Giant Trance Advanced 1 - Review
The Trance Advanced is the bike that showcases what Giant does best. They use their high tech manufacturing might to produce many of the bike's components in house. so they can spec top quality carbon handlebars carbon wheelsets, dropper seatposts and stems without paying the up-charge for branded products. But Giant doesn't pocket the savings; instead, they spend it on upgrading the bike's critical suspension and drivetrain components, The fact that Giant is one of the better frame manufacturers in Asia is their ace in the hole. Making your own bikes eliminates one big link in the supply chain between the factory and Giant's retailers, and those savings can be passed on to the customer, or reinvested in the product. Giant does both. The Trance Advanced 1 reviewed here sits one notch below the flagship Advanced 0. It's appointed with everything an aggressive trail rider would need, its numbers are contemporary, it weighs only 27.3 pounds, its carbon/aluminum chassis is delightfully capable and efficient, and its MSRP is attainable, at only $4,950 USD.
Trance Advanced 1 Details:
• Intended use: trail / all-mountain
• Frame: carbon front section welded aluminum Maestro rear suspension.
• 27.5" wheels, boost hub spacing.
• Metric shock sizing
• Rear-wheel travel: 140mm
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• 67º head angle
• Shimano XT 11-speed drivetrain (11 x 46t cassette, 32t chainring)
• MSRP: $4950 USD
• Weight: 27.3 pounds (medium)
• Contact: Giant Bicycles
• Intended use: trail / all-mountain
• Frame: carbon front section welded aluminum Maestro rear suspension.
• 27.5" wheels, boost hub spacing.
• Metric shock sizing
• Rear-wheel travel: 140mm
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• 67º head angle
• Shimano XT 11-speed drivetrain (11 x 46t cassette, 32t chainring)
• MSRP: $4950 USD
• Weight: 27.3 pounds (medium)
• Contact: Giant Bicycles
New kinematics: the Trance now has a lower leverage rate, which enhances pedaling and mid-stroke support.
The Real Story
Now, pretend that you never read that last paragraph. It's all true, but there is a simpler story behind the 2017 Trance Advanced. Bring your bike to Giant USA's headquarters in Southern California for a lunch ride and meet the folks who designed it in their element. You'll be hard pressed to find fitter or better bike handlers. Here, where climbs are sustained, the soil is sketchy, and speeds range from switchback survival to eye-watering ridge-line descents, the Trance is their weapon of choice. These are the men and women whose job it is to mix it up with Giant's pro athletes and develop their next enduro, downhill, and cross-country race bikes, so it should come as no surprise that the crew regularly updates their favorite trail bike with lessons learned on the professional racing circuit. So, the Trance Advanced is literally Giant's personal ride, made available to the public.
Aluminum was Giant's choice for the swingarm. Note how the internal cable routing exits over the top of the bottom bracket shell, not below it.
Construction
Giant's goal is to keep the Trance's performance at the leading edge of the trail bike category. These days, that means it needs to approach the speeds and technical prowess of a gravity oriented enduro machine like its burly brother, the Reign, but with a lighter, brighter feeling under power and sharper reactions in the steering department to suit the tighter confines of natural back country trails.
We learned in Mike Kazimer's First Ride piece at the new Trance launch that Giant extended its reach ten millimeters, shortened the chainstays by five, and completely revamped its dual-link Maestro rear suspension to reduce the leverage rate driving its shock. Suspension travel is 140-millimeters in the rear, and 150-millimeters up front - a combination that is becoming a favorite here at PB for-fast paced trail bikes.
 | A quick scan of the Trance's geometry indicates that Giant has chosen the conservative path... |
A quick scan of the Trance's geometry indicates that Giant has chosen the conservative path, with a 73.5-degree seat tube angle, reasonably long reaches, and a low enough bottom bracket to ensure sharp turning without bashing pedals through every rock garden. Giant also bucks the super-slack trend with the Trance's 67-degree head tube angle, but
Trance Advanced geometry
The front section of the Trance Advanced chassis is constructed from Toray T700 carbon material from Japan (perhaps the most respected supplier in the industry), while the rear suspension is fabricated from aluminum. The aluminum rear end was a pragmatic choice, shared by a number of high-end bike makers, because the complicated shapes and narrow tube profiles of carbon swingarms make them much more costly to manufacture, while the end result is minimal weight savings at comparative strengths. The lower link of its Maestro suspension is aluminum, while the new upper link is carbon and designed to fit "metric" trunnion-mount shocks.
Hefty molded rubber bash guard for the downtube, ISCG mounts, and frame clearance for DH-width tires.
Like most contemporary frames, the Trance Advanced has internal cables and housings, but Giant routes them above the bottom bracket shell, where they are protected from root and rock strikes. The curved down tube and vertical shock placement provides generous room for a full-sized water bottle, and there is ample space between the chainstays for gravity-sized 2.6-inch rubber. The carbon downtube is protected by a thick, molded rubber bash plate, while the drive-side chainstay is wrapped with an equally impressive rubber sleeve to keep things quiet back there when the downs get fast and scary. Finally, Giant chose to use screw-in through-axles on the Boost width rear axle and fork, presumably to ensure that there will be no question as to how well the axles have been tensioned, as is sometimes the case with lever-actuated axles.
Contact SL Switch-R dropper seatpost.
Giant's sharp looking TRX 1 carbon wheels.
Key Components
The stars of the Trance Advanced 1 show are its Fox 34 Float Factory Kashima fork and Float Factory shock. Right up there with the suspension are its Shimano XT 11-speed drivetrain and brakes. Also worth a mention are Giant's house brand TRX 1 composite wheels. They reportedly weigh 1640 grams a set, measure a respectably wide, 27 millimeters (inside width), and deliver a smoother ride than their more conspicuous rivals, with excellent steering feel.
On the opposite side of the enthusiasm meter, Giant spec'ed a narrow, 750-millimeter handlebar, paired with a longer than necessary, 60-millimeter stem on a chassis that is capable enough to race local enduros. Both are easy fixes, but the beauty of the Trance Advanced 1 is that, in every other respect, it is ready to rock out of the crate.
| The stars of the Trance Advanced 1 show are its Fox 34 Float Factory Kashima fork and Float Factory shock. |
| Specifications | ||
| Release Date | 2017 | |
| Price | $4950 | |
| Travel | 140mm rear, 150mm front | |
| Rear Shock | Fox Float Factory | |
| Fork | Fox 34 Float Factory Kashima, FIT4 | |
| Headset | sealed, tapered | |
| Cassette | Shimano XT 11x46, 11-speed | |
| Crankarms | Shimano XT, 32t | |
| Chainguide | ISCG mounts | |
| Bottom Bracket | Shimano press-fir BB92 | |
| Pedals | NA | |
| Rear Derailleur | Shimano XT | |
| Chain | KMC X11 EL | |
| Front Derailleur | NA | |
| Shifter Pods | Shimano XT | |
| Handlebar | Giant Contact SL aluminum, 750mm | |
| Stem | Contact SL 60mm | |
| Grips | Giant lock-on | |
| Brakes | Shimano XT, 180mm rotors F&R | |
| Wheelset | Giant TRX 1 | |
| Hubs | Giant TRX 1 | |
| Spokes | Sapim Laser | |
| Rim | Giant TRX 1 Carbon | |
| Tires | (F) Schwalbe Nobby Nic, 2.35" Trailstar, (R) Nobby Nic 2.25" Pacestar | |
| Seat | Giant Contact SL | |
| Seatpost | Giant Contact SL Switch-R | |
If you can imagine the sensation of being a mountain bike trail dog, mixing it up with your buds on a sweet section of forest singletrack, you wouldn't have to read further to understand how Giant's new Trance Advanced 1 performs. It's fast, it feels nimble in the turns, it has a certain lightness to it that I have yet to experience aboard a Giant, and it's quick reactions inspire the confidence to deal with unforeseen obstacles as they appear. At speed, when the Trance's suspension is pushed to its limits, the bike naturally floats off the back-sides of tree-root gnarls, off-angle rocks and undulations in the trail. It may fall behind gravity-oriented enduro machines down the most technical descents, but not too far, and it shows up ready to rock, with its tongue hanging out, smiling from ear to ear.
| At speed, when the Trance's suspension is pushed to its limits, the bike naturally floats off the back-sides of tree-root gnarls, off-angle rocks and undulations in the trail. |
The Trance's improved rear-suspension kinematics make ballpark settings feel just right. Get the sag at or a little past 25 percent, and turn in the low-speed rebound dial until you can sense a small amount of resistance after a deep compression and you are good to go. I used similar settings on the fork, but with slightly less sag (20 percent) to keep the front end riding up while I was negotiating Pemberton's frequent rock rolls, and never needed to touch the suspension dials again.
Climbing and acceleration: Previously, Giant's Maestro suspension impressed me as a seven out of ten for pedaling feel and efficiency. The Reigns and Trances I had ridden in the past were efficient, in the sense that they maintained momentum and accelerated quickly, but there was an ever-so slight disconnect between the instant that the leg muscles tightened and the moment when the rear wheel responded. Giant's new kinematics have eliminated that issue entirely. The cranks feel directly connected to the tire's contact patch, and the result is brighter, more energetic acceleration and much happier legs on the climbs.
Extended climbs warranted switching to the center position of the Fox shock's low-speed compression lever to firm up the pedaling feel and, more importantly, to keep the tail end of the Trance from settling too much into its travel. On that subject, I have been riding bikes with steeper seat tube angles (in the neighborhood of 74 to 76 degrees) for over a year and I believe that the Giant's 73.5-degree number is a bit too slack for a modern trail bike. To that end, there is enough reach built into the new Trance to run the saddle forward on the rails to compensate for it without cramping the cockpit. With the seat forward, climbing was enhanced and I found the bike's 17.1-inch chainstays were still short enough to maintain traction up steep pitches that might have defeated me otherwise.
Extended climbs warranted switching to the center position of the Fox shock's low-speed compression lever to firm up the pedaling feel and, more importantly, to keep the tail end of the Trance from settling too much into its travel. On that subject, I have been riding bikes with steeper seat tube angles (in the neighborhood of 74 to 76 degrees) for over a year and I believe that the Giant's 73.5-degree number is a bit too slack for a modern trail bike. To that end, there is enough reach built into the new Trance to run the saddle forward on the rails to compensate for it without cramping the cockpit. With the seat forward, climbing was enhanced and I found the bike's 17.1-inch chainstays were still short enough to maintain traction up steep pitches that might have defeated me otherwise.
| The cranks feel directly connected to the tire's contact patch, and the result is brighter, more energetic acceleration and much happier legs on the climbs. |
Technical handling: Before I had a chance to criticize the Trance for its steeper-than-I-wished-for head tube angle, I was given the chance to experience why its 67-degree angle was, perhaps, the better option. The trail to access the choice descents on the mountain was well over a thousand feet of climbing, punctuated by roots, rocks, a few ladders and fifty odd switchbacks. With a shorter wheelbase and its slightly steeper head angle, the Trance 1 could be unweighted with minimal effort to get the wheels over steps and roots and its steering felt effortless, compared to the slacked-out enduro sleds I was accustomed to riding at home. The Trance took the drama out of the climbs - all the power moves that big, long-travel machines require to navigate in tight spaces became comically evident.
| Both wheels tend to drift when it is pushed hard in a turn, and that remains consistent at a variety of speeds and trail surfaces. |
Contemporary mountain biking is all about clowns and downs. Climbing, not so much. As I crested into the first downhill, I was thinking about all the great climbing bikes I had experienced - and how frightening it was to pilot most of them down technical steeps. "If Giant hopes to make an impression on the sport's up and comers," I muttered, as I dropped the seat post. "This Trance needs to show me some skills."
Turns out that the only surprises that the Trance had in store were pleasant ones. Both wheels tend to drift when it is pushed hard in a turn, and that remains consistent at a variety of speeds and trail surfaces. I learned to lean the Trance a little more than necessary, let the wheels settle into a line, and then it would stay put until the exit point. Schwalbe's Nobby Nic tires would be suicide on my home trails, but they found grip everywhere in the Pacific Northwest's loamy wood-chipped soil. Conditions were dry, but there were plenty of opportunities to sample wet roots and rocks without issues.
The Giant is shorter than the bikes I am used to, so I needed to place my weight over the front wheel with greater precision to negotiate chutes and rock rolls. Thanks to its Shimano XT brakes, I could count on consistent engagement and power, so the Trance could be coaxed deftly to the edge of a skid. It's an easy bike to ride. I had only a handful of "moments" while I was descending in earnest and most were my errors, not the bike's shortfalls. In spite of the 60-millimeter stem (which I recommend changing to a 50 or 40) and its more upright geometry, I was comfortable dropping into all but the scariest lines in one of BC's more respected trail networks. That said, however, The Trance 1 is a true trail bike and thus, has its limitations. Push it beyond its speed threshold and it gets bouncy over bomb-holes and bumps. The same warning applies for steeps - it will happily descend some impressive lines, but speed control is of the essence if survival is the goal.
Technical Report
Shimano XT brakes: Armed with 180-millimeter rotors on each end, the Trance's XT brakes stopped harder and with greater consistency than SRAM Guide brakes on different test bike, but in equal conditions. It was an eye opener, considering that Guides have been my favorite brakes for over a year running.
Contact SL Switch-R dropper post: Defying all odds, Giant's original Switch dropper post is still operating smoothly after four years on one of my test bikes. It's been significantly upgraded since, but it's still cable operated, reliable, and it shows up on most of Giant's trail bikes. Large and XL Trance Advanced 1 models are spec'ed with 150-millimeter posts, but to ensure that smaller frame sizes will fit a wide variety of riders, Giant specs 125-millimeter posts on mediums (reviewed), and 100-millimeter posts on the small sizes. I often wished for the longer, 150-millimeter option to get the saddle out of the way.
Contact SL stem and handlebar: Once it was a nitpick, but reaches have been extended, head angles have adjusted to be slacker, and those changes favor stems in the range of 50 millimeters with handlebars near the 780-millimeter mark. I can attest that the Trance Advanced 1 can be piloted easily with the stock 60-millimeter stem and 750-millimeter bar, but I'll bet that the design team at Giant are sporting wider bars and shorter stems on their lunch-ride Trances. Just saying.
Shimano XT brakes: Armed with 180-millimeter rotors on each end, the Trance's XT brakes stopped harder and with greater consistency than SRAM Guide brakes on different test bike, but in equal conditions. It was an eye opener, considering that Guides have been my favorite brakes for over a year running.
Contact SL Switch-R dropper post: Defying all odds, Giant's original Switch dropper post is still operating smoothly after four years on one of my test bikes. It's been significantly upgraded since, but it's still cable operated, reliable, and it shows up on most of Giant's trail bikes. Large and XL Trance Advanced 1 models are spec'ed with 150-millimeter posts, but to ensure that smaller frame sizes will fit a wide variety of riders, Giant specs 125-millimeter posts on mediums (reviewed), and 100-millimeter posts on the small sizes. I often wished for the longer, 150-millimeter option to get the saddle out of the way.
Contact SL stem and handlebar: Once it was a nitpick, but reaches have been extended, head angles have adjusted to be slacker, and those changes favor stems in the range of 50 millimeters with handlebars near the 780-millimeter mark. I can attest that the Trance Advanced 1 can be piloted easily with the stock 60-millimeter stem and 750-millimeter bar, but I'll bet that the design team at Giant are sporting wider bars and shorter stems on their lunch-ride Trances. Just saying.
Pinkbike's Take:
| Those who live and die by the latest trends will find it hard, perhaps impossible, to embrace the sensibility of Giant's best-selling trail bike. It's like the creators of the Trance Advanced 1 blended everything good about modern long-travel trail bikes with the most salient aspects of their old-school designs. That may sound wrong, but the Trance feels very right. The reason it works so well is that they built it for themselves, to blaze trails, try foolish things, and to chase each other around the backcountry - which happens to be exactly what most of us live for. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
I also realized after trying out a larger sized bike though, that my bike was too small for me, which is another factor to be taken into account. I think it makes sense for these brands to spec a middle-range stem that allows bike owners to shorten or lengthen it to their personal preference. I expect that shortening your stem would make the most sense if your frame size is already relatively large for you, which may very well be a good way to set up a bike well... buy bigger frame (if close to the line between frame sizes or in the overlap zone of recommended sizes) and shorten the stem.
However, each brand sets up their bikes so differently it seems that you really just need to get a feel for them. I guess once again it comes back to personal preference!
Industry trends are not necessarily the right medicine for everyone. Run through some of the enduro and DH bike checks that have been on PB in the past year, 750-760mm bar width is not uncommon on many racers enduro bikes and how many DH racers are running super wide rims and tires? I can recall seeing DT EX471's (25mm internal) and 2.3 tires on quite a few bikes fairly recently.
I'm so exhausted by the bike industry and media, like a lot of people that read PB I now mostly just look at a few pics and scroll right to the comments.
Although you can chop the bars, the reality is the average buyer doesn't, they would just deal with a bike that doesn't handle quite right. Or more than likely, they would pick the bike from another manufacture who correctly matched stem and bars.
Jared graves has to ride through very tight tree sections at 40km/h ; I ride through medium/tight tree section at 25km/h. Don't tell me I need the same bar size
On my old V10, I preferred a 55mm stem also. I just don't get along well with short stems 50mm and below.
Doesn’t have to be a big deal.
The shorter the stem the better, up to DH lengths?
The wider the bar the better, up to DH lengths?
Short CS length improves climbing traction? According to another review, long CS length does too.
67d HA is conservative, slacker is better, up to DH angles?
63.5 SA is conservative, steeper is better, up to the steepest you've seen (75?)?
434mm reach is conservative, longer is better, up to the longest you've seen (Geometron, or more modest like Whyte T130?)?
Shorter bikes require you to ride a certain way?
Having made frames yourself, and having in depth talks with experienced designers like Jeff Steber, you should know geometry and all these component lengths is a juggling act, with dozens of things to juggle at once, to get right. Don't see the sense in trying to deceive us, unless you're using satire...
Globally, as emphasis shifted from XC/trail, towards more challenging technical riding, short stems were a mandatory tool to tame existing designs and to allow riders to get far enough behind the front wheel to survive steep descents. Frame design took a while to catch up.
Riding style drove frame designers to lengthen top tubes, stabilize handling and increase suspension travel.
When head tube angles passed 69 degrees and fork travel jumped from 120 to 160mm, the front wheel was moved substantially ahead of the rider. Steering reaction was slowed and steering forces were heavier for a number of reasons, one being, that slack steering angles tend force the frame to stay in line with the front wheel. Those changes had dynamic effects on the way bicycles handled, which dictated different riding techniques - and wide handlebars played an important role.
Long forks and slack bikes required riders to move forward and load the front wheel, so it was not surprising that everyone started extolling super wide handlebars. Wide bars forced old school riders, who had been riding on their rear tires down every descent during the Sam Hill era, to stay up front and maintain grip where it would do the most good. For most riders, exaggerated width was a training crutch, necessary at first, to get riders up to speed on modern geometry. Those who have adapted, probably don't need the crutch, as Richie Rude so aptly demonstrates.
So, riders are on a catch up plateau again, learning new riding techniques made possible by major changes in bicycle component and chassis design. We've learned that wider bars, and shorter stems are useful in other ways. For example: instead of setting up before a corner to establish an arc, we leverage the handlebar to force the rear wheel to square off the corner at a prescribed point. Downhillers are racing "point-to-point." Taking the straightest line down the course and compressing off of features to change direction. A short stem lines up your shoulders, down the fork, to the contact patch of the front tire, so you are literally punching the ground when you need to load the front wheel.
New-school riders will soon eclipse what we once believed was the ultimate threshold of speed and skill. I've seen it happen a few times.
So, yes, mountain bike design is always a compromise, but in times like this, when everything is in flux, explaining how a particular bike rides, rather than why, and suggesting small changes that may assist a potential owner to enhance its performance in some aspect of its envelope, can be more useful and economical information in a review.
Thanks for give me a chance to expand on those topics.
RC . .
Short stems being hailed as an upgrade is a trend from days of steep HAs. There was just too much weight on the front and once all momentum was lost, shit happened.
Slack HAs require more weight on the front. That's gained from both stem length and handlebar width, but you can only go so far on bar width, so you need to also increase stem length. With enough weight on the front, thanks to bar width and stem length (headset to grip distance), you can stay in a more relaxed centered position, rather than tentatively forward. 10mm of additional stem length is worth 20mm of additional handlebar width. Riders compensated for low weight on the front with big slow heavy tires up front.
Longer reach (longer downtube), increases weight on the front wheel, so a shorter stem is possible. Problem is that the weight bias is shifted more to the rear. With excessive rear bias, the rear wheel sees more abuse, increasing risk of flatting and other damage.
Short stems making steering more sensitive is a myth. I'm sure people have seen an illustration showing how much the face of a stem moves when you turn the wheel the same angle, with 2 different stem lengths. You're in for a surprise once someone convinces you to instead see how much the grips move when you turn the wheel with the two stem lengths. Hint: it's all based on the headset to grip distance. Steering feel probably should be managed by the fork offset, but that's a whole other issue to get that unlocked/adjustable.
Prefer wider bars, although some bridges and tree gaps on my local trails do make for a heart stopping moment.
In terms of short stems effect on steering, I have most often heard it described as slowing the steering down, which after looking at the graphic you describe, I would attribute that to as I understand: bar length being equal, for any given angular rotation of the wheel the faceplate of the stem travels a shorter distance versus a longer stem. I take this to mean less movement of stem and grips for any given turn angle (=a slower / calmer steering feel better for fast downhill riding). Not to mention the increase in leverage of a longer bar creating a similar stabilizing effect.
In terms of stem length, I agree 60mm is not long. Probably for most aggressive or trail riders of average height with the correct size modern long front centre bike 50/60/70mm is probably going to suit 90% of people with longer sizes being more on the xc side or trail.
I demo'd this bike yesterday on Mt. Fromme. I dropped the stem to the headset and sub'ed in my own 785mm bar. I didn't like the look of the stock 750mm bar's rise, with the rise bend so close to the stem. It looked and felt short in comparison to the 750mm flat bar I have on my 29er hardtail. Not a fan of 6 degree rise short stems either, does not make much sense when you can use zero rise and spacers to do the same thing. I would prefer the 50 or 60mm zero rise stem and longer bar from the Reign on this bike.
Choosing stem length based on riding style (XC, trail, enduro, DH) and fit is also another questionable trend. Stem length should be first considered for performance, primarily to tune weight bias according to what bar width you settled with. Riders and trails can only cope with so wide, and if they find disadvantages with bars wider than 750mm, what disadvantage is there with running a 10mm longer stem, to get the handling of running a bar that's 20mm wider? The body is really accommodating to "fit issues", but handling quirks are something else entirely. Tuning the weight balance affects "steering", in terms of oversteer and understeer. People say they'd rather have the rear slide rather than the front, but the bike would be faster and easier to handle when not biased towards either. Might find yourself holding uncomfortable riding positions in tech sections, due to disrupted weight balance, only to breathe a sigh of relief once clear of technical challenges--shouldn't you relish technical challenges? Does having a well tuned bike make it too easy, and/or less exciting? I suppose an expert might appreciate a bike that's more of a handful to control, to artificially increase the challenge, while still being more enjoyable all around than a less capable bike (a high end FS vs increasing the challenge by riding a cheap HT).
I can imagine an absurd amount of finely balanced bikes being compromised by customizing in the name of fit and trends. There's a strong belief that manufacturers designed their bikes for some specific proportioned person and that the odds are better to win a lotto jackpot than to have your own body fit the stock bike. Despite a manufacturer's efforts of lengthy prototyping and testing phases, people seemingly just have a thing for hot-rodding and ignorantly disrupting the balance, replacing setback posts, stems, bars, and whatever else, influenced by reviews like this. Are there real reasons behind the act of spending for a very minor change that may be no better? Psychological benefit?
Lengthening the front center, without changing the rear, makes the bike more rearward biased. The longer downtube adds additional weight on the front, but some of that additional weight gets shifted rearward by the shorter stem--there's an increase in total weight on the wheels combined. On that subject, with bikes growing in wheelbase, weight bias is less affected by small changes in the cockpit. Unsurprisingly, the longer bikes ride with more confidence, but it may come as a surprise that they *corner faster*, especially in tight switchbacks. This is contrary to the former popular belief that long wheelbases were terrible in corners (steer like a bus). Can choose whatever stem length you like with 1200 or even 1300mm+ wheelbase bikes; it won't matter, since the rider weight at the BB, from merely standing on the bike, becomes enough to dictate handling, with the sweet spot of rider fore/aft positioning becoming huge and forgiving. These bikes come with their own issues though...
Giant lowered the BB and slightly steepened 67 HA. The combination give's the user faster steering and should place them back on the descents like the previous model Trance @ 66. More fun!
Half of the fun I have riding is tech climbs and cleaning them so when reviewers keep wanting steeper and steeper seat tubes to weight the front tire I found it didn't help. Having a short torso I often had my seat forward to aid keeping the front tire on the ground. If it is forward it needs to also needs to go higher to compensate. I learned that if my seat was too high or to forward the bike climbed worse. A 1/2 inch lower saddle and have more knee bend and I become less perched on top of the bike managing the steep tech. sections. If I get to far forward I can't weight the rear tire to keep traction.
I can manage a 73 or 74 degree seat angle due to a short torso but it is flat out wrong for the long torso dudes!!! Same height guy as me has his seat 3 inch's lower and the saddle way back. So think twice designers chasing the reviews demand for steeper seat tubes.
Giants climb tech very good and it bugs me when a reviewer blames the SA for his ability on a given climb
Here is the datasheet for Toray T700
It is a high strength standard modulus FIBER.
www.toraycfa.com/pdfs/T700SDataSheet.pdf
And the spelling you are looking for is "their," not "there."
Unless Toray owns Giant or something. I dunno.
My biggest complaint on the reign was the soft DT wheels it came with, while they are expensive and nice quality they seemed really light duty for the bike.
We will see how long the frame lasts but I have a feeling things will be good, the bike is solid.
I had an 08 reign as well. Had a fox dhx coil and a vivid air on it. Neither had any issue with bottoming out where it shouldn't, both were run at 30% sag. Vivid air was run without any extra progression from tokens. "Pop" was found from the LSR and compression adjustments.
I had a trek fuel afterwards, never got along with the performance of the ABP and being stuck with the DRCV rear shock meant it was time for that bike to go, but YMMV
Does it shred right out of the box? How does it compare to its direct competition? Is it priced reasonably? Does it have a warranty (hahaha omg warranty on a bicycle....lol)
But bar width is more determined by your shoulder width, rather than your height. You can be 5'8 and more comfortably run a wider bar than someone at 6'0 who has much narrower shoulders than you. Going too wide is just as bad as going too narrow. Find the right width based on your build and you'll be much happier than simply going for the gusto at 800mm.
I do agree that cutting down a wider bar is easier than going the other way.
If you tomahawk the bike into a tree and punch a hole in it, it's not a warranty. Warranty from a large brand is usually so much better than I would expect. I've seen them warranty all kinds of shit that isn't a warranty.
Hell I have had one of the big three warranty another brands bike.
I'm sure a compromised was reached.
"Dave Weagle's dw-link suspension system may be the single most significant advancement in bicycles since the advent of suspension in the early 1990s."
someone has a massive ego.
"DW-Link has withdrawn its claims of patent infringement and regrets bringing the litigation against Giant." Giant will continue to sell bikes equipped with the Maestro suspension system since it doesn't infringe on DW-Link patents"
Yeah, he's a pretty boastful guy, but since he's the brand you kinda have to do that in a way if you want to get people to buy your stuff.
Google hard enough and you'll find that everything I said is true.
""Neither Giant nor DW-Link will have any further statements regarding the subject," If you actually think DW would just drop a case before it went through, and would 'not issue a statement', then you don't know DW.
If he was right, he should have stuck with the lawsuit. I don't know him but I heard he's a nice guy and obviously smart but I think he's got an ego the size of Trump. He's just pedaling (no pun intended) his version of snake oil. I'm not a fan of someone who thinks they are better than everyone. :
I bet it's awesome, the reign is already a pretty capable bike; this one must be really polyvalent
It's a bad ass. I came from a 2016 Devinci Saptran. On everything except super gnar, it's faster.
Best thing about this bike, as pointed out, it's super playful. Poppy and seeks out "the fun line."
Reviewer goes on to praise the handling of the bike. No wait, I need to find at least something that will sound negative, even if it is personal preference, or the review will sound like all others. How about stem and bar length, yeah that will do. Even though the bike handles great, I'd recommend a wider bar and shorter stem, just because:
"I can attest that the Trance Advanced 1 can be piloted easily with the stock 60-millimeter stem and 750-millimeter bar, but I'll bet that the design team at Giant are sporting wider bars and shorter stems on their lunch-ride Trances. Just saying."
Total BS. Reviewer should let the consumer decide for themselves the best stem/bar length rather steer them to change before even testing out of the box.
Maybe this test bike was not though?
Here is my 2017 Trance Advance 1 for reference: www.pinkbike.com/photo/14075388
Much larger cog. So rest assured, the production bike comes with 46T.
Plus side it makes me pedal faster uphill so I am not around them for the climbs.....
Glad you are liking your Magura though - it is seriously on my shortlist for a ht I am thinking of building up.
She has taken to that bike like a fish to water, her riding style was very safe and easy, now she's whipping on Advance Difficulty trails and she is bringing up the rear with a smile on her face. She's murdering climbs and is pedaling way faster on normal trails. I thought at first she may miss the smaller hardtail on the tighter stuff, but she's loves it in all conditions.
I've never owned a Giant before, but I must say they really hit the mark on the new Trance, she loves it. All it needs is a dropper, Some Spank bars and a shorter stem next year and she will be set.
I think this bike is the modern version of a mountain bike. it just seems to work well on most terrain with most riders.
10/10 would recommend.
I'd buy one 2morrow, un-test ridden.
Love my '14 Trance Advanced1!
No better bike 4 the money.
The only thing I'd change is that 11-46 cassette and 32T ring. (for 11-42 & 30T). Too much jump from 37 to 46T!
Same here. I've actually never rode Giant until I demoed one at a local weekend event here in AZ. Despite other brands being available to ride, I kept going back to the Trance because I could simply ride faster and smoother with it compared to other brands like Niner and Gurilla Gravity.
Freaking love this bike!
Just checked Giant's site and they spec it different in Spain, full SLX and Sektor. Uglier colorways too :/
I have been a big Fox 36 RC2 fan, but not the CTD or whatever name they choose to call it. Same on the back, would really like to try a X2 but the CTD type Floats I don't like. Maybe once there are more options in the metric trunnion mount shock available I would give this bike a go. FWIW, this is the first time in over 7 years, I am not riding a Giant Trance or Reign.
One other point the Giant branded wheels in the past although a bit narrow were very nicely built, quite light and stood up very well (change out the aluminum nipples to brass and all was good). The older TRX-1 wheels had DT Swiss 240/350 internals, I think the newer wheels are still using DT Swiss internals but a lower end selection.
All in all a very nice package for the price, given the price of other comparable bikes.
Now I'm just waiting for Fox to sell the X2 rear shock in metric sizes w/ trunnion. Though, truthfully, whats on there has served me well so far.
My notes:
- the stock tyres (Nobby Nic performance) roll really well, but lack grip - replace them for any serious downhill stuff
- tubeless setup works great (split tube method), with tape it is hard to get the tape to conform to the rim because of the rim shape (Tesa 4289 tape)
- fork will only work good if sag is set to 30% of travel, less than that = no small bump compliance, impossible to use all travel
- climbing is only good with the shock lever in the middle possition (= half locked compression), in the open position the bike bobs as hell and is only good on downhills)
- the shock is not a common size/mount - will see if in the future there will be a better option on the market (probably not)
- the stock seat is hard as hell - I ditched the thing for something more confortable after a few weeks of trying to adapt
- the chain jumped gears few times (3) in the gap between the space between the small cog and frame - going downhill, shifting few gears at a time, otherwise the shiftig works OK, adjusted B screw - will see if things will improve
- grips are small and slippery (without gloves)
Good review, even better to see an honest review of a trail bike - see so many people over biked and lumping around big rigs on singletrack trails. Recently changed to a Mondraker Foxy (similar geometry and travel) from a big rig, best choice I've made in years - more than enough for 99% of my riding and brought the fun back into things - more trail bike review pls Pinkbike
Just under £5k got me a 160mm travel bike with a Lyrik RCT3, Monarch Plus Debonair RC3, Eagle XO1 drive train and carbon cranks, Guide RSC brake set, RaceFace carbon cockpit, Reverb 170mm dropper post, and 30mm internal diameter carbon wheelset, with a 495mm reach, and with 2.5" DH casing tyres front and back it weights in at just over 13.5kgs.
Does it seem that this bike is under spec'ed and over priced, as well as a little hyped? Interested to hear people's thoughts. Just my opinion of course, nothing concrete.
Your opinion of the XT brakes might be effecting your opinion that the bike is "under-spec'd and hyped?"
I shopped for a new bike for many months, and saw no other bike with these specs for under $5k USD. Carbon frame, carbon wheels, Fox Factory suspension, XT Grouppo, and a dropper post. But again, I wanted XT components, so they hold more value to me. If Commencal or YT had spec'd Shimano and Fox on their bikes, I probably would have bought one of those. But alas, their bikes have SRAM stuff.
So yea, it comes down to opinion I think. And thats totally ok anyway. It means we all get choices!
I just find after riding Fox / Shimano for the large part, my switch to Rockshox / SRAM has been nothing but positive, don't think I'd switch back in a hurry.
Like you say, the fact we have the choice is cool in itself ????
I guess next I'll go for DVO/Box Components/TRP?
Maybe you're right!????
Yea I know, but three sets in a row just isn't something I'm happy to tolerate, especially considering how long it all took in returns etc.
Supposedly they have a revised version, which I was told the last pair were, but it still happened so enough was enough.
Pic - goo.gl/photos/2ZXR7VKbkRVvLNbh7