The Top Fuel has been missing from Trek's lineup for the last few years, long enough that the previous version rolled on 26” wheels and had a 2x10 drivetrain. For 2016 the XC race machine reemerges with 29” wheels, Boost 148 wheel spacing, and a updated frame design that uses Trek's Full Floater suspension design for its 100mm of travel.
The 9.9 SL is the highest end bike in the line, dripping with light and expensive bits like RockShox's RS-1 fork, XTR brakes and drivetrain, DT Swiss XMC1200 carbon wheels, and RaceFace's Next SL carbon cranks. Those parts and the featherweight frame have the bike weighing in at only 21.6 pounds without pedals, but all that carbon does come at a price, and the 9.9 SL retails for $8999.99 USD. Luckily, for riders who haven't won the lottery recently, there's more than one option in the lineup, and the base model aluminum version is priced at $2599.99.
Details
• Intended use: cross-country race
• Travel: 100mm
• Full carbon frame
• 432mm chainstays
• 29" wheels (27.5" for 15.5" frame)
• Weight: 21.6 pounds (9.79 kg)
• Price: $8999.99 USD
Trek's new Cable Freak internal routing can is easily adaptable to work with nearly every possible housing combination.Frame Details The 9.9 SL's low and sleek frame is completely made from Trek's OCLV carbon fiber, including the chainstays and rocker link, which keeps the frame weight down to a claimed 1900 grams for the 17.5” size. A small chip, what Trek calls their 'Mino Link' is located in the seat stays that can be rotated to switch the bike's head angle between 70.0° and 70.9°, a change that also raises or lowers the bottom bracket height.
Trek's new “Control Freak” internal routing configuration allows nearly every possible combination of derailleur, brake, dropper post, or suspension lockout housing to be run inside the down tube. To keep the housing from rattling around inside the frame, there's a spot on the underside of the downtube for a zip tie to enter the frame, bundling everything together and preventing any irritating noises.
A 12x148mm thru axle keeps everything snugged down at the rear of the bike, and as easy as it is to dismiss a new standard, the amount of rear tire clearance that the Top Fuel has is truly impressive. There's plenty of room to fit more substantial rubber than the minimalist Bontrager XR1 tires the bike comes with, which would make the bike even more capable in loose or steep terrain.
Suspension The Top Fuel now uses Trek's Active Braking Pivot (ABP) suspension design, which uses a pivot that rotates around the rear axle, with the intention being to prevent braking forces from affecting the rear shock in any way. The shock itself isn't attached to a fixed point on the frame; instead, it's attached to the chainstay and the upper rocker link, allowing it to 'float' for what Trek says is increased sensitivity, even on bike with only 100mm of travel. The Monarch rear shock and RockShox RS1 shock can both be locked out on the fly thanks to a hydraulic lockout lever found on the left side of the bar, allowing for even greater efficiency on smoother sections of trail.
It resembles a dropper post lever, but the black lever is actually the remote lockout for the bike's shock and fork.Ride Impressions When the opportunity arose to spend time aboard Trek's new Top Fuel, I wasn't entirely sure what to expect. These days most of my riding takes place on bikes that are a good deal slacker and with more travel than this XC race machine, and it's rare that I swing a leg over a bike without a dropper post. Still, I was intrigued by the prospect of seeing what a cross-country bike of this caliber could handle, especially when tasked with navigating through more technical terrain that what would typically be found on a race course.
Right off the bat, it's the Top Fuel's weight that's most striking. Compared to a modern all-mountain / enduro bike, the Top Fuel is 8 pounds lighter – that's like losing the weight of a gallon of water. It feels impossible to go slow, and I found myself standing and cranking up sections of trail that I would normally sit and grind through simply because of how much easier the reduced weight made climbing. The tires do tend to flounder a bit on really on loose terrain, occasionally spinning out when things got steep, but given how minimal their tread pattern is, they weren't nearly as treacherous as their appearance suggests.
I used the suspension lockout mainly on longer fire road climbs, and whenever I forgot that the bike didn't have a dropper post and pushed the lockout lever instead. On more technical climbs, keeping the suspension fully open provided better grip, keeping the rear wheel in better contact with the ground.
Descending aboard the Top Fuel ended up being much more manageable than I'd expected. I had to dig deep into my bag of bike skills to come to terms with tall posting once again, but even though a dropper post would be the first thing I'd add if I were to purchase a Top Fuel, otherwise the bike's handling was excellent. It's incredibly quick and efficient, but with just enough suspension to take the edge off botched lines. The back end is short enough that getting around tight turns didn't pose any issues, although there was a touch of flex from the RS-1 fork when things got really tight and twisty. I did reach the end of the 100mm of travel a few times, but it was with a subtle 'clunk' when it happened, and it was warranted in each instance.
XC race bikes tend to have reputations for feeling twitchy and nervous even in moderately technical terrain, but the Top Fuel defies that convention, and its handling is much closer to what I'd expect from a trail bike rather than one that's capable of taking a World Cup XC podium. The only downside? Purchasing the Top Fuel effectively eliminates any bike related excuses for not being the fastest rider in your town.
www.trekbikes.com /
@trek
21lbs out of the box.... wow.... impressive!
Seriously guy the search bar is right there.
Rant over lol
Check out piece of mtb history:
www.marccerdan.com/allride.html
So if we did this 10 years ago i think finally has arrived the time when cross country racing could be more gravity oriented cause some allmountain rigs with 140 / 120 pedal and go down so well that it makes difficult to justify so deacreased performance in dh just for gainning 1kg or so...
So what we did is limitate bike wheight to 11kg, but today it could be 10 or 10 and a half. Also did 13kg, 15kg and 17kg, so with this wheight limit you try to throw everything you can to your bike to make it as dh capable as you can with good compromise pedaling.... Dawn I can tell in one race the overall winner was a guy with a 17kg orange and he was throwing to all the crazy drops we put in while pedaling for 2h... I also i have to say when I was really strong some time ago I won 3 xc races on enduro bikes (14kg nomad) and alwas was due to I gainned big big margins on Dh...
Then circuits and riders could explore more the limits of this sport which is now into the right direction with technichall circuits and many more riders whipping like Nino and maybe other tricks and high speed... You know it could be next thing after enduro wave...
Cause I see this post is maybe is full of more xc oriented riders....I just throw you the next question:
Ask yourself how much time you are loosing on DHs cause with a very light allmountain bike you can go as fast as a DH bike on some trails... This is the benchmark and mentality you should all have... And no like 200gr more on a droperpost is going to punish me 5s.. on uphills...
For this reason my proposal which we allready implemented succesfully to just limte some wheight and then you stop riders obsessing for wheight weenies and all wearing at least dropper post ans proper tires... Much much more fun..
Came on lets go Neg prope me...
Just trying to give you my best advices which proved it worked...
Progress! Mind you this bike will retail for over $11k in Canada.
Or you coulda just put the seat down? Its not like its welded into the frame. The 5 seconds this will take you will easily be made up on a descent of over a minute.
Explain please? Cornering is no problem because fatbike I would understand, but fail to see what diff 29er wheels would make.
"Yeah, about dropper posts... I know a lot of people outside of XC look at your bikes and ask "why don't they use dropper posts?"
Dropping seatpost are a really good idea, but on a cross-country bike, we need to build bikes around that. A cross-country bike has a really steep head-angle, with a dropping seatpost, if you take out the saddle, it's not balanced. For us, it's not natural, as with the steep head-angle, if you have nothing between your legs, it's not comfortable. Maybe, in the future we will have different bikes, more aggressive, then maybe yes..."
www.pinkbike.com/u/mattwragg/blog/Interview-Marco-Fontana.html
not sure I agree with that one...
The latter is not good for descending. It may feel more what an xc rider is used to, giving them confidence, but if they got used to a lower seat, they could descend faster, no questiom
I don't know anything about XC fyi...just an honest question.
That saaid, I'm surprised more aren't taking that risk. Mechanicals are commonplace in WC DH- are the XCers not flatting / snapping chains?
If they are, I feel like a dropper has a significantly smaller chance of failing versus other mechanical issues.
I do agree, if we compare the risks one to one, a flat tire vs a dropper failing, a broken chain vs a dropper post failing, yes the dropper post will be less likely to fail than the other 2.
But the overall risk factor of a bike failing still increases since you are adding another component that could fail on top of the ones the bike already has.
Still having dropper post in XC could help develop that technology, the more riders using it and failing will give more feedback to the developing engineering teams. Maybe Enduro/AM (whatever) does not have sufficient riders to give feedback to the brands about the dropper posts failing, which I highly doubt, or maybe Enduro/AM still has many fire roads in their climbs in which a dropper is less likely to fail.
I think it's more down to weight and play, I can imagine pro riders being annoyed by wobbly posts.
Anything could happen
*off*
My bike is 23.2lbs with pedals and cages, computers and DCL shifters. A 19lb Scott Spark like Nino rides would truly be something. I don't know how many XC riders would be willing to pony up for tubular carbon wheels and imported tubular tires.
But I bet it is a very sweet ride. As well when you are 40+, only a full suspension ride will do.
Wait for a wet day and jam some 2x2's between the lower arm and underside of the shock mounts on the rear of your car then go for a drive. If you're still alive after a couple of days? remove them and you'll instantly feel like Lewis Hamilton.
Hardtails are useless.
But shorter stem/wider bar combo, longer travel fork and it's Enduro!
It's going to happen. Why would Trek otherwise take the hit on holding all that stock for only a minimal reduction is dealer margin?
Can someone explain me the logic by which reducing the price of 9000 by 1 cent will make any difference in the decision of a potential buyer? Why don't they have the balls to put a price tag of 9000 USD?
Just walk away bud! Feel like a rich man! Haha
You're funny guys, Trek!
This, by the way is a common mistake I've noticed even in the photo captions of Pinkbike news/reviews. People are wondering why some really fast guys use foam grips. Well, they are not. They are using ESI grips and for a good reason.