PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
Rocky Mountain Altitude
Words by Mike Kazimer, photography by Tom RichardsUp next in the Pinkbike Field Test is the new Rocky Mountain Altitude, a bike that had a strong debut under Jesse Melamed during the shortened EWS season.
The Altitude has 160mm of rear wheel travel with a 170mm fork, with different wheel size options depending on the frame size – there are 29” options for M, L, and XL sizes, and 27.5” sizes for S and M sizes. Rocky also offers full carbon and aluminum framed version of the Altitude, with a total of 8 complete configurations to choose from.
That 160mm of travel is delivered via Rocky's Smoothlink suspension design, their version of a Horst link layout. The Altitude's kinematics changed with the new frame, and the result are numbers that blend the best traits of the old Altitude and the Instinct BC. Anti-squat sits a little below 100% at sag, but it doesn't drop off quite as quickly as before.
Altitude Details • Travel: 160mm rear / 170mm front
• Wheel size: 29"
•Carbon frame (aluminum options available)
• Head angle: 64.4° - 65.5°
• Seat tube angle: 75.4° - 76.5°
• Reach: 474mm (lrg)
• Chainstay length: 438 or 449mm (slack setting)
• Sizes: M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: Weight: 31.4 lb / 14.2 kg
• Price: $9,099 USD
•
bikes.com The suspension rate is progressive, with a flatter curve earlier in the travel that ramps up more quickly towards the end of the stroke to provide additional bottom-out resistance. Each frame size has a specific shock tune in order to ensure that lighter riders on smaller bikes are able make the most of the bike's travel, and to keep bigger riders from blowing through all 160mm too quickly.
When it comes to frame details, internal, fully guided cable routing on the carbon frames makes it possible to run regular or moto style brakes without trouble. There's very nice chainslap protection to keep things quiet out on the trail, and plenty of room for a water bottle inside the front triangle.
The Altitude has Rocky's Ride 9 geometry, which, you guessed it, allows for 9 different geometry settings thanks to 2 flip chips. In the neutral setting, the bike has a 65-degree head angle and a 480mm reach, but for this test I ran it in the slackest setting, which is also the most progressive; that gives it a 64.4 degree head angle. I went with the slackest setting in order to give it a fair shake against the other bikes on hand. The chainstay length can be set at either 438 or 449mm, which lets riders pick the handling traits they prefer (for me it was the 449mm position).
I tested the Carbon 90 Rally edition, which is built up with the same parts that Rocky's Enduro team are using. Now, they're not out there racing around the world on entry level parts, which means this is an expensive bike at $9,099 USD. All those dollars get you a Shimano XTR drivetrain and, a Fox 38 fork and Float X2 shock, and Race Face Turbine R alloy wheels. Keep in mind that there are less expensive carbon versions, as well as a range of aluminum framed options with prices starting at $3,500 USD.
ClimbingThe Altitude has the slackest seat tube angle out of all the bikes here, but thankfully the actual seat tube angle isn't super slack, which meant the climbing position was still very comfortable. Having the chainstays in the longer position also helped to position me over the center of the bike, which makes it easier to find the right weight balance for steep climbs.
The rear end is fairly active under hard pedaling, so I regularly made use of that little blue climb lever. It's easy to reach, and I'm not as opposed to using it as Levy, but it's worth noting that the Altitude isn't the snappiest climber. The Propain Spindrift felt more efficient, even with 20mm more travel and a coil shock, a sensation that was backed up by Levy's pseudo-scientific effeciency test.
It may not be super-snappy under power, but the Altitude is a very easy bike to live with on technical climbs, with plenty of traction, and reasonable dimensions that keep it from feeling unwieldy in the tight stuff. The weight's very reasonable as well, especially for a bike designed to withstand the rigors of enduro racing. It was the lightest out of the five bikes in this category by over a pound, part of the reason that this would be my pick out of the bunch if I was looking for a longer travel, do-it-all machine.
Descending That active suspension that had me occasionally reaching for the compression lever on the climbs pays dividends on the descents – the Altitude has excellent traction, with a nicely damped, ground hugging feel. It doesn't feel overly stiff either; it feels like it contours to the terrain rather than trying to smash it into submission. Those traits are especially evident in wet or loose conditions, where it has an innate ability to grip rather than slipping and sliding.
Early on in the testing I removed one volume spacer from the Float X2 shock in order to take full advantage of the bike's 160mm of travel. Previously there'd been too much end-stroke ramp up for my liking, but that spacer removal did the trick, allowing me to use full travel when warranted while still retaining enough progression to prevent any harsh bottom outs.
Even though I set the bike in the longest and slackest setting, it never felt like a handful, and even with the chainstays in the longer 447mm position it was still easy to snake around tight turns and to navigate tricky, slower speed sections of trail. The Altitude will clearly work well as an enduro race bike, but there's more to it than that. It's a bike that can go up and down without demanding too much from its rider – pro level skills aren't required to have a good time on this machine.
Realistically, I'd say Rocky's geometry numbers are on the more conservative side of the spectrum, considering how good the bike felt in the slackest out of 9 settings, and there's probably a reason their team riders are running an angleset to slacken the bike up a little bit. A -1 degree angleset in the neutral setting would preserve the 480mm reach and give the bike a 64-degree head angle, numbers that are becoming fairly standard for this category.
The top tier components left little to be desired, with the exception of the rattly XTR brake pads. A strip of mastic tape on the caliper underneath the fins solved that, and the bike was very quiet after that, with the exception of the occasional 'twang' from the spokes of the Race Face Turbine wheels.
"Lots of geometry adjustments, but they're skewed towards the steeper side of the spectrum"
WAT? Well no? They wanted to create a fast bike, and they did.
Anyway, can we presume that setting it in highest position and shorter chainstay, will transform this bike into a poppy playful machine?
Geo has very little to do with how playful a bike is on the trail. It is much more about the suspension curve.
and every short ravel bike needs 64 bc we're all roughAF no matter which bike we're on.
The enduro I actually sized down at 5’11” as the S4 was way too much of a plow bike and the S3 was a better all rounder for me. So Geo changes the way the bike rides big time.
All that being said the new Stumpjumper evo seems like they copied the cascade designs rear link to change the leverage curve and all of a sudden the stumpy climbs and descends better. So kinematics also plays a big role.
Pros want more precise handling because they have the strength, skill and razor sharp reflexes to place the bike where they want, handle it and react to surprises/changes. It's fast but dangerous for regular riders.
I need something that, when the shit hits the fan, I can let "Jesus take the wheel" and bail me the f*ck out.. which just happens to be bikes that are a little longer and a little slacker than what most pros are riding.
"EWS professionals ride surprisingly short bikes – for good reason
The development of innovations always follows certain trends. Often the pendulum swings far in one direction only to level off somewhere in the middle. This seems to be the case with modern geometry. If you check out the race bikes on test, you’ll probably be asking yourself how Richie Rude, who is 180 cm tall, can be so fast on a bike with a reach of only 460 mm. Jack Moir is 1.91 m tall and rides a size L Strive, which, due to the extremely tall cockpit, is guaranteed to have a reach under 460 mm. The mullet conversion on the GT Force Carbon that Martin Maes rides has also shrunk the bike down to less than 460 mm in length. The reason for this became clear during the course of our test. Not only did the shorter bikes record faster times, they also allowed our test riders to change direction more quickly and position themselves better before corners to carry their speed through them. On top of that, the agile handling of compact bikes is usually more fun. Anyone who thinks that these bikes aren’t composed at high speeds can rest assured: handling stability is heavily determined by the suspension and all the bikes on test performed brilliantly in this regard."
enduro-mtb.com/en/enduro-race-bike-mtb-review
That's your Jerrymetron (thx Waki) concept right there.
Thanks for the tip Product Manager!
Is basically anyone going to be buying this bike and running it in the steepest Ride9 setting? Why make a super-adjustable bike if you're going to have the slackest setting be the "normal" one, and lots of folks (including your own team) are going to be immediately installing an angleset on your newly-released bike? Why not build in a bit of future-proofing for your customer?
If I'm Rocky... I'd change "Ride Nine" to "Ride Four" (similar to the Slayer), less complicated... for this bike I'd start at 65 in steep, then 64.5, 64 and 63.5. Done... let people have the choice to ride it in "modern trail bike geo"... or "mini-dh" geo... or somewhere in-between.
Furthermore, he's not "putting it down as a con on this test loop." The timed testing portion is only one part of the overall test. The idea that this field test boils down to just ranking bikes based on their timing numbers is absurd. Do you think he only rode the bike on the timed loop?
Also, it's absolutely not "stupid to say a certain head angle is a con because it just means that bike isn't designed for your preferences" - that's basically what a review is.
My argument isn’t that it’s a bad bike, it’s that Kaz isn’t an evil moron for suggesting that they might have made it a touch slacker at the head angle, even though his timed testing said the bike was fast as-is.
In a test where there are control tires to try to level the playing field, do you think he needs to make up some "real values" by pressing in an angleset? If someone published a food review and said "not spicy enough", would you take issue with that?
I do standby my statement of custom setups for pro level riders. I don't think there is anything wrong with the manufacturers modifying stock setups with custom links or even full custom frames to make their racers as successful as possible. That doesn't mean the stock bikes aren't fantastic for the other 99.9% of us.
I would agree and I wish more people saw it that way! We are riding at the extreme end of what these bikes are capable of and need it to be perfect for us. I don't know what is right for everyone, but I will try to find what is right for me.
76 degrees effective STA with a steep actual STA on my 2011 altitude - what an awesome bike that was ahead of its time. i had a -2.0 angleset and offset bushings in mine and it ripped up and down. only sold it because it didn't make sense to upgrade with a 1 1/8 steerer tube and a 135mm QR axle
But then again, I live in SoCal so all PNW stuff just looks equally drool-worthy to my untrained eyes lol.
And @mtmc99, you're right - that's my stunt double, Aidan Oliver, in the riding shots. The border closure threw a wrench in the works, so unfortunately Levy and I weren't able to ride together and argue as much as we usually would.
You have mentioned before that you have several riders test these bikes for the field test. Why not elaborate on how different riders (weight, riding style and on different trails) found the different settings?
At least this one didn't break.
It both lets people from both chainstay length camps (short vs long) have it their way, as well as giving people the chance to test BOTH on the same bike, and see what they actually prefer. And even stuff like "short for local trails, long for bike park" and other stuff like this.
That said, I'd REALLY like to see a test where chainstay lengths are the topic of the test. Where some of these bikes with adjustable lengths are used as the platform for the topic of short vs long, and who might like/benefit from one size or the other. And then maybe using bikes that are otherwise very similar to do the same thing (Commencal Meta AM TR vs Privateer 141 for example)
@mikekazimer/@mikelevy any chance of something like that in the future?
(and the same goes for the Spindrift vs the Slayer - I'm more into this category of bikes)
I totally agree on the price that is out of this world (like 90% of the bikes), because carbon frame, fox kashima suspension and shimano xtr groupset is everything you need.
There is no way to justify that price but putting some diamonds on the handlebar.
Sadly, no alloy frame only option, even though they offer some alloy models.
And their carbon frame pricing is wayyyy up there ($3700 usd, more than the low end alloy complete...). Which means this bike is officially off my demo list.
Yeah, the reason was "just to make it feel closer to the Slayer that was used previously".
According to the racers, the geo is just fine for both regular customers _and_ high-level racing, and the angle-set on the team's bikes will go away eventually.
Now, I understand that suspension designs evolve and change almost continually. However, it's not making it any easier for customers to understand what the benefits of a branded design when the design behind the brand keeps changing, and even more so when the special sauce of the original branding is completely removed.
Of course, Rocky Mountain isn't the only one doing this to their brands, just that Levy calling out Smoothlink by name and referring to it as a version of a Horst-link reminded me that Smoothlink used to refer to something very specifically _not_ a Horst link, It was touted as the best option with minimal chain growth and a smoothly progressive leverage rate. After the Horst-link patent expired, was that suddenly not good? Enough that a switch to a Horst-style axle-above-pivot was necessary, completely dropping a major design feature of the Smoothlink system?
Not according to their docs. Pos1 is the slackest, but Pos 3 is the most progressive and very slightly steeper. Yeah, small changes, but isn't that the point of Ride 9, to allow small changes? Might as well get the facts straight about those changes.
Has anyone else had problems with rear Axle seizing? I saw a note about this in old review for altitude - issue with factory... Tried to pull rear wheel off on day 1 to put on ride wrap, Axle was seized, snapped Allen key trying to get it off! Bike shop had to machine out the Axle to remove and replace... A bit disappointing for a new bike...
I am so sick of seing that this kind of price tag is slowly becoming the norm,
today, with 3000$, you don't get a better bike than 5 years ago, so what is the point of progress ? Making more dentists ride, and slowly loose the true passionate guys ?
Like, give me something to work with, make it interesting. It’s still better to watch than the horribly overdone acting on GMBN that makes me want to projectile vomit every time I see Blake’s face, but in terms of reviews it didn’t feel like a lot of information besides „it rides bretty gud“, which you should expect from a 9k bike. Or maybe bikes these days are all just really good and there isn’t much left to say.
Can you give me some feedback on the Dainese Trail Skins Pro knee, going to pull the trigger on ones.
Word is you have to size down right?
Even if the Slayer didn’t have that happen, the travel and geometry have moved into a realm that’s a little bit more than what I’d like for the type of riding I do. This bike would be a little more of what I’m looking for.
Or 437 as stated in the sidebar, for Neutral Ride9 (not stated in the sidebar)?
Or 438 to 448 in the Ride9 Pos1 that was used in the test?
Details matter!
(All numbers directly from bikes.com)