Field Trip: BMC's $1,599 Two Stroke is Perfect for Your First XC Race

Apr 26, 2021
by Sarah Moore  


PINKBIKE FIELD TRIP

BMC TWO STROKE AL ONE

Perfect for your first XC race.



Words by Sarah Moore, Photography by Tom Richards



We're over halfway through the hardtail reviews in our Field Trip value bike series and up next we've got the BMC Two Stroke AL ONE, a cross-country hardtail that comes with a 100mm fork. It retails for $1,599 USD.

BMC says the Two Stroke is best suited to riders who want to rip around a cross-country race track and chase uphill personal records. BMC has some of the world’s fastest XC racers on their bikes, including two-time Olympic gold medallist Julien Absalon and current World Champion Pauline Ferrand Prevot, so we were excited to get this race-focused value hardtail in for testing. I mean, it looks fast just standing still.
BMC Two Stroke AL ONE

Fork travel: 100mm
Wheel size: 29"
Frame construction: aluminum
Head angle: 67 degrees
Chainstay length: 425mm
Reach: 445mm (medium)
Sizes: S, M, L, XL
Weight: 27.75 lb / 12.6 kg
Price: $1,599 USD
More info: www.bmc-switzerland.com

The aluminum frame has internal cable routing, a threaded bottom bracket, and an integrated fork stopper, which means your bars won’t spin and damage your bike if you crash. It comes in sizes small through XL, all with 29er wheels.

As for the geometry, with a 67° headtube angle, and a 75° effective seat-tube angle, the BMC might not sound like that aggressive of a bike if you’re comparing it to trail bikes, but it has a half a degree slacker headtube angle than any of the bikes we tested in the XC Field Test earlier this year. Our size medium comes with a 445mm reach and it's pretty neat to see that kind of modern geometry on a value bike.

There are two aluminum models of the Two Stroke, with prices starting at $1,199 USD. If you want a carbon version, there are four models to choose from with prices starting at $2,199 USD. Our test bike here is the BMC Two Stroke AL ONE which has a 100mm Rock Shox Recon RL with a lockout on the handlebar, a mix of SRAM NX and SX making up the drivetrain, and Shimano Deore brakes. It comes with Vittoria Barzo 2.25'' tires with tan sidewalls. There’s no dropper post on this bike, which is not uncommon for cross-country bikes, even ones that aren't value-oriented.




BMC Two Stroke. Photo by Tom Richards
BMC Two Stroke. Photo by Tom Richards


Climbing

The BMC Two Stroke doesn't just look fast with its shiny red paint and tan sidewalls, it also felt like the fastest climber of all the value hardtails. While our bike wasn't delivered with spacers to raise the front end, the bike is usually delivered with them so that the rider can find the perfect fit for them regardless of how much yoga they have done. Regardless of how low or high you prefer your cockpit, there's no denying that the Two Stroke's aggressive position makes you want to push on the pedals and power up every climb. Compared to the Vitus, you're in a much lower, more aggressive position over the front end and it makes easy work of smooth, gravel climbs as well as tight, twisty singletrack.

While it's superb on all climbs, if you're on a more technical climb, you do have to be very precise about line choice or you’ll get bumped off line. In a similar vein, if you’re doing a lot of flat, rooty traverses, the lack of rear suspension will be fatiguing since your body has to make up for the lack of rear suspension. One nitpick about the spec is that it's not the easiest to shift when your legs are full of lactic acid and you're not thinking straight from lack of oxygen. The mix of SX and NX isn't as good as Deore 12-speed and the ergonomics of the shifter make it kind of hard to reach

With a bar-mounted lock out and fast-rolling tires, it's easy to imagine this bike on the race course. The steering is precise and it makes easy work of whatever climb it's pointed at, perfect for picking off your competitors one by one. For someone who is just getting into cross-country racing or just wants a really fast climber as their second bike, the BMC has plenty to offer in the way of horsepower.



BMC Two Stroke. Photo by Tom Richards

BMC Two Stroke. Photo by Tom Richards
BMC Two Stroke. Photo by Tom Richards


Descending


While the geometry numbers that the BMC Two Stroke offers might not seem that progressive, they really are for a cross-country bike. If you're coming from an older cross-country bike and you're upgrading to the BMC Two Stoke, you are going to see a significant difference in descending prowess thanks to the modern geometry and smooth RockShox Recon fork. You'll see an additional improvement to your descending times if you shell out the extra cash for a dropper post.

Of course, if we compare the BMC Two Stroke to the other hardtails we were riding on the Sunshine Coast, it's not the most capable on the descents. You're going to be picking your lines carefully, not leaning into the fast-rolling tires too much on the corners, and wishing that you had a dropper post every other minute. Of course, none of that is important if you made it to the top of the climb minutes head of all your competition.

All in all, BMC says the Two Stroke is suited to the XC race track and chasing uphill personal records, and I would have to agree. This bike might not be a sub-20 lb. hardtail, but it looks and feels fast when you get it out on the trails. It would be the perfect bike for a high school racer or their parent getting into the cross-country race scene. If you’re racing more technical terrain, you might want to consider adding a dropper post, but for smooth courses with a lot of climbing, the BMC Two Stroke AL ONE is a great choice.


2021 BMC Two Stroke AL ONE. Photo Tom Richards





Pros

+ Forward-thinking geometry for an XC race bike
+ Aggressive climbing position

Cons

- Nervous descender, especially without dropper post
- Low front end not adjustable
- Not much in the way of frame protection














The 2021 Pinkbike Field Test was made possible with support from Toyota.




Video: Jason Lucas, Max Barron
Editing: Tom Richards



140 Comments

  • 110 4
 Do they use pedals in xc or is this a weight savings thing
  • 82 0
 you tape dowel sticks to the bottom of your shoes and stick them through the pedal holes
  • 20 2
 @GumptionZA: still to heavy
  • 13 0
 @Lukefuelex: then youre going to have to do the awkward crank pedal thing you do when the showroom bike doesnt have any pedals on it, I'm sure the weight savings make up for the efficiency loss
  • 14 0
 @Lukefuelex: they're balsa wood dowels. Single-use only, I'm afraid.
  • 17 1
 If you have a bike that weights 27.75lbs, you cannot weight it with pedals because it will hit 28 pounds and boom, your sales are down to zero.
  • 37 0
 Personally, I find seatposts are unnecessary too. Anyone with an ounce of fitness can just sprint the whole race on the flats and climbs, and then your seat is already out of the way for descents.
  • 4 0
 @GumptionZA: are those called poke-less pedals?
  • 16 0
 @TrekXCFactoryRacing: You should ditch the handlebar and stem too. Just steer by grabbing the steerer tube. Brakes are kinda unnecessary as well. Just drag your feet.
  • 15 0
 @bocomtb: True. All brakes do is slow you down, and if you need any gear lower than the top then you need to ditch the donuts and do hill repeats until your lungs explode.
  • 4 4
 This BMC has curves though...
  • 1 0
 No curves, no buy.
  • 58 1
 I was actually looking forward to this review perhaps most of all. This looks like an ideal bike for someone who already has a burly full-sus and actually wants a different ride experience for different use cases; or a more robust bikepacker that's still fun.

That said, it's such a shame that these nicely-engineered, middle-tier aluminium frames are so rarely offered frame-only. Building it up with a Deore drivetrain, dropper and high-quality fork would make it an amazing bike, but if you swap these things out you're paying for them twice.
  • 27 0
 Yessss I would love to be able to buy a reasonably priced aluminum frame.
  • 10 0
 I've been hunting for a brand that sells a good aluminum frame, and dang options really suck. Lots of aggro steel hard tails and ancient Geo options, but very few truly modern quality frames available.
  • 1 0
 @ratedgg13: Yep. I've even looked at catalog and direct-import options, but the geometry on them is always terrible. Closer to road than MTB. Half the steel options weigh nearly as much as full-sus frames; whereas I'd be surprised if a carefully-designed alu frame came in at much more than 1600g.
  • 1 0
 same here, frame looks great! cheapest model comes with deore actually, but shittier fork and wheels...not sure if i were to buy this anymore
  • 2 0
 I have asked about this on every hardtail review so far, so thanks for beating me to the punch! Yes... What are my good and affordable "frame only" hardtail options, especially for a more agressive bike (designed around a 140-150mm fork)??
  • 12 0
 Salsa Timberjack comes with a frame only option... 600$, aluminum frame, never ridden the new one but for what you are all describing it's the first thing that came to mind for me.
  • 3 0
 @rogerwaters: I was going to say the same thing. I have one of my kids riding a Timberjack (v1) that we built as a frame only. 120mm Pike, Oneup dropper, Sram 11-speed. It's a great NICA race / trail bike. Geometry is really similar to this Two-stroke. Good luck finding any frames right now though.
  • 5 0
 Kona offers their alu honzo as a frame only for $499 usd. I have one with a SID 35 and an Xt 11spd drivetrain, the thing rips! (Though they sell out nearly instantly)
  • 13 0
 Check out the BC Original Podsol from bikecomponents.de
Light frame,great geo,very well finished and below 500€.
I'm building one next month.
  • 1 0
 @Lokirides: Check out On One, too
  • 1 0
 @ratedgg13: build your own
  • 2 0
 @Lokirides: NS Eccentric frames are pretty cheap. I built one up for my son last year with a Bomber and a bunch of hand me down parts. It’s a great bike with nice geo.
  • 2 0
 @icthus13: Ragley sells them.
  • 1 0
 Ragley in the UK or Rubber Side Down in Canada sell some pretty good priced alloy frames with killer geometry.
  • 4 0
 @woofer2609: Both nice; but neither really comparable to this. The RSD frames weigh about 2.5kg. That's heavier than my 140mm full sus... and almost a kilo more than a specialized Chisel, or probably this. And the Ragley is pretty similar, with an unhelpfully slack seat angle. Neither is really stepping up to the d**ncountry plate.

@nozes - the podsol is better; think they must have updated it as it's a little longer and steeper in the seat than it used to be, iirc. Nice simple lines, too; good cable routing; no shouty branding; sensible detailing... Might have a winner! cheers.
  • 2 0
 @ratedgg13: Banshee Paradox or Ragley Big Al
  • 2 0
 Ribble have Steel, Ti and alu
  • 9 0
 @nozes: I second the Podsol frame idea. It's fairly inexpensive in Europe, it's light, and it has excellent XC-trail geometry. It also looks ultra minimalist, super understated in a good way.

I have one here that I'm looking forward to building up at some point.
  • 2 0
 Trek do their xcaliber and the marlin in frame only, thats if you can find stock of course
  • 2 0
 Want to make this modern-geo-frame-only-for-a-reasonable-price frame search even more difficult? Try finding something for 27.5 wheels. I'd like to build one of those for my 5'1" daughter, but that's a unicorn that I don't think exists.
  • 2 0
 @nozes: Yes! I have been riding a BC Podsol for a few months. Build up a size large with a SID Ultimate 120 and relatively light parts. It works really well in the flattish but twisty trails we have around where I live.
  • 2 0
 @Lokirides: Banshee Paradox comes to mind
  • 1 0
 @ratedgg13: I've noticed the same. In the last year or so some brands have moved away from frame only options.
  • 2 0
 @TwoNGlenn: Second this. I built an NS Eccentric Alu Evo 27.5 up a couple of years ago into a XC focused build like the BMC reviewed here. Even though NS sell the frame as a "hardcore" unit, I went with 120mm DT Swiss forks and SLX, it's become my favourite bike for just ragging anywhere, anytime.
  • 1 0
 Just bought a Rocky Mountain Fusion for this reason. I have another bike that's fairly burly, so want a second that's fairly light. Refreshed an 11s drivetrain to swap onto it, have an old Reba kicking around. Should be able to sell some original parts that will be taken off. Kinda like a frame and wheels package at the end of the day.
  • 1 0
 Specialized Fuse is pretty cool, 66.5 HA 440 reach in a medium. Hard to find for sale at the moment though
  • 1 0
 @rogerwaters: I have one on order (I work at a Salsa dealer), should be here in June. Going from a 2020 Trek Fuel EX 9.7 to an XT 12spd/Marz Z2 Timberjack build.
  • 1 0
 @dominic54: for sure! I gotta say, though, if you can place up a light set of wheels, an extra pound on the frame is no big deal IMO. To each their own, of course, but I laced up a Hope hub with some 17/15/17 gauge dt spokes and it changed the feel of the bike remarkably.
  • 1 0
 @Marquis: RSD Middlechild
  • 4 0
 @ratedgg13: check out the bc originals podsol. EDIT: nozes beat me to it.
  • 2 0
 @dominic54: I built BC Podsole about 6months ago - the frame is great - but the cable routing is actually not that good. Smile There is very clumsy transition from upper side of the downtube to the downside of the chainstays. I had to put some spacers bellow water bottle cage in order not to pinch the cables. Also I had to use extra zip tie to secure the gear cable away from the chain ring. But once built - all is fine.

Other then that: beautiful frame, modern sensible geometry, light for the indented use, good price, great ride .... At that time - and even now - I didn't find anything better.
  • 4 0
 @nozes: If I can advise - be sure to use Loctite 242/243 on the small screws when mounting the dropouts.
  • 3 0
 @drib: thanks mate - that’s good to know. Sounds like it’s solvable though and I’m not above zip ties. I’m pretty particular about cables! I think @henryquinney beat me to that party though...
  • 1 0
 @Lokirides: Marin San Quentin
  • 1 0
 @ratedgg13: Kona? Of course everyone is out of everything these days.
  • 1 0
 I ride a 170mm enduro rig and would be super keen to have an affordable hardtail xc bike aswell to wet my whistle on the occasion. Be great to see more of these options.
  • 41 3
 Ah yes, the TWOSTROKEALONE. A great bike for claiming a KOM.

Commenter Age: 40 Mental age: 13
  • 26 0
 I’de opt for the “lower” tiered version specced with Deore kit which goes for $1200. Then maybe take my savings and upgrade the fork to a Sid 120 which would raise the front and make the bike more capable on the descents.
  • 3 1
 Very much so; though this raises the bb and slackens the already-borderline seat angle further still.
  • 20 1
 All the XC fans will be twostroking themselves over this
  • 12 1
 This seems expensive for what it is. As a point of comparison: Trek's Procaliber 9.5 is only 200€ more, but has a carbon frame with IsoSpeed, is nearly 1kg lighter and has far superior drivetrain components.
  • 6 10
flag Saidrick (Apr 26, 2021 at 8:25) (Below Threshold)
 They’re not really the same: look at the difference in headtube angle: 67 vs. 68.8 degrees.

For the extra money of the trek pro caliber, I would spend that on adding a dropper post and better wheels for the BMC....

The trek is lighter, but there’s more to the story than just weight here.
  • 8 0
 @Saidrick: Find me either wheels or a dropper for 200, and I'll agree with you. The BMC is an XC bike, and the descending comfort given by 1.8 degree HA change is far outweighed by the 80 mm of squish on the trek.
  • 8 0
 @Saidrick: Yes they are the same - both are XC race bikes. Also, "modern" geometry will not help an XC bike at all. On the contrary. If you go too long and slack, the bike will just feel super awkward when you're putting down big power while seated. If you want to use it as a trail bike, its fine, but on an XC race bike, having a slack head angle is not necessarily an advantage.
  • 4 5
 @BenTheSwabian: ehh, I'm honestly curious about where XC geometry is in 5 years. I put a -2° angleset, light parts, and a short fork on a SolarisMax and it's a pretty rad little downcountry bike with a long reach and 62.5° HTA... I'm 100% not an XC racer so my opinion there means nothing, but I'm struggling to find reasons even XC racers wouldn't want a more stable bike. So many of my assumptions about this bike's geo were wrong before I got on it.
  • 1 0
 @Ussr1223: pnw and one-up both make droppers for $200
  • 1 0
 @Ussr1223:

@ussr1223

The price difference is not 200 American, it’s $500, per Treks website listing of msrp (1,599 vs. 2,099.

Also, where are you getting the 80mm of squish from? The 9.5 doesn’t have iso strut, it has a hardtail with iso speed.

The front forks on both models are 100mm.
  • 2 2
 @BenTheSwabian:

I guess using your definition of “same”: a 26” dh bike is the same as a 27.5” dh bike , which the same as a 29” dh bike...
  • 1 0
 @brianpark: I've discovered that the ultimate trail hardtail is uuuber slack but with = 130 fork. However, we'd probably disagree on the longer reach bit.
  • 1 0
 @brianpark: Get a pipedream moxie and a 140mm fork.Its the perfect downcountrybike for me. The geochart is actually misleading, it says 64 degree headangle, but if you look closely it also says "with a 160mm fork at 25% sag", so its more like 62 degrees.
  • 4 0
 @brianpark: Sorry Brian, I don't want to sound like a condescending prick, but maybe that's because you don't race XC. I'm also by no means a pro racer either, but in my club we take training and racing quite serious. For me it's all about the seating and body position. Physiologically speaking, there's an optimal seating position for power transfer while seated, that's much an established fact. You wanna have your hips at a certain height above and a certain distance behind the bottom bracket. Your upper body should be relatively low over the top tube to activate your core muscles in your upper thighs and lower torso, or so my physio therapist told me. Just look at road bikes. Their geometry basically hasn't evolved in forever and that's not because those guys hate technical progress, but because they kinda found their optimum. Oldschool XC geometry (68° HTA, 74° STA) might not rip on the descents, but it solves the problem of how to achieve the optimal body position while overall having a relatively compact bike. STA, HTA and reach are connected inseparably with each other and if you slacken the HTA while keeping the STA the same, your effective TT lenght gets shorter, which would mean a more upright body position (which is bad for racing as we just established). To counteract that, you'd have to run a longer stem or lenghten the reach (and consequently the wheelbase), which you both don't want because it will either compromise your steering or your compactness and handling. You also can't just steepen the STA too much, because that would make assuming the position for optimal power transfer impossible. That's why I'm predicting that the geometry for serious XC race machines will not evolve too much from where it sits currently. Now, I hear you say: "That only makes sense if your aim is to have a bike that is as compact as functionally possible for any given size.", to which I would reply: Yes, that's the goal. You do want your XC bike to be as compact as possible for your height. A compact bike is more maneuverable, it's lighter, it sprints better and it's easier to get through tight spots on the trail or through groups of other riders. You also specifically mentioned stability, of which I assume you mean stability at speed through a longer wheelbase. The benefits of that are obvious, but looking at the race course in Albstadt for example, I just don't think that you need the benefits of more confident descending the same way you would on a trail bike and I certainly don't think they would outweigh the drawbacks. Don't get me wrong, on trail bikes I'm all for progressive geometry. My personal bike is a Norco Optic in size XL, with 510 mm of reach and a 65° HTA and I think it's totally awesome for rough trails. Would I ever attempt to race an XC event with it? Hell no. Because when you're just pedalling around that upright and relaxed seating position is nice, but it's no good for racing.
  • 1 0
 @Saidrick: They are both used and marketed as XC race hardtails. Racing is the foremost thing both manufacturers put into their marketing material. So I'll obviously judge both of them according to the criteria that make a serious and fast XC bike...
  • 1 1
 @BenTheSwabian:

It’s interesting that this bike is now an XC race bike. Mike Kazimer referred to it as “a new school hard tail with race proven roots” in the first ride article from August of last year.

I view it as a new geometry hardtail that can race, but is more forgiving on the dh’s or as an every day bike. But I don’t race XC, so what do I know...YMMV.
  • 1 2
 @BenTheSwabian: 100% don't race XC and don't pretend to be an authority in that world, but I am very curious to see where things go. I'd put money on XC geometry undergoing a bigger change than you think. We'll see!
  • 3 0
 @BenTheSwabian: you can argue with the pinkbike crowd about XC, but they don't get it.
  • 8 0
 How is the Recon fork? I know they used to be sorta entry level but now the Judy is below it, I think? Is the Recon what the Reba used to be?

The Rockshox fork range is very confusing just now.
  • 2 0
 Buy whatever comes in the travel you need with a Charger 2.1. Simple.
  • 18 9
 30lbs for a hardtail XC bike without a dropper? How?? Even for $1500 that's damn heavy.
  • 13 3
 Since when is 30 equal to 27?
  • 24 0
 That was a mistake, it’s actually 27.75lbs. Edited now.
  • 14 0
 It’s heavier than bikes that cost 3x as much. Remember the purpose of this field test (and this bike). Carbon fiber wheels and a SID SL fork would be way lighter but would cost more than this whole bike.
  • 9 1
 @icthus13: Not true. Trek Procaliber 9.5 costs only 200€ more but is nearly 1 kg lighter. Specialized Chisel costs the same, but has better components and is probably lighter aswell. The BMC is honestly just pretty heavy for what it is.
  • 1 0
 @BenTheSwabian:

$2099 US for the Trek vs $1599 US for the BMC. It’s in a whole other price bracket here.
  • 6 0
 Not only is this a great entry level cross country bike... It comes with amazing color shifting paint. Orange to Red how did they do that?
  • 3 0
 Yeah, I kept wondering if they had 2 bikes but then the jacket was also color shifting. The sunshine coast fairies using magic tricks....
  • 4 0
 With the sky high price of most MTB these days, a lower-tech bike like this is a pretty direct comparison to the Canondale I owned in the mid 90's. Adjusted for inflation, the price is right about the same.
  • 3 0
 You know you are getting old when you hear Levy refer to “older cross country bikes with a 70 degree head angle” as scary and think of all those years enjoyed on bikes with a 71/73 norba geometry and 26” wheels. They weren’t scary, just not nearly as competent and confidence inspiring as modern geometry.
  • 6 0
 I used to race XC. I still do,but I used to,too. Great bike!
  • 5 0
 Sarah Moore: "What do I do with my hands?"....insert Ricky Bobby meme here---->
  • 3 0
 I would love to see a survey on "getting into the cross-country race scene" and "chasing uphill personal records" Wink
  • 12 0
 the Venn diagram is a circle.
  • 4 2
 Dang, 30.2 lbs. is heavy for a HT XC. OH, they changed it now.... but 27 lbs. is still heavier than my alloy Stache in size XL with a 120mm 34 SC.
  • 11 0
 I'm going to guess your Stache didn't cost $1400.
  • 3 0
 I see another fellow man of excellent taste. I loved my Stache, one of the few bikes I regret selling. @nozes is definitely correct though, that thing was a spendy bike, definitely not in the same category as these. Also, I just found out Trek discontinued the Stache! It lives on as the 1120 built specifically for bikepacking and aluminum only, sad day.
  • 1 0
 @nozes: no, but just my frame and fork are gargantuan compared to this bike.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: and it's gotten even better after I slacked it out to a 66 degree HTA with a 9point8 Slacker-R kit.
  • 1 0
 Oops, disregard.
  • 1 0
 @krka73: Daaaang, I wanted to do that to mine, but that wasn't out yet. I did have a 140mm Fox 34 on the front though which went a long ways.
  • 1 0
 Even heavier than my steel Cotic BFe with Hope Enduro wheels and a 150mm Pike. # 26" ain't dead Wink
  • 5 2
 This is the case where you should add $600 and buy carbon frame, which goes with shimano 12s deore and frame protector.
  • 5 0
 Depends on what your going for. Carbon frame goes from a 31.6 seatpost to a 27.2 and you also go from threaded bb to press fit. You definitely save weight but might lose some of the simplicity of the alu frame.
  • 8 0
 So you're saying essentially that "you should multiply your budget by 1.5x to get a better bike" ?
  • 4 0
 Carbon fiber is not all it's cracked up to be (no pun intended). Usually marginally lighter, and the money would be better spent on a lighter wheel set.
  • 3 0
 For those who wonder, the bike ships with headset spacers and a soft rubber chainstay protector.
  • 3 0
 4-stroke is always better...
  • 5 0
 For lawn mowers
  • 2 0
 Well the i know BMC as "Basteln mit Carbon" which means "tinkering with Carbon" ;-)
  • 1 0
 I would buy one this afternoon - or a similar high-value hardtail in size Medium... but the local LBS's have zero inventory. Come see us in 2022 is their response.
  • 4 0
 BMC=
Bite
My
Chamois
  • 1 0
 Nice bike and great review. Need to consider the seat tube bottle bosses if you want to add a dropper. They may be the limiting factor for insertion length.
  • 1 0
 Interesting to see how it compares to the sonder transmitter, it has a steeper steering angle and less front suspension travel. Not sure how the actual weights compare.
  • 2 1
 The RockShox Recon dives better than Greg Louganis at the olympics I made the mistake of purchasing a 100mm version. ew.
  • 2 0
 Friend of mine showed me BMC years ago, still scarred for life!
  • 2 0
 Can’t wait for the knockblock trend to die
  • 2 0
 color grading sucked, the bike is orange and/or red not really sure
  • 2 1
 BMC > Bare Male Calf, a prominent feature of their primary ridership.
  • 8 0
 Big Muscular Calf would be more accurate given their xc orientation.
  • 4 1
 Bagged My Crotch or Broke My Cock would both be suitable given the lack of a dropper post.
  • 5 1
 @woofer2609: Ha! Balls Mostly Crushed?
  • 1 0
 BMC stands for balling & mountaineering crazies.
  • 2 0
 Be More Creative BMC ;-)
  • 1 0
 No headset spacers? Horrible!
  • 2 1
 BMC - Bikes for Man Childs
  • 1 0
 bmc stands for bottlenecked manufacturing company
  • 1 0
 those white rim tires look spectacular
  • 1 0
 Anyone else here "f#ck you" on repeat in the intro song?
  • 1 0
 Shimano option in that price range would be sweet!
  • 1 0
 Do you know what is great for your first XC race? A tube of Chamois Butt'r
  • 1 0
 So is this bike orange or red? Because from video review, I can't tell.
  • 2 0
 BMC: bicycle may crack
  • 1 0
 Wow, 28lbs without pedals? Must be German aluminum frame.
  • 1 0
 Burgermiester Maschine Cliquenbildung
  • 1 0
 BMC=black mountain cycles way better than bike manufacturing company
  • 1 0
 BMC - Bring Mike (back 2 the podcast) Channel
  • 1 1
 the name sounds like FORD , fully support reviewer on donsizes:
  • 1 0
 BMC = Bikes Made Cool
  • 2 3
 I just feel like head angles steeper than 65º are pointless
  • 1 1
 Slack AF.
  • 7 10
 Bike: *weighs 27.1 lbs
Pinkbike Commenters: *30 POUNDS!?
  • 16 0
 It originally said 30.2 lbs. It was corrected.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2021. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.016600
Mobile Version of Website