# Canfield Jedi geometry and comparison to Cove Shocker



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

I'm looking to move out of my current single pivot design frame, and into one of the short parallel linkage designs. The concept just seems to make sense from a lateral rigidity persepective.

Two frames at the top of my list are the Jedi and Shocker. They're about the same price and right at the limit of my budget. Both designs appeal to me and will accept most of the parts I'll be swapping over. I've read reviews on both frames and have seen no negative traits, other than early Shockers cracking at the original solid shock mount. 

The Jedi's seem too good to be true with their light weight and reported "bottomless" travel. What I can't seem to find are a complete set of geometry specs for a large frame. I know the wheelbase is short (and changes throughout it's travel), but how short is it? How about BB height? The only serious turnoff for me on the Jedi is the insanely tight rear tire clearance. I'd expect to wear through the rear triangle pretty quick after several muddy rides. How come there is so little information on Canfield's website?

Things I like about the Cove are it's slightly longer cockpit, (can't find a wheelbase dimension for this either) and ability to accept most rear tires. The increased weight (3 lbs) doesn't bother me that much since I'd equate that with increased strength. Reviews have all been positive. This frame reads to me to be more plowish than the Jedi.

I plan on using this bike for DH at east coast areas like Diablo, Plattekill, Whiteface, Highland. I tend to be a precision rider and like to nail a line rather than plow over it (which is why I've ruled out the V10) jumpability is high on my list since I like to hit doubles, wall rides, and other man-made hits like those at Diablo. So "some" freeride, but not hardcore 30 foot drops like thouse found on YouTube.

I'd appreciate any additional advice or information about either of these frames.

Cheers.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

careful about the coves. Several people are still having trouble with the connection at the shock mount, and cove CS is pretty abysmal these days. Probably next year when they lose a crap ton of money they'll pull their heads out of their asses and get their act together.

The canfields WB stays pretty similar throughout the travel from what I understand. Where most bikes shrink as the fork compresses and the rear wheel moves in a more vertical path, the canfield has about 2 inches of rearward travel. 

From what I can tell the only "deal breaker" on the jedi is that rear tire clearence, if you ride in the rain and when or lose rocks thats gonna be a problem. you could probably rig up a mud guard or fender or something. with 16.25 stays the jedi is definitely the more nimble of the two.

oh: as far as the geo, the charts look pretty good on the canfield site, but give them a call. their "work number" is actually chris's cellphone. I called at about 9 their time one time expecting to get a message machine and chris picked up and talked to me for about 15 minutes. fwiw I have a lucky and am totally stoked by canfields CS and bikes so i'm recommending them left and right.


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

Thanks for the insight William,

I know what you mean about Cove's customer service. My emails to them have gone unanswered and all I want to do is give them money. I can't imagine what a warranty claim process would be like.  The Interbike video I saw on the STD didn't exactly instill consumer confidence either.

I have a feeling there would be less of a buyers remorse factor with the Canfield, but that rear wheel clearance is killing me. I run disk brakes so I don't have to spend my weeknights standing in front of my truing stand, and I'm not going back to that. I'm going to call and see what the future holds for a rear triangle upgrade. If it's something they're working on and its made available in the near future, my mind would be made up. I just know that the mud clogging, wheel rub, and eventual unintentional wheel lock, would drive me right up a wall.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*Definitely call Chis Canfield*

I have a Jedi and a good buddy of mine has a Shocker. We both are VERY happy with our bikes. My Jedi is a large but I do not have geometry numbers beyond what is on the site. Mine is right at 40 lbs without even trying, that is very nice but it is turning me into a weight weenie. Being that low without trying makes me motivated to try. Customer service is definitely an advantage to the Canfield. Jedi is a better race bike, mostly due to weight and wheel path, than Shocker in my opinion. I am running a 2.5 maxxis in rear with plenty of clearance. I have built up enough mud on serveral different occasions to have it rub the swingarm but no wear that I can see. I would never run a bigger tire back there so it is a non issue. There is tons of clearance from side to side. My 2.5's have about an inch on both sides it seems, it is just the tire height that could be an issue
As far as strength goes, I think it would be a tossup if you disregard the Cove's shock mount issue. 
The Jedi is a nimble bike. Very lively and very smooth ride. Cove is cool, but more of a tank and not really any more capable in my limited experience.

Call Chris Canfield, he will tell you all you need to know. Number is on contact link of their page.


----------



## DickemDown (Jun 23, 2004)

The Canfield Brothers are way cool guys. Not too many companies out there that you can call and speak to the designers.

Rather than try to talk about the technical stuff, cause I 'd probably butcher it, give Chris a call. He'll answwer all your questions and then some.

FWIW, I looked at the Cove line as well. I really like their bikes, and you can't go wrong with a single pivot.

...but after being on a Lucky, I became a fan for life.

My Jedi:










My Lucky (old pic, have an 66 ata on it now):


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

aenema said:


> I have a Jedi and a good buddy of mine has a Shocker. We both are VERY happy with our bikes. My Jedi is a large but I do not have geometry numbers beyond what is on the site. Mine is right at 40 lbs without even trying, that is very nice but it is turning me into a weight weenie. Being that low without trying makes me motivated to try. Customer service is definitely an advantage to the Canfield. Jedi is a better race bike, mostly due to weight and wheel path, than Shocker in my opinion. I am running a 2.5 maxxis in rear with plenty of clearance. I have built up enough mud on serveral different occasions to have it rub the swingarm but no wear that I can see. I would never run a bigger tire back there so it is a non issue. There is tons of clearance from side to side. My 2.5's have about an inch on both sides it seems, it is just the tire height that could be an issue
> As far as strength goes, I think it would be a tossup if you disregard the Cove's shock mount issue.
> The Jedi is a nimble bike. Very lively and very smooth ride. Cove is cool, but more of a tank and not really any more capable in my limited experience.
> 
> Call Chris Canfield, he will tell you all you need to know. Number is on contact link of their page.


Thanks for the details aenema,
So if I understand correctly, the wheel clearance issue is one of tire height and not width? I've seen pictures (your bike I think?) where it looked as if the tread had been shaved down to clear the top crossmember. It could be just tire wear, but would a new Minion DH 2.5 in there? I've been wanting to run 2.5 Nevegals, but have used 2.5 Minions and can live with them if needed.

I haven't seen any pics of wheel clearance from side to side (between the chainstays), I just assumed it was tight there too. But now it makes sense that it would be as wide as other brands, since there's no performance to be gained by a narrow setup (other than negligible increase in stiffness).

Since you're riding a large. May I ask how tall you are? I'm 6'-0" even, and my current medium Yakuza's 23.5" top tube feels a little short. Flickable, but short. I'm running a 70mm stem. Do you feel the Large Jedi is "true to size"? And, Is there any chance you could measure your unsagged wheelbase?

Thanks again!


----------



## MattP. (Oct 3, 2005)

Here's a pic of a 2.5 in the Jedi that Lance posted a while back. I don't believe what 2.5 tire it was... Any guesses?


----------



## nmpearson (Aug 13, 2007)

i could be wrong, but i thought the jedi's clearance issues were being addressed and the next gen you should be able to do have larger tires if that's your problem with the bike. i've put 2.5's on the jedi's i've sold and that's enough imo


----------



## MattP. (Oct 3, 2005)

nmpearson said:


> i could be wrong, but i thought the jedi's clearance issues were being addressed and the next gen you should be able to do have larger tires if that's your problem with the bike. i've put 2.5's on the jedi's i've sold and that's enough imo


I totally agree, for a rear tire, 2.5 is plenty. That would be awesome if the clearance issues are being addressed in the next run.

Lance?


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

k1creeker said:


> Thanks for the details aenema,
> So if I understand correctly, the wheel clearance issue is one of tire height and not width? I've seen pictures (your bike I think?) where it looked as if the tread had been shaved down to clear the top crossmember. It could be just tire wear, but would a new Minion DH 2.5 in there? I've been wanting to run 2.5 Nevegals, but have used 2.5 Minions and can live with them if needed.
> 
> I haven't seen any pics of wheel clearance from side to side (between the chainstays), I just assumed it was tight there too. But now it makes sense that it would be as wide as other brands, since there's no performance to be gained by a narrow setup (other than negligible increase in stiffness).
> ...


It wasn't my bike you are remembering but you are correct on the shaving. It was Bullcrew's and he had Kenda's that he had to shave the center nobs to get it to roll through. I am running 2.5 Minion's in the rear and clear very well.

I talked to Chris this weekend and he stated that they are redesigning the linkages and rear for next production run to give more clearance for taller tires. I have no desire to ever run a bigger tire so I am completely content with my clearance. But for those who do want to run large, high volume tires, there will be a new rear end next year.

I am just shy of 6'2" and run it with a 50mm stem. Fit is great. I will try to remember to measure wheelbase tonight but I have a habit of being flakey at times. Mine is setup with a Boxxer team, 2.7 minion front and 2.5 minion rear.


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

thanks for the pic Matt P!
That looks like a High Roller to me. It's not that I want to run a 2.7 or larger, it's that it seems like it wouldnt take much mud or dirt to clog up that crossmember with a 2.5 or more to the point, a tall tire. I'm going to give those guys a call tomorrow. Still on the fence, but the Jedi is looking mighty fine.

Thanks for all the info guys.


----------



## YoPawn (Mar 26, 2008)

k1creeker said:


> thanks for the pic Matt P!
> That looks like a High Roller to me. It's not that I want to run a 2.7 or larger, it's that it seems like it wouldnt take much mud or dirt to clog up that crossmember with a 2.5 or more to the point, a tall tire. I'm going to give those guys a call tomorrow. Still on the fence, but the Jedi is looking mighty fine.
> 
> Thanks for all the info guys.


I could see a nevegal cloggin that up.

Minion? Not really.

In my experience, the minions shed mud really early in the wheel spin cycle. I never get face splatter with the Minions like I did with the Nevegal up front. The Nevegal would hold onto crap long enough to fling it up and in front of the tire.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*Took some measurements and photos*

I got as accurate as I could a static wheelbase of just shy of 46 inches. Measure starts at center of rear axle and put box in line with center of front axle for photo. I also took some photos of the tire clearance. Like I stated, I use a Minion 2.5 front tire in the rear and have ridden more than a few days of mud without issue. Tires are still packed in photo from last day of riding....


----------



## erikmolander (Apr 25, 2008)

DickemDown said:


> FWIW, I looked at the Cove line as well. I really like their bikes, and you can't go wrong with a single pivot.


The shocker is not a single pivot:








I have ridden my jedi all season and love it =)









Here is the medium geometry for the jedi by the way:


----------



## Mudmanner (Jul 27, 2007)

I'd go for the Jedi even though I've never ridden a Cove. My experience on the Jedi have been interesting to say the least. It's a FAST bike! The bike roles as though it has 2.1'' tire when they are actually 2.5''

My current bike is a Demo 8 and I love it. But if I were to buy a new DH frame right now it would be either the M6, 303, or Jedi. All three bikes ride very differently IMO with the Jedi feeling the fastest and easiest to throw around. The 303 almost seems like it was designed to ride a track made only of rock gardens because that's where I feel it shines most. The M6 feels like it doesnt wake up until you start to really pick up speed, everything after that is a blur. :thumbsup:


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

Aenema, Many thanks for the measurement and additional pics. 46" wheelbase sounds good and is about an inch longer than what I'm running now. I would welcome the extra length since my current bike feels kind of sketch at wide open high speed runs.

Erikmolander, thanks for the geometry pic. I'm going to see if Chris can provide one for the large. I'm assuming the multiple head angles are for static (at 66.2) and while sagged (64.6) (edit this comment: I now see the different head angles are for different axle to crown lengths.)

The wheel width clearance does not look bad at all. Earlier (from the side) pics I've seen made it look as if the tire was touching the top crossmember. I'd be happy running a 2.5 DHF since I've had good luck with them in the past.

How do you Jedi owners feel the bike handles in manky rock gardens? With the bikes relative light weight, high agility, and flickability factor, I'm imagining it requires you to "skip" over objects rather than run into them. I imagine the Shocker is more of a "run into it" type of ride with it's extra beef, and additional travel. Any thoughts?

thanks again to all.


----------



## erikmolander (Apr 25, 2008)

k1creeker said:


> Erikmolander, thanks for the geometry pic. I'm going to see if Chris can provide one for the large. I'm assuming the multiple head angles are for static (at 66.2) and while sagged (64.6)
> thanks again to all.


I think the multiple head angles is due to that boxers , 40s and 888 are different in height witch affects the head angle.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*The rockier the terrain, the better the Jedi*

I know it is just shy of 8 inches of travel but it has nearly 3 inches of rearward. That is a ton of bump 'let off'. You are getting a bike that does not hang up on obstacles. The rear wheel moving away helps the bike flow over and through the rocks with less decceleration. It is so very noticeable when riding. I eventually built up the confidence to literally jump into rock gardens full tilt knowing it will be drama free. 
The only reason I wouldn't call it a plow bike is because it is such a reasonable weight, especially compared to Shocker.


----------



## DickemDown (Jun 23, 2004)

erikmolander said:


> The shocker is not a single pivot:
> View attachment 402503
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

*Large Geometry*

Here is a large geo sheet.


----------



## clamber (Oct 22, 2008)

Do they sell completes? Or jsut the Frame?


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*Frame only*

They do not have any full build kits at this point.


----------



## odinnn (Sep 9, 2004)

I wished they had made the Jedi a year earlier, more of a race bike than my Formula 1. Only thing that stuns me about the comments from owners is about the plow ability of the Jedi. My Formula 1 lets me plow trough stuff like a bulldozer, has it really lost its plow ability?

And also Chris, any chance of you brothers taking up trade in frame upgrading? Please!


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*I had an earlier version F1 (04/05)*

The Jedi is smoother than my old F1. Less travel, less weight and smoother through rough terrain. Not to mention lighter and better handling. It really is an evolution of the F1, slightly better in all areas I cared about.


----------



## roku (Sep 24, 2007)

I've done enough riding on my Jedi to wear a 60a 2.5 Minion down to about 25% tread 
(with very little skidding, and only one really muddy, long, day in that timespan.) 
There is some substantial abrasion on the upper bridge between the seatstays and the 2 
vertical posts that connect it to the lower chainstay bridge. It would be cool if those posts
followed the arch of the tire for more clearance, but they don't. Anyway, the abrasion only
amounts to the anodization being worn off and a few scratches. At the current rate, I think it
would take longer than the useful lifespan of the frame for it to wear dangerously thin. 

I've got a pretty burly 42# build with a 888RC3 and I think it feels great. I'd gotten so used to
just riding over anything on it that when l switched to a 7" FR bike one day it scared the crap 
out of me when I hit some unexpected loose loaf-of-bread sized rocks in an otherwise routine trail.


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

I took the large geo chart Chris posted (thanks Chris!) and matched it up with the specs on my current bike. They're surprisingly close. Except for the seat angle 60 vs. 68 on the Jedi. and obviously, the chainstay length.

Aenema, is that clear tubing you have wrapped around the vertical bars on the rear traiangle? I'm assuming this is to combat the tire rub Roku mentioned on his ride? I wonder how helecopter tape would hold up.

Oh, and I got word on Cove's 2009 pricing. The Shocker is going up to $3150 USD. 
That's Brooklyn and Intense territory. Their new price is making the decision easier, but I still have serious lust for both frames. Maybe I just need to get both :thumbsup:


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*It is not tubing but a custom mud guard*



k1creeker said:


> I took the large geo chart Chris posted (thanks Chris!) and matched it up with the specs on my current bike. They're surprisingly close. Except for the seat angle 60 vs. 68 on the Jedi. and obviously, the chainstay length.
> 
> Aenema, is that clear tubing you have wrapped around the vertical bars on the rear traiangle? I'm assuming this is to combat the tire rub Roku mentioned on his ride? I wonder how helecopter tape would hold up.
> 
> ...


I cut up an old downhill tube and made one of those mug guard fender things that spans those two vertical supports. Chris Canfield used black duct tape on his though and I must say that it looks much cleaner than my setup. I just did it to protect the shock from debris off the rear tire.

Oh, and by the way, flymybike is Lance of the famed Canfield brothers.

Shocker is nice, but to be honest, I know I made the right choice with my Jedi. If you get a Jedi and still have lust for something else, talk one of your buddies into getting what you are lusting after and throw a leg over. I've ridden a few bikes at this stage and the shocker is one of them. I know I have the right steed for me.


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

aenema said:


> Oh, and by the way, flymybike is Lance of the famed Canfield brothers.
> 
> .


My bad on the name mixup. Sorry Lance.

Good to hear the Jedi doesn't ride like a 7" freeride bike. I just keep thinking 7 Point, when a bike is in the 7" travel range. I know, I know...quality over quantity.


----------



## bikerider49 (Oct 29, 2008)

*hmmmmm*

I'm new to this site, so take it easy on me guys? I've been thinking about getting a long travel bike for a while and have been looking at many different bikes. I've always like the STD by cove and since I am more freeride oriented, think that would be more of a better bike for me than the shocker as the shocker is more downhill oriented. I've heard of the canfield bikes and done some research on them. What I don't understand is that the few people that own them, act like they are the almighty of all bikes. I realize they are a small company, but you just don't see very many canfields around. Why is this? I would think if they were that much better than other bikes, you would see many more of them than what there are? Cove isn't a very big company either, but there are definitely more of those around than the canfield bikes. Guess what I'm looking for is why the canfield bikes are said to be much better than most other bikes, but yet there is so few of them?

Like I said, I'm considering getting a long travel bike and trying to get as much info as I can before I spend a big wad of cash on something.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*For one thing, they are much smaller than Cove*

Canfields have done very little the form of marketing since they starting selling bikes in the late 90's. That and the fact that they are not exactly cheap makes it hard to get the word out (people are hesitant to shell out a lot of something relatively unknown). It wasn't until about 2 years ago that you really started seeing their name sprout up all over. 
I think their bikes have been some of the best for a while now, you are just seeing the public start to realize it. I know that when I personally got one, I was blown away by its ride and felt obligated to spread the "gospel". I think anybody who has one, or any time on one, feels simliarly compelled to do the same. Like there is this great bike built by great people and you just want them to succeed and become big. Mostly because they deserve it as much as anybody out there. 
I saw the same from the Transition folks when those started making a footprint in the biking community. They have a different business model but the same sort of fanbase. It just grew larger and faster due to their low cost for a solid ride bang for the buck. You will start to see more and more Canfields out there is my prediction and it couldn't have happened fast enough. They really deserve the hype and worth the money if you have the budget for them.


----------



## doodooboi (Dec 29, 2006)

aenema said:


> Canfields have done very little the form of marketing since they starting selling bikes in the late 90's. That and the fact that they are not exactly cheap makes it hard to get the word out (people are hesitant to shell out a lot of something relatively unknown). It wasn't until about 2 years ago that you really started seeing their name sprout up all over.
> I think their bikes have been some of the best for a while now, you are just seeing the public start to realize it. I know that when I personally got one, I was blown away by its ride and felt obligated to spread the "gospel". I think anybody who has one, or any time on one, feels simliarly compelled to do the same. Like there is this great bike built by great people and you just want them to succeed and become big. Mostly because they deserve it as much as anybody out there.
> I saw the same from the Transition folks when those started making a footprint in the biking community. They have a different business model but the same sort of fanbase. It just grew larger and faster due to their low cost for a solid ride bang for the buck. You will start to see more and more Canfields out there is my prediction and it couldn't have happened fast enough. They really deserve the hype and worth the money if you have the budget for them.


To reinfoce what was just said here is that CB are so small it cost more for them to produce these elaborated/excellent frames. That most people who are just getting into it would not pony up the dough for it. I think CB choose this path so that it would take someone with some riding experience in the DH style to really appreciate there frames and put down those hefty amount of Green backs. Which I think is good cause your fan base will be true grassroot folks in the DH scene. If you ask anyone that's a cyclist who CB they would be... ... but if you ask a well seasoned DH'er gauranteed they would know. But that's just my experience (when ever people ask what Dh bike I got)cause those are only the one's that know who they are around me.

I have been lucky enough to have thrown my leg over a few bikes I thought would be good for me. But unfortuantely it really didn't really tickle my panties any. Then I realize CB and read and read and read about there design and really thought out my riding style and pulled the biggest trigger in sport for a beginner!!!! I have yet to ride my Jedi cause it's taking me awhile to get all the parts (damn economy crisis). But I really don't think I will ever reget what I did besides maybe getting cheap parts to just get the beast on the trail.


----------



## bikerider49 (Oct 29, 2008)

*?*

Guess I don't really understand? If there bikes are so great, how come they haven't marketed them more then? I see other small companies that have marketed their bikes and are doing well. Someone mentioned Transition which started small and are doing very well. Sure, their bikes might not be as complex as a Canfield, but they must ride fine or so many people wouldn't be riding them. There are many good or great suspension designs out there, but I think you have to decide what's right for you. I just find it funny when people taught one design as the greatest and best out there when in fact there are many great designs to choose from. While in my search for a bike, I have to take people's opinions with a grain of salt as I never know just how much time they have or don't have on the bikes they are talking about. I do know that at the price of these two bikes in general, not sure if I'll end up with either one of them? I'm sure they are both pretty similar in craftmanship and will both ride great!


----------



## nmpearson (Aug 13, 2007)

just fyi...cove will probably do a little better in the united states mostly because there's a USA distributor now and i discussed it with them about bad CS. sounds like the distributor will help out a little more....as far as canfield vs shocker...i've never ridden a shocker but i think i'd much rather have the jedi because of chris and lance...
not sure why they haven't gotten alot bigger. Their line is so amazing. i think it's because of the price of their frames and lance and chris do so much and are truly committed to riding as much as possible that they don't have time to promote as much as they'd like. the quality of their bikes will only go up so the sky's the limit for them


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

nmpearson said:


> just fyi...cove will probably do a little better in the united states mostly because there's a USA distributor now and i discussed it with them about bad CS. sounds like the distributor will help out a little more....as far as canfield vs shocker...i've never ridden a shocker but i think i'd much rather have the jedi because of chris and lance...
> not sure why they haven't gotten alot bigger. Their line is so amazing. i think it's because of the price of their frames and lance and chris do so much and are truly committed to riding as much as possible that they don't have time to promote as much as they'd like. the quality of their bikes will only go up so the sky's the limit for them


they are getting bigger. They still have one or two luckys (which are a couple years old at this point) left over from when they werent as big. This time they sold out of all their DH bikes in a snap. You're starting to see them become a more recognized name as people buy them and fall absolutely in love. I'm probably going to run my lucky into the ground until it starts breaking to bits in 6-7 years. Coming from a guy whos previous policy was "buy a new frame every year" this is quite something. Its just a matter of recognition, in the last year or so they've moved from "extreme botique unknown" to a more mainstream company that people recognize as a great brand.

Given the current economic climate, the fact that they're selling as many as they are is pretty impressive. I'd bet within the next couple years they'll double or even triple in size. They're gonna need to start hiring people if they're intent on growing the brand, it'll be interesting to see how they go about doing that.

Anyway, bike OT, sounds like the large jedi's are sold out for the year? do they have mediums? smalls? any estimate on when they'll get more in?


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*Marketing is expensive*



bikerider49 said:


> Guess I don't really understand? If there bikes are so great, how come they haven't marketed them more then? I see other small companies that have marketed their bikes and are doing well. Someone mentioned Transition which started small and are doing very well. Sure, their bikes might not be as complex as a Canfield, but they must ride fine or so many people wouldn't be riding them. There are many good or great suspension designs out there, but I think you have to decide what's right for you. I just find it funny when people taught one design as the greatest and best out there when in fact there are many great designs to choose from. While in my search for a bike, I have to take people's opinions with a grain of salt as I never know just how much time they have or don't have on the bikes they are talking about. I do know that at the price of these two bikes in general, not sure if I'll end up with either one of them? I'm sure they are both pretty similar in craftmanship and will both ride great!


They haven't really had the budget to do real marketing. Some ads in a couple of bike mags is about it. But really, how do you get people to ride your bikes these days. Only good way is to have a pro sign with you. Look how Mongoose has changed its name in recent times. The Canfields have not had the budget to do anything like that. Word of mouth is primarily it, and that is hard when you have small numbers out in the public's hands.

Transition did well because they are cheap. A basic suspension design that works well enough. I would go so far as to say they are entry level bikes without compromising in quality or warranty. Good company with solid frames but at a cost that anybody who is wanting to get into the sport can afford. That is a much larger demographic and the Canfields are working with and so they grew fast when people realized that they were a solid product at a good price.

It always comes down to how you feel on a bike. Some bikes you get on and you immediately feel comfortable and confident on. Some bikes go a little bit farther even by boosting your confidence. I have always felt that the Canfields fall into this elite category. That and the Bros are such solid guys makes it an easy decision for me when it comes to my next frame purchase. 
I am not telling you to buy one. Only you can decide where your hard earned cash goes. But take them seriously and seek out a test ride if you can. I live in Boise, ID and would gladly let you throw a leg over either my Jedi or my Balance. Only then will you really know. But if you really feel like taking a chance on one, I am convinced it would be money well spent and not a chance at all.


----------



## bikerider49 (Oct 29, 2008)

I think Transition found a niche in the market with their bikes. They built them tough and priced them very well for the consumers. The design definitley isn't horrible and works very well for most riders overall? Someone mentioned their suspension design beign average and working well enough? I can't understand how a certain design is going to be "the best" while most others are inferior to that design? How many people in this particular thread are actually racers or pro level riders and can warrant having "the best" design out there? As far as companies go, many of them think their design is the best. Turner, just to name one, definitley has a good design. I guess when it comes right down to it, in most situations, people are going to be bias towards the bike they are riding... Right? I think the Canfiled bikes are nice, but definitley not the "holy grail" of bikes as there probably isn't a "holy grail" of bikes anyway? For example, the V10 is a very nice bike and probably a better downhill bike than the Jedi, but it comes down to personal preference and honestly, how many people can ride a bike to it's fullest anyway? Certainly not myself or probably not most people on here?

For me, it comes down to what I'm comfortable on and what feels good. The bike definitley doesn't have to be the newest latest greatest, or best out there. I think the rider makes the bike? Guess I'm not into the hype of "this is the greatest bike, so get this one mentality".


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*Now you are getting into suspension theory...*



bikerider49 said:


> I think Transition found a niche in the market with their bikes. They built them tough and priced them very well for the consumers. The design definitley isn't horrible and works very well for most riders overall? Someone mentioned their suspension design beign average and working well enough? I can't understand how a certain design is going to be "the best" while most others are inferior to that design? How many people in this particular thread are actually racers or pro level riders and can warrant having "the best" design out there? As far as companies go, many of them think their design is the best. Turner, just to name one, definitley has a good design. I guess when it comes right down to it, in most situations, people are going to be bias towards the bike they are riding... Right? I think the Canfiled bikes are nice, but definitley not the "holy grail" of bikes as there probably isn't a "holy grail" of bikes anyway? For example, the V10 is a very nice bike and probably a better downhill bike than the Jedi, but it comes down to personal preference and honestly, how many people can ride a bike to it's fullest anyway? Certainly not myself or probably not most people on here?
> 
> For me, it comes down to what I'm comfortable on and what feels good. The bike definitley doesn't have to be the newest latest greatest, or best out there. I think the rider makes the bike? Guess I'm not into the hype of "this is the greatest bike, so get this one mentality".


There are ups and downs to EVERY suspension design out there, including the parallel linkage that Canfields use. The best bike for you is the one that compromises in a fashion that suits you and your riding style. It is not about getting the most out of the frame, it is about getting a frame that lets you get the most out of yourself. Some people can spend 1200 on a frame and get that. Some people want their bike to have characteristics a single pivot stuggles to provide and get a different frame (santa cruz, intense, Canfield, etc.). I could go into the physics and theory of suspension if you feel like the conversation should go there but there are tons of threads that already do so.

V10's, 303's, M6's, Jedi's. These are all high end DH frames and I would not say one is necessarily inferior or superior to the other overall. They do each have their own unique approach that sets them apart and it is up to the rider to research and decide. For me, I went with the Jedi and think it is the best of them for my riding style. That and the professional relationship I have developed with the Canfields made the choice pretty easy. I guarantee the bike could go faster with a better rider on it. But I feel great on the bike and know I am improving and evolving as a rider because of how good I feel when piloting the Jedi. That is worth everything to me.

For the most part, I agree with what you are saying and people will promote what they ride. Some do so to justify the money the spent, some have never ridden anything different. You ask good questions and bring up solid points. The biking industry is a tough one, margins are slim and competition is high. It is tough for a manufacturer to break into it with big numbers. Transition did it with decent bikes at good prices and that is great for them. The Canfield's approach is to create the best suspension characteristics and not have cost be the limiting factor. Again, best is subjective. But if you are looking to go fast down the mountain, it is hard to argue that another frame will do it better.


----------



## BetterRide (Apr 6, 2004)

*the Jedi is like cheating*

I have raced pro downhill since 1995 and have never had a bike as good as the Jedi. The rearward travel makes the rear end feel bottomless and it NEVER hangs up on square edged hits. As a matter of fact there are few places at Bootleg where I sub-consciously shifted my weight forward on my Demo 8 so it wouldn't hang up. On the Jedi I excelerated through these sections. When not injured I raced it all season and it handled amazingly. I just spent 9 days in Moab shuttling 2-4 hour mostly dh rides on this bike and simply coasted away from my friends on the rough straights and it handled the tight sections like a six inch bike.


----------



## trailadvent (Jun 29, 2004)

Here's a good explanation from Chris himself, this bike is really hawt my buddy rides one and he has had allot of bikes Ive never seen him get so excited over a bike so much or ride as much as he has since hes been riding one, dam it I can't ride at mo but it sounds impressive!

The boys just finished up a Can Diggle on Sunday and that looked hawt too, great job by these guys CB!

Some more cool vids of these guys on there JEDI's


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

sorry to kick this old thread up but im curious what size frame you guys are running?

im 6'0 even. would medium or large be best?

not going to get one this year cause i just built up a socom but probably in a year or so.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

*what size socom did you get?*

And are you happy with its fit? I am just shy of 6'2" and got a large. I had an 05 Formula 1 before the Jedi that was a medium. They feel very similar in cockpit fit. I would lean towards recommending a large for you but personal preference for smaller fits could put you comfortably on a medium. You live in Utah right? When you get serious, call Chris up, he is in Layton and would let you ride his Jedi. He would be stoked to actually and is on a large. You two could coordinate a shuttle and take your socom, he always likes to check out the competition so would welcome riding one of them I am sure. Bet he has already but still...., nice bike. 
Oh, and let me know so I can drive down and join in the fun.


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

I have a large socom and it fits good. I really haven't gotten much time on it so ill play with it this season. Im just trying to see what will work incase a med comes up used or a large. 

I emailed chris and he said i could try his bike but there is snow on all the trails so it will be a few months.

I rode a medium Jedi down in virgin utah (old redbull rampage site) and instantly fell in love. i should have paid more attention to how the size felt though. Next time i meet up with the kid ill give it a try and pay closer attention to it. the fact he had 30" wide bars probably helped feel more comfortable though.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

I would think you could be happy with either size with basic tweaking of things like bars and stems. But for the amount of money you are going to spend, I would seek out both sizes and give them both a run to get the optimal. But, if a killer deal comes along, you would probably be happy on either.


----------



## BetterRide (Apr 6, 2004)

I'm 6'3" and ride a large. I think Chris is about 6'1" and he rides a large also. When he took the camp from me last year I believe he said the shortened the top about .5 of an inch from the original F1. He will probably chime in soon. After 17 years of racing downhill and 11 years coaching it the Jedi is the best dh bike I have ever ridden. Honestly, I felt like I was cheating sometimes.


----------



## k1creeker (Jul 30, 2005)

climbingbubba said:


> sorry to kick this old thread up but im curious what size frame you guys are running?
> 
> im 6'0 even. would medium or large be best?
> 
> not going to get one this year cause i just built up a socom but probably in a year or so.


climbingbubba,
I ended up going with the Jedi, and bought a large. I'm 6'-1/2" 
I'd say go Large for several reasons:

1. There's a ton of standover clearance with the large frame.
2. The wheelbase is already short (even on the large)
3. You can find zero to short reach stems by the dozen. 60mm and longer DH stems are few and far between. FWIW I'm running a 70mm stem, but I like a balanced position, not hanging off the back like a monkey. 

Normally, I'd say go down a size, but it's just not necessary with this frame's design. The large equals my Iron Horse's medium.

While I haven't had mine on a real ride yet, I can tell you flickability is not going to be a factor with this bike.:thumbsup:

Best of luck!


----------



## DickemDown (Jun 23, 2004)

climbingbubba said:


> I have a large socom and it fits good. I really haven't gotten much time on it so ill play with it this season. Im just trying to see what will work incase a med comes up used or a large.
> 
> I emailed chris and he said i could try his bike but there is snow on all the trails so it will be a few months.
> 
> I rode a medium Jedi down in virgin utah (old redbull rampage site) and instantly fell in love. i should have paid more attention to how the size felt though. Next time i meet up with the kid ill give it a try and pay closer attention to it. the fact he had 30" wide bars probably helped feel more comfortable though.


I'm a good few inches shy of 6'0 and went with a medium. I'd say go with a large, but like aenema said, "you could behappy with either size with basic tweaking of things like bars and stems."


----------



## cSquared (Jun 8, 2006)

Okay kids- 
Sneak peek of the new rear-
It has 12mm of tire clearance on a 2.5 maxxis now- and will fit up to a 2.8, but tightly.
New retail is 3150.00 with a Fox 5.0- 
ETA- April.
Colors are unchanged for 09- Black ano main frame-
Links come in-
red
blue
white
glitter Silver powdercoat (new)
Gloss Black (new)

Chris-


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

nice changes. Looks like you changed the two vertical support tubes between the chain and seat stays to be a one piece, built in fender style? Or is it going to be tubing again in production? I like the idea of a fender type design there, however you pull it off. I still think a post production plastic fender of some type would be cool for first generation Jedi owners. I would buy one as it is guaranteed to look cleaner than my ghetto zip tied tube setup I am currently running.


----------



## supramk388 (Mar 6, 2007)

cSquared said:


> Okay kids-
> Sneak peek of the new rear-
> It has 12mm of tire clearance on a 2.5 maxxis now- and will fit up to a 2.8, but tightly.
> New retail is 3150.00 with a Fox 5.0-
> ...


Very cool! :thumbsup:


----------



## Nickle (Aug 23, 2006)

aenema said:


> I still think a post production plastic fender of some type would be cool for first generation Jedi owners. I would buy one as it is guaranteed to look cleaner than my ghetto zip tied tube setup I am currently running.


I used a cut down Mobil 1 plastic oil quart for a rear fender on my Balance. While it survived, it was excellent to have, but it just wasn't durable enough for extended use.


----------



## tatankainlondon (Apr 4, 2004)

aenema said:


> I cut up an old downhill tube and made one of those mug guard fender things that spans those two vertical supports.


Any pics?


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

Not really any good pics but I could take some. The pics I currently have are on the first page of this thread. It really is fairly ghetto and nothing I am particularly proud of but it works. If you want good ones I could. Also, look up threads by flipnidaho. He has a One and made a very funciontal fender out of a plastic milk jug with great pictures, not sure how long it will hold up though.
Chris Canfield used black duct tape and his looks very pro but would probably involve some disassembly to do it cleanly.


----------



## tatankainlondon (Apr 4, 2004)

My frame is still disassembled hence I wanted to do the fender thing before I put everything together.


----------



## aenema (Apr 17, 2006)

gotcha, I would do the black duct tape route. Maybe you can get Chris to email you a pic. Basically you do not want to bridge directly across the supports on the side closest to the tire or your tire will rub your fender. You want it to make its bridge on the far side. It is hard to describe this but i would take the tape and go a strip at a time down the length, circling the vertical support to give the tape surface area to adhere to and than across the far side of them. Hmm, that may make no sense at all. But once you have worked your way down, run a strip vertical in the inside to cover up the glue side and run it down and inside the rear triangle so any debris goes down and out by the wheel instead of weatching down where the link pivots and scratching the paint on your lower link. 

this may make no sense so maybe getting Chris to post or email a pic is the best idea I have had...


----------



## ak pura vida (Dec 15, 2008)

the jedi is just sick. i just bought a diggle which i am very excited about but the more i read about the jedi the more i want one and wish i would have gone with it. but i'm sure the diggle with do me just fine. plus i don't need a full on dh race rig. so for canfield's customer service has been exceptional. chris spent a lot of time on the phone with me explaining every question i had so my simple mind could understand it. very impressive. can't wait to get it built up and ride it. but i have time since the snow has to melt first...

pv


----------



## jutny (Apr 25, 2008)

are the links different? Could just be the drawing.


----------



## tatankainlondon (Apr 4, 2004)

aenema

I think I will get an empty plastic bottle and will start playing with it and see what would be the best shape. Plastic bottles are easy to just and to play with, so it should help me find the correct shape. Them maybe something in black and bit stiffer so there is something that (a) prevent debris from hitting the shock, and, (b) it prevents mud clogging there.
If I make something useful, I will post pics, probably in canfield section.


----------



## Techfreak (Feb 17, 2005)

Anybody think the Canfield bros might be interested in producing a limited number of XL Jedis? I have bounced around on a Jedi and it felt pretty col, but WAY too small. I'm 6'6" and a 23.5" TTT just won't do it for me. A 24.5" one would though...


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

jutny said:


> are the links different? Could just be the drawing.


The lower link is the same. The upper link is a new one piece 3D forged link. They still have the 20mm bearing setup we've always done. To fit the new link and add tire clearance, the upper and lower yokes are new as well as the dropouts.


----------



## burgundy snake (Dec 12, 2007)

*XL Jedi*

I'm 6'6" (2m) as well. I spoke with Chris about this Thursday evening, might be an option but would require a little lead time, and a deposit. 24.5" - 25.0" VTT would be ideal. Personally I'd rather go with a longer VTT and short DH stem, so 25" is my preference. 2010 XL Jedi, bring it! :thumbsup:


----------



## HTFR (Jan 11, 2007)

I noticed eeryone raving about the rearward travel on the jedi, but no one mentioned the rear ward wheel path of the Shocker. Does anyone know the amount of rearward travel on the Shocker?


----------



## doodooboi (Dec 29, 2006)

flymybike said:


> The lower link is the same. The upper link is a new one piece 3D forged link. They still have the 20mm bearing setup we've always done. To fit the new link and add tire clearance, the upper and lower yokes are new as well as the dropouts.


WOW that looks so sick!! I just got a few questions about it. 

1. Does this add weight to the frame?
2. Did you guys acheive he same chain length?
3. Will it be compatable with the first Gen Jedi's?
4. What is the estimated cost for just the rear and upper linkage? 
And this one has been posted already but just in case you missed it.
5. Will that new part where those two bars connected the seatstay and chaing stay going to be replaced with a solid piece represented in the drawing?

Besides my curiousity questions the G2 Jedi are going to be sweet!!! :thumbsup:


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

HTFR said:


> I noticed eeryone raving about the rearward travel on the jedi, but no one mentioned the rear ward wheel path of the Shocker. Does anyone know the amount of rearward travel on the Shocker?


I agree, also the rearward travel of a socom would be cool to know.

i know that part of the Canfield Jedi's appeal is that the chainstays start at 16.25 and sag to mid 17's where the shocker and socom start mid 17's and probably sag to about 18. they say it makes the jedi more nimble but the extra rearward travel also makes it feel plush and stable in the rocky stuff so the best of both worlds.


----------



## doodooboi (Dec 29, 2006)

WOW that looks so sick!! I just got a few questions about it. 

1. Does this add weight to the frame?
2. Did you guys acheive he same chain length?
3. Will it be compatable with the first Gen Jedi's?
4. What is the estimated cost for just the rear and upper linkage? 
And this one has been posted already but just in case you missed it.
5. Will that new part where those two bars connected the seatstay and chaing stay going to be replaced with a solid piece represented in the drawing?

Besides my curiousity questions the G2 Jedi are going to be sweet!!!


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

doodooboi said:


> WOW that looks so sick!! I just got a few questions about it.
> 
> 1. Does this add weight to the frame?
> 2. Did you guys acheive he same chain length?
> ...


Too answer your questions, Yes it's going to get 195 grams heavier. Thats mostly the new rear and upper linkage bolt heads. The new upper bolts cover the bearings to help keep dirt and water out. 
The suspension is exactly the same so the chain length is also the same. 
The new rear and upper link are upgradable to the 08 models, they will be $600 US for everything you need to change it over. 
The vertical tube will be as you see it in the model pictures. It's a custom tube made for us that will act as a fender, provide more clearance and stiffen the frame, side to side. 
We are excited about the changes and hope you are too. What do you think?


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

climbingbubba said:


> I agree, also the rearward travel of a socom would be cool to know.
> 
> i know that part of the Canfield Jedi's appeal is that the chainstays start at 16.25 and sag to mid 17's where the shocker and socom start mid 17's and probably sag to about 18. they say it makes the jedi more nimble but the extra rearward travel also makes it feel plush and stable in the rocky stuff so the best of both worlds.


Nice to see you looking at the chainstay lengths with the rearward travel. These numbers may not be manufacturing acurate, very close but you'll get the idea.

Bike______ Rearward____Chainstay
Jedi.............-37.................413 / 16.25in
Shocker.......-14.................442 / 17.4in
Socom.........-11.................438 / 17.25in


----------



## jutny (Apr 25, 2008)

seckshy!!!

Chris, that's an amazing diagram for illustrating the point of rearward travel. You could tilt it to one side to illustrate what happens when you're actually pointed DOWN the hill and it makes even MORE sense.

granted, it would be more a more accurate depiction if the x and y were on the same scale... the wider horizontal scale exxagerates the effect, but it still shows that the jedi is still moving rearward when the other bikes are actually moving forward!


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

flymybike said:


> Nice to see you looking at the chainstay lengths with the rearward travel. These numbers may not be manufacturing acurate, very close but you'll get the idea.
> 
> Bike______ Rearward____Chainstay
> Jedi.............-37.................413 / 16.25in
> ...


Thanks man, maybe im a little slow but does any one know what the -37 or -14 etc means? it obviously not inches or mm.

Its crazy to see the bikes side by side and its also cool to see what point in the travel it goes from a rearward to a forward rate. very cool.


----------



## jutny (Apr 25, 2008)

well... mm makes the most sense simply because that's what the vertical axis is marked in. However the jedi is a 7.75 vertical and 2.5" horizontal as per the website, which is 197mm and 63mm.

so i'm with ya, i got no idea what the units are for the horizontal axis.


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

The units shown are mm. The comparison is shown in true horizontal (unrealistic computer talk) where as the actual length of the chainstay does grow by 63mm. However the comparison is correct, you could apply the same chainstay growth to the other bikes and compare that instead but it's late for me. I'll catch up in a couple days, I'm going surfing! 

FYI - 6 upgrade rears left.


----------



## flymybike (Jan 6, 2004)

Can't sleep now. This should help.

Cove is 24mm chainstay growth.
Socom is 17mm chainstay growth.
Jedi is 63mm chainstay growth.

I need a sleepy passout emoticon.


----------



## burgundy snake (Dec 12, 2007)

WOW! Sweet comparision, love the chart. It definitively illustrates the difference in the horizontal travel between the Jedi and other bikes. For comparision, the Yeti 303 was designed around limiting deceleration caused by large obsticles and square bumps, their solution was the sliding linkage. However it is not as clean, nor efficient as the JEDI! Just compare the weight difference of the 303 and JEDI.


----------



## jutny (Apr 25, 2008)

Chris, I think it makes sense now. Chainstay growth is a diagonal travel (and dependent on the rest of the geometry), whereas the 37mm figure is pure rearward movement, independent of vertical travel. Your chart is showing actual axle path (with an exagerated horizontal axis), unrelated to the bike Geometry.

right? *scratches head*


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

flymybike said:


> The units shown are mm. The comparison is shown in true horizontal (unrealistic computer talk) where as the actual length of the chainstay does grow by 63mm. However the comparison is correct, you could apply the same chainstay growth to the other bikes and compare that instead but it's late for me. I'll catch up in a couple days, I'm going surfing!
> 
> FYI - 6 upgrade rears left.





flymybike said:


> Can't sleep now. This should help.
> 
> Cove is 24mm chainstay growth.
> Socom is 17mm chainstay growth.
> ...


Ok that makes alot more sense, I can see how thats hard to explain though with the different numbers.

But im guessing your saying that the jist of it is thats its smooth and better for going fast through rocky chunder.

I can't wait til april!!!!!


----------



## burgundy snake (Dec 12, 2007)

Chainstay growth is the absolute change in the chainstay length. The direction of growth is dependent on geometry since it is along the resultant vector, "diagonal" to X and Y. The X distance is the length of travel along a horizontal path parallel to a line from front to rear hub. (typically measured before suspension compression). Y deflection is the vertical travel perpendicular to this horizontal datum.

The Jedi will maintain momentum through rock gardens better than a bike with less rearward travel of the same weight, provide greater stability through technical stuff and drops as a result of the chainstay growth, yet feel like it accelerates out of corners and be nimble as the chainstay returns to it's normal length. It's low weight allows the design to be flickable and responsive.


----------



## MTN MAN (Feb 6, 2008)

Whats the standover height for the jedi with a 180mm fork? If it was on the geometry chart above i didnt see it.


----------



## cSquared (Jun 8, 2006)

The Jedi's standover is 27" 
About as low as you can get-


----------



## MTN MAN (Feb 6, 2008)

damn. It sounds like a serious race machine


----------



## Playdeep (Mar 18, 2005)

I have ridden many Dh bikes over the years but certainly not the expert that many are in the DH arena but I can tell you from having ridden a Jedi that it felt super deep and nimble. Usually these havent gone together on other DH sleds I have tried. I plan on getting one this season.


----------



## HTFR (Jan 11, 2007)

I just built my Shocker yesterday and of course it is raining like a beeotch today. I'll post some pics later.


----------



## burgundy snake (Dec 12, 2007)

Playdeep said:


> ...super deep and nimble.


That sums it up! Due to the rearward suspension travel the JEDI will disipate energy aft on big drops and hits both retaining forward momentum and limiting the tendancy to buck, perfect for DH. Years ago at the Red Bull Rampage Lance was planting his landings while many other riders were thrown. The placement of the pivots with low center of gravity and relatively short neutral chainstay give it a nimble FR feel. I'll pre-order an XL as soon as it enters production!

With it's versitility, performance, and weight the JEDI is in a class of it's own. Chris and Lance, sweet bike! :thumbsup:


----------

