Thoughts on the 2016 Pivot Mach 6

PB Forum :: Pivot Cycles
Thoughts on the 2016 Pivot Mach 6
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Message
Posted: Aug 23, 2017 at 4:37 Quote
Hi, I'm in the market for an enduro bike and I'm down to two choices: SC Bronson and Pivot Mach 6, which I'm leaning more towards. Any thoughts on the Mach 6? I'll appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thanks in advance!

Posted: Sep 1, 2017 at 8:46 Quote
Lean1202 wrote:
Hi, I'm in the market for an enduro bike and I'm down to two choices: SC Bronson and Pivot Mach 6, which I'm leaning more towards. Any thoughts on the Mach 6? I'll appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thanks in advance!

Just wait! There's a new version that is going to appear any day now. Much more similar geo to the Firebird! I enjoyed the previous version, but the new version is lightyears ahead of it!

Posted: Sep 18, 2017 at 2:09 Quote
briceshirbach wrote:
Lean1202 wrote:
Hi, I'm in the market for an enduro bike and I'm down to two choices: SC Bronson and Pivot Mach 6, which I'm leaning more towards. Any thoughts on the Mach 6? I'll appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thanks in advance!

Just wait! There's a new version that is going to appear any day now. Much more similar geo to the Firebird! I enjoyed the previous version, but the new version is lightyears ahead of it!

I wish they would hurry up and announce it

Posted: Dec 21, 2019 at 16:57 Quote
I’m really happy my old Mach 6. Like it better than my Bronson, Reigns, Spartan, Tracer, Fuel EX 8 & 9.7, StumpJumpers, Horsethief, etc.....


Posted: Dec 21, 2019 at 18:06 Quote
Lean1202 wrote:
Hi, I'm in the market for an enduro bike and I'm down to two choices: SC Bronson and Pivot Mach 6, which I'm leaning more towards. Any thoughts on the Mach 6? I'll appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thanks in advance!

The Gen 1 Mach 6 has once of the most extreme geometries in recent history: The reach on the size XL is shorter than 20% of the size Small bikes from the past couple years. It's tiny!

Another problem is the the seat-tube angle is slack, which was done to make the top-tube length feel adequately long with that crazy short reach. You'll be sitting on the absolute tip of the saddle on climbs and fighting to keep the front wheel down.

I do not recommend the Gen 1 Mach 6. The frame is the same as the 2013 model and the geometry was outdated by 2016. Things have changed rapidly since then, making it a dinosaur.

Posted: Dec 21, 2019 at 19:04 Quote
Weird that I like it so much then. Seems to be an excellent climbing bike for long rough XC trails and an excellent DH bike that is very stable and more confidence inspiring than my old DH race bikes. It could also be my extra light 27lb build and awesome Float X2 combination. If it were more slack, it wouldn’t climb well. If it’s BB were lower it’d smack rocks too much. With the seat dropped down, it’s out of the way, with it raised, it’s in the prime spot. I wouldn’t change a thing, except add some more purple.

I pick it as the one bike for everything short of road rides or BMX tracks, but maybe I haven’t had as many bikes as others or go as fast maybe

Posted: Dec 21, 2019 at 19:43 Quote
There was a time when I owned and loved a bike with similar geometry. I recently tried riding it and the experience was not as I remembered it - a bit terrifying, actually. Maybe I could get used to it again with enough practice, but I'll never love it like I once did, now that I know what I would be missing!

Some of it depends on the trails. If my trails were slow and tight, the modern trend of super long bikes wouldn't appeal to me as much as it does, since my trails allow more speed than in many other areas.

Some of it depends on the rider. Faster riders usually prefer longer bikes - to a point, of course, but there's certainly a correlation.

Finally, one point to clarify: head angle has little effect on climbing. The biggest factor is the location of your centre of mass between the contact points of the tires - specifically, the ratio of the rear offset to the front offset. On steep climbs, the rear offset is nearly zero, especially if the seat-tube angle is slack. Lengthening or shortening the front-centre via head angle does little to change the ratio when the centre of mass is nearly on top of the rear contact point. Moving the rider forward via a steep seat-tube angle makes a huge difference, which is one of the reasons steep seat-tube angles have finally become common, now that we're no longer afraid of seeing a long wheelbase on the geometry chart.

Previous Page | Next Page

 
Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.005237
Mobile Version of Website