Twelve months ago, we gave our “Mountain Bike of the Year” award to the Specialized Stumpjumper EVO, but until today it was only available with a carbon frame. A new aluminum version has now been added into the mix, one that takes nearly all of the features of the carbon model, including the SWAT box, and puts them into a more affordable package.
First appearing on the 2016 Stumpjumper, Specialized opened the door and utilized the void space of a carbon downtube with the SWAT box. If you’ve been out of the loop, SWAT is Specialized’s acronym for onboard utilities; storage, water, air, tools, which can be onboard the bike or your person. The Stumpjumper EVO Alloy is the first aluminum frame in Specialized's lineup to receive downtube storage, although I'd bet we'll see it show up on more metal bikes in the future.
Specialized Stumpjumper EVO Alloy Details • Wheelsize: 29" (MX with 27.5" link)
• Travel: 150 mm
• Alloy frame with SWAT box
• 63° - 65.5° head angle
• Chainstay length: 438 - 443 mm (S1 - S4), 448 - 453 mm (S5, S6)
• Sizes: S1 - S6
• Weight: 15.4 kg / 34.0 lb (S4 w/tubes)
• Price range: $3,800, $5,600 USD. Frame only: $1,900 USD.
•
specialized.com SWAT box aside, the Stumpjumper EVO Alloy has 150mm of rear travel and is available with two 29" wheels or a mixed wheel setup.
Frame DetailsUnlike some other aluminum takes on carbon models, the Stumpjumper EVO Alloy's silhouette is virtually identical to its carbon framed sibling. The half paint/half brushed finish is a clever pat on the back to the 2018 model that boasted some wild geometry at the time, but this new model is further refined and more adaptable.
The aluminum frame also has the same sleek cable routing and adjustable geometry as its carbon counterpart. With the use of neutral or angled headset cups and a flip chip at the dropout pivot, Specialized’s Stumpjumper
EVO Geometry Finder can guide you through all the numbers to choose from. To remove the guesswork, simply enter your riding style and local terrain.
The SWAT box makes its first appearance on an aluminum Specialized frame.
The two hoses running to the rear wheel feed into the front of the top tube and take a turn down the side arm brace, held in place by a plastic shroud.
Adaptability is the Stumpjumper’s speciality where the bike can transform from a bar-dragging corner destroyer to a contemporary trail seeker. A specific MulletLink is available as an aftermarket suspension component purchase to retain the geometry for riders wishing to use a 27.5” rear wheel over the stock 29er setup.
GeometrySize wize, the Stumpjumper EVO family covers a huge range of rider heights, from 150 cm up to 203 through six frame sizes. Specialized uses their “S” sizing scheme which allows riders to choose a couple frame size options to suit their riding styles, ruled by wheelbase not seat tube length. Starting at 385 mm for the S1 and S2, that tube length grows in 20 mm increments and the reach ranges from 408-millimeters to a whopping 528, so all riders should be able to find their happy place.
To match the change in front centers, the 438 mm chainstays on the S1-S4 bikes stretch 10 mm for the two largest sizes. The dropout pivot chip can be flipped to gain an extra 5 mm of rear center and dropping the BB height by 7 mm, which will also slacken the head angle by 0.5º.
Up at the head tube, a 1.0º offset bearing cup can be installed to make the head angle as steep as 65.5º or down to an aggressive 63º, depending on the chainstay setting. The swap is as simple as rebuilding the headset and doesn’t require anything more than a few allen keys.
Build KitsKeeping it straightforward with just two component packages to choose from, Specialized has mixed things up from the options available on the carbon frames. Starting at $3,800 USD is the Comp package with a Fox 36 Rhythm fork and Float X Performance shock, X-Fusion Manic dropper post, SRAM NX drivetrain and Code R brakes, as well as Specialized tires, wheels and finishing components.
On deck for our First Ride is the ‘no compromise’, Elite level build, which lands at $5,600 USD. You’ll find a fancy Fox Factory 36 and Float X suspension, SRAM GX Eagle 12-speed drivetrain and Code RS brakes with dual 200 mm rotors, plus an MRP AMg chainguide with a skid plate. The shoes and socks are Roval Traverse alloy wheels and Specialized’s Butcher T9 and Eliminator T7 Grid Trail.
For those picky riders who like to choose their own parts, the frame kit is available with a Fox Float X Performance shock for $1,900.
Ride ImpressionsAs you might expect, the alloy version of the Stumpjumper EVO rides a lot like the carbon iteration. Despite the large section of the downtube that has been removed, there were no worries about unwanted flex in the front triangle. Housing management carries over from the Turbo Levo aluminum frame with a plastic shroud to capture the lines against the inside of the sidearm front triangle support.
I found the Stumpjumper EVO Alloy to be a very comfortable bike to ride, especially with flat pedals. The soft and linear nature of the rear suspension kept the wheel tracking well while pedalling over small bumps, but that did give way on some large square-edge hits and harsh landings. Adding a 0.6-cubic inch volume spacer helped to ramp up the progression and take the sting out those impacts.
The bike really shines on twisty single track with the feeling of being close to the ground; think slalom meets trail, especially in the low and long setting. The increased leverage requires a bit more PSI in the rear shock and careful navigation through chunky terrain as the bottom bracket hovers just off the dirt. Falling back on the Geo Finder to check some numbers, Specialized suggests the high and short setting for the terrain on my local North Shore trails and I reverted to that setting for more clearance and quicker turning.
Under the downtube, it was refreshing to see an MRP AMg guide with a skid plate. I don’t understand why all bikes aren’t spec’d with this equipment, especially with the lack of chains in supply these days. They’re so light and save you from blowing up a chain or bending a ring, so why not have that extra security?
One part that didn’t fare so well was the Roval rear hub with 18-tooth DT Swiss Star Ratchet internals, which stripped out under normal use - not the ideal way to start the first ride. I can't speculate on what may have caused this. The axle was torqued sufficiently and there were no hard wind-ups on the cranks. All the parts were greased, but not over packed so the teeth didn't engage and the springs were in the correct orientation.
Back in action with some new parts, riding the Stumpjumper EVO Alloy showcased how much fun a shorter travel bike can be on the same old trails versus a big enduro rig. I looked to add in some creative side hits and loved taking the long way around some sections of trail. Adaptability geometry allows riders to transform the bike from an ultra-aggressive, MX-wheeled berm smasher to a platform ready for backcountry missions with more ground clearance and dual 29" wheels to roll fast. These characteristics are some of the reasons why the welded version of the Stumpjumper EVO remains as desirable as its fibrous counterpart.
Look for head-to-head comparisons as the SJ EVO alloy goes up against a handful of other aggressive trail bikes in our Fall Field Test.
Shush. You're ruining the narrative.
The most perfect bike is the one you already have…
This bike is too long, too low and too heavy…
Both good bikes at not-crazy prices. For me, it would be the Specialized.
So, unless you're planning on ripping off the stock wheels, I'll take the Spec over the Orbea.
I guess… Based on my height and Specialized’s website, the “short” version is still as long as my DH bike. 34lbs for a trail bike? Seems too much.
Polygon N9 3099$ shipped (via Bikesonline)
www.polygonbikes.com/product/mountain/siskiu-n9-2
Full Fox Performance Suspension (Rhythm stuff is fine but not the same)
Freaking Shimano XT drive train
TRP Slate 4-piston brakes
You can even buy an XL today:
www.bikesonline.com/2021-polygon-siskiu-n9-dual-suspension-mountain-bike
Reach is more like a new Capra than ultra long but you can size up. Then throw a wolftooth Angleset if you want for 90$. Killer value on a sweet bike.
The Code R brakes aren't great. I was just on a pair. RSC's- awesome brake but not the R's. Deore's are actually a really nice brake and don't have the servowave stuff (kind of a good thing).
The N9 is a great value for the components you get, but that doesn't make the evo a "bad" value.
Also, the N9 is somewhat "older" in its geo. For instance, XL has a crazy long seat tube of 520mm (75mm longer than the S5 Evo), and the wheelbase is something like 40mm shorter than the Evo.
And the Code R brakes are good brakes. They perform well for the price they are, just like Deore do, although I'll take Codes over Deore for brakes.
If you hate NX so much, you can pull off the brand new groupset and replace it.
even my DH bike is lighter.
It has done super well on almost everything. Only place it seemed a bit out of sorts is rough high speed off camber. But I also run it with less pressure then suggested so that could be on me. Seems like a great option. Price creep hurts as my carbon comp last fall was just over $5000 Canadian.
Nothing to add, just needed repeating. MTB industry is going to price itself out of existence.
@daweil:
The pricing is higher than it was a year or two ago, thats totally true. I doubt anyone here would try to argue that.
But in the reality that we now occupy, the pricing on this isn't bad.
Personally I'm looking at frame only options for a new build. And I can tell you right now that $1900 for the Evo frame only, is a pretty good deal. The only brand I'm aware of that has anything cheaper at the moment, are Privateer (both the 141 and 161 are $1750usd), and Commencal ($1800usd).
The bikes that used to be cheaper than this, are now more (Norco Sights AL frame went from $1700 to $1950 recently), and bikes that were more... are still more (Transition Sentinel $2100usd, Banshee Titan $2500 usd).
So yeah, its more expensive than it was. And if you don't need to buy a bike right now, its probably a good idea to wait. But for people wanting something now... its honestly not as much as I was expecting.
I also don’t get why the 36 Rhythm is seen as a something that needs to be upgraded immediately. It has basically the same damper as the Marzocchi Z1 and in the 36 version, it’s plenty stiff. I left it on my 2021 stumpy comp and it works fine for me. Maybe you just have to be in the average weight range, since the tuning options are of course limited.
I'd still rather have this haha
Bikes like the SB66 are the reason the bike industry had to change wheel sizes…
Those bikes were too good, couldn’t get people to buy new bikes without forcing obsolescence on their current bikes.
For the record, the evo will never be lighter, handle switchbacks, ride super techy, tight, single track or jump better than the SB66.
There’s a reason Rampage riders still rode 26”…
I think durability is often over looked when remembering older bikes. My evo has needed minimal maintenance compared to some older bikes and it has been on much rougher trails. Wear parts will always wear, bad decisions always lead to broken parts, but overall the ability for a "trail" bike to be ridden almost anywhere now is fairly amazing.
Wouldnt touch it. Just like I wouldn’t touch a trash heap. Same same.
most brands havent figured out how to make weed box with carbon frames and they're doing this on decently priced alu? take my money.
Is that really what you call "on fire"?
It would be hard to buy another bike with no trunk in it...
Whether the article is true/correct who knows... but it certainly presents a reason to consider your frame material and another possible advantage to going alloy. I choose carbon now because the weight benefit is wort the extra cost to me, but if alloy is proven to truly be better for the environment then that (plus the cost savings) might be enough to sway me.
Remember it was PB who chose to headline with that specific part of the report for the clicks. Note that Trek never said in that report that one or the other was "better for the environment". That report focused only on one metric: carbon footprint.
I'd find it strange if one of the major carbon frame sellers tried to specifically hype aluminium in any way. Do you think they were also trying to green wash bikes in general because the report indicated a larger footprint of e-bikes? So overall they are intentionally shitting on two of their highest profit margin product categories?
"Surely you will pay a little more (a grand) to help the environment, won't you?"
Trek isn't trying to tell you this report is going to fix anything. They're just showing you numbers, nothing more, nothing less. This being part of their marketing does not automatically make it "greenwashing" either, so no need to state the obvious.
If they indeed do lower their environmental footprint in the future and then use it for marketing, guess what? That still won't be "greenwashing" as long as the ad copy will be factual and the positive impact real.
Because of your misunderstanding of the term, you seem to contradict yourself when you say it's OK if they try to be less destructive but it's bad (i.e. "greenwashing") if they talk about it. I think the confusion comes from that naive but oh so common on PB view that "marketing=bad" which is obviously quite detached from reality.
@Ttimer My guess would be that they won't make any illogical business decisions like that unless they want to voluntarily kill their alloy frame sales. Let's not be silly. By that logic do you think they'll level prices between bikes and e-bikes?
Still I am staying on my original point, trek is trying to sell bikes and that's it.
Und noch was, Please stay factual and don't call me a troll while telling me to stay in school while knowing nothing about me. Schule wird ohne h geschrieben, mein Freund, vielleicht solltest du sie besuchen
To be clear: it's good that a company cares about the environment and publishing facts is an important first step. I am not against that (wrote that in my first comment). But as a consumer that information gives me nothing (compared with other mtb companies), so I interpret those figures as bland marketing. And marketing is not bad at all in a big scheme, I just see many people making purchasing decisions on shallow company communications and don't like that. How can I even see if their numbers add up? Is the sram or the Shimano equipped bike better for the environment? If I would be honest with myself and would care for co2 and water and energy consumption worldwide, I would keep riding my old bike instead buying a new one - while telling everyone "I care for the world so I bought an aluminum mtb!".
What's good about this that someone in the industry did something that (I think) hadn't been done and others might follow. I don't mean everyone publishing such reports; of course smaller brands like Transition don't have the resource or time for this like a big corp and as I said, it will be similar anyway. I mean that if/when Trek takes actual action, it might set a precedent and example to follow (even if only to not get left behind on the marketing front).
Some big players could probably follow sooner than later. You ask "Is the Sram or the Shimano equipped bike better for the environment?" Well, we'd know if both published the data But in reality it's probably similar. One small company that comes to mind who I think absolutely should show some numbers is Guerilla Gravity. So much of their message relies on the local, low-waste manufacturing etc. that it would be nice if they backed it up with data. How much better is it really when a Colorado resident buys GG vs Trek? What if I buy it and add the transport?
Of course you're right that the most environmentally friendly thing to do is... not buying a new bike. I'm on an older one like you (mine is 5yo) so I should feel good about myself, but definitely getting itchy for a new ride. I mean, how can I have fun anymore with that short reach, steep HA and tiny wheels??
Meine Muttersprache ist Deutsch, da sollte ich Schule eigentlich korrekt schreiben können...peinlich peinlich.
Happy trails
It's such a game-changer!!
But yeah, I'd usually expect the jump from alloy to carbon to be more like $1000
NX is roughly equivalent to SLX though I'd say
yea - this will be the norm. inflation inflation inflation and supply chain challenges are hitting the bike industry hard.
Your point being? It's $4300 if you want to buy one now. You couldn't buy a stumpy evo aluminum in January 2021.
Having owned and ridden both I'd say they're both of pretty poor-average quality.
Personally, I'll take non-shiny fork/shock+carbon+superior shifting over Kashima and alloy.
I will eventually switch to AXS. I keep hearing great things about it.
I have been hammering on my 3-pawl 370 since 2018 and it's still going strong. Not as great of engagement as some other hubs, but it's damn reliable and it's cheap.
Yeah I’ve read the same thing about the ex failures with only one spring. Been running and have had friends running 350s with various ratchets (54, 36 and 1 problem free for years - knock on wood!
Interesting to hear about the dt Swiss internals with a specialized hub body.
I test rode a carbon evo though and it didn't ride as nice as the spire for me.
And honestly, its the adjustment that does it. Almost like a test bike, where I can check to see if my preconceived theories about what I want from a bike are correct (HTA, chainstay length, BB, etc).
Specialized fanboys feeling their options questioned?
On the build quality side, jut to put things into perspective, I'm currently nearly 1,5 years into a V3 Bird AM9. Mostly the same trails, riding 2 or 3 times more frequently than the Evo, also riding harder. Zero creaks, bearings like new, everything perfect
The MTBR forums have an EVO thread, and there are plenty of people there who have indicated that the Carbon evo frame is simply too light/thin. I'd "hope" that the alloy version isn't a problem in that regard, but it still could be.
First, I'm not sure if the '19 Evo was as mass produced as the more conventional Specialized models. But since I have no figures, I'll refrain from further comment.
Second and maybe of more relevance, it was not like I had a bad weld that cracked. I had issues all over the place, and this type of situation reveals more about the actual design than an isolated breakage.
Coming from a place of eyeballing, it seems to me like the Stumpy was designed more like a light trail bike and then came the Evo with it's harder intended use that kept the same basic brackets, forgings, bearings etc. I remember once having a MK1 Meta AM 29 next to my Evo and being amazed on how much thicker the Commencal was everywhere.
A good number of issues often reported on the Evo, like bearings, bolts, shocks dying or wearing might be traced to insufficient frame stiffness that place the components under awkward stress
Also had dead frame bearings like all bikes I ever had that's because of small bearings who ovalised. I only can suggest to put bearings apart to see the different failure and engineering fail.
Very disappointed!
Hopefully this isn’t a tank, as I’d like to go back to alloy for the less stress!
At least for the mullet/MX configuration. I love riding the Status and the manuals for days but having two bikes that are similar is getting hard to justify. I know there are other plenty of other riders that still want playful bikes, where's that aftermarket jib-tune kit?
I think the jib boiz should all go short travel beefy like the optic. That bike is sooooo much fun. I got mine overforked with a 40mm rise bar and it feels like a big dirt jumper.
That’s all true, but all the more reason to go shorter reach and longer stem. Obviously stack matters too, but you can deal with some of that via rise and spacers. I’m just saying if you have a 530 reach the shortest you can go stemwise is a 35mm. If you start with a 500 you can pretty much get the same effect with a 50mm stem. But you are right, there are other effects.
Word up g! Look at all this love in the comment section.
IMO, the right move would be to put a reliable 10 or 11 speed drivetrain on this bike that will last a long time and won't weigh a ton. There are options.
Being 6-6 and tiding too small bikes for ages now, I appreciate more and more manufacturers give XXL frame size options. But PLEASE consider also higher body weights of us taller riders when designing the frame/shock ratio!
Giving S1 featherweights another leverage and designing different chain stays throughout the size portfolio is a good start, but this one is still a pass for me.
Otherwise, nice looking bike tho IMO.
I know that looks are bit that important for bikes, but this one is bad enough to make me not want it.
JP
They claim the Levo SL is only 17 ish?
They keep claiming frames are getting lighter, but overall weights are up a good two kilos in the last few years. 29 er tyres and wheels don't help, but these things seem like tanks now.
The flip chip is not that easily to switch being 2 bolts at the rear now vs. a single at the shock. The internal cabling seems to only be designed for non-moto style brakes which I don't use. All the bolts are one size smaller than the meta tr which feels less burly? I'm sure it's strong though.
The clearances are also soooooo tight. The rear disc barely has room to breathe. It's almost too over refined. Which I kinda don't love.
Each to their own. Just my opinion. And rant.
hahahahahahh
Next day: Specialized drops an new aluminum bike!
Once you've gotten this bike ready for hard riding (changed the drivtrain, cockpit, wheelset and tires) it's going to be more like 4500 €. There's quite a few carbon bikes with better components in that price range.
2. It's interesting that your post lists none of these carbon bikes with better components.
And I have to second @nickfranko question about those carbon bikes with better components for the same price. I'm in the market right now so I'll appreciate any such advice.
I happened to look at some bikes today (ones that are actually available to buy, not interested otherwise) and a lot in this price range were alu frames with shitty 35 Gold or Yari forks and so on and so forth. I did find a decent '21 carbon Marin Alpine Trail but it still has a Yari that would need swapping or a charger upgrade for around £200. Otherwise pretty much only alloy bikes in the £3300 range. Build kits vary but none of them are that great. None have good hubs or tyres at that price point. Meta has SLX for the money, I'll give them that. But I'd have to pay import fees on top because and it still has some questionable build kit choices. Previous model (non-high pivot) GT Force: similar build to the stumpy but a bit outdated geo, shitty short travel dropper and - again - "placeholder" wheels and tyres. Focus Jam: some XT bits, but old geo, heavy, unacceptable proprietary stem/headset combo and - you guessed it - budget wheels. I could go on. If I go up to £3700 I can look at a Slash or Patrol (which I'd love if it was available anywhere). Both nice, but still alloy of course.
And honestly, why exactly would you need to change the cockpit on the Stumpjumper for "hard riding"? Tyres I get but cockpit? It's got a 35mm stem and 800mm bar you can cut to your liking and I guarantee you won't break them. Drivetrain? Ride until you wear it out. It's not gonna stop you from "hard riding" because "hard riding" is when you're not really using the drivetrain much... Wheels? Just replace when/if they explode.
Or just get one model up that has all those bits already upgraded.