First Ride: 2021 Trek Slash - Now With Snack Storage

Sep 3, 2020
by Mike Kazimer  

Back in 2017, the Trek Slash took home the Mountain Bike of the Year title during the annual Pinkbike awards. At the time, it was one of the slackest 29ers on the market, and it helped usher in the next generation of big-wheeled enduro bikes. In the years since, mountain bike geometry has undergone a significant transformation, which meant it was time for the Slash to get a revamp in order to keep up with the other contenders in this category.

The result doesn't look dramatically different from the original, but the bike now has 160mm of rear travel (10mm more than before), longer and slacker geometry numbers, in-frame storage on both carbon and aluminum models, and a threaded bottom bracket. There's also an updated, removable Knock Block that allows for a greater range of handlebar motion, eliminating a complaint some riders had about the previous version.
Trek Slash

• Wheelsize: 29"
• Carbon or aluminum frame options
• Travel: 160mm (r) / 170mm (f)
• 64.1 or 64.6-degree head angle
• 486mm reach (size L)
• 437mm chainstays
• Weight: 32.3 lb / 14.7 kg (large 9.9 X01)
• Claimed frame weight: 2450 grams
• Price range: $3,500 - $8,500
• Frame only: $2,200 (alloy), $4,000 USD (carbon)
trekbikes.com


In total, there are seven complete builds available, two with aluminum frames and the rest in carbon. Prices start at $3,500 for the aluminum Slash 7, and go all the way up to $8,500 USD for the 9.9 XTR model.

The orange 9.9 X01 version that's pictured in this article retails for $8,000, with parts kit highlights that include a RockShox Zeb Ultimate fork, SRAM X01 12-speed drivetrain, Code RSC brakes, and Bontrager Line Elite carbon wheels. Want to spend even more? Trek offers their Project One program for certain models, which allows riders to customize the parts kit and select from a huge range of custom paint options. The full range overview can be viewed here.

Trek Slash 2021

Trek Slash 2021
Snack storage! The Slash now has a compartment for holding a tube, tools, or churros.
Trek Slash 2021
Knock Block 2.0 allows for more range of motion, and it's possible to remove it entirely.

What's New?

A whole lot, it turns out. The frame shape may be familiar, but there's a decent-sized list of updates and tweaks that were applied to the Slash.

Knock Block 2.0

Trek's Knock Block system emerged when they debuted their 'Straight Shot' downtube. That straight downtube supposedly allowed for extra frame stiffness, but it also meant that the crown of the fork would smack the frame it the handlebar was turned too far, which is where Knock Block came in - a small stop chip in the headtube and a special headset top cap and stem spacers prevented the bars from turning more than 58-degrees in either direction. That wasn't an issue for some riders, but others weren't happy with the range of motion, especially on tighter switchbacks.

On the new Slash, there's 72-degrees of possible handlebar rotation, and, perhaps best of all, the Knock Block system can be completely removed. The downtube now has a slight curve in it, and the top of the fork can pass underneath without any issues.

In-Frame Storage

Trek's in-frame storage solution first showed up on the Fuel EX, and now it's made its way onto the Slash as well. While Specialized deserves the credit for kicking off this trend, I'm all for it – I wouldn't mind if every bike company headed down the secret compartment path. Trek's system uses a lever that sits to the right of the water bottle cage. Flip the lever and the plastic panel can be removed, granting access to a tool roll that can be used to store a tube, CO2, and tire levers.

The in-frame storage is also found on the alloy Slash models, which means that riders at all budget levels can benefit from the ability to fill their bikes with gummy bears and small burritos.

Trek Slash 2021
A generous downtube protector helps keep the frame safe during rough shuttle rides or on rocky trails.
Trek Slash 2021
The BB92 bottom bracket has been replaced by a threaded one.

Threaded Bottom Bracket / 34.9mm Seat Tube

Adios, BB92, hello, BSA 73. To be fair, I didn't have any issues with the pressfit bottom bracket on the previous Slash, but the switch back to a threaded bottom bracket is one that's in line with what we're seeing from multiple companies. It seems to be a case of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' – threaded bottom brackets are less prone to creaking, and it's easier to remove and reinstall a threaded BB vs. trying to knock out a pressfit one without completely mangling it.

The Slash also has a 34.9mm seat tube diameter, and Bontrager has released a new 34.9mm version of their Line Elite dropper post that's available with up to 200mm of drop. At 5'11” I didn't have enough room to run that 200mm post without running into the kink in the bike's seat tube (the size large is spec'd with the 170mm version), but I was able to fit a 210mm OneUp dropper, which has a shorter insertion length, without any trouble.


Trek Slash 2021
There are three compression settings, and a numbered rebound dial on the Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock. Try to say that five times fast.

New RockShox SuperDeluxe ThruShaft

It wouldn't be a Trek without some sort of proprietary shock technology now, would it? But wait, before you start pounding on the keyboard, keep in mind that the Slash frame is compatible with a Fox Float X2 air and coil, DPX2, Super Deluxe coil, and most inline shocks.

It's the RockShox Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft that's only available on the Slash, at least for now. It shares some similarities with the inline Deluxe shock, like the ability to select from three low-speed compression settings. A turn of the dial can firm up the shock for smoother, flowier trails, or turning it the other way can be useful for slippery conditions when traction is a high priority. There's also a numbered rebound knob, one of those “Why hasn't everyone been doing this?” features that should help speed up setup.

The shock uses Trek's ThruShaft design, where the damper shaft exits out the bottom of the shock, which means the damper valve assembly is moving through one column of oil. Most shocks rely on a pressurized internal floating piston to deal with the displaced oil when the shock is compressed, but with ThruShaft the shock's IFP (they refer to it as a 'thermal compensator') isn't as dynamic - it's only activated only when the oil volume increases or decreases as a result of temperature change, rather than moving every single time the shock is compressed.

The shock has a new air can, which borrows elements from RockShox's MegNeg air can, like an increased negative air spring volume. Both the negative and positive air spring can be adjusted with volume spacers – the stock setup doesn't have any spacers installed, but it's possible to add in one negative spacer or up to three positive spacers to fine-tune the feel.


Trek Slash 2021

Geometry Updates

The Slash's head tube angle has been slackened by 1-degree, and now sits at 64.1-degrees in the low geometry setting. It's possible to steepen that to 64.6-degrees via the flip chips in the seatstays, but I have a feeling most riders will stick to the slacker setting.

Along with the slacker head angle, the bike's reach has grown by 20-30mm per size – the reach on a size large now measures 486mm. Speaking of sizes, there's now an ML option in the mix, which means there's a total of five sizes – S, M, ML, L, and XL.

The seat angle has been steepened to 75.6-degrees. That's slightly slacker than what we're seeing from other companies, especially when combined with the bike's relatively slack actual seat tube angle.

The chainstay length remains the same across the board, at 437mm in the low setting.


Trek Slash 2021
Ryan Howard doing his thing. Photo: Trek


Ride Impressions

Trek still hasn't fully embraced the steep seat-tube angle movement, and although the Slash's new numbers are a step in the right direction, the bike's 649mm top tube length gives it a very roomy feel during seated climbs. Yes, you can slide the seat forward in the rails, which is exactly what I did, but a steeper seat angle would have allowed me to keep the seat in the center, with room to move it forward or back to fine-tune the fit.

The good news is that the Slash pedals well, and the three position switch makes it easy to select your preferred amount of support. There's a full lockout, too, but I never felt the need to flip that lever. The weight's reasonable, considering we're talking about a 160 / 170mm enduro bike, and I didn't hesitate to take it out for long days of pedaling. I was a little surprised to see 175mm cranks as the stock spec - I'd rather have the extra ground clearance that comes from 170mm cranks, especially on a bike that's designed for racing.

It's on the descents that the Slash has taken a big step forward, and that's saying something considering the previous version was certainly no slouch. The 486mm reach felt familiar when descending, in line with a large Norco Sight or Commencal Meta, or an S4 Specialized Enduro, all bikes I've spent a significant amount of time aboard. The Slash has a big-bike feel that makes it easier to charge into an unfamiliar trail, while retaining enough maneuverability to prevent it from feeling like overkill on mellower trails.

It's the shock that I've been most impressed by so far – the tune feels exactly right for the bike, with a very good blend of sensitivity to smooth out the chattery bits, and support for handling bigger impacts, even without any volume spacers installed. The three compression settings make a noticeable difference, which makes it a quick process to adjust the bike to the day's conditions.

I'll be doing some head-to-head comparisons over the next few months to see how the Slash stacks up, along with putting in a bunch more miles on this orange machine – keep an eye out for a more in-depth review later this year.







352 Comments

  • 295 3
 A picture speaks a thousand words with that saddle slammed all the way forward
  • 24 49
flag mattdawson (Sep 3, 2020 at 7:24) (Below Threshold)
 Could be that he’s riding a slightly larger frame than usual. Doesn’t Kazimer typically test medium frames? I might be completely wrong
  • 10 0
 Hang ten!
  • 69 0
 @mattdawson, no, at 5’11” / 180cm I’m typically on a large.
  • 34 42
flag AyJayDoubleyou (Sep 3, 2020 at 7:28) (Below Threshold)
 Pointed down is even worse. A few years ago all the cool kids tilted their saddles backward to show they were far too much of a bro to actually pedal their bikes about. Now it's the forward tilt to show that you only ever winch up steep forest roads, to the next epic half hour enduro descent.
  • 36 3
 @AyJayDoubleyou, the seat might look tilted down more than it actually is because the post isn’t fully extended.

I tend to run my seat fairly level, with maybe a couple degrees of downward tilt.
  • 8 6
 This. I'm surprised if it will get the same sta treatment as the wreckoning.
  • 20 0
 Just going by the eyeball test it seems slacker than the stated numbers. I suppose that could be because they way they measure STA isn't standardized across brands.
  • 28 8
 @ashmtb85: Using my handing dandy angle finder using the axles as level shows that first pic as 76.4. I'm sure that's engineer worthy measurement too.

I'm probably swimming against the stream here but I don't like super steep seat tubes. Every one I've tried has made my knees and back sore. I was thinking about the Revel Rascal as my next bike partly because it doesn't have a crazy steep STA.
  • 3 16
flag willdavidson9595 (Sep 3, 2020 at 8:10) (Below Threshold)
 @AyJayDoubleyou: its all about where your saddle is in comparison to your bars. A good starting point is to point your saddle about an inch above your bars. That is why taller people will generally have their saddle pointed down a little.
  • 31 1
 @mikekazimer: i'm just curious... how will it be less downward inclined with the post fully extended? maybe i am missing something here
  • 7 6
 I ride mediums at 5'10" with a really short inseam and long torso. Large feels like old school XC bike body positioning to me. I'd rather sit up and clown bike on the climbs and slap the rear around on descents than be stretched out for both on larges.

I'd be pretty pissed off if I had average to long legs at 5'10-11" and had to push the saddle all the way forward on the rails. If you can't keep a saddle in the middle portion of the rails, you can feel odd ball flex in different climbing scenarios.
  • 2 2
 @ICKYBOD: You made me curious so I checked real quick too and got 75 haha. Just curious do you usually run relatively short reaches? I think the steep STA thing has more merits if the front center and especially the reach of the bike is particularly long. On slightly more traditional geo I think it doesnt matter as much.
  • 2 0
 Long reach, but more struck by long ETT. All other things being equal, longer ETT will flatten your back out, rotate your hips and generally change the level smashing your nethers get from the seat - so you tilt it down to accommodate.
  • 2 0
 @mattdawson: just read.
  • 12 1
 @AyJayDoubleyou: Some people, me included, have lower back pain/issues. Tilting the seat downwards a bit helps to have your hips in the correct position and that means you can have a more neutral lower back arch. All these things will prevent lower back pain. If anyone here has lower back pain while pedaling should try it and probably will be very thankful for this tip. It changed my life by the way. No more pain!
  • 6 0
 STA too slack?
  • 4 0
 @ryan1980: hang three...
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: how does it compare against the latest Sentinel? (expect the extra travel and stiffer fork?) Assume the Trek also has the pool under the shock?
  • 3 3
 Since the reach is plenty long, slamming the saddle works. Effective seat tube angle is likely 78 degrees with the seat slammed forward and the fit is fine.
  • 2 0
 @ICKYBOD: Me either. I find that as the bb moves back relative to the seat, I have more pressure on my hands. To alleviate that I’ll run my bar higher which makes me sit more upright which is less efficient for climbing. Moving my cleats all the way back helps a bit with no perception negative for me. To me a combination of steeper seat tube angle with longer rear centre as bikes get larger makes more sense. Watching Kazimer climbing the bike is really great to see. You can watch that and get sense of how the bike fits him.
  • 2 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou: don't k ock it until you try it. I used to run my saddle level, then a much better rider suggested my particular saddle (chromag trailmaster) is much better with a slight tilt down. Yup. Feels so much better. Mind you the trailmaster has a big wide nose. My SDG was fine level. Trailmaster needs the taint tilt.
  • 5 24
flag DavidGuerra (Sep 3, 2020 at 9:20) (Below Threshold)
 The words it speaks to me is that this rider likes to ride bikes made for guys above his size. Which is also something that is known to those who follow his reviews. That's generally fine, but the seat will have to be moved forward. If he didn't have to do that, larger riders, the ones that the frame was sized for, would have to slide it backwards. That's just the way it is, seat angles have nothing to do with trends, just room. Frame reach and stem size in relation to body size.
  • 19 2
 @DavidGuerra, I don't think that's the case - I'll often look at manufacturer's recommended sizes when requesting a review bike, and more often than not they'll suggest a large.
  • 8 4
 Pitty they didn´t hire any PB commenter at their quarters... it only took me 5 min to adress this mess: ibb.co/HqNKtmy Wink
  • 1 3
 ...But they preferred to let they marketing guy finish the drawing... 2 parallel lines (fork and seat-post), like straight lines from rear axle to crown axle, makes our sweety more straight.... really where the decisions are taken on men...
  • 3 1
 @mikekazimer: Mike, just so I know for personal sizing, what is your inseam? I typically ride a large for the reach, but feel like a 18.5 might fit me better now with the lengthened top tube!
  • 2 0
 Cropped, it doesn't look all that slack. Took a picture of it from the Trek website and cropped it along the BB axis. Saddle setback looks same as other "76°" seat angle bikes to me. At least in the standard level-with-bars photo position, extended for a tall person it looks like it may slacken a bit more than average.
  • 5 7
 Bike that still can't X'up Fail
  • 10 3
 Came here to say the same thing. 75 effective seat tube angle (and about 65 actual seat tube angle) is a massive fail. The original slash was slated for its seat tube and its about the only thing they kept. Would make a great uplift / shuttle bike, but I wouldn’t want to pedal that.
  • 8 3
 RE: the STA, just got done reading the VitalMTB review on this. They have some pics showing effective STA at different seat heights. Sounds like making way too much of this angle on paper. Sum of the parts and all that. Sounds like it climbs well for a 160bike. As always- you can infer a lot from geo sheets but they don't always tell the whole story.
  • 4 1
 SA is why I wrote off the Slash two years ago from my potential list. 76 is what it should have been before they slackened the HA even more.
I just wish they’d list seat height at the stated effective SA, that’s the real data point people need, especially riders on the taller end of a size.
  • 4 0
 Crazy that we still can't get remotely accurate SA geo from manufacturers. Set a standard, say 30" BB to saddle for medium. Done. None of this measuring with the saddle down at bar height nonsense.
Banshee has something like this but with angles for various saddle heights, haven't seen anyone else.
  • 4 2
 @ShredlyMcShredface: Likely? Have you even measured? In fact it's 75 in the picture at that saddleheight. Now imagine having 35 inch or more inseam and measure again. Instant fail and butt over rear axle. Sorry Trek, no sale. #STA Police
  • 5 0
 @emponix: I just did some measurements in CAD and he is in fact absolutely correct. Moving the saddle forward an inch at that saddle height changes the seat angle by 2.08 degrees, resulting on a SA of 78.18 in the high position, or 77.78 in the low position.
  • 1 0
 @ZenkiS14, I have a 33” inseam.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: did you think about asking for the m/l at 468 reach?
  • 1 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou: Dont forget when youre climbing your seat will actually be closer to flat
  • 2 0
 @mobiller: I think Revel measures and reports theirs at end of seat tube height! Total BS.
  • 1 0
 @stumphumper92: looks like it to me.
  • 1 0
 That was also the first thing I noticed in the video...
  • 1 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou:
m.pinkbike.com/photo/13664065
This guy was showing off too?

Also why wouldn't you set your saddle for the steep uphill ?
Is it because you seat on the way down ?
  • 6 0
 @ICKYBOD: When people say 'it climbs well for a 160mm bike' it really means it climbs like crap. People say the Capra 'climbs well for what it is'. Having owned one I can tell you that it too climbs like crap.
  • 1 1
 @gbcarmona: it's except not expect
  • 2 0
 @DavidGuerra: Even if you are right the saddle rises along the actual angle so still a fail at my saddleheight. Tip of the saddle end up 2 inches behind the BB. Combined with that chainstay length it just doesn't work for people like me. Impossible to keep the front down on steeper climbs. Effective angle only look good on paper but in reality it fails bigtime.
  • 3 0
 @emponix:

Yea agreed. I’m all legs and short torso.
A slack actual seat angle puts me over the casette when pedalling, kills my knees and back and it wanders like a dog on steep stuff.

Epic fail
  • 1 0
 @Richt2000: My Reign 27,5 has 73 effective sta, this Slash has 75,6- 76,1. On paper the Slash would win but at the same time it has a 2,5 degrees slacker actual angle. In the end it's just as bad as my Reign and the saddle ends up at the exact same position behind to the BB.
  • 1 0
 @emponix: Yes, it just ocurred to me that the seatpost might not be fully extended in the picture. For my saddle height, moving it an inch forward is equal to an increase of 1.88 degrees. As for your other comment, I understand your perspective but the Trek's seat angle is not abnormally low. My Capra has 75.5º on low, and I have the saddle right at the center. It's true that I run a 32mm stem, but even with a 50mm one, I could easily move the seat forward 18mm to match the seat-handlebar distance. Now, in comparison with the Trek, the L Trek has more 11mm in reach than my XL Capra. I could easily compensate that by saddle placement, but if we add a 50mm stem, that's 11+18mm=29mm. I agree that's right at the limit of saddle adjustment, but no big deal, really.
  • 1 0
 @emponix: The thing is, although for me the Slash would ideally have an extra degree of SA, for a larger rider, say 1.87m, it might be just fine. So maybe the sizing should be centered on that. Maybe the L should be recommended for riders with a height of 1.81-1.92m, instead of 1.77-1.88, and the M/L for those between 1.70-1.83m.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Based on the numbers, I'd say the L is good for riders with 1.81-1.92m, and the M/L for those between 1.70-1.83m. Trek should either adopt a recommendation like this or increase the seat angle a bit to allow riders to move up in reach.
  • 1 0
 @DavidGuerra: My only wish is for the actual and effective sta to have less of a gap between them. Now I'm only looking at bikes with atleast 70 degrees actual, that places my butt right were it needs to be. Luckily for me there are more options in the 2021 lineup of bikes than ever before. Also I'm going 29er this time for sure to scale up things correctly. It takes a couple of bikes to learn i guess.
  • 1 0
 @emponix: Oh, ok, I see what you mean. The actual seat tube angle can throw the calculations a bit off, since the effective STA is measured at top of headtube height. The bike I mentioned (Capra 29) doesn't have a more vertical actual STA than the Trek though.
  • 1 1
 Easy solution. Dont climb. Bike park is more funny anyways @Davec85:
  • 1 0
 @Davec85: Ya, probably. Punches above it's weight means something similar but for shorter travel bikes.

This bike isn't even on my radar but the comments have made me read all the various reviews. Bottom line is the STA does get mentioned, seems like reviewers wouldn't mind a degree steeper but it doesn't hold the bike back. It rolls a high dexterity saving throw because it's light for a full on enduro race capable-bike this big with a Zeb on the front. (Cue the 'my RM Slayer with a coil is only 27 brah' comments)
  • 2 0
 @mobiller: Transition does something similar in their geometry chart. They post the Effective STA for each size based on an average saddle height which is also specified.
  • 1 0
 @maxnomas: saddle position for cyclists is like asking a motorcycle rider what oil works best (Rotella,btw ), it's very personal. The best advice I heard is 1/3 weight on each the pedals,bars and saddle. Personally, I have the nose of my saddle tilted up to have weight on my sit bones and off my wrists. My saddle is as far forward as it can go.
Of course, YMMV.
  • 1 0
 Yep, bikes are way too long now, handles like total shit and makes you size down completely defeating the purpose of a longer bike. A large should be 475 reach at most
  • 88 1
 4k for a Frame only? I'm sure it's a great bike but that is beyond steep...no, not the seat angle, the price.
  • 10 3
 Lots of brands do that to encourage you in to a full build. Nothing too unusual here
  • 20 0
 @BeardlessMarinRider: $4000 for a frame? I can't think of a single company with a price point that high. In fact, most manufacturers have complete bike options (with carbon frames) for that price.
  • 12 3
 hey, you don't have to get a frame only. Just buy the 9.9 and get a GX cassette!
  • 16 3
 4k for a stash pocket and 3 year old geometry... They should've called it the Trek Stash 8.
  • 2 2
 @Seanut89: dated out the gate.. Pure laziness on Treks part.
  • 3 0
 Makes no sense how carbon frame is $4,000, but you can get a full build with carbon frame (9.7) for $4,800? What am I missing...?
  • 1 0
 @Billjohn6: they want to sell you a complete bike
  • 79 7
 After spending time on a bike with a steep seat angle and long stays, and realizing how much better it makes climbing and descending, I'd never buy a bike again whose seat tube looks like a sharp 7, like this does. Needs a steeper actual seat angle. And given how long it took for the last Slash to be updated, looks like Trek is gonna be behind the geometry game for awhile, and right from the gate.
  • 2 2
 How long is “long” stays? I love the 79ish STA on my Sight VLT but 458 chainstays I do notice vs my Ripmo and wish were shorter, like 445 or something. They feel great on steep climbs though! (a motor doesn’t hurt either Wink
  • 3 0
 Always have been
  • 17 2
 NSMB reporting actual STA of 66.6deg (low position) and 67.1 (high position)!!!
  • 12 0
 @coletrane-mtb: mine has 450mm (Nukeproof Mega). In combo with the steep seat angle and 10-51 cassette, I never have to shift my weight around even on 20% loose climbs. Total game changer.

The complete bike with SLX also cost less than the Slash frame....
  • 2 0
 @rickybobby18: 450 might be too long for smaller frame sizes. What size are you running?
  • 17 0
 People comment around saying how great their slash climbs without considering that they’re probably an average height person. Try being over / well over 6 foot (with your seat post extended inches further than a shorter person) and that slack seat tube angle (also consider that it gets worse as you move through the suspension) gets Significantly slacker again and sometimes unmanageable on steep climbs.
  • 10 0
 @HVrider: I'm pretty sure everybody actually likes their saddle in about the same place vertically. Lets just call it nose of the saddle just behind the bottom bracket when bike is level. So 5'7" dude with a long torso probably fits great on the slash, while 6'2" me with a 38" clown inseam might loop out just sitting there
  • 6 0
 @abalian: "loop out just sitting there" made me do a spit take. Just envisioning every first time dirt bike rider left standing there after he dumps the clutch and watches the bike backflip out from under him. Thanks for the laugh.
  • 5 0
 Couldn't agree more. It's so tedious watching bikes get released with the same sized rear centre, and the slack STA tells me all I'd want to know about riding this bike.

I accidentally and mistakenly bought a bike with both these geo failings before I knew better and never hated a bike as much. Never again.

Same size rear just says "we couldn't be bothered making it fit everyone properly".

Thankfully other brands get it.
  • 1 0
 @bertbc: do you mean to tell me that someone found a way to measure actual STAs? Well Hallelujah! I didn't think this was possible! What sorcery or voodoo permitted this measurement?
  • 2 0
 @Stoaks: I bought a sur-ron a couple months ago, and whiskey throttled it coming out of a switchback more than once. It’s light enough that it doesn’t go flying, so I’m still hanging onto the bars, standing in the middle of the trail with the bike standing on its back wheel, looking like a dumbass.
  • 1 2
 Again I'll make the unpopular counterargument: a slack seat tube allows one to downsize and doesn't require as much dropper travel to get the saddle out of the way. It probably helps that my max saddle height is 70mm lower than on a road bike and even that only gets used on road, where weighting/position aren't very important. I'm interested in new Slash for those reasons, and because it has three cm more wheelbase than my Bronson.3, and four inches more length than that. This is comparing Medium to Medium for a six foot rider. I'd do the same for a Mega 290, which doesn't have all that steep an STA, considering there's no forward offset at bb and that upper seat tube has a bend in it...besides, look at the lower actual seat tube on Slash--it's probably 95 degrees. Nominal toptube lengths aren't much longer than others, say 605 and 625mm for M & M/L.

Kazimer is wasting reach with those headset spacers, but it's not his bike.
  • 2 3
 @ceecee: what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
  • 2 1
 @HVrider: slacker--downsize. I drift. Thanks for the kind wish
  • 56 3
 Looks like a Process
  • 10 0
 Last gen Process frame explains the seat tube angle! Big Grin
  • 50 2
 I really like this bike. That said, $4k for a Treak Taiwan frame?? US price for an Atherton Enduro frame with a Float X2 is just a few bucks less. No dam way this is worth the same as a complete custom/low volume, made in the UK frame of carbon and ti
  • 18 2
 That comes out of a Giant factory
  • 16 2
 @Larkey1: in more ways than one.
  • 21 0
 Maybe I'll sell my Ripmo AF complete so I can almost purchase this frame then hang it on the wall.

Yes this bike is enduroAF but w/ a 170 fork my RAF hta is 64.5 and I've got a proper sta too. No doubt the Slash will win on the dh and it sounds like their rear suspension is pretty dialed on this.

This is about the update I expected from Trek. Almost there, but not quite.... and then there's that abysmal sta. Someone at Trek is asleep at the wheel. And gtfo with that frame only price. Asinine.
  • 7 10
 Then buy the alloy version of the frame for half the price
  • 2 1
 Does their highest end OCLV frames come out of America? Or is that just for the ultra high end road stuff? I remember a time when their highest end carbon manufacturing process wasn't allowed to be moved out of the country since it was good enough to be considered a defense level technology.
  • 4 0
 @NorCalNomad: They used to. Not sure much anymore unless you get their in house custom. Curious for sure. That 'might' start to justify the price....but still $4k is nuts
  • 2 0
 @bman33: only Project One I believe.
  • 9 2
 @HopeFbn: All carbon Trek frames are made by Giant.
  • 6 1
 @gambo21: Actually no. Trek has a couple of carbon suppliers for frames in Asia (I used to work for Trek)
There are no in house production made frames for any model, P1 or otherwise.

However, this is the same for most of the big brands these days. Not necessarily a bad thing as long as you have good quality control over your product.

All engineering, design and testing in house by Trek at least.
  • 2 0
 Yep. Sure it's a good bike, but I could not fathom buying this over the options on the market given the pricepoints.
  • 3 0
 @NorCalNomad: zero bikes made in USA anymore for Trek (including all categories)
  • 3 0
 I feel like I should say that you can get a GG Gnarvana for $3800, COMPLETE. MADE IN THE USA, carbon, Zeb, NX, DT wheelset. And it has a steep seat tube angle.
  • 3 1
 @rickybobby18: and a headtube the size of a 2L bottle lol
  • 3 0
 @rickybobby18: I don’t need a bike in this category — but what GG is doing almost makes me need to buy one just cuz, badass mfg model
  • 42 0
 I'm just here for the numbered rebound dial thanks.
  • 42 0
 Longer. Lower. Slacker. Snackier.
  • 23 0
 Dang it, why didn't I think of that line?
  • 44 3
 Steepen the ST angle. Hard pass.
  • 10 15
flag aztrack2010 (Sep 3, 2020 at 11:27) (Below Threshold)
 Probably steeper than your current STA
  • 44 7
 I thought we were past the days of ridiculous prices for framesets. $2.2k for aluminum? $4k for something Giant makes and installs Trek stickers on? Go home Trek, you're drunk.

For everyone else looking for a 160mm 29er, you can save 5 bucks off of the aluminum Slash, and get a made in the USA carbon Guerilla Gravity Gnarvana. Probably a better bike even if it was the same cost, but a half the price it's a no-brainer.
  • 12 6
 Just because they’re made in the giant factory doesn’t mean it’s a bike made by giant that trek slaps stickers on. It’s still trek design, r&d, engineering, and testing. It just happens under the giant roof
  • 16 0
 Not sure about their carbon but Giant's aluminum frame manufacturing is the best in the business. I would happily pay a bit more for a frame outsourced to them than outsourced to some other random plant.
  • 14 2
 @kleinblake:
Okay, and that R&D, "engineering" (Knob blocker and straight shot are not something you should pay money for), and testing justifies the absurd price tag? Note that the GG has the same requirements, domestic manufacturing, and yet costs 50% less. The difference is Trek's enormous markup.

@friendlyfoe:
Nothing wrong with Giant's aluminum frames, and I'm sure there's nothing wrong with this one either. But I can buy a complete Reign aluminum build for 3k, which implies the frame is substantially less than the 2.2k trek wants for the slash. The quality isn't the issue, it's the absurb markup.
  • 14 3
 @kleinblake:

Truth. The Giant Reign has better kinematics and a steeper STA and costs a few thousand bucks less. And comes with a better warranty.
  • 1 10
flag kleinblake (Sep 3, 2020 at 14:13) (Below Threshold)
 @tsheep: I don’t care
  • 1 5
flag homerjm (Sep 3, 2020 at 14:42) (Below Threshold)
 @friendlyfoe: Giant aluminum bikes are average,at least their enduro ones. Nikolai,Litelville and some other are far better. My old Cannondale Jekyll 26" Dyad was very well made,with a huge downtube and smooth welds. That Jekyll had scratches in the paint from huge rock impacts,but never get a dent. I have seen a giant reign full of dents in the BB area,like many other cheap bikes.
That Giant Reign in 26 and 27,5 works really well,it is a very good bike. But not high end materials or tech.
  • 7 0
 @homerjm: Couldn't disagree more. Giant's hydroforming process is light years ahead of the brands you mentioned in terms of technology. Hydroforming is pretty incredible and results in thinner walls and stronger tubes.

I don't really care for the way their bikes perform and find maestro to be okay at everything and good at nothing, but the actual quality of their frame construction is best in class.
  • 2 0
 @tsheep: The difference is that GG is direct to consumer, Trek is not. If you look at Trek's dealer pricing it's a lot lower than what GG charges. That of course make's sense given that GG is a smaller company that manufactures frames in the US, but you are not comparing apples to apples here.
  • 3 1
 @homerjm: you saw one bike with dents and now every giant is shit? Have you seen the giant factory dude?
  • 3 0
 @ranchitup:
There may be business structure differences, but it is apples to apples for the consumer. What is it about the Slash that possibly justifies an ~85% premium of the comparable (and arguably superior) product? Why should I, Joe Schmoe consumer looking for a frame for my next build, consider the slash for even a moment with that absurd price tag? Personally I do not see any reason to, which bums me out because I always prefer frame-up builds, and companies seem to be doing their best to make that not economically viable.
  • 1 1
 @tsheep: Right, I wouldn't choose the slash frame either if I was going to do a frame up build, but then again I wouldn't be doing a frame up build at all if economics were that big of a concern. They are notoriously expensive and don't really provide anything you can't just get with a pre built bike. I feel like most people here complaining about the frame price would never actually buy a frame in the first place.

And I thought it was worth mentioning that as you stated, "Trek's ridicolous markup" is not actually their markup, as they are not selling the frame at that price.
  • 2 0
 @ranchitup: all i do is frame up builds as it is way cheaper given the fact that iam able to just swap parts over from previous bike for the most part.. That, and once ur in with a shop as a customer, the achievable discounts on a frame make it that much sweeter...
  • 3 0
 @ranchitup:
Errr... if you think a frame-up build is "notoriously expensive" then you're doing it wrong. Stop buying components at MSRP and you very quickly discover you can get a bike for cheaper than a full build, all the while avoiding all of the stupid little things product managers do to cut corners on you.

RE markup- ever read a dealer contract? Your LBS cannot drop the price on that new release frame just because they like you, they are required to maintain minimum pricing for a set time, and that requirement comes from the manufacturer or they will lose their status as a dealer. So yes, it is Trek's markup, they are the one who sets it and the one who enforces it.
  • 2 0
 @tsheep: There aren't a ton of places to buy at less than msrp these days. Are you walking into your LBS and saying I'm only buying parts if you give me 10% off? That being said most shops do 15% off accessories with a new bike purchase and the shop I bought my Santa Cruz frame off did also offer me 15% off any components I wanted to buy.

I prefer frame up but there is no question that with most brands a full build comes to maybe a grand less than all of the components at msrp, assuming you're okay with dt 370 hubs and generic brakes.
  • 2 2
 @friendlyfoe: Tubes who are stronger because they are thinner? Yeah for the overall bike but with a thin wall like that, a bike who just fall on one side could be a result in a massive dent. That's not heavy duty like all Nicolai sleds are. With their geometry the rest of the industry still doesn't catch up. So who cares how good your hydroformig if it gets dents that easy. If I had those paper walls my bike would be dead after a tree hit it with 30kph on the lower tube. It is a dent but a small one. Any hydroformig I had get a dent from almost anything if you insist that it should be light as freck.
  • 2 2
 @friendlyfoe: Giant hydroformign could be as good as it be,but for an enduro bike,a thin wall tube maybe is not the best choice. Those other brands choose a far better material to start with,like many other small bike manufacturers.
So crazy hydroforming thin wall tubes are good to some bikes,but not for a burly bike IMO.
Big brands made cheap aluminum bikes for the lower end range,you can´t compare a Giant frame with a Litleville or Nikolai.
20 years ago hydroforming could be a thing but now,not so much I think.
  • 29 0
 That storage looks like it’s specialized in carrying snacks
  • 11 2
 It makes you think so. But this really is the new Trek Stash.
  • 8 1
 Its for keeping morphine for when your knees explode from being too far behind the axle lol
  • 33 8
 How much did they pay you guys to not just whine about the seat angle for the whole review?
  • 30 0
 About $3.50
  • 6 0
 I think the price of the frame-only hints at how much they had to pay.
  • 9 0
 @RonSauce: god damn it Trek I ain’t gonna give you no tree fiddy!
  • 4 0
 @ProperPushIrons: God damn Lock Ness Monster..
  • 29 8
 Big miss on the seat angle and I can't figure out why Trek thinks they need a special shock setup. Even if it works slightly better, it just puts more serious riders off because we don't want to deal with anything proprietary.
  • 27 2
 Trek is just being Trek. Their most important company policy is to always, always include some form of proprietary BS which, in practice, works exactly like everything else, but gives the marketing people something to wax lyrically about. Examples include, but are in no way limited to, Tru-shaft, Knockblock, Full-floater, React.iv, Isostrut and Boost.
  • 1 0
 The original super deluxe ultimate doesnt fit this frame. They needed a different lockout position
  • 1 1
 I don't get it either.
  • 25 4
 My girlfriend and I agreed we wanted to get kinky in the bedroom. I get home from work and find her already in bed with a 2021 trek slash. She was grabbing on to the seat tube when she turned to me and whispered “looks like a session”.
  • 23 3
 Maybe I'm missing something here, but why keep the Knock Block at all if the fork passes underneath the frame without contacting it? Wasn't that the whole point of it to begin with?
  • 12 1
 To prevent brakes levers from hiting the top tube ?
  • 35 4
 They don’t want to abondon their dumb idea so quickly? Only 2 years ago it was so important. Kinda like a straight down tube. Or full floater. Or re-active.
  • 13 0
 Was thinking the same at first but it's actually nice as it will prevent ripping out the brake hose during a crash. Had that happen to me
  • 3 2
 @SleepingAwake: perfect, soo it can really stay in the spot for stabbing you in the gut
  • 19 0
 I spit up some of my coffee when you said a frame is $4000, HOW?? Is it to justify the price of there full builds when they are entirely built with inhouse components?
  • 17 0
 I felt the slack seat tube wasn't as big of a deal when the new Wreckoning was launched. After riding, I've changed my mind. Trek messed up with their seat tube angle on this bike and I probably wouldn't buy due to the seat tube. I also have long legs and run a 210mm dropper. If you're shorter it probably won't matter as much. Norco seems to have the best grasp on how to build a bike with modern geometry.
  • 19 0
 Santa Cruz gets all the crazy for being super expensive but look at Specialized and Trek!
  • 15 0
 You ain’t lying. Why do other brands get the “dentist” designation when nearly all bigger brand bikes cost the same or more.
  • 8 0
 @twozerosix: it's extra weird with Santa Cruz, as they've got the partiers and the style cats and the Minnaar and they're a MOUNTAIN BIKE COMPANY!!!
  • 1 4
 Santa Cruz is one of the worst value for money in the overall package. I bought my Enduro at the same time another friend ordered his Megatower. We paid the same,and the bike came with very similar specs ,but the SC came stock with one use rims and cheap sram brakes . The SC bike is 2019,mine is 2020. I love how the Megatower rides even more than my Enduro hahaha. The bike is expensive,yes,but it is dam good. I never liked any Trek bikes,they are ugly and expensive.
  • 2 0
 Agree but Santa Cruz does an amazing job showing off this “boutique” image and if you really saw their revenue numbers, you’d be shocked. They are a BIG brand.
  • 1 0
 @pedalingbobby: where can one find these revenue numbers?
  • 1 0
 @twozerosix: thats always cracked me up a bit.. My sb130 frame was cheaper.. That, and the geometry on my 2019 more modern.. But hey, its still a dentist bike to the pb peeps..
  • 1 1
 @twozerosix: u gotta know where to look.
  • 2 1
 @bohns1: you mean you don't know
  • 1 0
 @twozerosix: nope.. I mean i aint doin peeps dirty work homie.
  • 14 1
 until trek figures out that a slack seat tube is not the way to go, i will never buy one of their full sus bikes again. maybe it does ride super good, i dont care. i remember the days of my ass getting chaffed every longer ride because of that slack seat tube. the energy required is just too much and its too difficult. never again.
  • 5 1
 Yes! Same reason I sold my Remedy a few years ago.
  • 2 0
 And I thought it was just me!
  • 14 0
 PLEASE, do the same review with the new Kona Process X !!! This bike seems to have the perfect numbers but I want to know its ride feeling??
  • 17 0
 We will - there's one on the way.
  • 12 0
 The STA feels okay to me. However, seems that the seat tube is not straight enough for logner dropper posts, which is a deal-breaker for me. Anyway, a $4k frame with RS Super Delux shocks (instead of Fox Float X2 or DHX X2) is not a good deal at all---even the super expensive Yeti frames come with the X2 shocks.
  • 1 0
 The large frame has a 220 mm dropper insertion. It’s plenty long enough
  • 2 0
 The super deluxe is just as good as fox
  • 14 2
 The perfect Trek for people who will only buy Treks. Maybe their local shop only has Trek. Maybe they have fond memories of their 1993 930. Maybe they really like Bontrager parts. Or maybe they can get a really, really good deal. Nobody who rides another brand is going to run out and buy this but the Trek loyalist will eat this right up.

Like all Trek’s it’s 85% of the way there but between the seat angle, the lack of value (at MSRP which only suckers pay) and the proprietary parts it has something glaring that will keep plenty of people from buying it.
  • 15 0
 Still can't get over seeing NX drivetrain components on a 9.7 costing $4800.
  • 14 1
 So they fixed the need for knock block, BUT they kept the "feature" seems crazy to me.
  • 1 1
 Couldn't bail on their " And Now With Knock Block Tech" just yet .It will be gone next cycle,

Straight shot downtube BS marketing, shot themselves in the ass with that one
  • 14 1
 Hello Trek, welcome to 2 years ago!
  • 12 1
 the thru-shaft shock is already on it's way to needing a damper bleed, it's shooting oil out the bottom and trapping dust.....
  • 11 2
 Two articles I would love to see from PB:

1. An interview or round table with major brand product managers on how frameset prices are determined. There’s a fat margin in there someplace, so where does it go.

2. A short how-to on proper photography for bicycles, new, old, for vanity or for sale. This is for the mouth breathers who post for-sale ads of a dirty bike, leaning against the garage wall, non-drive side presented, zoomed in on the handlebars.

Thank you.
  • 3 0
 #1 definitely.
  • 3 0
 1. The margin goes to Marketing to come up with reasons why useless crap like the knockblock is necessary.

Potentially more legit reason: when it's sold well under MSRP, the clueless customer thinks they got a good deal and can tell their friends about it. There's a watch company that does this, posts super high MSRPs for garish, trashy junk watches that sell for less than half that.
  • 7 0
 @texag I don't know anything about Trek's situation, but in my experience it's almost never the marketing department that wants more features for features' sake.

It's usually the sales team that has their clients (shops) asking for "game changing" USPs they feel would make their job of selling bikes easier. And engineering teams gotta engineer, so somethings they engineer the engineering engineeringly.

@twozerosix product line management usually sets prices based on the total cost of a project, over the expected sales period of the product, at the margin they've set for themselves. Frames will be a literal fraction of their sales and a large percentage of them get sold at significantly below MSRP, so it could be as simple as "we are the most premium, so lets price above other premium brands' frames" or even "we don't have enough frames to satisfy the demand in year one, so we're pricing high to cool sales and match demand to dollars."

This is all a fancy way of saying that frames are $4K because people pay $4K for frames. Smile
  • 1 1
 @brianpark: if marketing isn't determining which features are on a bike then they're doing it wrong.

Done properly, Marketing should be the voice of the customer in the organisation to understand and determine what they want and what's important in the purchase decision / process.

Done poorly, they add proprietary aspects and unnecessary elements in an attempt to differentiate and show innovation. It seldom lasts which is why we end up with Knock Block, Re:aktiv, DRCV, Straight Shot.

I've had 3 Treks recently and still own one but I tire of their attempts to be smart where they don't need to.
  • 1 1
 @brianpark: and of course thru-shaft... How could I forget that? And Control Freak cable management. It does work but is a PITA when working on the bike.
  • 16 4
 This might bring me over to Trek! I've been a M/L my whole life.
  • 21 0
 Hell yeah. 5'10" always between sizes. Really wish more manufacturers would make frames for literally the most common height out there.
  • 1 0
 Nukeproof do something similar - only with their 275b Mega though (I think)
  • 1 0
 @dubod22: what the hell is 275b you mean 650b
  • 11 0
 Forget the bottle, ram a BURGER in there
  • 1 0
 That is clearly a snag hatch.
  • 10 0
 This comment would make you think the average PB'er is 6'5" and climbs mostly 20% grades.
  • 1 0
 *Comment section Frown
  • 12 2
 Slack seat tube angle and way over priced - PASS
  • 9 0
 So sick to see frame storage on an aluminum model - fingers crossed that tech makes its way into more bikes
  • 6 0
 The storage locker on the aluminium frame is awesome. I've been waiting for this ever since Spesh brought out the SWAT box. Up until now I've been very conflicted. I really like the in bike storage but I really don't like carbon frames. This is the future. All other bike companies take note.
  • 12 3
 Oh yay - measurements in inches.
  • 10 3
 75.6 Seat Angle? Is it 2018 again?
Not even close Trek, see top comment.
  • 4 1
 Looks like Trek has corrected some of the following complaints I had about my 2018 model:
- Reach was on the short side, so I up-sized to a large to make up for it and had to run a shorter dropper post with seat
slammed all the way forward
- re Activ thru-shaft shock was less than stellar, so I swapped it with a Fox X2
- Press fit bottom bracket, so I replaced those wimpy bearings on the regular since I decided to run a 30mm crank
spindle
- Thin carbon down tube w/ less than adequate protection, so I ran a carbon down tube guard to prevent hole from rock
strike
- The necessity to run the knock block system w/ proprietary stem was a pain, so I bought one of those knock block
steerer tube collars.
I'm not so sure the 2021 Slash has improved the following:
- STA still pretty damn slack, and it still looks like not much available seat post insertion to run longer dropper posts
- I don't know if the paint durability has improved. You could just look at the 2018 model flat red paint and it would chip
- Trek probably still holds the hard line policy on considering any warranty for the inevitable rock-strike damage to that
thin carbon down tube. I know several riders that incurred a hole in the down tube and were denied warranty.
- The 2018 carbon model ISCG mount was a weak point, not sure if this area has been beefed up.
  • 1 1
 With all these reasons said, why would anyone want to buy carbon? Hmmm.
  • 3 0
 This is priced ridiculously, period. $4000 for a frame with dated geometry? $8000 for an X01 build with a crappy GX cassette? Insulting. What a monumental joke. When did companies start lying about build specs? This is clearly taking advantage of the integrity of other, better companies who don’t pull this sort of crap on the unsuspecting consumer. X01 should mean all drivetrain parts are X01 unless you have an equivalent or better crank for some good reason* (*making more profit by swapping in inferior equipment is not a good reason). You should update all your bikes to X01 cassettes and chains, or rename the build level to acknowledge the actual build spec. Only people riding these better be getting industry deals or die-hard Trek fanboys who think a bike with a slack-looking seattube is just the best thing ever.
  • 3 0
 Trek is out of their goddam minds for the spec at these prices. And $4000 for the frame!? WTF!? The bike weighs a shit ton, the components are trash, the STA is two years behind the times, proprietary shock and they stole their linkage design from Dave Weagle. No way in hell would I spend this much money on the Hyundai of bike brands. You can get a number of better bikes for this much coin.
  • 4 2
 I am a little confused about the wheelbase. Seeing how my Transition Sentinel has the same reach figures and essentially the same HA, how is it over 20 mm longer than the ML Trek Slash that has a longer chainstay. What other variables drive this?

FTR, this bike looks like a winner. The relatively slack seat angle and lighter frame will make it a more well rounded option for those who want to use it as a mountain bike, not just a winch and plummet race machine. The moderate wheelbase will make it easier to maneuver on tighter trails. Good job Trek.
  • 3 0
 The Sentinel has a longer front triangle to move your entire body forward to be more centered on the bike.
  • 6 0
 The "coolest" feature on this bike is the hole to put stuff in. - Kazimer
  • 4 0
 Dear lord I hope that absolute disaster of a shock has been improved. They've been the perfect combination of unreliable and difficult to get parts for (at least in Canada).
  • 1 1
 And unless they've made changes to the lower yoke mount, compatibility with other shocks may still require custom hardware like ShockCrafts Desktiv kit.
  • 2 0
 f*ck TREK. f*ck those guys for making mountain biking less accessible for the masses. Those guys don’t give two shits about bikes. All they love is money. The bummer is that other companies will adopt Trek’s pricing structure. And make that problem worse.
  • 4 0
 I wish I rode enduro so I could buy this bike... Or maybe just not have student loans.
  • 2 0
 Does the long reach trend require a steeper seat post? (I would guess it does?) My last gen Enduro is 76 degrees and that thing climbs up anything - no complaints at all and seat tube angle.
  • 2 0
 You need to the steeper seat angle to keep the effective top tube length in check. I would also argue that your Enduro's 76-deg STA is plenty steep.

But if you had a size "large" with 480 mm of reach and 72-deg STA, the effective top tube length would be out of control.
  • 2 0
 Just here to mention how great of a trail bike my '18 E29. Climbs well, even single track, and descends quite well too.
  • 2 0
 @JSTootell: Yup. Content with mine as well.
  • 4 0
 Seems like a lot of cash just for a slightly slacker slash with a snack stash.
  • 6 0
 4000 for the frame? lol
  • 4 0
 EVERY FRAME EVERY MANUFACTURER SNACK STASH SWAT WHATEVER STORAGE POCKET ™ GOING FORWARD
  • 1 0
 First pic says it all, i did the same thing with my old Slash 29. What a dissapointment. I expected even steeper than previous aluminium Slash and something as progressive what old Slash 29 was at the time of release, a gamechanger. Seems like they didn't get the memo that Enduro racebike has to climb to start of the stage. Seated position needs to be upright, short and on top of bb, not behind it. Yes that comes with lack of flat trail comfort and more pressure on hands, but endurobike gets pedalled mostly up and down the hill anyway. Upright climbing position helps to breathe more easy and recover before next stage than hip folded like switchblade. Reach numbers are also tad too short, but managable.
  • 1 0
 Looks alright to me, it's going to climb and descend better than the old one which was pretty good at both.

Not sure what happens in the rest of the world but here new season bikes are super expensive, then at end of summer they are a couple of grand cheaper which is when it makes sense to buy them. Pro tip; you don't need instant gratification. Do all you people moaning about the price of a just-released enduro bike also moan about how long it takes to have a wank?
  • 2 0
 Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock Super Deluxe Ultimate ThruShaft shock
  • 1 0
 The snack stash? I would love to see Trek “pimp my whip” episodes on pinkbike lol. They basically throw away your old bike and give you new bike custom, and somehow your travel van gets a flatscreen built into the door and PlayStation behind the seat! Your bike gets a west coast inspired paint and gloss with Laser etched diamond trimmed I9s sent off to off to Troy Lee for 1 of a kind detailing. Then because you surf too they throw in a couple of brand new surf boards...!!

We need a show like that for trail builders and senders!!
  • 6 1
 looks like a process!
  • 4 0
 Looks like the seat tube angle of a session!
  • 4 2
 The main pivot bearing looks like it could be about double the size it is on a bike like this. Predicting that's the weak point.
  • 4 1
 If the fork can now pass underneath the downtube wit no issues, why The knock block?
  • 1 0
 Brake levers...
  • 8 2
 If they took it out it might be an admission that they were talking bobbins from the start.... best leave it in till people forget about the marketing
  • 7 1
 @Compositepro: it’s definitely nice to have and the only people who complain about it are the ones who complain about everything. The new knockblock has a wider angle and is removeable, so out of the box it prevents average riders from tearing apart shift and brake cables during a crash
  • 1 0
 @Zimbaboi: ah ok thanks.
  • 3 3
 Looking at this, I realized that enduro bikes simply do nothing for me anymore. I do not race enduro(like the most of us), it is a drag when overmountain-ing and it is expeeeensive(4000 USD for a frame??!); nope, the only bike I am looking forward seeing is the new nukeproof. No, not the yellow new Mega that was raced in Zermatt, no.., I refer to the Nuke's response to the Commencal Clash, the green one with a suspension design based on the Dissent.
Life is too short to have XC bikes, Enduro bikes or DH bikes(achtung, trigger spotted!). As always, the most fun one cand find is in-between.

(Now really, for most of the trail riding and overmountain trips, a burly trail 130-150mm is enough; and for bikeparks or trail heads that need to be peddal at, a big 180mm bike is better than either a full enduro(more capable) or a full DH(you can't pedal it up the hill and it takes the fun out of 95% of the riding trails out there..); basically, the best combo is:
1. Gravel bike, for xc duties
2. Burly trail bike, for trail/epic rides duties
3. Biiig 180mm bike for serious gravity trails

That's it!
  • 2 0
 No need for internal frame storage when you have a jersey with a kick-ass breast pocket for keeping your burrito tight to the vest!
  • 2 0
 If you start a bike review with "You know the drill", doesn't that just mean all bikes are basically the same?
  • 6 0
 it means they review all bikes the same

That said: looks like a session
  • 1 0
 Translated it means Yes you may have read read the same press release on all the other other sites.....but
  • 5 0
 @barnz0rz, no, it means that pretty much all of the bikes that are being released these days are longer & slacker than the previous version.
  • 3 0
 Kona knows a thing or two..
  • 1 0
 haha yeah, looks like a kona
  • 4 1
 Wow that seat angle, What is their product manager doing over there?
  • 3 1
 Living in 2009
  • 2 2
 Gorgeous frame, such clean and tidy lines. But apparently they still haven't fixed the slack effective seat tube angle. Which is a shame because the slack STA was the only thing people complained about on the old model.
  • 1 0
 Snack storage? The main selling point should be that they got rid of that ugly ass bumper on the downtube.. that thing looked wack AF.
  • 2 0
 Does anyone else feel like they read this article already on the new trek slash? On pink bike even? Deja vu
  • 2 0
 LOL @ seat tube.... swing and a miss Trek, haven't you been paying attention the past 5 years???
  • 3 0
 Numbered rebound knob. Now this is progress in the sport I can support!
  • 1 0
 I think companies should start providing table of virtual seat tube angle at all usable sadle heights in 10mm increments... that would be most telling for potential buyer
  • 3 1
 Not sure why anyone would buy a Trek with so many superior options out there.
  • 1 0
 I'm glad PB waited another few days from the "new slash spotted" article. That showed the "full review tomorrow" crowd alright, thanks for the disclaimer.
  • 1 0
 ...this still isn't a review. Smile
  • 1 0
 Not sure on the seat angle but liking the T.W.A.T box (I assume that’s what it’s called)they’ve added for storage. Especially on the Aluminium version as well
  • 1 0
 Tools water air tools
  • 1 0
 why would they make the XL have super short chain stays and an insane reach and EF....you will be pedaling from the back seat!
  • 1 0
 LOL!
Mondraker Superfoxy was beaten down for seat tube angles (75,5 effective / 70,5 actual) and this one is ok with ~67 actual STA?

Keep your shit together PinkBike.
  • 3 0
 Twat box please
  • 3 1
 What no acronym on the SWAT???
  • 7 0
 Heard they're spinning around the idea of the TWAT Box
  • 3 0
 Sexy bike is sexy!
  • 2 0
 Trek stash, its medicinal officer
  • 3 2
 Also they should have designed a 38mm Seat tube/dropper post to go with the ZEB. That's a miss.
  • 3 1
 So how does a 5 pound frame build up to a 32 pound bike?
  • 4 0
 10 pound fork and eagle?
  • 1 1
 Instead of calling it a SWAT box like what Specialized has on the down tube, Trek made that into a locker and called it their next standard!
  • 2 0
 Glad I didn't order one of those Pinkbike t-shirts. Bacon neck much Smile
  • 1 0
 I've got a lav mic clipped to it, hence the slight wrinkle.
  • 3 0
 looks like a Ransom
  • 2 0
 LANDING IS AN IMPACT EVENT!
  • 2 4
 "There's also a numbered rebound knob, one of those “Why hasn't everyone been doing this?” features that should help speed up setup."

Because fitting 1-14 or more on a little dial means tiny and mostly useless printing. This has like 8 clicks? And a pressure range of probably like 150 to 300. So 1 click per 20ish PSI? That's a pretty big gap between clicks, when people obsess over like 5 psi.

What is the obsession with making setup faster? Most people aren't getting new bikes every other week, setup is not a frequent thing for the vast majority of riders. Hell, RockShox and you also tell us that less dials is better because then you can just set it and forget it. So how does faster setup help there, when it's only supposed to happen once? Does saving 3 seconds to count click really make a significant difference on something that happens so infrequently? Save the machining and printing costs and make the shocks less expensive.
  • 1 1
 Alright first of all, what does air pressure have to do with clicks?

Second, it’s nice to be able to fiddle with knobs for different trails (I do +4 clicks LSC for jumps, for example. And if I had HSC I’d add a bunch there too). But currently there are no numbers and if I don’t remember when I last adjusted my shock, I have to fully close it and then start counting. It’s a minor pita
  • 1 0
 @sdurant12: Those numbers were added to LSR, which is very closely related to spring rate (air pressure on an air spring). It's not something that is changed very often. Adding air pressure means you will need more rebound damping, and vice verse. If there are only 8 clicks, and a pressure range of 150 psi, then it's going to take around 20 psi of pressure change to get into the range of the next click. For smaller pressure changes, you'll be "in between clicks".

Either that or the adjustment range is smaller, and the rider running close the minimum pressure or the rider running close to the maximum pressure will run out of clicks and still not get the correct damping for their pressure.

If you just want to add 4 clicks, just add 4 clicks, go back 4 clicks when you're done doing whatever needed 4 more clicks. I hope you don't need printed numbers just to count to 4.
  • 1 1
 @just6979: you’re right that rebound should ideally cover the whole weight of spring weights.

But the point is sometimes I change it and then the next ride I don’t remember if I changed it back. So I leave it. Or I change it back when I had already done that. And then think I’m having an off day until I recount all the click from zero.

It’s just a minor inconvenience. Not a big deal ever. But why not print the numbers? Sure it’s probably a couple of dollars on the price of the shock by the time it gets to the consumer but that’s worth it to me. And it’s definitely nice for shops etc with demo fleets to help with setup, or at demo days etc.

Lots of pros, very few cons imo
  • 1 0
 @sdurant12: it's got one huge con, that only 8 clicks mean waaaay more people are going to be in between clicks.

If you forget you changed it or can't f*cking count to 8, that's on you. If someone can't get the ideal setting because the clicks aren't fine enough, that's on RS, and it's a f*cking stupid trade-off
  • 1 0
 T47 right? pretty much does away with the reason for dub. Let’s talk 30 mm spindles for all !!!!
  • 2 0
 saddle position is calling that geometry is not right out of the box
  • 1 0
 So to put it bluntly, as you did with the wreckoning, you don’t think the STA is steep enough?
  • 1 0
 Sped him enduro or trek slash which is your money going on if you are in the market for a spray or trek ?
  • 1 0
 The actual text above should say

Spesh enduro or trek slash which is your money going on if I’m the market for a spesh or trek
  • 1 0
 Frame looks better with the more curved down-tube than the straight tube of prior years!
  • 1 0
 I want one with a motor. Does the next Rail have that shock and rear triangle?
  • 1 0
 Is it arbitrary to talk about actual seat tube angle and virtual seat tube angle without specifying saddle relative to BB?
  • 1 0
 Looks like the molded drain ports below the shock are gone which is too bad. Might have a pool there after a wash.
  • 5 4
 Sooo how do we feel about sub 76° seat angle?
  • 12 9
 Slide the seat forward and it's 77 degrees. Not a big deal. Pinkbikers like to complain.
  • 8 5
 @jwdenver: there is absolutely no way that the STA is anywhere near 76 to begin with.
  • 3 4
 @jwdenver: Your dropper bushings will complain too
  • 3 1
 @jambarbeast: Oh really?
  • 3 0
 @jwdenver: Well, 75.6 to begin with, extended to my 790 mm hight and I'm back to oldfashioned 74 degrees
  • 2 0
 I don't think it is. Technically anyhow. At the standard measured height of level with the bars, in photoshop with a grid it looks at least as steep as some other 76 degree bikes.
  • 2 0
 @jambarbeast: the effective angle is. The kink is irrelevant to the relationship of your seat and bb
  • 3 3
 @jwdenver: according to the NSMB review the actual seat tube angle is 66.6 in the low and 67.1 in high. That is laughable and the whole eFfeCtiVe sEaT tube thing is a poorly concealed scam.
  • 3 2
 @Zimbaboi: it’s not irrelevant to the actual purpose of measuring the STA though. You can make whatever “effective” STA you want. It tells you something when every review has a picture with the seat slammed all the way forward...
  • 2 3
 @jambarbeast: dude. The seat tube can’t go directly through the pivot! The effective seat tube is literally basic math. Just because there is a kink doesn’t mean the relationship between your seat and bottom bracket changes. It’s a perfectly acceptable pedaling angle, it’s just that everyone wants longer reaches and slams their seat forward to make themselves feel more comfortable sitting down.
  • 1 3
 @jambarbeast: the purpose is to put your butt over your bottom bracket. It doesn’t matter if your seat tube extends directly horizontal from your bars, the relationship between your seat and bb is the only one that matters.
  • 1 2
 @Zimbaboi: did I say it has to? how does every other manufacturer manage to create a bike with STA that is within 1-2 degrees of the “effective” STA?
  • 3 1
 @Zimbaboi: right and with a 10 degree difference in effective STA And normal STA the anyone with relatively longer legs will be sitting on their tire.
  • 2 0
 @jambarbeast: Right. I still ride old style geo with slack seat angle, but even with my quite long chainstays (450 mm) I still have to slide forward on the tip of my saddle as soon as climb become more serious. I would be nice to be able to stay in normal pedaling position during climbs..
  • 1 1
 @jambarbeast: i have those long legs you’re talking about and my fuel ex is half a degree slacker and still comfortable with my seat in a normal positon. I have like 5 inches of saddle to bar drop.
  • 2 1
 @jambarbeast: also, florian nicolai is 6’ tall, rides a large and has his seat slammed all the way back.
  • 1 2
 @Zimbaboi: okay and Patrick Mahomes likes to eat his steak with ketchup. Doesnt mean the general public does. i don’t know what saddle to bar drop means....
  • 3 1
 @jambarbeast: if you don’t know what it means then you probably shouldn’t be arguing about geometry
  • 1 1
 @Zimbaboi: looked it up and it is a road bike measurement for measuring the difference in handle bars to seat which has nothing to do with effective seat tube...? Are you trying to say your optimal seat height? Your bars are not involved.
  • 1 2
 @jambarbeast: effective seat tube height is measured at level height with the bars. It definitely is relevant
  • 2 1
 @Zimbaboi: no it’s not. It depends on the manufacturer. And the measurement is not in relation to the bars but the top of the head tube. This is meaningless on larger sizes where the saddle height is much higher than the top of the head tube
  • 1 0
 @jambarbeast: I always measure angle that the post actually is
  • 2 1
 @jambarbeast: so I don’t know if you read pinkbike’s Q&A with trek. But trek measures their effective seat tube angles from a 760mm saddle to bb distance. That means you have to have legs longer than a 36 inch inseam for the 75 degree angle to be any less than stated, and in fact anyone with an inseam less than that will enjoy a steeper seat tube angle, especially because of the actual seat tube angle. You can go ahead and say I’m right
  • 1 2
 @Zimbaboi: dude how many times are you going to move the goal posts? First it was irrelevant, then it was based on the bar height, and now it’s based on a non-existent Q&A where they arbitrarily chose a 760mm saddle height across all sizes. There’s a reason you are being downvoted through this entire thread and it’s because so far everything you’ve said is horseshit.
  • 2 1
 @jambarbeast: you’re being downvoted too bud. I didn’t know it was based off of their chosen seat height until today but i was still correct based on those other measurements because that’s how the industry generally does them. I was originally trying to say it was nothing to complain about but now it turns out trek went above and beyond what i had originally thought and now you’re just mad because it’s not as bad as you thought either.
  • 1 0
 @Zimbaboi: Give me proof that anything you said is verifiably true.
  • 2 1
 @jambarbeast: read the Q&A with trek on Pinkbikes instagram. It’s all you need
  • 1 0
 @Zimbaboi: I have scrolled through literally years of Pinkbike posts on Instagram and didn't see it. Send me a link. I would love it if a Trek employee said that they measure the seat tube angle across all sizes at 760 mm completely defying basic geometry to get 76.1 across the board.
  • 1 0
 @jambarbeast: it was on their story for 24hrs only. I just got screenshots of it if you want them
  • 1 0
 @Zimbaboi: Yeah idk if you can post them or send a link.
  • 1 0
 @Zimbaboi: ok I’ll assume you don’t have it.
  • 1 0
 I don’t have any way to send them to you @jambarbeast:
  • 8 11
 Its would be good to have a few more opinions on these first ride impressions. I feel like a lot of the reviews are done by the 2 Mike's that ride in places catered to these types of bikes. A portion of the mountain bike community doesn't have access to these kinds of trails on a daily basis. Just because the Mike's think a seat tube is to slack at 75 or head tube is to steep at 64 doesn't mean the bike is faulted or out of date. This bike might be perfect for plenty of people. I have to disagree with trail bikes that have a 64 degree head angle is a push in the right direction. Its on the edge of what's manageable vs fun on long climbs and all day shreds. Maybe I'm butt hurt over my own personal preferences but all these reviews help mold what we ride in the future. I dont know about everyone else but I'm not interested in a chopper style font end with a poor functioning bowed fork(grimdonut)on my next trail bike/enduro/super enduro/downduro/ mini dh/all mountain bike.
  • 27 1
 Keep in mind that we're talking about a 160mm enduro bike here, one that's aimed at racing / aggressive trail riding - it wouldn't make much sense if I spent a bunch of time talking about how it works on flat terrain. Also, not all of my riding is done on ridiculously steep terrain - my local riding area has a great mix of natural trails and bermy, flowy trails that are rideable on any type of bike.

I don't think all bikes need to be crazy long and slack, and there are obviously limits, but I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't mention how a bike's geometry compares to others in the category.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Mike, out of curiosity, which bike geo you consider over the limit? Leaving out the grim donut of course
  • 1 1
 Your points are good and if it was a 130-140 mm trail bike I would agree on STA. The last thing you want is a seat up your you-know-what when doing short super punchy climbs out of the saddle, so 80° Is too much in those scenarios

But this is an enduro sled meant to sit and winch up hill, then go balls to the wall down hill.

Horses for courses.
  • 2 4
 @mikekazimer: I completely understand where you are coming from and I agree that the review should not be based on flat terrain. I would like to say most people are trail riders even if on the aggressive side still have melow trails and flow trails they ride and may only have one bike in the stable. I guess I'm trying to say for future sake is that I hope daily drivers and weekend warrior bikes don't become too extreme for the average mtb enthusiast based on a trend built by reviews of a small portion of the mtb community.
  • 12 1
 "This review about bikes that are made for terrain I don't have access to doesn't talk about how it rides on terrain I do have access to that isn't suited to this bike at all!"
  • 2 1
 @texag: Bikes like the Spur, Optic and the new Revel are everyday rides that are getting the same treatment like there meant to be raced down steep rough terrain. They are just trail bikes and at some point its too much and they loose that light nimble feel.
  • 2 1
 What kind of riding are you doing that necessitates 160mm, but not be slack?
  • 5 0
 @rckon03, have you had a chance to ride the Spur, Optic, or Revel? There are benefits to the new geometry, even on mellower trails.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: I did demo the optic before may last frame purchase. To be honest it was to long and the front end felt floppy on tight climbs. Down hill was good but I didn't like the slower steering response. I may just need more time on one but its a hefty investment to not love it. Ill shut up though and thanks for your input.
  • 3 2
 3k for the slash 7, 2.5k for just a frame..... Some dumb shit right there
  • 3 0
 It's almost like they want you to buy the full build?
  • 4 7
 Just a comment on seat angles. Rider fit has nothing to do with trends. A manufacturer will design the frame for a certain body size. A seat angle should increase as the frame reach increases for a certain intended rider height. Another way of putting it: the steeper the seat angle, the larger the reach is/can/should be for a given rider height. Or yet another way of putting it: the larger the reach on the bike you are going to ride in comparison to what you're used to, the steeper should the seat angle be in comparison to what you're used to. So, beware. If you're considering a bike that's just slightly larger than you're used to, the seat angle should also be just slightly steeper. If you really like to upsize like Mike Kazimer does, you should consider the bikes with the steeper seat angles. So coming back to this bike, not everyone likes to ride a monster truck and always go for one or two sizes larger. This seat angle will be appropriate for them.
  • 2 0
 did you look at trek's recommendations before posting this twice? The L is the only size that 5'11" fits according to them. Sure 5'10.5" is the upper range of ML and very close but he is outside this range. Reach is also only about 2cm difference, although Trek messed up their medium low reach in the chart so that is a guess based on the bike in high.
  • 1 0
 @JayUpNorth: Yeah you're right. Their seat tube angle is good for someone who likes to ride cramped on a bike. So, quite retrograde.
  • 1 0
 @JayUpNorth: I mean, it's not so bad. It's within the range of correction through saddle placement. Just an extra 0.7-1.0 degrees would make it optimal in my view.
  • 1 0
 @DavidGuerra: Agreed. I don't think bikes are 100% dialed in yet. I bought a GT Sensor and the steeper seat tube angle feels good climbing but reach isn't quite right for me. I would slide my seat forward for a little bit more front end weight while climbing but there isn't the room. It does pedal much more efficiently than my old 2013 100mm travel bike and makes downhills so much easier that it's still a huge upgrade.
  • 1 0
 @JayUpNorth: my Nicolai feels pretty dialed.
  • 1 0
 @erikkellison: Nice bike. I guess my comment is not really related to one bike being dialed, but more that when we reach a state where new models only get slightly refined instead of the pretty substantial changes that we can consider things pretty dialed in. Things are still being changed by a degree or two as new models get introduced.
  • 1 0
 @JayUpNorth: Sure. I just think we do have geometry pretty well figured out, but some manufacturers are slower to adapt than others for reasons other than performance. I will never forget a Santa Cruz employee told me they can’t change their bikes too fast (to make them longer and steeper/slacker) for risk of alienating their loyal customer base who is accustomed to a certain size/feel. Trek is weirdly married to their aesthetic of a bent seat tube (for marketing/recognition purposes), making it hard for them to design a bike with a seat tube that is steep enough when extended to pedal height. A steeper actual STA makes this easy, but the marketing folk I’m sure said “no, we can’t have a straight tube originating from near the BB” (which works great).
  • 2 1
 tomorrow we get the "Long Term Review"...? Or is that NEXT Tuesday... Smile
  • 2 1
 Sorry, but $3500 for a low spec aluminum frame bike. No thanks Trek.
  • 2 2
 ATTN BOOTLICKERS: GONNA HIDEYHOLE A PIECE OF RAW CHICKEN IN THE FIRST ONE I SEE
  • 1 0
 Does anyone know if it's coil compatible?
  • 2 0
 It is
  • 1 0
 How are they justifying the carbon frame for $4K!?
  • 1 0
 Would love to know what sizes the Trek riders chose, and their heights.
  • 1 0
 Slightly disappointed.....was expecting it to look like a Santa Cruz!
  • 1 0
 Now this bike looks like a Slash.
  • 1 0
 what's the trail at 4.18?
  • 1 0
 Why do all the Trek "XT" models have SLX brakes?
  • 2 0
 Because they are greedy and don’t actually care about bikes. If you want true value there are brands that are delivering (Commencal, Ibis, Santa Cruz, Norco).
  • 1 0
 Extra water storage at lower rear shock mount! Step above big S ahaha
  • 1 0
 Ripmo AF costs $1,000 less thank this frame only. Homer
  • 1 0
 4 grand for a frame. What a joke.
  • 1 0
 R Dog riding West Texas!!
  • 1 0
 Cant wait to spend 10 million dollars on a new fancy trek. Ooooh boy.
  • 1 0
 Gee my 2020 Sight looks like a keeper with releases like this.
  • 1 1
 Same CS across the range. Lame so very lame Trek
  • 1 1
 There’s a pretty horrific looking mold line on the knock block photo.
  • 2 2
 it has trek proptiotery shock... still never buying one
  • 1 1
 Seat tube angle. It's not ok. Did not read anything else, don't care.
  • 1 0
 Trek Process 165
  • 2 3
 Heyy Trek, take my money if you correct this: ibb.co/HqNKtmy
  • 2 0
 Agreed. That would make all the difference.
  • 1 1
 Looks like a slash...
  • 2 4
 Would be a good improve, see Trek Updating "Warranty policy"
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.051182
Mobile Version of Website