Are IBIS owners the new Orange owners?

toasty

My Orange Five frame is in the post by the way.

ricardo_smooth

I love it when people who spout random dribble argue.... bit like watching bum fights. They're a bit cruel to encourage, but you just can't help sitting back and watching the show!

I must however remember that now I own a Santa Cruz, that I can't possibly talk to my friends who own bikes such as lapierre, orange, trek, giant etc. I can only talk to my mate who owns a Yeti so we can ask each other how our bikes ride in a far superior way than them :roll:


ahhhh no I forgot, I also own a specialized, so I must now hate myself too!

IBISMojoHDamon

They're being rammed down your throat because they're in fashion

No, They are being rammed down my throat as it's easier to market something different, rather than something that is mainstream. They are being marketed as 'The Kings New Clothes'.

lawman

toasty did once have a mojo a bright green one, that frankly looked superb and he owns a meta 55... no offence but hypocrit kinda springs to mind... I agree marketing is shit, but you can't really slag off long travel bikes if you own one of them and have owned the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis in this argument.

IBISMojoHDamon

Haha, you tell yourself that, tragically you'd get BETTER carbon/aluminium construction with Trek/Giant etc, for less money.

I had an Intense 6.6 for 3 years, I wanted Carbon, not aluminum regardless of how Trek / Giant construct their frames, neither did a 160mm carbon bike, and I doubt VERY much that my Ibis cost more than anything in the 150mm travel category because of what I actually paid.

Mojos are lovely bikes, I've owned 2, they're just bike frames though, heavier than carbon Remedys/Stumpjumper Evos etc.

And?... I wasn't going for the Ibis because it was the lightest.

You pay a lot for the brand/looks

I'm sure some do, but I didn't.

IBISMojoHDamon

lawman wrote:

toasty did once have a mojo a bright green one, that frankly looked superb and he owns a meta 55... no offence but hypocrit kinda springs to mind... I agree marketing is shoot, but you can't really slag off long travel bikes if you own one of them and have owned the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis in this argument.

Toasty = Busted = Pot / Kettle / Black = Best to keep quiet!

cat_with_no_tail

Which I hope is coming soon.



.

larryb

Cat With No Tail wrote:

Which I hope is coming soon.

+1

And then I hope a new thread on voting for the cancelling members who keep ruining decent threads with there crap!!! Whats happening to this Forum



.

larryb

lawman wrote:

toasty did once have a mojo a bright green one, that frankly looked superb and he owns a meta 55... no offence but hypocrit kinda springs to mind... I agree marketing is shoot, but you can't really slag off long travel bikes if you own one of them and have owned the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis in this argument.

I missed the bit where he was slagging them off?

IBISMojoHDamon

larryb wrote:

Cat With No Tail wrote:

Which I hope is coming soon.

+1

And then I hope a new thread on voting for the cancelling members who keep ruining decent threads with there crap!!! Whats happening to this Forum



.

It was a pretty lousy post in the first place to be honest.... Some would class it as 'trolling'....something I have experience of recently!

larryb

It was decent to me & a very good valid point. And was making some progress up untill a certain point.

chez_m356

lawman wrote:

toasty did once have a mojo a bright green one, that frankly looked superb

Toasty wrote:

My Orange Five frame is in the post by the way.

so a former IBIS owner who will be an Orange owner, you couldn't resist then ?

sheepsteeth

lawman wrote:

the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis

wasn't the scott ransom the first well done long travel carbon trail bike?

supersonic

Giant / Trek / GT (no disrespect Supersonic) rides when I'm only interested in the niche / higher end of the scale of bikes with longer travel and lighter materials?.

What makes you think that Giant/Trek/GT don't use lighter materials?! I'm glad you didn't add Spesh/Merida/Scott/Cannondale to the equation as non niche brands, as their use of carbon for ultra light frames has been astonishing.

IBISMojoHDamon

supersonic wrote:

Giant / Trek / GT (no disrespect Supersonic) rides when I'm only interested in the niche / higher end of the scale of bikes with longer travel and lighter materials?.

Niche Brand - Not a mass market brand, a boutique manufacturer, someone that doesn't cater for the mass market.

Higher end of the scale - The things that not everyone will own, something a bit different.

Longer Travel AND lighter materials - i.e. not alloy, 160mm all mountain travel.

supersonic wrote:

What makes you think that Giant/Trek/GT don't use lighter materials?! I'm glad you didn't add Spesh/Merida/Scott/Cannondale to the equation as non niche brands, as their use of carbon for ultra light frames has been astonishing.

I never said they didn't, or did, they probably do... what I said was lighter weight AND longer travel, I didn't separate them.

Factually what I said was one sentence, I wanted Niche AND lightweight AND long travel.... ;0)

supersonic

I think most would say you implied that ;-). But thanks for clearing it up.

In the meantime, take a look at a Scott Genius ;-)

IBISMojoHDamon

supersonic wrote:

I think most would say you implied that ;-). But thanks for clearing it up.

In the meantime, take a look at a Scott Genius ;-)

It appears that a lot of the stuff I write implies something else to others when it actually means something completely different...

A Scott Genius I'm sure is good, great even but IMHO, 'Pull Shocks' should of died with the Yeti Lawwill design from circa late 1990's....

larryb

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

It appears that a lot of the stuff I write implies something else to others when it actually means something completely different...

Your dead right there...one of my best saying is "You can not change the facts" i.e. What you write is what is meant.

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

A Scott Genius I'm sure is good, great even but IMHO, 'Pull Shocks' should have died with the Yeti Lawwill design from circa late 1990's....

How come? It seams a very niche piece of excellent kit that tracks far better than most?

supersonic

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I think most would say you implied that ;-). But thanks for clearing it up.

In the meantime, take a look at a Scott Genius ;-)

It appears that a lot of the stuff I write implies something else to others when it actually means something completely different...

A Scott Genius I'm sure is good, great even but IMHO, 'Pull Shocks' should have died with the Yeti Lawwill design from circa late 1990's....

Might be the way you phrased it then, I bet the majority would agree with my synopsis!

Nothing wrong with pull shocks!

IBISMojoHDamon

supersonic wrote:

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I think most would say you implied that ;-). But thanks for clearing it up.

In the meantime, take a look at a Scott Genius ;-)

It appears that a lot of the stuff I write implies something else to others when it actually means something completely different...

A Scott Genius I'm sure is good, great even but IMHO, 'Pull Shocks' should have died with the Yeti Lawwill design from circa late 1990's....

Might be the way you phrased it then, I bet the majority would agree with my synopsis!

Nothing wrong with pull shocks!

I'm sure that when I had the two bikes I had with pull shocks, they were okay, just limited for choice of shock. (if you wanted adjustments in terms of rebound, lockout, compression damping) I'm sure the latest Cannondales and Scotts have these but as for reliability, I'd have a push shock any day.

The problems I've seen with Scott bikes with air 'pull shocks' and warranty problems out weigh push shocks around 10 to 1.

lawman

sheepsteeth wrote:

lawman wrote:

the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis

wasn't the scott ransom the first well done long travel carbon trail bike?

Fairly sure the ransom was 06/07 model year, Mojo was '05, the genius was a 125mm marathon bike at the time, the mojo bought 140mm travel and angles that were pretty aggressive at the time.

As for the argument that the likes of trek/scott/giant have the best carbon... bullshit! the quality of the carbon might be good, but trek alu frames are made of tin foil, just because they're big doesn't mean its the best... santa cruz were after all the first company to make a full carbon DH rig that worked.

Paying for the name?! Can I point out that a carbon remedy frame is £3000!!! you could buy a Mojo sl with an slx build for that! Whyte chuck out the 146X and 146s for £5000 and £4000, whilst trek rip £6500 off you for the 9.9, which doesnt even have the eaaaston carbon wheels seen on the whyte and £5000 for the lesser specced 9.8...

The likes of spesh/trek/giant etc are pricing themselves out of the game imo, they are extortionately expensive compared to supposedly lesser brands, the name game has very much swung in the other direction recently, you pay more for a better known brand, and less for the so-called niche, high-end brands... work that one out why don't you...

supersonic

As for the argument that the likes of trek/scott/giant have the best carbon... bullshit!

Not sure anyone has said that... but they are certainly very light! As are some 'niche' brands.

you pay more for a better known brand, and less for the so-called niche, high-end brands... work that one out why don't you...

What is to work out?. Better known does not always mean cheaper, and what is hig end is pretty subjective. Sure, the mainstream may have bigger factories and able to turn out stuff for less cost, but their R and D budgets are very high (I would guess more than the smaller brands), not to mention testing. This adds some back on. WIth hardtail frames sub 900g now, and Scotts Genius frame sub 5lb, you an see they are pushing the boundaries even further.

But yet again boils down to whatyou want to ride and pay for. There is no doubt both mainstream and lesser known can produce very good frames.

angry_bird

lawman wrote:

Paying for the name?! Can I point out that a carbon remedy frame is £3000!!! you could buy a Mojo sl with an slx build for that! Whyte chuck out the 146X and 146s for £5000 and £4000, whilst trek rip £6500 off you for the 9.9, which doesnt even have the eaaaston carbon wheels seen on the whyte and £5000 for the lesser specced 9.8...

Ummm Whyte do the 146S, X9 equipped for £3k!!!!! Same as a remedy frame it seems. IIRC the works is £4k full XX equipped.

lawman

Angry Bird wrote:

lawman wrote:

Paying for the name?! Can I point out that a carbon remedy frame is £3000!!! you could buy a Mojo sl with an slx build for that! Whyte chuck out the 146X and 146s for £5000 and £4000, whilst trek rip £6500 off you for the 9.9, which doesnt even have the eaaaston carbon wheels seen on the whyte and £5000 for the lesser specced 9.8...

Ummm Whyte do the 146S, X9 equipped for £3k!!!!! Same as a remedy frame it seems. IIRC the works is £4k full XX equipped.

Yep, sorry typo backs my point up further! Full XX, reverb, fox front and rear... for £4K! The market is primed for another rose, canyon or YT to come along and blow other brands apart imo, there is no way trek or spesh could compete with them if it were to happen, here in the UK the only decent high-endish retail brand we have is boardman, that carries the halfords stigma, imagine a canyon-type, UK based manufacturer, with a couple of concept stores dotted round the UK for people to try out the bikes before they buy them... canyon specs and prices with no drawbacks... If I had money to plow into business, I wouldn't think twice about it, its a sure-fire success. Whyte somehow manage great prices for the 146 and more so on-one do exactly this to an extent. All I need is a few million to throw at my (admittedly copied, but tweaked) idea

sheepsteeth

lawman wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:

lawman wrote:

the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis

wasn't the scott ransom the first well done long travel carbon trail bike?

Fairly sure the ransom was 06/07 model year, Mojo was '05, the genius was a 125mm marathon bike at the time, the mojo bought 140mm travel and angles that were pretty aggressive at the time.

nope.

ransom was released for the 06 season so would have been around at the end of 05

ibis mojo was released in 06

lawman

sheepsteeth wrote:

lawman wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:

lawman wrote:

the original carbon long travel bike... the original mojo is genesis

wasn't the scott ransom the first well done long travel carbon trail bike?

Fairly sure the ransom was 06/07 model year, Mojo was '05, the genius was a 125mm marathon bike at the time, the mojo bought 140mm travel and angles that were pretty aggressive at the time.

nope.

ransom was released for the 06 season so would have been around at the end of 05

ibis mojo was released in 06

may well have been uk launch in '06, but was first released to the US atleast in 05'

http://www.ibiscycles.com/bikes/mojo_sl/

The Mojo Carbon first debuted in 2005 and started a revolution. When it was introduced it was the first carbon fiber monocoque All Mountain bike.

Mental Mickey

Most of the posturing in my (just coming up to 3 years) limited experience, seems to be either on-line or groups (and some solo too) of riders at Trail Centres. Not visiting either of them that regularly can often make for a happy life!

I've not always known what to make of it all, Mountain Biking attracts such a diverse range of people and while I've encountered some people that looks so serious they have a face like an angry wasp when you say 'hello' to them, thankfully, most people I meet out and about are sociable and friendly like me. I don't even bother to look at people's bikes any more, (unless it really is eye catching and special) I just make eye contact, smile and chat a while.

My fitness and skills are positively average at best if I'm honest, but I have to be conservative with taking risks as I always ride solo. I don't care you skill level, whether you're holding me up or I you, I don;t care how affluent you are, whether you prefer a particular type of frame material, flat or spd pedals, or are riding a hardtail or full susser from anything fully rigid to enormous amount of travel, my only wish is that you enjoy off road cycling as much as me or more.

The more cyclist there are out there, the better for the industry.

toasty

chez_m356 wrote:

so a former IBIS owner who will be an Orange owner, you couldn't resist then ?

Nay, it was good fun, fits much better than the Meta too Just swapping the frame and forks, keeping the XT bits and Hope wheelset. The Mojo was a blind purchase, and it was a bit short, silly mistake. I actually tested this one fortunately Kashima Float RLC and RP23 too, exciting times!

larryb wrote:

I missed the bit where he was slagging them off?

Ditto actually, just pointing out they're selling lots. It seems to have degraded a bit into desperately trying to get a dig in, even when people have no idea what that dig is. Lawman, I thought you understood the previous mail was in reference to the 29ers thread? Not a a dig at trail bikes, clearly.

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

I never said they didn't, or did, they probably do... what I said was lighter weight AND longer travel, I didn't separate them.

Your rides must be packed with conversation, don't see how you get any riding in.

lawman

Toasty wrote:

chez_m356 wrote:

so a former IBIS owner who will be an Orange owner, you couldn't resist then ?

Nay, it was good fun, fits much better than the Meta too Just swapping the frame and forks, keeping the XT bits and Hope wheelset. The Mojo was a blind purchase, and it was a bit short, silly mistake. I actually tested this one fortunately Kashima Float RLC and RP23 too, exciting times!

larryb wrote:

I missed the bit where he was slagging them off?

Ditto actually, just pointing out they're selling lots. It seems to have degraded a bit into desperately trying to get a dig in, even when people have no idea what that dig is. Lawman, I thought you understood the previous mail was in reference to the 29ers thread? Not a a dig at trail bikes, clearly.

IBISMojoHDamon wrote:

I never said they didn't, or did, they probably do... what I said was lighter weight AND longer travel, I didn't separate them.

Your rides must be packed with conversation, don't see how you get any riding in.

ooopsy, my mistake understand what you mean about the mojo, the sl is too short, so is my HD to a certain extent, in between sizes, a combo of large toptube and medium seat tube is needed, and for the rest to be adjusted accordingly.

toasty

I so badly wanted that Mojo to fit it was truely awesome! Certainly not an issue with the bike, loads of people get on really well with them, I'm just a bit off the top end of the scale.

Apparently one of the chaps that works there is 6'4" or something similar, I think he must have a really long neck and head or something.