Trek Rumblefish Comments and sizing

TheGeneralist

How do,
Tried a Rumblefish in the carpark in Keswick yesterday and absolutely loved it. Before that I was fixed on getting an EX 9 but now I'm having second thoughts. The problem is that it seems stupid to make a call on a bike being good based on popping up and down a few kerbs. I was wondering if the reason I liked it was that it was pretty small size - 19" and so felt better for trackstands/wheelies/ endos etc.

I was thinking of the 19.5" EX 9 and so assumed the 19" Rumblefish would be the way forward. But then I noticed that Trek do the 29ers in 5 sizes with 19" being the middle size. I'm not middle sized by any means (6' 0.5") so should I be going for the 21"?

So I look on the Trek webpage and it appears that the standover height for the Rumblefish only varies by 1cm from the 15.5" frame to the 23" frame How on earth does that work?


http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes/mountain/singletrack_trail/rumblefish/rumblefish_elite/#/us/en/model/fit_sizing?url=us/en/bikes/mountain/singletrack_trail/rumblefish/rumblefish_elite

cooldad

Get a proper test ride.

TheGeneralist

Get a proper test ride

Yup, that would be the plan. However I'm amazed to say it doesn't seem to be possible to test ride a 21" Rumblefish n the UK. There seems to be a couple of shops in the Lakes with 19" inch bikes but no 21s anywhere.
Apparently while companies like Orange have a fleet of demo bikes which they send hither and thither for people to test, Trek don't do this and instead leave it up to individual dealers to fund and buy the demo fleet. So individual dealers are understandably reluctant to get any bikes in other than the really bog standard sizes in the popular models.

Given all the crap on the Trek website about not doing bikes mail order to ensure a good service and good fit it all seems a bit poor really.

cooldad

That is a bit rubbish.

Pudseyp

TheGeneralist wrote:

Get a proper test ride

Yup, that would be the plan. However I'm amazed to say it doesn't seem to be possible to test ride a 21" Rumblefish n the UK. There seems to be a couple of shops in the Lakes with 19" inch bikes but no 21s anywhere.
Apparently while companies like Orange have a fleet of demo bikes which they send hither and thither for people to test, Trek don't do this and instead leave it up to individual dealers to fund and buy the demo fleet. So individual dealers are understandably reluctant to get any bikes in other than the really bog standard sizes in the popular models.

Given all the crap on the Trek website about not doing bikes mail order to ensure a good service and good fit it all seems a bit poor really.

Probably because 29ers are a fad and they don't want to get stuck with stock when people realise they are a gimmick and don't really offer much more than a 26er....

Sheppy

I tested a Rumblefish just over a month ago just around some quiet cobbled streets. I thought it was fantastic, very reponsive, didn't seem to suffer from pedal bob, good bump absorbtion. I'm 6'1, tried the 19" and thought it pretty much spot on size wise. I am slightly longer in the body and shorter in the leg though. However, I'm more into endurance rides so ended up ordering a Giant Anthem X1 29er... Bear in mind the earliest delivery time for the Rumblefish was February, the Anthem I have to wait until March for And that was in October I was enquiring...

29ers make sense to me, I've had 26"s for years so why not try a 29er for a change. You'll never know if you don't try it (not that I have properly yet!)

TheGeneralist

Sheppy wrote:

, I'm more into endurance rides so ended up ordering a Giant Anthem X1 29er...

Hmm, maybe I should look into the Giant. I want to do some big rides this year.


Anyway, Trek kindly sent a 19" Rumblefish to my local bike shop for me to try out. Alas there was loads of snow about this weekend so I only just got the chance to try it today. Did a few laps at Llandegla today so got a good feel for the bike. It definitely goes faster along undulating tracks where the big wheels do their thang, but it seemed well heavy on the uphills and I'm really not keen on that.

The XT disk brakes were awful. The SLXs I demoed in Keswick were infinitely better. The XT ones howled and it was impossible to do an ender.
The saddle was awful.
Apart from that it was good, but still not sure if I'll go faster on an EX9 that's around 1.25 kg lighter. The Fish was 13.4kg if I remember correctly.

Clank

As an aside, the XT brakes should be every bit as good as the SLX's, if not better. Are they 30 quid an end better? Probably not, no. But damn, current XTs do work very, very well.

My guess would be, seeing as it was a demo bike, that they haven't bedded in yet.

I know what you mean about finding bikes to try. I've had a devils own job trying to find complete bikes to test in the past. People quote some really nice sounding frames, but if I can't be riding ride 'em, I ain't gonna be buying one (Pipedream and Sanderson take note).

Shaggy_Dog

Having worked in a Trek and Gary Fisher dealer for years I can assure you that a 19" will be a perfect fit and that it is a very good bike. I'd go fas as to say it's the best trail bike I've ever ridden.

weeksy59

Pudseyp wrote:

Probably because 29ers are a fad and they don't want to get stuck with stock when people realise they are a gimmick and don't really offer much more than a 26er....

You've been banging this drum a bit in other threads, however as stated by another in thread, you're wrong. Like the other poster i am 8% quicker overall on XC rides than on my previous 26" bikes. If you are riding/training XC then in some cases (like both of ours) the 29er simply is 'better' (assuming time targets are you goal)
They offer more... about 8-10% 'more' actually.... you're just quite simply wrong... wrong...wrong wrong wrong.

weeksy59

I'm also 6'0 and run a medium Giant XTC 2 29er. Which i think equates to an 18"... i don't find it small. It is a 'fraction' small... but i like my bikes to come up a bit small... but, certainly not excessively small... i certainly wouldn't want to go to a 21"... but ...some people like running their bikes large.... you may be one.

DodgeT

weeksy59 wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

Probably because 29ers are a fad and they don't want to get stuck with stock when people realise they are a gimmick and don't really offer much more than a 26er....

You've been banging this drum a bit in other threads, however as stated by another in thread, you're wrong. Like the other poster i am 8% quicker overall on XC rides than on my previous 26" bikes. If you are riding/training XC then in some cases (like both of ours) the 29er simply is 'better' (assuming time targets are you goal)
They offer more... about 8-10% 'more' actually.... you're just quite simply wrong... wrong...wrong wrong wrong.

Or maybe your pedalling harder cause your thinking "ooh, this is fast" which in turn will make you go faster, not to mention the fact your actively going out timing yourself.
Either way i'm not fussed, if you like the 29er then fine. I've tried a rumblefish, didn't like it at all, but thats just me.

weeksy59

DodgeT wrote:

weeksy59 wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

Probably because 29ers are a fad and they don't want to get stuck with stock when people realise they are a gimmick and don't really offer much more than a 26er....

You've been banging this drum a bit in other threads, however as stated by another in thread, you're wrong. Like the other poster i am 8% quicker overall on XC rides than on my previous 26" bikes. If you are riding/training XC then in some cases (like both of ours) the 29er simply is 'better' (assuming time targets are you goal)
They offer more... about 8-10% 'more' actually.... you're just quite simply wrong... wrong...wrong wrong wrong.

Or maybe your pedalling harder cause your thinking "ooh, this is fast" which in turn will make you go faster, not to mention the fact your actively going out timing yourself.
Either way i'm not fussed, if you like the 29er then fine. I've tried a rumblefish, didn't like it at all, but thats just me.

I've timed myself for every ride outdoors in the last 2 years.

my Av heart rate and max heart rate is pretty much exactly the same, give or take 1bpm...

DodgeT

Think you need some more exciting rides, or riding buddies...

weeksy59

DodgeT wrote:

Think you need some more exciting rides, or riding buddies...

LOL having a GPS watch doesn't make my life less exciting

RisteFisk

Reading this reminds me how difficult it was getting input from RF riders before I bought my own, so I guess I should do something about it. Let’s start with bike size which is the most common question. I’m 188 cm (6.2) and 86 kg (189.6lb). The 21” was the obvious size to go for, but after test riding the bike on the retailer’s garden trail (!) it became clear that 21” was just too big. The Rumblefish is a big bike. They didn’t have a 19” to offer me, so I just went for it and ordered one. I don’t regret it. I rode it all trough last year and it’s the sweetest bike I’ve ever had. I won’t lie, it can’t cut corners like a 26”, but that’s not something that is going to bug you for long. It’s a dream to ride on smooth single tracks, it climbs like a goat and going down … well, what can I say. I’ve never felt this safe on a bike before. It’s all about pushing yourself and daring, and after a year I still amaze myself and wonder why I didn’t do that one a long time ago. I have noticed some complaint about challenging set up of the rear suspension, but it’s not a big deal. I think I spent about half an hour and a short ride afterwards to get it right. The sag indicator never bottoms and the setup is still as good after a year. There’s also some negative reviews regarding the saddle, but I haven’t noticed anything wrong with it. I use a regular padded bib. If you ride for several hours sitting down, you’re going numb anyway. When it comes to tires I have to agree with some of the pro reviewers. They’re not much to go wohoo about. I climb to about 600 meters on fine gravel before I start having fun and the tires are fast and the grip is as good as it gets on gravel. After climbing it’s more regular mountain single track, moss, stones and it’s almost always wet. That’s when the tires come to short. I’ve still kept them on for a year, but when the snow is gone and spring shows up, I will replace them with Contis new Mountain King 2.4 Black Chili. When it comes to brakes and gear system I was worried that going from Deore XT on my 26” to SRAM X7 and SLX would be a real downer, but now I don’t think about it all. It just works. I did a high and low adjustment after the summer, but that’s it. Brakes, well I would love to keep my Shimanos, but the Elixir 3s are OK. They sometimes hang a little and they do make the famous turkey wobble, but there nothing “wrong” with them. I might replace them for next season, but only if there is an unbeatable offer on CRC. So the conclusion is you should just get one.

DodgeT

RisteFisk wrote:

It’s a dream to ride on smooth single tracks, it climbs like a goat and going down … well, what can I say.

Glad you like the bike. Seems more appropriate to see a bigger guy on a bigger bike, but enough of that..

What about riding on rough, technical stuff, is it a dream there too?

Rightly or wrongly, I still see 29ers as being more of a smooth track, longer distance bike, than a hard hitting technical trail machine.

rockmonkeysc

29er's seem to work for some people & not others. I tried a couple & certainly won't be buying one unless the handling improves, on twisty singletrack I could ride a 26" wheeled bike much faster.
I could ride my 31lb Giant Reign X faster cross country than a Rumblefish because I could climb better on the Reign X (even with 170mm rear suspension) & I can descend a LOT faster on the Reign. The 29er gave me no advantage anywhere.
Also you get a poor choice of tyres, tubes & forks and the wheels are weaker & heavier.

TheGeneralist

RisteFisk wrote:

, it climbs like a goat and going down … .......
There’s also some negative reviews regarding the saddle, but I haven’t noticed anything wrong with it. .....If you ride for several hours sitting down, you’re going numb anyway.

First off, thanks very much for posting your thoughts, please don't take the next bit the wrong way....
I'm just a little doubtful about your review. I don't know much about the 'fish having only done about 80km on it on one day, but I do strongly feel that it really doesn't climb like a goat - I found it dead on the ascents and ascents are usually the bit of biking I enjoy most. Also the saddle really does suck.

Based on those two elements that I do have an opinion on, I'm wondering how much I believe the other stuff you say. Sorry that sounds so harsh. Admittedly you do say the tyres suck so it's not a complete whitewash.

Anyway, good to see your enthusiasm for the bike, and thanks for the input on the size. All I need to do now is decide if i can cope with the immense weight and uphill sluggishness.

trekex

I have a ex9 2012 and love it,apart from a temporary problem with the rear rp3 shock but trek/fox are on the case to resolve.

RisteFisk

DodgeT wrote:

RisteFisk wrote:

It’s a dream to ride on smooth single tracks, it climbs like a goat and going down … well, what can I say.

Glad you like the bike. Seems more appropriate to see a bigger guy on a bigger bike, but enough of that..

What about riding on rough, technical stuff, is it a dream there too?

Rightly or wrongly, I still see 29ers as being more of a smooth track, longer distance bike, than a hard hitting technical trail machine.

I guess this all comes down to definitions, so I’ll just refer to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHTp7uRbMsI video. It shows a part of my regular route back home. I don’t do rougher than this for a longer period of time. No, It's not my video and I'm not in it.

RisteFisk

TheGeneralist wrote:

RisteFisk wrote:

, it climbs like a goat and going down … .......
There’s also some negative reviews regarding the saddle, but I haven’t noticed anything wrong with it. .....If you ride for several hours sitting down, you’re going numb anyway.

First off, thanks very much for posting your thoughts, please don't take the next bit the wrong way....
I'm just a little doubtful about your review. I don't know much about the 'fish having only done about 80km on it on one day, but I do strongly feel that it really doesn't climb like a goat - I found it dead on the ascents and ascents are usually the bit of biking I enjoy most. Also the saddle really does suck.

Based on those two elements that I do have an opinion on, I'm wondering how much I believe the other stuff you say. Sorry that sounds so harsh. Admittedly you do say the tyres suck so it's not a complete whitewash.

Anyway, good to see your enthusiasm for the bike, and thanks for the input on the size. All I need to do now is decide if i can cope with the immense weight and uphill sluggishness.

What kind of ascents do you do? I mean, in what kind of terrain and for how long periods of time?
By the way, I’ve just put Schwalbe Ice Spiker Pro’s on and they are really nice on snow. It takes much more effort to ride it than my 26” with spikes, but a lot of fun descending.