mm stem and 740 bars… what? And the size L goes to a 90mm stem!!

Also: What would the new 120mm rear link offer me? Seems like it rides with a higher bb, maybe that’s an opportunity to get a size L and ride it lower in the sag to feel more “inside the bike” as opposed to being perched atop it.

[Medico]

Thanks for the feedback, yes I was concerned about sizing up being too cumbersome in the first place. I’m open to changing my cockpit set up. From the start, I wished to avoid a bike that’s hard to maneuver (wheelbase) hence the Medium. I weight 78-79 kg, to prevent the suspensión from being too active, i have it pumped to about 230-250 psi i believe. I get lots of good small bump absorption, and the suspension works as intended everywhere else. Haven’t bottomed out either.

What I find strange though is that Vitus specs their top of the line size M with an 80mm stem and 740 bars… what? And the size L goes to a 90mm stem!!

Also: What would the new 120mm rear link offer me? Seems like it rides with a higher bb, maybe that’s an opportunity to get a size L and ride it lower in the sag to feel more “inside the bike” as opposed to being perched atop it.

It sounds like the sag is fine then.
Yes, you're right for a dc kind of bike 740mm seems off, I ride a 780mm with a 5cm stem and I'm 174cm! But If you look at the ns synonym they offer 60mm by 760mm for M, L and Xl.

I also have the 120mm rear link for a couple of weeks. It's even more on then in the bike even with 30+ sag. Helps for the peddle hits. But it doesn't feels that different to be honest, maybe bit more souple? You'll keep a fast snappy bike, not a totall different one.

[Kactusdog]

Before you cut the bars, move the grips and all of the controls in 10mm on either side and go for a ride. Focus on keeping your hands on the new position and see how it feels. Once you've cut them, you can't go back.
I presume your seat is already as far back as it will allow?

Yes that sounds good, and yes. I did just purchase a power saddle with rails that provide a platform further back from where my current fake power one sits. I will have to try that, but I know this bike is meant to be sat at zero offset and reaching forward. Looking to purchase a L now...

[Kactusdog]

It sounds like the sag is fine then.
Yes, you're right for a dc kind of bike 740mm seems off, I ride a 780mm with a 5cm stem and I'm 174cm! But If you look at the ns synonym they offer 60mm by 760mm for M, L and Xl.

I also have the 120mm rear link for a couple of weeks. It's even more on then in the bike even with 30+ sag. Helps for the peddle hits. But it doesn't feels that different to be honest, maybe bit more souple? You'll keep a fast snappy bike, not a totall different one.

Can you share any photos? I am probably going to buy a size L and try to sell my M. I think I will leave the shock with it, as it's all color matched at this point. I need to weight out here if the 120 rear with my 120 SID will be a better ride for my rocky, rough environment than keeping the travel at 42.5, or even 40.

Do you see any benefits of the 40mm or 42.5mm rears' travel? Or rather I should ask, is there a clear benefit to building with the new linkage. I am new to FS, so trying to make sense of it all. I had to really pump up my rear to 250 psi to make the L compression tune work for my trails, 23mm sag...

[Boybiskit]

Hey all, on the 936 in size Medium, have done a handful of rides on it... feeling regrets choosing the SL size M. I am 182 cm with longish legs. It feels cramped at times. A ride I did with lots of tight corners (I live in rocky, chunky Arizona) revealed how awkward I feel on the bike. Then again I could also just be lacking cornering skills. I'm coming from a size L Specialized Fuse with a 170 cranks and a 45mm stem. First time riding a full sus, the hardtail felt so much more straight forward. I ride rough XC with some occasional rough trail.

I heard a lot of cases reading through all the pages for "sizing up", but I am also taking RAD into consideration. But when the suspension (Rockshox RT M rebound, L compression) is active, steering get's wonky. It feels like reach shortens. The straight-line speed is excellent though.

I am currently riding a 50mm stem with 780 bars, but I did also pick up a 75mm stem to lengthen things out. The result was a floppy steering, I'm feeling stuck and not sure if there's anything that can be done to "fix" the fit. I'm open to any ideas y'all may have. If I must go large, wouldn't that make my stem tiny?? I am definitely on the bike to tackle challenging/technical climb, the downhill is a fun bonus

If you need to add length and stem doesn't work... try moving the seat back? Sorry if this sounds obvious but it might be a free upgrade!

[adroitrider]

Can you share any photos? I am probably going to buy a size L and try to sell my M. I think I will leave the shock with it, as it's all color matched at this point. I need to weight out here if the 120 rear with my 120 SID will be a better ride for my rocky, rough environment than keeping the travel at 42.5, or even 40.

Do you see any benefits of the 40mm or 42.5mm rears' travel? Or rather I should ask, is there a clear benefit to building with the new linkage. I am new to FS, so trying to make sense of it all. I had to really pump up my rear to 250 psi to make the L compression tune work for my trails, 23mm sag...

The Fuse is a relatively slack hard tail. What specific geometry measurement drove you to a M? Was it wheel base only?

I have ridden my hardtail a lot this spring and it is a size smaller than my 936. One thing my riding buddies noticed is that I take less risks on my hard tail. I take the B line a lot, navigating around obstacles or high consequence features.

The 936 wants to go straight. It begs you to feather the brakes and seek the apex at speeds you would never even consider on a hard tail. You want the longer wheel base to provide confidence in cornering. To provide the counter balance to your body getting really low and into the bike.

Get the Large.

[Kactusdog]

The Fuse is a relatively slack hard tail. What specific geometry measurement drove you to a M? Was it wheel base only?

I have ridden my hardtail a lot this spring and it is a size smaller than my 936. One thing my riding buddies noticed is that I take less risks on my hard tail. I take the B line a lot, navigating around obstacles or high consequence features.

The 936 wants to go straight. It begs you to feather the brakes and seek the apex at speeds you would never even consider on a hard tail. You want the longer wheel base to provide confidence in cornering. To provide the counter balance to your body getting really low and into the bike.

Get the Large.

What a motivational response! I rode a size L Fuse, the reach and stack roughly match the size M. But man, in hindsight the effective top tube, bb drop (i think) and the feedback from a few forum threads (before I found Chinertown) had me leaning towards  the size M.

I recently learned how the hardtail compress forward and gets a tad longer, where the full sus shrinks a bit. Getting cramped during the rear’s actuation.

[adroitrider]

What a motivational response! I rode a size L Fuse, the reach and stack roughly match the size M. But man, in hindsight the effective top tube, bb drop (i think) and the feedback from a few forum threads (before I found Chinertown) had me leaning towards  the size M.

I recently learned how the hardtail compress forward and gets a tad longer, where the full sus shrinks a bit. Getting cramped during the rear’s actuation.

I think those riders advocating for the smaller size are focused on XC racing where a very small percent of the course requires a long, low, slack bike. So, they shorten it and ride higher.

Most of my riding is for giggles and I’m chasing buddies on Yeti (SB140) Lunch Rides through a variety of terrain.

[Kactusdog]

I think those riders advocating for the smaller size are focused on XC racing where a very small percent of the course requires a long, low, slack bike. So, they shorten it and ride higher.

Most of my riding is for giggles and I’m chasing buddies on Yeti (SB140) Lunch Rides through a variety of terrain.

Gotcha, yeah I do enter in the occasional races when training and time permits, as I have a little girl now 

Is this still a race-able bike in the 120 front/rear config?

[adroitrider]

Gotcha, yeah I do enter in the occasional races when training and time permits, as I have a little girl now 

Is this still a race-able bike in the 120 front/rear config?

Yes. For dry technical courses like Breck Epic, perfect bike.

For Iceman, not perfect.

For muddy tracks, not enough clearance at the rear seat stay or chain stay bottom bracket area.

Run what you brung!

[japjoe7]

Quick question... 163cm(5'4") tall, 73.5cm(29") inseem. Size small is appropriate, correct? Would size medium be too much of a stretch?

Asking again...

Quick question... 163cm(5'4") tall, 73.5cm(29") inseem. Size small is appropriate, correct? Would size medium be too much of a stretch?

[qwerty]

I'm 5'7" with a 30" inside leg and I ride a small, there's no way I'd want a medium.

I can only just run a OneUp 120mm dropper before it bottoms out in the frame, using 165mm cranks.

Get a small.

[japjoe7]

I'm 5'7" with a 30" inside leg and I ride a small, there's no way I'd want a medium.

I can only just run a OneUp 120mm dropper before it bottoms out in the frame, using 165mm cranks.

Get a small.

Thanks for responding!