Cannondale Jekyll 4 Review

May 28, 2012
by Richard Cunningham  
BY Richard Cunningham
Ken Wood launches the Cannondale Jekyll 4 over the rocks at the top of Ted WiIliams. The 150-millimeter all-mountain chassis proved itself at the Southern California DH training ground. Ian Hylands photo

Cannondale’s single-pivot suspension and big-tube aluminum chassis has been around for a long time, but just when the industry is ready to declare it dead, the engineers there seem to be able to squeeze more performance from the design. The 2012 Jekyll, which has been competing successfully on the European Enduro circuit, bears witness to Cannondale’s magic. In this feature, we test the remarkably affordable Jekyll 4. The $3000 All-mountain/trailbike bristles with features, like the remote-actuated Fox-made twin-chamber Dyad RT2 pull-shock and a travel-adjustable RockShox Sektor TK fork that give the bike gravity-bike plushness on the downhills and XC freshness for climbing. Stripped to its elements, the Jekyll 4 provides a cash-strapped enthusiast with a modest, but very capable component selection, showcased by a beautifully-executed 150-millimeter travel frame that is worthy of expensive upgrades in the future. The Jekyll 4 is available in small, medium, large and X-large sizes. The weight (sans pedals) for our medium-sized test bike was 31 pounds even (14.09 kilos).

Pinkbike All Mountain Bike Shoot Out
  Cannondale Jekyll 4 Highlights:

-Frame: Manipulated aluminum frame tubes, 150mm travel, 1.5 head tube, Syntace X 12 thru-axle, ISCG-03 chainguide tabs
-Fork:150/120mm stroke, RockShox Sektor TK Dual-Travel, 15QR through-axle
-Shock: Cannondale/Fox Dyad RT2
-SRAM X.7 three by ten drivetrain
-Sizes: Small, Medium, Large, X-Large
-Weight: 31 pounds (med)
-MSRP: $3000 USD
Ian Hylands photo

Jekyll 4 Construction

Cannondale’s Jekyll chassis sports a huge-diameter down tube that widens to three inches at the midpoint to support the pull-shock rocker linkage. The hollow rocker link is welded from two halves to boost stiffness and it clamps 15-millimeter tubular pivot axles designed to provide over-the-top torsional rigidity to the rear suspension. A pair of sealed ball bearings at each dropout pivot location ensure that the Jekyll’s rigid suspension will not be defeated by bearing slop. The rear dropouts are also welded box-sections that feature a Syntace X-12 through-axle and a beefy derailleur hanger. A forked top tube keeps the bike’s stand-over clearance to a manageable height and its underside has screw-in housing guides for a dropper seat post. Down low, Cannondale uses an oversized-axle BB30 bottom bracket that incorporates an ISCG-03 chainguide flange. Finally, the direct-mount front derailleur is mounted to the swingarm so that the cage follows the chain as the suspension cycles to ensure optimum shifting in the rough. Aside from its full-length housing and hoses, the Jekyll’s frame is remarkably free from clutter – an evolved and purposeful looking design.

Cannondale Jekyll 4 Geometry

Geometry chart Cannondale Graphic

About That Suspension

Cannondale teamed up with Fox Racing Shox to produce the Dyad RT2 shock, which looks far more complicated than it is in actuality. The pull-shock has three chambers. Two of the chambers are air springs with floating pistons. The center chamber (the pull shock part) pumps fluid into one or both of the air springs, depending upon where you set the handlebar remote lever. When both chambers are open, the Dyad RT2 shock achieves full travel and a more linear spring rate. When the remote lever is activated, (elevate mode) the pull-shock pumps fluid into only one air chamber, which reduces the suspension travel to 90mm and increases the spring rate because there is not enough space in the one air spring to accept the full volume of fluid that the pull-shock can pump.

Dyad RT 2 Shock Dyad Remote lever
  Fox Racing Shox builds Cannondale's Dyad RT2 pull-shock. Follow the instructions on the seat tube and you'll be tuned and ready to ride in five minutes. Push the Dyad's remote lever (right) to reduce the suspension travel from 150 to 90mm and boost the spring rate. One tap of the silver button on the tip of the lever releases it and opens the suspension to full travel. Ian Hylands photo

Each chamber has its own low-speed rebound damping clicker, so technically, you must fine-tune two dampers before you can ride. Getting it right is quite easy and Cannondale provides easy-to-follow set up instructions that are printed on the frame near the business end of the Dyad RT2 shock. Fox Racing Shox also has a dedicated Dyad page which details tuning and setup as well.

Component Check

Allocating a sizeable share of the Jekyll 4’s sticker price to its premium frame and shock should have led to cost cutting everywhere else on the bike, but Cannondale managed to fill out its components quite well. The tires are super grippy 2.35” Schwalbe Hans Dampf on moderately wide, Sun Ringle’ Inferno 25 rims. Shifting is SRAM X.7 with a non-series triple crankset and brakes are Avid Elixir 3 with 180mm rotors on both ends. Cannondale was a first-adopter of the 1.5 head tube and the Jekyll gets a clean-looking internal version of the big headset.

Syntace X12 axle Schwalbe Hans Dampf tire RockShox Sektor fork
  Cannondale puts a pair of ball bearings in each dropout pivot to ensure the suspension stays tight. The Syntace X12 through-axle is a plus for stiffness and a minus for quick wheel changes. Schwalbe's Hans Dampf 2.35-inch tire is the knobby of the moment. For an inexpensive 150mm fork, the RockShox Sektor TK fork puts in a good performance. Ian Hylands photo

The fork is the coil-sprung RockShox Sektor TK with the Dual-Travel option (150mm/120mm) and a 15mm Maxle quick release through-axle. The cockpit is all Cannondale house-brand, with a 75mm stem (good), clamp-on grips with aluminum end-plugs (good) and a narrow, 680mm handlebar (not good). Incidental, but nice is a smooth-acting seatpost quick release lever which blunts the fact that this very capable machine lacks a dropper post.

Cannondale Jekyll 4 Trail Test

With its three-barrel pull-shock and massive frame tubes, the Jekyll 4 was an imposing sight for test riders, who shied away from the Cannondale in favor of bikes with more conventional profiles. After riding the Jekyll 4 a few times, however, the red and white monster became the go-to for almost everyone. Its handling grows on you, and once you learn that you can trust it, the Jekyll 4 becomes a hoot to ride. The odd-looking Dyad RT2 damper kills it on the long-travel mode and, in the ‘elevated’ short-travel setting, the Jekyll 4 climbs steeps with an ease that defies its 31-pound weight figure. The steering feels a tad steep, but that doesn’t seem to hinder its technical ability. During the downhill phase of testing, one of our test riders was happily launching road gaps. In short, the Jekyll 4 got the ‘all-mountain’ stamp of approval well before the testing was done.

Ken Wood rides a Cannondale Jekyll during the Pinkbike All Mountain Bike Shoot Out
  Stylin' it off the boulders - Ken chills on the Jekyll with another 35 feet to go to make the transition. Ian Hylands photo

Set-up notes: The Dyad pull shock can’t be read for sag unless you have a friend around to measure it (the shaft retracts at rest, so an O-ring indicator won’t work). Otherwise, it was the easiest bike to get right. Follow Cannondale’s printed negative and positive pressure recommendations printed on the seat tube sticker (or visit Fox’s informative Dyad tech page). Up front your options are slim - verify your fork sag (printed on the Sektor’s stanchion tubes), set the rebound and you are good to go. The Sektor’s coil spring must be preloaded internally with spacers if the sag is more than recommended (spacers included by Cannondale).

Pedaling/Acceleration: Even with the unlikely Hans Dampf knobbys, Jekyll riders could easily spin the big ring on fast, smooth dirt and pavement – thanks in part to the shock’s short-travel mode and the fork’s lockout setting. Still, it is a relatively heavy bike and that can be felt anytime one is forced to brake and re-accelerate strongly. With all the aids switched on (shock and fork shortened), the Cannondale can be pushed hard up and over rollers and out of flat corners, but it lags a bit with the first few pedal strokes when accelerating from a dead stop. In its favor, the Jekyll’s frame is famously stiff feeling in torsion, which can be quite a morale booster when trying to reel in an opponent, because you can be certain that you are not wasting leg power on mushy suspension and a flexible frame.

Climbing: On the dirt, with its suspension set hard, the Jekyll 4 makes good time uphill. When the trail got exceedingly steep, lowering the fork was a welcome help to keep the front tire planted on the ground. That noted, it doesn’t feel overly energetic, it just makes its way upwards effectively and without a fuss. While this ‘feel’ is typical of almost all bikes in its class, the Jekyll’s overall climbing speed is at least a gear faster on smooth surfaces.

With its grippy Hans Dampf, knobbies and slightly steeper steering geometry, the Jekyll negotiates tricky climbs with surprising dexterity. Add its thankfully low, 22-tooth chainring and its rider can maintain long pitches of murderous steps and ruts without triggering a pulmonary event. I often clicked the shock into short-travel mode, because it raises the rear end about a degree and gives the bike better balance – especially when climbing touchy switchbacks or slickrock.

Ken Wood rides a Cannondale Jekyll during the Pinkbike All Mountain Bike Shoot Out
  The Jekyll 4 and its aggressive Hans Dampf tires managed to find traction almost everywhere on the gravelly, hard-pack soil - and when it did let loose, it drifted smoothly. Ian Hylands photo

Technical handling: Cannondale’s choice of a coil-sprung Sektor fork was a deal breaker for heavier riders who complained of brake dive while negotiating steeps and drops. Riders under 169 pounds, however, reported that the Jekyll felt secure in similar situations. Cannondale packs plastic fork spring spacers to preload the fork and help solve this problem – and if that doesn’t work (it did for us), RockShox offers three spring options for riders who are lighter or heavier than the national average. With its 67.8 degree head angle, a competent rider can take the Jekyll down some tricky descents and during the downhill phase of the test, riders raved about the bike’s cornering and tire selection on the dry, unpredictable surfaces. Still, with the soft fork, a little brake dive can turn that 68 degree head angle into 70 - and we all had one ‘Hail Mary’moment.

Downhill: Initially, I felt less confident dropping down untried sections aboard the Cannondale, but after four rides, I learned that the Jekyll was much more trustworthy than first apparent. Once I got off the brakes and let the Jekyll go, I discovered that it was quite smooth through the corners and stable when I got the wheels off the ground. Armed with the grippy Schwalbe tires, I could drop the wheels into substantial ruts and it would pop right out, which inspired confidence while scouting unfamiliar routes.

Experienced downhillers in the test did not have trouble acclimating to the Jekyll and spoke highly of its cornering and ability to change direction. I learned to put a foot out when I really pushed the bike around flat corners because when it let go, the Jekyll was quite a drifter (a trait that at least one rider raved about). While on the subject; the Jekyll’s Avid Elixir 3 brakes were a sore point, with a squealer up front and pads with an indistinct feel. Once locked up, the Elixir 3 brakes required almost a complete release at the lever to unstick the tire – not an optimum condition for steep sketchy chutes. It should be noted here that the sticky brakes may have been caused by an improper bleed.

Ken Wood rides a Cannondale Jekyll during the Pinkbike All Mountain Bike Shoot Out
  Suspension trials at Teds. Trail builders constructed oversize chatter sections on the course specifically to test fork and shock tunes. The Jekyll's Dyad-powered rear suspension surprised us with a relatively smooth ride on the higher speed bumps. Underline 'relatively.' Ian Hylands photo

Suspension action: Surprisingly, the Cannondale suspension was a top performer, We didn’t have much initial faith in the Dyad RT2 shock, but it delivered in the rough, taking the biggest hits without a fuss. Not saying that the Jekyll is as plush as a big bike – it absolutely isn’t – but it can take a lot of punishment and hold a line. With a fork upgrade, the bike could be pushed much harder still. In short travel mode, the feel of the Jekyll is that of a short-stroke XC rear end. It pedals easily and takes the dullness out of the drivetrain.

The Sektor fork took a lot of oomph to set into the short-travel mode. The fork must be compressed 75-percent of its stroke to set the travel, and that is not easy while climbing technical ascents. Because of this, we often gave up and slogged up steeps with a sketchy steering fully extended front end – not a big worry, but still, having the option and not being able to get it is a pain. Opened up, the RockShox fork was pretty plush feeling and relatively sensitive while cornering at speed over rough surfaces. Good stuff from a value-priced fork.

Component report: Small details, but important ones, appeared on the top and bottom of our love list. Aluminum endcaps on the lock-on grips were sweet, the bars were never plugged with dirt, so neither was the car, the living room or the shop where dirt harvested by other handlebars usually ends up. The fit of the frame and seatpost was smooth, the action of the well-made quick release seatpost clamp was butter smooth and the full length of the post could slide into the seat tube for DH runs.

All was not wonderful, however. We like Syntace’s quick release through axles, but the Jekyll’s Syntace X12 rear axle was a hassle to operate. The axle required a shove to get the threads started – which was nearly impossible to do with one hand, because the Allen wrench required to tighten it slipped into the hollow axle. By contrast, the RockShox Maxle Lite up front was always a breeze to operate. One upgrade that we’d love to have is a double crankset (22 x 38 or 36) with a bash ring in place of the third sprocket. We rarely used the big ring on the dirt and always hit it on something. Finally, wide handlebars please? The consensus was, at least 720 millimeter width bars for the Jekyll.

Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesSomehow, Cannondale turned its ordinary single-pivot suspension design into a star performer. For $3000, the Jekyll is a sweet deal for a capable bikehandler that wants a do-it-all trailbike. It is no surprise that the elite level Jekylls are ripping it up on the Enduro circuit - and the Jekyll 4 shares the same frame numbers and suspension. Out of the box, Cannondale put together a true all-mountain bike for an affordable price. Add a more capable fork, wider handlebars and some hard-stopping brakes, and the Jekyll 4 would be tough to beat at any level - which is the unspoken sell of the Jekyll 4. At its core, the frame and suspension is a truly elite level chassis, so investing in expensive upgrades like a more capable fork and a dropper seat post would be money well spent. - RC

After reading the Cannondale Jekyll 4 test, I think I'll...

Five-Bike $3000 AM Tests:

1 - Cannondale Jekyll 4
2 - Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Comp
3 - Giant Reign 1
4 - Santa Cruz Butcher
5 - Norco Range 3


  • 85 1
 Ryan Dunns' alive!!!
  • 25 1
 It's either him or Zach Galifianakis!
  • 6 23
flag therealtylerdurden (May 28, 2012 at 13:43) (Below Threshold)
 169 999999 9999 99 9 pounds mutha fucka! 169! NOT 170! 169!
  • 3 1
 or zach brown haha
  • 4 2
 I have ridden a Jekyll before and they are actually fantastic bikes uphill and downhill.
  • 1 0
 hahaha This is Zach hahaha Big Grin
  • 8 2
 Sorry for my dumbass comment, dudes.. I was incredibly drunk.
  • 1 0
 Don't worry i like a bit of humour like u,that was niceSmile I didn't watch his face but after ur comment i was laughing Big Grin
  • 2 0
 Lol right on man. 169 IS a pretty arbitrary number to impose a weight suggestion on a bike!
  • 50 3
 Someone with $3000 to spend on a bicycle isn't 'cash strapped'.
  • 8 1
 Exactly what I was thinking.
  • 13 19
flag WestwardHo (May 28, 2012 at 12:44) (Below Threshold)
 Cunningham just freaking regurgitates press releases. There is no critical thought involved at all. This stuff is worse than road bike tests from Bicycling.
  • 12 7
 It reminds me of the days when he edited Mountain Bike Action. All reviews could be summed up with "In sunny California it never rains, and nothing we test sucks."
  • 15 4
 Yeah it is for the people who save up enough money to want to buy a mid-priced bike that preforms a lot better than the POS they have already... You guys know you can save money to buy nice things, right?
  • 5 1
 The other day I saw a dude washing his Mercedes SLk and I was out of water. I rode up the driveway to ask him to fill my bidon. I could now see that in his garage was a brand spanking Bentley Continental... and a bike - a $300 POS.

We spends the money on our precious.

And remember, if you can build a GOOD relationship with your LBS and advertise them, host race, race for them and/or dig for them and never ask for a discount, then one day retail prices will be a thing of the past.
  • 4 3're either not that familiar w/ RC's strengths or not a critical thinker.

RC excels at what he does. Totally respect his input. Keep in mind that its not just him testing the bikes and gear. So, he tests it, but he also synthesizes all the feedback from the riders and then he writes up the review. Just saying that the whole process requires some competency in many different areas. For example, RC writes well. You might even say professionally (btw have you ever surveyed your writing to see how many of your sentences use passive voice instead of active?)

I'm a fan.
  • 7 1
 @scott-townes: People who are cash strapped don't have money to save. It's the very definition of being cash strapped. Thanks for the finance lesson though
  • 6 2
 $3000 for a bike with a Sektor? Whomever spec'd the 620 mm handlebar on both this bike and the Claymore, for two years in a row, should be FIRED! Worthless.

RC is ok, but like the rest of us has been wrong a few times, like whe
n he recommends Kenda Nevegals. The problem is testing things in sissyass SoCal, the trails there are too mellow, no roots, not many rocks, hardly any rain and if it does everyone stays home instead of riding. Its not an adequate testing ground for mountain bikes, period.
  • 3 0
 ^WestwardHo - i'm pretty sure RC's been writing bike reviews for 20ish years. i used to devour MBA mags when i was cutting my teeth on rockshox mag 20's and judy's back in the early 90's. huge respect for a guy who's ridden bikes most of us can only dream of and takes the time to give us mortals the lowdown.
  • 1 5
flag scott-townes (May 29, 2012 at 7:46) (Below Threshold)
 dirtydroog, being strapped for cash means you don't have much disposable income, not that you're poor and living paycheck to paycheck in order to live... jeeze.
  • 1 0
 protour - whats your deal with the nevegals?
  • 1 0
 Tires are a personal choice, Nevegals are very grippy but also very slow rolling. If you live in an area where traction is less of an issue and rolling resistance is more important, than Nevegals are bad choice.
  • 1 0
 true enough. as far as personal choices - i find kendas, or at least nevegals and excavators (though not as much experience with the later) have lasted longer than the minion/holy roller i used to ride with, and way better than the WTB dissent tires.. but riding in mud, slop, wet roots n such. but then, wouldnt that mean the nevegals wouldn't be so choice in the socal enviro?
  • 27 2
 Seems strange they spec a 'aggresive all mountain bike' with a triple chain set and 620mm bars.
  • 6 2
 hence the name?

"with the rare mental condition often spuriously called "split personality", where within the same body there exists more than one distinct personality.[3] In this case, there are two personalities within Dr Jekyll, one apparently good and the other evil" -
  • 6 1
 pull shocks... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
  • 5 2
 Not everyone enjoys riding reeedonculous width handlebars
  • 30 3
 People who don't enjoy wide handlebars are simply the people who haven't tried them yet,620mm is absurd.
  • 8 1
 spot on with that. I keep telling people who don't have the wide bars to switch. I keep getting the same thing. "Oh these are wide enough"...... A good set of wide bars will do wonders for your control, effectively making you faster. Still wondering why people don't want to buy into it.
  • 5 13
flag scott-townes (May 28, 2012 at 16:41) (Below Threshold)
 ^ Maybe because they don't need wide handlebars to have proper control to go fast... Hell you could say the same thing with training wheels and your balance. You'll never fall over with this new tech!!! Introducing balance-enhancing wheel sets! I don't see a difference or see people with skinnier handle bars as somehow not as "into it" as you are. Maybe it'd benefit the top DH guys or slope/DJ riders for whatever reason but for any other rider... cut it out. Wider handlebars is a crutch.
  • 5 3
 because it is easier to control going highspeed through rough sections. i guarentee you put those "fast' people on bike with 750+ bars and they will go faster. more torquee generated by the hands, easier to control
  • 3 15
flag scott-townes (May 28, 2012 at 17:56) (Below Threshold)
 ^ More torque created by the hands = easier to over steer and lose control. Everything has it downsides, broooo
  • 10 5
 Have you tried riding through tight trees with wider bars? scott-townes is right, there are always plus and minuses
  • 7 6
 Ya know... twenty to thirty years ago, we screamed six thousand feet down rutted, gravel and dirt fire roads of major mountains at 50-60mph on bikes with 23" wide bars and little to no suspension and controlled ourselves just fine. Now all you kids today with 6 to 8 inches of plush wheel travel can't manage it with anything less than a 29" wide bars it seems. Of course we also understood the fact that a longer stem also increased leverage and didn't ride ridiculous little stubby stems.
  • 10 2
 @ scott-townes:

you clearly havent tried wider bars...

"More torque created by the hands = easier to over steer and lose control" if you have wider bars then it means you have to move the bars farther but with less force. less force. a greater distance moved = more control and less wheel feedback.

I'm currently running 30.8" bars on my downhill bike and I rarely have clearance issues despite riding tight trails with trees 90% of the time. and if it's something really narrow then learn to manual and turn your bars at the same time.

I see no real reason to run anything narrower than 28", you have more leverage to pull against on climbs, you have more control over the front wheel when descending so you get less fatigued, and the wider position opens up your chest so you can breathe better.

20-30 years ago we ran 23" bars because bikes were usually adapted road bikes. that dosent mean it was the best thing to have.
  • 5 0
 amen. and if your looking to go that fast through trees that would clip a 750mm bar and not clip a 650 bar, your nuts hahaha
  • 3 0
 Apart from extremely narrow tree lined trails there is no advantage whatsoever for bars under 680-700
  • 1 0
 I own this bike... And I completely agree with the review. Everything you said is good and everything you said wasn't so good.

BUT the bike ships with this 'Cannondale C3 riser, 680x20mm,' NOT a 620mm wide bar . So unless you guys got a different bar, it's not 620. Its 660mm wide. With a 20mm rise.

Epic review, very well written! Glad others appreciate how good this bike is for the money you pay for it. Yes the frame is the most expensive thing in the whole package hence the slightly downgraded brakes and such.
Ian - awesome photos dude!

I just pulled this from the 2011 review from bikeradar (sorry!) But this might explain the narrow bar:
"There's a reason for the narrow bar, though, an obscure law in Australia and Japan that limits handlebar width to 700mm, called ASNZ 2.12.1. Huesby says Cannondale will get around this in 2012 by shipping the Jekyll with two bars – a wider one for the US market and a narrower one for Japan and Australia."
  • 3 0
 ^You said 680 and then 660.
  • 4 1
 An often overlooked argument for the wide-versus-narrow debate is this: its not just about how much control you have over the terrain, but how much control the terrain has over you.

You can't go through a rock garden with your hands off the bars. No-one is going to argue that. Why must you keep your hands on the bars? Because the rocks will deflect your front wheel which turn the bars and you are cactus. The wider your bars, the more leverage you have against the deflection of the wheel.

Apart from the above, I climb a steep asphalt road faster on 720mm wide bars than 680s. Same bike, same everything on a 12-14 minute climb I train on regularly.

I race XC and marathons and you will pry my bars from my cold dead fingers - if you have the leverage of course, and since I've got my hands on the grips, you won't pry it outta my hands.
  • 3 0
 Just thought I'd clear up the issue for everyone by confusing it some more Wink

Ah balls. I shoulda proof read that some more Big Grin 680 - six hundred and eighty millimetres wide!
  • 8 2
 Hilarious to see people defending narrow bars...
  • 4 3
 I like bars in the 620 to 680 range. Sue me. I'm old school and have bike handling skills. I don't need wide bar crutches.

In any case, no place in the actual review did they say 620mm bars, 680mm bars or anything at all about the actual bar width of the bike they got. All they said was, in the final line of the review...

"Finally, wide handlebars please? The consensus was, at least 720 millimeter width bars for the Jekyll. "

And then the first guy to comment complained about the price tag and 620mm bars... and everyone ran with that without actually reading the review.
  • 3 2
 and your an idiot, cuz the guy is wanting at least 720 mm bars cuz he cant control the damn thing properly! hahah
"Cannondale house-brand, with a 75mm stem (good), clamp-on grips with aluminum end-plugs (good) and a narrow, 620mm handlebar (not good). Incidenal, but nice is a smooth-acting seatpost quick release lever which blunts the fact that this very capable machine lacks a dropper post."
  • 4 7
 You're 17 and calling me an idiot? That's rich.
  • 7 1
 Using age in your argument? Rich.
  • 6 0
 he can use age in his argument if he has been around through the evolution of handle bar widths, i have been reading this comment thread and i frankly find it hilarious that this is such a big argument. if you want to run 23 inch bars, then what you should do is run 23 inch bars, or if you like the bars a little wider, then put wider bars on your bike, you dont need to try to force your opinion on other pinkbikers, save this debate for a forum. in the end, who cares what others do, if you think wider bars are best and others who like narrower bars are stupid because you think they have less control, then let them eat it and then maybe they will learn that you are right. and if you think wider bars are in danger of clipping trees, then let those wide bar fools break down some trees as well as their handle bars.
  • 3 0
 Thats the best summary I've heard so far.
  • 11 0
 I own the Carbon 2 version of this bike and I must say I have never beat down on a trail bike like this one, it loves the abuse! Installed a Havoc 30" cockpit and reverb and the bike is an absolute killer. Everyone that's been on it (often reluctantly) mention how torsionally stiff the bike is and I must agree. Also, I've never dropeed my chain with the stock 3x10 set-up, that includes 5 super d races and 2 long trips to Moab. Sick Bike
  • 7 2
 We had a Claymore demo bike at our shop (same bike but with 120-180 mm of travel), and I was amazed at how that thing flies. Went uphill as well as my xc bike and downhill better then my Dh bike!
  • 2 1
 Have you ridden a Tomac Snyper,any comparison ? I was looking at buying a Tomac but i really loved my original 90's Jekyll with Lefty fork .
  • 2 0
 I have a tomac vanish and it just rips, snyper is much the same. this is a nice bike, well spec'd and everything but think of maintenance, custom shock is gonna hurt the wallet on servicing, would mojo even touch one here in the uk ? and if so how much is it gonna cost to service ? personally im game for trying new things but dont try and fix what isnt broken, standard rp23/monarch rt3 really that much different ? i doubt it. Thru axle is definatly a good idea but i wish people would stick with the standard 135 or 150 axles. we have enough standards going on already.
  • 2 0
 I have not, but it climbed amazingly imo for a bike with a talas 180 on the front
  • 2 0
 Thanks guys,decisions,decisions !
  • 1 0
 Jaydmf - Having owned a bike with an RP23 and now this exact bike. The Dyad feels totally different - better.
  • 1 1
 "custom shock is gonna hurt the wallet on servicing, would mojo even touch one here in the uk ? and if so how much is it gonna cost to service?"

It costs the same as any other Fox shock...
  • 1 0
 Aye, having researched into it now, it's not really any different to getting any other shock tuned. However you are limited only to Mojo for any work as Fox simply will not supply all the parts required to service the shock to anyone but Mojo!

Which is a real shame seeing as there as some incredible smaller companies that can do tuning and servicing of everything else!

(Southcoast Suspension!)
  • 13 1
 I like his beard.
  • 3 3
 Kings for the Cup?
  • 4 0
 you know what they say..."If your Dad doesn't have a beard, you've got two Mums"...
  • 7 0
 hmm while I really like the whole concept of jekyll and claymore, I really think that 3000$ is a bit too much for this level of components. The dyad shock ok, I get that, but the sektor fork isn't really good- I have a solo air version on my pitch pro 2011 and after a season of riding (was serviced at the end of the season) it just isn't working as good as it did. And the motion control thingy goes to shit cuz its plastic. I have to say that certain companies think a bit too high of their products.
Back to this bike- I understand that the prices have gone up, but it is kind of funny that they put elixir 3 brakes-come on...If you are selling a bike that is supposed to be all mountain/xc elixir 3 are just too weak. Even elixir 5 which I own, are a bit too weak for gentle park riding.
I paid 1800 euros last April for my pitch pro, got better geometry (apart from the long wheelbase Big Grin ), sektor fork (air version-way more adjustable than the coil, without the travel adjust that you don't really need, they couldn't even use it although they had the option), elixir 5 (not bad for the price), 24x36 with bash guard and chain guide, slx in the front, x9 in the back, 720 bars, and fox float rp2 shock. Rides like a blast at anything I've thrown at it for waaaay less money- got absolutely no media coverage whatsoever in its whole existence from 2008-2011?
  • 10 1
 A medium weighs 31 pounds sans pedals. A medium also apparently weighs 30.1 pounds. Math is hard.
  • 6 0
 Thanks for catching that typo. The Park Tool scale agrees with 31. RC
  • 13 4
 Kinda heavy and expensive for a 150mm travel bike.
  • 2 1
 giant reign, 29 lb, carbon nomad, 30 lb, the giant is 2300 and the santa cruz is 7000, so that puts cannondale in the middle for price atually
  • 11 1
 you only used two companies out of the hundreds there are actually out there....
  • 3 2
 The Jekyll is definitely not the same kind of bike and as the nomad...
  • 10 0
 maybe compared to other bikes but I wouldn't call 31lbs (14kg) heavy! Man up and ride!
  • 3 0
 i was just giving some prices at each end of the spectrum, yes there are many AM bikes out there, it was just to give duncan an idea
  • 2 0
 Yeah 14 kg is actually pretty light for the price...
  • 9 2
 I didnt know Alan from the hangover road bikes?!?!
  • 4 0
 620mm handle bars? My i swapped bars on my giant anthem XC bike to 660mm and shortened the stem to 70mm and the handling was far better. i can't believe 620mm is an AM handle bar. what a joke.
  • 2 0
 Due to a ridiculous bicycle law in Asia...
  • 3 0
 Most new XC bikes are wider than that
  • 3 0
 This is a sick bike. I haven't ridden one personally but i've sat on one enough to see what it's potential could be. My only problem with a bike like this is what happens when the shock is out for maintenance? You will need to have a spare as you will not be able to utilize any others to compensate. Other than that, awesome!
  • 4 0
 What happens when your RP23 blows up? Same thing, you don't have a shock while Fox repairs it. I've been there too.
  • 1 0
 I know several owners of RP23s of which only one had a bigger issue with it (ok two including me, but that was my fault and it was not a mechanical damage) then I knew 3 guys with equalizer shocks on Scott Ransom and Genius bikes, and all of them had issues with the shock, of which 2 have sold their bikes in the process, only due to repetitive problems with the shock. So... if you don't have a good scott or cannondale dealer in town, having spares in stock, then whatever happens with it (and it seems to happen more often than with RP23 Monarch or whatever) you wait 2 weeks+ for replacement parts, whereas many LBS carry FOX and RS rebuild kits so you can have your shock running next day. Not to mention the fact how fast can you obtain a completely new shock if something goes really wrong with it.
  • 1 0
 It is a sick bike. I own one. Lets face it though, this isn't a Scott.
  • 1 0
 I've owned two Scott Genius bikes since 2004 and had zero trouble getting shock service from DT Swiss in the US. The turnaround was 7-10 days both times which is on-par with the service I get from Fox.
  • 3 0
 I own a Jekyll 5 and it is way similuar to the 4 with Revelation up front. Like any bike it is rider preference. I myself love it, it fits me well and handles fine on all kinds of terain. I am only 5'4 and weigh in at 145 pounds so to me it is kinda a tank but it has helped me get stronger and have better bike control. I love the big hits , I called Cannondale and they said it wasn't ment for that. To me it wasn't ment for someone over 200 lbs. It handles great on turns and awesome on Downhills. It is like a rocket at times . I can't really say anything negative about the bike but it did take a sec to dial in on the suspension both front and rear but once I did it has been smooth sailing. One more thing , yeah it has put me in debt for 4 more years but who do you know that rides a mtn bike has money. I sure there are some but there are those like myself who care not about the money issue but about the next ride. Now go ride your bike and remember , when lost , the sun set's west. EMF
  • 2 0
 Got one of these, upgraded a fair bit and its beast!! Although not a light bike it feels alot lighter than it is when out on the trial, smashes the ups. Mad fun on the downs, corners sweet and jumps reasonably well.. only slight negative i could point out is the bb is a little low when in full travel mode if you have the shock set up perfect (can always increase the psi but loose alittle of the buttery small bump plushness)

Mine came with 680mm handlebars (upgraded to 780mm)... the website sates "Cannondale C3 riser, 680x20mm, 6061 alloy" 620mm must have been a typo???
  • 1 0
 My exact thoughts dude. I am confused about the bar also. Again I own this one and am yet to upgrade it yet!!
  • 1 0
 Typo, it's 680mm. It's fixed now. All the test riders (myself included) thought they were too narrow for the bike.
  • 2 0
 NEW CARBON JEKYLL FOR SALE!! I built a custom medium carbon Jekyll and absolutely love the bike, I've ridden many trail bikes and this is hands down the best pedaling and best descending trail bike I've ridden. However, I decided I wanted a large so I just bought a carbon Jekyll 2 complete and am swapping frames- I am putting all the new parts on the medium frame and selling complete. The medium has only been on 10 rides or so and is in perfect shape. The complete retails for $5,000- I will sell for way less than retail. If interested, please message me.
  • 3 0
 GREAT BIKE! I have ridden this and own a Clamore 2. Climbs great and DH's smoothly. Before you down this bike, you should see if there is a demo you can try then let us know how you like it.
  • 5 0
 That's so cute how all his clothes match the bike.
  • 4 0
 Yeah, especially his red Giro FEATURE helmet. ! It's awesome !
  • 4 0
 The bike looks sick. I would def. check one out. That being said, biking is becoming way too much of a fashion statement.
  • 3 0
 Richard, if this is a series, could you link the other tests in the series a la Tech Tuesday?

I hope you are testing a Giant Reign.
  • 1 0
 Yes, the Reign is coming up in a week or two. RC
  • 1 0
 I want to thank the editor for taking his words for good , more exactly , I've just purchased a chainguide for the exact same bike as reviewed here ( Jekyll 4 2012) with ISCG05 mounts and WHAT A suprise since it has ISCG 03 / Old mounts as everybody else informs correctly even the manufacturer . . .
  • 4 0
 Kinda wish you guys tested the higher end Jekylls.
  • 2 0
 Go check this out!!

Allez jeter un coup d'oeil et si vous y adhérez, vous savez quoi faire : AIMER !! Smile
  • 2 1
 Hey have anyone heard of Fezzari Bikes? Just heard of them now looks as if they are pretty legit. Especially for price point.
check it out guys.
  • 3 0
 Those Fezzari bikes are a crock. They tell you the retail price is $4500 and their factory direct price is $2800 which sounds like a steal until you do some investigating. The retail price is based on what they think is a bike of similar spec and quality. No way. An aluminum Giant Anthem has a better spec and is better quality and is only $3100, and the carbon version is $3700.

Steer clear. Get a proper bike from a proper bike shop with proper after sales service and people you can go for a proper ride with.
  • 1 0
 Yeah, i guess. But its always good to have lots of options right
  • 3 0
 where's the freaking video?!!!!
  • 2 0
 No idea why any companies persist with the triple front ring on AM/Enduro bikes, 2 is more than enough,
  • 1 0
 Mad road pinner with them triple rings...
  • 1 0
 Big advantage is that you can drop to a single and a bash easily, just try doing that with a SRAM double with its 'unique' PCD. Total PITA more like, I was more than happy that my current trail bike came with 3x although I would agree that a wide ratio out back and a 2x on the front definitely provides the best bet in terms of required ratios. Hell, I run a single 36t on mine...
  • 1 0
 this bike is f*cking rides just as and possibly better then the $6500 jekyll 1.....if u have 3 grand to spend buy this bike
  • 2 0
 this bike does seem very tasty...
  • 2 0
 Of course it is! I actually ride the 2011 Claymore 1 and it kills everything.
  • 2 1
 @TheCOJayhawk yeah i think i saw this guy in another video?
  • 2 0
 another one cannondale to
  • 3 0
 ^^ You're Broke Bud^^ When's the last time your Broke anything? I've broken my Specialized bikes 2 times and my Yeti once.. they all break eventually bro.
  • 1 0
 you're a super hero man........uuuuuuuhhhhhhhh
  • 2 0
 Anyone know how the Jekyll compares to the Pivot Firebird?
  • 2 0
 I should of bought a carbon Jekyll instead of the T2
  • 1 0
 Yes. Yes you should. Big Grin
  • 2 0
 I'm pretty sure a pitch would do the same for half the price...
  • 2 0
 and dont know its betwen this and a tomac vanish
  • 1 0
 I think there is a mistake in a text. Bars on a Jekyll are narrow but at 680 and not 620. Isn't it Richard?
  • 1 0
 Yup. RC
  • 1 0
 Did you take the bikes down Insanity or Trees? (Take a right at the top instead of a left)
  • 2 0
 muy hermoso me encanto.
  • 2 1
 One nice thing about the frame is that its also 650B compatible.
  • 2 1
 the scott ransom is a lot better bike!
  • 1 0
 That helmet is so retro...
  • 1 0
 I wonder what the COD is on that huuge ginger beard.
  • 1 0
 $3000 for SRAM X.7, Elixir 3s, and a Sektor? No thanks.
  • 1 0
 like it , but not the bespoke shock.
  • 3 2
 Tigers love pepper
  • 1 0
 god Kurt you didn't. LAWL lol
  • 1 0
 What helmet is that?
  • 2 0
 Giro Feature
  • 1 0
  • 1 0
 San Diego riding!
  • 2 1
  • 3 4
 Suspension looks complicated
  • 5 1
 Please tell me what exactly looks complicated?
  • 4 1
 The suspension
  • 2 0
 I fail to see how it's complicated. It's just a linkage activated single pivot, with a pull shock?
  • 1 0
 The shock itself is a really complicated piece of technology, but it has to be to change between 2 different travel settings on the fly. And as RC said, it works really well.
  • 1 0
 Doesn't look quite as complicated as it actually is when you see it in the flesh!
  • 1 1
 Roy nelson?
  • 1 4
  • 1 0
 Shit cunt
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment

Copyright © 2000 - 2021. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.023728
Mobile Version of Website