Norco Range C 7.2 - Review
 |
The rugged trails that British Columbia is famous for are only a short drive away from Norco's headquarters, technical test pieces full of rocks, roots, and mud, so it only makes sense that a bike like the Range C would emerge from this environment. With 160mm of travel, a 66° head angle, and a carbon front triangle, the Range falls squarely into the all-mountain category, a bike that's meant to be pedaled to the top of the hill, but with more emphasis placed on the descent. There are a four complete models in the Range C line, with prices ranging from $3465 to $7115 USD depending on the build kit – the 7.2 model we tested retails for $5465 USD, and there's also a frame only option for $2595.
Norco Range Carbon 7.2 Details
• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro race
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• Rear wheel travel: 160mm
• Carbon front triangle
• RockShox Pike RT 160mm fork
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Weight: 29.4lb (size L w/o pedals)
• MSRP: $5465 USD
• www.norco.com, @norcobicycles
Frame Details
Anyone who's ever whiled away the hours doodling sketches of fighter jets and stealth bombers will appreciate the clean lines and understated paint job of the Range 7.2 – the low slung top tube, shapely head tube junction, and the internal cable routing make for a clean and modern looking frame. The bike's front triangle and seat stays are constructed from carbon fiber, which Norco claims creates a frame that's 20% lighter than the full aluminum version. Aluminum is still used for the chainstays and the one piece Holloform link that joins the rear triangle to the Monarch Plus RT3 shock.
The Range's front triangle and seat stays are constructed from Norco's Smoothwall carbon fiber.
The internally routed brake and derailleur housing emerge from the down tube just before the bottom bracket junction.
Internal routing is in place for the rear derailleur and brake line, as well as for the Stealth Reverb dropper post. We did find that the rubber grommets that are intended to help keep out water and to further secure the lines had a tendency to work themselves up and out of the frame over time. It's a minor, almost trivial issue, but the system could use a little refinement. Other frame details include ISCG 05 tabs, which are used to secure the Range's BlackSpire taco style bashguard, and a thick downtube protector to ward off rock strikes and other potentially damaging impacts. The lack of an upper guide of some sort seems a little strange, especially considering that there's a lower bash guard already in place. We didn't lose the chain at any point during testing, a testament to the efficacy of the thick-thin ring design / clutch derailleur combo, but a guide would be a welcome addition for the additional peace of mind it would bring.
 |
 Norco's four bar linkage suspension layout has the rear pivot located on the chain stay well below the rear axle. |
Suspension Design and Geometry
The Range uses Norco's take on a Horst Link, four bar linkage, with the rearmost pivot located below the rear axle on the chain stay. Norco alters the suspension layout slightly depending on the intended usage of a bike, and downhill bikes get a slightly more rearward axle path, while with XC and trail bikes the focus is more on pedaling efficiency. The emphasis for the Range was on creating a bike that would remain stable and controlled at high speeds over rough terrain, the conditions typically associated with enduro racing.
Norco's use of their Gravity Tune geometry theory continues with the Range, and if you look at the geometry chart, you'll notice that the rear center measurement increases slightly with each size. This is accomplished through changes in the front triangle's geometry - as the top tube gets longer with each size, the bottom bracket moves forward, ensuring that the front center to rear center ratio remains the same, and keeping the same balanced ride feel for all sizes. The changing bottom bracket position also alters the seat tube angle, causing it to get slightly slacker as the frame size increases.
|  | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | On the flip side, that active rear suspension was beneficial when we were confronted with climbs composed of irregular sandstone steps, and helped to keep the rear wheel in contact with the ground without losing traction and spinning out. |
Climbing / Handling
The Range's reach numbers may not be quite as sprawling as what we're starting to see spread throughout the industry, but the bike's 72.8° seat tube angle combined with a 625mm top tube does make for a roomy cockpit when seated. Luckily, Norco had the foresight to include a 50mm stem to go with the 800mm wide Race Face Atlas bars, which helps keep things from feeling overly stretched out.
When it comes time to head uphill, the Range will get the job done, but like a kid that's forced to eat their veggies before being rewarded with dessert, or in this case, a downhill, it's not overly eager on the climbs. Flipping the compression switch on the Monarch RT3 into the middle setting is mandatory in order to quiet down the amount of rear end movement during out of the saddle pedaling, otherwise the shock has a tendency to cycle deep into its travel during those efforts, even set up with 30% sag. On the flip side, that active rear suspension was beneficial when we were confronted with climbs composed of irregular sandstone steps, and helped to keep the rear wheel in contact with the ground without losing traction and spinning out. Maxxis' Highroller II tires also lent a helping hand in the quest for traction, and although they're overkill for the hardpacked, sandy trails surrounding Sedona, they would be a good choice for the loamier (and muddier) trails near Norco's British Columbia headquarters.
While there may have been more rear suspension motion than we would have preferred, the Range is a well balanced ride, and it was easy to perform the weight shifts necessary to keep moving forward through steep, uphill switchbacks without stalling out. Plus, Norco has thoughtfully spec'd a 30t front ring for the SRAM X1 drivetrain, which helps take the sting out of those steep, soul crushing climbs where slow and steady is the only possible speed.
 |
| Even when plowing through chunky sections of trail it was still easy to get the bike airborne in order to pop up and over whatever obstacles got in the way. |
Descending
The amount of time it takes to come to terms with the nuances of a new bike's handling varies, but aboard the Range this period was extremely short, and in no time at all we felt comfortable enough to dive into the trickiest bits of trail. A technical downhill is all that's needed to get the Range to shed its somewhat sleepy climbing manners; once gravity takes over there's a personality shift that transforms it into a playful yet stable ride. Even when plowing through chunky sections of trail it was still easy to get the bike airborne in order to pop up and over whatever obstacles got in the way, and sharp corners and rapid direction changes didn't pose any problems either, no matter how tightly the trail slalomed through the ever-present cactus and yucca plants.
When compared to the geometry of other bikes in the 160mm travel range, Norco hasn't pushed any of the Range's numbers to the extremes – the head angle isn't the slackest, the seat angle isn't the steepest, and there are bikes with shorter chain stays and longer reach numbers, but by taking the middle road Norco has created a bike that can handle just about every style of descent without feeling out of place, whether it's a flowy, jump filled trail, or something more natural and technical. It wouldn't be asking too much to take the Range into the bike park either – the parts kit is certainly robust enough to handle lift served riding.
The bike's composure at high speeds is also excellent, although just like on the climbs, the middle compression setting on the Monarch Plus ended up being our go-to setting for the descents, providing a more solid platform for pushing into while cornering or preloading the bike before a jump. Left fully open, the rear shock seemed to want to go through its travel more quickly than we would have liked, and occasionally felt like it was packing up when ridden through repeated square edged hits. Flipping the blue lever into the middle compression setting made a noticeable improvement - it kept the bike sitting higher in its travel, which in turn gave it a better response to the multiple sandstone ledges that punctuated the trails.
SRAM's X1 drivetrain didn't give us any trouble, even after being ridden through mile after mile of fine desert dust.
The remote for the Reverb dropper post is located in the proper spot, on the underside of the left hand side of the bars.
Component Check
The product manager who chose the parts kit for the Range C 7.2 deserves a pat on the back – it'd be hard to chose better components at this pricepoint, and the bike's brakes, suspension, and drivetrain are all trail-worthy right out of the box, with no upgrades necessary.
• Guide Brakes: On the trail the Guide brakes were flawless, providing the modulation necessary to keep from sliding on the dusty sandstone descents, where there's a fine line between being in control and sliding out of it. We did run into an issue where the rear brake leaked from the SRAM Connectamajig fitting that Norco uses to make routing the internal routing easier - it's worth double checking to make sure everything is snugged up every so often to avoid pad and rotor contamination.
• Wheels: The desert is an unforgiving place, and we managed to knock the Range's wheels out of true a couple of times. We were able to get them straightened out in each instance, but the SUN Helix TR rims don't seem to be the best fit given how hard the Range begs to be ridden. It'd be nice to see something a little wider as well.
• Race Face Atlas 35mm Bar and Stem: It's hard to go wrong with Race Face's Atlas bar and stem combo. The the bars are wide and comfortable, and the stem is short and strong – exactly how things should be.
• RockShox Pike RC Fork : The Pike's high level of performance has been mentioned numerous times, but it's worth mentioning again just how well it handles on the trail. The RC version spec'd on the Range doesn't have the quick three position compression setting found on the more expensive RCT3, but it still possesses the excellent support and smooth, controlled feel that the Pike has come to be known for.
 |
| Test rider Mark Allison gets ready for landing after doubling up a portion of Sedona's Slim Shady trail. |
Pinkbike's Take:
| With a smart parts spec, good geometry, and a very reasonable price for a carbon framed ride, the Range C 7.2 offers up an excellent blend of performance and value, a well-rounded machine that's capable of taking on just about anything that's thrown its way. Descending is certainly its strong suit, but the Range will still get you to the top without too much fuss, and when the trail points downhill it more than earns its keep. - Mike Kazimer |
About the Reviewer
Stats: Age: 32 • Height: 5'11” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 150lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None Twenty years deep into a mountain biking addiction that began as a way to escape the suburban sprawl of Connecticut, Mike Kazimer is most at home way out in the woods, carving his way down steep, technical trails. The decade he spent as a bike mechanic helped create a solid technical background to draw from when reviewing products, and his current location in the Pacific Northwest allows for easy access to the wettest, muddiest conditions imaginable.
Stats: Age: 32 • Height: 5'11” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 150lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None Twenty years deep into a mountain biking addiction that began as a way to escape the suburban sprawl of Connecticut, Mike Kazimer is most at home way out in the woods, carving his way down steep, technical trails. The decade he spent as a bike mechanic helped create a solid technical background to draw from when reviewing products, and his current location in the Pacific Northwest allows for easy access to the wettest, muddiest conditions imaginable.
Author Info:
Member since Feb 1, 2009
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Norco is awesome
we're all cheeky bastards here...
Why don't you buy the aluminium version that starts at less than half the price? $2500 for the basic one, and what would $2500 have got you 8 years ago? Something worse. Quit complaining about "these days".
Of course you can buy the entry ALU version for half price but I sure would like to be able to buy the carbon version for half price.....(who wouldn't).
Its rediculous that a fork manufacturer asks more than 1200€ for it's product (especialy when RS shows that it can sell top notch PIKE for almost half price)
Its rediculous that a frame manufacturer asks more than 3000€ when YT , CANYON sell complete carbon bikes at the same prices.
I say KEEP PUSHING and sorry for being boring......
There is an old saying "If you want to make a small fortune in the bike industry, start with a large one." There may be a few people getting rich at the big companies but there isn't some big conspiracy to price gouge customers. It costs a lot to make great bikes, if they were sold for half the price they would make a loss and suddenly you wouldn't be able to buy great bikes at all. Margins in the bike industry are smaller than in most industries. The fact is you can buy a much better bike for £1000 than you used to be able to, you can just buy an even better bike for 5,6 or 10 grand now too. If those bikes didn't exist and all you had was the £1000 bikes we can get now you would be happy with them.
YT, Canyon and the like can sell bikes for 1/3 off because that is what a dealer, someone knowledgeable who spends money on space and stock to allow you to test ride the bike, make sure it fits, make sure you get the right bike etc needs to break even, they probably still make more money if they manage to get you to buy shorts and a jersey than they do on the bike though. If you are willing to buy a bike without any of that service and help, which a lot of people are, then you can save some money.
Also as mentioned I like the fact that Canyon, Rose and Yt offer great carbon alternatives at lower prices. Agreed, they also offer some of the same frames in aluminium.
Plus some great deals on stuff now, just buying some Saint brakes with a third off!
Maybe we have never had it so good!
Patrick, you say their profit margins are small. May I ask how do you know? Are you behind a bike company?
Do you actually know what it costs to built a frame in a Taiwan, Malaysian factory?
Do you even know what it costs to ship 2000 bikes byship from Taiwan to Europe? I'm pretty sure that the cost in order to ship 2000 frames from Taiwan is not higher than the cost of 4 ''superbikes''.
If you think it is possible to do it for less then I suggest you go out and do it for less. I am sure you will make a fortune and revolutionise the industry since you clearly know exactly what you are talking about.
Have you ever worked for a company that produces something? If I were to sell you the goods that my employer produces right out the door while still making sure everyone gets paid, you would pay about 25-35% of what the retail price will be. As dannyfag pointed out, there are simply more steps until a product reaches you, and no one is getting rich in this example - we only make good money if we produce a really good product that sells in large numbers, but we have to make sure we can pay our bills even if the product isn't a huge success.
You can cut significant costs by cutting out the middleman, but I believe good bikeshops can still offer a lot of consumers sufficient value to justify their margins.
There is a lot of competition in the bike market right now, and thus margins for producers aren't exactly huge - it's actually a great time to be shopping for bikes. Even if adjusted for inflation, the amount of performance you can buy these days compared to 10 years ago for let's say $2500 is quite remarkable.
By no means my coments were targeting Norco but ALL bike manufacturers.
If you are happy that you need at least 3000€ in order to buy a decent bike, well i'm NOT and that is what i'm trying to say.
SiSandro, your political coment is at least worthless....
At least, we in my, in dept country, do not feed our political oponenets to the dogs.....
You don't need €3000 to buy a decent bike, you can get a Spesh Hardrock or something like that for a few hundred and it will be a blast, you will have an awesome time riding bikes in the woods with your mates. You can also spend €10000 on the latest carbon wizardry and it will be a blast, you will have an awesome time riding bikes in the woods with your mates. You will also have a nice thing to look at, fettle with and be proud of and you will go a lot faster so if you are racing, you have the money to do so or you can otherwise justify spending a lot of your money on your passion then that is the way to go.
There is nothing new to say regarding bike prices today that hasn't been told before in those threads every time PB introduces a carbon bike. The subject has been exploited from every point of view. One can read and make his own judgement or he can just wait 20years or so to witness the progress relative to price changes and compare with other industries and formulate an experience oriented opinion.
Example, bike is £4000, divide by years, then divide by months, to weeks ie 208.
The bike will still be worth £1000 after 4 years.
Divide £3000 by 208 = £14.50 a week approx
If you don`t smoke because your busy riding and getting fit, ie deduct 5 packets of fags -£40 a week
Bike is actually making you £35 a week!!
If you do smoke, just use something else instead to make the bike free!
Does one who buys a top-top bike pays for the high tec and the R&D that the bike carries or he pays a big part for the inflation, the increased taxation as the frame and parts transported from one place of the world (production) to another (assembly and sales), the advertising costs, the "brand" name, the high profit etc.? From all of you that you are commenting on the industry's tight margins, have you ever seen Norco's or Santa Cruz's bikes balance sheets? Anyone?
Today carbon frames sell for 3,000$, in 1998-2002 was 1,200$. In 10 years you will pay 4,000$ to 5000$ just for the frame and not because of the additional R&D. And where exactly is today's high R&D cost? to the fact that a couple of guys sitting in front of their computers designing things? They still get paid on a monthly basis, and then testing a couple of alu frames? Because carbon made easy today. You go to Giant or a similar factory and you buy the various carbon layering options they sell. The Norco here in is an FSR design (I mean they didn't discover America here) with better placed pivots (the guy in front of the computer) manufactured massively somewhere in Far East. Why does the frame sell 3000$???? Because Far East is a long way and for the reasons above.
There are industries like the car industry that they do a lot of developments and prices are attractive to consumer and didn't get such an increase over the past years. On the contrary they stayed stable. The complexity of the manufacturing and the R&D required of course is not comparable to the bikes.
The bike industry doesn't work like this. It's a spoiled child.
And do not dare to compare a high end bike with a Ferrari...
8 grand gets you basically any bike in the industry. You can spend 8 grand on an espresso machine/grinder/associated bits and it just makes coffee. You can spend 8 grand on a watch and still not get the best one the company makes. You can spend 8 grand on a hifi stereo and it will be nowhere near the biggest purchase that week at the hifi store. See how far 8 grand gets you in motorsport - nowhere. How about a racing boat for sculls? you can spend a lot more than 8 grand and all you get is a canoe shaped piece of carbon fibre.
Companies need to make money otherwise they can't make awesome bikes. Frames are expensive because the frame manufacturer has to deal with the overheads of dealing with other parts manufacturers and assembling the frame into a complete bike. They're not making money on the components, they make it on the frames. That's why it's usually better to buy complete.
Sylvain-F simply means that the linkage design is more complicated than a single pivot design and point that the rear wheel is rotating about changes through the stroke and doesn't necessarily line up with the pivot above the BB. Obviously the linkage is different that Santa Cruz's VPP design - but that's not what Sylvain-F was saying.
Process, nomad, mach 6, tracer2, force, ..aside from gt, the range climbs tech&fire rds the best w/great traction while seated(bontrgr xr4), really poppy but not as much as kna53( Short cs), mach 6 and kna53 lil plusher in the dh chunck. I have noticed the rear kick but slowed rebound helped. Gta try mid setting as sugstd.
As stated, great middle ground, great looks, price and build.
descending, this bike is really excellent with square edge and the most stable bike at speed that i have ridden... it does like to hang around in the middle of the travel, and i havent yet decided if i want to continue to run more sag like @bradical9 or not, but i dont notice that its packing up or bottoming out or anything, it just doesnt stay as high as some other bikes... the bike ramps up a lot at the end of the stroke though and that is really helpful when its really chunky for extended periods... so all this behavior makes the bike really great in the rough, but its not optimal (like the review mentions) when you want to pre-load for jumps or push into swoopy turns... but in fairness, the Range is designed to go deep into the back-country where you are on natural hiking trails, without jumps and berms and stuff like that... and where i live, thats what we have... the BMX track has jumps and berms and thats pretty much where go to ride that stuff....
if you pedal up and ride the rowdyest stuff you can find going down, and dont have access to flowy trails, or jumpy trails, then this is your bike. I also sized up to XL because i liked the Kona geo so much... the XL is just longer, not taller... so that also adds an element of stability... maybe thats something else to consider size-wise if you re test riding...
I like 18" reach bikes w/40-50 stems, Xl range, large konas, large gt. Nomad in large(more playful)
I wrote all this because I think, there's too much misinformation in chainstay area.
russthedog is bang on when he says short rear centres feel weird (on anything but DJ/pumptrack hardtails). I go as far to say that 420mm rear centres on modern DH/Enduro bikes on medium plus sizes are dated junk. The result is low front grip causing the rider to hang over the bars on loose turns and body position on jumps is so critical as they're so pitch sensitive due to rear spring rate being so much higher than front.
The comments on the Range's suspension being too active climbing are bizarre. It has a high IC and more anti-squat than many 160mm bikes. The shock tune must be very low or they were running 50% sag.
I'll tell you exactly why companies go long front centre/short rear centre. Because they know long wheelbase = stability but the marketeers have done such a good job convincing the masses that long rear centres are crap that doing anything different is commercial suicide. Yeah it's just a bike but I don't wont to ride shit ones or listen to people who perpetuate the BS short rear centre myth.
BTW Stumpy Evo 29", Camber Evo 29" 455mm and they're some of the best reviewed bikes on the market.
Yours faithfully Adolf Hitler
(yes Godwins law, please don't post link to wikipedia)
I'm not saying longer or short is superior, I'm saying like head angle, BB height etc there is an optimum and it's a ratio of front centre length. It's obvious really. Norco is trying to do just that on this bike but I think they're about 10mm short on all sizes and they're going about it the wrong way as it effects seat angle. I'd rather every bike was aluminium instead of carbon but had varying rear centre lengths. It would make far more difference to how they rode.
Yours, average bike rider who can read
*regret
*its
You should know better as an educated squire.
Pasturized milk is unhealthy and disgusting. Cow factories are in humane. Micro brew beer is very healthy for you. Budwiser is Amurican piss in a can.
Grip shift is awesome! Oh I see you whiny face. Have you tried it?
If Waki does not leave a comment I rather bored with the regurgitated drivel that people state as fact.
Polecam odrobine skromnosci.
NB: any relevant translations available on demand.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, bit of a struggle on the ups but rewarded when heading back down.
Show some sack and compare all these bikes against each other, or are the repercussions from the manufacturers too scary or indeed costly?
Giant Reign
Trek Slash
GT Sanction
Specialized Enduro
Commencal Meta SX
I would put YT Capra in the list - but the 6+ month wait means (for me) this is out of contention.
!) it's too expensive
2) it's not the right amount of travel
3) The spec sucks
4) It looks like a (blank)
5) it's not as good as my (blank)
Thanks for reading. Plz feel free to email me or call me any time. miriamgib90@gmail.com
+1316-712-7520
Goes down - well too, the only stopping factor is you balls;
Have M size at 6' height, I do not like idea of gravity tune concept, cause if you jump, whit, and not only race L and and XL bikes fill to bulky...
I don't care if it climbs like crap.
Seems that the fashion is 140mm and 160mm "Enduro" and angles/ sizes are getting very similar.
Be interesting to see what happens over the next couple of years.
Plus all the clothing now is fantastic, gone are the days of soaking wet trainers and a waterproof jacket that made me lose 2 lbs in sweat on every uphill.
I have friends who have only started in the last couple of years and I tell them how spoilt they are now.....
The closest priced Enduro would be the Enduro Elite, at $5700, which gets you an Aluminum frame (vs Carbon), and is almost 1.5 lbs heavier.
And for what it's worth, aside from having a hoist link, the suspension curves are ENTIRELY different between the Range's ART design, and the Enduro FSR. I've ridden both an Enduro and the Range extensively, and can attest that they feel like entirely different bikes.
www.norco.com/range-support
Its actually a smart idea, but I think it looks hideous
And you can have the system pre-bled this way. You can have a pre bled lever, and a prebled caliper in two different factories for the same brake.
Now I would like to reiterate that I personally think they are stupid, and would agree with you, however some one somewhere is saving 10cents on every bike pumped out, and that is enough for them.
Can't I just be confused and not get flamed for it?
The aluminum rear triangle is an issue for me:
1. It screams out that the company is too cheap to spec a full carbon bike. At 5k, this is unacceptable. If Ibis can do it at 4k, then Norco can do it at 5k.
Or
2. It means that the company making the frame doesn't know how to make a carbon rear triangle that doesn't break. Santa Cruz and Ibis can do it, so it can be done.
The bike's frame material should really be called a hybrid frame material.
Half and half in coffee is good, with bikes, I am not so sure...
Is it really worth paying $1000+ more for carbon, when the only advantage is that it's "cool"?
I didn't say the only 'difference' is weight and coolness, I said that is the only 'advantage', currently, for frames in the enduro/6"-agressive-bike category. The advantage right now between a good carbon frame and a good alloy one in this category is so slight that it's not worth the cost difference for most people. Put that money into components for a much greater benefit. This is just the way it currently is. It will hopefully change sooner than later as carbon bike production increases. Carbon will become more the norm, less the high end hype.
I've been on a lot of demo days since I'm in Oz and what Norco did impressed me more than any other companies. I hope you have tried the YT your talking about and also the new Range and Sight
Also (random fact) it's listed on Norco.com for $6195 CAD, at todays exchange rate thats $4922 USD. So americans can save over $500 buying it from a bike shop in Canada.
SAVE , SAVE , SAVE ...
If you really want some thing you will find ways of saving money , sacrifice a few saturdays for over time , stop buying cigarettes , stop buyin expensive hipster coffee , stop drinking shit beer , what ever it is just make some sacrifices