First Ride: 2024 Rocky Mountain Slayer

Jun 14, 2023
by Mike Kazimer  
photo

The Slayer has been in Rocky Mountain's lineup since 2001, and each new model has been longer and slacker than the previous one. That trend continues for the latest edition of this freeride machine, which now has 180mm of rear travel and a 180mm fork (it's also dual crown compatible for anyone interested in creating what would essentially be a pedalable downhill bike). At this rate, I'm pretty curious about what the next version will look like – there has to be a limit to just how long and slack a bike can get, right?

According to Rocky, the Slayer is aimed riders looking for an “aggressive, big mountain bike that can smash bike park laps all day long, and still be pedaled to, from, up, and down their local trails.”
Slayer Details

• Wheel size: MX (S, M), 29" (L, XL)
• 180mm travel, 180mm fork (200mm dual crown compatible)
• 62.5° - 63.3° head angle
• 439 or 449mm chainstay length
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Aluminum & carbon models
• MSRP: $4,599 - $10,299 USD
bikes.com

The size small and medium models come with a mixed wheel setup, and the large and XL versions receive dual 29” wheels. All sizes can be set up in either configuration, but an aftermarket link is necessary to make the switch.

There are a total of seven complete versions of the new Slayer – four carbon framed options and three aluminum. Prices start at $3,799 USD for the Slayer A30 and go all the way up to $10,299 for the Slayer C90. The carbon frame only is priced at $4,199.


photo


Frame Details

The Slayer's front triangle casts a familiar shadow – the shock is still mounted to a brace between the top and down tube, where it's driven by a link that connects the top tube and seat stays. One new feature is the addition of downtube storage that's hidden underneath a magnetic cover. Rocky are calling it the PenaltyBox, and it provides plenty of room for stashing spares and snacks.

There's also tube-in-tube internal cable routing that's designed to work well for all riders, no matter which side they run their rear brake on. Bonus points go to Rocky for not succumbing to the ill-conceived thru-headset cable routing trend.

The carbon frames now also have a carbon rear triangle that Rocky says is stiffer, and designed for aggressive park riding. It's no secret that we had an unfortunate frame failure the last time we tested the Slayer, so it's good to see that the back end has been revised. In Rocky's words, “We designed the Slayer to be resilient enough for non-stop aggressive riding in bikes parks, off features, and down other big mountain mayhem. We’ve reinforced the frame and all suspension pivots to take a beating.”

photo
photo

That new swingarm also has a two position flip chip, similar to what's found on the Altitude enduro bike. That allows for a 10mm difference in chainstay length, going from approximately 439mm to 449mm depending on the position of the Ride-4 flip chip. The Slayer is also UDH compatible, but only in the longer chainstay position.

Like many of Rocky's other models, the Slayer uses bearings at the shock eyelet to reduce friction. It's a valid concept, but it does make spring swaps more of a hassle, since you'll need a special tool to remove the bearings in order create enough room to slide the spring off the shock.


photo


photo

Geometry

The 63-degree head angle of the new Slayer is a whopping 1.5-degrees slacker than the outgoing model. That's in the neutral position, too; it can be lowered all the way to 62.5-degrees by using the Ride-4 adjustment system. Those numbers make the Slayer's intentions clear – downhill stability is very high on its priority list.

The reach has increased by 5mm per size, and now measures 480mm on a size large. That change is accompanied by a steeper seat angle of 77.5-degrees. As I mentioned earlier, there are two chainstay positions, with a 10mm difference between them.


photo
Red lines: 2023 Slayer (MD). Grey: 2021 Altitude 29. White: 2020 Slayer 27. Dashed lines = anti-squat. Solid lines = suspension rate.

Suspension

As the above chart illustrates, the Slayer's leverage ratio has been changed to create a more linear, but still progressive suspension curve. The anti-squat has been increased slightly to help improve the pedaling performance, and it drops off more quickly as the bike goes through its travel.

photo
I wish I could ride like this. That's Hayden Zablotny getting it done down in Utah. Margus Riga photo.

Ride Impressions

Even though shorter travel bikes keep getting more and more capable, I still have a soft spot for a proper freeride bike. They bring me back to my initial years in the Pacific Northwest, when almost every weekend involved trying to conquer some new stunt or rock roll in the woods of Vancouver's North Shore. The trails have evolved, but there are still plenty of tricky test pieces hidden in the forest where a bike like the Slayer makes a lot of sense.

A C50 recently showed up for review, and I've been able to get in a few solid rides so far. All of them involved a decent amount of fire road and singletrack climbing, and even a couple hike-a-bike sections, just to boost the freeride cred, followed by steep, rough descents punctuated by plenty of drops, jumps, and a few spicy rock slabs.

It's been a few years since I last rode the Slayer, but going off my slightly hazy memories the new version feels like a much more formidable machine. The previous version felt a little more like a long travel all-rounder; this new iteration is decidedly more downhill focused. It's not a bad climber, but I did find the climb switch handy to have on long fire road slogs for firming up the shock, and the overall length is noticeable on tighter switchbacks.

As you'd hope, the Slayer is in its element (no pun intended) at higher speeds and on steeper trails – I'd put it solidly in the monster truck / smash through everything category, although it's not totally stuck to the ground – it still jumps very well, and touchdowns are very smooth and controlled.

So far I've been running it in the neutral Ride-4 postion with the chainstays in the shorter setting. That's felt nice and balanced, but I'll be playing with the longest and slackest modes as testing progresses. There are a bunch of bike park laps in the Slayer's future too; look for a in-depth review later this summer.

photo

Spec Check

The C50 is priced at $6,299 USD, and comes with a Shimano SLX drivetrain and 4 piston brakes (with metallic pads), a Fox 38 Performance fork, and a DHX2 Performance Elite coil shock. For the wheels, WTB i30 aluminum rims are laced to a DT Swiss 370 rear hub and a Rocky Mountain branded front hub.

The tires are exactly what you'd hope to see on a bike like this – a Maxxis Assegai with a DoubleDown casing and MaxxGrip rubber up front, and a DHRII, also with a DoubleDown casing but with longer lasting MaxTerra rubber in the rear. In addition, all of the carbon Slayers come with CushCore's XC tire inserts installed. They add an extra 150 grams or so per wheel, but do help prevent pinch flats and rim damage.

Overall, while the price might not present an absolute screaming deal, the build is very solid – there's nothing that needs to be swapped out immediately (okay, I did swap the 175mm post for a 200mm one – I'd consider that a slight spec oversight), and it's great to see that the little things, like good tires, metallic brake pads, good grips, and even tire inserts are taken care of.


Models & Pricing


photo
Slayer C90 | $10,299 USD / $12,999 CAD

photo
Slayer C70 | $7,799 USD / $9,699 CAD
photo
Slayer C50 | $6,299 / $7,799 CAD


photo
Slayer A50 | $4,199 USD / $6,199 CAD
photo
Slayer A30 | $3,799 USD / $4,699 CAD

photo
Slayer A30 Park | $4,599 USD / $5,599 CAD



Photos: Margus Riga / Rocky Mountain

Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,733 articles
Report
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup

243 Comments
  • 83 2
 Where I live this is the perfect bike (if you can only have one). You can hit the bike park day after day without destroying your fancy trail bike and you can grind to the top of the local single tracks or fire roads if needed. You won't be the fastest to the top but you will get there.

When you point it downhill you have a mini DH rig. Love it!
  • 24 0
 right, so what has really changed?
  • 44 5
 @gearbo-x: now with less frame cracking risk
  • 2 0
 @gearbo-x: chainstays are either 9mm or 19mm longer, depending on the setting. And there's a HA adjustment for the same slackness as before, or slacker.

@rnayel: what was cracking on the previous frame? Assuming it wasn't the aluminum models that had that issue?
  • 5 6
 @mammal: hey dude, from the article " It's no secret that we had an unfortunate frame failure the last time we tested the Slayer"

The last time: www.pinkbike.com/news/field-test-2020-rocky-mountain-slayer-carbon-90.html

Cracking was the wrong term, should have said "lower failure risk"
  • 4 1
 @rnayel: That hasn't yet been proven.
  • 36 3
 @rnayel: Yes, I remember the chainstay issue. It was pretty widely speculated that that was the result of insufficient axle torque. I've known a lot of people with those frames, and haven't heard of one failing in that area. It was massively overblown IMO.
  • 12 0
 @mammal: Agreed. I got a 2020 (same year as the infamous test) and have had zero issues with it. Should probably do bearings at some point, but everything is still tight and smooth. I know a ton of people with a Slayer and no one has had any issues.

Also, can't say there are enough changes with this one to make me want to replace with this iteration. They nailed it right off the bat!
  • 13 27
flag sanchofula (Jun 14, 2023 at 12:32) (Below Threshold)
 @mammal: it was a catastrophic failure, axle and frame broke, sent the tester to the hospital, and you think the axle wasn’t properly tightened?

Right, like that happens all the time to folks with a loose rear axle.

Let’s just call it what it is: poor design that wasn’t adequately tested before going mainstream.
  • 15 3
 @sanchofula: yes, it does happen all the time to bikes with a loose rear axle. Rocky did a voluntary recall because 2 out of 15 thousand front triangles snapped on a different frame. If it was an issue they would have addressed it.
  • 27 11
 @olafthemoose, you don't make it to the bottom of A-Line without realizing that an axle is loose. We've addressed this multiple times before.

Who knows, maybe we just got unlucky and had the only weak axle out of a batch - it's great that so many riders out there haven't had any issues with their MY20 Slayers. The good news is that the new bike has a revised design that's claimed to be stronger.
  • 2 13
flag NoahJ FL (Jun 14, 2023 at 13:07) (Below Threshold)
 @gearbo-x: they’ve made it worse in every way for what, I’m my opinion, it’s meant for
  • 4 2
 @mikekazimer: I don't believe it was the issue with rear axle. The linkage bolts between the chainstay and seatstay of my 21 Slayer came untorqued. And I only noticed the rattling when I hammered my rear wheel side ways. Looking at the photo of the broken test bike, I believe it had the same issue as mine.
  • 8 1
 I xc my Slayer, it does fine. It's a C50 2020 and I race Enduro on it, bike parks, trail centers and pub rides. It's just my every day bike.
  • 3 0
 @mirage1s7: funny you mention that, I lost one of those bolts when out riding.

The new bolt from RM had blue loctite on thread. The standard one I removed to check on the other side, nothing.

Both now have it. No issues since. I used a Milwaukee yellow pen to mark it so I can easily check every now and then
  • 1 5
flag skywalkdontrun (Jun 14, 2023 at 14:12) (Below Threshold)
 @olafthemoose: it was a lot more than 2 out of 15000. Likely the number they calculated as having a high potential to fail was closer to 15% which is sort of the soft line for when spot warranty becomes too expensive to cover.
  • 6 0
 @skywalkdontrun: yeah but apart from that PB one, how many others have we actually seen in the www as failed? I looked lots before buying my 2020 in 2022 and couldn't find anything else
  • 3 1
 @weeksy59: I had at least 10 Rocky’s with various frame failures come through my shop between 20-21
  • 10 3
 @mikekazimer: You must feel pretty embarrassed that PB spent all that time looking into a serious workplace injury, including communicating directly with the manufacturer, when the true diagnosis could have been obtained after releasing a couple of online photos and checking the comments section.

I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I have to think PB wouldn't make statements about a product failure that resulted in serious injury without a thorough investigation and a high level of confidence in what they are stating.

Maybe Rocky got a bad axle from a supplier. These things can happen to the best manufacturers.

  • 5 0
 @jsnfschr: I too have a 2020 Slayer and have rode it hard, bike park, shuttling and tons of pedalling, zero issues as well. Best bike I have ever owned
  • 5 1
 @mammal: my friend's 2020 Slayer had an axle failure - very similar to Mike's test Slayer - and the failure led to a warped swingarm. This was roughly 2 weeks after Mike's review was posted. Just sayin'
  • 2 0
 @jsnfschr: At least 2. A couple Altitudes and Instincts, and one EXTREMELY f*cked up Element. One of the Slayers broke exactly like the Field Test bike, and if I remember correctly so did one of the Altitudes. We also had a number of more common chainstay breaks (at the yoke) and a couple with hairline cracks at the headtube junction. The guy with the Element full on ripped the front of the bike off, but to be fair he's always been known to be hard on equipment. Something about being an ex-pro BMX guy I guess.
  • 8 7
 @rnayel: It's so funny to me how people will never let Rocky Mountain hear the end of this - all because one single frame cracked during one review.

Meanwhile there's literally hundreds if not thousands of examples online of Specialized Enduros which have practically all cracked in the same spot at headtube - and no one is talking about that. Not even PB, who gave glowing review to a bike riddled with engineering flaws.
  • 1 0
 I bought a 2020 right away. I knew that failure was going to be a one-off and didn't prevent me from buying this bike. I have beaten the hell out of my Slayer for the last 3 years (with over 4400kms on it according to Strava) and aside from some paint chips and regular maintenance, this bike is still running like a champ.
  • 62 4
 Another XL bike with not enough stack.

Compared to the size small, reach grows 16% while stack grows a whopping 4%.

Tall guys need tall bikes. Not many companies seem to get it.
  • 3 0
 Exactly!
  • 7 0
 Preach. I hate this trend. Stack heights are getting absurdly low, even for people right in the middle of the height range for a given frame size, not just tall people.
  • 20 0
 @danielomeara, what would your ideal head tube length be for this bike? 125mm isn't that far out of the ordinary - don't forget, this has a 180mm fork, and it does comes with 35mm rise bars, so I wouldn't say it's an abnormally low front end. I do agree, though, that more proportional stack increases make a lot of sense,
  • 16 0
 @mikekazimer: for a bike with 510+mm reach I would say around 670. The problem is compounded by steerers cut excessively short so the bike don’t look weird in the showroom. So tall riders are stuck with either buying a new fork or running excessively high rise bars to chase a good riding/climbing position. All of these solutions shorten effective reach which is not ideal. There’s a few brands (Santa cruz and raaw come to mind) that have this figured out but it’s not very common.
  • 9 0
 @mikekazimer: 6'4 here. 150mm HT length please, but I only say this as it happens to be the max supported by most dual crowns.

Mfgs should take a page from the XXL SC megatower, with a stack of around 670, I can only just get the cockpit high enough without excessive risers and spacers. The struggle is real
  • 5 0
 @BurtMcBurburt: They really nailed the numbers for the XXL megatower.
  • 7 1
 @BurtMcBurburt: Also 6’4” and had an xxl Megatower for about two weeks. Very stable but just not able to get the weight over the front end. The high stack with a long reach put the front wheel in a whole different zip code. Result was a scary ride that wanted to understeer and drift the front end wide through high speed corners. Sold very quickly. I think you’d need to be like 6’6” and up to make that long front center work right.
  • 3 1
 Super agree. I just put 50mm rise bars on one of my bikes and it's amazing now. Though I admit there can start to be a trade off with front wheel traction if you get too far from the front wheel. Raising the stack needs to be done correctly. I'm 6'4" for reference
  • 2 1
 @BurtMcBurburt: more thoughts… I think for us taller folks there is a much bigger discrepancy between optimum climbing ergo and optimum descending geo. Shorter folks may have a similar situation. Basically, I doubt bar height and (climbing) seat height have an ideal relationship for anything other than climbing. The WR1 Arrival has a very short stack height and, while not ideal for climbs, feels perfectly dialed (for me) pointed down.
  • 5 1
 @Blownoutrides:

I'm not as tall as some of you guys here (6'1" barefoot, about 6'2" in my riding shoes), but this sounds an awful lot like my problems with too short of chainstays.

I really think proportional/long chainstays are something I need to stay balanced (personally, as a short torso/long leg person). I know some people love short chainstays, but for me they just cause a lot of front end grip problems, especially if I try to have my handlebars high enough to feel good.

I mean, Greg Minnar rolls what... 472mm chainstays on his v10 or something like that? I'm loving the 452mm chainstays of my Banshee Titan fwiw.

Maybe check out the XL Forbidden Dreadnought which has 464mm before sag. Or maybe that new Orange Stage 7 with 468mm chainstays?
  • 2 0
 @davar16: 50mm bars helped loads. I still feel like I could be a touch higher though. Im 6’6 so definitely an outlier for mtb manufacturers.
  • 5 0
 @Blownoutrides: honestly, I subscribe to the idea that it takes months (not weeks) to figure out how to ride any bike on the limit

The bar to saddle height ratio is useless imo. Set the raised saddle position for on-saddle pedaling efficiency, and set bar position for off-saddle maneuverability. It's not complicated, but there's no magic #, it requires time and feel. This is what makes these quiver killers so fascinating, a poor setup can kill the climbing ability and leave you with just a limited DH rig.
  • 2 0
 @danielomeara: yeah the rear end numbers are atrociously horrible for that XXL. Everything else is good
  • 4 0
 @ocnlogan: I had the same feeling, at 6' 2", going from a 29er process 153 (super short chainstays, slack seattube angle with 510mm reach) to an xl forbidden dreadnought.
While the reach is similar (506mm vs 510mm), the fact that the chainstays are way longer makes for a way more stable and "in the bike feeling" compared to the process. While this may be slightly detrimental for slow speed stuff or small little jumps on the side of the trails, the bike just feels stable and composed while going through rough terrain
  • 4 0
 @ocnlogan: I’m 6’2” and with ya on that. I’m all about the longer chainstays and balance on the XLs. It’s been tough to find! Had to get creative with a bike now that I got to 490 front and 445 rear. That’s the best I could do at the time that fit the demands of what I was after. Thankfully there are a few new options that work better now but still not enough to warrant an immediate swap. But it sure is nice to see
  • 1 0
 @tgr9:

HA, thats the exact bike I came from, and for the same reason (super short chainstays, and super slack actual STA). A 2018 Kona Process 153 29'er had 425mm chainstays on all sizes, and like a 67 degree actual STA. Its interesting on the revised model they went to 435mm, and on the Process X they had a 450mm option. Apparently Kona thought they were to short too.

That Forbidden is on my radar (short stack though :/). I'm also sort of curious to try Banshees longer chainstay dropouts, just to see the effect (adds ~9-10mm iirc).
  • 1 0
 @danielomeara: you could use the yoshimura direct mount stem adapter to increase rise on short steerer tubes without using riser bars
  • 2 1
 Bollocks. What matters is appropriate fit. How your hands arrive at the correct height via headtube length, stem spacers, or handlebar rise... its all really just aesthetics, isn't it? There is no performance compromise.
  • 2 0
 banshee, look no further only one company that so far increase stack proportionally to reach
  • 5 5
 @flattire: No, spacers shorten the reach, longer head tube and riser bar do not. Riser bar is less stiffer as well as more spacers. Longer head tube is the best solution here.
  • 1 1
 @lkubica: Provided you have long enough reach for your height, it makes no geometric difference whether the headtube has extra length, or stem spacers are present. The difference in handlebar stiffness from 30mm to 50mm rise is probably not even distinguishable by a human.
  • 3 0
 @lkubica: Spacers and head tube do the same thing to bar position. The only difference is that head tube changes the reach in the geo table and spacers do not, because reach is measured to the top of the head tube. If you would lengthen the head tube without changing reach you'd be adding ett and wheelbase so making a longer bike.
But agreed, from a perspective of strength of the construction, less spacers is better.
  • 5 0
 Raaw gets it
  • 1 0
 @flattire: The taller bar is longer. if we can feel that a cut down bar is stiffer because it's shorter, it stands to reason the taller bar could be tangibly more flexible.
  • 1 1
 @AndrewHornor: Hardly incentive to change frame design to accomodate. There are some less tall people who ride long reach bikes. Making the headtube unnecessarily long compromises their fit. Extra Tall dudes will have to just run stem spacers and high rise bars and live with it. Oh the humanity.
  • 1 0
 @flattire: yeah, I'm not personally arguing for more ht length. Just making an argument against your dismissal of tall bar flex. It's a longer tube, so it's going to be more compliant.
  • 2 0
 Agreed. Then they cut your steerer too short.
  • 1 0
 @ak-77: No, as a bike designer you decide on the reach and stack first and then you make the geo you want, so you put a longer head tube and then make the rest of the frame to have the reach you want. So if people want higher stacks, they just want longer head tubes with se the same reach. Otherwise it would make no sense.
  • 3 0
 This. There's very few bike companies currently that understand the needs of taller riders. Very few XL and XXL models with appropriately proportioned reach and stack. The only mainstream brand right now who is building really good bikes with appropriate geo for tall riders is Santa Cruz.
  • 4 0
 @bigbrett: In Rocky Mountains defense, I wouldn't call 650mm of stack "absurdly low". But still, it isn't exactly where it should be either. For a size XL with 510mm reach the stack is probably a good 20-25mm short.
  • 3 1
 @davar16: Same here! I just put 40mm of stem spacers and a 40mm riser bar on my bike (XL Tallboy V5) and it feels so dialed right now. Feels like the taller front end unlocked so much more speed and confidence. Almost like a cheat code in a video game.
  • 1 0
 @lkubica: As a consumer, all I care about in bike fit are the horizontal saddle-to-bottom bracket distance at my pedaling height, and both the vertical and horizontal (two directions) bottom- bracket-to-grips distances. So the 'reach you want' depends on stack height. I don't care what reach the bike designer wanted or how many spacers they had in mind for me to run when they cooked up that number. Anyway head tubes are not adjustable and when choosing between different bikes they will seldom have all the numbers except HTL equal.

Yes, you need to take into account that two bikes with the same number for reach in the geo chart will not have the same fit (even in horizontal direction!) if the stack is not the same. But to me, that is something different than claiming "spacers change reach and headtubes don't"
  • 1 0
 @davar16: Just curious about your 50mm bars, are you rolled 0 deg (perpendicular to ground) to keep the reach number the same (albeit increasing RAD)? Or are you rolling back a bit to decrease reach?
  • 1 0
 @ak-77: Adding spacers technically does decrease 'reach', from a perspective of moving the handlebars closer to you. If you were to hacksaw off the top 1 inch of your headtube, technically your reach will have grown. Now SHAQ can ride your bike? No. The truth is the size of you bike hasn't changed one bit. Some people equate reach number in isolation to bike size. It's not that simple.
  • 1 0
 @flattire: This is the whole point I am trying to make. Let's say I have a home built steel frame with a short head tube and I add 50 mm of steel spacers below my stem. If I keep them like that the 'reach' and 'stack' geo number of the bike stays the same. Now I take my welding torch and I weld those spacers to the head tube. Lo and behold, my reach has decreased and my stack has gone up. But the only thing that has changed is that my top head set bearing is stuck and I can't rotate my bars :-)
  • 1 0
 @ak-77: I think we're on the same page here. Too many people don't understand reach and stack. In your example you just made, some people would think you just made your bike smaller because the reach is reduced. Monkeys who just focus on one number. Cheers! You have a bottom bracket...and a steering axis. Their relationship cant be changed.
  • 1 0
 I agree but maybe it is simply done to reduce material costs? Pretty much all my (large) bikes have 35+ riser bars and 2cm or more spacers. But I have a high saddle height.
  • 28 1
 People are saying it's ugly, but I think it looks great. I wonder if they'll come out with an altitude-specific frame soon.
  • 7 0
 ya. I like. To each their own.
  • 7 2
 I like Rocky but I don't like the two-tone colour options that they keep producing. This would look great in single colour
  • 3 0
 From what I’ve head from rocky reps the new altitude it’s at least 18 months out unfortunately
  • 1 0
 @Grady-Harris: but at least it's on the way..
  • 25 3
 Rocky Mountain, why do you not offer your bikes with an alloy frame only?

This looks great, and is right up my alley for the sort of bike I’d be interested in. But… I’m not looking for a $4200 carbon frame on a big bike like this. The fact that the alloy complete is only $3700 means the alloy frame only (if it existed) would be competitively priced!.

But for some reason despite offering an alloy frame (unlike say, Yeti), you don’t sell it separately?

Sorry, just bummed about that is all.
  • 16 6
 Hate to break it to you, but industry wide demand for framesets (even in carbon) is low. Allocating production slots for something you aren't going to sell is basically financial suicide right now.
  • 10 3
 @m47h13u:

I get that.

But they are already making the alloy frames in this case (unlike brands that only do carbon like Yeti). So it’s not like they have to make something “new” in order to sell alloy frames. Just sell the thing they’re already making.
  • 7 1
 @m47h13u: It's not necessarily production slots that kill you, it's storage of them and subsequent shipping. That being said, I don't see a huge reason stopping them from having an option to order it and they ship it when it's produced.
  • 6 2
 Personally, I've found plenty of shops which are willing to sell me a frame off a complete build. Really depends on your shop (helps to find mountain biking-specific shops as they know they'll be able to resell parts from the build kit).

Probably worth asking around! They're often inclined to do it if you're going to complete the build with them.
  • 25 0
 Solution...buy the lowest-end alloy bike version, take your favorite parts off of your existing bike to put on your new alloy frame, put the "inexpensive" parts off the new alloy build and put them on your old bike, sell your old bike as a complete.
  • 5 0
 Thanks for saying that. But frankly, even an aluminium frameset is bloody expensive nowadays. Most of the time, it's better off buying the complete bike and swapping the components that sucks / selling them in back market... it's a very detailed task but it can pay off if the built is not dumb.
  • 2 10
flag HeatedRotor FL (Jun 14, 2023 at 10:36) (Below Threshold)
 cheaper and more efficient to make a carbon frame
  • 2 0
 @ocnlogan: its a loss of income for them,
They make much more money selling the parts which they get at wholesale as a complete bike than they do selling frame alone.
The $4200 frame only option has that mark-up baked in, so you'd prolly be looking at a $3000+ alloy frame option, and no ones buying that.
Buy the alloy complete bike, and part it out, keep what you want (headset, bb, etc)
  • 2 0
 @ocnlogan: @ocnlogan: its a loss of income for them,
They make much more money selling the parts which they get at wholesale as a complete bike than they do selling frame alone.
The $4200 frame only option has that mark-up baked in, so you'd prolly be looking at a $3000+ alloy frame option, and no ones buying that.
Buy the alloy complete bike, and part it out, keep what you want (headset, bb, etc)
  • 19 0
 no grip 2 damper at that price...yikes? slx is solid, but for nearly 8g cad I would expect xt + grip 2.
  • 19 1
 They spent all of their money on the bargain bin WTB wheels
  • 8 1
 @ranchitup: That is one sh1tty wheelset for a bike that "affordable".
  • 8 0
 Is it just me... or could you build it up nicer parts at full retail and still come out ahead?
  • 3 0
 @AndrewHornor: Ahead of what they are asking for MSRP? Yes. Ahead of what you could get with doing the same thing with an Enduro or Slash frameset? No.
  • 1 0
 Also surprised by grip1 for the price. I know haters going to hate, but I got last year’s altitude A70 e-bike for $7400 cad. It’s not carbon but it’s got a motor I can smash up the grunty fire road at 20km/h and do 2 or 3x the laps
  • 18 0
 SSSLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
  • 3 0
 Slayer all dayer.
  • 14 0
 Is any other brand delivering bikes with tire inserts already installed? It seems very appropriate for a bike like the Slayer, and I know RM does this for their e-bikes too.
  • 10 0
 Hey Pinkbike. I would appreciate it if you spelt my last name right! Z A B L O T N Y Thanks!
  • 9 3
 Pretty sweet package if you're looking for one-stop bike for full-throttle trails. Some nit-picks:

1) Colors leave something to be desired. Mint on bronze for a badass freeride bike? C'mon...
2) Why is the downtube protector segmented? For the ~aesthetic~? There are two 1" gaps ready for rock strikes.
3) A 63 degree HTA paired with a 29" wheel is recipe for a TON of mechanical trail. That doesn't bode well for tight-medium trails.
  • 3 0
 Fair points ... well, colours are a matter of taste and I'll always choose a raw finish, so I'm not the person to ask. 2. Agreed, not ideal. My guess is they use the same pieces on all frame sizes and this is a way to avoid having to create additional molds - injection molding tooling can be expensive. 3. True, but not uncommon among recently released bikes in this category. Right or wrong, it caters to what people are buying. There are a few new models with plenty of travel and less trail, and the used market is absolutely full of that combination, so folks who want something suited to tighter trails might be in for a bargain. And there's always the option to use an angle-adjust headset.
  • 2 1
 Meanwhile I'm like: wow, they colours don't absolutely suck. I hated the red and black colourway on the earlier Slayer. The yellow/green was marginally better. The black is actually clean (though not as clean as the Forbidden Dreadnought Stealth (I'd take that over any metallic black). The mint bronze is a weird mix but I still like it more than previous colourways.The Norco Shore pink/purle is definitely way more badass.
  • 5 0
 I'm just guessing that revisions like the Penalty Box and a slightly steeper seattube angle will also make it to a few other models that are more relevant to me. If this is anything to go off of, I'm be REALLY excited to see the Instinct/Altitude. I'd love to say, rent this bike someplace more aggro than my home terrain. No disrespect to this bike, but its just more than I need.

I don't understand why some people are saying this is ugly and the previous ones looked good. To me this just looks like an extension of those models. Do you guys not like the color or something?
  • 2 0
 I agree, I bet we're going to see the same thing on the new Instinct/Altitude. Small geo tweaks, and a penalty box. Seems like a nice evolution but not a dramatic change.
  • 4 1
 Disappointed. I was ready to buy this. I really wanted the previous gen but they're sold out everywhere. I wanted a long travel bike with short chainstays but this one has ballooned up to 440 on the mx. There are plenty of plow bikes still on the market (and cheaper). Might as well just get one of those now.
  • 4 2
 What chainstay length are you looking for on a 180/180 bike?

Pretty hard to find 150-160mm bikes that are much shorter than 435mm. Most bikes in the 160-180 range seem to center on 440-450mm.

Personally, I love the more centered feeling of the longer chainstay, even for just all mountain riding purposes.
  • 3 0
 check out the canfield balance
  • 2 1
 @KJP1230: The previous slayer was 431 on the 27.5 version with 180mm of travel.
  • 1 0
 @KJP1230: The Marin Alpine Trail (160/150) has 430 chainstays across all sizes.
  • 1 0
 SCOR would be another option. I think 432mm CS lengths across all sizes
  • 2 0
 Salsa Cassidy has 432 chainstays
  • 1 0
 @lwk: yeah the score 4060 LT is the way to go. Delightfully short chain stays.
  • 1 0
 @KJP1230, @mcbretttetettet both of Nukeproof's enduro bikes are 435mm CS on the MX models.
  • 2 0
 @Will762: Geez - look, I am not saying that out of 50-60+ bike brands you cannot find examples of 430-435mm chainstays. But I am saying that many or most brands are centering around that 440+, especially for 29ers and especially when you are talking about travel in the 170-180mm range.
  • 1 0
 @KJP1230: OK cool. I was just suggesting some bikes that bucked that trend. In case OP wanted to look into grabbing one of them. I agree tho, longer stays are for sure becoming the norm
  • 7 3
 "Just stay out of my way, or you'll pay. Listen to what I say."

"How about I just go ride my Slay, I can make things out of clay, and lay by the bay, I just may, whaddya say?"
  • 1 0
 Slayer McGavin
  • 11 8
 As the above chart illustrates, the Slayer's leverage ratio has been changed to increase the amount of progression for better bottom out resistance.

The chart shows the opposite. Perhaps you're thinking of the more typical leverage ratio charts? Motion ratio charts, such as this, are more intuitive and are more common in motorsports, but require us to flip our thinking from leverage ratio charts.


The anti-squat has been increased slightly to help improve the pedaling performance

True, when compared to the previous Slayer.


and it doesn't drop off as quickly as the bike goes through its travel

Are we looking at the same chart? That one is obviously incorrect.
  • 15 0
 @R-M-R, that's been updated - the double chart had me seeing double.
  • 6 0
 @mikekazimer: Quickest response ever! Cheers!
  • 3 0
 Sincere question, has the meaning of freeride (frequent reference in the article) morphed into light downhill? Seems like long and slack would actually be antithetical to freeride, at least as it used to be known (thinking about North Shore skinnies and the like).
  • 2 0
 For me freeride is about the way you ride, it’s not about the bike itself. So when you’re not racing, competing or training, it could very well be freeride.
  • 2 0
 These are park bikes,even if the term is avoided by the industry for some reason.
Freeride today it's not the hucking/urban riding/skinnys of the early 00's,but rather big mountain lines and huge jumps ala Fest series.
  • 2 0
 That’s why I’m mad they keep making bikes such as this longer and slacker. It’s not better for Freeride. At this point it’s just an altitude with more travel
  • 5 3
 are we still messing around with unreliable shock eye bearings on big bikes...wtf my 22 altitude had nothing but problems, even a new frame didnt fix it, those bearings lasted like 1 park lap and they were gone. bearings do not belong on shock mounting hardware. Rocky's bikes all ride killer, the altitude is such a sick bike and id argue its still the best bike ive ever ridden. also, Stack needs to increase more with sizing.
  • 3 0
 i'm interested could you explain more of why shock eyelet bearings are less durable?
  • 3 1
 @11six: Honestly im honestly not sure but its the 2nd bike ive had issues with them.
From doing RC cars We always had issues with bearings that were small with high load and didnt see much rotation, for the rocky altitude i had, the bearing balls just split, locked the bearing and that forces the pin to rotate inside the inner race, which ruins the pin, causes creaking etc.

On the altitude FB page there is a few with the same issue.

RM were nothing but helpful as the local importer wanted me to pay for the bearings after 1 ride lol... RM sent me the tool, several sets of eyelet bearings and new ride 9 hardware before swapping the frame. They ended up refunding me for the frame.

Friend of mine bought the a70 and had the exact same issue.
  • 12 3
 I understand that you may have had problems with your eyelet bearings, but we have many examples of long lasting eyelet bearings on our R&D bikes, from Element to Slayer. I've had my pre-production Slayer up and running since last summer, and am still using the original eyelet bearings, along with the original dropout bearings. I only recent replaced the link and main pivot bearings. Of course your and my situations are anecdotal, but making sweeping/generalized statements about bearing durability isn't helping anyone.

A few items that require routine inspection and maintenance would be the Ride4 bolt and the bearing eyelet spacers. They do wear out eventually and are often the first source of a creaky frame.
  • 4 8
flag MT36 (Jun 14, 2023 at 12:30) (Below Threshold)
 @kperras: Thats fair. But are you one of the Rocky employees that is downvoting critical comments? Y'all seem to be all over this comments section.
  • 1 0
 I think its just on the eyelet that rotates more, like on all the Santa Cruz models. Those don't seem to see the problems you experienced, even though that eyelet is more vulnerable since it sits closer to the spray from the rear tire. I wonder if they Rocky design allows more flex to reach the eyelet?
  • 2 0
 On the 2020 it easily swapped for a 40mm length standard spacer. I run it on mine without a problem
  • 2 0
 And the "special tool" to change a spring, that seems like a downer.
  • 2 1
 @kperras: Thats great, i also have friends with no issue on their frames but the ones i had an 1 other friend had was the same.
I dont think you understand, Rocky replaced it all multiple times, the bike was only a month old...

I've also had this issue on a nukeproof bike that uses similar design.

Standard hardware fixed my friends frame and Hes a damn fast rider and he couldnt notice the different between them
  • 2 0
 @Snowytrail: vice grips work fine too.
  • 1 0
 @panaphonic: Yeah it's only a special tool if you want to use it again. Otherwise it's easy.. But even the special tool is just a bearing puller than many will already have in their tools anyway for removing other bearings. But most bikes/shocks need 'something' to remove the spring as the bottom spacer is wider than the diameter of the spring, so at the least you need to remove the inner spacer from the lower mounting.
  • 1 0
 @Snowytrail: only an issue with fox coils. I’ve swapped out my cane creek coil on my altitude with the bearings still in multiple times
  • 1 0
 @Snowytrail: yeah that’s why I’ve moved to an air shock on my slayer. Changing springs shouldn’t take a 60 dollar tool and a lot of extra time
  • 1 0
 @Snowytrail: It is just the bearing eyelet thing...which is kind of a pain. I often just switch my hardware to bushings on bikes that have bearing eyelets. I don't buy the theory of improved sensitivity... especially with a coil which is already incredibly sensitive. My SDU has bearings but the spring slides over them. Makes me wonder if RM is using some wider bearings?
  • 1 0
 @foggnm: the bearings are ENDURO 698 LLU MAX 19 X 8 X 6

So fairly standard in size, but you'd no way get spring off with them installed.

I mean let's be honest here, how often are people swapping springs? Mine came with 450, I swapped to 550 after a month and now 6 months later am throwing a 500 on. But it's like 10 mins work. (Although less now I have standard spacer instead)
But either way, it's not like it's 2 hours
  • 1 0
 @foggnm: my cane creek springs go over my bearing on my 22 altitude perfectly fine. This is a fox issue as they use more narrow inner diameter coils
  • 5 1
 I rarely see a Rocky Mountain on my local trails, they don't seem particularly good value compared to other brands offerings.
  • 2 0
 See them all the time where I live, more than I ought to. I suspect it's because people who buy Rocky's here in Aus are likely more enthusiastic than say your average Polygon/Giant rider and actually ride their bike.

As with all non-direct brands it depends on the dealer network in your area.
  • 6 2
 Nearly 2k price jump to the 2024 C50 from my 2020 Slayer C50 and not a single component upgrade, instead a derailleur downgrade. Yikes
  • 3 1
 $1300 USD price increase essentially matches the 18% inflation rate between 2019 and now. So the price isn’t shocking, it’s just economics.
  • 3 1
 As per usual with Rocky Mountain, you can't really find much of anything wrong with any new bike they release - except for the price!

In Germany, the cheapest carbon model (Slayer C50) is 7.000€ with a very basic build kit. Just to put into perspective how insanely terrible value that is: Instead, you could buy a Santa Cruz Megatower or Nomad frameset at full retail price, build it up with nicer components and still come out cheaper than the Rocky.

I sometimes wonder how Rocky Mountain is even still in business.
  • 5 0
 I'd hit that slayer park bike for sure.
  • 1 0
 Curious to know what is it that you would prefer with this slayer park version, over a normal DH bike?

If I were RM, I would have let the big cassette and the dropper. Since anyway weight isn't much an issue downhill, but those 2 differences can save you when you don't ride 100% park.
  • 3 0
 UDH but only in the long chainstay mode? how does that make sense. Do they mean it is only compatible with T-Type derailleur in long mode?
  • 3 0
 With the launch of T-type SRAM changed a few specs, so not every UDH bike can run T-type on paper. There's a zone that needs to be clear for the mech which I'd bet clashes with the horst link here, in the shorter settings. The current specs are on www.UniversalDerailleurHanger.com
  • 2 0
 @jamieridesbikes: Obviously but that is not what I am asking. The Article states that the frame is only compatible with a UDH in the short mode. Likely a typo.
  • 2 1
 Always wanted one, been a long time since I’ve owned a Rocky the prices are silly. Lots of Canadian bikes are so expensive to locals and make them unobtainable thank god for Trek or Commencal bringing affordable quality bikes to people who want to ride without going broke.
  • 1 0
 Loved my Slayers... a slayer 70 2013, a c50 2019, and a c50 27.5 2021 model currently which I've build as a mullet project last year... in fact, despite the slightly high BB(349mm), the bike feels awesome... the build kit intention was for enduro, so I put effort to try a geometry that matches the pedal needs of enduro stages, and the 180mm F/R mullet rails on the descents while keeping it easy to maneuver tight trails with pop too. Love it.
  • 1 0
 New slayer looks pretty good. Ya it has a sharp angle on the seat tube but how else are you gonna fit a big bottle? Its Whaaa seat tube looks weird vs Whaaa is doesn't fit a water bottle, I would take the bottle. Also I haven't had a great experience with rocky in the past but I can say they do go out of their way to make sure the customer can ride. I like how their bikes feel and would buy again, mind you this bike is way too much bounce, I can't wait to see what they do with the newer instinct/altitude in terms of penalty box and geo etc. stoked on this bike.
  • 1 0
 It's a point of detail but Santa cruz and Rocky mountain are making nice looking bikes and I cannot understand why they have been doing it for years for years and are still sticking it to it. Can someone explain me why do they fit the ugliest possible saddles on those nice bikes (i'm talking about the WTB saddles)
  • 9 5
 Is this bike Ugly or not? I can't decide...
  • 8 7
 I’m with you, but I’m going with ugly. The first couple photos with the shadows gave me hope, but then they flipped that “closing time” light switch on.
  • 3 0
 I like the black. Function is more important than form.
  • 2 0
 @frizzmatt: But also, they don’t need to be mutually exclusive.
  • 3 0
 I think majority have fallen for the look of shock sitting over the BB(almost hidden)
  • 3 2
 it's still hella ugly, their other bikes in the lineup have been updated and are less bad lately. I think it's mostly due to the brace in between the downtube and top tube which makes it look "unconventional" and disrupted in its lines, aesthetically. The massive headtube junction is not necessarily pretty either. I do understand that looks aren't everything but when you're spending in between 7-12k, you ideally want a bike that looks good
  • 7 3
 MX version for small people only? Why?
  • 3 1
 Just how it comes stock - you can switch it up as you prefer.
  • 4 2
 Taller people don't hit their ass on the rear wheel
  • 6 0
 @ranchitup: but tall people wants to party too
  • 3 0
 @ranchitup: ass often
  • 2 0
 On the suspension rate/antiquated graph, dotted lines are the antiquated and solid lines are the suspension rate. Note that suspension rate is the inverse of leverage ratio.
  • 1 0
 Antisquat* I really should proof read before hitting send...
  • 6 1
 looks snappy
  • 4 0
 Looks mean, especially in all black. Would ride
  • 2 0
 For that base model, swap out that cheap MC damper for a charger and then you have a Zeb (almost) instead of a Domain. Good value.
  • 5 0
 10k no thanks
  • 2 0
 I'm probably dating myself here, but isn't the bass boat sparkle on black paint job a throwback to the finish on the original 2001 Slayer?
  • 1 1
 I like it, the silly seat tube kink can FO (quite a corner radius for dropper cable and looks pointless and is shit)
I’m intrigued by their ebikes. Anybody got one? Due to their low tech torque sensor i reckon you could easily fit a throttle with some cunning mods
  • 2 0
 I think they did it for the water bottle placement.
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer I know I'll regret asking this, but is it still a press fit bb or have they shifted back to threaded,?
  • 4 0
 It's still a BB92.
  • 2 2
 Here is another review of the C50:
enduro-mtb.com/en/new-rocky-mountain-slayer-2023-first-review

It will be interesting to read PB:s review on this if they experience the same things.
But rattling cables, doors that fly away, useless fork and shock, wheels that are crooked after a couple of laps in the bike park and to top it of with bad handling on a +6k bike doesn't sound good.
  • 2 0
 Enduro and NSMB always have opposite takes on Rocky bikes. They hated the ‘21 Instinct as well, while NSMB loved it.
  • 1 0
 Pulling the bearings to swap springs is only an issue for fox coils. Source:own a 22 altitude carbon and have swapped my cane creek springs multiple times which keeping bearings on.
  • 5 6
 That coil is oppressively large, and so are the numbers. Big bike. Big price. Big intentions. To be seen on the tailgate of big trucks on the North Shore? Probably.

I could never justify buying one unless it was a n+1 bike I was given for free, but if I saw one at a shuttle/park demo or rental line-up it'd be the one I reach for first.
  • 3 1
 Oh I dont know. Longer coil stroke means better control. I have found that these big burly bikes are easier to live with for mellow rides then the industry is trying to tell us small bikes are for burly rides. There is no replacement for a gravity rig when the trail gets dh, fast, and gnarly. Plus its a good excuse to ride funner stuff more often.
  • 4 2
 That thing would really benefit from a unified rear triangle. Bring back the Pipeline!
  • 2 0
 Love my slayer! Med 27.5 bike that now has a 29" front. Very flexible capable bike!
  • 1 0
 Looking at last year's XL 29er geometry compared to the new model the head angle is less than 1 degree slacker, not 1.5 degrees.
  • 1 0
 Oh hey man I just bought a 2021 Slayer 5 months ago for below cost and now I'm oh so put out and triggered that they dared to release a new model.
  • 3 0
 4200 for a frame is insane. i don’t get it
  • 1 0
 I think it’s cool, but the seat post insertion doesn’t look as good to me as even the last one
  • 2 0
 I'm going to need to see it on the impossible climb
  • 2 0
 Save some $ and get the chainsaw...?
  • 1 1
 Most delayed bike launch recently? After seeing carbon framed versions of this bike over a year ago, I’m surprised there isn’t a full review at this point. Just me?
  • 1 0
 ah that sparkly metallic black... I recall that color was used on the OG 2001 version when a colleague at my LBS bought one.
  • 1 0
 How close is this geo to the Grim Donut? Seems like we're getting pretty close.
  • 2 0
 Isnt it like 5degrees off on the head tube? The Grim Donut was really out there
  • 2 0
 Waiting to see one of these being ridden around the Llandegla blue trail.
  • 3 0
 Hold my beer. See you Saturday
  • 2 0
 Slayer SXC? Bring it back!!
  • 1 2
 So a $7800 CDN (C50) and it comes with a f@cking dt 370 hub? That price point really should have a dt350.

Why not really bend the consumer over and install "resin pad only" rotors as well.
  • 3 0
 The new 370 hubs are essentially what the 350's used to be - they use a star ratchet design rather than pawls.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: well that is good news - is the primary difference then just the quality of the bearings?
  • 1 0
 Damn you know you're getting old when you've seen bike models disappear and "come back" multiple times.
  • 2 0
 $6200 and you get a 370 hub....
  • 1 0
 370 oem hubs are now spec'd with star ratchet system, no more 3 pawls.
  • 1 0
 @patcox: That's great to know - I just learnt something. I also thought the 370 was a bad spec choice until I saw your response. Thx
  • 2 0
 Honestly the component specs suck for those prices.
  • 1 3
 Ugh, another stupidly overpriced Rocky which has basically nothing special going for itself. The reviews on other sites (Enduro Magazine, MTB-News) have been less than stellar.

At this point I'm wondering how Rocky is even still in business.
  • 1 0
 “the Slayer is its element”. is in its element.
  • 1 0
 Pretty much the same spec as last gen.
  • 1 0
 Looks good, does it take whole 240mm dopper post into the seat tube?
  • 2 0
 A 470mm seat tube length (XL) and that silly kink in the seat tube above the bb will ensure only the tallest riders will be able to make a 240dropper work. Too bad manufacturers still insist on kinking the seat tube well above the bb.
  • 3 1
 The insertion depths are very long on our frames. We ream and finish to a certain depth, and after that the seat tubes widen out.

At 6ft tall with a ~35" inseam, I can use a 240mm post on my large carbon Slayer frame if I wished, although my go-to length is 200mm.
  • 1 0
 @kperras: thanks for the insight into the frame construction in this area.
What’s the max post insertion depth?
Does Knolly hold a patent on the straight seat tube? I’m genuinely curious why the kink is there at all?
My unfortunate proportions (6’2”x33”inseam) have me forever wishing for XL bikes to come with L seattube lengths.
My current bike (520reach/460st) has a 200mm OneUp slammed all the way and it barely works (admittedly, the added stack of the Aenomaly Switchgrade doesn’t help my situation, but it’d be hard to go back to a fixed seat position ‍♂️)
  • 1 0
 @HawmStacks: Knolly does have a patent on offset straight seat tube and as of a couple years ago they were willing to go to court to defend it
  • 2 0
 I have a 240mm Oneup dropper on my large 2020 slayer if that helps
  • 1 0
 The two tone paint scheme sure is group think.
  • 8 10
 How do I get these lame ass, old tech, standard pedal bikes off my feed? These bike reviews are as annoying as the guy riding them 2mph up a hill and always in the way. ON YOUR LEFT!!!!!
  • 1 1
 If (IF!!!!!!) these don’t snap, seems like a great quiver bike for true gnar. Looking forward to some long term reviews.
  • 1 1
 Beginning model 18+) I love being photographed in the nude Please rate my photos at ➤ u.to/mWPGHw
  • 1 0
 Where’s Levy?
  • 1 0
 talk to eazy-e about suspense.
  • 2 4
 Are modern trails so wide and without any kind of rough natural terrain that a 29'er xc bike is really classified as a free ride bike now ?
  • 1 0
 Nice but expensive ...
  • 1 0
 Lost me at 29er
  • 7 9
 I spy a brand that purchased highly discounted OE Shimano, in an attempt to increase margin.
  • 27 1
 would you rather they had purchased highly discounted SX or NX in an attempt to increase margin?
  • 6 5
 4k for a frame with press fit B.B.
  • 1 1
 Jeff Henneman RIP!
  • 1 1
 Sorry misspelled Hanneman. Rip Slayer legend.
  • 1 2
 29 is dead even in 2024..........
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.062809
Mobile Version of Website