Sunday, 21 October 2007

Moots MootoX Review



The MootoX in its entirety is a rather elegantly simple machine - external drivetrains are a mechanical marvel, but asthetically, they're clutter. The single speed looking Rohloff is no less a technical marvel, but it's hidden. I love how Moots doesn't cover up the S&S coupler welds with the collars S&S offers, it looks so clean without them. The suspension design leaves the classic bicycle geometry in tact. Nothing about the YBB says high maintenance. I try to seldomly refer to soft tails as suspension, although in some ways they are. If people expect "suspension", a soft tail may let them down, as it's not full travel plush suspension. However, if that's considered a weakness, the strengths they offer should be weighed - no moving parts, no bearings and pivots, modest weight, a shock that can't blow or fail, and in its complete form, a design that will function identically on year 20 of the frame's life as on year 1.

The Moots frame is stiffer than I expected, which I appreciate. The Rohloff sometimes asks to be ridden like a single speed, pushing a high gear up a hill rather than downshifting. There isn't much flex apparent in the BB under load... it seems the chain is the weak link on this machine, it's been stretching a lot every ride. I'll have to swap it out for a sturdier model.

The bike climbs well, but not in the 15.5lb road bike sense. The 29er wheels necessitate a bit of a longer wheel base, the result of which is that my center of gravity is an inch or two further forward relative to the rear hub than some of my other bikes. On super steep climbs, the geometry lends itself to a stable climb - the front end never feels squirrly. I'm able to ride several local steeps on my first attempts, ones that I couldn't ride more than once a season on my Specialized S-Works or Turner Flux.

Conversely, it doesn't feel like I'm too far forward on descents. It feels like any other non-XC mountain bike - there's not really a steepness that makes you feel uncomfortable descending in terms of bike geometry, the decision just comes down to your tires and front wheel traction.

I like the Moots seatpost and stem. They're not cheap, and they're not as light as alternatives on the market, but they complete the look of the bike nicely. The stem feels solid, even when pushing a big gear and standing I can't notice any flex when pulling on the bars. The seatpost is a clever design, although attempting to install a saddle without knowing the proper way to do it isn't recommended, it's one of those things you need to read about or have someone explain to you first.

The long wheel base feels great - the bike rides like a Benz, which might have something to do with it costing nearly as much? On loose aggregate, railroad tracks, any bumpy surface, the bike just floats - the big wheels, suspension, and long wheelbase make it a smoother ride than the minimal rear YBB travel would indicate. It's solid feeling overall, everything has a few extra degrees of reliability built in. And I hope it proves to be as maintenance free as it looks.

5 comments:

  1. I'm building up an old Moots YBB 26" frame and am trying to decide between a Rohloff and a conventional drivetrain -- probably an XTR 1x or 2x derailleur system. I'm planning to ride mostly on city streets and on rough, mountainous single track. Any advice?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Depends mostly if you have sliding dropouts or not. If you don't, go with a normal derailleur.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't have sliding dropouts, but the folks at Moots said a Philcentric bottom bracket would obviate the need for a chain tensioner if I went with a Rohloff.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Also, would you recommend a Schmidt SON? At the same time that I consider drivetrain options, I'm also considering lighting options.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The SONs are an exceptional product. It's nice to never worry about batteries - it makes a bike very utilitarian. If the cost and bit of weight don't bother you, I think they're fantastic.

    ReplyDelete