Rocky Mountain responds to your questions.

 WOW!!!! THAT, is exactly what every company needs to do to quell the masses and educate the new guys out there. Very impressive Rocky.

 Ok, I don't know how technically different it actually is from a giant reign but the fact that these two bikes look generic and similar now is just wrong. Where are the Rocky mountian paint jobs? the bright flames or the Fighter plane? where are the glorious CnC'd parts, the drilled holes? the gussets?
Yeh blah-de-blah it works well now and its light and it goes uphill, but I don't want that. I want it to be heavy, colourful and with maple leaves and canadian flags on it and dripping in syrup

 I like how some people are calling this design "generic" or similar to other bikes. I'm not trying to take away from the slayer here, i'm just happy bikes like this are almost considered common and the sport has progressed to being this awesome!

 boomforeal: I think you do have a point but by focusing solely on the parity marketing you overlook many other aspects.

Because bikes are expensive and often a passion, the buying process is most of the time a high involment one which suggest that people have a certain level of knowledge on what they are going to buy. Rocky has addressed most of the critics that the former Slayer had and it just so happens that the bikes "looks like" another brand. Rocky can easily overcome this point in a marketing perspective by saying "function over look".

Also, people are going in boutique and get to talk to a salesperson prior to buy their new bike. This is a critical point where the buyer will be educated on how different the Smoothlink is compare to Maestro or Horst link bikes.

Finally, I agree with you that people on discussion forum will give some credit to other brands for the desing but I you would still have to convince me that will translate into a direct negative effect on sales. A good example is how people used to say that Trek with their ABP "looks like" a horst link but at the end of the day Trek has now a pretty successfull line-up in term of sales.

Just my perspective, thanks,
Lp

 (continued from previous post)
Also, chainline changes significantly based on what gear you're in, so despite the somewhat Ellsworth-esque claims of the lower link "always" being parallel to the chainline, that is also obviously untrue - not that it matters because the theory that chainline being parallel to the lower link alone will impart no extension or compression force to the suspension is flawed anyway. Braking performance is a factor of instant centre position relative to wheelbase and the height of the centre of mass. Basically, it's the same old marketing filler-talk the bike industry has given us for the past 20 years. There is nothing legitimately innovative in the suspension design in my opinion.

However, in fairness to RM, the bike does look really cool, it's great that they've considered the option of reservoir shock mounting along with water bottle mounting, and I'm sure it's great fun to ride. The geometry looks good, the suspension will do its job (small imperfections aside - let's be honest, it's not a big deal despite my big rant) and I don't doubt that anyone buying one would have a sick time on it, regardless of the marketing spiel.

 There's alot of great bikes in the market place. Each manufacturer is trying to get to the same destination. They just taking different routes to get there. Test ride the bike and see if it suits you. If it does, buy it. I like Nike (fashion / brand positioning) but I wear New Balance (Fit). Bottom line.. you should buy what feels best to you and your style of riding whether it's a Trek or a Specialized or a Rocky.

Keep it in perspective. Look at the shit designs we used to ride 10 - 15 years ago. Lifes good. Ride your bike.

 wow, sounds pretty sick

 Very awesome. Liked the old design better.. however, less fragile parts. (i.e Carbon fibre seat stay) Always really preferred this look as opposed to other linkages on different designs.

 i want one

 Sorry but the suspension explanation was flat out wrong. The angle of only one particular bar of ANY 4-bar linkage has no bearing on motion of the axle. The axle path NORMAL line is what you should be looking at, not the angle between chainline and a single bar of the suspension. That theoretical detail aside, the actual axle path you get from that layout will be very VERY close to circular, ie that of a singlepivot, so claiming that it's better than Trek's ABP or FSR (which also almost always generates a damn-near-circular axle path) based on that is also incorrect. For all intents and purposes the ride characteristics that you can achieve with the "smoothlink" layout are pretty well identical to both ABP and FSR. Whether the pivot is above, below or at the axle makes surprisingly little difference to axle path (and thus pedalling characteristics), because the distance between that pivot and the axle is extremely small relative to the distance between "horst" pivot and main pivot, and the angle between chainstay and seatstay links changes very little and at quite a low rate. How do I know? Because I've mapped it out (download Linkage from www.bikechecker.com and check it yourself).
(continued next post)

 sure .. they design and explain great bikes, but can they hang a sign? or stand one up? NOPE, their handy skills seem to be lacking just a touch I SURE HOPE THE TALL BLONDE GUY isn't in the engineering dept.... or we are in teeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrouble!

 Interesting. Definitely has some Giant styling. Suspension isn't a horst link, ha. Silly bike companies moving a pivot point a few centimeters and giving it a new name. Wonder if they are licensing the suspension design. Still it looks nice, and if rides well who cares.

 the more I look at this new slayer, the more I'm stoked... its actually super clean design and BOMBER pivots (can the look a likes say that, eh??). And the new smoothlink, realize they evolved the 4 link from the horst or whatever the other 4 links are called. To be better. I'm with Alex, and I don't even know the guy. (see you in Garda, we'll have a few beers, eh!).

Ja someone mentioned the brakes, thats the only unknown for me... as I have a 2006 slayer 70 and she jacked hard especially how I had the RP3 pumped up 5-10psi over. My 2009 remedy, she has the nicest all around rear end any man could ask from an all day ripper! But I know this gen slayer is better... the days are numbered for my rem, and I didn't even get to know her so well....

 Either the guys at Rocky are very brave or very stupid coming on here to answer questions of which 90% must be asked by total morons.

Congrats on the bike guys. Definitely looks like a step forward in overall design. If the BB height isn't too high I might get one for the wife. A degree slacker HA and I might get one myself

 That's awesome !!

 Not sure how it performs under braking. Yes it could perform realy good under pedaling over bumps. Yes function over fashion, always. Dont get fooled if one bike looks similar to another - ITS WRONG. But lets get serious, every design is a matter of compromise and it only matter how it suits YOU. Let riding do the talking !

 artt: I have Slayer SXC (09) and have about 500 hours of heavy duty XC riding on it....half of it with a coil rear, 180mm fork up front doing full on BC bikepark runs, epic multi hour XC with a shorter fork, moderate jump trails with the 180 fork (Shore, Island, Interior BC). Albeit I haven't done any large drops to flat, but 6-8 feet to transition at speed. I consider it my XC/Mini DH bike... Frame has held up well, but the 09 has a slightly more substantial chainstay than yours. I consider myself a fairly smooth rider, but I have been known to be a hack on some trails.

Seat tube crack? Have a long enough seatpost extending past the TT?

 if i'm remembering correctly here, the reason why FSR is a good climber is because the chain tension keeps the suspension from playing out while under load. so if my thinking is correct here, this is going to pedal worse than an FSR bike since there is no chain tension to keep the suspension under control while climbing. correct me if i'm wrong here...

 Recently tried the Slayer SXC and loved it for both up and down, and looks like this will be an improvement in several ways (besides the agressive looks in my opinion but that's secondary and I'm not too keen on the cable routing..)

Curious about the patent pending "Straight Up Geometry" though - what makes it different from other bikes with similar geometry and exact same seat angle (i.e. Trek Scratch at 66degHA/75degSA or Spec Enduro at 66.5degHA/75degSA)?

 lookslikelookslike. this guy needs a lesson in parity marketing. one would hope there's a good reason for why the frame looks like it does - however, the fact that it "looks like" other brands' bikes is a problem: the fact that it looks like another bike suggests rocky figured "huh, that's a good idea/design, let's use that!". the slayer's design doesn't distinguish it from other bikes. the design merely reinforces the reputation of the brand that originated the design: they came up with the design, they get the credit as other brands copy it. say what you want about the last gen slayer, it looked unique - and that was part of what made it successful. if you're trotting out a common design, the only way to capitalize is if you originate the design - everyone else is merely giving you props by copying you.

 Fine looking bike! I love the paint job (much nicer then the current Slayer paint jobs). Just wondering, why was the announcement about the new design made so early in the season? Isn't Rocky worried no one will want to buy the 2010 Slayers? When can we expect the 2011 Slayer to go on sale?

 I've been completely stoked with my old Slayer SXC, this looks like a sweet ride, a seat tube angle that'll let you ride up, and a head angle that'll let you descend. Looks like a perfect Fro-ride bike to me!

 i would never get a slayer again. i cracked a frame in the seat-tube weld, and it was like pulling teeth to get rm to honor the waranty. rm finally did after i threated them with my imaginary lawyer. the bike is great when its up and running, but the company doesnt seem to back up its product.i have a 2006, this new one is probably just as flimsy(lite weight). the seat tube looks just as lonng and unsupported as past models(snap into a slim jim).im a 195lb xc rider who likes to keep rubber to the ground and i doent think i abused my ride like rm said i did. buyer beware! ask lbs, rm has a rep, hopefully they will change it. kona rulz!!

 I had a 5 year old 2 month Slayer with a BB that was ovalized. Yes - ovalized. It was warrantied - no questions asked. I bet you'll find lots of happy RMB customers out there

 the old design was way sicker, it was like nothing else on the market, i understand the climbing aspects, but come on couldn't you have just improved the old design a little bit.

 That was well explained...but as someone who rides a 150mm trail/am bike as my main rig, I agree with Slacker head tubes on bigger bikes, but really steep seat angles with really slack front ends feel really weird.

 I wanna ride that bike! Perfect seat and head angle plus ISCG tabs! But I'm not sure I wanna own one: I need to like the way it looks, and this one looks a bit sad. I guess I'll keep my Slayer for at least another year.

 Great response from Rocky.
I love the 75/66.5 angels, that sounds ace for AM riding.

As for the Air vs coil argument.
I have both on my bikes, for me the Air is a fit and forget shock, I have had a couple of Dhx5.0's and a RP23. The coil (I have a Dhx5 and Vivid, I can break in no time at all).
It is important to remember that many XC guys with air shocks will use the full travel of the shock for 5 hours plus every Saturday and Sunday, as well as several rides of 2hours plus during the week, so that is well over 10 hours ride time a week, sometimes for 2 or more years between a service. Now we are up to 1000hours ride time in a couple of years between a services.
Now how many minutes ride time do you get out of a coil shock between services?

 Where can I get one of those northface jackets with the rocky mountain logo on it, Im diggin it!

 This shape of frame is common because its effective, simple as that.
Its awesome that rocky answers thier critics, theres not alot of brands that would do that.

 These bikes are astonishing,probably designed by Chuck Noriss's inspiration.

 Try to read and listen "bikersinn".

Fantastic looking bike! Would love to try it out!

 It looks like all others: Trek, Giant, ............................????
Where is the special Rocky-Style?

 Reminds me of the GIANT REIGN, looks a hell of a lot similar

 165 ain't half bad.......

 so are they using this design for their slopestyle platform?

 I wish it came as a frameset!

 Does this mean there may be a new Slayer SS coming soon??????

 Should have been a coil shock. No more said.

 I think if u ask a good question u should get one for free

 I'm glad another company has figured out the best way to design a pivot.

 is it coming with a fox 180 talas? if so that is a damn fine bike...

 good job guys, looks awesome and well done

 Ha ha someones phone is ringing.

 Fromme Killer!

 4799 for a bicycle is a bit retarded

 Nice bikes I want one!!

 SYSTEM EVO BY TREK copy.. copy ...

 looks like a Mondraker Factor...