Mondraker Foxy Carbon RR SL Review

Jan 15, 2018
by Mike Kazimer  
Mountain bike geometry has undergone a fairly drastic shift over the last five years or so, and Mondraker deserves a good portion of the credit for helping to bring those changes into the mainstream. Their 'Forward Geometry' concept, which is based around the idea of using shorter stems and a longer front center, has become widely accepted, although Mondraker still sits near the front of the pack when it comes to just how long a bike can be.

The Foxy RR SL is the Spanish company's all-mountain offering, although it recently received several revisions to increase its capabilities even further. The latest version now has 150mm of travel (up from 140mm), and the head angle has been slackened to 66-degrees. Even the front center has grown slightly, and while the previous version wasn't what anyone would call 'short', the newest iteration has a reach of 500mm for a size large.
Mondraker Foxy RR SL

Intended use: all-mountain
Travel:150mm
Wheel size: 27.5"
Frame construction: Stealth Air carbon
Head angle: 66º
Chainstay length: 425-435mm
Sizes: S, M, L, XL
Weight: 28 lb (12.7 kg) - size large, w/o pedals
Price: $9,100 USD
More info: www.mondraker.com

There are four complete models in the Foxy Carbon lineup, beginning with the base model Carbon R for $4,400. Our review bike is the RR SL version, which uses Mondraker's Stealth Air carbon layup to save weight, allowing it to check in at an impressive 28 pounds. Of course, that does come with a price, in this case to the tune of $9,100 USD. Still not fancy enough for you? There's a limited edition Enve-wheel-equipped model that will drain $10,600 dollars out of your bank account.

bigquotesMondraker continue to push the limits of mountain bike geometry, and the Foxy is no exception, delivering a stable, rewarding ride once it's up to speed. Mike Kazimer

Contents







Mondraker Foxy RR SL review


Construction and Features

The Foxy's profile is striking, thanks in large part to the flat, ruler-like shape of the top tube. As we mentioned when the new Foxy was first announced, Mondraker's carbon construction process uses “solid internal molds, both in expanded high-density polystyrene and in biodegradable silicon (they don't use the bladder system), which they say allows for better compression of the fibers and a cleaner extraction after heat treatment.”

There's also a threaded bottom bracket, a welcome change from the press fit interface found on the previous model. Other updates include metric shock spacing (in this case, a trunnion mounted Fox DPX2 takes care of the bike's 150mm of travel), Boost spacing, and larger, 15mm bearings. And of course, it's worth mentioning that there's plenty of room fit a water bottle inside the front triangle.


Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
ISCG 05 tabs and a threaded bottom bracket are all welcome features, but it'd be nice to see some downtube protection.
Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
The dropouts can be swapped to lengthen the chainstay length by 10mm - a custom mount allows the brake caliper to be shifted backward or forward accordingly.


Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
Mondraker went with larger pivot bearings for the new model to increase their longevity.
Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
The long, thin top tube gives the Foxy its distinctive look.


Geometry & Sizing

Foxy RR geometry

It's the Foxy's geometry that truly sets it apart from most of its contemporaries, specifically the reach and resulting wheelbase length. A size large has a 500mm reach and a 1241mm wheelbase. Compare that to a Santa Cruz Bronson, with its 445mm reach and 1189mm wheelbase, or a Trek Remedy, with its 453mm reach and 1200mm wheelbase, and it becomes clear just how far Mondraker have pushed their numbers.

Mondraker also make it possible to tweak the Foxy's geometry even further via offset headset cups and replaceable dropouts. The 66-degree head angle can be increased or reduced by 1-degree, and the chainstay length can be increased from 425 to 435mm.



Views: 15,813    Faves: 6    Comments: 0


Suspension Design

The Foxy uses Mondraker's 'Zero Suspension System', their take on a dual-link design. The shock is mounted to the center of the lower link, which means that it's being compressed from the top and the bottom when an obstacle is encountered. According to Mondraker, this allows them to balance small bump sensitivity with the ability to handle bigger hits. Based on the graph provided by Mondraker, the anti-squat value is around 106% at the sag point, a number that decreases as the suspension goes deeper into its travel. There's also enough progression to the shock curve that it's possible to run the Foxy with a coil shock; Mondraker offer an XR version that comes with a coil-sprung Rock Shox SuperDeluxe and a 160mm fork.

Mondraker antisquat
Mondraker Foxy


Specifications

Specifications
Price $9100
Travel 150mm
Rear Shock Fox Float DPX2 LV EVOL Factory Kashima.
Fork Fox 34 27´5 Float FIT4 EVOL Factory Kashima 150mm
Headset Onoff Saturn
Cassette SRAM XG-129510-50T
Crankarms SRAM X01 Eagle
Bottom Bracket SRAM GXP
Rear Derailleur SRAM Eagle X01
Chain SRAM X01 Eagle 12s
Shifter Pods SRAM Eagle 12-speed
Handlebar Onoff Stoic Carbon, 780mm
Stem Onoff Stoic FG 30mm
Grips Onoff Diamond lockon
Brakes Shimano XTR M9020
Wheelset DT Swiss XM1501
Hubs DT Swiss 240s
Tires Maxxis High Roller 2.3 (f) / Maxxis Ardent 2.4 (r)
Seat SDG Fly MTN Ti
Seatpost Fox Transfer Post, 150mm



Mondraker Foxy RR SL review













Test Bike Setup

At 5'11” (180cm), I'm in the middle of Mondraker's recommended size range for a large Foxy. That's the size that I typically ride with most brands, although in this case I did consider going with a medium, which still has a generous reach of 480mm. I ended up sticking with the large, though, since I wanted to fully experience the Forward Geometry concept.

With a 780mm bar and a 30mm stem already in place I didn't need to do anything to adjust the cockpit to my liking, although I eventually swapped out the Ardent tire for something more appropriate. Part way through testing I did adjust the chainstay length to the 435mm position (the bike comes set at 425mm), and ended up preferring that setting. I wouldn't say it makes a radical difference, but I felt like the overall balance of the bike was improved by that change.

Suspension setup was straightforward as well – I ran 30% sag in the Float DPX2 shock, and didn't need to change that number or add any volume spacers at any point during testing.
Mike Kazimer
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 35
Height: 5'11"
Inseam: 33"
Weight: 160 lbs
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer


Views: 6,491    Faves: 2    Comments: 1


Testing of the Mondraker Foxy SL started with a week in the mountains of Colorado, followed by three months of regular use in Bellingham, Washington, where trail conditions ranged from tacky to treacherous as winter began to set in.


Mondraker Foxy Carbon SL review
The Foxy's light weight is helpful on those long climbs, but the length can be a little tricky in the tight stuff. Rider: Ricardo Broberg.


Climbing

There's no getting around it – the Foxy is one looong bike, and even with a stubby 30mm stem in place, I ended up scooting the seat all the way forward on its rails to achieve the pedaling position I was looking for. As reach numbers get longer, seat tube angles are getting steeper, and while the Foxy's 75-degree seat angle isn't what I'd call slack, I also wouldn't have complained if it was a degree or two steeper.

I hardly ever found myself reaching for the compression lever on the DPX2 shock – the Foxy is a very efficient climber, yet it still remains active enough to keep the rear wheel tracking through rougher sections of trail. The fact that it weighs almost two pounds less than most of its competitors doesn't hurt either; that lack of extra baggage means that it requires less effort to get it to the top of long climbs.

Straightforward technical climbing didn't pose any problems – there was plenty of room to shift my weight fore and aft as needed in order to maintain traction. However, in the tight stuff the Foxy's handling suffers a bit. Smoother switchbacks weren't really the issue – setting up a little earlier was all it took to navigate through them, and while it might not have been quite as quick as a shorter bike, the actual amount of effort it took didn't seem much different. It was on more meandering, technical climbs, ones that required abrupt direction changes or weight shifts that the Foxy felt slightly awkward, and I found myself forced to really muscle through those type of features rather than scampering up them like I might on a bike with less sprawling dimensions.


Mondraker Foxy Carbon SL review

Descending

My first descent aboard the Foxy SL started from the summit of Pike's Peak, 14,114 feet above sea level. The initial portion of that descent is more of a hiking trail than anything created with bikes in mind, full of super tight switchbacks and awkward rocks sections. It's a section of trail that would be tricky on any bike, unless you're Chris Akrigg or Danny MacAskill, but it did work well to immediately illustrate the shortcomings of the extra-long front center, namely the fact that it was more difficult to get through those extremely tight sections of trail than it would be on something with a shorter wheelbase.

However, once things opened up a bit it was much smoother sailing – literally. The Foxy is in its element when there's room to let it run, and the terrain isn't too rough – picture flying down a ribbon of high alpine singletrack, or making GS turns through a grove of aspen trees. It was moments like that where the bike felt like it was floating, delivering a smooth, incredibly controlled ride. Even with those relatively short chainstays, this is still a bike that prefers making long arcs, carving down the trail rather than hopping and popping from one trail feature to the next. Stability is the name of the game here, and that's certainly the Foxy's most outstanding trait.

That being said, I found myself wondering what a 29”-wheeled Foxy would be like, especially if it were just a touch shorter (I know, it's borderline sacrilegious to suggest that a bike is too long). Mondraker's main reason for the extra-long geometry is stability, which is why offering a bigger wheelsize seems like a logical next step.


Mondraker Foxy Carbon SL review
Setting up early and take the outside line is the key to success aboard the Foxy.


Although it's billed as an all-mountain bike, the Foxy feels more like a long-limbed trail bike, especially in rockier or rootier sections of trail. It's very light and stiff, and that makes it feel a little more likely to get knocked off line, rather than being able to plow straight on through. The margin for error in the really rough stuff seems smaller than it is aboard something like a Santa Cruz Bronson or a Trek Remedy – there's a sharpness to its handling that requires a more attentive pilot than those two aforementioned bikes.

The final note regarding the Foxy's descending skills is related to the frame design - I'm a big fan of the Foxy's looks, but I'm not a fan of the upper shock link's position and width. I smacked the inside of my right knee (I ride left foot forward) on the linkage a few times more often than I would have liked while descending. It didn't happen on every ride, but it occurred often enough that it's worth mentioning.





Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
Mondraker Foxy RR SL
Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Hightower LT

How does it compare?

The Mondraker is a 150mm all-rounder, which just so happens to be the same category that the Santa Cruz Hightower LT fits into. Of course, the Hightower LT rolls on 29” wheels, but it's still worth taking a moment to look at two different approaches to achieving the same goal out on the trail. The Hightower LT's geometry is a touch conservative, while the Mondraker's is on the more radical side of the spectrum.

Let's start with the wheelbase. Even with those bigger wheels, the Hightower LT's wheelbase still measures 1193mm, which is 48mm (1.88 inches) shorter than the Foxy SL. That difference makes the Hightower feel more nimble, and I found its handling to be more intuitive than the Mondraker. Of course, the tradeoff is that the Hightower LT doesn't deliver quite as much stability when it comes to high-speed, sweeping turns, although the bigger wheels do help to counteract some of that difference. When it comes to rougher terrain, I preferred the feel of the Hightower LT. The bigger wheels help take the edge off of chattery sections of trail, and the suspension had a more bottomless feel than the Foxy.

The Foxy SL does weigh a pound less than the Hightower LT, but that comes at a price, to the tune of nearly $1,000 when comparing similarly spec'd models. Of course, choosing one bike over the other will come down to rider preference, although I'd say that the Hightower LT is an easier bike to get accustomed to initially, while the Foxy's handling requirements take some time before they become second nature.


Mondraker Foxy RR SL review
Mondraker Foxy RR SL review


Technical Report

DT Swiss EX1501 wheels: The aluminum-rimmed EX1501 wheels didn't cause an iota of trouble, despite plenty of hard landings and rough trails. However, it is a little surprising that there aren't carbon rims on this bike – for $9,000 it seems like that should be a given. There's absolutely nothing wrong with alloy rims, but I'd imagine that for riders considering parting ways with such a significant sum of money, the lack of fantastic plastic wheels could be a stumbling block.

Shimano XTR brakes: The bite point of these brakes had a tendency to wander; sometimes it was in exactly the right spot, engaging partway through the lever stroke, and others that engagement happened almost immediately. It's a trait that seems to be plaguing Shimano's latest generation of stoppers – for the money, I'd rather see a set of SRAM Guide Ultimates spec'd in their place.

Maxxis Highroller 2.3 / Ardent 2.4 tires: Running a wider tire in the rear than the front isn't that common, and the Ardent's range of useable terrain is pretty narrow. I'd recommend ditching the Ardent, moving the Highroller to the rear, and then putting a 2.5” Minion DHF or something similar up front for the best results.

Fox 34 Float Factory: Although I could see hard chargers swapping out the Fox 34 for the stiffer (and heavier) Fox 36, the 34 felt well matched to the overall feel of the Foxy Carbon SL. It was silent and buttery smooth, and didn't require any fussing around once the initial setup was complete.


Mondraker Foxy review


Pros

+ Extremely stable at speed.
+ Lightweight, especially for a 150mm bike.
+ There's a good chance you'll have the longest bike around.
Cons

- Pricey.
- Upper link width can cause it to contact rider's knees.
- Forward Geometry isn't going to be for everyone.


Is this the bike for you?

As with every bike, it's always best to try before you buy, but with the Foxy that phrase is especially true. This is a polarizing bike, and some riders, especially taller ones who have traditionally struggled to find a bike that fits, will be smitten, while others may not get along quite so well with the extra length. It's well suited for somewhere like Colorado, where high speed, wide open descents are the norm, but in tighter, jankier terrain (BC's North Shore comes to mind) it requires a different riding style that may not be everyone's cup of tea.



Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesHow long is too long? Across the board, there are still plenty of models that could stand to be stretched out a bit, but there are limits, and for me, the Foxy tiptoes pretty close to that line. I do like the fact that this isn't a cookie cutter bike – it rides differently than a large majority of what's out there, a trait that kept me coming back to it to try to unlock its secrets. There were instances when I found myself working harder than I wanted to, but there were also times when it all clicked, moments of brilliance when the geometry and handling all made perfect sense. Mike Kazimer









313 Comments

  • + 371
 get the f*ck out of here $9100........
  • + 65
 Agreed and that with a 34 and no Carbon Wheels. Feels like XX1 Territory not X01...
  • + 93
 But it comes with suspension graphs. Joking aside I love this kind of info and should be included on EVERY bike review. Well done @mikekazimer
  • + 11
 At that price I'm also surprised by the weight. My reference is a 2000€ al spectral with a few upgrades (bigger fork, bigger shock, 1x10 and 1kg tires) and it weighs 13.5kg without pedals.

The Foxy's low weight is praised, but I'm surprised they can't come up with more than a 800g (or even less if those are just Exo casing tires) weight saving, at 9000$!
  • + 53
 And for that price you don'y even get the logo and valve lined up...
  • + 18
 Downtube can fit a lunchbox.
  • + 5
 I have a mondraker vantage, it's the most comfortable bike I've ridden geometry wise, but like hell I'd pay what they ask for the foxy or dune I'd go and spend 2/3k less and get an Intense
  • + 43
 The days of $10k bikes, $85 tshirts, and $99 DVD's on sale for $75 being considered a "deal" being acceptable, are over and customers are making statements loud and clear with their wallets.. Customers are being priced out of participation. Yes, we all need to make a living. Yes, theres marketing and R&D costs, salaries for team riders, yada yada yada - but please justify a $99 DVD in your argument, I'd love to hear it.
  • + 35
 It's funny how the bike looks sexy in the first pic and then we see the price and our opinion changes to "Who the f*ck would pay this much for this shit?!".
  • + 2
 @Boardlife69: Forces and anti-squat isn't enough.
  • + 32
 "get the f*ck out of here $9100........"

@Trekslash360 -- Says the guy riding a new Trek Slash 9.9!

Also, how many of you bitching about the price of a bike (that you're not forced to buy) read this article on your $800+ cell phone?
  • + 67
 I can't afford to read the article....
  • + 5
 @NYShred: 99$ is for the content, not for the DVD itself. Here for instance you can spend thousands of dollars for NOTHING (physical)! www.autodesk.com/buy-online
  • + 19
 @Pentaradiological: Haha! I knew I wasn't the only person that would notice that. I know that it doesn't matter, but it totally does.

@MTBrent: Those $800 cell phones are competitive in their performance category. This bike isn't. For ~$10k you can get TWO other bikes with a BETTER spec, or an Unno, or a totally custom bike from RobotBike Co, or buy a killer consumer-direct bike and use the other $5k to take the bike trip of your dreams. They've priced themselves out of their target market.
  • + 40
 @NYShred: markup percentage on an $85 t-shirt is a far cry from the markup on a $10K bike. Orders of magnitude higher.

That being said, we're going to be covering a wider spread of price-points in this year's bike reviews.
  • + 7
 @Snowsed341: seriously right, why did they go with a 34?
  • + 14
 460mm reach for a size small!?
Ridiculous.
  • - 3
 @MTBrent: well played sir
  • + 3
 @Boardlife69: it should be included by the manufacturer alongside their geometry numbers. along with the leverage curve, etc.
  • - 1
 what $9100 is a great deal for a bike made out of recycled condoms. SMH.
  • + 2
 @MTBrent: 9100 doesn't even come with a 36 150mm, carbon rims or xx1, atleast my bike had guide ultimates and was a few thousand dollars cheaper.
  • + 10
 Well there is a $10,600 version with enve wheels. Way to kill a new brand in the states. These will be right along Intense M16 next here for 75% off.
  • + 25
 @MTBrent: An $800 cell phone is a mini computer that you can carry in your pocket. You can literally trade a stock, manage a bank account, make a doctor's appointment, google an answer to anything, and call for an ambulance for that $800 investment. Oh, and take high quality photos and HD video... so $800 for something that does all that and a person uses *daily* seems like a comparative bargain.

Paying more than 10x that cellphone price for an item that used in one's leisure time, and take into account that as soon as you wheel it out the door of the bike shop it is instantly worth 30-40% less than what you paid for it, well... it's not hard to see how that comes across as a bit absurd. 'No one is forcing you to buy it' Yeah, great argument mate, no one is forcing me to order the sh*t sandwich from the menu either, but that wouldn't stop me from pointing out how ridiculous that it is being offered.
  • + 3
 @brianpark: This is a joke. Who is stupid enough to buy this or pay that kind of a money for a bike? This is a fashion industry. 9 out of 10 bikes are nearly the same with kinematic differences which mean sh+t. Good = good.
  • + 10
 @NYShred: impossible to argue with real facts...
There's a lot of people out there with money they didn't earn.
A world without equality is seen as normal, and blindness took over men kind.
l don't feel sorry for people who don't buy things cause it's to expensive, but l do feel sorry when they by stuff they can't afford
  • + 31
 Sorry Mondraker but when you read things like "if you want to go for the cheaper alternative pick the Santa Cruz", you know you're in for some trouble...
  • + 12
 $9100! I think even a dentist would rather take a fully pimped out Capra, and a Jeffsey.
  • + 4
 I really don't understand all these guys complaining about the price! I think this is actually too cheap. I'm holding out for the 20G bike.

I mean, I know I could buy some custom stuff, built out of ur-anuium, in space vacuum by naked Spanish ladies in translucent space suits. But, I don't want to look like a hipster with that thing, this is not 2001, people!

And it's too late for getting a gold bike, now the sheiks already have platinum e-bikes, I can't be seen with something gaudy in this day and age.

No, I need a decent mass produced plastic cabron bike that I can ride... you know? I'm seriously, you guys!
  • + 4
 Im Selling off a Mondraker Dune if anyone is interested!
  • + 4
 That size small has a longer reach and just slightly smaller ETT than my XL bike which is a few years old...
  • + 2
 Plus tax ????
  • + 3
 @the6thElement: yeah my torso would need a hard on to ride the extra small.
  • + 6
 @mikealive: sorry to say, but I think is the same.
$200 phone will do everything that a $800 one does. Except telling people who's the boss.
  • + 1
 @chyu: you can afford lunch after dropping 9 large? Will you be my friend.
  • + 6
 I'll go buy a brand new 450F instead...
  • + 2
 If I was rich and stupid enough to pay $9100 on a bike, it sure as hell won’t be an effin’ Mondraker. An effin’ Mondraker!
  • + 4
 If I wanted the geo etc of the Mondraker I would definitely buy one. I'm sure it's an amazing bike for Enduro racing.
  • + 2
 @mikealive: I get where your coming from, but my $150 phone does all that and I won't be upset when I smash it riding my bike.
  • + 2
 @Pentaradiological: much less matching colors of the MAXXIS logo
  • + 1
 @catalanfc: i lol'ed at this truth
  • + 1
 @Boardlife69: i beat you to that suggestion by about 2 years
  • + 5
 2.3" front tire and 2.4" rear tire spec is making me cringe...
  • + 1
 They have to make the money back to pay Danny Hart's salary somehow. Multiple world champions do not come cheap, and you know Danny was on a massive salary after hitting all his bonuses for 2016!
  • + 2
 @Trekslash360: Bigger isn't better, no need for a 36. And here you're riding something that doesn't look (too much) like a session
This bike is expensive, but it's quite different from any other bike ; Mondraker is trying to take things a bit further. I'd buy this bike instead of a half-baked Intense
  • + 2
 @enrico650: Yeah. It sounds ridiculous but you all should consider 30mm stem. Other bikes with shorter reach have 40-60mm stems. Try to ride one - shift yourself forward and ride it like dirt bike and I guess you change your point of view on Forward geometry ;-)
  • + 1
 @mac72attack: At only 5 feel and 6 inches I doubt it. And let's not even talk about execute a successful turn on a switchback.
  • + 5
 “However, once things opened up a bit it was much smoother sailing – literally.“

I would love to see a picture of this, you on the water with a mast and sail coming out of the top tube...

????
  • + 1
 @Whipperman: And because Mondraker is trying things 'a bit further' [you mean a "longest" bike? - because there are plenty of long bikes out there (see Nicolai or Pole for example)] is asking from us to pay such a price? It doesn't make sense man. For this price, you better have the top-tier components (and keep your things as "further" as you fancy).
  • + 2
 @Pentaradiological: yes I noticed this too, for $9100 you should at least get a "professional" quality build. Looks like an amateur built this bike
  • + 1
 @BikeEveryDay: Shez, please tell me he is be ironic.
  • + 2
 @MTBrent: looks like @trekslash360 had to sell a 2016 trek slash $2800, a 2017 trek slash $4100, and has a spec demo 8 for $3350 just to afford the new 2018 trek slash. 3 Used bikes at an average of almost $3500.
  • + 1
 @Whipperman: Except the Factory build tracer is 1100.00 less and comes with Enve everything, XX1, etc.

intensecycles.com/collections/tracer/products/2017-tracer-factory-build

A 36 is the standard for an All Mountain bike and the stiffness does matter.

This bike should be priced at 6500-7000, I cant believe 7000.00 is considered a balanced price for a bike now...
  • + 1
 @toad321: And new Intense gravity bikes are developed with the help of Cesar Rojo, who was the main designer of the Mondraker's Forward Geomtry... So, Intense looks better and is cheaper
  • + 0
 @MTBrent: ya but Trek
  • + 2
 @Trekslash360... yeah, but your Remedy doesn't look near as nice lol.
  • + 2
 @brianpark: That being said, we're going to be covering a wider spread of price-points in this year's bike reviews
Excellent.
  • + 0
 @weebleswobbles: your point is?? i buy bikes ride them then sell them just like everyone on pb... btw i m not getting a slash, plan on getting a canyon torque. never had a 180mm park bike
  • + 2
 @Trekslash360: i guess i didnt have a point, it was just an observation. Wasnt trying to be an a*shole. I built each of my bikes, so even your used bike prices seem high
  • + 2
 @yuroshek: word mate, I'm selling off my Foxy also!
  • + 0
 @weebleswobbles: btw thanks for the free advertisement, if anyone is interested in a 2017 demo carbon size large hit me up!
  • + 2
 @Trekslash360: sure thing man. Hope you get it sold!
  • + 1
 @mtbikeaddict: what remedy?
  • + 1
 @MTBrent: Have you ridden a slash?! You can't put a price on that type of speed dude
  • + 1
 @ShailyCR: most of these guys rip on it bc its a 29 but the bike is fast as hell, stiff in all the right places and just a rad bike
  • + 1
 @brianpark: “That being said, we're going to be covering a wider spread of price-points in this year's bike reviews.”

Thank you for this.
  • + 1
 @ismasan: It's not though. I have that $200 phone. Can it take a photo? Sure. Does it shoot as well as my roommate's Galaxy S8? Not even close. Does my phone work for me? Sure.

But I guess I have to clear up for both you and @CruJonez that I'm not arguing *for* people buying $800 phones. I'm arguing that there is a ton of utility in such a device, and most folks use them daily, so as I stated it "seems like a comparative bargain." So to pay over 10x that for a leisure device...

Yeah, you know what, forget it. Not going to waste time trying to explain the point, lol.
  • + 1
 @Trekslash360... never mind... going back and forth between topics. Other guy I was talking to had the top of the line Remedy. Guess you had the Slash... sorry, wrong person. Either way, Slash or Remedy, the Foxy still looks better Big Grin
  • + 101
 All bike reviews should be like this one
  • + 17
 Agreed, I like the column on the side that directed you to specific parts of the article.
  • + 18
 +1 for the suspension curves. would be nice to include the pedal kick back and anti-rise.
  • + 8
 The leverage ratio would be quite useful too
  • + 9
 I agree well written review!
  • + 57
 Thank you @cabochon, we've updated our Review standards for 2018 and will be using this format going forward. Any other suggestions or feedback?
  • + 40
 @brianpark: It would be cool if you did a "How to read the Suspension Graphs we're including now" article (Or even supplied me with a link to a similar article haha). I think there is merit to having them, but I am not sure how to read them. The format of this review was great. Kazimer is good at what he does too. Looking forward to reviews from all price points too.
Thanks PB!
  • + 13
 @brianpark: leverage ratios would be nice.
  • + 20
 @cky78: That's actually a great idea for a standalone reference piece. Cheers!
  • + 15
 @cky78: here you can check my kinematics analysis of the Mondraker Foxy (and also understand each graph in the "highlighted entry"):

mrblackmorescorner.blogspot.com.es/2017/07/mondraker-foxy-2018.html

@Happymtbfr @femto505 @jclnv @brianpark The graphs in the article are insufficient and the "shock characteristics" graph is only the compression curve of the shock, so this is like nothing. Leverage rate or rear wheel forces graphs would be useful to understand better the bike.

Cheers!
  • + 2
 Awesome review, honestly the best one I have seen so far! Thanks! Now the same for some freeride bikes would be really valuable for a lot of us I think.
  • + 2
 @femto505: My kingdom for someone who REALLY knows how to read those. 9/10 look at them and don't really get it.
  • + 1
 @brianpark: great review and format. i quite like that you don't mind comparing bikes with similar purpose but different wheel sizes. also that you didn't get too lengthy there. great work.
  • + 1
 @brianpark: Yep pedal kickback will be nice too since you provide AS curves, and if possible in the same transmission ratio for all the bike you test for comparing apples with apples - and maybe a little less than 32/50 since 50t eagle like cassette are not ubiquitous - maybe 42 t should be more representative.
  • + 1
 @femto505: why !? just watch the video when he compress the shock. look closely at calliper rotating round rotor / and cranks.
  • + 1
 @trauty: pedal feedback depends what gear you are in. A chart can show you what min and max, rather then relay on one Youtube video
  • + 1
 @brianpark: You also need to state on the charts if you are assuming coil or air shock. Using a linear coil is the normally the reference. The second charts does not look correct for the compression axis. It should range from 0-150mm
  • + 2
 @cky78: go through "andrextr" videos on youtube. Then use your current bike as a baseline.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0bAVTiFyy4
  • + 1
 @brianpark: great review, the new format is excellent. It would nice if reviews included actual tyre clearance at the rear, as in width between the chain stays and, actual possible insertion depth for a dropper. These are questions that come up in the forums all the time.

Keep it up guys!
  • + 2
 Agreed. Love the new review format.
  • + 32
 Should there be a separate comment section for all the totally personel comments, such as "too expensive" and "I don't like the color"? Nobody else needs or wants to read these as everybody has different preferences.

And don't tell me you can buy a motorcycle for that price. So what. You can also buy a billion M&Ms for that. Why are bike prices always compared to motorcylce prices? I bet 95% of pinkbike readers don't care about motorcycles so you may as well compare them to how much milk or cheese you can buy for that money or donate to the WWF. Or whatever else there is in the world to buy.

:-))
  • + 21
 Pinkbike IS this separate comments section.

(P.S. I only compare bike prices to bike prices... Actually I compare everything to bike prices)
  • + 55
 57 M&M's in a standard bag, bag costs around a dollar, x 11,800 (converted to CAD)= 672,600 M&M's.
  • + 4
 @woofer2609: but im sure the individual price unit gets lower by buying bigger bags.
  • + 9
 @Slabrung: totally! when people tell me they just spent 5k on this magical trip to *generic destination* i‘m nodding with a smile and thinking “you fools, could have gotten yourself a carbon Transition Patrol or a Jeffsy plus a Tues AND have some change left“
  • + 26
 @woofer2609: this is the most important comment on this page.
  • + 1
 @wowbagger: send me some of those M&Ms of yours. I want to go on a magjic trip
  • + 0
 Paying 10k for a bike is dumb...next year there will be a 12k bike you will want anyway.
  • + 3
 @WAKIdesigns: stay off of my Eminems, i‘ll be watching you ಠ_ಠ
  • + 11
 The motorcycle comments are people trying to wrap their heads around a pair of wheels connected by an aluminum frame with a MOTOR inbetween, and arguably just as advanced suspension, costing less than a pair of wheels connected together without a motor.
  • + 3
 @hamncheez: I am so triggered, oh my gawd, are you talking about... Pilgrimage?
  • + 3
 @WAKIdesigns: Waki, is this the time you're on or is this the normal you? I have to establish a benchmark to see a difference later...
  • - 1
 I'm glad my comment was taken up so well. People complain that for such and such price for a bike they could (better) get a motorcycle and then they turn around and hate on ebikes. :-)
What now, do you want a regular bike for 10k, or a motorcycle?

Probably not the same people :-)
  • + 0
 @mtb-journal: it has nothing to do with logical thinking, it's a brainless perverse manifestation of butthurtness. Someone buys an expensive bicycle and they just can't fkng deal with it. As if someone cared about the kind of bike they bought and what motivated them to make such choice. Nobody cares and nobody ever will.
  • + 3
 @hamncheez: motorcycles are gey!
  • - 1
 And BCAAs are found in vast majority of Whey protein powders (even in hemp powder) you just read giant letters at the front not the small ones on the list on the back. Motorcycles are damn rad.
  • + 2
 Assuming that the individual price per pound of standard m&m's diminish with significant order sizes, I'd estimate that your billion m&m's would cost somewhere between $5m-$10m USD.

Personally, it seems like a logical investment.
  • + 3
 @woofer2609: thanks! But can you also tell me if i can swim in them in a standard sized outdoor pool?
  • + 1
 @hamncheez: how many motorcycle frame sizes exist? Different engine tunes per rider weight? Does the carbon fibre frame weight 10% less than it’s competitors? A $10k mtb is of similar quality to a $40k plus motorcycle, the entry level moto is the equlvient in quality/detail to a $1500 entry level full suspension mtb. Yeah, it mostly works and looks the part. Dealer level moto’s are heavy, unergonimic and crudely manufactured. Hardware store brake levers, paint bucket plastic accessories, shopping cart frame weld quality, etc.
  • + 2
 don't get me started on milk and cheese!!! have you seen the price of brie!!!
  • + 2
 @freeriderayward: if my 5th grade math still serves me right the volume of one m&m is .636 cubic centimeters and a 25m × 10m x 1.5m pool is 375 cubic meters.
we change .636 centimeters to meters wich acording to my calculator is this 6.36e-7.
then we divide 375 by 6.36e-7.
we would need: 589,622,641 m&m to fill a pool wich will cost 876 mondraker foxy carbon by @woofer2609 calculations.
  • + 1
 @fercho25: my man, you are a star!
  • + 25
 I've just built an enduro style steel hardtail. It's shorter than my Enduro and I am loving the feel. Long wheelbase bikes make sense on paper but as we ride tight and twisty as well as flat out stuff a sensible middle ground is best IMO. The Mondraker may well be a bit too long to make sense.
  • + 0
 I seem to prefer longer bikes than most; I find most XL bikes too short but a large would fit me with this bike. It does seem excessive...
  • + 3
 Nice! Steel is real! I'm looking at the On-One 45650B Ti frame, can't beat the price of that for $1k.
  • + 2
 @abzillah: have you looked at the geo. on the OnOne?The large has a 407mm reach and the seat angle is 71.2 deg.Pretty antiquated.
  • + 2
 When push comes to shove...how about riding a school bus on your local trail. 460mm for a small is ridiculously long. And asking for a 29er version WHAT! This is just becoming plain stupid, If you don't want to feel the trail and have a stable ride... Get a road bike !
  • + 1
 @rideonjon: I have the Dee Dar Its geo is pretty much on point. I am 188cm and the large fits fine.On a HT a slack seat angle isn't as much of an issue.
  • + 1
 Once you get used to a long bike then you can ride everything with it! My 1340mm bike doesn't hold me back at all.
  • + 1
 I love the stability of my old Mondrakers. You will never have an issue with high speed and rough terrain. The Summum is more stable than Foxy, ofc. For tight corners in low speed I am sure there is a better bike, but you are less likely to tip over if you hit a root.
  • + 18
 At 6ft 6 and owning an XL dune for the past few years, I agree with most of these pros and cons. The bike works well when ridden like a long wheelbase DH bike. At low speed it feels long and awkward, but through high speed rough and long turns it's a dream. My biggest gripe with all these bikes is seat tube angle. Especially for the taller rider. Companies need to steepen up a bit. A 175mm post won't get anywhere near me, and the saddle is always slammed far forward and nose down. it's very hard to keep your weight over the middle on seated climbs and not feel like you are looping out.
  • + 2
 Stays could be longer too
  • + 1
 It's my one gripe about going with longer reach. It is not compensated for in the seat tube angle, and definitely not compensated for dropper post insertion.

For comparison, a large 2018 Stumpjumper has a 431mm reach with a 74 deg seat angle. To achieve the same type of riding position, you would have to move to a small (!) Foxy and run at least a 200mm dropper post. Or look like a roadie while you ride.
  • + 1
 You should try a Pole or a Geometron. 76-79º seat angle with plenty of stand over. The extra length over the Mondraker also makes them much better climbers specially on the super steep stuff!
  • + 1
 or check out www.instagram.com/ra_bike 79.5 degree seat angles all day long
  • + 1
 STA is a funny thing when talking actually vs effective. An effective STA of say 75, and an effective of 70, is sort of steep if you have a short or average inseam. But put a guy with long legs on a bike with that and the the seat gets pushed farther toward the rear axel. I've got long levers and have this issue with bikes. Past a certain point of seat post extension the effective STA become slacker when the effective STA is the actual STA.
  • + 17
 Funny that there was no comparison made with the Pole Evolink 140 or 150. The size large 140 has 510mm reach, so in the same ballpark. What makes the Pole a potentially better riding bike (IMO) is combo of longer chainstays (455mm) and a majorly steep seat tube (78 degrees). A huge top tube is one thing, but if the rest of the bike isn't also adjusted to make sense with how the weight is distributed and how the human body functions (thinking about climbing position here), I feel like the Foxy has missed the mark. But hey, I've never ridden one myself, so it's all with a big fat grain of salt. All I know is that I've been riding the Evolink 140 the last three days and it's completely changed my perspective on how a bike should be designed...it's truly that good.
  • + 2
 I found it disappointing that there was no comparison to the Pole either. However, the bike wasn't reviewed by Paul Aston...I do agree with you on how a long bike needs to be proportional. I notice a lot of brands going longer in reach trying to catch up to Nicolai/Pole/Mondraker but without the long chainstays or the steep seat angles thus missing the point. I have a Pole Evolink 176 and am super happy with it!
  • + 13
 $9100 for a 28 lb FS bike ... that's crazy! Heck my aluminum Transition FS weighs in at about 31 lbs and the only carbon I have on it are the handlebars. Built up with used parts - ~2k ... I'd gladly save $7100 to have a bike that's 3 lbs heavier. Hell I can easily lose 3 lbs of body weight to compensate. Bike prices have gotten out of control! I can't believe people are actually paying these prices (rich or not).
  • + 3
 My 2012 reign 1 is only 28 pounds and a few oz's
  • + 1
 There's a f load of material in a bike that's longer than my car. My S size alu Reign from last decade bike is probably about the same and half of that is fork.
  • - 2
 I could easily find a way to spend that on a HT...
  • + 4
 Agreed. The price of bikes has run to ridiculous levels, but the good thing is that we can still find less expensive stuff and still have the same amount of fun. I'd rather pay for an mtb vacation with my $2k bike than pay for a $10k bike...and I have the money to do both. The fun reward just isn't there for owning the really expensive bike for me.
  • + 2
 @latte1973: Especially when it will be outdated in 5 years. Some people, however, don't think that way though, and have enough disposable income (or credit) that it just don't matter to them. There are a few different price points, and it seems somewhere past 3.5-4K it is a case of diminishing returns.
  • + 1
 I would love to see what they sell high end bikes at. My guess is most of these bling models are sold at high discounts to industry people (shop employees). They mainly exist for marketing and reviews. 80% sold are of the base and 2nd tier models, and even most of those are at discount.
  • + 0
 @Rasterman: I know quite well a couple of people with high end bikes, not a single one paid full price for them or even close to it. I did meet a few people on trails who seemed to have paid close to MSRP. But how does it matter? They are all good people riding around happy and all I see here is a bunch of miserable cry babies, who don't like the fact that someone spent a lot of money on a bicycle.

I will never forget it, this is when I stopped with such behavior. A giant lifted diesel pick up truck stops next to me (pick up in Europe is strange enough this was super weird) and I think to myself, "oh you fkng small dicked wanker" and the dude getting out of it is smiling, looking super happy. And my inital reaction was, oh yeah, what the fk is so cool... I thought to myself, what kind of a sad, fkd up person one has to be to assume that this dude is not happy, oh yeah he looks happy but he isn't because he owns this sht, how could I assume that he is not actually happy by driving this truck. As happy as me riding a cool bike.

You know who talks like that? A fkng preacher in the church, a dysfunctional deviant telling people that those who fk outside ofmarriage are miserable, they may look happy but we know better what's good for them and they can't be happy. That is the level 99% of price comments are on Pinkbike. Miserable wankers. Go fuk yourselves with your bragain deales on your bikes that are best in the world. According to you. And NOBODY else. Nobody cares what piece of junk you are riding, whether you paid 2k being worth 5k or it costs 12k cuz you put 3k of components on top of original 9k. Nobody cares if you own a moto for less - Get fkd
  • + 10
 This bike needs to ridden, before you make an opinion. Like everything else, opinions vary, so heres mine. I demoed this bike, on two different days. I also test rode, 4 other top of the line full suspension bikes within the same month, so that I would have a solid comparison. I have been riding mountain bikes since 1999, I was an XC racer, and I still mainly ride a hardtail, 19lb, top of the line componetry, bike, FYI. Age has slowed me down, I thought, and I started looking for a plush bike to soften the trail. I have loved the look of these Mondrakers for years but being in the states gave me no chance to try it. I had decided on a different bike and then I found out they were coming stateside and my goodluck had them demoing at a bike festival, 3 1/2 hours from me. So, I got to ride the Foxy after all! I rode the Foxy and it took, maybe 20 minutes, for me to completely fall in love with this bike. Absolutely in love. For me, on a M frame (5'9" 150lbs) it handled like a dream. I flew up the hills. Faster than my hardtail. I rode over rocks, logs, wet roots, faster than on any other bike that I have ever rode and it seemed so effortless. Even though I did not get the chance to huck from anything severely gnarly, I know from the confidence I felt while riding this bike that I am going to be seeking any and everything to huck from! Yeah, the price point is pretty steep, (understatement) and the geometry is out there (go long or go home!) but when I finally get this kidney sold, it WILL be in my stable! Mondraker Foxy, I can't wait to love you forever!
  • + 13
 Long bikes are not for everyone but everyone should try one before rejecting them.
  • + 2
 amen to that!
  • + 13
 Best review on PB in a while. Suspension graphs and a few paragraphs comparing to a class leader is excellent.
  • + 5
 I spent 3 days demo'ing a Nicolai geometron with 520 reach and 35mm stem. My home bike is a large E29 with 445 reach although I ride it with a 75mm stem as its used for XC. I'm 5'11" with 32" inseam (short legs, long torso).

The bike had some fun things about it, but overall I didn't like the loooong geo. While it monster trucked good up general pfaff when climbing, when it came time for real tech I just wasn't able to shift my bodyweight back and forth to get rear wheel traction and donkey punch up obstacles. I had the same problem on downhills, if I had to start jumping tracks or monkey humping around the bike to get it over stuff it was just too much of a bus. It was as this review says, super fun for swooping down arcing switch backs and it was fun to turn on fast open stuff and handled speed chunk very well. But here agian when inching down very steep loam slopes, I just felt like I couldn't hop the bike up into a better line or rear steer as well.

So just a data point to say, while my next bike will be in the 465+ reach range (so I can run a short stem if nothing else) this new long geo is good for some and not others, so if you are getting carried away by the new long geo hype, make sure and demo it extensively to make sure it works for you.
  • + 2
 Good for you for trying something different.
  • + 5
 460mm reach on a small are you f*cked!..... That is like me ridding a size L rocky mountain Altitude. (to put it into perspective a small rocky is 406mm, a small yeti SB6 TR is 400mm, both super reputable EWS winning bikes.)

pushing boundaries big time, but seems way outside of what the athletes are ridding or even looking for.
  • + 3
 4mm longer than the large orbea rallon i have ordered, its crazy
  • + 4
 Maybe rockys and yetos are too small?
Maybe their ews credentials come from the pilots predominantly?
  • + 1
 Have you tried a Mondraker? I owned a Vantage frame, and the geometry was great, a stiff aluminum hard tail, not so much in the chunk. My next frame will be Mondraker like.
  • + 3
 We have all been riding tiny bikes for years. Now some brands are making normal sized bikes and it is a welcome relief! Mondraker may have started it all a few years back but it is brands like Pole and Nicolai that are showing the way of the future.
  • + 7
 Thanks @mikekazimer for making my trails look like shit. Awesome techy flowy stuff.
  • + 6
 I've made up my mind Yeah, I'm tired of wasting all my precious time You got to be all mine, all mine Foxey lady Here I come baby.....I'm commin to get ya Foxey....
  • + 6
 aaaw, price complainers don't get it; Spain is knee deep in the shit, so charging 5 digits for a bike is their way to contribute to the economy by paying more taxes Wink Wink
  • + 3
 Can foreigners write the bike off as a charitable donation to the people of Spain then?
  • + 3
 I understand that riding style and terrain will affect geometry preference, but I still find it hard to believe that a 480mm reach and 638mm TTT on the medium is practical. My Slayer has a ~430mm reach and ~600mm TTT and I wouldn't want it any bigger. Technical climbs are already a chore. At this rate, I'll need to drop down to an XS frame.
  • + 2
 But is your SA equivalent? Ive got a L with a 440 reach and relatively slack 72 SA and its fine for me at 6'1". On a new bike I would be looking at 480-500 with a steeper SA
  • + 2
 My thoughts exactly... Although I admit it's one of the most beautiful frame designs I've seen. Love the clean lines.
  • + 2
 @fartymarty: the TTT measurement takes the SA into consideration and is what I consider to be the seated reach. That means to get a similar seated riding position as my medium Slayer with 50mm stem, I'd have to run a 10mm stem on the Mondraker. With the spec'd 30mm stem, I'm stretched out on seated climbs by another 2cm. To me this isn't so much of a geo consideration, but a fit consideration. I don't want to be forced to climb in an aggressive XC racer position because my bike is too big.
  • + 1
 @dangerousdave: do you mean the Top Tube dinension? If so it doesnt account for the part of the seat post above the TT. What we need on these bikes is a "Butt to Bar" dimension.

I have ridden a mates L Foxy which has a 500mm reach and it felt similar to my bike which has a 440mm reach and slack ST. You are more in the middle of the bike on the Foxy than mine. I don't think they are as bad as the numbers lead you to believe they are.
  • + 1
 @dangerousdave: The difference between the seated and upright position with long reach bikes is less making you ride in middle of the bike and not off the back. A steep seat angle of 76-79º coupled with a long reach does actually put you in an upright position when climbing similar to a short reach bike with a slack seat angle. The difference is that you are more forward on the bike and thus weight the front wheel better thus removing the wheelie effect on the steepest pitches.
I would recommend trying out a long reach bike with a steep seat angle and seeing how you get along.
I am the same height as the tester in this review and have a bike with 520mm reach and love it!
  • + 2
 @SintraFreeride: We discussed this a while ago and the butt to bar on your Pole was similar to my 440mm R slack SA bike.
  • + 3
 @mikekaximer - Really like this review - the layout is great (including the ToC sidebar), the comparison to a pretty well known reference bike to showcase what's unique about this one, and the 'is it for you' piece that tries to give some perspective.

One thing that's missing, still, and is probably hard to achieve logistically would be a bit of emphasis on how rider build/size/body type plays into it. You mention your size/weight/ride style, and then you talk about how the sheer length of the bike (and especially the front end) means you had to use a fair bit of body English to make it work on technical climbs. As a 6'1" 220# rider with a long torso, that makes me wonder whether for someone like me, the seemlingly excessive length would actually be an advantage on technical climbs, as even my Process 111 (not exactly a short bike) sometimes seems to get overwhelmed by me getting all spastic and moving my weight around.

And when you talk about how it carves more than weaves and bobs and pops, I again wonder how that would translate to a bigger or smaller rider - from experience, I know that the way I experience those things is very different from lighter/smaller riders.

If you could have people ride the bike and then report on how it worked for them in those respects (to highlight the size and rider type dependent 'is it for you" bit), it would make a pretty awesome in depth review ever so much more valuable. In fact, if you're even looking for a biggish, heavy-ish, reasonably athletic and strong but technically very much intermediate rider to contribute that sort of input on any of the wonderbikes here on Galby, hit me up anytime Wink
  • + 2
 Excellent idea - and I’ll gladly contribute to the shorter, less athletic and sometimes inebriated rider that I’ll bet makes up a good portion of the riding population. I’m just up the road.
  • + 4
 @Mieszko42: this. If this site starts doing drunk reviews, I'll overlook the e-lephant in PB's room.
  • + 3
 I think you're probably right in a lot of cases but again I think it just makes the case that you need to demo.

I am the same way, I am not quite 5'11" with only a 30" inseam - long torso. Bikes with even 460mm reach feel too short for me without a fairly long stem. I rode a large 2017 Process 153 (475mm reach) and it was a revelation.

I ride an XL 2017 Bronson now, when in theory I am a large or even a medium on a short day. But even a L feels super cramped, ESPECIALLY climbing. The biggest thing I notice other than not feeling on the verge of going OTB all the time compared to me hardtail that has a 425mm reach and a 70mm stem is it's way easier to climb. I am so upright on a short bike that I can't manage front/rear traction. With the long bike I can lean forward and weight the front end while still having space to move my hips forward or backwards as needed.

I think wheelbase and tight corners falls into a similar category as low bb height. Definitely pros and cons, in theory most of the cons can be eliminated via technique, but how big of a change to riding style change any given person is willing to make in order to accommodate a geometry change just depends on the person. I can manage the long wheelbase but I am struggling with the BB height. 165mm cranks might be in my future...
  • + 2
 @KennyWatson: I'm a lucky bastard, because I live in a town where I can demo actual bikes on actual trails. Lots of people don't get to do that (fewer bike stores in their towns, meaning fewer brands represented or available for demo, etc.), and with more and more brands going consumer direct and the LBS ecosystem thinning out, that'll be only more of an issue in the future. So reviews that put things in perspective are valuable. Even for a lucky bastard like me, they narrow the field - demos aren't cheap, so having an idea of what has a better chance of working before you go out and demo is a good thing.

BTW - I'm riding an XL 111, even though for height I should be on an L. The ape torso makes a big difference, as does overall size/weight. I hate feeling cramped on a bike - and I hate long stems putting me in front of the damn well. Meanwhile, a buddy of mine who's the same height but 50 pounds lighter and with a 3" longer inseam finds the 111 to be a pig and prefers a 5010 - which I find intolerably nervous and sketchy.
  • + 3
 As mentioned, this would be a handful on tighter trails, (North Shore). I already dab on my Process 153 in spots that I can clear on a hardtail trail bike with a 3" shorter wheelbase than the 153, and a 5+" shorter wheelbase than the Foxy.
It's all give and take, I suppose.
  • + 3
 Admittedly posting without having read the above review nor peanut gallery comments, but I have to poke at that obvious way too forward saddle that screams “I will break when you’re least expecting it, far from home”
  • + 1
 Not reading the article and posting about something that was explained in the article. Classic PB comment.
  • + 4
 @MTBrent: what’s your Point? It was a comment on how the saddle will break eventually. There’s no “explanation” that will stop the saddle failure. They’re not made to be clamped like that, end of my point.
  • + 0
 @bubbrubb: I have been running the saddle in that same position for over a year without any issues. Please refrain from passing judgement without testing...
  • + 1
 @SintraFreeride: been on Mtb’s over 25 yrs I know a thing or 2. You’re on the wrong bike.
  • + 1
 @bubbrubb: It is the first bike I have had take fits right. No more feeling like I'm hanging off the back when seated, no more feeling like my knees are going to smack the stem when I'm pedaling standing up. It has amazing traction, stable at speed and I can move around the bike without ever feeling I will ever go over the bars! So I must respectfully disagree. This is the RIGHT bike for me!
  • + 1
 @SintraFreeride: except for a misaligned saddle.
  • + 4
 Even xtr suffers from mystery bite point.
Come on Shimano fix this please!
BTW has any on tried using Saint brake lines?
would that help?
  • + 2
 I don't think it's the lines. Master cylinder IMHO.
  • + 2
 It only too three years for bike media to have the balls to mention this. Can wait until the new stuff comes out and it's back to being the best stuff ever with zero faults.
  • + 2
 @wibblywobbly, I've mentioned it several times before, at least as far back as 2015: www.pinkbike.com/news/trek-fuel-ex-99-29-review-2015.html.
  • + 2
 @mikekazimer: Would be cool to ask Shimano directly though. Another "behind the scenes" story I would patiently await Smile
  • + 2
 9. Grand. USD. That's insane. I bought a bronson a year and a half ago for £5,250. The same bike, same frame, same spec, but in a different colour is now £6,700. I'd love to hear where a 28% price hike for an identical frame and components has come from in less than 2 years.
  • + 3
 #brexit
  • + 3
 Carbon bikes should really get cheaper after a few years, since the moulds have paid for themselves at that point.

I would love it if Ibis for example would sell the HD4 for list price, but at the same time keep selling the HD3 frame with full warranty for like 30% off...
  • + 2
 @bishopsmike: I love the bike industry and everything that comes with it, but can't help to feel that manufacturers really are starting to take advantage. If it carries on like this my next bike is going to be a steel hardtail.
  • + 3
 Let me get this straight and figured out. You spend $9000 for the bike. Yet there is no $2 piece of plastic, to protect the underside of $9000 worth of plastic? The truth is in the absurdity.
  • + 2
 For anybody thinking the bike is too long, you do know you could downsize on the frame, right? I was able to demo some Mondrakers last fall, and the guys from the company suggested I try a Large instead of the Xl, which I normally would ride. With the Foxy the large was right on, I also tried an XL Dune, which felt like an aircraft carrier to me. Downsizing is easy and lets you run a longer dropper.

Also, they have a really well specd $5k version of this bike, it would probably be better they send that bike out for testing for the lack of sticker shock.
  • + 2
 That pretty much means they are labelling the sizes incorrectly plus there's a limit to how that works and this bike is really pushing it. As someone with long legs and short torso, I'm 6'1 and would need a seatpost that was more than 400mm long to fit the size SMALL Foxy. So yeah dropper post do exist that long but I'd be very worried about the leverage being applied to the frame. It may even void the warranty. So admittedly I'm a minority case but reach figures were perfect for me before this whole longer, lower, slacker trend took off. I'm just hoping it will have calmed down next time I have to buy a new bike.
  • + 1
 Personally, I'd fear the shorter stack would be noticeable.
  • + 2
 Is it the lever or the caliper that is responsible for the migrating engagement point on newer Shimano brakes? I'm inclined to think some kind of master cylinder problem. Thing is, the older, (much) easier to bleed levers/brakes exhibited none of this behaviour, so Shimano has somehow managed to err, "un-improve" their product line?
  • + 1
 I don't know about the old ones being easier to bleed - I've got a newish XT brake on my bike, and it took all of five minutes to make it feel rock-solid. But yes, the engagement point waffles a bit, like Shimano always seems to. That may be a consequence of mineral oil instead of DOT fluid - I'll happily take that tradeoff if that's what causes the issue, as I find it easier to live with the slight technique adjustment needed to find the bite point than having to deal with the nastiness of DOT fluid, but I also understand that folks who are comfortable working with that stuff won't necessarily agree.
  • + 1
 @g-42: I just meant that you could trail bleed the older ones with a 7mm wrench, a piece of hose, and some mineral oil (from a drug store in a pinch). No syringe or overflow cup/specialized tools. Not sure how the syringe and cup made the brakes any better. The older gens were pretty good. I'm running both and prefer the older ones to the point i may switch to older levers and keep the current calipers
As far as mineral oil, I'll take it anyday over the paint removing DOT brake fluid.
  • + 1
 @woofer2609: Ah, the trail bleed. Yep, that makes sense (and could seriously save the day on a long ride). Overall, they still make some pretty solid brakes at pretty damn good value. I was riding SLX brakes for a long time, and they were great; after seeing them perform well on friends' bikes, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend even just plain Deore brakes.
  • + 2
 @g-42: I'm a massive Shimano fanboy, but they do have some "blips". By trailside, I mean more like "Riding in Moab, and camping 30 minutes out of town in remote camping and not having to bring my whole toolbox in my camper" type fix. I haven't seen much of a performance difference between my XTR's on one bike, and BR-M485 Alivio type brakes on another. Now, those older 755 4 piston XT's, wanna get me some of those...
  • + 1
 @g-42: part of it is the horrible quality control since they started going all out to cut their manufacturing costs. Lower quality seals too
  • + 1
 @woofer2609

I currently have XT m8000s and they're the exact same to bleed as my m785s that they replaced.

They do suffer from random bite point syndrome, though. I bled them tonight and the oil was grey and had chunks of what looked like rubber in the oil. Bite point seems normal again.

I've been toying with the idea of getting some guide RSs but they're like twice the money. Think I'd rather try hopes at that point.
  • + 2
 We learn in this article that extream long geo doesnt climb as good, turn corners as well, feel stable on rough sections but really would excell on a fast featurless turnless single track trail Smile neat . Tell me why again we ape hanger style bikes are better?
  • + 2
 "..especially taller ones who have traditionally struggled to find a bike that fits.."
Reach is only one of many things taller people are struggling with. Actual Seat Tube Angle is probably more important though. This parameter should be around 74° for XL and larger.
  • + 1
 Mondraker really need to go the direct sales route to address their pricing. I would love to get one of their bikes due to the reach, but cannot justify the extra cost above other brands out there; I have a Canyon Strive Al Race which is a great fit but would like the reach to be a bit longer, however I am not prepared to pay the significant price uplift to get a Mondraker.
  • + 2
 You should have a look at Whyte or Transition.
  • + 1
 quote: "The initial portion of that descent is more of a hiking trail than anything created with bikes in mind, full of super tight switchbacks and awkward rocks sections. It's a section of trail that would be tricky on any bike, unless you're Chris Akrigg or Danny MacAskill, but it did work well to immediately illustrate the shortcomings of the extra-long front center, namely the fact that it was more difficult to get through those extremely tight sections of trail than it would be on something with a shorter wheelbase. "

This is an interesting one. @mikekazimer How did you ride those switchbacks? Did you roll them or did you do the front pivots as recommended by Ryan Leech a few weeks ago on this website? If you did the front wheel pivots, how does the longer front center make these harder to do? If you choose to not do the front wheel pivots, why not? If this was because you don't currently master this skill, how is this a shortcoming of the bike instead of rider? Lots of questions.
  • + 3
 I'm not from France, so I don't do a whole lot of front wheel pivots, unless they're absolutely necessary. However, the longer wheelbase does make that maneuver more difficult - you have more bike to work with, and swinging it around a corner requires more effort, and more room than it would on a shorter bike.
  • + 1
 @mikekazimer: Cool, thanks for the quick response. I don't completely master the front wheel pivot (though I am on Ryan Leech's program) but I regularly unload and whip the rear wheel to the side in a corner as opposed to locking up the rearwheel to lose traction. Nowhere near as elegant but kind of effective. Still a long way to go. But my current bike (DMR Switchback, basically their old Trailstar geometry) is relatively short and steep. My next frame (BTR Ranger 26") is considerably longer and slacker. I'll find out how much harder it is going to be Smile . Cheers!
  • + 1
 @vinay: apart from WB and front center, take into account HA and stem length (+handlebar sweep), eg where your weight is when you want to load the front.
Turning around your front wheel means your weight is kind of over it, which is hardest if you're on a flat surface, with 65HA and a 35mm stem, etc.
  • + 1
 @Uuno: Yeah that's correct, there is more to geometry and rider position. Still I think the new frame will allow me to put much more weight over the rear because the front center will simply become so much longer. Which is good as (aside from needing more room in the cockpit to maintain good posture but also for my kneepads to clear the handlebar when climbing) I'm losing the rear end way too easily now when cornering. But still for steep descending as Mike mentions it should be doable to unload the rear even when on a longer bike. It just takes practice to do so consistently and reliably.

Thinking of it, the Mondraker does look a bit like the BTR, with that small reinforcement tube near the head tube Wink .
  • + 1
 Thank you for the review. How would you compare it to the 2018 SBG Transition Patrol? The Foxy is a bit longer, not as slack in the head angle and slacker in the seat angle. I'd be especially interested to hear how they compared climbing.
  • + 1
 The foxy is a much better climber, and nearly not as stable ("confidence inspiring") while descending fast.
  • + 1
 When I walk into an LBS and write a check for $10K+ for a freaking bicycle. I need to be rushed to the nearest insane asylum and put on watch. Unbelievable.
BTW, my GG Trail Pistol is better spec'd and almost 1/2 the price. Admittedly I built it frame up myself as well as wheels. But that is how I can stay in the sport anymore. Costs are out of control.
  • + 5
 That's the annual salary of a typical fresh grad here.
  • + 1
 Ya know, I guess there is a place for this "extra long" bike... But as I read this, you have to pretty much be railing the thing to make it feel good... Been riding MTB for close to 40 years now.... I will not be afraid to admit that I won't be trying to keep up with the 20-somethings on a downhill anymore, and that this bike is configured/designed for that - but if I am going to spend that much f*cking money on a bike, it should climb, corner and excel at pretty much whatever speed I happen to be going! There are a lot of bikes out there these days that climb decently and descend with authority and do a lot in-between very well. For a lot less money. Unless you are a podium chaser (realistically) in enduro events, this bike doesn't sound like a good fit for too many people. Face it, if you earn your turns, you spend 60 - 80% of your time climbing or riding the stuff in between the downs. Having a bike that does that and makes it enjoyable, while still giving you grins when descending sounds like a much better investment. Hell, there are quite a few nicely equipped rides out there that do these things. You can buy one, and with the savings from this bike, have a week in Whistler, a week in Park City, and a week in Fruita with some $$ left over.
  • + 1
 I'd love to see anyone other than a top-level pro tell the difference between some of these 10mm and 1 degree changes in a blinded test. As always, so much of what we determine is correlation is often just perception.

Big deltas in geo over 2-4 years? Yeah, easy to suss out and feel. Anything in between in one's brain playing tricks.
  • + 5
 1 degree in the head tube + 10mm in the BB make a big difference, I can tell you.
Just try offset bushings or an angleset in your own bike
  • + 4
 @aaronjb I want to see the blind test!
  • + 5
 just cuz YOU can't tell...
  • + 2
 @Travel66: me too, especially if the testers would ride blindfolded for a true blind test.

Jokes aside, I rode 2 bikes with almost the exact same geometry except one had slacker front and steeper seat tube and it cornered significantly better.
  • - 5
flag latte1973 (Jan 15, 2018 at 11:43) (Below Threshold)
 @ismasan: No, they don't make a big difference.
  • + 4
 wonder how many rear ends thay have pre stocked for all the returns that will be flooding in a couple of months time.
  • + 1
 Do the carbon ones snap as easy as the alloy? I loved my foxy but 2 rear ends in less than a year, no thank you.

Never had that issue with my Summum.
  • + 1
 is this a dig at all carbon rear-ends.. or mondraker carbon rear-ends specifically?
  • + 1
 I was looking for this comment haha! so many of my mates have had these fail. seems worrying that they have made them tubes look so much thinner
  • + 1
 @toop182: Carbon rear ends?
  • + 4
 I like to see the little vid of the reviewer actually riding. Nice to know the review comes from someone who isn't a goon.
  • + 1
 He can ride. OK ; )
  • + 1
 Mark my words. Next generation bike from Mondraker will have a "laying belly-on-toptube design", with saddle smashing your crotch, your arms reaching forward and legs behind you. A flipped recumberent bike or whatever those are. And Mondraker will call it Superman-flying-Forward-Geometry, and sell it having reach 500 in XS size this time around, on kids models. And of course, it will use new bottom bracket standard, DUB 3.0 from Sram, running 28.5 inch wheels on BoostPlus axles
  • + 3
 there is also option with ROCKSHOX suspension and fork, the name is Mondraker Roxy
  • + 0
 @mikekazimer It seems to me that you tried a bike that was the wrong size. The way I see it saddle position should only be adjusted to get your hips and knees in the right position wrt the bb. If you have to move it forward to reach the bars comfortably the bike is too long for you. I also seem to read this back in the text somewhat. So I wonder, what if you would simply screw the recommendation and pick the size that suits you, would it still be a large?
  • + 4
 The frame looks anorexic, but it seems it's on quite an expensive diet.
  • + 2
 This review was very well done. Very vital-esque and that's a compliment. Clearly we as a people are nearing the day of perfect bike reviews
  • + 3
 I'd rather go for a Kona Process 153 CR/DL, which can save me more than $3000, plus a "not-so-forward" geometry.
  • + 3
 Suspension design data!!!!! No way, finally someone understands that it isn't all about looks!
  • + 2
 Average STA, minuscule stack and no 29" wheels. It's like they were designing a bike for tall people but chickened out at the last minute.
  • + 1
 There's an independent source graphing nearly every full suspension bike in existence. Look up YT Tues vs Specialized Demo. So this whole look a graph! thing is kind of silly.
  • + 1
 $9100? There's just NFW, no matter how good it is.

Also I think PB should include both the low(er) and high end builds for each review, compare/contrast performance and value of each versus each other.
  • + 1
 Mondraker should reconsider pricing - cool your boots. Other than that, this is a nice looking bike but I could spend 3K less and get a Pivot, a Rocky Mountain, a TREK (!) and so on. Get the F away from me.
  • + 1
 complaining about coming down pikes peak? It's a freaking fourteener. Barr trail is nasty at the top above treeline, riding a full on trials bike would still be a hand full coming down that boulder field.
  • + 1
 Nice review. It does seem silly to compare the Foxy to the Hightower when the Bronson would be a more relevant comparison. Bronson is in the same segment, has the same suspension travel and most importantly, has 27.5 wheels.
  • + 2
 Then again, the Hightower LT was recently reviewed by Mike, so he has that info handy in a relevant way. Also, the Hightower LT uses bigger wheels to get stability at speed instead of a super long wheelbase - so it's a different approach towards achieving a similar desired outcome, and that's an interesting contrast.
  • + 2
 @mtxandy he does compare it to a Bronson and a Trek Remedy, both similar 27.5 wheeled bikes in the same segment. He just writes a longer comparison to the hightower lt. I don't remember there being as many comparisons to other bikes in previous reviews. I thought they did a pretty good job.
  • + 1
 Are there no bikes worth reviewing around say, $5000 or less?!

>> Does this pricepont really account for that high of a perrcentage of mountain bike sales?
  • + 1
 These people are nuts, R version for that $4400.00 has a revelation fork and so-so components. Lop $3000.00 of that $9100.00 and might be interested.
  • + 1
 Well, I work for a Mondraker dealer here in Golden, Colorado, and I just weighed our stock MD Foxy RR SL and got 26.9 pounds with two different scales. Just FYI. (no pedals)
  • + 2
 The model weighed here was a large, without pedals.
  • + 3
 Bad Shimano!! Fix yo stuff!
  • + 2
 Seems like Mondraker forgot to take off the 21% Spanish VAT for sale in the US
  • + 3
 Is rear triangle still snapping once a month?
  • + 2
 Why didn’t you just size down? I think that it may be completely different if you did as that reach is insane
  • + 1
 Valid point for Mike's riding and the review but it does seem to indicate that Mondraker need to review their sizes or at least how they label them.
  • + 1
 I think you are also right there fella , however just last year PB was telling riders that through 2017/2018 bikes were getting longer so sizing up wasn’t an issue. I’m also the same height and would’ve picked the medium being honest@Tim2:
  • + 1
 so the frame may be a bit too long for some but in 2019 the bike industry will sell back our old frames with "new backwards geometry" standards.
  • + 1
 no super boost hub spacing or dub bb......this things dead in the water before it hits the shops lol. joking bike manufacturers I don't give a toss for these "improvements".
  • + 3
 i get it, the min wage went up to 14$CDN so this is how they get us back
  • + 1
 Everything always has a line - where once you cross it, it's obvious to everyone that it's just not right..... Line crossed with this bike.
  • + 1
 Once things opened up it was literally smoother sailing-- they literally ditched the bike they were so fed up with it and went sailing for the day instead
  • + 3
 That seat positioned so far forward is really f**king with my chi...
  • + 2
 Logged in just to say the new formatting seen here is nice, especially the table of contents up top. Very useful on a phone.
  • + 2
 What a bizarre, useless bike. I bet they sell less than 5 in the entire country.
  • + 1
 @jwrendenver: I thought the same of the $10K Bronson V.1 in 2013. I demoed one and it was good, but not $10K good. SC sure sold plenty of them though. Mondraker, I don't know. We'll see.
  • + 1
 I now read the first 2 lines of introduction. Then look at bike PRICE. Then laugh and exit the review. The English people have a saying. Are you taking the piss
  • + 1
 It's worth pointing out that the Hightower LT with the Carbon CC frame and an X01 Eagle build kit is actually $2300 less than the Foxy Carbon RR, not $1000.
  • + 2
 It's crazy to think that a high spec Santa Cruz is a better value than something.
  • + 1
 @wibblywobbly: Not really that crazy. SC packs a lot of value into their builds.
  • + 2
 Seat positioned all the way forward tells me they went a little too far with their long geometry
  • + 1
 Well written and interesting. Disappointed that I had to go to the comments section for the m&m analysis tho.
  • + 1
 soon as i seen $9100, i went right to the comments to read. And I was not disappointed.
  • + 1
 Buy the RR SL frameset for £3000.
That’s only £300 more than a Santa Cruz here in the UK
  • + 1
 I really wonder what went through punkbikes head when they voted the Trek over this bike for The Bike of The Year.
  • + 2
 This is the reason why YT is selling like hotcakes....
  • + 2
 So it doesn't climb well, and feels good on smooth single track. Wow!
  • + 1
 The stack only increases 4cm from the S to XL?!? Get them bars up higher so use 6'4+ guys can actually ride it...
  • + 2
 I stopped reading at $9000........
  • + 1
 Just stop with the $10k bike reviews @pinkbike ... ya, we all know... they're awesome!
  • + 2
 Extends dropper post for climb... then stands up.
  • + 2
 Loving the new review format...
  • + 2
 Bird has very simillar geometry for half the price
  • + 1
 What's the difference between seat tube angle, actual and seat tube angle, effective?
  • + 2
 Effective is a virtual line from bb to ideal saddle height (usually around the bar height) while actual is the actual seat tube angle. Effective is only a useful value if you have your seat at the perfect height.
  • + 2
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: it is not ideal saddle height, it is always at the height of the head tube. This keeps it "somewhat" consistent although I think the more accurate measurement would be 4-5" above the head tube.
  • + 2
 Also worth mentioning that actual seat tube angle is pretty much useless as it doesn't tell much...unless it can be used to calculate effective angle if you have some CAD software.
  • + 1
 Oh, I have to say that the only thing I love about this Foxy is that threaded bottom bracket.
  • + 0
 priorities to afford that new bike in 2018.... mountain bike, housing, food, transportation and entertainment (see number one).
  • + 3
 No thanks!
  • + 2
 no thanks, I'll buy something else with that money... nice try anyway Big Grin
  • + 2
 yeah, like a small Romanian village
  • + 1
 White and yellow Maxxis, and also not properly aligned with valve stems? :o
  • + 2
 Maxis Ardent tyres, I don’t know why manufactures specify them?
  • + 1
 So they can go on about how their 6" travel bike weights 28lb.
  • + 1
 Low weight probably
  • + 2
 Lol that price. I’ll take a YT thank you.
  • + 2
 No thanks......looks nice but for the price i'd shop around for sure.
  • + 1
 Ia it me, or does it seem like a rock or something could get stuck between the BB and the lower linkage during compression?
  • + 1
 That can happen on lots of twin-link bikes. I got my chain caught there on a Trance X once, not fun at all.
  • + 2
 Look at the price ... -> no
  • + 1
 Great Bike!
At your local bike shop, you will get 20% off!
  • + 0
 A $9K Mondraker.....thats f*cking hilarious. Some expensive kool aid right there. GTFOOH with that BS.
  • + 1
 And a loooooooooooong jacket.
  • + 0
 I suspect that the new Mondraker Crafty 29er will suffer from the same not steep enough STA problem.
  • + 0
 Mondraker: $325 per pound
Ferrari 488 Spider: $87 per pound

I'll take the Ferrari.
  • + 1
 the first picture: moon baker, not mondraker
  • + 1
 Lol what a rip-off the bike industry has become, Thank rip off bike
  • + 1
 Looks like a tandem, minus the second seat!
  • + 1
 dump it in the ocean
  • + 1
 That's radical.
  • + 0
 470mm reach for a Large - what am I, a midget?
  • + 1
 Not interested.
  • + 1
 dune.
  • + 1
 hideous
  • + 1
 That ESA 0_0
  • + 1
 *actual SA
  • + 3
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Meaning...ASA is slack relative to ESA which is measured at an 'ideal'--applicable to almost no one--point? So that fit for a tall person with an effectively long inseam will be even more problematic? A more apt comparison in terms of fit, wheelbase, and wheel size woud be the 2018 Reign, which Kaz demo'd a couple of months ago. Or a TR Scout.
  • + 0
 A 2017 Yamaha FZ-09 cost 8999....
  • + 3
 Sadly, I can shred trails on a mountain bike in 15 minutes max from my door.
Motorized? Gotta drive or ride for 90 minutes Frown
  • + 4
 But you've got to fill it with petrol, have a licence, tax and insure it. Now how much has it cost you.
  • + 0
 Foxy sexy lady
  • + 1
 Expensive bitch
  • - 1
 ..
  • + 5
 ...

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.203259
Mobile Version of Website