Norco Range 9.2 - First Ride
It was less than a month ago that Norco launched their updated Sight trail bike, but the Canadian company doesn't show any signs of slowing down, and they've now released the details of the revised Range, their venerable all-mountain / enduro bike.
The bike grows longer and slacker for 2017, but it's the addition of a 29” wheeled version that will undoubtedly turn some heads. The big-wheeled option has 150mm of rear travel paired with a 160mm fork up front, while the 27.5” version has 160mm of rear travel and 170mm up front. Both versions have a carbon front triangle and seat stays, and aluminum chainstays are found on all models.
The bike grows longer and slacker for 2017, but it's the addition of a 29” wheeled version that will undoubtedly turn some heads. The big-wheeled option has 150mm of rear travel paired with a 160mm fork up front, while the 27.5” version has 160mm of rear travel and 170mm up front. Both versions have a carbon front triangle and seat stays, and aluminum chainstays are found on all models.
Norco Range Details
• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro
• Wheel size: 27.5" or 29" options available
• Rear wheel travel: 160mm (27.5"), 150mm (29")
• 65º (27.5") or 65.5º (29") head angle
• Frame material: carbon front triangle and seat stays, aluminum chainstays
• Metric shock sizing
• Boost hub spacing
• MSRP: $4249 - $7399 USD (complete bikes) / $2899 USD (frame w/ Fox Float X2),
• www.norco.com
• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro
• Wheel size: 27.5" or 29" options available
• Rear wheel travel: 160mm (27.5"), 150mm (29")
• 65º (27.5") or 65.5º (29") head angle
• Frame material: carbon front triangle and seat stays, aluminum chainstays
• Metric shock sizing
• Boost hub spacing
• MSRP: $4249 - $7399 USD (complete bikes) / $2899 USD (frame w/ Fox Float X2),
• www.norco.com
What exactly does it mean when a bike is described as being 'enduro ready'? Well, according to Owen Pemberton, Norco's senior design engineer, the Range “can take crashes. It can take being thundered through rocks and roots. That's what this bike is designed to handle.” In order to achieve their goal of creating a reliable, dependable bike, many of the new Range's design cues were inspired or borrowed from the Aurum, Norco's downhill bike. Whether it's the head tube junction to the derailleur hanger, “We took everything we learned from the Aurum, which is the strongest bike we've ever made, and took that learning and employed it on the new Range,” says Pemberton.
Similar to what was first seen on the revised Sight, the Range now uses a trunnion mounted rear shock, with the upper link oriented in a more horizontal position. The amount of chain growth has been reduced, and the suspension curve has grown slightly more progressive, changes that are intended to improve the bike's pedaling performance and give it a more bottomless feel towards the end of its travel.
There are three models for each wheel size, with prices starting at $4,249 USD. The Range 9.2 shown above goes for $5,799, and the top of the line model is $7,399. In case you hadn't guessed, the first digit of each model number denotes the wheel size. For instance, the 9.2 has 29" wheels, while the 7.2 has 27.5" wheels.
The Range will accommodate up to a 2.6" tire.
A trunnion mounted RockShox SuperDeluxe takes care of the 9.2's 150mm of rear travel.
The Range 9.1 retails for $7,399 USD.
The base model Range 9.3 is $4,249 USD.
Geometry
The 27.5" Range gets a 2° steeper seat angle and a longer front center compared to the previous version, and the head tube angle has been knocked back to 65°. When designing the 29" wheeled version of the Range, Norco wanted to make its handling feel as similar to the 27.5" version as possible, so they went with a 65.5° head angle, a fork with 51mm of offset, and a 40mm stem. All of the bikes use Norco's Gravity Tune geometry, which sees the rear center measurements increase as frame sizes grow larger in order to preserve the optimum weight balance. You'll notice that there's no small sized 29er - Norco felt that too many compromises were necessary to package the bigger wheels and that much travel into a frame that would fit a smaller rider.
Norco's headquarters are located within close proximity to some of British Columbia finest trails, rugged, rocky, and often wet testpieces, and the 29" wheeled Range 9.2 is spec'd accordingly. The wheels are shod with the proven Maxxis Minion DHF / DHR tire combo, and the wide bars, short stem, and a 150mm dropper post from Race Face make it clear that this bike is ready to rumble right out of the box. Despite Old Man Winter's decision to deliver an extra helping of snow, ice, and rain this month, I've still been able to get in a handful of rides on the Range, enough time to start getting acquainted with its on-trail personality.
It wasn't until I was halfway through my first extended climb aboard the Range that I noticed I'd left the RockShox SuperDeluxe in the fully open position, a testament to the Range's improved pedaling performance. Gone is the tendency of the shock to extend and compress during out-of-the-saddle pedaling; it's been replaced by a design that feels much more efficient and composed whether you're seated or standing.
I was a little surprised to see that the Range 9.2 checked in at 32 pounds when I hung it from the scale after those initial rides – I would have guessed it was a touch lighter than that. The good news is that it didn't feel overly heavy while climbing, and those extra grams were the last thing on my mind when it came time to descend.
The Range has what can best be described as 'sneaky speed' - it's similar to what happens when you rent or borrow a car that's smoother and more powerful than what you typically drive, and all of a sudden you look down and you're doing 100mph. That's how the Range feels, especially on steep straightaways - it has a plush, bottomless suspension feel, and it's very quiet to boot – all the ingredients necessary to encourage bombing down the trail a little faster than usual. One of my usual test tracks has a section that plunges straight down the fall line, a brake burner that typically has my hands begging for mercy by the bottom, but on the Range that wasn't the case - it sucked up everything that came its way, giving my hands and forearms a welcome reprieve.
I'll admit that there were a couple times when it felt like the bike started to get away from me on tighter sections of trail - I found myself a little further back than I meant to be, instances that served as a reminder that remaining in an aggressive, more forward position is key. Those moments could have simply been a matter of getting accustomed to a new bike – we'll see how things shake out as I spend more time on it.
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
I'm with @IllestT on this - my park bike has a much shorter reach than most trail bikes because it's built for jumping. A super long front center is great if you are riding fast on rough, rocky steeps. Otherwise I'll take a bike with a shorter front end, please. Helps getting that front wheel up.
And IMO a 160mm enduro bike does not have the stability and descending capability of a true 200mm DH bike. That's advertising hype. Hell even my 180mm park bike isn't as stable and glued as a true DH. People do definitely ride 160's on the DH trails, but just because it's possible doesn't mean it's as good as the real thing.
I think this trend will continue for a few more years.
www.pinkbike.com/news/mondraker-summum-carbon-first-ride.html
Just add, loving the dark green, of the Range 7.1.
Maybe pinkbike should have a "lame trail" switch like they did for mobile so riders aren't negatively affected by awesome descending bikes.
Gary fisher invented the idea like 25 years ago.
As usual all the other companies were sleeping on it while riding their gay ass cross country bikes all over California and saying long stems were the shit and ignoring what would have made riding safer and funner for everyone because they were too scared to make a change that the punters weren't yet keen on.
As usual.
And progress stumbles along at a pathetically incremental rate and we keep being told we are at the cutting edge.
That edge wouldn't cut through warm cheese.
I absolutely agree with everything else you said, though. Geometry progress has been painfully slow for MTB. It's all because the Gary Fisher template was the one that "won" in the beginning. Mountain bikes based on square road bike geometry made popular by a group of stoners from Fairfax, California. They even built their own museum to pat themselves on the back for skidding down a fire road 40 years ago. If they hadn't sabotaged the reputation of the Lawwill Pro Cruiser, the first production mountain bike, designed to be fun to ride, like a BMX MTB, progression likely would have happened a lot faster. Instead, Fisher, Ritchey, and Specialized established the mountain bike as an uncomfortable, climb oriented off-ROAD bike. Fun was not part of the formula, just slogging up fire roads, and then skidding and twitching down descents, going over the bars, and scaring hikers so much that they made the trails in Marin illegal to ride bikes on. But the stoner roadies didn't care, they just went back to road biking. Mountain biking to them was just a goof that turned into business opportunity. If the roadies hadn't won, mountain biking could have been founded on fun and handling and dynamic riding.
It would be interesting to see the geo numbers of the first klunkers. I bet they are similar to the numbers we have today.
I bear a lot of people saying their enduro bikes are just as fast as downhill rigs and yet I never fail to get slowed down by an endu-bro at the bike park. I bought a 160mm this winter and after the first few rides I was almost thinking it was just as fast since it rides so well. Then I took my dh bike to ride the same trail and f*ck is it ever faster and easier. I'm sad to say that it is indeed more fun to ride an enduro bike, but faster? Don't you dare!
They coulda just been smarter in the first place right
You're saying the 27.5 180 rod would still be 180 on a 29? I know on some forks like the Reba has air rods that, for example, the rod will be 100 for 29 and 120 for 27.5. I guess I could always just take my current rod out and see what length it is and compare, but it is a Yari which is open bath and I'd rather not pull it all apart just for that.
The 2017 parts manual lists all Lyrik air shafts beyond 160 as "27.5 only".
Sounds like there making a challenge!
Bring on the Range! Let's put it through the paces!
For road bikes it is common to use slacker seat angles for taller riders but it doesn't work the same for full suspension bikes because of the different dynamics involved.
On climbs, a suspension bike sags out too much under a taller, heavier rider because the mass is too high and far back. This only gets worse as the STA is slackened. It makes it tough to keep the front end down which becomes a real problem and is incredibly annoying. There have been many discussions on the boards about this but SOME manufacturers keep using a cookie cutter approach to geometry which is really disappointing. Others have figured it out by looking at the bike and rider as a system.
Out of curiosity, at 6' 5" do you feel that most XL frames are too small for you? I'm 6' 2" and ride in the XL size pretty much exclusively, despite the majority of companies thinking I should be on a Large (which feels terrible in pretty much every way)
Let me tell you though, the last few years have been great with bikes getting longer and longer. I finally have one bike that fits perfectly (XXL Tallboy 3) and I have an XL carbon Honzo coming that should fit really well.
I've been through too many ill fitting bikes over the years to count. I'm still riding a Nomad 3 but only at Whistler because the XL just feels too small for any other riding after I've been spoiled with longer bikes and steeper seat tube angles. With the Nomad I constantly smack my knees on the shifter when turning uphill switchbacks and just can't keep the front end down (short reach + slack STA).
When I approached them about this I was told:"The top tube / STA thing can be hard to wrap your head around and it's not something I'm going to attempt to explain but basically, there are A LOT of ways to measure it and our frame design doesn't make it any easier." At that point this bike was crossed from my list. So much for Evil measured ESTA.
Carbon would be nice though. When you start adding slightly beefier components for racing, or just being a trail hack like myself, all these bikes get heavy fast. I think with proper DD tires, chain guide, and aluminum rims a carbon Smuggler could still be right at 30 lbs which would be ideal IMO.
Also, I am not a north shore rider. I have ridden them, but I live on the east side of the Rockies, so they aren't my trails.
I ride a 26lb full carbon trail bike. My bike would certainly get UP the shore, but back down...
I'd love to see this bike reviewed and compared with the Trek Slash....they are almost similar in geometry...almost. Weight wise Trek is lighter if you go high end. However, when I hear these reviews about enduro bikes being able to climb well I need context. Almost any trail/enduro bike these days can climb well so why not put these bikes against each other so us viewers can have some idea of what "climbs well" really means.
Am I asking too much?
or WHEELSET .. used ONE year. Paid $1400 ... asking $1200 firm (with no warranty any longer .. what a bargain!! (sarc).
or BRAKESET .. $250 .. (you can buy brand new cheaper). The list goes on and on and on .....
However, having said that, obviously somebody must be paying these crazy prices otherwise people wouldn't keep putting up the ads asking ridiculous prices.
Article note, these Norco's actually look decent.
Or, to put that differently - yes, if you're buying a bike expecting it to keep its value, then that's a very poor investment. But you're not investing in a bike, you're investing in what you get out of it. And in that sense, these days you can buy a one-bike-quiver that will, as long as you actually get out and ride at every opportunity, make you a happier and healthier person. And that is a pretty damn good investment indeed - much better ROI than drugs, or most gym memberships, etc.
Because man is not a rational animal, but a rationalizing one...
Part of it is the old lemon problem - if you're buying from someone you don't know, you don't know in how good a shape it is. So for a frame, you don't know whether it's taken hits and will die on you (leaving you stranded without a frame warranty), etc. Meaning you can't rationally justify paying more than a pittance. Then you have the odd seller who knows they have a great bike (never crashed, always taken care of, suspension beautifully maintained, all bolts torqued to spec, etc.), and are frustrated because everyone is suspicious that they're selling a clapped out piece of shit (and offering accordingly). Tough market.
This creates an unfavorable weight bias where the rider has to move their body out of center to get proper weight balance over the wheels in situations other than very steep terrain. I understand this trend, as bikes are for selling, and most beginner intermediate riders feel better on a bike that is easy to lift the front wheel and where you feel safely behind the tipping point.
In my opinion it is a real shame that very few companies aside from KHS downillland enduro bike, are making frames that provide an option with longish chainstays. i'll also mention the Trek Session and Santa cruz V10 as bikes that dont have awquardly short chainstays, but their not, imo, long.
Even these norco's with longer chainstays on longer sizes are still quite short.
The industry is not providing options for people who are not afraid to have weight on their front wheel.
I also had the same sense when demoing a SB6C, perfectly centered in the bike. With these new 29" Enduro bikes being so race focused I think front-to-back balance is even more important. Super short stays on something like a Transition Scout that's meant to be fun, great, but not as great on a race-oriented bike.
Maybe the ridiculous price of the Trek?!
Not the same suspension design?
Lol
What crazy story will he make up next...
How googly his eyes are is how late your bike is gonna be showing up.
As a Norco Range 2015 7.2 owner, this issue is very annoying. No amount of tuning in the Monarch helps.
I heard a bigger chainring could mitigate this issue a little, but moving from a 30t to a 34t with a 1x11 would make some of the tricky up-hill pedaling on my local trails much less enjoyable.
Any tricks to reduce the anti-squat on older Ranges ?
try a high idler pulley like blenkinsop was doing on his old aurum last season
C9.1 / 7.1 - $9500.00
C9.2 / 7.2 - $7500.00
C9.3 / 7.3 - $5600.00
Something about this bike seems legit.
eh?
WTF?!?!?!
y tho?