Thoughts on Intense M9 geometry...

cameron_15

Eats Squid
Hey guys,

It's new downhill bike time and the M9 is at the top of the list at the moment.

Just looking at the geometry and comparing it to my old bike (a carbon fury) leaves me with a few questions...

The carbons furys geometry was generally not well liked, as evidenced by the hype surrounding the new fury with it's major geo changes.

But comparing my large carbon fury to a large M9, I notice that the large M9 is

  • shorter in the top tube by 25mm
  • higher in the BB by 4mm in the lowest setting
  • has the same length chainstays in the shortest setting
  • has a longer wheelbase in the shortest setting

Also, the stated geo of the fury is before adding the angleset, which lowers the BB further and lengthens the wheelbase a little.

So, what are these differences going to mean on the trail? I wont be able to test ride one on a DH track, only in the carpark. What are peoples opinions of the M9's geometry in general?

If it's any use, I'm placing fun over finish line time for downhill now and likely won't be racing much anymore. Also, 181cm's tall. Is a medium M9 frame out of the question?

Basically, sell me an M9, or convince me to keep shopping...
 
Last edited:

driftking

Wheel size expert
First up screw what others like in a bike or what paper says, what do you like?
Is there anything you don't like about the GT, just because others hated a particular aspect of it does not mean you should consider it a bad thing if you actually liked it. look at hill that demo was built around him but when Gwin jumped on it he changed it because everyone has different preferences in bikes.

As for the geo its hard to compare things when you look at singular measures a bike works as a unit and each measure will change how a bike feels, two bikes can have the same chainstay but feel very different depending on the rest of the bike.

The 4mm higher BB is due to the suspension the GT has 210 the M9 has 240 (techncially 241.3) (In its longest 9.5setting)
So if we use 30% sag the GT will drop 63mm
The Intense will drop 72mm so you have a good 9mm more drop and therefore 5mm lower than the GT.

This assumes the M9 low BB setting is also used with the longest shock setting?

If you use the middle 9inch M9 setting you will get 68.4mm of drop which will be 5.4mm more than the Gt and therefore the bike wills till be 1.4mm lower than the GT.

If you use the shortest 8.5 you will get a drop of 64.7mm, you have 1.7mm more drop than the GT and therefore will be 2.3mm higher than the GT is so its even smaller than you think.

Now The M9 has lots of benefits, the obvious is the huge range of adjustment, not only do you get geo and shock length but you have shock progressiveness so you can change the leverage curve of the suspension to 3 different settings, this is able to be done in each suspension length too.

Personally I see the M9 as a business bike in that it eats rocks and its about holding lines and just sticking to the ground, it doesn't seem like a bike that is playful and built for jumping around different lines or been overly twitchy, its a race machine and its built to do its job with no fuss, however I have never ridden one so its all speculation from an observers point here. There are guys on here who have them obviously so hopefully they will all jump on.

Never riding one myself this is as good as I can do in the information department.
 
Last edited:

cameron_15

Eats Squid
There was nothing I disliked too much about the carbon fury. I rode a medium from 2010-2012 and a large for 2013. The only small complaint I could make is the stand over height was pretty tall. Other than that it was an excellent bike, and I had some of my best racing results on the medium frame (probably because I was fitter back then, compared to the passed year). I changed to the large frame as the Fury's were short compared to most DH bikes of the time and I wanted to try a longer, and therefore faster/more stable, frame.

I was looking at the new Fury, and going back to a medium, which is still longer then my large carbon fury by 11mm, but they're a bit too pricey and hard to get, so I'm considering other options.

The reason I'm asking about the M9's geometry is because the first thing I noticed was that it was short when I stepped over it. I'm not sure if it's a large or a medium (seller doesn't know, but I suspect it's medium) and I measured the actual top tube length, which is not listed on Intense's Geo, only the effective TT.

Some browsing on the internet suggests I'd be fine for a medium or large at my height...

I guess I'm just perusing the internet for opinions on the M9 at the moment... before I chuck some big cash at one.

While we're all here, what's the long term life of an M9 like? I can't seem to find many pictures or threads of broken/damaged M9's on the net which is good, as the bike is second hand and won't have warranty, which is mildly concerning given intense's track record.
 

flamshmizer

Likes Dirt
which is mildly concerning given intense's track record.
Don't you mean... *puts on sunglasses* crack record "YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!"

M9's are a beautiful bike, and if it felt slightly short then I'd definitely opt for a slightly longer one. Top tube length is about the only parameter you are stuck with on the M9, you can change almost everything else.

As stated above (wow, driftking actually contributed something worthwhile) measurements at static and sag are very different and you're not necessarily getting the same bike even with the same numbers. It would be awesome if manufacturers started listing both when they quote numbers for a bike, would allow you to compare oranges with oranges.

Realistically though, unless you are really picky you will probably adapt to any bike you throw a leg over.
 

driftking

Wheel size expert
Don't you mean... *puts on sunglasses* crack record "YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!"

M9's are a beautiful bike, and if it felt slightly short then I'd definitely opt for a slightly longer one. Top tube length is about the only parameter you are stuck with on the M9, you can change almost everything else.

As stated above (wow, driftking actually contributed something worthwhile) measurements at static and sag are very different and you're not necessarily getting the same bike even with the same numbers. It would be awesome if manufacturers started listing both when they quote numbers for a bike, would allow you to compare oranges with oranges.

Realistically though, unless you are really picky you will probably adapt to any bike you throw a leg over.

Hey!

I contribute plenty at least i always try to provide some constructive information if not to the OP but participate in the threads conversation.

I also like to party....not as hard as moorey that gets you banned around here :party: :behindsofa:

Yes 100% agree manufactures need to list both numbers, I guess the issue with that is that static is a constant point where sag can vary with rider. Of course no harm in them using a standard 30% sag marker as their "riding position measurement". The V10 suffered from this too because of the drastic sag its static head angle and BB were quite steep and high on paper and it didn't look great, but as we know that is anything but accurate.

While we are here talking of manufacturer listing. I really wish giant would just provide a weight for their bikes, instead of their BS "bikes vary in weight" with their tight manufacturing tolerances they no doubt have an average number to hand out, they just don't want to, no doubt because they are not competitively light and weight is such a big ticket seller.

Op if you want to check the size measure the wheel base of the bike from axle to axle. Ask the seller to set the bike up in either full long or full short, you can see there will be a clear 1inch difference in the sizes.
medium 46.5″ – 47.5″
Large 47.5″ – 48.5″
 

MB

Intense Australia
Hey!

I contribute plenty at least i always try to provide some constructive information if not to the OP but participate in the threads conversation.

I also like to party....not as hard as moorey that gets you banned around here :party: :behindsofa:

Yes 100% agree manufactures need to list both numbers, I guess the issue with that is that static is a constant point where sag can vary with rider. Of course no harm in them using a standard 30% sag marker as their "riding position measurement". The V10 suffered from this too because of the drastic sag its static head angle and BB were quite steep and high on paper and it didn't look great, but as we know that is anything but accurate.

While we are here talking of manufacturer listing. I really wish giant would just provide a weight for their bikes, instead of their BS "bikes vary in weight" with their tight manufacturing tolerances they no doubt have an average number to hand out, they just don't want to, no doubt because they are not competitively light and weight is such a big ticket seller.

Op if you want to check the size measure the wheel base of the bike from axle to axle. Ask the seller to set the bike up in either full long or full short, you can see there will be a clear 1inch difference in the sizes.
medium 46.5″ – 47.5″
Large 47.5″ – 48.5″
First off I have to say that driftking's content is spot on - Great input, well said sir.

I initially had my doubts about a modern DH bike with a 14" (middle setting) BB height but once set up and sagged correctly it is actually quite low. To add weight to the wheelbase argument I wouldn't be too concerned about that either, my current medium 951 EVO has a 48.2" wheelbase and it corners just fine thanks. It fooled me, I thought it would be like riding the Titanic down the trails but its not a barge at all, in fact it's quite the opposite. It's a freak of a thing.

If you're concerned with past track record you can be assured that the M9 was a very good bike for Intense, well built, strong & light. Personally I've had 2 M9's that weighed 16.6kg and 17.1 kg's respectively (with pedals) and never had an issue with either of them. Generally speaking, if there are concerns with a bike (of any brand) these almost always surface at the beginning of a bike's life, not in the middle or at the end, and as such are always addressed at the beginning of a bike's life. So what I'm getting at is that if the bike has had any problems in the past they would have been fixed and there should be no future concerns with the bike. For what it's worth I can count the number of warranties I have done on M9's in the 3.5 years it has been on the market on one hand. But please be aware that if you are looking at a 3 year old bike that has been flogged to death don't expect it to last forever, nothing does.

To find out what size the M9 you are looking at it flip it over and check the stamp on the BB shell. Medium serial numbers will start with the letters BCM and large will start with BCL. Easy. Sometimes the powder coat fills the writing up a bit but you can usually figure it out.

Feel free to PM me if you have any more questions on M9's.

Cheers

MB
 

cameron_15

Eats Squid
Thanks for the reply Moonman.

The bike looks quite good in my lounge room now :) Also, It's hardly been ridden so I'm not anticipating any issues. Just wanted to make sure no body had strong negative opinions of the bike before I handed over my cash.

Can't wait to take it for a ride!
 
Last edited:

VTSS350

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Thanks for the reply Moonman.

The bike looks quite good in my lounge room now :) Also, It's hardly been ridden so I'm not anticipating any issues. Just wanted to make sure no body had strong negative opinions of the bike before I handed over my cash.

Can't wait to take it for a ride!
Cant go wrong with an M9. I have won 2 Vets state champs and many other races on one!
 

Odissius

Likes Dirt
The geo of the M9 is awesome, full DH race sled! Get a med if your under 6ft, large if your over. Rad bike!
 
Top