# rocky mountain rm7



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

i have heard mltiple times about something wobbling in the frames of the rm7 i was thinking of getting one and is it worth it? should i stop research now and find a different bike? what is wobbling and why is it so bad?


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> i have heard mltiple times about something wobbling in the frames of the rm7 i was thinking of getting one and is it worth it? should i stop research now and find a different bike? what is wobbling and why is it so bad?


 ** im not thinking about buying the one in the pic**-just a demo pic


----------



## MX 887 (Nov 2, 2004)

I am not sure but I believe there was strength issues with the linkage. Not sure


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

could you replace them with rmx linkages??


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

hardcoe newbie said:


> could you replace them with rmx linkages??


No. But, I agree, the RM7 & 9 did have problems. I probably wouldn't buy one used. Anyways, RM does have some 2004s left, and there is a great deal on the RMX. I just picked one up for a price you wouldn't believe...and saved enough $$ on the bike that I had the fork upgraded to a 66RC at the same time....and STILL have $$ left over!


----------



## ledzepp4life (Jan 27, 2005)

i have heard that the frame design of those bikes puts a ton of stress on the shock and they are known to blow shocks


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

monster on a rmx??


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

hardcoe newbie said:


> monster on a rmx??


 Sure, you can put a Monster on anything if you want to bad enough....


----------



## Cwilly006 (May 7, 2004)

Yes the RM7 and RM9 were known to blow shocks and develop alot of play in the linkage, The linkage just wasnt beefy enough for the bikes intended use and it also didnt help with their six month warranty. I would look for a different bike just because that one could be a big pain in the ass but who knows maybe that one is in good condition.


----------



## Shibby (Jan 13, 2004)

- RM6/7/9 have a poor suspension system for a number of reasons:
- High leverage ratio=blown shocks
- Sloppy linkage system=TONNES of play

Overall, a poorly executed system. Stop research now, there is a reason why they HEAVILY beefed up the rear-end for the RMX

RMX is much, much stiffer with a lower leverage rate. Keep in mind that the '04 can't mount a front der, the '05 can. And yeah, a Monster would be fine on an RMX, it comes stock with a 888.


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2005)

The RM7's ( which are older) had bad leveradge ratios.... I believe they have that problem fixed now with the RMX. Wade Simmons rips on one, so it can't be that bad.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

hmmmh wadda think


----------



## WheelieMan (Jan 19, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> The RM7's ( which are older) had bad leveradge ratios.... I believe they have that problem fixed now with the RMX. Wade Simmons rips on one, so it can't be that bad.


So the RM7 Wade Simmons ripped on a couple years back must not be that bad either, using your logic...


----------



## Shibby (Jan 13, 2004)

Wade Simmons also ripped it up on the RM7, don't let what the pros ride be your deciding factor


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2005)

WheelieMan said:


> So the RM7 Wade Simmons ripped on a couple years back must not be that bad either, using your logic...


hehe, never thought of that.... Maybe he blew a few shocks???

# 500...


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

so the question now is....i hardly shift my warp up frony and it mostly stays in the middle ring, if i put a 9 speed in the back would it be good or would i die trying to pedal? im 5feet7.5inches and 135 pounds would a monster be to much a heavy fork to lift for drops?


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

hardcoe newbie said:


> hmmmh wadda think


That's what I'll have by the end of the week (hopefully), but it will have a 66RC 170mm hanging on the front. Just got rid of a Monster T...no need for that much fork for me...


----------



## WheelieMan (Jan 19, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> so the question now is....i hardly shift my warp up frony and it mostly stays in the middle ring, if i put a 9 speed in the back would it be good or would i die trying to pedal? im 5feet7.5inches and 135 pounds would a monster be to much a heavy fork to lift for drops?


No, you do not need, or want a monster. There are forks with the same travel that weigh almost half as much.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

DownHillFast said:


> That's what I'll have by the end of the week (hopefully), but it will have a 66RC 170mm hanging on the front. Just got rid of a Monster T...no need for that much fork for me...


i probably dont need that muck fork but im learning so im tough on bikes and i killed the RST on my warp so im going to over shoot and go too strong instead of too weak and broken.


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

hardcoe newbie said:


> so the question now is....i hardly shift my warp up frony and it mostly stays in the middle ring, if i put a 9 speed in the back would it be good or would i die trying to pedal? im 5feet7.5inches and 135 pounds would a monster be to much a heavy fork to lift for drops?


 dude, a monster (03-05) is HEAVY. I am 5'11 and 200 lbs, and it was alot for me to lift on drops...especially after a few DH runs. I am willing to sacrifice the front der. cause I didn't have one on my PigHit...looking forward to a "lighter" long travel bike with normal sized wheels and some DH capability...


----------



## dandurston (Jan 20, 2005)

ledzepp4life said:


> i have heard that the frame design of those bikes puts a ton of stress on the shock and they are known to blow shocks


This doesn't make sense to me unless you mean sideways stress or something. The goal of any suspension system is to transfer the stress to the shock so the shock can soak it up. The probem is that Fox Vanilla's blow all the time on any bike. The stress on the shock can be calculated by how hard you land on the bike multiplied by the 'travel to shock stroke' ratio. Any 7" bike with X inches of shock stroke will push equally hard on the shock given the same impact. The only way a suspension design can be really hard on a shock is if the leverage ratio is really bad (high). Anything above 3:1 is considered high. I could be wrong but I think the RM7 has a 2.5" shock stroke for a leverage ratio of about 2.8 which is very normal.

Rocky did have some strength issues with their thrustlink design but i believe that was more in 2000 - 2002. They were constantly updating the design and by 03 they had it working pretty well. See the mtbr.com reviews (http://mtbr.com/reviews/2003_full_suspension/product_121317.shtml) everyone thought it was amazing except for one guy. 4.6/5 overall rating.

With all that said there is a SICK deal on 04 RMX that you should look at (http://www.bikesmart.com/index.cfm?menu=browse&cid=BIK&ssid=PAOHADICKGIJPGCB&ap=2999.99&StartRow=1. The whole bike for just 1999$ new. The RM7 did get a lot better than the first couple years but the RMX is still stronger so if you got the cash I'd say go for the RMX


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2005)

hardcoe newbie said:


> i probably dont need that muck fork but im learning so im tough on bikes and i killed the RST on my warp so im going to over shoot and go too strong instead of too weak and broken.


There is a BIG difference in a RST and a Monster T....
I went from EXR comp (105mm) to a Junior T (170mm) ....what a difference that was..


----------



## ledzepp4life (Jan 27, 2005)

noobie if you got a monster t that would way over kill there is absolutly no way that a beginner needs 12 inches of gad damn travel. even if you launched a monster t off a building it wouldnt bottom, it would also leave a giant crator cause the damn thing is so heavy. just get a sherman slider or a 888.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> There is a BIG difference in a RST and a Monster T....
> I went from EXR comp (105mm) to a Junior T (170mm) ....what a difference that was..


i shouldnt have even put the two in a sentence


----------



## MX 887 (Nov 2, 2004)

I think the new RMX is sweet.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

im getting a job(hopefully ) at a store that sells Cannondales, Rocky Mountains, and Treks, should i consider a bike from a different brand?


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2005)

ledzepp4life said:


> noobie if you got a monster t that would way over kill there is absolutly no way that a beginner needs 12 inches of gad damn travel. even if you launched a monster t off a building it wouldnt bottom, it would also leave a giant crator cause the damn thing is so heavy. just get a sherman slider or a 888.


Monster T=8 inches...
SuperMonster= 12 inches...


----------



## prerogative (Jan 15, 2004)

Shibby said:


> - RM6/7/9 have a poor suspension system for a number of reasons:
> - High leverage ratio=blown shocks
> - Sloppy linkage system=TONNES of play
> 
> ...


Dead on nuts . . . to what I would have said - good job Shibby.


----------



## ledzepp4life (Jan 27, 2005)

o crap my fault, still its over kill


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Monster T=8 inches...
> SuperMonster= 12 inches...


if a monster i am thinking of a monster t (8 inches) even though it is still probably too much and too heavy


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*Think it over!!!*

Dude...I got an 03 WS brand new. It was my first "long travel" bike. A few road gaps here and there, and It fell apart on me. It's not just mine either. There's a good amount of RM horror stories. On top of that...good luck dealing with Rocky Mountain customer support. Dealers are scarce too!
Yes Wade is the king of all kings. And yes he killed it on that bike. That does not make the bike anything special though! 
The funny thing is that I still think Rocky makes absolutely sick bikes. I'm sure the newer RMX's have corrected a lot of the "old" problems. If I new they were tried and tested...I would consider one again.

I hope this helps!!!


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

You're B. Pascoe's buddy, right? I have heard stories of your WS...sick ride.

BTW, he's giving up Monsters and going 66 too....ordered his when I ordered mine at the shop...


----------



## zedro (Jan 12, 2004)

dandurston said:


> This doesn't make sense to me unless you mean sideways stress or something.


 because there a thing called leverage ratio, and this determines the coil spring needed and the damping load required on the shock. High leverage ratios require higher damping loads and thats when shocks blow. With reasonable ratios, the Fox dampers perform just fine. Also acute shock angles can put bending loads into the damper which arent healthy either.

Another problem lies with the moto-links design. The setup they use put alot of force into those linkages with under specced bearings. The results is a system that wears out prematurely which generates slop.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> im getting a job(hopefully ) at a store that sells Cannondales, Rocky Mountains, and Treks, should i consider a bike from a different brand?


gemini, rmx, switch,or session 7 or session 77 ??


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*Yes*



DownHillFast said:


> You're B. Pascoe's buddy, right? I have heard stories of your WS...sick ride.
> 
> BTW, he's giving up Monsters and going 66 too....ordered his when I ordered mine at the shop...


What's up dude?
Yeah I talked to Brian yesterday. His Bullit's going to be nice with a 66. We got to ride together last week, but not enough.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

likestocrash said:


> Dude...I got an 03 WS brand new. It was my first "long travel" bike. A few road gaps here and there, and It fell apart on me. It's not just mine either. There's a good amount of RM horror stories. On top of that...good luck dealing with Rocky Mountain customer support. Dealers are scarce too!
> Yes Wade is the king of all kings. And yes he killed it on that bike. That does not make the bike anything special though!
> The funny thing is that I still think Rocky makes absolutely sick bikes. I'm sure the newer RMX's have corrected a lot of the "old" problems. If I new they were tried and tested...I would consider one again.
> 
> I hope this helps!!!


anything helps!


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

likestocrash said:


> What's up dude?
> Yeah I talked to Brian yesterday. His Bullit's going to be nice with a 66. We got to ride together last week, but not enough.


 I heard...and after he witnessed the collar bone incident over there, he witnessed a 5-rib cracker over here...he's bad luck, I should stop riding with him...or make him go off of everything first!


----------



## dandurston (Jan 20, 2005)

zedro said:


> because there a thing called leverage ratio


Yeah I covered that in my post and I think they had that improved by 03. Does anyone know what the stroke actually was?


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*who?*



DownHillFast said:


> I heard...and after he witnessed the collar bone incident over there, he witnessed a 5-rib cracker over here...he's bad luck, I should stop riding with him...or make him go off of everything first!


Who cracked ribs???
Yeah our buddy had a 3rd degree AC sep


----------



## bentimby (Jul 2, 2004)

i have a friend who ovalized one of his joints on his rm7 after buying it used


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

likestocrash said:


> Who cracked ribs???
> Yeah our buddy had a 3rd degree AC sep


 Another guy we ride with occasionally....Mike C.

He and Brian decided to do about a 15' drop to tranny, but Mike went off first, a little too fast, and landed way low, and wiped out....he was pretty shaken (as he should have been), he spit up some blood, and went to the ER. Turns out he had 5 broken ones, and some fluid on the lungs...

And then BDP didn't do that drop, but did a different one and threw a one hander on the way down as we were trying to pick up the beer cans and collect Mike C's stuff...a typical Sunday afternoon, except for the ER trip and the blood-spitting...


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

DownHillFast said:


> Another guy we ride with occasionally....Mike C.
> 
> He and Brian decided to do about a 15' drop to tranny, but Mike went off first, a little too fast, and landed way low, and wiped out....he was pretty shaken (as he should have been), he spit up some blood, and went to the ER. Turns out he had 5 broken ones, and some fluid on the lungs...
> 
> And then BDP didn't do that drop, but did a different one and threw a one hander on the way down as we were trying to pick up the beer cans and collect Mike C's stuff...a typical Sunday afternoon, except for the ER trip and the blood-spitting...


 And we got it on video, although I don't think Mike posted it...


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*yeah*



bentimby said:


> i have a friend who ovalized one of his joints on his rm7 after buying it used


that's exactly what I did. Was riding stunts one day, didn't realize the main pivot bolt on swing arm/chainstay came loose, and BAM...screwed. Bigest pivot point on bike was shot to hell.


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*Sweet*



DownHillFast said:


> Another guy we ride with occasionally....Mike C.
> 
> He and Brian decided to do about a 15' drop to tranny, but Mike went off first, a little too fast, and landed way low, and wiped out....he was pretty shaken (as he should have been), he spit up some blood, and went to the ER. Turns out he had 5 broken ones, and some fluid on the lungs...
> 
> And then BDP didn't do that drop, but did a different one and threw a one hander on the way down as we were trying to pick up the beer cans and collect Mike C's stuff...a typical Sunday afternoon, except for the ER trip and the blood-spitting...


yeah that's Brian. Maybe you guys can all cruise down here sometime. It's really wet right now, and we have a lot of building to do, but this Spring/Summer is on like Donkey Kong!


----------



## DownHillFast (Dec 30, 2003)

likestocrash said:


> yeah that's Brian. Maybe you guys can all cruise down here sometime. It's really wet right now, and we have a lot of building to do, but this Spring/Summer is on like Donkey Kong!


 I know, he keeps wanting me to go. We'll have to do it up this spring for sure. I have to TRY those gaps after all I have heard about them. We're trying to work out a Whistler trip in the summer, pre-August...

hope to get over there and meet you soon.. I'll post pics of my RMX when I get it...


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

DownHillFast said:


> I know, he keeps wanting me to go. We'll have to do it up this spring for sure. I have to TRY those gaps after all I have heard about them. We're trying to work out a Whistler trip in the summer, pre-August...
> 
> hope to get over there and meet you soon.. I'll post pics of my RMX when I get it...


Pictures! Pictures! Pictures! (chanting like a barbarian)


----------



## likestocrash (May 29, 2004)

*Sounds good*



DownHillFast said:


> I know, he keeps wanting me to go. We'll have to do it up this spring for sure. I have to TRY those gaps after all I have heard about them. We're trying to work out a Whistler trip in the summer, pre-August...
> 
> hope to get over there and meet you soon.. I'll post pics of my RMX when I get it...


Cool...have fun with the RMX. See you guys this Spring!


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

[don't like the linkage...don't like how it rides


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

ledzepp4life said:


> noobie if you got a monster t that would way over kill there is absolutly no way that a beginner needs 12 inches of gad damn travel. even if you launched a monster t off a building it wouldnt bottom, it would also leave a giant crator cause the damn thing is so heavy. just get a sherman slider or a 888.


thats 12 inches of travel


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> thats 12 inches of travel


looks kind of cool actually, i think.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

maybe i should shoot for this!??


----------



## flyingwalrus (Apr 14, 2004)

*wait....*

....you're coming off of a Giant Warp, right? An Rmx w/ a monster T would feel so different. It would be about 15 lbs. heavier, and have literally twice as much travel. Being that you're 115??? lbs (I don't remember what you said) this set-up would be difficult for you to throw around.

So, unless you plan on progressing very quickly to 25+' drops and 60' airs, I'd suggest you look at something like a Session 7. Good parts, good price, you could throw it around easier, and even hit some trails on it, but it still has 7" of travel that would (probably) be more than enough for you.

However, if you're bent on a bike that starts w/ RM, then I'd say get the RMX, and if you feel the need to upgrade the fork, get a 888, not a monster


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

i could do this.?


----------



## sriracha (Jun 23, 2004)

*hardcore target fixation*

hardcore newbie, you have hardcore target fixation.
forget those rocky mountains, they totally blow, shocks and bearings. you will be replacing bearings all summer long. a friend of mine had one, just replaced the bearings and destoryed them again on the first ride. he was so pissed about his frame. faulty design puts way to much force on the linkage bearings. drop that idea totally.
and forget about the monster, it's way overkill.
you don't need that much, look at what kyle strait and matt hunter are doing on their enduros.
you're on the right track w/ the trek and zocchi 66.
if you are stuck on a big doul crown fork, get a 888.


----------



## WheelieMan (Jan 19, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> i could do this.?


What's wrong with the sherman?


----------



## dandurston (Jan 20, 2005)

WheelieMan said:


> What's wrong with the sherman?


It's not a Marzocchi


----------



## MX 887 (Nov 2, 2004)

The banshee with super monster is just ridiculous. No need for it. What is wrong with the 888 on the RMX. Why do you need the monster?


----------



## zerossix (Jul 25, 2004)

a monster weighs about half as much as you do. one might call it over kill.


----------



## NotQuiteJdm (Jan 19, 2004)

I have an RM7 and have had zero problems with it, Id look at a RMX just because its newer but there's nothing wrong with RM7's. Any bike can have problems if you beat it up and not maintain it.


----------



## mtbrdan (Jun 1, 2004)

more links = more matinence. i have an older rm6 i bought used a year ago or so. i take the links apart every 3-4 months and make sure everything is tight every ride. i have had no problems and look forward to picking up an rmx.


----------



## flyingwalrus (Apr 14, 2004)

I'd say there's no need to look at these older, possibly faulty, bikes if you have the money to just get a Session. I'd say get the Session and don't upgrade the fork until you need to. The Sherman is a great fork that is W A Y stronger and better than the rst on your warp. Just ride the bike how it is until something breaks. Take the extra money that you save by not getting the 66 right away and get some nice armour or something. It annoys me when people upgrade a perfectly good part (which they've had no negative experiences with) just becasue they want the latest and greatest.


----------



## hardcore newbie (Nov 6, 2004)

dandurston said:


> It's not a Marzocchi


correct. i have heard that manitous are high matinence and i dont like high matinence. marzocchi are supposed to run forever (what ive heard)


----------



## austinb89 (Nov 6, 2004)

hardcoe newbie said:


> i have heard mltiple times about something wobbling in the frames of the rm7 i was thinking of getting one and is it worth it? should i stop research now and find a different bike? what is wobbling and why is it so bad?


 well i dunno about u guys maybe u all have nice bikes but if someone offered me a rmx 6,7, 9 or the wade simmons i would take it happily, with the problems, as long as it rides. and that banshee with the super monster looks soo tite i give u props there


----------



## sriracha (Jun 23, 2004)

austinb89 said:


> well i dunno about u guys maybe u all have nice bikes but if someone offered me a rmx 6,7, 9 or the wade simmons i would take it happily, with the problems, as long as it rides. and that banshee with the super monster looks soo tite i give u props there


take it and ebay it happily


----------



## matt (Feb 2, 2004)

NotQuiteJdm said:


> I have an RM7 and have had zero problems with it, Id look at a RMX just because its newer but there's nothing wrong with RM7's. Any bike can have problems if you beat it up and not maintain it.


you aren't riding hard enough.

a lot of people who do maintain their RM's still have problems with them. It's just not a great design, although I have heard much better things about the RMX's and stuff.


----------



## slipstream (Feb 26, 2005)

I have been riding an 04 RMX, and so far the rear linkage has been great. Very stiff and beefy. No problems, and compared to my buddy's RM7, it is much stiffer and stronger. So far, I would highly recommend. The Swinger seems to complement the rear suspension nicely.


----------

