Yeti thinks 114mm is ok on the sb4.5.. Norco optic 110mm.. Anyone know if these sell well?
I agree re burners, I have 130 rear travel on my 29 and it certainly feels like the sweet spot for general trail riding.. I have to say though I never feel like I don’t have enough rear travel..
First thing's first; I like the look of it. Blue and black is cool, looks ace. Box ticked.
Second thing; people have been asking alot about Giant bringing a reputable 29er into the stable and ah, this is it I guess. Box ticked.
The third thing for me; 93% of riders (actual fact established by the university of Dozer) don't give a shit for fancy geometry numbers. They buy a bike according to its size (Medium, Large etc). Typically I have found Giant's to be too long in the cockpit and I feel stretched so I looked at other bikes with a better measurement to suit me. I can ride a smaller sized frame in Giant bikes but even that feels all out of whack and makes me wonder who they use as a human example of a good bike fit?
The biggest point of discussion I see for this particular model is the price. It's nearly $11,000 in Australia! That's shit and not appealing at all especially with that spec list. Far out, that puts it well into the boutique range now.
Edit: It's $8,999 on the Giant Australian site now.
Last edited:
SummitFever
Eats Squid
There is no doubt you can get those other systems to pedal as well or better than a Maestro/VPP/DW bike. That's not what I was claiming. What I think Maestro brings to the table in the short travel suspension area is the combination of "pedals well, has good small bump compliance and still has a bottomless feel on the big hits". Those are the three things I want in a rear suspension package.
There's also a surprisingly large number of manufacturers out there cranking out variations on the dual link design. The only reason I can think of for going with a simpler design is to save weight. A faux bar with flexing rear stays (eg. no pivots) will give you a 120mm bike with a <2kg frame (eg. Scott).
Couldn't agree more.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
Ultra Lord
Hurts. Requires Money. And is nerdy.
Abit like trek and spesh charging over 12g for bikes that are nothin special.
SummitFever
Eats Squid
Orthodontists need to spend their money some how...
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
caad9
Likes Bikes and Dirt
It's surely too close to the burlier Anthem model for comfort.
As Zaf mentioned, this category is filled with some properly drool worthy machines, this aint one!
The Duckmeister
Has a juicy midrange
It essentially replaces the Anthem 27.5.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
Don’t the anthem’s just crack if you weight over 80kg and sit on it
? Maybe just a stronger anthem.. 66.5 hta ain’t xc territory tho..
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
Oddjob
Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
I've read some of that stuff from Leo and I'm looking forward to seeing it in action.
In my super scientific single set of observations, bob is unavoidable on any suspension system not only due to chain torque but the movement of the rider. I'm ok with some bob, but when you're a fat slob you appreciate all the help you can get when climbing. So turning my limited energy into heat in the shock turns my smile upside down
.I suppose the way I look at it is a trade off between anti-squat and sensitivity:
- four/faux bars tend to favour sensitivity,
- single pivots have lots of anti-squat under torque, are sensitive otherwise, but often have lots of brake jack,
- linkage driven sub frames sit somewhere in between.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk