Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
Okay so a 435 chainstay is short for both a size small and an XL?
This makes zero sense. That size small is going to ride similar to an XL with a 460 chainstay.
So they’ve got a massive rear center for a small and an tiny one for an XL…
Is this really that difficult for people to understand?
Evil knows exactly what people want. They know really short riders want really long chainstays, average height riders want medium chainstays and really tall riders like really short chainstays. If you’re a short ride who likes short chainstays, you should look at a different company. It just goes to show it’s rider preference, but riders of a different height, with the same style preference, need to buy different bikes. …
By the way in the comparison with the previous offering there is a mistake, LS with a 150mm fork was 66.4 HTA or 65.9 with a 160mm
So the head angle change is 1.2 degrees with the same fork not 0.5
Not at all
Well, call me a moron, but this 6’ 1” large frame riding person is going to buy this totally unrideable bike. I look forward to looping out, my front wheel washing on every turn, lack of stability over 8 mph, and curling up in the fetal position in the middle of every ride. I’ll report back.
Maybe you'll love it, maybe you won't.. Either way, I'm guessing that it won't be terrible..
Not sure if Evil is still around after this thread got derailed. But if so; can the bike be short-stroked (and still perform properly)? Would be interesting if it could be run as a 140R/150F trail bike for majority of use, then converted back to 150/160 or 150/170 when traveling to somewhere with bigger trails. Or is there simply no benefit to that? I know DELTA has a complex leverage curve so changing stroke might get too outside the design magic.
I’d just run the super deluxe to have the bike feeling “smaller” for your local trails
It’s impressive how fun and rewarding these bikes feel like regardless of the numbers
Yeah they say it should only be run at 150mm rear travel. I forget the stroke.
Not really sure what short-stroking would accomplish. If the goal is to make the bike pedal better, just run less sag and keep the full stroke length — you’ll get a snappier feel under power and maintain the same bottom-out support.
Alternatively, try adding a bit more low-speed compression instead of changing the geometry.
Short-stroking and running 30% sag basically does the same thing as keeping the full stroke and reducing sag slightly. But if you want to preserve the same geometry, start with more LSC first.
Shorter stroke with the same eye to eye maintains the geometry, but I'm guessing it really won't change much for pedaling.. More sag would change geometry, but that can hurt pedaling.. But compression is a better thing to play with, like you said..
They say you can't long-stroke it, but can't find anything about short-stroke. There's no mechanical reason not to, long-stroke is a clearance issue at bottom out, short only improves clearance. It's more about how it is affected by linkage curve.
Yes, you can try more air pressure (or LSC) but that has negatives to it. Lose sensitivity and too much ramp. Going to a short stroke shock the idea is you change the compression ratio inside the shock as well as the starting volume. I think that if simple "more pressure/LSC" was the answer we would have 180mm XC bikes, but they're all 80-120. Also, efficient pedaling XC bikes tend to be more linear in their leverage curves, so losing some of that end ramp might not be a negative in this configuration. I'm more concerned with the early leverage since Evil has that dual progressive curve might mean a short stroke is too much in the soft zone and can't hold itself there anyways. Just like how heavy riders struggle to get sag with air shocks on Evil because the linkage just pushes right through that beginning without tons of air pressure.
What’s your plan on sag if you short stroke it? Simply adding a couple psi (to achieve less sag) to the standard stroked shock will accomplish almost the same thing as short stroking and running 30% sag of that shorter stroke. Additionally, with the stroke shortened or running too little sag on properly stroked shock, you won’t be taking advantage of how the leverage curve (probably) ramps up at the very end like most Evils do. But I’m a hack, could be wrong.
Read my other comment
Sorry we posted at the same time, I see your other post now. I think short stroking or over inflating it will make it not match the frame leverage properly. Although they don’t publish the kinematics so who knows.
When you “short-stroke” a shock, I don’t think adding a travel reducer really changes how the shock behaves — it’s still the same size air can. The only real difference is that you’re running fewer millimeters of sag to hit the same 30% target, which means higher air pressure.
As mentioned earlier, you can get the exact same effect by keeping the full stroke and simply running less than 30% sag, while still maintaining full end-stroke support.
So in practice, short-stroking doesn’t accomplish much besides effectively running less sag and more pressure. It’s not comparable to adding a volume spacer or changing progression.
It seems like you're confusing the effect of short-stroking with something like adding a token in the negative air chamber.
In some shocks reducing the stroke also reduces the positive chamber volume.
Do you know which shocks are affected? I was told on the Float X it does not have a meaningful difference in positive or negative volume.
If you weigh your travel spacers that should give you a good idea of what equivalent size volume spacer they are.
Post a reply to: New EVIL Offering - Forum Hot Seat with Evil Bikes