# Timberjack vs Karate Monkey



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Still waffling on my next frame. Need something that I can use for all of the trails.

Timberjack-
+Lighter
+Cheaper $450 w/ headset
+Comes with a headset
+?Internal brake routing (meh)
+Geometry is spot-on for what I want
-? aluminum, all of my past frames have been steel

KM
+Steel
+Geometry also spot-on
-heavier
-more expensive $600-675
-includes a fork that I don't plan to use but can sell

I think either would work for me but it comes down to steel vs aluminum. AmI really going to notice the difference with 29x2.4 tires and a 120 mm fork?


----------



## racefit (Aug 26, 2010)

The steel one. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cotharyus (Jun 21, 2012)

If you try the salsa and don’t like it, what have you really lost?


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I think rider weight comes into play on steel vs aluminum, though I'm lightweight and prefer steel, though to be honest, it's been a long time since I've ridden an aluminum hardtail.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

Cotharyus said:


> If you try the salsa and don't like it, what have you really lost?


He brings up a good point on both of these frames. The entry price is so low you could build the bike, hate it, and not lose much by selling the frame. The monkey has a cult following too so it would be easy to move.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

_Please believe me_ when I say, for a variety of personal reasons (hint, she's cute and wears the ring I gave her 15 years ago), that ONE these two frames fit in my budget. buying one, selling it a few months later and buying something else is NOT an option. I've been through this before, several times in the past few years, in fact. I want to feel confident that I made the right choice and that I can ride the next frame for a few years. just trying to minimize the FOMO, which is a big trap for me. I'll probably feel reservation about it one way or the other.

I will say that the Karate Monkey does in fact have a big cult following. I still see a lot of old KMs on the trail. I had a 2013 KM a few years ago and sold it because I foolishly bought a small when I needed a medium. if I could have purchased a medium MDS version a few years ago (I was working at REI and tried to buy just as Surly quietly pulled the rug out from under REI as a dealer), I would probably still be riding it. time will tell if the Timberjack gets that kind of legendary status.

honestly, the main thing that pushes me toward the TJ is the price. headset included and it will be much easier to scrape together the cash to buy a dropper or some wider rims for it. but it's not a Karate Monkey amiright?

FWIW, it am 160 pounds. riding singlespeed with a rigid/ 120mm setup. this is the only bicycle I own, so I can't "just ride one of my other bikes" when I want something different. central Texas does not have a lot of elevation change, but the terrain to the west gets quite hilly. the overall terrain is chunky with lots of ledgy, punchy climbs out of the creek bed trails. very little that could be described as "flowy". I like going out to ride for 4-5 hours when I can and cover 30 miles or so on a good weekend day.


----------



## hsakkire (Mar 6, 2010)

I just dont care for aluminum in a HT. For that reason, I'd go Karate Monkey. I also don't care for Salsa's newer lineup. All that to say, I'm bias to Surly.

But, it sounds like total cost is a big factor so buy what you can comfortably afford would be my ultimate suggestion. 

There's nothing wrong with the Salsa. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MudderNutter (Oct 23, 2014)

Hey Mack,

I'm in a relatively similar situation... so, I figure I'll just spit out what's going on in my head.

I want a new hardtail with modern Geo, and a lightweight build. I weigh 155-160 depending on how hard I'm training/whatever. To me I can't get the frame weight out of my head. At around our weight, I think it makes a noticeable difference. I've ridden the Timberjack, and thought the handling was spot on. I haven't ridden one of the new KM's... but I'm sure I would like it. I'm at the point now where I think steel is nice, but won't discount an AL frame as worthless because it's AL. 

If I were you I would just buy a Timberjack and be happy that you're getting a lighter bike for less money, and put that extra money in your pocket, or into the bike elsewhere.

The Timberjack won't have a cult following like the KM, or like the El Mariachi did... because it's not steel. That doesn't mean anything though, lol.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

Mack, 

I understand where you're coming from. Does a shop have those on a discount near you? The reason I ask is I have been looking for a new old stock monkey. I called several shops nearby, with in 100 miles, and they offered me 10 percent off sight unseen. 

I've had my aluminum xtc for 8 years and it was my daily until last year. Aluminum is a great material and so is steel. I honestly dont think you could go wrong with either bike. If resell is important then I would choose the monkey. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

A friend at REI said the TJ is $450. Seems like a steal. Not sure on the Monkey but I can call around. Doubtful, very few shops keep frames in stock but focus on complete bikes.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

mack_turtle said:


> A friend at REI said the TJ is $450. Seems like a steal. Not sure on the Monkey but I can call around. Doubtful, very few shops keep frames in stock but focus on complete bikes.


Yeah I couldn't find one in stock but I could get a discount if they ordered it. I think surly is too niche

Edit: I couldn't even find a complete monkey in stock here. I was going to sell my old bike and put that toward a complete bike. 
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## Raumfahrer Rolf (Apr 18, 2007)

mack_turtle said:


> FWIW, it am 160 pounds. riding singlespeed with a rigid/ 120mm setup. this is the only bicycle I own, so I can't "just ride one of my other bikes" when I want something different. central Texas does not have a lot of elevation change, but the terrain to the west gets quite hilly. the overall terrain is chunky with lots of ledgy, punchy climbs out of the creek bed trails. very little that could be described as "flowy". I like going out to ride for 4-5 hours when I can and cover 30 miles or so on a good weekend day.


What do you want this new frame to do that your old frame/bike can't? Different geo? Wider tires? Want run a dropper post but your current frame is limited to 27.2?

My only mountain bike is a 2008 Kona Unit, an old school 29er with old school geo. It's got 100/135 QR dropouts and a 1 1/8" head tube. It's got 27.5+ (rear) and 29+ (front) tires, the most current mtb tech on it. I've been wanting to update/upgrade the frame for a while now to something with newer standards (tapered headtube, boost, dropper post friendly). But the cost is holding me back.

I could buy a TJ or KM - both are very tempting, and would be a nice update to a frame like the Unit. But honestly, I've decided to wait it out. The cost to build up a new bike with the features/weight/geo I want is more than I can spend (or justify spending) right now. Especially considering I'd end up with a bike not that different than the Unit. So, I'll save my pennies and build up a Ti TJ (which is, I think, the best compromise between the TJ and KM) when the time is right.


----------



## MudderNutter (Oct 23, 2014)

Raumfahrer Rolf said:


> What do you want this new frame to do that your old frame/bike can't? Different geo? Wider tires? Want run a dropper post but your current frame is limited to 27.2?
> 
> My only mountain bike is a 2008 Kona Unit, an old school 29er with old school geo. It's got 100/135 QR dropouts and a 1 1/8" head tube. It's got 27.5+ (rear) and 29+ (front) tires, the most current mtb tech on it. I've been wanting to update/upgrade the frame for a while now to something with newer standards (tapered headtube, boost, dropper post friendly). But the cost is holding me back.
> 
> I could buy a TJ or KM - both are very tempting, and would be a nice update to a frame like the Unit. But honestly, I've decided to wait it out. The cost to build up a new bike with the features/weight/geo I want is more than I can spend (or justify spending) right now. Especially considering I'd end up with a bike not that different than the Unit. So, I'll save my pennies and build up a Ti TJ (which is, I think, the best compromise between the TJ and KM) when the time is right.


Lol, except for the extra 2000 dollars that you'll put into that frame! (I do love the bike though, and think you should get it)


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Raumfahrer Rolf said:


> What do you want this new frame to do that your old frame/bike can't? ... So, I'll save my pennies and build up a Ti TJ (which is, I think, the best compromise between the TJ and KM) when the time is right.


I understand what you're saying. almost any frame that I could get to replace a Jabberwocky would be mostly a lateral change. I could also build up some wider wheels or bet a better fork instead.

My Jabberwocky has room for 29x3" tires and I have put a 31.8mm external dropper post on it. some people want "that in-the-bike" feel which I think is boring as hell. the Jabber is the opposite of what I consider a "nimble" bike. It seems to go forever in a straight line but it fights me on most other parts of the trail. it would be great for flowy trails or bikepacking.

I want something higher for trials-hoping my way through twisty rock gardens at low speed, which is how I have to approach the stuff that I enjoy riding the most. I lust after something with a shorter chainstay (17" is still very long, IMO) and a higher BB, slightly less reach (the Jabber is really long in front). The KM and TJ are the only two budget-friendly frames I have found that have those features. closer to a Canfield Nimble 9, which is not in stock with no word from Canfield. if they say they are going to stock mediums soon, I might consider that.

I hate to break it to you, but the titanium TJ is out of production. there are other ti options out there for sure the Vassago Radimus sounds good.


----------



## racefit (Aug 26, 2010)

Budget is always a concern at some point but from where I’m standing it sounds like you want the KM. 

If you plan on keeping it for a while, and it’s your only bike, wouldn’t you rather have what you really want? Plus the longer you keep it the more steel has an advantage making the price difference less of an issue. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> The Jabber is the opposite of what I consider a "nimble" bike. It seems to go forever in a straight line but it fights me on most other parts of the trail.


Me, I'd chop the bar a bit to make your effective reach shorter and the cs feel shorter, and the bike more playful (ie steer more with hips), but I know folks love their wide bars.

I'm curious how you'd get on with more fork offset than 45mm. I can distinctly remember how my first SS woke up when I went from 38mm to 45mm, and I no longer had to "fight" the bike. I see that sub-51mm offsets making a comeback in some circles, but personally I'd be weary of venturing <70d HTA with a 45mm offset.


----------



## Shinkers (Feb 5, 2014)

I ran 67.5* with a 47mm offset and it was fine. Rode better than anything else I'd ridden as a matter of fact. There's an ass for every seat basically. 

Mack, I've ridden aluminum and steel rigid bikes. If I was blind folded, apart from the different geo on each bike, I couldn't tell you the difference between them. That's with the same wheels on both bikes as well.

I can say that the cane creek 10 headset that comes on the salsa is junk. I had one on my Tallboy and it exploded. I also loath internal routing of any sort. I run external droppers on frames that have stealth routing. 

The only thing I don't really like about Surly is how the spec their completes. Their Gnot-Boost setup is actually brilliant and I'm a big fan of that dropout system.

YMMV but I'd probably take the Monkey. 

FWIW, if I had to have only one mountain bike, it would be rigid vs. anything with suspension.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Good question, Ryder. I've never quite wrapped my head around fork rake and trail and all that. The Odis fork that I have has 45mm of offset. I also have a Reba RL from about 2015 that I have used in 100 and 120mm settings but I am not sure of the offset on that.

I have an SQ labs 12 degree sweep bar and a 50mm stem at present. That reigns in the reach quite a bit. My hands are almost even with my steerer tube, which I like. A shorter frame reach frame make the sweet spot happen but I'd be curious to try a 35-40 mm stem too. Unfortunately, when you search for "35mm stem" you find a ton of stems for 35mm handlebars.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

One more reason to buy a KM- local bike shop ATX Bikes amhas been absolutely amazing. They host events, weekly rides, and support the local high school mtb team. Just waiting until I have a little extra cash from selling another bike.

In case anyone is interested... 52 cm Traitor Crusade with Cowbell bars and Arch rims. SSgravel!


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Shinkers said:


> I can say that the cane creek 10 headset that comes on the salsa is junk. I had one on my Tallboy and it exploded.


I'll second that, mine imploded into the head tube.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> One more reason to buy a KM [...]


Here's another: reading the TJ geo numbers is a PITA! 27.5+ vs 29, 120 vs 130 fork, 42 vs 51 offset, forks are sagged, seat tube isn't straight - makes my head hurt. And some of the numbers are wrong (e.g. fork length/offset). The MY2018 #s look more reliable, but I'm still not convinced the TJ has a shorter reach than your Jabberwocky, esp. since Vassago never published the reach/wb/f-c #s AFIK. You run a geo calculator on the three frames?

Unrelated, but here's something I noticed on some of Salsa's geo pages from recent years. I have no idea what they're talking about:

"Bar stack & reach are measured to the grip area relative to the BB center using an 8mm HS top, 20mm spacers, 60/70/70/80 x 5" stem and 15mm rise bar"


----------



## buell (Oct 15, 2015)

If you're putting plus tires on it, I'm voting for the Timberjack. +1 for alternator dropouts.


----------



## hsakkire (Mar 6, 2010)

mack_turtle said:


> Good question, Ryder. I've never quite wrapped my head around fork rake and trail and all that. The Odis fork that I have has 45mm of offset. I also have a Reba RL from about 2015 that I have used in 100 and 120mm settings but I am not sure of the offset on that.
> 
> I have an SQ labs 12 degree sweep bar and a 50mm stem at present. That reigns in the reach quite a bit. My hands are almost even with my steerer tube, which I like. A shorter frame reach frame make the sweet spot happen but I'd be curious to try a 35-40 mm stem too. Unfortunately, when you search for "35mm stem" you find a ton of stems for 35mm handlebars.


Regarding short stems, try Paul Components Box Car stem

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## racefit (Aug 26, 2010)

I have a Hope 50mm stem with 20 degrees rise and it works great. Short stems with some rise are hard to find. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Ryder1 said:


> Here's another: reading the TJ geo numbers is a PITA!


I noticed that too. This is why I advocate the use of Effect Down Tube as the primary way to start measuring bikes. Mark my words, that will be a thing some day soon.


----------



## hsakkire (Mar 6, 2010)

mack_turtle said:


> I noticed that too. This is why I advocate the use of Effect Down Tube as the primary way to start measuring bikes. Mark my words, that will be a thing some day soon.


It's what I've used for more than a decade but it still isn't a thing. I sometimes think they try to confuse people.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## nitrousjunky (May 12, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> I noticed that too. This is why I advocate the use of Effect Down Tube as the primary way to start measuring bikes. Mark my words, that will be a thing some day soon.


What is Effect Down Tube??


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Nitrous:
Effective down tube is exactly what it sounds like. think about how effective top tube is measured. Now apply that to the down tube. It is the hypotenuse of the triangle formed by the reach and stack measurements. It tells approximately where your hands will end up relative to your feet. 

Of course HTA, stem and handlebar dimensions, pedal stack, crank length, etc play a role in fine tuning that, but effective down tube makes comparing two frames a little easier where it counts for handling by removing saddle position from the equation. Trials bikes are often measured this way and I think some BMX companies do it. When I was last into BMX, they were still using actual top tube length, which is stupid because you never really sit down on a BMX bike.

Saddle position is important but I find it to be secondary to reach and stack because all the handling and confidence you get on a mountain bike counts when you're not planted on the seat. For many riders of us, the dropper post males ETT almost useless.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

I've long thought it'd be nice to measure Reach at the bottom of the HT to remove the HT length variable from things, or maybe measure at some arbitrary but standardized stack height(s) on the steering axis (@ 500mm and 600mm), to better isolate the actual (yet inexplicit) frame reach. But maybe eDT is a simpler and superior solution. Would HT angle muck things up a bit?

Front-center is still an interesting figure. Mack, the TJ and KM both have the taller BBH and shorter CS you seek for that low-speed trials hoppy effect, but also have longer FCs and slacker HT angles. Starts to get tricky how all the #s play out on the trail. Demo would be helpful even if it's just spinning a current KM on some urban obstacles.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Good luck finding a "demo" for a low-mid range bike like that! I borrowed a TJ from a local, but he had the cockpit set up very different from how I would (much higher, narrow handlebar) and his fork had NO damper fluid in it. Not a great way to test ride a bike. The aluminum didn't do much for me and he has B+ tires on it. I will say I never ran out of traction!

I am focused on a KM, which is not that expensive but requires nine months of planning, PowerPoint budget proposals, plasma donations, selling my body, begging, and whining to get it past the marriage finance committee.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

Putting a 480mm fork on the TJ would yield a pretty steep STA (upwards of 75?). Makes me think of the ROS9.


----------



## Sage of the Sage (Nov 10, 2011)

I am still really biased toward my TJ. Handles really well (sometimes a little too well), reasonably light, and with a 27.5x3” tire? Traction for daaayzzzz!


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Keep the Jabber. Your current frame is already nicer than either of your two options. Seems to me like you’re tying yourself in knots emotionally and financially for something that’s not a lateral move at all.


----------



## OldHouseMan (Dec 7, 2006)

Blatant said:


> Keep the Jabber. Your current frame is already nicer than either of your two options. Seems to me like you're tying yourself in knots emotionally and financially for something that's not a lateral move at all.


I agree with Blatant on this one, seems like a lateral move at best.

I'd save a bit longer and look at the Santa Cruz Chameleon, Ventana Wolfram or El Commendante or you can go all out with a Reeb Dikyelous.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Oldhouseman- you make a good point. I have owned several frames over the years and off of them were choices determined mostly by budget. That's still the case. However, the price of something like a Ventana is a hard-and-fast NO due to the cost. I'm kind of stuck there. Need to send time on that "Convincing the significant other" thread.

Sorry to waste everyone's time with this thread. The whole this is irrelevant for me because marriage. I am sure most of you know how that goes. I don't think she would ever recover from the violent fit of laugher she'd get if I showed her the price of a Ventana.

FWIW, I am not looking for a "nicer" frame. I am looking for something better suited to my riding style. Higher BB, shorter chainstays, and blue-collar affordable. If money was not an issue, I don't think I could find a frame that fills me with confidence without going custom. The Jabberwocky would be great if I wanted a 29+ bikepacking bike but that's not useful to me. A custom frame is something that would do it for me but there factually no way in hell I could afford such an extravagant purchase. I've checked every stock frame on the market and the two in this thread, oddly enough, were the only ones with geometry close to what I wanted.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

I bought a Karate Monkey, because I like the idea of steel and how it looks. I considered the Timberjack, but it is just ugly to me. I never rode it. I like a bike to handle like you do. The Karate Monkey keeps things lively without requiring constant rider input. There are times I wish it was a little easier to get off the ground, but that's not truly an issue for a rigid bike. I will say that I much prefer it as a 29er with 2.4 tires. It was just dead with 27.5 plus tires. It's a blast to ride and really fits my style. The only issue I have with it is that it is the purple and not the orange or lemon colors. I like how my bikes look. No apologies.


----------



## Kisherceg (Mar 5, 2007)

mack_turtle said:


> Oldhouseman- you make a good point. I have owned several frames over the years and off of them were choices determined mostly by budget. That's still the case. However, the price of something like a Ventana is a hard-and-fast NO due to the cost. I'm kind of stuck there. Need to send time on that "Convincing the significant other" thread.
> 
> Sorry to waste everyone's time with this thread. The whole this is irrelevant for me because marriage. I am sure most of you know how that goes. I don't think she would ever recover from the violent fit of laugher she'd get if I showed her the price of a Ventana.
> 
> FWIW, I am not looking for a "nicer" frame. I am looking for something better suited to my riding style. Higher BB, shorter chainstays, and blue-collar affordable. If money was not an issue, I don't think I could find a frame that fills me with confidence without going custom. The Jabberwocky would be great if I wanted a 29+ bikepacking bike but that's not useful to me. A custom frame is something that would do it for me but there factually no way in hell I could afford such an extravagant purchase. I've checked every stock frame on the market and the two in this thread, oddly enough, were the only ones with geometry close to what I wanted.


_
Here was a long and maybe too intrusive question in connection with the influence of your mate on your decision, which I simple can' understand, but decided to delete it._

As for the bike: why don't you look for a Kona Unit from model year of 2014-2015? I assume, this would be perfect for you, since I 'suffered' the same sensation with my 2017 Unit as you with the Jabberwocky. After half a year I sold it and found a NOS 2015 Unit, which is faultless, even if there are only minor differences between the two.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Kisherceg said:


> _
> Here was a long and maybe too intrusive question in connection with the influence of your mate on your decision, which I simple can' understand, but decided to delete it._
> 
> As for the bike: why don't you look for a Kona Unit from model year of 2014-2015? I assume, this would be perfect for you, since I 'suffered' the same sensation with my 2017 Unit as you with the Jabberwocky. After half a year I sold it and found a NOS 2015 Unit, which is faultless, even if there are only minor differences between the two.


Wife does not ride and we were both raised in unbelievably cheap families. Blue collar sensibilities are hard to shake, long after they are needed. We have financial priorities that include paying off the house, retirement, and staying otherwise out of debt. Our only current debt is our mortgage and a major house repair. Our house will be paid off in less than 15 years since we bought it. We plan to retire before we are too old to enjoy it. A $1000+ frame is like telling my wife that I am buying a personal jet.

Several people have recommended the Unit. I cannot think of a bike that would be _less_ suitable for me. I am not sure why people are stuck on that frame because I would hate it.

Basic requirements for my next frame:
*Sub 17" 430 mm chainstay (PM me if you must know how I know this)
*"high" bottom bracket (singlespeed on rocky central Texas terrain)
*Tapered head tube (I own two forks with tapered steerer tubes)
*420-430mm reach (many modern frames have crazy-long reach measurements that I have learned from experience don't work from me unless I run the stem backwards on the fork)
*120mm fork-capable (Kona told me that the head tube was not designed to withstand anything longer than 100mm)

The Unit of any year meets almost none of those. I am being as generous and compromising as possible but I can't think of any way to change the above.


----------



## Kisherceg (Mar 5, 2007)

I hear you, man. Early retirement and financial independence (or at least maintaining the 'as less work as possible and as much family/riding time as possible' scheme) is my main priority too.  Sad thing that sometimes this reqires hard decisions like this one of yours. Although, sometimes, in the long run, paying a bit much results in a much higher level of satisfaction. Get the Surly! 


I never believed that a Unit would be suitable for me, but it (the 2015's one) turned out to be one of the most beloved ride I have ever had, which is a real surprise for me too.

Good luck for your search!


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

Mack, you don't mind switching between a rigid fork and 120mm fork? Is the rigid just for gravel etc.? I found a 120mm fork ate up my reach.

You're probably smart to wait for the KM, but with a 100mm fork, the Unit wouldn't a bad choice.  Maybe a 2013 in 19". Just gotta use the dremel to shorten your chainstay length, and avoid mud.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Ryder1 said:


> Mack, you don't mind switching between a rigid fork and 120mm fork? Is the rigid just for gravel etc.? I found a 120mm fork ate up my reach.
> 
> You're probably smart to wait for the KM, but with a 100mm fork, the Unit wouldn't a bad choice.  Maybe a 2013 in 19". Just gotta use the dremel to shorten your chainstay length, and avoid mud.


I prefer riding technical, sketchy, rocky singletrack on a rigid fork. however, it slows me down a lot, so I keep it for solo rides and chill conversation-pace rides with friends.

the suspension fork is for group rides when I would drag the whole group down or get left behind (and in the dark this time of year) and when I ride new or especially difficult trails. 100mm of travel is probably enough for that. I have a SSCX bike that I use for urban/ gravel rides, which is considerably lighter and lot more fun than lugging around a 29er. I considered selling it to fund a new frame, but I think I'll regret that.

I have had a few experiences with bikes with short chainstays and I have to say that they are like crack. I just can't get enough! I can hop, manual, and monstertruck my way though stuff in such a way that makes riding so much more damn fun and plowing through with a limousine-length back end that just has all the grace of an ocean liner on rocky trails. I rode a Honzo once and the short CS felt amazing, but the medium Honzo is just too long in reach (I did the math and I would have to run a super short stem backwards on a medium Honzo) when standing and the small would be too cramped when sitting. I strongly doubt I could possibly get the CSL on a Unit under 17" no matter how heavily I modify it, and that's what I am after.

The list of bikes with moderate-reach, short chainstays, and a viable singlespeed setup is a short one. it seems like everything is an upright, long-stem, tiny-reach, looong chainstay XC race machine (looking at you, Chumba) or it's a LLS enduro bro jumping bike. I need something in the middle.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> I have had a few experiences with bikes with short chainstays and I have to say that they are like crack.


I hear ya. I've had 16.7-18" stays and like a SS @ ~17" (my inseam is nearly 37"). After a few chain-loosening rides, I used to be able to fit 32/19 on my Unit with dropouts slammed at 17.1. Was perfect. Then one day, I couldn't (still not sure why; it's not the chainline or chainring, shop claims frame is slightly bent). Being stuck with 32/20 @ 17.5", I actually stopped mountain biking for 6 months (only hiatus I've taken). I should've gotten a Gusset half-link. Anyhow, yesterday I got fed up with churning 32/18 and again tried to fit 32/19. Too tight but the pedals turned. Rode anyway, waiting for the chain to snap, but didn't. Best SS ride in a looong time. The bike was telepathic.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

mack_turtle how long has it been now? 


When I was doing all my careful shopping a lot of my choice came down to the build of the complete bike. The TJ was $1000 after discounts with a suspension fork, the KM was $1500 rigid and would have required more adapter-ing for kid seat and trailer.

I feel like it should not be hard to sell the KM fork to bring the prices back to par - perhaps to a TJ owner


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Darth Lefty said:


> mack_turtle how long has it been now?


Not long enough to get it authorised through the finance committee. See "convincing the significant other" over in General.


----------



## nitrousjunky (May 12, 2006)

Have you looked at the new Hayduke?

It's around the same money as the KM frameset and available in 142- https://eskercycles.com/pages/hayduke


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

At some point your hobby will no longer be riding bicycles, but shopping for them


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

I wrote off the old Hayduke but the new one looks legit. The reach is long but I might be able to rein that in enough. The gap between the small and medium frames is bigger than the other gaps. Weird.


----------



## seat_boy (May 16, 2006)

What problem are you trying to fix with your current frame again?


----------



## KVV (May 22, 2017)

mack_turtle said:


> I wrote off the old Hayduke but the new one looks legit. The reach is long but I might be able to rein that in enough. The gap between the small and medium frames is bigger than the other gaps. Weird.


Hayduke geometry looks like designed for 27.5 x 2.4 tires. It'll be OK with 2.8 tires and not too tall suspension fork. If I want 29 on it, BB drop is 50mm only with 495mm a/c fork. This is already on the edge of too high. I can see it running on 29" wheels with the 482mm rigid fork, but this is kind of niche.


----------



## pebbles (Jan 13, 2009)

RSD Big Chief? I have mine SS and use a Niner steel fork. Switch back to the stock fork when going to the mountains.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

mack_turtle said:


> I prefer riding technical, sketchy, rocky singletrack on a rigid fork. however, it slows me down a lot, so I keep it for solo rides and chill conversation-pace rides with friends.
> 
> the suspension fork is for group rides when I would drag the whole group down or get left behind (and in the dark this time of year) and when I ride new or especially difficult trails. 100mm of travel is probably enough for that. I have a SSCX bike that I use for urban/ gravel rides, which is considerably lighter and lot more fun than lugging around a 29er. I considered selling it to fund a new frame, but I think I'll regret that.
> 
> ...


Not sure if you could consider $2.4k for a full build over budget, but All City makes a top notch trail bike (Friend has one). Not in my budget, and I don't need it. But nice.

https://allcitycycles.com/bikes/electric_queen


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Does the Electric Queen come with a singlespeed option now? Maybe I missed that.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

Ah gee. Forgot about that. The Log Lady is just as good, but no suspension fork, though it is suspension-corrected.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

mack_turtle said:


> _Please believe me_ when I say, for a variety of personal reasons (hint, she's cute and wears the ring I gave her 15 years ago), that ONE these two frames fit in my budget. buying one, selling it a few months later and buying something else is NOT an option. I've been through this before, several times in the past few years, in fact. I want to feel confident that I made the right choice and that I can ride the next frame for a few years. just trying to minimize the FOMO, which is a big trap for me. I'll probably feel reservation about it one way or the other.
> 
> I will say that the Karate Monkey does in fact have a big cult following. I still see a lot of old KMs on the trail. I had a 2013 KM a few years ago and sold it because I foolishly bought a small when I needed a medium. if I could have purchased a medium MDS version a few years ago (I was working at REI and tried to buy just as Surly quietly pulled the rug out from under REI as a dealer), I would probably still be riding it. time will tell if the Timberjack gets that kind of legendary status.
> 
> ...


Hey man, 
Buy the steel bike and DM me for the parts you need. I'll see what I have. If it's something you can use I'll send it to you.

Merry Christmas.


----------



## j102 (Jan 14, 2018)

Hard to beat a Timberjack at that price. It would make a nice rigid SS bike.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

I would think that a TJ with a rigid fork would be LOW. not exactly sure how low, but most rigid forks are 470-480mm. With a 500mm a-c suspension fork (120mm?) The BB drop is already 58mm. That's going to put the cranks very close to the ground, but at least consistently so.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

mack_turtle said:


> I would think that a TJ with a rigid fork would be LOW. not exactly sure how low, but most rigid forks are 470-480mm. With a 500mm a-c suspension fork (120mm?) The BB drop is already 58mm. That's going to put the cranks very close to the ground, but at least consistently so.


Bb height is over a foot. How much do you think you need?


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

Darth Lefty said:


> Bb height is over a foot.


That's believable. You got a source?

Working off Salsa's listed bbd of 63 w/a 482 fork, bbh should be about 12.0" with 2.4s. If somebody wants to alternate between rigid and a 120mm fork, this sounds pretty good to me.

For comparison, Jabberwocky ~67, current Krampus is 65, El Mariachi was 60, KM is 55.

The rigid TJ SS I see in my mind has a 29x3 in front, 29x2.6 in back, and a 490mm fork - a bit more bbh and lots of tire volume (nice since it's an alum frame).


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

no way to tell without asking someone who has a rigid TJ (maybe I can find some in the Salsa forum, but it might be weird to go around asking every one that I see about that), but Salsa lists that bike with a 120mm fork and 29x2.4 tires as having a 58mm drop. a 20mm shorter fork might drop the BB as much as 10mm, but with tire size and exact fork length as an unknown variable, it's all fuzzy math beyond that. that could drop the BB a bit below 12", which iso too low for comfort IMO.

my ideal is to ride a bike with a BB that is well over a foot off the ground, closer to 13". perhaps that's splitting hairs, but a lot of rides end badly where I live because people clip rocks along the trail. every little bit helps. the BB on my Jabberwocky with a rigid fork and 29x2.3 tires is about 11.75" and even with 170mm cranks, i have to ride conservatively to avoid pedal strikes.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

Just got around to reading this. Check out Salsa stems, or Raceface Aeffect or Respond stems for short, affordable options. 

I think the original post summed it up nicely. Saving money is nice, but in the grand scheme $200 is a small price to pay if you prefer the ride of steel. The Cane Creek 10 headset is not much of a perk and really only a matter of time before it needs to be replaced anyway. (as noted, sell the fork for $100 and it closes the gap. Take into consideration the stronger resale value and the Surly comes out ahead.) 

I love steel for a hardtail, the weight is not even a consideration. That said, there is no wrong choice here. They're both good options. 

Everyone has different priorities. If the geometry of the current bike is the main issue, a new frame is the only way to correct that. Even if it's a "lateral" move it's money well spent IMO. 

My vote is for the Surly. I have two and enjoy them as much (more?) than my more expensive frames. (and I've had some pretty nice frames, still do) They're so good for the money. Can't wait till I have a good enough reason to buy another one.


----------



## Darth Lefty (Sep 29, 2014)

Ryder1 said:


> That's believable. You got a source?


It was a guesstimate based on the 29er page which puts it at 12.4 inches with the sagged suspension fork. It's a little under a foot with 27.5x2.8 tires and a sagged 120mm fork. I've been watching mack_turtle put himself through this since I bought mine and so I've looked at the charts a lot.

The charts for the TJ have been error-prone. They like to show each model's geometry with its fork sagged 25% but it's come with 29er or 27.5+ tires and 120mm or 130mm forks and they don't always get each page updated correctly. Some pages showed it with a 483 fork but I can't find one of those right now.

The KM is not a lot different.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

There are some clerical errors among Salsa's #s but I can't say anything struck me as otherwise wrong. With a 482 fork length, they list a 63 bbd ('19 frame). Subtract that from the axle height for 29x2.3 (~735mm) and you're at ~12" unless Salsa's wrong. Since the frame fits up to 29x3" in the back, it should be a nice choice for some. I think I'm done with my Pivot (3 years ridden) so might pick up a used TJ this year to play with (geared 27.5+).



mack_turtle said:


> the BB on my Jabberwocky with a rigid fork and 29x3 tires is about 11.75"


Did you mean 29x.2.3? I've seen 11.75" listed before for the Jab w/29x3 but had a hard time believing it. If my math is right (735/2 - 68), 2.3s should give the rigid Jab ~11.75. I'd think 29x3 (~760) would be 12+.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Ryder1 said:


> There are some clerical errors among Salsa's #s but I can't say anything struck me as otherwise wrong. With a 482 fork length, they list a 63 bbd ('19 frame). Subtract that from the axle height for 29x2.3 (~735mm) and you're at ~12" unless Salsa's wrong. Since the frame fits up to 29x3" in the back, it should be a nice choice for some. I think I'm done with my Pivot (3 years ridden) so might pick up a used TJ this year to play with (geared 27.5+).
> 
> Did you mean 29x.2.3? I've seen 11.75" listed before for the Jab w/29x3 but had a hard time believing it. If my math is right (735/2 - 68), 2.3s should give the rigid Jab ~11.75. I'd think 29x3 (~760) would be 12+.


Yes, I typed that incorrectly. Rigid fork and 29x2.3 ish tires yield a very low BB hieght. That frame might be awesome with true 29+ tires. Sounds like an expensive experiment though.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Now the big question is: Vassago Odis fork or KM fork? I already have the Odis fork and the KM frameset comes with a Surly fork.

KM fork is boost while the Odis is 100mm. Basically the same length and rake. Odis has a tapered steerer while the KM fork is not tapered. I would use the rigid fork part-time and a Reba when I feel the need for squish.

The KM fork would require boost adapters with my current wheel but I could build a new wheel with a boost hub eventually. The Odis fork means I can't move to boost, which I don't know if I care just yet.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

Visually I much prefer a segmented fork. Way cooler. 

Ride quality would definitely factor in for me. I'd ride them both back to back if possible and see if there's a significant difference. 

Lastly Boost. If your front hub is easily convertible to either then it doesn't matter much. If you're not planning on changing your suspension fork or front wheel then obviously stick with the Odis.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

Might as well keep the Surly fork in pristine condition while you try things out with the Vassago (and it does look cool). Nothing risked. If all is well, sell the Surly fork? But if the KM's steering feels a touch sleepy, then you can put on the Surly. Yeah, 2mm ain't much but yesterday I read about a guy who returned his new Whisky 51mm offset fork because it felt twitchy. He went back to the stock Surly fork.


----------



## LezRide (Sep 6, 2019)

Does the timberjack come in a rigid fork option?


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Nope, no TJ with a rigid fork option. It's designed around a fork that is longer than most rigid forks, so it could mess up the geometry unless you can find a 490-500mm for at least. Most rigid forks are more like 480.


----------



## LezRide (Sep 6, 2019)

Thank you.


----------



## Shinkers (Feb 5, 2014)

A 490mm fork would fit that frame perfectly, of which there are at least a couple available (carver xc490 for example).


----------



## hardmtnbiker (Feb 22, 2005)

This is a year old post so I’m not sure if you bought a TJ or KM, if not, have you considered a Hayduke? It’s a really nice frame and only $650


----------

