GT Force Carbon Pro - Reviewed

Dec 16, 2013
by Richard Cunningham  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
GT Force Carbon Pro 2014

GT’s 2014 Force Carbon Pro is a complete redesign of its namesake. The new Force is designed for 27.5-inch wheels, and while it looks and feels like a different animal, it is so charged with GT DNA that there can be no question that the 150 millimeter travel all-mountain/enduro machine will be a wicked descender that is willing and able to attack the climbs. Force Carbon Pro models have a true monocoque carbon fiber chassis that is designed around the latest iteration of GT’s Independent Drive - a suspension system that is engineered to create a rearward axle path, while minimizing chain growth to a few millimeters. The Force’s frame numbers were directly influenced by GT’s enduro team, spearheaded by Dan Atherton and as one might expect, its head angle is slack, its bottom bracket is low and there is enough room in the office to get rowdy at mach speeds. Add race-tuned Fox suspension, a Shimano XT drivetrain and a Race Face cockpit, and the 2014 Force Carbon Pro is almost ready for the Enduro World Series at its $7059 sticker price. Sizes are small, medium, large and X-large and the solo color option is blue and white graphics on raw carbon.



Clevis rear dropout pivots (top) each house a pair of sealed ball
bearings. GT's sturdy direct-mount derailleur mount doubles as the axle
nut and ensures consistent shifts for rocky race runs. A look a the Force
Carbon's shock tunnel and cable routing - there's a lot going on down
there. Plenty of clearance for the rear tire
(bottom), considering that
2.4-inch Conti Trail Kings are among the largest all-mountain casings.

Force Carbon Features:

• Purpose: All-mountain/trail, enduro competition
• Frame: Carbon monocoque front section, carbon suspension members, forged aluminum linkage, AOS Independent Drive rear suspension, 150 millimeter travel.
• Wheel size: 27.5-inches
• Suspension: Fox 34 Float CTD 150-millimeter fork, Float CTD shock.
• Shimano XT 3 x 10 drivetrain
• RockShox Reverb Stealth dropper post, 125-millimeter stroke
• Race Face Turbine handlebar and stem
• e*thirteen TRS wheeelset
• Weight: 29.7 pounds (13,5kg), no pedals
• MSRP: $7059 USD


Construction

GT builds the Force's carbon front section in sections to control fiber density, and then bonds the assembly into a single unit in a second operation. This is the preferred construction method of a a number of top frame producers. GT claims that its method makes the Force's frame stronger. Much attention was given to the shift cable and brake hose routing, with screw-on aluminum clamps neatly fixing everything below the down tube, where the conduits break away near the bottom bracket area like a Los Angeles freeway interchange and head off towards their final destinations. Up top, gently curving frame members ensure that there is adequate stand-over clearance, and the lack of cables and housings to be seen there gives the Force a clean profile.

GT's Independent Drive suspension centers on a forged aluminum 'PathLink' that houses the bottom bracket and drives the shock through a tunnel in the seat tube. All the suspension's pivot locations rock on 15-millimeter aluminum shafts and sealed ball bearings. The main pivot locations near the pathLink are secured with sturdy pinch clamps. The oversized shafts and clamping strategy reportedly provide a high degree of stiffness to the chassis. Out back, clevis-type dropout pivots and a 142/12-millimeter Maxle through-axle further stabilize the frame. Post-type rear brake bosses are built into the carbon set stays, and to ensure a long service life, GT designed threaded aluminum cylinders that slip into holes at the base of the bosses. The caliper bolts screw into the replaceable cylinders. It is a nice touch that reflects upon GT's experience.

The Force Carbon's rear frame has plenty of room for its DH-width 2.4-inch Continental Trail King tires - and it gets it done with modestly short, 17.4-inch (443mm) chainstays. Where space really gets cramped is near the front derailleur, where GT's efforts to route cables and suspension members around the Shimano XT mech make this area of the chassis look like a prop for a cheap sci-fi movie. To GT's partial salvation, somewhere in there is an integrated mud guard to prevent the mech from becoming further entombed.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014 Geometry 2014

Force by the Numbers

All-mountain geometry requires a delicate balance between a gravity bike's slack head angle and a relatively compact front center, and a trail bike's XC-racer seat angle, short chainstays and roomier, climbing-friendly cockpit. GT brewed the Force's numbers in favor of hard chargers who are willing to give up a bit on the ups to rip the downs with conviction. Its head angle is listed at 67.2 degrees, but if corrected for its larger 27.5-inch wheels, the effect is more like 66-degrees. The bottom bracket feels quite low, although it is 13.7 inches static (348mm), which probably has more to do with the positive bottom bracket drop created by the larger-diameter wheel. Its roomy, 23.6-inch (599mm) top tube in the medium size we reviewed will accommodate riders to six feet, and with its 17.4-inch chainstays, the Force's wheelbase starts to stretch out - 1169 millimeters, or 45.7 inches on this side of the pond. Estimated by its numbers alone, one would expect the Force to favor a high-speed approach to nearly every trail situation.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014 suspension
  The heart of AOS Independent Drivetrain suspension is the gray aluminum PathLink in the center of the photo. Bump forces pull on the white chain stays (lower right), which rocks the bottom bracket towards the rear wheel while the PathLink is busy compressing the shock. We destroyed the PathLink's center bearings in four rides to the point where they were unrecognizable. Reportedly, they were the incorrect item - a temporary fix for GT's demo fleet. GT sent us a replacement kit and we easily replaced the bearings and shaft with no further issues.


Angle Optimized Suspension

GT's Independent Drive rear suspension has been around the block, and the latest improvement is called AOS, for Angle Optimized Suspension. The acronym refers less to independent Drive as it does to the advantage that a high pivot location gives to the rear suspension when it contacts square edges or sharp impacts. The beneficial rearward arc of the wheel that the GT's high-pivot configuration provides, would normally create massive amounts of detrimental chain growth - but that is taken care of by the 'PathLink' - a hollow aluminum link that suspends the cranks below the main frame. The swingarm pulls the PathLink rearward to activate the shock and because the cranks rock back along with the PathLink, chain growth is virtually eliminated. Of course, that means your feet move slightly as the crank axle swings slightly with each impact, but in reality, there is no sensation of movement. Potential benefits of Independent Drive are that pedaling forces are uncoupled from the suspension, so pedaling over rough terrain is enhanced, and also that the mass of the suspension is kept low in the chassis, which should add a more nimble feel to the bike.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014 components
  (From left) Formula The One brakes and a RockShox Stealth remote button were far more welcome than the left shift lever was. GT's choice of 2.4-inch Continental Trail King tires was a complement to the Force's appetite for speed. E*thirteen's TRS hubs are almost as huge as the tires they drive.


Key Components

All-mountain may be a broad and sometimes misunderstood category, but there is almost universal consensus in the cockpit - wide handlebars, lock-on grips, a short stem and a reliable dropper seatpost. GT checked all the boxes, with a comfortable, 760-millimeter Raceface Turbine low-rise handlebar and a 50-millimeter Turbine stem up front, and with the industry standard RockShox Reverb Stealth dropper in the rear. We were surprised to find e*thirteen TRS wheels on the Force Carbon because they are rarely seen for OEM spec, but they look sharp, especially with the massive Continental tires. Test riders were all thumbs up until the old-school Shimano XT triple crankset came into view. The party line at GT is that people really want three-by-ten drivetrains (insert "...on $7000 carbon enduro racing bikes..." here) because they offer the average rider more options. One wonders whether that statement seemed logical after the fifth or the sixth concussion? The good news is that the rest of the bike is very well appointed for the Force's intended environment.

Specifications
Release Date 2014
Price $7050
Travel 150mm
Rear Shock Fox Racing Shox Float CTD
Fork Fox 34 Float 27.5 CTD FIT, 150mm
Headset Orbit C-40-ACB
Cassette Shimano XT, 11 - 36
Crankarms Shimano Deore XT, 40/30/22T, 3x10
Chainguide N/A
Bottom Bracket Shimano
Pedals N/A
Rear Derailleur Shimano Deore XT Shadow Plus, Direct Mount, RD-M786-D
Chain KMC X10
Front Derailleur Shimano Deore XT
Shifter Pods Shimano Deore XT, Rapid Fire
Handlebar RaceFace Turbine, 760mm Width, 1/2" Rise
Stem Raceface Turbine
Grips GT Statement Single lock-on
Brakes Formula T1, 180mm alloy-spider rotors
Wheelset e*thirteen TRS
Hubs e*thirteen TRS
Spokes e*thirteen
Rim e*thirteen TRS
Tires Continental Trail King ProTection 2.4" F/R
Seat Fizik Gobi XM Mg
Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014



GT Force Carbon Pro 2014

bigquotes...it trades some of the nimble feel and pop that we have come to expect from elite-level trail bikes in exchange for the ability to carry as much speed as its rider has the courage to give it.


GT’s Force delivers as advertised, with secure handling down technical steeps and enough cornering grip to shred bike park trails like a big bike. In the pedaling department, GT’s carbon trail smasher requires no finesse – only pressure on the pedals – to bang its way up rooted, rocky climbs or accelerate between corners. The chassis feels stiff under power and precise when cornering or pushing hard in broken terrain. The Force feels long and low, because it is, so it trades some of the nimble feel and pop that we have come to expect from elite-level trail bikes in exchange for the ability to carry as much speed as its rider has the courage to give it.

Setup: We needed to set the air pressure in the shock carefully to ensure that we didn't blow through the suspension travel over the big hits. Initially, the bike feels stiffly sprung, as if it will ride well up in its travel, but this is an illusion, because once the shock gets moving, it settles well into its stroke and remains there. Typically, after setting the shock’s sag to 25 percent, we would end up increasing the spring pressure of the Float CTD shock about ten PSI. GT works closely with its suspension providers to custom tune its shocks and forks, so we assumed that the slight falling rate and linear feeling rear suspension was intentional. Up front, the Force’s 2014 Fox 34 CTD fork turned out to be a set-and-forget affair – after we got the spring pressure right and spun the rebound knob to where it felt OK, we never had to touch it again.

Pedaling/acceleration: The carbon Force weighs 13.5 kg (29.7 pounds), which is on the outer edge of competitive for a race bike, but light enough to keep most trail riders happy on the climbs. It pedals and accelerates well, without any feedback from its supple-feeling suspension, nor a sense that the suspension was dulling our leg power. GT’s Independent Drive linkage does a good job of keeping the suspension action uncoupled from the drivetrain, which greatly assists pedaling up steep, uneven pitches or loose, gravelly climbs. Extended climbing was not so inspiring a task, however, nor were long stretches of pavement. In both cases, the oversize tires may have been the contributing factor. Switching on the pedaling aids of the fork and shock to the middle position was the most helpful of the three CTD options, as it improved the ride height of the rear suspension in addition to firming up the pedaling feel.

Agility: At slower singletrack speeds, the Force requires more input at the handlebar than some 26 and 27.5 trail bikes to maneuver. The front end feels weighted, in the sense that yanking up the front wheel in a low-speed situation requires a hefty pull. The up-side of that is the front tire stays put in the turns, or anywhere you ask it to be for that matter. Like all 27.5 or 29-inch trail bikes, the Force must be leaned slightly more than a 26-inch model to turn sharply. Its lengthy wheelbase can be felt in the tight stuff, but when we carried a bit more speed, we found that we could trust its suspension and cornering grip to bash up, over or through anything that we may have tried to avoid using the handlebars. Momentum is the key to enjoying the GT, because when the Force slows below a certain point, it seems to need a lot more push on the pedals to get out of the turns with conviction. The Force rewards courage.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014
  GT's new Force is light years better on the climbs than its predecessor. Supple rear suspension, traction a-plenty and a front end that won't misbehave, make it possible to scratch up some impressive steeps. On longer climbs, while it gets the job done, it lacks some inspiration.


Technical Skills: Once riders learned that the Force could be trusted, speed became our friend. The GT's length, sticky tires and supple suspension made us heroes in the turns. When we hit a section of trail with a lot of grade reversals, we could ignore rocks and ruts and charge the downs to carry momentum for the approaching climbs. Rolling into steeps and tricky descents with conviction was rewarded with an enhanced feeling of control, and it lands like a big cat off jumps and drops. Sure, the Force can pick its way down a dicey line with a high degree of control, but its soul aches for that moment when the brake levers are released and the sound of the wind starts to exceed that of the tires scraping the earth. It only takes a day on the bike to realize that its steering, suspension and size prefer broader brush strokes than your average long-travel trail bike.

Suspension: There is truth in GT's claim that the AOS suspension's pivot location makes for a more responsive rear end over the harsh bumps. There were certainly plenty of chances to put that attribute to use on the red rock, but its suppleness under power was the benefit that stood out most. In other good news, it turned out that the Fox suspension was well tuned for the GT. The 34 Float fork stayed smooth and up in its stroke while we put the bike through Sedona's incredible suspension testing terrain. The shock held its own, but with the Force Carbon's appetite for hard charging, the Float X reservoir shock would have been a much better choice. As is, however, we pushed the Force as hard as any of us wanted to go and the shock put in a good show..

Thirty gears: Rolling out, the incongruity of GT’s choice of a triple crankset, bolted to a bike that could campaign on the Enduro World Series begs to be explained. If the Force was intended for smooth climbs and rolling trails, the Shimano XT triple crankset could be defended, but it was not. Flipping chainrings while we negotiated the fast-breaking, technical terrain that the bike was specifically designed to conquer was an obnoxious time waster.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014 front derailleur
  The largest chainring of the GT's Shimano XT triple took a beating on Sedona's red rock. The difficulty of tucking the front changer between the swingarm and the various bits that share the same space makes one wonder if it is worth the trouble. To its credit, GT used direct mount tab to ease installation.


Mechanical issues: We had an unusual blow up early on in testing when the central bearings of the suspension's PathLink disintegrated in the middle of a ride. The bike made it home, but there were only fragments left inside the hollow link when we pulled the bike apart. GT officials told us that the bearings were not to spec and that they had been purchased to assemble demo bikes for earlier product launches. Fortunately, it was easy to replace the bearings and shaft with simple tools, and the bike survived the remainder of testing without further issues. There were mixed reactions over the Formula brakes. The maximum power was not what we expected, which made us wonder about ditching the standard organic pads for semi-metallic aftermarket versions. On the better side, Formula's lever reach and bite controls were the easiest and most effective to use compared with Avid and Shimano. Finally, all the riders mentioned to a degree or another that the GT was noisy. The rear derailleur featured Shimano's clutch system, but the culprit seemed to be the chain banging against the upper rear suspension member - not the place where most riders would think of using silencing tape.

GT Force Carbon Pro 2014
  Fast, downhill and rough is how GT's new Force Carbon Pro likes to roll. It may be too much bike for trail riders, but for racing enduros, shredding the downs and weekends riding park flow trails, it would rock.


Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesGT bills its Force Carbon Pro as an all-mountain/enduro bike and in the best sense, this is exactly what the bike is most suited for - except for its three-by drivetrain. As a cross-country oriented technical trailbike, the Force would not be our first choice. It is too much bike. But the Force Carbon Pro was not intended for Sunday pleasure rides on blue-square trails. Dump the triple for a one or a two-by crankset. install some metallic brake pads, and then prepare to shred. The Force needs nothing else to provide supreme happiness for top bike handlers who want a competitive enduro racer that can handle DH trails, weekends riding the bike park and still be used as a daily rider in the mountains. The Force Carbon Pro can do it all, as long as you want to do it all fast. No doubt, that is exactly what GT had in mind. - RC

GT Bicycles
Must Read This Week

208 Comments

  • + 199
 Over $7000 dollars with mid range components? XT? Non-kashima? money doesn't go far with GT. You can get a Carbon Norco Range for thousands less with better components.
  • + 50
 that was my first thought too

what's big deal about triple chain rings?
  • + 44
 The new Norco bikes are siiiiiick. I want them all. Smile
  • + 49
 or the Devinci Dixon RX reviewed a few days ago with similar spec for $2500 less.
  • + 8
 i am a norco guy too..the range killer b is so much fun to ride...it maybe is a little more unstable at high speeds than the gt but everything else is just pure fun on this bike...gives me loads of confidence and big jumps are no problem...it gives me almost the same confidence like my aurum. just cant imagine a more fun bike for AM/ENduro.
  • + 7
 $7000 is a bargain, In fact I will have 2. NOT! Totally agree with poozank.
  • + 37
 AM that pretends to be a freeride without enough travel nor space to add a decent damper, oversized wheels and with desintegrating suspension, three rings, incredibly messy bb aera, noisy chain, not great going uphill or downhill, sluggish, painful and crappy brakes. Cheap parts spec for a 7 grand sweatshop bike. No like, GT got it all wrong.
  • - 4
flag Pr0-Moo5e (Dec 16, 2013 at 3:24) (Below Threshold)
 @poah They're big in Europe.
  • + 3
 I run a triple - couldn't use a twin or single for what I use my bike for. I'd spin out or not have enough spin. seems odd they pic on the chain ring yet don't complain about the spec for 7k
  • + 12
 My Reign can do all that and cost less than half the price. And it had 2x10 and a chain guide. No thanks.
  • + 13
 7k for a GT is crazy. 7k for a 30 lb CARBON bike is just beyond insane. edit: and the comment about the shock being so tucked away that you're stuck with the monarch/float platform is spot on, that's even more cray cray.
  • + 9
 I hope GT is reading this! I could get the Range carbon mentioned above WITH a Pike, DBAir CS, & XX1 for around the same price! This is just stupid. To top it off, we here in the States can not get a frameset OR the team color. Sorry GT, you are not getting a dime of mine! Too bad, I actually like this bike and was looking forward to its release.
  • + 12
 Just wait. Performance will be blowing them out at 50% off at the end of the year.
  • + 7
 Pricepoint too.. (not affiliated)
  • + 13
 Yeah, but the GT has wings on the side. It's basically a vtec badge. You will be riding it along, wondering why you spent so much extra money on a bike. Getting passed by guys on Norcos, Jamis... Hell even some Gary Fischer 29ers. But then all of a sudden the wings kick in, and you fly past them. And at that moment you realize... Money well spent. Thank you GT. Thank you!
  • + 13
 I think the wings kick in only if you are wearing your Atherton replica kit.
  • + 14
 They have to recover the Athertons salary somewhere. I guess they are trying to get it all on this bike haha.
  • + 6
 ok, this is far one of the best looking "enduro" bikes of the year...
and expensive call girls are for stupid rich people
  • + 3
 Make sure you have an emergency redbull as well
  • + 3
 @zede you go for the budget call girls?
  • - 3
 @poo
call girls don't exist here, i don't even know what it is
  • + 13
 call girl - hooker, whore, prostitute, person who has sex for money, wife lol
  • + 1
 interesting, your country looks weird

Oh, and..."how much" for this one ? www.pinkbike.com/photo/9726658
  • + 5
 7000 base price*1.5 (for gold color and team replica) ~ 10500 haha
  • + 3
 That rear suspension pivot design looks like a disaster... Must be a real pain servicing it, let alone a simple clean.
  • + 5
 I Blame those E13 wheels for the stupid 7grand price... have you seen the prices for those things?! Carbon prices without carbon, it's ridiculous.
  • + 8
 Kashima is a bunch of marketing horsesh*t.
  • + 6
 Triple? No Kashima? E13 Wheels? No Carbon bars? $7050...?!

F*ck. That. Shit.
  • + 5
 Im so surprised noone talked about the yeti either carbon sb-66 is 5200 weighs 2lbs less. and has 2x10 xt all around and carbon bars...... dafuq gt...... you can fit a real shock on a yeti as well. Im gonna have to paint my gen one i-drive out of shame now.
  • + 5
 You can also get a carbon Giant Trance with full XT (2x10), dropper post, decent wheelset with DT internals that weighs about 27lbs for $5300!! GT need to fire some people!
  • + 5
 Yeti for the win! All of their bikes are gorgeous and functional as hell! SB66 is probably one of the most versatile Enduro/Trail bikes out there!
  • + 2
 5K bike. Max! Even then, most 5K bikes at this spec level have Factory Kashima forks.
  • + 2
 yeah... yeti and now even kona are offering kash koated in this price area. and BOTH said bikes have the option for the 160 pike rtc3 witch is a beast fork if you arent a fox fan..... And once you pay 7k for a new gt 3 months later it will only resale for 2k. gt bikes are terrible on resale. I mean come on there are '10 carbon force's on here for 16-2200 all damn day... and they were 6k new
  • + 2
 @Twallywilly E.13 wheels retail for around $1000. They're a high-end part of the spec, not something to complain about regarding the retail price of the bike and its lack of nice component.
  • + 1
 Seraph, how is $1000 AL wheel set "not some to complain about regarding retail price"? Those wheels are over priced hype, not bad wheels for sure, but way too expensive for what they're offering. I'd bet that those wheels are the major reason this GT is over priced with a weak parts spec otherwise.
  • + 2
 I agree with the points about those wheels being overpriced, but: 1. $1000 wheels aren't a big enough item to cause the price to be this far off the competition. 2. We don't know what GT pays for them. they have a significant price premium at retail, but at wholesale/oem, they could be a trivial cost increase. It's like the claims about X01 vs XX1: X01 isn't enough cheaper at retail to make sense, but apparently, at oem, the cost difference is enough to justify mass adoption.
  • - 5
flag seraph (Dec 17, 2013 at 10:59) (Below Threshold)
 If neither of you have ridden the E.13 wheels then I would recommend you keep your opinions to yourself. They've packed a lot of performance into those hoops and they're well worth the price tag.
  • + 4
 They'd have to have make my bike perform spontaneous superman double-backflips to justify being almost twice as much as Hope pro2's laced to Flow EXs.
  • + 1
 They may be round and hold tires, a cassette, and bake rotors like your wheels, but they're lighter, stronger, and stiffer than them. All features that would make them more expensive.
  • + 2
 I'm not debating that they're possibly better in some ways: I debating that they're TWICE as good, and on par with comparable wheelsets. They aren't.
  • - 2
 Oh so you've ridden them then? Because if you had then you could rightfully say that they're not twice as good as your wheels. I have ridden both the same wheels you have described and the E.13 wheels and I would argue that they are more than twice as good.
  • + 3
 e*thirteen TRS rim inner width: 21mm. Flow EX inner width: 25.5mm. and you only lose .6 of a lb. That's not twice as much better: the narrower rim will actually perform worse. and let's be real here: the weight in the Flow wheelset is hubs: you could build with other, just as mechanically reliable hubs, for about the same price, and get the weight down from the ~1900g for the Flow/Hope set. hell, you can buy something lighter and wider off the shelf: Sun-Ringle Chargers.
  • + 2
 edit: lighter than the stans, wider than the ethirteens.
  • - 2
 Maybe so but you're forgetting a few key features that the E.13 wheels would have over a set of Chargers, namely better PoE and a stiffer rim (scandium alloy). Also the Charger Pro SL is the only version that is lighter than the TRS+ and it costs about the same.

And let's be real here: the Hope Pro 2 hubs are among the most affordable offerings on the market. There's almost no offerings out there that are lighter and priced as well as the Pro 2s, so taking them out of the equation and swapping them for something lighter is not really an option.
  • + 1
 I think what GT has done is make a deal with e13 on some great wheels no doubt, but being they bought/buying in bulk they must be paying a fraction just like any OEM part. The same build is being sold by other companies in the 3500-4500 range with wheelsets that probably cost them (manufacturer) ~$200 than GT is getting the e13s.
  • + 3
 What the heck! 7000 for a bike that you still have to change things on. Come on gt.
  • + 4
 @seraph ....... ok lets take this argument a different direction... those e13 rims are sick bro.... think they are worth tagging 2k extra onto a bike that should be 5k?

seriously man so what if the rims are sick.. the rest of the bike is underclass. I said on another post here.. if this bike had full e13 components and full kash shocks.. then yeah i could actually see it being 7k.... but wheels ALONE is simply not a justification on that price... no matter how sick they are...I mean you could throw some enve's on an old kona dawg.... doesnt make me wanna pay 5k for a used dawg.... get where im comin from man?
  • + 2
 exactly. Even at my most generous, If i'm buying a complete bike, I'm not expecting to pay what all the parts cost retail. Why wouldn't I just build it up from frame with the exact components I wanted then? the part of the retail price that's accounted for by those wheels should be $800 max, and $600 is probably closer.
  • + 1
 @Bladed yeah the bike is over priced but as far as "the rest of the bike is underclass", I wouldn't consider XT, a Raceface cockpit and a Reverb stealth underclass.
  • + 1
 I can ride a different gruppo no problem as long as it's up to par (no 3x10...). Like a 2x10 XT or a 2x10 XO or even X9 I wouldn't mind! Hell...even SLX is solid now! All of those are great! However, there are certain things on an all mountain bike that I am anal about.

Reverb: I'd add that anyways.
RaceFace: Not my 1st choice but they are definitely up there...RaceFace stuff is awesome!
Wheels: I lace that shit up on my own and sell the stock wheels EVERY SINGLE TIME I buy a bike. Nothing beats a hand laced wheel if you do it right.
  • + 1
 up to par no 3 x10? - why would a 3x10 not be up to par. is my SLX triple not as good as the double SLX
  • + 2
 If you care about not having to use a long cage derailleur, being able to use a chainguide of some type, etc, then a 3x10 isn't acceptable.
  • + 1
 not everyone is like that - I'd pedal out and not be able to climb on a 2x10 (9) you can change a 3x10 to a 2x10 if you wanted too.
  • + 3
 @h82crash ... I never said xt was underclass kit perse.... but its underclass for 7k. if you want shimano and are paying 7k it better be full xtr.

and the argument about the triple chain ring. sure thats all to each individual. But if you are in a place where you would be using that 42/44t big ring... why in the hell did you buy a 6 inch AM rig?
  • + 10
 Am I the only one who enjoys a longer cockpit for both climbing and descending? I want more room to dangle my berries, so I can get low and into the bike when I'm flying over technical stuff with the dropper down, and more room up front to make it efficient to climb and feel more stable on the down. To me this bike may have a unique suspension setup that seems to work, but I want a lower stand over and a longer bike.
Please put reach and stack on the geometry chart, those are the ones that matter.
Also who the hell designed that hanger system? It looks like an after thought, at this price I would expect the edges to butt to the frame and the bolts to be recessed flush to the hanger, maybe that's just me?
  • + 3
 bro, I agree...if you can't stand over it, it's going to be bad for descents...

not to mention for $7k you can buy a NICE DH bike, X-Country Bike and a Dirt Jump bike as well...wouldn't you rather have 3 than 1?
  • + 3
 Yeah more bikes is better for sure. I find that the hardest thing with many bikes is thinking, "gahhh, I wish I was on my other bike right now" so you do have to choose wisely.
I would love a 3rd bike (Specialized Enduro SX) but I feel like it would be too rare I get to use it for something my trail bike wouldn't be better at, and my trail bike is a ripper so can do the 4x, Jump stuff anyway (because of the low stand over and short back end).
Glad I'm not the only one thinking sooo many of these new bikes just don't match the needs of a modern agressive rider. I think the Kona Process range is actually the best I've seen this year, but I do want my 26" wheels (as I cheerish fun over ease) and it to be lighter.
  • + 7
 Seems a distinctively average bike with a whirlwind of Atherton marketing propping it up. Not saying its a bad bike, even average bikes are good bikes now but its not exactly pushing boundaries or better than its competition is it. At 7k i would want above average weight, performance and components.
  • + 1
 Forgetting the spec list, I think the frame is pushing boundaries. I think they failed with the long stays on a bike with rearward axle path. I'd prefer it had a the linkage pivoting around the BB and had an idler. Then there'd be no human weight on a suspension component, and the rear would be more active. Have no chain growth unless they designed it too. It would have slightly more drag, but worth it IMO.
  • + 8
 Not the bike for me... but I'm kind of curious about the weight complaints... under 30 pounds for a 3 chainring bike with a dropper doesn't seem out to lunch. What kind of featherweights are you guys riding?
  • + 4
 Compare the kona process 153..aluminum at or near 30lbs w/2x.
I've been waitn for this review! "Front end feels planted, needs heavy pull..etc" is proly why ill prefer the process, mach 6, which wants to lift right up. (I've found I like shorter chain stays).
Sounds like new force does the job for intended use (fast enduro).
Lighten it up w/1x11..
  • + 1
 My Al. framed Yeti 575 with a Marzocchi Roco TST(heavy), 3 chainrings on Race Face Evolve cranks (heavy), Mallet pedals (heavy), and heavy tires is 27.2lbs. Granted that's with an SDG I-beam post (Heavy) rather than a dropper, but droppers don't weight 2.8 pounds, Surely a $7k carbon bike should weigh the same, or less than my bike, right?
  • + 2
 Didn't believe it either, so I took the thing to work and put it on a more accurate scale, same weight. Wether you believe what my bike weighs or not, the GT is a pig at 30lbs. Bike Radar shows the XTR build on an SB66C W/O pedals at 25.5, 4.5lbs lighter than the GT, probably due to the higher end drivetrain, but you get a lighter, better spec'ed bike for the same price. An SB66 with the XT build kit is still noticeably lighter than the GT, and over $1000 cheaper. The price to weight ratio is all screwed up.
  • + 2
 jrocksdh "Front end feels planted, needs heavy pull..etc"would be because of rearward axle path. Needs finese to mono, but easy enough to lift for riding situations. Rearward axle path benefits way outshine this IMO. Stays on this are too long though IMO, and that's what the test says over and over in a marketing correct way.
  • + 1
 @gtrguy we're riding doubles or 1x....
  • + 8
 No iscg tabs??!! Haha, well good luck going with a 1x drivetrain, also a direct mount rear mech hanger, so no XX1 option either!
  • - 10
flag hetfield1 (Dec 16, 2013 at 7:16) (Below Threshold)
 ISCG tabs would be pointless with this setup, no? I'm not aware of any chainguides that works with a triple disc. I could be wrong though. According to the picture of the front chainrings it looks as if the largest ring acted as a bashguard Smile
  • + 4
 No, ISCG tabs would have been nice. Easy to replace the big ring with a bashguard, and run say a 36/24 setup with bash.
But for a bike worth over 7 G's it's a mod that shouldn't be neccessary.
  • + 1
 Did you look at where they would have to attach?
  • + 1
 Narrow/wide ring should work well on this bike if chain growth is minimal.
  • + 8
 "Its head angle is listed at 67.2 degrees, but if corrected for its larger 27.5-inch wheels, the effect is more like 66-degrees."

Anyone else read that and say, "huh?"
  • + 1
 hah I thought that too!
  • + 2
 I think they want to say something lke "the 67.2 degrees head angle with 27.5 wheels feels like a 66 degrees head angle with 26wheels".

The bigger diameter of the 27.5 wheels increase the distance between the head pivot and the contact point of the wheel on the ground (that distance is more important than the angle himself)(I don't know the english technical term for it). So for the same feeling, you need a steeper head angle, or more fork offset.
  • + 2
 I did. So does that mean you can swap 26" wheels back and you'd still have a workable ride? Doubt it. Count me among the haters on this one. Too much $$, too much complication, too much heavy, too much gears.
  • + 6
 I have a '10 Force 1.0 and it was one of the best bang for buck deals in the market when i got it. FULL XT including brakes (instead of these questionable Formulas). I was so stoked to see the new AOS platform (my main complaint about my '10 Force is that the CG was too high and made for poor cornering) but then you decided to launch it in a carbon version that is stupid expensive.

GT, make an Alum version of this thing already and give us a reasonable sticker price. Those Ethirteen wheels aren't worth the spike in price that they are driving. Drop them for some Stan's and you'll have enough money to bring back the XT brakes and slash the sticker price.



PS The Float X fits inside it just fine people. See Martin Mae's Bike. www.pinkbike.com/news/GT-Force-Enduro-World-Series-7-martin-maes.html
  • + 1
 I would pay for this bike if it had e13 everything.... those wheels are serious in the amount of abuse they can take.... id say comparable to stans easy.... but are they worth pushing an extra 2k on what should be a 5k bike? hell no.
  • + 1
 Btw. those formulas are way more expensive than xt's
  • + 2
 Great so an area to both improve performance and to save a buck and make this thing more reasonably priced.
  • + 6
 GT spent so much time climbing back up after one of their founders passed away. They just got nominated for most improved company here on pinkbike. A sure sign they are moving forward. Then days later they dump this steaming pile on the market. These bikes are sold in my town in Sportchek. Clueless salespeople selling bikes they don't understand in a store no real rider would step foot into. They need to do some damage control quickly or they will slip back to mediocrity.
  • + 5
 This is one of the worst specced bikes I've ever seen. Triple chainring, no kashima coating, XT parts, turbine stem and bars.. that is a $40 stem and a $50 handlebar. But then Formula The One brakes? I think the purchaser at GT got drunk and accidentally bought the wrong parts. Triple chainrings are great for long fireroads and paved hills. They were really sneaky by getting people to focus on the crankset and not notice all the other garbage parts. The step down bike is even worse! 5200 for SLX and a Revelation?! A Rocky Mountain Altitude 770 is 5500 and is better specced than the 7000 Pro model. GT, you were JUST nominated for most improved company.. what a joke! Also, SithBike.. stop being such a fanboy and open your eyes.
  • + 4
 So they claim the floating BB allows a high pivot point without too much chain growth. My question is what about the BB moving rearward? The whole point of a rear-ward axle path is so the wheel can move away and over bumps, but this requires the rear wheel to move away from the bike/riders center of gravity. Most of my body weight is carried on my legs and through the pedals/BB, especially when descending. Since most my weight is on the BB, and the BB moves rearward during a bump, then my weight is also pulled slightly rearward, making it perform just like any other traditionally pivoted fs bike.
  • + 1
 I was thinking the same thing.
  • + 1
 You're basically right, but the movement is very slight and it doesn't matter when you're descending. The isolated drivetrain basically eliminates chain growth when climbing, which is where it really matters. You may get a slight rearward movement of the pedals when the suspension is compressed while descending, but it is hardly noticeable and worth the trade-off (nice wheel path arc). I own a force and can say that it is not a problem. Not that I love everything about the force. Love the i-drive but it is heavy and, as the review says, it doesn't maneuver well at slow speeds.
  • + 2
 The point of rearward axle path is improved square edge bump absorption. The drawback is rearward axle paths have a large amount of chain growth. This GT has rearward axle path but only milimeters of chain growth.
  • + 0
 @hamncheez, I think the same. I don't know why so much brand are making bike with a "floating" BB. The rearward axle path need to be between the wheel and the pilot, not between the wheel and the frame. Maybe they forgot the biker when designing the bike? Or they design the bike to be ridden sat down?
  • + 1
 Or marketing speak?

@bassnote Chain growth is actually great for climbing. Keeps the suspension from bobbing, plus you don't compress your rear as much going up hill as down, so less growth.

The rearward axle arc, to really matter, needs to be in relation to the rider, not the bike as faul said. If you move backwards a tad, and chain growth is comparable to other designs, then the relative rearward axle movement is also comparative in other designs.
  • + 1
 If you watch their video on youtube you can see the bb has a more rearward path with a slight rise(much less movement compared to the axle) and the axle on the wheel moves more up and back, there is still chain growth in relation to the wheel and frame. I'm not sure they are doing anything radically different suspension wise they are just going about it a different way.
  • + 1
 hamncheez high pivots cancel a lot of bobbing.
GT seem to have negated the need for chain growth locking out the suspension a touch when pedaling by using a poor leverage curve. Although I'd have to reread the review to check that. But from my one read it seemed it was stiff initially.
Guessing weight on linkage would just be like having more damping really. The BB doesn't move as much as the bottom of linkage, so feet wouldn't move much, and without anti squat pulling on the chain, cranks could rotate a little bit to lessen the feel maybe.
I'd rather an idler and linkage mounted on BB bearings, but still think with shorter stays and maybe better leverage curve this would be an okay design. I'd still own one of these. GT always get it so right, but so wrong(IT1, Great idea, ruined by geo). I wonder if the Athertons are to blame for the long stays to make it stable at warp speed. Shame for the rest of us.
  • + 1
 Skid marks i think has a point. The advantage of a floating BB could be that you can have extremely short chainstays without having to have a dramatically slack seat tube angle. Since the wheel does have a ton of rearward movement relative to the frame, the seat won't get in the way of a fully compressed rear tire.
  • + 3
 Over $7000 and they don't even give you pedals? I'll cancel my order then. Seriously though, I was anticipating this bike/review and I expected a slightly better spec for a bike that's "ready for enduro". Especially at a very premium price
  • + 2
 I completely understand that this review is for the 2014 GT Force Carbon Pro but, I really have to put my opinion here about GT all together. In the past I've owned 2 GT bikes "Karakoram" and "Force" currently still with the 2012 Force Carbon. To make a long story short... GTs are a piece of S*#^!!!! The I-Drive works great "when it's not broken" I would imagine that it will be the same with this new Pathlink design GT has come up with. I've learned with the 2012 Force that the more complicated the BB area is, the more chances there are of it breaking hence my "when it's not broken" comment. The frame has cracked twice on me. The shop taking care of the warranty work says its just my luck and i just happened to "get the bad" bike out of the batch, so if GT is still using the same manufacturer in Taiwan for these new 2014s good luck for those of you who buy the carbon model. Aesthetics wise the bike looks good. Components wise, I agree with most on this post that for the 7K GT could have done way way better.
  • + 2
 Needless to say, no more GTs for me in the future!
  • + 2
 Some heads at GT should roll, but I still like the bike
I would wait for other reviewers before trusting one source judgement. I am pissed too about the components choices this side of the Atlantic, look how much better this version sold in the UK looks: Float X, 2X10, etc.
www.evanscycles.com/products/gt/force-x-pro-2014-mountain-bike-ec054161

Some heads at GT should roll, but I still like the bike
  • + 1
 .............. that bike is twice the bike we americans get.... WTF my old gen one i-drgive says "made in southern cali" is gt not an american company anymore? if they still are why are the overseas folks getting better bikes
  • + 2
 Strong and ready to shred !! Good job GT ! Trail smashing bikes ready for the real world ! Love all the comments from folks who have never even touched one. I getting a 2014 GT For sure ! FYI Everybody deserves to have an opinion,,,,GT actually listens and evolves from it !
  • + 2
 Cant say anything about this bike looks good.... Long chainstay, bad head angle, and its a fat pig in the weight category. For 7k there ought to be a pike fork, 160mm travel, carbon bars, a cane creek dbair, and a decent wheel set included. That's what you get now for $7000 didnt gt get that memo?? This bike is what you get for around $3500-$4000 anywhere else on planet earth....
  • + 2
 "Trades the nimble feel and pop in exchange for the ability to carry as much speed as its rider has the courage to give it." Does anyone else get worried about these enduro race bikes replacing "old fashioned" 5-6 inch trailbikes? It's not even about wheel size really. That nimble feel and pop is exactly why I pull out my trailbike, I want something that can handle some rough, make small trails fun, and be thrown around easily. I dont know why anyone would get on a mid travel bike like this just to bomb stuff at warp speed. that's what a DH/FR rig is for!
  • + 3
 Everything about this 7K rig is SO wrong! Notice rider position on report pic #1, get on your bike bro, wtf? Hanging balls out, straight arm is amateur.
  • + 5
 This bike is a joke. Simple as that.
  • + 1
 I don't know how or where they came up with $7050. There's no way a sane individual would pay that kind of money for a 30 lb. bike speced out with XT when there are so many other better choices out there for less money. Honestly, I doubt I ever will throw a leg over this bike and like many others would probably shy away just seeing the price. GT has gone through some positive changes over the years but unfortunately I believe they may have priced themselves out of a comeback.
  • + 1
 ouch! For the price of two of these bikes you can get a brand new Honda Civic, and I'm pretty sure there's a heck of a lot more engineering involved in manufacturing an automobile than a mountain bike! Also a Honda Civic will last longer than this bike!
  • + 1
 The suspension set-up is very similar to the Mongoose Freedrive - www.mongoose.com/usa/teocali-expert-19708
The main difference appears to be that the GT has a Horst like pivot near the dropout and the Mongoose has a short link behind the BB.

I think the triple is just to protect that lower pivot...w/o a chainring or bash, that thing will take a beating.
  • + 3
 GT owns Mongoose... they're almost identical designs. The comment about the big ring is either the dumbest thing I've read or just trolling...
  • + 0
 The lower pivot actually isn't a horst link. Look closer at the seatstay- that is the main lever for the rear suspension to pivot on. If you take the floating BB out, its actually and upside down 4 bar suspension, like Kona. Its also very much like the Devinci Wilson, except the Wilson has a concentric rear pivot with the brake mounted on the chain stay. If GT did a concentric pivot or a pivot on the seat stay so the brake could be mounted on the chainstay, it would essentially be an upside down horst link.

You are very right that it is just like Mongoose designs; they have the same parent company so I imagine they have the same engineers.
  • + 1
 ReformedRoadie I think you have hit the nail on the head with regards to the triple/ lower pivot....that pivot looks far too low and I think GT must have realized this when they tried a 1x or 2x set up.....They absolutely will not let go with the I-Drive thing..
  • + 2
 @mattsavage - either you don't read much, just discovered the internet, or cannot grasp sarcasm…or all three. Clearly the triple was not spec'd to protect the linkage, but if you think that is a non-issue, there must not be any rock or logs on your trails.
  • + 1
 Linkage moves backward if struck, so that'd absorb some hit force to it.
  • + 1
 @reformedroadie - Is this a common thing, sarcasm, on the internet? How do I know anything I read to be true? Yes, I do read a lot and I read a lot of dumb shit. Which is why it would not surprise me that someone would write what you wrote with intent.

But, no, I don't believe its an issue. I'll take a GT engineers production over an armchair engineers opinion anyday...
  • + 1
 I rode this in whistler this year and the bike is quite simply sublime! It did everything well and just made you want to ride more. The only thing i didn't like where the brakes, they where effective but dam they where loud.
  • + 2
 Ha ha, one worthy comment. Well done ;-)
Did the long chainstays make it a dog though?
Did you feel your feet move?
Did it pedal well?
Did it eat small bumps as well as it would big bumps?

This is the premo carbon version kids. They do an ally cheap one too.
  • + 1
 What I always wonder: What's the height of the Pinkbike reviewers? They always seem to test medium frames and comment so I guess they are not that large?
Maybe Levy can answer me that question.

The review is nice and really good but you should critiize GT more for poor component choice at a really heavy price tag!
  • + 1
 Is it just me or am I the only one who thinks: If one can afford a $7,000 + mountain bike then they can afford to swap out the drive train with something else?

I mean call up the LBS or GT and request "Hey I'd like one with a 2x10" I mean not everyone can afford a $7k bike so maybe it's just me but the targeted audience/customer is those who have the money to blow.
  • + 12
 That may be so but we don't test bikes with customers swapping out drivetrains before leaving the shop in mind. They're evaluated with the stock parts, which in this case happened to be a bit questionable. Maybe it's for European spec, but the triple is an odd choice regardless.
  • + 4
 1x11 is pretty much standard for any serious Enduro or XC racer now. The triple crankset seems so throw-back that I would simply not trust GT enough to buy their bike for that reason alone. I care about attention to detail big time and little things like that scream that somebody at GT does not.
  • + 4
 @liquidspin ,

You are right that people could blow money at 7k bike. But here's the thing:

At 7k people can also buy a bike and have it built the way they want it.

Gt is trying to play with the big boys, they need to be ready to step up their game.

The Santa Cruz Bronson and Ibis mojo HDR can both be built up with a variety of components for the same price or less.

Is this bike worth the price, maybe?

But I spent over a 1k less on my mojo HD, built how I wanted it, with all the goodies( kashima, LEV, 2x10, etc...)

Most people that can afford a 7k bike are not going to buy the first pretty thing they see. I demo'ed bikes for a year before I bought a bike.
  • + 13
 Mike - Us Europeans don't like it either. "European" seems to be the PB excuse for anything weird.or out of place. Yes, there are elderly Germans who liek electric bikes and British folks with beards who insist on rigid steel and all sorts of other oddbals, but pretty sure you have your share of oddballs in the US too - meanwhile, the huge and growing Enduro scene is looking at this bike and thinking "Triple? No ISCG? SEVEN GRAND? WTF?" just the same as you guys are. It wasn't specced for Europeans - it was specced without thought. Good that it was criticised for the spec in your review, strange that the crazy pricing wasn't pointed out.
  • + 0
 Wow! Why all the cry babies? Just swap for a 2 X 10. The new XT shifters can be set either 2 or 3. It isn't that big of deal
  • + 2
 ^ the drivetrain people would expect on an enduro bike of this price in 2014 is XX1 or X01. This will cost $1200 or so to buy aftermarket. Not a cheap or quick change at all.
  • + 1
 I'm with the folks that think this is a lot overpriced; I do agree that GT missed the mark by pricing it so high. However, not every bike is made for every rider in every situation. This rig has pros and cons, but I think the one thing we can all agree on is that the price is absolutely f*cking absurd.
  • + 1
 @ honourablegeorge - love the Ed Oxley reference.
  • + 1
 I didn't mean Ed - I wouldn't exclude him from the list of oddballs by any means, and certainly not from the list of bearded oddballs, but from what I've seen of him, he's more than happy on a six inch full suss, even if he does dabble in rigids.
  • + 1
 Why does this review constantly nag at the fact that it would not make a good cross country bike. Of course not! GT makes the sensor for a reason, less travel more nimble of a bike.. Not to say the Sensor is exactly a cross country bike either but, theres no need to keep nagging on a bike when their is a model by GT to help fill that gap..
  • + 1
 They're just saying that to express it's low and slack. So explaining it's better for open fast tracks, not tight nimble ones that most XC tracks are.
  • + 1
 One more thing, "GT officials told us that the bearings were not to spec and that they had been purchased to assemble demo bikes for earlier product launches." this comment from a "GT official" leaves me wondering weather any of these "not to spec" components make it on to production bikes. It seems like my 2012 Force Carbon has plenty of these because aside from the frame cracks, the hardware it comes with is the next biggest issue. Frown NOT COOL GT!!!!!!!!!!
  • + 1
 Yes the bike is heavy, this the need for the triple. haven't ridden a 3x in a long time, but much appreciated on this carbon hog. It's heavy and slow, but will climb anything. That steep ass punch you've never been able to manage, try it on this thing, with the 2.4's and no loss of tension in the chain, unreal. It climbs better than my scalpel 29er1 race bike. The wings may not make you fly, infanct I can barely get the heavy pig off the ground, but they sure do give you balls. I've been dropping things I wouldn't have looked at before, it gobbles up trail. handles like shit while slow manuevering, but I think I'll keep it. Let me go throw my Dan Atherton starter kit on, and my grannies panties so I can ride my triple ring, and go for a ride. cheers
  • + 4
 Man there's a lot going on in that bottom bracket/ main pivot area.
  • + 0
 Imagine a think mud there...
  • + 0
 I mean thick
  • + 0
 Exactly.
  • + 1
 Hey, lets clean ours bike's.... The force guy: ''Let me take half of my bike apart so that it kinda looks clean at all''.
  • + 1
 I know someone has already said this but 3x10? My little sister doesn't even use that anymore. Neither does my wife. Or my kid. Certainly not my friends. Does GT have a good explanation for this?
  • - 1
 Europeans. GT's Market share in America is no where near Europe.
  • + 3
 Some of these bike prices are highway robbery. Some of us riders are not sponsored and have real bills to pay..
  • + 2
 That terrain is nothing like where I ride. I wish Levy or someone else in PNW would have tested it...and then weighed it after a mud ride.
  • + 0
 The frame is almost identical to a Mondraker Foxy XR which is amazing, with real value and ally frame 2x10 and way more value. No PR just decent bikes massive cockpit and forward geometry, this bike is the shit for Enduro. www.mondraker.com/14/eng/bikes/foxy-xr/348
  • + 4
 It's like the foxy xr ?? HOW, as in there both bikes and have wheels .....
  • + 2
 this carbon frame must be a high quality finish product, but the price i say : LOL (what a joke)
  • + 3
 yup, I can see why it wasn't in the pb awards... what terrible value
  • + 1
 I was loving it until I saw the picture showing drivetrain's left side. All those cables, links, bearing and stuff together.. Just not my thing.
  • + 2
 Well let's see, for the same money I vsn go to Honda and buy a new 450r. I don't care what you say they are still bicycles.
  • + 2
 Man GT is well ahead of the competition, they already have a 2104 bike avaliable.
  • + 1
 I had to skim read the article again to find it and i started at the bottom dammit lol way future tech yo
  • + 2
 nice bike but I will stick with my Tracer 275 (which came in at 30.4 lbs w/ pedals
  • + 1
 They test what manufacturers submit for testing, that is all. And manufacturers submit what they want to submit, not what whiners on internet forums want to have tested.
  • + 1
 Weight to cost doesn't make sense. Performance is another thing but not everyone is competitive. Now, please review Evil Uprising. Thank you.
  • + 3
 Bike mag reviewed uprising. Good 26" bike, poor rear tire clearances. .
  • + 2
 Looks like a trek session.
  • + 1
 That suspension design has very similar pivots to the Freedrive system by Mongoose.
  • + 2
 Nice paint job but that's not a 7000 dollar bike you ninnies.
  • + 1
 Is anyone making a new 26' bike, or are they all like giant, and have discontinued the 26" format?
  • + 2
 GT is steping back with enduro bike for 7k and archaic head angle.
  • + 2
 That whole pivot/linkage/bottom bracket/derailleur area is a disaster.
  • + 1
 I don't see why they have triple ring on enduro/am bikes still, no1 uses the big ring you only need the 1!!
  • + 1
 Guessing because the linkage doesn't allow ISCG tabs.
It's do well with a narrow/wide ring though thanks to little chain growth.
  • + 1
 -triple
-$7k (lack of higher end parts)
-USA limited avalability
-limited shock options

Fix it GT.
  • + 1
 Maybe they should throw a LEFTY on it and call it good.
  • + 2
 GT just officially died.
  • + 2
 Go home GT, you're drunk
  • + 2
 How do you check sag?
  • + 6
 A little tricky to see it, but with an o-ring on the shaft as with other air sprung bikes.
  • + 2
 I like the design of the frame, but how practical is it to have the CTD switch so far down there?
  • + 4
 Its not. The top model should come with remote lever IMO.
  • + 0
 no alloy frame and such low lvl components, good bye GT. I don`t give you a fk anymore although I really like this force
  • + 1
 3 orgasms... love this bike. I want it !
  • + 1
 $7050?! What a bargain..
  • + 1
 Also, the cabling is disgusting on the nondriveside. I hate this bike.
  • + 1
 Holy Wheelbase! 47" for a large!
  • + 1
 Wake me up from this nigthtmare!
  • + 1
 Also, the tires are garbage!
  • + 1
 and the expensive carbon hype continues...
  • + 1
 Daylight robbery with those components.
  • + 0
 no pedals included ok but i dont get one thing, why remove them to take pictures after the bike was ridden ???
  • + 0
 I just need to know if it can handle canyon gap jumps
  • + 0
 And probably the next one is a GT.
  • + 1
 S7upid 27.5 wheels...
  • + 1
 Perfect bike
  • + 0
 I like that 22-30-40 chainring...
  • + 0
 7 grand and it ways 30lbs. No thanks.
  • + 17
 OMG no weigh it's so freaking heavy!
  • + 8
 It does seem a bit over wait I agree
  • + 2
 EDBPProductions- What you did there..... I saw it.
  • + 6
 You guys are whey too clever.
  • + 1
 It's weight doesn't bother me, other things do though. I'd still buy one in a couple of years used. Nice design. But....(see below).
  • - 3
 The frame looks kinda like a specialized enduro 2014, just a little bit.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2018. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.110500
Mobile Version of Website