Anyone ridden the Mojo Nicolai yet?

Read my posts above.

Sorry....I'd read it when you'd posted and well I'd logged it under TLDR..... 😆

What is TLDR? Too Lazy Didn't Read? 😆

Too Long Didn't Read.

That chainring setup just doesn't look right.

Chainline what angleset did you put in the G13?

I decided to keep mine standard at first but I feel like the balance will be closer to the 27.5 with a bit more length in the front.

Also I tried faster tyres with a semi slick on the back. I know they're a popular choice and they roll well but I just don't get on with them in the corners.

Too Long Didn't Read.

That chainring setup just doesn't look right.

agree - looks like he are using the wrong mounting point on the spider, he has the chainring mounted to where the granny ring would normally mount. A typical 32 tooth ring would normally mount to where the middle/outer ring goes.

Chainline - I read a post of yours a while back, I think it was on MTBR but not sure now. I think it was just when you were putting the Fox 40s on.
You mentioned it was going to be super slack, close to 60 deg iirc. Getting down that low helped counteract the steering flop in the 'head angle no mans land' of 63 - 66 degrees. Not sure if those were the exact figures you used.

Real world experiences of this now having ridden it a while? As good as planned or any downsides?

julians - Member

That chainring setup just doesn't look right.

agree - looks like he are using the wrong mounting point on the spider, he has the chainring mounted to where the granny ring would normally mount. A typical 32 tooth ring would normally mount to where the middle/outer ring goes.

It would if he ran a 73mm or boost crankset, but as stated in his earlier comments he is using a 83mm bb crankset and 4mm spacers.

Yeah but that's by design, that's how he's got it to a middly position in the first place.

From what I've read on here the geometron may work better with a lower position?

I think that has a lot to do with personal preference and body shape. You want to be able to put a lot of weight over the front and get it back off again.

The picture of Rubber Buccaneers GPI may be my favourite yet.

That's a bike that gets used. RB - Are you on Instagram?

Lazy, agreed Scott! 😉

It just looks very different to the others I've seen on here lesson proportion? Might be the high stem position! But asked before I'd re-read! LoL

Scott,

Can you confirm it's a std 148mm boost rear hub and a std 8mm BB with non boost setup.

It should be an 83mm crankset, non boost with 1 x drive side spacer (2.5mm) with a boost rear hub. set up like that and single ring, middle or non-spider, the builds going out line up to the 6th/7th gear at the rear.

I have no experience of the race face crankset however, but the BB cup spacing should be the same. Might be worth checking the std chainline for the Raceface middle ring position should be approx 50mm.

Do you have the 222 shock in? Is it in the 170mm position on the lever?

On other questions, the flop factor increases with slacker HA. Mine has a 60.8-61deg head angle and I love it. The increased flop factor makes the steering response quick even though it has a slacker HA but once you have your line it remains stable as you would expect. It is a different feeling. At slow speed you hold it up rather than drop it in almost.
it doesn't affect climbing as the rider position is such that the weighting is central so it doesn't wander, a function of the longer front and longer rear.

The table I published earlier shows the flop factors. Flop is the distance that the center of the front wheel axle is lowered when the handlebars are rotated from the straight ahead position to a position 90 degrees away from straight ahead.

G13 HA, -2 angleset.

I'm not sure why you would be concerned about the chainline.
83mm std BB is a 5mm increase in chainline either side compared to a std 73mm BB
Boost rear (148mm) is a 3mm increase on the driveside compared to 142mm spacing.
Thus with a std install the 83mm BB moves the chainline out by 2mm. a std install is a single drive side or no drive side spacer depending on the chainset used (dedicated 1x or a spider designed for a double)

I wouldn't be concerned about centering the crank relative to the downtube.

Too long, didn't read

Does this relate to his comments or the frame?

Ho ho ho.

"I'm not sure why you would be concerned about the chainline"

To be clear I meant 'concerned' before you ordered it!

TLDR! 😯

I'm not sure how to reply to all of the comments regarding chain line.
Some people seem to think it doesn't matter at all, some think it is "automatic" or "good enough" by using the "correct" parts. I disagree.

I am a Mechanical Design Engineer, and I approach this subject from an unbiased point of view, using logic and experience as my guide, not bicycle industry "norms", which are hard to pin down with the ever changing standards.

I chose to make my crank arms equidistant from the down tube because that is intuitively the correct thing to do ergonomically. Why should I vary from this if I don't have to? Moving the crank set to one side to improve chain line is a poor compromise at best.

In my opinion, the 148 boost cassette is dictating the proper location of the chain ring. I chose to make my chain ring align with the middle cassette cog because it is the ideal position to minimize chain angle and related issues like chain drop. With this chain line I suspect a chain guide will not be necessary.

It shifts superbly and thus far there have been no issues at all. And yes, it back pedals on the 42T without complaint or a hint of derailment. I will be keeping my chain line where I have it, as I see no reason to make it worse.

My chain ring measures at 47.4mm chain line. The center of a 148 boost cassette is 47mm, as seen here: [img] ?7100227419112134174[/img].

Some people recommend a chain line 49-50mm for various reasons, such as swing arm (chain stay) clearance and tire clearance. These issues don't concern me, so I will quite happily leave the chain ring where it is at the moment.

With the chain on the largest cog 42T, the 2.35 tire clearance is 9mm, while the industry minimum is recommended to be 6mm.

The chain ring is closer to the swing arm yoke (chain stay) than the industry would like, but I can easily clearance the yoke (remove a little material) to accommodate a larger chain ring or add more clearance.

Prior to ordering, during my analysis of the 2017 G16, I realized that there would be a significant discrepancy between the RaceFace specified 83BB chain line of 57mm, as seen here: [url= http://www.raceface.com/media/Crank_Q-factors_and_chainlines.pdf ]http://www.raceface.com/media/Crank_Q-factors_and_chainlines.pdf[/url]
and the 47mm chain line of the cassette. That is why I chose to use a spider instead of a direct mount chain ring, which has no adjustability. My chain line concerns were not enough to dissuade me from ordering this superb chassis because I assumed I could sort it out with the removable spider.

My middle ring position measures ~60mm due to not offsetting the crank. That is 13mm wider than what I consider to be ideal.

Like Chris Porter, I am capable of independent thought. I am not a follower, I am a free thinker and I make my own analysis and decisions. If I were a follower, I would have bought a major brand bicycle with no thought given to geometry or anything else.
Maybe that makes me eccentric or contrary, but I have proudly been a non-conformist my whole life.

I am not trying to convince anyone that I am right and someone else is wrong, I am just sharing my findings about the chain line on this frame. Others can take heed or dismiss it at their discretion.

Happy trails,
Scott

Regarding my handlebar position, it is a simple matter of ergonomics, rider preference and comfort. I like my saddle and bar to be nearly level. If the bar is too low I get the dreaded neck pain from looking up all the time.

There is a small price to pay for raising the handlebar on a very slack head angle frame, as it also moves rearward more than it would on a steeper frame.

Currently the top of the handlebar grip is about 20mm lower than the top of the saddle. This is a bit lower than I would like, but I am getting used to it and I think it will be fine. I have not detected any handling issues with this position.

I am quite pleased with the cockpit fit on this frame. As I stated earlier, at 183cm, I may also fit well on the Extra Longest frame.

For reference, on my motocross bikes, I always used a taller seat with taller handlebar clamps and higher rise on the handlebar.

Also a design engineer and I'd prefer a slightly out chainline than to remove material from the frame.

Mother of god, that last silver one.

Someone please pass the eye bleach & a scrubbing brush.

Confused! Where is the dropper post?

Scott, fair enough. I appreciate that point of view. If it isn't a problem to you and you are happy with it, enjoy! I rode a Jones Ti Spaceframe for years so I understand being told what I should and shouldn't like or do!

I did read it, I just didn't understand (from my perspective) why you would do it and interpreted the explanation as that there were issues to solve. I can see that isn't the case now.

Scott, fair enough. I appreciate that point of view. If it isn't a problem to you and you are happy with it, enjoy! I rode a Jones Ti Spaceframe for years so I understand being told what I should and shouldn't like or do!

My last bike was very non-conformist, but it had become too obsolete to carry on with it.

I did read it, I just didn't understand (from my perspective) why you would do it and interpreted the explanation as that there were issues to solve.

I'm not sure what you are saying Phil. I am saying that in my opinion the chain line is less than optimum on this frame. Others may not see it the same way I do, due to their point of view or the components they used. I am happy with the chain line I achieved, however unorthodox, and I am sure others will be happy with what they end up with. To each their own.

I rode it again today and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Also a design engineer and I'd prefer a slightly out chainline than to remove material from the frame.

I don't consider 10-13mm to be slight.

I have no need or intention of removing material from the frame. If I removed any material, it would be a slight amount on the yoke of the chain stay.

There are already a couple of large pockets cut out of each side of the yoke for whatever reason. My material removal would be much smaller than this and would have no effect on the strength of this part.

[img] [/img]

Scott, I'm saying that I understand and respect your point of view even if I don't agree with it, nothing more that that.

material removal would be much smaller than this and would have no effect on the strength of this part

[quote=Rorschach ]material removal would be much smaller than this and would have no effect on the strength of this part
Without an FEA I would say......if you say so chief.
(Backs away slowly from thread)

+1

Speaking as a metallurgist 😉

Double post

Have you ever seen a Nicolai? I doubt it'd have little if any effect, it's not like it's an ultra light xc whippet built to be used once.

It shifts superbly and thus far there have been no issues at all. And yes, it back pedals on the 42T without complaint or a hint of derailment

But so does the normal 142mm Geometron without need for modification?

Fair enough though, if you have the skills and care enough to go through that rigmarole just to make the chainline look right then good luck to you, I respect your individuality and your enthusiasm is noted!

Have you spoken to Nicolai/Mojo about it? Will the modification invalidate your warranty?

I don't tthink Scott has machined anything so no warranty impact, certainly not from the adjustments made to cranks etc to effect the chainline. If there was material removed then yes it would.

Without an FEA I would say......if you say so chief.

FEA is of limited value, depending on the software used and the constraints on the part.

Did you notice the rather large pocket in the side of the yoke? What I am talking about would be a mere scratch compared to that. In addition, there is notch that you cannot see in that picture.

Here you can see the notch in the yoke:

[img] [/img]

In this picture I have drawn an oval to represent the small area where I would remove material if necessary for clearance. It would be very minimal compared to the pocket and notch.

[img] [/img]

I would be happy to run an FEA before and after if I had the part available to me, but it would be completely unnecessary in my opinion.

For those who may not have noticed, this yoke is now a very nice single billet part. Previously it was a bolted together three piece design.

Have you ever seen a Nicolai? I doubt it'd have little if any effect, it's not like it's an ultra light xc whippet built to be used once.

This.

Will the modification invalidate your warranty?

I don't think Scott has machined anything so no warranty impact, certainly not from the adjustments made to cranks etc to effect the chainline. If there was material removed then yes it would.

I have zero concern about warranty. If I removed a smidgen of material, and if by some miracle it failed at that spot, then it's on me.

Just to be clear, I am not angry about any of this, I have nothing against Mojo or Nicolai, I am just sharing my thoughts and findings on the subject. It is nothing more than a technical discussion to me.

Good clear thought process Scott, but i think assuming the middle of the cassette is best might be missing something.

While its the obvious choice I think there must be some reason manufacturers are developing 1x systems with 3-4mm difference to the actual middle of the cassette.

If you look at how the chain comes off a cassette in the extreme sprockets it is most effected when in the smallest sprocket, as the angle and reduced tooth count means the chain 'jumps' as it comes off each tooth. In the largest ring the increased diameter means the release from each tooth is smoother. I think this is likely what is driving a wider-than-centre chainline.

Of course if you are going to be in the bigger sprocket more, or wont be using the smallest 10t in anger, then the performance requirements move so your decision for a narrower chainline pulls more weight. Not sure id be bothered enough by 1mm to mod the frame though.

I moved a chainline out 1mm once to solve chainsuck issue and it was un-noticable, id rather do that than suffer a tight clearance.

Good clear thought process Scott, but I think assuming the middle of the cassette is best might be missing something.

I think we can all agree that being somewhere "near" the middle is best, and the further away from the middle the worse the system as a whole will work.

If you look at how the chain comes off a cassette in the extreme sprockets it is most effected when in the smallest sprocket, as the angle and reduced tooth count means the chain 'jumps' as it comes off each tooth.

I agree that there may be some minor nuances that I may be overlooking or unaware of.

I have also read that when the chain is on the smaller sprockets (10T) that the chain can catch on the next bigger sprocket due to the angle. I have not seen that effect though.

I don't think I have been using the 10T or 42T at all on the trails. I ride mostly in the middle gears and use 2nd and 3rd for the climbs, thanks to the 28T chain ring. When I switch to the 30T I may need the 42T on some climbs.

What I am doing is in the same spirit of experimentation that CP and Mojo use to achieve their superb frames. Empirical data for the win.

Be interesting to hear from Nicolai and Chris Porter on this one, they love to experiment. I know someone with an older Nicolai that didn't have stealth routing, he asked Nicolai and they advised him where to drill!

CP is happy with the Chainline I know.

I took the G16 on what I call an adventure ride yesterday. The trail is not a normal mountain bike trail, but a torn up Jeep trail. I finally put the 42T to good use. It has many steep and rocky sections which I had to hike-a-bike to get up them. The downhill sections were a lot of fun on the G16.

It was only four miles to the Chiva Falls, but the grueling ride is rewarded with a magnificent view at the end.

[img] [/img]

I love rides where you actually go exploring and cover gnarly terrain - that looks great! Do you manually drop your saddle for the descents?

Chiva Falls is 75 feet high.

[img] [/img]

Here is a video showing what the trail looks like (not me).
There are a few smooth sections. Too few!

Do you manually drop your saddle for the descents?

I do not lower the saddle unless I am at a bike park.
On "normal" trails it does not get in my way.

With the G16 geometry, I feel it is not necessary to get your weight far back like the old geometry bikes.

Had a go on Gotama's G13 yesterday, here's my thoughts;- it's too much bike for me. The conditions were absolutely filthy which made it harder to get good feedback but nevertheless what I found was that you need to be fully committed to muscling the front end to get it to work, on the few occasions I did it felt really good but I'm just not aggressive enough a rider for the majority of the time for it to be an only bike. Additionally it is not light and felt glued to the ground, you couldn't describe it as poppy. As my local riding is South Downs I know I'd get pissed off with it pretty quickly.

This of course isn't to say it's a bad bike, far from it. Steve (Gotama) is clearly a more aggressive rider than me, I watched him send it off a drop into a sketchy, soaking wet landing and then disappear around the corner sideways, that's how it needs to be ridden. He also had no problem keeping ahead down the flatter trails when we swapped back at the end. I have decided I don't like him all that much.

The angles for pedaling really work well, when climbing there is less pressure on your lower back and your glutes are more engaged. Steve loves his and I can see why, if I got to Wales a bit more and was a better rider it would be awesome but as it is I would say try before you buy, they're not for everyone.

So now I'm back to square one, my Stumpy evo felt a bit short and steep after the G13 (although I still felt far more comfortable riding it. Steve felt it was short and steep too but also learnt me riding it. Told you he's a ****). So now looking at 2017 Trek Fuels again, could put an offset bushing on the Stumpy though, what to do, what to do.............

Ha ha, thanks for the ego points Dave! Conditions were filthy but it was great fun riding yesterday and the beer certainly went down well in the evening.

Yeah, whatever. I'm not talking to you.

Was good fun even though I wasn't feeling it. Will defo shout you next time, thanks again for the demo and showing us round.

Interesting perspective. I had my first proper all day ride on my G13 yesterday,back to backing at BPW with my G16. Weather was horrific. Bike was fun, Very interesting to compare it side by side with my radical G16 setup. I ran it stock to get a feel for what I might want to change.

I won't go into great detail here but I know exactly what you mean by having to muscle it (I think muscle might be a strong word but I totally get what you mean) , in my opinion that's for two reasons, 1. Its not slack enough as std and 2. the BB height may be a little low unless you are an aggressive rider. It feels just like my old Ion15 and how I expected it to. For clarity this is FOR ME and HOW I RIDE. Jonesy, much like it sounds Gotama, shows it who's boss naturally

I found my 27.5 G16, which has a 61HA was much more nimble at speed with far less effort to change direction.

In a nutshell davosaurusrex, I suggest you try a 27.5 G16 with a light build, possibly with the 29 front wheel before righting it off and the same bike with 29 wheels which is easily possible on the new Mojo bike (You'd need the 29 fork fitted to do both on the same day)
I'd also suggest trying a Longest not an XL given your feedback which is the size most people of your height ran initially and many still do.

You could even try a Longer/M which could feel like a BMX (Although still likely longer than your stumpy with more reach but a lot closer to it in physical dimension but with the slacker HA and steeper SA giving you the climbing, carving and increased steering response), that with a light 29 wheelset, a DPS shock (or float X) a set of 34's would come in 30lbs or under all up and feel quite different I am positive.

There is so much value in the setup day beyond if you buy a bike in understanding what works for you, what you do like what you don't etc.

@ davosaurusrex Quite surprised you thought that the G13 was glued to the ground! compared to my Carbine 29 the G13 is super lively, it loves sending and jumping the smallest features! Wondering if the shock had too low pressure, too high rebound for you?

@chainline Any tips on how to swap it between the low and high geo positions? Mines in low at the moment and was wanting to try it in the high setting. Had a quick look the other day but couldn't seem to get the chips out of the seat stays to swap them round. Must say, totally loving the bike otherwise!

Cheers!

I'd agree with davosaurusrex about

it is not light and felt glued to the ground

from my experience with a 27.5 version. But being glued to the ground is usually a good thing for a suspension set up. I blame MBR for introducing a desire for this 'poppy' BS 🙂

It's a good thing if you're focused on going flat out all the time, less so if you want to **** about a bit. IMO

The conditions were filthy and we were riding a lot of trails I didn't know though so it wasn't the best test

And i think your opinion is spot on. It's a very long slack angled bike with a certain 'solidity' 🙂 to it's build. They hug the ground which isn't what everyone wants

I rode the G13 again at the weekend. I thought it was poppy as f*&k. and still not slack enough to really actuate the steering 😉 very neutral though ann great fun on the local trail.
I've put an angleset in it now for next time.

I went riding this past weekend on the famous red rock trails of Sedona, Arizona. The more I ride this bike, the more I like it, and the more I find the limits of my fitness and endurance. Good times.

[img] [/img]

How poppy or glued the Geometron feels is entirely down to build and setup. Different tyres, wheels, suspension, a few clicks of compression here a few psi there and it feels totally different. I think that's the whole point of a Mojo demo day so they can see what you are looking for and set it up accordingly. Two different Geometron setups could feel like two entirely different bikes.

Now we have the G13 wagon wheeler can we also have a 140mm front and rear 27.5 version? 😀

Now we have the G13 wagon wheeler can we also have a 140mm front and rear 27.5 version?

duir, yo ualready can with the 2017 Mojo version.Just configure the fork and rear shock to be more progressive and limit the travel. Why would you want less travel for the same weight? I'd just reconfigure the travel. Current version is 155mm at the rear so no sweat to do that. It will already run 29 wheels front or rear.

bedmaker, Very very unlikely you will see an official 27.5+ version. the wheels might fit. 157 currently very limiting in hub choices. It's already 83mm BB.

Hi guys, apologies if this has ever been covered before, but the thread is getting pretty long now!

Looking to replace the rear axle on my G16 (have rounded the hex bolt) - would like something qr/tool free if possible. Would I be correct to assume a Rockshox Maxle 12x142 should work fine?

Have any of you guys ever changed this, and if so, any recommendations?

Cheers

You could ask Nicolai. I had assumed a maxle would be a straight swap with the Nicolai axle but have never tried it, I can take a look tonight if you haven't had an answer by then

Yes, Maxle is a straight swap. I've used both and I'm not convinced the Maxle is better. How did you manage to round it off? It doesn't need to be super tight.

it takes a 6mm allen key as well as the hex.

hi all, been keeping an eye on this thread for a little while and Nicolai is currently top of my list for my next bike (probably not laying out the cash for another year or so but half the fun is the research anyway :wink:)

Of course there's the usual suspects Whyte, Orange, Cotic, Santa Cruz but there's something special about Nicolai

My first thought was to go the Helius AC but now the G16 has caught my eye so re the 27.5"/140mm comment - as this would be more for trail rather than enduro use couldn't it be engineered to be lighter? The G13 looks to be lighter than the G16 by 100g

Really enjoying the thread

yeah you could engineer a 140 version no problem and control the weight a little, the lower A2C would enable you to use a smaller DT which is the normal location that Nicolai save some weight. The other tubes are broadly similar. Also if the rider is not so heavy.
I'm happy to save the weight somewhere else so not normally on my radar!

duir, yo ualready can with the 2017 Mojo version.Just configure the fork and rear shock to be more progressive and limit the travel. Why would you want less travel for the same weight? I'd just reconfigure the travel.

What I mean is an entirely different model basically a Geometron Trail bike based on 140mm front and rear. It would not have to be as robust as the Geometron without all the bracing and with light forks/shock it would be a rocket ship.

It's just an idea I have and pure folly but a very interesting experiment and after all that's what the Geometron started out as!

The 'G-' range currently has the G13 (x-country), the G16 (enduro), and the G19 (downhill) so the obvious gap is a 27.5"/140mm trail bike

Sorry if this over simplifies things; I know I shouldn't get too hung up on pigeon holing certain bikes into disciplines. However 155m rear travel seems excessive for my riding - I only get to a trail centre every 3-4 months so mostly local stuff

bilbo, thats an easy custom solve for £500. I don't think Chris would pigeon hole the G16 into enduro. Nicolai might.
My 40's could be deemed excessive for my riding but I just think they are bloody good! My GeoMetron at 155mm felt very lively when set up progressive.

The kids/smaller person bike that will be launched will be built light at 160mm/155mm with 34s and a non piggy back, light wheels etc. and is expected to be around 28lbs.

Could appeal to riders looking for a long reach but shorter overall super playful trail bike. All the attributes of a GeoMetron in terms of WB and HA/SA but in a shorter frame package similar to other brands M. Like a bonkers FS bmx, add in a 200mm dropper and woohoo..

What does the £500 cover? custom shock tune? or geometry/swingarm changes?

Plan would be to build it up similar to a Helius with Pikes/Fox 34's etc although clearly front/rear balance is key

FS BMX sounds insane - is that more a slopestyle thing?

Obvs the thing to do is get a test ride when the time is right, not quite at that stage yet though

One final comment while I'm on - It must be covered elsewhere on the thread but how does Nicolai Ion G16 differ from Mojo G16 (GeoMetron)? Are they the same? is it just that Mojo will do the suspension tuning service etc

£500 is full custom geometry, IF from Mojo the shock tune is in anyway if you buy their suspension. You basically get to choose geo. You could just say I want a GeoMetron but designed for 140mm both ends.

My reference to FS BMX was more how the bike might feel, super small standover.

Mojo G16 has a different BB, different bearing spacing at the pivot, correspondingly different tyre clearance, different head angle.

ok thanks Chainline, endless possibilities...

Hi Chainline

I'm just being upfront here and saying that I won't be buying a Geometron but if you're still happy to have a geometry discussion along similar lines, then that would be great. 🙂

I'm currently on a custom built Starling Cycles Murmur. It's a 160mm front, 145mm rear steel 29er. Geometry is currently at 1295mm wheelbase, 510mm reach, 64.5 degree HA, 445mm chainstays and -38mm BB height as the important ones. Chris himself did the suspension setup on the 36 and X2, so it's feeling pretty good (not a fan of the very slow LSR though) but I'm keen to push forward geometry-wise.

I'm getting a new front triangle made and am unsure how slack to go on it... Have you found a head angle that works best with the big wheels?

In the future, I will also be getting a longer rear centre, but am unsure whether to go for 455 or 460mm chainstays in order to balance the long, and soon to be longer front centre.

Sorry for pulling the discussion away from Nicolai and completely understand if you don't want to respond. Cheers, Pete

I'd love to see a pic of that Murmur, sounds ace

My ugly mug is in the first but it's the only one I've got on level ground.

[img] [/img]

Minus rim and plus suspension decals. I've since sacked off the Fabric cageless bottle for a normal bottle cage and got a multi tool stowed with a releasable cable tie at the BB/ down tube junction:
[img] [/img]

Cool. Curious as to why you're going for a new front triangle? Wouldn't an angled headset be an easier way to tweak it?

It's so that I can stretch out the reach a bit further at the same time as the head angle (can't get a headset to do both at the same time) and also increase the head tube length to get rid of the spacer stack. I'm also very lucky to be in the position where this won't cost be hugely.

Ah.. last point is the one where it all makes sense. How much longer will you go?

61 is about where Chainline (Phil) seems to end up... not sure if 29er wheels make a difference.

As someone who communicates regularly with Joe at the moment happy to help...if I can.

Can I as what the ETT and ST angle is so I can understand the reach/rear length in context?

At the front you should have no fear around the 62-62.5deg mark.

I am at 61deg this is true, as is Chris,but his is 29 front only, not both ends. I would also add tho that the steering gets fast at that point (which is part of the point, but with a 51mm offset 29er fork potentially too quick on initiation, especially with 27.5 wheels. (I'd like a 44mm offset 40 but only way to do that is machine new crowns) however I'm used to it now and don't want to give up the 40's!

So if you do go to 62.5 or lower perhaps arrange to try a 44mm offset CSU (uppers). Ask Chris about the mod to increase neg chamber size at the same time. He may not suggest it as he has balanced the Murmur setup but worth asking.

You may not need to go as far as 460mm CS if the SA is right and you deliver the reach that way, 450mm should be fine, 455mm more than fine.

-38mm bb drop? My personal view (and it's just that) is that that is too low, assuming it results in a 332mm BB height ((740mm wheel dia/2)-38mm) when you go slacker, particularly with 29 wheels
I find it makes the bike less agile in fast turns when changing direction quickly. It's not needed for stability at this length and HA and you also don't get the weight transfer when you are braking on anything except steep stuff which can result in push (even at 64.5) this is what I am experiencing on my G13 (at 64.5 and lower)
You are already in the bike (it's long, thats the point). So I would suggest a higher BB too.
You could try that now on the current bike to see if it works for you.
I'd add a -2 headset and then 2 suspension bushes to steepen it and check the angles that should steepen your seat tube, increase your reach and lift the BB by about 10mm but you will need to measure it) (Chris has lots of bushes) but still result in perhaps a -1 deg slacker front.Ideally I'd say 445mm to 350mm BB for the 29.

Nothing to lose and pretty low cost for those little mods.

Alternatively I am picking up my G16 this week and that can run 29 wheels. It will have a 520mm reach, 660mm ETT, 61deg - 62 HA with 29 wheels, approx 350mm BB and I can set the chain stay to 450mm, 77 SA. You are welcome try it in that form. unless you are in Scotland in which case that's harder for me!

Alternatively I am picking up my G16 this week and that can run 29 wheels. It will have a 520mm reach, 660mm ETT, 61deg - 62 HA with 29 wheels, approx 350mm BB and I can set the chain stay to 450mm, 77 SA. You are welcome try it in that form. unless you are in Scotland in which case that's harder for me!

I noticed a mistake in my bb numbers "445mm to 350mm" should be 345mm to 350mm!

Sofaking, All 2017 Mojo G16's can run 29" wheels or hybrid 29/27.5 or 27.5. 2016's can't run both ends 29". This is due to the change to both the BB and the cnc bolted yoke as opposed to the previous welded yoke.

Thank you very much for replying and there's some interesting stuff in there!

Unfortunately I'm not sure on the ETT but the SA is 74.5, so not perfect but pretty good.

Ah cool. I was definitely thinking of going slacker so that the 'flop' will help it turn in but didn't think of going that far. I'm also lucky to have Works Components helping out so I'll have a range of anglesets from 1 to 2 degrees to play around with. With this in mind, I might go for a 63 degree HA and then use the anglesets and offset shock bushings to play around with BB height (can't change that on new front triangle) and head angle. With this I could raise the BB and still get the HA to 62.5 or lower if I want to.

Ah, that's a shame. Yeh, I'm up in Edinburgh but thanks for the offer anyway chap.