Transition Spire - new long travel 29er

PB Forum :: Transition
Transition Spire - new long travel 29er
Author Message
flag rean1mator
O+
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 10:05 Quote
I'm the same weight and size as you...
It will probably be the most playful in terms of rear suspension and "poppiness" of probably any 170mm travel bike out right now. I'm not sure if it's for everyone tho'. Most Bikes I've ever owned I've been able to get the rear suspension to just disappear in the fast and chunky terrain with proper tuning. Haven't been all that successful with the Spire tho after about 100 miles on the stock Fox X2 and about 75 miles on an EXT Storia. I'm about your weight and I'm still trying to find the sweet spot on the rear end. I've tried everything. 28% sag, 33% sag, more rebound less rebound. I thought the Storia would solve everything and it hasn't. It's helped considerably tho'.

It is quite agile and flickable for such a long bike tho' which suits my riding style more than the Specialized Enduro I had before this bike. And with the longer wheelbase the stability it provides at speed somewhat negates the over-active rear end.
It handles the bigger slower hits great, and smoother flowy fast trails as well. It's just the fast medium chunky terrain that I feel it doesn't do all that well. Unfortunately that's most of the riding I do. The Enduro gave me this but it is such a slow turner and really just likes to plow through everythng that it was kind of a boring bike to ride.

Based on Strava times it's not much slower than my old Enduro. Very different on trail characteristics tho'.

I think if Transition can balance out the rear end just a smidge more they will have a winner.


I'm still in the process of tuning the Storia tho' so will see where it ulitmately ends up.




Ttruts wrote:
Hey all, Trying to decide if its worth it to wait 4+ months for the upcharge in carbon or to just get the Alloy XT build right now? can anyone comment on the playfulness of the bike?

For context I am 150 pounds and 5'8, I like to go fast but also more enjoy popping of everything in sight. I live in California and am also considering a canfield Lithium. Any thought are much appreciated
flag dekone
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 11:16 Quote
The frame seems to be on the stiffer side of things especially the rear end.
flag mtb-thetown
O+
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 12:16 Quote
Ttruts wrote:
Hey all, Trying to decide if its worth it to wait 4+ months for the upcharge in carbon or to just get the Alloy XT build right now? can anyone comment on the playfulness of the bike?

For context I am 150 pounds and 5'8, I like to go fast but also more enjoy popping of everything in sight. I live in California and am also considering a canfield Lithium. Any thought are much appreciated

I'm 5-10 170 and the alloy feels nice and agile to me. Mine is coming in at about 37.5 pounds, but I don't notice the weight when riding, including big climbs. I think saving 2 pounds or so from the frame for carbon isn't worth it, not because of price (which wasn't a consideration for me), but because of the increased reliability and thrashability of aluminum. If weight is your biggest concern, go carbon, but for everything else I prefer alloy.
flag Ttruts
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 12:51 Quote
Awesome thank you for the detailed response, now I just have to weight my options.
rean1mator wrote:
I'm the same weight and size as you...
It will probably be the most playful in terms of rear suspension and "poppiness" of probably any 170mm travel bike out right now. I'm not sure if it's for everyone tho'. Most Bikes I've ever owned I've been able to get the rear suspension to just disappear in the fast and chunky terrain with proper tuning. Haven't been all that successful with the Spire tho after about 100 miles on the stock Fox X2 and about 75 miles on an EXT Storia. I'm about your weight and I'm still trying to find the sweet spot on the rear end. I've tried everything. 28% sag, 33% sag, more rebound less rebound. I thought the Storia would solve everything and it hasn't. It's helped considerably tho'.

It is quite agile and flickable for such a long bike tho' which suits my riding style more than the Specialized Enduro I had before this bike. And with the longer wheelbase the stability it provides at speed somewhat negates the over-active rear end.
It handles the bigger slower hits great, and smoother flowy fast trails as well. It's just the fast medium chunky terrain that I feel it doesn't do all that well. Unfortunately that's most of the riding I do. The Enduro gave me this but it is such a slow turner and really just likes to plow through everythng that it was kind of a boring bike to ride.

Based on Strava times it's not much slower than my old Enduro. Very different on trail characteristics tho'.

I think if Transition can balance out the rear end just a smidge more they will have a winner.


I'm still in the process of tuning the Storia tho' so will see where it ulitmately ends up.




Ttruts wrote:
Hey all, Trying to decide if its worth it to wait 4+ months for the upcharge in carbon or to just get the Alloy XT build right now? can anyone comment on the playfulness of the bike?

For context I am 150 pounds and 5'8, I like to go fast but also more enjoy popping of everything in sight. I live in California and am also considering a canfield Lithium. Any thought are much appreciated
flag Ttruts
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 12:52 Quote
Thanks for the advice, definitely leaning towards the alloy version now.
mtb-thetown wrote:
Ttruts wrote:
Hey all, Trying to decide if its worth it to wait 4+ months for the upcharge in carbon or to just get the Alloy XT build right now? can anyone comment on the playfulness of the bike?

For context I am 150 pounds and 5'8, I like to go fast but also more enjoy popping of everything in sight. I live in California and am also considering a canfield Lithium. Any thought are much appreciated

I'm 5-10 170 and the alloy feels nice and agile to me. Mine is coming in at about 37.5 pounds, but I don't notice the weight when riding, including big climbs. I think saving 2 pounds or so from the frame for carbon isn't worth it, not because of price (which wasn't a consideration for me), but because of the increased reliability and thrashability of aluminum. If weight is your biggest concern, go carbon, but for everything else I prefer alloy.
flag fuckingsteve
O+
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 15:13 Quote
mtb-thetown wrote:
I think saving 2 pounds or so from the frame for carbon isn't worth it, not because of price (which wasn't a consideration for me), but because of the increased reliability and thrashability of aluminum.

As a current owner of a carbon Scout I'll say I have literally thrashed the f*ck out of it and other than some blemishes in the paint (that would be just as bad on an alloy bike) it's none the worse for it. Transition's carbon frames are solid as f*ck.
flag Parsurf
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 16:30 Quote
I don’t thrash my bike other than when I’m riding it, but I do ride it pretty hard. The only part of a carbon frame I worry about is the downtube, but I made a kydex guard to take care of that. Generally speaking I think most modern alloy frames are so optimized for light weight that if a carbon frame is going to break so is the alloy version.

If I was in the market for a new bike right now and I had the option of picking up an alloy bike now or waiting for “four months” for a carbon I would pick up the alloy, flog the hell out of it and decide if I needed a lighter bike when the carbon was actually available. I don’t think it will be that hard to unload a spire down the road.

The spire isn’t going to win any races up hill regardless of what it’s made of. The platform climbs well enough a couple pounds shouldn’t make much of a difference, your buddies on shorter travel lighter bikes are going to be waiting at the top regardless, but that’s not why you would buy this bike. The folks I ride with generally wait for me at the top and then let me take point on the way down.

I went carbon knowing I overbuild my bikes. I’m at 37.5 lbs with a dual crown and coil rear shock. That’s about my limit for wanting to climb. Had I went alloy I would be pushing 40…at that point it’s just a really heavy dh bike .
flag mtb-thetown
O+
Posted: Dec 8, 2021 at 17:43 Quote
f*ckingsteve wrote:
mtb-thetown wrote:
I think saving 2 pounds or so from the frame for carbon isn't worth it, not because of price (which wasn't a consideration for me), but because of the increased reliability and thrashability of aluminum.

As a current owner of a carbon Scout I'll say I have literally thrashed the f*ck out of it and other than some blemishes in the paint (that would be just as bad on an alloy bike) it's none the worse for it. Transition's carbon frames are solid as f*ck.

I've got a carbon transition throttle, and it's definitely burly, but for a bike that I occasionally tomahawk down rock gardens, alloy sets me more at ease. Carbon can hide damage better than alloy for one thing, so alloy is easier to tell if it's in dangerous condition after a crash.

I also just prefer the look of welds and raw alloy tubes, which is totally just preference. Molded carbon doesn't give me the same warm fuzzy feeling as something where I can see how it was welded together. I like how alloy shows you it's quality through the welds, unlike carbon which could have a flaw or void but you don't know until it breaks.

Another advantage of the raw finish is Transition has really bad paint longevity (old bike was the blue patrol and, though pretty, it scratches really bad really easily) but raw is much tougher.

I'm sure very few people will have an issue with the carbon one though if that's their preference, and it is definitely lighter. But there are plenty of reasons to choose alloy other than price.
flag youngandthriving
Posted: Dec 10, 2021 at 19:36 Quote
Anyone encounter this? Upper seat stay gaps are significantly off. From the widest point of sidewall bulge to inner seat stay: non-drive side has a 16.5mm gap, and the drive side has a 12.8mm gap. Tire was aired up and axle was torqued to spec. Normal frame design or flawed frame? Thanks all

photo
flag nubbs
O+
Posted: Dec 10, 2021 at 19:49 Quote
Could be the actual wheel dish. Happens sometimes on new bikes.

Try another rear wheel and see if that changes the gap.
flag youngandthriving
Posted: Dec 10, 2021 at 21:03 Quote
nubbs wrote:
Could be the actual wheel dish. Happens sometimes on new bikes.

Try another rear wheel and see if that changes the gap.
Didn't think of that one. Will do. Much appreciated
flag Frowzy
Posted: Dec 11, 2021 at 10:41 Quote
Almost sure that is by design, see the lower linkage above bb how its offset also, pretty sure its to help chainline but just a guess, anyway here is mine on dt swiss fr560 rims maxxis 2.4 tires, seems more centered than yours
photo
flag nickjackson
O+
Posted: Dec 12, 2021 at 8:01 Quote
luckyguy19 wrote:
Really loving my Spire XT so far, for now its my only bike and its working great even on mellow trails.
It replaced a 2022 Stumpjumper Evo that I just didn't get along with. I have so much more confidence downhill with this bike and its seems to have a better pedaling platform too.

Mods;
GX AXS
DHF EXO
Dissector EXO
Carbon Renthal Bar
Red Bling

32.8 #s Size Large with XT Trail SPD pedals.

photo
photo
photo

I've got a 200mm Fox Factory Transfer ordered and I'll be getting a second set of wheels to mount the stock tires for the bike park (Angel Fire) in the Spring.

What differences are you finding between the SJ Evo and the Spire?
flag don-kiwi
Posted: Dec 13, 2021 at 13:07 Quote
so, who's riding the spire with a coil shock? is it progressive enough? does it offer good support and is it still poppy?
quite worried the frame isn't progressive enough
flag dekone
Posted: Dec 13, 2021 at 13:58 Quote
Got one installed but could not ride much. Initiall feel ist good.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.015268
Mobile Version of Website