# Is a Ripmo too much bike?



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Anyone buy the Ripmo (or similar) and later regret it feeling like you have too much bike?

I've been riding for many years on a Niner hardtail with 100mm SID. I love it actually. But my shop has some Ripmo's coming in and I'm seriously interested. A riding buddy mentioned I might want to consider the Ripley, and the shop guys say "sure the Ripley is great" but they think the Ripmo is close in weight and it's preferable to go for the extra travel available on the Ripmo.

I'm 53 and live in Northern Utah. I'm a weak climber. I have lots of trails with some very steep up, and steep down, with some flow, rock gardens and a bit of chunk here and there.

I have tried a Yeti SB130 on my trails and it didn't feel over biked but I did have to walk/push it up in more places than usual compared to my HT. I also demo-ed a e-bike the Orbea Rise and while it was loads of fun and solved my weak legs issue, I just think I'd still rather have a regular pedal bike.

Maybe as between the Ripley and Ripmo it just comes down to personal preference, but I really don't want to drop the coin on this and come to feel I made the wrong choice.

Thoughts?

[Edit: changed "Ridley" to "Ripley." Thanks!]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

There are no wrong choices, just personal preferences. One man's short travel is another man's downhill bike.

Why not demo both, then you can know if you have too much travel for how you ride? Bikers Edge has both in m-xl for demo.

Since you already have a hardtail, I'd say go for the Ripmo. If you need short travel you have the hard tails, and of you need big travel, you'll have that too.

That said, 120-130mm is perfect for all of northern Utah. There are only a handful of trails that a bigger travel bikes excel on in all of Utah compared to other states I've ridden in. 

But, you should get the bike you really want, not what a riding buddy or internet warrior thinks you need. If the one bike will get you out riding, that's better than not riding.


----------



## sooslow (Dec 14, 2017)

Ksanman made some good points. Bike preference is very subjective! I'm 65, ride a Ripmo and love it. She handles great in all conditions and I'm no expert, just like to ride within my limits.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Ride what your want...

You'll get stronger on it either way (up or down).

Sent from my Asus Rog 3


----------



## Antimatter (Jan 3, 2018)

The Ripmo's a nice bike IMHO. It boils down to what's important to you. If your LBS has a demo bike you can take out, I recommend trying it out.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

If pedaling efficiency is of importance to you a shorter travel bike will pedal better. No free lunch here. 

I agree it's personal preference, but I'm personally not a fan of being over-biked. I much prefer to be under-biked, that's more fun to me than letting the bike do all the work. Not everyone has the same preferences as me though. 

Buy whatever you think will put a bigger smile on your face.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)

Pre COVID there was a demo day at a local trail system. Lots of big brands and I'd always go and try 6-7 bikes. Was really eye opening to try a bunch of $6-7k bikes back to back on the same trails, and after a few _years_ I started to get really fast at bike setup and develop an opinion. It's pretty easy to get wrong impression from poor bike setup.

At this point there are bikes that delight me and bikes I think are dogs. I like poppy bikes that let me climb standing. There's some magic I don't understand but I know it when I feel it. I was tempted by a few FS bikes until I rode a friends upgraded 5010 on a favorite wet roots descent, I was much faster (12 minutes instead of 18) but found it smoothed everything out and stole charm from the trail, I didn't need much line choice and just flew over everything. Could ignore the scary stuff. Not my bag. Felt like snowboarding. Also with those speeds and air I felt like I would need to start wearing armor and full face.

I definitely wouldn't get a bike without a solid demo. If I get a bike it's going to delight me and make me happy on my favorite trails, that's the criteria.

Instead of new fs bike I put a 140 float 34 on my ti 29er singlespeed and a 2.35 dhf on the front, was a huge improvement for my riding and I use my legs and dropper for rear suspension, that's where I'm at. I also love that I don't need pivot maintainance any more but maybe not a concern in Utah. Here in pnw the bushings and bearings never lasted a year.

I tried the ripmo v1 a few times. Is a bit heavy but terrific pedal platform, climbed delightfully out of saddle. Too much travel for me and it doesn't 'pop' off trail features. I liked the transition smuggler quite a bit, it made me happy to ride it. the yeti sb150 was pretty lively and precise but definitely too much bike for my trails and speed.

I think demo bikes until your Cinderella finds you. At this point I think I'd much rather have a custom hard tail made for me than any fs bike, something with a longer dropper, lower bars and a 150mm 36 fork.


----------



## OperatorBo (Mar 20, 2011)

I think we have the same LBS (BE?) and pretty sure we ride the same trails. I know how you feel about the E bike. I'm 48, they are tons of fun, just not ready. Look at the Orbea Occam. just enough bike to keep you out of trouble and climbs as good or better than the Ripley.


----------



## OldMike (Apr 30, 2020)

A Ripmo may not be too much bike but it also might not be as good a fit as something else.

I was in the same boat as you (I'm 51) wanting a longer travel FS for comfort over climb.
In the end all I could find was a 21' SJ and I soon realized that It is a better fit for my riding style (XC) than
a longer travel bike would have been.
I rarely get to any bike park and most of my riding is XC/Trail with some aggressive DH's that the SJ handles with ease.
Along with the weight savings, the shorter travel SJ is far more playful off Jumps and climbs like a goat.

If I had gone with a SJ Evo I don't think I'd necessarily be disappointed, however It wouldn't fit my riding style as much as the SJ does.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Thanks everyone. Good input for sure. And especially a big thanks to those who live near me. Yes, I’m talking about getting a Ripmo from BE in Kaysville. I love in NSL near the Wild Rose trailhead. Most of my riding is on these trails: wild rose, including the various climbs to up to the top tower, lost lad, shoreline, city creek, and above the avenues, including bobsled, dry creek and 19th avenue. I’m 6-4 at 185 lbs and 53 years old. Mueller canyon and the Wasatch Crest also! Like I said previously, I’ve been on an old school geo hardtail for many years. 

I’ve wanted a full suspension for a while but never got serious about it. I went to BE last month specifically to try the XL Orbea Rise, having heard good things about it and thinking at 53 this new type of e-bike might work well for me. Long story short, it’s definitely a great bike, but I think the motor/battery tech is still evolving quickly and at 53 I’m not ready yet to throw in the towel with a motor. Lol. Maybe in 7-10 years I’ll fell differently. 

I like the Ripmo because: (1) it’s available now, and for personal reasons buying this month is good timing for me, and (2) being 6-4 I like the idea of having a longer fork to put the front up higher, and I really liked the confidence that the SB130 gave me going down. I don’t “send it” or go for jumps, and that won’t change. But the traction and stability was amazing and very appealing. 

Will the fact that it’s longer on travel make me wish I had gone for a Blur TR, Epic Evo, Exie, or equivalent instead? That’s the big question that’s on my mind right now. 

Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

I'm 69 this month and also ride in northern Utah. I'm on the Wasatch back and make frequent trips to Moab. I have a Giant Trance 29 Pro and it works perfectly for my application. I ride with my youngest son (30) fairly frequently and he's on a Ripmo. Given your description, I think something with less travel would be a better fit. They're both great bikes, though. There are several shorter travel 29ers that would probably fit the bill.

Edit: I just read your post (#10). Frankly, given your size, I'd pick the bike that feels the most comfortable. I've shrunken down to about 5'8" tall and my son is 6'2" tall. He does send it, but I think his Ripmo is a good fit for him. It's a great bike!


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

It's "Ripley", not Ridley. That said, I would recommend the Ripley for riding in Northern Utah unless you often visit a bike park. The Ripley is more efficient, better for long days in the saddle, and can handle pretty much any trail where you live with ease. I have both in Park City and seldom go for the Ripmo unless at Deer Valley bike park. But most days I'm going for the Orbea Rise anyway. lol


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

BTW, both of our bikes have the DPX2 shock. We both tried the DPS equipped versions on the Giant and we both decided we greatly prefer the DPX2 on it.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)

Silent Drone said:


> I've wanted a full suspension for a while but never got serious about it. I went to BE last month specifically to try the XL Orbea Rise, having heard good things about it and thinking at 53 this new type of e-bike might work well for me. Long story short, it's definitely a great bike, but I think the motor/battery tech is still evolving quickly and at 53 I'm not ready yet to throw in the towel with a motor. Lol. Maybe in 7-10 years I'll fell differently.
> 
> I like the Ripmo because: (1) it's available now, and for personal reasons buying this month is good timing for me, and (2) being 6-4 I like the idea of having a longer fork to put the front up higher, and I really liked the confidence that the SB130 gave me going down. I don't "send it" or go for jumps, and that won't change. But the traction and stability was amazing and very appealing.
> 
> Will the fact that it's longer on travel make me wish I had gone for a Blur TR, Epic Evo, Exie, or equivalent instead? That's the big question that's on my mind right now.


Well, if you're riding a classic geo ht then this is a big step up. If you demo and you like it then do it. Like today! Enjoy your health for the rest of this year. Ripmo is one of the better bikes and will have fine resale if you decide next year that it's too big and you want the ripley.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

BmanInTheD said:


> &#8230;But most days I'm going for the Orbea Rise anyway. lol


Ha! The Orbea Rise is indeed tempting. Thanks for the solid advice.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Sounds like too much bike to me, given that you've been riding a HT forever. You'll probably never be under-biked though....


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

I'm 42, on a Mach 6 (160mm) and I'm currently nursing two broken ribs cause I'm an idiot and go out of my way to hit every jump and drop I can find. My best friend and riding buddy, same age, same trails and he's on 120mm and has an equal amount of fun.

Really comes down to you, but I went with more travel cause I already have a 100mm HT and wanted something on the other end of the spectrum. Dude with the 2nd comment said it perfect, demo them both and get whichever you like best. Maybe even throw Santa Cruz, Revel or Pivot into the mix and demo them too, though availability might be an issue.


----------



## toyotatacomaTRD (Apr 4, 2012)

I bought too much bike before and hated it. You're way better having something for where you ride most of the time. It's just not fun pedaling up a pig when the downs don't justify it.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

*OneSpeed* said:


> If pedaling efficiency is of importance to you a shorter travel bike will pedal better. No free lunch here.
> 
> I agree it's personal preference, but I'm personally not a fan of being over-biked. I much prefer to be under-biked, that's more fun to me than letting the bike do all the work. Not everyone has the same preferences as me though.
> 
> Buy whatever you think will put a bigger smile on your face.


I mostly agree with this depending on where and what you're riding. If I'm at a bike park, I'll take over biked, but most other scenarios, or like OP said Northern Utah, yeah I'll take my HT all day. People think they need A LOT more bike than they really do.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

eri said:


> Ripmo is one of the better bikes and will have fine resale if you decide next year that it's too big and you want the ripley.


That's actually a really good point. I'd been combing the classifieds for a buddy and it's definitely a seller's market right now. Just last week I saw a 2019 Trek Fuel going for only $500 less than it's original MSRP. I'd still demo, but there's definitely less risk knowing how strong the resale market is right now.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

MSU Alum said:


> BTW, both of our bikes have the DPX2 shock. We both tried the DPS equipped versions on the Giant and we both decided we greatly prefer the DPX2 on it.


Haha, yeah. I won't ride a DPS. If I bought a bike with a DPS, I'd pull it off and twiddle my thumbs until the replacement arrived in the mail. If I was the last rider on earth, and the only bike that survived the asteroid impact had a DPS, I would go to the last known location of an LBS and start digging through the ash with my bare hands until I could reach down and pull up at least a Monarch.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

TylerVernon said:


> Haha, yeah. I won't ride a DPS. If I bought a bike with a DPS, I'd pull it off and twiddle my thumbs until the replacement arrived in the mail. If I was the last rider on earth, and the only bike that survived the asteroid impact had a DPS, I would go to the last known location of an LBS and start digging through the ash with my bare hands until I could reach down and pull up at least a Monarch.


LOL why don't you really tell us why you hate it so much?!


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

If the Ripley is in stock I'd go that way. It's still going to feel like a huge step up in performance compared to your 100mm forked, classic geo hardtail and will still give you a lot of confidence on the downs.... but without as much compromise on the climbs compared to the Ripmo. If the Ripmo is in stock and the Ripley isn't, buy it. They're hard to come by and like others have said, it will be easy to sell if you feel over-biked.

Both great bikes. Can't go wrong, but given your previous bike and normal riding style, Ripley would be my choice.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

I'm going to say no to a fs. 
Yes to a current geo hardtail. 
Lighter than fs with better climbing and descending capability than your current bike.
All pluses. . . Watch some of the reviews on YouTube Hardtail Party.


----------



## RadicalPugilism (Nov 24, 2020)

I was in the same spot a few months ago. I chose the Ripmo. Looking back, I'd rather have a 140-forked Ripley with a Topaz or a DPX2 in the back. I plan to try something with a little less travel soon.

Someone also mentioned the Occam - I think it's a great compromise. I demoed one for a few days and loved it. I just can't get along with that DPS and the dealer couldn't get me another shock anytime soon.


----------



## shakazulu12 (Jul 14, 2015)

Sounds like you could go Ripmo, then just ditch the Assegi's so it rolls a ton better. If inventory was plentiful, I would think a Ripley sounds like more of an ideal solution though.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

RadicalPugilism said:


> I was in the same spot a few months ago. I chose the Ripmo. Looking back, I'd rather have a 140-forked Ripley with a Topaz or a DPX2 in the back. I plan to try something with a little less travel soon.
> 
> Someone also mentioned the Occam - I think it's a great compromise. I demoed one for a few days and loved it. I just can't get along with that DPS and the dealer couldn't get me another shock anytime soon.


I'm curious about the option of a 140 on the Ripley. Are many people doing that? Does it make much do a difference? I would think it's only a minor change, but perhaps in the right way.

Is your Ripmo size XL? Send me a DM if you want to talk about selling it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

shakazulu12 said:


> Sounds like you could go Ripmo, then just ditch the Assegi's so it rolls a ton better. If inventory was plentiful, I would think a Ripley sounds like more of an ideal solution though.


This seems to be the universal consensus, and I have to admit that my brains agrees, but my heart isn't quite there yet&#8230;

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## shakazulu12 (Jul 14, 2015)

Silent Drone said:


> This seems to be the universal consensus, and I have to admit that my brains agrees, but my heart isn't quite there yet&#8230;
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


We've all been there. Buy whatever makes you smile the most. Not like any of us are getting paid to do this.


----------



## RadicalPugilism (Nov 24, 2020)

Silent Drone said:


> I'm curious about the option of a 140 on the Ripley. Are many people doing that? Does it make much do a difference? I would think it's only a minor change, but perhaps in the right way.
> 
> Is your Ripmo size XL? Send me a DM if you want to talk about selling it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I haven't personally ridden it with a 140, but I feel that might put the Ripley right in the sweet spot for my usual rides. A little more margin for error up front, but not so much that I would forget the rear end is still at 120 mm.

I am selling - but it's a medium. Sorry!


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> I'm curious about the option of a 140 on the Ripley. Are many people doing that? Does it make much do a difference? I would think it's only a minor change, but perhaps in the right way.
> 
> Is your Ripmo size XL? Send me a DM if you want to talk about selling it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


On my Trance 29, I replaced the 130 with a 140. After taking into consideration about 20-30% sag, it's only 7mm of additional travel/extension, and it's dynamic, so it doesn't make much difference. But, I replaced the stock Fox 34 with the Float 29 Grip 2 Factory. The Grip 2 was a fantastic upgrade! Many of these forks in the 130/140 range can easily be adjusted, if you want - to add or subtract 10mm. I rode the previous generation Ripley before getting the Giant, so unfortunately, I can't compare. The Giant feels an awful lot like a short travel Ripmo. Coming from a Yeti SB5 "brunch ride" 160 fork, to the Giant made the downs in Moab more doable and I've set numerous long climb PR's here in PC.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

MSU Alum said:


> On my Trance 29, I replaced the 130 with a 140. After taking into consideration about 20-30% sag, it's only 7mm of additional travel/extension, and it's dynamic, so it doesn't make much difference. But, I replaced the stock Fox 34 with the Float 29 Grip 2 Factory. The Grip 2 was a fantastic upgrade! Many of these forks in the 130/140 range can easily be adjusted, if you want - to add or subtract 10mm. I rode the previous generation Ripley before getting the Giant, so unfortunately, I can't compare. The Giant feels an awful lot like a short travel Ripmo. Coming from a Yeti SB5 "brunch ride" 160 fork, to the Giant made the downs in Moab more doable and I've set numerous long climb PR's here in PC.


Interesting. Do I understand this correctly? Moving to the Giant Trance with a 140 fork from the Yeti SB5 with a 160 fork made the downs and ups nor doable? So, it was the bike/fork combo that made the difference. The Trance just works better than the yeti, even though the yeti has that bigger fork.

Sorry if I'm not quite getting it. There's so much out there, so many variables to consider. Haha.

I appreciate your input about the Grip2. I've noticed that many others praise it too

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> Interesting. Do I understand this correctly? Moving to the Giant Trance with a 140 fork from the Yeti SB5 with a 160 fork made the downs and ups nor doable? So, it was the bike/fork combo that made the difference. The Trance just works better than the yeti, even though the yeti has that bigger fork.
> 
> Sorry if I'm not quite getting it. There's so much out there, so many variables to consider. Haha.
> 
> ...


1. The Grip2 damper (Factory), regardless of fork travel, was a huge improvement over the Fit4 (Performance) that came with the bike. It's the damper, as I thought the Performance level was a good fork overall.
2. On both the 130mm and the 140mm, the Giant Trance 29 - which I have upgraded - is better for what and how I ride.

The Yeti is a 27.5, while the Giant is a 29. I'm 69 this month, so you can expect that I'm not a super downhiller. On the Yeti, I had not "cleaned" the trail Bull Run in Moab. The first time I cleaned that descent was on my Giant. I got climbing PR's on several rides in Moab...Hymasa, the climb up to Burro pass (and no, I'm not walking it faster), Getaway, and a bunch up here in Park City.

I don't know what it is about the geometry of the Giant (2018) Vs. the Yeti (2016) with the 160mm fork, but it's more capable on the downhills I ride. Also, there are some tight climbing switchbacks that I find easier on the Giant than I found on the Yeti, despite a slightly longer wheelbase. One that comes to mind is, as you go south on Mid-mountain toward the Canyons, there's a climbing right turn onto the Ridge Connector that I have more success on, on the Giant.....though I'm still not 100%.

A favorite circuit for me is to go up Sweeny's, John's, back down John's to 420 over to Gravedigger/Moose House and back around. That's some rocky, rooty climbing, if you're familiar with it, and I've pulled off a number of PR's on that climb and that circuit. Also climbing up Iron Bill in the UOP area. On that sort of stuff, the 29" wheels are an improvement.

One thing I notice about the geometry, which took some getting used to, was that on steep climbs on the Yeti, I had to slide forward more on my seat to keep the front down than on the Giant. My Yeti even has a 130-160 fork. On the Giant, I stay more centered and in fact, if I do shift forward too much, it unloads the rear tire and I lose traction.

Being in the area, you may be familiar with these, which is why I mention them. Hope this helps.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

MSU Alum said:


> 1. The Grip2 damper (Factory), regardless of fork travel, was a huge improvement over the Fit4 (Performance) that came with the bike. It's the damper, as I thought the Performance level was a good fork overall.
> 2. On both the 130mm and the 140mm, the Giant Trance 29 - which I have upgraded - is better for what and how I ride.
> 
> The Yeti is a 27.5, while the Giant is a 29. I'm 69 this month, so you can expect that I'm not a super downhiller. On the Yeti, I had not "cleaned" the trail Bull Run in Moab. The first time I cleaned that descent was on my Giant. I got climbing PR's on several rides in Moab...Hymasa, the climb up to Burro pass (and no, I'm not walking it faster), Getaway, and a bunch up here in Park City.
> ...


Thank you, @MSU Alum. Yes, that was very helpful to me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

By your description and trails it sounds like the Ripley would be better. I live in SLC and know the terrain. I want a Ripley as well! You can find videos of MTB Yum Yum rip Jacobs ladder on his Ripley, pretty rough fast trail. Very capable.

My current quiver is 5010 V2 and 2021 Enduro. The short travel bike would be better for you I am sure, especially coming from a hard tail.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

C Smasher said:


> By your description and trails it sounds like the Ripley would be better. I live in SLC and know the terrain. I want a Ripley as well! You can find videos of MTB Yum Yum rip Jacobs ladder on his Ripley, pretty rough fast trail. Very capable.
> 
> My current quiver is 5010 V2 and 2021 Enduro. The short travel bike would be better for you I am sure, especially coming from a hard tail.


It's nice to have another local on here. Would you like put a 140 mm fork on the Ripley for these local trails? If I go for the Ripley I think that's what I'd do.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

Silent Drone said:


> It's nice to have another local on here. Would you like put a 140 mm fork on the Ripley for these local trails? If I go for the Ripley I think that's what I'd do.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I would definitely increase the travel to 140mm. In the giant Ripley thread you can read peoples experience with that. I increased from 130 to 140 on my 5010 and there were only positive results. It didn't affect climbing or handling in a negative way at all.


----------



## MTBozo (Jun 4, 2021)

As a brand new 2021 Ripley owner, I would say whole-heartedly go for that bike given what you have shared. I have a blue steel XL, with the new 2021 34 Factory Grip2 damper which is getting along nicely and a 2021 lackluster Factory DPS. I haven't dialed the rear enough yet and have spacers on the way, but will play with the DPS and maybe have it tuned before outright replacing it. Giving the rear shock a fair shake here, given the cost of the damn thing. I do have it closer to working well with the front end now after the first few rides and tweaking pressure and compression etc. 
Went XT build and it shipped with the 2 piston XT brakes and not the current website spec 4 Pistons, but they are doing a fine job of hauling my 6'2" 218 lb a$$ right on down when needed and I am getting along well with their feel. I am loving it and my local MD trails sound a whole lot like your UT trails do. It's a phenomenal all around FS, speedy uphill hauler that instills lots of confidence on the downs and quickly made me more confident to try new trail features and higher speeds.
FWIW, I am coming off a dinosaur Trek 4200 from the early 2000's and I won't ever even look at, let alone ride that thing now that the Ripley is anxiously awaiting its next adventure out. Helluva bike!!!

PS: I too will throw a 140mm air shaft in it on my first service but don't feel it is a big need - more just a small adjustment to keep my pedal strikes down. It's fairly perfect as-is for my riding.


----------



## goodmojo (Sep 12, 2011)

I had a ripmo, it took me a lot of rides to get the new geometry dialed in. It rode fine, but I never loved it. I did like how the dw link suspension didnt bob, I didnt like the pressure on my hands from being forward. I was able to dial most of it out but it was never quite right. In the end I sold it to get an ebike and my main bike is a turner czar with slightly outdated geometry. the ebike is for more downhill trails and the czar is for everything else. The thing just fits me like a glove and is super light. I wish the suspension was 120mm instead of 100mm, but otherwise Ill just keep riding it.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

I was able to demo the Ripmo (XL) for two long rides yesterday and today. Great bike!

I liked the longer reach and fit. I'm 6-4 with a long torso, and found that on this bike I needed to lean forward more than on my current bike. My hardtail is so steep and low up front that I have to get way back over the rear when going down anything. And there are features and trails that I avoid or walk down because it's beyond the bike's capabilities/ my skills to descend. On the Ripmo, I didn't have to avoid anything. And with my long torso, and the slack front end, it was a very comfortable "in the bike" feeling to lean forward with my weight more evenly distributed between the two wheels. It felt very natural. I noticed that on this bike, if you lean too far back over the rear wheel the front starts to lift and lose traction, and it just doesn't feel fight.

The Ripmo climbed much better than expected. I really have no complaints about climbing on this bike. When the climb was long and steep I found it good to lockout the shock (DPX2) but I also did lots of climbing with the shock wide open and that was just fine.

I can't wait to get out and try the Ripley and then buy one. I think I'd be very happy with this bike, but I'm reserving judgment and will see what I learn from the next demo ride. I think as between Ripmo and Ripley it's ultimately a question of preference, as others have said. I'm sure the Ripley will be more well rounded because I could feel the bias towards descending on the Ripmo.

Here are some pics:










On my way to the top&#8230;









Should I send it? Nah. (The angle on the pic doesn't capture it very well. And it's obscured by tall grass. That's a 10 ft gap to the ramp for your landing.) 









The bike just "fits" in my garage. Lol. Time to take her home to the LBS where she lives. 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

I had been looking for a new bike for about 6 months and just couldn't find anything. I was riding a 2016 Miner Rip9 Carbon (which has Al rear triangle). Good bike but was time to move on. Local shop got a shipment of Ripmos the beginning of May. I road one around the block just to check the reach and paid cash. All XT bike with the Fox factory 36 and X2. All I know is that without really trying I am setting PR's uphill, downhill and on the flats. Only downside so far is I have to be going faster to ride no hands comfortably. The big suspension, tires and brakes solve all kinds of problems. I am 57, 5'10" and got a large. My advice is to buy the bike while it is available.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

outside! said:


> I had been looking for a new bike for about 6 months and just couldn't find anything. I was riding a 2016 Miner Rip9 Carbon (which has Al rear triangle). Good bike but was time to move on. Local shop got a shipment of Ripmos the beginning of May. I road one around the block just to check the reach and paid cash. All XT bike with the Fox factory 36 and X2. All I know is that without really trying I am setting PR's uphill, downhill and on the flats. Only downside so far is I have to be going faster to ride no hands comfortably. The big suspension, tires and brakes solve all kinds of problems. I am 57, 5'10" and got a large. My advice is to buy the bike while it is available.


Do you think your local shop still has an XL? Let me know who it is and I'll call them.

Same experience here, that suspension just made the bike want to go, go, go.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Today was Ripley XL demo day for me. What a bike! You guys aren't kidding, that thing climbs like a rocket. It felt like I could use a cog or two smaller than on the Ripmo. My demo bike had the performance DPS and 34 with previous version of the grip damper. When both were locked out the bike was very rigid. But I found it best to just leave them open when climbing, or maybe put the DPS in the middle position but even then it wasn't really necessary.

On the flats the Ripley was much more balanced than the Ripmo. But of course it was only ever on the flats when I was on asphalt. On the trail it was either up or down.

Descending was adequate. I cleared all the same features and slopes as on the Ripmo. I never felt I had to dismount. But I did feel I needed to me more careful, and in a couple of place I felt I was approaching the limit of the front end. I did also slow down. On the descents, the Ripmo was a more or less constant feeling that I could go faster if I wanted. The Ripley was a little nagging feeling from time to time that maybe it would be wise to slow down.

The Ripley also felt shorter than the Ripmo, which it is as far as wheelbase but they both have the same reach (500 mm for the XL). I found this feeling to be odd because I expected that with the same reach the cockpit would feel the same. Nope, because it felt shorter the Ripley felt much more flickable and playful. On the other hand, because the Ripmo felt longer, it had more of a "down in the bike" feeling, and there was more of a need to remember to lean my body forward a bit to keep some weight on the front wheel.

The matte black was absolutely gorgeous in person. Stealthy and aggressive looking.










The "S" in SLC stand for "Smokey" from the forest fires in California. 


















No, I did not send it. On the Ripmo I was tempted, but not on the Ripley.










Thanks for all of your input everyone!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> Today was Ripley XL demo day for me. What a bike! You guys aren't kidding, that thing climbs like a rocket. It felt like I could use a cog or two smaller than on the Ripmo. My demo bike had the performance DPS and 34 with previous version of the grip damper. When both were locked out the bike was very rigid. But I found it best to just leave them open when climbing, or maybe put the DPS in the middle position but even then it wasn't really necessary.
> 
> On the flats the Ripley was much more balanced than the Ripmo. But of course it was only ever on the flats when I was on asphalt. On the trail it was either up or down.
> 
> ...


Very nice analysis. Thanks.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

I will add that yes, a 5"+ 29er, especially with beefy or large tires, is a lot of bike for most situations. It will roll downhill rather easily and wheel-catchers will become a thing of the past, but it's a lot of bike to ride up and constantly accelerate/slow on the trail. For some types of riders, it's not a big deal, but it's a lot of bike and you should be putting all that travel to use regularly with such a bike IMO.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)

I like this thread. Its fun to read. I'm happy you took the time to try the ridley. Will be neat when you make a choice. I'm not really hearing love though.

Hey, something occurred to me once I saw the pictures, isn't waltworks in park city, just out of town from slc? Is he still making bikes? Why wouldn't you go check out his hardtails? Aren't there a bunch of insanely sweet hardtails in that area? I guess wait time but worth checking out. A sweet steel hardtail with 140 fork. Proper bike. Cheers!


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

Thanks for the update after the test rides. So which do think you'll get?


----------



## CrozCountry (Mar 18, 2011)

You will always pay a price in climbing when adding travel, so that's the tradeoff you are doing.

Sounds to me like you need a short travel, efficient full suspension. If you really want to improve your downhill times, meaning riding a lot faster on difficult terrain, then you need more travel, something like the Ripmo. But you will also increase the consequences of a crash in an order of magnitude due to the higher speeds. If you get a Ripmo, get good protection with it. The bike will save you from a lot of stupid decisions, but the once or twice that it will not, will need every piece of plastic you can cover your body with.

Bikes like the Ripmo are popular because many people have the mindset of climb to descend. If this is your mindset, great, if not, you will just lose climbing performance over the ripley.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)




----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

It’s done. I’ve paid for a Ripmo v2 XT and it should be here in about 3 weeks. 

Thank you everybody for your solid advice. This thread really helped me to focus on what I needed to know to make a discussion. 

For those that are interested, here’s my thinking for why I picked the Ripmo:

1. Of the 4 bikes I demoed, the Ripmo was the most fun for me. That’s pretty subjective. But is there a better reason to pick a bike? Doubt it. Although, honestly they were all great fun in their own way and any of them would have been a winning choice.

2. I really liked the feel of my personal fit on the Ripmo. The Ripmo has the longest wheelbase of the bikes I tested. I liked how I could lean forward into it more than the others. I’ve got somewhat unusual body proportions. I’m 6-4 with a 34 inch inseam (pant sizing), which means a long torso and short legs. With its long fork and slack HT angle the front wheel is further forward, and the Ripmo allowed me to stretch out/forward more than on the others. On the Ripley, for example, I found myself leaning back more to stay over the center of the bike. 

3. Descending stability. In many ways, the focus of this thread is the trade off between longer travel/more capable descents vs shorter travel/more capable climbing. I find myself drawn to the Ripmo’s superior capability to roll over things more easily as the feature I want to prioritize. Now, as I’ve said above, I don’t plan to “rip” down trails or “send it” over gaps. I still want to descend ride conservatively. The features I’ll tackle can be done on the Ripley. But on the Ripmo I feel more secure having more margin for error. I liked that feeling a lot. 

4. Climbing. It’s true I won’t be able to tear up the climbs like on the Ripley but, still, I found the Ripmo’s climbing ability to be pretty good nonetheless. It’s a much better climber than I expected. 

So there you have it. Will I still love this bike three seasons from now? I don’t know but we’re going to find out!

I’ll post up some pics once it’s here. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

When I get a Riply for any other 120 29er I am going to run a piggy back shock and a grip2 36.

Congratulations! The Ripmo will be better in Moab and other places away from your main trails. Bountiful DH is calling your name!


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

C Smasher said:


> When I get a Riply for any other 120 29er I am going to run a piggy back shock and a grip2 36.
> 
> Congratulations! The Ripmo will be better in Moab and other places away from your main trails. Bountiful DH is calling your name!


Yes, Moab and St. George are calling! In fact I plan to be spending some time in StG this winter and I'll bring the Ripmo for sure.

Maybe I'll run into you on the shoreline trail. Cheers

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> Yes, Moab and St. George are calling! In fact I plan to be spending some time in StG this winter and I'll bring the Ripmo for sure.
> 
> Maybe I'll run into you on the shoreline trail. Cheers
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yep. 
All I know is that my son sure loves his Ripmo V1.
Looking forward to a longer term report!


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

Congratulations. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You can't go wrong with the Ripmo. Such a good bike.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike. The Ripley seems to be a bit short in travel and the Ripmo a bit much. If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Flyer said:


> In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike. The Ripley seems to be a bit short in travel and the Ripmo a bit much. If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon.


The Ripmo is 12mm longer travel. That's less than half an inch difference. Once you set sag, it's a third of an inch. I wouldn't wait for a 135 from Ibis, but who knows?


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Thought it was 120 vs. 147 of rear travel. That is 27mm, which is quite significant in that travel range.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Flyer said:


> Thought it was 120 vs. 147 of rear travel. That is 27mm, which is quite significant in that travel range.


"In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike."
"If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon."
You were wishing Ibis made a 135. That's 12 from the Ripmo, a 147.

I have a Trance 29 and my son has a Ripmo. Because of the way the Ripmo rides, It just doesn't feel like that big of a jump up in size until you need it.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Ah, I see what you meant. Yeah, that is only 12 but a 130-135 would be ideal. It is a nice jump from a 117 that I am on now, yet will still climb well (that is the vast majority of my time) and not flatten out the trails like a 147 would. I don't need a DH or enduro sled for the downhills either. There are other options besides Ibis, of course. Yeti, Spot, etc...

I just think a Ripmo may be a huge jump from my 117mm Yeti 4.5. The technical uphills would possibly be reduced to a boring ride.


----------



## rotorbaru (Mar 23, 2011)

Silent Drone said:


> Thanks everyone. Good input for sure. And especially a big thanks to those who live near me. Yes, I'm talking about getting a Ripmo from BE in Kaysville. I love in NSL near the Wild Rose trailhead. Most of my riding is on these trails: wild rose, including the various climbs to up to the top tower, lost lad, shoreline, city creek, and above the avenues, including bobsled, dry creek and 19th avenue. I'm 6-4 at 185 lbs and 53 years old. Mueller canyon and the Wasatch Crest also! Like I said previously, I've been on an old school geo hardtail for many years.
> 
> I've wanted a full suspension for a while but never got serious about it. I went to BE last month specifically to try the XL Orbea Rise, having heard good things about it and thinking at 53 this new type of e-bike might work well for me. Long story short, it's definitely a great bike, but I think the motor/battery tech is still evolving quickly and at 53 I'm not ready yet to throw in the towel with a motor. Lol. Maybe in 7-10 years I'll fell differently.
> 
> ...


I have a Ripmo AF and really like the bike, it pedals very well IMO. I don't find it to be too much bike but I ride in the mountains of North Carolina in the Pisgah NF which can get pretty rough. I am 48 and can pedal well and find the bike is a great do it all bike.

Happy shopping!


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

Flyer said:


> In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike. The Ripley seems to be a bit short in travel and the Ripmo a bit much. If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon.


I have a 135mm travel 29er and feel it is just about right for most things, but if I could get a 145-150mm travel bike that climbed as well in most situations, that little bit of extra travel might be appreciated in some of the deeper, rocky, rough stuff. Assuming it's the same quality of travel as my bike, of course. Want to trade?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

rotorbaru said:


> I have a Ripmo AF and really like the bike, it pedals very well IMO. I don't find it to be too much bike but I ride in the mountains of North Carolina in the Pisgah NF which can get pretty rough. I am 48 and can pedal well and find the bike is a great do it all bike.
> 
> Happy shopping!


I don't see how anyone could find a 147/160mm bike "too much bike" in Pisgah. There is some really gnarly stuff there.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Flyer said:


> In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike. The Ripley seems to be a bit short in travel and the Ripmo a bit much. If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon.


The Yeti SB130 is 130 in the back with a 150 fork, right in between the Ripley and the Ripmo. The lunch ride edition takes it to 137 with a 160 fork. I was interested in these bikes but I found the Ripmo's tire clearance and DW-link to be more appealing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bozo T CLown (Aug 10, 2020)

MSU Alum said:


> BTW, both of our bikes have the DPX2 shock. We both tried the DPS equipped versions on the Giant and we both decided we greatly prefer the DPX2 on it.


A bit off topic here.
I have the Trance 29er 1 with the DPS. I have been looking at swapping to a [email protected] or the DVO equivalent. What are the differences you ****?


----------



## frana (Jan 5, 2008)

Iwould go with the ripley. Efficient, enough travel for what it sounds like you ride. NO e bike, your're too young so keep pedaling and don''t give into peer pressure, LOL. Age is just a number....yessss


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Bozo T CLown said:


> A bit off topic here.
> I have the Trance 29er 1 with the DPS. I have been looking at swapping to a [email protected] or the DVO equivalent. What are the differences you ****?


I think the differences are subtle. A bit more climbing support open, for climbing (I always ride with it open) and maybe a bit more big impact support. I got it after testing out several bikes a few years ago, including the previous version of the Ripley (with the current Ripley being quite different, I guess) and a couple others (including the SB100, since I was coming off an SB5 "brunch ride") with much better build specs than the Trance 29 demo bike I rode.
My son ended up with the Ripmo, but hated the lower end Trance while loving my 29Pro with the DPX2. It seemed his dislike of the bike was centered around the DPS, but while I prefer the DPX2, I don't exactly hate the DPS. But, when a high performance trail bike comes out with the DPS spec'd, it kind of makes me wonder why.


----------



## Jefe74 (Mar 1, 2006)

Go Rip-Lil'mo. Ripley with fork at 140, DPX2 rear shock, chunky tires, 4 pot front brake. Handles a lot but still lively and fun at lower speeds. Still climbs like a Ripley.


----------



## Bozo T CLown (Aug 10, 2020)

MSU Alum said:


> I think the differences are subtle. A bit more climbing support open, for climbing (I always ride with it open) and maybe a bit more big impact support. I got it after testing out several bikes a few years ago, including the previous version of the Ripley (with the current Ripley being quite different, I guess) and a couple others (including the SB100, since I was coming off an SB5 "brunch ride") with much better build specs than the Trance 29 demo bike I rode.
> My son ended up with the Ripmo, but hated the lower end Trance while loving my 29Pro with the DPX2. It seemed his dislike of the bike was centered around the DPS, but while I prefer the DPX2, I don't exactly hate the DPS. But, when a high performance trail bike comes out with the DPS spec'd, it kind of makes me wonder why.


Thanks


----------



## ben2e (Mar 6, 2005)

Interesting to see this. I'm facing the same choice in Bend, Oregon. We have Oakridge nearby with steeper stuff. I don't typically go longer than 3 hrs on rides so figured I'd be willing to pay the price pedaling up to get the extra travel going back down and have a Ripmo on a rather long term order. Sunnyside Sports said unless I was spending major time in Oakridge, I should just get the Ripley for its ability handling on even steeper local trails (parts of Funner, Tylers, Farewell etc).


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Jefe74 said:


> Go Rip-Lil'mo. Ripley with fork at 140, DPX2 rear shock, chunky tires, 4 pot front brake. Handles a lot but still lively and fun at lower speeds. Still climbs like a Ripley.


I see it as a mistake to buy the Ripley intending to upgrade the fork, shock, tires and brakes right from the get go.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

ben2e said:


> Interesting to see this. I'm facing the same choice in Bend, Oregon. We have Oakridge nearby with steeper stuff. I don't typically go longer than 3 hrs on rides so figured I'd be willing to pay the price pedaling up to get the extra travel going back down and have a Ripmo on a rather long term order. Sunnyside Sports said unless I was spending major time in Oakridge, I should just get the Ripley for its ability handling on even steeper local trails (parts of Funner, Tylers, Farewell etc).


I know where you're coming from. My Ripmo should be here next week. I'm sure I'll be wishing for a little more efficiency on every long climb, but the difference in control and fun on the downs was noticeable, and that's the reason why I chose the Ripmo.

It's well known advice, but for me the decision was obvious after I rode both of them on the same trails. Compared back to back the one that suited me best was very apparent. In these discussions I could see the logic of going with the Ripley but on the trail it was another story and the Ripmo got the nod hands down.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Silent Drone said:


> I see it as a mistake to buy the Ripley intending to upgrade the fork, shock, tires and brakes right from the get go.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


If you actually had to replace all that stuff, I would agree.

However, Ripley builds I have looked at already come with 4 pot brakes and reasonably meaty tires.

I believe the Fox Float 34 can be upped to 140mm with just a new air shaft.


----------



## Higbee (Jan 13, 2004)

I purchased a Ripmo V2 this year coming from riding a 2015 Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt BC and was worried about having too much bike. I always appreciated short travel bikes that felt quick but I wanted to see how a modern longer travel trail bike would handle. I’m continually amazed how the Ripmo handles a wide variety of trails. It is in my opinion after 35 plus years of mountain biking an amazing all around trail bike. Outside of the extremes of xc racing or tones of DH park duty it just works and doesn’t require a heavy hand to ride well. I have ridden Whistler this year (Dark Crystal, Comfortably Numb etc) and confidently rode features I would never attempted before, conversely I can take it on mellow terrain and it doesn’t feel like a massive bike. I don’t need to worry if I have the right bike with me.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

Jefe74 said:


> Go Rip-Lil'mo. Ripley with fork at 140, DPX2 rear shock, chunky tires, 4 pot front brake. Handles a lot but still lively and fun at lower speeds. Still climbs like a Ripley.





Silent Drone said:


> I see it as a mistake to buy the Ripley intending to upgrade the fork, shock, tires and brakes right from the get go.





kapusta said:


> If you actually had to replace all that stuff, I would agree.
> 
> However, Ripley builds I have looked at already come with 4 pot brakes and reasonably meaty tires.
> 
> I believe the Fox Float 34 can be upped to 140mm with just a new air shaft.


^^^THIS^^^

My Ripley AF came equipped with a 2.5" DHF up front and 2.4" DHR in the rear and 4 pot G2 R brakes. Sure, they aren't Code RSCs, but you wouldn't expect that of a bike of this type at this price point. The fork can be changed to 140mm with a $35 air shaft assembly. The DPX2 (or similar shock) would be the big purchase, and likely a good idea for anyone planning to ride bigger terrain. I have heard that the Fox 34 at 140 might not be stiff enough for more aggressive and/or heavier riders. In that case, you could be looking at a fork and shock replacement.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I am more convinced that the Ripmo, as a one-bike thing, may probably be too much for the Colorado riding I do. If I keep my Yeti though, something like Evil's The Offering or the Ripmo may make sense. It basically HAS to be under 30 lbs and climb well with NOT a very active suspension (like the FSR, which is very active) and a good amount of anti-squat right off the top.

EDIT: I'll try to demo a few bikes like the SB130, Ripmo, Evil, Pivot, etc.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Higbee said:


> I purchased a Ripmo V2 this year coming from riding a 2015 Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt BC and was worried about having too much bike. I always appreciated short travel bikes that felt quick but I wanted to see how a modern longer travel trail bike would handle. I'm continually amazed how the Ripmo handles a wide variety of trails. It is in my opinion after 35 plus years of mountain biking an amazing all around trail bike. Outside of the extremes of xc racing or tones of DH park duty it just works and doesn't require a heavy hand to ride well. I have ridden Whistler this year (Dark Crystal, Comfortably Numb etc) and confidently rode features I would never attempted before, conversely I can take it on mellow terrain and it doesn't feel like a massive bike. I don't need to worry if I have the right bike with me.


This was the experience I had when demoing the Ripmo for two days. It should ship tomorrow, I'll have it soon, and then the long term review begins.  I hope to have the same experience with it that you've had. Thanks for the feedback.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> This was the experience I had when demoing the Ripmo for two days. It should ship tomorrow, I'll have it soon, and then the long term review begins.  I hope to have the same experience with it that you've had. Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think my son's XL Ripmo is 28 and change in weight. I'll have to check that, but he "inherited" some light components from me that left it plenty capable. It can be built up pretty light without much penalty in durability.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

MSU Alum said:


> I think my son's XL Ripmo is 28 and change in weight. I'll have to check that, but he "inherited" some light components from me that left it plenty capable. It can be built up pretty light without much penalty in durability.


The XL Ripmo I demoed was 30.77 lbs without pedals. It was built up with XT group, fox performance suspension, and Ibis hubs with Ibis carbon rims.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> The XL Ripmo I demoed was 30.77 lbs without pedals. It was built up with XT group, fox performance suspension, and Ibis hubs with Ibis carbon rims.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Next SL crankset, Chester pedals, XO1 1x12, SixC carbon bars, i9 carbon wheelset/Torch Hubs, Fox 36 Factory, DPX2, DHF/Aggressor One up dropper. Doesn't seem like that would be 2 pounds. I may ride with him Sunday. I'll bring a scale! It doesn't really matter, though. 31 pounds for an XL Ripmo seems pretty reasonable considering the Trance 29-2 I demo'd in a medium was about 32 pounds and climb surprisingly well. I'm becoming more and more convinced that a couple of pounds just isn't a real big deal.

Corrections:
My son's Ripmo in an XL has the GX crankset and with the Maxxis tires on is 29.65 pounds with pedals (Chesters). With the Nobby Nics on it, it was sub-29 pounds. I actually have a Next SL crankset (445 grams) sitting unused that I should put on his bike instead of the GX (645 grams)! That's nearly half a pound. He doesn't seem to care about my fixation on weight, though!
Anyway, you certainly can get the weight down on the Ripmo (or Ripley, for that matter).
Makes me think I could have a Ripmo at sub-28 pounds for myself.....hmmmm!


----------



## Antimatter (Jan 3, 2018)

Everyone's experiences are different but the Ripmo is a good climbing bike that can do all mountain style riding.

From what I'm told and I've only had 2 rides on a Ripmo recently, I'd say that it's an all mountain bike that's biased towards climbing. Some bikes are still better but the Ripmo isn't far behind and it's much easier to climb than some other bikes I've tried while still being a good bike going down.

However climbing is all about efficiency, and bikes that are biased towards efficiency are not necessarily the plush kind of bike. Plush bikes are comfortable to ride but suffer from inefficiencies, it's just the way they are. I prefer a bike biased towards comfort (plush) over a bike biased towards efficiency (speed). My Yeti SB150 is my fastest non-DH bike that's both efficient and turns better times consistently over my other bikes, but it's not a bike I enjoy riding all day, but that's just me.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

MSU Alum said:


> Next SL crankset, Chester pedals, XO1 1x12, SixC carbon bars, i9 carbon wheelset/Torch Hubs, Fox 36 Factory, DPX2, DHF/Aggressor One up dropper. Doesn't seem like that would be 2 pounds. I may ride with him Sunday. I'll bring a scale! It doesn't really matter, though. 31 pounds for an XL Ripmo seems pretty reasonable considering the Trance 29-2 I demo'd in a medium was about 32 pounds and climb surprisingly well. I'm becoming more and more convinced that a couple of pounds just isn't a real big deal.
> 
> Corrections:
> My son's Ripmo in an XL has the GX crankset and with the Maxxis tires on is 29.65 pounds with pedals (Chesters). With the Nobby Nics on it, it was sub-29 pounds. I actually have a Next SL crankset (445 grams) sitting unused that I should put on his bike instead of the GX (645 grams)! That's nearly half a pound. He doesn't seem to care about my fixation on weight, though!
> ...


Thanks for the feedback. My hardtail has XTR 11 spd. I usually want XTR. But all the bikes I demoed had XT and after riding it I think it will be a great fit with the Ripmo. Honestly I can't see myself putting XTR on that bike, even it was available these days. It seems too blingly to me. The bike needs a solid workhorse group set. By the way, I've tried SRAM and I just can't get into it. I really missed the push-pull shifting and I hated the brakes.

I'll be happy to have a bike with burly tires that hits 30 lbs without pedals.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Antimatter said:


> Everyone's experiences are different but the Ripmo is a good climbing bike that can do all mountain style riding.
> 
> From what I'm told and I've only had 2 rides on a Ripmo recently, I'd say that it's an all mountain bike that's biased towards climbing. Some bikes are still better but the Ripmo isn't far behind and it's much easier to climb than some other bikes I've tried while still being a good bike going down.
> 
> However climbing is all about efficiency, and bikes that are biased towards efficiency are not necessarily the plush kind of bike. Plush bikes are comfortable to ride but suffer from inefficiencies, it's just the way they are. I prefer a bike biased towards comfort (plush) over a bike biased towards efficiency (speed). My Yeti SB150 is my fastest non-DH bike that's both efficient and turns better times consistently over my other bikes, but it's not a bike I enjoy riding all day, but that's just me.


This is interesting feedback, thanks for sharing it. I was curious about the SB150, but never had the chance to demo one. It's odd to me how my demo experiences caused me to gravitate toward the longer travel bikes. I never expected that would happen when I started this process. I was positive I would feel like a 120 travel bike was maybe too much. Just goes to show how important those test rides are.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Silent Drone said:


> Thanks for the feedback. My hardtail has XTR 11 spd. I usually want XTR. But all the bikes I demoed had XT and after riding it I think it will be a great fit with the Ripmo. Honestly I can't see myself putting XTR on that bike, even it was available these days. It seems too blingly to me. The bike needs a solid workhorse group set. By the way, I've tried SRAM and I just can't get into it. I really missed the push-pull shifting and I hated the brakes.
> 
> I'll be happy to have a bike with burly tires that hits 30 lbs without pedals.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My Giant came with SRAM Guide T's. I've always had XT's on my bikes and thought I was having a brake failure at first. But, after riding with them for a while - like 20 minutes - I was used to them. I actually like them, but I put the Guides on my wife's bike because she was locking up the XT's and put the XT brakes on my bike. I really do like the bleed system that SRAM now uses on their brakes, though, and I like the RSC adjustability! My son and I built his Ripmo up, so he has XT brakes and a SRAM drive train.

As I get older, I do think I'm being drawn to the XT gearing of 39, 45, 51 Vs. the SRAM 36, 42, 52 for the Wasatch Back. I don't much care whether the biggest is 51 or 52, but with the amount of time I spend in second and third, I see that as an advantage. I'd like to make it up Puke all the way in 2nd and 3rd for a change.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

Silent Drone said:


> Do you think your local shop still has an XL? Let me know who it is and I'll call them.
> 
> Same experience here, that suspension just made the bike want to go, go, go.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Cal Coast in San Diego. No clue if they still have any, but I doubt it. Good luck


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

outside! said:


> Cal Coast in San Diego. No clue if they still have any, but I doubt it. Good luck


It must be destiny. I bought the XL Ripmo from Charlie at Cal Coast Bicycles. It was just fortuitous that I found them. Charlie has been super easy to work with, responsive and professional. My bike is in transit with UPS right now and should be here on Tuesday. I feel very fortunate to have found exactly what I wanted in stock: XT build, factory 36 and float X2, upgraded hydra wheels, and most of all-Star Destroyer Grey.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

MSU Alum said:


> My Giant came with SRAM Guide T's. I've always had XT's on my bikes and thought I was having a brake failure at first. But, after riding with them for a while - like 20 minutes - I was used to them. I actually like them, but I put the Guides on my wife's bike because she was locking up the XT's and put the XT brakes on my bike. I really do like the bleed system that SRAM now uses on their brakes, though, and I like the RSC adjustability! My son and I built his Ripmo up, so he has XT brakes and a SRAM drive train.
> 
> As I get older, I do think I'm being drawn to the XT gearing of 39, 45, 51 Vs. the SRAM 36, 42, 52 for the Wasatch Back. I don't much care whether the biggest is 51 or 52, but with the amount of time I spend in second and third, I see that as an advantage. I'd like to make it up Puke all the way in 2nd and 3rd for a change.


I can't get all the way up puke hill. Lol. I'm running 28 front with a 9-46 eThirteen cassette. 11 spd. The 28x46 is about the same ratio as the 30x51 that I'll have on my Ripmo. I picked up a 28 front ring from the Competitive Cyclist retail store and it's sitting on my workbench waiting for the Ripmo to arrive. But I'm debating whether to install it. 28x51 would be super low. I probably will.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

Does MSUalum and Silent Drone remember puke hill before Scotts Bypass was built? The "new" way to puke hill. You used to have to start at that steep 180 degree switchback in the road west of Guardsman Pass. Was a LOT more climbing before you even arrived at puke hill. Personally I never want to take that route again ha.

I would take the Riply for puke hill and the Ripmo to millcreek, then Riply for pipeline, then Ripmo for rattlesnake. Cant have it all! 

I have not yet tried puke on my Enduro but I can clean it most times on the 5010 when I am strong - on the 50 tooth - so slow. I cant imagine cleaning it in even one higher gear. I had never looked into Shimano gear ratios that MSU noted, sounds good actually.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

C Smasher said:


> Does MSUalum and Silent Drone remember puke hill before Scotts Bypass was built? The "new" way to puke hill. You used to have to start at that steep 180 degree switchback in the road west of Guardsman Pass. Was a LOT more climbing before you even arrived at puke hill. Personally I never want to take that route again ha.
> 
> I would take the Riply for puke hill and the Ripmo to millcreek, then Riply for pipeline, then Ripmo for rattlesnake. Cant have it all!
> 
> I have not yet tried puke on my Enduro but I can clean it most times on the 5010 when I am strong - on the 50 tooth - so slow. I cant imagine cleaning it in even one higher gear. I had never looked into Shimano gear ratios that MSU noted, sounds good actually.


I got here in '91. Used to be up Sweeny's-John's to The Steps (pre TTS) and then up Powerline to that hideous dirt road up from the bottom of the Jupiter lift. I still really like Sweeny's-John's, but from the Steps up was horrible and I avoid those sections like Herpes Simplex 19! I came down The Steps early this summer and even that was horrible!
The first time I came in from Scott's bypass, I actually did make it up Puke in 2nd and 3rd. Amazing what a difference it makes to bypass almost 3000 feet of climbing first!

I think the 28 tooth will make it pretty sweet. I'm using a 30 tooth Absolute Black Oval now that helps a lot with traction control with my 10-50 cassette. That's a pretty good combo for me. If I were on an 11 speed, I'd likely use a 28 tooth. Actually, that is what's on my SB5 (11-42).

I have a quiver of skis, but not of bikes. My wife keeps asking me if I need a Ripmo......


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Silent Drone said:


> Today was Ripley XL demo day for me. What a bike! You guys aren't kidding, that thing climbs like a rocket. It felt like I could use a cog or two smaller than on the Ripmo. My demo bike had the performance DPS and 34 with previous version of the grip damper. When both were locked out the bike was very rigid. But I found it best to just leave them open when climbing, or maybe put the DPS in the middle position but even then it wasn't really necessary.
> 
> On the flats the Ripley was much more balanced than the Ripmo. But of course it was only ever on the flats when I was on asphalt. On the trail it was either up or down.
> 
> ...


Excellent review! That bike is gorgeous. I came from a hardtail too, and had similar concerns about these longer travel bike climbing. What I found was the rear shock gives you a lot more grip, and climbing has been WAY easier than expected. My Assegai tires have more to do with it being heavier at times than the actual bike, so you can lighten up your load quite a bit just from tire choice.

After reading both your reviews, if it were me the choice would be obvious and I'd go with the Ripmo. I'll give up a little stability on flats and slightly less climbing capabilities, in exchange for being able to descend with more confidence. Plus, your skills are inevitably going to improve, and the extra capabilities on the Ripmo will be even more significant.

That Ripley looks sick BTW. Ripmo too, but Ib love that raw, stealthy look. Good luck!


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

MSU Alum said:


> I got here in '91. Used to be up Sweeny's-John's to The Steps (pre TTS) and then up Powerline to that hideous dirt road up from the bottom of the Jupiter lift. I still really like Sweeny's-John's, but from the Steps up was horrible and I avoid those sections like Herpes Simplex 19! I came down The Steps early this summer and even that was horrible!
> The first time I came in from Scott's bypass, I actually did make it up Puke in 2nd and 3rd. Amazing what a difference it makes to bypass almost 3000 feet of climbing first!
> 
> I think the 28 tooth will make it pretty sweet. I'm using a 30 tooth Absolute Black Oval now that helps a lot with traction control with my 10-50 cassette. That's a pretty good combo for me. If I were on an 11 speed, I'd likely use a 28 tooth. Actually, that is what's on my SB5 (11-42).
> ...


You NEED the Ripmo!

You know the trails better than me! I have never climbed up from the PC side and 3000 feet before puke sounds awful. Going to climb pine cone this week, but turning around 

Herpes Simplex 19 haha!

Im stuck with SRAM, which I like. 32 on the 10-50 and 30 x 10-52 on my enduro - stock. Im content for now.

Sorry for the thread jack


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

MSU Alum said:


> My wife keeps asking me if I need a Ripmo......


After riding my Megatrail around there, I could easily see how a longer travel bikes would be pretty awesome for some of the trails. I bet the Ripmo would be fantastic in that area. Especially on some of those dusty, cratered-out trails.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

A package arrived, and it does not have a Santa Cruz inside. More to follow&#8230;










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

Maiden voyage was this morning. She rides like a dream. Thank you to everyone who helped me with their comments and recommendations.

Happy trails, everyone.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

Silent Drone said:


> Maiden voyage was this morning. She rides like a dream. Thank you to everyone who helped me with their comments and recommendations.
> 
> Happy trails, everyone.
> 
> ...


NBD - awesome! What trail is that?


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

I took that pic where Woodbriar connects to Eagle Crest. 

Have you seen that they’re cutting in a new trail that will run from Tunnel Springs park to North Canyon? I was told it would be 16 miles. I think it’s not going to be the most challenging trial, but it will be really nice to have a trail that links into North Canyon, Rudy’s flat, and Mueller Canyon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

Silent Drone said:


> I took that pic where Woodbriar connects to Eagle Crest.
> 
> Have you seen that they're cutting in a new trail that will run from Tunnel Springs park to North Canyon? I was told it would be 16 miles. I think it's not going to be the most challenging trial, but it will be really nice to have a trail that links into Borth Canyon, Rudy's flat, and Mueller Canyon
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks. Great pic.

I have not seen the new trails, but that sounds good. The trails they are building near City Creek and above the shore line seem pretty tame. Lame! They need to contact the Draper trail builders to see how it is done


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

C Smasher said:


> Thanks. Great pic.
> 
> I have not seen the new trails, but that sounds good. The trails they are building near City Creek and above the shore line seem pretty tame. Lame! They need to contact the Draper trail builders to see how it is done


Right! Maybe the plan is roll out the beginner tails first, and they have a few black diamond trails yet to come. A guy can wish!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

Silent Drone said:


> Right! Maybe the plan is roll out the beginner tails first, and they have a few black diamond trails yet to come. A guy can wish!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hopefully!


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

For someone who spends a lot of time on trails with tons of embedded rocks how does the ripmo handle that compared to others? I’ve got a mojo 3 now and want big wheels and more cushion for that stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Nick_M (Jan 16, 2015)

I would say Ripmo AF/ripmo;

It is safer to have more travel then you need rather then less;

Also you can use it to shred in whistler 


Cheers


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Skilled riders get away with less travel...

That's why I ride a 170mm Enduro mule 

Sent from my Asus Rog 3


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

desertwheeler said:


> For someone who spends a lot of time on trails with tons of embedded rocks how does the ripmo handle that compared to others? I've got a mojo 3 now and want big wheels and more cushion for that stuff.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Ripmo handles it very well. I'm loving the tune-ability of the X2 and Grip2, and the low pressures I can run on the wide s35 rims. I have some trails with long stretches of rocks like that and the Ripmo eats it up.










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Nick_M (Jan 16, 2015)

DW / KS/VPP platform are very pedal efficient, so you will outperform 


Cheers


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

Flyer said:


> In my case, I wish the Ripmo was a 135mm bike. The Ripley seems to be a bit short in travel and the Ripmo a bit much. If I'm really lucky, Ibis will build a 135 soon.





Jefe74 said:


> Go Rip-Lil'mo. Ripley with fork at 140, DPX2 rear shock, chunky tires, 4 pot front brake. Handles a lot but still lively and fun at lower speeds. Still climbs like a Ripley.


I still think Ibis has a gap in their lineup. I'd really like to see a 130ish range bike that was a bit more capable than the Ripley. With their new XC bike they should just bump the Ripley to 130r/140f and a degree slacker (like the AF) and would have a killer do-it-all trail bike.


ben2e said:


> Interesting to see this. I'm facing the same choice in Bend, Oregon. We have Oakridge nearby with steeper stuff. I don't typically go longer than 3 hrs on rides so figured I'd be willing to pay the price pedaling up to get the extra travel going back down and have a Ripmo on a rather long term order. Sunnyside Sports said unless I was spending major time in Oakridge, I should just get the Ripley for its ability handling on even steeper local trails (parts of Funner, Tylers, Farewell etc).


IMO the Ripley is the best bet for Bend. So many miles of mellow trails there.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

mtskibum16 said:


> I still think Ibis has a gap in their lineup. I'd really like to see a 130ish range bike that was a bit more capable than the Ripley. With their new XC bike they should just bump the Ripley to 130r/140f and a degree slacker (like the AF) and would have a killer do-it-all trail bike.


As I mentioned before, I have a 115mm travel Trance 29 and my son has the Ripmo V1 with 145mm of travel. I think they are close enough that there is overlap - think Venn diagram.
They pedal in a very similar fashion due to the rear suspension design.
I'm not super familiar with the Trance X, but I'm guessing it also has the Maestro rear and it's right at 135mm of travel. It might sit right in the center of that Venn diagram with overlap toward the Trance 29 and the Ripmo. Anyway, just a thought if the porridge is too hot on one side and too cold on the other!


----------



## SteveF (Mar 5, 2004)

mtskibum16 said:


> I still think Ibis has a gap in their lineup. I'd really like to see a 130ish range bike that was a bit more capable than the Ripley. With their new XC bike they should just bump the Ripley to 130r/140f and a degree slacker (like the AF) and would have a killer do-it-all trail bike.
> 
> IMO the Ripley is the best bet for Bend. So many miles of mellow trails there.


The Mojo has 130mm of travel.


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

outside! said:


> Cal Coast in San Diego. No clue if they still have any, but I doubt it. Good luck


Does Charlie still run the shop? They were my favorite LBS in the city. I kept with them until I moved away.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

SteveF said:


> The Mojo has 130mm of travel.


I think we may be talking 130mm on 29ers.
I rode a Mojo years ago in the 26" version and thought it was pretty awesome!
Gotta love the Ibis suspension.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

SteveF said:


> The Mojo has 130mm of travel.





MSU Alum said:


> I think we may be talking 130mm on 29ers.
> I rode a Mojo years ago in the 26" version and thought it was pretty awesome!
> Gotta love the Ibis suspension.


Yeah, should have said 130mm 29er. The all-around 29er trail bike has to be the most-sold type of bike in the industry. Just surprising Ibis doesn't have one. The Ripley is a bit less than that and the Ripmo is a bit more than that. The Ripley is close I think, it's just a bit more light duty and conservative than I'd want for a one bike quiver.



MSU Alum said:


> As I mentioned before, I have a 115mm travel Trance 29 and my son has the Ripmo V1 with 145mm of travel. I think they are close enough that there is overlap - think Venn diagram.
> They pedal in a very similar fashion due to the rear suspension design.
> I'm not super familiar with the Trance X, but I'm guessing it also has the Maestro rear and it's right at 135mm of travel. It might sit right in the center of that Venn diagram with overlap toward the Trance 29 and the Ripmo. Anyway, just a thought if the porridge is too hot on one side and too cold on the other!


There are a number of bikes in that category, I just wish Ibis had one. From what I have read and seen in reviews, the Trance X is a very active bike and not all that efficient, so not quite an Ibis substitute. It's not just Ibis either...a number of bike companies skip this segment. Maybe what I think makes a great all around (slightly aggressive) trail bike doesn't match the masses.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

mtskibum16 said:


> Yeah, should have said 130mm 29er. The all-around 29er trail bike has to be the most-sold type of bike in the industry. Just surprising Ibis doesn't have one. The Ripley is a bit less than that and the Ripmo is a bit more than that. The Ripley is close I think, it's just a bit more light duty and conservative than I'd want for a one bike quiver.
> 
> There are a number of bikes in that category, I just wish Ibis had one. From what I have read and seen in reviews, the Trance X is a very active bike and not all that efficient, so not quite an Ibis substitute. It's not just Ibis either...a number of bike companies skip this segment. Maybe what I think makes a great all around (slightly aggressive) trail bike doesn't match the masses.


I wonder if anyone has talked to Cascade Components about the Ripley AF? It would seem that if they could get a more progressive curve from the link (maybe bump travel to 123-125mm) in the rear and change the fork to a 140mm, you'd be well on your way to the bike you describe.


----------



## SteveF (Mar 5, 2004)

Well, I can't claim to be impartial-I'm a 27.5" guy and I have a Mojo 4 on order.  I read a lot of reviews and more than one was by a self-described 29'er fan who found the bike a bit of a revelation for whatever that's worth. I seriously considered the Ripley, actually-I think it would have suited me well.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

SteveF said:


> Well, I can't claim to be impartial-I'm a 27.5" guy and I have a Mojo 4 on order.  I read a lot of reviews and more than one was by a self-described 29'er fan who found the bike a bit of a revelation for whatever that's worth. I seriously considered the Ripley, actually-I think it would have suited me well.


I've always been a small wheels guy, but I figure at this point I owe it to myself to try owning a 29er for the first time. It will be my only bike, so I'm being picky. Currently on a 2018 Transition Scout (130r/150f) that's a pretty aggressive trail bike. I'd like something similar in a 29er. I think the 120/130(or 140) nature of a Ripley could be ok, but the spirit of the bike doesn't seem quite right. For instance, the Norco Optic at 125 rear seems significantly more capable/aggressive. I also ride quite a bit of more mellow trails which is why I hesitate to jump up to something like a Ripmo. A short travel Ripmo is really what I'm after.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

mtskibum16 said:


> I've always been a small wheels guy, but I figure at this point I owe it to myself to try owning a 29er for the first time. It will be my only bike, so I'm being picky. Currently on a 2018 Transition Scout (130r/150f) that's a pretty aggressive trail bike. I'd like something similar in a 29er. I think the 120/130(or 140) nature of a Ripley could be ok, but the spirit of the bike doesn't seem quite right. For instance, the Norco Optic at 125 rear seems significantly more capable/aggressive. I also ride quite a bit of more mellow trails which is why I hesitate to jump up to something like a Ripmo. A short travel Ripmo is really what I'm after.


I think, at least for my purposes, that 29ers went through a significant change in design and execution around 2018, or so.
In 2016, I demo'd several 29ers wanting to like them and just couldn't get excited. I ended up with a Yeti SB5c "brunch ride".... I didn't modify the rear travel, which stayed at 127mm, but put a 130-160 Pike RCT3 fork on it. That was/is a great bike, and I had it built up nice and light as well. My wife rode it and ended up with a 2017 SB5 Turq build.

Around 2018, I decided to demo some 29ers again and was blown away at the improvements. My SB5 was built up at about 26.5 pounds for Utah conditions and on my first ride on a 32 pound 29er, on a 45 minute, 1200 foot climb, I set a PR on that segment that I'd ridden dozens of times over the years.

I ended up with a Trance 29 Pro that I modified, with 115mm of rear travel and a 140mm fork. The "feel" is that it has way more travel than the Yeti and there are downhills in Moab that I've cleaned on that bike that I'd never cleaned before. After weight weenie-ing that bike, I've added weight back on with stuff like an Assegai/Dissector combo, and Fasst Flexx bars, that add a couple of pounds with no real effect other than positive and at just about 28 pounds, I'm now a recovering weight weenie.

As I've mentioned, my son is on a Ripmo, and that can be built up any way you want. It's overkill for me, but not by much.


----------



## rton20s (Aug 27, 2010)

mtskibum16 said:


> I've always been a small wheels guy, but I figure at this point I owe it to myself to try owning a 29er for the first time. It will be my only bike, so I'm being picky. Currently on a 2018 Transition Scout (130r/150f) that's a pretty aggressive trail bike. I'd like something similar in a 29er. I think the 120/130(or 140) nature of a Ripley could be ok, but the spirit of the bike doesn't seem quite right. For instance, the Norco Optic at 125 rear seems significantly more capable/aggressive. I also ride quite a bit of more mellow trails which is why I hesitate to jump up to something like a Ripmo. A short travel Ripmo is really what I'm after.


I'm curious what makes you feel the Optic would be "_significantly_ more capable/aggressive" compared to the Ripley? I can see the differences on the spec sheets and geometry charts, but I don't see enough there that would make me think the Optic was_ that much_ more capable. (I do think the Ripley AF is probably a little closer to the Optic in down hill performance than the standard Ripley.) Having ridden my wife's Norco Fluid FS (similar horst link design) and my own Ripley AF, the Ibis is noticeably better going up than the Norco. I haven't ridden an Optic to know if it is that much more capable on the way down.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

MSU Alum said:


> I think, at least for my purposes, that 29ers went through a significant change in design and execution around 2018, or so.
> In 2016, I demo'd several 29ers wanting to like them and just couldn't get excited. I ended up with a Yeti SB5c "brunch ride".... I didn't modify the rear travel, which stayed at 127mm, but put a 130-160 Pike RCT3 fork on it. That was/is a great bike, and I had it built up nice and light as well. My wife rode it and ended up with a 2017 SB5 Turq build.
> 
> Around 2018, I decided to demo some 29ers again and was blown away at the improvements. My SB5 was built up at about 26.5 pounds for Utah conditions and on my first ride on a 32 pound 29er, on a 45 minute, 1200 foot climb, I set a PR on that segment that I'd ridden dozens of times over the years.
> ...


 Totally agree. I was mostly off bikes from '16 to '19 b/c recovering from injury/surgery. I've been riding "longer" travel 29ers since '11, first with Niner WFO, then Canfield Riot and Banshee Prime (all 140mm rears). Every time I bumped up my forks to 150mm, hated it. Felt like a monster truck. Point and shoot.

Then I picked up a Ripmo V2 last December. First new 29er in over 4 years. Crazy difference. Poppy and fun. Don't know what happened, but it worked.


----------



## masonmoa (Jul 11, 2011)

SteveF said:


> Well, I can't claim to be impartial-I'm a 27.5" guy and I have a Mojo 4 on order.  I read a lot of reviews and more than one was by a self-described 29'er fan who found the bike a bit of a revelation for whatever that's worth. I seriously considered the Ripley, actually-I think it would have suited me well.


If you like 27.5" bikes, you'll like the Mojo. Just picked up a used Mojo frame not too long ago.

What got me thinking about a smaller trail bike was I also own an HD5 and Ripmo, and while the Ripmo (and 29ers in general) feels faster, like I carry more speed, when I compare my times for both bikes on the exact same routes, it's comparable. Like a minute or two difference over a 2.5 hour ride.

I enjoy the way I can throw around the Mojo, and it's the lightest bike I've owned in a long time. And if Ripley was 130, I'd probably own one, or bought instead of Mojo. But 120mm just isn't enough for most of my riding.

But ya, I think Ibis made an interesting choice on travel lengths for their bikes. But then I look at Transition and feels like they have way too much overlap.


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

rton20s said:


> I'm curious what makes you feel the Optic would be "_significantly_ more capable/aggressive" compared to the Ripley? I can see the differences on the spec sheets and geometry charts, but I don't see enough there that would make me think the Optic was_ that much_ more capable. (I do think the Ripley AF is probably a little closer to the Optic in down hill performance than the standard Ripley.) Having ridden my wife's Norco Fluid FS (similar horst link design) and my own Ripley AF, the Ibis is noticeably better going up than the Norco. I haven't ridden an Optic to know if it is that much more capable on the way down.


Well significantly is relative, but based on design intent, geometry, and reviews the Optic is closer to the character I'm after as a shorter travel but aggressive bike. 140 fork, slacker front end, built with a bit more heft, and more bottom out resistance. From almost all accounts the Optic fits in better to the class above it (the 130 bikes) than the class below it (the 120 bikes). You mention the Fluid and IMO it's more of a close competitor to the Ripley. But my biggest hesitation with the Optic is it's liveliness (or lack there of) pedaling out of the saddle on quick punchy stuff. Which again, is exactly why I'd like to see a beefed up aggressive Ripley or short travel Ripmo. Basically give me the Mojo in a 29er. A 140 forked Ripley AF would probably be close too, though I still think 130mm rear is the sweet spot for a do everything trail bike. Closest to the best of both worlds I can come up with for my needs.


masonmoa said:


> But ya, I think Ibis made an interesting choice on travel lengths for their bikes. But then I look at Transition and feels like they have way too much overlap.


Maybe in the bigger travels, but they are almost exactly like Ibis up to the Sentinel and also lack that middle ground do-everything 29er trail bike. They go from the 120 Spur (pretty light duty for an all-arounder) to the 150 Sentinel (too much bike for most general trail riding). The then try to plug that hole with a 27.5" bike but don't have a true general 29" trail bike. I'd love to see the Smuggler come back with 130 range travel..


----------



## ShakyDog (Oct 24, 2019)

Rented a Ripmo V2 when I was up in the PNW last month, I found it to be a very ridable bike. Looking at the geometry and comparing it to my 2018 Intense Primer, they are completely different. I felt right at home on the Ripmo. It was excellent for the PNW, not sure I could justify that much travel in the center of the United States. Then again it was that nice that if I had a chance at getting one at the right price, I would not hesitate to ride one here also.

Steve


----------



## mtskibum16 (Apr 14, 2009)

ShakyDog said:


> Rented a Ripmo V2 when I was up in the PNW last month, I found it to be a very ridable bike. Looking at the geometry and campaigning it to my 2018 Intense Primer, they are completely different. I felt right at home on the Ripmo. It was excellent for the PNW, not sure I could justify that much travel in the center of the United States. Then again it was that nice that if I had a chance at getting one at the right price, I would not hesitate to ride one here also.


That's good feedback. I'm in the PNW and have typical PNW trails available for day trips, but my normal local rides are primarily tight twisty punchy forest single track and blue flow trails. I just don't want to be too over biked for my 90% trails even though the Ripmo will be good on my favorite type of trails and really want to get something that rewards standing and mashing the tight twisty stuff and riding really energetically but can still handle some higher speed chunk.


----------



## ShakyDog (Oct 24, 2019)

I took the bike for only two days. One ride at Galbraith and one ride at Anacortes Community Forest Lands. Galbraith was very different type of riding when I got to the hills than Missouri. Anacortes was much more like what I am use to here in Missouri. I thought the Ibis did great in both worlds. I would definitely be trying my current bike in WA if I was moving there, but it would be hard not to upgrade to longer travel (130/140 Intense) vs (160/147 Ibis). I would have like to stay longer and ride lots more, but the Mrs. only has one week of vacation : - (

Reading your response above again, you might be better suited to a lower travel bike. Myself I love the plushness of travel and even though I should be riding an XC 100 or 120mm bike, I am on a Trail bike with 140mm.

Steve


----------



## Pipeliner (Oct 30, 2018)

Just finished an initial weekend of riding on a new ’22 Ripmo V2 frame. Coming off a ‘18 Norco Sight with 130/140 travel. I have a 160 Mezzer and a Jade X coil on the rear. Carbon wheels with 350 hubs and carbon bars, 170 Loam dropper. XT drivetrain. Shi-gura brakes with 203 rotors. I put some Butcher T9 Grid 2.6 tires on it.

Ride? It’s more work to pedal but I was pretty shot after 2 long days before I discovered how good the shock lockout works (duh). My first coil shock and I’d always heard that they don’t lock out at all but this one is pretty solid. I also think the soft compound 2.6” tires are tougher to pedal around than my old hard compound 2.3s but I knew that would be a compromise. I guess my thoughts are that I could build an easier pedaling trail bike with different tires and losing the weight of the coil. More to come on that. For long rides with lots of climbing I think a tire change would help and I know using the firmness setting on the shock would really help.
When it gets rough though, the big sticky tires, excellent Mezzer fork and coil shock along with that Ripmo geo are a revelation. I could ride stuff at speed that I could never have ridden with my old Sight, which is to be expected. But the thing that sticks in my mind is reading the Ripmo described as a “hover bike”. Yeah, that’s it. It eats up everything and at speeds I would never have attempted. Very easy on you in the chunky stuff both pedaling and descending. With the shock open I could clear step up ledges and climbs with ease as long as my lungs held up. Corners like it’s on rails and the traction in rocks and loose stuff is awesome.

I guess it all comes down to what you want and how you build it… not sure this is exactly what I want as is but the fun factor sure pegs the meter.


----------



## RETROROCKS (Sep 25, 2004)

Silent Drone said:


> Anyone buy the Ripmo (or similar) and later regret it feeling like you have too much bike?
> 
> I've been riding for many years on a Niner hardtail with 100mm SID. I love it actually. But my shop has some Ripmo's coming in and I'm seriously interested. A riding buddy mentioned I might want to consider the Ripley, and the shop guys say "sure the Ripley is great" but they think the Ripmo is close in weight and it's preferable to go for the extra travel available on the Ripmo.
> 
> ...


Your post sounds like where I am right now.
Im55 well 56 in month 1/2. And im hovering close to 200lbs.
Im seeing the 6 and 7 inch travel trail bikes.. And i see yours is carbon and right at 30 lbs thats a big weight gain over your old ride.
Ive been looking at the new bikes and almost got one.. But other than slack head angles and newer tech I couldnt justify the purchase.
Iride my old 4 and 5 inch travel bikes, and feel like even they are overkill for 80% of the trails in Colorado!!
The bikes I was looking at were around 32lbs.. 4 pounds heavier than my old enduro.
Will the one inch gain in travel matter.. I highly doubt it.. Will I feel the extra weight.. Maybe.. Probobly.. For me it came down to the bike being overkill!!
Im regressing!! I actually found an old Foes xct with a big fork in front and 3 inches of travel in back.. And it weighs right at 24 pounds.
I can see on the fork after my rides im going thru 2 to 3 inches of travel on the front.
And ive not bottomed out the rear yet on 2 foot drops at speed.
But bottom line is all us humans are different you may love it!! gotta try it, or something close to see if its going to be a benefit to you.
Not sure this helps but felt like it hit home with me!!
Plus the old stuffs cool!!


----------



## shadowsports (May 10, 2009)

Purchased an SLX HD5 in 2020. 31lbs. Lots of travel. 5'9", 210. Went for a LRG. Sled like ride. Very plush, No regrets. I'd buy a Ripmo in a heatbeat.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Hopefully this is not a repeat. I had the Ripley for about 9 months and just bought a Ripmo V2. The Ripmo is around 2 lbs heavier. I'm in Colorado. The Ripmo does not give up too much on climbs and is a great pedaling bike. It is more comfy on chunkier terrain than the Ripley and it pedals better though technical chunk. It is not a plush squishy bike but feels perfect to me. The Ripley is a very firm bike..at times it feels racy but I put a Topaz T2 shock in it to make it feels a bit more plush. After riding both, I decided that the Ripmo is a more comfy bike that pedals almost as well, and descends better. It just is a little more fun too.


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

OP here. I’ve had the Ripmo for about a year now and I’m still totally loving it. I’m really glad I went with the longer trail bike and not it’s shorter sister the Ripley. The Ripmo suits me very well. Climbs just fine and I really appreciate the plushness on the descents. 

This spring I took off the assegais and replaced them with minion DHF/DHR2, and I also put a factory float X on it. I wanted to nudge it a little more towards the trail category. The float x is a great match. It seems just as plush as the X2 for my style of trail riding, but the lockout is much more noticeably firmer which is to my liking. 





















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ben2e (Mar 6, 2005)

Pandemic no doubt sidelined new bike releases but wonder when new iterations of the Ripmo and Ripley will come. Our local dealer recently got several new Ripmo's so at least they're now available.


----------



## kamper11 (Feb 8, 2008)

Silent Drone said:


> OP here. I’ve had the Ripmo for about a year now and I’m still totally loving it. I’m really glad I went with the longer trail bike and not it’s shorter sister the Ripley. The Ripmo suits me very well. Climbs just fine and I really appreciate the plushness on the descents.
> 
> This spring I took off the assegais and replaced them with minion DHF/DHR2, and I also put a factory float X on it. I wanted to nudge it a little more towards the trail category. The float x is a great match. It seems just as plush as the X2 for my style of trail riding, but the lockout is much more noticeably firmer which is to my liking.
> 
> ...


Hey Silent

Did you tune the X or just use the standard Fox tune?

does your compression adjust have actual clicks or is it more friction/mushy? Im trying an X and so far find it not to my liking - heavily damped which I didn't think would be the case compared to the x2...


----------



## Silent Drone (Jun 7, 2013)

kamper11 said:


> Hey Silent
> 
> Did you tune the X or just use the standard Fox tune?
> 
> does your compression adjust have actual clicks or is it more friction/mushy? Im trying an X and so far find it not to my liking - heavily damped which I didn't think would be the case compared to the x2...


It’s just an off the shelf float x. The compression knob does have positive clicks. I opened it all the way and am happy with it. Good luck 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I rented a Ripmo AF in CO Front Range for three days. I was very impressed. And what impressed me the most is that it rode like a smaller bike than its travel numbers would suggest. And I mean that in a good way. Acceleration was really snappy climbing was amazing, and it was a surprisingly playful and nimble bike considering its travel numbers. I found it to be just as well suited for flowy pedally stuff as for rougher stuff. Its not an Enduro sled and it is not an XC whip. It is a great do-it all bike.

I rented the Ripmo right after I finished building up a Canfield Tilt (138/150mm). I was flying to CO and did not want to bring a bike. I was up in the air between getting the Tilt or a Ripmo. I went with the Tilt because I thought the Ripmo might be just a little too big of a bike for my local trails. Turns out, the Ripmo would have been just fine. I love the Tilt, but I would have been just as happy with the Ripmo (for slightly different reasons)


----------



## H-akka (Dec 31, 2017)

I've have both a Ripley v4 and a Ripmo v2. And here are my thoughts on top of all other posts. This are MY opinions on Ripley vs Ripmo, not trying to say it's the definite answer. Both are amazing, but very different.

I started off with a reasonably light Ripley build with i9 s28 wheels. I ran 140 fork and even a 1° angle headset for a while. I must say I prefer stock. Upforking affects climbs and angle headset even more. The unique selling point of the Ripley is the climbing and acceleration. So, in my opinion stock is better. If you are dialed and still feel you bottom out the 130 all the time, maybe a Ripmo is better.

I got myself a Ripmo with the intention to sell the Ripley and have one bike for both trail and bikepark. I sort of fell for everybody saying that there's "not much weight difference" and "Ripmo climbs almost as good as Ripley". But in my opinion these bikes are VERY different, and it turned out I felt that selling the Ripley was not an option. Ripmo is pedal friendly all-mountain bike, but Ripley is pedal friendly light trail bike. Even if I put my carbon wheels with Rekons on the Ripmo it still feels like an all-mountain bike. It's not weight, it's mainly kinematics and geometry, although frame, fork and shock weight together are not neglible either. As an example I have a 4 min quite flat segment with lots of tight corners, accelerations and tiny 2 foot drops. I've done it 100 times on different bikes and I love it. But I am about 20% faster on Ripley, and it's twice as fun. And when I go to the bike park or alpine stuff or ride rough rooty and rocky stuff I bring my Ripmo and it's the other way around. An angleset and 140 fork doesn't make Ripley a mini-Ripmo for riding blacks and rough stuff. To me Ripmo makes trail riding much slower and a bit boring when it's flat, and on my Ripley I stick to the flow trails with the smaller jumps and drops. I don't race, I only ride to have fun. So for me, my Ripley is perfect for trail riding, cross country and easy blues with drops around 3 feet/1 meter and I just didn't enjoy that stuff on the Ripmo like I hoped. But for me Ripmo is a perfect bike park, alpine and "enduro" and is much more fun than the even bigger bike it replaced, so it all depend on what feels most important to you.

If I made a guess, I think for most people Ripley is more fun and faster up to easy blues and Ripmo on harder blues and up, there somewhere is an overlap.


----------



## gerryl (Aug 10, 2014)

kapusta said:


> I rented a Ripmo AF in CO Front Range for three days. I was very impressed. And what impressed me the most is that it rode like a smaller bike than its travel numbers would suggest. And I mean that in a good way. Acceleration was really snappy climbing was amazing, and it was a surprisingly playful and nimble bike considering its travel numbers. I found it to be just as well suited for flowy pedally stuff as for rougher stuff. Its not an Enduro sled and it is not an XC whip. It is a great do-it all bike.
> 
> I rented the Ripmo right after I finished building up a Canfield Tilt (138/150mm). I was flying to CO and did not want to bring a bike. I was up in the air between getting the Tilt or a Ripmo. I went with the Tilt because I thought the Ripmo might be just a little too big of a bike for my local trails. Turns out, the Ripmo would have been just fine. I love the Tilt, but I would have been just as happy with the Ripmo (for slightly different reasons)


Thanks Kapusta, I have been wondering about a comparsion. Anything else you noticed?

I am on the fence with Tilt vs. Ripmo. I am sure I would be happy with either. I am looking for a good pedaling 140mm (ish) trail bike. I have a 29er hardtail for the blue / green trails.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

gerryl said:


> Thanks Kapusta, I have been wondering about a comparsion. Anything else you noticed?
> 
> I am on the fence with Tilt vs. Ripmo. I am sure I would be happy with either. I am looking for a good pedaling 140mm (ish) trail bike. I have a 29er hardtail for the blue / green trails.


At this point I have LOT more time on the Tilt at and have been able to fine tune it more, though the Ripmo had the same rear shock (Topaz) and I feel like I got it well dialed by the end of the first day.

Also I was riding a Ripmo AF, not the carbon one. The AF is the model I was considering buying. So with that out of the way...

Climbing and acceleration: The Ripmo is snappier when you give it gas, and on non-tech climbs does better than the Tilt. However, on rougher techy climbs the Tilt stays more active and does not hang up on on stuff like big roots as much, so when it comes to those challenging rough sections, the Tilt has a clear edge. But overall, if I had a thousand feet of climbing in front of me, the Ripmo is the one I would _usually _prefer to get me to the top. Bottom line is that the Tilt is a pretty good climber, but the the Ripmo is a great.

Pointed down (or any time I'm not hard on the gas) I like the Tilt more, but it really depends on how/what you ride. 

As far as the rear suspension performance, the Tilt seems superior to me any time you are not pedaling. It just gets out of the way and is more capable than the Ripmo. Of course the Ripmo runs a 160 fork vs the Tilt's 140-150 in the front (I run 150), but the difference in capably due to 10-20 mm fork travel is IMO much less important than the difference between the rear suspension of these two bikes.

The geo and handling is likely a preference thing. The Tilt is the more nimble and "playful" of the two, though the Ripmo is a fun bike and seemed to me to be pretty nimble and fun for a bike of it's travel. I suspect that the Ripmo is going to feel more stable on wide open, high speed bombing, though to be honest I did not do much of that when I rode it. But when it comes to tight and twisty stuff, the Tilt does better. Fantastic, actually. It is also a more fun bike to pop off things. 

The Ripmo's handling is very intuitive and took no time at all for me to know how to corner on it. The Tilt requires a more activity on my part to move my weight around to get it to corner really well... but the reward it that it does tight corners really well.

It is the fun and quick handling that makes ME ultimately prefer the Tilt. I am not all that concerned with top speed, and focus more on cornering, popping off things, making log-overs, and navigating technical sections. And for this the Tilt is a stellar bike. The suspension designs are somewhat of a wash for me with the Ripmo having the edge on climbing and the Tilt more effective at doing its job.

I think that overall, more people will be happier with the Ripmo. Its a more straightforward, easy to love bike. The climbing efficiency is going to be a real crowd pleaser, and when it comes to the "nimble vs stable" continuum, it lands where I think more people's tastes are. While I would not call the Tilt's handling niche, it's fan base is going to be more specific, and it does require a little more skill and attention to get the most out of it. 

The Tilt frame is heavier than the Ripmo AF. My frame was almost a half pound over claimed weight (which itself is a bit more than the Ripmo AF). Overall, I think the Tilt frame may be roughly a pound heavier than the Ripmo AF.


----------



## Prognosticator (Feb 15, 2021)

Silent Drone said:


> I'm curious about the option of a 140 on the Ripley. Are many people doing that? Does it make much do a difference? I would think it's only a minor change, but perhaps in the right way.
> 
> Is your Ripmo size XL? Send me a DM if you want to talk about selling it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have a Ripley with 140 Pike Ultimate in front and a Mara out back. It took the bike from great to greater.


----------



## gerryl (Aug 10, 2014)

kapusta said:


> At this point I have LOT more time on the Tilt at and have been able to fine tune it more, though the Ripmo had the same rear shock (Topaz) and I feel like I got it well dialed by the end of the first day.
> 
> Also I was riding a Ripmo AF, not the carbon one. The AF is the model I was considering buying. So with that out of the way...
> 
> ...


Thank you, I appreciate it. Seems like you just affirmed what I have been reading and viewing on youtube about the ripmo af and the tilt. I am going frame only and have parts from two separate bikes, so either would work. I am not a big smasher (hence the lower travel would be more than I need). I am leaning toward the tilt. Thanks again. GL


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

kamper11 said:


> Hey Silent
> 
> Did you tune the X or just use the standard Fox tune?
> 
> does your compression adjust have actual clicks or is it more friction/mushy? Im trying an X and so far find it not to my liking - heavily damped which I didn't think would be the case compared to the x2...


Probably too late but I purchased my V2 yesterday and had the shop swap out for a float X. They told me the float X needs to have a spacer removed to get the full 147 mm travel. By chance is your spacer still in?


----------

