Anyone riding one of the RM ETSX bikes?

[CraigH]

Considering one to replacing my dying XC/trail bike frame.

I already have a big bike, so want something that is a bit more useful when I travel.

Comments on the ETSX series?

http://www.fmfsportgroup.com/images/etsx70gd.jpg

[corey@nsmb.com]

Supposed to be awesome...and the 04 looks like it is a step above the previous models in terms of pivot durability.

I have only seen a few on the hill, but have read great things about them.

[CraigH]

From what I've read it was only the first batch (02.5) that had pivot bearing problems. Apparently RM sent out retrofit kits for the early batch owners.

I've read the 3 reviews RM has on their site.
Dirt Rag has a review on their site.
I have the Aug. 03 MBA at home.
www.justridingalong.com has a review.
Lots of happy owners in the MTBR.com reviews.

Anyone have the May 02 issue of Mountain Biking magazine? Apparently there is a review in there too.

[LeeLau]

A friend of mine in Victoria has one. His gf also has one. Another friend also has one for himself and two he bought for wedding presents - these are all in Nanaimo.

The guy in Victoria loves his bike but is beginning to experience ghost shifting issues - chain appears to skip on the rear cogs.

His gf also had ghost shifting. The lbs dramatically shortened the rear housing to deal with it. The housing now looks to short imo.

The people in Nanaimo had such bad ghost shifting he returned all 3 bikes and said he was embarrassed that he gave such poor quality wedding presents to his daughter and son-in-law. They are now riding Hecklers. Call Kebble at Arrowsmith bikes to confirm what happened.

However, all love the component choices. All were on ETSX 50s from this year. None of these problems were setup issues afaik

[corey@nsmb.com]

Ghost shifting may be happening if the back end is wagging due to crappy sloppy pivots...Otherwise there is no reason why a chain would hop around on the bike (unless it has a horrible chainline..something uncommon on XC bikes of that caliber).

[LeeLau]

Originally posted by Mulletron
Ghost shifting may be happening if the back end is wagging due to crappy sloppy pivots...Otherwise there is no reason why a chain would hop around on the bike (unless it has a horrible chainline..something uncommon on XC bikes of that caliber).

I rode my friends bike and took a look at the pivots. They looked fine. The ghost shifting only happens under load when going uphill and it doesn't happen all the time. It was really hard to see if the chainline was poor. The bike wasn't ghost-shifting under load in a sprint but I never got a chance to ride it uphill to tell if it slipped under uphill load while torqing

I had a GF Sugar 1 with the carbon chainstays and the chainline on it was very poor - resulting in sloppy shifts and ghost shifts; even with XTR cranks.

[corey@nsmb.com]

New drivetrains?

Wierd...I know the rear mech hangers on Rockies are pretty soft and succebtable to damage...one drop on the side can really through things off.

Heavy sprinting is what would upset the suspension the most and put the highest load on the drivetrain...you would think if it was design related (a result of the back end jacking changing the distance b/w the cogs and cranks) that this would be the time where things are worst.

Long grinds with steady power and skipping that is intermittant sounds more like incorrect rear mech adjustment that requires the right pedal frequency and bump combo to toss it off a tad.

Man, I am a gear whore.

[LeeLau]

I know what you mean - It's just hard for me to figure its a design issue with the RM given that they are a pretty superior bike company quality-wise. Gary Fisher I can understand having design issues but not RM. But its hard to draw any other conclusion given that 5 out of 5 ETSx's have this problem

They were all new drivetrains too. The stock components that RM puts on the ETSX.

They are beautifully spec'ed bikes though. I'm curious how well they hold up to hard riding as the linkage looks so fragile/funky.

I even checked limit screws and derailleur alignment and it all looked good. Drivetrains were clean too.


Originally posted by Mulletron
New drivetrains?

Wierd...I know the rear mech hangers on Rockies are pretty soft and succebtable to damage...one drop on the side can really through things off.

Heavy sprinting is what would upset the suspension the most and put the highest load on the drivetrain...you would think if it was design related (a result of the back end jacking changing the distance b/w the cogs and cranks) that this would be the time where things are worst.

Long grinds with steady power and skipping that is intermittant sounds more like incorrect rear mech adjustment that requires the right pedal frequency and bump combo to toss it off a tad.

Man, I am a gear whore.

[spookymilk]

good bike. realy good pedaling efficiency and almost NO rear end flex. Maybe for 04 the fixed that ghost shifting problem.

[corey@nsmb.com]

Originally posted by LeeLau
I know what you mean - It's just hard for me to figure its a design issue with the RM given that they are a pretty superior bike company quality-wise.

They do make nice bikes, but rest assured they have had their fair share of design flaws..mostly all tied to the RM line.

It began with the first RM-6, and lasted until the RMX came out (a 2004 bike, revised version of the RM-7). They have finally recognized that in order to have a solid suspension bike that will be reliable, and durable, that they need big, oversize sealed bearings and some width in the linkage.

Every single RM6 and RM7 regardless of year suffered the exact same problems. Not acceptable for such an expensive bike. I hold it that if they did not have the allmighty Free-Ride Gods on their bikes that the RM6-7-X bikes would have been gone after 2 years. Their image has allowed them to produce a bike that was unable to last a season on the shore without excessive maintenance that should not be required on a $5000 bike.

They ride really well, and I am thinking the RM-X is going to kick some serious butt. Kudos for them finally doing something new with that bike.

[Dave K]

Hey Craig. I rode a few for a couple brief spins. The suspension action is pretty nice on the X bikes. They feel pretty snappy on the climbs and when sprinting. However, I can feel there is some lateral flexibility in the rear end. This is when they were new. I did not ride on them long enough to gather any info on their shifting reliability.

They are pricey bikes though. X-70 retails at around 5K. No wonder they have good parts spec because they should at that price. Even then, there is only a tiny bit of XTR. X-50 is a 4K bike. At that price bracket, I think there would be some other bikes that I would be looking into.

Dave

[LeeLau]

Originally posted by Dave K
They are pricey bikes though. X-70 retails at around 5K. No wonder they have good parts spec because they should at that price. Even then, there is only a tiny bit of XTR. X-50 is a 4K bike. At that price bracket, I think there would be some other bikes that I would be looking into.

Dave

They're not very light too.

Personally, I'd go for a RM Instinct instead.

Or you could buy my new Norco Team XC fs frame and hang your parts on it - size M. White and red

[BAC5.2]

Originally posted by LeeLau
I rode my friends bike and took a look at the pivots. They looked fine. The ghost shifting only happens under load when going uphill and it doesn't happen all the time. It was really hard to see if the chainline was poor. The bike wasn't ghost-shifting under load in a sprint but I never got a chance to ride it uphill to tell if it slipped under uphill load while torqing

I had a GF Sugar 1 with the carbon chainstays and the chainline on it was very poor - resulting in sloppy shifts and ghost shifts; even with XTR cranks.

I have ridden, and worked on a number of the Sugar 1's. None of them had problems. I don't remember exactly (havent been to work in a few months because of college), but I recall only the seat stays being carbon with the V-brake bosses bonded on. I dunno, i've never had any quality control issues with Fisher bikes. Maybe you got a lemon?

[LeeLau]

Originally posted by BAC5.2
I have ridden, and worked on a number of the Sugar 1's. None of them had problems. I don't remember exactly (havent been to work in a few months because of college), but I recall only the seat stays being carbon with the V-brake bosses bonded on. I dunno, i've never had any quality control issues with Fisher bikes. Maybe you got a lemon?

GF had a recall on the Sugar 2's because the chainstays were not correctly aligned. These were the alu chainstays version. Mine were misaligned so I got a Sugar 1 instead. I'm not sure if there were Sugar 1 lemons

The Sugar 1's chainstays were aligned but if you took a look at the chainline when on middle ring and on largest cog in rear there was a chainline issue that only showed up when pedalling backwards - like for a ratchet move. It wasn't a terribly huge misalignment issue for most people who might ride the Sugar without doing a lot of hopping and backpedal ratchet moves but for me, it was not acceptable. So I got rid of the bike and moved on.

[WBC]

We have a few customers with em. Supposedly the ride is awesome and the angles are really good. But all ours had the same problems with ghost shifting. We traced it to the flimsy rear.

Nothing new :)

[CraigH]

I took a ETSX-30 out for a test ride on the weekend (only one built up in my size) and didn't have any ghost shifting issues, but then that was a brand new bike.

I also didn't feel any rear end flex, but the test ride wasn't all that long. If I could find one, it would be great to take one out for a longer ride.

None of the reviews I've read on the series has mentioned ghost shifting either.

Has anyone tried going to full length cable housing? That was the cure for Bullits with ghost shifting issues.

I was considering a frame only on one of the left over 03s that are on sale.

The left over 03 complete bikes are on sale. I agree, the MSRP of the series seems very high, but now they are on sale they seem competitive.

Sorry Lee, a Medium would be to small, a friend of mine has a medium FSR and I'm to cramped. I tried a Large FSR and it is the right size.

The other frame I'm considering is the SC Blur. Test rode a large with a Fox AVA and was very happy with it.

I also rented a large Heckler for a day in Downieville and really liked it, but found it very similar to the Bullit I already have, in fact it felt almost the same as a 6" Fox & 5" single crown equipped Bullit other than it had the 5th rear shock performace.

[hampstead bandit]

yeah my friend's RM-7 suffered the same fate

after a month of light trail riding he had to get the main pivot bearings replaced under warranty

then 6 months later after riding in Les Gets the whole swingarm was rocking loose

they replaced all the bearings / bushings / pins, etc. under warranty but it was still there

then eventually talked to RM in Canada for a new swingarm as the mounts has flogged out and it was all moving around loose

he waited another month...


that isn't the first rm i've seen with that problem?

[LeeLau]

Originally posted by CraigH
Sorry Lee, a Medium would be to small, a friend of mine has a medium FSR and I'm to cramped. I tried a Large FSR and it is the right size.


Are you sure? I am taller than you.

Here are frame dimensions

http://www.norco.com/bikes/2004bikes/teamxc.htm

[CraigH]

Originally posted by LeeLau
Are you sure? I am taller than you.
Here are frame dimensions
http://www.norco.com/bikes/2004bikes/teamxc.htm

I'm 6'2", I thought I was taller than you.

I see they only have 3 sizes, so their medium = 18.5" with a theoretical top tube of 23.23.

I tried to find Specialized's FSR geometry, but it isn't immediately obvious.

[LeeLau]

Originally posted by CraigH
I'm 6'2", I thought I was taller than you.

I see they only have 3 sizes, so their medium = 18.5" with a theoretical top tube of 23.23.

I tried to find Specialized's FSR geometry, but it isn't immediately obvious.

No you're right. I had small man's syndrome. I'm 5' 11". You should be on a large

[CraigH]

In case anyone else is looking at them, reviews:

What Mountain Bike, May 2003 (http://www.bikes.com/news/reviews/rv_03etsx-30_may03wmb.aspx)

Canadian Cyclist Magazine, 2003 Buyer's Guide Annual (http://www.bikes.com/news/reviews/rv_03etsx-70_cdncyc.aspx)

Mountain Bicycling Magazine, Dec, 2002 (http://www.bikes.com/news/reviews/review_03_x50_bm.aspx)

DirtRag issue #101 (http://www.dirtragmag.com/articles/article.php?ID=469&category=stuff_reviews)

Bike Magazine (http://www.bikemag.com/gear/etsx/)

JustRidingAlong.com (http://www.justridingalong.com/biking/index.php)

Rider reviews on MTBR (http://www.mtbreview.com/reviews/2003_full_suspension/index_R.shtml)

Mountain Biking UK (http://www.mbuk.com/biketestdetails.asp?id=73)

There are a couple of others magazine reviews out there, but I haven't found them online.

Edit to add one more review.

[switch]

Originally posted by Mulletron
They ride really well, and I am thinking the RM-X is going to kick some serious butt. Kudos for them finally doing something new with that bike.

I talked to the design guy at RM about my 2002 Switch. I really liked the bike, except that the leverage ratio was too much for the travel. The RM designer said that he was aware of the problem (no solution for my problem), that he inherited the Switch/RMx designs, and that he was doing something about them. So, for 2004 RM now has put out the RMX and Switch with much less leverage ratio and beefier linkages. The RMX Team comes with a Swinger shock, which I've heard really good things about from one of the RM riders.

[$lack]

Any one looking for one (or any Rocky for that matter) should go see Simon.
He's blowing out press review demo models at it seems up to almost 1/2 off list.
ETSX 70 in the low 3's. Simon's always motivated to make a deal.

[CraigH]

Thanks for the info, but I was mostly interested in a frame only as I already have a build kit.

Once the MBA "wrecking crew" (and their brothers) got through with a bike, would you want to buy it?

[switch]

Originally posted by CraigH
Thanks for the info, but I was mostly interested in a frame only as I already have a build kit.

Once the MBA "wrecking crew" (and their brothers) got through with a bike, would you want to buy it?

What size frame, and what ballpark price on the frame?

[CraigH]

19", and as low as I can find...

Cove told me about $1800, but they had to call to confirm.

For that price I'd probably get a Blur instead as I've ridden one for a day and liked it a lot.

[$lack]

Originally posted by CraigH
Thanks for the info, but I was mostly interested in a frame only as I already have a build kit.

Once the MBA "wrecking crew" (and their brothers) got through with a bike, would you want to buy it?

These are bikes ridden once or twice only.
Not a scratch on them.
Check it out.