Canyon, the direct sales giant from Koblenz, Germany have just finished updating their Strive enduro bike and invited us to Malaga, Spain, to see what it's capable of.
The new model was designed for top-level enduro racing with the help of the Canyon Factory Enduro Team, but promises to be a step up in performance for your local trails too. The previous version took the team to 2x Enduro World Series team championships so it has a lot to live up to. The geometry and kinematic-adjusting Shapeshifter remains to help with climbing, and is arguably more useful than a shock lockout, but has undergone a redesign for greater reliability and easier switching between modes.
This iteration was solely designed for 29" wheels, following extensive testing with athletes such as Ines Thoma and Dimitri Tordo. It is also only
Strive Details• Intended use: enduro
• Rear wheel travel: 150mm
• Wheel size: 29''
• Carbon only, CF and CFR (-300g lighter)
• On-the-fly geometry and kinematics adjustment
• 66° head angle
• 435mm chainstays
• 2400g frame weight (CFR w/o shock, claimed)
• S to XL frame sizes
• Colors: CF- Mint Blue, Black, Red | CFR- Blue, Black/White
• MSRP: $3,999 - $6,000 USD | €2,999 - €6,999 EUR
•
www.canyon.com available as a carbon frame, with no cheaper aluminum bike available. Instead, Canyon have followed Santa Cruz and Yeti with two different qualities of carbon used to create a less expensive, slightly heavier CF frame and a lighter, more expensive CFR frame, but both with the same stiffness characteristics.
Six models are available, four with the CF frame and two with the CFR, but only three in the USA, along with the CFR frameset. Complete bikes are available from $3,999 to $6,000 USD, with the frameset costing $2,999. For the rest of the world, complete bikes cost from €2,999 to €6,999 EUR with the frameset at €2,999.
Frame Details The carbon frame uses an angular design language to create a slick finished product. It features full internal cable routing (housed in foam to keep it quiet), essential down tube and chainstay protection, a custom headset retaining cap, space for a full-size water bottle and a 180mm PM brake mount so that most riders shouldn't need to use a brake adaptor, which is also good to see.
Canyon have designed their own Quixie rear axle for the Strive, which is tool-free and allows the lever to be stored inside the axle, reducing the width of the rear of the bike – one less thing to snag on a rock.
The CF vs CFR frame's weight difference is down to a change of lay-up of the carbon fiber. The CFR uses higher quality carbon fiber; the resin and fiber are combined in a different way and the weave alignment changes to create a frame that is 300g lighter, but equally as stiff.
Shapeshifter 2.0 Canyon's Shapeshifter enables the bike to be optimized for climbing or descending without adjusting the suspension setup, but they call the two modes 'pedal' and 'shred'. The geometry and kinematics are changed simultaneously to make the bike more efficient when you want it.
The system uses a handlebar mounted remote, air spring, and patented rear shock linkage. By changing the linkage locations, and kinematics with it, it is possible to switch between two different geometries with corresponding amounts of travel and suspension curves. In shred mode the bike has 150mm of travel, a 66° head angle and 73.5° seat angle. but with the Shapeshifter engaged in XC mode, these angles change by 1.5° for a 67.5° head angle and 75° seat angle, along with a reduction in travel to 135mm and a firmer suspension feel.
The original Shapeshifter did the same job but some riders experienced reliability problems, so this was a priority for the engineers working on version 2.0. Canyon made the decision to work with Fox, due to their experience with telescopic mechanisms, in the same way Yeti does with their Infinity systems. Changes made in the name of reliability are the new piston seals, which also reduce friction; the internal cable routing setup and the new air spring does not require an additional screw thread, enabling an integrated design to keep dirt out.
Other changes were also made to the system. The most important one being the ease of changing modes. The old version required a certain amount of effort and coordination to change modes, which could be tricky to accomplish during a race run. To change into the climbing mode, riders had to unweight the bike to let the suspension extend, and give a hefty bounce on the suspension to lower it back to descending mode. This also had to be timed in conjunction with depressing the remote lever on the bar and then releasing.
On the 2.0 it clicks into XC mode and then 'clacks' back into shred mode. The suspension no longer needs to be loaded, as setting the gas spring pressure equally to the shock allows it to change mode within a few seconds or with slight suspension movements.
Finally, the remote has been made more ergonomic and combined with the dropper post remote, cutting down on bar mounted clutter, weight and putting both levers in the easiest place to reach.
0% Loaded
prev
1/2
next
Geometry The new Strive is available in sizes small to XL, with corresponding reach measurements of 415mm to 500mm, so it should fit most riders. The head tube length also grows from 90mm to 130mm, keeping the handlebars in a similar position for all riders. Other important numbers are the 66° head angle (shred mode), 75° seat angle (XC mode), 336mm BB height and mid-length 435mm chainstays. These are rather conservative numbers on numbers on paper for a new enduro race bike.
Specifications Four different builds (5.0 - 8.0) are available with the CF frame from €2,999 to €4,499 with a choice of three colors in each. The 5.0 uses an NX drivetrain up to X01 on the 8.0. Most models use Fox suspension front and rear (36 fork and DPX2 shock), with the 6.0 being the only Rockshox equipped choice. Some of the 8.0's price can be attributed to the Reynolds carbon wheels, but there are lots of choices without.
The two CFR builds, the 9.0 Team and 9.0 LTD, retail for €5,499 and €6,999 respectively. Both of these use SRAM Eagle drivetrains and Code RSC brakes, with X01 on the Team and XX1 on the LTD. The additional cost of the LTD is mostly down to the Fox Factory suspension and Enve M730 wheels, while the Team uses Rockshox suspension and Mavic Deemax Pro wheels.
Riders in the USA should be aware that only the CF 6.0, CF 8.0 and CFR 9.0 Team will be available to them for $3,999, $5,300 or $6,000, along with the CFR frameset for $2,999.
With the bike set-up with help from Fabien Barel, we were ready to shreddy. The advice was to set the bike at 30% rear sag in descend mode, with around 20% from the fork. Later I added pressure to the fork as the bikes were built with a Lyrik RCT3, which feels really under-supported and spends more time in the mid-stroke compared to the amazing 2019 Charger 2 version – luckily production bikes will be specced with this killer version of the fork.
The first thing I noticed with the Strive was how quiet it was, proving that the attention to detail and internal foam housing tubes work well. Secondly, the Shapeshifter really does offer performance benefits over the old system and worked on the trail every time. Just click into the mode you want and it changes quickly without bother. It pedals well in either mode, though slightly better under power in climb mode. More importantly, the changes in geometry make a real difference for climbing off-road. I think that raising the bottom bracket and steepening the seat angle is key for a travel and geometry adjusting bike: improved ground clearance, better climbing position, and increased fork sag (from your weight shift) make more of a difference than the 1.5º change in a static situation.
In shred mode the bike had great small bump sensitivity, mid-stroke support, and smooth bottom out control, all of which resulted in a bike that tracked well and gave a playful and responsive ride, wanting to be pumped through terrain and popped over things. Canyon didn't mention anything about tuning the carbon layup, but this bike is definitely on the more forgiving side of the stiffness spectrum, meaning great grip and compliance through rough sections.
Geometry? This is the sticking point for me, with the bike billed as an enduro racer. After going back and forth with so many bikes over the last few years, for me personally, the Strive has drawbacks. First, after riding with much steeper seat angles between 76 - 79º (hell, even those freeriders at YT just added a full 3º to the SA of the new Jeffsy), my legs just hate to pedal a slack seat angle. My quads and lower back were aching within minutes and it felt like pedaling through sand - maybe this would not be a problem if you already ride something similar. Secondly, the steeper head angle made it harder to commit to corners and brake hard in steep sections, forcing me to lean back more and lose grip on the front wheel. I rode an XL, which is the longest bike, with the steepest head angle I have tried to date (other bikes I have ridden with around a 500mm reach have had a maximum of HA of 65º). Leaning back to feel safe on steep sections made the bike feel too big (an Aston first!) and I would ride the large next time.
Overall, Canyon have improved upon their previous Strive chassis that was a hit with many riders and racers. Great suspension, feel, and now with a Shapeshifter that cannot be complained about (unless reliability issues show in the future), with a 'middle of the road' geometry and shape. The shape will work for many riders and scenarios, but it's on the tame side of things for an EWS racer.
334 Comments
Seems like they forgot to develop the bike along with the shapeshifter.
Still, the frame is absolutely gorgeous as it is. One of the best recent frame designs.
Canyon has something to strive for with the next generation bike. Conceptually, Shapeshifter is an excellent idea. Unlike, TALAS and its kind.
I know they say never go full enduro, but this concept is just begging for it to be taken further. Also why not make the system wireless and hydraulic...
If you like the geometry, then buy the equivalent spectral, which is 1kg lighter for the same price and better specced, geometry is almost identical.
If you want a 29er enduro bike, buy a YT capra alu bike, similar specs are 1k cheaper, 500g lighter (wtf), and it has more aggressive geometry.
Thinking reduced offset forks should be slightly slacker...works headset needed for testing
As an aside, I also find that forward seat angles shift 90% of the workload to my quads, whereas a more traditional position over the BB uses my glutes and hams more effectively. It seems that would result in better muscle utilization over time, but again you probably get used to whatever you ride.
I'm glad that forward seat angles work for many people, but getting tired of them being touted as the end all be all. Although it should be noted that with a 32" inseam I don't extend the seat post as high as taller people so the effects of a slacker SA aren't as acute with me. For example I run a 150mm dropper and have never ever felt like I needed more drop.
A tad melodramatic, eh?
It just looks like a longer legged spectral with a liitle more complication...
So we'll with yt. Mist likely run low position 1st, then most likely slack it to 65 w/headset if its compatible.
You shouldn't be too hard on the staff though. If you look at the poor sap commentators, you will see the same thing. Not that long ago, a 68 head angle on an enduro/trail bike was "balanced" and 66 was "extreme". A year before, and you can bump up those numbers a notch, and a year later and you can drop them down similarly. Now 66 is out of touch, and anyone who knows anything is at 65 or lower. Tough to say where we will end up but it does seem that things have stabilized in the 62-63 range for DH, and we know moto didn't go much below that, so it may have reached its terminus. I know, it's frustrating having people who claim to be experts, who write reviews, when they are fallible humans subject to the same biases as you and I, but such is the condition of enthusiast journalism, take it or leave it. Knowhatimean?
The recent 65/66 - ha 77 sa bikes are by far the best ive ever ridden. No loss in chuckability at all.
I reviewed the Banshee Prime in October 2013!! I think a few things have progressed since then.
You guyz are looking just for numbers in geometry and travel and this is wrong.
A slacker strive with more travel would be nice on a paper but would it be on a trail too?
J. Graves was racing with new stupmy frame last year instead with old enduro frame---He said: Its more about quality than quantety...
I have been riding bikes for years now and I can tell that a good balenced bike with 150mm travel performs better than some of long travel enduro bikes...Like scott genius 16-17....170mm travel for nothing...On the other side you got a Santa Hightower LT with 150mm travel which performs better on the trail than most full enduro bikes...
Dont judge a bike on a paper...thats all...
It is possible, I've done it on a regular basis. It's not ideal for technical climbing but if you're mostly pedaling up gravel roads it's fine and worth it for the downhill performance. This has been an ongoing battle in the sport for 30 years, every time the bikes get slacker some complain they won't climb as well but they turn out fine. If you want steeper angles get some offset bushings or a shorter travel fork and quit trying to hold back the downhill performance of downhill oriented bikes.
If its a bike designed for top level enduro racing it's a downhill oriented-bike and should have DH bike geometry.
Pedo/shredo?
Deal?
Yep, and if I buy a bike with one-off tricky components... it will be with my LBS.
When you buy online you want simplicity and easy home wrenching.
I like Canyon but again, shapeshifter is off the table.
Nah
Local Bike Shop,
Or that’s a whoosh over my head smartass
This might pedal well but you know what also does? A lighter bike with a steeper seat angle
1° or 1,5° angleset
Buy XL over 180
Buy L under 180
Don't bother over 190
Buy one-up dropper to make this biggest drop possible out of your too long seat tube
Slide saddle forward and hope it doesn't feel too short when pedalling.
Or you can have race-ready Capra out of the box for the same money
I didn't consider the first Strive because of the wheel size, but I wouldn't consider this one either I'm afraid.
It does look good though.
I mean how on earth do I shred the maschine made trails with these ancient numbers?
Also big chance that cheaper carbon frame weights about the same as a previous alloy version.
Also 2017 Strive Al 6.0 weights 14,1kg, not 13,4. Still quite the difference.
The same goes for top end models:
2017 Strive CF 9.0 Race Team - 13,1kg
2019 Strive CFR 9.0 LTD - 14,2kg
Wow. I had no idea a 3 degree seat angle was so important. I'm going to throw out my old bike and buy something with a 77 or greater angle immediately.
Ah, good old marketing hyperbole. Where every tiny, incremental change is lauded as the second coming of crist which makes all of last years "ultimate" bikes completely unridable.
My guess is we’ve come close to geometry limits. I don’t know what’s next.. Maybe suspension? Think about it — about 15 years ago, a 160mm bike was a floppy mess. Now it’s no big thing to have a 160mm bike as your one bike quiver. What if they started making 200mm bikes that climbed like mountain goats? But we’ve been stuck at 150mm for a while now.
Obviously a MTB would need a steeper effective STA because of suspension sag, but not dramatically so. The main issue is that manufacturers measure effective STA at unrealistic saddle heights.
@TheR: Maybe the 140-160mm travel range is indeed the sweet spot for mountainbikes. Just like Motocross bikes have settled on a narrow range of travel.
I'm wondering how many of the posters have actually ridden a 78 STA/ 63 HTA bike that they all seem to require?
It's not that I don't like the modern geo on my Foxy 29 with a -1 headset (heck, that's even sounding out of date now!), it's just that I don't buy in to it being right for everyone nor that it made older geo bikes obsolete.
Seems to me this new Strive will be a good fit for a trail rider looking to shred.
The new set up for less bar mounted clutter, seems not to have worked that well, as it looks pretty dam busy under the bar there! doesn't much look like you can move much around to resolve it either.
The geo isn't much of a surprise, but having no AL is, and I can see strive sales suffering for it. overall I cant see much here to grant rushing online, and buying one, aside from if your in love with wagon wheels.
"Secondly, the steeper head angle made it harder to commit to corners and brake hard in steep sections, forcing me to lean back more and lose grip on the front wheel."
VS
"In long, open corners you always have enough weight on the front wheel without having to shift your weight around too much – way to go!"
Same as the YT trail bike? Jeffsy
And same as the previous Strive?
It’s this the same bike with 99 wheels on...
I was looking for a Strive with same designs and kinematic as the torque / spectral.
I get why only one of the four factory riders from last season was using the Strive.
So, it actually _is_ slacker than the previous model.
Also expected a similar layout to the Torque...
But, what does this thing weigh? Is it feasible to replace a trailbike? I don't wanna ride a 35lbs bike everywhere I go, if I have a choice. Does that frame weight include the shapeshifter linkage?
Oh I forgot it’s Canyon, so no recall, you’ll have to deal with it yourself.
But... it looks like (with my limited fork offset/geo knowledge) that this could be a nice aggressive bike for those who train on it, but spend most of their weekends racing on it. It just looks quick.
Also now you can tell which mode are you on by the position of remote's levers.
Any other owner have the same impression? Maybe someone found a workaround? Cheers
M size strive looks very close to the L size stumpy
M size strive compared to L stumpy is:
+10mm fork travel, same rear travel
-5mm reach,
-10mm stack,
-0.5 HA,
about the same SA depending on the shapeshifter position (if you'll seat and pedal in XC mode, than it is 75 vs 74.1 degrees)
wheelbase is 5mm smaller, but the fork offset is smaller by 9 or 7mm (rockshox vs fox forks on the strive)
Seatube is shorter as well - 440 (strive M) vs 455 (stumpy L)
bb drop is -3mm in DH mode
and the antisquat is higher on the strive
correct me if I'm wrong, but the new stumpy was a hell of a great bike last time I checked
Does it have more of an antisquat/efficient feel, or more of a plush fsr/horst feel with a bit of bob on sprints?
#27.5 is dead.
It's why many still ride 27.5 (i.e. top 3 at DH world champs, 1 & 2 in the EWS last year etc etc...)
Also, Trek, Specialized and S/C all going 29er on their DH bikes. Just saying. May not be for everyone. 29er for DH bikes is def new, but they will figure out the geo soon enough, if they haven't already. Guess my point is, innovate or die. But with that being said, we are all riding our bikes. So thats a good thing. Cheers.
Also, the Germans in the comments seem to agree about the Strive.