First Look: 2022 Canyon Lux Trail - Downcountry for the Backcountry

Aug 19, 2021
by Henry Quinney  

Canyon has launched a downcountry version of its Lux cross country race bike called the Lux Trail.

The Lux has been a formidable force on the race track under riders such as Pauline Ferrand Prevot, Mathieu Van Der Poel and Emily Batty, but this new version takes its intentions away from the track and into the territory of long, backcountry epics. To make that a reality, Canyon has developed a new front triangle for this bike that allows for longer travel and adjusted geometry to realign the Lux Trail for its new purpose.
Canyon Lux Trail Details

Frame material: Carbon
Intentions: Downcountry
Travel: 110mm (120mm fork)
Wheelsize: 29" front and rear
Head Tube Angle: 67.5°
Frame Weight: 1,905 grams (medium)
Price: $3,999 - $6,999
More info: canyon.com

There are four models of the Lux Trail. The CF 6 kicks things off with a solid mix of SLX, DT Swiss and Fox. This model, which retails for $3,999 also benefits from the same frame as the rest of the range and is shod with the same high-end Schwalbe tires as the more expensive models. It looks like great value.

Next up is the CF 7. It shares a lot of the same components as the CF 6 but has a slightly higher-end fork and wheels plus Shimano XT throughout. It will sell for $5,299 USD.


The CF 8 goes to a mid-high end SRAM / RockShox build and features carbon DT Swiss EX 1501 wheels. The highlight of the build will probably be the recently released SRAM GX AXS drivetrain though. This drivetrain, combined with an AXS Reverb is a surefire way to clear up the cockpit a little. This will retail for $6,299 USD.

Then there is the range-topping CF 9, which is pictured. It’s the Emily Batty Edition model and comes with full XTR, Fox Factory suspension, DT Swiss XRC 1200 wheels, and a price tag of $6,999.

Emily Batty

Frame Details

The Lux Trail shares the same 110mm rear travel as some of the regular Lux range but now pairs it with a 120mm fork. This goes hand in hand with a 67.5° head tube angle, which is 2.5 slacker than the standard Lux, and reaches growing by an average of 20mm per size. These combine to transform the Lux into one of the most traditional XC race bikes into a more on-trend bike that should offer a bit more reassurance to its rider when the trail turns downhill.


Most of the other features carry over from the regular Lux including the flex pivot suspension design, room for two water bottles and low profile frame hardware. The increased length of each front triangle means the weight creeps up by about 30 grams per size but at 1,905 grams for a medium, it's still very competitive for bikes in its class.

There’s fully internal cabling with rubber grommets and rear tire clearance is around 2.35 to 2.4” depending on the brand and model.

The new Lux Trail, as well as being slacker in the head angle, is half a degree steeper in the seat tube angle. This is also combined with a slight increase in stack for most sizes over the standard Lux.


Models

Lux Trail CF 9 Emily Batty Edition

Lux Trail CF 9 Emily Batty Edition
Fork: FOX 34 SC Factory
Shock: FOX Float DPS Factory RMT
Drivetrain: Shimano XTR
Wheels: DT Swiss XRC1200
Tires: Schwalbe Wicked Will 2.4” SRC / Racing Ralph 2.35” SGRD
Cranks: Shimano XTR 34T
Handlebar: Raceface Next 35 760mm
Stem: RaceFace Ride 35 60mm
Brakes: Shimano XTR 180/160mm
Seatpost Fox Transfer SL Factory
Saddle: Ergon SM10 Pro Carbon
Claimed weight: 10.9 kg / 24 lb


Canyon Lux Trail CF 8

Canyon Lux Trail CF 8
Fork: RockShox SID 35 Select+
Shock: RockShox Deluxe Ultimate RMT
Drivetrain: SRAM GX AXS
Wheels: DT Swiss XRC1501
Tires: Maxxis Rekon 2.4” TR EXO / Reckon Race 2.3” TR EXO
Cranks: SRAM GX Carbon 34T
Handlebar: Raceface Ride 35 760mm
Stem: RaceFace Ride 35 60mm
Brakes: SRAM Level TLM 180/160mm
Seatpost Rockshox Reverb AXS
Saddle: Selle Italia SLS
Claimed weight: 11.8 kg / 26 lb

Lux Trail CF 7

Lux Trail CF 7
Fork: FOX 34 SC Performance Elite
Shock: FOX Float DPS Performance Elite RMT
Drivetrain: Shimano XT
Wheels: DT Swiss XRC1700
Tires: Schwalbe Wicked Will 2.4” SRC / Racing Ralph 2.35” SGRD
Cranks: Shimano XT 34T
Handlebar: Raceface Ride 35 760mm
Stem: RaceFace Ride 35 60mm
Brakes: Shimano XT 180/160mm
Seatpost Fox Transfer SL PFE
Saddle: Selle Italia SLS
Claimed weight: 11.7 kg / 25.8 lb


Lux Trail CF 6

Lux Trail CF 6
Fork: FOX 34 SC Performance
Shock: FOX Float DPS Performance Elite RMT
Drivetrain: Shimano SLX
Wheels: DT Swiss XRC1900
Tires: Schwalbe Wicked Will 2.4” SRC / Racing Ralph 2.35” SGRD
Cranks: Shimano SLX 34T
Handlebar: Raceface Ride 35 760mm
Stem: RaceFace Ride 35 60mm
Brakes: Shimano SLX 180/160mm
Seatpost Fox Transfer SL PFE
Saddle: Selle Italia SLS
Claimed weight: 12.1 kg / 26.7 lb



Why US & European Bikes Will Be Slightly Different

There is a small divergence in specification depending on whether you buy from the European and North American arm of Canyon. The bikes sold in North America will have the standard Fox Transfer, which is around 150g heavier, and offer longer 150mm drop options.

The bikes sold in Europe will feature the Transfer SL which is lighter and uses a different internal design that is built around a lighter mechanical spring. These bikes will have their drop limited to 100mm.

To me, and maybe it’s how I see the downcountry bike, but they’re there to just take the edge of XC bikes and make them easier to live with. A healthy amount of drop is part of that. Maybe some people will like the lighter model. Who am I to say, really? But I like the way the North American branch of Canyon is thinking.

The CF 8 has a 125mm Reverb AXS dropper in all markets.



Initial Impressions

There are a couple of things that become apparent when looking at the Lux Trail in the flesh. Firstly, and as mentioned, the new Fox Transfer SL doesn’t offer that much drop and could be the undoing for somebody who does intend to ride it hard without having World Cup XC skills.

The front end also suffers from the same fate as many remote lockout bikes and it’s certainly busy. Riding the Lux Trail, its seated position feels rather long and it definitely has a more traditional feel. The added reach, without drastically increasing the seat tube angle, means that while standing up it feels really well proportioned, however, when seated I do feel a little stretched out.

There are other details that nod to its XC orientation as well. Not least its flat-mount rear brakes. It could be looked at one of two ways, is this a Lux+? Is it an XC bike wanting to make the jump up to full-blown downcountry nirvana? Or is it a more comfortable, very fast bike that, whilst having its roots in XC, is ever more versatile because of the changes made? I think probably the latter.

We've got this bike in for a long term test and will be coming back in due course to see how it stacks up.

Posted In:
Reviews and Tech First Looks Downcountry Bikes Canyon Canyon Lux


Must Read This Week
Review: 1,000 Miles on SRAM's New Eagle Transmission
111285 views
Commencal Reveals 2023 Enduro Project Team Bikes
79546 views
Annie Ford Sets World Record for Descending the Most Vertical on a Bicycle
58780 views
Revel's DH Bike Concept Has a 3D-Printed Thermoplastic Frame
55455 views
SRAM Releases Stealth Brake Lineup
54591 views
First Ride: 2023 Canyon Neuron
46635 views
Development Story: SRAM's New Eagle Transmission
45016 views
First Ride: TRP's New 12-Speed Mechanical Drivetrain
44901 views

323 Comments

  • 310 45
 Good lord - if you're planning to ride hard the dropper doesn't have enough travel? If you bought this bike and want to ride that hard, you bought the wrong bike; it's not just the dropper that is an issue. Please, please stop reviewing every bike like it should be ridden like an enduro bike. You don't need an 8" dropper post on a cross country trail bike, and if you ride this like an enduro bike, it will not last long, or give you the kind of downhill performance you are looking for. One not just say it should have a 64 degree head angle, or more suspension travel, or that it could benefit from the sensitivity of a coil shock. Or the tires are too fragile or sharp rocks at downhill speeds. Can you see what we mean. The best way to actually rate a bike is for its intention. You can also give it's effectiveness for general traits like climbing, descending, etc, but looking at the over-all picture, if you have a bike that gets a 10 for climbing and a 6 to 7-ish rating for descending, they nailed it. You will never have a 'down country' bike that even descends like a trail bike, let alone an Enduro or a Downhill bike.
  • 28 4
 Define hard. Bike park style jumps trails and blown out eroded crap, wrong bike. Blasting technical backcountry trails? I've seen what Bishop can do on these things, it works fine.
  • 33 12
 I think the point is more that riding any bike with the saddle lowered will make descending not just easier, but also more fun. If you've gone to the effort of putting a dropper on a bike then why not get the longest one possible, you don't have to use all the travel.
  • 31 24
 Sorry, your rant is off-base. The decision is 150g of weight vs. an extra 1 or 2 inches of dropper travel. The differences to the bike's climbing characteristics are tiny going from the 100mm to the 150mm dropper. The differences to the descending characteristics are significant, regardless of how "hard" you descend. You can be smoother at any reasonable speed with the seat lower, which is more fun. There is nothing wrong with an XC bike with dropper > 100mm, just like there is nothing wrong with an XC bike with a dropper.
  • 21 21
 Yeah, that's just like, your opinion man. You would be surprised what these little bikes can handle, it is way more fun being on the edge on a little bike than bored on a big bike, as long as you can handle it. They are all designed to the same strength standards (ISO 4210) so why wouldn't they be able to handle being ridden hard?

Everyone does not have to prescribe to your riding styles and opinions and you are not the one that wrote the article so go have fun riding your enduro bike down a blue trail.
  • 15 2
 agreed....as someone with 2 XC bikes w/ no dropper in either....this is not an issue. Sure, I could put a dropper in my Anthem (and probably will) but its not like a limited dropper is going to make or break a bike that is first and foremost for XC riding with some more aggressive trail stuff thrown in. This is not a bike for launching off drops, but technical descents and some smaller jumps are not going to be an issue.
  • 24 2
 You nailed it, @shawndashf1

With + than 4 decades in my legs cycling, I see this XC bikes as a bless.
Light - check
Good geo, and not over stretch, or all over the BB (straightish seat tube)
Efficient suspension.

A bike for those looking into a new XC/Marathon bike, but are not into RACE Replicas (anymore....).

100mm dropper? Now only if it would be possible to drop some weight and place it @75mm...or even 65mm
  • 3 0
 You nailed it!
  • 71 13
 @shawndashf1, asking for more than 100mm drop isn’t unreasonable at all - that’s why the US version comes with the longer post.

These shorter travel bikes have become incredibly capable, and a little more dropper travel isn’t exactly on the same level as installing DH casing tires or asking for a super slack head angle. Keep in mind that this is supposed to be the downcountry version of the Lux, something that's more capable on the descents compared to a pure race bike.

Having the seat out of the way is a really easy way to improve descending performance while still preserving the rest of the bike's handling traits.

Also, the Transition Spur presents a good case for a downcountry bike that descends like a trail bike…
  • 2 16
flag bohns1 (Aug 19, 2021 at 9:08) (Below Threshold)
 @shawndashf1 I think it's time for you to take out some frustration and dip into the sock fund buddy...,
  • 24 4
 @shawndashf1 I would give you 3000 upvotes if I could.
Pinkbike reviews has evolved a lot, it's not long ago that every bike was treated to the "bigger bar and tires,smaller stem" before any test.
Now they test the bikes stock,but everytime a XC bike shows up, it's blamed for not being trail enough.
This is a XC/marathon bike. It's not your downhiller's XC bike,there are plenty of those around. People who ride this kind of bikes around the world don't ride them in trails like the ones in BC or WA, it's the way it is.
And those 150gr difference in the dropper,on a bike this light,is a huge number for any weight conscious rider.
  • 8 9
 The really is no objective reason to have less range of motion even if you were on a fully rigid. If I bought this bike Id take the Fox post right off and put a One-up with either 180-210mm of drop right on it. I want my post road height while climbing, I want a couple CM lowers for flowly flatter trails, and I want the post to be invisible while going downhill. Bike suspension travel and dropper post drop do have to correspond.
  • 20 7
 This. So much this. PB kinda suffers from a pretty severe gravity riding bias.
  • 3 1
 All that and not once did you mention the skin walls.
  • 17 1
 @nozes: "People who ride this kind of bikes around the world don't ride them in trails like the ones in BC or WA."

I think this is why "real" XC riders gripe at PB. I live in WA and ride/race XC. It's just not much fun riding a pure XC bike on trails around here. Nearly all trail systems have long descents, tons of roots, at least some steep stuff. Show up with no dropper, 2.1" tires and 160mm rotors and you're gonna have a bad time.
  • 8 6
 @hardcore-hardtail: If we're talking about riding the edge of a $200 Walmart bike, I guess you could find that fun. But, to buy a $4k+ trail/XC bike just to ride it outside of what it's designed for sounds more akin to stupidity, not fun.
That's like buying a Honda Civic and going, "Well, it's time to go to Moab with it and push it to the limit! Teehee, it's fun!" No, not really.
  • 9 2
 Sounds like you want the regular Lux. If they're gonna make a "trail" version of the bike then longer dropper + slacker angles + real tires are entirely appropriate.
  • 1 1
 @shawndashf1 I like your comment.
  • 7 11
flag shortcuttomoncton (Aug 19, 2021 at 12:20) (Below Threshold)
 @JoshMatta: "The really is no objective reason to have less range of motion even if you were on a fully rigid."

I don't think that's correct. Taller droppers objectively suck more energy from your legs in raising and lowering them. As a 5-10 guy I went to a 170mm dropper and then eventually dialed it back to 150mm. The extra inch made a noticeable difference (bam!) in my legs.

Go look at many enduro bike checks, or guys like Danny Hart when they run enduro--they almost never have full-length droppers that use the max available tube length.

You simply don't need to get that low on the trail this bike will be ridden on. And if you do, you're wasting some energy that the type of rider this bike is meant for needs to save!

Otherwise, I agree with you: every OEM should just spec OneUp and let the rider choose their preferred drop....Smile
  • 10 17
flag Waldon83 (Aug 19, 2021 at 13:44) (Below Threshold)
 Do weight conscience riders take a dump before every ride, do they have shaved heads and a freshly waxed anus? Do they ride nude to shed more grams?

At what point are people going to stop the weight argument. It's either for you, or its not. If it's not, the doors over there
  • 1 1
 @shortcuttomoncton: how low the seat needs to be is directly related to how steep the trail is that your riding you’d actually want to run your seat slightly higher on the gradients you’d use this bike on for something to hang off on the corners.
  • 5 1
 @Waldon83: yes we do.
  • 5 0
 For me the longer travel dropper isn't about riding steep gnar, it is about bunnyhopping and boosting, which is useful on XC trails. I have an Epic Evo M that comes with 125 dropper but I'll be seeing if I can get a 150 in it because the seat hits my butt doubling up XC humps that I can do on my 150mm dropper bike.
  • 2 0
 @shortcuttomoncton: "need to get that low"

I mean if any part of the trail resembles a pump track especially with my short legs and limited uptravel because of my short legs I would want as much ROM as possible.

I run a 210mm Dropper on my hardtail(and a 180mm on my 160/140 bike because its what I can fit) and would run that size on everything but manufactures for some reason think smaller legs need less drop and really I see no reason for it to be that way.

The issue with most pro "bike checks" is that those pros are paid to ride on big components which typically means they are limited to how long of dropper they can run. The difference between a Reverb and One up for me on some frame is 125mm to 210mm of drop.
  • 3 0
 For me the simple rule is if you are racing xc, it worth the weight savings to use a short light dropper. If you are riding for fun or doing a longer race, it’s totally worth the weight to have a longer dropper.
  • 5 3
 465mm seat tube on the size med!!! Was this bike built in 1995? For some comparison, the brand new Scott Spark WC XC size med has a 440mm seat tube. 25mm shorter. My 2020 Transition Scout has a 390mm seat tube. Get with the times people!!!!
  • 7 1
 @agnostic: maybe it’s not your type of riding/bike, but I think the XC Marathon crowd (a likely candidate for a bike like this) might prioritize two bottles in the frame. With the shock oriented as it is, to fit two bottles requires a fairly high top tube and long seat tube.
  • 1 2
 @MarkJ70: How? What’s the difference between a 100mm dropper and a 150mm? Think of all the energy you’d save in the long run being way more comfortable on the bike.
  • 5 2
 "You will never have a 'down country' bike that even descends like a trail bike, let alone an Enduro or a Downhill bike."

Don't tell the the Epic EVO that, it has taken some PRs away from the 170mm Enduro on some of the rougher local trails. Takes a higher level of focus, and for sure has less margin for error, but more than holds it's own against big bikes on anything less than a full blown DH track.

And I swapped the 125mm dropper for a 150mm the first day I had it. Smile
  • 4 0
 @Waldon83: I'm scared to ask but this kind of implies you're intentionally holding your dumps in?
  • 1 0
 @bikebasher: I assume you are running a medium since the L comes with 150, so what brand of 150 mm dropper fit?
  • 3 2
 @mikekazimer: "Having the seat out of the way is a really easy way to improve descending performance while still preserving the rest of the bike's handling traits." Yes agreed 100%. But how low the seat can go is not limited by the seatpost, it is limited by the length of the seattube. The shorter the seattube, the lower you can get the saddle. The limitation this bike here may have, is that some customers apparently call for bottle mounts on the seattube. This usually limits how deep the seatpost can be inserted. Unless you're willing to cut down the seatpost, but in case of a dropper seatpost that typically voids warranty. So if the longer travel dropper post can be lowered all the way to the collar, then in both cases (long and short travel dropper) the saddle can be lowered to the same height. If the shaft of the longer dropper is so long that you can't drop it all the way to the collar, then with the shorter travel dropper you'll be able to get the saddle lower.
  • 1 3
 Why did you waste your time typing all that guff?
  • 3 2
 @chakaping: Because it was missing from the discussion. It is kinda obvious, but still it wasn't mentioned. Considering you call it "guff", please point out which part you don't get.

1) The seattube length limits the lowest seat height. The shorter the seattube, the lower you can get the saddle.
2) If the seattube is kinked or interrupted (by suspension, bottlemount bolts or e-bike motor) this in combination with the length of the seatpost (the bit below the collar in case of a dropper) limits how low the seatpost can be installed hence how low the seat can be.
3) Seattube length and (max) seatpost length (respecting minimum insertion) limit max seatpost height.
4) Seatpost travel limits how much the seat height can be changed on the fly between lowest and highest setting.

So if the complaint is that the seat can't be low enough, that's because of point 1) and maybe because of point 2). The discussion seemed to focus on point 4), but that's not relevant to achieve the goal. Unless someone also wanted to be able to raise the saddle fairly high, but no one mentioned that she/he wanted that too.

As for the time, I think that took me less than a minute to type. Didn't feel like wasted unless these points were already mentioned in this discussion.
  • 6 0
 Key takeaway from this thread: everyone prefers a different saddle position when descending.

Most of my riding days are pre-dropper and never had an issue descending with a tall seat mast other than occasionally catching the baggies, which is why 100mm on an XC bike is all you really need. I personally hate having the seat totally slammed as it is a tool in feel and steering the bike. If DH racers don't need to slam their seat all the way I don't know why Average Joe's need it.
  • 1 2
 @BenTheSwabian: true. They should test these bikes for the commute to the trailhead, turn around, then back home. Not any actual riding.
  • 2 1
 @pourquois-pas: ummmm Id argue that anyone who leverages the seat is not that good of a rider.

Any weight on the seat is making your COG higher than your feet and killing cornering speed.
  • 1 0
 @JoshMatta: I think @pourquois-pas was referring to having the seat between the thighs on FAST descents. As a XC rider with both bikes using Fox's 100mm SC forks (and no droppers), the fork will only absorb so much on technical XC descents (referring to XC bikes here) and the bike can have a tendency to buck left and right due to limited travel. A raised seat will catch the inside of the thighs if it bucks either way; if you acknowledge this, you have the ability to control how much the bike moves by using the inside of your legs (note: my ass is still back over the rear wheel, I'm not a sadist). Been riding XC for over 20 years, this is definitely a thing and not indicative of lack of skill though doesn't make much sense outside XC where your not dropping off things or taking massive jumps.
  • 2 0
 @shawndashf1 you are trending for comment of the year
  • 1 0
 I want to see a video of someone goign "HARD" on the bike and then i might think about buying...
  • 1 0
 @JoshMatta: Huh? I didn't say sitting on the seat.

And thanks for proving my key takeaway... we all have diff preferences (but go ahead and judge those who ride differently as inferior).
  • 1 0
 @SATN-XC: I agree 100% with this. I have tried droppers and losing the ability to grip the seat with my knees and thighs really does not work for me. Also, often there are section of a descent that I can sit and get some good pedals in for 5 or 10 seconds while sitting. I think if I end up with a dropper, i would prefer something like the fox SL or the DT swiss not really because of weight, as much as I dont want something that drops 150MM.
  • 99 1
 "the new Fox Transfer SL doesn’t offer that much drop and could be the undoing for somebody who does intend to ride it hard without having World Cup XC skills."

MvdP's day just got a bit worse
  • 56 0
 "Now you TOO can nosedive like team rider MVDP!"
  • 47 0
 He's sh*t out of Lux...
  • 17 0
 WC level build includes RampScan(c) heads up display to alert rider to upcoming drops.
  • 17 0
 You make the bridge drop sound like it was a canyon.
  • 9 3
 Lol. Remember a few weeks ago when all the dentists were going nuts claiming mvdp as the next deity of bike control only for him to get farmed by a teenager drop at the Olympics? Again lol.
  • 6 1
 @thenotoriousmic: is he not a good bike handler? I assumed he could probably mop the floor with most of us.
  • 4 0
 @Hayek: agreed.
  • 77 1
 Most importantly: how does it handle any ramp removal?
  • 19 1
 The Lux Hucks
  • 1 0
 Not enough ramp - big drop in support followed by a sudden spike up at the end
Ramp- smoothly all the way though travel

Apply to drake happy/sad face meme
  • 8 0
 I was impressed by how fast and big so many of those riders took that drop. And landing on that rock too. Always go full send.
  • 11 0
 @MaartenR: Lux to flat
  • 3 3
 with less skills you need the longer dropper - hence the US version guess MvdP was on the EU version. poor guy
  • 1 0
 @vhdh666: MVDP does not have a dropper on his bike... Why? Good question.
  • 1 0
 @pievan: weight?
  • 39 2
 Spec Epic Evo 110/120 with a 66.5 head angle (good), 2 lbs less weight (real good), twice the price (not so good).
Well I'm glad to see more versatile trailish bikes, at XC weights... remote lock out though, I can do without.
Transition Spur for me. 25.5 lbs, 120/120 and 66 head angle. One month old and loving it.
  • 7 0
 Couldn't get my hands on a Spur, found an Epic EVO frame and built it up. Never had a really lightweight XC bike before, but now I am pretty sure I will always have one. So fast and fun, loves to get rowdy, begs to gather speed at every moment. This LUX looks like another fun option for folks who can't get their hands on one of those other bikes!
  • 18 2
 Twice the price? The Epic Evo starts at $3800.
  • 2 0
 @Lokirides: I just missed out on a spur myself and specialized told me to take a hike when I asked about an epic evo. Right now i guess the bike that I can get for the 2022 season is the one I'll buy. Hopefully Canyon can deliver.
  • 7 1
 @ruggedmaine: I fell into a Spur. Walked into my LBS and they had one in the back ready to be built up. They are not taking names for bikes, so it was basically first come first serve.
  • 4 0
 @Lokirides: the best thing about lockouts is you can take them of
  • 9 1
 The biggest standout for me when comparing geo charts (for what it's worth) between Canyon Lux and Transition Spur is the Lux seems really stretched out because the seat tube isn't steep enough. STA's Lux 74.5 vs Spur 76.7. Longer reach is great but the seat needs to be brought forward to accommodate for seated climbs!
  • 4 0
 @Lokirides: can confirm my epic Evo with 120 pike weighs 25-26 lbs and shreds hard, really hard, I’d put it against a spur (which is also great and lustful) any day!
  • 4 0
 Heck yeah. I’ve had my Spur for about 6 months now and it’s a total blast.
  • 4 1
 I paid 3300 for my spur frame. And 3600 for my epic evo complete bike, with a lighter frame. You're talking nonsense
  • 1 2
 @DetroitCity: shhh people have narratives to keep.
  • 3 0
 @DetroitCity: Lets talk current prices. It is pointless to discuss outdated pricing.
  • 8 0
 @Endurahbrah:

$3800 with a Reba fork and Shimano Acera hubs. Not at all comparable to the $4k Lux.
  • 2 0
 @baldybrucetires: I'm finding your comment about being stetched out a curious statement and need help. My riding friends are all kinda XC/marathon guys. We're finding when we buy new bikes that they are to SHORT when seated, not long?? I ride mediums and my Intense Primer feels pretty short, my buddy just got a large Ripmo and should have gotten the XL, and my other buddy just got a Large LaSal Peak and should have gotten an XL. What are we missing??? All the steep seat tube angles mean the top tubes are actually pretty short....
  • 3 0
 @gcavy1: The number one thing that I look for on the geo chart to see what size I want to ride is Reach, not TT. Once you know what works for you, you can apply that number across brands paired with stem length to get a good guesstimate of what size you'll want. I used to ride medium bikes for years, in current era geo I'm almost always on a large though. (at 5'10" I found ~460mm reach is good for me).
  • 2 2
 @mikealive: For seated riding position you still need to look at ETT, reach doesn't tell you whether the bike will give you a stretched out XC riding position or T-Rex enduro climbing position. Reach only tells you the horizontal distance from the BB to the centre of the top of the head tube, but the distance between the head tube and the seat is also determined by the STA.

By saying that a 460mm reach works for you with a "current era geo" bike, and that the current era bike will be a L but the old school bike that fitted was a medium, you're proving that point, because the old school bike would have had a much shorter reach, but probably similar ETT due to the slacker STA (simplification as stack and stem length also play a part in final position, and unless it's a dedicated XC race machine the modern geo bike you're riding probably also targets a different riding style to your old bike)
  • 4 0
 I picked up a size medium Ibis Exie. Changed out the tiers to a 2.4” Dissector out front, 2.4” Rekon in the back, so I agree with Henry. These bikes are fun when they are made a little more trail capable.

With pedals, tire change, sealer, bottle cage etc it comes in at 24.7 lbs. My other bike is a Ripmo and I’m shocked at how much fun and capable this Exie is.
  • 1 0
 @HB208: currently the same bike is 3800. Around what a spur frame is after tax.
  • 1 1
 @icthus13: yeah because the evo is 2x the bike considering it has a lifetime warranty, a dealer on every corner, and much more capable as is. Everyone upgrades parts anyways. But the 3800 dollar evo is more bike than 92pct of riders need until its time to take pictures of their bike leaning against something.
  • 1 0
 @gcavy1: I'm no expert and I'm still experimenting w bike sizing and geos myself. I like referring to Lee McCormack's resources. I'd suggest adjusting your cockpit - much cheaper than buying a new bike! 1) longer stem and 2) decrease stem spacers to put you in a more forward position on the bike and your body is more bent at the hip-hinge. That is the position most XC guys/gals are usually in. Finally 3) you could widen handlebars to lower your body position. Modern bikes have quite wide bars tho and it also depends how wide the trees are spaced apart in your area! I hope that helps!
  • 1 0
 @rocksandrocks: nice! I think for ppl outside the steep areas like squamish (ie almost everyone), these lightweight trail "downcountry" bikes that are sub 30 and even sub 25 pounds might make a renaissance. Like someone commented above, there is no point in lugging a heavy enduro bike around for flowy blue trails. I think part of the answer to making climbs more enjoyable / doable are bikes that are more climb capable (which might also mean lighter) and compromising a little bit on the downs. An n=1 anecdote: I watched an inexperienced friend try to do technical climbs with an e-bike and it still looked crappy and totally turned me off the idea of an e-bike assisting for climbs to be able to bomb more downhills.
  • 1 0
 @dsut4392: Nah dude, it's not a debate--I'm saying what *I* look for... *I* know that if the reach is ~460mm I'm going to do ok on it. That's all. The rest can be sorted with stem/bars/etc.

(Oh please dear lord I did not want to start a geo chart debate circlejerk...time to hit this booter into the trees) Peace out.
  • 1 0
 @ruggedmaine: I also couldn't nab a Spur but buying the Revel Ranger frame/fork direct from company and they anticipate an October delivery. The Ranger and Spur are fairly comparable.
  • 37 2
 Downcountry? Surely this is just a FS XC bike.
  • 6 0
 Downcountry was just FS XC bike with a dropper, 120mm fork instead of the step cast 32, and a bit more brakes & tires.

The Epic Evo vs the Epic is the perfect example of downcountry vs xc race bike. With the success of these bikes downcountry is starting to become the norm for brands to offer, and the racier versions will be the special editions in the future.
  • 3 1
 @bruvar: The Epic Evo and the Epic are perfect examples of an XC race bike and and XC race bike with a bit more travel, hence why they are both under "Cross Country" on the Specialized website. It doesn't lose the SC 32 and get a 36, it gets a SID.
  • 6 0
 @warmerdamj: It gets the new SID 35mm, which is directly targeted at the 120mm range. The 36 is for trail/all mountain/enduro or whatever you want to call it.

I would say downcountry is one end of "cross country" with the Epic HT (or equivalent) being the other end.

"A doped-up cross-country bike? Sure." - www.pinkbike.com/news/what-the-heck-is-a-down-country-bike-opinion.html
  • 2 0
 @bruvar: The SID Ultimate (35mm) is 100% an XC fork and the 36 comment was clearly in jest, Go check out the SID Ultimate on SRAMs site, I bet the page says "XC" like 100 times and "down country" zero times.

Even Levy says the phrase down country is a term he came up with to "mock the industry" in that article.
  • 19 2
 @warmerdamj: Yeah, it was meant to be tongue in cheek and to poke fun, which makes it even better when I see the phrase used by brands. But to be fair, Dre Hestler at Rocky Mountain is the one who said the down-country phrase to me - I forced it on everyone but didn't come up with it haha Smile
  • 2 1
 @warmerdamj: I'm aware that its a mocking term, but alternatively the only bike being advertised as Downcountry 120mm Sids everywhere - www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/mountain-bikes/downcountry-mountain-bikes/c/B345
  • 3 0
 @bruvar: We could play this game all day man but I don't really want to. Here's Norco's "XC Race Bike" page with the top bike rocking an Ultimate. How can it possibly be both XC Race and Downcountry?!?! Let's both take the day to ponder that mindf*ck and if we're still mad tomorrow I'll meet you here. Smile

www.norco.com/bikes/mountain/xc-race
  • 3 0
 @mikelevy: thanks for the honesty!! Give credit where its due. And also, maybe now I'm more inclined to go buy a Rocky Mt just knowing they're cool ppl.
  • 1 0
 Whether downcountry was a joke or not, I’ve been riding shorter travel bikes since I bought a SC Blur 4x in 2008 and I much prefer it. I’m past the days of big hits etc but for many trails I really feel people are over-biked most of the time. It’s nice to be nimble and climb with ease. I’d say that if downcountry truly does catch wind the frames are going to need some meat… the one in this article looks fragile. Beef it up and put a long dropper on it!
  • 30 0
 Full XTR, fox factory, carbon frame and wheels for only $7k? No pinker price complaints to be seen
  • 3 1
 Unfortunately that buil only comes in the "Eyebleach" colourway...I suspect it to be some kind of cruel joke.
  • 3 0
 @Nygaard: Polarizing color, for sure.. but I happen to LOVE that bike. So 80s, so dorky.. I think it's great.
  • 5 0
 This. Everyone going on about the length of the dropper and no comments about how this bike is $3k less than an equivalently spec'd Specialized, Trek, or Santa Cruz?
  • 2 0
 @mikealive: I feel dorky enough in lycra already. No need to add more on top of it.
Canyon usually do a murdered out top spec model, which I personally digg. Quite disappointed that they didn't went that way since I have been waiting for them to release this bike for over a year...
  • 1 0
 @Nygaard: Ha, fair enough!
  • 18 1
 I live under that overpass, but I had just stepped out to get my morning breakfast Monster. Thanks for the Tims!
  • 3 0
 need more Levy. Miss your gonzo-ish writing style.
  • 17 1
 Hey Canyon, you forgot to update the seat tube lengths.
Unless 465mm on the medium is a typo?
  • 7 27
flag sewer-rat (Aug 19, 2021 at 4:16) (Below Threshold)
 And the head angle from 2018
  • 44 4
 @sewer-rat: absolutely nothing wrong with 67.5 on a bike with this purpose
  • 14 15
 @nfontanella:
The spur begs to differ
  • 6 1
 @nfontanella: agreed...its an XC bike, not a trail or enduro bike. There isn't supposed to be a HTA angle for all styles. I have a 2017 HT and 2020 FS XC bike both with 69 HTA. I have no issue with either and both bikes are fast as hell for their intended use. 67.5 for a bike that is first and foremost a XC ripper is perfect if you decide to get aggressive with it every once and a while
  • 2 2
 Yes, that's the first thing I noticed, 505cm on the large? That's absurd, unfortunately that's been a deal breaker for me on something I would otherwise consider for my next bike. Seat tube length should not be longer than reach, ideally at least an inch shorter for XC/dowcountry and two inches shorter for trail/enduro.
  • 5 0
 @stokedrightnow: The Spur was not made for this purpose, it is a bruiser compared to this Canyon.

A good comparison would be the 2022 Scott Spark 900 that has a sub 66° head angle and a 76° seat tube angle.
  • 16 2
 @stokedrightnow: just because the spur did it doesn't mean it's right. The spur isn't some build off point that all bikes need to follow because it was the best bike in the world. I've ridden one and it felt much more wandering up climbs than my spark. If I wanted xc I wouldn't choose the spur.
  • 5 3
 @triggerdog: Except that Canyon is advertising the Lux Trail as more of a all-around small travel bike, which is what the Spur is. For that purpose, the Spur is almost certainly a better bike.

I agree that the downside of the spur is that the front end can wander a bit. Now that I've had like 20 rides on mine, that has become less of an issue. I think a 35mm stem will help as well.
  • 1 0
 @HB208: On any slacker bike they will wander due to lean angle or if the ground is off camber, it is just a result of trail length.
  • 1 0
 @insertfunusername: Right, I get that. However, I don't feel like it is that much of an issue other than really steep and long climbs. The trade off is a bike that is really confident on the downs despite being short travel.
  • 2 0
 @HB208: I have never found the slackness to be an issue, especially once you learn to just keep the bike more upright the wandering isn't too noticable. I'm currently on a Hightower, and don't notice a wondering front end, but want to get a bike that pedals a bit better so the Spur is on my short list for sure, but like the gg trail pistol and most bikes in that category the chainstays are so short on the XL sizes that it makes me look over at the Norco Optic.
  • 1 0
 @insertfunusername: I'm on the XL and it feels balanced. I don't notice the short chainstays holding it back or anything.
  • 2 0
 @HB208: I'm on the XXL Hightower and the CS felt short at first and then I got used to it I guess, I had been on Norco's for years, and they actually size the rear end so it always seems strange when others don't. The short stays always feel fine once heading down hill, they are mostly annoying on the steeper climbs and I always feel like the bike would be more balanced down hill with longer stays, but probably a bit less poppy.
  • 7 0
 @stokedrightnow: we have a local xc drop ride. There are a handful of hardtails, 2 supercalibers, 2 luxes, a lux trail whatever and now a spur. Some truly fast xc racers that always kill the climbs and turns. A few singlespeeders that came from or still race dh (myself included) that typically flow a bit better and therefore hang on. The spur can not hang on the climbs and twisty stuff. Where as previously he could. On the more open downs he is probably fastest now. Horses for courses. Plenty of folks ripping on 68 degree head angles
  • 5 0
 @AccidentalDishing: I'd probably agree that the Spur is not the right bike for someone wanting a true "XC" bike. It is the right bike for someone wanting to do big days that involve long climbs and moderately rowdy descents. I ride a lot in SV and Boise, so for me, it is pretty much the perfect bike.
  • 3 0
 @AccidentalDishing: these are the kinds of subjective yet meaningful first-person reviews that hold water.
  • 6 0
 Absolutely, the spur is the downhillers climby bike. Seriously cool. Point being (to stokedrightnow's original comment that the spur would disagree a 67 5 ha is sill functional) if someone wants this lux for something like xc marathon races in the mountains (NUE etc) they are very well served by 67.5 head angle. Spur wouldn't be bad there, but would suffer a bit in tight twisty technical sections as well as said xc marathoners local xc training rides. Want a pedally bike that you can run pretty wide open=spur. Care about course speed? More traditional xc geo. There's a place for both and some crossover in between. But to shun as xc/trail bike as "wrong" for a 67.5 head angle is naive
  • 3 0
 To clarify my original comment, this is being touted as down country, to me that’s , short travel, aggressive geometry, tough tyres and decent brakes. Whilst this bike has a few of those points (to me) the geo isn’t aggressive enough. I ride a 125mm trail bike with a 65 head angle and it’s perfect, I would however like something a bit more sprightly (like a Spur or Optic). However saying that my bike is exceptionally weighty for it’s travel so anything would probably be a bonus
  • 2 3
 @sewer-rat: Agreed. I feel like this is a lazy attempt to cash in on the "downcountry" segment while really just swapping a few components.
  • 4 1
 @HB208: I guess you didn't read the part about a new front triangle. Hardly a "lazy attempt" at that cost.
  • 4 0
 @HB208: long climbs on smooth trails or fire roads. The Spur was the worst technical climbing bike I've ever owned. It was way too long and the bb way too low to actually pedal it up trails.
  • 2 0
 @DetroitCity: IDK, does just fine around me. Maybe not midwestern tech, but western tech for sure.
  • 2 0
 @DetroitCity: the BB on the Spur seems to be pretty typical. A Norco Revolver FS is only 5mm taller, a Hightower is 6mm taller but has 20 mm more travel, so is basically the same at sag.

As a 6'4" person that had used 175 cranks for the first 30 years of riding it was pretty eye opening to switch to 165 cranks a few years ago. I haven't found one drawback to how I ride and they seem better in so many ways including pedal strikes, I highly recommend it.

Long bikes are a little more annoying at super low speeds, but I have always found short chainstays to be the main hindrance on tough climbs.
  • 3 0
 @HB208: I haven't lived in Detroit in 6 years. Im talking about the Colorado trail, all the trails around Crested Butte, Durango, Fairplay, Bailey. Virginia trails around Harrisonburg. Pisgah. Marquette and Ishpeming. Bentonville. I also raced it both some pro xc races and endurance races, is that enough of a sample size for you? I bought a 2021 Stumpjumper that has a lighter frame, and is way less flimsy, the paint doesn't flake off if you look at it, and if something breaks I have a dealer on every corner. I also bought the Epic Evo recently because the Stumpjumper is not a race bike. I use the Epic evo in the High positon, with a 75 stem and 720 bars. Its lighter, and way better technical climbing than the Spur. The Stumpjumper is better than the spur also. By far. And you can actually ride it like an enduro bike, unlike the spur.
  • 3 1
 @insertfunusername: I use and used 165 cranks on the spur. Its not the static BB is too low. Its that the bike is so long the wheelbase puts you in a bad position to work the bike up and over things. Because when you get out of the saddle and start making big power the bike sags down and doesn't leap forward. Its a combination of too long low and slack. For a downcountry bike. I ride my Stumpjumper up things I could not even get close to on the Spur. My Stumpy is also 10x the bike DH.
  • 2 0
 @DetroitCity:
The newer stumpjumper looks like a really awesome bike, I likely would have bought one(an evo) last year if they were available. I do imagine the kinematics are really nice on those.

Even the S5 stumpy has longer chain stays, roughly the same front center as a XL spur and a BB that is only a few mm higher. It sounds like you mostly like the suspension platform a lot better than the spur, which totally makes sense.
  • 1 0
 @sewer-rat: I agree, 66deg would have been totally fine. The fact that they've also cocked up the seat tube lengths suggests poor design rather than a conscious decision to keep the HA steep-ish.
  • 1 0
 @insertfunusername: The stumpjunper is more bike. Its not really fair to compare to the spur. It just has a lighter frame. My problem with the spur is it was as light as an xc bike, but didn't handle like one. So it bounced you around like crazy. For example Crested Butte 409.5 trail, is when I decided to sell the spur and get a real trail bike, and a real xc bike, not try and combine them. I had the first green spur released to the public last year, I got it the same day they announced the spur, which was 2 days before the epic evo was released. Had I waited 2 days I would have never gotten the spur, but at that time it was the only bike that used xc parts on 120/120 with a slack hta and steep sta. The spur is the bike most people should be riding though. In theory. A 120/120. The new rocky mountain element comes out in a few days and its going to be very much like the spur. Hopefully they have more available though.

The epic evo is pretty flimsy also but its a race bike not a trail bike. A lighter bike isn't always better on rough trails.

And as far as sizing. I owned a L spur and my Stumpy is a 2021 s5. It handles technical terrain much better than the spur. I cleaned switchbacks I have never ridden on the stumpy.

After I sold the spur I went like this...
Blur CC L
2019 Fuel ex L
2021 Top fuel L
2021 Fuel Ex L
2021 Anthem XL
Currenlty...
2021 Stumpy s5
2021 Epic evo L

I was looking for something more than a pure XC bike and less than a trail bike. The spur is that bike, if you are not riding super technical slow trails. I ride slow technical trails. And I ride Bryce Bike Park. So the spur was not it for me.
  • 2 0
 @DetroitCity:
Had you ever looked at the Norco Revolver FS? I did a demo ride on the previous gen, in 2016 or so, and really liked it, but the 2020 revision looks pretty great on paper. I'm just a bit nervous about strength as I cracked the chainstays on my 1st gen optic.
  • 13 0
 Feels a bit like the TR version of the new Blur. It's not really downcountry; still a full on XC bike but with a more modern geometry and a bit more travel. Looks great to me.
  • 3 2
 Was thinking the same thing, it's a real sweet spot for the majority of UK trails. Was about to pull the trigger on the Blur TR but this could work well
  • 8 0
 @HankHank: please amend to 'majority of *southern* UK trails'
  • 2 0
 @pen9: sorry! If there was an edit function I would, good point well made
  • 4 0
 I see them as marathon XC bikes, but that's not as sexy.
  • 10 0
 Honestly confused by all the comparisons to the Spur. I want a Spur, because it is a burly looking bike that can cover distance quick and climb pretty well compared to more traditional trail bikes. This bike seems like it could be compared to a 2022 Scott Spark or a Norco Revolver, or Spec Epic(non EVO), but not a Spur, Optic, or Izzo, which I think of as rowdy long distance bikes.
  • 1 0
 Exactly. Putting bikes in categories these days is super hard. You either have too few categories, and right now in this segment it's mainly XC or downcountry, and bikes like this straddle the middle, or the bikes don't compare well just like comparing this to the Spur.
  • 4 0
 @tgent: This bike just seems like an update to the Lux, it is hard for me to see the downcountry in this bike at all though. There are several pure xc bikes that are slacker, with shorter seat tubes. It really does seem like a conservative update to their XC bike, especially when you look at a bike like the Scott Spark.
  • 9 0
 Can we stop saying downcountry? This is an xc bike with bigger rotors and 10mm more travel. Will it rip, yep it sure will but it will take an absolute beating if you ride this like a trail bike or an enduro bike. Downcountry isn't real, there's XC bikes and there's trail bikes and both can exist with a bit more or a bit less travel then one would think.
  • 1 0
 ^^^ this
  • 2 0
 That's a fact. I beat the piss out of my 120/120 bike and it never complains. The only thing is it doesn't have as much room to save you as a 140 bike. So just ride better and the 120 will be fine
  • 9 1
 Have to laugh when people are hyperfocused on the head tube angle being 1-1.5 degrees steeper than the Spur or Evo. The makings of a 'downcountry' bike has a much to do with the components as it does with the geo. IMO, this bike checks all the boxes and a 67.5 degree head angle is plenty slack to get rowdy.
  • 4 0
 agreed...HTA should not be a focus point on XC bikes. 67.5 is way more than enough to push this bike to the limits of what an XC should be able to do.
  • 1 0
 I agree with you that it doesn't really matter and some people will want this and some want the slacker 66 deg on those bikes. That said, the more XC geo of the Lux definitely does push it more toward a well rounded XC bike than a "downcountry" bike that will still let you get pretty rowdy on the descents. It's just hard to categorize bikes these days and if Canyon designed this as a downcountry bike to compete with those, then they should be assessed against it, but personally I don't think Canyon intends for these to go head to head with those bikes.
  • 9 1
 Pretty much just my old specialized camber with a much better head angle. Which is great.
  • 3 0
 I like-a the way that you boppity-bop
  • 1 0
 Shame they killed the Camber, it was a great bike. You can get an Epic Evo or Stumpy ST but neither really fits the slot the Camber filled.
  • 1 0
 @mrpfp: pretty sure the ST is just a cheap entry level bike too. I don't think they do a carbon version with decent suspension anymore (unless I didn't look hard enough)
  • 3 0
 @mrpfp: The Stumpy ST definitely replaced the Camber. The camber was originally exactly that a shorter travel version of the Stumpy. Though, I did just find out they stopped making the ST, but the standard SJ is still a very good comparison. I guess the Camber sat between the Epic Evo and SJ, but these days, I believe both bikes are more capable in every aspect than the Camber, so just choose if you prioritize climbs with the Epic Evo or descents with the SJ.
  • 2 0
 @tgent: I've had the two last versions of the Camber. My '17 has been converted to a Stumpy. My '14/15 Camber Evo was a riot, the '17 too heavy. The Stumpy ST was IMO, a big step in the wrong direction. The LT was just as good/bad everywhere. Never got along with my '19 Stumpy. The Epic Evo is for me what the evolution of the Camber should have been. Fast and fun everywhere. I'm extremely happy with my EE, so much so that I'm dreading riding "traditional" trail bikes as they feel dead and sluggish. My Stumpy is moping in the corner gathering dust.

Maybe I'm just getting old.
  • 2 0
 @knutspeed: So you have an Epic Evo that you like? That's a killer bike, and I would think more capable than the old Camber obviously uphill, but downhill too. I've ridden both and owned an old 14 stumpjumper that the camber was based off (same front triangle), but it's been years and I think the EE is miles better than any of them. Bigger (more travel, slacker, longer) bikes do feel more dead and sluggish at the same speeds as smaller bikes, but that's the whole point is they allow you to go a lot faster downhill in rough terrain. If you don't need the extra capability then it's wasted though.
  • 1 0
 My EE is brilliant.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: yeah, EE Expert (EEE?). It's perfect for 90% of my riding - no big mountains where I live, but lots of punchy elevation changes, steeps and gnar, so I enjoy the light & snappy handling. On a typical ride I also do quite a bit of transport between the good stuff, which is no problem on the EE.

Toying with the idea of fitting a 130 Pike and a 42.5mm shock, but that might ruin the point of this bike and why I like it so much.
  • 2 0
 @knutspeed: I switched my epic evo to a 42.5, just because I had the base model and wanted a better shock and it was easier to find a 42.5 from a friend than a new 40. I actually can not notice one single difference other than its a better shock. Base model shock to Fox DPS factory.
  • 4 0
 Some of the longest top tube lengths by size I've ever seen honestly. Not surprised the reviewer felt stretched out when seated. Definitely don't want to size up with this one.
  • 4 0
 I'm 5'9" and could easily ride a small with a 440 reach and 67.5 head angle.
  • 1 0
 @jrk37: that's not the problem though. when standing, that sounds like a dream, but when sitting, the slack seat angle is not ideal.
  • 1 0
 @Spencermon: The 74.5* STA isn't really slack for something in this travel-range. The odd thing is the reach numbers on each size. It's a weird chart, I'd like to ride it because sometimes paper doesn't match up with real-life. You're right in the fact that if they steepened the STA 2 degrees it would seem like normal effective top tube lengths then since they'd all shrink; but that would make more sense on a 150mm bike not 110mm.
  • 1 0
 i really do not understand the sizing. The reaches per size are equivalent to the next size up in the latest SC Blur, the specialized epic evo, and cannondale scalpel. Really not sure what they're trying to achieve.
  • 1 0
 @jrk37: At 5'8" I would have to take this bike in a small, but would have to take an M in every other brand's equivalent of this bike
  • 1 0
 If we forget the irrelevant naming of a given size for a minute, this is actually slightly SHORTER than a Epic EVO in terms of reach/top tube:
Epic EVO (L): Reach = 460mm. TT = 629mm.
LUX Trail (M): Reach = 460mm. TT = 627mm.

Canyons sizing is basically just one size above most other brands for some reason.
  • 3 0
 This bike looks great to me and I'm considering buying one. Some people don't like the long seat tubes, but I love a long seat tube! In fact the long seat tube may be the biggest single factor that makes me lean toward this bike. I like a dropper but I don't need to drop the seat that much. And I hate the aesthetic of a super long seat post. I'm 6'4" and do xc trails and racing. I'm more about climbing and fitness than jumps and gnar. Finally there are a few bikes being produced that suit a tall xc rider. This Lux Trail, the new Ibis Exie (very expensive), the Spur (ish). I wish this one had a taller stack, but I think I could make it work. The Epic Evo looks awesome but on paper the shorter reach makes me avoid it. My long arms and legs love a long ETT and reach.
  • 2 0
 This thing looks perfect for ripping around my local woods (as an n+1 to my enduro bike). But Canyon says only rated for jumps up to 60cm. I'm quite tempted, but is it going to risk trashing the frame if it gets some air time? I've got some fun doubles and a couple of decent step downs that I wouldn't want to just ride past...
  • 48 0
 Maybe ad a wooden ramp?
  • 9 0
 is that 60cm at the max rider weight? because my 62kg dropping 60cm is very different to my friends 110kg....
  • 3 0
 @zeusdreadbeard: I'm only 75kg, and hardly a "smasher", but having recently had the joy of warranty on my carbon road frame, I'd not fancy testing Canyon's direct to customer support...
  • 7 2
 Rated to a 60cm jump is the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard on a bike warranty

So it can take a rampage style drop but not a 2ft table? I know people who can land a 40ft double way smoother than I land even on just a tiny little jump
  • 1 0
 With carbon at least, it’s either bust or nothing. It’ll take big jumps all day until one time you go too far and it snaps.

With alu, you’ll fatigue the frame rapidly under such loading.
  • 5 0
 @zeusdreadbeard: I'm afraid those 60cm are meant for bike going over without rider. I'm currently trying to deal with Canyon customer service (not really easy thing), as my half year old Lux has cracked seatstay. I never crashed it, I ride flowly xc trails with no jumps (I don't feel super comfortable in air even on skis, which are my tools, and on bike there no way I would jump), and I weight 75kg, lets say 77-78kg in full equipment. Yet Canyon decided that there's no warranty because there was overload. Overload caused by 75kg rider on flow trails with no jumps, roots or rocks.
Otherwise bike is officially rated for 120kg rider and jumps up to 60cm, so 75kg rider without jumping causing overload so that seatstay cracks... well it's beyond my imagination.
  • 3 0
 Yeah, that statement is a loaded gun. Sounds like it's better to skip this bike for a brand with a more sensible warranty if you plan to use this on anything bigger than some baby trail jumps.
  • 1 0
 @nickfranko: Most bikes in the XC category are rated the same way. The manufacturers just make it less obvious.
  • 1 0
 @MaplePanda: Lol wat. no. Carbon doesn't fatigue until it explodes. It often cracks, deforms, and gives you lots of warning it's going. Yes, carbon can fail catastrophically just like aluminum can too.
  • 1 0
 So the lip can't be more than 60 cm high? Got it.
  • 1 0
 @iamamodel: Isn't it meant to say, a 60cm huck to flat? The OP mentioned he had doubles so the landing is often as high if not higher than the lip. Doesn't quite matter how deep it is between jump and landing if you're not going there. As for the "to flat" part, you'd typically try to land on a downslope and if you have proper purpose built jumps, your landings are like that. And then the bike can take much more than that. Compare landing on top of a table to properly clearing the table and landing on the downslope. The bike takes a much harder beating when you land at the top (so when you dropped 0cm) than when you clear it (and drop more). It is just much harder to give an indication of what it can take and 60cm to flat is an easy reference. So just do that, check what it feels like and then compare it to riding the doubles. As long as it doesn't feel harsher than that huck you should be good. And a little technique goes a long way of course.

But as for warranty, don't think too much of that. Warranty tackles production errors. If it fails and they find a fault, they'd honor the warranty claim. If they can't they won't.
  • 2 0
 @vinay: the thing with Canyon is, that they don't even look if it's production error, but simply sign you off with "not our fault, buy new frame". Even when it's clear production error.
Otherwise I agree, don't think too much of warranty... unless when you need it, but then it's sort of late Wink
  • 1 0
 @primozj: I have no personal experience with Canyon let along their warranty procedures. I only recall that a Pinkbike reviewer was reviewing a Canyon Sender DH bike and noticed cracks in the paint (which indeed was due to an issue with the laminate). I recall he was treated and informed fairly. Could be that it was because he is/was (don't recall who it was) a journo at Pinkbike or it could just differ case by case. Could also be that they're more willing to look into it if the issue is developing (so they can learn and prevent an even worse experience) than if it is already broken (so the cause is much harder to find and anything could have happened). Plus of course, I don't think there is a limitation (in warranties) on how big jumps on a DH bike are accepted within the warranty regulations. A message like that (rejected warranty) could be considered a badge of honour and more lunatics would be trying to achieve that Wink .
  • 1 0
 @vinay: I'm sure it helps if you are "Pinkbike reviewer" versus normal client with very limited public reach. At least one good thing with this social media thing is, that even normal client can have some reach and can press to manufacturer to honor their promises and not to sign you off any way they wish.
  • 1 0
 @vinay: who knows what they really mean by 60cm?... For the case of my local woods, I'm thinking of a fun ladder drop, that if you send it, you're dropping maybe 180cm, onto a down slope, but not super steep, so there's certainly some forces going on! I guess there are 2 issues - will the bike handle it and can you reply on a Canyon warranty? Is that asking too much of a down country bike? The enduro bike is overweight overkill for the rest of the woods
  • 2 0
 @vinay: I was kinda making a joke. If Canyon say the limit is a 60cm jump, then what is the definition of a jump. Is it the gap, the drop, or in my inference, the lip, because my way you can hit a nice two-foot high lip at speed and go a loooooong way.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: Yea, that’s what I meant. It doesn’t accumulate fatigue. It just fails in some way when you truly overload it.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: when I got cracks on my Giant carbon road bike I did some looking into this, and provided it doesn't fail straight away, carbon crack propagation seems a lot more benign than aluminium. And seems pretty easy to repair. Certainly seem to be able to get nicer finish than a bunch of aluminium welds.
  • 3 0
 Aside from the 5mm more travel that my Top Fuel has in the rear, pretty similar all around, and my bike is great for long xc rides and races.

I’m sure this one will be too.
  • 3 0
 These combine to transform the Lux into one of the most traditional XC race bikes into a more on-trend bike that should offer a bit more reassurance to its rider when the trail turns downhill.

What does that even mean?
  • 3 0
 I think the first "into" was meant to be "from"
  • 4 0
 If they redesigned the front triangle... Why didn't they give it a modern, steeper STA? Long reach and slack STA sucks for long climbs.
  • 2 0
 Not intended to be a dig on Batty, but this has to be the first time someone ranked 25th in the World Cup standings had a bike model named after them. I realize she's in more of an ambassador role now, but I've never seen a top end model named after an ambassador.
  • 5 0
 Shouldn't the Emily Batty edition be a hardtail.
  • 2 1
 I certainly hope carbon will be better quality then current Lux has, because if not, get ready for quite some expenses very shortly as Canyon has currently policy that nothing is material/manufacturer's fault, and you can buy new frame, even when it's about clear manufacturer's issue... on half year old bike.
  • 2 1
 Looks nice and progress in XC geometry is good compared to the old super steep head angles One day XC bikes will have 65 degree head angles and be mini Enduro bikes, like Enduro bikes are mini Dh bikes when it comes to head angle.
  • 5 0
 Nothing downcountry in this bike. Stupid marketing term anyway.
  • 1 0
 There is a lot to like about this bike, the geometry is spot on for its intend purpose and the price is superb. The lack of choice in the build spec and colours is disappointing though. Canyon do a great job of offering 10+ builds on their road bikes and its a pity they've not applied the same here. Why no top spec SRAM/Rockshox build. No power meter even on the top build... most people dropping this kinda money will be training to power and it's just annoying to have to swap components straight out the box. In saying that it is substantially cheaper meaning it still makes sense upgrading spec vs. dropping £12k on the new Spark.
  • 4 0
 No power meter kinda makes sense though…most people who train with one already have something they like and are used to. They would probably be transferring it over from another bike anyways.
  • 1 0
 @BamaBiscuits: Maybe... but my point is if this was a road bike you could choose to spec it with or without. I'm running a power2max on my Scalpel and I'd far rather just sell the bike with it on. It wouldn't be difficult to give you a build option with a stages crank or xx1 power meter spider.
I don't think power meter pedals have really achieved much market share in mtb yet, it'd obviously be far easier if it was just a pedal swap.
  • 2 1
 Honestly, if you want something more than a XC bike, get a neuron. I have one. It’s my main bike and performs beautifully. I do a 20km loop almost daily on it. It’s fun and nimble whilst being comfortable and assured when racking up the km’s. I run a pro taper 2020 bar on it and a mattock, but apart from that it’s stock. I thought I would end up over forking it, but I haven’t felt the need. I’m also 195cm tall and 110kg in my Birthday suit. I can’t recommend it enough.
  • 4 0
 For all the greedies : Location of the doughnut : 49.70181488023997, -123.144793847199 (Squamish)
  • 6 5
 Can you blame Canyon for being lazy and slightly tweaking the LUX triangle and slapping on more travel? I’m quite disappointed with this release. Aside from the price, nothing innovative here. I’ll wait for the ride review, but not holding my breath.
  • 7 0
 I beg to differ... CF 6 with SLX, DT Swiss and Fox, full carbon, and room for TWO water bottles at $3,999?! sign me up.
  • 1 0
 @SATN-XC: like I said, the ride review is important, until then, just because it is cheap doesn't make it great
  • 1 0
 @SATN-XC: they will be available next January or February. Enjoy your wait. Just because it has a certain brand parts doesn't make it better. Its still a canyon. The worst company in the industry. My best friend is very high up at Canyon USA, not only is it a terrible company to work for, they have the worst warranty in the industry, and the highest opinion of themselves. Their bikes are cheap trash.
  • 1 0
 Good play on the Levy tm- and great intro video Henry-

This bike looks really interesting- but - when are we going to port over wireless technology to lockouts?

The mess of cables for a lockout is so unappealing- if you’re going to add a battery for shifting and a dropper post, why stop there? Imagine one simple button to lock out / unlock the fork and shock. I’m not a huge fan of lockout in the first place, but I understand it’s place on this bike. But let’s ditch the spiderweb of cables already, it’s a 2022 model bike.

Side benefit- it would be really easy to set the suspension to always unlock when the (wireless) dropper is used.
  • 1 0
 If you shift through the latest Sram/Rockshox patents, you'll see that there is such a product currently in development. I'd wager that it will hit the market sooner than later.
  • 2 0
 At 6' tall in just a few years Ive gone from XL on an Anthem to a Medium?? Looking at the numbers Id have to drink a dozen kombuchas and find a new yoga teacher to even reach the bars on the Large
  • 1 0
 This is what the standard XC race bike should look like instead of being the DC version... and even then, this bike is hugely conservative on the geo side of things.

Also why is the seat tube so long above the intersection of the top tube, Is that why it is not being spec'd with a longer dropper?
  • 5 1
 Just be careful on rock drops and rock climbs.
  • 3 0
 This pretty much looks like what the regular Lux should have been from the beginning.
  • 4 1
 "however, when seated I do feel a little stretched out" -- easy to shorten by changing the 60mm stem for a 35mm.
  • 1 0
 Just say- I’m in between sizes, so I slammed the seat forward and put a shorter stem on!
  • 1 0
 @Henry- I paused your video to read your 'contract'. /golfclap. Your dad jokes are well ahead of their time. I feel like the real benefit of this video is a look at the inner workings of pinkbike
  • 3 0
 This is specifically for van der Poel so he can make the drop next Olympics.
  • 2 0
 Because the frame geometry has already been updated, I think there will be a new XC Lux 100mm soon. Same new frame, full XC components. Hope I am right.
  • 1 0
 “the new Fox Transfer SL doesn’t offer that much drop and could be the undoing for somebody who does intend to ride it hard without having World Cup XC skills” you meant “endoing” right?
  • 2 0
 I think he meant "van der Poeling".
  • 1 1
 LOL this "downcountry" bike discussion is about as peaceful as the discussions about masks in schools or the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

BTW, I've been riding my blur with a cc inline and 120 SC 34 w/150mm of drop for some time, this is basically a take on that. Shit rips.
  • 1 0
 You must be riding a size small on flat ground. The last gen blur has the worst geo ever. The seat tube angle is terrible and if you are over 5'3 your seat will be so far back you basically have a 68 seat tube angle. Then add a 120 fork and you are falling off the back. You have no idea what ripping is if you are "ripping" on a 68 seat tube angle
  • 1 0
 @DetroitCity:

It's the rider not the bike, not that you'd know that.
  • 1 1
 @pistol2ne: the rider doesn't change the seat tube angle, bro. And you're obviously not 6'2 trying to ride a blur. As I stated. The geometry is for flat ground. I ride steep technical trails. Not a match. Adding a 120 fork, not a match either. Because it makes a too slack seat angle, slacker. Have fun climbing 20pct grades on a 68 seat angle.
  • 1 0
 @DetroitCity: You're right, I'm 6' 3".

Do you even have 20% grades in Detroit? Lol
  • 1 0
 @pistol2ne: I haven't lived in Detroit in 6 years, and if you are 6'3 you would need a xxxl to fit properly.
  • 1 0
 @DetroitCity: Okey dokey.

I've bene riding bikes for 2 decades. The XL fits fine bud.
  • 1 1
 @pistol2ne: Its not physically possible for the last generation blur to fit someone 6'3 and still have an effective seat angle above about 65. It might fit fine in your mind. But it doesn't actually fit you and remain an effective and efficient platform to ride. You are way behind the BB.
  • 2 0
 @DetroitCity: LOL reggie miller is 6' 7 and rides and xl blur and has for a long time (and won races).

If you spent less time talking about STA and geometry and more time riding your bike people would take you more seriously.
  • 1 1
 @pistol2ne: just because someone rides something doesn't mean it fits, just because someone won a cat 6 dad bod race doesn't mean something fits, just because you feel fine doesn't mean it fits, and just because I commented on this post doesn't mean I don't ride 15-20 hours a week, and have ridden just about every 100-120 bike on the market on variety of terrain, and I can understand basic geometry. Based on all that the last gen blur doesn't fit anyone thats over 6ft properly because you are too far behind the BB for anything other than flat trails. Science.
  • 2 0
 You internet clowns using the word science with no stem degree pisses me the fuck off. Let's race. Whenever you're out here hmu.
  • 4 1
 weird platform but hot damn that emily batty edition color scheme is bad ass AF.
  • 1 0
 Put a 120mm 35 sid on my supercaliber with xr4 2.4 front and xr3 2.4 rear on 30mm. unreal performance. switch to faster tires for xc. probalby the ultimate down country bike in the world!
  • 3 0
 I'd rather have a trail bike. This just seems like a compromised XC race bike.
  • 1 0
 Wish these bikes had room for 2.6 inch tires or clearance for a beefy 2.4. I could be wrong, but it looks like this bike will have trouble fitting a 2.4 race recon in the rear.
  • 2 0
 ayayay, that seat tube... this people live in the edge, risking a potential lawsuit from Knolly
  • 3 0
 looks like a supercaliber but open
  • 1 0
 how are more people not noticing this.
  • 2 0
 On the website the seat angle is 72 degrees. This article states it is steeper at 74.5 degrees. Which is right?
  • 1 1
 74,5
  • 2 0
 @ilyamaksimov: on canyon site they are all sub 72, with XL at 72.
  • 3 0
 Does it have ramp removal detection?
  • 3 0
 XRC1700? Carbon version of XR 1700? no mention on DTSWISS.
  • 1 0
 I would love to exchange my used 150mm Fox Transfer for a 100mm SL one... If someone has bought the wrong bike with the wrong dropper Razz
  • 1 0
 This could be the best gravel bike at the moment!! I mean fire roads are often rough, and one just want to escape to something more pleasing to the body and soul, wright?
  • 2 0
 Who cares what term you want to give it... Is it fun? Is it fast?
  • 1 0
 I'd love to spend some time on a bike like that, would be rad for covering distance fast.
  • 2 0
 Wonder what it feels like to coin a word like "downcountry"
  • 4 1
 WTF is downcountry? Big Grin
  • 25 2
 You must be new here
  • 1 0
 @mr-moose: yes, i'm here from 2000 Smile
  • 6 0
 Transition Spur, Epic Evo, Ripley, etc. This canyon just looks like an XC bike
  • 6 5
 Downcountry has always been the dumbest combination of words applied to bikes in modern MTBing.
  • 8 1
 @SimonD: Right up there with MTBing.
  • 1 0
 Sicily?
  • 2 0
 It is for countries below sea level. It doesn't work when you remove the ramp behind the drop.
  • 11 10
 Is the designer in charge of Batty Edition's colors is fired or better: in jail?
  • 3 3
 My thoughts exactly!
  • 9 3
 Let's also hope that the engineers didn't apply her low carb diet to the frame.
  • 3 3
 Exactly that looks horrific
  • 11 11
 Emily Batty edition: for when your Instagram presence is much greater than your actual race results.
  • 10 0
 I quite like it, definitely not another boring black bike
  • 2 0
 It might be Emily herself.
  • 1 0
 @thisspock: hopefully there are options between black and ugly
  • 1 1
 Reckon the look nice and fun to ride. Never been a fan of this loooonnnggggg looooowww slaaaaaccckkk geometry for trail bikes anyway.
  • 5 4
 With competition like the Spur and Epic EVO, this bike kinda feels like a swing and a miss.
  • 4 0
 It's a miss for me, but not everyone wants slacker HTAs and also... if this one is actually available then plenty of people will buy it. Good luck finding a Spur or Epic EVO right now.
  • 7 1
 I think this looks like a perfect XC-bike, but I don’t know why they named it Lux Trail instead of just making it the new Lux. Spur and Evo is missing one of the most important components of an XC bike, a remote lockout.
  • 3 2
 Difference is those bikes are made to be what they are. Canyon are doing 'downcounty' on the cheap
  • 1 0
 @magnusc: you can mount one on the Epic Evo, the hole is there Smile
  • 2 0
 @ice29: But then you have to buy a new fork and shock on an already expensive bike ;-)
  • 2 1
 @Lokirides: the lux will be available in February in the USA. I just bought a new epic evo about 3 weeks ago and know places with 5 of them in stock. I know shops with spur in stock also. This bike is a giant miss. Canyon spends more time worrying about Instagram than engineering
  • 1 0
 @magnusc: exactly.. epic evo looks nice, but i dont get it why they dont offer lockouts
  • 2 0
 Emily Batty edition is screaming for Big Bettys
  • 1 0
 Downcountry Backcountry - really? will we have sidecountry diagonalcountry. Ridiculous.
  • 6 1
 Backcountry is an old word meaning away from habitation. Is isnt an MTB specific word in any sense. It just isnt used much in UK. Much more widely used in North America.
  • 1 0
 I've already coined and trademarked sidecountry (tm) and Ecountry (tm). Expect a letter from my legal team soon.
  • 1 0
 @pink505: that's wicked smaht...don't forget to gobble up the domain names too!
  • 2 1
 The Emily Batty version actually looks very good! Also @brianpark, there is nothing shameful, you can come out Big Grin
  • 1 0
 Why don't they flip the shock to make the adjustment knobs easier to reach?
  • 1 0
 If I was an xc rat, I would jump for that cf6 at $4000. A lot better value than most other 4k bikes.
  • 1 1
 In theory maybe. If you are an xc rat you need an actual bike to ride, not a 7 month wait for the bike and a 7 month wait for when it breaks soon after getting it.
  • 1 0
 @DetroitCity: Do you have firsthand experience?
  • 1 0
 @11six: I have inside information, the bikes won't be available till February, and I know the inner workings of Canyon USA. I wouldn't take a free canyon.
  • 2 0
 @11six: My friend who works at Canyon just bought an Epic evo. And they get a super discount on a canyon. They paid retail for an evo. Theres a reason.
  • 1 0
 @DetroitCity: I wonder why that is? Cheaper carbon layup process? The actual material is of lower quality? Poor QC? I would love to see a study done on numerous frames from numerous manufacturers to find out who actually makes good frames and who to stay away from because all I can find is anecdotal evidence.
  • 2 0
 @11six: the best ability of any bike is availability
  • 1 0
 I see they slackened the head angle after Mathieu Van Der Poel, crashed. Would have saved him.
  • 1 0
 dropper would have saved him maybe as well.
  • 2 0
 The top end edition for well under 10kUSD - a steal!
  • 1 0
 I'd feel like a thief buying one of these!
  • 2 0
 Schurter's XC is more trail than this downcountry.
  • 2 1
 Please stop with this downcountry nonsense. The bike can either be thrashed or it can’t.
  • 2 0
 yooo Henry was always my fav at GMBN haha sick
  • 1 0
 I'm not sure what is uglier...the bike colors or the rider's outfit colors in the second pic.
  • 1 0
 Why so much hussle?
Canyon bikes seems to be for social media and racers only.
Never available for shopping.
  • 2 1
 When will the top spec model be available in a colourway that doesn't look like shit?
  • 2 0
 so downcountry is just XC. thanks for clarifying this.
  • 2 0
 Scott-Bikes knows it, everyone else is just in denial.
  • 1 0
 what is currently classified as XC is basically just a gravel bike with flat bars Wink
  • 2 0
 Eh, carbon frame with pressfit BB - pass ...
  • 2 0
 I want wireless lockouts.
  • 2 0
 I would go with the cf8 because of the axs dropper.
  • 1 1
 seat angle very slacker, head angle little steeper. wheelbase, reach, stack is good.
  • 2 1
 Did the 1980’s Trapper Keeper inspire Emily for her paint job?
  • 1 0
 Love the colors on the Batty bike, reminds me of my Huffy from the 80’s.
  • 1 0
 Their xc bike now has more reach than their enduro race bike.
  • 1 0
 Glad to hear my 2006 Lapierre x-control was a downcountry bike!
  • 1 0
 Emily forgot to take of the valve caps. Where is the rage, Pinkbiker’s?
  • 1 0
 Its new frame time what is this canyon
  • 1 1
 Disappointing. Especially after I clicked on the article fully expecting a new model with revised geometry.
  • 1 0
 But it is a completely new geometry.. just the design is old, which is a shame..
  • 1 1
 reviewer says bike feels to stretched out with a 60mm stem........ Ever heard of a 50mm stem?
  • 1 0
 Brakes - two piston or four piston? Didn't see it mentioned. Thanks
  • 3 0
 Two piston all the way… But you can swap the front for 4-piston. The back is flat mount, so apart from the special Hope RX4 you can only mount 2-piston in the back.
  • 1 0
 A few weeks too late for MVDP.
  • 1 1
 Almost a good bike til you glimpse that short wheelbase and slack seat tube
  • 1 0
 Price: as much as bikes purchased through local dealers.
  • 1 0
 There are no xrc1900 wheels from dt swiss , even oem afaik
  • 1 1
 Maybe Levy can actually ride this one?
  • 1 0
 Doffnut?
  • 1 0
 dem bois splooshin
  • 1 0
 Knock Block!!!!!!!!!
Below threshold threads are hidden





Copyright © 2000 - 2023. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.062938
Mobile Version of Website