# New Build - 2013 S-Works Stumpjumper HT



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*2013 S-Works Stumpjumper HT - 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg*

I had been working on a 2011 Epic that I got down to 19.95 lbs:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/my-20-5-lb-9-3-kg-fs-29er-specialized-epic-914287.html

...but I missed a hardtail that I had earlier. Decided to move in a new direction with a 2013 Stumpy frame, pictured below.

It is 1180g on my scale, which is exactly, I mean to-the-gram of what I read in a BikeRumour article from 2012. Check out the pic of the guy holding the scale! Talk about manufacturing consistency.

I'll try to weigh everything and post pics as the build progresses.

Still can't believe how heavy those pizza crusts are. Ripoff.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Ohh this is going to be good. What's your expected drop in frame weight?


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Nice! Looking forward to the build.


----------



## Yellowr6 (Mar 30, 2011)

wow, 2.6 lb frame. What is your goal? can't wait to see it finish.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Based on that same BikeRumour article, complete weight on that bike stock is 20 lbs 6oz, or 20.375 lbs (9.24 kg).

We'll see where I wind up.

I like the 2013 frame because it is the last year to support a rear 140mm rotor natively (without adapter) - 2014 and beyond are setup for 160.

I'm mixed though on the rear setup as it has standard dropouts. The 2014 and later models now support 142 rear axles, which I liked on my Epic. I suppose 135 is ultimately lighter if I go QR.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Wheels*

Here are some details on the wheels.

I opted for a custom-built set from a Canadian firm, NOBL: NOBL Wheels - Custom Wheels & Accessories

Built on Industry Nine Torch classic hubs (120 POE), Sapim spokes, and UD carbon rims. The black and stealthy look are a good match for the frame as well. Used black WTB valves at 3 grams each. Total for wheelset with valves and Stan's tape is 1487g, which is pretty close to my previous Roval Control Carbon SL 29 rims which were 1470g. I think I get a nice hub upgrade for the extra 17g, which I'll take.

Next post: boring details on the bottom bracket.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Bottom Bracket*

So now the extremely exciting bottom bracket. Everyone I know has had a BB creak at some point on a PF30 frame. I've tried several different brands at this point. The other problem is water ingress, so either way these have been mostly disposable.

Will give the Chris King BB30 a try. At 104g (exactly as claimed by Chris King BTW), I'm adding 19g from the default Specialized BB setup in the bottom pic. (On a semi-related note, the Spesh BB was already installed in the frame when I got it. It had been red threadlocked aka "glued" in there, probably out of desperation to prevent creaking. Maybe threadlocking the cups is specified in the installation instructions now. Anyway, getting it out sucked!)

The difference here is that the Chris King uses alloy cups, and there's a nice bearing spindle sleeve setup. I can also add grease via their injector tool. Will it be better? We'll see.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Tires*

Bottom bracket is in. Installed easily, via the Park bearing press. I like the Chris King in that there's a minimal lip on the cup, so it's very nearly flush with the frame:









For the tires, decided to try the Schwalbe Thunder Burts. They are decently light - not Furious Fred light - but decent at 461g and 466g respectively:
















As with any thin sidewalled tire like this, I had to mount them both initially with a tube for a few hours, then was able to pull them out for tubeless. I'm trying something a bit new this time around as well WRT the fluid. I've used Stan's for years, but for my two most recent flats it didn't really help. One was a sidewall gauge that fluid just won't help with, while the other was a smallish puncture, but the sealant just wouldn't hold at pressure/weight. So, in both instances I had to apply a tube anyway.

Given that I always carry a tube, I'm going to try to use a minimal amount of sealant just to get the tires sealed on the rims. I'm not targeting puncture repair. I'll update with the amount of fluid I've had to use, and see how much, if any, weight I can save in that area.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Wheels Done, Cassette*

Tires are on. As mentioned, I've used half as much fluid as usual, as I'm just aiming for a tubeless seal, rather than having extra fluid around for puncture fixes. Seems like a good seal now, but I'll keep an eye on the pressure.









Cassette is on. Although I've ranted against it (and the early wearing ALU big ring that you can't replace), the price has come way down. I didn't take a picture of it on the scale, but it's weight of 208g with the lockring is well known - and tough to beat with anything else. Here's a shot of it anyway while it's nice an shiny. You can also see here that I've migrated my 140mm SICC rotors over from the Epic. As indicated, this frame does not require an adapter for rotors of this size.









Did a test fit, with the fork just loosely in the frame. It's a SID w/ brain, that was unused, and uncut. You'll also notice an Enve seatpost as well:









Things I'll cover in future posts:
-Amount of sealant and weight I've managed to save, if any.
-Jagwire cable vs standard Shimano - any weight difference?
-RD weight.
-2013 SID fork vs 2014 SID WC fork weight.
-Updated Sworks carbon crankset, w/ Wolftooth ring.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Sealant*

As mentioned, I'm trying to use a minimal amount of sealant, just to get the tire setup tubeless. In the case of my last 2 flats the sealant didn't really help, so I figured there's no point in having extra fluid rolling around in the tires. I carry a spare tube all the time anyway.

So, I managed to get both tires setup with just over half a scoop of Stans. When I normalized my scale for the little bottle I use to fill the tires, the fluid itself comes to 32g:









When I transfer the liquid to a Stan's scoop, it shows as 30g - maybe due to residue left over:









In any event, total sealant weight is ~30g, which equates to just over half a scoop. For reference the Thunder Burts I'm using are 29 X 2.10.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Next up are the shifter cables, and with 1X10 I only have one of them for the RD.

My existing cables were a bit ratty, so I opted for some black carbon Jagwire Mountain Pro. While their Elite version made up of ALU links is indeed much lighter, I had seen references to reduced weight on the Pro version as well.

In any event, the scale shots below show that there isn't much difference between the two. Both segments are leftovers that are ~64 inches / 163 cm long. First shot is the default cable that came with my Shimano XTR shifter:









...and the next is the same length of Jagwire Mountain Pro:









So, you're looking at around 4g for that length. Lighter, yes, but probably not worth being concerned about. Consider it bling only.

While I'm at it, I'll include a shot of the old XTR (M986) rear derailleur that I'm transferring to the new bike. The clutch is valuable for the Wolftooth ring setup. Nothing fancy here or particularly light - tough to clean though. Probably removed a few grams of dirt alone. Just posting the scale shot for my reference.









Will continue with the build and post as I go.


----------



## xc71 (Dec 24, 2008)

Looks like its coming together great. If you haven't purchased the Wolftooth CR yet Absolute Black is coming out with S-Works DM NW rings. Have a look at the Hollowgram DM rings on their site, they are a work of art and I'm sure the S-Works will look similar. I think these will be lighter than the WT. I'm waiting for a couple of them myself.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks XC71 for the heads up. I've spent enough money, so I've moved the Wolftooth over from my Epic.   Will definitely keep the Absolute Black in mind though, especially if a bit lighter.

On a related note, I bought a 3rd party Sworks crankset removal tool from eBay recently so I could do the chainring swap myself. (The dedicated Specialized tool is expensive, and hard to find.)









However, even with that tool in a vise, I could not loosen the chainring nut. The manual recommends to use blue threadlock, and it just hangs onto that ring like crazy. Ultimately had to go to my LBS to get it removed. The eBay tool fit the notches perfectly, but I just couldn't do it myself. (Afraid to add too much leverage on carbon crankarms as well.)


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

This is going to be one sexy looking bike when its all done. Keep the murdered out theme going. I recommend buying black vinyl stickers for your fork, and swapping them out. You can get matching rockshox stickers all in black. I look forward to progress.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks for the comments. My previous Epic (the bike that I'm moving some stuff from) had a 2014 SID WC fork, but it had mostly red accents. This frame came with an uncut and unused 2013 SID brain fork, with mostly white & grey stickers, although I agree, full on stealth might be really nice.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Brakes, Cranks*

Next up are brakes, which I'm porting over from my 2011 Epic. Nothing new here - XTR - didn't weigh them as they're not new. As mentioned, replaced the brake lines with Jagwire Hyflow in black carbon, but not expecting any weight savings. I don't think I weighed the blacked Ti brake bolts on my last build, so here they are for reference @ 5g per pair (from Toronto cycles):









The new frame came with some Sworks Carbon cranks (175mm), which are identical to my older ones, except with grey instead of red tones. I've weighed the older set here for reference, but the weights should be exactly the same. That's the nut for the spider, which isn't installed as I was using the spiderless chainring from Wolftooth.









...and I'll use some RaceFace crank boots, as I've done before since I'm scared crapless of damaging the ends of the cranks. 17g well spent I think:









Up next will be the seatpost, and saddle...


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Seatpost & Saddle*

This is one of the more interesting and surprising items: the Enve seatpost. I was lucky enough to get the seatpost, new Sworks cranks, and unused SID brain fork along with the frame, so I'm trying to make use of them.

I really like the saddle attachment mechanism (2 connecting wedges) as it works well - even with the bigger oval carbon rails - and it is easy to level the saddle. Very impressed with the overall finish. However, it is not a "Weight Weenie" item by any means. Pictured below is the full seatpost (400mm to middle of mounting oval, 27.2mm) at 189g:









I used an MCFK setback seatpost (350mm long, 30.9mm) in the Epic, that obviously won't fit here. The fit and finish was great, but I was not a fan of the tricky mounting mechanism (see my 2011 Epic build thread in the first post for this build for details). I have ordered a new MCFK straight seatpost @ 350mm, 27.2mm, which should be 99g. I'll review that when I get it, and it should save a nice 90g!









Also, from my old build, is the MCFK saddle. Unbelievable at 70g (although MCFK claims 67g):


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Any reason why you didn't go with the aluminum segmented shifter housing?


----------



## Gregg K (Jan 12, 2004)

2.72 pizza crusts per frame! That's amazing. They are heavy.

Thanks for another what should be entertaining thread. But I have to admit that I always get upset when I see I9's without the straight pull spokes. Yeah, money.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

RS VR6 said:


> Any reason why you didn't go with the aluminum segmented shifter housing?


Those would be the Jagwire Mountain Elite (I used the Pro), and I definitely thought about it. They would be 20% lighter for sure. However, they only come in 4 full-on metallic finishes, although the black might be OK. Not sure if I like it or not.

Mountain Elite Link Shift | Jagwire

Good catch though - maybe I'll switch at some point, but I like the flat carbon look for now.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Gregg K said:


> 2.72 pizza crusts per frame! That's amazing. They are heavy.
> 
> Thanks for another what should be entertaining thread. But I have to admit that I always get upset when I see I9's without the straight pull spokes. Yeah, money.


Fair point, and another good catch. Have to save somewhere.


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

following… just for fun. No way I could afford to do this so I'll live vicariously though you if you don't mind.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Saddle, Cranks, Chain*

Saddle and seatpost are done. As mentioned, the mechanism is very easy on the Enve post, just wish it were a bit ligher:
















I'm using a KMC SL 10-speed chain. Had to remove about 3 links from the default. Here it is at 237g:









Last shot is of the new cranks (identical to old, but grey) and the 32T spiderless ring. Wolftooth claims the 32T ring is 71g - thought I had a shot of it, but can't find one. Anyway, there's no way in hell I'm able to remove it now anyway, so let's trust their listing:


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

In the last photo in the previous post you can see a bit of the stock Specialized chainstay guard. These are relatively heavy, but I'm leaving it on for now. I had replaced it with 3M tape (only 2g), but the adhesive on it is a bit weak, so I'm unsure what I'll do. In any event, I can do a lot better than the 32g of the current guard:









For reference, I weighed the same plastic guard on my 2011 Epic. The chainstay is bigger on that bike, and the guard is also 11g heavier:


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Fork*

Next up is the fork.

I weighed the 2013 SID fork (grey decals) that came with the Stumpy frame, but forgot to take a pic - sorry. From memory, it was maybe 40-50g lighter than the 2014 SID WC fork (red decals), but I'm not sure why. Physically they seem identical, and hard to imagine they'd add weight from 2013 to 2014. Also, making it even more odd, was that I hadn't yet cut the 2013 steerer, so you'd expect it to be heavier.

I'm too lazy to remove the fork and detach everything now, so let's say it's about the same as the 2014, which I weighed here for my previous build:









Always scary to cut the steerer. I think I measured 8 times! Anyway, the cut dropped 25g from the fork, not that I really had a choice of where to cut it:









Here's a shot of the installed fork - not especially cool looking like an RS1 would have been:


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Expander*

Oh, and forgot to offer up the expander. Didn't want to try anything funky, so I stuck with the OEM one @ 27g:


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

phlegm said:


> I used an MCFK setback seatpost (350mm long, 30.9mm) in the Epic, that obviously won't fit here. The fit and finish was great, but I was not a fan of the tricky mounting mechanism (see my 2011 Epic build thread in the first post for this build for details). I have ordered a new MCFK straight seatpost @ 350mm, 27.2mm, which should be 99g. I'll review that when I get it, and it should save a nice 90g!


I thought about mentioning that when you got the 30.9mm diameter MCFK seatpost. If you were throwing that much money at a 2011 model year bike it was only a matter of time until you were going to replace the frame with something else too.


----------



## jackdz (Aug 12, 2010)

phlegm said:


> That's the nut for the spider, which isn't installed as I was using the spiderless chainring from Wolftooth..


I have the same setup on my Sworks Epic....how do you hold the Wolftooth on if you don't use the nut?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

WR304 said:


> I thought about mentioning that when you got the 30.9mm diameter MCFK seatpost. If you were throwing that much money at a 2011 model year bike it was only a matter of time until you were going to replace the frame with something else too.


Yep, fair point. I'll be selling the 30.9 seatpost, and will certainly take a cash hit on it unfortunately.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

jackdz said:


> I have the same setup on my Sworks Epic....how do you hold the Wolftooth on if you don't use the nut?


My sentence was pretty awkward:

_"That's the nut for the spider, which isn't installed as I was using the spiderless chainring from Wolftooth."_

Meant to say the spider isn't installed. That nut is certainly required to connect the Wolftooth ring to the cranks.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Stem, Bars, Grips*

Nothing new here, as I'm transferring the MCFK stem, bars, and Ahead cap to the new frame.

Here are the scale shots from the last build anyway:























Here are a couple of shots of it all together. I removed several MCFK stickers, as they were overkill. The logo on the stem is paint.
















One new item that I'm happy with - at least before riding them - are the LizardSkins DSP grips. I didn't weigh them on my scale (and I won't peel them off now), but at 30g (claimed) including tape and caps, they are at least half the weight of my favourite ESI Chunky grips. (Unclear if ESI includes the caps in their claimed weights.)

I opted for the slightly larger 32.3mm grips, which feel almost exactly like the ESIs, except they have that rubber wrap around them. We'll see how they hold up, but really hoping they do given the weight advantage is nice.

Install was easier too. With the ESIs, even wet, I still had to really squirm and struggle. These were far easier. Wish the logo was less obvious, and we all know that white on a grip only looks like crap after a while:


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

The adhesive was a major pain to take off.

DSP is the 32.3 and the ESI is the Chunky. Cap is on the DSP grip...it just got cut off in the photo.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

RS VR6 said:


> The adhesive was a major pain to take off.
> 
> DSP is the 32.3 and the ESI is the Chunky. Cap is on the DSP grip...it just got cut off in the photo.
> View attachment 933106


Excellent - thanks for confirming. I wind up having to cut off my ESI grips anyway. In most cases at least one of them is shredded a bit, so I suspect I may have to do the same with the DSPs. Not looking forward to the double-sided tape removal though.

You are brave with the white grips.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Coming along great! Looking forward to seeing final weight.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

phlegm said:


> Excellent - thanks for confirming. I wind up having to cut off my ESI grips anyway. In most cases at least one of them is shredded a bit, so I suspect I may have to do the same with the DSPs. Not looking forward to the double-sided tape removal though.
> 
> You are brave with the white grips.


I ripped my ESI on a fence. I got the DSP in place of it. My hands just couldn't get used to the DSP grip. Plus my gloves have a leather palm...so with the rubbery surface of the DSP...it made a squeaking sound.

I use white grips to match my saddle. I use that pink spray cleaner stuff when it gets real dirty. Works pretty well.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Gold, Gold, Gold, and the Rear RWS*

Not related to weight, but wanted to rant a bit. I'm not a fan of gold accents, especially on my previous frame that was predominantly black, white, and red. Not a big deal, but it looks a bit out of place.

Was trying to keep things toned down on this build too, but sadly I'm stuck with a few gold accents. First is on the Crank Bros 11 pedals. Their 11 series stuff is gold accented, so it's unavoidable. I did at least tone it down with a Ti end cap in black (circled), but otherwise still pretty gold-ish:









Next are the fittings for the Jagwire Hyflow brake hose. I really like the subtle carbon hose, but Jagwire's scheme adds the gold. (Even the crimp for the shifter cable is gold.) Not a lot, but I think black would be better:
















We can actually get back to weights, as you can see the rear DT Swiss RWS in the rear brake shot. The hubs currently are setup for 10x135, and I think I'll like the improved stiffness over standard skewers. However there's a weight penalty for that as it comes in at a hefty 69g. This sucks when you consider a Tune X12 (for a 12X142 axle) is only 36g. There is another option in 10x135 from Hadley, but it is a bolt-on, and still ~58g. I may swap out the hubs to standard QR, if only as a protest.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Front DC15*

One last thing before the final weight - I'll be using the same Tune DC15 for the front wheel. Hard to beat at 43g (compared to 70g for the stock one):


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Total Weight: 17.81 lbs / 8.08 kg*

Total weight is 17.81 lbs / 8.08 kg so far.









I'll compare this to the stock bike, and earlier in this thread I mentioned a BikeRumour article, where it is scaled at 20.38 lbs / 9.24 kg, however upon closer inspection of the photo it didn't have pedals on it - see below. So, to compare apples to apples, the "stock" weight of that bike should add at least 186g for Crank Bros 11 pedals, for a total of 20.78 lbs / 9.43 kg.









As a result, so far I am almost 3 lbs (2.97 lbs / 1.35 kg) below the stock bike.

But "weight", there's more! (See what I did there?) I have a few more changes pending that should drop things further:

1. An MCFK seatpost is on the way. At claimed 99g, it could shave 90g more.
2. A Tune DC17 rear skewer (and hub conversion caps) are on the way at a claimed 17g. If I decide to change that up, it could be another 52g saved.
3. I'll likely drop the rear plastic chainstay protector. 3M sheets amount to 2g, although unsure what I'll do. Potentially 30g more savings there.

Might take me to below 17.5 lbs, but we'll see.

Complete build list to follow soon.


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

cool, thread. thanks for taking the time to document & photograph all the parts. I used to run esi grips & I've been running those dsp grips for a few months now & I actually prefer them. the rubber surface provides a little more grip, esp in the wet.

I like the "murdered out" all black look too. I took the decals off my fox forx, they weighed 15g, yeh not a great saving, but it all counts right.

those gold brake caliper parts, just a quick dab of black touch up paint?


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

DSP grips are amazing. I was a fan the moment i saw our store's road tape demo. Its surprisingly grippy... i no longer wear gloves on XC/All mountain rides, unless the terrain is full of sharp rocks. They get sticker, the sweatier your hands get too.

They are pretty durable as well.... enough ISO or goo gone, will take the residue off. I imagine spraying it with soap, like the instructions, would also help. 

I would get some heat shrink for the pedal caps, or any of the other bits. You can get any size from a decent electronics store. Its incredibly light, and can get cut off if you dont like it. Cut it to length, slide it over the part, and a hairdryer should take care of the rest. It will conform to the shape of the object. Plastidip is a spray paint version of the above, which id reccomend on weirdly shaped pieces. I use the heatshrink to hide sections of nokon that arent color matched, because their kits are always about 3-5 inches too short for what i need. I try to place it on a mounting point too, so the zip ties can grip it better. 

It'll add a negligible amount of weight (15gs if that)...but its a necessary evil to keep things fresh and black.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

FWIW, my Hadley 10x135 is right on 50gms. Still not as light as a skewer setup, but super stiff/stout, and looks nice and clean when all bolted up. 8gms is 8gms.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

CuddlyToast said:


> DSP grips are amazing. I was a fan the moment i saw our store's road tape demo. Its surprisingly grippy... i no longer wear gloves on XC/All mountain rides, unless the terrain is full of sharp rocks. They get sticker, the sweatier your hands get too.
> 
> They are pretty durable as well.... enough ISO or goo gone, will take the residue off. I imagine spraying it with soap, like the instructions, would also help.
> 
> ...


That heatshrink is a good idea, and I already have some from other electric-based projects. Would be fairly durable, but suspect it won't fit nicely over those gold brake banjo connections. Maybe Plastidip, assuming those areas don't get scratched. Suspect there's nothing I can do about the pedals though.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

scrublover said:


> FWIW, my Hadley 10x135 is right on 50gms. Still not as light as a skewer setup, but super stiff/stout, and looks nice and clean when all bolted up. 8gms is 8gms.


Thanks for the confirmation. I don't dislike the Hadley option, but a knock against it is that you always need a wrench to remove the wheel - suppose there are good and bad aspects to that. It also occurred to me that it needs a torque setting, so that's another bit of a pain if you just want to peel off the rear wheel.

I'm starting to miss 12x142, and the nice light options out there for it.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Test Ride*

Took it around the street just now, and off a few curbs. (I'm still recovering from a concussion, so can't ride full on just yet.) No squeaks or squawks.

No creaks at all from the saddle. Reason I mention that is because on my Epic , with the MCFK setback seatpost, there was always a creak from the saddle. Was really hoping (praying) that it wasn't the expensive MCFK carbon saddle, and it is not! Looks like I just couldn't tighten the MCFK seatpost appropriately. As indicated, the mounting system on their setback seatpost is a bit frustrating. In any event, the Enve seatpost is working nicely. We'll see how it goes once my MCFK straight seatpost arrives.

The other noise that is gone from my Epic is the dreaded bottom bracket. I'm guessing most PF30 frame suffer from this at some point. The Chris King BB is brand new, so can't really say anything yet, but it's nice to not hear noise with every pedal stroke.

Lastly, thought I'd comment on the I9 freehub - holy crap it's noisy, but in a cool kind of way. I'll see if I can post an .mp3 of it at some point. The 120 POE (and associated pawls) make a lot of noise, although I'm not noticing extra drag. Certainly can't notice the extra points of engagement on the street. I've heard you can take out half the pawls and get a 60 POE hub, which is uh, maybe half as noisy? Not sure I want to do that...yet.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Industry Nine Hub Sound*

Here's a quick vid of the hub in action:

[video]https://vid788.photobucket.com/albums/yy166/phlegm2/WP_20141023_002_zpsxdcbvjwq.mp4[/video]


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

I9 rear hubs changed the way i ride mountain bikes. I wont buy a hub with less engagement now. 

Keep the pawls in. Your ability to ride technical ups will change dramatically. I also found it much easier to ride skinny's, as you can ratchet the cranks back and forth, and still generate movement. 

The sound is the best part, it lets everybody know that you have i9s


----------



## Gregg K (Jan 12, 2004)

CuddlyToast said:


> I9 rear hubs changed the way i ride mountain bikes. I wont buy a hub with less engagement now.


Yep. Same here. 8 years of riding them, and I love the engagement. And the sound. It's like an angry beehive.


----------



## gobriango (May 3, 2006)

Phlegm - how much do the disks weigh and how is the stopping power ? Any odd noises from them ?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*....*

Weights are:

Kettle SICC rotors, 160mm, 140mm (55g, 47g).

No noise, stopping power is adequate, with Kettle carbon pads. You'll want to check this thread before investing:

http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/carbon-brake-rotors-823378-25.html


----------



## gobriango (May 3, 2006)

So basically, carbon disks aren't figured out yet !


----------



## kuk2 (Dec 8, 2010)

Cool build, inspiring! Makes me miss a light fast HT 

Can i ask how did you manage to set up the king BB for the s-works crank? I have the same on 2 bikes, and really hates the crappy plastic bearing cups. But have been told that it is only the original cups that will fit to the crank as they set the bearings longer indside the frame.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

vfb said:


> Cool build, inspiring! Makes me miss a light fast HT
> 
> Can i ask how did you manage to set up the king BB for the s-works crank? I have the same on 2 bikes, and really hates the crappy plastic bearing cups. But have been told that it is only the original cups that will fit to the crank as they set the bearings longer indside the frame.


Thx for the comments.

No issue with the Chris King bottom bracket and the S-Works crankset. Just installed to the same specs as always.

Not sure why you heard that re other cups.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Nice job!, Again, jealous 

If you ever sell that enve post, Let me know!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

machine4321 said:


> Nice job!, Again, jealous
> 
> If you ever sell that enve post, Let me know!


Thanks man, appreciate the comments. I'll probably be selling the seatpost, so will give you first option.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

single bolt designs....... *shudders*


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Acko said:


> single bolt designs....... *shudders*


You're not a fan of the single bolt Enve seatclamp? So far it's pretty good actually, but there are a lot of dual bolt designs that are far lighter. It has worked well so far though (on my super-limited 3 rides) and the finish is perfect.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

I have seen saddles on that particular seat post nearly give the rider a cavity search... 
All one bolt designs are prone to movement.
Certainly wouldn't question the look or finish of their gear but I just personally think that the one bolt design should be binned!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Fair enough. I had mediocre results from a 2 bolt MCFK setback seatpost, due largely to design. Hoping the straight post addresses that issue, some weight issues (crazy, right?), and allows a bit more weight up front (to counter lifting the front wheel on aggressive climbs).


----------



## kuk2 (Dec 8, 2010)

vfb said:


> Cool build, inspiring! Makes me miss a light fast HT
> 
> Can i ask how did you manage to set up the king BB for the s-works crank? I have the same on 2 bikes, and really hates the crappy plastic bearing cups. But have been told that it is only the original cups that will fit to the crank as they set the bearings longer indside the frame.


Thanks, i will buy a king bottom bracket next time


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

vfb said:


> Thanks, i will buy a king bottom bracket next time


Well in fairness, I have very few miles on the CK BB. However the bearing are top notch (I stayed with stainless steel). Hoping the alloy cups will creak less. Also have their grease injector that should help with maintenance.

I didn't epoxy in the cups, as seems to be popular now with PF30, so that's a future option.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*New Stuff!*

The theme for this post is "more than claimed".

First up is the Tune DC17 rear QR. I'm debating switching the rear over from 10X135, and will be testing to see if I notice any difference.

This is the newly redesigned version, which presumably offers more clamping force, and less pain on the hand. Claimed is 17g, and I'm seeing a flip flop between 19 and 20g on my scale. Minor difference, but still "more than claimed":









Next up is the MCFK straight seatpost, 350mm long, 27.2mm diameter. Claimed on their site as 99g for those dimensions, but I'm seeing 106 for the whole assembly (including carbon rail arch). Not massively different, but still "more than claimed":

















As reference, without the carbon arch, it was 97g, for whatever that's worth.

Will post further as I assemble things.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*.04 Pounds of Dirt*

So I made pretty much the final changes to the bike setup:

1. Swapped out the end caps to QR, and switched to the Tune DC17 skewer. Old 10x135 caps were 2 grams lighter, but the DC17 is far lighter than the RWS:

















2. Removed the stock plastic chainstay protector, and replaced with 3M tape:









3. Swapped out the Enve seatpost with the MCFK:









Weight at this point is 17.5 pounds on the nose:








I actually weighed it before a ride yesterday, and it was 17.46 pounds, so somehow I picked up extra dirt weight. 

At this point, I'm wondering if I can break the 16 pound barrier. Might try some Furious Freds, which could drop 100g a piece, which equates to ~.44 pounds, so tantalizingly close to under 17 pounds.

We'll see.


----------



## Yellowr6 (Mar 30, 2011)

nice! i wonder now how it rides compare to my FS.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

phlegm said:


> Fair enough. I had mediocre results from a 2 bolt MCFK setback seatpost, due largely to design. Hoping the straight post addresses that issue, some weight issues (crazy, right?), and allows a bit more weight up front (to counter lifting the front wheel on aggressive climbs).


How was the one bolt enve while you used it? I need a setback and like the looks/weight/ price? lol


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

machine4321 said:


> How was the one bolt enve while you used it? I need a setback and like the looks/weight/ price? lol


It was actually fine, but only used it briefly.


----------



## Devincicx (Nov 20, 2011)

phlegm said:


> It was actually fine, but only used it briefly.


The enve is good, I have 2 of them, 27,2 and 30,9, both for sale


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Plastic Caps*

Minor update. Have seen some people do this before, but had difficulty finding plastic inserts that replace water cage bolts. Seems like you have to buy a quantity of 100, and pay ridiculous shipping. At least in Canada.

Weight of existing bolts is 5g:








Finally found these at Lowes:








Have to cut off the ends a bit, but they fit, and the finish on the caps is flat-ish, so that's fine. They don't register anything on the scale.








Weight savings aren't really anything to speak of, but it's so cheap to do, that you might as well.


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

phlegm said:


> They don't register anything on the scale.
> Weight savings aren't really anything to speak of, but it's so cheap to do, that you might as well.


You need a better scale, up to 1/10th of gram 
Maybe something like this&#8230; sorry for the side view


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

You can also use nylon grub screws.

M3 M4 M5 M6 Nylon Grub Screws Plastic Slotted Head Packs of 10 | eBay


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

doccoraje said:


> You need a better scale, up to 1/10th of gram
> Maybe something like this&#8230; sorry for the side view


I prefer to assume those plastic caps weigh nothing.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx man. The bottle cage bolts are M5, right? Any idea how long to get them?


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Pretty sure they are M5.

Not sure about the length. Maybe slightly shorter than the stock bolts? You can always trim them if need be.


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

You can use tidds.

Silicone Tidds


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

You don't use bottle cages?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Acko said:


> You don't use bottle cages?


Nope.

http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/my-heavy-pack-alternate-title-im-stupid-938316.html


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

RS VR6 said:


> Pretty sure they are M5.
> 
> Not sure about the length. Maybe slightly shorter than the stock bolts? You can always trim them if need be.


Cheers, thx.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

khardrunner14 said:


> You can use tidds.
> 
> Silicone Tidds


Nice, although I prefer natural Tidds.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Not finished yet.

I'm fed up with the SICC (carbon rotors) and making excuses. In a drunken stupor I stumpled across this list of rotor weights:
FAQLoad - Lightweight disc brake rotors

While some of the numbers are off, it introduced me to some cool rotor ideas. I tried to buy a front and rear set from Scrub (magnesium, $450 front and rear), but their website didn't like my Canadian address. As a protest, I then bought some carver Ti rotors:
Titanium Disc Rotors - Carver Bikes

Only a minor weight penalty over the carbon SICC from Kettle, and I can use standard pads.

Will report on those soon.

-Also bought some TIDDS for the cage bolts.

-Downsized to to a GS (medium) XTR rear derailleur, and will tune it via parts from Toronto Cycles.

-Will swap out to Furious Freds, bearing in mind only a dry tire.

I'll post back - hoping to touch 16 pounds by the time I'm finished this round. (Acko - shut up about your non-suspended SS.)


----------



## Gregg K (Jan 12, 2004)

That rotor list is so totally bookmarked.

Also, an excellent product desription which includes: If you ride a lot near recording studios in the Pacific Northwest, stainless might be the better call!


----------



## MichaelV8V (Aug 16, 2014)

I used a Ti rear disc for a few years, and didn't need a bell on the bike, one squeeze of the lever and everyone knew I was there.

It was also a bit dramatic at night, literally sparking brightly whenever I braked hard. So, overall an entertaining purchase. Didn't progress to having one on the front, that would have given me no options for quiet braking


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yeah, I've seen that elsewhere too, so hoping organic pads can help. They are still cheaper than the carbon rotors, and way cheaper than the magnesium matrix.

Could be an expensive experiment.


----------



## roadscuzz (Jan 18, 2004)

*funny*



phlegm said:


> nice, although i prefer natural tidds.


ha ha!


----------



## jeffrey j (Jul 10, 2010)

Nice looking build. I'm in the process of trying to get my Trek 9.8SL under 19lbs (even 18.95 is fine!) and you're all the way down at 17.5 now! Bastard!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

jeffrey j said:


> Nice looking build. I'm in the process of trying to get my Trek 9.8SL under 19lbs (even 18.95 is fine!) and you're all the way down at 17.5 now! Bastard!


 

Should get some deliveries this week, so may have some updates.


----------



## jeffrey j (Jul 10, 2010)

phlegm said:


> Should get some deliveries this week, so may have some updates.


I've got some deliveries this week too, but I won't be getting down to 17


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Silicone Tidds (Yes, you read that right.)*

As per a recommendation in this thread by khardrunner14, I decided to go with some Silicon Tidds:









Claimed as .25g each, my scale proves them to be weightless!









The reason I opted for these, is that the plastic bits from Lowes were a bit loose after I trimmed them, and the Tidds just make for a better fit:

















The Tidds are inexpensive relative to other WW parts, however they are overpriced for what you are actually getting. They seem to work fine though - not really much to say about it: lube, push, twist (tee-hee.)


----------



## jeffrey j (Jul 10, 2010)

How much savings were the silicone tits (oops, I meant tidds) again? Might have to look into these as I don't use bottle cages either.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

jeffrey j said:


> How much savings were the silicone tits (oops, I meant tidds) again? Might have to look into these as I don't use bottle cages either.


See post #67 for the weight of the stock cage bolts (5g for 4). Saving 4g (or 5g if you trust my crappy scale) is trivial, but the Tidds are cheap enough. Good tight seal too.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

Tidds can be used in a couple spots on my bike actually. The ISCG mounts are shiney, metallic inserts that stick out like a sore thumb. At that weight, it might be worth while to use them as concealer plugs, because as a true weight weenie, i couldn't be caught dead with a heavy bash guard


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

CuddlyToast said:


> Tidds can be used in a couple spots on my bike actually. The ISCG mounts are shiney, metallic inserts that stick out like a sore thumb. At that weight, it might be worth while to use them as concealer plugs


thats a really good idea..


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Hope everyone had a good holiday break. I'm about to get going on the build again, and will post a few updates shortly:

-tuning the XTR rear derailleur
-moving to Formula R1 Racing brakes
-moving to Carver Ti rotors
-swap to minimalist FuFr tires

Hope to be under 17 pounds.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

and you call me a tease


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

I note you are using Race Face boots on your S-Works crank. What size did you go with? I had to modify my holes on the back a bit with a razor blade to be able to more easily fit the allen wrench in to remove/install my pedals. Mine are a bit loose.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

TiGeo said:


> I note you are using Race Face boots on your S-Works crank. What size did you go with? I had to modify my holes on the back a bit with a razor blade to be able to more easily fit the allen wrench in to remove/install my pedals. Mine are a bit loose.


I wasn't aware there were multiple sizes. As you indicate, the holes don't line up perfectly, so I need to move them around slightly when getting an allen wrench in there. Haven't had to cut them, but I can see how you'd want to.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

There is a smaller size available now plugged as being for aluminum cranks. I agree that it is not a huge deal b/c really...how often do you take your pedals on/off? I just trimmed mine a bit b/c it was easy.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Slightly Lightening the XTR Derailleur M986*

So, sometimes I've spent a fair amount of money to save just a bit of weight. In this case I spent just a bit of money to save just a bit of weight. I guess that's OK.

When I had my M986 XTR derailleur off for cleaning, I noticed the jockey wheels weren't spinning freely. Probably not enough to be noticeable in terms of drag with the chain on, but I could definitely use some new bearings.

First, here's the stock, clean rear derailleur at 215g:









I had a glance at Toronto Cycles, and noticed some Aerozine jockey wheels, with bearings, claimed at 11.6g. Decided to opt for a black set, and they came in at an honest 12g on my limited scale. (The bearings are in the wheels, and you are seeing the 4 bearings caps/covers on the scale before assembly - which by the way was a PITA):









For reference, the stock Shimano jockey wheels and bearings were 20g:









Since I was ordering from them already, I opted to replace a few of the other stock bolts with black Ti equivalents:

1 - M6 X 8.5 (shifter cable secure bolt)
1 - M6 washer (shifter cable secure bolt washer)
3 - M4 x 15 (b-tension, hi & low adjustment bolts)

Note that the 3 M4 bolts aren't an exact match for the stock bolts length-wise, but I'm close. My settings for these bolts allow for some length differences without issue.

I also mistakenly bought an aluminum "hollow rear derailleur pivot bolt kit", although most of the bolts in the kit (such as the main pivot bolt) don't work with shadow+ derailleurs. At least I could make use of the two bolts that attach the jockey wheels though.

All in all, those bolt changes only reduced things by another 1-1.5g, so probably not worth it. Final "tuned" XTR weighs in at 206g:


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

phlegm said:


> 3 - M4 x 15 (b-tension, hi & low adjustment bolts)


I'm not sure if you're aware, but the stock XTR hi & low adjustment bolts are actually alu. The stock B tension bolt is steel, so you made a saving there.
Out of all the bolts on a XTR rear derailleur the real heavy weight is the lower shadow steel bolt. Does anyone make lighter weight replacements of those please?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

scant said:


> I'm not sure if you're aware, but the stock XTR hi & low adjustment bolts are actually alu. The stock B tension bolt is steel, so you made a saving there.
> Out of all the bolts on a XTR rear derailleur the real heavy weight is the lower shadow steel bolt. Does anyone make lighter weight replacements of those please?


I was not aware, but that makes sense as there's nothing structural happening with those. At least now though I can adjust them with a 3mm hex as opposed to stripping with a Phillips.

I've been looking for a complete kit for Shadow+ derailleurs, but haven't had any luck either.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Hello: Carver Titanium Rotors, See Ya: Kettle SICC*

I'll rant a bit at this point, as I've been fighting with my Kettle Cycles carbon rotors ever since I took part in their Kickstarter campaign.

First off, there are some inherent problems with the rotors themselves:
1. Braking power is sub-par, almost to the point of danger if using "regular" pads with them.
2. Due to #1, you really require carbon pads from Kettle to get decent, and I mean just decent braking power. This adds more $.
3. One of my rotors was a bit warped, and you can't adjust or bend to attempt a fix.
4. The rotors are fatter than a typical metal-based rotor - at least the ones I have. Can create clearance issues.
5. There is apparently a "C Process" that may help with stopping power, that I don't have on my rotors.
6. They are expensive: $124 each for 140mm, through to $199 each for 200 & 203mm.
7. They are having some significant customer service issues. People are having difficulty hearing from them, and many are still awaiting parts.

http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/siccc-carbon-rotors-user-review-840451.html

There are some advantages to them:
a. They are light.
b. They don't fade due to heat.
c. They offer great modulation (although some may claim modulation = lack of power).
t. They look cool.
z. After you hit trees enough, they become pine-scented.
å. They make great drink coasters when removed.
þ. They taste like diamonds.

Q - "But Rob", you ask, "why didn't you contact Kettle about that warped disc"? 
A - See #7 - I had a heck of a time getting incorrect shipping sorted out the first time, so I am reluctant to send anything to them at this point. People are still awaiting stuff.

Q - "Should I cut down on coffee? I think I drink too much."
A - Uh, yes.

Q - "Why haven't you sent back your first gen rotors for this magic C Processing?"
A - See #7.

Q - "Why are you bashing these guys?"
A - See #7. I can put up with a lot of product development stuff, after all it is a startup. However they've dropped the ball so much with customer service that I give up.

Q - "My girlfriend and I just don't talk the way we used to. Do you have any advice?"
A - See #7.

So, I've decided to try some Ti rotors from Carver, that come out cheaper, especially when you consider you can use regular pads. I have heard some Interweb talk about noise on these, but I'll give them a shot. I'm only taking a 4g penalty (my 140mm rear, and 160mm front), and I suspect I'll be able to actually stop:


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Interested to see how the rotors turn out! Sad to see so little savings available on the derailleur, but I guess that means shimano did well!


----------



## Gregg K (Jan 12, 2004)

Poor Kettle. I wanted so badly to love you. 

You didn't even have to post any of that, but now that you have, it kind of makes me realize I'll never go Kettle. Sob. 

But thanks for the real world weight of the alternative. I'm posting without knowing about the titanium rotors, but hopefully we'll get a report Hint hint. Also, titanium probably comes in pine scented as well. Kettle can't take all the blame.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

All is covered in snow up here, so unfortunately no testing for a while Gregg.

I am concerned about noise with Ti rotors as that will drive me nuts.

Came close to buying some magnesium rotors, but the price was insane.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

I have a pair of brand new C-Processed rotors (160mm) that I was saving for my new bike, but I'm not sure if I'm gonna use them, because I'm worried about the braking power being lacking if I don't get the carbon pads. I don't want to spend any more money nor deal with Kettle again (it took forever to get my rotors back).

Has anyone tried them with Magura Performance pads?

BTW, the C-Process made them a bit heavier (they are 60g now if I remember correctly).


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

phlegm said:


> All is covered in snow up here, so unfortunately no testing for a while Gregg.
> 
> I am concerned about noise with Ti rotors as that will drive me nuts.
> 
> Came close to buying some magnesium rotors, but the price was insane.


Very cool build!
Noisy brakes drive me nuts as well. I just stick to shimano at this point, but am open to changing for an actual improvement.
Have you heard how the magnesium rotors hold up to corrosion? I'm in the auto service business, and from what I've seen, magnesium does not age well when it is in direct contact with different metals. In auto applications, the magnesium corrodes and pits away fairly quickly around steel bolts. Curious how a magnesium rotor would do against an alloy hub with Ti bolts.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

sfer1 said:


> I have a pair of brand new C-Processed rotors (160mm) that I was saving for my new bike, but I'm not sure if I'm gonna use them, because I'm worried about the braking power being lacking if I don't get the carbon pads. I don't want to spend any more money nor deal with Kettle again (it took forever to get my rotors back).
> 
> Has anyone tried them with Magura Performance pads?
> 
> BTW, the C-Process made them a bit heavier (they are 60g now if I remember correctly).


You'll want (need) the carbon brake pads, sorry to say.

Geez, so the C-Processing adds weight... great.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> Very cool build!
> Noisy brakes drive me nuts as well. I just stick to shimano at this point, but am open to changing for an actual improvement.
> Have you heard how the magnesium rotors hold up to corrosion? I'm in the auto service business, and from what I've seen, magnesium does not age well when it is in direct contact with different metals. In auto applications, the magnesium corrodes and pits away fairly quickly around steel bolts. Curious how a magnesium rotor would do against an alloy hub with Ti bolts.


Thx for the compliments!

Great point re the Magnesium. I use anti-seize compound on all my Ti bolts, so probably extra important to slather them up if I went for the magnesium rotors.

BTW, here's the link to the rotors I almost bought. Actually had a pair in the shopping basket over the holidays, but the store had a glitch that didn't let me continue.
MMC Rotor


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

How do you find the rims? Looking into those. Nobl doesn't seem to offer the complete wheels right now. They now use their own rim molds instead of the LB rims it seems. They don't have xc rims with their new molds yet though. But they do have some of the old xc rims left. I think it would work out to the same price as LB.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> How do you find the rims? Looking into those. Nobl doesn't seem to offer the complete wheels right now. They now use their own rim molds instead of the LB rims it seems. They don't have xc rims with their new molds yet though. But they do have some of the old xc rims left. I think it would work out to the same price as LB.


I stumbled on those guys by accident. I was looking up wheelsets for sale on Pinkbike, and noticed an ad they had posted. They had a few different wheelsets on offer at the time. Looks like they are just offering the wider rims at this point as you mention.

It was also a bonus for me that they were based in Canada, so no need to mess around with duties etc in my case.

[EDIT] - Just found one of their listings:
2014 Industry 9 Torch, 35mm brand new carbon wheelset For Sale


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

Yes, I saw that set. That's one of the old sets too. Looking for the narrower 27mm rim for my race bike though. May just pick up the set of rims. Or wait for the XC rims they have coming out later this year. The new ones are over double the price though.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Out with the XTR Brakes, In With the Formula R1Rs*

As mentioned earlier, I grabbed some Formula R1 Racing brakes before the holidays, but was unable to set them up before now.

Reason? I bought them from Chain Reaction, and the OEM package did not include the pins and olives (ferrules) to shorten the lines. I let CRC know about it before the holidays, and they shipped some to me, but they chose a very slow UK-to-Canada option that took a month.

After the month I realized they only sent me one (1) pin and one (1) olive/ferrule. Enough to do exactly half of my brake set. So I let CRC know again, and they rush-shipped me another set, and gave me a 15 GBP gift certificate. Decent outcome, but a bit of a pain.

Why am I sharing this? If you buy from CRC, and grab an OEM brake set (which won't necessarily be indicated in the item listing), be sure to ask if you get a brake line shortening kit or not. It'll save you some time.

Anyway, here's a messy shot of my outgoing XTRs (M985), front and rear, with relatively new Jagwire on them, weighing in at 432g:








Next up are the new Formula R1 Racing, which Acko sold me on. It is a nice apples-to-apples comparison, as I've shortened the Kevlar lines to the exact same length, with the fancy aforementioned pins and olives. A nice 365g for front and rear total:








A nice 67g savings, although this wasn't particularly about weight savings, but rather I always wanted to try the Formulas.

*Next up*: How do you combine a Shimano XTR shifter with a Formula R1 brake, i-Spec style? 
(Hint: It is extremely complicated and probably not worth it.)


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Combining Formula Brakes & Shimano Shifter*

OK, this is gonna get complicated, but I'll share this and cross-post in the Brake Time subforum as a reference to others.

I've been running XTR brakes and shifter for a while now, and like the clean I-Spec setup. Was considering a move to XTR M9000 brakes, but Shimano's I-Spec 2 design is incompatible with I-Spec 1 (A or B type), so that would force a purchase of a matching M9000 shifter. However, those shifters are 11 speed, which would necessitate a cassette change, etc, etc. No thanks.

I opted for Formula brakes instead as per my last post, so the challenge becomes doing something I-spec-like. However, there is no direct solution I could find to match Formula Brakes with Shimano Shifters.

So, I discovered a combination I could use:

Formula MixMaster (SRAM) -> Problem Solvers SRAM/Shimano -> Shimano Shifter

First off, here's a look at the original mounting bracket from Formula:








Next up is Formula part # FD40183-20 (right side), which is the MixMaster that allows direct mounting of (some) SRAM shifters. First shot is the front view, followed by a side view to show the mounting tab a bit better. There's a 3g penalty to move to this part:















So that's the first part in the chain. Next is to add the Problem Solvers piece. This would be the right side of their BR0387 kit. This just replaces the I-Spec mount in the shifter. First up is the outgoing Shimano bracket (with bolt) and the incoming PS bracket (bolt to be shown later). The weight difference on this bit is a wash:















Here's the bolt and adapter that holds everything together, which comes as part of the Formula Mixmaster kit. This adds another 8g to the mix:








So, all told, I'm taking an 11g penalty to retain a clean bar setup, which I'm fine with. Here's a side view of the Mixmaster assembly:








Here are a couple of shots of the final setup. It is only hand-tightened as I'm still adjusting things, but it looks clean enough:















There's a fair amount of adjustment available, so I'll test it out when I can, and report back on how viable it is as a long-term solution.


----------



## nunokas (Aug 12, 2014)

Hi.

Interesting "MacGyver" work there 
I'm using the same brakes with xtr shifter, normal bar mount.

What' your opinion about the brakes?

Regards


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

It's snow-covered here, so haven't had a chance to test yet. I'm mostly looking forward to the titanium rotors as I've been fighting with the carbons for too long.


----------



## nunokas (Aug 12, 2014)

Hi.

I read that about the carbon rotors. Those scrub ones on the link look tasty but they require specific pads don't they?

I know it's not a "weight weenie" part but i'm using the two piece formula rotors with semi metallic pads from jagwire and they've been silent 

regards


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

That setup looks pretty decent. Especially since you pieced it together. Have you seen that done, or just figured it out? How is the stability of the shifter when shifting? Looks solid.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

nunokas said:


> Hi.
> 
> I read that about the carbon rotors. Those scrub ones on the link look tasty but they require specific pads don't they?
> 
> ...


I didn't go with the Scrubs, but you could be right about requiring special pads. They are a magnesium matrix, so pretty funky for sure.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> That setup looks pretty decent. Especially since you pieced it together. Have you seen that done, or just figured it out? How is the stability of the shifter when shifting? Looks solid.


So far it's fine. It's only tightened hand tight as I have to remove/adjust some stuff still, but even with just that amount of tension, it is stable. I'm a bit surprised actually, since there are several things that can go wrong. I'll still have to test it further before I can claim victory tho.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Are Red Decals Heavier?*

If you head back to an earlier post in this thread from last year:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/new-build-2013-s-works-stumpjumper-ht-935429.html#post11527997

... I posted a pick of a 2014 SID WC fork with brain (red decals) that I used to own. I actually built my bike with the 2013 version (grey decals), but hadn't taken a picture for some reason. I thought I weighed the 2013 and it was lighter, but wasn't sure. It doesn't make sense why it would be lighter anyway.

Since I have everything apart for some updates, I thought I'd weigh the 2013 fork again just to make sure. Sure enough, it is lighter.

First off, here's the older shot of the 2014 version if you were too lazy to click on the link above, at 1556g (cut steerer):








Here's the shot from today of the 2013, which is 1519g, cut to the same length:








In both cases, the rubber o-ring and cable guide was included. (Even so, it would have only been ~6g difference).








Anyone know if they added 37g of goodness for 2014? All the specs are identical from what I can find, and they are visibly identical.

Maybe red decals are heavier.


----------



## serious1 (Jan 11, 2013)

I know they added bottomless tokens in 2014 for the rebas so maybe your sid has them too. that would explain the 37g I bet.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Ah, that could be it - good idea!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Am I Crazy?*

Haven't posted in a while as 2 things were going on:

1. I was traveling.
2. I was fighting some Furious Fred Tires:
















No matter what I did, I could not get these mounted tubeless.
Soapy water? Yep.
Compressor? Yep.
Removal of the valve cores? Yep.
Spread peanut butter on my private parts? Yep.
Let it stretch with a tube inside overnight? Yep.
Let it stretch with a tube inside for 2 days? Yep.
Let it stretch with a tube inside for 4 days? Yep.

All the old tricks didn't work. As for the "let it stretch", as soon as I delicately, gently pried off one side of the tire to remove the tube, the other side popped out! [email protected]#[email protected]!!

So, back to #1, the traveling bit.

Decided, on a whim, to pick up a set of 2015 Roval Control SL 29s while in the US. They added the hookless bead last year, and the weight is down to (a claimed) 1397g.

It came with Specialized weird brown tape, and valves already installed for an actual 1414g:








I'm not sure if Spesh's claimed weight includes valves, tape, or what. My guess is that tape is probably 10-14g per wheel, and valves maybe 5-7g per wheel, so maybe it is a valve-less claimed weight. In any event, I'm happy with that, and it is a significant drop over my existing wheelset.

Crazy to move away from those slick I9 hubs with 120 POE (yes, 120 points of engagement) and the cool sound that I videoed (word?) in an earlier post? Maybe. That rear hub is sweet. Sounds sweet. Mind you, the DT Swiss 240s in the new wheelset are no slouch.

However, guess what - those same Furious Freds went on first try, without soap, or peanut butter.


----------



## nunokas (Aug 12, 2014)

Hi.

I can imagine that fight with the fred's. I had a similar one with a Burt on crossmax st rim 

Those tires are hiperlight but only suitable for hardpack. To slippery for everything else 

regards


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yep, all those thin side wall tires are a challenge, and yep, limited terrain options with that tire, and it must be dry.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Test Weight - 16.89 lbs*

Well, was hoping for under 17 pounds, and got 16.89. I still haven't tightened everything up yet, but everything is mounted.

I think I'm done at this point. I'll provide some final pics and a component list soon.


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

looking forward to seeing the finished product


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks man. Still cleaning up some stuff, and adjusting, but I'll get some pics and a complete build list out soon.


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

Pics shredding on it too! Will you be racing it? Love all of the S-works line


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> Pics shredding on it too! Will you be racing it? Love all of the S-works line


Ha, won't be any action photos for a while - you'll understand when you seen the heaps of snow in the following pics.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Final Weight: 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg*

So, although there's always some gram-shedding to do, I'm effectively down to my final weight of 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg.

I discussed back in post #38, that the stock weight of this bike is 20.78 lbs / 9.43 kg when I give the benefit of using light CB11 pedals:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weeni...rks-stumpjumper-ht-935429-2.html#post11529891

I'm pretty pleased with a fully XC-rideable* bike that is almost 4 lbs (3.89 lbs to be exact) below an already light stock.

*The only borderline item(s) are the Furious Fred tires. They are a dry-only tire with limited (read: no) puncture resistance. Otherwise, I stand by all the components as fully XC-ready.

Here are some shots, starting with the obligatory scale shot:








Now some wintery shots of the rest of the final build:








_Carver Ti Rotor (160mm), SID Brain Fork, Formula Brakes, Control SL 29 wheel_








_Carver Ti Rotor (140mm), XX Cassette hiding in the background_








_MCFK seatpost and saddle_








_Cockpit with Lizardskin DSP grips, Formula R1R brakes, MCFK seatpost and stem_

More photos and final build list to come...


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

More photos...








_Chris King BB, S-Works cranks._








_Yellow-ish braid on the Kevlar hoses. You can better see the new Formula "pull" mechanism near the reservoirs introduced last year._








_Old-school 10-speed XTR derailleur, tuned a bit. Fugly 3M tape on the chainstay._








_Not much exciting here - maybe the Tune front 15mm thru-axle._








_Wolftooth 32T direct mount (spiderless), KMC-SL chain, Eggbeater 11s (with Ti black end cap), another view of the fugly chainstay tape._

Next will be the build list, with references to the posts where the bits appear.


----------



## Gregg K (Jan 12, 2004)

I absolutely love it. 

What kind of chain is that? I haven't noticed any chains with punched out inner links.

Oops, now I see writing below the pictures. Ah ha, I was too stunned by what I was seeing to read.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

Sweet bike. Dig the blackness. 

What type of 3m tape did you use on the chain stay? I have been pondering this for my Solo, as it comes with a removable rubber chain stay guard, that is somewhat porky. 

Did you take any pictures of the whole bike? Its nice to see it in all of its glory.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Gregg K said:


> I absolutely love it.
> 
> What kind of chain is that? I haven't noticed any chains with punched out inner links.
> 
> Oops, now I see writing below the pictures. Ah ha, I was too stunned by what I was seeing to read.


Thanks for the kind words Gregg.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

CuddlyToast said:


> Sweet bike. Dig the blackness.
> 
> What type of 3m tape did you use on the chain stay? I have been pondering this for my Solo, as it comes with a removable rubber chain stay guard, that is somewhat porky.
> 
> Did you take any pictures of the whole bike? Its nice to see it in all of its glory.


Ha - talk about getting caught up in the details! 

Here's a pic of the actual bike:


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Lovely bike, lovely build and lovely weight ! Keep up the good work with the next project !
I'm hopping after I finish my build to get near 8kg, race ready and hopefully not tearing apart after the first bumps


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx muntos. One of the key things for me is that is has to be fully rideable (word?). In my case I have no concerns about using this for XC Racing, aside from maybe the tires, as I've outlined.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*My 2013 S-Works Stumpjumper HT: Build List*

Here are the build details, in order of weight, along with a reference to the post where the part first appears.

Weights are actual on my scale, except where specified.

2013 Rockshox SID WC Brain Fork: 1519g
Post #118

2015 Specialized Roval Control SL 29 Wheelset (including Spesh tape and Spesh valves): 1414g
Post #121

2013 S-Works Stumpjumper HT 29er Frame (19"/Large): 1180g
Post #1

Schwalbe Furious Fred Tires (383g & 384g): 767g
Post #121

2013 S-Works Cranks: 373g
Post #16

Formula R1 Racing Brakes (Front and Rear, levers to calipers complete, lines trimmed): 365g
Post #110

KMC SL Chain (10 spd): 237g
Post #23

SRAM XX Cassette (11-36): 208g
Post #9

XTR M986 Rear Derailleur (tuned a bit): 206g
Post #96

XTR M980 Shifter (Rear): 195g (claimed, forgot to weigh it, also using Jagwire shifter casing which adds to this number)
[No post on this item.]

Crank Bros Eggbeater 11 Pedals: 174g (claimed, forgot to weigh them)
Post #36

MCFK Handlebar: 119g
Post #31

Carver Ti Rotors (Front 160mm, Rear 140mm): 107g (total)
Post #99

MCFK Seatpost: 106g
Post #61

Chris King BB30: 104g
Post #8

MCFK Stem: 76g
Post #31

Wolftooth 32T Spiderless Chainring: 71g (claimed by Wolftooth - I forgot to weigh it)
Post #23

MCFK Saddle: 70g
Post #17

Stan's Fluid (32g per tire): 64g
Post #10

Tune DC 15-RS (15mm thru axle): 43g
Post #37

Specialized Expander (for SID fork): 27g
Post #26

Lizardskin DSP Grips: (12.5g each): 25g (thanks to RS VR6)
Post #31

Tune DC 17 (Rear QR): 19g
Post #61

Race Face Crank Boots (QTY 2): 17g
Post #16

12 X Ti Bolts (For brake rotors): 14g
[No post on this item.]

"Frankestein" Shimano-to-SRAM-to-Formula (single clamp mix of Formula Brake and XTR shifting): 11g penalty (over I-spec equivalent)
Post #111

MCFK Ahead Cap (headset cap with Ti bolt): 5g
Post #31

3M Tape for Chainstay: 3g
Post #24

Silicon Tidds (QTY 4 - Bottle cage fillers): 1g
Post #86

Specialized Seatpost Clamp (32.6mm, alloy): unknown
[No post on this item.]

Cane Creek Headset (IS42 tall cover carbon, 1 standard carbon spacer, 1 self-made micro carbon spacer, 110 series lower bearing, 40 series upper bearing): unknown
[No post on this item.]

*Total weight 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg*


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

phlegm said:


> Ha, won't be any action photos for a while - you'll understand when you seen the heaps of snow in the following pics.


Yup, same snow here! I'm in Waterdown, so not too far. Hopefully a drier race season this year if you're using the freds. I actually raced with a spec ground control a couple times last year due to rain and mud. The bike looks awesome! I would like a hardtail, but I like the reduced back pain riding a fully. Might build one next year for a second rig.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx stew - I really missed a previous hardtail, but I was younger then. Maybe my back will force a different build at some point.


----------



## Yellowr6 (Mar 30, 2011)

Beautiful, just beautiful! keep up the hard work. keep us posted how you liked the FF. I had to change out my front to RaRa bc i almost ate it a couple times. Totally lost the front end and somehow regain traction. I cannot go full speed DH with the FF. So I'm running RaRa in the front and FF in the rear. So far, so good. Anyone else tried that combo?


----------



## nunokas (Aug 12, 2014)

Hi.

Here were i live the winter is very dry so i use and love the combination of RaRa rear and RoRo front. Now i'm using el burto in the rear since last summer, thinking to change it in the winter for something like a RaRa, onza canis or ritchey shield. But, as i said, this winter has been very dry and, surprisingly, thunder burt is still rolli'n  FF i think it's very restrictive in rocky sections, even on dry...


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yellowr6 said:


> Beautiful, just beautiful! keep up the hard work. keep us posted how you liked the FF. I had to change out my front to RaRa bc i almost ate it a couple times. Totally lost the front end and somehow regain traction. I cannot go full speed DH with the FF. So I'm running RaRa in the front and FF in the rear. So far, so good. Anyone else tried that combo?


Sure, make no mistake that FFs aren't an all conditions tire by any means. On top of that, they tend to run in smaller widths. I've actually run them before, and they take some getting used to - almost practice I'd say, but they absolutely have limitations.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

nunokas said:


> Hi.
> 
> Here were i live the winter is very dry so i use and love the combination of RaRa rear and RoRo front. Now i'm using el burto in the rear since last summer, thinking to change it in the winter for something like a RaRa, onza canis or ritchey shield. But, as i said, this winter has been very dry and, surprisingly, thunder burt is still rolli'n  FF i think it's very restrictive in rocky sections, even on dry...


Agreed, you have to be careful when choosing FF. I also have a pair of Thunder Burts, and they were great on the limited rides I had on them last fall.


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

Sorry to continue off topic, but the only experience I have with Schwalbes is Roro's, and Ice spiker Pro. I've usually raced on Spec Fast tracks. Would like to try something with comparable traction to the fast tracks. Would that be a Racing ralph? Thunder Burt comparable to spec renegade maybe? I'm assuming you have used Spec tires by your previous bike from another thread.


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

Just SO nice!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> Sorry to continue off topic, but the only experience I have with Schwalbes is Roro's, and Ice spiker Pro. I've usually raced on Spec Fast tracks. Would like to try something with comparable traction to the fast tracks. Would that be a Racing ralph? Thunder Burt comparable to spec renegade maybe? I'm assuming you have used Spec tires by your previous bike from another thread.


My 2011 Epic came with the S-Works Renegade tires, and to be honest I thought they'be be throwaways - minmal tread, thin. I was amazed by how good they were. Not mud tires, but otherwise surprizingly good. Hard to mount though with thin sidewalls.

IMO, they are better than the Furious Freds. I'd say the Thunder Burts seem to be pretty close in terms of performance, but I haven't ridden them enough yet.

For overall dry hardpack to asphalt, those Renegades were really good.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

I hope to try the Thunder Burts for this season. I ran sworks renegades last year and like you said, I though I would hate them. To my surprise, they are incredible. They have all ocups on them except one, they were also my training tires all year. They even survived Pisgah.

I wasnt happy that they were 50g over claimed weight so the Burts are next. Looks like all the benefits of fast rolling with some added cornering grip. And 120g lighter the the renegades.


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

killer bike & thanks for taking the time to document everything.


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

phlegm said:


> Decided, on a whim, to pick up a set of 2015 Roval Control SL 29s while in the US. They added the hookless bead last year, and the weight is down to (a claimed) 1397g.
> ...
> Crazy to move away from those slick I9 hubs with 120 POE (yes, 120 points of engagement) and the cool sound that I videoed (word?) in an earlier post? Maybe. That rear hub is sweet. Sounds sweet. Mind you, the DT Swiss 240s in the new wheelset are no slouch.


You can upgrade the star ratchet on the Specialized hub (DT 240s internals). As stock the hubs come with 18 tooth ratchets but it's very easy to change the star ratchet to either the 36 tooth or 54 tooth star ratchets. (The 54 tooth star ratchet is made for Trek / Bontrager. So far as I know you can order it from a Trek dealer as a separate item without needing to own a Trek bike or anything like that.)

It doesn't require any tools to do the upgrade, pull the freehub body off by hand, change the star ratchet, put the freehub body back on and it's ready to use.

I've got a 36 tooth star ratchet in my DT 240s rear hub and it's been good. Apparently you can sometimes run into issues with the extra (smaller) teeth on the 36 tooth star ratchet chipping or breaking if you're a big powerful rider, or if you use too thick a grease in the freehub, stopping the teeth engaging fully under load. I haven't had any issues with mine though.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

scant said:


> killer bike & thanks for taking the time to document everything.


Thx for the comment, and thx for your input during the build.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

WR304 said:


> You can upgrade the star ratchet on the Specialized hub (DT 240s internals). As stock the hubs come with 18 tooth ratchets but it's very easy to change the star ratchet to either the 36 tooth or 54 tooth star ratchets. (The 54 tooth star ratchet is made for Trek / Bontrager. So far as I know you can order it from a Trek dealer as a separate item without needing to own a Trek bike or anything like that.)
> 
> It doesn't require any tools to do the upgrade, pull the freehub body off by hand, change the star ratchet, put the freehub body back on and it's ready to use.
> 
> I've got a 36 tooth star ratchet in my DT 240s rear hub and it's been good. Apparently you can sometimes run into issues with the extra (smaller) teeth on the 36 tooth star ratchet chipping or breaking if you're a big powerful rider, or if you use too thick a grease in the freehub, stopping the teeth engaging fully under load. I haven't had any issues with mine though.


Hey, thx for the advice - good to know an easy upgrade is available.



WR304 said:


> How long do you think it will be before you decide that you prefer full suspension for your back and start changing this bike for a new project? I give it three months.


Ha! Based on my history I suppose I'm due for my next build this summer.


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

Phlem, do you know if the first set of wheels for this build from Nobl have the spoke hole drilled at an angle, or are they straight?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> Phlem, do you know if the first set of wheels for this build from Nobl have the spoke hole drilled at an angle, or are they straight?


They appear to be straight, why?


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

Starting the process of researching new wheelsets. Heard of issues with straight drilled holes possibly causing broken spokes due to the nipples not sitting flat in the holes. I have very little knowledge of wheel building, but know an experienced wheel builder who has had issues with a set of cross wheels with straight holes, that continually breaks spokes even after rebuild. It does seem that many carbon rims do have straight drilled holes though. I wasn't sure what drilling the LB/Nobl rims had. The new Nobl ones are angle drilled I think?? Are the Rovals straight too? I would trust those wheels in a heartbeat.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

It's been a while, so thought I'd update.

Was about to adjust the clearance on the Formula R1 Racing, when I noticed a leak from the rear "side cap". (I had no idea what to call this before contacting Formula. It's the black cover on the caliper, with a proprietary star-shaped access on the side, with the website written on it.)









Seems to me like it's just loose, and I *might* be able to tighten it with some rigged tool, but why risk it? Off to S4 Suspension in the Montreal area (Formula's warranty partner in Canada), which BTW looks like an interesting firm:
S4 Suspension - Mountain biking shocks and forks maintenance and rebuilding.

Dying to finally get this build out on dirt since it has been a loooooong winter.


----------



## Yellowr6 (Mar 30, 2011)

Tired of the clearance issue with the r1s. I went with the MT8. Love it. Gained liked 10g but the wider gap for the disc is well worth it.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Any experience between the mt8 and xtr?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Had MT8s briefly, and didn't like the feel of them. Had older Shimano XTRs, and they were fine. Haven't tried the latest M9000 version though. Now struggling with the Formulas, as I can't get the clearance on the front brake, and the rear is being serviced.

Best in my history of cycling were the Magura Marta SLs - miss those ones.


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

I have a few rides on the M9000s. They feel like they have more power than the last gen race brakes. Not as much as the trails, but I like them so far


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

I know a common problem with R1's are sticky pistons, which in turn can cause pad clearance issues. My take on it which is a basic tip but worth trying if you are experiancing issues with pad clearance; 

Remove pads and squeeze lever to check both pistons are moving equally, if you notice one piston is moving less or not at all it will need some attention. Push both pistons back then hold the piston that is not sticking with an allen key or flat head screwdriver, squeeze the lever and the sticky piston should come out. Give it a good spray with isopropyl alcohol or similar then give it a clean with a cotton swab, push that piston back and repeat the process a couple of times. Then all being well the sticky piston should free up meaning that once you centre the disc any dragging should be gone

Used this to good effect on a couple of pairs of R1's which has solved any issues with clearance, you will have to do this again if the problem returns which it probably will, and its only a 10 min job so no biggie.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

Yellowr6 said:


> Tired of the clearance issue with the r1s. I went with the MT8. Love it. Gained liked 10g but the wider gap for the disc is well worth it.


After replacing the squeal a lot stock pads and a leaky membrane in the master cylinder my R1r's were a doddle to set up, no rubbing whatsoever. If you spend time setting them up correctly you will reap the rewards, great breaks power and modulation wise, just make sure you ditch the pads :thumbsup:

Not that I wouldn't love a set of the 2015 MT8's.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

I've actually done the piston-alcohol thing several times. Also loosened the bleed port to release a small amount of fluid (fix for when it's overfilled), no go.

Pistons just keep getting tighter and tighter - they don't retract.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Got my rear brakes back form warranty service. The shop called me in advance to warn that they had deformed the side cover, but it should work correctly in the interim. They are on backorder, so they'll send me a new side cover and tool later on.

I might post a picture later, but they really destroyed the cover - I could have done that myself.

In the meantime, I absolutely cannot get any pad clearance front or rear. Have a bleed kit coming, but not overly optimistic. Perhaps time to switch to Shimano M9000 for the whole bike.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

So, to begin, I don't want to be overly harsh on the warranty work. That said, these are not inexpensive brakes. In fact, they are mortgage-requiring expensive brakes.

First, here's a shot of a stock side cover:








Looked like it was really just a bit loose, but since I didn't have the right star-shaped tool to tighten it, and knowing that it is light aluminum, I thought I'd pay to send it in for service.

I got it back like this:








_Caption: Wow, my right sock is surprisingly white!_

Pretty much mangled, much like I thought I'd do if I tried it myself. Sheesh.

In fairness, S4 called me, and said they'd send a replacement side cover, and tool to install it. Cool.

If you've followed this thread, you know that I have zero patience. So, I just bought a full M9000 gruppo, so I'll document the weights and install soon. I'll take a weight penalty, but in many ways I will welcome it. Will be fun to explore Shimano's take on 11-speed. G'bye Formula. Watch pinkbike for the sale.

Cheers.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

How much you asking for them?


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

If you liked the previous XTR Race brakes, you'll like the 9000s. I liked the previous generation, but thought they lacked power a bit. This doesn't seem to be an issue on the new ones. I like the dark colour, and carbon lever too.

There are threads in drivetrain about using XX1 cassettes with the m9000 setup too. Apparently it works great, and saves weight. Just need to change the freehub body too though.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Acko said:


> How much you asking for them?


I'll PM you, but I'm waiting on the new side cover.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> If you liked the previous XTR Race brakes, you'll like the 9000s. I liked the previous generation, but thought they lacked power a bit. This doesn't seem to be an issue on the new ones. I like the dark colour, and carbon lever too.
> 
> There are threads in drivetrain about using XX1 cassettes with the m9000 setup too. Apparently it works great, and saves weight. Just need to change the freehub body too though.


I went with an XTR cassette, but it is certainly heavier. However, I like the fact that you don't need an XD driver, which saves a bit of cash.


----------



## moefosho (Apr 30, 2013)

I am excited to see the full xtr group on your bike.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

Shame things didn't work out with the R1r's 

Lets hope the M9000 are not too much heavier :thumbsup:


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Post your weights for the XTR brakes, I'm curious what the weight of the rear brake as I forgot to weight mine


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

phlegm said:


> I went with an XTR cassette, but it is certainly heavier. However, I like the fact that you don't need an XD driver, which saves a bit of cash.


I know what you mean, but I've been following your build, and it seems that you have definitely spent more for less.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

True.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Prepped for Gruppo Switch - M9000*

So I've stripped off the brakes, shifter, cassette, chain and rear derailleur. Kinda looks cool all slimmed down like this. Maybe I should just ride without brakes and most of the drivetrain.









Super light too: 14.24 lbs / 6.5 kg without that unnecessary shifting and safety stuff.









In any event, I've got a good baseline ready to see what the M9000 will do in terms of weight. Stay tuned.


----------



## campergf23 (Aug 4, 2013)

A little off topic, but I've followed a few of you posts and I know you race ocups.... Are you racing at Woodnewton this weekend?

Sorry If that was really creepy haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Creepy, no. Thanks for reading!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*XTR M9000 Cassette*

Stuff has started to arrive, so I've finally been able to take some pics. I also thought I'd give a mini-review, or at least a summary of each item as I had difficulty finding in-depth info on some of these components.








_Caption: Don't clean cassettes look awesome?! That will last about 10 minutes._

First off the pain - at least in WW terms. The XTR M9000 cassette. It is heavier than the equivalent flagship cassette from SRAM (XTR: 327g - my scale, XG-1199: 260g - claimed). It also has less range (XTR: 11-40T, XG-1999: 11-42T). So, on first glance it is really a lose-lose, especially if you have weight concerns as I do.

However, the XTR M9000 has a few things going for it:
1. Does not require an XD driver, i.e. you can mount it on a standard freehub.
2. It is less expensive than the SRAM equivalent (not to mention #1, where you don't have to buy the driver).
3. In theory, you may be able to buy additional cogs/cog combos for it as they wear out - not that I know where you can buy them.

Shimano claims the 40T big cog is ideal, but seems to me that most folks like the 42 that SRAM offers. I was actually fine with my previous 1X10 setup (11-36), so I'm not bothered either way. The chief concern for me is weight, and 67g is significant in WW terms. Seems like it is tough to beat the carved-out-single-chunk-o-metal that SRAM does with the X-Dome.

That said, I'm actually surprised that the Shimano is that much heavier. Technically a 40T cog should be lighter than a given 42T cog of the same material, so Shimano should have an edge there, although SRAM is using ALU on that last cog, ugh.

In addition, Shimano is using a couple of cool, carbon carriers for the largest 4 cogs (2 groups of 2). I thought I'd take a pic of them:















_Caption: Shown above are the "front" and "back" of the largest 2 cogs (40-35T), with cool carbon carrier. Any excuse to add more carbon!_ Shimano has even cut away carbon in the first pic - now that's WW!

In any event, I'm taking a hit with this, although I have read (on these very forums) that the XX1 is fully compatible, so if I feel like buying the driver, and a more expensive cassette, I still have the option.

Stay tuned for the rear derailleur, folk songs, rants about Shimano cables, and more!


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Great review!


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

What about that XTR brakes weights ?
Let us know if XTR cassette works fine for you also with XX1 setup, I'm considering buying a second wheel pair and a XTR cassette / standard hub would be much cheaper.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

muntos said:


> What about that XTR brakes weights ?
> Let us know if XTR cassette works fine for you also with XX1 setup, I'm considering buying a second wheel pair and a XTR cassette / standard hub would be much cheaper.


Yep, I remember your request, I'll definitely be weighing all of it.

Not sure I get your other bit re XX1 though - I'm moving over to Shimano entirely, and never ran XX1 - just an XX cassette.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Cassette Update*

I might have been unclear on the above post about the Shimano M9000 cassette.

I was comparing the weight to the XX1, which is of course the equivalent 11-speed cassette from SRAM. The Shimano is 67g heavier (M9000: 327g, SRAM: 260g).

However, my outgoing cassette is an XX, which weighs 208g, so for the purposes of this build, the bike weight increases by a 119g! In fairness I am moving from 1X10 to 1X11, but that is significant.

So, the build weight score is +119g so far, and as in golf, lower is better. Not a great WW start so far.


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Sorry, didn't understand that you are not using XX1


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

muntos said:


> Sorry, didn't understand that you are not using XX1


It was my fault - I was unclear. Stay tuned for those weights, or maybe I should make you wait, and do the brakes last!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano XTR M9000 Brakes - Part One*

*Build Score: +119g*

So, we're off to a poor start by adding ~ 120g to the build over the original XX cassette. At this point, I'll cover the brakes, otherwise Muntos will freak out. As before, I'll try to do more than just weigh stuff - I'll elaborate on some of the features, and hope it helps someone out.

To start, here's the scale shot of the new XTR M9000 brakes, uncut:









397g total - under 200g per side (on average - due to varying hose lengths F&R) - is pretty impressive. You'll recall from this post that my older XTR brakes (M985) were 432g - *cut to fit the same frame*, so Shimano has really trimmed down here. In particular, the levers are carbon in this generation which surely helps.

I weighed the outgoing Formula R1 Racing brakes in that same post, and they were 365g, *also cut to fit* my bike.

I don't have a scale shot of the cut M9000 brakes, because I had to mount them to check the length. Also, the Shimano hydraulic hoses were so stiff, that I really had to fight with them on the frame itself. However, the 2 cut bits of hose amounted to 10g:









So, this gives us 3 apples-to-apples weight totals for my frame (all are sans bolts, BTW):
Shimano XTR M985: 432g
Shimano XTR M9000: 387g
Formula R1 Racing (year 2014): 365g

That adds another 22g of weight overall, however there are several other things to consider with the brakes that affect the final on-bike weight. Stay tuned...


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Ha ha, thanks man, now I can die in peace ! 
Could you weight them separately (as I weighted the front but not the rear) ?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

OK, I'll remove them just for you man. Can't do it right away though.


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Oh, not that curious if it's such trouble, when you have the time and mood.


----------



## Radioinactive (Aug 2, 2011)

epic build my friend *slow clap*. Sub 17 pounds and completely rideable, dont mind if i do!!! I cant think of any areas you can save signifcant weight on... this is awesome keep it up!!


----------



## serious1 (Jan 11, 2013)

Very nice build and thanks for the brake weights. I've been wanting to go to R1's for the weight savings but I've heard many horror stories about bleeding them and the calipers rubbing. If you can get XTRs for only a 22g penalty that seems worth it. I'm curious about what rotors you'll be getting. Are you concerned about the XTR cassette creaking? I know the 11spd dura-ace cassettes use a similar construction and they were prone to creaking and self destructing. It seems like XX1 or XO1 is the way to go with cassettes for the range and weight even if you do have to change freehubs.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Radioinactive said:


> epic build my friend *slow clap*. Sub 17 pounds and completely rideable, dont mind if i do!!! I cant think of any areas you can save signifcant weight on... this is awesome keep it up!!





serious1 said:


> Very nice build and thanks for the brake weights. I've been wanting to go to R1's for the weight savings but I've heard many horror stories about bleeding them and the calipers rubbing. If you can get XTRs for only a 22g penalty that seems worth it. I'm curious about what rotors you'll be getting. Are you concerned about the XTR cassette creaking? I know the 11spd dura-ace cassettes use a similar construction and they were prone to creaking and self destructing. It seems like XX1 or XO1 is the way to go with cassettes for the range and weight even if you do have to change freehubs.


Thanks for the kind comments!

I originally had Kettle carbon rotors, but they just didn't work - even with carbon brake pads. I've switched to Caver Titanium rotors, but early results are NOISY. (And yes, someone warned me about that in an earlier post.) Weights are here.

I also read about the cassette creaking bit - I suspect we saw the same Bike Radar article. In any event, I wanted to try the entire setup (sans chainring & cranks). I'm even running the Shimano 11-speed chain, which I'll post on as well.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano XTR M9000 Brakes - Part Deux*

OK Muntos - Hope you're happy, as I've removed both brakes, and weighed them individually. Both lines are cut to fit. I should point out that the brake lines are longer that I had them with the Formulas, as the Shimano hoses are very, very stiff. I've used older XTR hydro brakes, but it seems like they've really beefed up the cables - I don't like that part.

Here's the front, @ 184g:








Here's the rear, @ 197g:








Here's the total, @ 382g which is lower than my initial estimate of 387g:







_Caption: It was difficult, but yes, I ensured no part of either brake was touching the workbench, and I rearranged and weighed it twice. The 382g is correct for my scale._

It is also slightly lighter than my first scale shot because of this I-Spec II piece:







Caption: _It is not weightless - my scale sucks. I'll call it 1g._

I'll elaborate on the I-Spec II in a separate post, because it is impressive. The gist is that this plastic liner is removed from the brake clamp, and the shifter has a similar-fitting part.

Anyway, I'll recap the weights, because they were a bit off. All are on my scale, lines cut to the same Large hardtail 29er frame:

Shimano XTR M985: 432g
Shimano XTR M9000: *382g *[Updated]
Formula R1 Racing (year 2014): 365g

So, just a 17g penalty for the Shimanos so far. Nonetheless, the weight continues to build for this, er, build. (Awkward.)

*Build Score: +136g *


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

Thanks man, you're truly a great member and probably a very nice person !
Looking on the positive side, after you removed the brakes for me and weighted them again you loosed 5 grams 
I'm interested in your findings regarding the I-Spec II, I would be happy to find a solution to pair the right brake with XX1 trigger shifter and thus removing the heavy 24 grams Matchmaker clamp.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

Radioinactive said:


> I cant think of any areas you can save signifcant weight on... this is awesome keep it up!!


An east 200-300g to be saved on wheels but deep pockets would be required


----------



## bryco13 (Apr 30, 2006)

The xtr cassette looks cool. What keeps the carbon spider from spinning on the aluminum ring that goes on the hub?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Acko said:


> An easy 200-300g to be saved on wheels but deep pockets would be required


For sure. There's an interesting thread here on a sub 1100g 29er wheelset.

Or, I could continue my MCFK fettish and go for this 1250g 29er wheelset. However I estimate that after shipping and duties the total would be around $3000 US. Yikes!

I'm not a flyweight though, so I'd have to consider the weight limit.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

bryco13 said:


> The xtr cassette looks cool. What keeps the carbon spider from spinning on the aluminum ring that goes on the hub?


That's a great question. I hadn't thought about it until you brought it up. I assume you're talking about the area circled in red here:









Looking at it, it seems like it would have to be some sort of super-adhesive, but that seems dicey. Also, the amount of torque applied there during use must be significant, to say the least. I'm wondering if the inner ring actually has knobs, or spikes on the outer edge that are embedded into the carbon. Maybe something like this terrible rendering in MSPaint:








_Caption: Would there be tines/knobs or something like those in red that are hidden in the carbon?_

Anyone have other ideas? Looks like a tough engineering challenge. I think SRAM just has it simpler.


----------



## bryco13 (Apr 30, 2006)

I'm new to the ww way of thinking, but I'm assuming there must be some sort raised parts to prevent the carbon from spinning on the aluminum. There doesn't seem to be any holes in the inside of the aluminum ring so I'm going to guess its a single machined piece, which is pretty interesting. I wouldn't think that small spikes of aluminum that thin would hold up to that kind of torque, maybe they're family big spikes and contributing to the mystery weight?
2nd newb thought. Can you purchase just the last 2 rings on the carbon spider, if so, what about drilling/machining out some of the carbon?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano XTR M9000 Brakes - Part Three*

Now for some more detail on the brakes, specifically I-Spec II. I'm impressed.

As I touched on in Part Deux, you simply remove this plastic liner from the inside of the lever clamp:
















_Caption: Excerpt from Shimano's dealer manual._

...then insert the same-shaped bit from the I-Spec II shifter (SL-M9000 in this case), and clamp it down:








_Caption: Ditto, Shimano doc DM-SL0005-02._

You get a super-clean look, quite easily, as you'd expect from any I-Spec:








..and you retain the lateral adjustment on the shifter, although it is somewhat hidden:








Oh, and while I'm on I-Spec, I remember seeing questions about if I-Spec I is compatible with this newer I-Spec II - and never definitive answers. Upon first glance it is easy to say "no", because the interface is completely different. However, if I remember correctly, the original I-Spec used a square nut, much like the one circled in red for my new shifter:









I have no way to test it, but I'm wondering if you removed the entire assembly (red arrow), would that square nut fit into an original I-Spec I? Anyway, if anyone knows for sure, this could be a great spot to post a firm answer.

Next up, some more boring crap about the brakes, but I think it is worth mentioning, especially if you are still shopping around.


----------



## dan4jeepin (Apr 9, 2007)

I'm interested to hear how you like your brakes. I'm doing pretty much the same thing by adding weight going from MT8 to XTR. Hated to do it but felt I needed better braking. So far the biggest bummer is how heavy the XT icetech rotors are compared to the Margura SL rotors.


----------



## muntos (Jul 28, 2013)

What's the real weight of 160/180mm Magura SL rotors?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

dan4jeepin said:


> I'm interested to hear how you like your brakes. I'm doing pretty much the same thing by adding weight going from MT8 to XTR. Hated to do it but felt I needed better braking. So far the biggest bummer is how heavy the XT icetech rotors are compared to the Margura SL rotors.


At present, I still have the Carver Titanium rotors - look back a few posts for details. The braking power (160mm\140mm) is fine in the early going, but it is crazy loud. The only way I can describe the tone is as high and loud as a steam whistle - and not the good Steam Whistle:









You needn't stay with the Icetech rotors, especially if you don't have additional heat stress (longer downhillls) during your typical riding. They are indeed heaviest - as a rough order from heaviest to lightest I'd say:

Shimano Icetech
Magura Storm SL
KCNC or Ashima
Carver Ti or similar
Magnesium Matrix ($400)
Kettle Carbon (don't work)

On first glance, you'd save some nice cash and weight by trying the KCNC or Ashima for now.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

I have tried to run Shimano's with other rotors, XTR with Formula and Ashima, Saint with Magura, and they all kinda sucked... to be honest. They work for light XC applications, but once the descents get long/gnarly, or you really need to stop, they wont hold up. I think this has to do with Shimano's inherent design. They typically have more stopping power, which creates more heat. By throwing on something different, you are much more prone to brake failure. I gave up on weight weenie rotors, and equipped my fleet with Ice Techs. Super Heavy, which sucks... but they have been on of the most reliable rotors i have ever used. They dont warp when they get hot, they don't fade when i need them the most, and they are much more consistent in bad weather. My one complaint, aside from weight, is that they are somewhat of a noisier brake... but it was nowhere near as noisy as some Avid's Ive ridden behind, and the Magura brakes i used to run.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

dan4jeepin said:


> I'm interested to hear how you like your brakes. I'm doing pretty much the same thing by adding weight going from MT8 to XTR. Hated to do it but felt I needed better braking. So far the biggest bummer is how heavy the XT icetech rotors are compared to the Margura SL rotors.


According to a recent test in Bike Magazine, the new Magura MT8 Next are far more powerful than the XTR Race M9000.

(w/ 160mm rotors)
Magura MT8 Next 375 Newton
XTR Race M9000 294 Newton
Formula R1 Racing 267 Newton









http://www.magura.com/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&g=0&t=1431196786&hash=3d74282abc38e79eb9dfbbedbb77a9cffe4e2ae5&file=fileadmin/user_upload/bikecomp/PDFs/Presse_Feedback_Bike/PressFeedback_2015/BIKE%20Tipp%2002_12015.pdf


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

muntos said:


> What's the real weight of 160/180mm Magura SL rotors?


I have three 160mm and one 180mm Storm SL rotors.

160mm: one is 94g and the other two are 96g
180mm: 118g


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

sfer1 said:


> According to a recent test in Bike Magazine, the new Magura MT8 Next are far more powerful than the XTR Race M9000.
> 
> (w/ 160mm rotors)
> Magura MT8 Next 375 Newton
> ...


Thx man, that's good info.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano XTR M9000 Brakes - Part Four*

OK, last bit on brakes, finally.

*Last Build Score: +136g * 
To this point, I've just added weight. Now I'll remove a tiny bit.

I was using 4 Ti bolts (and washers) for the brake calipers, @ 13g:









I noticed a warning in the Shimano documentation around using *only* their special bolts due to the magnesium housings on the M9000 series. I'm not sure if this is typical dissimilar metal corrosion, or something unique to magnesium, but they warned about increased corrosion. Anyway, wasn't going to risk it, so I'll use the stock Shimano bolts, regardless of their weight.

Turns out they are slightly lighter (also with washers):







_Caption: Bolts are pretty much the same length as the outgoing Ti ones above. _

Next up, just some random things that I'll document in this last post on the XTR brakes...

*Shimano Hose - Stiff As Me in the Morning*
If you've been reading previous posts, the brake lines are thick, and hard to manipulate. I've had older XTR hydros, and I don't remember them being so stiff. I've had to leave them slightly longer to feel good about the bending they'll do. There's also some torquing going on if you have them twisted. Crazy.

Anyway, just for reference, here's a shot of ~1 foot, 30cm segment when stretched out:








The weight for that segment is 6g, for future reference on hose weight:








*Reach Adjustment*
Not much to say here, except that reach is done via a small hex adjustment on the Race brakes. I think the Trail version has a larger knob, but I'm not sure why that's really needed. I don't adjust the reach very often, so the presumably lighter solution here makes sense:









*Color*
I just thought I'd call this out. My photos aren't particularly color-accurate, but the brakes are a nice dark grey. Here are some random shots:

























So, I'll leave this post with the updated build score, which drops a massive 2g in weight, which sadly is probably close to the error margin on my scale!

*Build Score: +134g *


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

Interesting info... I have heard this before, yet every single Magura brake I've ever used lacked bite (except for the venerable Gustav). 

I wonder how this is measured actually. Is this equal force applied to the lever?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

I loved the Marta SL.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*SL M9000 Shifter*

Next up the shifter.

Outgoing XTR M980 shifter @ 97g, with I-Spec I mount:








New M9000 shifter @ 106g, with I-Spec II mount:







_Caption: Hard to see in the scale shot, but the shifter arms are now carbon._

So, I've added 9g here, but that seems pretty good given the additional shift in the M9000.

However, I have been able to jettison a bit of weight with the I-Spec II. There's no direct way to mount Formula brakes with a Shimano shifter, so I made a Fraken-Spec (TM) conversion. This goes from Formula MixMaster (SRAM) to Problem Solvers SRAM/Shimano to the Shimano Shifter (I-Spec I). It worked fine, so you may find it useful if you want to do this combination. It did add 11g to the build at the time, so not using it now drops that tiny bit of weight.

So, I've added 9g, dropped 11g - net loss of 2g. (Pretty much a wash, but I'm desperate.)

*Build Score: +132g*


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano CN-HG900-11 Chain*

I'll tackle the chain in this post. Thought I'd try a Shimano chain, instead of the KMCs I've used in the past, just to give the full Shimano shifting experience a try. I've also used the default Shimano pin, instead of a quicklink.

Outgoing chain, 10-speed KMC SL @237g:









New CN-HG900 chain, default length (116 links), @254g:








Shortened the length as per Shimano's guidelines:









Also note the chain is asymmetric, and thus you want to ensure the orientation based on the stamping on one side of the chain:









Reduction of 18g worth of chain to fit:







_Caption: Yes, technically I also added a tiny chain pin. I'm saying that's weightless._

Total Shimano chain: 236g. Ha, dropped a gram (subject to scale inaccuracies)!

*Build Score: +131g*


----------



## bryco13 (Apr 30, 2006)

Is that chain already on? I'd be curious to see if "big to big, plus 2 links" (the way I learned), will work with a 1x setup? (I'm assuming you're running just rear as there's no front shifter in your pics). My reasoning for questioning it is that shimano developed that when you are running three up front and at least 8 in the rear. Nobody ever ran in easiest front/hardest rear, or hardest front/easiest rear. It would have resulted in a horrible chai line and pulled that deraileur straight. I'm thinking you may want to carefully approach the easiest gear while making sure that nice light derailleur doesn't get pulled too tight.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

That's another great question bryco. I didn't have the luxury of simply matching my old chain's length.

For non-road use, Shimano only specifies the "big-big + 2" for sizing, whereas road gives 4 different scenarios based on # of teeth, and double vs. triple. I read, and re-read those documents several times. 

However, I was concerned because SRAM indicates +4 links (pin to pin) for XX1:
http://cdn.sram.com/cdn/farfuture/Db...and_chains.pdf

Anyway, I went with +2, and it has been absolutely perfect. There also isn't excessive tension when in the 40T cog - there is a nice "suppleness", "springiness" to the RD that you'll lose if it is truly maxed out.

That said, another 2 links would probably work smoothly too.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Shimano XTR M9000 Rear Derailleur*

Last change is the rear derailleur.

Outgoing was my slightly tuned XTR M986 @ 206g (stock is 215g):









Inbound is the XTR M9000 @ 222g:








This is actually impressive, as you get the added 11 speed capacity with just a 7g bump over the stock 10-speed from a few years ago.

Some notes:

They moved to hex heads for the HI, LO, and B-Tension adjustments over Phillips - nice!








They've changed the clutch switch (orange) location. It actually feels a bit wimpy now, almost like it will snap when you apply it. You can also see the carbon elements they've added in this shot:








... and now for the continuing pain of weight-add, [sigh]. Although fractional, I've added 16g more from my old, modified RD.

*Build Score: +147g*

Next up final bike weight after the move to M-9000, remaining challenges, and Pros/Cons thus far on the change.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*Final Pros/Cons of XTR M9000*

As promised, here is my overall summary based on the install and limited rides (3 so far) with the new XTR M9000 components:

_*Brakes*_
_Pro_

Impressive weight at 382g (F&R without bolts) on my scale - within 17g of the Formula R1 Racing 
Great I-Spec II integration 
Easy reach adjustment (no need for a knob) 
Stock caliper bolts are lighter than expected 
_Con_

Brake hose is very stiff, tends to torque-spin, probably heavier than the R1's kevlar hose 
Impressively light, but still can't claim lightest in class 

*Cassette*
_Pro_

Less expensive than equivalent XX1 from SRAM 
No XD driver required - fits where a 10-speed cassette would 
Can replace cogs/cog groups in theory 
_Con_

Less range (40T VS 42T in SRAM) 
Significantly heavier than XX1 cassette 
Added complexity gives concerns re creaking (although I have not heard a peep from it so far) 

*Shifter*
_Pro_

11-speed for only 9g more than previous 10-speed XTR 
Seamless I-Spec II integration 
_Con_

Probably not I-Spec I compatible. (?) 

*Chain*
_Pro_

Slightly lighter than outgoing KMC SL 10-speed chain, even though it uses additional links 
Far less expensive than a KMC SL chain 
_Con_

Need to be careful when installing (asymmetrical) 
Shimano sizing instructions are hard to find, somewhat unclear for 1X11 

_*Derailleur*_
_Pro_

Only 7g increase from stock 10-speed derailleur 
Same smooth shifting you'd expect from XTR
Adjustments now use hex heads 
_Con_

Clutch switch seems flimsy 

Overall I'm impressed. There is undoubtedly a weight gain across the board going from 1X10 to 1X11, although all the Shimano components are incredibly close in weight for the added utility you get. As mentioned, the shifting has been fantastic, and crisp as I've expected from XTR over the years.

There is extensive use of carbon on pretty much all the components (shift levers, brake levers, derailleur support, cassette), and while this may look cool, it's neither a Pro nor a Con - just a means by which Shimano is trying to keep the weight down.

There were only 2 oddities/disappointments I came across: the overly-stiff brake hoses, and the somewhat flimsy clutch knob that I am half-expecting to break.

Next up, new bike weight, ugh.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

That brake hose has a lot to do with the power and feel of their braking system. I had an incredibly small kink in the line of my XTR, and it felt like garbage because of it. One thing I have noticed, is because the lines are so stiff, there is a lot less frame rub/rattling.

Still, it makes most brake trimming/general brake maintenance a chore. Good thing you should only ever have to deal with it once 

EDIT* Forgot to mention thanks for the details! Looking forward to the final scale picture.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Nice writeup on the 9000 parts! Looking forward to seeing the full bikes pics as well. :thumbsup:

Good to see that Shimano finally went to hex screws for the RD adjustment screws. It was always much easier to adjust the SRAM limit screws with the 3mm hex screws. If you look at the screws on my Shimano RD bikes...the phillips screws all have some signs of being chewed.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks RS. I did the same thing when I tuned my outgoing rear derailleur. However, someone pointed out (was it you?) that the old phillips were actually aluminum, so I added a bit of weight by changing over to Ti. At least I prevented further chewing of the head though. Hex is a smarter choice for sure.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Thumbs up again for all the info! I want xtr so bad but just cant clutter my batlrs with sram shifter and xloc....ugh


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*The Weigh In*

So, I've added 147g to the bike, and 119g of that is moving form the XX cassette to the M9000 XTR. Given the grams to lbs conversion, I would expect my bike to weigh .324 lbs more.

Last bike weight was 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg. So, the weight should be 17.214 if everything checks out.

Weight after moving to XTR M9000 (for most stuff) is 17.22 lbs / 7.81 kg:








Boo - not as sexy as in the 16 lb range as before. 
But, logic rules the day, and that seems about right. I'd guess that the Shimano brake hoses weigh a fraction more than the outgoing Formula Kevlar, so that could easily account for that small difference.
I can still swap to an XX1 cassette, and drop 67g, brings the bike down to 17.07 lbs, but we'll see.

Up next:


What the heck do I do about the brake rotors? Carbon sucked. The Carver Ti are crazy, crazy LOUD. Do I have to, [cough], use ... steel? (Geez, I can't imagine that.) 
Might switch out the front tire to the Thunder Burt for a bit more side grip. 
Fully rigid with Enve carbon fork?


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

I'd switch to an xx1 or xo1 cassette and driver, once you wear out the XTR, not only for weight, but for more range both ways. Other than that, I think your build is absolutely dialed!! Don't think I could handle a rigid fork.


----------



## serious1 (Jan 11, 2013)

I'd definitely try the specialized chisel rigid fork. Its a lot lighter than the enve fork and also cheaper. Mine weighs 601 grams with the steerer cut to 6.5 in and with the heavy specialized expansion plug. Riding fully rigid is a blast.

I agree with the previous poster as well about the benefits to the xx1 cassette being increased range and lower weight. Plus you'd stand to lose a few more grams with the xd driver.

Have you thought about or tried scrub rotors?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

stew325 said:


> I'd switch to an xx1 or xo1 cassette and driver, once you wear out the XTR, not only for weight, but for more range both ways. Other than that, I think your build is absolutely dialed!! Don't think I could handle a rigid fork.


Thx for the comments. I'm actually iffy on a rigid fork as well, but always wanted to try it.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

serious1 said:


> I'd definitely try the specialized chisel rigid fork. Its a lot lighter than the enve fork and also cheaper. Mine weighs 601 grams with the steerer cut to 6.5 in and with the heavy specialized expansion plug. Riding fully rigid is a blast.
> 
> I agree with the previous poster as well about the benefits to the xx1 cassette being increased range and lower weight. Plus you'd stand to lose a few more grams with the xd driver.
> 
> Have you thought about or tried scrub rotors?


Thx for the tip on the Spesh fork - I'm not an expert on them by any means, so good to get suggestions. I hadn't thought about the XD driver either - I kinda assumed it would be heaver (wider?) but if it turns out to be lighter all up, great!

The Scrubs are the magnesium matrix right? I almost bought a pair on a drunken web surfing episode. Had something like $400 worth of rotors (one set) in the cart, but they couldn't complete my sale. The Kettle carbon's were pricey at the time - not sure if I'm that desperate...yet.

Would love to hear a review of the Scrubs if anyone has experience with them.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

CuddlyToast said:


> That brake hose has a lot to do with the power and feel of their braking system. I had an incredibly small kink in the line of my XTR, and it felt like garbage because of it. One thing I have noticed, is because the lines are so stiff, there is a lot less frame rub/rattling.
> 
> Still, it makes most brake trimming/general brake maintenance a chore. Good thing you should only ever have to deal with it once
> 
> EDIT* Forgot to mention thanks for the details! Looking forward to the final scale picture.


Sorry Toast, missed your comment. So far the single-finger braking is the best I've seen from any brake, so that's great. Perhaps it is due to the hose.

I don't think I can show it in a photo though, but the rear brake hose has constant torque tension on it which prevents it from moving smoothly with the bars. (I'm not explaining that well, but as an example, when you coil up a garden hose, sometimes it naturally wants to twist away unless you let it flip to remove the torsion. This is what is happening here.) I might be able to get rid of it by taking off the brake lever, and letting it naturally rotate a turn or two.

Thx for the kind comments.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

The Niner RDO Tapered rigid fork is lighter than both.

Mine is 558g uncut.


----------



## serious1 (Jan 11, 2013)

sfer1 said:


> The Niner RDO Tapered rigid fork is lighter than both.
> 
> Mine is 558g uncut.


You may be right but does that weight include the expansion plug and crown race? My expansion plug was 50g and the crown race is integrated in the chisel fork and that adds another 12g so I'm guessing the weights are very close once the steerer is cut.

I did a little digging and it seems like the DT Xd freehub is about 14g lighter if you compare the 2 hub weights on the DT website.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

No, that weight doesn't include the plug nor the crown race, but the steerer is uncut.

Besides, isn't the Chisel fork standard QR?

He would need an adapter like this (~35g) to use it:









The Niner RDO fork is 15mm thru axle.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

sfer1 said:


> The Niner RDO Tapered rigid fork is lighter than both.
> 
> Mine is 558g uncut.


Also NINER have been making them for YEARS and they're bomb proof!


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

phlegm said:


> Thx for the comments. I'm actually iffy on a rigid fork as well, but always wanted to try it.


If you're thinking of changing for a lighter fork how about a Lauf Trail Racer 29 fork? 60mm travel and a claimed weight of 990g/ 2.18lb including thru axle.

https://www.laufforks.com/lauf-trail-racer/

For the gearing you could consider going down from a 32 to a 30 tooth front chainring, claimed weight reduction of 7g if you stay with Wolf Tooth.

https://www.wolftoothcomponents.com/collections/chainrings/products/s-works-lightning-chainrings

You could then fit a SRAM Red 22 11 speed 11-32 cassette, claimed weight 196g, saving 131g over an XTR 11 speed 11-40 cassette, plus the reduced weight of a shortened chain. (It will require a road 11 speed freehub body which should be a straight swap on a DT Swiss hub)

https://www.sram.com/stories/sram-red-22-wifli-cassette-offering-expands

Here's how these gearing changes compare using the Sheldon Brown gear calculator.










With your original XTR 1x10 setup your bottom gear was 32x36, 6.6mph at 90rpm cadence. You said that you were fine with this.

With your current XTR 1x11 setup your bottom gear is 32x40, 5.9mph at 90rpm cadence.

If you were to change to SRAM Red 1x11 setup your bottom gear would be 30x32, 6.9mph at 90rpm cadence.

Compared to the 1x10 setup that bottom gear is close. It's a little higher but if you could get up the hills on 32x36 you'll get up them on a 30x32. Just think of the weight savings.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

WR304 said:


> If you're thinking of changing for a lighter fork how about a Lauf Trail Racer 29 fork? 60mm travel and a claimed weight of 990g/ 2.18lb including thru axle.


I've seen that Lauf before. I think it was on something claiming to be the "lightest mountain bike in the world", which I found amusing. It looks like it should be heavier, doesn't it? It kinda scares me, to be honest. I'm not doing drops, but 60mm strikes me as too little - seems to be a tradeoff between rigid and suspension. *

$1000.*

The idea of zero maintenance required is good.

BTW, thought it was German - it ships from Iceland!



WR304 said:


> For the gearing you could consider going down from a 32 to a 30 tooth front chainring, claimed weight reduction of 7g if you stay with Wolf Tooth.





WR304 said:


> You could then fit a SRAM Red 22 11 speed 11-32 cassette, claimed weight 196g, saving 131g over an XTR 11 speed 11-40 cassette, plus the reduced weight of a shortened chain. (It will require a road 11 speed freehub body which should be a straight swap on a DT Swiss hub)


That is an intriguing suggestion WR304. I've tried to visualize what a difference of "0.3" in gain ratio would be. Might be more than I think, but can't be all that much.

If anything, I'm ashamed to say moving to 1X11 has made my legs weaker.  I was indeed fine with my outgoing 1X10 with a 32T ring, but now that I have that 40T cog, I'm starting to use it.


----------



## stew325 (Jan 3, 2011)

phlegm said:


> If anything, I'm ashamed to say moving to 1X11 has made my legs weaker.  I was indeed fine with my outgoing 1X10 with a 32T ring, but now that I have that 40T cog, I'm starting to use it.


1X11 is the gateway to e-bikes!


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

phlegm said:


> That is an intriguing suggestion WR304. I've tried to visualize what a difference of "0.3" in gain ratio would be. Might be more than I think, but can't be all that much.
> 
> If anything, I'm ashamed to say moving to 1X11 has made my legs weaker.  I was indeed fine with my outgoing 1X10 with a 32T ring, but now that I have that 40T cog, I'm starting to use it.


That's a difference of 0.3mph in speed between the two gears when pedalling at 90rpm. I find it much easier thinking in terms of speed than gain ratios as I can then go back through some historic ride files, see what my climbing speeds and cadence were and then decide if the gearing will be appropriate or not.

On Wednesday for example I rode up a 20% (plus) gradient climb on my Epic. I was struggling in my bottom gear, down to 4.6mph at 84rpm and a power output of 348 watts. From that I could then look at possible gearing options to see how fast I would have to go to use a particular gear on that route. If the speed for a gear combination in the chart is much higher than I can manage to climb at in practice it's not going to work.

If you want gain ratios instead it's an option in the Sheldon Brown gear calculator. Just select it from the drop down list:

http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

When it comes to having a light bike the main reason for making it lighter is so that you can go uphill faster in a bigger gear. It's a virtuous circle - the lighter you make it the less you'll feel the need for bailout climbing gears. At some point I'm assuming you're going to switch to singlespeed because that's lighter again.

The Lauf fork is an interesting one. There are some terrible magazine reviews on the internet from when they first launched but also some more recent positive feedback. It's one of those items that the manufacturer can continue to adjust the character and performance of the suspension when making the fork so that newer revisions potentially work much better.

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=129462

.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

You shouldn't have suggested the Lauf and the SRAM red stuff. You got me thinking. I hold you responsible.

Can I bill you directly WR304?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

bryco13 said:


> Is that chain already on? I'd be curious to see if "big to big, plus 2 links" (the way I learned), will work with a 1x setup? (I'm assuming you're running just rear as there's no front shifter in your pics). My reasoning for questioning it is that shimano developed that when you are running three up front and at least 8 in the rear. Nobody ever ran in easiest front/hardest rear, or hardest front/easiest rear. It would have resulted in a horrible chai line and pulled that deraileur straight. I'm thinking you may want to carefully approach the easiest gear while making sure that nice light derailleur doesn't get pulled too tight.


BTW bryco, I was getting chain skipping with back-pedalling recently. At the end of the day, I wound up remounting everything, and playing with tiny changes to HI, LO, and the B-tension to ultimately fix. Drivetrain thread is here:
http://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-shifters-derailleurs-cranks/chain-skips-backwards-969226.html

However, during this process your post above got me thinking. Maybe the chain was too short. So, as reference, I added 2 links (pin to pin) just to see if that would help, and it didn't. So, just for both of our reference, still seems like "big-big +2" as per Shimano is fine, however the "big-big +4" is also shifting perfectly. Seems to be some leeway.

Thx for the input tho.


----------



## bryco13 (Apr 30, 2006)

Interesting that it skips in reverse. Maybe because the chain is directional if it goes against the cassettes ramping it causes skipping?


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

If you read the long term reviews on a Lauf I think that you'll likely stop worrying about its cost as you'll no longer be considering it as an option....

No damping means that you can end up pogo-ing through constant bumps eg rocky sections

L/R springs can move independently of each other meaning the wheel doesn't track in a straight line while cornering.

Don't get me wrong, it's a cool idea but you get better performance from either a proper suspension fork or a rigid...


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Well, I have about 10 rides on the 1x11 XTR. Shimano has successfully weakened my legs. 

First couple of rides I always had that 40T in reserve, but started to wimp out and use it more and more. Never needed more than 32-36, but now apparently I do. Lawsuit?

Anyway, to the actual Gruppo:

-Shiftng is great, and I solved the chain skip on backpedal issue (mostly b-tension)
-Brakes are great, with KCNC rotors
-Legs are weaker
-Using Schwalbe Thunder Burt up front - new favourite tire!

I should weigh again because the tire and rotor change have increased weight yet again.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

*End of Summer Update: 17.39 lbs / 7.89 kg*

Well, all the marketing folks say it is "End of Summer", so I thought I'd do an update. Sorry for the long delay, but there wasn't a heck of a lot to share.

*Formula Brakes*
This was disappointing. In previous posts you saw that I had an out-of-the-box leak on the rear caliper, so I sent it along to Formula's Canadian rep (S4 Suspension) for service. The turnaround was actually reasonable, but they damaged the caliper in the process.

I'll spare you the details, but after months of indicating the part was on backorder (it was serviced in January of this year), a recent email to S4 confirmed they had never ordered the part, and that Formula (Italy) was closed for all of August. They've promised a new order this month. 8 months thus far is just too much, sorry.

Again, a shame, because at 365g for the pair (lines cut) they are still the lightest brakeset I've seen firsthand. I was struggling with some rotor clearance issues, but ultimately gave up due to the warranty business. I've put these on sale on Pinkbike today, and won't be holding my breath for the replacement part.









_Side Note:_ In desperation, I reached out to Formula USA, and Jake was amazingly responsive. He returned calls and emails. Great attitude, but ultimately they can't do the warranty work for Canada. I can wholeheartedly recommend them if you are based in the US, but for Canada I'd suggest you are taking some chances.

*XTR M9000 Drivetrain*
This is going well, and shifts perfectly, but I still have this odd tick every once in a while. I'll sort it out this winter when I pull everything, but I still can't find it at the moment. As a refresher:
-Only occurs on some cogs, so not a bottom bracket creak
-Cogs in question are still in great shape, and this occurred early on, so not a tooth wear issue
-Could be a pin on the chain, but given the cog combinations it occurs on, it doesn't make sense logically (I won't explain it here)

Overall though, pleased with it, and the I-Spec "B" mount is great, and super-easy to adjust.

Also, moving to the 11-speed system has indeed weakened me as a rider.  I use the 40T cog all the time (only had 36T back in 1X10). I am a wimp now. Gee, thanks Shimano.

I forgot to sell my 1X10 stuff, but a new XX cassette, new XTR (10-speed) derailleur and shifter are all for sale as well.

*Brake Rotors*
This part is boring, but I was struggling to find a decent brake rotor.

I started with the experimental (and ultimately useless) Kettle carbon rotors. Super light-weight, great heat tolerance, but would not stop the bike, even on XC-style descents. I then thought I'd try Carver Titanium rotors, which were slightly less expensive (than Kettle), slightly heavier, but still light, but very noisy. Someone warned me about that, but I ignored them - duh - and thus I can't use them. Could not find a brake material to silence them - and when I say LOUD, I mean it.

Post with details on both rotors is here, in case you missed it.

So, I've been using KCNC rotors at this point (F-160mm, R-140mm) and they've been fine. They are super-cheap, decently light, and they've just worked. It did increase the bike weight though of course.

*Tires*
I was originally using Schwalbe Furious Freds front and rear. You can't really go lighter than those, but I wasn't 100% happy with the tracking up front. I switched the front to a Thunder Burt, and I've been extremely pleased. I think it has made me a better rider, honestly. Hard to prove, but I also *think* the rolling resistance is even better than the FuFrs. I have retained a Fred on the rear.

As has been the trend in my recent posts, the build continues to get heavier, but again it has improved the bike IMO. Not sure which tire I actually used, but it is either 461 or 466g. 















*Current (Final?) Weight*
I'm happy with the current setup, so may not tinker further until my next build. As indicated, the recent introduction of the KCNC rotors, and Thunder Burt tire up front have certainly increased the weight.

At its lightest, it was 16.89 lbs / 7.66 kg, but it is now a hefty 17.39 lbs / 7.89 kg.









If interested, the complete build list, with individual components hyperlinked, is here. This was at its lightest, and not current, but hopefully a decent reference.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Your issues with Formula's Canadian rep seem par for the course with most of the Canadian distributors. They go for the throat on pricing and then do nothing for the most part when it comes to after sales service. Not necessarily the case for Canadian brand stuff though - Race Face, Sugoi, etc...

When I had issues with my Formula master cylinder leaking years ago, I approached Formula USA because I had bought the brakes from a US company's website. Since I had a US shipping address (I live 5 minutes from the border) they had no issue sending me the parts under warranty. How close to the border are you? If all else fails, you could buy the parts from an ebay seller called KW570 from Italy. I've bought several Formula bits from him over the years. His prices are fantastic (60% or less than anyone else) and his service is top notch.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thx for the info and advice Civic, much appreciated.

*However, just a few hours ago, Jake from Formula USA contacted me, and offered to send out a complete replacement set to Canada!*

As mentioned, Formula USA has been outstanding here, and are going above and beyond as far as I'm concerned. I'll keep folks posted as to progress - I just might hang onto these.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

phlegm said:


> Thx for the info and advice Civic, much appreciated.
> 
> *However, just a few hours ago, Jake from Formula USA contacted me, and offered to send out a complete replacement set to Canada!*
> 
> As mentioned, Formula USA has been outstanding here, and are going above and beyond as far as I'm concerned. I'll keep folks posted as to progress - I just might hang onto these.


You really should...
I have two sets and love them


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Thanks for the XTR review. I'm considering a similar setup. Do you have any issues with the chain dropping off the 40 when back pedaling? Just curious (may be covered previously) why did you choose to stay shimano and not jump to sram? I've been debating XX1 or XTR (with XT 11-42) for a bit.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yes, I was getting chain drops (or almost chain drops) when back pedaling. Took a while, but it amounted to some micro adjustments, especially the b-tension. Wasn't aware it was a common issue, but it certainly was a pain at the time.

I've always like Shimano shifting, so I just decided to go that route. Also, Shimano's I-Spec II is a great combo when you also run their brakes.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks for all the great comments and input into this build.

I have a new project, and this particular frame (and some components) will be sold off.

If interested, the new build discussion is here:
http://forums.mtbr.com/weight-weenies/new-build-2015-s-works-stumpjumper-ht-xtr-di2-992587.html


----------

