Trance X 29er Details • Availability: August• Rear wheel travel: 120mm • 69° head angle, 73° seat angle • OverDrive 2 head tube (1-1/4'' top and 1-1/2'' bottom) • Integrated 89.5mm BB shell • Internal cable routing (incl. dropper post cable) • Frame weight: 2670 grams (claimed) w/ rear shock and hardware | Giant's Adam Craig has been campaigning aboard the prototype Trance X 29er for some time now, including taking a win at the recent U.S. National Super D Championships aboard the bike. Out back, their dual link Maestro suspension controls the 120mm of rear wheel travel, and the bike uses a single spar swingarm (their 26'' bikes feature two vertical spars) that allows Giant to tuck the rear wheel in as tight as possible to the seat tube. While the version shown above is still in the pre-production stages, we can expect the final design to remain basically the same. This means that it is likely the the new bike will employ a standard, 135mm quick release rear end rather than any type of thru-axle system, and we don't expect the frame to be equipped with ISCG chain guide tabs either (especially given the integrated BB shell). Cable routing looks remarkably clean thanks to internal routing that also sees the bike's dropper post line run through the top tube. Expect to see the production Trance X lineup at your local Giant dealer around August. |
About Us
Contacts FAQ Terms of Use Privacy Policy Sign Up! SitemapAdvertise
AdvertisingCool Features
Submit a Story Product Photos Videos Privacy RequestRSS
Pinkbike RSS Pinkbike Twitter Pinkbike Facebook Pinkbike Youtube Pinkbike Instagram
Why do people keep commenting on 29ers? If you don't like them, don't buy them. They will then go away. If its only the odd road bike rider buying them, they won't meet sales targets.
If you want a huck bike, go buy an early 2k's Karpy with some monsters.
And talking about "purdy" this, and purdy that... do you have a murse, matching skinny pants shoes, t shirt, and f*ggoty trucker hat with a poser early 90's volleyball/roadbiker bill? If you want to talk about looks... talk about girls or something, not some piece of machinery that gives you enjoyment. The only people I know who bitch about looks dealing with machines that bring enjoyment are girls and fags talking about the latest sex toy on the market. Lmao
But as the majority of giant, i imagine, are sold as complete bikes i cant see it being an issue or do you all change the forks as soon as you by a brand new bike?
You can get thru-axle 10mm Hadley or King hubs that will work on your std dropout 135mm rear end and will feel exactly the same as the "improved 142mm standard" rear end.
So, to all you e-riding wannabes who pushed the industry for this new "improved" standard, thanks for another great new thing that is nothing more than a new expense and a new way to sell a bike that isn't really improved.
You know, like your insistence on 15mm axles in forks because you were convinced the extra 45gm in a 20mm format might make you lose that XC race you imagine doing 3 years from now when you finally start riding with some regularity.
Instead, you should call your Frat Brothers and do a circle jerk of mutual congratulation for your witty internet put-down. Flatbillin' it HUGE, broheem!
Don't forget to congratulate yourself on expensive new "standards" that you can afford with your swanky new job selling vapor to eedjits!
I'm not a geo junky, but I'm guessing the seat being that far back over the rear wheel will make it more flickable? I don't like the looks of the s-curved down tube, but it leaves room for when 36" wheels are all the rage.
I live 1.5, 2, and 3hrs from lift access parks and I think I'm the only person in my state that owns a DH bike.You literally can't buy a single part for a AM to DH bike without special ordering and that incudes flat pedals.
@katmai: Just to add to what you're saying..... on paper, the negatives of a 29 (it's effect on other parts of the system / unsprung weight being just one issue) are undeniable. The 650b sounds like a reasonable compromise. You gain some in the area of small obstacle demolition, but don't have anywhere near as great an effect unsprung weight, gyroscopic effect, or wheelbase increase to accommodate 6 (for AM bikes) to 8+ inches of travel.
29's are cool, but they're trail bikes!
If you want flick-ability get a bmx bike
@skiwenric- flick-ability doesn't just apply to jumps! you need that for tight fast corners and rock gardens! a good bike always needs a quick rear end- IMO
Flick-ability is possible on 26's and 29's both, but it seems that a lot of bike guys are afraid to steer using some muscle. Road racing 400lb motorcycles, we steered rather aggressively if we wanted to to go real fast. I steer the same way on an MTB and have done so on 26's and 29's. It's not the bike.
"Flick-ability is possible on 26's and 29's both, but it seems that a lot of bike guys are afraid to steer using some muscle. Road racing 400lb motorcycles, we steered rather aggressively if we wanted to to go real fast. I steer the same way on an MTB and have done so on 26's and 29's. It's not the bike."
@BDKR when you use these big wheels for competing any advantage you can get is good. trail riding and hucking probably not so much. 80% of the top ten in last years XC WC liked them though.
If you like to pedal until you are hypoxic, those are the ones
Agreed!
also, wtf is up with that old ass standard QR in the rear Giant? That solely alone is enough for me to never even think about purchasing it.
and no, no guarantee that it will make your bike stiffer... but, it should, if its a well designed product. i noticed when i upgraded to 15mm qr right away. at this point in time, im just waiting for the 9mm to die off.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieuBkWHfCuc
I have owned ten Giants and I will probably get myself one of these since they don't make the 26" Trance anymore, but I have to completely disregard their marketing attempts in order to keep loving the brand.
Zero!
I've owned and ridden a lot of bikes and I think Giants are equal to anything on the market. And then I compare the price and it is an easy decision to make. Frames are great. Components are great. Cockpit sucks. And when they introduced the 1.25" steerer tube I had to get a fellow Pinkbiker to source me a stem from the States (thank you whattheheel) which really ticked me off.
Kevin Dana, call a bunch of your riders and ask them what stem and bars they are running and put that combo as OEM. We are not roadies - we do not need a 90mm stem on a 6" bike.
Pinkbikers beware that Giant's warranty just changed - if you race your bike, you void your warranty.
Good thing I don't race
you'll also have to get a new fork as well mind you but as i think the majority of giants are sold as complete bikes i dont think its going to be an issue.
previously had a 2008 trance x1 26" bike and once i stuck a 140mm revelation on the front it was an awsome bike, didnt miss a thru axle on the rear at all unlike the bike i replaced it with which could have done with one, a 2011 fsr stumpy evo.
think that quite a few who just say "must have thru axle on rear" need to start thinking for themselves rather than just following industry fashion.
as for the whole 26/29/650b have ridden 29's and can see their advantages but also like my 26" bikes, especially as i have loads of parts for them. if your really vocal/ concerned about then whole wheel size thing then frankly you need to get out and ride a bit more then you wont care what size your riding as long as your having fun
"According to PB armchair engineers, they need low and slack 26ers so they can be quicker handling than the steeper angled 29ers. Two different ways of getting to the same place in handling."
But that's a confusion between turn in responsiveness (29) and stability once leaned over (26). It's not really an accurate comparison.
A 29" can get away with a steeper head angle (which it kind of needs anyway) when the additional rotational mass will bring some stability back to the table.
@jcinv: I've been hearing the benefit of 29 is a shallower AOA for roots and rocks so they roll over them better. Cool! That makes all the sense in the world, but the increased unsprung weight and rotational mass means the suspension has to work that much harder to get the wheel back on the ground to maintain traction. In a fast downhill sweeper with small steps in the middle of it, a 26" will do better because the suspension can react faster (get it's wheel back on the ground faster) then a 29. You could make the 29 react as quickly, but you've just added size and weight to the suspension system to achieve that.
Oooops!
The 26 wheel is nimbler, accelerates quicker. But falls deeper into holes. For a plow rider it's inferior. For a rider who works the terrain it's more fun because its tendency to drop into more holes and drop deeper into holes gives the rider more chances to work the terrain for speed. But if the rider doesn't have the skill to work the terrain that way, a 29 format bike is the better choice, he'll hold more momentum through the same rough patches that the 26 rider has to work smart to go fast. A skilled rider can work the terrain with a 29 bike just as he would on the 26 bike, and can take crazier lines while doing so. But 29 bikes have a different feel that doesn't appeal to all riders.
For sure 29 bikes can run steeper HA than 26 bikes and have the same general feel of stability in steep parts and at speed. Seems to me they feel the same with about a 2deg HA difference, a 70 in 29 format feels like a 68 in 26 format.
As to the bike PB presents here, I think Adam Craig would beat 99.8% of PB viewers in a Super D or DH no matter what bike he's on, but it's interesting to see what he prefers and what he's developed with Giant.
On tight fast descents a slacker head allows for a tighter turn without throwing the weight out front and to the side. This translates to better tracking when descending and therefore better handling. The sloppiness at low speed diesn't come into it. Everyone knows the benefits of stability from big wheels but the same force that causes that stability makes them struggle to change direction at speed. They just can't hit the same handling extremes as smaller wheels any more than a dj rig can tail wip like a BMx.
Taletotell, you are confusing gemoetry and corresponding handling traits. Slacker = more stability, steeper = quicker turning. Slack = faster in the rough sections making up for the deficit in tight corners.
Center of gravity, wheelbase, front center, rear center and trail all impact handling characteristics. Reciprocating mass will affect direction change and handling traits. BB drop, stem length, handlebar width, and Q factor have impacts on handling as well. I could explain the pros and cons of changing each of them in different direction, but since you missed the basics, it is too much trouble. You will likely argue anyway.
There's a logical conclusion there but let's move on.
Within the minds of car and motorcycle racers, many corners if not all are broken down into multiple stages. How many is up to you of course, but I see it as approach, entry, mid corner, and exit. Some, but not many vehicles are stellar at every single phase. Normally however, some are better at some parts then others.
In the case of a steep angled 29 vs a slack angled 26 with a lot of travel, the 29 has the potential to be far better during turn in. However, what makes it good at turn in limits it's potential to carry speed mid corner, which is exactly where a 26" AM or DH bikes will have an advantage.
That said, these are apples and oranges. What would be awesome is compare a long travel 29 to a long travel 26. Instead of a short travel trail bike to dh bikes.
Completely agree!!!!
"You cannot make such broad generalizations. Handling is tuned by numerous overlapping variables."
I agree, but there are some generalizations that act as basics to work from. The details do matter but in win or lose racing or dog fighting, these basics still apply.
Case in point? Mass centralization, which I argue Kawasaki started when some of their racers used pretty aggressive steering head angles but with longer swing arms to aid stability. It was the packaging that allowed them to apply some basics in a unique way.
I really think we're all just talking past each other and there's a lot more agreement then we realize. LOL
"On tight fast descents a slacker head allows for a tighter turn without throwing the weight out front and to the side."
You need to explain that better. It seems like you are saying a slower-handling, slower-steering bike actually is quicker handling. Which would be a necessary internal inconsistency.
Quicker handling is the opposite of stable at speed. The very opposite. No matter what you are arguing here, you can't get around that.
Unless you choose to re-define "quicker" in some new way. And that's what it looks like you're doing. Looks like to you, "quicker" is being used as a synonym for "stable at speed."
Which, as I said, is not true.
Ain't that the truth. Most of the people I come across aren't riding their bikes to 50% of their potential.
The truth is, most riders don't know how to handle a bicycle, and expect the bike to do everything for them while they passively sit on the saddle and hold the grips. That's why we see people buying 6" + 6" bikes for trails that are 4-foot-wide dirt sidewalks. They think they're riding "all mountain" because they have an "all mountain" bike. Just like people who drive a Hummer imagine they're rugged and outdoorsy because they drive a stupid gas-guzzler on pristine asphalt in some dorky suburb.
Yeah... A lot of people don't seem to realize that to get the best out of these things you need to put in a little effort. :-)
but this is one of the only 29ers i've seen that looks like a Jr. frame with 26" wheels on it.. it would've been nice to see some real differences in the frame (re)design to make it suit having 29" wheels...
How about running the cables on the 2013 Glory like this cuz they get shuttled.
We shouldn't have to use zip ties or stick on fasteners.
Will I have to wait for a carbon 2014?
It's not fun to ride but you would have been on the podium. I ride for a team and we all have XTC 29ers and at least one of Giant's FS bikes and we all have proven that the XTC 29er is the fastest on an XC loop. I had to get one as I was letting the team down (I was already the oldest and slowest).
either way, a 1 1/4 upper crown isnt going to be any stiffer or better than a 1 1/2 or lighter than a 1 1/8.
Its still a 29er and is considered a trail bike, so tapered or 1.125 is still sufficient, unless the headtube is made of playdoh...
How do you imagine engineering a suspension system would go, rob? Do you think they do a Napoleon Dynamite, invent a Liger, and then create a Liger Optimized Suspension System ("LOSS") based on how they wanted it to LOOK?
In case you haven't been paying really close attention, designing and selling based on LOOKS rather than function is why Crank Brothers parts fail early and fail often... while having what many consider great LOOKS.
gosh!
I heard brits had a good sense of humor, dry but sharp. what happened here?
I'd say look in the mirror when talking about irony!
There's that fabled UK humor sense! Bang-on, Jeeves! Right-o!
www.canadiancyclist.com/reviews.php?id=23253
Click on the Photo Gallery too!