Author Topic: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame  (Read 116769 times)

Flo7

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2021, 01:37:42 AM »
The final Design...

Price with faster Shipping to austria, headset, axle, replacement Hanger, custom paining/ decals and PayPal fees around 1100$


QuentinLL

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #31 on: January 12, 2021, 06:13:33 AM »
I find the FM1001 pretty small, don't you ?
I am 1m78 tall. 83cm inseam. On my bikes I have 690mm distance saddle to handlebar and 745mm BB to saddle. I like to have an aggressive position when climbing and a short stem / long reach for aggressive riding on downhill (I never ride on flat trail, only mountains).

I was first interested in the FM936 size L, 30mm stem => 689mm saddle to bar. Perfect for handling on downhill and perfect position for climbing.
I changed my mind and would like to buy a FM1001 that suits better my rinding style (more travel and stiffness). Goal : 11,5 kg for 135/140mm travel MTB.

Size L and 40mm stem would be 659mm saddle to bar. I have to ride saddle 3cm backward. Why not, but I would feel the 78° STA benefit. Plus, i would like to ride 20 stem if possible (and 42mm offset fork) for a perfect handling => saddle to bar would be 640mm.
I think that I will go for a XL frame with 20mm stem => 664mm saddle to bar (and massive 495,5mm reach) + 2cm saddle backward.

Is there somebody who already tried riding a 20mm stem on a long bike ? Do you think that it is completely stupid ?
178cm guy on a XL size  :o

Bajker

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #32 on: January 12, 2021, 06:52:00 AM »
I find the FM1001 pretty small, don't you ?
I am 1m78 tall. 83cm inseam. On my bikes I have 690mm distance saddle to handlebar and 745mm BB to saddle. I like to have an aggressive position when climbing and a short stem / long reach for aggressive riding on downhill (I never ride on flat trail, only mountains).

I was first interested in the FM936 size L, 30mm stem => 689mm saddle to bar. Perfect for handling on downhill and perfect position for climbing.
I changed my mind and would like to buy a FM1001 that suits better my rinding style (more travel and stiffness). Goal : 11,5 kg for 135/140mm travel MTB.

Size L and 40mm stem would be 659mm saddle to bar. I have to ride saddle 3cm backward. Why not, but I would feel the 78° STA benefit. Plus, i would like to ride 20 stem if possible (and 42mm offset fork) for a perfect handling => saddle to bar would be 640mm.
I think that I will go for a XL frame with 20mm stem => 664mm saddle to bar (and massive 495,5mm reach) + 2cm saddle backward.

Is there somebody who already tried riding a 20mm stem on a long bike ? Do you think that it is completely stupid ?
178cm guy on a XL size  :o

My thoughts as well, reach to STA ratio is pretty small so it wont fit my body type.

Flo7

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #33 on: January 12, 2021, 07:53:04 AM »
I find the FM1001 pretty small, don't you ?
I am 1m78 tall. 83cm inseam. On my bikes I have 690mm distance saddle to handlebar and 745mm BB to saddle. I like to have an aggressive position when climbing and a short stem / long reach for aggressive riding on downhill (I never ride on flat trail, only mountains).

I was first interested in the FM936 size L, 30mm stem => 689mm saddle to bar. Perfect for handling on downhill and perfect position for climbing.
I changed my mind and would like to buy a FM1001 that suits better my rinding style (more travel and stiffness). Goal : 11,5 kg for 135/140mm travel MTB.

Size L and 40mm stem would be 659mm saddle to bar. I have to ride saddle 3cm backward. Why not, but I would feel the 78° STA benefit. Plus, i would like to ride 20 stem if possible (and 42mm offset fork) for a perfect handling => saddle to bar would be 640mm.
I think that I will go for a XL frame with 20mm stem => 664mm saddle to bar (and massive 495,5mm reach) + 2cm saddle backward.

Is there somebody who already tried riding a 20mm stem on a long bike ? Do you think that it is completely stupid ?
178cm guy on a XL size  :o

Why do you think the Fm1001 is a small/ Short bike??

The TT is short because of the steep seat angle. I think the large would fit perfectly for you...

I will order a "M" for my 170cm. I also have a Spec. Enduro 2020 in S3 and it has the same STR as the Fm1001.

QuentinLL

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #34 on: January 12, 2021, 08:14:25 AM »
Did you read my message ? :-)
On my other bikes, the perfect riding position is 690mm saddle to handlebar.

With FM1001 size L, I should ride 85mm stem to be OK => 85mm stem on a trail bike seems completely stupid, right ? As well as fitting the saddle 4cm backward (wouldn't have the benefits of 78° STA).

470mm reach with 78° STA equals 440mm reach with 75° STA => which is very short for L size !
170cm i would definitely go for L size personnaly.

Flo7

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #35 on: January 12, 2021, 09:33:54 AM »
Reach does not depends on STA?!

Which bike are you riding now?

RobertRinAustin

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #36 on: January 12, 2021, 01:37:31 PM »
Looking at the effective top tube length (O on the geo on the first page), this frame seems to run a full size smaller.  XL measures 627mm which is more typical of a large. I like this measure because it shows the distance from the seat post to the center of the head tube, basically center of your seat to your stem. You can adjust fit with stem length or moving your seat, but this gives you a good starting point.

Flo7

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #37 on: January 12, 2021, 02:21:24 PM »
This is because of the steep STA. If you sit on the Bike the Bike feels very compact, but in the downhill position you have enough space/distance...

Look at this very aggressive Privateer 161 with 80° STA. The Bike is a massive bike but has a short TT because of the step STA.


RobertRinAustin

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #38 on: January 12, 2021, 07:28:25 PM »
This is because of the steep STA. If you sit on the Bike the Bike feels very compact, but in the downhill position you have enough space/distance...

Look at this very aggressive Privateer 161 with 80° STA. The Bike is a massive bike but has a short TT because of the step STA.
No, that's not right. A steep effective seat tube angle does not necessitate a shorter effective top tube. The gold standard trail bike is the Ibis Ripmo, eSTA 77 degrees,  eTT 632mm for a large. It's literally the most awarded trail bike out currently.

A shorter eTT is a design choice and there's nothing wrong with that.

Flo7

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #39 on: January 12, 2021, 10:47:37 PM »
No, that's not right. A steep effective seat tube angle does not necessitate a shorter effective top tube. The gold standard trail bike is the Ibis Ripmo, eSTA 77 degrees,  eTT 632mm for a large. It's literally the most awarded trail bike out currently.

A shorter eTT is a design choice and there's nothing wrong with that.

The Ripmo in large has a 76 STA...

QuentinLL

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #40 on: January 13, 2021, 03:20:07 AM »
This is because of the steep STA. If you sit on the Bike the Bike feels very compact, but in the downhill position you have enough space/distance...

Look at this very aggressive Privateer 161 with 80° STA. The Bike is a massive bike but has a short TT because of the step STA.

I agree. These bikes are made to have a nice space on the bike while downhill (generous reach).
But very very compact in climbing position (what ruins performance).
While riding trail bikes, we have >80% of our pleasure while descending but spend 80% of our time climbing
Compromise is difficult :D

The Privateer 141 (trail bike 150/140mm) is more comparable to FM1001 (140/135mm). The geometry (with 150mm travel and 44mm offset fork) size P3 (equivalent L size) is 483mm reach, 612 effective top tube and 78° STA.

P3 size is exactly between size L and XL FM1001 (eTT 601mm & 627mm). My Specialized Enduro 29" size M 2015 was 594mm eTT which had a really shitty climbing position, even if the eTT is not the only parameter.

The FM1001 size L is a half-size shorter than other L size and XL is half-size bigger.
Really wondering what to choose. Not easy without testing it.

FM1001 XL size and 20mm stem, it would look like future of the future #grimdonut  ;D
44mm offset fork and long reach for stability
20mm stem for reactivity

 8) or :o ?
Maybe i will give it a try
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 03:44:28 AM by QuentinLL »

ilyamaksimov

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #41 on: January 13, 2021, 03:47:11 AM »
in fact, yes, on this frame the size grid is offset downward. At 936 in the size of L reach 500 stack 600 ETT 640 ST 490

maybe they did it to keep the seat tube lower for the big dropper in the latest fashion, but they just changed the size names)
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 03:50:24 AM by ilyamaksimov »

QuentinLL

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #42 on: January 13, 2021, 09:40:11 AM »
Hi Flo7 and QuentinLL !

Hi, what bushing did you use please ?
8x22.2mm ?

scourge

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #43 on: January 13, 2021, 12:49:36 PM »
No one seems to be complaining about the Geo chart being off. The steeper head tube angle is a big minus to me.

RedCruz

Re: FM1001 / FM1156 - 135mm frame
« Reply #44 on: January 13, 2021, 11:56:04 PM »
Hi, what bushing did you use please ?
8x22.2mm ?

Hi I had to use 8x25.9mm + 2 washers to make it fits, but this way it fits perfect!