2015 Norco Sight: Reviewed

Words Todd Hellinga
Photos Sarah McQueen, Adrian Bostock, Todd Hellinga
Date Oct 23, 2014

At first glance, the 2015 Norco Sight C 7.2 seems like it ticks all the right boxes for a modern, semi-aggressive, all-mountain bike. For our tastes here in the Pacific Northwest the angles trend towards the more cross country or trail side of the spectrum, but the smattering of enduro-esque parts hints towards a slightly more aggressive bent. At 140mm of travel front and rear, and a steeper head angle of 67.5 degrees, it was likely never going to inspire vast amounts of confidence when things get really steep and deep, but one couldn’t help but ponder the possibilities of what this bike may be able to handle.

TH_IMG_0577

Smooth lines, sleek matte black frame, the Sight is definitely easy on the eyes, while the sloping top tube provides as much standover as possible while still being able to, only barely, fit a small water bottle in the traditional location. Photo: Todd Hellinga

The carbon framed Sight has a drastically sloping top tube that provides ample standover, even in the medium size I rode. While the front centre may appear a bit short by today’s standards, I found the whole cockpit to be comfortable and adequate for my riding style and it was nice to be able to stay relatively centered on the seat and not have to slide back and forth much to maintain weight and traction on the front wheel when required.

The Sight is spec’d with many solid choices. The X1 11-speed drivetrain performed flawlessly with the narrow wide style ring combined with the e13 XCX upper guide chain device ensuring no chain retention issues. Norco also made a great value/performance choice with the Race Face Turbine bar and stem combo, with moderately wide (760mm) bars and relatively short (60mm) stem, which combined with skinny(ish) lock on grips making for a no-nonsense setup. Finally, the internally routed cables maintained the clean aesthetic of the frame, even if they can tend to be rattley at times.

TH_IMG_0582

Smart, no-nonsense cockpit. Race Face Turbine bar and stem, combined with SRAM Guide RS brakes and a Reverb remote mounted under the bar on the left side. The beefy headtube junction ensured maximum stiffness and rigidity. Photo: Todd Hellinga

The Reverb handled the remote adjustable seatpost job very reliably, and the SDG Circuit saddle was neither too bulky or too narrow, providing enough support without being uncomfortable. SRAM’s Guide RS brakes were definitely a standout item on the bike, and in a good way. 180mm rotors provided plenty of radius for the calipers to really clamp down and provide plenty of stopping power. Even on long, rough descents with lots of braking, it was always unstrained one finger braking, and I never experienced much in the way of fade and always felt confident that they wouldn’t let me down when I needed them.

SM_IMG_1455

1x with a upper guide made for a deadly quiet drivetrain, and beefy knobs on the tires helped maintain tracion in soft dirt and on wet roots and rocks. Photo: Sarah McQueen

I’m not going to dwell on the tires/rim combo here as I’ve already spent multiples of hours gnashing teeth, skinning knuckles, and working really hard not to hurl the wheels off something cliff-like. Suffice it to say, putting an agressive tread (Magic Mary/Hans Dampf) on a lightweight casing (Snakeskin) tire is kind of deceptive, and that, combined with pinner rims meant that any and all slightly square rock was likely to cause a flat. Pinch flats galore with tubes, punctured and slashed casings tubeless, it was really bad. And I think I’ll just leave it at that.

SM_IMG_1386

The rear tire is actually in the process of deflating here, the tubeless set up having been punctured by a rock hiding somewhere in the moss. Photo: Sarah McQueen

Wheel woes notwithstanding, let’s focus on the ride of the bike. A prominent component selection would be the new Cane Creek DB Inline rear shock. Featuring more opportunity for fiddling than most people know what to do with, the damper features both high and low speed compression and rebound adjustment. For the first couple weeks I attempted to dial in the settings but could never really get it feeling great, even after a visit to Steve at Vorsprung Suspension. Eventually I just zeroed everything and went back to the base tune as listed on the Cane Creek website. This proved super handy and immediately the bike felt noticeably better, lesson learned. With some minor adjustments to the rebound and low speed compression, I felt like I was getting a lot more performance out of the bike and shock.

SM_IMG_1170

The rear suspension proved diverse enough to handle drops and jumps without any weird traits or harsh bottom outs, and was able to handle roots and rocks under braking into corners. It liked to track the ground closely and provide a very smooth ride. I regularly used the full travel and never felt it bottom out. The Pike on the front was stable and provided smooth performance throughout the duration of the test, I just wished it had been a 160mm travel adjust instead of the 140mm solo air. Photo: Sarah McQueen

While the shock provides an incredibly supple and smooth ride, even on really rough trails, I still felt that the bike lacked a certain cachet in that it just always felt kind of dead and lacking in pop and playfulness, especially when trying to air sections, or double up features. That being said, it more than held its own on big hits, and while the o-ring always indicated regular full travel being reached, I don’t ever remember really bottoming out the bike, even in g-outs or big holes or off drops or jumps, which says a lot on a short travel bike that saw its fair share of rowdy trail riding.

With patience and some learning, the DB Inline provides ample opportunity for tinkering and fine tuning to eke out those extra bits of performance for personal preference, although on the flipside the less inclined may find that to actually be an irritant compared to some more simple to use dampers.

SM_IMG_1513

The Sight is perfectly at home on tight trails. The twistier the better. Photo: Sarah McQueen

My first week on the Sight consisted of some pretty heavy off the deep end into the burl territory. I received the test bike a day before the now infamous Crankworx EWS event and spent a couple of days on some of Whistler’s steepest, more technical, and rough terrain. At only 140mm front and rear, and that ‘steep’ head angle, things definitely remained on the spicy side. Steep rolls to compressions required a more than normal amount of muscle to hold on and get back, no- further back, to prevent one from getting pitched over the bars.

At speed and hitting hard, solid objects, the bike probably hit its limit more than a few times, and I never had an overwhelming sense of stability. Again, I was not surprised at all by that given that I was definitely pushing the limits of what this bike was designed for. That being said, in EWS practice on the Saturday I also felt like I had some really great runs on the technical stages where the speed was a bit lower. A full lap down Ride Don’t Slide to cap it off may have been one of my more memorable down that trail in the recent past. The Sight’s quick-handing nature meant that the bike was extremely responsive to direction changes and allowed one to make quick decisions, albeit with little room for error.

AB_DSCF4090

Wet rock slab to off-camber slab corner to compression back into the woods. Classic Fall riding in Pemberton. Photo: Adrian Bostock

It was when the speeds picked up that the Sight just got a bit too twitchy for my liking, and it became a lot more of a chore to handle. I couldn’t help but feel more than a few times that this bike would benefit from a 160/140 travel adjust fork, to both help rake out the head angle a bit, and provide that little bit of extra suspension travel to help soak up the bigger hits at speed.

Where the bike really shined, though, was on rolling technical terrain and at slightly lower speeds. Norco’s move to a single-ring setup also seems to have reduced the pedal bob that was prevalent in the granny gear on their previous 2x setups (although there is a direct mount for the front derailleur should you be so inclined).

SM_IMG_1472

Anaconda roots, narrow slots, and duffy in-betweens are where the quick handling Sight really shines. Photo: Sarah McQueen

The Sight really came into its own on technical trails with lots of roots and rocks, and awkward power moves. On trails like Kill Me Thrill Me or Lumpy’s Epic in Pemberton, the bike was supple and planted through the rough bits, but never felt like it was losing energy to the suspension while seated. The bike also stayed firm enough in its compression to not get too bogged down when you needed to get on the pedals and get the power down. The quick handling definitely helped on trails where you need to be use lots of steering input to hit the right lines, versus plowing straight over things. The Sight really likes to be turning and is nicely damped to handle the multiple trail variations one faces on those kinds of technical singletrack.

AB_DSCF4121

Struggling to maintain on lap 3 of Lumpy’s Trifecta in Pemberton. The steep, technical climbing on this course is a war of attrition. The rear suspension did a great job of maintaining traction in marginal conditions, and still allowed you to put down the power over loose rocks and wet roots when you needed to without wallowing. Photo: Adrian Bostock

Towards the end of the test period I found myself seeking out those lesser travelled, tighter and more technical trails. Rides where maybe the speed wasn’t as high, but the challenge of classic rooty and rocky singletrack mixed with a soft heaping of duffy goodness was where I really started to enjoy riding the Sight. Short punchy uphills with slabby rocks or roots were danced up, and tight trails that can be a handful on a slacker and longer bike were really enjoyable. The bike really excelled on trails that required more turning, finesse, and skill as opposed to straight line monster trucking, and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

SM_IMG_1498

Turn and burn, and then do it again. It was easy to get the front end off the ground, and that helped with how agile the Sight felt on the trails. Photo: Sarah McQueen

While the Sight may try to masquerade as an enduro, or more aggressive all-mountain bike, I can’t help but feel like it only gets half way there. When it comes down to it the Sight seems to be a trail bike for people who like it rougher around the edges. While it sometimes feels let down by the 140mm travel Pike and the weak tires, addressing those two issues would allow the Sight to compete quite well with some other brands who offer models in a similar genre. The argument can also be made that a $6000 bike ($6425 CAD to be exact) shouldn’t require immediate upgrades to make it more suitable.

SM_IMG_1360

Duffy turns in close proximity is where the Sight comes into its own. The snappy handling lets you change directions quickly, and get back on track in a hurry after getting drifty around flat or off camber corners. Photo: Sarah McQueen

In the end the Sight may not have handled the rougher and higher speed trails as much as I was hoping. It made up for that by being a fun bike for hours of pedaling on technical singletrack where quick handling and responsiveness are balanced by its suspension’s efficiency without sacrificing compliance over roots and rocks. With a couple of changes (and even without them for some), the 2015 Norco Sight would definitely put a smile on a singletrack lover’s face.


A slightly steeper option for those who want a more playful bike…

Comments

0
Jan. 29, 2017, 8:59 a.m. -  rolly

150 fork, or better yet, 150-130 dual position fork, swap the rims out for Stan's (you should be able to keep the hubs) with a wider internal width, and put on different tires (I went with Specialized Butcher/Purgatory combo) and you've got a bike that's dialed for up and down.
I debated going with a Range, Altitude, or Process 134. The Range wasn't as playful and didn't climb as well, the Altitude didn't climb the tech as well and wasn't as playful, and the Process with lockout wasn't available at the same price point as the alloy Sight.

Reply

0
Sept. 10, 2015, 10:13 p.m. -  ILYA Korolkov

Have you used stock Reverb or installed a longer one? Norco is using quite short seatpost (355 mm, as far as I know) and some users had to replace them with longer one. I'm exact your height. What size to chose, M or L?! Geometry of my resent bike is similar to M.

Reply

0
Oct. 26, 2014, 5:42 p.m. -  x4nrg

Todd,

Would you mind telling how tall you are? In the article it's stated that the frame size of the Sight being tested was a "Medium", so I'd just like to get some kind of perspective in regards to Norco's frame sizing using your height as a point of reference…

Thanks in advance.

Reply

0
Oct. 27, 2014, 8:22 a.m. -  t.odd

I'm 5'10″…long(ish) inseam. Check the post insertion height for reference in the bike shot at the top of the article.

Reply

0
Oct. 27, 2014, 6:34 p.m. -  x4nrg

Cool. Thanks, Todd!

0
Oct. 24, 2014, 8:50 p.m. -  Arco Aric

Nice review Todd, I'm aware you didn't ride the range, but I'm curious if you could draw some comparisons just based of the spec list of the range? I Wounder if the Range may not be the "monster Trucking" kind of rig I'd imagine it to be…
Obviously the Sight was built with a different tidding style in mind, but I've been flirting with the idea of trading in my Nickel for something like the range because Id like to have a bike that is much more committed to the steep, technical, burly, high speed riding I prefer. If not, then maybe I should just get my ass to the nearest place to demo one for myself.. but then again I appreciate the insight of those who are more knowledgeable than I. Thanks again!

Reply

0
Oct. 25, 2014, 8:30 a.m. -  t.odd

I'd always recommending demo'ing a bike if possible, of course. I have some friends that have been interested in both the sight and range, and have ridden the range and seem like they're going in that direction vs. the Sight because of the HA/short(er) travel fork setup. Horses for courses as they say….if you'll be riding higher speed stuff that gets steep and really rough, I'd probably look to the Range, if your riding is more up and down and lower overall speed, the Sight will suit that purpose for sure.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 9:58 a.m. -  Actar

Great review. Your impressions are shared by me with my sight 650b I had last year. I did try mine with a 160mm fork but found it sat too high. Head angle felt a little too steep for the rest of the bike and the bb height with 20mm extra travel really changed the playfulness of the bike for the worse.

I ended up settling on 150mm of front travel and became firmly convinced this bike needs a "BC Edition" with a 150mm fork. The geometry still felt great and the bike felt more confident through out.

That all said, I often felt I was out riding the sight, and for my own personal riding style, should have been on a range… MY lesson learned.

Overall, it's an amazing bike tough! Really confidence inspiring if your riding the trails irks designed for. I rode mine through out north van, on the sunshine coast, through out the interior of BC, and through out the US and loved every minute of it despite feeling I would have liked slightly more travel and slightly slacker angles… Which is why I'm riding a range carbon instead now.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 6:24 a.m. -  uncle duke

i own a 2013 26″ sight.. i replaced the fork to a 160 mm pike and i replaced the tires to minions…now it climbs awesome and downhills good enough for me..

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 6:18 a.m. -  Rob Gretchen

Seems like you are trying to compare it to the Range which it is not. Its a 140mm trail bike and if you want rowdy step up to the next bike in the line up. You change the fork travel and then the geometry along with it which kind of defeats the purpose a bit.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 8:39 a.m. -  t.odd

Fair comment, but I don't think I was trying to compare it to the Range, or even wanted it to be the Range. If anything I feel like adding semi-aggressive parts to this bike made it try to be something it wasn't, but I also think if it had a slightly more fork travel it would've made it much more capable at speed and descending, without really giving up too much in terms of climbing and tight trails, etc.

With a 150/130 travel adjust fork I think the Sight could easily go head to head with the Trance SX or Altitude which while shorter travel trail bikes, are seriously capable when things do get rowdy.

Reply

0
April 18, 2016, 11:54 a.m. -  Taylor Philp

I'm upgrading from a 10 year old hard tail and doing my research is a bit daunting. Your review is very helpful, however I seem to keep getting hung up the nitty gritty details that people like yourself who ride more often and harder would notice. Would you consider the 2015 aluminum version a good all round bike for the north shore/sunshine coast/squamish with the occasional gravity park foray, or would my money be better spent on something a little bigger?

Thanks!

0
April 18, 2016, 12:08 p.m. -  t.odd

I think after a 10 year old hardtail, you'd be very happy on the aluminum version. it's a really good bike when it comes down to it for most users.

0
April 18, 2016, 12:11 p.m. -  Taylor Philp

That's pretty much the impression I've gotten from reviews and sales folk, just so many extra things to consider when bike shopping compared to the last purchase.

Thanks for the response

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 8:43 a.m. -  Dirk

From the Norco website - https://www.norco.com/bikes/mountain/all-mountain /sight-carbon/sight-c-72/

"Delivering a perfectly balanced and incredibly efficient ride experience, the Sight Killer B is the complete package for all mountain riding. A short, ultra-stiff rear end, low BB and slack head angle speak to a ride that begs to be ridden as far and as fast as you dare. The Sight’s all mountain-tuned A.R.T. suspension system powers riders to the top of the steepest climbs and delivers grin-inducing playfulness and confidence-inspiring capability on the downs. For those who always take the lead in a pack, the Sight Killer B is the ultimate weapon."

Sounds like he was riding it exactly as they suggested. There's always going to be something that does things better, but that's not really the point.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 3:50 a.m. -  DrewM

Did you ever look into the cost of having the fork lengthened to 160mm? It is a 160mm chassis so it would either be really cheap/free (remove spacer, swap bumper, push pin), or relatively cheap (replace air system).

It sounds like a totally uninspiring - ~$6500 - trail bike with shit wheels could have been a very good - ~$7000 - trail bike with shit wheels if you had upgraded the tires (heavier -- stock tires will never please everyone) and had the fork bumped up 20mm?

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 9:06 a.m. -  mightyted

Excellently put, Drew. Same thing with bikes like the Nomad and Altitude. Premium prices for bikes that most of us would have to pull apart upgrade for another 2g.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:19 a.m. -  Pete Roggeman

Ted, I'm curious what you would put 2k into on either an Altitude or Nomad? Trim level dependent, of course.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:44 a.m. -  mightyted

If starting with the base model Nomad ($7150)Most of the Cockpit, (Keeping the reverb). Brakes need to go. XT's don't have enough stopping power. (I'm a bigger guy). I'd trade the shock for sure and maybe the fork. Tires would get swapped out too. Santa Cruz is notorious for sending their bikes up to Canada kitted out for the Trails in California . (I could recoup my losses by selling parts but I would loose a fair bit in the conversion.)

Altitude 770MSL starting at $5800: Again cockpit, XT Brakes(), Fork (I hear the 34 is meh)and drive train.

I'd love to be able to pay 7g for a bike but if I do It had better need very few changes. I can spend my money on a Nomad or head over to COve and buy a Hustler for under 5 with a kit set up exactly the way I want it and it weighs 1lb more.

I guess my complaint is about the lack of Customizability. Yes both these bikes come in a frame only option, but to get the nomad where I'd want it would easily cost over 7g. It just irritates me that bike companies can charge you this kind of money and not enable you spec it to your liking.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 3:16 p.m. -  Pete Roggeman

7,150 is a lot for a base model to be sure and I'm curious to hear about some of your spec prefs (see below) but you're not comparing apples to apples.

A 5k Cove is aluminum for starters, and I'm not seeing anything in their build kit that separates it from the Nomad's base kit (Elixir 7 brakes - those work for you but XTs don't?). I'm skeptical about that build coming in at a claimed 30 lbs but not certain either.

But you should be comparing to a Bronson anyway since Hustler is a 66.5º HA/150mm bike - Nomad is 65/165. If you do that, you can get a Bronson Carbon starting at $4450 USD. And yes, you'd want to make some changes (especially brakes, I'm guessing) but that's a lot more palatable for most budgets and you only pay a .5 lb weight penalty over a Bronson Carbon C frame.

In your comment you said "for bikes that most of us would have to pull apart (to) upgrade for another 2g"

1) MOST of the cockpit? What isn't going to work for you in the X1 range? Ok, so XT brakes aren't enough power, but that isn't the case for most riders. In fact I've never heard someone complain of a lack of power on them and for me, they're the best value out there. Do bigger rotors do the trick or do you need Saints?

2) Shock and fork…ok we all have different preferences but the RS stuff that comes on the Nomad is first class. You can play the "it's not my fave" card but not the "it's not good enough" one. I've been running the Monarch Plus and it is awesome. The Pike needs no introduction. What would you switch to? For my money it would be hard to argue with a Pike/Monarch combo, and some would rather have Fox or Cane Creek but you're not looking at resale of 0 and full pop to replace.

3) Tires - we could go on forever about 'em. High Rollers may not be everyone's ideal tire up here but they're nowhere near the throwaway OE spec tires you see on so many bikes. I've been running them front and back lately and don't hate them, at all. They were great this summer, and have remained good in the wet, although I have yet to try the deeper-knobbed 2.4 and/or would be happier with a Minion on the front. Any Minion. You would be able to trade that straight across at any shop and they could sell them easily. The Cove comes with an Ardent in the back, btw…

4) I understand your customizability complaint but there are scant few companies that actually offer what you're looking for. It's a logistical nightmare for companies to go too deep there and you can't only blame the bike co's - lead times on OE spec parts make it difficult to please everyone. Still…7k and a bike that you don't feel is perfect is a problem. I get that. Soon enough I'd speculate the Nomad will be available in CR version or aluminum, and that'll bring it into play for a lot of people.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 4:15 p.m. -  mightyted

Wow Pete, that's quite a reply. You're quite right, these are not apples and apples.

I demoed the Bronson. We didn't really get on. Haven't tried the Nomad yet but the owners I talk to all really like it.

You can go into Cove and put your own kit together. That's what I like about them. You don't have to use their preferred kits and you can get the weight under 30 with the X01 drive train etc. I would likely have to add a few grams for minions, wheel set, brakes etc.

1.Most riders I am not, mainly because I wouldn't look good in a Kitsbow jacket. I've had the old XT's and hated them. Had a full on host of issues with them the main one being the whaling noise they often made. I switched to Codes on both my bikes and love them. Lots of stopping power and control. I've never tried saints. My GF runs the new XT's on hers and really likes them. As far as the rest of the Cockpit goes, I would ditch the bars and grips as well. Not because I'd have to, but because I'd want something else.

2. No arguments on your comments about Shock/Fork. Only to say that I like getting my suspension serviced by Suspensionwerx and they don't touch RS. I could still try the RS front and rear I suppose. But if I didn't end up being happy with them, I would at least loose some money plus the time taken to resell them. For example, I waited a year and a half for someone to pick up my newish reasonably discounted Lyrik.

3. Tires: Minions for me. I can also through an Ardent on the rear in dryer months.

4. Customizability is my main complaint. $7500 and up shouldn't be the start of the cost of purchase, it should be at or near the end. I do have the choice of going frame only. It would be nice however if after I paid 3.5g for a frame, if I could leverage the companies buying power to bring the rig in for what I feel is a reasonable price with no junk parts (IMO at least). Again, not disagreeing with you, just making a general comment aimed towards the more elite MTB companies out there.
Also, the bigger you are, the more important customizability becomes. Based on what I know about you I'd say your body type falls in or around the category of "most riders" so I'd guess you are more likely to be happy with more stock kits than I would. (Another thing that irritates me about the MTB industry ) If I could have my cake and eat it to, It might look like a shop that sold lots of different types of framesets and let you choose your build kit.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:16 p.m. -  Pete Roggeman

All fair points! Thanks for clarifying. I didn't know Cove offered that degree of customization, but that's a good use of their retail + OE situation which is pretty unique, at least for NorAm MTB co's. In Europe, many (even most) road brands started out of a shop, which is pretty cool. Did you know that the brothers that started Ridley were originally professional painters who started painting frames?

Hey, Fox makes great stuff and Suspensionwerx working on your boing is addictive, so I get it. Fox is an option on Santa Cruz now, but I get why it may not work for you. BTW Nomad is completely different than Bronson and for a bigger dude, that's definitely the direction I'd steer you in. Might be a good option if they release Carbon R in Nomad sometime.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:33 p.m. -  mightyted

Thanks for the good chat, Pete. Are you a Nomad owner?

0
Oct. 24, 2014, 11:46 a.m. -  earle.b

uh you realize you can buy frame only from both Santa Cruz, Norco, and Rocky. Comparing ala carte build from Cove to the build kit of manufacture X is pointless. Lots of companies offer frame only.

Also anyone that hasn't actually ridden the current generation of Shimano brakes shouldn't automatically call them a take off. Read the reviews, they are the best brake in the business right now.

0
Oct. 24, 2014, 12:09 p.m. -  mightyted

Thanks Earle. I think I did cover most of your points in my previous comments. And yes I know the latest XT brakes turned a corner, however I still don't think they are right for me.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:21 a.m. -  Pete Roggeman

Drew, I'll let Todd comment, however I definitely didn't get the impression from Todd's review that there was anything uninspiring about the Sight - just that he was clear on what he would change. Your thoughts about fork lengthening and cost are interesting, though. We can look into that. I will because I'm curious.

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 11:07 a.m. -  DrewM

Cheers Pete,

We must have both read the review applying a different tone to the author's words.

I'm not familiar with the Pike, but if this was a 2014 Fox you would need a $10 neg plate to go to 150mm and another $5 bumper to go to 160mm.

With both X-Fusion and Suntour you simply remove the air system and swap the Push-Pin to a different height, which is quickly/easily accomplished before the bike ever leaves the shop.

The nice thing with internally adjustable air systems is bikes can easily be adapted to the terrain/rider without the extra cost/complexity of a travel adjust system.

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 10:37 a.m. -  t.odd

Drew, thanks for the nice comment about the review, I appreciate it.

In regards to looking into costs of upgrading, I didn't, as I believe that if I'm given a bike to review, that's what I'm reviewing as that's the bike that's been created by the manufacturer. As you can see, I've definitely speculated as to what I think could make this bike a better performer for certain things, but again I'm not sure I think people will (or should) buy a $6500 bike and then have to drop another 1000ish to make it better/more suitable….

I'm sure that there are many places around the world where this bike stock is suitable, and I also realize that pushing it in Whistler is a lot different than other places. That being said, I also think that minor changes on the spec from the factory would make this bike more diverse and more capable, while still staying pretty close to the intended use. I think even a 150/130 travel adjust would slacking things out just enough to give an extra comfort descending, while still being able to maintain that steeper head angle for climbing. And a move to a mid-weight casing tire (even while keeping the wheelset) might be enough to eliminate the headaches with flat tires, as long as it's setup tubeless from the get go….but we all know manu's love light OEM tires to try and make the bike seem lighter…..

Reply

0
Oct. 23, 2014, 11:16 a.m. -  DrewM

I totally understand re. reviewing the bike unchanged; Maybe there is a opportunity to bring more value to a company giving over bikes to review (for long term) by doing two reviews?

1) Stock
2) The reasonable upgrades ($500?) you would suggest to make the bike perfect.

Added benefit is it may help those companies make spec choices in the future. Dealer margins on a lot of these high-end bikes are tight -- when riders start asking for trade-ins on tires, bars, stems, wheels, brakes (I know, at some point it just becomes a custom build) so I know, in my past experience, having a bike ready to roll with real rubber etc makes a huge difference.

Please log in to leave a comment.