Anyone ridden a Merckx MXM? - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 48 of 48
  1. #26
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    Feeling that compared to team SC?....
    Sorry to hear that you are feeling torsional flex.....much softer than the team SC??
    Maybe the new Merckx premium...Easton "flare" scandium tubing...supposed to be a tad stiffer than the Team SC. I thought some pros were riding the MXM, but I am not sure... the Merckx team bike is now the "premium".
    I just bought a Fondriest carb-level plus '04 as a second frame...it has the same rear triangle as the Lex, same tubing as the carb-level, but with a 32.4 post instead of 27.2. $1299 @ Col. Cycl w/ post & external H.S.....they might have a few left.
    RogerH; I hope you get it sorted out one way or another,
    Regards

  2. #27

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,601
    More similar rear to the Magister and Luxter. Still not quite the same however. Less of a smooth transition under the chainstay and above the brake caliper mounting hole.

  3. #28
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    191

    I like it better than the SC except .......

    for the front end. I suppose the fork could have something to do with it. It has slightly thinner walls on the steerer than the SC. It's a smoother ride, and a good fit, but I'm more reluctant to take a hand off the bars at speed. Maybe I'll get used to it.

  4. #29
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    Yes.....the Lex is very smooth with the one piece (monocoque) mold....The Magister has that joint at the rear of the B.B. and the top of the seatstay and does look like the carb-level plus and Luxter. My older ('03) carb-level (not plus: the alu & CNC chain stay) had a much different looking CF composite in the "PSA" seatstay than the Lex, I have not seen the '04 plus yet....it was shipped to my friends house in Nev., I will see it next week.
    I was hoping the weave/composite in the rear triangle is the same as the Lex......I know that Fondriest grades their CF as "high modulus"( magister), "ultra H.M." (Lex), and "super H.M." (TF-1 & top carb fork).....the higher the grade; the more threads and less resin.
    The carb-level was great, but I sold it to my friend to get the Lex, and later upgrade to the '04 plus as the "backup" and air travel bike; my guess is that it will be somewhere between the carb-level and the Lex......I was thinking of a Merckx, but the plus '04 popped up alot cheaper ( with the top carb fork, H.S. and carbon 32.4 post) and I could not resist....

  5. #30
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    Interesting that the fork has thinner walls.
    According to Merckx, their forks are made in conjunction with Easton; maybe their newest fork(on the MXM) is noticeably less stiff than previous versions with that thinner wall.
    You could try the SC fork if everything is not too different in terms of rake and length, and then go from there....people love to buy high end forks...(.eBay:this thing came off a$3900 MXM!!!!!)

  6. #31

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,601
    Sorry for the confusion. I was referring to the actual shape of the seat and chainstays. Not where they are joined to the frame.

  7. #32
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    As usual, divve, you are entirely correct....
    I just looked at the Fondriest USA site which gives quite a few angles and one high resolution shot of the '04 plus...looking at the lex in the livingroom , both the chain & seat stay are straighter with less "s"; they are "smoother " lines (less bend), and the chain stays in particular have quite a different shape; also, the dropouts are slightly different (on the plus) with two holes on ea. d-out and a removeable der. hanger; they do call the chain stays on the plus "ultra H.M.", which should be an upgrade from the CF on the original Carb-Level.
    ....good observation

  8. #33

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    80
    Hey Roger H. ,

    I've heard conflicting reviews on that frame too. Divve might know more info but I thought I remember someone at the weight weenies site mention that the Tour german mag tested the stiffness and found it was very flexy. However others who have actually ridden the frame say its nice and stiff.

    However don't give up on it yet. The torsional flexion could most definitely be coming from the fork or carbon steerer. What is your bar/stem setup and how many spacers do you have. My caad6 was very flexy up front when I first got it because I didn't know any better and had 2.5cm of spacers with a flexy canondale stem. I switched to a thomson road stem and got rid of all the spacers (over time of course) and now the front is really solid....almost too much on rough roads but I'm a sprinter and I like it.

    New bikes need some break in time for your body to get adjusted. You'll always be comparing it to the previous bike you rode the most. Also here's a great article explaining trail and its ramification by one of the leading custom Ti frame builders...Tom Kellogg..You'll learn why your bike handles the way it does.

    http://spectrum-cycles.com/612.htm

    Let us know about your front end set up.

  9. #34

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,601
    twelvepercent, am I reading correctly that your Lex doesn't have a removable hanger?

    HXTi, Tour did indeed test the MXM and found that the torsional stiffness of the head tube was very low. I tried to look for the actual figures, but I can't find the test anymore. Having stated that, I think frame performance is highly subjective. Intended use and preferences amongst various cyclist can differ greatly.

  10. #35

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,601
    That Spectrum page has high and low trail reversed. More trail will slower steering and less trail will make it quicker.

  11. #36
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    My Lex DOES NOT have a removeable hanger.......what about yours?; as I remember yours is the blue graphic (mine has the yellow detail)...yours should be an '04, correct?
    .....I just looked @ the USA website and the '04 lex in the pic is the ONLY one in the entire line w/o removeable der. hanger.....the ITA site shows the '04/'05 lex WITH remov. hanger.....If yours has a remov. hanger, you did very well...this was one of my concerns when I purchased the frame. Here in the USA I get a 4 yr. warranty and a "crash-replacement"@ cost...which I think is 1/2 retail. The Fondriest USA service is outstanding; so if I was to break the hanger, my guess is that Will would take care of me in some way that would make me happy.
    Last edited by twelvepercent; 08-07-2005 at 09:13 AM. Reason: Addendum

  12. #37
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    354
    My Lex is a late 2004 (purchased in August) and it has removable hanger-2 small allen bolts (2.5mm) on the inside of the dropout that, I am assuming, are holding the hanger on.

  13. #38
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    Mine has these little allen bolts on the inside of the dropout, but only one on each side up where the d-out connects to the seat stay...this joint looks permanent, and even if it was not, the chain stay has no such connection...check it out.

  14. #39

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    2,601
    Mine has a removable hanger as well. I bought it last year around March and it was delivered in April. I had to wait 3-4 weeks I believe, because it had to be specifically manufactured for me with the custom graphic. I remember whining about the non-removable hanger when I ordered it. Perhaps they threw it in there to make me happy

  15. #40
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    191

    Less spacers helped but

    another problem has popped up. I noticed a small void at the end of the steering tube when I received the bike originally, but didn't give it much thought. Hoped that when I cut it down the void would be gone. It wasn't. When I trimmed a little more off today to reduce the flex, it seems a bit larger. And, it's on the back side where the stem clamps. I think it was probably some trapped air or something during the manufacturing process. Anyhow, now I've contacted the person who sold it to me, who is the original owner, and hopefully he can get Gita to warranty the fork. But till then, I think I won't ride the bike which could make it worse or perhaps fail. I was wondering if maybe the defect could have contributed to the forks flexiness. Anyhow, check it out.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  16. #41
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    nice work...the '05's on the ITA site clearly show the removeable hanger, the '04's on the USA site show no removeable hanger...oh well, I guess I will have to upgrade to the TF-1 if anything should happen....

  17. #42
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: elviento's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,222
    Definitely should replace it. That side of the steerer apparently has less material. May not be a real issue, but why take the risk?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger H
    another problem has popped up. I noticed a small void at the end of the steering tube when I received the bike originally, but didn't give it much thought. Hoped that when I cut it down the void would be gone. It wasn't. When I trimmed a little more off today to reduce the flex, it seems a bit larger. And, it's on the back side where the stem clamps. I think it was probably some trapped air or something during the manufacturing process. Anyhow, now I've contacted the person who sold it to me, who is the original owner, and hopefully he can get Gita to warranty the fork. But till then, I think I won't ride the bike which could make it worse or perhaps fail. I was wondering if maybe the defect could have contributed to the forks flexiness. Anyhow, check it out.

  18. #43
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    381
    I have seen certain CF using the term "void free" composite...It is possible that the manufacturing process by Easton allows this to happen under certain circumstances....I would think that this situation would fall under the category of design and/or manufacturing flaw. You could call Easton directly and ask them about the relationship between Easton and Merckx in the design, process and manufacture of these forks. If that void is present all the way down the steerer, I can imagine it would be easily felt considering the stiffness of the complete front end system.
    If you (or the seller) do speak with Merckx or Easton, using terms like "safety" and "catastrophic
    failure" can be very helpful in immediate replacement..(i.e. liability issues)
    best of luck to you

  19. #44
    Roadcyclist
    Reputation: Maverick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    412

    sorry to hear bout ur MXM Roger H..

    wonder why you're encountering so many problems on your frame.
    anyway, pls check out with Merckx or Easton regarding the void on the frame.
    their response are pretty good as far as i know.

    anyway..here's the pic of my previous GX2 and current Viner EOM16.5 steel ;)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  20. #45
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    191

    Update and photo

    Well, I'm slowly adjusting to the MXM. Took out some spacers and it really helped the front end. Had to send the fork back for replacement but no news yet. Bought an Easton EC90 SL on sale to use in the meantime, and besides matching very well, it also makes the bike feel more stable, or maybe it's just me. Rode a century yesterday and it performed very well. Sold my Team SC, so looks like I'm committed. Here's a photo of how it looks, so far. Thanks for everyone's comments.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  21. #46
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: oneslowmofo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    363

    That a beaut!

    I just ordered a C50 but i want one of those too...

  22. #47
    Roadcyclist
    Reputation: Maverick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    412

    hey roger h..

    nice bike!!
    anyway hope Merckx or Easton replace the fork soon enough. ;)

    btw..a piece of advice from my experience on Merckx frames.

    -be extra cautious of the cable bosses as they corrode easily.
    from the day i started riding the frame, until the day i sold it, i've never failed to clean up the cable bosses after each ride, only to find it to be corroded eventually.
    that's my only complaint on the frame.

    cheers

  23. #48
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    191

    Thanks for the tip, Maverick.

    A new fork is coming soon. The original owner got a warranty replacement for me.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Lance Is Better Than Merckx...
    By Akirasho in forum Merckx
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 11-29-2005, 10:44 AM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-02-2005, 09:27 PM
  3. Axel Merckx TT Bike
    By cannibal in forum Merckx
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-04-2005, 06:06 PM
  4. Merckx MXM or Look 585
    By jca82282 in forum Merckx
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-21-2004, 04:57 PM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-23-2004, 03:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.