Zesty 160mm
izthewiz
Posts: 154
Yes, I know the travel is wrong, but a photo caption in a recent WMB test of the Zesty suggested that the new spacer for the rear shock could allow a longer stroke shock to be fitted, uprating it to 160mm rear travel. I'm thinking with maybe an angle-adjust headset and a bigger fork too, this could make a crackerjack light longer travel bike. Opinions, anyone?
The only bad view from the saddle is of the point of impact rising rapidly to meet you.
0
Comments
-
-
....but 2kg lighter, according to evans:http://www.evanscycles.com/categories/bikes/mountain-bikes/f/lapierre#! and a degree less slack on head and seat tube. I know some of that weight loss would disappear into the longer fork, but I'd quite like 4lbs less to haul uphill...The only bad view from the saddle is of the point of impact rising rapidly to meet you.0
-
i haven't got time to trawl through all the different models of spicy and zesty, but comparing a zesty 314 to a spicy 316, the domain is already well over a kg heavier than the fox. then you add in other components and it will make little difference to weight. there is probably very little weight difference between the two frames. the difference will be in the components.
trust me its a pretty bad idea.My Nukeproof Mega
viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=128652380 -
Nico Vouilloz does exactly that since the Zesty front-triangles are about 250g lighter than a Spicy one (and this is for the carbon versions). Then you factor in an added 250-500g (at least) for a 160mm fork, so at best you'll break-even weightwise, but maybe end up with a bike that's more fun.0
