2018 Devinci Spartan - First Look

Aug 10, 2017
by Vernon Felton  



The original Spartan hit the scene in 2014—a descendant of the bike that debuted beneath Steve Smith at the 2013 DH World Championships—which is saying a lot, right there, about the Spartan’s strong suit: Going downhill, fast. You’re looking at Spartan Version 2.0, which officially hits the streets today. In a nutshell, this is a lighter, stiffer and better pedaling flavor of Spartan. Here’s a first look at the Spartan and few quick impressions on how it all adds up on the dirt.


Devinci Spartan

DETAILS

• Intended use: enduro
• Wheel size: 27.5"
• Front-suspension travel: 170mm
• Rear-wheel travel: 165mm
• 65º or 65.4º head angle via a flip chip
• 4 carbon models/2 aluminum models
• Complete weight (X01 Eagle): 29.25 pounds
• MSRP: $3,359 to $9,069 (complete bikes)
www.devinci.com

devinci spartan


WHAT'S NEW?
The most obvious departure from the Spartan of yore is the suspension layout. The new Spartan adopts a vertical shock mounting arrangement. Devinci contends that there are several benefits here. For starters, you can now fit a full-size (24-ounce) water bottle in the front triangle on every Spartan—including the size small. Moreover, the new arrangement led to higher seatstays, which creates a more open rear triangle and improves lateral stiffness.

devinci spartan
Here's how the old (grey) and new (red) Spartan frames stack up against one another.
Though no one was slagging the Spartan for being a flexy flier in the past, “stiffer” is invariably a design goal. To that end, Devinci also upped the stiff factor by ditching the aluminum chainstays found on the first-generation carbon Spartans in favor of full-carbon chainstays. That move to carbon also netted Devinci about half of the 310-gram weight reduction on this new model. The company shaved 160 grams with the shorter, carbon chainstays and trimmed another 150 grams worth of nips and tucks elsewhere on the chassis. A carbon Spartan frame now tips the scales at 7.14 pounds (3,240 grams). Our size large Spartan X01 Eagle test bike weighs a very respectable 29.25 pounds, sans pedals. At left, you can see how the new (red) and old (gray) frames stack up against one another. The new frame features a lower seat mast; accordingly, Medium, Large and Extra-Large carbon frames are all compatible with 170-millimeter dropper posts.

What else is new? It's a Boost world these days and the Spartan rocks the wider fork and rear end (110 and 148, respectively). Devinci kept the rear travel at 165 millimeter, but opted to go with a 170-millimeter fork this time around; they feel it gives a more balanced feel and just flat out makes sense given an evolution of enduro courses, which continues to trend towards the aggro. That vertically-mounted rear shock is a metric-flavored RockShox Super Deluxe RC3. Going with the trunnion-mount shock, says Devinci, helped them maintain a low standover height on all their models. Always a good thing. Devinci also notes that their new suspension layout and link better isolate the rear shock from side loads than the previous configuration, which should help extend its lifespan. Speaking of shocks, the Spartan frame also plays nice with coil-sprung shocks.

The past three years have seen bikes grow longer, lower and, yes, slacker. Same drill here. Reach on the Spartan grows by about 30 millimeters and the overall wheelbase stretches about 40 millimeters, as the head angle is a tad slacker than before. Rear center is actually shorter, as Devinci was able to trim two millimeters from those chainstays.

The Spartan, like many other Devinci's, features a flip chip. In the past, most people simply ran the bikes in the Low setting. Given the new, slacker geometry, some people might actually find themselves opting for that High flip-chip setting this time around--at least, that is, if they are clipping pedals all the time. In the High setting, the head angle sits at 65.4 degrees, which is still relaxed enough for high-speed descents on lumpy-as-hell trails.
Devinci Spartan

devinci spartan


Devinci Spartan
Insert motorcycle sounds here, or the theme from the Dukes of Hazzard or whatever floats your particular boat.


SIX MODELS & A WIDE PRICE RANGE
Here's the part of the article where people get pissed off about the price. The top-shelf models do, in fact, cost a pretty penny. There are two roughly-equivalent models (one with an XT Di2/XT brake spec and the other wearing X01 Eagle and Guide RSC's) that are up there in the stratosphere. That said, there are two lower-priced, carbon-framed models wearing the same frame and Super Deluxe RC3 rear shock.

Starting price for a complete carbon Spartan? $4,539. While I'm not suggesting that I have four and a half grand in pocket change beneath my couch cushions, it is a fairly competitive bid for a complete carbon bike. For my money, the GX Eagle version of the Spartan presents the best value in the carbon line-up (it also wears a Lyrik, Reverb dropper and isn't smuggling a weak widget anywhere on bike.
Devinci Spartan

devinci spartan

Devinci Spartan

The Spartan is also available in two all-aluminum models.


Not feeling the carbon thing? There are also two made-in-Canada, aluminum-framed Spartans. Aluminum models start at $3,359. You can check out the full specs below.

DEVINCI SPARTAN






I’ve had the very subtle, purple and green Spartan Eagle X01 model in the house for the past couple months. A long-term review is in the works. This being a “First Look” article, here’s a few preliminary thoughts on the new Spartan….

Our maiden voyage was a tour through Bellingham's Chuckanut mountains. None of us was feeling particularly spunky, so we started the day with a shuttle—it’s the kind of ride where you shuttle and still log a solid 2,000 feet of climbing on the “descent.” I mean, there is plenty of descending, but there also long sections that you spend hunched over on the nose of your saddle, grunting and thinking to yourself, “Dammit….why are we climbing this much on the downhill?” Anyhoo, the point here is that the ride is a mix of big, root-laced rock sections, some tight and awkward corners, a few sphincter puckering steeps and the aforementioned bit of grunting and cursing the climbs.

For starters, I was always impressed with how deep and controlled the old Spartan felt. If anything, the new Spartan only gets better in that regard. On sections of trail where I am normally death gripping the bars, I found myself, instead, letting go of the brakes altogether and just plowing through at speed. Stupid levels of fun ensue.

Devinci Spartan

On climbs, the bike has a few things going for it. For starters, it’s pretty damn light for a bike in this class. That always helps. But it also pedals well—at least, a whole lot better than I expected it would. Yes, things get better when you select the middle compression damping setting on that Super Deluxe, but you don't absolutely need to add that mid-range compression damping to stop it from squatting every time you pedal. The anti-squat is pretty well dialed in here. On the other hand, the bike does sit a bit higher in its travel when you flick the switch, and on a bike this slack and long you can use the slightly steeper head angle to help with tight switchback climbs.

Okay, I better stop right here, because I’m about to go into full blown review mode…and that’s going to have to wait for another day. But, yeah, such a review is definitely in the works because every time I walk into the shop, the Spartan has called my name. Deadlines have suffered in the process, though that's not necessarily a bad thing.

In short, full review coming soon. Until then.



MENTIONS: @devinci



Must Read This Week

244 Comments

  • + 42
 Not a fan of the ever shortening CS. What these "Enduro" bikes are designed for is fast and "aggro", wouldn't it make sense to get the stability from a tad longer CS? Slap those super short one's on Freeride park bikes, but not race bikes. I have been very happy with my 448mm - granted, it's a XL frame.
  • + 37
 norco and yt are the only brands im aware of that have figured out that if reach gets longer chainstays have to get longer too... its a balance between the two that makes good handling. ill stick with my 445mm chainstays
  • + 5
 Agree 1 million %
  • + 2
 @acetasting1992: I have horizontal drops on my HT so can go up to 446 up to 460. Currently have 460mm and its good.
  • + 5
 @fartymarty: always used to run my jump bike with as long a rear end as possible, so much more stable at speed.
  • + 6
 @EnduroManiac: Pole as well.

There are a few but it is definitely against the trend at the moment. It is probably the next phase in geometry now we have got to sensible reach numbers and suitably slack head angles.
  • + 8
 @acetasting1992: Also CS length need to be proportional to Reach and not just one size across the board. With one length CS someone is getting a raw deal and I have a feeling it is the taller riders.
  • + 1
 @EnduroManiac: Geometron even offers an option of modifying a CS length. imgrum.me/media/BQBQReHg_Gk
  • + 8
 @fartymarty: it is certainly the taller riders. I ride a medium (if the seattube is short enough.......), and the trend of shorter CS is great.

That is another wonky geo thing that need to go though.....make seattubes short enough that people can chose a size either way. Lets people run a longer dropper too. There are alot of brands where i would ride a small just because the ST is too long on a medium.
  • - 1
 No No, you want short CS and long wheel base. My Intense DH rig has 17.25 CS and that thing can track a line..
  • + 1
 @Torbo24: yeah the seat tube length is another issue. I think the Geometrons run the same length seat tube and let taller riders run longer posts. As you say you can then choose a bike on length rather than height which is a throwback to road bikes.
  • + 5
 @mbiker35: for me it is a balance between front and rear. If the front is long, the rear needs to be made longer to compensate. Otherwise you end up with too much weight on the rear and not enough up front. Im at 460CS with a 1200WB but slack SA (hence the longer CS to keep the weight balance).
  • + 12
 Agreed. Long front needs a long rear - very simple.
Now.... seat tube angles *sigh* a longer reach needs a steeper seat tube angle, it seems common sense. Just looking at the nex XXL Santa Cruz gives me a bad back and a wandering front end.
  • + 1
 @webbe: Being a Nicolai ride you must understand this in practice as well as theory. It's a shame the industry is slow to follow.
  • + 16
 sure if you want to race it on fast and flowly or fall line tracks but i definetely prefer shorter chainstays for the tight, technical and steep stuff.
  • + 1
 @jollyXroger: I don't like the way it's made. That will change the whole bike geometry, unless there is another "flip chip" on the seat stays, or 2 anchoring locations for the shock.
  • + 0
 @Torbo24: +1. I'd always go for the XL (except maybe Nicolai Geometron!), but then it would be tight with a 150 mm dropper post, let alone a 185!
I think Specialized has started something like this with their latest Demo. But it's a bit less important on a DH bike I believe.
  • + 13
 i think the shortening chainstays is informed by the fact that a lot of people are buying these new generation enduro bikes as park bikes. my canfield balance has 420mm stays and it is SO FREAKING FUN in the park. the only limiting factor for the top end of speed on it is my lack of cojones as i start getting near 40mph... and i dont think longer stays will fix that
  • + 0
 @webbe: the usual company response is some BS reference to the effective seat tube angle... in this case, 75 degrees lol.
  • + 10
 Stability comes mostly from wheelbase length, bb height, and head angle. A bike with a long front center will be very stable, all other factors being equal. If a bike has a long front center and slack head angle chances are the wheelbase will be long as well, which aids stability. Therefore you can have short stays. I think some people get confused what reach actually means. Reach is a measurement of the bb in relation to the headtube. A long reach doesn't necessarily relate to a long top tube, especially if the seat tube angle is steep. Usually if a bb is close to the rear axle and the head tube is slack, then the frame will have a long reach.
  • + 1
 @webbe: Agree agree agree. I don't see how designers could possibly think that riders of all sizes require the same seat tube angle. To some degree I can understand their desire to use the same rear ends on all sizes which allows them to use the same suspension kinematics and share swingarms and suspension parts. But the seat tube angle should be easily to vary by size.
  • + 0
 @alexsin: I don't think @webbe means varying the seat tube angle between sizes as that just doesn't make any sense. With a longer reach you need a steep ST. But you do need to change the CS according to reach as different sizes will handle differently due to the F / R balance.

You can't just make the front longer without making the rear longer as it will throw out the balance. Companies like Nicolai and Pole get this. I don't think any others do yet.
  • + 2
 @mbiker35: I agree. Just like a bmxer can suffer steep head angles dropping into verts by putting the bike in front of them a downhiller can put more of the bike ahead of them and ride off the back of the bike. Increase the wheelbase in front of you.
  • + 1
 @WayneParsons: Exactly!!! And let us not forget riding style. Its all what you're use to or what you want your bike to feel like under you. I just bought a Giant Reign after demoing it at Highland mtn bike park.. And knew after shaving seconds off my runs over my DH bike, its what I luv in a bike. I also climb just as well as my xc bikes on it. That is a fact. 17 inch CS are nothing new either, every bike I have owned sence 1996 had just over 17 inches CS.. My Diamond Back V-link, Specialized FSR, 2 Iron horse SGS's, KHS hardtail, Intense M3..and 3 different year Giant Reigns that all had different geometry. Got to say, I do like this bike though, looks speedy
  • + 5
 But at least it looks sick
  • + 6
 I like short chainstays. Uphill all your weight is on the back wheel and that helps with climbing traction. Downhill your weight naturally biases towards the front wheel. Guys are hanging their asses on top of the back wheel to get weight off the front. It's seems like a short chainstay would helps those guys going down. Are you guys washing out in turns? I'm not having that problem.
  • + 2
 @WayneParsons: BB position is where the riders mass is located. It's position front to rear within the wheelbase dictates F/R grip balance and spring rate balance. More balanced spring rates and tire pressure equals predictable suspension. Also, weighting the front tire contact through the bars is a myth. It might just work in the controlled environment of a pump track but if you ride with your chest over the bars to have enough effect in normal trail conditions your face will be in a tree in minutes.

You can't increase front centre and do nothing to the rear centre. Any vehicle dynamics guy outside of the mountain bike marketing world will tell you that. Centre the mass, even out the spring rates and tire pressures and then things start getting truly predictable/fast.
  • + 26
 It always blows my mind how many experts frame designers comment on pinkbike...you would think most of them would be at work designing frames instead of commenting about the proper cs length...but then again, I also should be working
  • + 1
 @speed10: Not me, I know when to ride with my chin out and when to with my ass out...lol
Balance may brother...balance
  • + 1
 @jclnv: well put... A+ straight to the head of the class
  • + 1
 @acetasting1992:

+ Turner RFX
  • - 1
 www.vitalmtb.com/forums/The-Hub,2/The-Internet-Was-Wrong-Short-Chainstays-Suck,9344 Vital beat you all to it Wink

In all seriousness, I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking this way.
  • - 1
 @acetasting1992: yep, pretty happy with my large Aurum carbon for DH and Jeffsy 27 for trail Smile
  • + 1
 @mbiker35: can't disagree with you there. I just sold my DH bike and grabbed an '18 Reign to use at Highland, Creek and big trips out west when mt Trance needs a break. Guys seem to just need something to pick apart and today is chainstay length.
  • + 1
 @bbachmei: hahahahaha
  • + 3
 @jclnv: there can be only one center!
  • + 1
 @Lastpikd: oh no! you should have taken the blue pill
  • + 2
 @fartymarty: Very true. I just don't think enough people have ridden anything that's particularly 'radical' but well proportioned before. I can understand that some people might like shorter bikes, or steeper HAs and that's fine, but all changes have to be done in proportion to one another as a complete package. It seems like most of the major manufacturers are moving in the right direction, but only making changes one step at a time.
The result is that people jump on a bike with a stretched out front end but short CS, high BB and a slack SA and immediately complain that the bike can't climb or corner properly. They then blame the front end length... Like I say, the new Santa Cruz looks like you'd struggle to reach the bars when climbing, let alone weight the front wheel.
If I added an extra 200bhp to my car (I wish), it wouldn't drive or corner properly unless I upgraded the rest of the components to match. Shitty analogy, I know, but it's all about the complete package.
  • + 0
 @acetasting1992: if that was true, the handlebar to front axle distance should increase with an increasing chainstay.
  • + 7
 CS shortened by only by 2 mm. Hard to see how that will make it less stable at high speed, really! I certainly wouldn't pass up the chance to try this thing out, or own one.
  • + 17
 Too short chainstay - says peoples who rides 1ply tyres on 160 bikes cuz rotating masses low must be. Want a stable bike? Put fkng DH tyres on it and pedal. Or Put your money where your mouth is and buy Pole or Geometron. Until then ride your god damn bike. If you don't like what the evil industry is doing, then don't ride their bikes. Protest, Occupy Whistler or Interbike, I don't know. At least half of this whining has nothing to do with chainstay length physics, rather with "I will tell you about CS length to show how informed I am"... I thought the energy in the topic has been depleted few years ago by the occasion of Gwin Chainstay gate. But no...

The odds that this is a great bike are rather high. So are the odds that geometron will not make you much faster... it will only make you feel that you made a good purchase. So high are odds that since you can afford Geometron you will sell it in 2 years, cuz too low pivot and you can blow cash at something else. I mean... are you guys really so fkng spoiled? Go ride a hardtail with cantilevers and then come back to me with your 1st world problems...
  • + 3
 have you been drinking again, waki?
  • + 3
 More mushroom tea waki?
  • + 3
 @WayneParsons: Respectfully I would disagree, surely staright line stability at high speeds would have something to do with chainstay length. Most of your mass is centered around the bb area, so I dont understand why an XS bike should have the same chainstay length as a XL, your bb is in a completely different location in relation to the wheels. Surely if one of those bikes handles very well, the other must handle completely different? I think it has more to do with bike companies not wanting to produce 5 different moulds for the chain/seatstays...
  • + 11
 @WAKIdesigns: You must be the worst troll online. I mean... you contradict yourself more than the bible.

Everyone, shut up and eat what you have been given. The industry cannot be wrong. Makes sense - they have never done anything to maximize profit and are always concerned more about what is right than what is highest on the marketing priority list.

In all seriousness, can we just agree that people have different wishes of their bike and some like longer chainstays? You Waki sound like a religious nutcase telling everyone how your god is the right one and any other opinion is false.
  • + 7
 ask Damien Oton if the stays are too short...oh wait he's too busy getting multiple top ten EWS finishes....
  • + 2
 @speed10: Guys are hanging their asses on top of the back wheel to get weight off the front.

Funny, I always hang off the back to keep from going over the front...
  • + 0
 @El-Train: Just imagine how many wins he's lost...
  • + 1
 @acetasting1992: And the public reinforce the issue by sucking up the "short chainstays bro" marketing.
  • + 1
 @bbachmei: 51mm offset forks will tell you most don't know what the f**k they're doing.
  • + 2
 @El-Train: He also won Megavalanche this year.Bike can't be bad.Also looks great.
  • + 1
 @acetasting1992: As i've said a bit further up, if the chainstay length changes, the handlebar to front axle line should change too with sizes going up.
  • + 4
 cant believe we're still talking about this. What do you mean Jesus isn't real?
  • + 0
 @jclnv: until next year (or the year after) when marketing departments start pushing longer chain stays to sell more bikes.

This is the big problem with carbon. One mold is expensive. Having four or five for a chain stay is not economically possible. Hence everyone gets the same size chain stays.

If I were making carbon bikes I would have a slotted aluminium section at of the CS so people could have their axle where ever they want it. I think Canyon do something similar on the Sender.
  • + 1
 @Primoz: Headtubes lengths do increase.

@ThomDawson: And still nothing changes.
  • + 3
 @fartymarty: The multiple mold issue is solved by moving the BB rather than extending the CS. This also has minimal effect on kinematics.
I'm also a supporter of longer chainstays on larger bikes, I can't speak for short or average height people but at my height and having 430mm chainstays, as soon as I move my weight lower or rearward I feel like the bloody bike is about to break into a manual. It probably annoys me the most in corners when most of my weight pushes the rear tyre causing it to drift. Getting right over the front can help but isn't always an option depending on the trail or situation. To counter the problem I end up running the rear suspension in the firmest compression setting to discourage the rearward weight shift.
I've never had this problem when I was riding a bike with 440 or 450mm chainstays. I can also understand that people under 6 feet tall might have a hard time understanding the problem.
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: Don't believe that mold cost myth. Sure they're expensive but hydroforming aluminum is hardly cheap. It's all part of the carbon frame price justification.
  • + 3
 Super short chainstays feel twichy and unstable over rough stuff for me, and you have to lean forward aggressively over the handlebars to get the your weight centered between the wheels.
  • + 1
 @jclnv: I'm in no professional, but iv'e done my fair share of dabbling in vehicle dynamics. So i'll bite.

I believe the term your looking for is longitudinal load transfer. And load transfer, as I understand it, does not deal in mass as it does center of gravity. I can tell you right now that the center of gravity of a bike w/ rider is not at the BB. Load transfer can be manipulated with CG location, wheelbase, and damping (not spring rate!). Looking at an F1 car can show you a CG toward the rear of the car. Long front centers do a good job at keeping the rider (main contributor to CG) back further. So, why would that be a bad thing on a bike? I dig my long front center and short CS on my Kona Process. Thing is stable and playful. Turns like a tractor in switchbacks though.

My unwanted two cents,
Stephan
  • + 2
 @Stephan-roberts: I guess I should have clarified that the riders mass is loaded through the BB, not that the BB is the mass centre of bike/rider combination. I believe that's just above the hips (on average) from memory?

Using an F1 car as analogous to a bicycle is a flawed argument as they have an aerodynamic effect that has vastly more influence on F/R grip levels than mass location. In fact they compromise weight distribution for aerodynamic performance. Look at a MotoGP bike for the epitome of mass centralisation.
  • + 2
 @webbe: the car analogy is a good one.

I have always ridde ln bikes with fairly long CS and not had issues with front end weight. I rode my bro in laws bike with a good reach and short CS and washed the front out 3 times in a morning ride. I was having to force myself to ride over the front of the bike to compensate which felt very unnatural.

As you note its a complex problem with many variables but the proportions of the bike need to be right to start with before you start messing with bar heights, BB height and suspension setup.
  • + 2
 We should look at the relationship between front and rear centers. It's not necessarily a matter of rear-center vs reach but rear-center vs front-center. There are more factors to the front-center than the reach alone.
  • + 2
 @jclnv: Well making molds in more than one size is sure to drive a production cost up. To what degree it is debatable, but it is real nevertheless. So I wouldn't call it a myth. But what about the companies whose bike designs allow for the whole sizing spectrum to use the same triangle and vary a CS length just by modifying linkages (which is also not that expensive to produce)? What's their excuse?

To those who say CS is not important for the overall balance, one question. Why do ski tails not remain the constant length regardless the change in total length with an increase in ski size?
  • + 3
 Imagine you're a bike designer, obviously you believe your bikes should have a certain rear-center for each given size (ie each given front-center). But the guys who do the money bit say it's too expensive an option and they're not willing to do that. So you say "ok...well we'll have to put what would have been the chainstays from my Medium or Large size designs on all the bikes to try and keep everyone happy". The money men are happy and most people get a bike with good geometry. But those at the extreme ends lose out. You could say on average taller riders lose out more so than the shorter ones, you may argue otherwise depending on your preference (or height...). But then the money men come and say you need to increase the reach by an inch cus we're losing sales but marketing won't let you increase the chainstays cus they've been pushing short chainstays for so long a u-turn now would be an embarrassment. "But they're not 'long'" you say, "they're just proportional to the reach, same as before". But nobodies listening.
  • + 1
 @ThomDawson: it's like that: making custom rear ends per size is expensive. Custom frame from Nicolai or Swarf will put you at least 2k back. 99% of people will chose a cheaper bike. 99% of people with additional 2k in the pocket will chose carbon rims, bars or cranks, Di2 or other bullcrap instead of "appropriate geo" - people DO NOT buy what they say the want to buy. Economy and prestige wins, most of times. Because they are quite self unaware, they have a fkng nerve to call companies greedy. Genes override culture, always.

End of story.
  • + 4
 I must agree with you all that longer chainstays equal more straightline stability. At super high speed it is confidence inspiring.

That being said I ride for fun. The 414mm stays on my Canfield Riot are so fun. The back end is so fun to just load up and snap into corners. There are downsides/trade offs with every geometry descision. However, where I'm not so concerned with speed as I am just heading out and having a blast, I am super pleased to see these short stays appearing on more bikes.
  • - 1
 @Crankmiester: I rode the old Stumpy 29 Evo, it had humongously long chainstays, yet I had no problems cornering with it, it felt like a small bike. The biggest trouble with having short chainstays is that, most bikes have them now and you may be accused of being normal. It's like the fear of telling people what you ride or how you ride and they may just say: "yeah everyone rides that". Tell them you ride Enduro and they will find it perfectly normal... terryfing concept so #ridetrail or #dhlife my friend. Until that becomes normal...
  • - 2
 One day I was so pissed off that industry makes bikes with too short reach that I started writing an open letter, a petition to all major companies to stop this sht. But first I wanted to write a mail to Pinkbike to ask if they would publish my petition. But then I got bored in the middle of writing it and decided not to do it. Also a 30% off all wheels on Superstar Components distracted me.
  • + 1
 @ThomDawson: hahahaha good one
  • + 1
 @jollyXroger: holy shit comparing bikes to skis is like comparing fork lifts to boats because they both steer from the rear...
The entire bike doesn't have contact with the ground, unless you've just crashed..
  • + 1
 Its also worth noting it isn't a simple matter of just putting a longer chainstay on each size. To have a corresponding chainstay length for each size would require a more in depth redesign than that. Unless you had a clever linkage perhaps. But that may be detrimental to your suspension kinematics in certain configurations.
  • + 1
 @ThomDawson: The weight transfer forward reduces how overwhelmed rear suspension is. Causing the currently critical leverage rates a little less of an issue. Sure it's still important but as you move the rider weight forward in the wheelbase the rear suspension becomes far less taxed and the spring rate and damping less critical. I agree with your point that leverage rates might need to change with a plus 30mm rear centre say, but the weight being more centralized might be enough to just require in-shock tuning. Fork performance becomes more important though but that just shows how rear biased most of us currently are that fork set-up is far less critical.
  • + 2
 @jollyXroger: If multiple carbon rear ends increase production costs that much maybe manufacturers should put aluminum rear ends on them rather than flawed length carbon ones?
  • + 2
 @jclnv: and aluminium linkages that can be easily changed according to rear end length similar to what Nicolai have done.
  • + 1
 @panaphonic: At 190 cm i don't know what you're talking about (running 434 mm chainstays on a Reign). If anything, moving back causes the front to want to wash out.
  • + 0
 @jclnv: so do the stem lengths on stock bikes (with L and XL bikes often fitted with longer stems). So you're back to square zero or even worse.
  • + 1
 @Primoz: I'm 188 cm and my last few bikes and current bike have had 430~ mm chainstays. I did enjoy the 440 mm chainstays on a previous bike. I think 10 mm goes a long way with chainstays. Your dead right that the rearward weight shift can cause the front to "wash out" on corners. This happens because of the lack of weight pushing down on the front wheel (obviously you know this). The situation I was attempting to describe with the rear wheel sliding is caused by having too much weight pushing the rear tyre and making it slide (when the knobs deform or the ground becomes too soft or too firm). It's the same issue.
We all have different techniques to ride and I'm not suggesting that every tall person will dislike short stays but I do think that there are a large number of us who would be happy to spend our hard earned cash on a 450 or 460 mm chainstay bike if there was a manufacturer who had the balls to make one.
  • + 0
 @acetasting1992: Your weight is centred where you put your body. Longer chain stays reduce your ability to put your body weight further back. As do longer front ends but these can be countered by having shorter stems. Shorter chain stays are also better for power transfer and obviously bunny hopping obstacles because you don't have to move the bike as far forward to clear the back wheel. Longer stays are better for climbing and straight line stability sure.
  • + 1
 I don't get why people keep going on about CS becoming shorter and shorter. I've got a Cannondale Prophet and a DMR Switchback, both over a decade old. Both have about 420mm chainstays. Chainstays haven't become much shorter in the meantime. More the other way around actually.

I do agree chainstay length should be frame size dependent though and indeed too many companies forget to take proper care. Norco does it (probably because Ben Reid insisted), BTR does so too, but it is too rare.

Personally I would want my chainstay even shorter. Simply because I started to pedal with my midfoot over the pedal axle instead of the ball of my foot. Not sure when exactly, but it was when the Catalyst pedal came out. I love the way it pedals but it negatively affects stability. At about 6ft tall, I could just handle my DMR with 375mm reach and 420mm chainstay. Now that I've moved my feet about 50mm forwards, I basically ended up with a 470mm chainstay and 325mm reach. It is a bit too twitchy on the descends. So yeah, a frame with shorter chainstays and longer reach would set things straight again.
  • + 0
 @vinay: I disagree about the chainstays being frame size dependant (and the way Norco does it, by moving the BB forward, is just plain stupid, considering how slack their seat tube angles are). I think the BB to rear axle length should be constant, just like the handlebar to front axle distance. You lengthen the space between them, i.e. the cockpit. Well something along those lines, so you keep the weight distribution the same.

Granted, this would work with really steep seat posts, with posts as slack as they are today, lengthening the chainstays is a must, since guys like me (seat posts at full extension) have our asses over the rear axle anyway.

So the ctux of the matter is that i want an actual 75° or more seat-mount angle, however that gets achieved.
  • + 28
 Seems that the guy in charge of photoshoping the bike didn't know where to put the DHR2 or DHF. It's changing from one photo to the other.
  • + 9
 Don't be silly, that's the higher level of trolling
  • + 4
 On the last render, the fork crown does not contact the lower headset Wink
Btw, DHR2 is a very good front tire. DHF is also a very good rear tire, but it simply does not brake (we all know that braking is for pussies, so this is not a problem)
  • + 0
 @lkubica: DHF brakes ok, but since 80% of braking comes from the front wheel it is not that important on the rear. It is a compromise on the front though. DHR2 does brake better than DHF but the leaning transition is not so smooth, so it does not allow for as much careless cornering as DHF. The actual cornering grip may be the same, but the feel is not as predictable. It is miles ahead of HR and HR2 though.
  • - 1
 @WAKIdesigns: This is exactly what I mean, the rear brake is mainly for pussies, that's why I am using DHR2 on the rear Wink If you ride properly, DHF is a very nice rear tire, precisely because you rarely use rear brake without the front one.
  • - 1
 @lkubica: If I had lots of long and steep I'd ride DHR2. But I don't. I just spent a month in Poland with very similar G5, worked absolutely awesome, but for the front, I just can't get enough of Minion DHF in Maxx Grip. I will now probably give Schwalbe the last chance.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Where in Poland may i ask? I've been meaning to hit Czarna Gora for a while.
  • - 2
 @jimmythehat: Czarna Gora has a World Cup worthy DH track but that's the only track there worth riding and lift goes every 45 minutes so it's a lot of beerduro incilved and after 3 runs you are done. Mountains around are not that cool for Enduroing unless you have a guide. Lord knows how much I was swearing when climbing singletrack and ending up riding down a fire road or logging gutter. Just behind the border in Czech Republic you can Enduro with Joeys from around Europe on rather good Ryhlebske Stezky. Nice place good trails but no lift, no shuttle. Also close by is a bike park that everyone swears by called Kouty. I haven't been there though.

I've been to my hometwn though and I can recommend it for real Enduroing. You can get your ass kicked properly. There is a trail center (pedal powered) a set of fkng sketchy trails on another side of town from the trail centet (also edal powered) and a Gondola accessed 3 tracks which are OZOM. Bielsko Biala the townis called. PMme if interested
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: I have been once to Kouty, nothing special, one DH-worthy trail, nice fast lift, a lot of clay which is so thin it gets in everywhere once starts raining.
BB is OZOM but the lift is heavily accessed by tourists on sat/sun, every second gondola has a bike mount and what is most important, the gondola staff hates bikers, you can see it in their eyes Wink
  • + 5
 @lkubica: I like dhf on the rear
  • - 1
 @lkubica: Gondola staff was very kind to bikers while I was there Big Grin Noteven close what was happening in Szczyrk, where they were always saying something disencouraging to bikers. I mean those a*sholes are nasty to skiers in winter... My cousins wife fell off the lift (yea Joey girl first time there, anyways...) and instead of stopping the lift instantly they shouted at her like: "hah! Now you got it! You deserved it! You are banned from the lift, we will never let you in again!" or Jasna where some German dude hanged the bike on the lift chair and wanted to sit down and go up with his buddy on the next chair. Crew guys shouted at him that they are not paid to take bikes off the lift, and effectively they DID NOT take his bike off, he had to wait on top for his bike to arrive after a loop. At the bottom they told him he is disallowed to enter the lift for not following the rules. Eventually they let him go after we started telling them to shut the hell up and quit their job if they don't like serving people, but still... A-M-A-Z-I-N-G. People from the mountains are fkng special. They have Euros instead of eye lids and sht instead of brains. Goorale - fk them.

Also it went well with "boarding" on Szyndzielnia Big Grin Not that much queue. So Slavic countries ARE evolving.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Magic Mary dude. The fascination PBers have with MAXXIS blows me away with their "grip center knob-slip gap -grip side knob" orientation and you hope to hell the side knobs hold.
  • + 0
 @will-burr: I always loved the grip to rolling resistance ratio of Schwalbes. But durability left quite bad taste in my mouth. I will give them another try though. Maybe the new Addix holds better...
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: for sure about the shwalbe longevity. Doesn't make me feel so great when I burned through a pacestar rear tire in only a month.
  • + 18
 Guide R brakes on a +$5000 bike...srsly?
  • + 6
 Sadly, and no shimano build spec until you get to DI2 for $9000usd
  • + 7
 About guides : am I the only one having trouble with power? I really have to squeeze hard even with 200m rotors (is it all because of my 95kg weight?)
  • + 1
 I've had the same issue. Took the new bike back to the shop, and they said they did stuff and it's better, but not sure if I just got used to it. Muuuuch better mod than XTs though @Uuno:
  • - 2
 i had Guide RS on my bike and swapped them out pretty quick cos like all other sram/avid brakes (other than codes) I found them to be unreliable and under powered. Running Hope Tech 3 V4s now and they are soooo much better.
  • - 5
flag twelvemonths (Aug 10, 2017 at 2:45) (Below Threshold)
 @Uuno: I'm on Guide R's and they do seem to not work very well when trying to slow down on steep stuff or from high speeds... But I've only been riding a year so what do I know :s
  • - 3
 @Uuno: You're not the only one. Guide are as good as the Elixir.
  • + 9
 @Uuno: not weighting as much, but after proper setup they have the same amount of final power as XT (XTs are just kicking harder off the top).
Bleeding is not enough. Cause they have 4 pistons, you have to make sure, they are running alltogether. If dont, take out the pads, squeeze brake lever and clean them one by one... It make wonders.
  • + 1
 @twelvemonths: I've always had Shimano until my recent new bike which has Guide R's. They are a wee bit spongy, and the lever travel seems to change dependent on outside temp, but I guess this could be sorted with a bleed. Went through the OEM pads very quickly too. Other than that they working just fine. I really like the shape of the lever too.
  • + 4
 Then I'm puzzled : why do these get specced on such gravity bikes as Spartan, Swoop 170, Capra, fking Sender?? These come to mind first but there are many others...

In my case I took the leap to Zee s, all the power and modulation as good as I can wish for.
  • + 2
 The R is not really the same as the RS-C and Ult. The R grabs and isn't nice but the Swinglink ones work so well. I am 75kg with RSC's and I have moments when they don't work as expected but with a bit of change to the contact they are mint.
  • + 6
 @hamplanet: if your brake feeling changes with outside temperature, you probably have a master cylinder problem (well documented issue with SRAM Guide brakes). I had the same problem, so bad actually that at one time my front wheel didn't turn at all, because my bike was on the roof racking a hot day.... bring the brakes back to your LBS, it should be a warranty covered issue!!
  • + 1
 Sram Guide brakes are worthless junk, no matter which version.
  • + 1
 @Uuno: Depending on the age of your guides there have been some issues with the seal on the piston in the master cylinder. Can be replaced under warranty or rebuilt. Another symptom of this is the lever is slow to return to its original position.
  • + 9
 @Uuno: Sram forces bike makers to spec the whole bike with their components : suspension, transmission, brakes. That's why you often see : full Sram or Fox+Shimano.
  • + 4
 I love my Guide R and Guide RS, I had shimano brakes (including xtr) before and didn't like them.
  • + 0
 @Whipperman: yup, they also have massive minimum buys, thereby excluding lots of smaller bike outfits from running their stuff.
  • + 1
 @atrokz: @Whipperman just bought a new Devinci Troy. It has Shimano SLX/XT drivetrain and brakes with rockshox suspension.
  • + 1
 @BEEner: good to know, I think it may have changed for this now though. I'd prefer shimano as well, fox suspension, but that seems to be the high end ones now.
  • + 3
 I recently demo'd a Spesh Enduro\Santa Cruz Nomad\Bronson\Hightower, all had Guide R or RSC. Enduro had zero power, Bronson had awesome power like XT's only with a bit more modulation\Hightower had less power, all the SAME brakes. I think pad selection is huge with these brakes, a good bleed and aggresive pads (often they are spec'd with organic from factory) is critical with these brakes. I had a set of Elixir's that came with organic pads, they had little power, I re-bled them perfect and put on metallic\ceramic aggresive pads, like 2 or 3x the power. I run XT's on my main bike, I can see now that if Guide's are setup right, they can be just as good, maybe a bit better modulation wise then magical Shimano.


Also they totally changed the rear suspension design on the Spartan! Big news I think.
  • + 4
 At 105kg my guide r brakes do the job of stopping my fat ass very well
  • + 1
 @road-n-dirt: just rebuilt mine, you would think they would recall them...THEY'RE BRAKES!!!!!!!!
  • + 4
 @Whipperman: No FOX + No SHIMANO = No Purchase. Smile
  • + 1
 @Whipperman: Like @BEEner, I also just bought a new bike and it is Full Fox suspension, but a SRAM drivetrain. And my bike before that had mixed companies as well
  • + 4
 @Uuno: you only accidentally go as fast as aaron gwin when you run sram brakes...
  • + 1
 @louif23: thanks for raising that mate, I'll look into it.
  • + 2
 @larr: or you don't go at all because they completely lock out on people -- a well known issue
  • + 17
 I love that they still make their aluminium frames in Canada. Good job!
  • + 3
 I really like the look of the aluminium frame. Also the sizing and geo looks good with the exception of the slightly short CS.
  • + 11
 I think it's hilarious when a bunch of Yahoo!'s come on here and spout off a whole bunch of one liner regarding a bikes geometries....these guys do this for a living and build bikes and r&d day in and day out! If they felt the bike needed longer Chainstays it would have been developed! Obviously through testing they swapped through a bunch of rear ends and stil came to the conclusion that the bike where it is today is the best fit for all range of riders!!! Pretty simple really!
  • - 2
 Though it's not always what the R&D dept. wants, more so what the R&D dept. thinks the consumer will want. Internet threads have been all over short CS for a while now, though it does seem like that trend could be turning around. There has been some great articles posted on PB that advocated for longer CS to increase stability (the Chris Porter interview, for example) and more and more people complain about short CS in the threads.
  • + 0
 That may be. But I think the new one looks like crap compared to the old one.
  • + 2
 I think this new bike look fantastic!!! Definitely a good change and would love to see it in person...I'm sure my after though will be to buy the darn thing as I loved the my 2015
  • + 5
 I think the perception on long vs short chain stays is all off! I remember a year back everyone saying shorter stays are here to stay and here we are now talking about longer stays a year later being the pinnacle! I say let these companies set the trend and and we will either love it or hate it! To think a company would sacrifice real R&d dollars to go with mainstream trends is ridiculous! These companies bust their asses and it shows with really nice looking bikes that function.
  • + 1
 Its because the "companies" really don't know what makes a good bike... they only know what sells. If more people want short chain stays, they are gonna make bikes with shorter chain stays regardless of how the bike handles. Same with longer reach... which is also getting out of hand. (literally)
  • + 13
 Someone bring back the Klein Mantra just so there's a bike that doesn't look like all the rest.
  • + 1
 ^^this^^they really all look the same now but why?
  • + 7
 @Daddybear: waterbottle compatibility
  • + 0
 it does have that weird bend in the top tube right before it goes into the seat tube
  • + 4
 But when they do look different, people complain. Look at the 2018 Nomad thread.
  • + 2
 @guycharlesvalois: i don t complain bout the new nomad....found it nice....i just don t understand why a lot of bike look the same when just 5 years ago almost every brand look totally different...
  • + 8
 "On sections of trail where I am normally death gripping the bars, I found myself, instead, letting go of the brakes altogether and just plowing through at speed." What bike are you normally riding? Maybe this statement says more about that than the spartan.
  • + 1
 Yeah would be nice. I haven't ridden enough bikes to exactly describe the handling of one but i habe ridden some. So if you compare it to others as you did with the jekyll it might be easier to image if I may like it
  • + 10
 Isn't that statement a contradiction... if you are death gripping the bars your fingers are no where near your brakes.
  • + 3
 I really like Devinci, and other brands in general. Ok it looks not wild. But not everybody likes the wild colors on a bike. So good with that. But I hope I speak for everybody. The prices of bikes are really rising so quickly. Every time I see those prices I feel so lucky I got my first generation Troy. A solid bike that I bought for a good price. Here the price for a carbon frame is 3499 euro. Maybe they want we go back to Aluminium. ;-). But all the best wishes for Devinci, this is definitely a good bike.
  • + 17
 In 1994, the Specialized S-Works Epic Ultimate hardtail frame & fork was $3,800 USD. The complete bike was a little over $6,000. For a hardtail, with about 80mm of suspension up front. Adjusted for inflation, that is about $9,900 USD in today's currency.

23 years later, we are paying for 3,499€ for a frame only (I can't get the website to change to dollar, help?) and the top model is a little over $9,000

This is no doubt an absurd amount of money, but I fail to see how the price of bikes is rising so quickly. If anything, we are paying about the same but getting way more bike for our buck.
  • + 12
 @ka-brap: Hear hear.

Not only are high end bike prices not rising that quickly. The quality of bikes in the 1-2 grand range is rising exponentially. People just love to bitch about things that they can't afford.
  • + 4
 @ka-brap: I agree... While a high end bike in 1991 was at 3000 , I would much rather ride today's mid-range 3000 bike... People freak out about 9000 bikes killing the market, but that's not where a majority of the sales are.. There are million dollar cars out there, yet most people drive cars that cost way less than that...
  • + 2
 Yes true, we got more for the money. And the bikes are much better. But I don't know if the quality is so much better. I agree I don't buy the top model and I will be in the middle part. But still, I have the feeling we pay all the sponsoring and commercials. Don't misunderstand me when I say that brands are speculating prices. Here in Europe they got evidence that car brands like bmw,volkswagen, mercedez and some smaller brands got secret agreements about prices of cars. I strongly believe the bike industry have the same problem. It's weird when trek got a new model that another brand got for the same specs the same price more or less. I don't want too start a new topic but I really got problems with some rules in the bike industry. Like all the new little things they change too sell every year. But that's normal, because we created such kind of world. But I don't want too be the negative one. We got all the new tech and we don't need too buy this. So for me the year before tech is also good with a good price tag. So for everything his own choices. And know we ride and enjoy the beautiful trails.
  • + 3
 My girlfriend had a 2004 stumpjumper expert 2 years go, that was 2200$ USD back when released IIRC. I rode it, the geo felt wonky (too XC with a big forward bias) but the prior owner put full XTR and it didn't feel any different nor more unreliable compared to today's XTR and the bike weighted something like 27 pounds which is alright.

20 years ago was a long time but except for geometry, people tend to overestimate the progress that was made during the last 10 years.
  • + 1
 @PLC07: True, the progress of parts is less and less. That's normal. Also the electronics these days have less and less progression. The last 20 years we had a serious evolution. The most important thing is if the rider is happy. And you can have fun with many bikes or parts.
  • + 2
 @lucky13p0: You're right! The Troy carbon frame only was 2400cad (not sure but think Spartan was 200$ more because of the shock) and this new Spartan is 3800cad!!! For 2400cad you now have the aluminium one! No way we're paying 1200$ more for a new technology.... metric shock?! Plus, mtn bike are more popular then ever so the prices shouldn't increase!!
  • + 7
 Trek for people who don't want to ride a trek.
  • - 1
 Different linkage brah
  • + 2
 @DHaddict82: *different paint hahahah
  • + 1
 @DHaddict82: Virtually identical to the Slash. I recall Weagle having a dialog with Trek regarding this and his split-pivot patent.
  • + 1
 @hellbelly: knew him an Giant had issues.
  • + 6
 No information on bottom bracket? I assume it's press fit again?
  • + 2
 The new frame design is an improvement over the old, no question. A few thoughts are:

1 - one advantage of a Trunion mount is the ability to run a shorter eye-to-eye. However, a Trunion-mount on a rocker-link means the shock mass actually rises in the chassis. There is plenty of room beneath the lower eye to move the shock weight down in the bike, albeit some nifty engineering would be necessary. Perhaps a consideration on the next version.

2 - I know people have already suggested a short CS on XL frames is a bad thing, and I don't disagree. Rather, I'd like to see companies start offering rear-end geometry that mimics the front-end; short CS on Small frames, long CS on Large/XL frames. A 6'3" rider is going to experience a 430mm CS on an XL frame a LOT differently than a 5'7" rider on a small.

3 - It's nice to see the 165mm travel. Even though I'm not an Enduro racer, I think it's an appropriate amount given the bike's intended purpose, especially in a sea of bikes that range from 140-170mm.
  • + 8
 Umm, the advantage of trunnion mount is the ability to run a LONGER eye to eye in the same space, not shorter. Longer stroke, lower leverage ratio: refer new Giant Reign.
  • + 5
 When Vernon gushes over a bike, especially one that isn't a wagon wheeler, you know it's gonna be something special.
  • + 1
 Or when it is like, his job to.
  • + 1
 @raditude: So cold..it just got really chilly 'round here. Big Grin
  • + 1
 Just ride your fuxkung bike Nd quit your birzching about Chain Stay n shit.
Btw I will ride my 2016/15 Spartan for awhile longer because it's a rad bike and not super far off the current model.
And I just slapped on fresh #longlivechiansaw stickers
  • + 1
 I love my 2015 Spartan!... but its a RC, XL size and I have it sitting at 29.5lbs w/XT SPD's.
All I had to do was a SixC bar, Turbine Cinch, Ghetto Tubes and the DTSwiss E1900's.
All in all, wrapped me up $4200 bran new.

soooOOooOOOo wat gives guys?
  • + 1
 Sorry all but I would own this in a second!! I absolutely love my Scott Genius 700 Tuned plus. Short guy, short chain stays, low BB and it is a ton of fun. Forget the specs ride what you like and ride for fun. BTW I do enduro, XC, DH and marathons on this 1 bike and post some pretty good times for an old guy.
  • + 2
 Remember when rocker links weren't cool and all the bike companies started pumping out yoke linked bike after Spec? Wonder why the reversal with Devinci. Was the yoke link thing just a sexy fad?
  • + 2
 Sort of. It also a crappy technical choice, put a lot of side load on the shocks.
  • + 2
 @EI-Train I'm sitting right beside oton, he says "chainstays are sweet only 2mm shorter." hahaha these comments are hilarious ???????? i suggest you all come try a demo of the bike before deciding what the cs is like.
  • + 1
 A lot of complaints about the short CS.
I have yet to see one comment regarding the chain growth (lengthening rear center) due to the split pivot.
This makes it necessary to have short chain stays and makes all those comments irrelevent.
  • + 5
 A purple and green mountain bike looks "boring." Hilarious guys...
  • + 0
 the lines are boring in my humble opinion, and the build kits are all the same. the colors, well, I don't give a damn.
  • + 6
 The purple and green was the first part of this bike that made me say 'wow!'.. The reddish color one was also great, and I don't even like red bikes. I'm with you, I didn't think these were boring in the least.
  • + 1
 Sooo happy!!!! Been waiting for the release! I have the 2014 Troy and I absolutely love it just wished it had more travel. I'm so hoping fox releases the orange lowers for their 36! Look dope with the murked frame.
  • + 0
 Good call on the redesign. The older design allowed the shock to move side to side under side loads, wearing out bushings quicker and in some instances, messing with the shock itself (losing air). The troy didn't suffer from this, and it's apparent the design for the Troy has found it way here, essentially a long travel troy.
  • + 1
 That said, $1400 more for a carbon frame over aluminum is a departure from their old one where carbon had great value. Now, not so much. $3800 frame only, ouch.
  • + 1
 @atrokz: What was the frame-only price before?
  • + 0
 @cwatt: Can't remember exactly, but a lot less (was like 500ish more than alu, not 1400). Currently, the Troy Carbon is 2800, the Spartan Carbon is 3800. Quite a jump, and I guess we can expect the next gen Troy to follow suit as apparently people are fine spending boutique money on large production framesets.
  • + 0
 36t chainring max is bullshit. It would be quite enough with a 10-42 or 11-42 cassette, but in the age of 46t and 50t cogs, chainrings can grow proportionally. I would run a 40t chainring with an Eagle cassette (but not with this bike, which I will never buy because of this 36t limitation.
  • + 3
 The junction between the seat tube and the top tube is really strange, it look a bit rum.
  • + 6
 It does look a little weird, but also very functional. Look at that straight shot down for longer length dropper posts. It looks like it was designed specifically so there's no kinks in cable housing/hydraulic hose.

I think it's a nice detail.
  • + 1
 Can rum be the new gay please? Much less offensive, more positive and more inclusive. Plus rum is nice.
  • + 4
 75 deg. is the ideal climbing angle for a ladder.
  • + 2
 New vs. old frame overlay clearly shows the new one having a bit slacker real STA yet claimed geometry numbers state differently (74.5/74.9 vs 72.4/73.0). Curious.
  • + 4
 New real sta seems nearly parallel to the fork... Approaching that 65°.
Big riders are going to pedal on the rear axle, again, also with those 430mm cs.
I'd love to try before speculating, but I don't see how this can add up positively.
  • + 1
 @Uuno: Agreed
  • + 0
 I liked how unique of a look it had before. Now it seems to follow Giant's 'scale up' rule. Here's what I mean... Visually, the Giant Reign is just a beefier version of the Giant Trance. Visually, the Devinci Spartan is now just a beefier version of the Devinci Troy.
  • + 0
 beefier version of the Troy is actually a good thing. The Troy was actually a stiffer bike.
  • + 3
 what is the weight of the alu frames? they list the carbon ones but cant see the same for alu....
  • + 0
 Wow...am I missing something on their website? $6400 for the GX Eagle and the next jump is $10,800 for X01/XT DI2? What happened to the SLX/XT build option in between those two?! Yikes.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns says the biggest hypocrite on pinkbike. You are usually the one acting like a know it all on every single article here. Pot calling the kettle black.
  • + 1
 Cama-cama-cama-cama-cama-cameleoooooon
  • + 1
 Is everyone glancing past the fact that the paint is Iridescent? Purple from one angle and green from another So sick! Not to mention the rest of the bike looks unreal.
  • + 3
 surely very effective, visually very boring.
  • + 2
 I thought bike stability came from the person riding the bike more than ego I mean geo of said bike
  • + 1
 Gotta say I loved the lines of the old bike. This one's not bad lookin, but I always prefer the aesthetics of bikes where the shock is horizontally-configured
  • + 3
 Lower shock mount that doesn't hold water! THANK YOU Devinci!
  • + 2
 Such a nice looking bike! Drool
  • + 1
 When Devinci gets a threaded BB, they will have one of the best lineups in cycling.
  • + 2
 Love it! Good work 'Vinci!
  • + 2
 one beautiful bike. Lust worthy
  • + 1
 What is a trunnion mount? And why is it better or different than a simple bolt through the shock?
  • + 0
 the bolts thread into the shock housing, like he said to shorten the legth of the shock and allow for a lower standover height. in comparison as i recall the Rocky Mountain Slayer has a really high SO height.
  • + 0
 @imho4ep: no! trunnion lets the shock body be longer using the same eye to eye length! why do people keep saying this? longer shock means lower leverage ratio which is better.
  • + 2
 @El-Train: it's the same thing. Keep the old stroke and have a shorter shock or keep the old eye to eye and have a longer stroke.
  • - 1
 @vernonfelton - I spy with my little eye that your shoulders are not facing the exit of the corner, you were staring at that tree on the outside for too long. Guilty as charged!
  • + 1
 Im a big fan of devinci (own a 2016 carbon troy and a road bike) but those price tag :/// insane..
  • + 2
 Digging the knee pads, Vernon!
  • + 1
 Every new XC bike is targeted to ride more like a dh bike.... so why not just buy a DH bike? its almost cheaper these days
  • - 2
 Looks like every other modern enduro bike, except with a weird seat tube design. Not seeing any actual innovation, and as usual with the bike industry, the pricing is an absolute joke. 4500 USD for the most basic carbon model vs 5k for a YT Capra pro level race build kit... though decision there. Also it would have been cool if they changed the name name or had a custom colored ''Stevie Smith Chainsaw edition'' or something like that. Then it might have been worth the asking price.
  • + 6
 after all devinci is a commercial company, they know exactly (and i bet they thought about that) doing a stevie smith chainstay or something like that, would definitly bump the number of sold frames up. classy act that they dont do it.

maybe we see something on the next wilson frame, but i hope not.

#longlivechainsaw
  • + 13
 Why the new Devinci Saprtan carbon aginst YT Capra carbon isn't a fair comparison:

Devinci on the left vs YT on the right
- sells through bike shops vs direct sales (which isn't a bad thing either)
- lifetime warranty vs just 3 years
- known for strong and stiff frames vs lots of problems with broken carbon ones
- has the current axle and suspension standards vs doesn't has those current standards
- up to date geomtery vs out dated geometry
(Just because I like to ride without backpack, fits a bottelcage vs doesn't fit one)
  • + 3
 @AOshred: Just to weigh in on that one, Capra's frames are pretty damn tough. While there were a few first generation issues around the superfluous carbon around the hanger cracking, the redesigned frames are fine. No brand is perfect, don't forget an entire batch of Wilson CF's had to be replaced due to bad carbon being used.
  • + 0
 @NickB01: Sounds strange I'm sure the problem wasn't only around the hanger. Heard from someone that has cracked 4 carbon frames in different places not by his mistake. Lots of other people had problems too. No brand is perfect and if I remeber right it was their first carbon production model so it's more usual. But when probelms do occur it's nice to have coverage by them for more than just 3 years.
  • + 3
 Look at the photos on the Devinci website. The paint work is really awesome : the glitter purple/green is beautiful.
  • + 2
 @NickB01: Also don't forget the Norco Range carbon frame recall a few years ago.
  • + 2
 patrol springs to mind
  • + 0
 Sure does.
  • + 1
 Hi Pinkebike, how's that review coming? Smile
  • + 0
 If anyone is interested in a mint XL original Spartan:
www.pinkbike.com/buysell/2225185
  • + 1
 Not, but I'm interested to know how anyone gets so effing big!!!
  • + 0
 @BenPea: the original spartan is short to today's standards so the guy may be like 6'
  • + 1
 I was interested, but then I saw you put a Fox 34 on it. What was your reasoning for putting a 34 on a Spartan? If it were a 36 or a Pike I'd drive up there tomorrow to take it off your hands.
  • + 2
 @cueTIP: It does have a Pike up front. My buddy was lending me the 34 to try out, so I took photos when the bike was all clean. The original Pike is back on there now. PM me for details! Thanks for your interest
  • + 2
 @kurt2: @cueTIP FWIW Tyler, the 34 in question was custom tuned with Ohlins internals (can't remember if it was vorsprung or suspensionwerx) and rides like a beast. The stanchions are only 1mm smaller than the pike; pretty negligible difference.
  • + 1
 Puh, pricey 'n' heavy for a going-up-going-down rig...
  • + 2
 looks like a django
  • + 1
 3300 for a nx drivetrain wow
  • + 1
 Ugh, all that Sram garbage... Where's the basic XT/Fox build?
  • - 1
 The lack of a dropper on a $4500 USD bike is pretty cheeky on their part. I understand that it is the base model carbon bike, but yeesh.
  • + 3
 every highend mountian bike in their lineup has a dropper so i dont know where you saw that info
  • + 1
 @skinna: My bad, I read that wrong. Thought the FSA Adjustable was a rigid seatpost.
  • - 1
 Yet another bike ruined by the water bottle brigade. Same old layout as everyone else now zzz zzz Thanks
  • + 0
 well, it didnt get better looking that for sure.
  • + 0
 I really enjoy this version but the old one was more spartan! Big Grin
  • + 1
 You don't have to be De Vinci to see that... Wink
  • - 2
 Looks super dope! But who ever the art director is for Devinci blew it on the color ways.
  • + 4
 Thanks for the comment.
  • + 3
 No way! I think they look awesome and different than a lot of the others out there now.
  • - 3
 Looks like a Patrol
  • - 3
 7lbs carbon frame. Is it massive?
  • + 6
 Devinci has always said their frames are a bit heavier to ensure the bikes can survive the lifetime warranty.
  • + 5
 Yes. But you get more carbon for your dollar, yey! This bitch better be stiff in all the right places and bomb proof.
  • + 1
 "Devinci gives the Spartan a bit of a makeover"...."Lighter, STIFFER, slacker, LONGER".

I would think that if you already ride a Spartan on regular basis, that you may be ahead of the game when switching over to the 2018 Spartan, but if you haven't, the ride could be a bit....uhhh harsh?
  • - 3
 Actually fairly ugly and could anymore brands' use transitions Patrol linkage????
  • + 3
 You think Transition invented the rocker link?
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2017. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.139170
Mobile Version of Website