BMC Trailfox TF01 - Review

May 12, 2014
by Mike Kazimer  


The Trailfox TF01 is BMC's entry into the long-travel 29er category, a full carbon 150mm bruiser of a bike intended to tear apart enduro race courses around the world. Decked out with SRAM's XX1 drivetrain, a Fox 34 Float CTD in the front and a Float X in the rear, along with DT Swiss' Spline 1501 wheelset, the TF01's high-end spec has it coming in at $8999 USD. Full aluminum versions are available as well for riders looking for the same geometry at a more attainable price. After initially getting acquainted with the bike in Whistler late last season, we headed down to Sedona, Arizona, to see how it dealt with chunky, technical desert trails full of punchy climbs and rocky downhills.


Trail Fox TF01 Details

• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro
• Wheel size: 29''
• Rear wheel travel: 150mm
• Carbon fiber front and rear
• APS supension
• Fox Float 34 CTD fork
• Fox Float X shock
• Weight: 27.2lbs (w/o pedals)
• MSRP: $8,999 USD


Frame Details

Perhaps paying tribute to its Swiss roots, the TFO1's carbon frame has a very utilitarian look to it – this is a bike built for a purpose, without any unnecessary swoops or curves to be found. BMC offers three different frame configurations in the Trailfox line: bikes carrying the TF01 designation have carbon front and rear triangles, while the TF02 bikes have aluminum rear triangles, and the TF03 bikes are completely aluminum. The geometry stays the same throughout the line, allowing riders to pick the frame that best suits their budget. While we're on the topic of geometry, the last few seasons have seen traditional 29er geometry get thrown out the window as companies search for the magic numbers necessary to give big wheelers quicker handling and more stability at speed. This search has led to a push for longer top tubes, shorter stems, and short chain stays, and for their part BMC have gone with a slack, 67 degree head angle paired with 435mm chainstays, along with a tube tube length of 611mm for a size medium.

BMC Trailfox TF01 review
  Little details abound on the TF01, including a down tube protector, internal cable routing, and rear shock sag gradients printed on the frame.

The TF01's frame has all of the features you'd hope to find on a frame of this caliber, including internal cable routing that has the cables run through a large port in the top tube before exiting out the down tube and continuing on to their destinations, molded chainslap guards, a downtube protector, and even a chain catcher that's mounted around the bottom bracket shell to keep any dropped chains from marring the frame. Although our XX1 Trailcrew version of the TF01 came equipped with a 1x11 drivetrain, there is a spot to mount a front derailleur hidden behind a small cap on the rear swingarm. Other frame features include routing for a stealth dropper post, post mounts for the rear disc brake caliper, ISCG 05 tabs, and a 12x142 rear thru axle.

BMC Trailfox TF01 Review
  The Advanced Pivot System (APS) uses two short linkages to join the carbon front triangle to the carbon rear swingarm.

Suspension Design

The TF01 uses BMC's APS (Advanced Pivot System) suspension design which uses two short aluminum links to attach the rear swingarm to the front triangle. As with most dual link designs, the idea behind APS is to use chain tension to prevent the suspension from compressing due to pedalling forces, while at the same remaining active in order to absorb impacts from trail obstacles. Fox's Float X CTD shock takes care of the bike's 150mm of rear travel, with sag gradients printed on the frame to make it easier to set up the rear suspension.


Specifications
Price $8999
Travel 150mm
Rear Shock Fox Float X Adj CTD Factory kashima
Fork Fox 34 Float CTD Adj FIT Factory Kashima 150mm
Cassette SRAM XX1 10-42
Crankarms SRAM XX1 28t
Rear Derailleur SRAM XX1 Type 2
Chain SRAM
Shifter Pods SRAM XX1
Handlebar BMC MFB01 Carbon
Stem Easton Haven 55mm
Brakes Avid X0 Trail
Wheelset DT Swiss XM 1501 Spline ONE
Tires Continental Mountain King / X-King 2.4
Seat Fizik Tundra 2
Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth 150mm
BMC Trailfox TF01 review




bigquotesThis is a bike that's happiest being ridden at full speed in a straight line. If you've got the terrain to let it run, the TF01 will deliver, its stiff frame tracking well through the roughest of chop, like a rocket sled blasting through the desert.

Climbing

As we mentioned before, the TF01's top tube length is decidedly on the longer side of the spectrum, measuring 611mm for a size medium, and 638mm for a size large. The 74 degree seat angle does help to prevent riders from being overly stretched out when the dropper seatpost is fully extended, but this is certainly a bike that you'll want to run a short stem with. BMC has outfitted the bike with a short 55mm Easton Haven stem, but we wouldn't be surprised if riders opted to go even shorter, installing a 40 or even 35mm stem to get the most out of the bike's design. We used both the stock stem and a 40mm stem, and preferred the fit and handling of the shorter stem.

Out on the trails, as long as there's enough room to keep the TF01's momentum up it's a solid climber, clawing up and over whatever obstacles are in the way, but there's no getting around the fact that this is a long bike, with a wheelbase of 1173mm for a size medium. The extra length helped prevent it from getting hung up on the sandstone steps that are plentiful on Sedona's trails, but it also made it feel cumbersome when it came time to get through tight switchbacks or during maneuvers that required sudden direction changes. Just like driving a big rig, it takes advanced planning to get through those sharp turns – swing wide, and then point the front end in, hoping that there's enough room to avoid getting hung up in the cactus on each side of the trail. On longer gravel road climbs, like the one leading up to Sedona's famous Hangover trail, we typically switched the Float X into Trail mode to curb any unwanted motion, since the APS suspension design isn't as immune to pedal-induced movement as some other dual short link designs.

Mike Kazimer testing the BMC Trailfox in Sedona AZ
  The TF01 is a capable descender, but it takes extra effort to maneuver on tight, slow speed maneuvers.

Descending

Many of the traits we mentioned regarding the TF01's climbing performance are true on the descents as well. This is a bike that's happiest being ridden at full speed in a straight line, and if you've got the terrain to let it run, the TF01 will deliver, with the stiff frame tracking well through the roughest of chop, like a rocket sled blasting through the desert. The bike gains speed incredibly quickly, which can be beneficial in a race setting, but the flip side is that you need to look further down the trail than usual - let your guard down and you'll soon be grabbing a fistful of brake to rein in the speed before the next sharp corner. The TF01 proved to be very competent on steep, rugged trails, maintaining excellent stability no matter how fast we went. It was on trails that required quick direction changes to avoid running into a cactus or a sandstone outcroppings that the long wheelbase of the TF01 was a hindrance, and it took a concerted effort to navigate the bike through slower speed, tight radius maneuvers. Even though the bike has relatively short chainstays (430mm), especially for a 29er, the overall length means it takes an extra helping of body language to get the back end to come around quickly in order to get everything lined up for the exit of a sharp turn.

150 millimeters of travel and 29-inch wheels may sound like the recipe for a plush, bump sucking machine, but we found it difficult to find the sweet spot for the amount of sag in the rear shock. Even though we were using all the travel, the bike didn't absorb as much of the trail noise as would have been expected. We even experimented with running 40% sag, but still didn't get the compliant, bottomless feel we were looking for. The stiff frame may be the culprit here - it seemed like its stiffness was overwhelming the Float X's best efforts to absorb the impacts we subjected it to. We spoke to BMC about our experience, and they said that rear shock tune has since been altered in order to improve the bike's rear suspension performance, and that all bikes currently on the market have been outfitted with the updated tune.

BMC Trailfox TF01 review
  SRAM's XX1 drivetrain, DT Swiss wheels, and BMC's own carbon bar paired with an Easton Haven stem round out the component highlights.

Component Check

• SRAM XX1 drivetrain: We were a little surprised to see a 28 tooth front chainring spec'd on the TF01. It does help the bike's climbing performance, and we certainly never found ourselves wishing for anything easier, but given the bike's race-oriented intentions a 30 or 32 tooth ring would make more sense to increases the TF01's top speed. The bike also developed an occasional grinding feeling that was caused by the upper pulley not meshing with the chain properly. This occurred a couple of times, and although shifting through the gears fixed it, it isn't the type of feeling you want to experience from a top-of-the-line drivetrain.

• BMC MFB01 handlebar: BMC developed their own handlebar specifically for the Trailfox series, a flat, carbon fiber bar that measures in at 750mm. Call us picky, but it'd be nice to see a little wider bar on this bike in order get the aggressive positioning we prefer.

• Continental Mountain King tires: The Mountain Kings provided plenty of traction, and were predictable in the mainly dry conditions we tested them in, although the sandpaper-like rocks of Sedona wore down the center knobs rather quickly.

• DT Swiss 1501 Spline wheelset: The desert can be unforgiving on wheels, and a botched line often means a dented rim, but the 1501's didn't give us any trouble, staying true for the duration of our time on them.

Mike Kazimer testing the BMC Trailfox in Sedona AZ


Pinkbike's take:
bigquotesRiding a $9000 bike should cause an ear-to-ear grin of guilty pleasure, but at times riding the TF01 felt more like work than play. Getting sideways, blasting off of little trailside bonus features; basically, going any direction except in a straight line is what makes mountain biking so enjoyable, but the TF01's serious manners had us struggling to ride it like we wanted to. It's a lot of bike to handle, and won't be the best option for riders seeking a lively, nimble ride. In the hands of an aggressive rider whose home terrain consists mainly of ultra-high speed, wide open trails the TF01 could be a formidable weapon, but that type of terrain can be difficult to come by. Plus, even though the TF01 has a very high end parts kit, the final price is still well above what we would have expected; there are similarly spec'd carbon bikes on the market that retail for hundreds of dollars less. - Mike Kazimer


www.bmc-racing.com


101 Comments

  • + 130
 It's a mountain bike for roadies designed by roadies that were commissioned by roadies to make a mountain bike for roadies. Just a waste of resources.
  • + 11
 ^funny!
  • + 7
 TopperHarley. Best handle name ever. Hot Shots Part Deux--great comment, too.
  • + 13
 Roadies don't think it's a waste of resources. They will definitely be picking this up to add to the stable, and adding a 3X drivetrain.
  • + 2
 I can't ride a bike with BMC on it. In french military slang it means military campaign's brothel (Bordel Militaire de Campagne)
  • + 6
 ^^That's why?^^ Because of French military slang?
  • - 1
 Bro, few guys of my bike gang are legionnaire. They will make fun of me for ages haha. BMC bike are overpriced merida made bikes - that's just my opinion -
  • + 0
 Shredfactor 0. Blandness 10. 29 is a mistake.BMC should stick to making commuter bikes.
  • - 1
 BMC = Badly Made Carbon?

...opinion of the general consensus on the forums, among BMC riders here in the UK that have owned, cracked and warrantied their carbon road bikes

its an Evans exclusive brand in the UK, apart from their top of the line BMC Impec road bike range made in their Swiss "Stargate" factory

those are supposed to be something quite special yet crazy expensive and rare, Impecs are sold through a high-end dealer network nothing to do with Evans Cycles
  • + 7
 A bike that feel better when going on a straight line.... Dunno 'bout you but most of my trails do have turns
  • + 2
 Carbon works well. It's just the wrong material for backlane sweatshop engineers and marketeers. BMC lacks depth and knowledge. No go.
  • + 1
 @wakaba

carbon fibre certainly can work well, but when engineered and manufactured properly

the big problem we had with BMC in the UK was the poor after sales warranty service through Evans, which unfortunately was needed quite regularly with the older BMC carbon road bikes
  • + 2
 Yep. Landfills are littered with carbon frames. It is an environmental disaster. Epoxi leaking for the next 500 years....
  • + 34
 Personally, I love the critical review. The numbers equate to a 29er that can be thrown around: short chainstays, 67 degree HA, 150mm travel. But I'm glad that Pinkbike pointed out the shortcomings. I guess we're all still catching up to the Enduro 29er as far as a 29er that can shred....(its chainstays are shorter than the new 650b stumpy evo and Santa Cruz 5010!!) I loved my sb95, but it's a little low on travel and heavy(alloy model) for a 130mm bike. The long travel 29er evolves.... with successes and disappointments. Thanks for reviewing another one, PB.
  • + 8
 It's nice to hear a review on PB that's not just a gushy ode to how great the bike is. BMC should have sent one with ENVE wheels.
  • - 2
 You should check out a Lenz Lunchbox. You could say Specialized caught up.
  • + 20
 "there are similarly spec'd carbon bikes on the market that retail for hundreds of dollars less" Hem... I would say "thousands" instead...
  • + 13
 When a Capra costs a fraction of the price for better kit you have to wonder why bike companies in the EU and Merica still manage to rip the dumb customers off the way they do. $9k. Thats mad.
  • + 4
 There's more than the price tag: YT is direct distribution only. Good for the price, but massively reduced pre-sale service.
  • + 7
 "We spoke to BMC about our experience, and they said that rear shock tune has since been altered..." - Out of serious interest: I assume BMC gives away their bikes to professional reviewers in the best setup available. Wouldn't it be useful if they provide current testers with the latest updates? Or at least actively informs them? What's the period of time between bike shipping and expected publishing review? Are there too many bikes underway to do this?
  • + 1
 It's fairly common. Same thing happened on the Suntour Auron review and a few others (BOS Deville had a similar thing, IIRC). They ship a product out to be reviewed, the reviewer maybe doesn't get to it for a while, and in the meantime the pro riders in the development program are giving feedback on how to improve it.

Unfortunate (for them) that they don't work out the problems beforehand, but at least they're improving the product.
  • - 1
 Or they update it while it's getting reviewed, it would be nice tho if the reviews received the updated part too... even partway thru the review
  • + 1
 and that all bikes currently on the market have been outfitted with update !!!!!!!!!1 yerrrrrrr alright BMC !!!!
  • + 7
 Dirts review of the same bike say that its massively let down by under damped fox suspension and the sram equipped bikes are far far better. Probably why the rear end felt bad not the bike being too stiff. How would a stiff bike impede suspension performance anyway? If anything it would improve it as the shock wouldnt be subjected to any torsional forces when the frame/linkages flex around it. Another fairly useless pinkbike review.
  • - 6
flag bOObdesign (May 12, 2014 at 4:01) (Below Threshold)
 im sure, the bike is hot shit! but yeah! pinkbike reviews are useless and heavily influenced
  • + 2
 Just my 2p worth, but there have been some super-slo-mo videos of riders hitting features in recent years; notable one of a Giant Glory smashing through a rock garden. You can actually see the rear wheel flexing the rear triangle and the whole thing twisting about. If the frame wasn't absorbing that energy, it would be passed on to the rider and his line choice. Frame flex is not simply a /negative/ thing but can improve ride quality. I'd suggest yours is another fairly useless pinkbike comment... Ho hum. I don't know why I'm getting involved really. I've got papers to mark.
  • + 5
 Yeah the stiffness bit made no sense at all... if the suspension needs flex and slop in the rear triangle to feel right, it's probably just a lousy suspension design.

Other than that I don't think the review was bad at all. It's pretty obvious from the last paragraph that they weren't too happy with the bike, they just worded it politically so as not to call it a POS outright. Might not be as scathing as you'd like, but nobody would come away from this review saying "I want that bike!"
  • + 2
 It takes a little bit of skill to read a review.Sometime they dont put stuff right out there in the open. But I thought this was a good one. In no way was it a positive review and I wasn't left guessing why.
  • + 4
 If you think about it, a shock takes the rear wheel only in one plane of direction. But the rear wheel doesn't only get knocked about in one plane (front to rear), but will experience a shed load of forces left and right too. Flex in the frame essentially /is/ the shock absorber for these impacts that otherwise you would have to absorb with your body. You don't want to be riding a noodle of course, but a seriously stiff frame is a bad thing that surely can't be overcome with better suspension...
  • + 1
 As a former softail rider (litespeed unicoi), I can tell you that side-to-side play in the rear triangle is not at all confidence-inspiring. Vertical compliance is great, but I'll take lateral stiffness all day. Plus if you think about it, a bike has to balance on two wheels, so if you're really experiencing sudden lateral loads that the tire displacement and wheel flex can't damp out...you're probably crashing.

The other difficult thing with flex on a full suspension design is that (because of the side loading you're talking about) the two independent members won't be displaced the same amount (really exaggerated on my old softail), causing torque on the pivots and shock, which will increase friction and accelerate wear in the seals, bushings, pivots, etc. Anyway, the displacement of the rear members would be insignificant compared to that of the shock, so it'd be kinda silly to design for that anyway. Much better just to build that performance into the shock/suspension platform.... I have some shredded shock internals to back up that claim Razz
  • + 4
 @bluechair84 A shock is designed to absorb only vertical impacts, so a frame needs to be stiff enough to allow it to work correctly. Yes a frame will flex but it has to be stiff enough to resist the deflection sufficiently that it can transfer that movement to the shock, so it can dampen the movement as the frame returns from the flex. Basically as no impact will be truly vertical or horizontal, the frame has to be able to transfer those forces to the damper to allow it to absorb the energy of the impact or the rider will be thrown off line and as the damper is set up to absorb the vertical component of the force a stiff frame that resists lateral flex will deal with impacts better than a flexy one as more of the force is absorb bt the damper rather than by the lateral movement of the rear triangle which is essenstially a rather odd shaped undamped spring.
  • + 0
 Looks like the mechanical engineers have arrived^^^
  • + 1
 Some very interesting points BKM and Benners Smile My only other thought on this is that 'compliance' is a term bandied about by the manufacturers from time to time... It's been a long time since I've heard a company boast about having the 'stiffest' frame on the market - my assumption (from a non-engineering point of view) is that the suspension isn't the only thing damping the impacts from the trail. And for sure, frame flex will lead to wear in the components.
  • + 1
 @bluechair good point about the compliance bit. I think companies still talk about having stiff frames in some cases, but the terminology is different for full sus rigs. For example, Kona talks about tolerance stackup in their marketing stuff (if I remember correctly), which is basically the same as talking about lateral stiffness, just with linkages instead of welds and members.

For road bikes compliance is a huge deal, and with road tires at full pressure I can absolutely feel a difference between a nice carbon/chromoly/titanium frame and an overbuilt aluminum one - but on my cyclocross tires I can hardly feel the road at all, so I can't imagine the frame compliance making a huge difference. And at the other end of the spectrum you have FS mtbs, where I'd be surprised if anyone could feel the difference in frame compliance through the tires AND all the work the shock is doing. Much easier to get that benefit from dropping a couple psi from the tires than by designing for directional flex, and having to compensate for all the compromises that implies for stiffness and pivot life.

But I'm a heat transfer/fluids guy, so it's entirely possible that I'm completely f*cking wrong about structures and vibrations Wink Good discussion!
  • + 1
 I'm an English teacher so I most definitely know Sweet F All Wink the point about tyres is interesting. They say that for a tyre to grip well it has to deform to the trail conditions. Specialized did something on BikeRadar a while ago which talked about hysteresis - a rebound rate. So the deformation of the tyre aids grip... can the deformation of the frame aid control? And just to be clear - I certainly agree that no-one wants a soft wallowy frame. My only direction here is that an overly stiff frame may very well impede a bikes feel. Baby Bear had it right with the porridge and all that.
  • + 1
 In principle, yes, but in practice using the frame to do the tires' job would be tricky. The tire smooths out the ride very well because it's very deformable and has virtually zero unsprung weight, since it squishes around small obstacles rather than tracking over them. If you wanted this same effect with the frame, you'd need a very low effective spring rate. Basically, the frame would have to be able to displace as much as the tire does under the same forces, and do it as fast as the tire does (which is for all intents and purposes instantaneous). If you wanted to do this on a hardtail, for example, the rear triangle would have to deflect by ~1" or so. Even assuming you could achieve that kind of flex with a modicum of lateral stiffness, it would (a) never be as fast or sensitive as the tire due to the unsprung weight of the wheel and stays, and (b) would pedal like crap, because you'd have no LSC damping of any kind. Back to my earlier example of my old Litespeed Unicoi (or a Moots YBB, to be more current), that frame is actually designed around using the frame flex to soak up small bumps, but they also threw a tiny SID rear shock in there for some damping...and I still got pedal bob.

aaaahhhhhh post is too long....
  • + 1
 Anyway, what I'm getting at is that a frame can be made to damp out high frequency, low amplitude vibrations (ie. carbon road bikes), but you only need that there if you're running your tires hard enough to transmit those forces... if you let those tires down to mtb pressures there would basically be no vibrations for the frame to damp out. In mtb we see lower frequency, higher amplitude disturbances (rocks), and if you wanted to use frame compliance to damp out those, you'd have to be able to deform the frame to those amplitudes... which is half the reason we have FS bikes and soft tires in the first place, because letting the frame bend that much is impractical. At most, I'd guess that even a 'soft' rear triangle on a real bike would deform by a millimeter or less under big loads, which is pretty insignificant compared to the 160mm of travel and 10+ mm (or so) of tire deflection. But if you wanted to increase that rear triangle deflection to help out with bumps you'd do hell on your bearings, and create uneven friction in your pivots, which would hurt suspension performance in an unpredictable way. So it would probably do more harm than good. Basically to keep the susp running smoothly and doing its job, I'd guess you'd want as much stiffness as you can get, without sacrificing weight.

God damn I am not working so hard right now!
  • + 1
 Yup, some very interesting thoughts - I reckon you're pretty accurate, it does make sense. We do still see reviewers mentioning that frames can be too stiff at times - no particular review springs to mind, but those sorts of comments come to define the way us users come to think about our frames. They might be more prevelant in hardtail reviews thinking about it.
  • + 10
 Quite affordable. Sub 9k only,
  • + 5
 testrode it. brutally fast, but too much bike for me. though as an enduro racebike it is hard to beat...so fast. 28 -42 on a 29er is not sissi gearing. somehow brits without real mountains cant believe it, ride in the alps and you will learn it the hard way. in my region i dont need 28 either, but every time in the alpes i wish i had 28
  • + 5
 Interesting read. I was debating between the low-end BMC TF03 and the Spec Enduro Comp, but the enduro won with the pike and the rest of the component spec. I love the short head tube on this bike. One thing to note- reviewing the kinematics over on Linkage blog shows a very efficient and well designed bike, but he comments that based on the linkage it's unlikely that the bike is getting 150mm of travel, and is more likely to see something like 140. That might explain the stiffness and lack of plush feel.
  • + 1
 If those are the bikes you are the only considering I would highly suggest you take a step back and consider another 10+bikes that I would rather have than either of those (SC nomad, Intense tracer 275, Cannondale Jekyll 27.5, Cannondale Trigger, GT Force, etc..)
  • + 1
 Why would I want the bikes that you would rather have? All of those are kinematically inferior to either the BMC or Enduro. The nomad is rad, but I don't want a lift-only bike (or a bike that handles so poorly I cry on the way up), the cannondales have proprietary non-replaceable shocks, the GT is using suspension designs from 1999, and the tracer has a leverage curve better left in 1999.

Plus, the whole friggin' point is that there are two aggressive 29ers on the market, and 27.5 doesn't suit my needs.
  • + 8
 dear europeans, is it ok that he is on an "enduro" bike with a open face helmet on??
  • + 17
 He is not enduroing here, he is just mt. Biking....if anything he is riding XC.
  • - 10
flag gs4designs (May 12, 2014 at 0:48) (Below Threshold)
 but he is on an enduro specific bike which makes it enduro. wearing an enduro specific helmet, shorts, jersey, while also eating enduro specific gu packs. its enduro bro.
  • + 6
 Only without wearing kneepads ofcourse! Razz
  • - 5
flag gs4designs (May 12, 2014 at 0:55) (Below Threshold)
 and flat pedals! this guy is out of control. Europeans are probably heated.
  • + 8
 *goes to the shed, sharpens the axe*
  • + 24
 I am European and I don't give a damn. I didn't "invent" enduro... so I don't consider myself as one of those Europeans. Just like you don't consider yourself one of those fat fast food eating Americans. You didn't invent fast food. Those were other Americans.
  • + 24
 It's not ENDURO because it's not a RACE!
  • + 2
 @robbyB, Enduro is a perfect race for fat fast food eating Americans, cause they don't actually need to ride fast uphill, they can shuttle it or hike a bike!
  • + 11
 Dear gs4designs it's ok he's wearing an enduro specific helmet, so all is well with the world. So you can relax and get back to playing your banjo on the porch.
  • + 3
 I like how the laces match the top tube,do they come with the bike or do I have to buy the shoes separately
  • + 2
 They are Five Ten Enduro specific laces dirtbeard only £50 a set of laces.
  • + 0
 Enduro fail, that is not the face of an enduro rider... There's no 'holy cow this is gnarly!' anywhere in that brow.
  • + 3
 Too funny some people continue argueing about a stupid word for years now... 6_6
  • + 3
 Its why PB is better than FB!
  • + 5
 Rule 10.21.34.736 (page 16,302, EC rulebook, 2003) states "in order to use the E.n.d.u.r.o (European Nations Downhill Union for Racing Only) all Enduro bicycles must be only used in a EC sanctioned race [e.g. EWS]....the only exception to this rule is where the Enduro bicycle is used by a professionally employed tester endorsed by the bicycle manufacture" so I guess it must be ok then?
  • + 2
 no kneepads = XC of course
  • + 1
 Um sort a like it for a 9er LT bike. Def test ride one if given ootion only way to tell for self, easy to be a e critic PB monkey. But cant Fox ever get a proper tune right! I rode a base model with RS Monarch R Pike RC then same bike back to back with FloatX Kashima Factory fit plus float 34 Factory shit, straight away came back swap the base RS with pro Fox on top model then it would be one hell of a rig! Btw never feel the need to use compression or fricken trail mode on the Monarch or my Vector air, onoy on a Fox do I even look for it. Nice frame options re budget as well should satisfy PB monkeys if they actually read that section, highly unlikely as by the many whiny comments here I doubt many acutally ride mtb beyond 20ft wide sealed cookie trails. European is the new American. Hard core on the bike not on the Internet.
  • + 3
 For sub 9k I get a shock where I hardly can reach The rebound - sounds great
  • + 1
 TF03 SLX Reduced to £1700 . I'm getting one . In medium though . Great fit for me and I think it feels fantastic.
If we were all the same....... Horses for courses . And all that.
Get out and ride.
  • + 1
 When you use chaintension to resist bobbing, you will never have a plush ride, no matter what sag you run. Every bump is transferred into the foot that is driving the chain at that moment.
  • + 1
 A new Niner Rip 9 RDO cost about half the price of this bike and the geo is dialed. BMC has got some serious competition in the 29er category. 9k is outrageous for any bike.
  • + 2
 Do they include a roadie waxing kit and pink strava sticker with the $9000?
  • + 1
 @mikekazimer Do you go back to this review and feel this bike was 4 years ahead of its time... Long, slack with short stays and a steep seattube in May of 2014.
  • - 1
 I find it interesting that the trek remedy 29 got a pretty nice review (www.pinkbike.com/news/Trek-Remedy-9-29-Tested-2013.html) and this TF01 is getting panned. Their geo is very similar. Does the DRCV rear shock on the trek make it that much better?
  • + 5
 The Remedy has a different suspension design, and there are some fairly large differences in the geometry numbers, particularly top tube (611 on the TF01 vs. 576 on the Trek) and wheelbase length, so I'd say it's more than just the rear shock that makes the difference.
  • + 1
 Thanks Mike! I hesitated to compare top tube measurements, as BMC's geo chart seems to measure actual tt length, which seems kind of pointless. The size XL Remedy stack & reach of 620 and 451mm seems comparable to the BMC's size large (619 and 460mm), so cockpit setup would be similar. Not surprising given that Trek's seem to run a bit small in my experience.
For a given stack and reach, the wheelbases line up similarly-- with the slightly longer reach of the TF01 begging for a 5-10mm shorter stem.

What fork offset does the TF01 have? Do all 29er fox forks now use a 51mm offset?
  • + 1
 The vast majority of riders want longer front centres but you complain about it? Next time you should look at the geo chart rather than ordering a medium every review.
  • + 1
 @freagan - The fork on the TF01 has a 51mm offset. @jclnv - I'm all for long front centers, but the overall length of the TF01 makes it feel unwieldy when things get tight.
  • + 2
 A semi-negative review on Pb! Who's paying who?
  • + 1
 Other companies must have paid PB to do a negative review on the competiton!!! Ha ha
  • + 1
 So this bike is handfull because of the wheelbase? How much longer is it than the bike of the year E29?
  • + 1
 The medium TF01 is 14 millimeters longer than a medium Enduro 29, and it has 5mm longer chainstays.
  • + 1
 So a small TF01 would have been a better comparison to a medium E29?.
  • + 1
 so in a nutshell if you've got the 9k to blow on a bike and its gotta be a 29er than buy an enduro sworks
  • + 2
 28T : little weights sissi with a 42Tcassette ??? so sissi ...
  • + 1
 Like St Francis...
  • + 0
 what a numpty
  • + 2
 Awesome Smile i was looking for a 9k $ 29ers review!!
  • + 0
 The poor suspension performance being the result of a "stiff frame" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read in a modern mountain bike review.
  • + 1
 That was a bit of speculation on my part - the feeling I was experiencing didn't seem directly related to the shock, more to the stiffness of the bike as a whole. The suspension was going through all of its travel, but there was still a harsher feel to the overall ride than expected, and this wasn't just at the rear of the bike.
  • + 2
 I overreacted anyway. Sorry for the e-snark.
  • + 1
 garbage, not even worth half the price
  • + 1
 good a review for 1% of the riders
  • + 2
 8999
  • + 1
 BMC. translation. Bacon Mc Chicken
  • + 1
 Many other, more worth while, things I would prefer to spend $9k on.
  • + 1
 If this bike is for road, when will a version 26 " for mountain bikers?
  • + 2
 DW-Link?
  • + 1
 I thought the same thing.
  • + 1
 Out of any non-DW-link short link bike, this looks the most like one. IMHO.
  • + 1
 It's hueco!
  • + 0
 haven't we seen this review some time ago, what is this, dejavu?
  • + 1
 it was first ride impressions, as seen here www.pinkbike.com/news/First-Ride-BMC-Trailfox-TF01-2014.html
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.039218
Mobile Version of Website