Paradoxically, the seminal bike brands of the Pacific Northwest - the huckmasters who cluster-bombed the planet with burly, long-travel, freeride machinery - have collectively become the spearpoint for the recent renaissance of the lightweight, short-travel trailbike. Norco's Optic is exactly that: a sexy looking chassis that is outfitted with components, carefully chosen to bridge the gap between climbing weight and descending strength, and made available for either 27.5 or 29-inch wheels. The Optic's carefully-crafted frame numbers change between sizes to maintain the optimum fore/aft balance for different sized riders, and also to meld technical skills forged on the ultra-technical trails of the Northwest, with pedaling ergonomics along the lines of an XC race bike.
Give me a dollar for every time I've read or written that time-worn recipe and I'd be a wealthy man. Rather than spewing about the "one bike," however, Norco aparrently envisions the Optic as a fresh perspective on riding in general. Norco's tag line for the new Optic is, "See the trail differently," which seems to be the key motivator among the many riders who have left their long-travel brutes dangling from the rafters and are now challenging themselves to ride similar lines on bikes with half the travel and, reportedly, double the fun factor. Norco sent me a carbon-framed, Optic C92 for a first-ride opportunity and a chance to weigh in on their take of the post-modern trailbike.
Two Wheel Options
Norco will sell the new Optic with two different frame platforms, one configured for 29 and another for 27.5-inch wheels. Two top-tier options feature carbon front sections paired with aluminum, Horst-Link-type rear suspensions. In addition, Norco will offer two all-aluminum models in each wheel size to keep the Optic's MSRP within reach, and prices swill range from $7199 to $2599. Suspension travel is reduced ten millimeters for the C9 series big-wheel Optics (110mm rear and 120mm front), with the C7-series 27.5-inch versions sporting 120 millimeters of rear-wheel and 130 millimeters of fork travel.
Optic C9.2 Details:• Purpose: aggressive XC/trail riding
• Frame: 29" wheels,110mm travel, Boost 148mm rear axle, carbon front, with aluminum 4-bar rear suspension.
• Sizes: Small. medium, large and X-large with geometry specific to each option.
• Fork: Fox 34 Float Performance Elite 29 Boost 110 X 15mm
• Shock: Fox Float DPS Peformance Elite EVOL
• Dropper: Rockshox Reverb stealth 31.6 mm
• Brakes: Shimano Deore XT 180mm (F), 160mm (R) rotors
• Transmission: Shimano XT 11-speed/Race Face Turbine Cinch crankset (one or two-speed options)
• Cassette: Shimano 11-42T 11 speed
• Bottom Bracket: Race Face Press fit BB92
• Wheels: SRAM Boost MTH hubs/Easton AR 24 - 29 rims
• Tires: Schwalbe Nobby Nic 29x2.25 (F), Racing Ralph 29 x 2.25 EVO (R)
• Weight: 27.06 pounds (12.3 kg) - medium size.
• MSRP: $4699 USD
• Contact:
Norco /
@norcobicycles Norco didn't cut corners on the geometry either. The chainstay lengths, seat tube angles, and top tube lengths all grow proportionately for each of the four frame sizes. Reportedly, the reasoning was to provide all riders with a similar fore/aft weight balance and handling qualities. When asked which of the two wheel sizes that Norco's design staff was most excited about, the reply was surprising: It was the 29-inch C9. We got our hands on their more affordable carbon 29er, the C9.2, to find out why.
The C9.2 is billed as a tougher, more capable XC trail bike, and most of its parts, like its 760-millimeter Race Face Turbine handlebar and 50mm stem, Fox 34 Float fork and Float EVOL shock, and its RockShox Reverb dropper, fall in step with that purpose. Its XC-width, 2.2-inch Schwalbe tires, however, seem out of place. So do its relatively narrow, 24-millimeter-id Easton AR 29 rims. Light wheels can shave a good deal of weight from a 29er, which is probably the motivation for the Optic C9.2.
On the subject of components, the bike comes standard with a Shimano XT two-by eleven drivetain, powered by a Race Face Turbine Cinch crankset. If you need the lower gearing, Shimano's side-pull front derailleur is best in class, if not, Norco includes a 30-tooth narrow-wide Race Face chainring with the bike that is a snap to swap out, I did exactly that - and in retrospect, I'd add some more robust tires to better match the Optic's mission statement.
Specifications
Specifications
|
Release Date
|
2017 |
|
Price
|
$4699 |
|
Travel |
110mm (R), 120mm (F) |
|
Rear Shock |
Fox Float DPS Peformance Elite EVOL |
|
Fork |
Fox 34 Float Performance Elite 29 |
|
Headset |
Cane Creek 10 Series |
|
Cassette |
Shimano XT 11-42T |
|
Crankarms |
Race Face Turbine Cinch |
|
Chainguide |
ISCG tabs |
|
Bottom Bracket |
Race Face Press fit BB92 |
|
Pedals |
NA |
|
Rear Derailleur |
Shimano XT |
|
Chain |
Shimano HG-600-11 11sp |
|
Front Derailleur |
Shimano XT side-swing |
|
Shifter Pods |
Shimano XT 2-speed I spec front and rear |
|
Handlebar |
Race Face Turbine 760x20mm |
|
Stem |
Race Face Turbine Basic 35 50mm length |
|
Grips |
Norco lock on |
|
Brakes |
Shimano XT 160mm (R), 180mm (F) |
|
Wheelset |
Custom |
|
Hubs |
SRAM MTH 716 Boost (F, R) |
|
Spokes |
Sapim |
|
Rim |
Easton AR 24 29 |
|
Tires |
Schwalbe Nobby Nic 29x2.25 (F), Racing Ralph 29 x 2.25 EVO (R) |
|
Seat |
SDG Circuit Mtn with chromoly rails |
|
Seatpost |
Rockshox Reverb stealth 31.6 mm |
|
| |
Riding ImpressionsNorco's sizing may be on the small side, as the medium Optic feels just right for me, and at five-foot, seven inches, I am on the smaller side of the medium spread. A crash the day before we scheduled the photo shoot put me out of action, so PB test rider Harold Preston stepped in for me. Preston, who is three inches taller, also commented that the Medium Optic felt more compact than similar sized all-mountain trailbikes. That said, its balance is excellent, with little need to move around the chassis to weight the contact patches for steep ascents or downhill sections.
If I were to rave about any one aspect of the Optic C9.2, it would be its turning - especially for a big-wheel design. Even with the skinny rubber, the Norco held a tight line around most corners and the bike always felt in control when they let loose. I did not switch out the tires, but I was tempted to, just to experience how hard the Norco could be pushed around when descending tracks that I had been testing longer-travel, more capable enduro machines on only a week earlier.
I expected the Optic to shoot uphill, and with the shock switched to the middle "trail" position, it gets up the mountains with less effort than most AM/enduro designs will, but I was not overly impressed with its acceleration. Norco's four-bar suspension kicks in when the trail is rough and helps to keep the bike moving uphill, but it seems to blunt the edge of sharp, quick efforts on the cranks. Smooth, round pedal strokes seem to work best.
Pointed down, the Optic is as playful as Norco's ad copy presents it to be. It feels firm and connected. It handles small jumps and drops with ease and steers with surprising nimbleness for a 29er. Larger jumps, felt a little awkward until I got used to the Norco's compact chassis and how its low bottom bracket exaggerated its planted-between-two-29 inch-wheels feel.
Overall, Norco delivers on its promise. The Optic C9.2 is easy to ride, trustworthy on the downs, and easy enough on the legs to encourage its rider to climb to the next higher zone and add another twenty minutes of sweet descending - or to bust out one more lap before the sun sets.
I like the options we are getting in the bike industry as of late.
A 27.5, 130, 66* trail bike that weighs around 25lbs could be the ultimate bike for a lot of people's local trail systems. Product diversity is a good thing for us. You don't have to buy one just because a lot of people like them. If it isn't for you, it isn't for you. I guess my point is that regardless of marketing tactics (they gotta tell us about the bikes and try to showcase them!), this "trend" is diversifying the product line by filling in gaps. Instead of some new fat bike or e-bike or something that isn't really filling in holes in the current product offering, we are getting access to more dialed bikes that may be perfect for a lot of people. Remember when you used to be able to pick 3 different build kits for a given bike (the "xc" build the "trail" build and the "AM" build)? There was a 130mm fork and a bash on one end, and a 100mm fork with a triple ring on the other... both on the same frame, 69* ha, etc etc. Now they design a whole bicycle for each category!
I would venture a guess that most average riders like the current progression of mountain bike capabilities because it's finally allowing them to conquer the more difficult trails and ride the trails and lines that scared the piss out of them yesteryear. So to them, that equates to "FUN".
To some extent, even highly skilled and experienced riders are most likely, very much enjoying the newer, more capable 160mm bikes. Mainly because they are now riding them on trails that were previously the sole domain of DH bikes.
I am still a firm believer that going back to riding a shorter travel and less capable rig, on gnarly trails, will keep your skills sharp. Most people love how much better the bikes are getting year after year because they make riding easier. But by making the riding easier, they are doing more of the work that the rider was once doing. Effectively diminishing the riders skills over time, and to some, making familiar trails not as exciting as they were. So to continue to get that FUN factor and continually test your skills, riders result to riding harder and harder trails. Which for some ends quickly because of the lack of advanced trails nearby, or safety for ones life starts to become a major thought. And mountain bike protection is definitely not keeping up in this regard. But that's another topic...
Ahhhh what do I know anyway.....
It also means that we are getting nearer and nearer of the mythical beast that is the quiver killer. I'm not much of a half-full glass type of guy when it comes to the bike industry but I like where things are headed when it comes to bike capability. I once went the way of having a bike for most disciplines and I really prefer having a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none kind of bike in the end. More flexible and cost/time efficient.
Overall this bike is a huge step forward in trailbike design."
Couldn't agree more though, the idea of "what we think we need" vs. what we actually need as a comparison to the bike industry the last few years is honestly a joke. Single speed cassettes with 14 gears that weigh a ton and cost a fortune to machine for a decent weight. Almost every component is arguable these days it seems for functionality over cost. Soon we'll all get fed up and just stop buying stuff because we'll be so confused at what we're looking at or being told to look again at a "NEW" trail bike setup that was popular about 8 seasons ago. Round and Round we go!!
The short travel 29ers are showing up more and more on the shore as well along with my own Process 111. Once u get the suspension dialed( also running 140 fork) these bikes take absolutley everything that gets chucked at em.
With all the roots and tech and steep AF wood rollers the big wheels take care of this stuff really well. I have yet to ride a trail on either Seymour or Fromme that I felt heavily out gunned.
If you aren't sure about the short travel aggressive bikes and what not get out there and try one out. They are a lot more capable than you may think.
When is "recently" with respect to the term trail bike? 5"/130mm travel bikes have been called that for 10 years. I like Norco and as far as I can recall the Sight was their 5" trail bike. Richard, why must you call this 4" trail bike idea a "new way to look at trails"? My 2014 130mm Felt Virtue 920 is a trail bike as are a dozen more like it from other companies. Yeah its 5 inches but its a trail bike and it wasn't a new model in 2014.
I guess this is a new model name and I guess now for lack of anything else to focus on or sell it on 4" will be the "new" trail standard... But wait a minute... the 2000 Rocky Mountain Element Race I had 16 years ago was a 4" XC/trail bike...
Drop the new hype. Nothing "new" about the idea.
One more thing just how much bulk neon yellow paint did the industry buy 2 years ago and when for the love of god are they going to run out of it? Time to move on.
I can only say that they wouldn't do it if it didn't work... Pinkbike commenters probably make up a small percentage of the mtb buyers. Also consider that the logical buyer will make the logical choice regardless of advertising; i.e. you (probably) won't say "well that's a great bike, perfect for me, but I hate the ad campaign so I refuse to buy it." The illogical buyer is swayed by marketing. So companies have every reason to make a great product and also market it with loads of bullshit
I love the reviews here. I would love to have @Banshee-Team give one of their Phantoms to hear what Pinkbike thinks about it. In fact, I would love to read more reviews of these "new, mid travel trail bikes." I know enduro is the new thing but the market is probably more in tune with 5" travel bikes that can do just about everything. Just, please, leave the marketing jargon in the round file.
"Larger jumps, felt a little awkward until I got used to the Norco's compact chassis and how its low bottom bracket exaggerated its planted-between-two-26 inch-wheels feel."
i'm still sure on the whole thing about bikes getting gigantically huge. 441mm reach is on the small side of a medium these days?
I always thought it should be the other way around, the swingarm seems to be the most flexy and would benefit the most from being carbon, where an alloy front triangle would flex less and benefit less from being carbon (weight weenie aside).
Next phase for me is a 170mm all mountain bike for burly days here in BC and the 2-4 days in the park. The other bike will be something like this Optic and in the 120-130 mm range for the other 50% of my riding. Do I need both? Absolutly not, but I want both because it's fun? Same reason I have my everyday snowboard and and a 2nd board for deep powder days. It's all about the conditions and how you want to ride. So much fun when you have the right gear matched to the right terrain.
For f*&^Ks sake Pinkbike, review the benchmark "short travel aggressive trail bike" first then people will have something to measure all of these "oh shit we need to get one of these to market too " bikes against.
The Following's a year old with stiffer back end than these boosted imitators or or should we have a reader whip round and buy evil some ad space??!!