I have one coming, I cannot wait.
2021 - Full Suspension Bike Thread
Yes Range is hot
Expensive though! A write up I read, cant remember which, suggested that high pivots are the way of the future and only starting to bloom now because one-bys have taken over and a front shifter isnt a barrier anymore. The engineering of the high pivot makes sense to me too.
So many cool bikes!
Posted by: Ddean
Yes Range is hot
Expensive though! A write up I read, cant remember which, suggested that high pivots are the way of the future and only starting to bloom now because one-bys have taken over and a front shifter isnt a barrier anymore. The engineering of the high pivot makes sense to me too.
So many cool bikes!
So funny because Canfield had a hell of a time selling the Jedi because of the high pivot. Didnt see too many around
Posted by: Endur-Bro
New Norco Range 🔥
But that video.😂 Are all bike release videos that cheeseball?
The new Jekyll (another high pivot enduro design) video actually makes me want to buy that one. He nose-manuals a berm!
Posted by: RAHrider
The new Jekyll (another high pivot enduro design) video actually makes me want to buy that one. He nose-manuals a berm!
And the pricing is (suspiciously?) low
but but its a Cannondale
Speaking of new FS bikes. What's the deal with many of the EWS riders riding one size smaller? The winner of the latest EWS is 190cm and rides a size large with a 460mm reach. He says that on the gnarly courses, the smaller bike is better. Aren't we all riding "the gnarly trails" all the time here?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-a-closer-look-at-jack-moirs-canyon-strive-race-bike.html
Posted by: RAHrider
Speaking of new FS bikes. What's the deal with many of the EWS riders riding one size smaller? The winner of the latest EWS is 190cm and rides a size large with a 460mm reach. He says that on the gnarly courses, the smaller bike is better. Aren't we all riding "the gnarly trails" all the time here?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-a-closer-look-at-jack-moirs-canyon-strive-race-bike.html
Those Germans at Enduro covered this by testing a bunch of racers bikes vs recommended sizes of the same frames.
Seemed to come down to the longer bike being more stable + forgiving, vs shorter being easier to move around. So far so obvious, but for us mortals on tough terrain longer is better. For pros with the skills and fitness, mobility can mean better line choice and seconds saved etc... Are we hitting peak reach?
But then again that long reach makes the climbs oh so comfy.
Posted by: RAHrider
Speaking of new FS bikes. What's the deal with many of the EWS riders riding one size smaller? The winner of the latest EWS is 190cm and rides a size large with a 460mm reach. He says that on the gnarly courses, the smaller bike is better. Aren't we all riding "the gnarly trails" all the time here?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-a-closer-look-at-jack-moirs-canyon-strive-race-bike.html
In my experience (as a European rider, who got to spent three extended vacations in BC) the shore trails (most of the stuff I rode on Cypress, Fromme and Seymour, in Squamish and Whistler) is janky and gnarly, the rock stuff very much so, some of it is very steep and well above what I want or can comfortably ride (or risk). But to some extent most of these trails are "made" with some sort of two-wheeled vehicle in mind, going up or down. So, almost no matter how harsh and janky they get, the have some sort of flow for really good riders. Also the trails don't suffer from hundreds of years of erosion.
Over here in Europe more than half (personal estimation from the two handfuls of EWS circuits I've ridden recreationally across Europe, NOT RACING) the EWS tracks are either mostly based on farming, walking, donkey transport, smuggling (hiking) trails or paths, which are in many sections hundreds, sometimes thousands of years old. They can be incredibly rocky and janky, downright scary. Especially in the France there are sometimes nightmarish sections, made almost unridable in wet or not ideal conditions. (look at the crashes from the Olargues EWS races, even for top ten riders it was only a 70/30 hit rate) Or you have longer parts of stages which are just racing tape, sticks and an undefined grassy slope of a mountain or slalom on gravel roads for hundreds of meters. Sometimes the tracks are just reclaimed, long unused trails. We get more and more purpose built trails and that is great.
The "classic" European "trails" are often not as much fun to ride and require very different riding style and technique, some are scenic however. But if you see the EWS pros flick their bikes with incredible speed and finesse through switchbacks, sometimes hopping, muscling or jack-rabbit-jumping in (to me) unimaginable ways, the smaller frames might make sense for losing as little time as possible. Often they ride EITHER on the front OR the rear wheel in these sections or jump from line to line...
These riders must have dialed bike handling to the extent that stability and not going over the bars isn't a worry for them. And also a lot of it might have to do with being used to performing on too small bikes and not changing a winning combination.
I absolutely DON`T want to say that the BC trails are easier. I want to express that they are more fun and offer more flow, because they are actual biking trails and therefore there aren't as many situations where a longer bike (and not in a racing situation) would cost seconds. Even if it is much more fun, safe and more enjoyable to ride for moderate to great riders, when they are not racing.
Last edited by: Znarf on June 27, 2021, 5:54 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Yeah, I think so! At least for people of average height.
Posted by: velocipedestrian
Posted by: RAHrider
Speaking of new FS bikes. What's the deal with many of the EWS riders riding one size smaller? The winner of the latest EWS is 190cm and rides a size large with a 460mm reach. He says that on the gnarly courses, the smaller bike is better. Aren't we all riding "the gnarly trails" all the time here?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-a-closer-look-at-jack-moirs-canyon-strive-race-bike.html
Those Germans at Enduro covered this by testing a bunch of racers bikes vs recommended sizes of the same frames.
Seemed to come down to the longer bike being more stable + forgiving, vs shorter being easier to move around. So far so obvious, but for us mortals on tough terrain longer is better. For pros with the skills and fitness, mobility can mean better line choice and seconds saved etc... Are we hitting peak reach?
Posted by: Znarf
These riders must have dialed bike handling to the extent that stability and not going over the bars isn't a worry for them. And also a lot of it might have to do with being used to performing on too small bikes and not changing a winning combination.
Is the bike "too small" if they are a) winning on it and b) prefer it?
Moir's bike fits exactly as all mine do me. I wonder if the pendulum will swing back a little bit? The strive has geo numbers from 2 or 3 years ago and he is going down a size. I think this says something about how much you lose by going with such long bikes as people are.
Perhaps the take home is that wheelbase does not equal speed for a pro rider. Fast riders can go fast on any wheelbase, but they lose the ability to maneuver the bike when it gets too long?
Posted by: RAHrider
Posted by: Znarf
These riders must have dialed bike handling to the extent that stability and not going over the bars isn't a worry for them. And also a lot of it might have to do with being used to performing on too small bikes and not changing a winning combination.
Is the bike "too small" if they are a) winning on it and b) prefer it?
Moir's bike fits exactly as all mine do me. I wonder if the pendulum will swing back a little bit? The strive has geo numbers from 2 or 3 years ago and he is going down a size. I think this says something about how much you lose by going with such long bikes as people are.
Perhaps the take home is that wheelbase does not equal speed for a pro rider. Fast riders can go fast on any wheelbase, but they lose the ability to maneuver the bike when it gets too long?
That's good rhetoric on your part! =)
I love nsmb.com for the great discussions (no sarcasm!)
What I should have said/what I meant - most of the taller top pro riders who ride comparatively "small" bikes seem to have started riding on some "too small" bike of some sort, in the past. When they like their bike OR even win on it, it is a good fit for them, apparently. Athletes can be peculiar imho, because they can compensate insane stuff, when they feel there's a specific advantage etc. They MAKE things work. And that's a great talent and probably what makes them ride WORLDS better than me =)
Still: The bikes which were available before the geometry "revolution" around (2014/2015), were really (too) small for most people 6ft+.
And compared to these bikes even the "smaller" 29" Strive has a relatively modern geo. For illustration: my 2014 Specialized Enduro size LARGE - I am 6ft. 
I absolutely agree with you, that there is a TOO big. And sizing is a fine line, highly dependent on anatomy, fitness and preference! The POLE EWS rider, even though he is fast, looks like an acrobat of some sort, maneuvering a longboard through the twisty tracks. I think that's not because of his riding style - he's super competent. But because his bike is HUGE.
I do think (but that might be cognitive bias) that most tallish "new-school" top pro-riders don't size down as much. But riding the smallest bike you can comfortably get away with probably still has it's benefits.
How tall are you and what are you riding?
Last edited by: Znarf on June 28, 2021, 12:54 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Posted by: Hepcat
Posted by: RAHrider
The new Jekyll (another high pivot enduro design) video actually makes me want to buy that one. He nose-manuals a berm!
And the pricing is (suspiciously?) low
Lead times are off the charts though, in the UK we are looking at 2023 until the Jekylls come to the shop....
Posted by: Znarf
Posted by: RAHrider
Speaking of new FS bikes. What's the deal with many of the EWS riders riding one size smaller? The winner of the latest EWS is 190cm and rides a size large with a 460mm reach. He says that on the gnarly courses, the smaller bike is better. Aren't we all riding "the gnarly trails" all the time here?
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-a-closer-look-at-jack-moirs-canyon-strive-race-bike.html
In my experience (as a European rider, who got to spent three extended vacations in BC) the shore trails (most of the stuff I rode on Cypress, Fromme and Seymour, in Squamish and Whistler) is janky and gnarly, the rock stuff very much so, some of it is very steep and well above what I want or can comfortably ride (o, r risk). But to some extent most of these trails are "made" with some sort of two-wheeled vehicle in mind, going up or down. So, almost no matter how harsh and janky they get, the have some sort of flow for really good riders. Also the trails don't suffer from hundreds of years of erosion.
Over here in Europe more than half (personal estimation from the two handfuls of EWS circuits I've ridden recreationally across Europe, NOT RACING) the EWS tracks are either mostly based on farming, walking, donkey transport, smuggling (hiking) trails or paths, which are in many sections hundreds, sometimes thousands of years old. They can be incredibly rocky and janky, downright scary. Especially in the France there are sometimes nightmarish sections, made almost unridable in wet or not ideal conditions. (look at the crashes from the Olargues EWS races, even for top ten riders it was only a 70/30 hit rate) Or you have longer parts of stages which are just racing tape, sticks and an undefined grassy slope of a mountain or slalom on gravel roads for hundreds of meters. Sometimes the tracks are just reclaimed, long unused trails. We get more and more purpose built trails and that is great.
The "classic" European "trails" are often not as much fun to ride and require very different riding style and technique, some are scenic however. But if you see the EWS pros flick their bikes with incredible speed and finesse through switchbacks, sometimes hopping, muscling or jack-rabbit-jumping in (to me) unimaginable ways, the smaller frames might make sense for losing as little time as possible. Often they ride EITHER on the front OR the rear wheel in these sections or jump from line to line...
These riders must have dialed bike handling to the extent that stability and not going over the bars isn't a worry for them. And also a lot of it might have to do with being used to performing on too small bikes and not changing a winning combination.
I absolutely DON`T want to say that the BC trails are easier. I want to express that they are more fun and offer more flow, because they are actual biking trails and therefore there aren't as many situations where a longer bike (and not in a racing situation) would cost seconds. Even if it is much more fun, safe and more enjoyable to ride for moderate to great riders, when they are not racing.
it ain't like it was in the early days, trails being "dummied down " might be accurate for a number of reasons, a big one is that if your trail association wants the money BC gov is throwing around the trails have to be built TO the whistler standard
so the old days of building whilly nilly are not ( and never were really ) allowed cuz now days BC gov knows exactly what you are doing, the CO is probably a rider whereas in the old days it was fat guy who rode a desk
personaly I like riding them smooth man made berms done up nice with the mini-hoe
as opposed to rocks the size of your head
Forum jump:
