Introducing the Blur TR Carbon

Mar 28, 2011 at 7:56
Mar 28, 2011
by Karl Burkat  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login

Santa Cruz debuts a new carbon trail bike, the Blur TRc. Did you have a soft spot for the old Blur 4x? If so, you'll want to check out the details of the new TRc!

With 5 inches of travel and similar geometry to the original Blur 4x, but with a frame weight that is 2.5 lbs<br />lighter, the TRc will have many riders looking forward to April 15th - the bikes scheduled release date.
With 5 inches of travel and similar geometry to the original Blur 4x, but with a frame weight that is 2.5 lbs
lighter, the TRc will have many riders looking forward to April 15th - the bikes scheduled release date.

An entirely new addition to our family, the Blur TRc defines what we think a trail bike should be. Crafted from carbon fiber, featuring our proprietary lay-up process, the frame weighs a scant 5 pounds with shock included. Patented VPP suspension offers 5 inches of travel and combined with the carbon fiber frame, chassis rigidity is second to none. The top tube length and riding position are evolved from our climb-happy xc bikes – a bit more stretched out than on our longer travel rigs – but mated to a relaxed head angle that is sure to make any dedicated gravity fiend weep with joy. The Blur TRc will be available in matte carbon/green or gloss carbon/orange. $2699 US MSRP frame with Fox RP23 - Complete bikes from $3799.

Carbon fiber frame and swingarm
Carbon fiber frame and swingarm
Tapered head tube
Tapered head tube
Grease ports in lower link, angular contact bearings, oversize aluminum axles
Grease ports in lower link, angular contact bearings, oversize aluminum axles
Dropouts, disc tabs, suspension pivots molded into frame during one piece layup - lighter, stronger, stiffer.
Dropouts, disc tabs, suspension pivots molded into frame during one piece layup - lighter, stronger, stiffer.
Carbon fiber upper link, angular contact bearings, oversize aluminum axles
Carbon fiber upper link, angular contact bearings, oversize aluminum axles
Metal chainstrike plate
Metal chainstrike plate


Like what you see? The new bike is set to be available on the 15th of April, but in the meantime let's hear what you think of it!
Must Read This Week









107 Comments

  • + 24
 I love the way carbon bikes have smooth curves, no welds and that shine, just stunning
  • + 2
 totally agree with you.. They did an amazing job on the design.. The details, like the rounded area on the pivot links surrounding the pivot bolts is buttery smooth..

The carbon chain-stay protector and the metal anti-chain-suck plate are very nicely integrated too. even the paint is pimp!.. all well done.

Props to the design team, another bike on my wish-list.. (V-10c is currently at the top of that list.. a photo of the V-10 hangs next to my monitor at work. for inspiration, and to keep me on task!)
  • + 0
 So......this is NOT a new name for the LTcarbon?
[Reply]
  • + 10
 I have had a blur 4x for five years and absolutely loved it! Descends and corners well and if you have an adjustable fork it climbs great too! Not super stoked about carbon though... expensive and poor fracture toughness for fat arses like me!
[Reply]
  • + 6
 It must go fast because it has red on it tup
  • + 0
 doesnt go faster, but it does add at least twenty horsepower.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Great looking bike but my fear is that the linkage sticks too far down from the bottom bracket. Not really sure what is under that paint and carbon in that spot, looks like one good hit from a rock will make it a long walk back to the car.
  • + 1
 Good catch, I didn't even think about that...surely they'll incorporate some protection plate similar to what the v-10 has for the shock mudgard?
  • - 1
 I wouldn't take it down Downieville as is, that's for sure.
  • + 3
 I ride my 4x at downieville and it rips. I love my 4x. I have had people ask to trade me that have Nomads.
  • + 3
 when its compressed (which is the only likely way that it will hit something) that lower link will move upwards. i'm not sure how much but surely enough for the chainring to take the hit just like any other bike.
they will have thought it through, they aren't going to sell a bike that will snap on the first bottom out
  • + 1
 @ goathead...

I don't think the lower link will be a problem since a build like shown above has a large outer ring that covers the linkage.
s you'll wreck youre chainring instead of youre frame..

correct me if I'm wrong... (going back to my beer)
  • + 1
 Perhaps, but I highly doubt that one good hit -- depending on the hit, of course -- derived from most riding situations/conditions would completely wreck that frame. I've personally been given the privilege of using a hammer to hit a carbon front triangle -- kept on hand to demonstrate to customers the strength of carbon, which is a nifty sales tactic -- and it took several barn-yard swings to eventually put a small crack in the tube (perhaps I am a pxssy). One good hit might b!tch a carbon frame for good, but you'd still ride it home, I can say with confidence. As for the position of the linkage, that's a different story. It does look kind of low, but I'd say either the chain-ring would hit first, or the rear triangle would get shoved backward within its regular path. All this said, what the hell do I know? *Smile.*

I want one.
  • + 1
 Kripes! The linkage looks low...but that is minus the weight of a rider. Der! I totally forgot about rider-weight. I think she'd be alright.
  • + 1
 @ nutcase: If you are banking left it is quite possible, not sure if you been down D-ville but it is a complete brake burner of a trail. It eats bikes. I have bent pedal shafts and knocked the teeth out of the bottom side of them while while going down it. You are almost guaranteed to hit a rock in this manner if you ride it hard. Santa Cruz is one of the most popular bike brands to ride here in Tahoe, I am not knocking them. I am a larger fellow (6'2", 235lbs) and I just wouldn't be confident on that or any carbon bike for that matter. They can definitely have an Achilles heel. That part of the linkage is half as long as the crank arm as pictured, putting it at least two inches below bottom bracket height, and that is taking rider weight into consideration.

www.flickr.com/photos/benfish/2667077980

@ p-ball: As far as riding a 4x down it goes I would be all for it. what you would lack in suspension travel would be made up for with maneuverability, I am a BMX rooted rider and have thought since the days of my first MTB (89 GT Karakoram w/purple flecked paint) that frames should be less diamond-like (read road bike) and more like a BMX in geometry. It took a while for that to materialize but now you can buy all sorts of bikes for different disciplines.
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Sexy xc/trail bike to be sure. And considering the spec, that's pretty cheap.
  • + 14
 It is "from" $3799. That isn't the price of the build shown. The build shown will probably be something like $8000.
  • + 1
 that was sweet but I dont get the relation
  • + 1
 The guy riding the drop bars is named Pat Romano, a flatland freestlyer from the 80's
  • + 1
 oh sick hahaha
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Rival for the Yeti ASR5-c?

Looks amazing! Probably the most relavent bike in Santa Cruz's lineup for trail centre riding?
  • + 1
 My thoughts exactly! But which do you think would be better? This or the Yeti AS-R5c? I had tried to buy the Yeti, but they haven't made the XS or XL's yet so now this has come along and will probably be ready before the Yeti's! Any advice for me?
  • + 6
 why not try a size in between an xs or an xl. seems pretty strange that your going for sizes on opposite ends of the scale
  • + 2
 The Santa Cruz will (probably, I haven't riden it!) have a plusher, more active back end, due to the VPP. The ASR's use the flex of the carbon back end, which gives a tight, precise feel.

To be honest, you could buy either, and have an incredible bike. Both different, but both amazing. Go for whichever you prefer the look of, or the 1 that your local shop has in stock. I bought the Yeti ASR 5 (alloy, not carbon).

BTW, the Yeti is properly long. I'm 6'2, and ride a medium, which is only 10mm shorter in the top tube than my large Giant Anthem X. Even if you're usually an XL, the large Yeti is very, very long. You can comfortable go down 1 size.

Sorry to high-jack a Santa Cruz article with talk of Yetis!
  • + 1
 lol - sorry, my question does seem a little ambiguous now that I read it!! I'm waiting for an XS, I just know that both the XS and XL are waiting on production! So, I'm more wondering if there is any difference between the bikes or if it's basically a Yeti with a santa cruz sticker??
  • + 1
 I would go for Yeti anytime, pivot placement on VPP is not too fortunate. Lower bearings are always gonna get lots of crap on them, plus this specific bike is gonna get it big time from stones and rocks. Yeti has this "flex link" which means two bearings less and that is only a good thing. Plus it seems that Yeti does their bikes "at home" so in a way you do a good thing for "local" economy by buying it.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Many of you are complaining about the low hanging suspension linkage. Once you sit on the bike, the sag drops the BB and rear linkage comes up. It has a 13.1 BB height which is actually HIGHER than the Yeti ASR 5 Carbon (by a .1"). You will always hit the chainring before you hit the bottom of the frame, so I am not sure where the concern comes from.

It has shorter Chainstays which helps for climbing. A more sophisticated suspension that from my experience with Yeti 4-Bar/Single Pivot pedals a little more crisp and much more plush than the Yeti. It is also easier to do maintenance on even though it has more parts. It also tracks the ground better which yields better traction. The Blur 4X was/is a very good bike, and this is just the reincarnation of it.
[Reply]
  • + 6
 Good work Santa Cruz!
  • - 2
 thhhatttt loookss awwwwwwwwwwwwwwww :0
  • + 0
 "With 5 inches of travel and similar geometry to the original Blur 4x, but with a frame weight that is 2.5 lbs
lighter"

Note that on SC website it says the carbon frame is 1 lb lighter than the aluminum Blur TR, and when selecting frames with shocks, its is only 0.6 lb lighter. So that would be $600 to save 0.6 lb.
  • + 2
 I checked that one with possible built weights. With the following setup highlights:

fork: RS Revelation dual air
wheels:Easton Haven Carbon
tyres: Nobby Nic Evo DD 2.25 on sealant
drive:1x10 X9shift/mech with X0 cassette and chain
cranks/CG/: XTR single, Ethirteen XCX
brakes: Formula R1
controls: ENVE/Thomson/SDG
other: Ti bolt set,

You end up slightly over 9kg/20lbs without pedals on a fully capable Trail/AM bike - that is f***d...

I sort of like my 15kg/30lb AM bike...
  • + 1
 I think you guys are missing the point. Sure, there's a weight savings, but have you ridden a carbon bike? The ride quality is what you're paying for IMO. I went from an alloy Trance X to the Advance SL. The lack of noise and improved compliance are notable benefits.
  • + 1
 i'm a light weight (63kg) and I have no issue riding a 15.4kg (with pedals and coil fork, could spend some more and get it down to 14kg) 165mm all mountain rig, I can still climb faster then most, especially when dialling in U-turn and dropping the head set a bit, it all feels a lot more stable at over 55kmh in a forest, something under 10kg's at that speed would feel....................skittish, for me
  • + 1
 ooo thank you... it's good to know that I am not the only one thinking that too little weight is bad mmmkay... I just dropped my AM bike slightly under 14,5kg and under that border there's just thousand bucks per kilo to get lower. And I see no point in doing that as everything gets wrecked one day, and it's super expensive to replace and that light is just easy to wreck.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I wanted to buy a Blur LT Carbon, now I'm not so sure anymore.. May I should buy that Blur TRC. Wondering how different the Geo is compared to the normal LT-C. I my opinion SC ist actually the bikebrand with the most outstandig bikes. I have the normal Blur since 7 years now and it is fun to ride it as it was the first day. I nerver had such a good trailbike before Smile ! And they are also very durable - I had never changed the bearings on my V10 nor the Blur since I have they - By other bikes I had, I did this once a year....
  • + 1
 C'mon UR from Switzerland you are one of few with solid argumentation to run a full on AM machine like NOMAD Wink take BLT at least, TRc is for those who have hills around, not the most awesome mountains in the world
  • + 1
 Sorry but Switzerland isn't only mountains. At the place where I live are only Hills (tall up to 2000 over sea level) arround in a radius of 30 km. I think a Blur Lt fits better into it as an Nomad. But a Nomad would not be completly wrong.
  • + 1
 I still envy your "location". I own a Nomad and as a matter of fact it works exceptionally well in XC/trail riding, and it is an old version. The only thing i can recommend after trying Blur LT2 is if you are close the edge of sizes (for instance I am 180 and both M an L should fit me) I would go for bigger size as it is super short. On M I was a properly cramped, and if I would go for such bike as a daily basis trail/AM bike I would go for something longer, promoting a better, more effective pedalling position with a minimum loss to Dh performance/ fun factor. It's always better for a trail bike to be a bit longer and then fine tune your reach with stem length.

Cheers!
  • + 1
 I'm 5'9 with medium LTC and had to go to a 100mm stem to fit In the bike. If you are taller perhaps a large
  • + 1
 yea exactly. SC has it very strange with sizes, they always downsize stuff. It's cool when the trail points down as the shorter bike is easier to move around and more playful, but on uphills with light tyres it's a wheelie machine. It's always better to go for longer frame and shorter stem. 586mm TT in Blur TRc isn't the longest thing you can hope for M size either. These guys at Sc must be some mig... small people
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Hmm... when I serviced my old Nomad three weeks ago I thought that the bottom pivot location is less than... good. No matter how often you service it, you will find tons of crap on the bearings. Back wheel throws the dirt on the tight space between link and swingarm where it makes it's way to scrape a bigger and bigger hole in both. I buy the fact how resistant to hits is the CF on new frames but how about intensive scratching?

Then I see how low the bottom linkage sits on this new beauty and I remember how often during a short stall, some big stone pushes the roller of my CG to the bottom of the swingarm, even though I have a 38t bash. That pivot base on Blur TRc is very likely to sit lower than regular 2x setup CG roller.

So dear potential buyer If you are into shredding the gnaRRR (pirate aRRRRR) of technical trails with lots of stones and boulders I would strongly suggest a 1x9 or 1x10 setup with a taco CG.

dang! dang! dang! location location location...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 As the proud owner of a Jackal, Nomad and new Carbon V10 I can confidently say that Santa Cruz bikes are the goods!!! I've owned a ton of different brands of bikes ranging from Specialized, Giant, Foes, etc.. but none have performed like the Santa Cruz's I have owned (even the Blur, Blur 4X, Heckler and Bullit of generations past). This is the next addition to the fleet for sure.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The linkage is definitely a week point on my Lt2 I knocked off the grease fittings after a half dozen rides,JB weld works wonders,but depends on your terrain,many rocks in my area.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 i'm not hatin but why does the paint remind me of a dept store schwinn? wish they would reissue the 4X instead.
  • + 1
 I couldn't place it but you are right, my wife had a schwin mesa back in the day, black and red scalloped graphics......
  • + 1
 zzzzzzz

it was this scheme, but black and red, can't find it....

www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?Year=1999&Brand=Schwinn&Model=Mesa%20GSX&Type=bike

why did you neg fullbug, cause he doesn't like the paint job. Get a life dude.
  • + 0
 i originally remember a cheap full sus bike it was on. just an observation.
  • + 0
 i dont like the paint job either looks cheap
  • + 5
 i was just thinking the finish lookis damn good!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 This is an awesome ride, but I am not feeling those stripe graphics at all.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The cleanest frame I have ever seen, how are the no weld marks in it? anyone know?
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Having a lot of friends that ran the Blur 4X as their trail bikes a few years back, this will surely spark a revival for them - lighter, faster dang! Nice work Santa Cruz!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Who wants to buy my LTC and 4X. Looks like they won't be needed anymore....
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I wonder if this new machine will replace the Blur LTc. I do know that a 29er LTc is in the works.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 oh my goodness ....
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Pardon the pun, but they have kind of blured the lines of their trail bikes with this, .5" less travel then blur lt, but frame weight in line with xc bike. I'm confused.
  • + 3
 It's the geometry and frame angles that change the bike and, because of that, the intended purpose and ride characteristics. More XCish than the LT.
  • + 2
 Propped myself, didn't know I could do that. I totally agree, sounds like interesting geometry, releaxed head angle with longer top tube. Shouldn't be a shock to me, santa cruz loves to have redundant bikes, I ride a heckler, cheap mans butcher, and even cheaper mans blur lt.....
  • + 2
 Not sure what SC considers a long TT, but it must be only relative to their own bikes and nothing else in the industry.
  • + 1
 Same thing with a 68 degree HA...I wouldn't consider that slack?? Maybe it is...Slack to me is around 66 for a trailbike, right? Either way, looks like a great all day XC epic bike from SC
  • + 1
 What's strange is that it's slacker than the LT but with .5" less travel and meant to be more of a XC bike.
Sort of wonder if they're doing this and will plan on dropping the LT in a year or two...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I'd love to see them put shimano's crappiest line of parts, and a super low end suntour fork just to mess with people
[Reply]
  • + 1
 This would probably be involved in my dream bike build.. mmmmmmmm
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Not too sure what about this bike isn't perfect.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 this XC is the best for now!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 holy moly! I like it a LOT Big Grin
[Reply]
  • + 1
 would be nice to cover up those gressey niplies with a plate or something
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Nice ride, but I think it's not as nice as the 4x...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I WILL buy her! If I can actually get my hands on one... Beautiful!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Is it me or it doesnt look to have a 4x Geo? Looks mor XC...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 yay more bikes to choose from in the gnar-trail riding category Big Grin
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Absolutely Gorgeous, i am a big fan of SC BIKES and this makes me drool.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Such an awesome bike. I wish i could have it lol
  • - 2
 Its such a sick bike but Santa Cruz is getting less creative. Come on make a cool Name
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Thats one clean looking rig, props to Santa Cruz
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Any details on the rear axle/ hub spacing?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 $3799 is a fair price for this sick looking bike!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 looks like one sick bike
[Reply]
  • + 0
 props to Santa Cruz for making sucha sweet XC bike!!!
[Reply]
  • + 0
 so sick wish i could get one
[Reply]
  • + 1
 yay grease ports!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 this bike is pure sex
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Very good looking bike.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 beautiful engineering
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Its a very close copy of the yeti 5
  • + 1
 Except for pretty much everything about it, least of which is VPP2.
  • - 1
 Oh yeah, I forgot , Who cares about Santacruz?
  • + 1
 I have seraph's old 4X and it is my number one trail bike. it has been beaten and abused and held up well. I am a big fan of the geometry especially the low BB, so I might need to look into this replacement.
  • + 1
 One of my 4Xs! I have had two at this point in time. I hope to have another one in the future.
  • + 1
 I still have 2 of the 4x's. Love it to death and when they were running low on them I picked up a spare frame just in case.... now that this is out I think one of the frames might be up for sale...... anyone??
[Reply]
  • + 0
 would this frame/bike be cheaper if it was offered in aluminum?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Are you insinuating that this frame will *snap* when you ride it, just because it's carbon? Or are you saying "Oh SNAP, that's a hot bike!"? I'm not sure whether to neg prop you or not.
  • - 2
 i meant oh snap thats shit hot!
[Reply]
  • - 3
 Fuck i wish my friends were still sponsored by SC, I WANT THIS!!!
[Reply]

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2014. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv16 0.064835
Mobile Version of Website