PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
Trek Slash
Words by Mike Kazimer, photography by Tom RichardsThe Slash was updated for 2021 with 10mm more travel, along with the expected longer, slacker geometry changes, and a few bonus frame features. It's still rolling on 29” wheels, with 160mm of rear travel and a 170mm fork. Its intended purpose hasn't changed at all - it's still meant to be an enduro race bike.
That 160mm of travel comes from Trek's ABP suspension layout, which uses a concentric pivot at the rear axle. The overall layout hasn't deviated much from the previous version, but what's new is the RockShox Super Deluxe ThruShaft shock. The shock uses Trek's ThruShaft design, where the damper shaft exits out the bottom of the shock, which means the damper valve assembly is moving through one column of oil.
Slash Details • Travel: 160mm rear / 170mm front
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head angle: 64.1-degrees (low)
• Seat tube angle: 75.6-degrees (low)
• Reach: 486mm (lrg)
• Chainstay length: 437mm
• Sizes: S, M, ML, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 32.5 lb / 14.7 kg (as pictured)
• Price: $8,000 USD
•
trekbikes.com The shock was developed specifically for Trek, but it does share some similarities with the current inline Deluxe shock, like the ability to select from three low-speed compression settings, along with an extra-firm locked out position. A turn of the dial can firm up the shock for smoother, flowier trails, or turning it the other way can be useful for slippery conditions when traction is a high priority. There's also a numbered rebound knob, one of those “Why hasn't everyone been doing this?” features that should help speed up setup.
Trek debuted their in-frame snack storage on the Fuel EX last year, and that's now been carried over to the Slash. Flipping a lever underneath the water bottle cage unlatches a panel that covers the downtube, where a tube and snacks can easily be stored. Perhaps best of all, the feature is also found on the aluminum Slash frames.
Along with the snack compartment, the Slash has a threaded bottom bracket, a 34.9mm seatpost diameter, and Knock Block 2.0. For those that aren't familiar, the Knock Block system uses a a small stop chip in the headtube and a special headset top cap and stem spacers to prevent the handlbar from being turned too far in either direction. The previous version only allowed 58-degrees of rotation in either direction, while the new one allows 72-degrees of rotation. Even better, the feature can be completely removed, since the downtube now has a slight curve in it that allows the forks crown to pass underneath without any issues.
The Slash's head tube angle has been slackened by 1-degree, and now sits at 64.1-degrees in the low geometry setting. It's possible to steepen that to 64.6-degrees via the flip chips in the seatstays, but I have a feeling most riders will stick to the slacker setting. Along with the slacker head angle, the bike's reach has grown by 20-30mm per size – the reach on a size large now measures 486mm. Speaking of sizes, there's now an ML option in the mix, which means there's a total of five sizes – S, M, ML, L, and XL.
The seat angle has been steepened to 75.6-degrees. That's slightly slacker than what we're seeing from other companies, especially when combined with the bike's relatively slack actual seat tube angle. The chainstay length remains the same across the board for all sizes, at 437mm in the low setting.
The Slash 9.9 X01 version reviewed here retails for $8,000 USD. Parts kit highlights include a RockShox Zeb Ultimate fork, SRAM X01 12-speed drivetrain, Code RSC brakes, and Bontrager Line Elite carbon wheels. That's a lot of money, but you can get an alloy version starting at $3,500 for the aluminum Slash 7.
The total weight is 32.5 lb with our Maxxis Assegai / DHR II control tires installed, making it the second lightest bike out of the 5 on hand for this test.
ClimbingTrek bumped up the anti-squat on the Trek, and for the most part I was happy leaving the shock alone while climbing, especially when it was in the middle or firmer compression setting of the 'open' position.
As it is, the Slash is a good climber, but you can notice that front center length when things get really tight; at times I felt I was a little further back than I wanted. Otherwise, the reasonable weight and good traction from the Super Deluxe shock make it relatively easy to get the climbing out of the way before the fun really begins. Sure, you won't mistake it for an extra-nimble trail bike, but doesn't turn into a cumbersome sled on mellower terrain.
In regards to sizing, the Slash has the longest top tube length out of all five bikes being reviewed, at 649mm. Yes, it also has the longest reach to go along at that, but if you look at the Norco Shore, that bike has a 480mm reach and 617mm top tube length - the seat tube angle makes a big difference in how well the longer front center is hidden while climbing. Now, I was able to achieve a pretty comfortable climbing position by sliding the seat forward in the rails, but I wouldn't have complained if the seat tube angle was a couple degrees steeper. Interestingly, that’s pretty much what I said about the Specialized Enduro last year, and the two have similar reach and top tube lengths.
Descending I spent a lot of time on the previous Slash, and one thing's for certain – it hasn't lost anything when it comes to speed and precision. Out of all the bikes, this one felt the fastest, even if that wasn't totally reflected in the timed laps. I like bikes that make you want to go fast, the kind where it doesn't feel like there's a speed limit, and this is one of them.
Have you ever rented a car, and then somehow found yourself going 90mph because of how smooth the ride was? That's a fitting analogy for the Slash - it's stiff without being harsh, and the tune on the Super Deluxe is excellent. I didn't need to play with volume spacers at all, and the three positions are all very effective. While I used it in the fully open position most of the time, it's nice to be able to firm it up for different terrain and trails.
The chainstay length is the same across all sizes, something that's becoming less common. I wouldn't have minded the option to lengthen things, just to be able to experiment, and I'm sure taller riders than myself would appreciate the ability to fine-tune the back end length a little bit. However, that longer front / shorter back end balance is a good time in the steeps, where it gives the bike a nice blend of stability and maneuverability.
That's sort of the theme with this bike – it's stiff and fast, but it's also really great at jumping and slapping through corners. Overall, the Slash would make a great race bike, or an all-rounder for someone who's focused on rowdier trails and is looking for a precise speed machine.
Nice
What purpose would that serve besides giving former Slash owners an at-home feeling on the new bike?
That said, I totally understand people who hate it or find it useless.
Right on. I guess I’ve never experienced that before but I can imagine it. Glad it works for you
Singular. One fork. Two legs.
Would this kind of impact brake the frame, or the knock block, or both?
Singular. One bag. Two legs.
Same Not had issues with mine on corners etc.
It makes the bike stand up perfect against the inside of my
Van (as bars can’t just bloody a spin around, when you think it’s not gonna move once tied down bloody tight and feels solid).
So I like it.
Everyone above 90 kg will feel the shock going to fast through its travel, even with 275 psi charged.
I rode the X2 (4 volume spacers and 275 psi) for one season. Way better in my opinion, but still a little bit soft.
Switched to a Super Deluxe Coil with a 650 coil last week. Need more time to figure out which one is better for me =)
Also @bigogoat: most commen issue is that the nitrogen gets mixed with the oil, don‘t ask me why they would even need to use a piggy back since, it‘s a thru-shaft?
On the older fox ones they have a tiny coil spring IFP inside the upper shaft. IMO a much better design but have you seen any problems with the fox ones?
Long story short: Short cranks for DH bikes, biometricly ideal cranks for anything thats meant to climb.
The big money bikes are sexy, but there are a lot of great budget options out there which is great to see. Looking forward to field tests once bike availability gets back to normal and the values can be kept in line.
It does make me wonder if one of the companies involved in the field test had slotted in one of their lower end models with a decent spec, could they could have come out as the sleeper winner based on value and solid midrange components?
On most brands' build tiers, as you go up a spec level, almost everything on the bike changes with it - which should be expected if the price is jumping significantly with it. But do you really need (or want to pay for) high-spec *everything* when upgrading?
I assume most people's main point of concern on which spec to pick (aside from money) is suspension, drivetrain or brakes.
I'd wager a lot more people would be more than happy the lower-level spec options if they can change the few bits that they are particular about (e.g. going base spec but changing the drivetrain from SX/NX to GX for a relatively small price increase, rather than paying a huge price increase to get 'the GX build' which also comes with a bunch of other upgrades you woulld otherwise be happy to live without).
nsmb.com/articles/duelling-knolly-wardens-final-verdicts
The more expensive bike has a beefier stanchioned Zeb vs. the Yari on the base model. Usually you'd expect to drop some weight when going high end vs. base fork, but here the Zeb is ~200 g heavier, so the bike has to make that up in other parts.
Then the Slash 7 has a non piggyback Deluxe+, while the more expensive bike here has a Super Deluxe, so another 100g.
The more expensive bike also comes with 60 vs 120 tpi tires with Bontragers' tougher casing, while the cheaper bike comes with the opposite. I'm not sure how much the weight difference is, but the more expensive bike's tires are heavier and stronger, so I imagine that wheel and tire weight is similar across both bikes, even though the wheels are lighter on the expensive bike.
So instead of saving weight on the premium suspension and wheels/tires, you've gained 2/3 of a pound, so they have to drop approximately 3lbs from the frame and drivetrain.
You could make a refrigerator or an oil can out of carbon and it would still be the vastly superior material. But would it be sensible?
Are you by some crazy coincidence in collegeville or just another cville ????
- 6'5" guy who doesn't want cadillac handling
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JpazTiddYE
*The More You Know*
I agree that standard, the ReActive shock sucked, poor activation and blew through travel with lack of mid support but modified, it polishes up well (thinking of turds with those last words). ))
Does anyone else find that insulting?
I'm not against giving folks the option to spend big bucks for premium bikes... but [I'm addressing you, product managers] please don't try to sneak cheap mid-spec parts onto top of the line builds.
_
Rant over. Pretty nice bike overall.
Enough already with the grim donut wishes....
Leaving the shock alone is generally accepted as leaving it in it's most open(least compression resistance) position.
Why we suddenly need water cage , swat/stash box’s and overpriced tools in bars and axles, folk being sucked in to spend spend spend !
Backpack never been a problem in 25 yrs riding
But tbh guys load their packs with crap items.
Pack smart and the weight has little or no effect.
That’s why I recommend a test to expose how little these compartments and tools on bikes don’t matter.
More convenient but not necessarily better.
Evil Wreckoning= 77 degree STA is a deal breaker
Me: my rebound knob goes to 11.
No one: couldn't you make 6 faster?
Me:......... but 11 is 5 faster than six....
Old version made even bar turns really awkward as it would hit the block and twist the bike back. New version takes a lot more effort to hit the block.
Thanks