Is the orbea Rise suspension progressive?

[jimsantos]

FYI, just connected ST Unlocker to my Rise the other day and you can seemingly turn it up to 85nm very easily.

 

[urastus]

Wow. That is light!

It does look like a short spring though. They've made something fit.

 

[shredjim]

FYI, just connected ST Unlocker to my Rise the other day and you can seemingly turn it up to 85nm very easily.

Please comment on your experience with ST unlocker ? Were you able to get the assist to 85 NM and raise the speed the assist cuts off?

 

[jimsantos]

Raising it to 85nm looks super easy. Literally just move that slider. I haven’t actually tried it yet though, mostly because 60nm is more than enough for me and already drains the battery in 90 min or so for my 190lb riding weight. I much prefer 2-3hr rides in “trail” mode vs 60-90min at full boost.

 

[shredjim]

Raising it to 85nm looks super easy. Literally just move that slider. I haven’t actually tried it yet though, mostly because 60nm is more than enough for me and already drains the battery in 90 min or so for my 190lb riding weight. I much prefer 2-3hr rides in “trail” mode vs 60-90min at full boost.

I hear ya there but interested in knowing the details from someone who has tried it. Also, all bets are off once our range extenders show up…

 

[DanMcDan]

I hear ya there but interested in knowing the details from someone who has tried it. Also, all bets are off once our range extenders show up…

About to go for a big ride with my range extender for the first time, managed 75km with about 1100m and got back with 11% last time without the extender.

 

[DanMcDan]

So just finished a big ride stats below, but as a side note, you can feel the extender. The extra weight is noticeable when popping off stuff etc.

 

[siciliano]

So just finished a big ride stats below, but as a side note, you can feel the extender. The extra weight is noticeable when popping off stuff etc.
View attachment 62830 View attachment 62831

Probably a dumb question but I have a garmin 530 and only see that second screen with the battery, etc...the first picture with miles, etc how can I see that screen too?

 

[DanMcDan]

Probably a dumb question but I have a garmin 530 and only see that second screen with the battery, etc...the first picture with miles, etc how can I see that screen too?

Just page down to the “second field”

 

[b33k34]

So just finished a big ride stats below, but as a side note, you can feel the extender. The extra weight is noticeable when popping off stuff etc.
View attachment 62830

Interesting. How much do you weigh and what mode did you use?

Just completed our first two rides - I'm just under 80kg without kit and we were basically riding everything in trail (with some very short use of boost)
Internal battery I got 42km/1070m climbing (and was in limp mode for the last 20m or so..., but battery was only showing as 92% at the start of the ride on the Garmin).
With the extender on yesterday got 1640m climbing and 65km - that's near enough the same ascent as you got but you did another 10 miles or so. I think it does show that the range is more driven by climb than distance...

 

[DanMcDan]

Interesting. How much do you weigh and what mode did you use?

Just completed our first two rides - I'm just under 80kg without kit and we were basically riding everything in trail (with some very short use of boost)
Internal battery I got 42km/1070m climbing (and was in limp mode for the last 20m or so..., but battery was only showing as 92% at the start of the ride on the Garmin).
With the extender on yesterday got 1640m climbing and 65km - that's near enough the same ascent as you got but you did another 10 miles or so. I think it does show that the range is more driven by climb than distance...

I’m 75kg W/out kit, the first 9 miles were in eco and that was a gradual climb along an old railway. Then it was a mix of trail and boost for the short sharp ascents of Dartmoor, started going home as it was getting late so used boost and trail to do the 14 miles home.

 

[dsimpson]

Looks about perfect to me! Let us know how that DHX2 holds up over time.

All my parts to swap have arrived, just waiting on the bike now. Ship date is now 4/19... plus customs... other holds. gahhhh!

Curious if you ever tried out the 29'r with 160mm of travel. If so, how did it work out? Would be great to have 150mm-160mm of travel out back of the Rise.

 

[Istari]

Orbea Rise frame is nearly the same as Orbea Occam frame. Several days ago Orbea launched new Orbea Occam LT which has 150mm rear.
I am wandering if Occam LT rear linkage would fit to Rise and if Orbea could sell these linkages. Maybe we should e-mail them.

 

[volts]

Orbea Rise frame is nearly the same as Orbea Occam frame. Several days ago Orbea launched new Orbea Occam LT which has 150mm rear.
I am wandering if Occam LT rear linkage would fit to Rise and if Orbea could sell these linkages. Maybe we should e-mail them.

I highly doubt they would do that even if they fit. I think there are better chances of getting someone like cascadecomponents to make it.

 

[Istari]

They are already selling that kind of linkage for Orbea Rallon:

RALLON LINK

RALLY ON RALLON LINKAGE

www.orbea.com

 

[jimsantos]

Curious if you ever tried out the 29'r with 160mm of travel. If so, how did it work out? Would be great to have 150mm-160mm of travel out back of the Rise.

I've tried a number of configurations and here are my notes:

Overall setup
- My setup is on the more rugged side. I have 203/223 rotors, and tough 2.4/2.5 tires. I ride a mix of steep/chunky terrain and flowy singletrack around the SF Bay Area. I tend to favor smoother lines enjoy popping of smaller trail features.
- I'm also running a OneUp 210mm dropper and 35mm rise bars, Paul Components 35mm stem, and WTB Saddle
- I'm about 180lbs plus gear and bike weighs in around 42 lbs with pedals, but without tool/pump/tube.
- I settled on a 450lb spring after experimenting with different rates and putting my #s in about 198732423 different "calculators".

210x55 coil with offset bushing, 160 fork, 29 F/R
- I bought a Fox coil on ebay that was supposed to be 216x63.5 but was actually 210x55, and didn't realize it till about 5-10 rides later when I measured the BB ht @ 340, HT at 65, and ST at 76
- Handled very quick, climbed steeps surprisingly easily with no wandering (which I attribute to the shock action vs geo). The ST angle is actually slacker here, but it climbed EASIER and felt more stable which was a surprise. Only conclusion I could draw was that the shock action helped maintain more traction despite the slacker ST angle. Still didn't quite make sense going from paper to trail, but I'll take it!
- Descending felt like a bigger bike for sure, great body positioning for steep terrain. Slightly reduced reach could be compensated with a longer stem ( I have a 50mm on the way vs the 35 on there now)

216x63.5 shock with offset bushing, 160 fork, 29 F/R
- This is my current setup and it feels amazing across rough terrain, You really just float over stuff that would have the 140/150 version bucking a bit more.
- HT measured 65.5, ST 76.5
- That said, the BB is much higher now, measured at 350. I compensated by running more sag which brought back some of the quick handling. It looks like there is room to run another offset bushing as well, so I'll add that in today which should drop the BB further and bring it closer to stock handling, while still running 29s front and rear.

34T ring conversion
- The Shimano chainrings DO NOT WORK with the Orbea chainguide. I scratched one up testing it out. The clearance between the frame and chainguide is SUPER tight and I haven't found any third party chainguide that works actually. I believe this is part of the design compromise as the Rise has super short chainstays for a 29er EMTB. Most other EMTBs with 445 chainstays are running 27.5 rear wheels. The Orbea chainguide is specifically designed to route around the carbon frame. So you can stick with 32t or you can remove the chainguide.

27.5 rear wheel conversion
- This MIGHT just be the ticket if you wanna run this bike as a legit enduro EMTB. a 27.5 rear with a 2.5 tire will put the BB right in the sweet spot if you use a longer shock and 1 offset bushing. It should end up somewhere around 5mm higher than stock BB ht, but with 20mm more travel!
- I tried this setup briefly with a borrowed wheel and I'm pretty sold it's the way to go


If you're itching to tinker with your suspension I would try these steps in this order first:
- Lower your shock pressure and use the bigger volume spacer
- Swap your fork airshaft to 160
- Add a single offset bushing to the rear shock mount (offsetbushings.com)

Then finally if you wanna go ALL IN:
- Swap your shock for a 216x63.5 (8.5" x 2.5")
- Add a second offset bushing to the front mount
- Swap your rear wheel for 27.5

 

[dsimpson]

View attachment 73634

I've tried a number of configurations and here are my notes:

Overall setup
- My setup is on the more rugged side. I have 203/223 rotors, and tough 2.4/2.5 tires. I ride a mix of steep/chunky terrain and flowy singletrack around the SF Bay Area. I tend to favor smoother lines enjoy popping of smaller trail features.
- I'm also running a OneUp 210mm dropper and 35mm rise bars, Paul Components 35mm stem, and WTB Saddle
- I'm about 180lbs plus gear and bike weighs in around 42 lbs with pedals, but without tool/pump/tube.
- I settled on a 450lb spring after experimenting with different rates and putting my #s in about 198732423 different "calculators".

210x55 coil with offset bushing, 160 fork, 29 F/R
- I bought a Fox coil on ebay that was supposed to be 216x63.5 but was actually 210x55, and didn't realize it till about 5-10 rides later when I measured the BB ht @ 340, HT at 65, and ST at 76
- Handled very quick, climbed steeps surprisingly easily with no wandering (which I attribute to the shock action vs geo). The ST angle is actually slacker here, but it climbed EASIER and felt more stable which was a surprise. Only conclusion I could draw was that the shock action helped maintain more traction despite the slacker ST angle. Still didn't quite make sense going from paper to trail, but I'll take it!
- Descending felt like a bigger bike for sure, great body positioning for steep terrain. Slightly reduced reach could be compensated with a longer stem ( I have a 50mm on the way vs the 35 on there now)

216x63.5 shock with offset bushing, 160 fork, 29 F/R
- This is my current setup and it feels amazing across rough terrain, You really just float over stuff that would have the 140/150 version bucking a bit more.
- HT measured 65.5, ST 76.5
- That said, the BB is much higher now, measured at 350. I compensated by running more sag which brought back some of the quick handling. It looks like there is room to run another offset bushing as well, so I'll add that in today which should drop the BB further and bring it closer to stock handling, while still running 29s front and rear.

34T ring conversion
- The Shimano chainrings DO NOT WORK with the Orbea chainguide. I scratched one up testing it out. The clearance between the frame and chainguide is SUPER tight and I haven't found any third party chainguide that works actually. I believe this is part of the design compromise as the Rise has super short chainstays for a 29er EMTB. Most other EMTBs with 445 chainstays are running 27.5 rear wheels. The Orbea chainguide is specifically designed to route around the carbon frame. So you can stick with 32t or you can remove the chainguide.

27.5 rear wheel conversion
- This MIGHT just be the ticket if you wanna run this bike as a legit enduro EMTB. a 27.5 rear with a 2.5 tire will put the BB right in the sweet spot if you use a longer shock and 1 offset bushing. It should end up somewhere around 5mm higher than stock BB ht, but with 20mm more travel!
- I tried this setup briefly with a borrowed wheel and I'm pretty sold it's the way to go


If you're itching to tinker with your suspension I would try these steps in this order first:
- Lower your shock pressure and use the bigger volume spacer
- Swap your fork airshaft to 160
- Add a single offset bushing to the rear shock mount (offsetbushings.com)

Then finally if you wanna go ALL IN:
- Swap your shock for a 216x63.5 (8.5" x 2.5")
- Add a second offset bushing to the front mount
- Swap your rear wheel for 27.5

jimsantos, thank you, this is exactly what I was looking for!

I have the same exact bike (XL Frame), I weigh the same as you, I ride similar terrain in SoCal, did a 203mm rotor on the front, put heavier duty 2.4 / 2.5 tires on, installed a oneUp 210mm dropper, kept the stock 50mm stem, overforked to 160mm, and put a cush core in the rear to increase the capability of the rear suspension. All very similar to your approach. I have a 2019 Rallon with the updated linkage that took the rear travel from 150mm to 160mm and I would love to hear that the Rise could get the same type of rear linkage increase as the Rallon (and what was released for the Occam LT to take to 150mm). I am aware of the mullet approach...but would want to test before going down that path as I like the 29'r feel. The intriguing option is to leave as a 29'r, do the larger stroke shock, and figure out how to get the bb height to cooperate (as well as ensuring nothing gets messed up with the linkage or tire hitting frame). Please DM me or respond on this thread regarding the offset bushing, going Mullet, or which path you end up going...I'll likely do the same!

 

[jimsantos]

jimsantos, thank you, this is exactly what I was looking for!

I have the same exact bike (XL Frame), I weigh the same as you, I ride similar terrain in SoCal, did a 203mm rotor on the front, put heavier duty 2.4 / 2.5 tires on, installed a oneUp 210mm dropper, kept the stock 50mm stem, overforked to 160mm, and put a cush core in the rear to increase the capability of the rear suspension. All very similar to your approach. I have a 2019 Rallon with the updated linkage that took the rear travel from 150mm to 160mm and I would love to hear that the Rise could get the same type of rear linkage increase as the Rallon (and what was released for the Occam LT to take to 150mm). I am aware of the mullet approach...but would want to test before going down that path as I like the 29'r feel. The intriguing option is to leave as a 29'r, do the larger stroke shock, and figure out how to get the bb height to cooperate (as well as ensuring nothing gets messed up with the linkage or tire hitting frame). Please DM me or respond on this thread regarding the offset bushing, going Mullet, or which path you end up going...I'll likely do the same!

Quick update, just tried to install the offset bushing on the upper shock mount and it does NOT work with the Fox Van /Marzzochi Bomber CR. The "shoulders" of the shock bump into the frame.

So if you wanna run full 29, your best bet to lower the bb is a single offset bushing in the rear, and more sag. Static height is still around 350 with 2.4/2.5 tires, but running it "soft" will at least bring the dynamic height lower for stability and quicker turning. I happen to think it turns plenty quick with these settings.

For reference a Transition Sentinel is 347 with 2.4/2.5 tires.

 

[volts]

Quick update, just tried to install the offset bushing on the upper shock mount and it does NOT work with the Fox Van /Marzzochi Bomber CR. The "shoulders" of the shock bump into the frame.

So if you wanna run full 29, your best bet to lower the bb is a single offset bushing in the rear, and more sag. Static height is still around 350 with 2.4/2.5 tires, but running it "soft" will at least bring the dynamic height lower for stability and quicker turning. I happen to think it turns plenty quick with these settings.

For reference a Transition Sentinel is 347 with 2.4/2.5 tires.

it doesn't even work well with bomber cr without the offset bushing unless you have the rebound all the way open.

 

[dsimpson]

I talked to a suspension shop and they can take a fox dhx2 (8.5x2.5) and use spacers to reduce eye to eye to 210mm and can update stroke As follows:

1. No spacer - 63.5mm stroke and 161.6mm rear wheel travel
2. One 2.5mm spacer - 61mm stroke and 155mm rear wheel travel
3. Two 2.5mm spacers - 58.5mm stroke and 149mm rear wheel travel

Read in the thread that someone tried a 210x60 shock with no tire clearance issues. Thinking option 2 or 3. I can also make the eye to eye slightly longer than 210mm to raise bottom bracket and give more tire clearance.

thoughts?

 

[DanMcDan]

I talked to a suspension shop and they can take a fox dhx2 (8.5x2.5) and use spacers to reduce eye to eye to 210mm and can update stroke As follows:

1. No spacer - 63.5mm stroke and 161.6mm rear wheel travel
2. One 2.5mm spacer - 61mm stroke and 155mm rear wheel travel
3. Two 2.5mm spacers - 58.5mm stroke and 149mm rear wheel travel

Read in the thread that someone tried a 210x60 shock with no tire clearance issues. Thinking option 2 or 3. I can also make the eye to eye slightly longer than 210mm to raise bottom bracket and give more tire clearance.

thoughts?

That was me, I have an old Rockshox Monarch plus rc3 from a Trek Slash, had a proprietary size of 210x60 and had no issue with clearance etc. Currently running a 210x57 (2mm spacer removed) can creek db inline coil and 150mm zeb (might go 160mm)

 

[Chicane]

it doesn't even work well with bomber cr without the offset bushing unless you have the rebound all the way open.

I had considered buying a Bomber CR and running it stock at 210x55, but your saying this coil isn’t a good fit for the bike/ linkage? What are you saying exactly? Fox coil would be a better option? Thanks

 

[volts]

I had considered buying a Bomber CR and running it stock at 210x55, but your saying this coil isn’t a good fit for the bike/ linkage? What are you saying exactly? Fox coil would be a better option? Thanks

bomber cr doesn't fit properly unless you file a few mm of the edges of the Y shaped link. The rebound nob is in the way. I'm running bomber cr with stock 210x55 and after filing away the tiny amount of alu it's great, but you have to be prepared for that. Also, consider getting a progressive coil, the frame isn't particular progressive so if you plan on doing bigger features it won't be great with a normal coil.

 

[shredjim]

bomber cr doesn't fit properly unless you file a few mm of the edges of the Y shaped link. The rebound nob is in the way. I'm running bomber cr with stock 210x55 and after filing away the tiny amount of alu it's great, but you have to be prepared for that. Also, consider getting a progressive coil, the frame isn't particular progressive so if you plan on doing bigger features it won't be great with a normal coil.

Volts - what size frame do you use? I heard the L and XL frame sizes don't have clearance issues with the rebound knob, but sizes medium and small do have clearance issues. Can anyone confirm this? I want to get a coil shock but i'm impressed with the price and positive reviews of the Bomber CR shock... But, I am not going to file away material on my bike to make it fit...

 

[jimsantos]

Volts - what size frame do you use? I heard the L and XL frame sizes don't have clearance issues with the rebound knob, but sizes medium and small do have clearance issues. Can anyone confirm this? I want to get a coil shock but i'm impressed with the price and positive reviews of the Bomber CR shock... But, I am not going to file away material on my bike to make it fit...

I’m on a large and can confirm the fit is super close with the offset bushing as Volts mentioned. I wouldn’t run it without the offset bushing. That said, I did previously run an older Fox Performance Van, which is essentially the same shock as the Bomber CR and it fit great. They rebound knob is a bit longer and cleared easily. Only reason I switched was that shock was mis labeled in the eBay listing and was actually the same length/stroke as stock.

 

[DanMcDan]

I’ve switched to a fox sls spring on my db inline coil, the Valt Progressive spring is about 2mm larger on diameter and was just catching the frame on full compression, this is on a size Medium.

 

[volts]

Volts - what size frame do you use? I heard the L and XL frame sizes don't have clearance issues with the rebound knob, but sizes medium and small do have clearance issues. Can anyone confirm this? I want to get a coil shock but i'm impressed with the price and positive reviews of the Bomber CR shock... But, I am not going to file away material on my bike to make it fit...

Mine is size L. Rebound knob is in the way.

 

[DanMcDan]

My latest experiment, it’s an old dhx Rc4 222x70 that I have shortened by 12mm with an internal delrin spacer, should give approx 150mm travel on the rise.

 

[shredjim]

My latest experiment, it’s an old dhx Rc4 222x70 that I have shortened by 12mm with an internal delrin spacer, should give approx 150mm travel on the rise.

Dan - in your picture that shock has the rebound adjuster knob in the same position as the bomber CR and other shocks that people on this forum have reported won't work without filing down the lower shock attachment point. In my attached picture of my size medium Rise, you can see where the lower shock attachment point will interfere with any knob in that location. This is a bummer because I want to try a coil shock on my Rise and don't want to spend a pile of $ to test one out, and I also don't want to file/grind my bike hardware to make it fit. It appears many of the lesser expensive coil shocks have the rebound adjuster knob in the same position as the one in your picture. I see your Rise is also a medium, what do you plan to do to make your pictured shock work?

 

[DanMcDan]

View attachment 76575

One option would be to run the shock upside down with the reservoir sticking out the side like a Pole bike, or I could machine the clearance properly rather than filing it. I’m pretty sure that the yoke is a fairly inexpensive part to replace if I had to.