Mondraker Foxy Carbon XR - Review

Jan 26, 2015
by Mike Levy  

Mondraker is a name that will have many riders thinking of downhill bikes and the newly signed Danny Hart, but the Spanish company's lineup of bikes actually runs the gamut of disciplines, all the way to pure cross-country race machines. The 140mm travel Foxy Carbon XR that's review here sits smack dab in the middle, with a new-for-2015 carbon frame that is said to be 400 grams lighter than its aluminum counterpart. I think it's also safe to say that its appearance is much more pleasing to the eye than previous iterations - this bike is a stunner. The Carbon XR model comes setup from the factory for a rider who prefers a spot of rowdy riding, with a 160mm travel FOX 34 Talas fork - that's 20mm more than out back - that gives it a slacker head angle than the less well endowed Foxy models, and a CTD remote that provides push-button control over both the fork and shock's compression settings while on the go.
Foxy Carbon Details

• Intended use: all-mountain / trail / enduro
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• Rear-wheel travel: 140mm
• FOX 34 Talas CTD FIT, 130/160mm
• Mondraker's Zero Suspension System
• Frame material: carbon fiber
• Forward geometry
• Internal cable routing
• ISCG 05 chain guide tabs
• Weight: 27lb 5oz
• MSRP: 6,999 EUR

The 27lb 5oz XR model is the boss of the Foxy range, with an XX1 drivetrain, Formula T1 Carbon brakes, and FOX Factory suspension that add up to a 6,999 EUR price tag (roughly $8,100 USD, although there is no U.S. distribution at this point in time). Don't want to spend that much? There are three less expensive carbon versions, as well as three alloy Foxys, that won't lighten your wallet as much as the Carbon XR will.

Mondraker Foxy Carbon XR

Frame Details

Telling someone that Mondrakers have a distinct look to them is a bit like saying that Nicki Minaj has got her own unique thing going on. Sure, she often looks like she's an alien from some angles, but there's something there that works for me, although I can't quite put my finger on what it is. It's the same story with the Foxy, at least for me, as I'd say that while it does look a bit odd from some angles, it also has that one-of-a-kind appearance that's just staggering. The bike's front end is the most obvious standout feature, but how the top tube flows into the swing arm, with a stubby seat mast of sorts jutting up, has it looking ready for action. Tech details and other geekery aside, I don't think I'm alone in thinking that this thing appears to be pretty badass.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  The Foxy Carbon frame is an impressive sight, and you should be prepared for plenty of questions at the trailhead if you end up on one.

Mondraker's move to carbon has seen them ditch the hump at the front of the top tube, which, despite being synonymous with the brand for many years, was obviously a good move as far as appearances go. That hump is gone, and there's now a short section of carbon that joins the top and down tubes together just aft of the head tube, no doubt done to up front-end strength. All of the cables and hoses enter the down tube through ports at the front of the bike, including the hose for the Reverb Stealth, and they exit the frame at the opposite end of the same tube. It makes for a clean look, so long as you don't take a gander at the mess in front of the handlebar, and the ports should also make it easy-ish to run new cables when the time comes. There's a bonded-on down tube guard, as well as room for a large-sized water bottle within the front triangle, not something that every competitor can claim. How it's acceptable for that not to be the case still boggles my mind. Thanks, Mondraker, for using some common sense and keeping me from dying of thirst in the deserts of Arizona.

The carbon frame is said to weigh 4.62 pounds (2.09kg) without a shock, which is 400 grams lighter than the alloy version and also four times as good looking (I did the math). Mondraker's clearly done their homework here because that's a pretty respectable weight, and it's a figure no doubt helped along by going with a full carbon rear-end, which is something that some other brands have said isn't often worth the effort given how difficult it can be to build a reliable swing-arm out of carbon. Now I have to list off the usual design points that all bikes have these days, including the Foxy Carbon, so here goes: tapered head tube, 12 x 142mm rear end, ISCG 05 tabs, Press-Fit 92 bottom bracket, and so on.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  Somewhat ironically, Mondraker's Forward Geometry is designed to move the rider's center of gravity farther rearward relative to the fork axle.

Forward Geometry Explained

Geometry is an always evolving thing, with numbers changing over the years as designers learn what works best for how people are riding at the time. A short while ago it was a competition to see who could get their bottom brackets closer to the deck, and now it seems that mega-long front ends combined with short stems is the way to go. Kona saw the light before most others did, at least here in North America, with other brands following to some extent, but credit should go to Spain's Mondraker for being being on the bleeding edge of what is actually a paradigm shift in how geometry is looked at. They were experimenting with roomy front ends and zero-reach stems many years ago, taking it to the extreme before dialing it back a bit, but they still run some of the most radical numbers out there. The long front end and short stem combo isn't just a fad, though, as it makes a lot of sense for how many of us ride bikes.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
Anyone who has ridden a traditional cross-country bike with a long stem, and then a longer-travel bike with a short stem on the same rowdy downhill, can attest to which bike felt scary and which one inspired confidence. But if using a short stem has that sort of effect, why not go to an even shorter stem? It's not quite that simple, though, because using a very short stem on a bike with standard geometry will only create one awkward riding machine that will feel too cramped, as well as not place enough weight on the front wheel for proper handling when you're climbing and descending. That means that if you want an all-around kind of bike to handle well with a short stem, it has to be designed around that idea - it has to have a longer top tube to compensate for the length lost in the stem. That's exactly what Mondraker have done with their Forward Geometry. Instead of Mondraker designing the bike around a traditional stem, they instead added length to the bike's front-center and then spec'd a short stem to balance it out. The result is that the rider is in roughly the same position, but the front wheel is farther out in front of them, and the bike's wheelbase is a touch longer.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  The Foxy Carbon XR's 140mm of rear wheel travel is controlled via Mondraker's Zero Suspension System.

The Foxy's Suspension Explained

The Foxy's 140mm travel Zero Suspension System employs two burly looking aluminum links that create a virtual pivot point out in space and connect the rear triangle to the front of the bike. Both of the links rotate in the same direction, with the longer upper link compressing the shock from above and the lower link doing the same from below. Working the shock from both ends isn't a fresh concept, but it does mean that the front triangle doesn't have to be designed to deal with the direct force of a harsh bottoming moment in the same way as it would if the lower shock mount was static, and this can lead to a slight weight savings. Mondraker makes plenty of bold claims about their Zero Suspension System, saying that it "prevents any unwanted movements produced whilst pedalling,'' and that ''rear brake forces do not alter the suspension system," both of which explain where the design's name comes from: zero movement while pedalling, and zero rear brake input.

The bike's FOX Float CTD shock is located about as low as possible in the frame, a move that can trick the bike into feeling lighter on the trail than it actually is, and a remote lever controls both the fork and the shock's compression, allowing you to switch them both between Descend, Trail, and Climb modes while on the move. While I do admit to generally not being a fan of such things, especially due to the rat's nest of cables that can stem from spec'ing extra buttons and levers, being able to control both ends of the bike with the push of a single button is a pretty neat feature.

Release Date 2015
Price $8100
Travel 140
Rear Shock FOX Float CTD Remote LV Boost Valve Factory Kashima 200x57mm
Fork FOX 34 Talas 27´5 CTD Remote FIT Factory Kashima 15mm tapered 160mm
Headset Onoff Integrated tapered 1-1/8”->1/5”
Cassette Sram XG-1199 10-42T
Crankarms SRAM XX1 w/ 30T
Bottom Bracket SRAM PF92
Rear Derailleur SRAM XX1
Shifter Pods SRAM XX1
Handlebar Onoff Stoic Carbon 1” 740mm
Stem Onoff Stoic FG 30mm
Grips Onoff Paw lock-on
Brakes Formula T1 Carbon 180mm
Wheelset CrankBrothers Iodine 3
Tires Maxxis Ardent 27.5 x 2.40
Seat Fizik Tundra2 MG
Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth 31.6mm
Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore

Climbing / Handling

At first glance the Foxy looks like it'd climb about as well as a Top Fuel dragster goes around corners, especially given that both seem to have similar length front ends, but that turned out to be far from the case. Another instance of a bike defying expectations, really, and further proof that while geo numbers are important when considering a bike, you'll never get the full story unless you ride it. What did I expect? A handful, to be honest, and I was fully prepared to be struggling on technical challenges and be off the back on longer, smoother grinds up gravel access roads. What did I find? That the Foxy can more than hold its own against other 140mm bikes, even those with serious cross-country leanings.

It's likely one of the more efficient bikes in its class that I've spent time on, so much so that Mondraker's decision to spec the handlebar-mounted CTD remote seems a bit silly. Left full open, the Foxy takes off improbably quick and feels more like a spritely 120mm bike, enough so that I had to get a few other riders to give it a go just to make sure it wasn't the sunstroke and light beer that had me feeling things. It wasn't - the Foxy is great under power, and out of the saddle efforts will see it get up to speed like a fire has been lit under your ass. This makes crushing access road climbs a cinch, which is a great thing if that's how you access your singletrack, but it also helps your cause when you need to get up and over a jumble of roots or rocky ledges that stand between you and cleaning a trail.
bigquotesLeft full open, the Foxy takes off improbably quick and feels more like a spritely 120mm bike, so much so that I had to get a few other riders to give it a go just to make sure it wasn't the sunstroke and light beer that had me feeling things.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  The Foxy isn't just a great climber for a 140mm travel bike with slack angles, it's a great climber, period.

There's yet more surprises when you're faced with tricky ascents that test even the most skilled climbers out there, although I shouldn't be too shocked given that Mondraker's longer-travel Dune out performed my expectations in the same way when I tested it last year. A 30mm stem, 66.5 degree head angle, and 1220mm wheelbase should add up to a handful when the ups are difficult enough that trackstands and wheel-pivots come into play, but the Foxy can hold its own so long as you stay on top of it. There's boat loads of traction out back to keep you moving forward, allowing you to get up out of the saddle if you need to put in a solid burst, and that's something that really helped when I was faced with a dusty rock face that I wouldn't have been able to top if I had stayed seated.

More importantly, the extremely long front end didn't feel all that excessive when dealing with ultra-tight switchbacks, although it does require a different method at times. The best approach was to (obviously) go as wide as possible, but then to pretty much turn in as hard and as sharp as you can while almost stopped so that the entire front of the bike swings around while the rear wheel is nearly stationary. That routine saw me get around the tightest of corners, even some that required me to pull out my old school trials card when on other bikes with more traditional geometry. And while I'm not a big fan of forks with adjustable travel (seriously, just get used to how your bike handles), it was appreciated on the Foxy, much more so than the CTD function.

All of my climbing praise isn't going to change that fact that the Foxy most certainly does require a different approach on technical sections, which means that it's not likely going to be an ideal bike for a newer or less skilled rider that might not put in the time to figure out its eccentricities. However, a rider who can adapt to the bike is going to clean anything that they'd make on any other trail bike, and it absolutely flies up smoother climbs.

Descending and Suspension

With its Batman-esque appearance, slack head angle, and stubby 30mm stem, the Foxy looks like a demon of a descender. And it can be, but the story isn't that simple. Truth be told, I struggled to understand how to get the most out of the black bike in a lot of downhill situations, and I went through all sorts of varying setups while trying to figure it out. Different handlebar heights, different handlebar widths, and drastically different suspension settings were all on order. What did I discover after all that? That the Foxy Carbon XR is not your run of the mill trail bike.

Speed is not just your friend when on the Foxy, it's your BFF, and the faster you go, the more natural the bike's handling will feel to you. This is because counter-steering is the best way to get the Mondraker around corners, but that's a technique that requires some commitment, so you best be on it. Get a handle on that method and the Foxy isn't the tricky machine that it can be on slower, rolling terrain. Alas, I feel like a 140mm travel bike, even with a longer fork and relatively slack angles, should be able to rip on slower trails that require some bobbing and weaving, but the Foxy just doesn't gel on those sort of trails. I constantly found myself off line and not where I wanted to be in such situations, and the front-end of the bike would feel like it was switching between biting and giving up, although running more sag out back did help the situation a bit. Go figure. I'd describe it as feeling inconsistent, which was especially troubling when in a corner that tightened up through its radius. Not the ideal bike if you do more poking and plonking than pinning.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  Speed is your BFF when riding the Foxy Carbon XR, and the bike feels much more manageable than when you're rolling around on tight singletrack at walking pace.

The scene was much brighter when not confined by tight trees and tighter corners, with higher speeds allowing the bike to come into its own. Again, this is because that's when you can start to either counter-steer or use the rear brake to change the bike's direction, otherwise known as skidding. I knew when I was about to start feeling my oats as soon as my eyes began to water from going fast, and that's when the Foxy comes into its own. The bike suddenly went from being a handful to a good time, almost like you just flipped the bitch switch from 'no' to 'go', at which point it was time to let it roll. Much like I discovered when I tested Mondraker's Dune last year, their Forward Geometry puts you in a very confidence inspiring position, especially when it comes to pointing it down something scary enough to make you hesitate. It was quickly obvious that there was no reason to dither, though, even if the run-out looked about as inviting as a perfectly flat parking lot, and I suspect that many Foxy riders will end up trying lines that they wouldn't if they were aboard other bikes of similar travel.
bigquotesI knew when I was about to start feeling my oats as soon as my eyes began to water from going fast, and that's when the Foxy comes into its own. The bike suddenly went from being a handful to a good time, almost like you just flipped the bitch switch from 'no' to 'go', at which point it was time to let it roll.

The bike's Zero Suspension System is more efficient than a solar powered Prius, but it's not quite as forgiving as I would have expected. Going with a firmer spring rate, as many aggressive riders often have to do on a trail bike, makes for a bit of a harsh feeling rear end that doesn't take the edge off as it should. Thankfully, Mondraker doesn't force those who are going to smash into things on the downs (pros and hacks alike) to run a stiff setup in order to prevent the bike from blowing through its travel - there's plenty of progression built in - so you can go well over 30% sag without worrying about clanging off the bottom. The rear end also seems to ride fairly high in its travel, and this means that the bike can feel a touch stinkbug-ish if you run less than 30% droop. I eventually settled at just over 35% sag, which sounds excessive when talking about a 140mm travel bike, but that number solved the initial harshness I was feeling, and the efficiency of Mondraker's Zero Suspension System design still had the bike pedalling like a champ. It also had a positive effect on the handling, which was the opposite of what I would have expected.

Technical Report

• Maxxis Ardent Tires: I seriously don't like these when I'm on my typical rocky, rooty, dirty home trails. Never have and I doubt I ever will, which is why I was surprised to find out that they worked so well on the Mondraker when in Sedona, Arizona. They roll fast as hell, the large volume (2.4'' front and back on the Foxy) makes for a very forgiving ride, and they seemed to work well on the local terrain. I did manage to tear a casing, though, which was a bummer. That said, Sedona is very hard on tires.

• Onoff Stoic Carbon 740mm Handlebar: Really, Mondraker? This bike needs to be ridden fast as balls but you spec a 740mm handlebar? I feel like talking about handlebar width should have stopped three or four years ago, but here we are. The 740mm width does speed up the bike's handling a touch, which can help - I know this because I swapped it out for a 780mm just to see - but the stock handlebar is just too narrow for a bike that excels on hectic terrain and at high speeds. Also, the stock Onoff Paw grips were universally hated by everyone who spent time on the bike, with the hard rubber making short work of our palms and fingers.

Mondraker Foxy review test Photo by Paris Gore
  I regularly took advantage of the FOX fork's Talas system, but rarely reached for the CTD remote. I don't think the Foxy needs CTD, and it also makes for a mess in front of the handlebar.

• FOX 34: The FOX 34 Talas 27.5'' CTD Remote FIT Factory (and take a breath) is a good match for the bike and was very impressive on the trail. It was active but still quite supportive, and the new Talas system allowed me to drop it down to 130mm and have it still feel very, very good. In fact, I spent a load of time with the fork lowered while trying to sort out the Foxy's handling, including experimenting with this short-travel setting on some pretty rowdy downhill sections, and have to say that FOX has nailed their air-sprung travel adjustment system. I still cringe when I look at photos of the CTD remote cables, though, and I imagine riders with OCD tendencies will start twitching and stuttering with uneasiness at the same sight.

• Formula T1 Carbon Brakes: Does anyone out there still use Formula stoppers besides those who get them for free? Two other riders spent a good amount of time on the Foxy, and both felt that they would be able to go faster and ride with more confidence if Mondraker had chosen different brakes. And what about me? I think you'd get better modulation, and maybe even more power, by just using your hands to squeeze the rotor with two wooden blocks rather than sticking with the T1 Carbons. Sorry, Formula, but if I was buying the Foxy Carbon XR for myself, these brakes would go before I left the bike shop.

• Crankbrothers Iodine 3 Wheels: These things look badass on the Foxy, don't they? More importantly, I had zero troubles with them during my time on the bike. They were still arrow-straight when it was time to ship the Foxy back home to Spain, and I didn't hear a single ping out of them during the test period. Did I mention how cool that look on the bike?

Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesThe Foxy Carbon XR is a bit hard to pin down. Its radical Forward Geometry inspires confidence in some situations, yet left me frustrated in others. A 140mm travel bike should be an all around badass, even if it has a longer-travel fork, and the Foxy is just too focused on all-out speed and rowdy terrain to wear that label. Straight up, those who ride slower, flatter trails won't be doing themselves any favours by being on the Foxy, but someone who's all about going as fast as possible (and has the trails to match) will find a good partner with the Spanish machine. It has plenty of character, and while it's clearly not perfect, it will be for the right rider. Just make sure that's you if you're considering the Foxy Carbon XR. - Mike Levy

Visit the high-res gallery for more images from this review


  • 83 2
 "I think you'd get better modulation, and maybe even more power, by just using your hands to squeeze the rotor with two wooden blocks" This XD
  • 8 5
 I totaly get what he's saying after using mine, I can't imagine riding dusty rock faces with those, holy mother...
  • 6 0
 Took my friend a few rides to get used to how "instant" they are, and people say how XTs are too instant? Naaaaa..
  • 3 2
 I know a guy around my area who runs these brakes on his XC bike. And even I think that Shimano Deore or the m455 non series brakes has a more bitier feel than these T1s
  • 11 12
 I wanted to try one blokes Radon, it was wet as hell, roots all over the place, stone slabs, mud. I rolled in and wanted to brake before the turn aaaaand - as teenagers say when they see Taylor Swift - I died! He had T1s with 200mm rotors... on a freaking trail bike. If it's not super tacky ground and you don't run super tacky compounds, you may as well run no brakes at all, or start building brake spots paved with sand paper into your trails.
  • 3 1
 and its funny cause a few days or a week ago a Formula Factory tour article just happened here Big Grin
I used the 'old' non radial master cyclinder The One's, I bought my bike used with them, they were crap... And then those were the top of the line Formula sets.. hilarious
  • 5 2
 Formula is not doing well past few years, since they replaced the ORO generation and switched to new lever design (RX, The one, r0..). Oros really had a good modulation and sticky feel on the lever for those who liked it with a combination of enough stopping power
  • 1 0
 But still, that is a pretty darn gorgeous ride! And they just had to make some bad choices to spoil it..
  • 1 0
 Im running M445. Cheap amd good but not the best. Needs to be taken care of and they shall last.
  • 1 0
 Wouldn't want to imagine that!
  • 2 1
 Something looks a bit wonky with that front brake hose. In the first picture it's actually got a nice loop in it.
  • 3 1
 I ran Formula's for years starting with the Oro's. I than upgraded to R1's & T1's. All first gen. They worked but the pad clearance was a constant headache. The Brake fluid that would leak all over my bar's and destroy the carbon from when the brakes over heated drove me nut's. having to adjust them every 2 rides or so drove me nut's. I eventually got fed up and went to Shimano. The reason that I stayed with them so long though was the amazing customer service that they offered. It is unbelievable how well Formula USA treated me. Even inviting me to their USA headquarters in the Bay area to learn how to do complete overhaul's. My buddy's Ibis came with RO's. They are wickedly powerful But still I stay with Shimano now. I have been curious about the new Avid Guide brakes but have no desire to go back to Dot fluid.
  • 18 1
 Could we at least fix the curly fry brake hose for the front.
  • 2 0
 Weird, I like my T1s, no issues at all. They are touchy but still fine. maybe I haven't been spoiled by something better. I have some older saints and find them to be a bit more power but about the same modulation. Meh....whatever...they work.
  • 10 2
  • 5 0
 lol thanks for that graphic, I'll save that to me archives. arrrrr
  • 20 3
  • 5 0
 Do i have to post my response that got downvoted to oblivion again?
  • 6 23
flag seraph (Jan 26, 2015 at 11:00) (Below Threshold)
 454 grams to a pound. It's a really easy conversion. I don't know why so many people bitch about it. I do the conversions in my head.
  • 5 1
 Who remembers that off the top off their head though, Seraph?
  • 8 1
 Maybe this is easier: 7 grams = 1/4 Oz.
  • 10 2
 As an American, I approve this message.
  • 3 11
flag seraph (Jan 26, 2015 at 13:25) (Below Threshold)
 @GrunderS - if you can't remember that 454 grams are in a pound, you have a poor memory.
  • 17 1
 When I was in grade school they told me by the time I graduated high school that we would be using the metric system. That was 40 years ago. My daughter is now in grade school and they never mention it at all. Here make some equivilent fractions out of 1/4 for me so you will be of no use to anyone. The USA is going to be in the stone age forever. Neg prop me if you want but you know it's true.
  • 5 0
 @seraph It's not that I can't remember it, but why use such an unconventional and awkward measurement system? 1000 grams in a kilo, 1000 kilos in a tonne. Not stupid things like 454 grams in a pound, 6.35kg in a stone etc etc.
  • 3 8
flag bentplate (Jan 26, 2015 at 14:31) (Below Threshold)
 The beauty of imperial measurements is that they're practical measures A foot is the length of a foot. An inch is the length of your thumb (top part). A yard is a pace. A cup is how much milk you want to drink. A pint is how much beer you want to drink. Oh, and a pint's a pound the world around.

It's annoying for conversions, sorta. But if you don't like imperial, try following a metric recipe!
  • 5 1
 bentplate, people don't go around with their thumbs and feet measuring distances. They'd use a tape or a rule etc. A litre of water weighs one kilo.
  • 2 2
 @GrunderS - I'm not saying that we shouldn't switch to the metric system overall. I'm saying that it's not hard to convert grams to pounds, and vice versa. The way things on bikes are measured is not going to change, so you might as well adapt.
  • 4 2
 @seraph By your logic, if it's easy to convert then it's not that hard for PB to just offer metric measurements and save us some time. If you want to play the stupid American conversion game go right ahead. I do it everyday, all day and I'm sick of it. Bicycle standards are in metric. Measure them in metric.

@bentplate There is no "beauty" in Imperial measurement. Everyone's feet and thumbs are different sizes. This is a terrible way to measure objects and is far from practical.

Boiling/freezing point of water in Fahrenheit = Stupid. Torque values in foot-lbs, in-lbs & in-oz = Stupid. 36 inches = 3 feet = 1 yard = Stupid. Drill sizes are in numbers (larger the number, smaller the drill) as well as letters = Stupid. WTF thread major is a #00-90? (double ought ninety) = Stupid. Thread pitch measured by # of threads per inch = Stupid. Imperial is just plain stupid. As Americans shouldn't we be glad to rid ourselves of the Imperialist non-sense?
  • 4 0
 This kinda reminds me of how retarded NPT is... because a "half inch pipe" measures 1/2" right? right? lol.
  • 1 3
 @iamamodel, when I don't have a tape, I measure things based on my body parts. A lot of people do. If I need to know how long a table is, I estimate it using my foot length. I could do the same thing if I thought in metric, but to me 1cm is too short and 1m is too long. It just doesn't feel right.

@Reverie2Reality, no shit. It's an approximation. IMO English threads are way more versatile than metric. When you're trying to eek out all the strength you can in something, having fine, extra fine, and coarse thread options is very handy. Drill gauges, however, are stupid.

The reality is it doesn't matter how you measure things as long as you're all on the same page as to what it means.
  • 3 1
 bentplate, so you just walk all over the table, measuring the thing with your feet? god bless merica
  • 44 4
 4.62 POUNDS without a shock, which is 400 GRAMS lighter. For fucks sake, pick one.
  • 39 4
 "Really, Mondraker? This bike needs to be ridden fast as balls but you spec a 740mm handlebar?"

Comments like this are so tiresome. Tell Graves that 740 is too narrow

I'd also like to see that when an individual reviewer doesn't completely gel with a bike to go back to the manufacturer, get some input and then see if that changes anything, whether it be bike set up or ride style. It is a shame to see slightly negative reviews and pigeon hole bike based on one person's quick opinion.

Very entertaining read though Smile
  • 43 1
 Don't be too hard on him, he lives in a desert where the gaps between the trees are huge.
  • 8 1
 Maybe Graves likes 740mm bars. They seem to work for him.
  • 4 0
 I'm with you, I read the bars comment and groaned (again). The reviewers just need to tell us why they changed the bars, not tell us some moderate width is rubbish. I run 710s on my trail bike and 750s on my all mountain bike. On most trails I ride I feel like the 750s are too wide. And I'm 193cm tall, I bet mike isn't that tall.
  • 46 0
 If you're spending this kind of money on a bike, you should be 100% ready to put on a seat, handlebars and pedals of your choice. They are all very personal and you can't expect a stock bike to have a cockpit that suits you.
  • 2 1
 Didn't you read the article ? This bike is unrideable between trees Wink
  • 5 0
 @maxlombardy True, but you should still feel like the bike is fairly ridable... competent, but not perfect for you, which this probably is at 740mm.

That said, they are a fit item, & should change size as frame size goes up. Somebody who rides a small is unlikely to want a 780mm bar, someone who rides an XL isn't likely to want a 680mm.
  • 11 2
 If you don't have broad shoulders, then you don't need wide bars. Although lot of people need big bars to make up for their small errr....
  • 5 0
 @ maxlombardy - at a cost of 7,000 euro, if you mean that the manufacturer, via a pre-arranged agreement to re-imburse the retailer, should provide the seat & handlebars of your choice, I agree.

For my 7,000 euro, the bike should leave the store with all the contact points sorted for my physique and preferences at no extra cost or hassle.
  • 1 0
 That´s because he lives at dulles airport and needs a minimum wingspan to TAKE OFF ...
  • 8 5
 Unless you are well over 6' tall 760mm is about as wide as you should go for bars...Always makes me laugh when I see 13year old kids with 800mm a pushup and measure the outside of your hands..that's how wide your bars should be
  • 3 6
 It's not that simple. Width is measured from end to end, as if the bar was a straight piece of stock(it is, when they cut it to length.) However, after adding rise & sweep, how far the ends are apart from each other will vary. I ride a 780 bar currently, but it's got some of the highest rise & sweep numbers (5 up, 9 back) you can get, so doesn't feel overly wide, especially compared to some bars that are narrower, but straighter. I'm only 5'8".
  • 3 0
 I have 710mm bars on my Spark 29 and I wouldn't want it any wider as the cockpit feels perfect. I have 740s on my HT though. BAR WIDTH IS A USER PREFERENCE.
  • 19 0
Just tried your test which, seems logical. Now where do I find some 840mm bars?
  • 23 1
 Handlebars outside 720-760 - Unethical. But that's not the most disgusting bit - stems longer than 50mm - unreasonable, illogical! A guy freewillingly chosing a frame one size shorter than he "should" - unreachable! Person running no angleset or no offset bushing - the prodigal son! Person running angleset backwards - Satan himself on the mission to destroy the spirit of true mountain biking.
  • 2 0
 Maybe a slightly narrower bar works better with the longer front center?
  • 20 1
 Yes, bar width is a matter of personal preference, but at least when a bike comes spec'd with a wide bar you can always trim it down. With a 740mm bar, that's narrower than many riders now prefer, which is why it's mentioned.
  • 4 4
 Solution to pretty much any Trail/AM bike: Always spec a Race Face Atlas 785mm bar. Best looks, cut if you want, many anodized colors, and it's a Race Face. The only bar I use now, matched to a RF NW single ring. No more questions.
  • 3 0
 Totally agree @mikekazimer all bikes like this should come with 800mm bars with cut marks. That way the bike shop or bike owner can cut them to suit. I went from 760mm to 780mm last year. Even though it was only 10mm on either end, the jump was huge but worth it.
  • 2 0
 If you take these comments as an example maybe it isn't most riders preference to go above 740mm? And yes you can cut them down but in my experience it changes the bar feel so I often try to avoid and just buy the correct length.
  • 2 1
 I just replaced a 60mm stem and 740mm bars with 40mm stem and 780mm bars. I was skeptical at first but I'm really digging the improvements. The steering is more fluid, the front end is a lot easier to get over obstacles, and the shorter stem seems to have eliminated a lot of the back pain I was feeling on the previous combo. I'm 6'1" for reference, and have been riding 740s on all my bikes for 2 years now.
  • 2 0
 Just had this conversation with a niner rep that had a bunch of demo bikes at the bottom of one of our trails yesterday. One of the bikes (I believe it was a Rip 9) had 800mm bars on it. We just made fun of them and had a good laugh. I personally wouldn't go over 140mm. Anything else and my chin would be way to close for comfort. I also remember back in the lat 80's and early 90's I was running Zoom bars. They were wider than any other one's at that time, they must have been 680mm with bull horns. People always asked "why are you handlebars so wide" and I said "for more control." They didn't get it back then. Just like, I suppose, I don't get it now. Oh well.
  • 3 1
 cbenderusa007, a wider bar gives you more control as it gives you more leverage over the front wheel - less effort is needed to overcome the input of rocks trying to twist the front wheel, and there is more stability mid-corner as the tyre is squirming about.

Bars can be too wide though because a person with a small frame trying to manipulate (say) 800mm bars is going to run out of body-English/reach. This is shown by doing a push-up by putting your hands close to as far apart as they will go: firstly, it is much harder and secondly you will get very little vertical movement.
  • 36 1
 'The carbon frame is said to weigh 4.62 pounds without a shock, which is 400 grams lighter...' -- it's 9:37 in the morning and my brain already hurts. Thanks Pinkbike!
  • 19 0
 It means it's just 0.881849049 pounds lighter, simple.
  • 2 1
 Just think that 450 grams is roughly equal to a pound. Not that bad really...
  • 19 4
 Pinkbike; reading the line "this bike weighs 4.62 pounds, which is 400 grams lighter than the alloy version" hurts both my eyes and my brain. Please stick to imperial only, or, even better, metric only
  • 13 2
 Yep, summed up my Foxy ownership experience. In hindsight there are lots of better, less compromised 140mm travel bikes out there. At least the test bike didn't constantly fall apart like mine. Thankfully it ended up cracking. Like most of them.
  • 6 1
 They have addressed those issues for my mind. I'm guessing you have a pre 2013 model??
  • 1 0
 That's not been my experience so far. I did have a shock bolt come loose, but a dab of thread locker and torque wrench sorted it out.
  • 12 3
 "I still cringe when I look at photos of the CTD remote cables".

The key point of going from 2x10 to 1x10 is to simplify the riding experience and reduce the clutter. It probably appeals to some and thats cool but as far as I am concerned, adding remotes defeats the purpose. I'm fine with a reverb remote because it is an accessory you will actively manage but lockout and CTD? Really? Maybe it is just my area that doesn't warrant it but it seems like a solution looking for a problem.
  • 5 0
 Just don't understand how Mondraker doesn't know that this frame has one of the highest anti-squat percentages on the market. Lockout on the rear is absolutely unnecessary unless you're wanting a hardtail level of power transfer, and even then, wouldn't this have been a perfect application of internal cable routing?
  • 1 0
 I normally feel the same way, though I will admit, I rode an RM the other day that greatly benefited from being able to mess with the rear shock easily. Conversely, I rode a BH that it felt absolutely useless on, & that one controlled fork & shock, both.
  • 2 0
 Actually having a remotely operated rear shock is pretty nice. I pretty much rather not fumble with some lever I have to reach down and try find and being able to switch modes is pretty sweet. I think the reason this bike has it is because of how low the shock is mounted in the frame.
  • 1 0
 I agree though, the frame design doesn't really require you to use the CTD lever as much... However I wish my Float CTD was the remote version.
  • 2 0
 @ maxlombardy - at a cost of 7,000 euro, if you mean that the manufacturer, via a pre-arranged agreement to re-imburse the retailer, should provide the seat & handlebars of your choice, I agree.

For my 7,000 euro, the bike should leave the store with all the contact points sorted for my physique and preferences at no extra cost or hassle.
  • 1 0
 replied to the wrong post...
  • 1 0
 I run an XO front grip shift instead of the standard Fox lever.... cant work out which is more useful on the bars that or the Reverb button...
  • 13 2
 One of the best review in a while, at least in terms of humor, had a few laughs while I read it. Props @mikelevy
  • 17 4
 He's a class in bike review world for sure. If only MTB would be bigger so there would be more money from advertising, we'd have our own show: "11th Gear"
  • 7 3
 Funny in some ways , but at the same time referencing some r'n'b slappers ass for a metaphor for a bike is not gonna make the female readers invite their friends to come out biking.
  • 5 1
 Good. A few less riders with no sense of humor.
  • 3 2
 Leave it LuvAZ! - we need people with no sense of humor, they are the best objects to laugh at. Love thy enemy Big Grin
  • 1 0
 I thought it was Love thy neighbour & Know your enemy????
  • 3 1
 It may have been, but "Love thy enemy" is the main one - it's physics
  • 6 0
 Loord. I have 725mm next carbon bars 70mm easton haven stem and formula ones. I was ok with that until I read to much pink bike. Now I almost feel bad about using this parts on my new Pivot Mach 6 build... Thankfully I got a Pike and the frame is for 27,5 wheels.
  • 9 1
 What is with all the bikes with Formula brakes? My shoe works 10x better when I stick it between the tire and fork.
  • 11 1
 I'll tell you where you can stick that shoe of yours. Not sure it'll help stop you on the trail. But it will amuse me.
  • 3 1
 I had a set of formulas and they were surprisingly good and yes I did get them for free. Needed new hoses, due to backwards supply in OZ it was cheaper and quicker to buy a set of XT's off CRC
  • 4 0
 Remember, the brakes are trying to stop a 240 lbs. white kid going down hill. I just need some thing that'll lock up and stop my ass from bouncing off a rock or the idiot in front of me that didn't here my screaming for dear life.
  • 2 0
 I liked every set of Formulas I had. R1s, T1s, and RXs. My co-worker still runs them on all his pro team bikes. They make great brakes. Not sure why Mondraker is stocking the old Formulas though. The updated lever design creates a superior system versus the old one.
  • 1 1
 Eh, it's preference mostly. I just like brakes with a lot of power and my T1s have let me down. I can't even nose wheelie that how weak they are.
  • 3 0
 I guess they can't sell them aftermarket well enough , Don't get why though , I mean who does not want finicky , expensive brakes?
  • 1 1
 I've developed a theory on Formulas- all the R&D, engineering, and quality control they don't perform on the lower level stuff goes into their top tier stuff, like the RO. All the lower tier Formula brakes I've tried have been meh at best. Then I tried the RO, and they put everything else to shame. More power than even the Hope Evo's and the Saint M820s they replaced, superb modulation, and really really easy maintenance. The only pain with them is the pad clearance is tight and they're kinda finicky to align so you're not getting rotor rub, but I'll take that hit for the performance.
  • 1 1
 So $200 or more a wheel doesn't get you a good brakes set. And these are T1s I'm talking about. They might be even more. Good thing they came on the bike.
  • 1 1
 No argument their low end stuff sucks. In fact I'll go out a on a limb and say everything other than the RO sucks. They took all the awesome a company is capable of and put it into one product, completely ignoring all the others.
  • 2 1
 @Bronco82 - Your T1s are likely set up wrong. The T1s I ran on my Black Market Edit1 were ridiculously powerful. They stopped on a dime.
  • 1 0
 I might have to have them bled then.
  • 1 0
 I like the T1s on my Sanction. They are quite the powerful stoppers. Just a bit quick to bite. I got used to the modulation and they are fine.
  • 1 0
 +1 on ROs, mine has been flawless, no fade, good power/modulation, zero maintenance besides changing pads and a yearly bleed. Havent touched any other Formula set so they might be just as crappy as other say but ROs is up there as 1-3 best brakes on the market.

Only annoying thing about the ROs is the lever design, the blades develop significant play if you use them alot and there really isnt much to do besides buying new master cylinders which sucks.

2 full seasons, over 150 park days plus alot of pushbike/shuttle and they work more or less as day 1. May be luck but I sure do appreciate gear that just takes the abuse and works.
  • 5 0
 Can't fault Mondraker at all...had a 2013 foxy (which I loved) but the rear triangle cracked (a known problem) Got in touch with Mondy and they replaced the whole frame with the 2014 frame....cheers Mondy.
  • 4 0
 I´m riding a Foxy Carbon XR for 2 mounths and the only issue is the lack of modulation from the T1´s and lever shape, I´m missing my old Hope´s Mono Mini Pro...
Zero Suspension, Forward Geometry, Crankbrothers Iodine, Maxxis Ardent 2.40... everything is perfect, except the price and that cable mess in the front of the bike.
Coming from a Cannondale Prophet with Lefty Max 140mm Carbon, allready with 27,5 wheels,I´m sure this bike is changing my riding style, for better!!!
  • 6 1
 Perfect balance between humour, technical jargon, non-technical explanations, and "someone took a shit in my oats this morning" honesty. Very well done.
  • 3 0
 Already test this bike on a familiar trail, where I ride a lot on my enduro bike, and man... It was so hard to descend on it... in the begining.

When I went full gas (on really scaring speeds), it started all make sense and the bike seems to love it... It's agressive like hell and bites you to get more speed. Is not for the faintheated.

One (another) really impressive detail is that is like an XC top gun on the climbs. So easy and so fast, with minimal effort. That thing, in my opinion, is really remarkable!!!

This is a bike for people with some extra large balls where performance is a priority!

Of course, and I agree, brakes are crap! And price is a bit (a lot) hight...
  • 6 0
 Whats that? a 1200mm wheelbase and it handles like a truck? All you short stem people deserve this bike.
  • 3 0
 Can't fault mine!!! I did custom build it though so no wanky looking wheels and crappy formulas for me. I also changed the fox remote lever for an XO front grip shift to tidy up the bars. As with the dune you do just need to turn faster and later. I don't get why people are surprised to say oh it handles wrong it's not like another bike I once rode... Of course it's not the frame geometry is completely different why are you surprised!
  • 3 0
 If your not happy with the build kit (I wouldn't be) you can get the Foxy Carbon as a frame only. Price wise the frame is about £2,600.0 in the UK, which is the ball park for carbon frames these days (only Evil and Canyon are cheaper).

I would liked to have had Mikes comments on using the 10 / 20mm stem options. Stock they come with 30mm but the reach is long enough for some riders to be able to use the shorter stems.

I find my Dune (2015 version) handles twisty single track really well so I don't get Mike's negative comments on this. You need to change riding style, it pays to be weight forward and more aggressive in the corners.

Somebody told me that Formula is not what it used to be? I can't comment on that but my three year old Formula One's are going strong. have plenty of power and nice feel.

If I was getting the a Foxy I would want to look at changing the shock for a BOS Vip'r, X-Fusion or a Monarch. Some dealers will do this at no extra cost if you ask them.
  • 2 0
 Or get the UK special edition they've recently released Wink Comes with a 36 and non-remote CTD shock but still formula brakes Frown Agree on the comments about riding style, I found by putting my weight way further forward really helped in loading the front wheel and the grip once I did that was insane. Once you get used to it and adapt accordingly this bike is an absolute riot. Nothing I've ridden in this travel category comes close to matching it when it points down, but the way this thing climbs is even more amazing, so much traction and mega precise steering, it'll claw it's way up pretty much anything the rider has the legs for. It certainly won't suit everyone but as a bike that does everything well it's pretty damn spectacular!
  • 5 1
 'it's not perfect' i'd expect dam perfect and a night out with Rachel Stevens' thrown in at that fact i'll just take the date
  • 4 0
 Kashima sliders have such a distinct colour that I'm surprised more companies haven't made it a big factor in their colour pallets. It makes this bike just look sorted.
  • 2 0
 I had the old aluminum Mondraker Foxy. I thought it felt sluggish while pedaling, but it was alright, not too bad.
At High speed descends it was really good and I felt really confident on it, but when speeds were slower I also felt like it was really harsh and didn't have any grip. I tried a lot with the shock, but couldn't really get it to work better.
I didn't have to deal with it very long though, as the cage around the shock cracked... well it was more of an explosion, all 4 rods were completely bend and broken.
The trail was pretty technical and had some rocks, but just usual stuff, not too wild and I didn't do a big huck, it just came out of no where.

Well, now I've got a Banshee Spitfire (old version), it has 10mm less travel, pedals way better and feels like 20mm more on the descends, I couldn't be more happy!
I like how the new Mondrakers look, but I don't think I'll ever buy one again. If it would have performed better, maybe, but the overall experience was just too bad.
  • 5 4
 Seen a few of these a couple of weeks ago, a rep had them up at a local shop, awesome bikes, even the Alu version is a great machine. Everything about the bikes were good, best range I've see in a long time. they'll got the sizing, design and the look just perfect. photos in the mags or on the net don't do these bikes enough justice!
  • 6 4
 This bike is hot sex. Good writeup dude and the ink is looking pretty sick! I also ride a Spanish bike (Orbea Occam 29c) with forward geo and really enjoy the fit. Long TT are the way to go.
  • 3 0
 and for 8 thousand dollars you get another 27.5lb 27.5 bike. Is it me or are the idiotic bike companies striving for some sort of 27.5lb weight to be cool? I call BS.
  • 2 0
 Damn I hadn't thought of that. Even my custom built steel framed 650B bike spec'ed by me weighs 27.5lb. I think I'll remove a tire.
  • 1 0
 My Formula brakes work just fine. I don't even really think about them because they work. I got a year and half out of the stock pads, just replaced them and did a bleed and they're good as new again. I also have not had any issues with my 7 year old Avid Juicy Sevens either.
  • 2 1
 As a mechanic let me give my opinion about Formula brakes.
Most of them need bleeding out of the box to function properly, which is why you read a lot of reviews saying how crappy they feel. They need to be ridden several times for them to "settle" which isn't really a good quality for the price. Their ergonomics are off, they don't have a straight pull line, which means that your finger pivots as you pull the lever. Not good.
Bleeding them is a pain as well, to get a perfect bleed you must remove the caliper and the cable to get a straight line so the bubbles can come out. Then put it all back and pray for it to not need another go.
To be honest, only the top of the line brakeset is OK. And thats top dollar.
They are the prettiest to look, but unfortunately thats about it. Quality is meh, even the mid range brakes feel a bit, poorly made.
Nowadays there are many brakes in the market that offer a much better value, (SLX, Elixir 7, Tektro Auriga) for much less of a price and many that give you that bling factor (XTR, Hope, Magura) that make Formulas look years behind. Im not saying they are rubbish, but they are definitely not the best out there considering their competition.
  • 1 0
 If you want more XC ride use the 30mm stem, if you want a more DH ride even with the long wheelbase the 10mm stem handles the tight sweet and the fast but you need to be aggressive, eg commit to the line, stay off the brakes to keep the weight on the front wheel, no issue then, if you ride like a nooby the 10mm stem will bite your arse, I prefer it over the 30mm. i a,so found running 170mm cranks over 175mm is advantageous depending om your terrain, the wheelbase not the BB drop will put you in contact esspecially if plodding at impulse speeds through terrain, at speed not an issue unless you put a pedal stroke or two in for Warp speed Ive put people on Dunes for demo for example and seen them totally ride differently to theyre own AM rigs almost like different riders in corners and downhills, setup is key, confidence just flows after that. Mike I know ya tried stack heights try going a bit higher atleast 20mm of spacers under the stem, this will help in the tight, the Geo does allow in the tight to to take high lines not often obvious on the track before entry to a tight corner and run out on the inside, and run a 760mm, 780 might be pushing wide too far on the Foxy.
  • 2 0
 We have a couple of trails here like that and they have corner after corner after corner like that no bench off camber roots and 26" g out holes in the apex of the corner so entry in and out to enter the next is critcal but once dialled its inspiring, course Im on a Dune!

I wonder since most of the Foxys are 140/140 front and rear and only the XR alloy and carbon come specced with a 160mm that the balance harder to get and affects that consistency of feel you mentioned or lack of, it would be good to do a comparison test with a 140mm Foxy which from the RR models down are!
and all 140/140mm front and rear. 160/140 to me would suit a certain terrain or rider, I would also like to test it with a 150mm setting on the fork on the XR that might give best of both and not have such an em balance and not be so hit and miss?

Most dont seem to get the XR models were always aimed at the top rider, not the rider with the biggest wallet!, hence origonally only XRs came with fwd geo and the Zero stems. That changed in 2014.

Just my 2c
  • 1 0
 Also running R0s Ive put up with them had some success with re bleeding but once new pads went in back tl same rock feel from new rebleed over and over ah have XTs going Zee or Saints on DH, over them, also had a bite adjuster crap itself , just threaded itself out, cheap metal. Dunno not a fan of Formula sorry. Good to hea the wheels held up though again wouldnt be my first choice set, if I was buying an XR Id buy frame only build it up with my choices, get rid of all those remotes as well and maybe even the shock.
  • 13 9
 Sorry to disappoint you - the best brakes I ever had - Formula Smile
  • 31 4
 Which were the other ones you had, Hayes?
  • 7 1
 My formula are the most powerful brakes I owned. And I already tried Avid (several), Hope (several), Shimano (old xt), Hayes (several). (I'd like to try latest Shimano Saint or XTR).
  • 5 5
 Powerful they are indeed, they are incredibly light as well, I am truly impressed with that! Lever adjustment sucks, modulation is none - wanna buy mine?
  • 1 0
 i have RO's on one of my DH bikes, and (maybe its not only me) but they are terrible. modulation is okay, but i have to pull the lever SOO hard to get anywhere near slowing down... and apparently they are formula's most powerful brakes...
  • 2 0
 @SileTzar @HutchJR I had The One Wink Just personal opinion guys.
  • 18 3
 No no no @barzaka, the collective has determined Formulas are baaad, and so it shall stay, for the greater good. You may practice your religion in solitutude. We officialy put Formulas into the bag with Specialized logo. Fox, avid brakes and all +100$ pedals are already there. We use Pike to beat the crap out of that bag. Then we ride over it with Nomad and Capra
  • 6 0
  • 2 0
 Amazing comment.
  • 4 0
 @HutchJR Uh, bad bleed or something? That doesn't sound right. I own two pairs and they have waaaayyy more power than anything else I've run, including Saints and Hope Evo V3s.
  • 1 0
 I'm on a set of 2012 Avid XOs and love the modulation. Shimano has far too much of an early bite and makes me feel like an OTB is bound to happen.
  • 3 1
 Look I can only mention Canyon again. Look on their site the new Spectral ALU its enugh.... I dont think a lot of people need a carbon frame..
  • 1 0
 This. I will pull the trigger sooner or later.
  • 2 0
 I really dislike where the mountain bike industry is going, I'll soon need to mortgage my house to pay for a bike that won't have me thinking I'll die on a decent
  • 3 0
 Nicky minaj reference in pb? Lol.
The bike is brilliant though.
  • 3 0
 Full of C.A.B.L.E.S Nuff said.
  • 3 0
 There's something about Nicki Minaj that works for Levy?

Fair enough.
  • 2 0
 I have the 2014 aluminium version. Hands down best bike iv ever ridden. Shes a whip!
  • 2 0
 which new bike for 7000 € is bad ?...c'mon give us some normal budget reviews's ...Smile
  • 1 0
 This review proves to me that the writer is honest and not just trying to sell the company to anyone. Still, I will skip this dance...
  • 1 0
 Ardents are awesome. It's too bad they shrunk significantly in 2014 though.
  • 2 0
 That is the most badass looking bike out. Period.
  • 5 6
 Nice trail bike but the price is ridicolous...ok:
the frame is a new project , more performance but is trail bike !!

..7000 euro ?!?!? Yamaha Xjr 1300cc IS MORE ECONOMIC
  • 14 0
 Motorbikes are not very good at mountainbiking.
  • 3 0
 I'd rather have that mountain bike than that Yamaha...
  • 2 0
 7k euro pls ..... 4k tops
  • 3 1
 I heard that crank brothers idione suck
  • 1 1
 I also heard that your mom is a witch and should be burned at the stake... doesn't necessarily make it true. I'd try riding them - they are doing a 90 day satisfaction guarantee if you buy them at the crankbrothers website.
  • 3 1
 I dare anyone to say something positive....
  • 4 2
 Since when is okay to skid? Leave the dirt where it is.
  • 2 0
 Sweet bike. How's the cheap version ride?
  • 1 0
 You can consider the Foxy carbon XR middle year version!
  • 5 3
 Awesome, Formula brakes instead of XT/XTR!!

Said nobody ever.
  • 4 8
flag seraph (Jan 26, 2015 at 10:57) (Below Threshold)
 I'd take Formula over Shimano any day.
  • 3 3
 I'm guessing you've never used Shimano or only used the poverty models.

XT and XTR brakes are a gift from the heavens. Formula is utter trash by comparison. Reaching down and pinching your rim with your fingers is on par with Formula brakes compared to XT/XTR.
  • 2 2
 So I'm guessing you've never used Formula brakes then. If you had you wouldn't be saying anything poor about them, unless you're a shit mechanic and you set them up yourself. Every Formula I've had has been awesome. T1s were rated as the second most powerful brake on the market, right behind the ROs. Shitmano brakes pale in comparison to the power of Formula.
  • 1 1
 Hmm, replaced my XTRs with Formula ROs. Huge upgrade. Formula actually has a thing called modulation, and the freestroke adjust actually works unlike the placebo screw on Shimanos. Oh, and Formula still makes one-piece calipers, unlike the cheapskates at Shimano, M985 was the last XTR with one piece, it's all crappy two piece now.
  • 2 0
 I test rode a 2014 Enduro 29 (I forget what trim level) with Formulas and they were tragically bad.

And I guarantee neither of you are skilled enough riders to tell the difference between two and one piece calipers when braking, that's laughable.

Shimano is highly regarded as having fantastic modulation. You must be confusing it with Avid lol
  • 1 1
 the brakes :-D had a pair of ROs...for one day, god I am so glad for my saints again and I would even rather go for slx than formula again
  • 2 0
 Good grief, I could never ride with that many cables bouncing around.
  • 1 0
 That's a great looking bike, but damn what a mess of cables up front...they could do a much better job of cable management!
  • 1 0
 Mike, Have you try to use the 10 mm stem to test this bike?
  • 2 1
 The key to this bike.
  • 5 0
 Needs a 30mm stem mounted backwards.
  • 2 1
 Wondering if riding lot on muddy conditions, rear shock will wear faster?
  • 1 0
 There's a plastic cover that comes with it.
  • 3 2
 I'll never buy a bike like with this infected wheelset...
  • 1 0
 their newer hubs are bombproof, and they've increased the rim width a bit on their newest models... super stiff and strong, can't really see many drawbacks to owning a pair.
  • 1 0
 I'd personally bypass this spec and go straight for a Dune model.
  • 3 2
 Giant Trance Advanced SX is better
  • 1 0
 Guys do you have any plans on reviewing the commencal meta v4 any soon?
  • 1 1
 So what your saying "is if it's fast trails you ride then buy a Dune"
  • 3 4
 A Spanish bike which looks like Niki Manaj that requires skidding around corners to get the most out of? No thank you.
  • 2 2
 Great bike but crap wheels and brakes ...
  • 2 3
 Do you have to run Fox suspension on a bike named Foxy? If you ran Boxxers, would you change the name to Boxxy?
  • 1 0
 8100 bucks wow
  • 1 3
 WAKI you usually make me laugh - you cynic! This time at least admit that Formula brakes are shite.
  • 1 2
 You could buy it one size smaller to get a more common sized reach.
  • 8 11
 MSRP: 6,999 EUR

Sorry, I'll just buy a car.
  • 7 1
 You wouldn't download a car though...
  • 35 1
 cars are not very good at mountainbiking.
  • 1 11
flag riejuspike (Jan 26, 2015 at 2:39) (Below Threshold)
 but you can 'use' chicks in the back seat Big Grin
  • 8 1
 7,000 EUR for a bike is a bit of a wank - especially if it doesn't ride as well as some bikes half the price. Why are we (Industry, Press and ultimately consumer brainwashed by marketing) going crazy for plastic bikes way out of the price range of the average punter? Can't we be satisfied with an alloy framed bike at 30+ lbs? Oh no - we can't hinder innovation and progress. MTB is disappearing up it's own arse.
  • 2 0
 problem is most people (including me) are getting more and more obsessed with little things that make you go faster than the opposition. But agreed, i have just as fun on my heavy ass old dh bike as on my newer and lighter one... even if i do go slower. Its not all about speed
  • 2 0
 what car is 7000 EUR? a used one? oh, well maybe look through the classifieds. there may be one or two used carbon bikes for way less than 7000 EUR.
  • 2 0
 High end cars often cost more than cheap houses. Let's keep it apples to apples, even if it is a golden apple.

Post a Comment

Copyright © 2000 - 2020. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.030540
Mobile Version of Website