# Revel Rascal



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

This bike deserves its own thread. I've ridden most the modern super bikes. The rascal is as good as any of them.

It's like a snappier, livelier sb130. With outstanding finish, customization, and touch points. The rear end doesn't feel quite as plush as the sb130, but I think it far exceeds it in terms of dancing with the trail and being insanely nimble and quick, and possibly a better climber.

Anyone ridden it?






I'll post a more thorough review when I have the time.


----------



## smartyiak (Apr 29, 2009)

There's a few reviews in here, including my own:

https://forums.mtbr.com/custom-builders-other-manufacturers/revel-bikes-reviews-1101818.html

I agree with your evaluation.


----------



## A. Rider (Jul 25, 2017)

It's the CBF (_Canfield Balance Formula_) suspension at the Rascal's heart. I ride a 2017 Canfield Riot, the Rascal's closest (and _only_) 29er relative. Without ever having ridden, or even seen one in person, I can kind-of-sort-of attest then to what you're saying.


----------



## autosmith (Jan 16, 2012)

I think there's a tread called Revel reviews. They are amazing bikes. I can't complain at all.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

The black frame with the helm looks so good. How do you like the helm? 

I was originally looking to go all black, but they had a blue ready a few days after ordering so I went with that. And now the blue is really grown on me. 

This bike truly rides like a dream.


----------



## autosmith (Jan 16, 2012)

Gratefulone said:


> The black frame with the helm looks so good. How do you like the helm?
> 
> I was originally looking to go all black, but they had a blue ready a few days after ordering so I went with that. And now the blue is really grown on me.
> 
> This bike truly rides like a dream.


I really like the helm. It stays planted around corners and through rocks and roots. The only time it doesn't feel great is when I'm going slow.

I think Revel nailed it with all the colors so far. The blue looks amazing too.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Is the frame stiffer than it's namesake?


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

Not sure which name sake implies not stiff? 

But I think the frame is super burly and stiff. I am not a light man, and I detect no flex on the trail. I think the frame is a bit heavy compared to a few competitors, and I think part of that is it due to the incredibly robust paint job. It also includes some built in frame protection. 

It’s burly bro. Until you get it moving then it’s a dart.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

What travel do you have helm set too?


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

I only have one ride so far, but yes, rear end stiffness is not an issue. 

I wouldn’t call the frame portly, but I think it enjoys a good pizza on the weekends.


----------



## autosmith (Jan 16, 2012)

Helm is set at 140. I’ll probably try it at 150 or 160 eventually. But it rides so good right now I’ve lost my ambition to play with settings. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

autosmith said:


> Helm is set at 140. I'll probably try it at 150 or 160
> eventually. But it rides so good right now I've lost my ambition to play with settings.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I'm curious what 150/ 160 would be like. Revel hasn't publicly stated anywhere if they approve of increase / wether it voids warranty. The frame sure seems stiff enough to support. But yes I agree it's riding so good, no need for tinkering.

Look forward to taking It to the desert in the coming weeks to see how it handles more chunk.


----------



## 92gli (Sep 28, 2006)

I rode one a few weeks ago. Blue X01 build. Was planning on getting my first full squish 29er and also tried the sb100, tallboy 4 and evil following. I really didn't like any of them and ended up falling in love with the SC 5010. I just didn't find any of those 29ers nimble enough for my style and area trails, so, I'm going 27.5 for my new bike. That said, take what I'm about to say with a huge grain of salt. 
The rascal was by far my least favorite bike to ride out of the 4. I got really frustrated climbing a few times. The front end was very light for me and I was wandering a lot when things got really slow. Didn't feel like it accelerated well on flat sections (dhf/dhr combo didn't help I'm sure). The bike really really shines on downhill chop though. Smooth, plush as hell and feels like there's no bottom. It's just that around here that's not a high enough percentage of the time you're on the bike. In my 2 hour ride I only had a couple brief moments like that. 
Also, the frame is beautiful in every way. Very high quality. You definitely won't be disappointed there if you buy one. 
For comparison sake, I liked the SB100 the best but decided not to buy one because of the issues with the link and the cost. My next choice would have been the evil. But as I said, none of them felt flickable enough for me.
On an unrelated note, the I9 hydra freehub was popping constantly on my ride. This demo was virtually brand new, maybe 30 miles on it and the I9 issues were already rearing their head.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

92gli said:


> I rode one a few weeks ago. Blue X01 build. Was planning on getting my first full squish 29er and also tried the sb100, tallboy 4 and evil following. I really didn't like any of them and ended up falling in love with the SC 5010. I just didn't find any of those 29ers nimble enough for my style and area trails, so, I'm going 27.5 for my new bike. That said, take what I'm about to say with a huge grain of salt.
> The rascal was by far my least favorite bike to ride out of the 4. I got really frustrated climbing a few times. The front end was very light for me and I was wandering a lot when things got really slow. Didn't feel like it accelerated well on flat sections (dhf/dhr combo didn't help I'm sure). The bike really really shines on downhill chop though. Smooth, plush as hell and feels like there's no bottom. It's just that around here that's not a high enough percentage of the time you're on the bike. In my 2 hour ride I only had a couple brief moments like that.
> Also, the frame is beautiful in every way. Very high quality. You definitely won't be disappointed there if you buy one.
> For comparison sake, I liked the SB100 the best but decided not to buy one because of the issues with the link and the cost. My next choice would have been the evil. But as I said, none of them felt flickable enough for me.
> On an unrelated note, the I9 hydra freehub was popping constantly on my ride. This demo was virtually brand new, maybe 30 miles on it and the I9 issues were already rearing their head.


Buzz kill. Sounds like demo setup issues. I've ridden the modern offerings from santa Cruz and yeti, etc, and the rascal easily stands up to the competition. I had the opportunity to purchase any of the above mentioned bikes and chose the rascal.

It seems like it's certainly more bike then you were looking for, which makes sense as to why you preferred the sb100.

Glad you are stoked on 5010. It's also a very sweet rig.

I'm coming off a blinged out tallboy 3. It was ever so slightly snappier then the rascal, but the rascal is far more confident descending. They climb very similar. Tech climbing the rascal is better by a notch. Smooth climbing the tallboy is better by a notch.

Tbh: it took me 4 rides to get the suspension dialed on the rascal and truly fall in love. You really can tell so little from a demo. For example: if you lowered the bar height and shortened the stem, the wandering you experienced would probably disappear.

I'm 5'9". I demoed the medium and large and settled with a large and 40mm stem, 780 bars with a good bit of rise. It's perfect.

In the past few seasons I've had: a Yeti Sb4.5, Santa Cruz Tallboy 3, specialized epic - s works, Rocky Mountain slayer; and I've extensively demoed all the modern super bike offerings (including 5010).

I feel like the rascal is the culmination of my favorite parts of all these bikes. For me, it's the perfect 1 bike quiver.

Happy trails. Enjoy your new 5010


----------



## 92gli (Sep 28, 2006)

Gratefulone said:


> Buzz kill. Sounds like demo setup issues.


Spent a good amount of time at the shop setting sag with all my gear on, I think it was pretty well set. However, looking at the numbers of what I've been riding, what I just ordered, and the bikes that were my 2nd and 3rd choices, I think I should have been on a medium even though the large "felt" ok. Also, even if I was on a medium the wheelbase is still longer than what I gravitate to. I think the rascal needs a good amount of wide open space to stretch it's legs. I was thinking if I had a chance to ride one at Buffalo Creek in CO I'd probably adore it. Or, if revel had a 130mm 27.5 bike, that would also be a strong contender. In the big scheme of things, $2800 for a revel frame is a really nice price compared to some other companies and the quality is top notch.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

92gli said:


> I rode one a few weeks ago. Blue X01 build. Was planning on getting my first full squish 29er and also tried the sb100, tallboy 4 and evil following. I really didn't like any of them and ended up falling in love with the SC 5010. I just didn't find any of those 29ers nimble enough for my style and area trails, so, I'm going 27.5 for my new bike. That said, take what I'm about to say with a huge grain of salt.
> The rascal was by far my least favorite bike to ride out of the 4. I got really frustrated climbing a few times. The front end was very light for me and I was wandering a lot when things got really slow. Didn't feel like it accelerated well on flat sections (dhf/dhr combo didn't help I'm sure). The bike really really shines on downhill chop though. Smooth, plush as hell and feels like there's no bottom. It's just that around here that's not a high enough percentage of the time you're on the bike. In my 2 hour ride I only had a couple brief moments like that.
> Also, the frame is beautiful in every way. Very high quality. You definitely won't be disappointed there if you buy one.
> For comparison sake, I liked the SB100 the best but decided not to buy one because of the issues with the link and the cost. My next choice would have been the evil. But as I said, none of them felt flickable enough for me.
> On an unrelated note, the I9 hydra freehub was popping constantly on my ride. This demo was virtually brand new, maybe 30 miles on it and the I9 issues were already rearing their head.





92gli said:


> Spent a good amount of time at the shop setting sag with all my gear on, I think it was pretty well set. However, looking at the numbers of what I've been riding, what I just ordered, and the bikes that were my 2nd and 3rd choices, I think I should have been on a medium even though the large "felt" ok. Also, even if I was on a medium the wheelbase is still longer than what I gravitate to. I think the rascal needs a good amount of wide open space to stretch it's legs. I was thinking if I had a chance to ride one at Buffalo Creek in CO I'd probably adore it. Or, if revel had a 130mm 27.5 bike, that would also be a strong contender. In the big scheme of things, $2800 for a revel frame is a really nice price compared to some other companies and the quality is top notch.


Totally appreciate what you are saying. The only thing I would add, is once I was able to find some space to open it up on the rascal, I'm now finding I can open it up in tighter places and finding it very nimble. now that I know how to ride it. It felt a little big at first, now it feels like a dart.

Of course, a long wheelbase 29er will never feel like a shorter 27.5 bike. Personally, i am a 29er guy.

Cheers!


----------



## Stroganof (Jan 28, 2006)

A friend has one and is not so happy with how it climbs, his main complaint being wallowing when he stands up. However, he doesn't have a shock with LSC - would that make a big difference on this bike?


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

Stroganof said:


> A friend has one and is not so happy with how it climbs, his main complaint being wallowing when he stands up. However, he doesn't have a shock with LSC - would that make a big difference on this bike?


To your friend: the CBF suspension is sag point independent. Meaning it rides well whatever sag point you set. If he is wallowing, add 5 psi and see how that goes.

I'm a heavy dude and need I loose 25lbs (former Cat 1 racer, and college athlete prior to that, for reference). And I have no adverse wallow. I like to sit and spin until it gets tech and steep, then I stand and hammer. It's super firm while sitting, and just the right amount of compression to give me grip while standing through steep/ techy climbs.

I've been very successful at 25% sag. Then I dropped down to 30 percent sag so it's a little more plush descending. I still have no detectable wallow at 30 percent. And this coming from a guy who rode the tallboy 3 last, and a specialized Epic before that (both very firm pedaling platforms).

Why would your friend buy a brand new bike if he wasn't stoked on it? Did he demo first?

The bike freaking rips. Don't over think it (to your friend). Once you get to know the bike, and ride it aggressively, it comes to life like no other.

I almost bought the 130. But so glad I waited for a rascal.

Ps. I have a good set of carbon wheels, and the aggressor 2.3 on the rear so that certainly helps uphill/ and flats. I have no complaints climbing other than my current fitness level.


----------



## autosmith (Jan 16, 2012)

I’ve heard a few people say it wallows up climbs. I’m curious how that happens. I think mine wallows less than the Ripley LS I had before. Maybe its size of rider and shock settings. I’m 200lbs with a cane creek shock 25% sag, high speed compression fully open, low speed 3 clicks from open. It climbs great seated or standing. I ride lots of steep ups and downs with rocks and roots. You could always contact the guys at Revel they are always quick to respond.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

Stroganof said:


> A friend has one and is not so happy with how it climbs, his main complaint being wallowing when he stands up. However, he doesn't have a shock with LSC - would that make a big difference on this bike?





autosmith said:


> I've heard a few people say it wallows up climbs. I'm curious how that happens. I think mine wallows less than the Ripley LS I had before. Maybe its size of rider and shock settings. I'm 200lbs with a cane creek shock 25% sag, high speed compression fully open, low speed 3 clicks from open. It climbs great seated or standing. I ride lots of steep ups and downs with rocks and roots. You could always contact the guys at Revel they are always quick to respond.


Totally agree. It's perplexing.

If I wasn't so dang stoked on this bike, I would regret making this thread. I have a little medical issue that has me off the bike for a week, and I was hoping to just read and share stoke around this bike.

I sure do hope your friend finds the right settings as it would truly be a shame to not be in love with this bike. It deserves all the love. It does want to be driven though, and is not nearly as fun if you are just along for the ride. That's even more true of the Large Yeti SB130.

I may have already mentioned this: but this like feels like it's directly between the medium and large sb130.

The large rascal also feels like it's in between the large v4 Ripley and the large sb130. Which to me, is the perfect compromise right now.

Ps. I'm on the western slope of Colorado. So I certainly have some room to let it run. But also have TONs of challenging climbing and some tight spaces.


----------



## LoneStar (Jun 17, 2004)

I test rode a Rascal at a recent demo. Setup was a little soft for me, so it was blowing through its travel faster than I'd like, but it was a sweet feeling ride and if I were looking to get a short travel 29er, it would be in strong contention. Revel is coming on strong in the Atlanta area, with a lot of folks opting for the Rail. I'm tempted to go that route when I spring for a new frame as every part on my Spider would swap over and I can just extend the travel on my Helm.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

3rd ride on mine today. Monarch Crest yesterday, Reno/Flag/Bear/Deadman in Crested Butte today.

Climbing wise, if you are comparing it to a short link set-up like an Ibis, and prefer to ride high in the travel, I can see where you may feel it wallows. Yes, the Rascal is not a snappy, however, traction on techy climbs is superb.

As cliche as it sounds, where this bike really shines is going the other way.


----------



## Broads72 (Feb 17, 2015)

*Lovin it!*

Couldn't be happier with my Rail. I'm set up 27.5 rear/29 front with 160mm travel and 51 offset, Fox 36.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

Broads72 said:


> Couldn't be happier with my Rail. I'm set up 27.5 rear/29 front with 160mm travel and 51 offset, Fox 36.
> View attachment 1283005


Oh nice! Tell me more, did you ride it 275 up front before going 29? That's exactly how I would like to setup this frame...

What size frame? Does it feel snappy - playful?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## matt1025 (Oct 14, 2010)

smartyiak said:


> There's a few reviews in here, including my own:
> 
> https://forums.mtbr.com/custom-builders-other-manufacturers/revel-bikes-reviews-1101818.html
> 
> I agree with your evaluation.


Anyone here coming off a Rocky Mountain Instinct as a comparison? That's my current bike but interested in the Rascal, especially in the climbing capability.
Thanks


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

Gratefulone said:


> Buzz kill. Sounds like demo setup issues. I've ridden the modern offerings from santa Cruz and yeti, etc, and the rascal easily stands up to the competition. I had the opportunity to purchase any of the above mentioned bikes and chose the rascal.
> 
> It seems like it's certainly more bike then you were looking for, which makes sense as to why you preferred the sb100.
> 
> ...


How are you liking the Rascal now that you've had a bit of time with it? I'm currently riding a Tallboy v3 in a medium w/ 70mm stem, and a recent move has me looking for something more capable on the descents without sacrificing in the climbs. I had my mind set on a ripmo v2, but they're so far backordered that I would miss most of the warm riding season, so considering the rascal. Do you think there is value in having both the Tallboy 3 and the Rascal in the bike quiver?

Also, what size Tallboy 3 did you have? I'm a hair over 5'9" and struggling to decide on size and don't have the option of test riding.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

I’m 5’9”

I had a large Talllboy and now a large revel rascal. The rascal is the best 130mm 29er trail bike on the market. Somedays I wish I had the medium. But I did demo both sides prior to purchasing.

The safe bet is medium. It will climb better and be more fun in tight twistys. The large has an awesome attack position and feels more stable when things open up and speeds increase. 

Personal preference.


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

Has anyone been able to also ride a Banshee Prime v3 and compare it to the Revel Rascal?


----------



## Raja (Nov 9, 2005)

Anyone had any creaking pivots? I demoed a Rascal last week and it had a very annoying creak from somewhere in the pivots. I checked all of the bolts and none were loose. I think it has 18 bearings, so a lot of possible points of noise.


----------



## ryano4u (Nov 8, 2011)

I have heard some.. Put some grease in them and it helped but then I noticed the rear flex.. I'd like to see if anyone else has noticed significant rear flex with the Rascal. All pivots are to spec and so is the rear axle. Rear wheel is a SC reserve 30 - Hydra hub and its fine. I can hand push the wheel to touch the side of the swing arm. Tire is a 2.3 Minion SS. so nothing huge.. Kinda boggled with it..


----------



## Qfactor03 (Dec 8, 2005)

I have an XL Rascal and it had an issue right out of the box with flex in the rear end. After loosening and re-torquing the pivots, I found that a couple had extremely dry anti-seize on the threads and they were reaching torque but not fully seating the way they should. If you check how easy it is to turn the entire axle assembly with a hex key, you may notice that some have some resistance while others turn very easily. Take the looser axles out, clean the threads really well, re-apply anti-seize and re-torque to spec. I actually over-torqued them slightly on purpose, loosened them and re-torqued to make sure they were seated all the way once reaching final torque. You should feel more resistance afterwards when turning the entire axle assembly with a wrench.

The bike was dead quiet for a few weeks but then a really bad creak started up. Every pedal stroke, seated, standing; constant creak. I chased it for a couple of weeks before finding it was the single vertical bolt that mounts the shock to the yoke end. It was bone dry. Gave it a light coat of Philwood grease and dead silent ever since. May not be the cause of yours but worth checking.

I also experienced the same issue with chain rub on the inside of the guide when in the largest cog as the two other posters above. XO 12 speed drivetrain - used the thinner spacers to move the guide inboard just a small amount and now it clears throughout the entire gear range. 

I'm 6-5 and upper end of clydesdale weight - came off of a first gen Santa Cruz Tallboy LTc. The Revel is a great bike. Smooth and sucks everything up. It took a while to get used to climbing. Not quite as efficient as a the TB, but keep the pedals turning and the thing just keeps going - the gnarlier the climb, the better it is. It just seems to dig in and keep going. Going down - the bike will inspire enough (over)confidence to get you into trouble.


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

Gratefulone said:


> I'm 5'9"
> 
> I had a large Talllboy and now a large revel rascal. The rascal is the best 130mm 29er trail bike on the market. Somedays I wish I had the medium. But I did demo both sides prior to purchasing.
> 
> ...


What gen tallboy are you coming from?

What other bikes were you seriously considering and why did the Rascal win out?

How long have you had it and are you still stoked on your decision?

Ugh. I wrote a lot. Sorry guys.

I'm looking for a 2nd bike to compliment the SB150 and have demo'd a rascal, optic, and tallboy v4. Still planning to demo the Ripley v4 and (even though it doesn't fit this list) a Transition Scout, and maybe the YT izzo if I can wait that long to demo (they are local but... corona). Just need a bike that would be more fun when I ride easier local trails before work, not necessarily needing something for all day epic rides, but something more poppy/playful/fun than the 150 (which is not really any of those things on blue trails at casual speeds). Ideally with decent or at least comparable climbing to the 150.

The Rascal had this amazing sense of acceleration under power, and turned so naturally. Medium and small bumps and rocks were really easily absorbed. I was expecting to have to slow down in some places where I know the sb150 just smashes, but my caution was unwarranted. In burlier trails or park days the 150 would still show it up but for most of my riding I think this bike could be a really great bike. It was an easy pedaling bike. Maybe not the best pedaling bike ever... But on a long steep climb I remember telling my buddy "i could do this all day". It wasn't like a Ripmo DW link where you feel like there's extra free power under every pedal stroke pushing you up the hill, but it was surprising to me especially downhill how immediately my pedal strokes became forward momentum. I was really impressed with it. But it was also a 9k custom build. I am 5'10 and rode a medium, but need to demo a large and see if the same ease of acceleration and the characteristics I liked so much feel the same with my own set of cheaper and heavier wheels.

The Optic was a really fun and playful bike. Riding it around the neighborhood was a riot. Jumping curbs and stairs, manuals (at least as good of manuals as I can do) and general f'ing around was a good time. However I didn't jive with this bike on the trail at all. I hit a few sections of trails that I thought were going to be pushing it for this bike, but when it hits its limits it hits them pretty hard. I went from having fun to being really uncomfortable really quickly. The bike is said to be a good climber. Most people put it up there with the tallboy and rascal but still below the ripley... But I hated climbing it. If it at least had a climb switch maybe I could just lock out and be fine but come on... No lockout? Maybe I've just gotten too used to better pedaling platforms... Who knows. Sadly my least expensive option isn't going to win this one.

The Tallboy v4 might be the bike. It had similar playful and fun nature like the optic but I found myself much more comfortable with it on the trail and at speed. Like the Rascal I had a few places where I went to slow down but realized it could handle a lot more than I was giving it credit for. The new lower vpp is really good. Not being able to see your sag is super annoying... Previously had a v1 bronson and this bike reminded me of that bike a bit, with better geo and 29" wheels. Again, a 10k build will feel pretty awesome so I'm trying to remain focused on bike feel and suspension and avoid falling in love with hydra hubs and 26lb bikes. SC warranty and bearing replacement is a selling point but their factory builds are a joke. Rascal wins at the 5k price point.

Been a while since I rode the SB130 but it was a damn good bike too. I'd consider one except that I already have the 150 and I think there's too much similarity between the two.

Going to ride the Ripley V4 and see if it checks all the boxes. I'm pretty sure I'd have a hard time hating a Tallboy, Rascal, or Ripley.


----------



## Raja (Nov 9, 2005)

Alfred, any update on the Ripley demo? My shortlist is the Rascal, Tallboy, and Ripley. Demoed the Rascal and had a sort spin on a friend's TB4.


----------



## rccp (Aug 17, 2009)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> What gen tallboy are you coming from?
> 
> What other bikes were you seriously considering and why did the Rascal win out?
> 
> ...


Seems a Jamis Portal could be on your potential list as well...


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

Raja said:


> Alfred, any update on the Ripley demo? My shortlist is the Rascal, Tallboy, and Ripley. Demoed the Rascal and had a sort spin on a friend's TB4.


I demo'd a large Rascal (previously only rode a med) and man it's a great bike. It fits me really well at 5'10. Build for the 5k ish budget is really decent. The external cable routing by the BB still bugs me and the company being so new makes me wonder if the lifetime warranty is worth much. I have no reason to believe they wouldn't be awesome but the overcautious pessimist in me has to wonder. Great bike though... I could definitely love it. But the Tallboy is so much fun. If I didn't already have a bigger bike the Rascal would be the bike for sure. It can keep up with rowdier bikes no problem. I'm kind of leaning tallboy frame up build and just buying parts on sale as I find sales. SC really earned my business over the years and I completely trust they will take care of anything that ever goes wrong. I honestly hate both tallboy colors though hah.

I didn't demo the Ripley yet. My local shop has been so slammed that I was lucky to get another demo on the Rascal. Weekend demo's have been a challenge and I screwed up a ligament in my hand making the bed the other day (yeah, ridiculous right?) so my timeframe may get pushed back a little on this purchase. However that gives me time for a better color tallboy to come out, or maybe enough of a discount to make me hate the yellow less.

Will post whenever I get some time on the Ripley. I loved the DW on the Ripmo and the SLX build is pretty good. We'll have to see what happens. Sorry I don't have more info for you.

My local shop doesn't sell Nukeproof or Jamis but those would be on the list too. I'd like to keep my business at this shop but also the YT Izzo has my curiosity ($3,899 build spec is better than any of these options and a grand less $) and they are local and they give me free beer whenever I go in there so...


----------



## Raja (Nov 9, 2005)

Thanks for the update, Alfred! I guess I need to go rent a Tallboy and see how it compares. I too worry about a new small company being around long term.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

Raja said:


> Thanks for the update, Alfred! I guess I need to go rent a Tallboy and see how it compares. I too worry about a new small company being around long term.


I've demo'd two Rascals from different shops. Neither bike had more than 15 days of usage, one of them less than 10. Both X01 builds. *BOTH* bikes had a knock (not a creak) in the rear suspension when I needed to give a lil' extra effort on a climbing feature. It was the nail in the coffin for me as I didn't want to deal with tracking down issues in that complicated linkage. I ended up ordering a Ripley. Hope to have it in a few weeks.

I also demo'd the Ripley twice and while it's not as composed as the Rascal going down, which is maybe the best rear suspension I've ridden going down repeated chatter/braking bumps I've ever ridden, but it's still punches above it's weight class. Going up, the Ripley is a game changer whether you're a spinner or need to get on the gas because that thing is snappy as hell.


----------



## Raja (Nov 9, 2005)

In addition to a constant creak, scratchy sound my demo had a big knock as well. It was usually on a big g-out like a dip in the trail. I really want to pull the trigger on one, but I hate chasing creaks/issues.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

I didn't demo the TB4 but I've had 3 in the past...TB1, TB2 & TB LT. As is par for the course the last 5 years, I can't stand Santa Cruz's color combos. Anyway, after reading this thread I went and watched some comparison videos if the TB vs Ripley. I will say they were all pretty consistent...and similar to the ones I saw/read on Rascal vs Ripley....get the Ripley if going uphill is more important, get the TB/Rascal if getting more rowdy on the downs is what you seek. While it may not soak up the chatter as well as the Rascal, I thought the Ripley is much easier to throw around.


----------



## JimmyC (Dec 19, 2005)

Just a datapoint for comparison. I own a Ripley v4 and I have ridden my friend's Revel Rascal. I previously owned a Canfield Riot so I am quite familiar with the CBF suspension that the Rascal utilizes. At least to me (and I know that we all have very different preferences in suspension performance), the Rascal was much smoother, much more composed in rough terrain, and much better handing square edge impacts that the Ripley v4 fitted with a Factory DPS. As others have stated, the DPS equipped Ripley seems slightly snapper than the Rascal when pedaling uphill. I have installed a DVO Topaz T3 on the Ripley and the "suspension performance gap" between the Ripley and Rascal has narrowed significantly. I still think that the Rascal has the more composed suspension system but the DVO Topaz equipped Ripley is much smoother than the DPS equipped Ripley. The addition of the DVO Topaz was a huge upgrade for me (it may not be for others depending on their suspension preferences). I was frustrated with the Ripley's downhill performance (I live in South Lake Tahoe) in rougher terrain but I am now quite happy with the Ripley's downhill capabilities. It is still a 120 mm rear travel bike but it is now much more composed in the rough.


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

Raja said:


> Thanks for the update, Alfred! I guess I need to go rent a Tallboy and see how it compares. I too worry about a new small company being around long term.


Don't let me dissuade you from loving the Rascal, it really is a rad bike. It's worth solid consideration for sure. It just doesn't fit exactly what I'm looking for.

Also if you're shopping now/soon I can imagine an updated Pivot 429 trail and Transition Smuggler will be out soon. Smuggler probably won't climb wel enough to make my short list but we'll see what happens. Rumors of a Yeti SB 115 starting to seem credible... So many great options out there.


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

JimmyC said:


> Just a datapoint for comparison. I own a Ripley v4 and I have ridden my friend's Revel Rascal. I previously owned a Canfield Riot so I am quite familiar with the CBF suspension that the Rascal utilizes. At least to me (and I know that we all have very different preferences in suspension performance), the Rascal was much smoother, much more composed in rough terrain, and much better handing square edge impacts that the Ripley v4 fitted with a Factory DPS. As others have stated, the DPS equipped Ripley seems slightly snapper than the Rascal when pedaling uphill. I have installed a DVO Topaz T3 on the Ripley and the "suspension performance gap" between the Ripley and Rascal has narrowed significantly. I still think that the Rascal has the more composed suspension system but the DVO Topaz equipped Ripley is much smoother than the DPS equipped Ripley. The addition of the DVO Topaz was a huge upgrade for me (it may not be for others depending on their suspension preferences). I was frustrated with the Ripley's downhill performance (I live in South Lake Tahoe) in rougher terrain but I am now quite happy with the Ripley's downhill capabilities. It is still a 120 mm rear travel bike but it is now much more composed in the rough.


I have always wondered how much you could blur the lines with a slightly overbuilt Tallboy or Ripley v4. A lot of people say "why? just buy a ripmo or a hightower if you want more" but that deosn't mean there's not room for a bike between these bikes... If you're mostly happy but want just a little more, it seems like there's possibilities.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> I have always wondered how much you could blur the lines with a slightly overbuilt Tallboy or Ripley v4. A lot of people say "why? just buy a ripmo or a hightower if you want more" but that deosn't mean there's not room for a bike between these bikes... If you're mostly happy but want just a little more, it seems like there's possibilities.


Would you slot the Rascal here as the 'in-between' bike between theTallboy/Ripley and the Hightower/Ripmo?

I ordered a Large Rascal sight-unseen based on reviews since I can't demo one locally. I'm sitting on a medium tallboy 3 right now w/ a 70mm stem (I'm 5'9"), and really wanted a Ripmo V2 as a compliment to the tallboy 3. Since I can't get a Ripmo V2 until the end of the year, I opted to go with the Rascal instead, in a large, and hopefully will find it fits what I'm looking for in a bike that climbs well (hopefully at least as well as my tallboy) but gives me a more capable descender. Waiting on delivery of my Rascal, which is projected for the end of the month.


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

jchan417 said:


> Would you slot the Rascal here as the 'in-between' bike between theTallboy/Ripley and the Hightower/Ripmo?
> 
> I ordered a Large Rascal sight-unseen based on reviews since I can't demo one locally. I'm sitting on a medium tallboy 3 right now w/ a 70mm stem (I'm 5'9"), and really wanted a Ripmo V2 as a compliment to the tallboy 3. Since I can't get a Ripmo V2 until the end of the year, I opted to go with the Rascal instead, in a large, and hopefully will find it fits what I'm looking for in a bike that climbs well (hopefully at least as well as my tallboy) but gives me a more capable descender. Waiting on delivery of my Rascal, which is projected for the end of the month.


I haven't ridden the Ripmo V2 or current Hightower. My main bike is a sb150 so both of those bikes kind of seem too close to that bike for me to be really considering right now. The shop owner at Pro Bike Supply said the Rascal climbs as good as the v4 Tallboy but descends closer to a sb150. For what it's worth he said he went with a Rascal and loves it.

Like I said I can't imagine being unhappy with a Rascal or Tallboy or pretty much any new bike in 2020. Just nitpicking because I love my sb150 so much and I'm trying to have 2 bikes for different types of trails. Also we need a second bike in the stable as my gf keeps stealing my sb150 so this is a good position for me to be in while she's still happy with me burning money on another bike.

Also I'm nobody - literally nobody. I am a middle of the road rider and my opinions are practically meaningless. I thought I would love the Optic after reading everyones glowing reviews and man I just didn't get along with it.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> I haven't ridden the Ripmo V2 or current Hightower. My main bike is a sb150 so both of those bikes kind of seem too close to that bike for me to be really considering right now. The shop owner at Pro Bike Supply said the Rascal climbs as good as the v4 Tallboy but descends closer to a sb150. For what it's worth he said he went with a Rascal and loves it.


He also put a 150mm fork on it...


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

jazzanova said:


> He also put a 150mm fork on it...


Ah, I think I forgot to mention the Rascal I demo'd was on a 150 lyric ultimate. The Tallboy I demo'd was a 140 Pike ultimate. Really enjoyed both of them. I think a lot of people run both of these bikes +10mm (I think I read both companies fully support this too).


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> Ah, I think I forgot to mention the Rascal I demo'd was on a 150 lyric ultimate. The Tallboy I demo'd was a 140 Pike ultimate. Really enjoyed both of them. I think a lot of people run both of these bikes +10mm (I think I read both companies fully support this too).


I probably demo'd the same bike at PBS and yeah, Mark raves about riding his Rascal at Aliso and such. I rode it out at The Luge on my demo and then Gooseberry Mesa on the demo bike from Over the Edge in Hurricane. Mark also loved his SB130 and I wasn't impressed with it going DH at all. The 150 was sooooo much better. I'm going to start out with the Factory suspension on my V4 Rascal but will probably put a Cane Creek DB IL on there if needed. I hear good things about the people that like the DVO stuff but the looks of the Topaz turns me off. Just a personal thing.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

jchan417 said:


> Would you slot the Rascal here as the 'in-between' bike between theTallboy/Ripley and the Hightower/Ripmo?
> 
> I ordered a Large Rascal sight-unseen based on reviews since I can't demo one locally. I'm sitting on a medium tallboy 3 right now w/ a 70mm stem (I'm 5'9"), and really wanted a Ripmo V2 as a compliment to the tallboy 3. Since I can't get a Ripmo V2 until the end of the year, I opted to go with the Rascal instead, in a large, and hopefully will find it fits what I'm looking for in a bike that climbs well (hopefully at least as well as my tallboy) but gives me a more capable descender. Waiting on delivery of my Rascal, which is projected for the end of the month.


I'm not 100% sure what you're asking but I'll take a stab at it from two directions....

Yes, the Rascal is "more" than the Ripley but less than the Ripmo on the scale of how aggressively most people would tend to ride them. I have the V1 Ripmo for reference and have demo'd both the Rascal and V4 Ripley twice. If I could only have one bike, I might get a Rascal and pray the knock in the rear suspension that both demo bikes had stays away.

If you're asking if the Rascal would be a good 2nd bike to compliment the TB3 since you couldn't get a V2 Ripmo, then no, that would not be a good plan as they are too similar.


----------



## autosmith (Jan 16, 2012)

I’ve had a rascal since last April with a lot of miles on it. It has been dead silent the whole time.


----------



## Alfred_Buchi (Aug 8, 2017)

k2rider1964 said:


> I probably demo'd the same bike at PBS and yeah, Mark raves about riding his Rascal at Aliso and such. I rode it out at The Luge on my demo and then Gooseberry Mesa on the demo bike from Over the Edge in Hurricane. Mark also loved his SB130 and I wasn't impressed with it going DH at all. The 150 was sooooo much better. I'm going to start out with the Factory suspension on my V4 Rascal but will probably put a Cane Creek DB IL on there if needed. I hear good things about the people that like the DVO stuff but the looks of the Topaz turns me off. Just a personal thing.


Small world man. Yeah I rode the medium and the large Rascal at PBS. The large when I rode it was creaking something terrible but some of the pivot bolts were loose (did I mention there are a **** ton of pivot bolts on this bike?). I don't think the demo bikes are getting the attention they usually get with the shop being so busy. I can't really complain as "officially" they are not doing demos right now at all. Prior to this bike every demo from them has been really clean and well tuned.

I also rode the demos at Luge and thought the Rascal really shined there. Perfect amount of travel for that trail.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> ... (did I mention there are a **** ton of pivot bolts on this bike?)...


Rear triangle is still 4, like most all bikes, (double that counting both sides). It adds a pivot for the shock yoke to rear triangle so that makes 5, not counting 2 shock mounts that you'd have on any bike.

It's actually the same as IBIS Ripmo and Ripley bikes for example. Same number of pivots and bearings but on IBIS, the rear upper link pivot is coaxial with the shock yoke pivot.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

autosmith said:


> I've had a rascal since last April with a lot of miles on it. It has been dead silent the whole time.


Similar story here. Lots of miles, many with a lot of sand/ grit. No issues.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

Was there a new Rascal release? V4? or still selling the same frame release in 2019?


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

k2rider1964 said:


> I'm not 100% sure what you're asking but I'll take a stab at it from two directions....
> 
> Yes, the Rascal is "more" than the Ripley but less than the Ripmo on the scale of how aggressively most people would tend to ride them. I have the V1 Ripmo for reference and have demo'd both the Rascal and V4 Ripley twice. If I could only have one bike, I might get a Rascal and pray the knock in the rear suspension that both demo bikes had stays away.
> 
> If you're asking if the Rascal would be a good 2nd bike to compliment the TB3 since you couldn't get a V2 Ripmo, then no, that would not be a good plan as they are too similar.


Sorry, reading my original post in hindsight, it definitely wasn't clear. My original plan was to get a 2nd, longer travel bike (ripmo), to compliment the tallboy 3 I have. Since I can't get the longer travel bike that I wanted, I ordered the Rascal in a large in hopes that it will be a nice replacement for my Tallboy 3 (being sold as soon as I receive the Rascal), so instead of a short & long travel bike, I'm only going to have the Rascal (and my epic HT for XC days).

I normally ride medium being 5'9", but given the reach numbers on the Rascal compared to a medium Ripmo v2, I decided to go Large since I'm running a 70mm stem on my 430mm reach tallboy, and the large Rascal is 464mm, and I want to run a shorter 35-40mm stem on the Rascal. Anyone think this is a bad idea? I also figure if I bump to 150mm fork, it will bring the reach slightly closer as well.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

I’m 5’9” and test road both. I bought the large. 

I did end up selling last week preferring the medium revel rail. For what you describe, you will love the large. 

The only time I didn’t Prefer it over the medium Rascalwas tight, twisty, techy, Climby bits.

My quiver now is a medium revel rail. And a medium turbo levo expert. And damn am I a happy camper. 

The rascal was my favorite 29er trail bike without a motor. And some of the best rides of my life happened on that bike. Pure flow state, extacy, Nirvana. 

I’m loving the medium rail though. The climbing position is just So much more comfortable for me.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

Gratefulone said:


> I'm 5'9" and test road both. I bought the large.
> 
> I did end up selling last week preferring the medium revel rail. For what you describe, you will love the large.
> 
> ...


What other reasons did you have to keep the rail over rascal?
Do you find the rail's STA to be steep enough?
I am currently considering selling my Tallboy 4 and getting the rail instead. 5'8" on a medium. I have a Nomad 3 and found out I miss its travel when on Tallboy, especially 140mm front isn't enough.


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

I used to be a very fit racer type and preferred 29er. I had the cadence and power to support them. I’ve sadly put on a lot of weight, and just prefer to have fun while riding these days. 

I find the Medium 27.5 to be A much more comfortable climbing position. By that I mean I feel lower in the bike. Not as perched up high. The smaller wheels are easier to spin. I have better grip and position for climbing. I have no issues with ST angle. 

And on the way down, it’s just a little more nimble and fun. The rascal was mind numbing nimble and fun. But when ridden back to back, I’m just more comfortable everywhere on the 27.5. And because of that, I would Almost say it’s a better climber for me. Probably not a faster climber. But more comfortable, and for that reason, I can climb tech more easily. And the wheel base is a few cm shorter than the large rascal. 

I’m just preferring 27.5 these days.

For those about speed there is no question 29er is probably the way to go. But for those who just ride to have fun, I’d be inclined to encourage 27.5. Especially if you are under 5’10”....


----------



## pdqmach26 (Jul 24, 2011)

Alfred_Buchi said:


> Small world man. Yeah I rode the medium and the large Rascal at PBS. The large when I rode it was creaking something terrible but some of the pivot bolts were loose (did I mention there are a **** ton of pivot bolts on this bike?). I don't think the demo bikes are getting the attention they usually get with the shop being so busy. I can't really complain as "officially" they are not doing demos right now at all. Prior to this bike every demo from them has been really clean and well tuned.
> 
> I also rode the demos at Luge and thought the Rascal really shined there. Perfect amount of travel for that trail.


If you ride south oc and already have a yeti 150, do yourself a favor and get the Ibis Ripley with a 140 fork. It will be your go to bike. It does everything great! Only thing you find is it overwhelmed on very high speed big chunk. Not to much of that around here.
I ride everything legal and illegal with it. K2rider1964 loved the Revel, but in the end still purchased the Ibis Ripley V4.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

NS-NV said:


> Similar story here. Lots of miles, many with a lot of sand/ grit. No issues.


Same here. I was one of the first 50 orders when they were announced last year...zero issues with mine. Only creak I had developed was from the stem. Other than that it's been awesome. Ordered the ElevenSix and it should arrive in another week or two.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

cpolism said:


> Same here. I was one of the first 50 orders when they were announced last year...zero issues with mine. Only creak I had developed was from the stem. Other than that it's been awesome. Ordered the ElevenSix and it should arrive in another week or two.


Oooh, 11/6? What is driving your decision?

Overall, I am happy with the DPX2, but a little more suppleness off the top would be nice. Was contemplating a Diaz to custom tune...


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

NS-NV said:


> Oooh, 11/6? What is driving your decision?
> 
> Overall, I am happy with the DPX2, but a little more suppleness off the top would be nice. Was contemplating a Diaz to custom tune...


Yep, I've got the super deluxe that came with the frame, and actually like it quite a bit. I do visit the DH parks in the area like Bryce and Snowshoe a couple times a year, and having a coil on the Rascal has just been a dream. I had one on my Riot and loved it in the chunky downs.


----------



## NateMob (Mar 25, 2017)

Anyone figure out and running a bashguard on their Rascal? Not having ISCG tabs basically makes the bike a nonstarter for me. 

I remember some bikes in the past though used a bottom bracket adaptor to mount a guard.


----------



## savechief (Jun 8, 2004)

https://mrpbike.com/products/iscg-05-adapter


----------



## NateMob (Mar 25, 2017)

Yeah that's the adaptor I'm familiar with, not an experiment for me to try. Maybe someone that already owns the bike will give it a shot.


----------



## Anchorless (May 15, 2008)

New Revel colors:

Rascal:









Rail:


----------



## M12 (Jul 3, 2007)

Wish they added shimano build kits with the new colors. 

From the pictures, it looks like the Rail has a metallic paint but the Rascal has a solid color. The Rail paint job looks awesome.


----------



## Raleighguy29 (Jan 7, 2014)

I had a canfield riot for a number of seasons loved it and sold it for some stupid reason. Replaced with a smash and I’m not digging the smash. I miss the playfulness of the riot. So I’m thinking of selling the smash and getting a rascal. Has anyone put a dvo topaz on the back of the rascal. My riot was full dvo front and back. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Fkuashum (Dec 1, 2008)

*Sizing challenge*

Guys, I am about to pull the trigger on a Rascal with no opportunity to throw a leg over one. I desperately need you help with sizing.
I am 5'10' with 33 inseam and torn between M and L.
Could Rascal owners please share with me all of the following:
- Your height and frame size;
- Your stem length;
- Actual measured distance between center of your stem clamp and center of your seatpost (horizontal line) - this will be your actual cockpit length;
- Do you run your saddle centered or shifted fore or aft on its rails?
- How does it feel for your type of riding - spot on, a bit tight, or a bit stretched?

Thanks heaps in advance, and I do need to know all (!) the variables to be able to use it for any judgement. Thanks guys.


----------



## OldHammheaddude (Jun 28, 2018)

how many of you are running a 150mm fork on a Rascal and liking the handling in tight stuff?


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

Fkuashum said:


> Guys, I am about to pull the trigger on a Rascal with no opportunity to throw a leg over one. I desperately need you help with sizing.
> I am 5'10' with 33 inseam and torn between M and L.
> Could Rascal owners please share with me all of the following:
> - Your height and frame size;
> ...


I'm 5'9" . I demoed the medium and large. Rascal and sb130.

Bought the large rascal.

When descending, or even in the parking lot, I preferred the large by far as I could achieve ideal attack position.

I learned to ride it everywhere and it's one of the best bikes ever made.

However, in the tight and twistys, especially climbing... I started to get the itch for a medium.

I ended up buying a medium rail. I was going to keep both but they were just to similar so I sold the rascal.

The medium rascal was borderline to small for my preferred reach.

If you're terrain is all tight and twisty I'd say your a candidate for medium. But otherwise you'll be happy on large. It did feel slightly stretched out climbing , and could give my back trouble... but I'm fat and out of shape.

If you are strong and in shape, the large will be money.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

I'm 5'10". Don't have other #s for you but I demo'd a medium and ordered one. I wouldn't want it any larger. I do have a preference for riding smaller as opposed to larger bikes.

I demo'd a large sb130 back to back. Cockpit stretch/length felt very similar to me. I'm not sure the numbers would bear that out looking at a geo chart but I'm going by feel. 

The medium rascal I demo'd belonged to a guy just slightly taller than me. The seat was slid back on the rails but I will ride it neutral. Fork was 150mm not 140mm. Believe the stem was 35mm or 40mm.

Bike was very balanced. Most balanced 29er I've been on.


----------



## Anchorless (May 15, 2008)

Fkuashum said:


> Guys, I am about to pull the trigger on a Rascal with no opportunity to throw a leg over one. I desperately need you help with sizing.
> I am 5'10' with 33 inseam and torn between M and L.
> Could Rascal owners please share with me all of the following:
> - Your height and frame size;
> ...


I'd buy a large.

I'm 6'0", 32" inseam, and I have a large. I feel it fits fine, though perhaps a touch on the small side. I felt the x-large was just a bit too big, but if it were all I had available, I could make it work.

I think you being 5'10" puts you right in the range of the large.


----------



## houndogone (Oct 16, 2017)

So, I guess I'm now on Revel's mailing list, since I just got an update about a new model. When I was in the market for a new bike about a month ago, one of the models I was seriously considering was the Rascal. Did a demo ride and really liked it a lot, but ended up getting a Ibis Ripley, since I wanted something a little lighter and better at climbing. Felt for the type of riding I did I really didn't need the slightly better downhill capability of the Rascal, but still liked the bike a lot. 

Revel has now apparently come out with a new, more XC oriented model, the Ranger. Frame is over a pound lighter than the Rascal. Suspension is 115 rear and 120 up front, slightly less than the Ibis Ripley. Would have loved to demo it before I bought the Ripley. I suspect it will be a great climber and still pretty good on the descents. Wonder if you could put a 130 fork on the front.

In any event, thought I'd give everyone a heads up, if your looking for a lighter, more playful version of the Rascal, the Ranger might be a great alternative.


----------



## ejabbale (Mar 3, 2015)

houndogone said:


> So, I guess I'm now on Revel's mailing list, since I just got an update about a new model. When I was in the market for a new bike about a month ago, one of the models I was seriously considering was the Rascal. Did a demo ride and really liked it a lot, but ended up getting a Ibis Ripley, since I wanted something a little lighter and better at climbing. Felt for the type of riding I did I really didn't need the slightly better downhill capability of the Rascal, but still liked the bike a lot.
> 
> Revel has now apparently come out with a new, more XC oriented model, the Ranger. Frame is over a pound lighter than the Rascal. Suspension is 115 rear and 120 up front, slightly less than the Ibis Ripley. Would have loved to demo it before I bought the Ripley. I suspect it will be a great climber and still pretty good on the descents. Wonder if you could put a 130 fork on the front.
> 
> In any event, thought I'd give everyone a heads up, if your looking for a lighter, more playful version of the Rascal, the Ranger might be a great alternative.


You are describing the exact position I find myself in now. My choice came down to a Ripley or a Rascal. I wouldn't have had the opportunity to demo a Rascal until early August and I did not want to wait that long so based on my demo of the Ripley and what I read about ride characteristics of both I now have a Ripley on order. I am sure I will love it but now I have in my head that I should wait and demo the Ranger! I think I am going to go with the thought the the Ranger may be just a bit light in the travel category and that the Ripley is spot on for my trails (northeast) and riding style...that's what I am telling myself anyway ha! Good "problem" to have either way.


----------



## yagr68 (Aug 21, 2018)

Fkuashum said:


> Guys, I am about to pull the trigger on a Rascal with no opportunity to throw a leg over one. I desperately need you help with sizing.
> I am 5'10' with 33 inseam and torn between M and L.
> Could Rascal owners please share with me all of the following:
> - Your height and frame size;
> ...


I'm about 5'8", 30" inseam on a medium. 50mm stem. I'm running a 150mm Fox 36 and using the Rascal as my 'big bike' and I wouldn't want it any smaller. Previous bike had a really steep seat tube angle so I have the saddle moved almost all the way forward on the rails as I've gotten used to it. For typical SoCal riding, steep up and then steep back down, it's just about perfectly sized for me.

At your size, I'd really be considering a large.


----------



## yagr68 (Aug 21, 2018)

I built frame up and put my 150mm Fox 36 44offset on because that's what I had. I was intending on changing airshaft to bring it down to 140mm but just haven't felt the need, it handles the tight stuff much better than anticipated with the slacker head tube and higher BB. I was really surprised. 

If you're talking about really rocky/rooty east coast 5mph singletrack, I'm not sure about that but for fast tight west coast riding, it's amazing how agile these long wheelbase slack 29ers are getting to be. Also, you're not exactly attacking uphill switchbacks like on a xc bike but I get around them just fine.


----------



## OldHammheaddude (Jun 28, 2018)

yagr68 said:


> I built frame up and put my 150mm Fox 36 44offset on because that's what I had. I was intending on changing airshaft to bring it down to 140mm but just haven't felt the need, it handles the tight stuff much better than anticipated with the slacker head tube and higher BB. I was really surprised.
> 
> If you're talking about really rocky/rooty east coast 5mph singletrack, I'm not sure about that but for fast tight west coast riding, it's amazing how agile these long wheelbase slack 29ers are getting to be. Also, you're not exactly attacking uphill switchbacks like on a xc bike but I get around them just fine.


cool


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

ejabbale said:


> You are describing the exact position I find myself in now. My choice came down to a Ripley or a Rascal. I wouldn't have had the opportunity to demo a Rascal until early August and I did not want to wait that long so based on my demo of the Ripley and what I read about ride characteristics of both I now have a Ripley on order. I am sure I will love it but now I have in my head that I should wait and demo the Ranger! I think I am going to go with the thought the the Ranger may be just a bit light in the travel category and that the Ripley is spot on for my trails (northeast) and riding style...that's what I am telling myself anyway ha! Good "problem" to have either way.


You were in a no-lose situation and to be honest, I think you made the right call...at least at the time you had to decide. I rode both the Rascal and Ripley twice. If I could only have ONE bike and lived out West with a lot more techy downs, I'd go Rascal w/o a second thought. But the Ripley climbs better, is snappier and won't fatigue you as much in all those rocks & roots back East. Now take off the 1.5 lbs and still keep that CBO rear suspension and who knows, the Ranger may have been bad ass for you.


----------



## houndogone (Oct 16, 2017)

ejaballe - although there's always going to be a new latest and greatest bike that's going to make you wonder if you should wait a few more months, I think we both made the right decision with the Ripley.

I was really lucky in that I was able to demo a Ripley, a Rascal and a Pivot Mach 4 right after things started opening up in early June. I actually felt most comfortable on the Mach 4 because its handling was closer to what I was used to, but it was definitely a little sketchier on the downhills than either the Rascal or the Ripley. Ultimately, I felt the Ripley was the best combination of climbing and descending, particularly since I'm not planning on riding any super-technical trails. The great thing was that my LBS had a new Ripley in my size in stock, so once I finished my last demo I just had them set up the suspension for me, loaded the bike in the back of my SUV and drove off.

Revel is saying that the new Ranger may be available in late July, but who knows how long it will actually take to ship. If you want to demo, I assume that will mean further delays. 

Most of the trails I ride start at 8000' and climb from there. By late October/early November they could be under a foot of snow. Didn't really want to get a new bike, ride it for a couple of weeks and then have it sit in my garage for the next 5 months. I've been going out on the Ripley 3-4 times a week since I got it and am starting to really love this bike. Climbing, the only limitation is my shitty fitness, and I'm getting a little stronger every day. Descending, the bike has handled every thing I've thrown at it, and is worlds better than my 25 year old hardtail.

You definitely won't regret getting the Ripley.


----------



## ejabbale (Mar 3, 2015)

houndogone & k2rider1964 - thank you both for your replies, much appreciated. I think you both make great points and I am feeling satisfied in my decision on going with the Ripley. I really did love the bike when I demoed it so as great as the Ranger/Rascal may be, I'll be happy. Trails in upstate NY where I live are definitely full of roots and rocks and many of them can be tight and twisty. Many more short steep climbs than anything sustained, same goes for the downhill. Winter won't come quite as early here but living in the Adirondacks, it will come early enough so very good point on getting the bike and enjoying it now. 

Thanks again, should have the Ripley within two weeks, can't wait.

Take Care


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

ejabbale said:


> houndogone & k2rider1964 - thank you both for your replies, much appreciated. I think you both make great points and I am feeling satisfied in my decision on going with the Ripley. I really did love the bike when I demoed it so as great as the Ranger/Rascal may be, I'll be happy. Trails in upstate NY where I live are definitely full of roots and rocks and many of them can be tight and twisty. Many more short steep climbs than anything sustained, same goes for the downhill. Winter won't come quite as early here but living in the Adirondacks, it will come early enough so very good point on getting the bike and enjoying it now.
> 
> Thanks again, should have the Ripley within two weeks, can't wait.
> 
> Take Care


My buddy just moved back home to Stamford, CT last December after living in San Diego for 5-6 years. He is on a V3 Ripley and loving it back there. He says it's the perfect bike.

I ended up ordering the V4 Ripley (Steel Blue) too and mine actually came in on Thursday but I'm out of town riding in Durango. It will be a companion bike to my HD5.


----------



## houndogone (Oct 16, 2017)

ejabbale - been living in Colorado for the last 8 months, but before that lived outside Boston and spent the last 18 months in upstate NY in the Catskill mountains, so I'm pretty familiar with roots, rocks and twisty trails. Trails in Colorado, at least where I am are pretty sweet. Lots of really nice flow, although we do get our share of rock gardens, drop-offs, etc. However, given the altitude and the fact that Colorado does have some mountains, it's nice to have a bike that's good at climbing.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

I'm probably weird, but I actually prefer the riding in much of New England compared to CO. Incessant rocks and roots (slippery when wet) with punchy tech climbs and interesting, if short, descents. You can often ride year round. And unless you're in the city proper, there are always at least a few good riding spots close by, often within easy riding distance. Most all of these trails weren't created, improved, or maintained for mtbing and you see very few riders or other people on them.

I find CO's flow trails rather tedious. Anyway, Revel is very high on my list.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Lone Rager said:


> I'm probably weird, but I actually prefer the riding in much of New England compared to CO. Incessant rocks and roots (slippery when wet) with punchy tech climbs and interesting, if short, descents. You can often ride year round. And unless you're in the city proper, there are always at least a few good riding spots close by, often within easy riding distance. Most all of these trails weren't created, improved, or maintained for mtbing and you see very few riders or other people on them.
> 
> I find CO's flow trails rather tedious. Anyway, Revel is very high on my list.


If I could take the trails and soil from the Whites/Greens/Adirondacks or the Blue Ridge to CO, and keep the CO weather and vegetation, that would be perfect.


----------



## Anchorless (May 15, 2008)

ejabbale said:


> You are describing the exact position I find myself in now. My choice came down to a Ripley or a Rascal. I wouldn't have had the opportunity to demo a Rascal until early August and I did not want to wait that long so based on my demo of the Ripley and what I read about ride characteristics of both I now have a Ripley on order. I am sure I will love it but now I have in my head that I should wait and demo the Ranger! I think I am going to go with the thought the the Ranger may be just a bit light in the travel category and that the Ripley is spot on for my trails (northeast) and riding style...that's what I am telling myself anyway ha! Good "problem" to have either way.


I've ridden a Ripley, bought a Rascal. I would have been happy with both. I don't think you're going to miss much on the Ripley, and with any bike, there's give and take. The Ripley simply climbs better than the Rascal, but still descends with confidence. I chose the Rascal because (a) I wanted something with more downhill capability, (b) I found the Rascal fit me better ergonomically, and (c) I was impressed by the company and intrigued by having something a little different.

It really is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other... probably especially so with the new Ranger.


----------



## Fkuashum (Dec 1, 2008)

Thank you all for your responses to my sizing dilemma. This was useful but I still keep wondering by how much exactly Medium Rascal will actually be shorter in cockpit than my curent bike. The actual measurement from bar clamp center to seatpost center would help immensely. Perhaps someone could reach out for a measuring tape for a second??

I rode my friend's Trek Fuel EX 2019 today in ML size with this clamp-to-post measurement at 635mm (my bike is 665 and feels just right). Trek's ML very close to Revel M. 
Surely this Fuel felt short when both sitting and standing but I can't say it was intolerable - I just felt sitting unusually upright all through the ride but that did not steal much from my confidence. At the same time I did sense that had it been 3-4cm longer in cockpit, it would have been more difficult to maneuvre up the hill in switchbacks. I guess, one could get accustomed to any bike eventually but would it be more difficult or tiresome to go bigger or smaller? Go figure... Ah, and the Trek had a 60mm stem.

Must note, I now ride a '09 26-er, so it's a large leap for me anyway )


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

Anchorless said:


> I'd buy a large.
> 
> I'm 6'0", 32" inseam, and I have a large. I feel it fits fine, though perhaps a touch on the small side. I felt the x-large was just a bit too big, but if it were all I had available, I could make it work.
> 
> I think you being 5'10" puts you right in the range of the large.


Agreed....L with a 35mm stem.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

ejabbale said:


> You are describing the exact position I find myself in now. My choice came down to a Ripley or a Rascal. I wouldn't have had the opportunity to demo a Rascal until early August and I did not want to wait that long so based on my demo of the Ripley and what I read about ride characteristics of both I now have a Ripley on order. I am sure I will love it but now I have in my head that I should wait and demo the Ranger! I think I am going to go with the thought the the Ranger may be just a bit light in the travel category and that the Ripley is spot on for my trails (northeast) and riding style...that's what I am telling myself anyway ha! Good "problem" to have either way.


I've had a Canfield Riot and a Ripley V1, LS and V4.
Love the Riot but more bike than I needed. Loved my Ripley's except the V4.
I already posted a thread about the Ranger, but 99% sure that's me next bike. Even before selling my Riot I with others always wished the Brothers came out with a shorter travel version of the Riot. The Ranger is exactly what I want except for the under BB routing. I guess I'll have to get over that.

Not discounting Ibis's DW link, I prefer it to other bikes I've had except for CBF of the Riot.

FYI I'm riding the same types of trail here in MD/VA area.


----------



## konamd (Jan 18, 2005)

houndogone said:


> Revel has now apparently come out with a new, more XC oriented model, the Ranger. Frame is over a pound lighter than the Rascal. Suspension is 115 rear and 120 up front, slightly less than the Ibis Ripley. Would have loved to demo it before I bought the Ripley. I suspect it will be a great climber and still pretty good on the descents. Wonder if you could put a 130 fork on the front.


I'm coming off the OG V1 Ripley and looking at both the Rascal and Ripley V4 as top choices (unfortunately, looks like it's going to be tough to find demos of either right now). The Ranger peaked my interest as well - 115/130 with the CBF suspension sounds like an awesome combo.

The Revel page mentions something about being a more well rounded bike with a 130mm fork, but they don't offer that option. I reached out to them today and got the response that "We really do not advise over forking the bike, so no it will not be an option, of course it is always possible. We do think it messes with the uphill steering when changing to a 130mm Fork."


----------



## ejj (May 5, 2009)

If you want a bigger stiffer fork you might be better off with a Rascal.


----------



## konamd (Jan 18, 2005)

ejj said:


> If you want a bigger stiffer fork you might be better off with a Rascal.


Yep. I do a lot of climbing and am a little anxious about picking one of these up without having a demo available in my area -- but I just pulled the trigger on a Rascal last night! That Sedona color looks gorgeous.


----------



## ejj (May 5, 2009)

konamd said:


> Yep. I do a lot of climbing and am a little anxious about picking one of these up without having a demo available in my area -- but I just pulled the trigger on a Rascal last night! That Sedona color looks gorgeous.


The orange Rascal is awesome! I think you made a great choice.


----------



## rwrusso (Apr 12, 2011)

TwoTone said:


> I've had a Canfield Riot and a Ripley V1, LS and V4.
> Love the Riot but more bike than I needed. Loved my Ripley's except the V4.
> I already posted a thread about the Ranger, but 99% sure that's me next bike. Even before selling my Riot I with others always wished the Brothers came out with a shorter travel version of the Riot. The Ranger is exactly what I want except for the under BB routing. I guess I'll have to get over that.
> 
> ...


I'm on a Riot now, and have said the same thing...more bike than I need. But...coming from a hardtail w/ 140mm fork (Yelli Screamy), I notice the Riot (set up w/ 150mm Fox 36 and 27.5x2.8 tires) is actually easier to ride. Is there more suspension travel than I need? Probably. But other than saving a few lbs. on a smaller travel bike, I'm not really wanting for anything. I guess if I was in the market for a new bike, I'd lean towards the Rascal over the Ranger.


----------



## Velorangutan (Aug 28, 2012)

I really like how the suspension works!


----------



## konamd (Jan 18, 2005)

Velorangutan said:


> I really like how the suspension works!
> 
> View attachment 1348813
> 
> ...


You got the Sedona and silver combo! I just ordered that too - I emailed Revel to see if they had any photos of that build and they didn't. Looks sweet! :thumbsup:


----------



## Velorangutan (Aug 28, 2012)

konamd said:


> You got the Sedona and silver combo! I just ordered that too - I emailed Revel to see if they had any photos of that build and they didn't. Looks sweet! :thumbsup:


I built it with a shorter 42mm offset fork instead of the 51 that Revel specs. I also wanted to find the fork in gloss black, but it wasn't available.

I live in Austin, TX where everyone is a Texas Longhorn fan. So this color is perfect!


----------



## meSmokem (Jul 19, 2020)

Was between a 2020 Transition Sentinel and Revel Rascal. Demo'd a Medium Revel Rascal in Brevard, NC and LOVED it. Minute I sat on the bike, it just felt right. I felt like this bike both climbed and descended prodigiously. Handled everything in Pisgah and I rode it hard. I am however a little concerned that it was spec'd so well (overforked with a Fox 36 150mm, Shimano XTR drivetrain) that I may have come away with an overinflated impression. 

Demo'd a 2020 Transition today and let's just say it did not go well. I felt like climbing was just way too difficult and I was getting a lot of pedal bob even with the shock locked out. 

Question for you Revel experts out there - is there any difference between the 2019 and 2020 Rascal except for color? 

Also - anyone know if it would be faster to order from probikesupply.com or revel's website. Trying to pull the trigger ASAP. THANKS!


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

meSmokem said:


> Was between a 2020 Transition Sentinel and Revel Rascal. Demo'd a Medium Revel Rascal in Brevard, NC and LOVED it. Minute I sat on the bike, it just felt right. I felt like this bike both climbed and descended prodigiously. Handled everything in Pisgah and I rode it hard. I am however a little concerned that it was spec'd so well (overforked with a Fox 36 150mm, Shimano XTR drivetrain) that I may have come away with an overinflated impression.
> 
> Demo'd a 2020 Transition today and let's just say it did not go well. I felt like climbing was just way too difficult and I was getting a lot of pedal bob even with the shock locked out.
> 
> ...


Yeah man I was down to the Smuggler and Rascal. Once I rode both it wasn't even a close competition so I feel you there. No such thing as an overinflated impression with this bike! 140 and 150 are both great and you can go wrong with either. I'm at 140, tossed in the MRP ramp cartridge and placed my order for the ElevenSix about 5 weeks ago. Sadly still waiting...patiently. As for ordering, I think you can order it from anywhere and it'll be about the same wait time.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

meSmokem said:


> Was between a 2020 Transition Sentinel and Revel Rascal. Demo'd a Medium Revel Rascal in Brevard, NC and LOVED it. Minute I sat on the bike, it just felt right. I felt like this bike both climbed and descended prodigiously. Handled everything in Pisgah and I rode it hard. I am however a little concerned that it was spec'd so well (overforked with a Fox 36 150mm, Shimano XTR drivetrain) that I may have come away with an overinflated impression.
> 
> Demo'd a 2020 Transition today and let's just say it did not go well. I felt like climbing was just way too difficult and I was getting a lot of pedal bob even with the shock locked out.
> 
> ...


Can't speak to the transition, but I can say I just got my Rascal and took it out on it's first ride yesterday. It's definitely different than any other full suspension design I've ridden to date - I don't think you will be disappointed. For reference, I got the GX build w/ the fork & shock upgrade to the 'ultimate' line for the extra $350 and can't complain about the bike at all. I'm 155lbs and didn't feel underwhelmed by the 140mm Pike, and can only imagine a 150mm lyrik or Fox 36 making the bike feel even bigger and more capable. As far as ordering goes, I think turn-around time will be about the same wherever you order from, unless they have inventory in-stock already. No changes from 2019-2020 Rascal models other than color (and slight changes to build kit - e.g. my Rascal came w/ the new 10-52t GX cassette and shifter and G2 brakes, which when I ordered in May still had the older 10-50T/Guide R brakes listed (has since been updated on their website))


----------



## yagr68 (Aug 21, 2018)

For availability, I'd suggest just calling Revel. They were very open and honest about timeframes for different options. Really great CS! Probikesupply is awesome to deal with as well but unless they have something in stock, I doubt they'd get it quicker.

I've tried my Rascal with both a 150 Fox 36 grip2 and a 140 Pike. The 36 handles bigger stuff better for sure but the Pike was no slouch, it was a really good fork and as an all around trail bike, the Pike is probably a better setup. I use the Rascal as my 'big bike' so I prefer the 150 36 but I really wouldn't worry about it. Get the Pike set up well and you'll love it.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

meSmokem said:


> I am however a little concerned that it was spec'd so well (overforked with a Fox 36 150mm, Shimano XTR drivetrain) that I may have come away with an overinflated impression.


I wouldn't worry about this. My previous bike had a 36. Demoed a Rascal with 150 Pike. Ordered a Rascal and got the 140 Pike. I've had 4 rides on my new rascal in some really rowdy terrain. I've been really impressed with the Pike at 140. Didn't expect it to feel as good as it does. Has easily handled everything I've thrown at it including up to 6ish foot drops. No flex and plush on the big hits.

I bought the XO1 build and this bike rips. You won't be disappointed.


----------



## Velorangutan (Aug 28, 2012)




----------



## nbaier (Jul 4, 2020)

*Revel Wheels*

Has anyone tried revel wheels with their revel rascal?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It was a Revel party in Tahoe this weekend, saw four Revels in a group ride on the TRT near Toads.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

nbaier said:


> Has anyone tried revel wheels with their revel rascal?


I have them on my rascal. I think they ride great. Got mine with the I9 hydra hubs.


----------



## cschuetta (Jun 6, 2017)

Let us know how you like the ElevenSix when you get it! I’ve been curious


----------



## sfr4dr (Dec 24, 2004)

Hi. Do you guys know the confirmed weight of only the frame and shock in a medium? Sweet bike. Just looking at how it compares to other similar bikes. Thanks!


----------



## yagr68 (Aug 21, 2018)

Fanatik is a good resource for actual weights usually. They'll even show the painted version heavier than the raw for many frames so it seems like they actually weigh them. They show the medium Rascal at about 3000g or 6.64 lbs w/o shock. So it's not Ibis (carbon) light, that's for sure. More in line with something like SB130. My medium Rascal with Fox 36, GX Eagle, decently light carbon wheel build and 2.4 dhr2 / 2.3 Agressor (both exo) is at about 30lbs w/o pedals if that helps.


----------



## sfr4dr (Dec 24, 2004)

I did see the weights on Fanatik but wasn't sure how accurate they are. You might be right about them weighing them though if they get that specific. What size is yours? Also, which size and tire spec do you have? There can be a big difference on those when looking at a 2.3 exo vs 2.5 dd. I for sure don't think that the lightest carbon bike is always the best thing anyways. I think some brands go a little more stout for less flex, more reliability/less warranty issues, etc.


----------



## A. Rider (Jul 25, 2017)

I need to know if Revel measures their effective top tube from the TOP center of the head tube horizontally to the center of the seatpost, so I can compare it to my current bike and buy the right size frame from Revel (some manufacturers measure this differently vs others).

Ideally, would current owners of a Rascal (or Rail) frame please measure their horizontal top tube measurement and post? Do you get exactly 610mm for a medium Rascal, or 633mm for a large if measuring from the TOP center of the head tube to the center of the seatpost?


----------



## yagr68 (Aug 21, 2018)

sfr4dr said:


> Also, which size and tire spec do you have? There can be a big difference on those when looking at a 2.3 exo vs 2.5 dd. I for sure don't think that the lightest carbon bike is always the best thing anyways. I think some brands go a little more stout for less flex, more reliability/less warranty issues, etc.


Sorry, about that. 2.4 dhr2 on front, 2.3 aggressor on back, both exo. Medium T1000 frame. It's definitely a burly frame.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

First few rides on the ElevenSix. Pretty impressive to see the difference. Brought both shocks with me to the trail and riding them an hour apart on the same trail and conditions really proved how a shock can completely change the ride and characteristics of your bike.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

cpolism said:


> View attachment 1352651
> 
> 
> First few rides on the ElevenSix. Pretty impressive to see the difference. Brought both shocks with me to the trail and riding them an hour apart on the same trail and conditions really proved how a shock can completely change the ride and characteristics of your bike.


Um tease.... More plush? Small bump sensitivity?

Thinking of swapping the DPX2 for an 11/6.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

NS-NV said:


> Um tease.... More plush? Small bump sensitivity?
> 
> Thinking of swapping the DPX2 for an 11/6.


Can't speak on the DPX2 with the Rascal as I had the SuperD on mine. I actually had the SuperD tuned to be similar to a coil, and less poppy given that we have a lot of root/rock/chunk on my local trails. With that being said, once the 11.6 went on I could tell how different it was.

Small bump sensitivity was great, and definitely more plush. The craziest difference was how connected the rear feels to the ground. Through very fast rooty sections where I normally felt the rear bouncing/skipping, it just stayed planted. Climbing was also great.


----------



## mtnwater (Jan 7, 2004)

Just to add another data point/perspective to this thread. I'm coming off an Ibis Mojo 3. Brief saddle time on a buddy's Rascal convinced me of the CBF goodness so I put together a Rascal with XT drive train, WR1/Onyx Vesper wheels, Hayes Dominion brakes, and a Pike Ultimate 150. I've been happily running Maxxis tires for years, and put a DHF/DHR set on the new bike (2.6/2.4). 

I've had a handful of rides on it now and have yet to befriend the bike. I like technical climbing and am reasonably proficient. I am consistently failing on the Rascal where I regularly succeed on the Mojo (or my hard tail). The bike feels long, the front end floppy, and the suspension seems to wallow. It feels slow and heavy. I've bumped up shock pressure and am now running 20% sag. Unclear if it's the weight (33.5 lbs), the 29er wheels, the tires, the 150 fork, or the frame design but I honestly don't love the way it rides. Climbing feels ponderous and clunky. Descending is fine, if somewhat imprecise. It's smooth as all get out - I think the suspension feels good, for the most part.

The jump from 27.5 to 29 is perhaps bigger than I thought. While I've had 29ers in the past, the Rascal feels....different. I'm super happy with all the build decisions and don't see any obvious changes. I know the hubs are heavy, but I really like them. I know the tires are considered "slow" but they are what I'm used to an I appreciate the traction. This just might not be the bike for me. 

I'll keep riding it, for now, but reach out if you're interested in an exceptional, lightly used T1000 build (large)...I could probably be talked into letting it go.


----------



## sfr4dr (Dec 24, 2004)

mtnwater said:


> Just to add another data point/perspective to this thread. I'm coming off an Ibis Mojo 3. Brief saddle time on a buddy's Rascal convinced me of the CBF goodness so I put together a Rascal with XT drive train, WR1/Onyx Vesper wheels, Hayes Dominion brakes, and a Pike Ultimate 150. I've been happily running Maxxis tires for years, and put a DHF/DHR set on the new bike (2.6/2.4).
> 
> I've had a handful of rides on it now and have yet to befriend the bike. I like technical climbing and am reasonably proficient. I am consistently failing on the Rascal where I regularly succeed on the Mojo (or my hard tail). The bike feels long, the front end floppy, and the suspension seems to wallow. It feels slow and heavy. I've bumped up shock pressure and am now running 20% sag. Unclear if it's the weight (33.5 lbs), the 29er wheels, the tires, the 150 fork, or the frame design but I honestly don't love the way it rides. Climbing feels ponderous and clunky. Descending is fine, if somewhat imprecise. It's smooth as all get out - I think the suspension feels good, for the most part.
> 
> ...


Great feedback and very interesting comparison with the Mojo3. I demo'd a Mojo3 along with about 8 other new bikes and even amongst 27.5ers, it's certainly one of the lightest, snappiest and more compact ones. It has a very short reach and steep angles compared to the "modern" mid to long travel 29ers. My Ripmo AF is kinda an odd duck as a heavy'ish bike (frame is less than 1 lb more than the Rascal) but has that super efficient DW pedaling. It's nimble for that type of bike but no where like a Mojo3. It's also way more stable than a Mojo3 so there's a trade off. A carbon Ripmo with a light build or that new Mojo4 sure sounds appealing when looking for a premium nimble mid/long-travel bike if you're really into the DW link huh? Good luck with your decision. I hear those Rascals are great bikes.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

mtnwater said:


> Just to add another data point/perspective to this thread. I'm coming off an Ibis Mojo 3. Brief saddle time on a buddy's Rascal convinced me of the CBF goodness so I put together a Rascal with XT drive train, WR1/Onyx Vesper wheels, Hayes Dominion brakes, and a Pike Ultimate 150. I've been happily running Maxxis tires for years, and put a DHF/DHR set on the new bike (2.6/2.4).
> 
> I've had a handful of rides on it now and have yet to befriend the bike. I like technical climbing and am reasonably proficient. I am consistently failing on the Rascal where I regularly succeed on the Mojo (or my hard tail). The bike feels long, the front end floppy, and the suspension seems to wallow. It feels slow and heavy. I've bumped up shock pressure and am now running 20% sag. Unclear if it's the weight (33.5 lbs), the 29er wheels, the tires, the 150 fork, or the frame design but I honestly don't love the way it rides. Climbing feels ponderous and clunky. Descending is fine, if somewhat imprecise. It's smooth as all get out - I think the suspension feels good, for the most part.
> 
> ...


Interesting observations.

On the technical climbing point I felt the same thing going from 27.5 to 29. On smooth surfaces the 29 wheels just roll but in the rough stuff they feel like they take more effort to me. That said, once I decided to go 29 I demo'd a SB130, Stumpy and the Rascal. The Rascal was the best climber of the 3, smooth or chunk. On the smooth stuff it didn't feel as fast as the Stumpy (it felt faster than the SB130) but the clock said it was faster. In the chunk I've found that if I drop one gear lower than what I think I need it will motor through just about anything. The traction really is that good. I've cleaned a handful of technical climbs on the Rascal that I never cleaned on my 27.5. I have a Pike 150 on mine as well and haven't experienced any floppiness. I run a DHR 2.4 on the front and Dissector 2.4 on the rear, both on Revel wheels with the hydra hubs.

I will also say that I think the suspension rewards good pedaling. If your approach is wreckless hammering I don't think you'll get the most out of this bike. If you're a bit more thoughtful with your pedal stroke and body/weight position I think you will get more out of it than most other bikes. Sounds nuts, but that's kind of what I like about it. The geometry puts you in such a good position to shift and move around as needed. I've even gone back to platform pedals to try and improve technique and so far it has been very rewarding with this bike.

And descents are just awesome. It's big without being too big and small without being too small. Not sure I will ever find the bottom of the rear travel. Super smooth.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

mtnwater said:


> The bike feels long, the front end floppy, and the suspension seems to wallow. It feels slow and heavy. I've bumped up shock pressure and am now running 20% sag. Unclear if it's the weight (33.5 lbs), the 29er wheels, the tires, the 150 fork, or the frame design but I honestly don't love the way it rides. Climbing feels ponderous and clunky. Descending is fine, if somewhat imprecise. It's smooth as all get out - I think the suspension feels good, for the most part.


Hopefully you've got some of that sorted out by now....I will be running 150 as well, pretty excited to get my hands on this thing.

What offset are you running? I have had that floppy feeling with offset less than 51 on few bikes.


----------



## mtnwater (Jan 7, 2004)

TraxFactory said:


> What offset are you running? I have had that floppy feeling with offset less than 51 on few bikes.


Less than 51. Ended up with a 42 as the 51 was back ordered. Swapped some messages with Revel and they (and Worldwide) thought the 42 would actually help compensate for the longer travel :???:.

I appreciate the replies and feedback. I gotta say it's odd having a fancy new bike that I don't want to ride. Planning an outing with a buddy this weekend and will be riding my Canfield EPO. I'm concerned about keeping up on the Rascal and would rather ride and not be flummoxed by my bike.

Guess it's time to put an ad together...


----------



## wolsey (Apr 20, 2013)

i'm in a positon that seems just as frustrating minus actually owning a new bike.
I haven't ridden a bike yet that has fired me up enough to want to spend the money 
I find it somewhat amusing when people say that "you'll get used to it", in response to the newer bikes feeling a lot less fun than my "old" Yeti SB66c
The only two major complaints I have with my bike is the narrow rim/squirmy tires (2.4) and that the seat post doesn't drop far enough down for technical riding
I wish I could have made it to the last Sedona Bike festival to try out a handful of bikes to see what fits me and my style of riding 
So far, I've been on a Yeti SB130, SB140, SB150, Ibis Ripmo("old" one), Ibis HD4, Revel Rail, Revel Rascal 
Being 6'3'', I've been told that the 29ers are the way to go and I have yet to feel that way, 
29ers wheels feel too big and especially when mated with such aggressive tires
Other bikes on my list to ride are
Revel Ranger, Pivot Switchblade and the Ibis Mojo
Yes, the above is every style of bike but when my bike checks off the boxes of being a fun bike in a broad spectrum of trails, I am curious to see what bike can do the same


----------



## sfr4dr (Dec 24, 2004)

wolsey said:


> i'm in a positon that seems just as frustrating minus actually owning a new bike.
> I haven't ridden a bike yet that has fired me up enough to want to spend the money
> I find it somewhat amusing when people say that "you'll get used to it", in response to the newer bikes feeling a lot less fun than my "old" Yeti SB66c
> The only two major complaints I have with my bike is the narrow rim/squirmy tires (2.4) and that the seat post doesn't drop far enough down for technical riding
> ...


Well, what you define as fun, your terrain and riding style, your tall height and your weight all matter here. You're talking about short travel bikes, long travel bikes, etc. What travel and geo do you want? If you want mid travel, not 29er, snappy handling, modern geo, then the Mojo4 is probably your bike based on your demos so far. That's for a light all around "trail/light enduro" bike, depending on the fork you put on it. What did you dislike about the HD4? I loved my Bronson V3 demo but it'd classify it as a bit more enduro than most of what you mentioned, except for the SB150. Before buying my AF, I did a ton of demos; Mojo3, Ripmo V1, Bronson V3, Hightower 2 (after I got my AF), Altitude, Instinct BC, Stumpy 27.5, Enduro 27.5 (2018) and Tracer. I didn't demo the Offering, but that's another sweet middle ground 29er that everyone loves. The Rascal and V2 Ripmo weren't out yet when I got mine so not an option.


----------



## mtnwater (Jan 7, 2004)

wolsey said:


> i'm in a positon that seems just as frustrating minus actually owning a new bike....


I suspect it's a bit more frustrating to have spent tall dollars and be unsatisfied with the result.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

wolsey said:


> i'm in a positon that seems just as frustrating minus actually owning a new bike.
> I haven't ridden a bike yet that has fired me up enough to want to spend the money
> I find it somewhat amusing when people say that "you'll get used to it", in response to the newer bikes feeling a lot less fun than my "old" Yeti SB66c
> The only two major complaints I have with my bike is the narrow rim/squirmy tires (2.4) and that the seat post doesn't drop far enough down for technical riding
> ...


How did you like the Rail?


----------



## wolsey (Apr 20, 2013)

Being on the tall side 6'3'' and only having the option of riding a large frame, I knew i had to take that in consideration of the feel
I ended up getting used to the bike fairly easily.
That said, the maxxis dhf/dhr are pretty aggressive tire for all but the most demanding trails and then in southern california you dont need that much tread
The Rail is a full on enduro bike that does feel very supportive in regards to pedaling. Unfortunately the suspension felt harsh to me despite being soft on both compression setting and lowering the air pressure below what RockShock says is the ballpark
If your trails are flowy, trail bike style this is completely overkill


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

wolsey said:


> Being on the tall side 6'3'' and only having the option of riding a large frame, I knew i had to take that in consideration of the feel
> I ended up getting used to the bike fairly easily.
> That said, the maxxis dhf/dhr are pretty aggressive tire for all but the most demanding trails and then in southern california you dont need that much tread
> The Rail is a full on enduro bike that does feel very supportive in regards to pedaling. Unfortunately the suspension felt harsh to me despite being soft on both compression setting and lowering the air pressure below what RockShock says is the ballpark
> If your trails are flowy, trail bike style this is completely overkill


SoCal, mostly Laguna Beach.
I prefer 27.5 bikes and like longer travel, especially in the front. 140mm isn't enough Fork for me, 160 is a minimum I would go with. I don't like 2 bike scenario either, I ride the same stuff most of the time, so had to sell my mid travel 29er due to not riding any mellow trails much. I even like longer travel on flow trails, as long as I can firm up the rear a bit. Push coil works well in this regard with 2 different settings, trail and DH on mine.
Considering the rail as my Nomad replacement.


----------



## wolsey (Apr 20, 2013)

sfr4dr said:


> Well, what you define as fun, your terrain and riding style, your tall height and your weight all matter here. You're talking about short travel bikes, long travel bikes, etc. What travel and geo do you want? If you want mid travel, not 29er, snappy handling, modern geo, then the Mojo4 is probably your bike based on your demos so far. That's for a light all around "trail/light enduro" bike, depending on the fork you put on it. What did you dislike about the HD4? I loved my Bronson V3 demo but it'd classify it as a bit more enduro than most of what you mentioned, except for the SB150. Before buying my AF, I did a ton of demos; Mojo3, Ripmo V1, Bronson V3, Hightower 2 (after I got my AF), Altitude, Instinct BC, Stumpy 27.5, Enduro 27.5 (2018) and Tracer. I didn't demo the Offering, but that's another sweet middle ground 29er that everyone loves. The Rascal and V2 Ripmo weren't out yet when I got mine so not an option.


I would say that my 9yr old Yeti SB66c seems to be fun to ride in a wider range of conditions than what I've demoed so far and most likely would be similiar to the Mojo or the Bronson which I've yet to try
And most, if not all of the bikes I've demoed have been set up with super aggressive tires which I believe would help significantly if the set up was a Maxis Aggressor or Rekon in the back and whatever up front ....slightly less aggressive all around

I rode the Ibis HD4 around 1-1/2 yrs ago at least but I'm almost certain it was set up with a 2.5 rear and possibly bigger front. I also don't like the ID of a rim wider than 30mm, like what Ibis and Pivot do on their bikes is too much unless you run a wide tire.
I would never run anything larger than at 2.5 front and 2.4 rear

The 29ers are not anything I believe I'll be stoked on as all around bike but I still want to try the Revel Ranger to see what that category of bike is all about


----------



## sfr4dr (Dec 24, 2004)

I demo'd a Mojo3 and it was a totally different bike from the Bronson 3. The Mojo3 is a snappy less capable bike but better on more xc or trail type rides. The Bronson 3 is certainly trail/enduro and much more plush and stable. The Mojo4 though has been updated quite a bit and with a big fork is probably closer to the Bronson 3 but still, the Mojo4 is not an HD5. Anyways, if you like your bike so much and don't seem to like anything else, why bother! Haha. Just ride it.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

mtnwater said:


> Less than 51. Ended up with a 42 as the 51 was back ordered. Swapped some messages with Revel and they (and Worldwide) thought the 42 would actually help compensate for the longer travel :???:.
> 
> I appreciate the replies and feedback. I gotta say it's odd having a fancy new bike that I don't want to ride. Planning an outing with a buddy this weekend and will be riding my Canfield EPO. I'm concerned about keeping up on the Rascal and would rather ride and not be flummoxed by my bike.
> 
> Guess it's time to put an ad together...


I have been there on a V1 Ripmo, everyone loved the bike. I did a short demo ride and thought I was happy with it. I built up a dream machine only to feel just like you do now. Sell it while its fresh, move on.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

mtnwater said:


> ... I like technical climbing and am reasonably proficient. I am consistently failing on the Rascal where I regularly succeed on the Mojo (or my hard tail). The bike feels long, the front end floppy, and the suspension seems to wallow. It feels slow and heavy.,.


Yeah. I don't have a Rascal (or Revel) yet, but been looking at and demoing new bikes and have the same issues with the "new" geo bikes. Too low/long/slack for my riding and preferences, which sound similar to yours. Trail bikes I liked a couple of years ago have moved toward all-mountain/endure geos. XC bikes (and now "down country") have geos very similar to trail bikes a few years ago. That's kind of where I've been looking...maybe the Revel Ranger or Spot Ryve...


----------



## nbaier (Jul 4, 2020)

mtnwater said:


> Less than 51. Ended up with a 42 as the 51 was back ordered. Swapped some messages with Revel and they (and Worldwide) thought the 42 would actually help compensate for the longer travel :???:.
> 
> I appreciate the replies and feedback. I gotta say it's odd having a fancy new bike that I don't want to ride. Planning an outing with a buddy this weekend and will be riding my Canfield EPO. I'm concerned about keeping up on the Rascal and would rather ride and not be flummoxed by my bike.
> 
> Guess it's time to put an ad together...


You should try swapping the fork. I recently went from a 140 Pike 51 offset to 150 42 offset Lyrik. I am quite happy with it. Revel recommended the shorter offset fork to maintain geometry. A guy I know had 150 pike on his rascal with a 44 offset and didn't like it as much as a 51. He swapped his fork.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

A longer fork slackens the HTA and adds trail. Decreased offset also adds trail. Those two changes are in the same direction, making the bike even more floppy in climbs.


----------



## cschuetta (Jun 6, 2017)

cpolism said:


> View attachment 1352651
> 
> 
> First few rides on the ElevenSix. Pretty impressive to see the difference. Brought both shocks with me to the trail and riding them an hour apart on the same trail and conditions really proved how a shock can completely change the ride and characteristics of your bike.


Nice setup! I've been looking at the push shock but worried it might be too linear? Do you feel like it blows through its travel more? I'm sure push did a good job tuning for the Rascal.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

cschuetta said:


> Nice setup! I've been looking at the push shock but worried it might be too linear? Do you feel like it blows through its travel more? I'm sure push did a good job tuning for the Rascal.


I have always enjoyed the feeling of an air shock, especially on this bike (and on my old Riot). The main issue I had with it was on the fast rooty, rocky, rutted out sections, I always felt the rear skipping around a good bit. With the ElevenSix it has essentially eliminated that issue.

By eliminated I truly mean just that. The bike is grounded, the rear stays put and you can absolutely open it up on the downs. I haven't noticed anything with regards to blowing through the travel. I have only used it in 'DH' mode so far, and I think the biggest surprise is how well it climbs. Mostly on the rocky tech climbs, but it's impressive.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but I can easily say you'll be 100% satisfied with this on the Rascal.


----------



## cschuetta (Jun 6, 2017)

cpolism said:


> I have always enjoyed the feeling of an air shock, especially on this bike (and on my old Riot). The main issue I had with it was on the fast rooty, rocky, rutted out sections, I always felt the rear skipping around a good bit. With the ElevenSix it has essentially eliminated that issue.
> 
> By eliminated I truly mean just that. The bike is grounded, the rear stays put and you can absolutely open it up on the downs. I haven't noticed anything with regards to blowing through the travel. I have only used it in 'DH' mode so far, and I think the biggest surprise is how well it climbs. Mostly on the rocky tech climbs, but it's impressive.
> 
> I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but I can easily say you'll be 100% satisfied with this on the Rascal.


Nice! Thank you for the feed back. It's looking very tempting.


----------



## pedrosalas7 (Apr 2, 2015)

Has anyone here also tried a knolly fugitive lt that can compare the two?


----------



## Crashmtber (Aug 14, 2020)

Hi guys - just got my Rascal today down here in Australia . Went with XL 

just seeking some advise in setting up the front & rear shock , I’m 83/84 kg which is around 183-185 pounds

any info would be greatly appreciated


----------



## nbaier (Jul 4, 2020)

Crashmtber said:


> Hi guys - just got my Rascal today down here in Australia . Went with XL
> 
> just seeking some advise in setting up the front & rear shock , I'm 83/84 kg which is around 183-185 pounds
> 
> any info would be greatly appreciated


For the rear shock revel recommends 110% of your body weight. I set up my front based on the RockShox app, which recommended 88 psi for 178 lbs.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

Crashmtber said:


> Hi guys - just got my Rascal today down here in Australia . Went with XL
> 
> just seeking some advise in setting up the front & rear shock , I'm 83/84 kg which is around 183-185 pounds
> 
> any info would be greatly appreciated


Sag is suggested to be between 25%-30% in the rear. I weigh just about the same as you and I achieve that sag with about 215 psi. Sag sits just shy of 30% at that pressure and feels great.

I'm running about 90 psi in the Pike up front and it feels great too.


----------



## Crashmtber (Aug 14, 2020)

nbaier said:


> For the rear shock revel recommends 110% of your body weight. I set up my front based on the RockShox app, which recommended 88 psi for 178 lbs.


Thx a lot will check out rock shock app


----------



## Crashmtber (Aug 14, 2020)

Pinch said:


> Sag is suggested to be between 25%-30% in the rear. I weigh just about the same as you and I achieve that sag with about 215 psi. Sag sits just shy of 30% at that pressure and feels great.
> 
> I'm running about 90 psi in the Pike up front and it feels great too.


Ok that's good info , have you played around with any tokens ?

thx again for the reply really appreciate it


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Crashmtber said:


> Hi guys - just got my Rascal today down here in Australia . Went with XL
> 
> just seeking some advise in setting up the front & rear shock , I'm 83/84 kg which is around 183-185 pounds
> 
> any info would be greatly appreciated


Curious how tall you are and how the XL fits. Reach seems short on paper, but that can be deceiving sometimes

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Crashmtber (Aug 14, 2020)

Rideon said:


> Curious how tall you are and how the XL fits. Reach seems short on paper, but that can be deceiving sometimes
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


im 187cm or 6"1.622 
arm wing span = 174cm 
leg inner = 85cm

for my height I have shorter arm length but longer torso

today my first ride on it so I will let you guys now


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

Crashmtber said:


> Ok that's good info , have you played around with any tokens ?
> 
> thx again for the reply really appreciate it


Haven't played around with tokens yet but i'm thinking the Pike may benefit from adding one. I'll probably give it a shot in the near future.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Is the Rascal’s seattube angle in a good position for pedaling uphill? I know it’s advertised at 75deg, but it’s hard to know what that number really means without demo-ING the bike. And does it do well in all positions when using the dropper post? I’ve had bikes that do a good job in this department and others not so much(too slack.) I’d be on an XL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## svinyard (Aug 14, 2017)

How do these compare to a Ripmo? I've spent a bunch of time on a buddy's XL Ripmo and holy hell are they nice as a do-it-all bike. Ibis's DWLink is just insanely nice. Its not even close to anything else I've ridden going up...and its a blast going down. Not what I'd want for a heavy Enduro race but ridiculously nice for everything else. That being said, I've never ridden a Canfield.

BTW, my Grandma also rode a Rascal E-Scooter. She loved it. (Worst bike name ever lol...their other names are sweet tho)


----------



## nbaier (Jul 4, 2020)

I bought the Rascal over the Ripmo v1. I preferred Rascal suspension platform. Rascal rides like a bigger bike than it’s numbers suggest.


----------



## Pinch (Nov 1, 2004)

Rideon said:


> Is the Rascal's seattube angle in a good position for pedaling uphill? I know it's advertised at 75deg, but it's hard to know what that number really means without demo-ING the bike. And does it do well in all positions when using the dropper post? I've had bikes that do a good job in this department and others not so much(too slack.) I'd be on an XL.


I think it's great. It is very balanced/neutral. A lot of bikes have gotten too aggressive with the seat angle IMO. I've ridden a SB130 and found it put me too far forward when climbing the tech stuff. Too much forward weight caused the front wheel to get hung up. The Rascal puts you in a very neutral place and allows you to move your body weight to accommodate what you are doing.


----------



## BlackTrails (May 28, 2020)

Just got my Rascal today. I bought it sight unseen and after deciding between a Fezzari Delano, ripmo, or Hightower. I'm 6'2" so right on the edge of most sizes, but the XL Rascal fits spot on. Here are some of my measurements for those trying to decide.


6'2" height, 73" arm span. 33" pants inseam, 36" standover.


I got the gx build spec with upgraded shock/fork and also changed to 170mm cranks. Cockpit fit was spot on out of the box with several spacers on the stem, and I moved the seat forward on rails almost to the stops limit. The dropper is raised maybe half an inch above the collar, so getting almost max drop possible above TT. One thing I would change is the chainring from 32T to a 30T. I do a fair amount of climbing for my descents and found myself in the bailout ring too often, and never used the smallest 2 rings.


I'm coming from a specialized Fuse, so my comparisons to other full suspension rigs are non existent. 


I'm still playing with shock settings, I have psi at suggested pressures, but trying to dial in rebound and compression. If anyone has settings they can share I'm all ears.

Also, tire pressure is 27R/24F. What have others found works for them on the i9 wheelset/tire combo?


----------



## BlackTrails (May 28, 2020)

Well I can answer some of my own questions, maybe it will save some other folks time. For tire pressure I've started to settle around 20f/23r.

shock setup has been the biggest hassle, and had I just stayed close to the factory setup it would have saved a few hours. I have always lived by this setup guide https://www.shockcraft.co.nz/technical-support/suspension-setup-53/suspension-setup However I got fancy with tokens and should have tweaked pressure and rebound first.

And for my weight around 172 geared up I have the rear shock at 190psi, rebound 2 from closed (slow), LSC 4 from open(Fast) for 28-30% seated sag.

Pike Ultimate Fork has 1 token, 66psi, LSC 4 from closed, rebound 9 from closed for 20-22% attack position sag. I ride somewhat light on the bars seated, so this will definitely affect my settings vs others.

The RS fork takes very fine tuning to get rid of its typical harsh ride, I delved through many forum posts here on the "I hate my pike". Glad I went with the ultimate upgrade...

The fork definitely needs breaking in,something I've never had with fox forks. The stiction is real for Rockshox forks, so much that I can't wait to get some other wiper seals in there when the time comes.

Also, the GX cassette is the biggest piece of junk that has ever graced my rear wheel. I had to actually take pliers and a dremel to it to stop in "clicking" and jumping the chain. See this thread https://forums.mtbr.com/sram/eagle-cassette-tolerance-clicking-1087072.html

Other than that, the rear suspension just doesn't seem to have a limit, and been loving everything else.


----------



## tchilds (Jan 14, 2018)

*Setup with DPX2*

Hey folks, getting my Rascal in later today. Curious if anyone is running the dpx2 and what settings they have there. Any different to the setup with the super deluxe? Trying to understand good baseline for open mode adjustment and rebound? Thanks


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

BlackTrails said:


> Just got my Rascal today. I bought it sight unseen and after deciding between a Fezzari Delano, ripmo, or Hightower. I'm 6'2" so right on the edge of most sizes, but the XL Rascal fits spot on. Here are some of my measurements for those trying to decide.
> 
> 
> 6'2" height, 73" arm span. 33" pants inseam, 36" standover.
> ...


If you want to get your seat back in the rails more you could try reducing the stem spacers if that works and even go hi-rise bar if you want to retain the bar height.

That's what I ended up doing (6'4") to get comfortable reach and saddle setup.

I think tire pressure is going to be mostly based on your tires and terrain & riding style.

I am running a Garbaruk 28T/Eagle52 Oval, love it for steeps.


----------



## Anchorless (May 15, 2008)

So I've had my Rascal for about 6 months and love it. It has served me extremely well.

One thing I've noticed - the rear triangle is very pliable. If you grab the back wheel and rock it back and forth, there's quite a bit of movement / pliability side to side.

Its not the bushings or bearings - all are fine and well maintained, properly torqued. Same with the axle and hub.

This seems to be a design characteristic. I can't speak to whether it is a _bad_ characteristic or not. I have talked with a dealer and he said he noticed the same thing with his Rascal, and he thinks it is because the bushing / pivot bolt sizes are smaller than what he saw with the Canfield design, and he thinks maybe they should have been sized bigger and the seat-stays and chain-stays maybe sized a bit thicker.

Anyone else noticed this?


----------



## Gratefulone (May 27, 2016)

Anchorless said:


> So I've had my Rascal for about 6 months and love it. It has served me extremely well.
> 
> One thing I've noticed - the rear triangle is very pliable. If you grab the back wheel and rock it back and forth, there's quite a bit of movement / pliability side to side.
> 
> ...


Every modern bike I've tried, I can use my hands and get the tire to touch the rear triangle....

Maybe a bit of flex designed it. I certainly never noticed it while riding.


----------



## smmokan (Oct 4, 2005)

Anchorless said:


> So I've had my Rascal for about 6 months and love it. It has served me extremely well.
> 
> One thing I've noticed - the rear triangle is very pliable. If you grab the back wheel and rock it back and forth, there's quite a bit of movement / pliability side to side.
> 
> ...


Not on the Rascal, but I did notice this on the Rail that I demoed in Moab a few weeks ago. I could feel the flex in certain instances, but when I was hauling ass and hitting drops on the Whole Enchilada, I couldn't feel it at all. I'd be curious to see what Revel says about it. I also have a GG Trail Pistol, and there's virtually no flex at all in the rear triangle... but the ride isn't quite as plush as the Revel either.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

Has anyone wrapped their Rascal? Getting a frame soon, and with the half gloss half matte finish, unsure of which route to go with the film.


----------



## BlackTrails (May 28, 2020)

habitrap said:


> Has anyone wrapped their Rascal? Getting a frame soon, and with the half gloss half matte finish, unsure of which route to go with the film.


The 3m protective film I got off amazon that protects downtube and back of seat tube is a good, cheap option. It's not super thick so doubt it would help much with a big rock hitting but it definitely helps with scratches on tailgates and general use. Comes in many widths and thicknesses though. Costs like $20.

I also have a couple thick pieces on rear triangle and chainstay from an old "honeycomb frame guards" frame protection set for when you inevitable lay it over. That stuff is super thick and nice, but it is peeling in spots already.

The kits from dyedbro are really cool, if that's your thing. I would get the bike in hand and decide which one you want though, as the frame color is a bit different in person from their online photos.

Pinkbike has an article on frame pro too;

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/review-7-films-and-tapes-to-keep-your-bike-shiny-and-new.html


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

habitrap said:


> Has anyone wrapped their Rascal? Getting a frame soon, and with the half gloss half matte finish, unsure of which route to go with the film.


What size frame? Invisiframe doesn't have a kit for the medium only the large. Ride wraps has medium for the Rascal but it's $95. The half and half on Revel frames make a wrap a tough choice. Do you want gloss or do you want matte.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

Rngspnr said:


> What size frame? Invisiframe doesn't have a kit for the medium only the large. Ride wraps has medium for the Rascal but it's $95. The half and half on Revel frames make a wrap a tough choice. Do you want gloss or do you want matte.


I was looking at the Medium Ride Wrap. The half and half does make it a tough choice. I was wondering which one keeps the original finish better.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I had Invisiframe on my Following and it kept the paint in excellent condition. I think a protective wrap also adds resale value if you ever decide to sell the frame.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

May pick one of these up next week but it's a bit of a drive. I'll sit on it but wondering if any other folks in here have long legs? The look of that seat tube angle make me nervous. I'm 5'10 with a 33 inch inseam. Will likely get a large. I have an issue with almost every size medium bike ive owned where the saddle hangs way off the back and it's way up above the bar height. 

Are my long legged friends cool with the seated climbing position? I have a lot of tight rolling trails and need a solid seated position.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

ulnar-landing said:


> May pick one of these up next week but it's a bit of a drive. I'll sit on it but wondering if any other folks in here have long legs? The look of that seat tube angle make me nervous. I'm 5'10 with a 33 inch inseam. Will likely get a large. I have an issue with almost every size medium bike ive owned where the saddle hangs way off the back and it's way up above the bar height.
> 
> Are my long legged friends cool with the seated climbing position? I have a lot of tight rolling trails and need a solid seated position.


I'm 5-8 with average length legs and _could_ ride a large if I had too. At 5-10, a Large will fit you fine. I didn't end up getting one but it's a great bike. I said it before, if I could only have ONE bike, this would be it.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

k2rider1964 said:


> I'm 5-8 with average length legs and _could_ ride a large if I had too. At 5-10, a Large will fit you fine. I didn't end up getting one but it's a great bike. I said it before, if I could only have ONE bike, this would be it.


Nice! Yeah I'm really looking forward to riding it. Geo looks conservative but that's probably what I want for an all purpose trail bike. I actually was trying to avoid going nuts on the reach since my legs are long so the bikes I've been looking at I've been trying to land somewhere at the 460-470 range.

Overall fit looks like it should be great but just because of my long legs, it means my effective seat tube angle is a lot slacker than someone who has shorter legs. Less of a fit issue and more of a where is my body hanging on the climbs issue. Only fit issue I'm worried about is stack height but I can always mess with risers etc


----------



## obiwanknope (Jan 10, 2021)

BlackTrails said:


> 6'2" height, 73" arm span. 33" pants inseam, 36" standover.
> 
> I got the gx build spec with upgraded shock/fork and also changed to 170mm cranks. Cockpit fit was spot on out of the box with several spacers on the stem, and I moved the seat forward on rails almost to the stops limit.


I have the same body dimensions and was also considering this same bike. My concern was with the seat angle. After riding it for a few months, what are your thoughts? Do you feel like your hanging off the back or is it fine? I feel like I'm falling off the back of my current bike, even with the seat slammed forward, and I don't want a repeat. Thanks!


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Just picked up a Rascal earlier this week. Can't wait to get it out on a ride!


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

obiwanknope said:


> I have the same body dimensions and was also considering this same bike. My concern was with the seat angle. After riding it for a few months, what are your thoughts? Do you feel like your hanging off the back or is it fine? I feel like I'm falling off the back of my current bike, even with the seat slammed forward, and I don't want a repeat. Thanks!


I think the 75-degree claimed STA is a little deceptive -- because of the way CBF suspension behaves under pedaling power, you'll find that the seat angle feels steeper than it would on other bikes (especially four-bar/Horst Link bikes) that have the same claimed STA. I find that the seat angle feels slackest when I just sit on the bike and sag it, since as soon as I start pedaling the bike wants to stand up in the travel more, which puts me in a comfortable, upright pedaling position.

That said, if you do want a bike with super-modern geo, the Rascal is definitely not the one -- it's the ideal bike for someone who wants a more "modern-conservative" feel that is more agile and energetic than some of the longer wheelbase, slacker HTA, steeper STA bikes in its class. Revel didn't design a mid-travel trail bike with the sole focus of rallying through gnarly descents at high speeds; the Rascal is phenomenal on slower-speed tech and carries great speed on rolling, pedally sections.

At 189cm (194cm armspan) on the XL I am running a 60mm stem to compensate for what feels like a slightly cramped cockpit, but the extra stem length isn't a problem -- it's awesome for weaving through techy climbs and doesn't interfere with high-speed steering paired with a 140mm fork at 51mm offset.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Really torn between the Rascal and the Ripmo V2. I know this is a Rascal thread, so I am prepared for bias, but I am guessing I am not alone being stuck on this choice now or in the recent past if you are reading this thread. My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain. I am not a double black jump line guy, but enjoy the black diamond singletrack. While the Ripmo probably has more travel than I need 95% of the time, from what I have read about the pedaling platform and weight, there is little if no penalty for having it along for the ride. Possible downside of Ripmo V2 is the slackened head tube. I have not heard of many reviewers complaining about this however, there is mostly just love for the V2/AF geometry out there. It is only 18mm longer than the Rascal, so not a tank in comparison. Rascal is a tad light on travel, but many have described it as bottomless in the back and the front can always be bumped up to 150. Downside to forking up being making a relatively conservative stock STA even more conservative. The STA is one of my primary gripes on my current Trance Advance 27.5.

*TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

gluestick said:


> Really torn between the Rascal and the Ripmo V2. I know this is a Rascal thread, so I am prepared for bias, but I am guessing I am not alone being stuck on this choice now or in the recent past if you are reading this thread. My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain. I am not a double black jump line guy, but enjoy the black diamond singletrack. While the Ripmo probably has more travel than I need 95% of the time, from what I have read about the pedaling platform and weight, there is little if no penalty for having it along for the ride. Possible downside of Ripmo V2 is the slackened head tube. I have not heard of many reviewers complaining about this however, there is mostly just love for the V2/AF geometry out there. It is only 18mm longer than the Rascal, so not a tank in comparison. Rascal is a tad light on travel, but many have described it as bottomless in the back and the front can always be bumped up to 150. Downside to forking up being making a relatively conservative stock STA even more conservative. The STA is one of my primary gripes on my current Trance Advance 27.5.
> 
> *TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


I think I may have already commented on one of your posts on facebook but I live in Massachusetts and own a rascal I got recently. Only a handful of rides but I'm very happy with it. I originally had my eyes on the ripmo af, banshee prime, and knollys warden lt. I ended up with the rascal because I found a good deal on one in stock and also felt like at least on paper it suited new England trail riding better than anything else. I do feel like it's suited VERY well to the trails except the 800mm bars which I like the feel of so I may not change.

So far I've ridden it at Vietnam, goat hill,and pine hills if you're familiar with any of those. I haven't ridden a lot of full sus bikes tbh. I did ride a ripmo v2 around the parking lot and at least just goofing around on flat land, the two feel pretty similar tbh.

Also, don't be fooled by the 66 hta. At least to my feel, it almost feels slacker than other bikes with the same hta when pointed down. Idk what it is but it's just a much better descender than you might think. It does not totally mute the trail, but I feel very well supported while riding. I wouldn't say it feels like a long travel bike but it does feel like it has more travel than my partner's orbea occam. I'd say it climbs slightly worse on smooth steady climbs than that bike, but has a clear advantage to any bike I've ridden on tight techy climbs which is why I feel like it's the perfect new England bike. Lmk if you have any specific questions. Where in new England are you?


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

gluestick said:


> My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain.
> *TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


If you're spending your bike park days at Killington and Thunder, and your home trails have that old-school "slow tech" feel, you must be a New Englander on the hunt for the elusive New England trail bike! It's a difficult quest, especially given that so many highly-lauded, boutique American frame manufacturers are based either in the Rockies, California, and the PNW -- all places with bigger elevation gain/loss and riding cultures that focus more on sustained descents, high speeds, and relatively smooth, flowy terrain. Despite the influx of machine-built trail building in VT and NH the past 5-10 years I still find myself riding a lot of slower, techier stuff, which is why I ended up on a Rascal -- my current choice as the perfect "New England trail bike."

re. Ripmo: I only have a few hours on the Ripmo v2, but I rode the Ripmo v1 with a Float X2 quite extensively, and I thought it was an impressively speedy and efficient all-rounder, though with a noted weakness for that sort of awkward, physical, slow riding that seems endemic to our region. The way Ibis has been tuning their DW-Link in the past few years, it feels absolutely incredible -- so fast, so smooth -- when pedaling hard and pumping through berms and high-speed features, but the traction is really limited at slower speeds when trying to finesse the bike instead of gunning it. When If anything, I found that the added progressivity of the v2 Ripmo over the v1 made it even more difficult to keep the rear wheel planted when climbing jumbled, techy stuff.

The Rascal, on the other hand... I can't say enough good things about the way the bike picks apart janky, weird, off-camber trails where traction is at a minimum, both ascending and descending. It was a fun challenge this past fall to try and find a situation in my usual riding (which sounds a lot like yours) that exposed a weakness in the bike's design. I was cleaning climbs with relative ease that I thought reserved for a sub-25lb. XC bike, but also finding extra momentum and plushness on descents I usually avoided. And, unlike with most modern trail/all-mountain bikes that tend to flail and flop on slow-speed tech, I never have to avoid those tight, old-school, relatively flat trails that I'd otherwise find frustrating on a bike like the Ripmo. The Rascal wants to slice its way through flat corners and pick up speed with just a couple pedalling jabs. At some point I'm going to start sounding like a broken record about this, but I believe that the way Revel has tuned the CBF suspension system to work with the Rascal puts it above and beyond other linkage designs as fast as plushness, traction, pedaling platform and small-bump compliance.

I wouldn't mind having a bit more travel on the Rascal -- at this point I'm actively hoping that Revel's new 2021 bike will be a long(er)-travel 29er -- but I also wouldn't want to dull the bike and make it lose that blend of sharp cornering and mid-stroke plushness. With it set up at 130/140 with a DPX2 and a Fox 36 Grip 2, I've never found myself wishing for more travel on handbuilt, techy trails. The bike's only limiting point is going full-speed into successive big hits where a longer wheelbase and lower BB would keep it more planted. And given what you're saying about your home trails, I wouldn't want to fall into the trap of assuming that "more travel is better." You may find that the Rascal's shorter travel makes the bike a bit more responsive, agile and quick to maneuver. Even if you were to run the same fork on the Rascal and the Ripmo, that extra 20mm of travel isn't always in your favor -- especially when you're constantly lifting and squashing the front wheel through roots and rocks. Personally, I don't want a super long, low and slack bike, no matter how far the industry may go in that direction.

I think your question well exemplifies one of the big conflicts/divides we see in bike design today -- how does a product manager/frame engineer in northern California effectively understand what a bike needs to function well in a totally different environment? I love the wide gamut of trails in NorCal (they're arguably some of the most fun trails anywhere), and I love the local trails near my house, but they're not all that similar. In fact, you might even say they're pretty dissimilar when you consider that different trails demand different suspension tuning and kinematics choices, alongside more obvious geometry differences. The Rascal might feel a little muted at high speeds ripping down 3rd Divide in Downieville, and the Ripmo feels clunky and hesitant in technical, low-speed terrain that we have in abundance in the northeast.

I think my bigger bias point in recommending the Rascal for your riding isn't that I own a Rascal, it's that I have a strong aversion to the modern MTB cultural attitude that seems to think one bike could work for all sorts of riders in all sorts of different locations. If you want the optimal bike, it has to be optimal for YOUR terrain. While the Ripmo is hardly a bad bike, it's a far cry from the exceptionally nimble, flat-corner-dissecting feel of the Rascal. Coming out of CO, you wouldn't expect Revel to make fantastic bikes for old-school New England riding... yet they do.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

I don't have a Rascal, but owned a Riot. Also, never rode a Ripmo, but had every version of the Ripley.
Owned a bunch of other suspension designs as well.
CBF is the only one I like better than Ibis DW-Link.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

gluestick said:


> Really torn between the Rascal and the Ripmo V2. I know this is a Rascal thread, so I am prepared for bias, but I am guessing I am not alone being stuck on this choice now or in the recent past if you are reading this thread. My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain. I am not a double black jump line guy, but enjoy the black diamond singletrack. While the Ripmo probably has more travel than I need 95% of the time, from what I have read about the pedaling platform and weight, there is little if no penalty for having it along for the ride. Possible downside of Ripmo V2 is the slackened head tube. I have not heard of many reviewers complaining about this however, there is mostly just love for the V2/AF geometry out there. It is only 18mm longer than the Rascal, so not a tank in comparison. Rascal is a tad light on travel, but many have described it as bottomless in the back and the front can always be bumped up to 150. Downside to forking up being making a relatively conservative stock STA even more conservative. The STA is one of my primary gripes on my current Trance Advance 27.5.
> 
> *TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


It sounds like for the majority of your riding the Rascal will be a better fit than a Ripmo. The Ripmo pedals very well to the point that it hides its travel. However the Rascal climbs better. For everyday riding the Rascal will be a better all around bike. It really excels in technical riding because of the 66 degree HA and the CBF platform. At the end of the day it comes down to if you want a trail or enduro bike. The Ripmo will be better in the bike park but the Rascal is more well rounded for what you ride most of the time.
(I was in the same situation. I went with a Rascal)


----------



## NTsnow (Jul 18, 2009)

gluestick said:


> Really torn between the Rascal and the Ripmo V2. I know this is a Rascal thread, so I am prepared for bias, but I am guessing I am not alone being stuck on this choice now or in the recent past if you are reading this thread. My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain. I am not a double black jump line guy, but enjoy the black diamond singletrack. While the Ripmo probably has more travel than I need 95% of the time, from what I have read about the pedaling platform and weight, there is little if no penalty for having it along for the ride. Possible downside of Ripmo V2 is the slackened head tube. I have not heard of many reviewers complaining about this however, there is mostly just love for the V2/AF geometry out there. It is only 18mm longer than the Rascal, so not a tank in comparison. Rascal is a tad light on travel, but many have described it as bottomless in the back and the front can always be bumped up to 150. Downside to forking up being making a relatively conservative stock STA even more conservative. The STA is one of my primary gripes on my current Trance Advance 27.5.
> 
> *TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


I demoed a Rascal and a Ranger one day this fall on a tight and techy Colorado trail. Then I demoed a V1 Ripmo the next day on a not quite so techy but steeper trail. The Ripmo felt vague and lifeless until it woke up at high speed. Rascal felt much more agile, precise, and 'fun' at most speeds.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

ulnar-landing said:


> I think I may have already commented on one of your posts on facebook but I live in Massachusetts and own a rascal I got recently. Only a handful of rides but I'm very happy with it. I originally had my eyes on the ripmo af, banshee prime, and knollys warden lt. I ended up with the rascal because I found a good deal on one in stock and also felt like at least on paper it suited new England trail riding better than anything else. I do feel like it's suited VERY well to the trails except the 800mm bars which I like the feel of so I may not change.
> 
> So far I've ridden it at Vietnam, goat hill,and pine hills if you're familiar with any of those. I haven't ridden a lot of full sus bikes tbh. I did ride a ripmo v2 around the parking lot and at least just goofing around on flat land, the two feel pretty similar tbh.
> 
> Also, don't be fooled by the 66 hta. At least to my feel, it almost feels slacker than other bikes with the same hta when pointed down. Idk what it is but it's just a much better descender than you might think. It does not totally mute the trail, but I feel very well supported while riding. I wouldn't say it feels like a long travel bike but it does feel like it has more travel than my partner's orbea occam. I'd say it climbs slightly worse on smooth steady climbs than that bike, but has a clear advantage to any bike I've ridden on tight techy climbs which is why I feel like it's the perfect new England bike. Lmk if you have any specific questions. Where in new England are you?


Thanks for weighing in. I am about 95% on the Rascal train. Looking for nimble and poppy, decent climber, but still deep enough travel to hang on DH days. Waiting to hear back from my local shop on availability. I am in North Central CT. I have not yet been to Vietnam, but from what I have seen on youtube, it looks like it would be my jam. I also try to hit up Kingdom a few times a year.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

gluestick said:


> Thanks for weighing in. I am about 95% on the Rascal train. Looking for nimble and poppy, decent climber, but still deep enough travel to hang on DH days. Waiting to hear back from my local shop on availability. I am in North Central CT. I have not yet been to Vietnam, but from what I have seen on youtube, it looks like it would be my jam. I also try to hit up Kingdom a few times a year.


If I only had 3 descriptors for the Rascal, it would be nimble, poppy and descent climber.

I can hit pretty much everything I normally do on my Warden on DH tracks/ bike parks, but with only 140mm up front, it does beat the crap out of me.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

I owned a Ripmo V1 and though it was a great all around bike. It climbed great and better than the Rascal for _me_ out her in the West. However, even though it has more travel, I preferred the Rascal going down, especially on DH's with repeated hits and chatter. That CBF suspension design is the best I've ever ridden going down. I've also ridden my friends Rail a few times. I ended up with a V4 Ripley because it climbs better than the Rascal for me (much snappier) but if my main concern was going down or how the rear suspension reacts, I would have gone with the Rascal.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Thought I'd finally chime in as I own both a Ripmo V2 and just finished my Rascal build. Didn't plan on getting my Rascal for a few more months, but to my great surprise, it showed up WAY earlier than they told me. And I only have two rides on the Rascal, so some things I'm about to say may change. 

First off, I may take some slack for this, but the Rascal is a bit of a porker. It's virtually the same build as my Ripmo V2, nearly all carbon, SRAM X01 cranks, eagle drivetrain, Enve bars, except the Ripmo has a Zeb fork and Onyx hubs and the Rascal has a 150mm Lyrik and CK hubs, and even with the slightly lighter fork and hubs, the Rascal is almost two pounds heavier. And it's pretty much the same weight as the Riot I had before. Not what I was expecting nor really wanted, but when I'm riding the Rascal, I don't find the extra weight annoying at all, at least not yet. 

Second, one thing I found interesting is that I'm 6'5" tall, so on XL frames, and while on paper the Ripmo has like 11mm more reach, I'm actually running a shorter stem on the Rascal. So 50mm stem on Rascal and 60mm stem on Ripmo. The Rascal felt really stretched out with a 60mm stem. 

Guess before I go any further, I'll add that my most previous bikes have been Knolly Warden, Banshee Prime and Canfield Riot. Also owned a Niner WFO and Knolly Chilcotin. I mention this because the Rascal is everything I had really wanted from the Riot (with the one exception of not being any lighter, which I'm still trying to wrap my head around) but the Rascal is even more fun to ride. 

My first ride on the Rascal was in really tight singletrack with lots of quick turns, roots, quick up and downs with a bit of prolonged logging road climbs. As some have mentioned in previous posts, I found the Rascal wallowed a bit with the stock RS shock, but I'd planned on swapping it out anyway with the new CC Kitsuma b/c my Riot came with CCDBA and Canfield's new long travel 29ers are specced with CC shocks. The Kitsuma is leaps and bounds better. Also, first ride I had an older Pike with a Vorsprung coil conversion set at 140mm, but it was too heavy and put the bike over 35lbs, so I put on a Lyrik set at 150. Really like the addition 10mm up front, and doesn't feel any less stable and maybe just a tad bit more wobbly on climbs, and I'll probably keep it there for now. 

Second ride on Rascal was gnarly, rocky, technical riding that I normally only take my big travel 27.5 bike on, but it was the only place dry enough to ride. I was super impressed with how well the Rascal pedals with the new shock, zero wallowing, as well as how well it took the chunk. In my opinion thus far, the Rascal is a much better climber in technical, chunky stuff. It's solid and stays glued to the trail the entire time, kinda reminds me of how my old Knollys climbed and better than the Riot. The Ripmo on the other hand just doesn't stay nearly as planted, like if I don't keep my speed up, I find myself getting bounced off on chunky climbs. The Rascal is also plenty fun on the downs, too. I didn't find the 130mm to be harsh or lacking in any way, but it definitely does not have the bottomless floaty feeling that 147mm of travel on the Ripmo gives me on the downs. 

I guess lastly I'll mention that unlike some folks' comments about the Rascal's rear end being a little flimsy, I did not find that to be the case and I'm a clyde at the upper end of the curve. I found it to be super solid, and the carbon feels thicker than Ibis's carbon, which makes sense since it weighs more.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Really torn between the Rascal and the Ripmo V2. I know this is a Rascal thread, so I am prepared for bias, but I am guessing I am not alone being stuck on this choice now or in the recent past if you are reading this thread. My riding is mostly tight, twisty, technical singletrack- average speeds of only 4-5 mph. Short punchy ups and downs, natural rollers, rocks with more rocks on top of them. I get maybe a half dozen days a year of lift service at places like Killington and Thunder Mountain. I am not a double black jump line guy, but enjoy the black diamond singletrack. While the Ripmo probably has more travel than I need 95% of the time, from what I have read about the pedaling platform and weight, there is little if no penalty for having it along for the ride. Possible downside of Ripmo V2 is the slackened head tube. I have not heard of many reviewers complaining about this however, there is mostly just love for the V2/AF geometry out there. It is only 18mm longer than the Rascal, so not a tank in comparison. Rascal is a tad light on travel, but many have described it as bottomless in the back and the front can always be bumped up to 150. Downside to forking up being making a relatively conservative stock STA even more conservative. The STA is one of my primary gripes on my current Trance Advance 27.5.
> 
> *TL*;*DR* If you have experience with either (or both) the Rimpo V2/AF or the Rascal in lower speed, punchy tech, please weigh in.


I'm in central Texas where it's mostly tight switchbacks in very rocky limestone terrain @ 3-7mph with short punchy climbs. Previous bike was a V1 Following. I have not ridden a Ripmo, but I can say that my Rascal is much better for the terrain I ride than my Following was. Not saying the Following wasn't a good bike but the Rascal outperforms it where I ride, which sounds similar to the terrain you would be riding. My Rascal is no light weight @ 32# being two pounds heavier than my Following was. The crazy thing is the Rascal actually feels lighter than the Following did it pedals much better and maintains momentum much better also. Have not had a chance to get it to the local bike park here but I think it will be excellent in that environment as well. I have mine set up with a 150mm 44offset Diamond up front and it pairs extremely well with the CBF suspension. The higher stack from the fork at 150 slackens the STA a bit but it still climbs fine and the front end doesn't wander on climbs like my Following did. At 150 the fork slackens my head angle to 65.5* which feels really good to me. The Rascal climbs like a goat especially out of the saddle it doesn't get hung up on roots and ledges like my Following did. The Rascal doesn't wallow at any point in the suspension. When you start to climb out of the saddle the rear suspension will settle in a bit but then the suspension stays stable with almost no pedal bob. Pointing down the Rascal is very confidence inspiring, it's stable at speed and when it's fast and chunky it eats up the chunk extremely well. So far I'm loving my Rascal. I'll add this, I bought my Rascal sight unseen with no demo ride and I am extremely pleased with the bike in all aspects. The fit and finish of the frame is very nice the internal tubes for cable routing make building the bike easy and extremely quite on the trail. Long writeup but I hope it helps. Good luck in your choice and I don't think you'll regret either bike.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Well, local shop is saying no Rascal availability in my size and color until the end of 2021. Ripmo V2 is still in contention, also looking at the Esker Rowl (not available until spring). Evil Offering V2 looks interesting, but might not be in my budget.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

gluestick said:


> Well, local shop is saying no Rascal availability in my size and color until the end of 2021. Ripmo V2 is still in contention, also looking at the Esker Rowl (not available until spring). Evil Offering V2 looks interesting, but might not be in my budget.


That esker looks real nice. Didn't even know that thing was announced. I'd honestly strongly consider that. The deore is a great value for a carbon bike and I've heard amazing things about orion. You could also look into the canfield tilt which is aluminum and ships in April. Also cbf


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

gluestick said:


> Well, local shop is saying no Rascal availability in my size and color until the end of 2021. Ripmo V2 is still in contention, also looking at the Esker Rowl (not available until spring). Evil Offering V2 looks interesting, but might not be in my budget.


I would look used. I found my Rascal with an xo1 axs build for less than the gx build new. And it is essentialy brand new.


----------



## obiwanknope (Jan 10, 2021)

gluestick said:


> Well, local shop is saying no Rascal availability in my size and color until the end of 2021. Ripmo V2 is still in contention, also looking at the Esker Rowl (not available until spring). Evil Offering V2 looks interesting, but might not be in my budget.


I'm also trying to decide between the Rascal and the Offering. Fortunately my shop has a Rascal GX on order in my size that I could claim and I also have a pre-order in for a GX Offering. Now to just decide based off of what I've read on the internet 😆

my friend has a Ripmo AF that I tried out. It definitely pedaled well but I didn't ride it enough for an opinion. I cant get past the looks though. Not a fan, no matter how good it is!


----------



## obiwanknope (Jan 10, 2021)

gubbinalia said:


> I think the 75-degree claimed STA is a little deceptive -- because of the way CBF suspension behaves under pedaling power, you'll find that the seat angle feels steeper than it would on other bikes (especially four-bar/Horst Link bikes) that have the same claimed STA. I find that the seat angle feels slackest when I just sit on the bike and sag it, since as soon as I start pedaling the bike wants to stand up in the travel more, which puts me in a comfortable, upright pedaling position.
> 
> That said, if you do want a bike with super-modern geo, the Rascal is definitely not the one -- it's the ideal bike for someone who wants a more "modern-conservative" feel that is more agile and energetic than some of the longer wheelbase, slacker HTA, steeper STA bikes in its class. Revel didn't design a mid-travel trail bike with the sole focus of rallying through gnarly descents at high speeds; the Rascal is phenomenal on slower-speed tech and carries great speed on rolling, pedally sections.
> 
> At 189cm (194cm armspan) on the XL I am running a 60mm stem to compensate for what feels like a slightly cramped cockpit, but the extra stem length isn't a problem -- it's awesome for weaving through techy climbs and doesn't interfere with high-speed steering paired with a 140mm fork at 51mm offset.


This is just the kind of input I was looking for. Thanks!
I'm coming from a 2014 Tallboy LT which has pretty old geo, so the Rascal looks like a nice middle ground between what I'm used to and the new crop of super modern geo bikes.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

obiwanknope said:


> This is just the kind of input I was looking for. Thanks!
> I'm coming from a 2014 Tallboy LT which has pretty old geo, so the Rascal looks like a nice middle ground between what I'm used to and the new crop of super modern geo bikes.


I was also very concerned about the seat angle. I don't think it would hurt things to be a degree steeper but if your trails are on the flatter, rolling, twisty side the 75 feels pretty good. The really steep angles I think are for people that have steep sustained climbs. It's not as comfortable for more standard terrain which is why I think the rascal works so well as a capital T trail bike. Kind of works well on anything.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gluestick said:


> Well, local shop is saying no Rascal availability in my size and color until the end of 2021. Ripmo V2 is still in contention, also looking at the Esker Rowl (not available until spring). Evil Offering V2 looks interesting, but might not be in my budget.


Shoot a text to Revel and ask them directly. They respond pretty darn quick. I ordered my Rascal in Oct, told me it wouldn't arrive until Feb, and then it showed up in December. Can't hurt.


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

masonmoa said:


> First off, I may take some slack for this, but the Rascal is a bit of a porker. It's virtually the same build as my Ripmo V2, nearly all carbon, SRAM X01 cranks, eagle drivetrain, Enve bars, except the Ripmo has a Zeb fork and Onyx hubs and the Rascal has a 150mm Lyrik and CK hubs, and even with the slightly lighter fork and hubs, the Rascal is almost two pounds heavier. And it's pretty much the same weight as the Riot I had before. Not what I was expecting nor really wanted, but when I'm riding the Rascal, I don't find the extra weight annoying at all, at least not yet.


Excellent comparison -- you make some great points. Especially interesting to hear about the traction you were getting with the Rascal vs. the Ripmo v2 -- that super-planted rear wheel has definitely been a big factor for me for falling in love with CBF.

With respect, I'm curious how you ended up with the Rascal 2lbs heavier than the Ripmo -- as far as I can tell from weights on the Ripmo v2 frame that appear online, the difference in frame weight for the XL is only about 300g. I agree that the Rascal is probably not the go-to if you're trying to build up as light a bike as possible, but it's well within reason. I've admittedly strayed into weight-weenie territory in the past but I'm more than willing to accept the extra frame weight on the Rascal; easy enough to even out the weight by running Exo or Exo+ tires rather than Double Downs, lighter cranks, a bit of carbon here and there, etc.

Not precisely on topic: I'd love to hear your take on the Zeb vs. Lyrik debate since you've spent time on both.


----------



## InspectahDeck (Jun 12, 2017)

I ordered a Sedona X01 Build today in XL. Texts and email with Revel said sometime in July. I’ll post up as I find out more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dr Gigi (Nov 3, 2016)

Just got my medium T1000 build finished. It's the first bike I've ever built that felt almost perfect right off the bat. Maybe I got lucky with cockpit and suspension settings, but this bike feels just right for my 5'9 160lb frame. I'm coming off a Following mb, which was an amazing bike, but wanted something just a little more capable. After my first few rides, I'd describe this bike as the mb on steroids. It just does everything a little bit better, from climbing to descending. It has the same fast, corner railing feeling but adds more plush to the ride over choppy stuff. I don't think it's quite as poppy as the mb, which is the poppiest bike I've ever ridden, but it still wants to hit all the extra features. The climbing platform is very supportive and the rear tracks really well. I used to ride a Riot so I'm familiar with cbf but man I forgot how amazing it is all around. The only disappointment for me was the porky weight. At 29.4 lbs, it came out over a pound heavier than my mb with the same parts swapped over. And this is with some light compenents: x01 drive train, raceface sl cranks, 1600g wheelset, carbon bars, and 1750g worth of tire. I'm not a total weight weenie, but with components like that I'd expect a lighter rig. Overall though the bike climbs great and I don't feel the extra pork on the trails so far.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gubbinalia said:


> Excellent comparison -- you make some great points. Especially interesting to hear about the traction you were getting with the Rascal vs. the Ripmo v2 -- that super-planted rear wheel has definitely been a big factor for me for falling in love with CBF.
> 
> With respect, I'm curious how you ended up with the Rascal 2lbs heavier than the Ripmo -- as far as I can tell from weights on the Ripmo v2 frame that appear online, the difference in frame weight for the XL is only about 300g. I agree that the Rascal is probably not the go-to if you're trying to build up as light a bike as possible, but it's well within reason. I've admittedly strayed into weight-weenie territory in the past but I'm more than willing to accept the extra frame weight on the Rascal; easy enough to even out the weight by running Exo or Exo+ tires rather than Double Downs, lighter cranks, a bit of carbon here and there, etc.
> 
> Not precisely on topic: I'd love to hear your take on the Zeb vs. Lyrik debate since you've spent time on both.


To answer your question about weight, I honestly have no clue how the Rascal came out 1.72lbs more than my Ripmo. I'm a big dude, so I build stout bikes, like I used Derby DH carbon rims laced to either Onyx/CK hubs. The only differences are my Ripmo has slightly wider tires (2.6), 160mm dropper and a Zeb; and the Rascal tires are 2.5/2.4 but same models, a 185 dropper and a Lyrik. But the bars, grips, brakes, stem, saddle, wheels, cranks, bb, drivetrain and shocks are identical. And I can tell you that when I'm loading both bikes into my truck, the Rascal definitely feels heavier, particularly the rear end.

That being said, just got my third ride on the Rascal, and I'm really stoked! Despite the unexpected weight, which I didn't really notice, it's an impressive bike. Rode again in narrow, really damn twisty trails with lots of quick up and down and tons of big redwood tree roots, and altho it was really wet, the back end just stuck to the trail like nobody's business! I've ridden the Ripmo a bunch here too, and REALLY prefer the Rascal for this type of riding. Actually exactly why I wanted the Rascal.

My thoughts about the two while on the trail today were that they are really not comparable bikes. To me, the Ripmo is a straight up enduro bike, or what I tend to think of as AM. It has really modern geo, peddles well, is lightweight, poppy, but it likes to go fast. In fact, the Ripmo is the fasted bike I've owned, just because it can go over everything with such ease, kinda point and shoot. I mean, it's why pros use it for racing. But it's not the greatest for tight, slow riding cuz it's kinda long and the issue I mentioned before about needing to keep speed while climbing chunkier stuff. The Rascal, while a little slacker than its predecessor the Riot, is still a straight up trail bike with a natural, familiar, old school feel to it. Like right off the bat, it just felt good and was fun to ride, even without having my suspension dialed. I can't say that was the case with the Ripmo. But the Rascal climbs like a billy goat, is super stable at slow speed on narrow trails, handles really tight corners like a champ, is playful, stable in the air and can also move pretty good, but when you really open it up, it's just not quite as smooth, fast and stable as the Ripmo cuz it ain't got as much travel and it's not as slacked out. And, thus far I am also getting significantly less peddle strikes on the Rascal compared to the Ripmo, and which had been mentioned as a problem in previous posts. So I think both could be a "one" bike, just depends on where and what conditions you're mostly riding.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

masonmoa said:


> Shoot a text to Revel and ask them directly. They respond pretty darn quick. I ordered my Rascal in Oct, told me it wouldn't arrive until Feb, and then it showed up in December. Can't hurt.


I reached out to Revel. Apparently the hold up is on Rockshox. not available until the July-ish timeframe. They can ship late February/early March with DVO diamond/topaz. I am going to do a little homework on how much $ I would have to put in on the $3500 frame/suspension build to get it together. Not sure if Revel is only fulfilling consumer direct sales and not shops, or what.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

gluestick said:


> I reached out to Revel. Apparently the hold up is on Rockshox. not available until the July-ish timeframe. They can ship late February/early March with DVO diamond/topaz. I am going to do a little homework on how much $ I would have to put in on the $3500 frame/suspension build to get it together. Not sure if Revel is only fulfilling consumer direct sales and not shops, or what.


That sounds about right. I've had a Rascal on order, and its been delayed because of Rockshox. Interesting to hear about the DVO suspension.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gluestick said:


> I reached out to Revel. Apparently the hold up is on Rockshox. not available until the July-ish timeframe. They can ship late February/early March with DVO diamond/topaz. I am going to do a little homework on how much $ I would have to put in on the $3500 frame/suspension build to get it together. Not sure if Revel is only fulfilling consumer direct sales and not shops, or what.


I got my Rascal (frame only) directly from Revel. Ordered it on Oct 22 and was told not to expect it until Feb. I was actually cool with that cuz I needed to save up for it and my Ripmo was still pretty new. Well, then I got an invoice on Nov. 17 (thank god for credit cards, altho my wife wasn't too happy about it!), and it arrived around Thanksgiving. And the reason I just finished building it up was because I had to wait until I could afford parts (xmas $$) after the old ones I'd planned to reuse broke (don't ask), as well as wait for parts to show up. The entire supply chain is a wreck cuz of covid. I'm still waiting for brakes I ordered in August.

But, you can also definitely buy it from a shop or online from I think World Wide.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> I reached out to Revel. Apparently the hold up is on Rockshox. not available until the July-ish timeframe. They can ship late February/early March with DVO diamond/topaz. I am going to do a little homework on how much $ I would have to put in on the $3500 frame/suspension build to get it together. Not sure if Revel is only fulfilling consumer direct sales and not shops, or what.


Personally I would go with the DVO suspension. Rockshox and Fox are pretty much all hype as far as I'm concerned. Soloair is BS as far as I'm concerned too. A dimple to equalize pos/neg pressure and that's it "perfect", really? That's the best you got? Let's not get into the whole token thing, a poor solution for tuning issues. Or the air migration into the lower leg. My buddy has a Pike that he has dumped a ton of money into to get what it is now. He rode my bike with a stock Diamond fork and was like "I can't believe how supple that fork is". My Diamond is much more tunable than any Rockshox fork currently being produced. I had a dual air Revelation that I liked because I could set the neg chamber where I liked it but that technology is no more for Rockshox. DVO also has outstanding customer service. If you call them you speak to a person that actually works on suspensions. If I'm not mistaken Revel frames were originally supplied with DVO suspension. Canfield bikes used to come with DVO also but now come with Ohlens. Rockshox and Fox are the most common suspension products because they've supposedly "simplified" suspension set up, that's why you need tokens and many people have custom tuned cartridges in their forks. There are better choices out there DVO, Manitou, Ohlens.... When it comes time my Rascal will probably get a Topaz for the rear.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

masonmoa said:


> To answer your question about weight, I honestly have no clue how the Rascal came out 1.72lbs more than my Ripmo. I'm a big dude, so I build stout bikes, like I used Derby DH carbon rims laced to either Onyx/CK hubs. The only differences are my Ripmo has slightly wider tires (2.6), 160mm dropper and a Zeb; and the Rascal tires are 2.5/2.4 but same models, a 185 dropper and a Lyrik. But the bars, grips, brakes, stem, saddle, wheels, cranks, bb, drivetrain and shocks are identical. And I can tell you that when I'm loading both bikes into my truck, the Rascal definitely feels heavier, particularly the rear end.
> 
> That being said, just got my third ride on the Rascal, and I'm really stoked! Despite the unexpected weight, which I didn't really notice, it's an impressive bike. Rode again in narrow, really damn twisty trails with lots of quick up and down and tons of big redwood tree roots, and altho it was really wet, the back end just stuck to the trail like nobody's business! I've ridden the Ripmo a bunch here too, and REALLY prefer the Rascal for this type of riding. Actually exactly why I wanted the Rascal.
> 
> My thoughts about the two while on the trail today were that they are really not comparable bikes. To me, the Ripmo is a straight up enduro bike, or what I tend to think of as AM. It has really modern geo, peddles well, is lightweight, poppy, but it likes to go fast. In fact, the Ripmo is the fasted bike I've owned, just because it can go over everything with such ease, kinda point and shoot. I mean, it's why pros use it for racing. But it's not the greatest for tight, slow riding cuz it's kinda long and the issue I mentioned before about needing to keep speed while climbing chunkier stuff. The Rascal, while a little slacker than its predecessor the Riot, is still a straight up trail bike with a natural, familiar, old school feel to it. Like right off the bat, it just felt good and was fun to ride, even without having my suspension dialed. I can't say that was the case with the Ripmo. But the Rascal climbs like a billy goat, is super stable at slow speed on narrow trails, handles really tight corners like a champ, is playful, stable in the air and can also move pretty good, but when you really open it up, it's just not quite as smooth, fast and stable as the Ripmo cuz it ain't got as much travel and it's not as slacked out. And, thus far I am also getting significantly less peddle strikes on the Rascal compared to the Ripmo, and which had been mentioned as a problem in previous posts. So I think both could be a "one" bike, just depends on where and what conditions you're mostly riding.


Dang, your post has me really thinking the Rascal is a much better choice for my tight, twisty, and technical trails. On paper, I can't see the Ripmo front end geometry being the best choice for me.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

My Sedona Red Rascal


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

So are most folks running the stock 140 fork length or bumping up to 150?


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> So are most folks running the stock 140 fork length or bumping up to 150?


Running my fork at 150mm. 44mm offset.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:


> Running my fork at 150mm. 44mm offset.


Did you start at 140 and bump up, or start at 150? Curious about those that made the change and have ridden both if they felt any difference in climbing (front end floppy/lighter) as well as general riding (any loss of precision/nimbleness).


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Did you start at 140 and bump up, or start at 150? Curious about those that made the change and have ridden both if they felt any difference in climbing (front end floppy/lighter) as well as general riding (any loss of precision/nimbleness).


Started at 150. I thought that 150 would be a good pairing for the rear end.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

I was thinking about going to a 150mm fork but I like it how it is honestly. I wouldn't want a shorter reach anyways.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

I'm running my fork at 150mm w/ 51mm offset. I did one ride at 140mm on an old fork, and I thought it was fine. Actually, bought a spare 140mm air spring for new fork in case I want to drop it down. But, so far so good. Bike still feels balanced at 150 and I don't notice any flop at 150mm and the little bit of extra bb height is also nice.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

Just ordered my Rascal today. Since it's 4pm Mountain Time on a Friday - I will call them on Monday to get the wait time. Also, for those of you that went 150mm up front, did Revel do the conversion for you prior to shipping? Looking forward to riding this bike....sometime this summer, haha!


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gluestick said:


> Dang, your post has me really thinking the Rascal is a much better choice for my tight, twisty, and technical trails. On paper, I can't see the Ripmo front end geometry being the best choice for me.


I wholeheartedly agree with what you just said. I spent three days riding my Rascal in the conditions you described and it's such a fun bike! Loved every minute of it! Then yesterday I rode my Ripmo for first time in a while on open, flowy, fast trails and totally different bike. Each have their strengths/weaknesses, but I'm now wondering if I really need both. The Rascal is actually is a better fit for the trails I prefer riding 29ers on.

That being said, need to take back what I said in an earlier post about the Rascal being kinda heavy cuz I figured out where the extra weight was coming from. I had slightly different cassettes/drive shells, as well as I just realized that the new Derby rims I used for the Rascal, although same model, are a lot beefier than the rims on my old wheels I reused for the Ripmo. Swapped the wheels and bought a new cassette and now the Rascal is only 1/2lb heavier than the Ripmo. Granted, the Ripmo has a Zeb vs Lyik on Rascal, but still, pretty stoked to balance things out a bit.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

Running 150/50 as well, initially a 21' F36 but switch to a Manitou Mezzer.

I wanted max reach as well but the 150 only reduces reach ~2mm. I can make that up in the seat and and bar setup. I also run 0 spacers and higher rise bars to get the riding position I like.

Never rode @140 but feels amazing at 150.


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

masonmoa said:


> I wholeheartedly agree with what you just said. I spent three days riding my Rascal in the conditions you described and it's such a fun bike! Loved every minute of it! Then yesterday I rode my Ripmo for first time in a while on open, flowy, fast trails and totally different bike. Each have their strengths/weaknesses, but I'm now wondering if I really need both. The Rascal is actually is a better fit for the trails I prefer riding 29ers on.
> 
> That being said, need to take back what I said in an earlier post about the Rascal being kinda heavy cuz I figured out where the extra weight was coming from. I had slightly different cassettes/drive shells, as well as I just realized that the new Derby rims I used for the Rascal, although same model, are a lot beefier than the rims on my old wheels I reused for the Ripmo. Swapped the wheels and bought a new cassette and now the Rascal is only 1/2lb heavier than the Ripmo. Granted, the Ripmo has a Zeb vs Lyik on Rascal, but still, pretty stoked to balance things out a bit.


Nice! Stoked to hear the Rascal is hitting the spot for you. And jealous you're getting in some good winter riding -- we're pretty snowbound here until March/April.

The weights make much more sense now -- 350g frame weight difference minus the Zeb/Lyrik fork weight difference sounds like about 1/2 a pound to me. Have to hand it to Ibis for making DW-Link bikes that are light and fairly stiff (well, not Pivot stiff), and still ride really well. I'm thinking that when they finally release their made-in-the-US carbon XC frame, I will have to make some room in the stable for that  Or maybe I'll never ride another non-CBF bike again...who knows.


----------



## Dr Gigi (Nov 3, 2016)

I've been running my reduced offset Pike at 140mm and this feels perfect for my needs. I wanted to keep it more snappy and trail oriented, to keep some separation from my Nukeproof mega, and for my daily trails I don't feel like it needs anymore front end capability.


----------



## meSmokem (Jul 19, 2020)

I own a M rascal and a M rail and thought I would give my impressions of both. I ride in Alabama mostly but venture up to TN and NC to ride occasionally.

The Rascal is the AXS build with the RW30 wheels. Fox X2 and fox 36 140mm fork. This is the best bike I have ever owned. It feels so snappy and responsive to my pedaling but at the same time has brought cushion to smooth out the rocks roots in the SE. Only time I’ve sort of hit its limit is when I take a big huck to flat and bottom out the suspension which has only happened a handful of times. I would also say if your desire is to rail massive jumps it’s not the best at that but certainly not terrible. This is the bike I would choose to ride 99% of the time. I even think in a bike park setting (like snowmass) it would be fine.

the Rail is also a dream build. X01 drivetrain, carbon wheels, Fox 36 170mm fork, and a dpx2 shock. To be honest, I don’t love this bike. Whenever I ride trail on this, I usually just wish I was on the Rascal as this bike is significantly harder to pedal especially out of the saddle. I feel like I’m losing half my pedal to the rear shock and I’m only running like 10% sag (210 PSI and I weigh 160). If you live in a region that doesn’t have significant vert and your riding is up and down, this bike is probably not for you. Perhaps my susp isn’t set up quite right. I asked Revel if anything was wrong with my setup and they said they didn’t recommend a dpx2. Think I may try to sell this one and get a short/mid travel bike. Maybe I’ll try to swap the dpx2 for and x2 and see if that helps. Thoughts?


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

Sorry if it's been posted, don't see a way to search the thread itself.

Anyone running a Push 11-6?


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

meSmokem said:


> I own a M rascal and a M rail and thought I would give my impressions of both. I ride in Alabama mostly but venture up to TN and NC to ride occasionally.
> 
> The Rascal is the AXS build with the RW30 wheels. Fox X2 and fox 36 140mm fork. This is the best bike I have ever owned. It feels so snappy and responsive to my pedaling but at the same time has brought cushion to smooth out the rocks roots in the SE. Only time I've sort of hit its limit is when I take a big huck to flat and bottom out the suspension which has only happened a handful of times. I would also say if your desire is to rail massive jumps it's not the best at that but certainly not terrible. This is the bike I would choose to ride 99% of the time. I even think in a bike park setting (like snowmass) it would be fine.
> 
> the Rail is also a dream build. X01 drivetrain, carbon wheels, Fox 36 170mm fork, and a dpx2 shock. To be honest, I don't love this bike. Whenever I ride trail on this, I usually just wish I was on the Rascal as this bike is significantly harder to pedal especially out of the saddle. I feel like I'm losing half my pedal to the rear shock and I'm only running like 10% sag (210 PSI and I weigh 160). If you live in a region that doesn't have significant vert and your riding is up and down, this bike is probably not for you. Perhaps my susp isn't set up quite right. I asked Revel if anything was wrong with my setup and they said they didn't recommend a dpx2. Think I may try to sell this one and get a short/mid travel bike. Maybe I'll try to swap the dpx2 for and x2 and see if that helps. Thoughts?


Revel has so many bikes that start with "R" that when I'm scanning these posts, I often get things mixed up. Like when I first read your post, for some reason I though your Rascal was a Ranger, and the Rail was a Rascal. So when you said you were running a 170mm fork on the Rail, I thought Rascal and I almost responded with no wonder you don't like it! Thank god I reread it!

But ya man, I totally agree with everything you said about the Rascal. One thing I've been thinking about with the Rascal is that its 130mm rear travel feels just as plush, if not more even more so, than the 140mm Riot it replaced. I too think it's going to be the bike I ride the majority of the time. The exception for me is super chunk rock garden stuff, even though I know the Rascal could handle it just fine, but more travel is more forgiving, and I'm old and need it sometimes.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gubbinalia said:


> Nice! Stoked to hear the Rascal is hitting the spot for you. And jealous you're getting in some good winter riding -- we're pretty snowbound here until March/April.
> 
> The weights make much more sense now -- 350g frame weight difference minus the Zeb/Lyrik fork weight difference sounds like about 1/2 a pound to me. Have to hand it to Ibis for making DW-Link bikes that are light and fairly stiff (well, not Pivot stiff), and still ride really well. I'm thinking that when they finally release their made-in-the-US carbon XC frame, I will have to make some room in the stable for that  Or maybe I'll never ride another non-CBF bike again...who knows.


Yep, the weights now make a lot more sense. I'm ok with the Rimpo being like 1/2lb heaver, and stoked the Rascal is lighter. As for Ibis, seems counterintuitive how light and stiff they are. And as for suspension designs, they all have their pros and cons, and unique feels. Like I liked, not loved, Banshee's and Niner's, and for a while I loved Knolly's suspension. If I did a ton of technical climbing and Knolly had more carbon options, I'd consider getting another. But otherwise all needed a climb switch for long, boring climbs. CBF is a nice balance, and I haven't felt the slightest need for a climbing platform.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

In case anyone was wondering, Revel won't do the Pike 140 to 150 conversion. Gotta do it yourself after you get the bike.


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

In case anyone is in search of an XL frame, Fanatik Bike Co. out of Bellingham (yes, they of the crazy custom builds and online build tool) has two frames in the Sedona Red colorway. (They also have XL Rails in all three colors, I believe.)

I know not everyone is in love with Fanatik and their business model, but having interacted with them over the course of several purchases I have nothing but praise for their custom service and how easy it is to work with them. Super clear communication from their CS department and accurate timelines when I've pre-ordered items. Though they're hardly my local shop, I'm happy to support them and I appreciate their bringing in many Revel frames, as well as bikes from some other very interesting brands such as Knolly and Forbidden.


----------



## Rican0624 (Jan 16, 2010)

I see a lot of post about how surprising The weight of the rascal comes out to despite swapping the same parts from one bike to another. Just curious if anyone has actually put the frame only on a scale and got the exact weight of their frame?


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

Rican0624 said:


> I see a lot of post about how surprising The weight of the rascal comes out to despite swapping the same parts from one bike to another. Just curious if anyone has actually put the frame only on a scale and got the exact weight of their frame?


My XL Sedona frame with seat collar, axle and DPX2 shock (no headset or BB, or frame protection) was 3620g on my Park Tool scale (a tool not known for greatest accuracy, mind you) which jives with Revel's claimed weight as well as other weights I've seen online. It's not a featherweight in the trail bike category but my 28.7lb Rascal absolutely eats the lunch of any 26-27lb trail bikes I've owned or rode... I could go on; but enough said, I think.


----------



## Rican0624 (Jan 16, 2010)

gubbinalia said:


> My XL Sedona frame with seat collar, axle and DPX2 shock (no headset or BB, or frame protection) was 3620g on my Park Tool scale (a tool not known for greatest accuracy, mind you) which jives with Revel's claimed weight as well as other weights I've seen online. It's not a featherweight in the trail bike category but my 28.7lb Rascal absolutely eats the lunch of any 26-27lb trail bikes I've owned or rode... I could go on; but enough said, I think.


Thanks for the info! Yeah I demoed one and didn't weigh it, but it didn't feel super heavy compared to some of the other bikes I demoed. I was just curious because of how much heavier people's builds were coming out to. I think the bike pedaled very well for a trail bike. Even the rail blew me away by how well it climbed.


----------



## gubbinalia (May 11, 2020)

Rican0624 said:


> Thanks for the info! Yeah I demoed one and didn't weigh it, but it didn't feel super heavy compared to some of the other bikes I demoed. I was just curious because of how much heavier people's builds were coming out to. I think the bike pedaled very well for a trail bike. Even the rail blew me away by how well it climbed.


Glad you enjoyed the demo! Agree the CBF suspension is one of the most sophisticated linkage designs out there when it comes to climbing, especially over techy and difficult terrain. If you're mostly hammering up <10% grade fire roads then the weight will start to seem more, uh, weighty.

It's also hard to overstate how much the Rascal can out-ride its travel bracket and feel more like a 140-150mm bike in terms of plushness, traction and bottomless feel. If anything, given its descending capabilities, the Rascal's weight should be compared more to bikes in the "all-mountain"/enduro category and less to other mid-travel trail bikes -- the Ranger is really the bike to compare more to those short-/mid-travel bikes.


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Just wanted to join this party. I have a Rascal incoming (already received the frame but doing a custom build and waiting for my local shop to get all the parts).

Coming from an Ibis Mojo 3 and briefly a Guerrilla Gravity Pistola. Didn't get along with the Pistola and sent it back...turns out it had a rear shock damper (Fox X2) bladder defective from the factory. Had the shock been working correctly, I may well have fallen in love with the Pistola.

That said, the goodies on the Rascal will be Rockshox Super Deluxe Ultimate shock, Pike fork set at 150 with a Push internals available should I feel the need to upgrade prior to the first service, I-9 Enduro 305 wheels with Hydra hubs, Bike Yoke Revive, Shimano XTR drivetrain, Hope Tech 3 E4, OneUp Bar, Ergon Saddle.

Looks like the longest lead time component is the wheels with delivery expected on March 5. Trying to wait patiently!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

ABQ Clydesdale said:


> Just wanted to join this party. I have a Rascal incoming (already received the frame but doing a custom build and waiting for my local shop to get all the parts).
> 
> Coming from an Ibis Mojo 3 and briefly a Guerrilla Gravity Pistola. Didn't get along with the Pistola and sent it back...turns out it had a rear shock damper (Fox X2) bladder defective from the factory. Had the shock been working correctly, I may well have fallen in love with the Pistola.
> 
> ...


I think you're gonna like it. My buddy mentioned the Rascal to me when I was looking at upgrading. I did a little research and decided why not? I love mine.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

The One Up carbon bars seem to have quite the following! I am thinking about going that route for my build as well. For those with experience- how flexy are they when really cranking down on the bars in standing efforts? Everything else about them sounds great, that is my primary concern with this design.


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

gluestick said:


> The One Up carbon bars seem to have quite the following! I am thinking about going that route for my build as well. For those with experience- how flexy are they when really cranking down on the bars in standing efforts? Everything else about them sounds great, that is my primary concern with this design.


I've had mine for a bit less than a year now and I haven't felt any noticeable flex when climbing at all. Though take my experience with a grain of salt as I only weight 140 lb


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Very much looking forward to it, as I'm confident I'm going to love it. As for the OneUp bars, I went with them based on the preponderance of positive reviews.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

TwoTone said:


> Sorry if it's been posted, don't see a way to search the thread itself.
> 
> Anyone running a Push 11-6?


Yes I'm running the 11-6 on my Rascal. I've had it on there since it was released for Revel. After my last ride in November I had to order the next coil size up. 22lb COVID weight gain had me maxing out the last coil haha


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

cpolism said:


> Yes I'm running the 11-6 on my Rascal. I've had it on there since it was released for Revel. After my last ride in November I had to order the next coil size up. 22lb COVID weight gain had me maxing out the last coil haha


How would compare the ride to when it had an air shock?

I'm not riding steep fast stuff so worry about losing the pop with a coil.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

TwoTone said:


> How would compare the ride to when it had an air shock?
> 
> I'm not riding steep fast stuff so worry about losing the pop with a coil.


This is my first coil, so I was definitely concerned about losing the 'pop' as many had said in the past. I had a canfield Riot for 3 years and was always afraid to switch to coil. While the coil might lose a tad of 'pop', it's nowhere near as much as I was anticipating. The two modes (DH/Trail) are really incredible. For smooth flow trails I always put it in 'trail' mode, but on chunkier stuff I switch to DH and that pop returns in all it's glory.

With all that being said, I think it's really important to have the ride coil for your weight. I don't regret the decision one bit, but my riding is east coast chunk so having the bike more planted on the downs suits my riding style far more. The SuperD was actually great, and complements the CBF system nicely. The ElevenSix just takes it one step further.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

So its finally time to make a decision, cross posting in both model threads.

I had a Riot so very familiar with CBF.

Currently in MD so the riding is just rolling terrain, nothing crazy. Plan a move to Austin(most likely) in 2 years.

Debating Rascal vs. Ranger. Either frame build will have light weight parts coming over from current Ripley LS.

I have a Fox 34 140 and a Fox 34 SC 120, so have a fork for either frame.



My understanding is 120/120 would be plenty for the Austin area.



I know it has been asked, but any thoughts now that you’ve had more time on one or the other?


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

TwoTone said:


> So its finally time to make a decision, cross posting in both model threads.
> 
> I had a Riot so very familiar with CBF.
> 
> ...


I live in the Austin area and own a Rascal. It really depends on what trails you will frequent. If you'll be primarily riding local Austin trails (Barton Creek/Walnut/Brushy Creek) near the city/towns then the Ranger would be the way to go as there isn't much in the way of sustained downhill sections.

On the other hand, if you plan to frequent places like Reveille Peak Ranch or Spider Mountain, I'd stick with the Rascal as the Rascal is still spritely especially with less aggressive tread and handles those steeper and faster trail systems very well.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

leejohnh22 said:


> I live in the Austin area and own a Rascal. It really depends on what trails you will frequent. If you'll be primarily riding local Austin trails (Barton Creek/Walnut/Brushy Creek) near the city/towns then the Ranger would be the way to go as there isn't much in the way of sustained downhill sections.
> 
> On the other hand, if you plan to frequent places like Reveille Peak Ranch or Spider Mountain, I'd stick with the Rascal as the Rascal is still spritely especially with less aggressive tread and handles those steeper and faster trail systems very well.


I wonder about Spider Mountain, not putting it down but we have a small bike park here called Bryce Mountain which looks very similar and I rode every trail with a first gen Tallboy 100mm travel.

I'll look up those trail systems thanks.


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

TwoTone said:


> I wonder about Spider Mountain, not putting it down but we have a small bike park here called Bryce Mountain which looks very similar and I rode every trail with a first gen Tallboy 100mm travel.
> 
> I'll look up those trail systems thanks.


Yeah it'd also depend on what you ride there, I'd say aside from the double blacks the Ranger can handle the rest. As for RPR, the Rascal would handle the Race loop much better.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

Sizing help.
Hey guys, recently ordered a large rascal frame. However been looking at the geo charts and wondering if I ordered too small. I'm 6'-0.5", 184 cm. Been on 27.5 bikes for the last several years. This will be my first 29er. Last bike was a mach4 XL with a ttl of 645 and a reach of 449.
What's everyone else of similar height riding?


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Jlar said:


> Sizing help.
> Hey guys, recently ordered a large rascal frame. However been looking at the geo charts and wondering if I ordered too small. I'm 6'-0.5", 184 cm. Been on 27.5 bikes for the last several years. This will be my first 29er. Last bike was a mach4 XL with a ttl of 645 and a reach of 449.
> What's everyone else of similar height riding?


I think if you are six foot or taller you should get an XL. I am 5'9" in riding shoes on a large. It feels good to me, but if I was taller it would feel too small. I do like larger bikes though.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

Jlar said:


> Sizing help.
> Hey guys, recently ordered a large rascal frame. However been looking at the geo charts and wondering if I ordered too small. I'm 6'-0.5", 184 cm. Been on 27.5 bikes for the last several years. This will be my first 29er. Last bike was a mach4 XL with a ttl of 645 and a reach of 449.
> What's everyone else of similar height riding?


I think its really what you are looking for in your bike. I'm 5' 8" but ride a medium, I know a good amount of people my size go for a large. After riding both sizes (Md/Lg), I decided to go for a medium, as I liked the quicker feeling for the windy tech for the trails I ride. I felt if I lived in a place with more straights and higher speed trails then large, but I liked the medium better for my local trails. I bet the large will feel more natural coming from the Pivot than an XL.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

Thought I’d update both threads.

Came down to availability. Called Revel today and asked for time frame on both the Rascal and Ranger.

Was told June for the Ranger August for the Rascal. He mentioned the problem was shocks and he had 3 Sedona Rascals waiting on shocks.

Mentioned I’ve been wanting to try a Mara pro anyway and I’d gladly take without a shock. They won’t sell it that way but could down grade me to a Rockshox Super Deluxe Select that they had in stock.

Not normally an option- so my frame should be here next week.

Also anyone go with Invisiframe? Which did you go with, matt or gloss with the two tone frame?


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

TwoTone said:


> Thought I'd update both threads.
> 
> Came down to availability. Called Revel today and asked for time frame on both the Rascal and Ranger.
> 
> ...


Rockshox is the hold up. My dealer ordered a DVO build for me, hopefully coming in next week. Works out great as I prefer DVO over RS.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

gluestick said:


> Rockshox is the hold up. My dealer ordered a DVO build for me, hopefully coming in next week. Works out great as I prefer DVO over RS.


Yea now I'm thinking about what I want to do about a shock. Push is out of my price range.

There's an Avalanched Bomber CR coil or a CC inline. Might ride it first, want to keep the weight down if possible.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

TwoTone said:


> Also anyone go with Invisiframe? Which did you go with, matt or gloss with the two tone frame?


I used a RideWrap on mine in the matte. I think it came out well. The matte is a bit shinier than the actual matte on the bike.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

habitrap said:


> I used a RideWrap on mine in the matte. I think it came out well. The matte is a bit shinier than the actual matte on the bike.


Mind posting pics?


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

TwoTone said:


> Mind posting pics?


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

TwoTone said:


> Thought I'd update both threads.
> 
> Came down to availability. Called Revel today and asked for time frame on both the Rascal and Ranger.
> 
> ...


Nice congrats! Keep us posted on what shock you go with and how you like it


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

So long story short @*gubbinalia *posted Fanatik got 2 Rangers in large. Was lucky enough to catch my Rascal before it shipped today and bought the Ranger.
So I have an Invisiframe kit on the way, literally just shipped a few hours ago.

Anyone interested in the kit? Just trying not to loss money on it. Large Matte.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Question for those who bought the frame and built up, what else comes in the box besides the frame and suspension? Spare derailleur hanger? ISCG mounting ring or bash guard? Anything else?


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

gluestick said:


> Question for those who bought the frame and built up, what else comes in the box besides the frame and suspension? Spare derailleur hanger? ISCG mounting ring or bash guard? Anything else?


Just the seat post clamp and rear axle as well as some stickers. I believe that was it.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

gluestick said:


> Question for those who bought the frame and built up, what else comes in the box besides the frame and suspension? Spare derailleur hanger? ISCG mounting ring or bash guard? Anything else?


You get the CC40 headset as well.


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

TwoTone said:


> You get the CC40 headset as well.


Good point!


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

Just ordered a Large T1000 frame I found online. Anyone else 5'11" running a 185 Bike Yoke Revive?? I'm hoping I can get it it work. 

I'm going to transfer parts off my Following MB. I currently have a 160 in the following with plenty of room to spare, but I think/hope I can get a longer post in the Revel.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gaper80 said:


> Just ordered a Large T1000 frame I found online. Anyone else 5'11" running a 185 Bike Yoke Revive?? I'm hoping I can get it it work.
> 
> I'm going to transfer parts off my Following MB. I currently have a 160 in the following with plenty of room to spare, but I think/hope I can get a longer post in the Revel.


There is a dropper compatibility chart on their website. I have a medium frame and can run a 200mm dropper depending on brand.
I also came off of a Following, a V1. For my local terrain the Rascal is a much better bike.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

Thanks. The chart is a little tricky to navigate. I spoke to Matt at Revel and we worked through it. Sounds like I’ll have to bottom out the post to get the saddle height I need. But it should work. I’ll report back once I get it built up.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

Bunch of Rascals at Fanatik


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Anyone running a Topaz on their Rascal? 
I'm curious as to what you think of it if you are. 
I just pulled the trigger on one so we'll see. I can always sell it if I don't like it. I just thought that the Topaz might be a better match for the Diamond up front.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:


> Anyone running a Topaz on their Rascal?
> I'm curious as to what you think of it if you are.
> I just pulled the trigger on one so we'll see. I can always sell it if I don't like it. I just thought that the Topaz might be a better match for the Diamond up front.


My build is Diamond/Topaz, should have it in a fee weeks.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

Noone wants an Invisframe for their large frame?


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

any news on an updated rascal any time soon? i’m curious to know the production cycle on such a new brand. i’m debating between a rascal and an offering to be my next go to in the stable for the next 2-3 years but i wouldn’t be mad at a slightly steeper seat tube


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

coachxtaylor said:


> any news on an updated rascal any time soon? i'm curious to know the production cycle on such a new brand. i'm debating between a rascal and an offering to be my next go to in the stable for the next 2-3 years but i wouldn't be mad at a slightly steeper seat tube


Carbon molds are very expensive, I wouldn't expect an updates any time soon from a smaller brand.
That and they have a good thing by not following everyone else down the stupid long, slack, steep geo trend.


----------



## kamper11 (Feb 8, 2008)

I think im about to pull the trig on a Rascal. Anyone here have seat of pants comparison to the Ripmo v2/af? Or say Norco Optic?


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

kamper11 said:


> I think im about to pull the trig on a Rascal. Anyone here have seat of pants comparison to the Ripmo v2/af? Or say Norco Optic?


I've demoed a Ripmo AF and own a Rascal. The Rascal is definitely a livelier bike happy to pedal on mellower gradients but still prefers the fast and chunky. The Ripmo AF felt still very efficient but I could feel the heft of the bike, partly from the frame but I think primarily from first the double Assegais, and then the heavier DVO Onyx in the front, which contributed to a heavier feel on the flat corners and mellow gradients. That said, I think the Ripmo v2 with lighter tires would be pretty close in sprightliness but the Rascal I'd imagine would still hold that edge, by virtue of just having less travel.

summary:
Straight line capability - Ripmo
Cornering / Flats - Rascal


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

kamper11 said:


> I think im about to pull the trig on a Rascal. Anyone here have seat of pants comparison to the Ripmo v2/af? Or say Norco Optic?


With a demo only on a Ripmo V1 and a new Switchblade, I was asking the same question. I ended up choosing the Rascal (sans demo) due to it's more nimble geometry and slightly shorter travel. HTA not as slack, shorter CS and WB of the Rascal seemed better suited for my typical tight twisty New England single track. The Ripmo V2 geometry went in the opposite direction of what I think an ideal New England trail bike should be. That being said, if I lived out West perhaps with more wide open trails, I would have probably chosen the Ripmo.


----------



## kamper11 (Feb 8, 2008)

thanks for the feedback - truly appreciated. I could see a Rascal in the garage and I'd likely be very pleased with it where I currently reside in CO. Heck - as the crow flies im actually not far from their HQ. Now - if I decide I want one - finding one is the other challenge as M's are not available direct from Revel. Will ping some local dealers and see IF anything in the wild.


----------



## Tmoores0902 (Mar 7, 2021)

masonmoa said:


> Thought I'd finally chime in as I own both a Ripmo V2 and just finished my Rascal build. Didn't plan on getting my Rascal for a few more months, but to my great surprise, it showed up WAY earlier than they told me. And I only have two rides on the Rascal, so some things I'm about to say may change.
> 
> First off, I may take some slack for this, but the Rascal is a bit of a porker. It's virtually the same build as my Ripmo V2, nearly all carbon, SRAM X01 cranks, eagle drivetrain, Enve bars, except the Ripmo has a Zeb fork and Onyx hubs and the Rascal has a 150mm Lyrik and CK hubs, and even with the slightly lighter fork and hubs, the Rascal is almost two pounds heavier. And it's pretty much the same weight as the Riot I had before. Not what I was expecting nor really wanted, but when I'm riding the Rascal, I don't find the extra weight annoying at all, at least not yet.
> 
> ...


Do you have a review yet with the CC coil on the revel?


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

Im thinking about pulling the trigger on a Rascal to replace my Ibis Ripley V4. The steep sta and short reach on he Ripley really do not do it for me even though on paper it looked perfect. My question for all of you is, do you think the Rascal frames tend to run shorter that advertised like the Ripleys or do they run fairly true... I have an 21 epic evo as my shorter travel bike and really like the fit because I sized up to a medium- reach 336- and used a shorter 35mm stem. The Rascal has a 424 reach, same as a Ripley but also has a slacker STA. Im about 5'4.5. should I size up or just go with the small.


----------



## Myers005 (Jan 31, 2011)

I have a Ripley and a Rascal, both small. I’m 5’5” and feel the Ripley fits me well. The Rascal is definitely longer - I’m using a riser bar on it vs flat bar on Ripley. FWIW, to me the Rascal feels like a bigger bike and I wouldn’t want a larger frame.


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

Myers005 said:


> I have a Ripley and a Rascal, both small. I'm 5'5" and feel the Ripley fits me well. The Rascal is definitely longer - I'm using a riser bar on it vs flat bar on Ripley. FWIW, to me the Rascal feels like a bigger bike and I wouldn't want a larger frame.


Thanks for the reply... Just what I wanted to here.


----------



## Alta825 (Mar 9, 2004)

Looking at making a few upgrades to my T1000 I built up last summer. Has anyone installed a 210x52.5mm stroke shock vs the 210x50mm that it is spec'd with? Yes, I know the rear tire will be closer but I'm curious if someone has done it. Also, thoughts on a CaneCreek IL Coil shock vs the 11.6? Have the '21 Fox Factory DPX2 on it now with a 150MM Pike Ultimate... Thanks a Ton Y'all


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Finally installed a Topaz on my Rascal. World of difference. I will say though that I think my Super deluxe has an issue. The first ride on my bike I expected it to be fairly plush and compliant but it was pretty harsh and not as plush as my Following was. The last ride with the Super Deluxe after climbing a small hill I noticed that the back of the bike felt stiff like a hard tail. I stopped to check it out and the shock was hard to compress like it was locked I flipped the platform switch to locked and tried to cycle the shock a couple of times and it felt the same as unlocked, I unlocked the shock and cycled it a couple more times and it was still stiff but a little better. I decided to end my ride and ride home and the shock started working like normal. Going to contact Revel and see if I can get it warranteed. Needless to say it will not be going back on my bike. The Topaz is crazy smooth with zero initial breakaway in the beginning and now the front and rear feel the same. I never really liked RS suspension stuff or Fox for that matter although the only Fox shock I've had was an RP23 probably one of the worst shocks ever.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:


> Finally installed a Topaz on my Rascal. World of difference. I will say though that I think my Super deluxe has an issue. The first ride on my bike I expected it to be fairly plush and compliant but it was pretty harsh and not as plush as my Following was. The last ride with the Super Deluxe after climbing a small hill I noticed that the back of the bike felt stiff like a hard tail. I stopped to check it out and the shock was hard to compress like it was locked I flipped the platform switch to locked and tried to cycle the shock a couple of times and it felt the same as unlocked, I unlocked the shock and cycled it a couple more times and it was still stiff but a little better. I decided to end my ride and ride home and the shock started working like normal. Going to contact Revel and see if I can get it warranteed. Needless to say it will not be going back on my bike. The Topaz is crazy smooth with zero initial breakaway in the beginning and now the front and rear feel the same. I never really liked RS suspension stuff or Fox for that matter although the only Fox shock I've had was an RP23 probably one of the worst shocks ever.


Stoked to hear about the Topaz. hoping my DVO build will be done in the next few weeks!


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

I’ve got my order placed for a rascal. It’s going to be built up by next Friday. I have an option to pick up the fox DBX2 shockfor an extra 340...Would it be worth it or is the Rock shock deluxe shock good enough. I weigh about 195 and ride in Tahoe/ Santa Cruz/sacrament o region... I am more of a set it and forget it type of rider. I heard the rock shocks is better for that but if there is a significant difference in the two I’d rather get it included with my bike...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

rollinrob said:


> I've got my order placed for a rascal. It's going to be built up by next Friday. I have an option to pick up the fox DBX2 shockfor an extra 340...Would it be worth it or is the Rock shock deluxe shock good enough. I weigh about 195 and ride in Tahoe/ Santa Cruz/sacrament o region... I am more of a set it and forget it type of rider. I heard the rock shocks is better for that but if there is a significant difference in the two I'd rather get it included with my bike...
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


See if they can do a Topaz like on @gluestick got. People complain that DVO products can be finicky to set up, but if you start with their recommended settings it doesn't take much adjusting to get them where you want them. Another bonus if you're a tinkerer is that they are very user serviceable and DVO will help if you choose to do so. The only company I know of that actually encourages people to service and custom tune their products.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Stoked to hear about the Topaz. hoping my DVO build will be done in the next few weeks!


You're gonna love the Topaz. By far the best rear air shock I've tried.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Hi Guys,
I just got my Rascal delivered and am currently building it... what a rad looking piece of kit  I´m running into a little problem however, namely the chain guide. I´m having clearance issues on the inner, frame side of it; when I just put the chain on the chainring it is ever so slightly rubbing. I´m running a XTR 9120 crank with a Saint bottom bracket (one spacer on the drive side) and an OneUp Switch 30 tooth oval chaingring. Now, chainline according to Shimano (and OneUp) is nominally 52mm, so the same one as for SRAM. I even measured it (from the little hole in the middle of the bottom bracket to the middle of the teeth) and even though I won´t win and precise measuring prices it definitely looked like 52mm. Anyone having similar issues? The chainguide is installed without any washers or spacers underneath, so as it is now I simply can´t get closer to the frame. I´m planning on filing it down (thought about 1mm on the mounting face and 1mm on the inner side of the actual chainguide) and don´t really think it´s a problem as it is burly af, but still, anyone any idea what can be wrong? I know the chainguide is designed for SRAM and so on and so forth, but chainline is chainline, am I right? Any thoughts, ideas and/or hacks are highly welcome. 
P.S.: anyone else thinking that the T1000 colorway is way darker in reality than on pictures? It looks way more like gunmetal than terminator in my opinion. Actually almost perfectly matches the XTR cranks in color, which was a nice bonus after I realized that the Mezzer LE I got for it is a completely different color


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I had the same issue when I built mine up. Boost crankset will fix the issue. When I originally built mine I used my non boost XT8100 crank and needed to space the drive side cup outboard making my crankset asymmetric in the frame. I had to buy a boost crankset to get a centered crankset.
Chainline for non boost is 49mm 52mm for boost.
If you have calipers measure the thickness of the seat tube right next to the chainring divide that by 2 then measure the distance from the teeth on the chainring to the seat tube and add that number to the divided number that will give you your exact distance.
This will most likely fix your issue;








XTR HOLLOWTECH II MTB Crankset 168 mm Q-Factor 2x12-speed | SHIMANO BIKE-EU


The SHIMANO XTR FC-M9120-B2 crank features an entirely new construction, using direct mount chainrings, special gear tooth profile for improved chain retention, and a narrow 182mm Q-factor. The FC-M9120-B2 uses a 51.8mm chain line and can be converted between 1x and 2x, with 38-28T chainrings...




bike.shimano.com


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Rngspnr said:


> I had the same issue when I built mine up. Boost crankset will fix the issue. When I originally built mine I used my non boost XT8100 crank and needed to space the drive side cup outboard making my crankset asymmetric in the frame. I had to buy a boost crankset to get a centered crankset.
> Chainline for non boost is 49mm 52mm for boost.
> If you have calipers measure the thickness of the seat tube right next to the chainring divide that by 2 then measure the distance from the teeth on the chainring to the seat tube and add that number to the divided number that will give you your exact distance.
> This will most likely fix your issue;
> ...


Thanks for the answer! However, unfortunately that´s exactly the crankset I have (*Shimano XTR FC-M9120-B2 Enduro / Trail Kurbelgarnitur 2x12-fach - Boost*). I will try and remeasure the chainline (thanks for the tip with the seattube, that actually makes sense, although I presumed and still presume that the bottom bracket shell is symmetric and centered therefore measuring from the small hole should give the same result). Any other idea? I can add some pictures this evening, but after double- and triple-checking I am still super puzzled what I might have done wrong.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Hafermilch said:


> Thanks for the answer! However, unfortunately that´s exactly the crankset I have (*Shimano XTR FC-M9120-B2 Enduro / Trail Kurbelgarnitur 2x12-fach - Boost*). I will try and remeasure the chainline (thanks for the tip with the seattube, that actually makes sense, although I presumed and still presume that the bottom bracket shell is symmetric and centered therefore measuring from the small hole should give the same result). Any other idea? I can add some pictures this evening, but after double- and triple-checking I am still super puzzled what I might have done wrong.


You could try bending it slightly to avoid the rubbing.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Hafermilch said:


> Thanks for the answer! However, unfortunately that´s exactly the crankset I have (*Shimano XTR FC-M9120-B2 Enduro / Trail Kurbelgarnitur 2x12-fach - Boost*). I will try and remeasure the chainline (thanks for the tip with the seattube, that actually makes sense, although I presumed and still presume that the bottom bracket shell is symmetric and centered therefore measuring from the small hole should give the same result). Any other idea? I can add some pictures this evening, but after double- and triple-checking I am still super puzzled what I might have done wrong.


Is that crankset direct mount? If so you could remove the spider and get a 3mm offset direct mount chainring for a boost application. It looks like your spider is direct mount. Call Wolftooth and talk to them they can give you an answer on how to correct it without modifying your chain guide. If you modify it it may void your warranty.


----------



## Alta825 (Mar 9, 2004)

Easy Peasy....Take the guide off... ran my Rascal w/o it the last half of last year with zero issues. I had Installed an oval AbsoluteBlk ring that was rubbing ever so slightly, took it off for a ride to verify the rubbing and I never bothered to put it back on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Thanks for all the replies! So I measured and remeasured, and I always end up at 52mm, so there is nothing wrong with the chainline. This was measured from the bolt that holds the cables under the bottom bracket... it´s 56mm to the middle of the teeth and the bolt is roughly 7,5-8mm in diameter. So from the middle of the bolt to the middle of the teeth it´s 56-4mm which is... you guessed it, 52mm. As specified. Unfortunately I dont have calipers, so the only thing that comes to my mind is that both the draining hole and the bolt are offset, but I do not think that is the case. Yeah I already took it off, and bending is not an option, that thing is 4mm thick aluminium. That´s why I thought that filing it down a mm will not have any significant structural impact on it.
What size are your chainrings and what is the clearance to the chainstays? With the 30 tooth oval ring it is running awfully close, something like 2mm at the closest point. I honestly do not think that a 32 tooth oval ring or a 34 tooth round ring will even clear the chainstays. This of course would again hint at something wrong with the chainline. Mysteries, mysteries... Yes, the crank is direct mount, but at the moment i really think that chainline-wise, everything is according to specification, and something is "wrong" with the chainguide. Does anyone know what the earlier problems with shimano cranks was? I´ve read multiple reports, (for example here: The Rascal's stock chain guide also didn't work with the XT crank, which I found odd. So I asked Revel's founder, Adam Miller about it. "You're correct, our chain guide was designed to be optimized for use with SRAM Dub cranks/BB," he said. "It also works with most other modern cranks that use the exact same chain line as SRAM, such as Cane Creek, RaceFace, and others. Or here: Revel Bikes with Shimano Drivetrain ), but if I understood correctly is that some shimano cranks have a 55mm chainline, which is then too far outboardfor the standard chainguide. Is it possible they have by now Shimano-55 specific chainguides and I got sent one of those? I think I mentioned to my dealer that I plan to build it up with a shimano crank, but still, that sounds like an awful lot of work. Anyhow, thanks, I think ´ll also simply run without the chainguide until this is cleared up... I emailed Revel and my dealer, but still no answer so far.
While I´m at it: Is anyone running a Manitou Mezzer on their Rascal and has tips for setup, together with Superdeluxe in the rear? It´s my first full suspension bike, so I don´t have a clear idea how it should feel (other than awesome, that is)


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

This is the one I put on my bike. 52MM chainline.








SHIMANO DEORE XT HOLLOWTECH II MTB Crankset Chain Line 3 mm Outboard 1x11-speed | SHIMANO BIKE-EU


The SHIMANO DEORE XT FC-M8000-B1 crankset provides an optimal balance between durability and weight and is compatible with 148mm O.L.D. frames. Perfect for a wide range of MTB disciplines, this 1x11 speed crank is offered with 30, 32, and 34T chainrings with enhanced chain retention.




bike.shimano.com




BB installed with one spacer on drive side fits with no issues.
This might be the one you need,








SHIMANO XTR HOLLOWTECH II MTB Crankset 168 mm Q-Factor 1x12-speed | SHIMANO BIKE-EU


The SHIMANO XTR FC-M9120-1 crank features an entirely new construction, using direct mount chainrings, special gear tooth profile for improved chain retention, and a narrow 168mm Q-factor. The FC-M9120-1 uses a 52mm chain line and can be converted between 1x and 2x, with 30, 32, 34, 36, and 38T...




bike.shimano.com




It specifies a 52mm chainline as opposed to 51.8mm. You say it's just a hair too far inboard 51.8mm might be the issue. Also the crankset you have is for a 2x12. It does say it can also be 1x12 but I think that the 51.8mm chainline is the culprit.
Here's a pic of mine on bike.








I'm running a Wolftooth 32t oval ring no problem. 
Can't comment on the Mezzer but that is the fork I originally wanted for the bike. Unfortunately at the time they were unobtainable so I went with a DVO Diamond.
Had a diamond on my last bike and loved it. Just replaced the Super Deluxe with a Topaz, world of difference.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I don't know if this might help...








Understanding Chainline for Optimal 1X Conversions (Boost and Non-Boos


Have you converted your bike to 1X in the past 5 years? If so, your chainline could be causing premature drivetrain wear. Find out how to optimize your setup and save money. What is chainline? Chainline is the distance between the centerline of your frame and the average centerline of your...




int.oneupcomponents.com


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Rngspnr said:


> I don't know if this might help...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I had I look at that; actually I have their OneUp switch chainring. The 12-speed series Shimano one-by and two-by cranks are exactly the same, the only difference is the rings that they ship with (the 9120-1 ships without rings and the 9120-2 ships with the double ring; the big ring is direct mount and the granny ring is mounted to the big ring). I just got that crankset because for reasons unknown it was much cheaper than the 9120-1. Probably because people think it´s different cranks. According to the shimano link you linked your chainline is 53.4... did you measure it? 53.4 is what in my opinion would fit perfectly to the chainguide (yours looks super centered).
Is the Topaz really that much better than the superdeluxe? I heard and read almost only good stuff about the SDL, I even asked the revel dealer if the fox dpx2 upgrade was woth it and he basically said "nah, the sdl is awesome". Goddamn this Fomo!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Hafermilch said:


> I had I look at that; actually I have their OneUp switch chainring. The 12-speed series Shimano one-by and two-by cranks are exactly the same, the only difference is the rings that they ship with (the 9120-1 ships without rings and the 9120-2 ships with the double ring; the big ring is direct mount and the granny ring is mounted to the big ring). I just got that crankset because for reasons unknown it was much cheaper than the 9120-1. Probably because people think it´s different cranks. According to the shimano link you linked your chainline is 53.4... did you measure it? 53.4 is what in my opinion would fit perfectly to the chainguide (yours looks super centered).
> Is the Topaz really that much better than the superdeluxe? I heard and read almost only good stuff about the SDL, I even asked the revel dealer if the fox dpx2 upgrade was woth it and he basically said "nah, the sdl is awesome". Goddamn this Fomo!
> 
> View attachment 1921255


I hadn't noticed the 53.4. I though that because it was a boost specific crank that it was 53. But yes it is 53.4. My cranks are symmetrical in the frame where as when I was using my non boost cranks it wasn't. Looks like you need to get to 53.4.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

The Topaz has zero breakaway stiction because it uses a bladder instead of an IFP. First ride on my Rascal I noticed that it wasn't as plush as my Following was but I just thought that it was the way the suspension was. The Topaz is super smooth and plush. The Topaz matches the way the fork feels perfectly.
The SDL shock will be going up for sale. 
If I had gotten the Mezzer I probably would have went with the Mara Pro. I've he'd a Mcleod on two bikes and it was an awesome shock. I think you'll like the Mezzer. From peoples feedback it's a really great fork.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Rngspnr said:


> I hadn't noticed the 53.4. I though that because it was a boost specific crank that it was 53. But yes it is 53.4. My cranks are symmetrical in the frame where as when I was using my non boost cranks it wasn't. Looks like you need to get to 53.4.


Interesting... do you have any washers or spacers under the Chainguide? If not, how about the SRAM faction with the 52mm chainline?


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Rngspnr said:


> The Topaz has zero breakaway stiction because it uses a bladder instead of an IFP. First ride on my Rascal I noticed that it wasn't as plush as my Following was but I just thought that it was the way the suspension was. The Topaz is super smooth and plush. The Topaz matches the way the fork feels perfectly.
> The SDL shock will be going up for sale.
> If I had gotten the Mezzer I probably would have went with the Mara Pro. I've he'd a Mcleod on two bikes and it was an awesome shock. I think you'll like the Mezzer. From peoples feedback it's a really great fork.


You guys are freaking me out a bit about my suspension choice. I'll have the SDL out back and a Pike Ultimate 150 up front. I had an older Pike on my prior bike and got along with it just fine. I have a DVO Diamond on my single speed, and while I think it's very good, I don't see a world of difference compared to my prior Pike. The rear shock may be a different story, however, as I haven't had Rockshox in the bike for several bikes now. That one worked pretty well. Guess I'll start with the Rockshox stuff and see how it goes. The build is just about finished, and I expect the maiden voyage to be this weekend!


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

ABQ Clydesdale said:


> You guys are freaking me out a bit about my suspension choice. I'll have the SDL out back and a Pike Ultimate 150 up front. I had an older Pike on my prior bike and got along with it just fine. I have a DVO Diamond on my single speed, and while I think it's very good, I don't see a world of difference compared to my prior Pike. The rear shock may be a different story, however, as I haven't had Rockshox in the bike for several bikes now. That one worked pretty well. Guess I'll start with the Rockshox stuff and see how it goes. The build is just about finished, and I expect the maiden voyage to be this weekend!


I don't think you should be freaked out by a single negative experience with the SDL. I have the SDL Ultimate on my Rascal and have nothing but good things to say, it's been awesome and I have no plans on replacing it. Feels sensitive and supportive where it needs to


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

leejohnh22 said:


> I don't think you should be freaked out by a single negative experience with the SDL. I have the SDL Ultimate on my Rascal and have nothing but good things to say, it's been awesome and I have no plans on replacing it. Feels sensitive and supportive where it needs to


Thank you for the reassurance. That's pretty much the same thing the guys at Revel said when I ordered the frame.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

This.  Honestly, it's so easy to fall down that rabbit hole... I just got the mezzer because I got a good price on it and I am a bit of a fan of "underdogs" or "not-big-player-stuff". And because of the looks. And the ease of travel. And I thought it would be the same or at least a very similar color to the T1000 frame (wanted to go full silver bullet), which of course turned out to be not so true. Did I mention the looks? Those fatass 37mm stanchions look so right  I think nowadays almost all of the stuff is at a level performance-wise that is far above and beyond of the average Joe's needs. Anyhow, that stupid Chainguide. Could someone with a sram or raceface crank and a 52mm Chainline give a quick input on chainring clearance? Would be much appreciated! Btw, so stoked about your upcoming maiden voyage! I thought mine would also be this weekend but winter has decided to mount a full comeback, and now we have more snow than the two months before. 😕


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Hafermilch said:


> Interesting... do you have any washers or spacers under the Chainguide? If not, how about the SRAM faction with the 52mm chainline?


No washers or spacers. Guide is mounted directly to frame. Don't know what SRAM faction is.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

ABQ Clydesdale said:


> You guys are freaking me out a bit about my suspension choice. I'll have the SDL out back and a Pike Ultimate 150 up front. I had an older Pike on my prior bike and got along with it just fine. I have a DVO Diamond on my single speed, and while I think it's very good, I don't see a world of difference compared to my prior Pike. The rear shock may be a different story, however, as I haven't had Rockshox in the bike for several bikes now. That one worked pretty well. Guess I'll start with the Rockshox stuff and see how it goes. The build is just about finished, and I expect the maiden voyage to be this weekend!


To be fair I think there is an issue with the SDL that came on my bike. Last ride with the SDL it felt like it was locked while in the open setting. I switched it to lock and tried to cycle it and it felt the same as unlocked, when I started riding again it started to work again but it has been harsh since day one. Coming off of an Evil Following the first thing I noticed about the Rascal was it's lack of plushness. It also seemed that the rear end skipped around more than my previous bike. I assumed that it might just be the way the CBF behaved or just need to break in. The Topaz works much better than the SDL did, it's plush off the top and the rear tire stays planted better now. Something else I noticed with the SDL is that the rebound dial would get really hard to turn as it got closer to full turtle. 
Sending it in for warranty service but it still won't be going back on my bike. I'm a heavier rider and have had no luck with Rockshox shocks. My Following had a Monarch RCT3 Debonair that required so much air pressure to get to recommended sag that it was harsh. I replaced it with a Mcleod which is a way better shock in all aspects.
I can't speak for the Pike as never having owned one but my buddy has a Pike he dumped a ton of time and money into to get it where he likes it. He has the latest charger damper and an MRP ramp control in it. He rode my bike with the Diamond and his first comment was how plush the fork felt compared to his Pike. 
I don't really care for the Rockshox solo air stuff I had a Revelation dual air that I liked quite a bit because I could tune the negative chamber to my liking. The idea of a dimple to equalize pressure just seems like a cheaper way to produce the fork to me. Rockshox forks are also notorious for air migration into the lower legs I had a Yari on my hardtail that suffered from air migration.
Don't sweat the SDL I'm sure it will be fine, like I said I think mine had an issue.
Another note on the Diamond is the one you have boost? I had a non boost on my Evil and liked it I, but I have a boost on my Rascal and it's noticeably better. The chassis is much stiffer.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Rngspnr said:


> No washers or spacers. Guide is mounted directly to frame. Don't know what SRAM faction is.


With sram faction I just meant the guys riding sram. Must be some of those around, right? This whole chainline business has me completely puzzled right now. Official SRAM technical handbook states their boost chainline at 52mm. You have a perfect fit for the chainguide but are running a 53.5mm chainline (btw, did you measure that? Just read up at absoluteblack, they do indeed say that the chainline depends on the crank. How is that even working then?! Because the next bigger SRAm chainline is then 56.5 for their Superboost+, and that again would be too far outboard.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I do know that the frame was designed using the SRAM Dub crank.
OK measured BB and the weep hole is dead center. Measured from weep hole to center of chainring and it's 53mm pretty much on the nose.
You'll need to get your chainring to 53mm it looks like. 51.8 puts you1.2mm off. You could use a 1mm spacer along with the 2.5 on your BB drive side cup to get you there, your cranks would be ever so slightly asymmetrical in the frame but I can tell you you won't notice it when pedaling.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Or contact these guys for some info








Direct Mount Chainrings for Shimano Cranks


Direct Mount Chainrings for Shimano Cranks. These chainrings are for Shimano cranks. The Wolf Tooth chainrings feature our patented Drop-Stop® design for the best wear life, chain retention and mud clearance.




www.wolftoothcomponents.com


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Revel just wrote, they have a new chainguide in the making, so I´ll wait for that one and in the meanwhile ride carefully  Are you guys wrapping or partially wrapping the frame or can anyone recommend some matte foil/film/helicopter tape? I don´t want to go supersayan full wrap, but a little bit on the down tube and other exposed areas would be nice, and basically all areas in question are matte and become superglossy with the normal tape I have.


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Rngspnr said:


> I don't really care for the Rockshox solo air stuff I had a Revelation dual air that I liked quite a bit because I could tune the negative chamber to my liking. The idea of a dimple to equalize pressure just seems like a cheaper way to produce the fork to me. Rockshox forks are also notorious for air migration into the lower legs I had a Yari on my hardtail that suffered from air migration.
> Don't sweat the SDL I'm sure it will be fine, like I said I think mine had an issue.
> Another note on the Diamond is the one you have boost? I had a non boost on my Evil and liked it I, but I have a boost on my Rascal and it's noticeably better. The chassis is much stiffer.


Thank you for all the detailed input. My Diamond is indeed a boost on the SS, and it is very good. I find myself willing to go down most of the same technical and steep descents on that bike, as I did on my previous full suspension. If the Pike Ultimate I'm putting on the Revel is as good as my prior Pike, I think I will be fine with it. I also appreciate the input on the SDL. I'll evaluate how it feels as well as the controls and how easy or hard they are to turn. I'm also a pretty big guy (around 220 lbs. geared up and ready to ride), so we'll see how it goes. Thanks again!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I wanted to wrap mine but decided not to because of the matte/gloss issue. Good luck with the chain guide!


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

I drove to Salt cycles in Salt Lake City from Sacramento to pick this beast up. Did a shakedown ride in the Jem trails in Hurricane to break it in. Such a great ride 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

rollinrob said:


> I drove to Salt cycles in Salt Lake City from Sacramento to pick this beast up. Did a shakedown ride in the Jem trails in Hurricane to break it in. Such a great ride
> View attachment 1922076
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sweet looking bike! I wanted the T1000 but settled for Sedona Red back in October not knowing when a frame would be available.


----------



## Alta825 (Mar 9, 2004)

rollinrob said:


> I drove to Salt cycles in Salt Lake City from Sacramento to pick this beast up. Did a shakedown ride in the Jem trails in Hurricane to break it in. Such a great ride
> View attachment 1922076
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The crew at Salt Cycles are awesome

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

rollinrob said:


> I drove to Salt cycles in Salt Lake City from Sacramento to pick this beast up. Did a shakedown ride in the Jem trails in Hurricane to break it in. Such a great ride
> View attachment 1922076
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Looks rad!! I also went with the silver-orange theme  and it looks like you also got rid of the chain guide, although this should be the same crank Rngspnr is using. Is yours the non-boost variety?


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

New Rascal in the house!

Rode it home from the shop on Thursday. 22 miles in the Albuquerque foothills on Friday and 28 more yesterday. I am absolutely blown away!

It has already exceeded my expectations. I'm making technical moves on climbs I never have on any other bike, and the descending and air time are sublime! It's exactly what I hoped it would be. Near perfection!


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

Hafermilch said:


> Revel just wrote, they have a new chainguide in the making, so I´ll wait for that one and in the meanwhile ride carefully  Are you guys wrapping or partially wrapping the frame or can anyone recommend some matte foil/film/helicopter tape? I don´t want to go supersayan full wrap, but a little bit on the down tube and other exposed areas would be nice, and basically all areas in question are matte and become superglossy with the normal tape I have.


I used lamin-x. I diy'd it and did the spots I was most concerned about wear. It's not pretty since I'm a little dexterously challenged when it comes to fine motor skills, but it's protected and you can only see my wavy, jagged cuts in bright light which is ironically when the t-1000 color looks its best. The tape works well and is way cheaper than ride wrap etc. I bought a matte role and a glossy. Ignore my messy room and dirty bike. Used flash to show how noticable it is in very direct light.

I ended up getting headtube, toptube, down tube, chain and seat stays, and the behind the bb area where the rear wheel kicks up rocks. Had to get really creative for cutting out around the rear axle on the chain/seat stays but it's on and protected.


----------



## ulnar-landing (Nov 22, 2020)

Hafermilch said:


> This.  Honestly, it's so easy to fall down that rabbit hole... I just got the mezzer because I got a good price on it and I am a bit of a fan of "underdogs" or "not-big-player-stuff". And because of the looks. And the ease of travel. And I thought it would be the same or at least a very similar color to the T1000 frame (wanted to go full silver bullet), which of course turned out to be not so true. Did I mention the looks? Those fatass 37mm stanchions look so right  I think nowadays almost all of the stuff is at a level performance-wise that is far above and beyond of the average Joe's needs. Anyhow, that stupid Chainguide. Could someone with a sram or raceface crank and a 52mm Chainline give a quick input on chainring clearance? Would be much appreciated! Btw, so stoked about your upcoming maiden voyage! I thought mine would also be this weekend but winter has decided to mount a full comeback, and now we have more snow than the two months before. 😕


I had been considering the silver mezzer on my t-1000 for the same reasons. Any pics? I have a gx build with the default sdl select and pike select. They work just fine for me but was thinking I would upgrade the fork next season for looks and because I enjoy being able to tinker a bit. Would probably change the shock out first. It's weird only having rebound but luckily cbf is so good I have never felt the need for a lockout


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

does anyone have builds/weights we can compare? anyone ridden both a rascal and a ranger and have any insight on the overlap and where one excels/doesn’t where it might surprise you? (save for the obvious ranger climbs better rascal descends better yada yada)


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

ulnar-landing said:


> I had been considering the silver mezzer on my t-1000 for the same reasons. Any pics? I have a gx build with the default sdl select and pike select. They work just fine for me but was thinking I would upgrade the fork next season for looks and because I enjoy being able to tinker a bit. Would probably change the shock out first. It's weird only having rebound but luckily cbf is so good I have never felt the need for a lockout


You guys always have such breathtaking background to put your bikes against... Best I can do at the moment is a medium sized tree, but here you go!


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

coachxtaylor said:


> does anyone have builds/weights we can compare? anyone ridden both a rascal and a ranger and have any insight on the overlap and where one excels/doesn't where it might surprise you? (save for the obvious ranger climbs better rascal descends better yada yada)


Uuuuuuh, porky af, to be honest. I don´t have a precise scale, so I just used the one for suitcases and stuff. 14.7kg with pedals. Which sounds like a lot. Also feels kind of... let´s just call it solid, when you pick it up. For reference, my previous/other bike is a 26" Race hardtail at 9kgs (that was considered light, back in ´09). But. Pedaling so far has been brilliant (didn´t get to steep/technical stuff yet), almost no pedal bob, and with the shock locked out it´s almost rigid. I also built it slightly heavier than it strictly has to be (without going full pork); Mezzer adds some coule of hundred grams vs the pike, I have a cushcore xc in the back, big discs front and rear. On the other hand I tried to save some weight without going completely bonkers, money-wise, and without compromising the inherent beefy-ness. I can´t wait trying it out in it´s intended habitat 
Color wise I really have to say that it comes alive in direct sunshine. In the shade, the frame has a completely different, much darker color than the Mezzer. It´s almost exactly the color of the cranks, think gunmetal/battleship grey. I am still not sure if I like it or not and also still very undecided if I wouldn´t prefer the black mezzer.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

The freaking weight weinies always have to poke around, don't they. 

From what I understand after talking with Chris Canfield, the Rascal and Ranger should feel very similar with regards to pedaling platform. So similar that if blindfolded, Chris admitted he prob couldn't tell the difference pedaling both bikes. Pretty sure there is clear documentation from Revel that the Ranger frame is over 1lb lighter then the Rascal.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

jonshonda said:


> The freaking weight weinies always have to poke around, don't they.


Without weight weenies, we'd all be riding around on 50lb sleds.... 
Weight is a driving factor for design.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

Jlar said:


> Without weight weenies, we'd all be riding around on 50lb sleds....
> Weight is a driving factor for design.


right? my enduro bike is 37 lbs and my ranger is about 27-28! i used to have that frame of mind until i rode a lighter bike. pedaling a 35+ lb bike on a 6000+ foot day can be a lot.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Hafermilch said:


> Uuuuuuh, porky af, to be honest. I don´t have a precise scale, so I just used the one for suitcases and stuff. 14.7kg with pedals. Which sounds like a lot. Also feels kind of... let´s just call it solid, when you pick it up. For reference, my previous/other bike is a 26" Race hardtail at 9kgs (that was considered light, back in ´09). But. Pedaling so far has been brilliant (didn´t get to steep/technical stuff yet), almost no pedal bob, and with the shock locked out it´s almost rigid. I also built it slightly heavier than it strictly has to be (without going full pork); Mezzer adds some coule of hundred grams vs the pike, I have a cushcore xc in the back, big discs front and rear. On the other hand I tried to save some weight without going completely bonkers, money-wise, and without compromising the inherent beefy-ness. I can´t wait trying it out in it´s intended habitat
> Color wise I really have to say that it comes alive in direct sunshine. In the shade, the frame has a completely different, much darker color than the Mezzer. It´s almost exactly the color of the cranks, think gunmetal/battleship grey. I am still not sure if I like it or not and also still very undecided if I wouldn´t prefer the black mezzer.


Totally agree, and I think I said something similar about weight in earlier post. Great description man.

I've got an XL Rascal
Lyrik set at 150
CC Kitsuma
Onyx laced to Derby DH35i
XTR pedals 
SRAM X01 drivetrain
Raceface alloy chainring
CK BB & headset
Bike Yoke 185 dropper
Enve M9 bars w/ enve 50mm alloy stem
XTR 4 piston w/ 203/180 ice tech rotors
Maxxis DHF 2.5/DHR 2.4
Ergon grips

Built pretty damn burly cuz I'm burly, but comes in 33.5lbs. I'm no weight weeny, but I was hoping for just under 33lbs because my alloy Riot with pretty much the same build, but with Saint brakes and an old Pike, was only like a pound more. I thought carbon was light!

Super fun bike though.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Tmoores0902 said:


> Do you have a review yet with the CC coil on the revel?


Dude, somehow I lost track of where this thread was at. Couldn't find it once they changed up the format. Glad I finally did!

I'm not running a CC Coil. I'm running the Kitsuma air. Thing is, I'd been riding it for a while trying to dial it in, cuz CC shocks aren't exactly simple. Could never get it right and psi for sag was different one ride from the next. So threw a Shock Wiz on it, and when I released psi to calibrate, the shock collapsed. Had to send it in for warranty, (super good CS and quick turn around from CC) but only have one ride since the repair. Been getting in end of the season snowboarding instead of riding. But I'm a big CC fanboy. Had one on my Riot, and Canfield is offering the Kitsuma for their latest frames, so I know it's a good fit.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i received my rascal on 4/1 and couldn't be happier. i am familiar w/ cbf so i purchased it unseen and is exactly how i thought. i got the gx build with pike ult (thinking of coil conversion) and the 11-6 and honestly i'm going to ride it this season as air and then make my decision. 

large t-1000
200# geared up at 6'-2"


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

Saw this last night....


----------



## rollinrob (Feb 22, 2004)

So it looks like they raised prices by $200.00 Glad I go mine when I did and am surprised it took them so long...


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

masonmoa said:


> Totally agree, and I think I said something similar about weight in earlier post. Great description man.
> 
> I've got an XL Rascal
> Lyrik set at 150
> ...


How does the bike ride being overforked? Do you know the offset?


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Jlar said:


> How does the bike ride being overforked? Do you know the offset?


My first two rides on it, I used a coil converted Pike set at 140 (51mm offset) and it was fine. I didn't feel the need to up the travel, but the bike just weighed way too much with that fork. Like 2lbs more than my super burly bigger travel bikes. So I ordered a Lyrik and with supply being so limited, all I could find was a 160mm (51mm offset) that I lowered to 150mm. Also bought the 140mm air spring because, like I said, I wasn't sure and it was only like another $40. But, I liked it at 150 and haven't felt the need to lower it. I think the extra BB height is nice. (I hit peddles way too much on my other 29er!) I know somebody on here said they'd talked to Revel about a 150 fork and a shorter offset was recommended, but I don't mind it the way it is. And, if I decide to drop it to 140, then I'm still good.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

masonmoa said:


> My first two rides on it, I used a coil converted Pike set at 140 (51mm offset) and it was fine. I didn't feel the need to up the travel, but the bike just weighed way too much with that fork. Like 2lbs more than my super burly bigger travel bikes. So I ordered a Lyrik and with supply being so limited, all I could find was a 160mm (51mm offset) that I lowered to 150mm. Also bought the 140mm air spring because, like I said, I wasn't sure and it was only like another $40. But, I liked it at 150 and haven't felt the need to lower it. I think the extra BB height is nice. (I hit peddles way too much on my other 29er!) I know somebody on here said they'd talked to Revel about a 150 fork and a shorter offset was recommended, but I don't mind it the way it is. And, if I decide to drop it to 140, then I'm still good.


Did you notice a difference in reach?


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Haha. Pretty funny you asked that cuz I almost mentioned reach in my last post. I personally find the reach listed to be a bit misleading, as in the Rascal feels longer than it says it should. Like I have a 27.5 with a 503 reach and a Ripmo v2 at 500. I think the Rascal in XL has a 489 reach. I’m tall, like 6’5 and all torso, and I’m running a 50mm stem on the 27.5, a 60mm stem on the Ripmo and a 50mm stem on the Rascal, even with fork bumped up to 150. I assumed I’d need a 60mm stem, and I tried it with my fork at 140 and was super surprised when I felt too stretched out, even with 46mm riser bars, cuz that sh1t never happens for me. I’m usually a bit cramped.

The more I ride the Rip and Rascal, cuz they’re both relatively new and Winter made it hard to ride, I find I like the Rascal more. Still trying to figure out exactly why....


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

masonmoa said:


> Haha. Pretty funny you asked that cuz I almost mentioned reach in my last post. I personally find the reach listed to be a bit misleading, as in the Rascal feels longer than it says it should. Like I have a 27.5 with a 503 reach and a Ripmo v2 at 500. I think the Rascal in XL has a 489 reach. I'm tall, like 6'5 and all torso, and I'm running a 50mm stem on the 27.5, a 60mm stem on the Ripmo and a 50mm stem on the Rascal, even with fork bumped up to 150. I assumed I'd need a 60mm stem, and I tried it with my fork at 140 and was super surprised when I felt too stretched out, even with 46mm riser bars, cuz that sh1t never happens for me. I'm usually a bit cramped.
> 
> The more I ride the Rip and Rascal, cuz they're both relatively new and Winter made it hard to ride, I find I like the Rascal more. Still trying to figure out exactly why....


I agree about the reach # being misleading. Before I built up my large rascal I was really agonizing about the bike being too short. 460 for a large is short vs todays new crop of 480-490 larges. 
Went over the geo numbers against my previous bikes and other bikes I had considered. 
Well when I finally built it up and sat on it, it felt absolutely perfect. With a 50mm stem mind you. 
I think we're all over looking one key geo #, and that is TTL. Half the time while on the bike, we're seated. It's when seated I really feel the differance betwen bike sizes.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

This is a really good video about getting the right size frame. Once you know your RAD it's pretty easy to find a frame that will fit you well. I checked my current bike against the numbers they use and it was spot on.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

I'm going to try this when I get home in a few days. Super interesting. Only bad thing is I only own one of those little ladders, and as someone who used to be a contractor and already has way too many ladders, I may just have to buy another. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

A followup to the video Rngspnr posted.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

What chainring size is everyone running? I'm using a 32t oval and I have to push the crank outboard so that the ring doesn't come into contact with the chainstay. Which leads to poor chainline. I have a 30t oval on the way. Just thought a 32t oval was small for a max ring size.


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Jlar said:


> What chainring size is everyone running? I'm using a 32t oval and I have to push the crank outboard so that the ring doesn't come into contact with the chainstay. Which leads to poor chainline. I have a 30t oval on the way. Just thought a 32t oval was small for a max ring size.


32t oval here. Absolute Black. Running Shimano XTR, and my excellent LBS did a tremendous job getting everything set up perfectly with good chainline, smooth shifting, etc. The clearance is very tight, but I've had no issues in the first 120 miles.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

ABQ Clydesdale said:


> 32t oval here. Absolute Black. Running Shimano XTR, and my excellent LBS did a tremendous job getting everything set up perfectly with good chainline, smooth shifting, etc. The clearance is very tight, but I've had no issues in the first 120 miles.


Interesting. Clearance is so tight that the chainnring has scratched the chainstay due to frame flex. Thus why I pushed it out by another 4mm.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

Jlar said:


> What chainring size is everyone running? I'm using a 32t oval and I have to push the crank outboard so that the ring doesn't come into contact with the chainstay. Which leads to poor chainline. I have a 30t oval on the way. Just thought a 32t oval was small for a max ring size.


i'm running a 32 shimano xt and i rode the bike set up from the shop for about 2 rides before i noticed the ring, specifically the bolts on the back of the chainring were scratching the chainstay and one of the pivot bolts. i took it into the shop and they determined that with the shimano crank sets it needed about 3mm worth of spacers for proper clearance. i'm glad i noticed it and it was just a bit of paint, otherwise i'm sure i'd be dealing with a warranty right now.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

What cranksets are you guys using? If it's not a boost crankset you'll need to shim the drive side BB bearing an additional 2mm to get proper clearance. Shimming the drive side BB bearing will give you an asymmetric Q factor. I'm running a boost XT (FC-M8000-B) crank with a 32t oval and have plenty of clearance.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

Rngspnr said:


> What cranksets are you guys using? If it's not a boost crankset you'll need to shim the drive side BB bearing an additional 2mm to get proper clearance. Shimming the drive side BB bearing will give you an asymmetric Q factor. I'm running a boost XT (FC-M8000-B) crank with a 32t oval and have plenty of clearance.


And hows your chainline? Lined up with 6-7 cog?

I'm running a RaceFace Next R Crank which is boost compatible. I pushed my chainring out to the same clearance as yours and my chainline is horrible. Lined up with 11th cog. In 1st cog the chain is so sideways I can feel the drag.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

i’m running a boost xt crankset as well. i shouldn’t have said the chainstay, the bolts on the back of the chainring were contacting the rear triangle directly under the chainring during riding when the frame would flex. either way it’s no longer a problem now.


----------



## ABQ Clydesdale (Dec 30, 2010)

Shimano XTR boost here with great chain line - lining up perfectly with #7 cog on the 12-speed cassette.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

ABQ Clydesdale said:


> Shimano XTR boost here with great chain line - lining up perfectly with #7 cog on the 12-speed cassette.


Then this simply tells me that my frame is out of alignment.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Jlar said:


> And hows your chainline? Lined up with 6-7 cog?
> 
> I'm running a RaceFace Next R Crank which is boost compatible. I pushed my chainring out to the same clearance as yours and my chainline is horrible. Lined up with 11th cog. In 1st cog the chain is so sideways I can feel the drag.


Chainline is fine no dropping chain when backpedaling and shifts perfect.


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

Rngspnr said:


> Chainline is fine no dropping chain when backpedaling and shifts perfect.


I just installed a 30t last night. Took out the extra spacers from the crank spindle and push it inboard. Chainline is minty now. We'll see how I like the 30t, smallest I've ever run.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Hopefully simple questions here: how many spacers come stock in the positive and negative chambers in the Topaz on the DVO build? In terms of setting sag, what is the stroke length? My bike will hopefully be ready to pick up tomorrow, I am stoked!


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Hopefully simple questions here: how many spacers come stock in the positive and negative chambers in the Topaz on the DVO build? In terms of setting sag, what is the stroke length? My bike will hopefully be ready to pick up tomorrow, I am stoked!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I don't think there are any volume reducers in the Topaz from factory. Mine came with five if I needed but I don't think I will. As far as sag you can set it pretty much anywhere it feels good to you due to the way the CBF suspension works. But if you want numbers 12.5mm would be 25% and around 16mm for 30%.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:


> I don't think there are any volume reducers in the Topaz from factory. Mine came with five if I needed but I don't think I will. As far as sag you can set it pretty much anywhere it feels good to you due to the way the CBF suspension works. But if you want numbers 12.5mm would be 25% and around 16mm for 30%.


Thanks for the reply. I just heard back from DVO and they do not believe that any spacers are spec'd in the OEM Topaz they provide Revel. This seems like a curious thing to me.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Thanks for the reply. I just heard back from DVO and they do not believe that any spacers are spec'd in the OEM Topaz they provide Revel. This seems like a curious thing to me.


I don't think the shock really needs them like RS or Fox. I think that they're more of a fine tune option for some riders. The platform switch works really well on the Topaz, open is super plush, trail is definitely noticeably firmer and closed is very firm but not locked. Also with the fact that it's on the CBF suspension leaves a lot of room for a set up that feels good to the rider meaning running more or less sag depending on how firm or soft you like your bike to feel. That's one of the great things about the CBF is that it functions the same way regardless of how much sag it has where as other suspension platforms perform best at a recommended sag.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:
I don't think there are any volume reducers in the Topaz from factory. Mine came with five if I needed but I don't think I will. As far as sag you can set it pretty much anywhere it feels good to you due to the way the CBF suspension works. But if you want numbers 12.5mm would be 25% and around 16mm for 30%.



gluestick said:


> Thanks for the reply. I just heard back from DVO and they do not believe that any spacers are spec'd in the OEM Topaz they provide Revel. This seems like a curious thing to me.


So out of curiosity, I asked Revel about this. Their customer service is top notch and they replied quickly stating if purchased OEM with the frame from Revel, two spacers will be in the positive chamber and none in the negative.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Rngspnr said:
> I don't think there are any volume reducers in the Topaz from factory. Mine came with five if I needed but I don't think I will. As far as sag you can set it pretty much anywhere it feels good to you due to the way the CBF suspension works. But if you want numbers 12.5mm would be 25% and around 16mm for 30%.
> 
> So out of curiosity, I asked Revel about this. Their customer service is top notch and they replied quickly stating if purchased OEM with the frame from Revel, two spacers will be in the positive chamber and none in the negative.


That's good to know. Now I have to open my shock and see what's in there I'm betting no reducers being as the shock was bought online. Yes, Revel is excellent about customer service. Called the other day to get color Pantone for my frame and got an immediate call back after leaving a message.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Rngspnr said:


> That's good to know. Now I have to open my shock and see what's in there I'm betting no reducers being as the shock was bought online. Yes, Revel is excellent about customer service. Called the other day to get color Pantone for my frame and got an immediate call back after leaving a message.


Out of curiosity, what color frame do you have? Can you share the pantone code.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

gluestick said:


> Out of curiosity, what color frame do you have? Can you share the pantone code.


I have the Sedona Red. The Pantone that Revel gave me is 1525C they said it's not the actual Pantone of the frame but is the closest color in the Pantone chart.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

3 rides in on the Rascal and all I can say is "wow". I had previously ridden a 27.5 Giant Trance Advanced. I enjoyed the poppy and nimble feel of that bike, especially on my local twisty and technical New England singletrack. Average speeds can typically be under 4 mph on this terrain. The Trance was light and agile and easy to move around. My primary complaint while riding that bike was that the front end always felt light and would become easily unweighted on steep climbs, doubly so technical climbs. It also felt a tad squirrely on fast downhills, wandering and getting kicked around a bit. I test rode a Ripmo V1 and the new Switchblade, and wasn't exactly wowed by either, but knew it was time to move on to a 29er. I set my sights on the Ripmo V2, but after advice from some on this thread and some friends, I decided on the Rascal. I sold the Trance back in January to fund the Rascal (with no demo ride) and have sadly not sat on a mountain bike again until this past weekend.

The Rascal is every bit as poppy and nimble as the Trance, if not more. My mountain bike fitness and trail skills have certainly dulled over the past 3 months, and I have put on a few pounds since last season. That being said, the Rascal is cleaning technical climbs on the first try that I rarely cleaned on the Trance, even while in my personal peak fitness and skill level. It feels surgical in that I can place it where ever I feel like to get through tight spots and rolls with confidence and speed when the trail points down. It claws easily over greasy roots and rocks and I am still searching to find the limits of it's traction. I had to throttle back a tad today on one particular technical downhill because I felt like the bike was writing checks that my current skill level couldn't cash. I am feeling super motivated to get my fitness, skill, and weight back on track so I can begin to really understand what this bike is capable of. It is certainly capable of far better performance than I am able to challenge it to.

My only niggle, as others have mentioned, is the weight. I have not put it on the scale yet, but I can tell from the parking lot bike rack lift test, this bike is kind of a pig. I cannot feel this weight *at all* when sitting on it, and it climbs like a deranged mountain goat, but I am wondering what this bike would feel like if I could drop a pound or two. Current build below,

Fork: DVO Diamond
Shock: DVO Topaz
Brakes: Shimano Deore
Shifter: Shimano XT 12 speed
Rear Mech: Shimano Deore
Cassette: Shimano Deore
Crank: Shimano Deore
Bars: OneUp carbon
Wheels: i9 1/1 Enduroi
Tires: DHF/Agressor

I would appreciate any and all suggestions on how to get a little fat off without touching the wheel/tire combo.

For those waiting on theirs, feel free to ask any questions. I certainly asked a lot leading up to my decision to buy and am happy to pay it forward.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gluestick said:


> 3 rides in on the Rascal and all I can say is "wow". I had previously ridden a 27.5 Giant Trance Advanced. I enjoyed the poppy and nimble feel of that bike, especially on my local twisty and technical New England singletrack. Average speeds can typically be under 4 mph on this terrain. The Trance was light and agile and easy to move around. My primary complaint while riding that bike was that the front end always felt light and would become easily unweighted on steep climbs, doubly so technical climbs. It also felt a tad squirrely on fast downhills, wandering and getting kicked around a bit. I test rode a Ripmo V1 and the new Switchblade, and wasn't exactly wowed by either, but knew it was time to move on to a 29er. I set my sites on the Ripmo V2, but after advice from some on this thread and some friends, I decided on the Rascal. I sold the Trance back in January to fund the Rascal (with no demo ride) and have sadly not sat on a mountain bike again until this past weekend.
> 
> The Rascal is every bit as poppy and nimble as the Trance, if not more. My mountain bike fitness and trail skills have certainly dulled over the past 3 months, and I have put on a few pounds since last season. That being said, the Rascal is cleaning technical climbs on the first try that I rarely cleaned on the Trance, even while in my personal peak fitness and skill level. It feels surgical in that I can place it where ever I feel like to get through tight spots and rolls with confidence and speed when the trail points down. It claws easily over greasy roots and rocks and I am still searching to find the limits of it's traction. I had to throttle back a tad today on one particular technical downhill because I felt like the bike was writing checks that my current skill level couldn't cash. I am feeling super motivated to get my fitness, skill, and weight back on track so I can begin to really understand what this bike is capable of. It is certainly capable of far better performance than I am able to challenge it to.
> 
> ...


Dude! Glad to hear you like it! Bike preferences are so subjective that I never know how much or what advice to give folks. I'm still stoked with my Rascal tho and ride it more than any of my other bikes.

As for the losing some bike weight, I've struggled with this but think I've found peace with where my Rascal is now. Not traveling over the past year definitely gave me some extra cash to work on it too. (Keep in mind, I just bought the frame cuz I build my own bikes and reuse parts.) I swapped out the stem and brakes to lose all of like 1/2lb, but debatable if worth the cost. Also swapped out my wheel sets cuz one is a slightly lighter than the other. About all I can see that you could do with yours would be to slap some carbon cranks on there, but that won't lose that much. I mean, I'm running all carbon, granted burly carbon cuz I'm big, but my Rascal is only like a pound less than my old Riot, which is still hard for me to wrap my head around.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

gluestick said:


> 3 rides in on the Rascal and all I can say is "wow". I had previously ridden a 27.5 Giant Trance Advanced. I enjoyed the poppy and nimble feel of that bike, especially on my local twisty and technical New England singletrack. Average speeds can typically be under 4 mph on this terrain. The Trance was light and agile and easy to move around. My primary complaint while riding that bike was that the front end always felt light and would become easily unweighted on steep climbs, doubly so technical climbs. It also felt a tad squirrely on fast downhills, wandering and getting kicked around a bit. I test rode a Ripmo V1 and the new Switchblade, and wasn't exactly wowed by either, but knew it was time to move on to a 29er. I set my sights on the Ripmo V2, but after advice from some on this thread and some friends, I decided on the Rascal. I sold the Trance back in January to fund the Rascal (with no demo ride) and have sadly not sat on a mountain bike again until this past weekend.
> 
> The Rascal is every bit as poppy and nimble as the Trance, if not more. My mountain bike fitness and trail skills have certainly dulled over the past 3 months, and I have put on a few pounds since last season. That being said, the Rascal is cleaning technical climbs on the first try that I rarely cleaned on the Trance, even while in my personal peak fitness and skill level. It feels surgical in that I can place it where ever I feel like to get through tight spots and rolls with confidence and speed when the trail points down. It claws easily over greasy roots and rocks and I am still searching to find the limits of it's traction. I had to throttle back a tad today on one particular technical downhill because I felt like the bike was writing checks that my current skill level couldn't cash. I am feeling super motivated to get my fitness, skill, and weight back on track so I can begin to really understand what this bike is capable of. It is certainly capable of far better performance than I am able to challenge it to.
> 
> ...


hahaha, exactly my impression. It´s like that Rascal has a secret 1,2*Weight multiplier that is only in effect when picking the bike up and deactivated as soon as you start peddlin´. The only think coming to my mind would be switching to a lighter cassette, but I am really not sure if it´s worth it, as the Deore is all steel all hyperglide+ goodness. Mine is a large rascal with:
XTR chainset
XTR pedals
Intend Grace Stem
Pro Tharsis carbon handlebar
PNW Ranier V3 dropper and Loam Lever
PNW grips
Manitou Mezzer Pro fork
Superdeluxe Shock
X01 Eagle cassette
Formula Cura4 brakes
XT shifter
XT derailleur
Astute Mudlite Saddle
Vittoria Agarro 2.6 fron 2.35 rear (Trail casing)
cushcore xc rear
Sram Roam60 rear wheel, Syntace W33i front wheel

So it´s a shitload of carbon with also some really light parts like the Intend stem, the XTR crank and the X01 cassette and relatively light tires and still the goodamn Rascal is at 14.4 kg with pedals. But I really can´t be mad at it, it´s a bit of a rascal and likes to party, so an extra pound here and there is to be tolerated  It think even going full XC build on it one couldn´t drop below 12 kg... so I just try to drop a pound or two of my personal weight.
After putting some miles on it I am really super super impressed and happy. What an animal. Paraphrasing the old "climbs like a XC, descends like a DH" cliché I would like to say it climbs like a goat and descends like a goat.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I think some of the weight is that the frame is pretty burly. The rear end is definitely way stiffer than my Following was. It is very odd that it weighs more than my last bike but feels lighter when pedaling it. I think that because the suspension is so efficient it offsets the extra weight.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

Hafermilch said:


> It think even going full XC build on it one couldn´t drop below 12 kg...


I have a buddy looking to build a sub 30lb shorter travel bike (Ripley, Spur or SB115), like he's aiming for 28lbs or less. I suggested the Ranger, and he was like "no way". I haven't seen a Ranger in person, but I'm guessing he's right.

Think I mentioned in a much earlier post that I also swapped out the cassette, which also required swapping the driveshell too, which I thankfully I already had. Helped a little with weight.


----------



## gluestick (Aug 4, 2017)

Hafermilch said:


> hahaha, exactly my impression. It´s like that Rascal has a secret 1,2*Weight multiplier that is only in effect when picking the bike up and deactivated as soon as you start peddlin´. The only think coming to my mind would be switching to a lighter cassette, but I am really not sure if it´s worth it, as the Deore is all steel all hyperglide+ goodness. Mine is a large rascal with:
> XTR chainset
> XTR pedals
> Intend Grace Stem
> ...


It looks like switching from the Deore or XT cassette can save 125 g. I have read a few reviews about the Shimano aluminum 12 speed cassette teeth wearing prematurely, not sure if it is worth saving 4 oz. XT crank could save 158g. A frankenstein Descendendent crank with Shimano chainring could save a tad more than the straight up XT crank. Again, with zero complaints on the climbing or trail feel, I'm not sure if it is worth the money...


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

masonmoa said:


> I have a buddy looking to build a sub 30lb shorter travel bike (Ripley, Spur or SB115), like he's aiming for 28lbs or less. I suggested the Ranger, and he was like "no way". I haven't seen a Ranger in person, but I'm guessing he's right.
> 
> Think I mentioned in a much earlier post that I also swapped out the cassette, which also required swapping the driveshell too, which I thankfully I already had. Helped a little with weight.


no way? my ranger is under 28lbs and i'm running an xt groupset.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I shaved a half a pound off mine by ditching the DHF/Aggressor combo and going with a Rekon/Rekon Race set up. Rolls much better and the Rekon Race has a surprising amount of traction.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

coachxtaylor said:


> no way? my ranger is under 28lbs and i'm running an xt groupset.


Well, I may just have to share that with him. Thanks for the 411.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

what is the longest dropper a lg frame will except? i'm lazy, sorry


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

fishwrinkle said:


> what is the longest dropper a lg frame will except? i'm lazy, sorry


The max insertion depth is 285mm you could fit a 170mm pnw loam or a 170mm reverb axs for reference.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i have a 170 now, just wanted to get the post wiper collar as close to the frame as possible. there's 3.5" exposed and makes my ocd go crazy


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

coachxtaylor said:


> no way? my ranger is under 28lbs and i'm running an xt groupset.


Yeah.

All Large/S4, frame without shock:

Ripley, 2360g
Spur, 2180g
Stumpjumper: 2305g
Rascal: 3029g


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

TylerVernon said:


> Yeah.
> 
> All Large/S4, frame without shock:
> 
> ...


Something all of those are missing- CBF.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

What are they doing at Revel, applying the carbon into the mold with a trowel?


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

TylerVernon said:


> What are they doing at Revel, applying the carbon into the mold with a trowel?


I know right! Seems pretty heavy. Keep in mind most of those other bikes are a lot lighter duty than the rascal though.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

TylerVernon said:


> Yeah.
> 
> All Large/S4, frame without shock:
> 
> ...


you just listed the weight of a rascal frame. we were talking about the ranger.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

oh, woops. Well in that case I'm totally wrong.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

The Rascal is a stout frame but it is also pretty stiff.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

TylerVernon said:


> What are they doing at Revel, applying the carbon into the mold with a trowel?


Seriously. Ordered in January, looks like another 3 month wait.... I do know the issue right now is with SRAM components, stuck on a lot of boats


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

yeah it took me about 5.5 months to get mine. brakes were a hold up then too. if i had to do it over again and could source brakes, i'd send them the brakes and have them do the install. they just deal with sram for stoppers because i asked if they had magura ties and that was a no.


----------



## pstphnsn (Apr 27, 2021)

Buying my first trail bike and Rascal is on the list. I just wanted to clarify how the cables route. Do they pass under the bottom bracket?


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

pstphnsn said:


> Buying my first trail bike and Rascal is on the list. I just wanted to clarify how the cables route. Do they pass under the bottom bracket?


Unfortunatley yes. I hate that routing, but in the end it's offset by everything else.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

2nd that. two tone, i thought you sold the revel and that's why you got rid of the frame saver kit?


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

fishwrinkle said:


> 2nd that. two tone, i thought you sold the revel and that's why you got rid of the frame saver kit?


Nope, I had a Rascal on order. I actually wanted a Ranger but none in stock. The day the Rascal was supposed to ship a Ranger showed up at Fanatik.
But my Invisiframe for the Rascal had just shipped when I made the switch and had no way to stop it.
Kinda of glad it happened cause I love that Purple and would have been a little pissed for that color to be released so close to getting the Rascal.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

utmtbrider said:


> I think if you are six foot or taller you should get an XL. I am 5'9" in riding shoes on a large. It feels good to me, but if I was taller it would feel too small. I do like larger bikes though.


This comment is likely too late but my mate is 5'10" and rides a Large. I enjoy riding his Rascal as well and like the Large for my 5'9". I guess you could go smaller if you wanted something more playful. The Large at our height is better suited for hitting descents - that's what we live for.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

Posted this in the Revel bikes thread too. Anyone have good setup for a bashguard? I have the MRP adaptor mounted behind the bb cup. Tried the Funn Zippa, but its too thick and I had to run more spacers than I wanted. Here's my build. Recently changed the Hope V4's to TRP Evo DH. WOAH. Those brakes pack a punch. Also in case it hasn't been stated enough, this bike rips. Came from a Following MB. Wow. Improvements on both the climbs and decents. Still tons of pop.
View attachment 1935563


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I came off of a V1 Following. Rascal is a much better bike for where I ride. The Following is probably a great bike for flowy trails but for rocky tech it's not much fun. The Rascal excels at climbing in the chunk and is even better descending in the chunk. The rear wheel doesn't hang up on ledges like my Following did.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

gaper80 said:


> Posted this in the Revel bikes thread too. Anyone have good setup for a bashguard? I have the MRP adaptor mounted behind the bb cup. Tried the Funn Zippa, but its too thick and I had to run more spacers than I wanted. Here's my build. Recently changed the Hope V4's to TRP Evo DH. WOAH. Those brakes pack a punch. Also in case it hasn't been stated enough, this bike rips. Came from a Following MB. Wow. Improvements on both the climbs and decents. Still tons of pop.
> View attachment 1935563
> View attachment 1935908


Beautiful build. Really like that the fork matches the frame so well. No advice for a bash tho b/c I'm not running one nor do I feel the need for one for the Rascal. Actually, I stopped running them on all of my bikes, including my bigger travel ones.

And ya Rngspnr, the Rascal climbs chunk amazingly well. Never gets hung up and just stays planted the entire time.

After six months of ownership and some very dry, dusty miles, I finally developed a noise somewhere that's driving me nuts. Thought it was my pedals cuz they were really old and had been on 3 prior bikes, but nope. Gotta spend some time going over things to see if I can find it. Pretty sure it's drivetrain and not the frame tho. ?


----------



## waha (Oct 6, 2020)

I have a Sedona Red Rascal frame coming in next week in size large to replace the Ripmo v2 frame I just sold. I've heard the small/medium Rascal frames are limited to 600ml water bottles, but what about size large? I have my trusty Wolf Tooth 620ml water bottle that I'm hoping will fit with a side loader cage.


----------



## ccornacc (Mar 26, 2007)

What’s the widest tire and rim combo anyone has tried with a Rascal? I know it says 2.4, just wondering if anyone has tried larger.

Thanks!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

ccornacc said:


> What's the widest tire and rim combo anyone has tried with a Rascal? I know it says 2.4, just wondering if anyone has tried larger.
> 
> Thanks!


I was running 2.5 Aggressor/ DHF for a little while. no issues.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

Very intrigued about this bike. How does it pedal on flat ground and how is the mid travel support? Most of the trails I ride are pretty flat so I do a lot of seated sprinting out of corners. I also hit the dirt jumps once in a while and like to have something supportive to push against on the transitions.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

id get a ranger and build it with a pike and maybe a dps in that case. check brady tweedy on instagram he just built a jib version and jumps it pretty big


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

coachxtaylor said:


> id get a ranger and build it with a pike and maybe a dps in that case. check brady tweedy on instagram he just built a jib version and jumps it pretty big


Thanks for not looking for an XC bike or a dirt jumper, just want something that pedals well on the trails where I ride.


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

Just ordered my Purple Rascal M frame (I'm 5'8"). Are you guys wrapping your Rascals? I'm thinking about Ridewrap custom 95% coverage but not sure between matt or gloss? Also what crank length are people running? I'm thinking my 165mm?


----------



## ccornacc (Mar 26, 2007)

noose said:


> Just ordered my Purple Rascal M frame (I'm 5'8"). Are you guys wrapping your Rascals? I'm thinking about Ridewrap custom 95% coverage but not sure between matt or gloss? Also what crank length are people running? I'm thinking my 165mm?


I just picked up a large in the T1000 color and I'm debating Ridewrap or not. Also Matte or Glossy. The frame is both a matte and glossy finish and would hate to wrap it and take some of that beautiful finish away. I'm interested in others opinions as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

After some other searches I am going with gloss ridewrap as it self healing and will show off the gloss top tube better.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

I did the Sedona in the Matte which I think it looks nice. I did find that there are parts of the ride wrap kit that does not fit the rascal 100 accurately mainly near the chain stay protector. I needed to do some slight modifications there.


----------



## waha (Oct 6, 2020)

Anyone had problems setting up their B-gap (and I guess chain length) for their SRAM drivetrains? I measured and set up chain/B-gap at sag on my Rascal, but at non-sag the chain is droopy on the 10t cog and shifting to the 42t/52t the derailleur actually hits the cassette. Had to adjust and do a middle-ground between sag and non-sag and I dunno if that's good or not.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

waha said:


> Anyone had problems setting up their B-gap (and I guess chain length) for their SRAM drivetrains? I measured and set up chain/B-gap at sag on my Rascal, but at non-sag the chain is droopy on the 10t cog and shifting to the 42t/52t the derailleur actually hits the cassette. Had to adjust and do a middle-ground between sag and non-sag and I dunno if that's good or not.


Set it so there is a 3mm gap on the eagle gear when in the 42t then back off 1/4 turn to account for sag. Sounds like your chain is too long also. I would double check the length.


----------



## Ken D (Jul 20, 2021)

Seat dropper post length.
On a large Rascal, would 150mm be ok?
I'm 5'11 with bb to seat rail height of 675mm (31" inseam).
Adam at Revel said a 170mm dropper has a min height of 680mm.


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

Ken D said:


> Seat dropper post length.
> On a large Rascal, would 150mm be ok?
> I'm 5'11 with bb to seat rail height of 675mm (31" inseam).
> Adam at Revel said a 170mm dropper has a min height of 680mm.


I'm running a 170mm one up v1 post on my medium Rascal with 45mm of insertion left over. I have a 30" inseam. I will put a 180mm one up v2 post on it when this post dies.


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

Finally completed my Rascal build. She's not light at 33.2 lbs but built burly to handle rocks and roots. I have been PR'ing almost all my main trails. Great bike!


----------



## Jlar (May 29, 2006)

noose said:


> Finally completed my Rascal build. She's not light at 33.2 lbs but built burly to handle rocks and roots. I have been PR'ing almost all my main trails. Great bike!


Nice build! Like the purple frame.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

noose said:


> Finally completed my Rascal build. She's not light at 33.2 lbs but built burly to handle rocks and roots. I have been PR'ing almost all my main trails. Great bike!
> View attachment 1940565
> View attachment 1940566
> View attachment 1940564


Custom decals for the fork? Or did you get the fork with the bike?


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

masonmoa said:


> Custom decals for the fork? Or did you get the fork with the bike?


Yes they are custom decals on an older fork.


----------



## Hafermilch (Mar 14, 2021)

Did anyone come up with a workable solution for rear fender? The Revel guys finally made one, but apparently only for the Ranger (and according to them it also only fits on the Ranger). I mean, without having seen a Ranger in person, are the two bike so fundamentally different that the couldn´t have made the fender fit both? And the Rail also? The owner of my LBS has fixed a piece of an old tube with zipties on his Rail, but that can hardly be the most elegant solution to protect the rear linkage...


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Hafermilch said:


> Did anyone come up with a workable solution for rear fender? The Revel guys finally made one, but apparently only for the Ranger (and according to them it also only fits on the Ranger). I mean, without having seen a Ranger in person, are the two bike so fundamentally different that the couldn´t have made the fender fit both? And the Rail also? The owner of my LBS has fixed a piece of an old tube with zipties on his Rail, but that can hardly be the most elegant solution to protect the rear linkage...


I suspect that the reason for it only fitting the Ranger is due to rear wheel travel.


----------



## Anchorless (May 15, 2008)

Rumors of a long travel 29er coming from Revel sometime soon....

I don't know anything more than that. Just a wink and a nod from a local dealer.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

Anchorless said:


> Rumors of a long travel 29er coming from Revel sometime soon....
> 
> I don't know anything more than that. Just a wink and a nod from a local dealer.


I love my Rascal, but if the LT 29's can be run mullet'd for us shorties, take my money!


----------



## NateMob (Mar 25, 2017)

Anchorless said:


> Rumors of a long travel 29er coming from Revel sometime soon....
> 
> I don't know anything more than that. Just a wink and a nod from a local dealer.


This would be my next bike if they added an extra set of mounting bosses and full ISCG tabs. Basically a Sentinel with Revel/Canfield rear suspension.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

waha said:


> I have a Sedona Red Rascal frame coming in next week in size large to replace the Ripmo v2 frame I just sold. I've heard the small/medium Rascal frames are limited to 600ml water bottles, but what about size large? I have my trusty Wolf Tooth 620ml water bottle that I'm hoping will fit with a side loader cage.


Ever make this switch? Would be curious on your comparison of the Rascal and Ripmo.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

Absolutely loved my Rascal but would love to see the V2 Rascal slightly longer reach 10-15mm, steeper STA, 140/150, improved bearing seals and cleaner lower cable routing that does not get pulled as suspension cycles.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

TraxFactory said:


> Absolutely loved my Rascal but would love to see the V2 Rascal slightly longer reach 10-15mm, steeper STA, 140/150, improved bearing seals and cleaner lower cable routing that does not get pulled as suspension cycles.


I like the current sizing because the smaller large ends up more like a medium-and-a-half which is perfect for us inbetweeners. I also think the 130 rear is about perfect. I'm with you on the STA though.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Does anyone on a large but 6 ft tall, have any issues with the slacker seat tube angle? I think it may effectively have a few more mm of reach than my Ripley V4. That is a good thing but I am wondering about something- with that spacer seat tube, and the saddle pretty high, that seems to put you back more that it should. Is that an issue anyone has faced? I have a 33" inseam and am usually on a Large.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i ride a lg and am 6'-2"/34" inseam. at 1st the slack sta kinda bothered me as the front tended to lift a touch. wrote it off to adjusting to a new bike. i'm more of a masher on the climbs as i'm used to ss so this became a none issue real quick. yes, a high 70s sta would be nice and maybe slack the front a touch. i wouldn't trade sizes

also, i just saw the love your brain giveaway ranger. oh hot damn she be so sex


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Im with everybody on the seat angle being too slack. If they steepened it to the 77-80 range that would be sweet. Also wish the frame protection was a bit better. A ribbed chainstay protector and linkage guard would be welcome additions.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

fishwrinkle said:


> i ride a lg and am 6'-2"/34" inseam. at 1st the slack sta kinda bothered me as the front tended to lift a touch. wrote it off to adjusting to a new bike. i'm more of a masher on the climbs as i'm used to ss so this became a none issue real quick. yes, a high 70s sta would be nice and maybe slack the front a touch. i wouldn't trade sizes


Interesting. You're at the very top end range of their size rec for a large. You're happy with it? Seems like the XL would be a better fit. I'm 5'9.5" and very seriously considering the large. My last couple bikes I chose to size down, but the Rascal has a shorter reach than industry average, so medium seems too small


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

nope, wanted a smaller bike for playing around. glad i made the choice


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I don't want to feel cramped but the slack ST may actually make the cockpit roomier than my Ripley with its steeper ST. I can handle the slightly slacker ST if it gives me a bit more room to stretch out. While the ETT and Reach may look short on paper, the actual seat-to-bars length may be longer than it appears. The steep seat tubes do cramp up the cockpit and/or make the wheelbase quite long as well.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

fishwrinkle: If I message you, would you be able to send me a couple of measurements from your bike? I can compare them to my Ripley, and decide. I do have a couple of rascals a local dealer may be getting in a couple of weeks but I would have to pay for it now. I'd hate to do that without at least comparing it to my Ripley. Mainly, I want to make sure it is no smaller. If so, I can step up in size.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

what dims do you want?


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

With saddle just above stem level- front of seat post (right on stanchion under the clamp) to back of stem. Then with your saddle at ride height, same thing. Thanks man!

Basically, I am trying to figure out the cockpit length of the Large Rascal compared to my Large Ripley. At 33ish inseam, we probably have our saddles in the same area too.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Flyer said:


> With saddle just above stem level- front of seat post (right on stanchion under the clamp) to back of stem. Then with your saddle at ride height, same thing. Thanks man!
> 
> Basically, I am trying to figure out the cockpit length of the Large Rascal compared to my Large Ripley. At 33ish inseam, we probably have our saddles in the same area too.


If you subtract the effective tt and reach you will be able to tell the difference in mm of how steep or slack the st angle is and therefore the riding position.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

I own a Ripmo and Rascal, both XL. On paper, the Ripmo has a lot more reach, but the Rascal is actually longer b/c of the ST angle. I'd go so far as to say the Rascal has a lot more reach. 

I'm running a 50mm stem on the Rascal, and have pushed my seat up pretty far forward. Whereas the Rip has a 60mm stem and the seat pushed pretty far back. 

Ya, I've been wondering about the ST angle. My front end does come off the ground on steeper climbs, but I thought I just needed to remove some headset spacers to drop my bars down a bit. 

The two aren't even the slightest bit comparable in my opinion. Different categories.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

masonmoa said:


> Ya, I've been wondering about the ST angle. My front end does come off the ground on steeper climbs, but I thought I just needed to remove some headset spacers to drop my bars down a bit.


Dropping those spacer's will give you more reach as well.

Lots variables for sure. For me with a 34" inseam if the Actual STA is too steep my saddle ends up being too far behind the BB and I am not able to put as much power down. This was one of the issues on the Rascal for me. If I drop a plumb bob from seatpost rail center (seatpost height adjusted for me) and measure to center of BB the sweet spot is ~7.5". On the Rascal I was much more.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

TraxFactory said:


> Dropping those spacer's will give you more reach as well.
> 
> Lots variables for sure. For me with a 34" inseam if the Actual STA is too steep my saddle ends up being too far behind the BB and I am not able to put as much power down. This was one of the issues on the Rascal for me. If I drop a plumb bob from seatpost rail center (seatpost height adjusted for me) and measure to center of BB the sweet spot is ~7.5". On the Rascal I was much more.


Totally agree, and ya, my buddy who owns a shop pointed out just how far back my saddle was over the rear wheel. (I'm 6'5" tall with 32" pant inseam/35" bike inseam.) 

The thing is, after no new bike purchases b/t '16-'20, I went kinda nuts during Covid and picked up more than a couple frames I built up myself. Of all of them the Rascal was the most comfortable and easy to adjust to from my old geo bikes. Like I felt right at home on the very first ride, whereas the other bikes took a while to get used to, and there's one, the Ripmo, that I still don't know how I feel about it. Was just emailing with a buddy who also has mixed feelings about his Ripmo. 

I still think the Rascal rocks in the terrain I use it in, which is tight, slow, rooty single track with punchy up and downs without too many long, drawn out climbs, and it climbs tech/chunk better than my other bikes, even the bigger travel ones. But for any other type of riding, I use my other bikes as they're more appropriate.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I think it would be great for those rocky/rooty tech climbs but either way, I climb at least 2,000 ft on each ride. some of the trails are smoother, but the longer rides are 3,000-4,000 ft. The Ripley does decent but I sometimes think a more active suspension would do better, as long as I don't go too big or too mushy. I can't go with too much travel/weight or I would never take that bike out for the bigger rides. For example, a SJ EVO may be too much. Anyway, I keep coming back to the Rascal, for some reason.


----------



## cantdecide (Jan 20, 2005)

I've been enjoying my Rascal for about 2 years. This season I had a consistent creak under load (so mainly climbing) which took away some joy for me; the bike was silent and great on the DHs. I greased and cleaned all sorts of potential creak spots and figured out that the creak would go away for about a day if I greased the rear minilink axle (pivot no. 4). Revel sent me a replacement axle and bearings. I put the axle in with the old bearings and no change. I had a shop (not a Revel dealer) install the bearings and after about 10 quiet rides I feel confident that creak is resolved. Yay!! It's nice to love my bike on the ups and the downs again! The mechanic said the bearings came out of the swing arm really easily, fwiw. I removed the seals on the four removed bearings and they all had grease, looked the same, and feel smooth. I'm still not sure I understand why it needed bearing replacement but all is good again. I thought this might help somebody out there. Kudos to Revel (Leo) for great service.


----------



## adlmtb (Aug 18, 2021)

Just pulled the trigger on a Sedona Red Rascal size large.
Has been great reading everybody's positive experiences here, getting excited to ride the bike.
I'm coming off a Yeti SB100, wanting a bit more travel but something that also pedals real nice.

Happy trails!


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Anyone here that was in-between sizes could talk a bit about which size they chose and why ? Specifically, if you chose the larger size, do you find more weight on your hands (longer reach) or had to raise your bars ? If you chose the smaller size, were you able to slide the seat back enough or get a longer stem ? I'm in between sizes right now and really trying to figure this out with the new Geo.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

I'm 5'9", and ride a med. I know there are other guys at the same height who swear by a L. I like how nimble, and quick turning the Med is. It's like a big BMX bike on a pump track. However, I tend to always lean towards smaller.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

NS-NV said:


> I'm 5'9", and ride a med. I know there are other guys at the same height who swear by a L. I like how nimble, and quick turning the Med is. It's like a big BMX bike on a pump track. However, I tend to always lean towards smaller.


Do you find the bike is still pretty stable on the descents ? I'm asking because I'm also thinking of sizing down.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

ridetheridge said:


> Anyone here that was in-between sizes could talk a bit about which size they chose and why ? Specifically, if you chose the larger size, do you find more weight on your hands (longer reach) or had to raise your bars ? If you chose the smaller size, were you able to slide the seat back enough or get a longer stem ? I'm in between sizes right now and really trying to figure this out with the new Geo.
> 
> 
> > my reach on a 13 xl nimble 9 is an inch longer then my lg rascal. my seat on the n9 though is more forward and feels better for climbing. the rascal has gears so it doesn't bother me that i'm out from the bb more. good luck on the decision


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

ridetheridge said:


> Do you find the bike is still pretty stable on the descents ? I'm asking because I'm also thinking of sizing down.


Before I answer that, keep in mind that this is my first 29’er, and all my previous bikes (over 20) have been very skewed towards my previous stomping grounds of N. Vancouver/ Squamish/ Whistler.

High speed, flowy descents like those found in Crested Butte, this thing shines. I do not know if it is more a function of the wheel size, or stability. Regardless it is very stable there.

Loose, steep lines, tech lines, with drops into tight corners, if you just let it go, it is surprisingly capable. it’s nimbility is what helps there. 

Where it gets overwhelmed is machine built jump lines at bike parks. Sailing big tables or gaps is not something I really enjoy on the Rascal. I don’t think the length of travel is the issue, but more confidence in letting it go to carry enough speed is.

My riding style does not really change from bike to bike, be it a full DH or Hardtail. The difference is how much punishment I can take on a given trail.


----------



## DoubleKinColorado (Sep 18, 2013)

I'm glad I found this thread... I have a Rascal frame on order, but have seriously been going back and forth between the SB130 and the new Alchemy Arktos 135. Any opinions on the Alchemy? Or between the bikes in general? I've ridden the SB130, and own an SB150 and SB100, so those are my baselines for comparison.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

I think you'd be splitting hairs between the SB130 and the Rascal. I did find the Rascal was a bit more active in it's travel. 

Living 2 miles from Yeti HQ, I really want to be a Yeti guy (absolutely love how the SB150 rides), but as the wrench for my Park Rat son's SB165, I don't think I could own a switch infinity equipped bike. The amount of effort to keep it running smooth in dirty conditions is staggering when compared to more conventional designs.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

NS-NV said:


> I think you'd be splitting hairs between the SB130 and the Rascal. I did find the Rascal was a bit more active in it's travel.
> 
> Living 2 miles from Yeti HQ, I really want to be a Yeti guy (absolutely love how the SB150 rides), but as the wrench for my Park Rat son's SB165, I don't think I could own a switch infinity equipped bike. The amount of effort to keep it running smooth in dirty conditions is staggering when compared to more conventional designs.


Seems like the frames crack a lot also.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

That may have been when they were trying to keep the frames really light a few years ago. My 4.5 was light but I had no issues. I have noticed that all their frames have gotten a bit heavier recently though. I also had no issues with the Switch Infinity in the 5 years I owned this bike, and overhauled it recently.


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

DoubleKinColorado said:


> I'm glad I found this thread... I have a Rascal frame on order, but have seriously been going back and forth between the SB130 and the new Alchemy Arktos 135. Any opinions on the Alchemy? Or between the bikes in general? I've ridden the SB130, and own an SB150 and SB100, so those are my baselines for comparison.


I have the older Arktos 140.160 frame suspension works as advertised, pedals incredibly well and Alchemy is great company to work with. Would buy the 135/150 in a heartbeat but no reason to replace my existing Alchemy right now.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

i liked the way that old alchemy pedaled but the top tube was so high it was pretty scary for me to ride on steep descents. my current bike (a ranger) is way more confidence inspiring.


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

Just in case anyone is looking for a Rascal (Medium) https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/3162924/


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

ridetheridge said:


> Do you find the bike is still pretty stable on the descents ? I'm asking because I'm also thinking of sizing down.


I am 5'8" on a M (was considering a L) and wanted to maximize stability so put on my 160 mm Lyrik with 42 offset a couple days ago. I know it's over-forked and was thinking about reducing the fork travel to 150mm with a new air spring until I rode it yesterday with the Lyrik for the first time. I am not sure if it's the reduced offset or extra slackness (now around 65 deg) or both but it holds lines in turns way better now and has zero twitch at speed. I won't be changing the fork and like the added clearance to boot.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Has anybody else tried running their Rascal at 25% sag? I originally had the bike set at 30% sag and it was good all around. Felt a little harsh in tech both up and down but wasn't too bad. I recently tried the bike at 25% as recommended by customer support and it was better everywhere ! Tech climbing is easier, it was smoother on the descents and the increased pedal clearance climbing was great too. Seems weird the bike felt better everywhere with lower sag. Thoughts?


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

utmtbrider said:


> Has anybody else tried running their Rascal at 25% sag? I originally had the bike set at 30% sag and it was good all around. Felt a little harsh in tech both up and down but wasn't too bad. I recently tried the bike at 25% as recommended by customer support and it was better everywhere ! Tech climbing is easier, it was smoother on the descents and the increased pedal clearance climbing was great too. Seems weird the bike felt better everywhere with lower sag. Thoughts?


You mean less sag, I think? I am three rides in with my Revel. I am running 25% sag in the shock and 30% sag up front. It's my first Rockshox fork (used to FOX), and I am happy with it, but it is definitely a firmer ride. Maybe I'll bump it up in PSI and see how it goes. Taking a lot longer to dial in the fork than what I am used to


----------



## leejohnh22 (Mar 23, 2020)

Zoomie said:


> You mean less sag, I think? I am three rides in with my Revel. I am running 25% sag in the shock and 30% sag up front. It's my first Rockshox fork (used to FOX), and I am happy with it, but it is definitely a firmer ride. Maybe I'll bump it up in PSI and see how it goes. Taking a lot longer to dial in the fork than what I am used to


Rockshox forks are usually one of the easier forks to get feeling pretty well so sounds like maybe you can tweak your settings closer to recommended.

30% sag sounds like too much up front and the fork is likely packing up leading to harshness.

Try bumping up to ~20% sag and speeding up your rebound. You can also try referencing the chart as a starting point as well.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

leejohnh22 said:


> Rockshox forks are usually one of the easier forks to get feeling pretty well so sounds like maybe you can tweak your settings closer to recommended.
> 
> 30% sag sounds like too much up front and the fork is likely packing up leading to harshness.
> 
> Try bumping up to ~20% sag and speeding up your rebound. You can also try referencing the chart as a starting point as well.


Good call. I downloaded the Rockshox app and I bumped up by 15 psi and added more rebound. Fork feels a little plusher from a quick ride around. A little counter intuitive, but it makes sense forcing the fork to ride higher up in travel for more "plush"


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Zoomie said:


> Good call. I downloaded the Rockshox app and I bumped up by 15 psi and added more rebound. Fork feels a little plusher from a quick ride around. A little counter intuitive, but it makes sense forcing the fork to ride higher up in travel for more "plush"


I have spent months measing with my pike ultimate settings. I found the rockshox trailhead recommendations to be spot on. I agree with the post above higher pressure and less sag make the fork ride better.


----------



## cantdecide (Jan 20, 2005)

cantdecide said:


> I've been enjoying my Rascal for about 2 years. This season I had a consistent creak under load (so mainly climbing) which took away some joy for me; the bike was silent and great on the DHs. I greased and cleaned all sorts of potential creak spots and figured out that the creak would go away for about a day if I greased the rear minilink axle (pivot no. 4). Revel sent me a replacement axle and bearings. I put the axle in with the old bearings and no change. I had a shop (not a Revel dealer) install the bearings and after about 10 quiet rides I feel confident that creak is resolved. Yay!! It's nice to love my bike on the ups and the downs again! The mechanic said the bearings came out of the swing arm really easily, fwiw. I removed the seals on the four removed bearings and they all had grease, looked the same, and feel smooth. I'm still not sure I understand why it needed bearing replacement but all is good again. I thought this might help somebody out there. Kudos to Revel (Leo) for great service.


I just wanted to follow up on my Rascal saga. After less than a month and a ~10 rides, the creaking under pedal load came back as loud as ever. Revel asked me to send them the bike. They found that bearing bores in the frame and swingarm were out of tolerance. They said this was a manufacturing defect that affected a small number of early Rascal frames. Because I bought my Rascal (very) lightly used via Pink Bike, Revel offered me a crash replacement warranty. So ... $1500 I should have a new frame pretty soon. They said they were expecting a shipment on Dec. 10. For sure, I'm a little disappointed that I'm buying the frame twice, but customer service continues to be outstanding. I hope Revel picks up the shipping. They did send me a shipping label, and a buddy lent me his Evoc Pro case so getting the bike to them was easy. More good news is that I'll get a full warranty on the new frame. Looking forward to new bike day!


----------



## Reveler (Dec 25, 2021)

utmtbrider said:


> I have spent months measing with my pike ultimate settings. I found the rockshox trailhead recommendations to be spot on. I agree with the post above higher pressure and less sag make the fork ride better.


I'm looking at a 2021 Large Rascal build. Do you think a 2021 Fox Float 36 Factory GRIP2 at 160mm is too much travel? My shock is a Rockshox Super Deluxe Ultimate and XT drivetrain/brakes. I'm 5'11', 190 lbs, 52 yrs old. I mostly like rocks, roots, small hops, and descents. Any advice on the build would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much .


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

I was running my Lyrik at 160 but noticed some wheel flop and a little wander climbing so had a 150 air shaft installed and love it. The biggest improvement came from the fork being reduced offset 42 degree which really adds stability.


Reveler said:


> I'm looking at a 2021 Large Rascal build. Do you think a 2021 Fox Float 36 Factory GRIP2 at 160mm is too much travel? My shock is a Rockshox Super Deluxe Ultimate and XT drivetrain/brakes. I'm 5'11', 190 lbs, 52 yrs old. I mostly like rocks, roots, small hops, and descents. Any advice on the build would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much .


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

I’m 49 and like the same. I upgraded my Pike to 150mm. It’s pretty balanced but I do think 160 might make the front a little floppy to your liking. At 150mm, the front can get light on steep techy climbs. I personally wouldn’t want that front end riding any higher


----------



## ccornacc (Mar 26, 2007)

Zoomie said:


> I’m 49 and like the same. I upgraded my Pike to 150mm. It’s pretty balanced but I do think 160 might make the front a little floppy to your liking. At 150mm, the front can get light on steep techy climbs. I personally wouldn’t want that front end riding any higher


Zoomie, Did you go from 140-150 on the pike? Did you need to replace the air shaft to do that? Anyway to do that with out a brand new air shaft? I have the 2021 Pike Ultimate at 140 and if possible, it would be great to not have to replace the current air shaft and do a cheaper mod if possible. Sorry if that has been spelled out previously. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

Yes. I have the Pike Ultimate and simply ordered a 150 airshaft for $40. It took less than 10 minutes to swap it out with the 140. You can use an older 150 air shaft and just order the debonair upgrade which is less than $20 I believe. There isn’t a way to bump the travel with your current airshaft as the length of the physical shaft is longer on the 150


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Reveler said:


> I'm looking at a 2021 Large Rascal build. Do you think a 2021 Fox Float 36 Factory GRIP2 at 160mm is too much travel? My shock is a Rockshox Super Deluxe Ultimate and XT drivetrain/brakes. I'm 5'11', 190 lbs, 52 yrs old. I mostly like rocks, roots, small hops, and descents. Any advice on the build would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much .


It really just depends. Some people love the bike at 160 others hate it. I would say it's worth a shot if you hate it just swap the air spring back down to a 150 or 140.


----------



## ccornacc (Mar 26, 2007)

Zoomie said:


> Yes. I have the Pike Ultimate and simply ordered a 150 airshaft for $40. It took less than 10 minutes to swap it out with the 140. You can use an older 150 air shaft and just order the debonair upgrade which is less than $20 I believe. There isn’t a way to bump the travel with your current airshaft as the length of the physical shaft is longer on the 150


Thanks Zoomie!


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

Zoomie said:


> Yes. I have the Pike Ultimate and simply ordered a 150 airshaft for $40. It took less than 10 minutes to swap it out with the 140. You can use an older 150 air shaft and just order the debonair upgrade which is less than $20 I believe. There isn’t a way to bump the travel with your current airshaft as the length of the physical shaft is longer on the 150


Were you able to just swap the 150 air shaft on the stock pike ultimate (assuming it's the stock one that came with the bike). I know the stanchions on the pike ultimate that came w/ my rascal has sag markings for 130 and 140mm, but wasn't sure if I was able to swap a 150mm air shaft without also changing the uppers.


----------



## Reveler (Dec 25, 2021)

Zoomie said:


> I’m 49 and like the same. I upgraded my Pike to 150mm. It’s pretty balanced but I do think 160 might make the front a little floppy to your liking. At 150mm, the front can get light on steep techy climbs. I personally wouldn’t want that front end riding any higher


Thanks for all the advice. I'm going with 150 mm. Just FYI I heard from Revel and they approve the 150 mm travel and will still warranty the frame but will not warranty at any higher travel.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

jchan417 said:


> Were you able to just swap the 150 air shaft on the stock pike ultimate (assuming it's the stock one that came with the bike). I know the stanchions on the pike ultimate that came w/ my rascal has sag markings for 130 and 140mm, but wasn't sure if I was able to swap a 150mm air shaft without also changing the uppers.


Yes. i used the “stock” Pike. Rockshox says the max travel on the Pike is 150mm. If you look at the stanchions, the sag markings are pretty linear. 30% sag at 130 is 25% sag at 140 (or vice versa - I’m not looking at it right now). So, you can easily interpolate sag settings at 150. Also, you can just go into the rockshox app and instead of putting the serial number in, just put the model number in with the 150 travel. Although, I’m running almost 20 psi lower than their recommended settings.

this video is pretty good on how to do it


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

anyone successfully running a bash guard and if so what one? i'm afraid the bb mount style could interfere with the guide.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

After owning my Rascal for a little over the year I really love this bike. It is really fantastic everywhere, however I can't seem to find a good setup for the shock even with all my tinkering. I have tried all the clicks of rebound, different pressures, spacers, and servicing the shock with little improvement. The shock feels really harsh when the trail gets rough any suggestions?


----------



## ckspeed (May 25, 2012)

Built my rascal last month but did not get any time on it til today. Here are some photos for your enjoyment. Size small about 29.9 lbs.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

utmtbrider said:


> After owning my Rascal for a little over the year I really love this bike. It is really fantastic everywhere, however I can't seem to find a good setup for the shock even with all my tinkering. I have tried all the clicks of rebound, different pressures, spacers, and servicing the shock with little improvement. The shock feels really harsh when the trail gets rough any suggestions?


Buy a new shock. Well, unless you splurged on one of them fancy Push ones. 

I think I rode my Rascal less than 5 times on the RS SD. I was using a CC Kitsuma air for a while because my Riot came with a CCDBA and I really liked it. And just recently picked up a Mara in an attempt to revamp my Rascal after I came to terms that swapping it for something with a little less travel and lighter just wasn't going to happen any time soon. Only have one ride on the Mara, but I really liked it and it definitely changed things up.

Btw, I did run the RS SD I took off the Rascal on my other bike. It was okay, but I also never really could get it dialed. Swapped it for a Float X and so much better.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

masonmoa said:


> Buy a new shock. Well, unless you splurged on one of them fancy Push ones.
> 
> I think I rode my Rascal less than 5 times on the RS SD. I was using a CC Kitsuma air for a while because my Riot came with a CCDBA and I really liked it. And just recently picked up a Mara in an attempt to revamp my Rascal after I came to terms that swapping it for something with a little less travel and lighter just wasn't going to happen any time soon. Only have one ride on the Mara, but I really liked it and it definitely changed things up.
> 
> Btw, I did run the RS SD I took off the Rascal on my other bike. It was okay, but I also never really could get it dialed. Swapped it for a Float X and so much better.


Yep I am on the stock Super Deluxe. I think I am going to get a custom tune on it since my bike fund is a little low after buying a new xc bike.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

utmtbrider said:


> Yep I am on the stock Super Deluxe. I think I am going to get a custom tune on it since my bike fund is a little low after buying a new xc bike.


I did a Vorsprung Tractive Tune on my Super Deluxe, can could not be happier. The tune is much better, and the low speed compression is actually usable.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

utmtbrider said:


> Yep I am on the stock Super Deluxe. I think I am going to get a custom tune on it since my bike fund is a little low after buying a new xc bike.


I feel ya. Only reason I splurged a bit on upgrading parts on my Rascal is b/c I sold another frame and had some cash to spare. Thing is, it's still not as light as I'd like and I don't know if I want to spend even more for very small loss of weight. 

Ever since I got the Rascal w/ the Super Deluxe, I've been playing around with the idea of getting the Vorsprung tune for it, but just never got around to it. Hell of a lot cheaper than a new shock. But, I've had less than ideal experiences with custom tuned suspension, so if possible, I prefer to make something work out of the box.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

masonmoa said:


> I feel ya. Only reason I splurged a bit on upgrading parts on my Rascal is b/c I sold another frame and had some cash to spare. Thing is, it's still not as light as I'd like and I don't know if I want to spend even more for very small loss of weight.
> 
> Ever since I got the Rascal w/ the Super Deluxe, I've been playing around with the idea of getting the Vorsprung tune for it, but just never got around to it. Hell of a lot cheaper than a new shock. But, I've had less than ideal experiences with custom tuned suspension, so if possible, I prefer to make something work out of the box.


Totally get that. I am super lucky to have one of the more reputable tuners in the area around me so I'm not too worried about them doing a bad job.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

utmtbrider said:


> Totally get that. I am super lucky to have one of the more reputable tuners in the area around me so I'm not too worried about them doing a bad job.


I'm with you. I cannot get the RS SD to feel good. Any fast chunder and it is overwhelmed very quick. I spoke to Craig at Avy, and he said "he can re-valve the shock to feel better, but at the end of the day it is still a 130mm trail bike". He also suggested moving to a coil to better match the CBF platform. I'm going to at least have the SD tuned, but I was so unimpressed on the black trails (steep chunky descents in Pisgah). It's got me looking for a 2nd longer travel bike to travel with (ie. Moab, NC, PNW / BC type riding). Originally, I was hoping the Rascal could do it all for me.

I will say that the Rascal rips 90% of the trails I normally ride. Again the only trails it didn't perform well on were black rated with long descents and big ass rocks. Maybe a coil and beefier fork would have helped. Hard to know unless I drop $1200 of a 11/6, and upgrade from a Pike to 36 or Lyrik.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

gaper80 said:


> I'm with you. I cannot get the RS SD to feel good. Any fast chunder and it is overwhelmed very quick. I spoke to Craig at Avy, and he said "he can re-valve the shock to feel better, but at the end of the day it is still a 130mm trail bike". He also suggested moving to a coil to better match the CBF platform. I'm going to at least have the SD tuned, but I was so unimpressed on the black trails (steep chunky descents in Pisgah). It's got me looking for a 2nd longer travel bike to travel with (ie. Moab, NC, PNW / BC type riding). Originally, I was hoping the Rascal could do it all for me.
> 
> I will say that the Rascal rips 90% of the trails I normally ride. Again the only trails it didn't perform well on were the black rated with long descents with big ass rocks. Maybe a coil and beefier fork would have helped. Hard to know unless I drop $1200 of a 11/6, and upgrade from a Pike to 36 or Lyrik.


You just summed my experience up so well. It feels great on easier flow trails but as soon as it gets rough the bike gets choppy and unsettled, it almost feels like the back end is getting pinged around by the rocks. At this point I am planning on retuning the shock since unfortunately I cant spend $1200 on a shock.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

man sorry to hear you guys having problems with the super d. I will say the 11/6 is a dream. I do leave it in firm mode most of the time so i can have more pop, but plush is still great all around, even climbing. I'm hitting some good speeds riding Az trails and the ass is planted. I'm not trying to sound snobby, but just giving feed back


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

fishwrinkle said:


> man sorry to hear you guys having problems with the super d. I will say the 11/6 is a dream. I do leave it in firm mode most of the time so i can have more pop, but plush is still great all around, even climbing. I'm hitting some good speeds riding Az trails and the ass is planted. I'm not trying to sound snobby, but just giving feed back


Doesn't sound snobby to me. Its pretty good feedback. I jusr cant get myself to spend that mch on a shock, I can get some carbon wheels for the same price.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

Yeah, I hear ya on the price. The only reason I got one was because it was an upgrade option and I usually hold onto bikes forever. So that's how I justified it to myself. Love the bike and the only things I have to complain about is the lack of space between the lower link and the tire. The other gripe is the lack of ISCG tabs, but that seems to be a trend for a bit now. I hate BB adapters. Hope you guys get it sorted so you can enjoy that new bike.

If either of you guys are in central AZ I'd be happy to let you rip the bike down some trails or shock swap if frame size isn't your size. I feel a coil is best for the cbf, like Craig mentioned. Just saw Gaper80 is in NC.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

gaper80 said:


> I'm going to at least have the SD tuned, but I was so unimpressed on the black trails (steep chunky descents in Pisgah). It's got me looking for a 2nd longer travel bike to travel with (ie. Moab, NC, PNW / BC type riding). Originally, I was hoping the Rascal could do it all for me.


Back in July I was riding Farlow, Avery, Bennett and trails of the such and was impressed with the rear tracking and sucking up the chunder.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

fishwrinkle said:


> Back in July I was riding Farlow, Avery, Bennett and trails of the such and was impressed with the rear tracking and sucking up the chunder.


Right on. I WISH I called NC home base! I only get to visit once or twice a year. I had a few great rides that trip, but when we rode Pilot Rock and a few runs on Bennett I had a hard time keeping up with my buddies - and in this situation we all ride at the same level so it wasn't my fitness or anything. They could just smash away and I'd get tossed around too much. (Rimpo's, Slash's, and Sentinel's are the bikes I'm talking about). 

Just paid for the Avy tune, so I will report back. Maybe this will really help the bike. I'll get to test it this April in Sedona.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

If you Have a RS SD Ultimate IMHO it’s definitely worth spending the extra cash to give it the Tractive tune by Vorsprung. Suspension Syndicate in Utah did mine. I don’t have a Rascal but instead ride a HightowerV2. The back of the bike is so much more composed in the rough and the back wheel tracks the ground like Velcro. Just my experience yo


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

I sent my RS SD Ultimate in new to Vorsprung but pretty happy with the outcome on the Rail.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

rockman said:


> I sent my RS SD Ultimate in new to Vorsprung but pretty happy with the outcome on the Rail.
> View attachment 1972502


Nice! Were you Able to tell a difference in feel when going thru rough sections of trail?


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

angieri918 said:


> Nice! Were you Able to tell a difference in feel when going thru rough sections of trail?


i sent the shock in new so hard to tell about the difference but after years of running coil I’m impressed with how well the rear end hugs the ground. It tracks and doesn’t get deflected off line. Climbing traction is also quite good.


----------



## NS-NV (Aug 15, 2006)

There is nothing wrong with the DPX2, but I found that it is not too hard to ‘out ride’ it on the Rascal.

Flowy trails, no problem, but if you push the bike (which I find it handles ‘big bike’ trails quite well), better to go with a bigger volume or coil shock.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

rockman said:


> i sent the shock in new so hard to tell about the difference but after years of running coil I’m impressed with how well the rear end hugs the ground. It tracks and doesn’t get deflected off line. Climbing traction is also quite good.


Haha that’s exactly my thoughts. I mentioned that I preferred support over plushness and was surprised just how well it managed to stay composed in the rough. How are you running your LSC? Steve from Vorsprung told me in an email to start with -7 from closed. I’m currently on the bench right now due to shoulder surgery so I haven’t completely settled on where the sweet spot is with LSC


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

angieri918 said:


> Haha that’s exactly my thoughts. I mentioned that I preferred support over plushness and was surprised just how well it managed to stay composed in the rough. How are you running your LSC? Steve from Vorsprung told me in an email to start with -7 from closed. I’m currently on the bench right now due to shoulder surgery so I haven’t completely settled on where the sweet spot is with LSC


Not as much LSC. -10 from full closed. Seems to have plenty of pedal efficiency with the CBF. I didn't get any recommendations from Vorsprung or Melius either. But maybe I'll dial up a bit more and see how it feels. Heal up!


----------



## paleh0rse (Jun 20, 2011)

New (to me) Rascal all dialed in and ready to roll. Swapped over all my parts from a Transition Spur X01 build. Sooo stoked!


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

gaper80 said:


> Right on. I WISH I called NC home base! I only get to visit once or twice a year. I had a few great rides that trip, but when we rode Pilot Rock and a few runs on Bennett I had a hard time keeping up with my buddies - and in this situation we all ride at the same level so it wasn't my fitness or anything. They could just smash away and I'd get tossed around too much. (Rimpo's, Slash's, and Sentinel's are the bikes I'm talking about).
> 
> Just paid for the Avy tune, so I will report back. Maybe this will really help the bike. I'll get to test it this April in Sedona.


Did Craig get your avy tune done? I am super curious on your feedback because my shock definitely needs some tuning done.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

utmtbrider said:


> Did Craig get your avy tune done? I am super curious on your feedback because my shock definitely needs some tuning done.


Apparently they are pretty backed up. I am scheduled for service next week. I will report back once I have it reinstalled. I've got a trip to Sedona end of April, so I should have some solid feedback by then. But if I were you, I would just have either Vorsrung or Avy do it and not worry about it. Craig tuned the shock for my V1 Evil Following, and it transformed the bike. No joke.


----------



## ebiagi (May 18, 2006)

Has anyone done the MegNeg upgrade on their Super Deluxe? Wondering if that is a worthwhile upgrade for the Rascal or not.


----------



## kamper11 (Feb 8, 2008)

paleh0rse said:


> New (to me) Rascal all dialed in and ready to roll. Swapped over all my parts from a Transition Spur X01 build. Sooo stoked!


how does this compare to your spur?


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

is anyone having a problem with rocks getting pulverized between the lower link and the bb/st ? it's happened twice this weekend and its not a reassuring sound. luckily it's just paint this time. this bike does have some tight clearances in the rear. i am using a printed mud guard in that area, so idk if that's contributing to it or not?


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

ebiagi said:


> Has anyone done the MegNeg upgrade on their Super Deluxe? Wondering if that is a worthwhile upgrade for the Rascal or not.


I did this for a bit, and I liked the standard can better. The bike never felt right at the end of the travel as I had to run more air pressure with the bigger air can. The biggest change I did was the Vorsprung tractive tune, which accomplished with what I was looking for in using the magneg.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

paleh0rse said:


> New (to me) Rascal all dialed in and ready to roll. Swapped over all my parts from a Transition Spur X01 build. Sooo stoked!


That spec seems spot on. Do you know how much it weighs?


----------



## paleh0rse (Jun 20, 2011)

kamper11 said:


> how does this compare to your spur?


I only have one ride on it so far due to rain (of course!), but the differences are really profound. The Spur required a much more intense focus to choose lines and descend at speed, while the Rascal is like riding on clouds - literally every bump, small drop and hit just completely disappears. All the nasty roots that required concentration on the Spur are pretty much no-brainers on the Rascal. It's certainly not at the level that any DH or Enduro bike would be on the descents, but it's close enough for my level and style of riding. 

The Spur was lighter and easier to flick around on the trails when popping off every little rock and drop. It's probably going to take some time for me to get used to the added weight and geo of the Rascal before I can flick it around like that again. In the meantime, I'm already 100% more confident on bigger jumps and drops, which was the primary reason I moved up to the longer travel Rascal. I got exactly what I hoped for in that regard.

More to follow once I've ridden it a few more times and really seen what it can do.


angieri918 said:


> That spec seems spot on. Do you know how much it weighs?


I don't know yet, but I'll try to swing by the local shop and throw it on their scale asap. My medium Spur weighed in at around 26 pounds with all of the same parts, so I'm guessing 31-ish for the Rascal. I can definitely feel the difference whenever I load it up on my truck, but not so much out on the trail - which is very encouraging!


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

31# sounds just about right. Mine is a hair heavier right at 32#. Built a M Rascal on Fanatik with the lightest components Fanatik had to offer and the bike came in at 27.7# at a cost of $11,053.00. I'm all in on mine for under $4k. I'll take the 3# penalty at those prices. I think this is the reason a lot of people are building Rangers with coils and Pikes trying to keep the weight as low as possible. My last bike was a V1 Following that was two pounds lighter with essentially the same components but my Rascal pedals like a lighter bike.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Just for the hell of it I built one up pretty light with the Fanatik builder, you can get the Rascal pretty light but your wallet will take a hit for sure!


----------



## kamper11 (Feb 8, 2008)

paleh0rse said:


> I only have one ride on it so far due to rain (of course!), but the differences are really profound. The Spur required a much more intense focus to choose lines and descend at speed, while the Rascal is like riding on clouds - literally every bump, small drop and hit just completely disappears. All the nasty roots that required concentration on the Spur are pretty much no-brainers on the Rascal. It's certainly not at the level that any DH or Enduro bike would be on the descents, but it's close enough for my level and style of riding.
> 
> The Spur was lighter and easier to flick around on the trails when popping off every little rock and drop. It's probably going to take some time for me to get used to the added weight and geo of the Rascal before I can flick it around like that again. In the meantime, I'm already 100% more confident on bigger jumps and drops, which was the primary reason I moved up to the longer travel Rascal. I got exactly what I hoped for in that regard.
> 
> ...


thanks for the intel and perspective...


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

paleh0rse said:


> I only have one ride on it so far due to rain (of course!), but the differences are really profound. The Spur required a much more intense focus to choose lines and descend at speed, while the Rascal is like riding on clouds - literally every bump, small drop and hit just completely disappears. All the nasty roots that required concentration on the Spur are pretty much no-brainers on the Rascal. It's certainly not at the level that any DH or Enduro bike would be on the descents, but it's close enough for my level and style of riding.
> 
> The Spur was lighter and easier to flick around on the trails when popping off every little rock and drop. It's probably going to take some time for me to get used to the added weight and geo of the Rascal before I can flick it around like that again. In the meantime, I'm already 100% more confident on bigger jumps and drops, which was the primary reason I moved up to the longer travel Rascal. I got exactly what I hoped for in that regard.
> 
> ...


5 pounds seems like a crazy difference especially if using same parts. I would guess the frame is only a pound or so heavier.


----------



## paleh0rse (Jun 20, 2011)

Unbrockenchain said:


> 5 pounds seems like a crazy difference especially if using same parts. I would guess the frame is only a pound or so heavier.


The longer fork and shock are each slightly heavier, as well. I haven't done a weight comparison on paper, though, so I don't know the exact expected differences.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

Have been kicking around the idea of a having a custom "dream" spec Rascal built to replace my Stumpjumper (which I love 90% of the time but the flex-stay rear pivot doesn't play well with chunky trails). Typical riding would be intermediate to low advanced trails in SoCal.

I'm leaning toward a build based around X01 AXS shifting and my existing Nobl TR37 wheels. 

The main decision points are:

Go with Fox 34 Factory / Fox DPX or Pike Ultimate / RS Super Deluxe suspension? I see some builds using Fox 36 but my instinct is to not add the extra weight to what's already going to be a chonker compared to the Stumpy. Don't care as much about value on the suspension as overall performance.

Has anybody run a mixed drivetrain on the Rascal with Shimano cassette/crank/chain and SRAM derailleur? I see a lot of talk over early chainline issues. I'm currently on Shimano so this would let me move over existing custom parts.

Brakes? Hayes Dominion and Hope Tech 4 both look interesting.

Finally, does anybody have experiences with Fanatik builds? I prefer to work with a local shop but just have a feeling they are going to come in multiple thousands over Fanatik's pricing for this build.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Lionel_Hutz said:


> Have been kicking around the idea of a having a custom "dream" spec Rascal built to replace my Stumpjumper (which I love 90% of the time but the flex-stay rear pivot doesn't play well with chunky trails). Typical riding would be intermediate to low advanced trails in SoCal.
> 
> I'm leaning toward a build based around X01 AXS shifting and my existing Nobl TR37 wheels.
> 
> ...


I would highly recommend the DVO Diamond D1 fork for the Rascal. It's heavier but by far the best performing fork. The negative spring being an actual coil spring is a major plus. It is also internally adjustable between 140, 150 or 160mm of travel.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i have the pike ult and while it's a good fork i wish i had the dvo. are you not considering a coil due to weight? i'd take the 1# penalty as the bike is just a floating magic carpet with one.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Lionel_Hutz said:


> Have been kicking around the idea of a having a custom "dream" spec Rascal built to replace my Stumpjumper (which I love 90% of the time but the flex-stay rear pivot doesn't play well with chunky trails). Typical riding would be intermediate to low advanced trails in SoCal.
> 
> I'm leaning toward a build based around X01 AXS shifting and my existing Nobl TR37 wheels.
> 
> ...


If I was doing a dream build I would go with Ext suspension front and rear. It’s by far the best mtb suspension imo.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

fishwrinkle said:


> i have the pike ult and while it's a good fork i wish i had the dvo. are you not considering a coil due to weight? i'd take the 1# penalty as the bike is just a floating magic carpet with one.


Largely weight weenie issues (it’s already going to be something like 3 lbs more than I could get the Stumpy to, which I think is a lot) but also the coil is probably a bit much for my intended use of the bike.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i wouldn't worry about the couple extra lbs. they will disappear with all the grins it will give you. well i see people putting 11/6's on a ranger so... anyhow good luck in the build and i'd research the super d a bit as it seems to be not giving some riders good experiences on the rascal.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

So, I did a thing and went ahead with the full fat build. Pike at 150mm with the Push shock. It's a hell of a bike--feels very burly and is an absolute weapon on rough trails. I've only had it out for four rides, but some of those have been trails that I've ridden dozens of times on my Stumpjumper. 

The bike descends and handles chunk unbelievably well compared to my Stumpy. It just absolutely eats bumps and has so much more traction than I'm used to. With an identical tire setup, I knocked _25%_ off my PR on a favorite flow segment this afternoon.

Downside is it climbs only 80-90% as well as the Stumpy and doesn't have an edge unless the climbing is extremely rough (this seems to be true with the Push with "climb" valving as well as "trail"). I'd really like to find a way to close that gap but it may just be the reality of the bike geo, weight, and suspension compared to the Spec. Also trying to get the bike to feel more poppy and playful, but that's probably just suspension fine-tuning. Would welcome any thoughts on setup here.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i mostly ride the 11/6 in the firm mode for the lil extra pop. i only ride it in plush mode for the fast flow trails. i have almost the same suspension setup as you, but a 140 pike ult. my next venture will be to run it mullet after i burnish the pikes bushings. my only gripe of the push is the sharp edge on the switch. cut my inner knee good so i took a fine file and knocked down the edge and busted out a sharpie.

i noticed the teal in the cassette. who makes that? it'd match my teal hoses good


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

fishwrinkle said:


> i mostly ride the 11/6 in the firm mode for the lil extra pop. i only ride it in plush mode for the fast flow trails. i have almost the same suspension setup as you, but a 140 pike ult. my next venture will be to run it mullet after i burnish the pikes bushings. my only gripe of the push is the sharp edge on the switch. cut my inner knee good so i took a fine file and knocked down the edge and busted out a sharpie.
> 
> i noticed the teal in the cassette. who makes that? it'd match my teal hoses good


Do you ride in the factory “climb” setting (ie, almost fully closed compression)? That felt pretty firm to me.

Cassette and chain are the SRAM xx1 rainbow color.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

yes the black circuit and pedal mode on the pike. i guessed oil slick, but in the pic it looks all teal, thx.

idk your terrain but i'm currently in az so i don't really take it out of the settings here, but back home in mid mich i ride in the silver circuit and open up front. 25 miles of modern flow trails.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Does anybody else have issues with bottoming out their shock on their Rascal? I bottom out every ride even with 2 spacers and 25% sag.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

utmtbrider said:


> Does anybody else have issues with bottoming out their shock on their Rascal? I bottom out every ride even with 2 spacers and 25% sag.


No, and I weigh 240lbs ready to ride. I'm using a DVO Topaz rear shock though.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

I'm with @Silentfoe. In the #240 range geared I ditched the RS shock for a Topaz. The RS shock worked but not as well as the Topaz does. The Topaz also works well with the Diamond on the front for a matched suspension. Most stock shocks that come on frames are tuned for riders in the #150- #180 range beyond or below that they aren't that great.


----------



## gaper80 (Apr 3, 2013)

utmtbrider said:


> Does anybody else have issues with bottoming out their shock on their Rascal? I bottom out every ride even with 2 spacers and 25% sag.


I finally got a handful of rides on the SD that was tuned by Avalanche. I am a big fan. I'm running around 15 psi less than before, to get sag right around 30% (no tokens). No more bottoming out (even on 5-6' drops), and no packing up on chunder. 100% pleased. I think the one thing I would change would be a slightly less "firm" setting. It is almost too stiff, but I can live with the wide open setting in most cases, and then use firm for climbs and longer flat sections.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

gaper80 said:


> I finally got a handful of rides on the SD that was tuned by Avalanche. I am a big fan. I'm running around 15 psi less than before, to get sag right around 30% (no tokens). No more bottoming out (even on 5-6' drops), and no packing up on chunder. 100% pleased. I think the one thing I would change would be a slightly less "firm" setting. It is almost too stiff, but I can live with the wide open setting in most cases, and then use firm for climbs and longer flat sections.


Sounds like that was a worthwhile upgrade! Hopefully I can get some tuning done this season, I honestly just don't want to spend money on it.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

My new to me rascal:









Bike is incredible. My first ride I set sag more like 35% and the bike was prone to bottoming and adding compression made it really harsh.

30%, compression wide open, and rebound adjusted just closed enough to calm any bucking sensations and the bike is really something else.

I had a ripmo AF and Raaw Jibb previously, so my fork is set to 160mm since its what I had.

Yeah the front end can get light on very steep pitches, but I'm not one to "sit and spin" in those situations anyways.

The bike descends as well as the ripmo AF did with a 170 fork, maybe better because it's equally composed yet still more maneuverable.
Much more zippy on flat trails and overall a better climber as well (needs some more focus on body position when it's very steep but it's more efficient overall).

Super stoked on this bike. If I had the money I'd buy another frame just to horde in my attic for when this one eventually dies.


----------



## masterp2 (Mar 4, 2007)

This bike is spec'd for 210x50mm shock. Can anyone suggest if a 210x55mm stroke will interfere with anything? Can someone air down the shock and let me know? Thanks!!


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

call or text them they'll respond pretty quick


----------



## masterp2 (Mar 4, 2007)

fishwrinkle said:


> call or text them they'll respond pretty quick


They did not know the answer. Just the "void warranty" standard. I am guessing that the tire will rub with any more stroke, but was wanting to confirm. I would do it myself but I don't have a frame here.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

masterp2 said:


> They did not know the answer. Just the "void warranty" standard. I am guessing that the tire will rub with any more stroke, but was wanting to confirm. I would do it myself but I don't have a frame here.


Heres what the standard stroke shock bottomed looks like, I think you could definitely get away with more travel theres plenty of clearance.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i'd check the gap on mine but then i'd need to pull the shock (coil). my clearance question, is will a delium rugged 2.5 fit comfortably in the rear? hey utah, what is the measurement if you don't mind? i forgot to measure when i was greasing pivots


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Deleted


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

thanks, but due to my crappy wording in my post i was meaning the st to tire for over stroking.

edit: i have a 2.5 aggressor on there now, but i can't find them listed anywhere on what length the knobs are. they're around 3.5-4mm right now but they saw a fair amount of AZ riding so not sure what they started off as. delium rugged are listed at 6mm knob length. i do have a touch of rub on the heli tape but it's still glossy. just dust is wiped clean, no scratches


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

fishwrinkle said:


> thanks, but due to my crappy wording in my post i was meaning the st to tire for over stroking.


Ahh ok, not sure what the clearance difference would be based on tire size alone. I just overstroked the shock (50mm to 55mm) and there is still a good amount of clearance.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

nice that it does work. so what is your travel gain(estimated)? i have no idea what the rascals leverage ratio is


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

fishwrinkle said:


> nice that it does work. so what is your travel gain(estimated)? i have no idea what the rascals leverage ratio is


The leverage ratio is 2.6, so around a 13mm travel increase.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Hmm that’s nice to know. I’ve been hesitant to look at the rascal just because I feel like I might want more travel for more higher speed gnar trails. Are there peeps on here riding theirs with 2 different setups w/ travel? Would like to know your thoughts on how that’s working out for you


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

utmtbrider said:


> The leverage ratio is 2.6, so around a 13mm travel increase.


That is quite a bit. Could you instantly tell that it was plusher over stock?


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

I looked into removing the travel reducer in the Super Deluxe, and noticed that the leverage curve falls off when the shock is over stroked. Ultimately did not go this route, as I feared that the bike would not perform the same.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Flyer said:


> That is quite a bit. Could you instantly tell that it was plusher over stock?


Just did it this afternoon so no ride report yet, will definitely share feedback after I get some time in though!


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

Any input from folks who've tried both 140mm and 150mm travel? I've been at 150mm since day 1 but am considering going down to mitigate wheel lift on steep climbs and see if the bike will get more playful.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

i talked with dillon from push today and i find it odd that he said you could run a 55mm stroke on it when revel says warranty void if you do. the only way push will sell a shock or mess with the stroke is if you tell them what bike it's going on and they're in communication with the frame maker. now that that is said, he said that they would tune it better to my liking with more ramp at the the bottom. i don't want it more progressive as i think i'll lose the feel it has now but just goes through the travel too soon. what am i missing here? i'm not the best with suspension as that's why i bought the, "motorcycles suspension bible". have yet to crack it open. i think i want the extra 1/2" of travel to help me accomplish what i am after? i'm referring to the plush mode only as the firm is perfect for what i use that circuit for(park and poppy playfulness). i use plush for plowing through tech like rock gardens and roots.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

I believe having a more progressive tune will keep the shock from blowing through its travel. May try bumping up your hsc to see how that feels


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

so i fit the delium rugged reinforced 2.5 on a 30.5 id @ 30 psi and it fits just like the aggressor that it replaced. measurements of the knobs 2.4 and the casing 2.43. not real happy about the casing being wider, but we will see about sidewall wear. clearance on nds is 8mm and ds is 6mm.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

I have gotten some time in on my long stroked Rascal and feel like its a worthwhile upgrade over the stock setup. It makes the rear end feel like it reacts to bumps better since I dropped pressure to get about 30% sag with the longer stroke, but at the same time I can't feel the shock bottom out as harshly. Overall its not a world of difference but definitely worth considering if you want to eek out a little more performance out of the bike. I think this would pair super well with a 150mm fork for people who want a little more travel than a Rascal but don't quite need a Rail 29.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

utmtbrider said:


> I have gotten some time in on my long stroked Rascal and feel like its a worthwhile upgrade over the stock setup. It makes the rear end feel like it reacts to bumps better since I dropped pressure to get about 30% sag with the longer stroke, but at the same time I can't feel the shock bottom out as harshly. Overall its not a world of difference but definitely worth considering if you want to eek out a little more performance out of the bike. I think this would pair super well with a 150mm fork as something for people who want a little more travel than a Rascal but don't quite need a Rail 29.


What's the approximate travel you're getting now? 140/143? So kind of like a tilt.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

dysfunction said:


> What's the approximate travel you're getting now? 140/143? So kind of like a tilt.


Spot on somewhere in the 140-143 range based off a 2.6 leverage ratio.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

utmtbrider said:


> Spot on somewhere in the 140-143 range based off a 2.6 leverage ratio.


Nice, fwiw my lithium feels better with a bit more than 30%ish sag... still pretty bottomless and provides pedal support.


----------



## Bicmtb123 (Sep 26, 2021)

Has anyone tried using Manitou Mara/ Mara Pro on your Rascal? The RS Super Deluxe Ultimate is nice, but it's not as smooth as I want it to be. Also, the shock has noticeable stiction and a bit of squelching sound whenever I pump. Looking for a better alternative.


----------



## Rngspnr (Feb 15, 2016)

Bicmtb123 said:


> Has anyone tried using Manitou Mara/ Mara Pro on your Rascal? The RS Super Deluxe Ultimate is nice, but it's not as smooth as I want it to be. Also, the shock has noticeable stiction and a bit of squelching sound whenever I pump. Looking for a better alternative.


I went with a Topaz for mine. Definitely an upgrade over the RS deluxe ultimate.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

How old is the SDU? Squelch and stickiness might suggest you're just due for a rebuild.

I have an SDU on my Rascal and like it but I know what you mean. It's not super plush... but it's also 130mm. I still like it overall. 

I had a topaz on my previous bike (ripmo AF) and swapped it for an SDU and much preferred the SDU. 
Topaz might feel more plush though, as I think they tend to have much lighter damping on average. I feel like the SDU is a more "sporty" feeling shock. 

One thing I've considered just for the sake of having something to tinker with is a meg neg air can. I changed my fork to a different air spring and it's very soft off the top and then ramps up hard. I love that feeling so although I like how the bike feels I wouldn't mind trying to replicate that feeling on the rear suspension as well, and that's sort of what a megneg should do when set up right. 

I've only seen a couple megneg reviews on rascals and they were mediocre, but the megneg is really a tinkerers mod, not a bolt it in and forget it part, I don't think it shines unless you're willing to mess around to get the positive and negative volumes dialled.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

KennyWatson said:


> How old is the SDU? Squelch and stickiness might suggest you're just due for a rebuild.
> 
> I have an SDU on my Rascal and like it but I know what you mean. It's not super plush... but it's also 130mm. I still like it overall.
> 
> ...


Since you've had experience on both the ripmo AF and the rascal, do you think running a 210x55mm stroke shock in the rascal (to get it closer to 140mm travel) with a 150mm fork would put the Rascal fairly close in descending performance to the ripmo AF? 

I've been considering trying to get a ripmo AF, because I'm finding I want a bit more confidence on the steep chunky and technical trails, but have been wondering if it maybe makes more financial sense to keep the Rascal and up the travel a bit (or maybe even splurge on a push coil). It's hard though, given than a push coil & new fork for the Rascal will run $23-2500, and a ripmo AF coil would be less than $1k more for an entirely new bike.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

I think the rascal rear suspension keeps up with the ripmo AF just fine as-is, to be honest.

The AF has a longer reach, slacker head angle, and longer fork. Any advantage it has descending is more due to that. With a 160 fork on my rascal the difference is pretty small.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Well… I bit the bullet and bought a Ext Storia for my Rascal. The stock Super Deluxe just hasn’t been cutting it no matter how I adjust it. Stoked to get some time on it and share some feedback!


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

be nice to see the review. is anyone else running this shock on their rascal?


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Yeah that'll be interesting. I'll also be interested to hear how the balance is front to rear and what you decide to do for a front fork.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

What bottom bracket are folks running on their Rascals? My SRAM Dub has started getting noisy after ~6 months. Not super impressed. Would need to be compatible with 5Dev cranks.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Lionel_Hutz said:


> What bottom bracket are folks running on their Rascals? My SRAM Dub has started getting noisy after ~6 months. Not super impressed. Would need to be compatible with 5Dev cranks.


Im currently running a Dub but you cant go really go wrong with options from Chris King, Cane Creek, or Wheels Manufacturing.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

Alright just got my Storia in the mail today. Firstly the quality of the shock is great, it’s very nicely machined and the fit and finish is top notch. Secondly its very light for a coil, mine came in at 670g with a 350lbs spring installed. Hopefully will have some ride impressions within the next couple days!


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Very cool! Do keep us posted. What fork are you running currently?

As far as bottom brackets go, some early ones had issues but genuine sram dub bottom brackets generally have a very good track record. 

Beyond that I've had good experiences with wheels mfg, as was mentioned. All of them are essentially 30mm bottom brackets with small shims for the "28.99" axle (including the sram one).


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

anxiously waiting for the ride report, utah. ain't gunna lie, she's a beauty


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

Looking at upgrading the Rascal Fork. Has anyone tried a short offset 150mm travel fork on the Rascal?


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

I went straight to a 160mm short offset, but recently swapped a 140mm long offset from my hardtail over to try. 

I may adjust it to 150mm, but I prefer the longer offset. The short offset really.makes the front end feel short (even with the fork at 160mm).

I think short offset makes total sense of bikes that are quite slack (maybe 64.5 or slacker) but I don't seem to like it on bike with steeper head angles, it makes it feel like the front wheel is going to "tuck" under me and shoot me over the bars. 

So unless you are specifically trying to make the front center feel shorter, my recommendation is to stay with long, or traditional, or what ever you want to call it. (51mm or so). FYI - I was/am comparing a 160 lyrik at 42mm offset to a dvo diamond at 140 with 51mm offset.


----------



## habitrap (Sep 11, 2020)

Thanks for the info. That’s good to know. Was thinking about trying out a 23 lyrik, but noticed Rockshox only makes a 44mm offset for 29ers now for the aftermarket fork. Might be looking elsewhere to improve the Pikes stiffness.


----------



## noose (Feb 11, 2004)

habitrap said:


> Looking at upgrading the Rascal Fork. Has anyone tried a short offset 150mm travel fork on the Rascal?


Yes I built up my Rascal with a 150mm 42 offset lyrik. I tried my 150mm Fox 36 regular offset on it first and the bike felt twitchy. The reduced offset lyrik rides a lot more stable and steers better for me.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

Anyone with the Pike Ultimate install an ACS3? I always felt the Pike couldn't keep up with the rear when I was running the SDU. I just recently swapped in an eleven six, and now the Pike definitely feels under-gunned on the small bumps. I'm running about 20% sag on my Pike. It feels great on the bigger hits and is plenty stiff and supportive for me in general, I just feel the small-mid sized bump performance is not up to par, especially with the eleven six in the rear. Looking to find a way to make the bike feel a bit more balanced as I ride my rascal in east coast chunk.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

jchan417 said:


> Anyone with the Pike Ultimate install an ACS3? I always felt the Pike couldn't keep up with the rear when I was running the SDU. I just recently swapped in an eleven six, and now the Pike definitely feels under-gunned on the small bumps. I'm running about 20% sag on my Pike. It feels great on the bigger hits and is plenty stiff and supportive for me in general, I just feel the small-mid sized bump performance is not up to par, especially with the eleven six in the rear. Looking to find a way to make the bike feel a bit more balanced as I ride my rascal in east coast chunk.


My LBS/Revel dealer highly recommends the 11-6 and ACS3 combo. I haven't done ACS3 yet, partially because the bike is already heavier than I'd like and partially because I haven't seen forward compatibility confirmed for the new gen of RS forks.

Same LBS also mostly cured my small/mid bump harshness with a spacer in the Pike and backing out both low and high speed compression all the way. I'm using full travel a surprising amount now but have yet to bottom it out. And the comfort is pretty good.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

Lionel_Hutz said:


> My LBS/Revel dealer highly recommends the 11-6 and ACS3 combo. I haven't done ACS3 yet, partially because the bike is already heavier than I'd like and partially because I haven't seen forward compatibility confirmed for the new gen of RS forks.
> 
> Same LBS also mostly cured my small/mid bump harshness with a spacer in the Pike and backing out both low and high speed compression all the way. I'm using full travel a surprising amount now but have yet to bottom it out. And the comfort is pretty good.


I only have LSC adjustment on my Pike, and I already had it at 2 clicks in, so I'll give it a shot to open it all the way. I tend to use all of my travel as is, but maybe I will try and drop a few more psi in air spring and add a spacer as my next step before jumping into the ACS3.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

I have the same setup and run a considerable amount less psi than recommended with the lsc 2 clicks from wide open and feels great. I want to burnish the bushings and see how that feels. Guess I’ll wait another couples months before doing that. What is your weight and psi now?


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

fishwrinkle said:


> I have the same setup and run a considerable amount less psi than recommended with the lsc 2 clicks from wide open and feels great. I want to burnish the bushings and see how that feels. Guess I’ll wait another couples months before doing that. What is your weight and psi now?


I'm about 160lb ready-to-ride.

60PSI in the fork, LSC 2 clicks from open, LSR 11 clicks from open.

I'm going to try LSC wide open first and see how it feels, and maybe drop down to 9 clicks from open for the LSR to see if I notice any improvement.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

jchan417 said:


> I'm about 160lb ready-to-ride.
> 
> 60PSI in the fork, LSC 2 clicks from open, LSR 11 clicks from open.
> 
> I'm going to try LSC wide open first and see how it feels, and maybe drop down to 9 clicks from open for the LSR to see if I notice any improvement.


So just an update...I'm currently running 0 clicks LSC, and 9 clicks from open for the LSR, and the pike feels better in the chunky stuff. Still looking to find ways to improve the pike and make it feel more balanced, but speeding up the LSR definitely helped. I kept the fork PSI the same.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

A little late to the party here, but if you can get your hands on a ShockWiz, I highly recommend it. I'm 205 lbs and running 73psi with two spacers on my Pike Ultimate (I upgraded it to 150mm). It is really nice and plush while still being supportive at the bottom end (LSC = 0 and my Rebound is about 3 clicks from closed). The ShockWiz also put me at 185 psi and two spacers on the Super Deluxe Ultimate. I don't think I would have gone that low had the ShockWiz not directed it. Rascal feels great and I am a pretty big fan of the Rockshox products coming from all Fox stuff


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

In case anybody is interested I have my size large Rascal up for sale here, https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/3425868/
It's been a great bike just looking to try something new!


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Zoomie said:


> A little late to the party here, but if you can get your hands on a ShockWiz, I highly recommend it. I'm 205 lbs and running 73psi with two spacers on my Pike Ultimate (I upgraded it to 150mm). It is really nice and plush while still being supportive at the bottom end (LSC = 0 and my Rebound is about 3 clicks from closed). The ShockWiz also put me at 185 psi and two spacers on the Super Deluxe Ultimate. I don't think I would have gone that low had the ShockWiz not directed it. Rascal feels great and I am a pretty big fan of the Rockshox products coming from all Fox stuff


205lb and only 185psi? How much sag do you end up with? If it works it works, but that seems crazy low!


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

Had ShcckWiz not recommended I would never go that low. Puts me at about 28% sag with 2 spacers. Plush off of the top but never bottoms out and I’ve ridden some really rough stuff


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Zoomie said:


> Had ShcckWiz not recommended I would never go that low. Puts me at about 28% sag with 2 spacers. Plush off of the top but never bottoms out and I’ve ridden some really rough stuff


I had two spacers kicking around so I tried this for the sake of science. 

I had pulled the spacers and was running 260psi for about 28% sag with no spacers and support was great but small bump sensitivity was not great. 

I tried 200psi with the two spacers (I'm about 215ish) , result was 35% sag and easy to bottom out, so for me this didn't work unfortunately. 

I am now at 240psi and 25% sag with two spacers and around the yard it feels promising. 

I do feel the bike has been better at less than 30% sag and have heard people say 25% is really good, so we'll see. Without spacers I'd have needed more like 280psi to get 25% sag which is starting to seem crazy, so I wanted to put spacers back in anyways.


----------



## Zoomie (Dec 26, 2008)

I would put one more spacer in and get your PSI lower. I believe 3 spacers is the max for that shock


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Yeah agreed. I am curious to try a few rides at 25%, but more spacer is something I might try for sure. 

Honestly the bike rides pretty good however I set it up but I think there's more optimization to be had.


----------



## Dr Gigi (Nov 3, 2016)

utmtbrider said:


> In case anybody is interested I have my size large Rascal up for sale here, https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/3425868/
> It's been a great bike just looking to try something new!


So I'm assuming you didn't like the long stroked Ext on the rear?


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Dr Gigi said:


> So I'm assuming you didn't like the long stroked Ext on the rear?


 Missed this was the same dude. Yeah bummer.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

So who else is on coil these days? 

My super deluxe ultimate is feeling pretty good on big to medium hits, but could be more active on smaller stuff. I can make it more active by opening up rebound and compression, but at the expense of big hit stability. 

I am thinking a coil, with a progressive spring and/or adjustable high speed compression might give me similar stability on bigger hits while being a little more sensitive off the top. 
Would probably go with a jade since since I'm running a dvo fork, and the Jade has adjustable HSC and a thicker shaft which seem to play better with suspension platforms that have shock yokes.


----------



## utmtbrider (Dec 8, 2020)

KennyWatson said:


> Missed this was the same dude. Yeah bummer.


Yeah didn’t make much of a improvement. Compared to the other bikes I rode at Outerbike it just doesn’t fit my riding style as well. I absolutely loved the Rail though!


----------



## OO7Zummie (May 3, 2015)

I am curious to see how many Meg Neg users there are out there. I would be curious to come it head to head with a coil.


----------



## Dr Gigi (Nov 3, 2016)

KennyWatson said:


> So who else is on coil these days?
> 
> My super deluxe ultimate is feeling pretty good on big to medium hits, but could be more active on smaller stuff. I can make it more active by opening up rebound and compression, but at the expense of big hit stability.
> 
> ...


I recently picked up a Jade X coil for my Rascal. It's long stroked to 55mm, coupled with a 400 lb SLS spring. There's plenty of tire clearance at full bottom, although I don't run my seatpost slammed all the way. I'm at around 27-28% sag with the 400lb spring, which is a little less than I usually run with air. I've only gotten it out on a couple shake down rides, but so far so good. I was worried about how it'd climb, but there is no noticeable drop in climbing efficiency, or extra bob when standing. But I did notice an increase in climbing traction, so there must be more movement going on back there. Descending, it does everything a good coil does. Small bumps are erased and the midstroke is fantastic. I've hucked it to flat a couple times and felt extremely supported with no harsh bottom out. This was something I was concerned about with the frame's 20% progression, but I think the combo of a slightly stiffer spring and the increase in travel helps take care of. In short, the performance gains are real while I haven't noticed any drawbacks. That said, I have not taken it out on a proper jump trail yet so it's hard to tell if there's any noticeable loss of pop. Added bonus, it's light as hell for a coil setup at 680g.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Nice dr Gigi, great feedback. My concern is bottom out as well, as I run a gnar dog (2.5 spacer equivalent) in my sdu so it's pretty progressive. I would probably stick to the standard jade rather than the X also so I have LSC to play with. I have a sprindex adjustable spring and a progressive came Creek spring collecting dust from a previous build so that also gives some options. 

The megneg is an interesting option, if I was a bit lighter I'd probably try it, but with a stronger negative spring I think I'd end up needing to run a huge amount of pressure which I'm not sure I'm keen on. For someone 160lb or lighter, could be interesting though. 
A few people have done the vorsprung tractive tune and reported great results as well.


----------



## D396 (Aug 13, 2014)

Dr Gigi said:


> I recently picked up a Jade X coil for my Rascal. It's long stroked to 55mm, coupled with a 400 lb SLS spring. There's plenty of tire clearance at full bottom, although I don't run my seatpost slammed all the way. I'm at around 27-28% sag with the 400lb spring, which is a little less than I usually run with air. I've only gotten it out on a couple shake down rides, but so far so good. I was worried about how it'd climb, but there is no noticeable drop in climbing efficiency, or extra bob when standing. But I did notice an increase in climbing traction, so there must be more movement going on back there. Descending, it does everything a good coil does. Small bumps are erased and the midstroke is fantastic. I've hucked it to flat a couple times and felt extremely supported with no harsh bottom out. This was something I was concerned about with the frame's 20% progression, but I think the combo of a slightly stiffer spring and the increase in travel helps take care of. In short, the performance gains are real while I haven't noticed any drawbacks. That said, I have not taken it out on a proper jump trail yet so it's hard to tell if there's any noticeable loss of pop. Added bonus, it's light as hell for a coil setup at 680g.


What's your kitted up weight if you don't mind my asking? I have that exact same shock with a 350lb spring from another bike that I put on my rascal, which I built up today, and I can't decide if I would be better off with the 400 based on my shakedown ride.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

I rode my rascal for 2 years with the SDU, and just got a push eleven six. It was quite a big change for me, for the trails I ride (rocky/chunky mid-atlantic trails). It doesn't seem to have lost much 'pop' on the smoother flow trails, but the biggest change for me was on the steeper, high-speed chunky trails. The rear wheel just tracks better and soaks up the chunky stuff better than the SDU did.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

jchan417 said:


> I rode my rascal for 2 years with the SDU, and just got a push eleven six. It was quite a big change for me, for the trails I ride (rocky/chunky mid-atlantic trails). It doesn't seem to have lost much 'pop' on the smoother flow trails, but the biggest change for me was on the steeper, high-speed chunky trails. The rear wheel just tracks better and soaks up the chunky stuff better than the SDU did.


Exactly where I’m at. Got the ElevenSix on the Rascal and I love everything about it but the lack of pop on the smaller jib type stuff. I’m in the mid-Atlantic also, so I’ll take the traction, tracking, and added weight all day over the SDU. I do miss the light setup I had with the Pike and SDU, but still worth every penny.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

I also will agree with all the hype over the push. I pretty much just leave it in the dh circuit all the time and am happy with it like that.


----------



## Dr Gigi (Nov 3, 2016)

D396 said:


> What's your kitted up weight if you don't mind my asking? I have that exact same shock with a 350lb spring from another bike that I put on my rascal, which I built up today, and I can't decide if I would be better off with the 400 based on my shakedown ride.


I'm 160 lb geared up, give or take a super burrito. I think a 375 lb spring would get me close to the 30% sag I'm used to on this bike, but don't feel the need to make a switch yet..


----------



## pete 158 (Nov 12, 2004)

Anyone have a source for a Rascal derailleur hanger? I’ve been trying to track one down since August with no luck. Revel originally said October, then Nov 1st..my local dealer and online shops are out of stock as well


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

I haven’t as I bought one along with the bike. Cycle path in Portland sells tons of revels. Might want to call them and see. Worth a shot

Also worldwide cycle, if you haven’t looked already.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

It’s pretty amazing how awesome this bike has been over the years. Just upgrading parts here and there but it’s still the mid-Atlantic beast.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Nice, looks dialled! Whats the lyrik set to? 
How's the push?
I am still enjoying mine but sometimes feel like it's a little short and I'm perched on top of it. 
I may try a slack-r angle set or a coil, or both. Hahah.


----------



## lvrpl (Mar 6, 2019)

Looking for advice on compression settings for my suspension. Just finished a frame-up build on my Rascal, and went with a Lyrik Ultimate up front and a Super Deluxe Ultimate out back (both the outgoing 2022 versions). I’m about 195 lbs. What are people doing for the HSC and LSC on the fork? And any suggestions on where to start with the shock? Thanks for any help!


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

I had the same setup on mine when I first got it. For the fork I'd run HSC/lsc wide open, rebound probably nearly wide open. It's sensitive to small pressure changes so get a digital shock pump if you don't have one. I'd start around 93psi and make changes 2psi at a time.

I'm honestly probably not done playing with the shock but for me, anything that keeps it from running too deep in the travel works great. You can run 30–40psi above body weight with no spacers, or equal to or maybe 10psi above body weight with three spacers. 
Resulting ride is about the same except the overall ride height is a little lower with more spacers. 
The rear end is hard to screw up, basically, but avoid running softer than 28% sag unless you have several volume spacers installed.


----------



## cpolism (Mar 20, 2010)

KennyWatson said:


> Nice, looks dialled! Whats the lyrik set to?
> How's the push?
> I am still enjoying mine but sometimes feel like it's a little short and I'm perched on top of it.
> I may try a slack-r angle set or a coil, or both. Hahah.


Feels pretty good but still trying to figure the Lyrik out. It’s set to 150, but the offset is also 44 which is the first time I’ve had that on this bike. Not sure how I feel about It vs the Pike and Helm M2 at 50 but for the most part it’s great. I’m just trying to dial in the rest little by little but the cooler temps aren‘t playing nice.

As for the Push…it’s been 2 years now and it’s still just as good as day 1. This was the first time I’ve gone coil, and I have to say it’s really awesome. It’s been said a lot I know, but just reiterating how amazing the traction is. My biggest complaint with the bike was how skittish the rear felt at speed and the push solved that issue. Bonus traction on the climbs too. Sure it’s a good bit more weight over the SDU but 100% worth it. 

As for feeling on top of the bike…no getting around that unfortunately. I’m the same way on a medium, but that’s the way it’s designed to feel. Some bikes you feel in, which is a great feeling when you’re pinning it. Where I live, the ‘on top’ feeling adds to the nimbleness of the bike, and is pretty perfect for these mid-atlantic chunky/root filled areas. In saying that, I do dream of bikes like Hightowers and others where you can feel confident in bombing through the chunk a little more. Little thinks like not being to throw a coil on a Hightower just kill that idea…so here I am still holding strong 3 years now with the Rascal.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Great comments and agreed. With respect to being "in the bike" vs "on the bike" - I almost wonder how an xl with a 35mm stem would feel, vs my large with 50mm.Maybe I should look at sizing up. I think with a one-up dropper I could just manage the longer seat tube. 

Anyone looking to size down from an xl to an L? Haha


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Santa found me a jade x!
I put a 550-670 progressive spring on it to start. 
Weather has been atrocious so no rides other than around the front yard but hopefully in the next couple of days. 

Around the front yard it feels really sweet but it might be too soft on actual trails, it feels very plush and bottom bracket feels pretty low. The stance feels different and more aggressive.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

Got a ride in and wow, feels like a different bike.
I typically like a lot of sag and a lot of progression, super deluxe ultimate with fairly low pressure and a ton of spacers has worked well for me on other frames in the past but this bike was too prone to bottom out still.

With the 550-670 spring I think it's a little too soft off the top, lots of pedal strikes, but feels insanely planted, corners like a beast, and I could not bottom it out (I was intentionally landing heavy off some drops to get a feel, maybe the bottom out bumper was masking it). With the compression lever in the middle position the BB height was better but still low.

I have a linear sprindex spring that goes up to 610lb, I think that may be the ticket, then I can keep the compression open on gnarly stuff and in the middle for mellower terrain and have a more zippy feel like the air shock had.

It really does feel more like a 150mm bike with the coil though, pretty crazy.

Also regarding spring rates, I am about 215-220lb with gear, normally run about 230psi in the super deluxe with 3.5 spacers)


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

I changed the fork from 160 to 140 and installed a slack-r angle set.









This results in about the same or slightly slacker head angle, but steepens the seat tube a little and lowers the bottom bracket a little.

I honestly didn't mind how it rode with a 160, but there were certain scenarios where it could feel kinda "choppered out".
Idea here is similar stability and confidence in the steeps but a little more neutral handling overall.


----------



## jchan417 (Apr 19, 2018)

KennyWatson said:


> I changed the fork from 160 to 140 and installed a slack-r angle set.
> View attachment 2016463
> 
> 
> ...


Did you happen to try it with the 160 and slack-r (backwards) so as to steepen the HTA to counter the slacker HTA with the increased front travel? I’ve considered overforking my rascal, and using a slackr to keep HTA similar to the stock 66*


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

No, for me the advantages of a longer fork are slacker head angle and longer front center. 
A backwards angle set would cancel those out, while making the seat tube extremely slack and bottom bracket quite high. Neither of those is a good thing, at least for my preference.


----------

