# Tallboy LTc vs. Niner Rip 9



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

I've narrowed down my search to these two bikes and wanted some input from guys my size. I'm 6'6" 240lbs and ride mostly trail, with some aggressive all mountain (Downieville) in the mix.

I'm looking for specific feedback from people who have ridden the new Rip 9 and the Tallboy LT. Climbing performance, descending performance, overall trail performance such as cornering and braking. I'm currently on a Stumpjumper Evo 29 and it just doesn't climb how I want. I was set on the Tallboy LT but started to think that not having a water bottle inside the front triangle might bother me. I use a ton of water in the summer time here so a water bottle to supplement my camelbak is a must. I realize it can take one under the downtube, but this is less convenient and reduces clearance.

I'm not interested in other bikes. I've done a ton of research and other bikes either won't fit, don't appeal to me, or there are no local dealers that sell them.

Thoughts? Thanks.


----------



## 53x11 (Jan 28, 2014)

you def need XXL frame in tallboy LTc, you may also go for regular tallboy XXL (only comes in carbon.

Do you like to sprint downhill or go superfast downhill? If not then you really dont need 135mm of rear travel and can do just fine with 100mm of rear travel of regular Tallboy XXL.

Regular tallboy XXL is lighter and has slightly longer top tube then XXL Ltc

Does other bike comes in XXL frame size or is their XL top tube length comparable to XXL tallboy?

see this spreadsheet for comparison:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LUxkVzEWlzY2qHG36y20Fcaqmg0KP_GMiqqRsXJ5Sgw/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

There are enough trails around here where I bottom out my 135mm as is. My previous XC bike was downright scary. I firmly believe that I need 125-135+ in the rear. A lot of them I could get by with 100mm in the rear or even a hardtail, so I don't want MORE than 135-140, but any less and I'm outgunned on the rockier/steeper trails. Even with a Pike up front and massive tubeless tires I'm riding my Stumpy as close to the limit as I care to. Thanks for the spreadsheet!


----------



## 53x11 (Jan 28, 2014)

Alias530 said:


> There are enough trails around here where I bottom out my 135mm as is. My previous XC bike was downright scary. I firmly believe that I need 125-135+ in the rear. A lot of them I could get by with 100mm in the rear or even a hardtail, so I don't want MORE than 135-140, but any less and I'm outgunned on the rockier/steeper trails. Even with a Pike up front and massive tubeless tires I'm riding my Stumpy as close to the limit as I care to. Thanks for the spreadsheet!


Let me know if you want to edit it to add more bikes, if you want to edit pm me your email and I give you editor rights


----------



## smilinsteve (Jul 21, 2009)

Fit is so important, I would think that test riding would be even more crucial for a guy your size than for the average guy. No XXL for the Niner.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

Geo on the Stumpy in XL, Niner in XL, and Tallboy LT in XXL are about the same (stack/reach).

Has anyone ridden these two bikes or can compare VPP vs CVA for a heavier rider? I'm ~240lbs pre-gear.


----------



## 53x11 (Jan 28, 2014)

I would also steer clear of any frame with press-fit bottom bracket. My friend is a bike mechanic and he says there always people coming in the store with creaking BB. Being a clyde we are prone to destroy press fit bb plastic and other adapters much faster. So if you want a low maintenance , silent and trouble free ride pick a frame with threaded bottom bracket.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

Both the Niner and Santa cruz have threaded BB's


----------



## JHH (Jul 4, 2013)

I own a TBc.

I've rode a TBLTc for a week on my local trails. I found that adjusting the shock (SAG, air pressure, rebound) was pretty vital in getting the suspension to load and work the way I wanted it too for climbs. (Mandatory lockout as compared to my TB where I can leave it open unless I'm grinding) Once I got that sorted. I got used to the extra travel and how to work the load dynamics. The LT climbed pretty well. It's not as nimble as the TB but they are altogether different bikes with different geometries and my TB weighs about 3 lbs less than the TBLT I rode. At times I miss the travel of the TBLT. 

I'm 50/50 climb/descent in nearly all my rides. So climbing is important to me. Have you considered the Ibis Ripley? Not as much travel as the bikes your looking at but a very agile climber and solid on the descents from what I've heard from people who have rode both.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

The ripley is like 4cm shorter than the tbltc or I'd be all over it. Such a sexy bike. I'm just sure it won't fit me. Too much shorter to overcome with a longer stem


----------



## M320 (Mar 22, 2013)

I'm a 6'4 290# super clyde. I demoed at XL Tallboy LTc and a XL Niner Rip 9 last year. I will start by saying that the XL Tallboy was too small/cramped for me, the XL rip 9 felt perfect. With that being said. The tallboy did climb very well but the Rip 9 Climbed a little better ( different trails ). Both bikes felt good in the trails (east coast single track) on the down hills I like the tallboy just a little more over the Rip 9 ( splitting hairs).If money is not issue I would go with the XXL tallboy ltc. I know how much fun I had on one that was a little too small...... I was all but ready to pull the trigger on a XL 2 star Rip9 knowing that I would need at XXL Tallboy LTc and carbon was not in the budget. But for some reason My local Niner dealer did not feel like emailing me back. So for shits and giggles I emailed my Local Santa Cruz dealer, explained my budget and he got back to me right away. Long story short, My 2015 XXL Tallboy LTc w/150 mm Pike Rct 3 will be shipped out next week. Not sure if that helps or not. Good luck


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

That does help, thanks. I'm reading that the Tallboy is a little better up/down, but the Rip9 corners better and is a little easier to toss around. Up/down is more important to me so I'm leaning towards the TB LTc. Just wish it had a water bottle inside the front triangle.


----------



## 53x11 (Jan 28, 2014)

Alias530 said:


> That does help, thanks. I'm reading that the Tallboy is a little better up/down, but the Rip9 corners better and is a little easier to toss around. Up/down is more important to me so I'm leaning towards the TB LTc. Just wish it had a water bottle inside the front triangle.


Come on, water bottle will fly away on the first real descent, besides, even on average ride you need total of like 3 or 4 water bottles, which means you still need 3 liter Camelback HAWG or Osprey Manta 36..


----------



## M320 (Mar 22, 2013)

Yeah ... Have to agree on the water bottle. Tried it one ride , picked it up 3 times. Last time I ever had a bottle cage on any of my bikes. camel bak MULE doesn't fall off. Problem solved.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

I've never lost a bottle in a mount inside the front triangle but I imagine it can happen if mounted under the downtube... I have a 100oz camelbak that I drain along with a 25oz bottle during summer. My loops allow for me to park my car in the middle though so I could easily leave water in the car and refill or put my bottle in my camelbak storage compartment. It's still a pain compared to my current option, but might be worth it to get the bike I want.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

I haven't ridden either of those bikes, but the king cage iris and a water bottle like this one- 







work very nicely together. You get some downtube protection and no cow-turds in your drink. I've had downtube water bottle cages in the past and they don't get bashed even if you abuse your cranks; they're fine. That specific cage has proven to be very very reliable as far as retaining water bottles goes, and the steel cages let me tweak them a bit to suit my occasionally goofy bottles and don't crack after a few seasons.


----------



## JHH (Jul 4, 2013)

Alias530 said:


> That does help, thanks. I'm reading that the Tallboy is a little better up/down, but the Rip9 corners better and is a little easier to toss around. Up/down is more important to me so I'm leaning towards the TB LTc. Just wish it had a water bottle inside the front triangle.


I don;t ride with a hydro pak much anymore. I found the same issues on the TBLT and was happy that the clearance never became a problem. But grabbing water while moving was more challenging and of course the bottle gets a good dousing of dirt, dust , mud.

I bought a Platypus 1L water bag and stuffed it into my jersey on longer rides. I drink that down first.

Frankly I wouldn't let the bottle cage issue be the deciding factor. there are plenty of workarounds. Hydropaks are no bueno on your back.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

JHH said:


> I don;t ride with a hydro pak much anymore. I found the same issues on the TBLT and was happy that the clearance never became a problem. But grabbing water while moving was more challenging and of course the bottle gets a good dousing of dirt, dust , mud.
> 
> I bought a Platypus 1L water bag and stuffed it into my jersey on longer rides. I drink that down first.
> 
> Frankly I wouldn't let the bottle cage issue be the deciding factor. there are plenty of workarounds. Hydropaks are no bueno on your back.


My camelbak is 100oz and I'll finish that on a longer ride even during winter. During summer I'll drain that, and the 25oz bottle, and still be empty on the last 5 miles of a 25 mile ride and I only ride in the morning when it's <80 degrees that time of year.


----------



## M320 (Mar 22, 2013)

LTC it is !!!


----------



## MrHyde (Nov 11, 2004)

I am just coming off an XL '12 Rip (not current gen) and currently have a '14 LTC in XXL. I am your size, maybe a tad heavier. As for sizing I can say for sure they feel very close, but they are very different animals.

I had my rip set up 2 ways - first was with a Fox 34 TALAS 140/110, 12x142 kit, and haven carbon wheels. I had the bike like this for more than half a season, and it was OK. The havens were noodles, I thought the rear triangle was flexing, but it pedaled well, and the handling felt a tad slow, and I never really got comfy on it. I blamed the flex on the frame and the havens. My eyes started to wander towards the LTC. I bought the LTC, sold the havens, put a dumbed down build on the RIP and sold it to a friend at great loss.

Here's the funny part - To sell the RIP I put a 120mm WB Fluid fork on it, some heavier but way stiffer wheels, and 2.1 NN's tubeless. I had my LTC built with a 140mm pike, 30mm light bicycle carbon rims, blah blah blah, and rode it back to back with the RIP for a weekend with my similarly sized brother, and we both agreed that the RIP... RIP'd harder. The bad flex was gone. It handled snappier, climbed better, and just plain old felt great. The LTC clearly had higher limits going down, and was stiffer, but the RIP had that feel like it would do it all anyways. Despite being pounds heavier the RIP was still quicker overall.

That was the end of last season, and this year I HAVE to get this LTC better sorted. One thing about the LTC is that it might still come with an under dampened rear end for larger riders. I have the kashima CTD and it has to be in climb all the time, and still feels no bueno, wallowy, no support. Lots of people are not happy with the shocks on these things unless they are towards the lighter end of the spectrum, which we are not. I'd love a double barrel air, but this frame cost a fortune to begin with, I'd hate to spend another 700 on a shock, or have to get push to deal with it. I'm still early in the dialing in phase with the LTC, so I do anticipate that things will get much better. You might want to consider lumping in the XXL Trek Remedy 29, it would be a strong contender.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

Can you compare climbing between the two?

I've read a few places that the TB LTc climbs better but the Rip9 corners better.


----------



## MrHyde (Nov 11, 2004)

With the sloshy shock on the LTC, the RIP wins in climbing hands down, even at about 4 lbs heavier as built above. If you think about it it does make sense tho, the rip has the same shock size as the LTC, with similar tune, and lower leverage ratio. The LTC's shock has to deal with a 2.8:1 ratio and the rip is 2.4:1. I'm sure lighter guys won't notice a thing, but we are both pushing well outside what these components were made for, without factoring in a high ratio. For big people the LTC needs extra work. I'm trying to find a double barrel air used right now, and I'll try and get a few bucks out of this Kashima CTD. When it's all done I hope that the LTC climbs as well as the RIP did.

I'll put it to you this way - if I had known how the RIP behaved with the shorter fork and stiffer wheels, I would not be riding an LTC right now. Not that I wouldn't think about cheating on the RIP, but I would love the RIP. You can get a complete Niner for a bit more than the bare LTC frame. :/ I had a conversation with Santacruz about why no aluminum LTC in XXL, and the guy said that aluminum was not suitable for big riders and lanky frames. Which makes sense, but it sure jacks the cost through the roof. Both Trek and Niner will get you a complete bike in your size with solid spec for a bit more than the LTC frame cost.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

The frames I was mostly considering were the TB LTc, Niner Rip9 RDO, Intense Spider, and Intense Carbine 29.

If you're talking about carbon across the board, I think the TB LTc and Niner cost the same and the Intense's were a few hundred extra. Yeah I could get a Niner that would fit me for cheaper but I don't think its fair to compare aluminum to carbon. As much as that $3k sticker is going to hurt, the guy at Santa Cruz who said aluminum wasn't appropriate is probably right.


----------



## MrHyde (Nov 11, 2004)

Ah, I didn't catch the RIP RDO part, it would be nearer the top of my list too. There were some reviews of the RDO that mentioned flex in the rear, but I can't say that anyone mentioned if it was wheels or frame, and these were not clyde reviewers on xl frames. I don't think the Intense frames will be a good fit, unless you are more back than legs. At least I don't think I would fit, but I have a lot of leg, and would need long cranks at a minimum. A real shame too, I absolutely love the look of the carbine. At least they are offering an XL this year. That orange/black frame....... just wow.
At any rate the options are better now than they have ever been for us tall guys, I'm sure you will get into something that will blow your mind!


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

Any other thoughts?


----------



## manpurse (Feb 6, 2011)

I wouldn't worry too much about the water bottle mount on the Tallboy either as there's a number of handlebar/stem/seatpost bottle mounts available out there as a solution. 

I have an older aluminum RIP and it climbs amazingly well compared to the other bikes I've owned. Granted I haven't really put an LTc through the paces besides some parking lot rides, so I can't compare the two specifically.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

rossluzz said:


> I wouldn't worry too much about the water bottle mount on the Tallboy either as there's a number of handlebar/stem/seatpost bottle mounts available out there as a solution.
> 
> I have an older aluminum RIP and it climbs amazingly well compared to the other bikes I've owned. Granted I haven't really put an LTc through the paces besides some parking lot rides, so I can't compare the two specifically.


Seatpost mounts that'll work with a dropper?


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

I'm anxious about the rumored announcement of new Santa Cruz models on Apr 1st... might impact my decision.

Still going back and forth between the Rip9 RDO and the TB LTc.


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

No new Tallboy LT announced today


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

Alias530 said:


> No new Tallboy LT announced today


would you trust a new bike announcement on april 1 anyway...?


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

scottzg said:


> would you trust a new bike announcement on april 1 anyway...?


Didn't they announce the new Nomad last year on April 1st? And the Bronson the year before April 1st?


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

MrHyde said:


> With the sloshy shock on the LTC, the RIP wins in climbing hands down, even at about 4 lbs heavier as built above. If you think about it it does make sense tho, the rip has the same shock size as the LTC, with similar tune, and lower leverage ratio. The LTC's shock has to deal with a 2.8:1 ratio and the rip is 2.4:1. I'm sure lighter guys won't notice a thing, but we are both pushing well outside what these components were made for, without factoring in a high ratio. For big people the LTC needs extra work. I'm trying to find a double barrel air used right now, and I'll try and get a few bucks out of this Kashima CTD. When it's all done I hope that the LTC climbs as well as the RIP did.
> 
> I'll put it to you this way - if I had known how the RIP behaved with the shorter fork and stiffer wheels, I would not be riding an LTC right now. Not that I wouldn't think about cheating on the RIP, but I would love the RIP. You can get a complete Niner for a bit more than the bare LTC frame. :/ I had a conversation with Santacruz about why no aluminum LTC in XXL, and the guy said that aluminum was not suitable for big riders and lanky frames. Which makes sense, but it sure jacks the cost through the roof. Both Trek and Niner will get you a complete bike in your size with solid spec for a bit more than the LTC frame cost.


I'm revisiting this and I'm coming up with different leverage ratios than you...

Niner - 125mm / 51mm = 2.45
Santa Cruz - 135mm / 50.8mm = 2.65

I'm reading that the lower the better for heavier riders (6'6" 240lbs). So torn here... I want the water bottle mount inside the front triangle but the Santa Cruz frame is like 20% lighter... but the Santa Cruz has a shock that's about to be discontinued (for a reason, CTD sucks) while the Niner can come with the Monarch....


----------



## Alias530 (Apr 1, 2013)

MrHyde said:


> Ah, I didn't catch the RIP RDO part, it would be nearer the top of my list too. There were some reviews of the RDO that mentioned flex in the rear, but I can't say that anyone mentioned if it was wheels or frame, and these were not clyde reviewers on xl frames. I don't think the Intense frames will be a good fit, unless you are more back than legs. At least I don't think I would fit, but I have a lot of leg, and would need long cranks at a minimum. A real shame too, I absolutely love the look of the carbine. At least they are offering an XL this year. That orange/black frame....... just wow.
> At any rate the options are better now than they have ever been for us tall guys, I'm sure you will get into something that will blow your mind!


The geo between the Spider 29 and Carbine 29 is pretty different... the stack on the Spider is 599 and it's 658 on the Carbine. Weird, that's a BIG difference.


----------



## Jamis63 (Aug 18, 2009)

I have a Tallboy Lt AL and don't think that the rear standard CTD shock is garbage. It works great to me. I am 6'4" 240 on a XL. I also haven't had a comparison to the monarch.


----------



## thunderbuck (Aug 25, 2011)

MrHyde said:


> I am just coming off an XL '12 Rip (not current gen) and currently have a '14 LTC in XXL. I am your size, maybe a tad heavier. As for sizing I can say for sure they feel very close, but they are very different animals.
> 
> I had my rip set up 2 ways - first was with a Fox 34 TALAS 140/110, 12x142 kit, and haven carbon wheels. I had the bike like this for more than half a season, and it was OK. The havens were noodles, I thought the rear triangle was flexing, but it pedaled well, and the handling felt a tad slow, and I never really got comfy on it. I blamed the flex on the frame and the havens. My eyes started to wander towards the LTC. I bought the LTC, sold the havens, put a dumbed down build on the RIP and sold it to a friend at great loss.
> 
> ...


u mentioned XXL Trek Remedy, but to my knowledge only XL exists in 2015, which sucks cause i so want an XXL 29 9.8 remedy carbon.


----------

