Norco Sight C 9.2 – Review

May 22, 2017
by Mike Kazimer  

The Sight has been in Norco's lineup for five years now, a period that's seen mountain bike technology progress at a whiplash-inducing pace. Need proof? The very first Sight had 26” wheels, narrow handlebars, and a front derailleur – you won't find any of those things on the 2017 models. Instead, the latest Sights have a carbon front triangle and seatstays, wide handlebars, a single ring drivetrain, and the option to choose either 27.5” or 29” wheels.

We tested the big-wheeled version, which has 130mm of rear travel and 140mm up front. There are three complete models in the lineup, with prices ranging from $3,899 USD to $6,499.
Norco Sight C 9.2 Details

• Intended use: trail / all-mountain
• Travel: 130mm
• 29" wheels
• Carbon front triangle, seatstays, alloy chainstays
• 67° head angle
• 435 chainstays (size L)
• Boost spacing front and rear
• Sizes: M, L, XL
• Weight: 30 pounds (size L)
• Price: $4,999

The Sight 9.2 tested here comes in at $4,999 USD, with a build kit that includes a 1x11 Shimano XT drivetrain, a RockShox Pike RC, and wide Race Face rims shod with a Schwalbe Magic up front and a Nobby Nic in the back, all components that are in line with the bike's aggressive trail / all-mountain designation.

Norco Sight 2017
Norco's Gizmo internal routing design was rattle-free, but the plastic covers don't quite fit in with the sleek look of the rest of the frame.
Norco Sight 2017
Bolt-on thru-axles are in place at the front and rear of the bike.

Frame Details

The Sight's yellow and British racing green paint scheme works much better than I would have expected – my preferences lean towards a more subdued palette, but given how dark and gloomy this past winter was, the bright color served as a welcome reminder that the sun would one day return. Underneath that glowing paint is a carbon front triangle and seatstays that are joined to aluminum chainstays.

Technically, it is still possible to run a front derailleur on the Sight, but Norco wisely chose to spec all three models with 1x drivetrains and a small upper chainguide from OneUp instead. The brake, derailleur, and dropper post housing are routed internally, save for the portion of shift housing that loops under the PF92 bottom bracket, and the brake housing that runs along the chainstay.

Norco Sight 2017
The Sight's suspension layout has been updated, with a more horizontal rocker link attached to a metric, trunnion-mounted RockShox Deluxe.


The new Sight still uses Norco's take on a Horst link suspension design, but the rocker link now sits in a more horizontal position than before, with a trunnion mounted RockShox Deluxe RT3 serving up 130mm of travel.

The previous Sight had a fairly high level of anti-squat, enough to cause the rear shock to move rhythmically under hard pedaling, especially during out-of-the-saddle climbing. That issue has been addressed on the new model by reducing the amount of chain growth, which Norco says should improve the bike's pedaling performance and also allow the shock to more easily absorb impacts.

Norco Sight 2017
A thick plastic guard keeps the underside of the frame safe from flying rocks.
Norco Sight 2017
The Deluxe rear shock performed admirably, but there's also enough room to fit a piggyback rear shock, something that wasn't possible with the previous generation Sight.


The 29” wheeled Sight is available in three sizes (medium, large, and extra-large), with the chainstay length increasing by 5mm for each size, from 430 up to 440mm. According to Norco, this helps preserve the optimum weight balance across the entire range of frame sizes.

A 67-degree head angle, 74.1-degree seat angle, and a reach of 458mm for a size large are all thoroughly modern numbers that put the Sight right in line with bikes like the Santa Cruz Hightower and Trek Fuel EX.
Norco Sight geometry

Release Date 2017
Price $4999
Travel 130mm
Rear Shock Rockshox Deluxe RT3 Trunnion, w/Debonair
Fork Rockshox Pike RC 140mm Boost 110x15
Cassette Shimano 11-46T 11sp
Crankarms Shimano XT w/30T
Chainguide One Up S3 FD mount chainguide
Bottom Bracket Shimano Pressfit BB92
Rear Derailleur Shimano XT 11sp
Chain Shimano XT 11sp
Shifter Pods Shimano XT 11sp
Handlebar Race Face Atlas 35 800 mm 20mm rise
Stem Race Face Aeffect 35 50mm ext.
Grips Race Face Half Nelson lock on grip
Brakes Shimano XT hydraulic disc w/180mm rotor
Hubs Shimano XT Boost
Rim Race Face AR 30
Tires Schwalbe Nobby Nic rear/Magic Mary front 29x2.35
Seat SDG Circuit Mtn w/chromoly rails
Seatpost Rockshox Reverb Stealth

Norco Sight 2017


I ran five pounds less than my body weight in the rear shock, which equated to a little under 30% sag. Up front, I stuck with the stock 2-token configuration of the Pike due to the softer trail conditions that persisted during the test period. For drier conditions, I'd probably toss in another token in order to gain a little more bottom-out resistance and mid-stroke support.

Norco Sight C 9.2 review


The last few seasons have seen more and more do-everything 29ers hit the market, and the Sight falls squarely into that category. At 30 pounds it's not exactly a featherweight, but given its sturdy parts spec and how well it can handle rough terrain I'm more than willing to overlook a few extra grams.

The Sight has an excellent blend of quickness and comfort that makes it well suited for those all-day adventures where you don't exactly know what type of trails you'll end up on. On long grinds up steep fire roads I'd flip the shock's compression lever into the middle setting, but even in the fully open position, the rear end stays nice and calm, free from the oil-pump-style bobbing that was present on the previous version.

Compared to the YT Jeffsy, the Sight feels a little less snappy on the climbs, likely due to in part to its longer wheelbase, but it's no less adept at getting up tricky sections of trail. If anything, I'd give the edge to the Sight when it comes to the really technical stuff – the balanced geometry and the amount of traction the RockShox Deluxe provides is a potent combination that keeps the rear end glued to the ground.

Norco Sight C 9.2 review

bigquotesIts handling is very intuitive, and it was only a matter of minutes rather than days to before I felt completely at home. That feeling remained over the following months, and the Sight continued to deliver on all types of terrain, everything from rough, steep singletrack to flowier jump lines.


The very first note I jotted down about the Sight reads, “Holy f*#ck, this thing rips.” Needless to say, my inaugural outing on the yellow machine was a good one. Its handling is very intuitive, and it was only a matter of minutes rather than days to before I felt completely at home. That feeling remained over the following months, and the Sight continued to deliver on all types of terrain, everything from rough, steep singletrack to flowier jump lines.

At the moment there are a number of bikes that share fairly similar geometry to the Sight, and for good reason. The 67-degree head angle and 435mm chainstay length create a bike that remains composed on the steeps while remaining lively enough for carving quick S-turns through tighter sections of trail. The 458mm reach for the size large is roomy without feeling unwieldy, and it allows for riders to go shorter than the stock 50mm stem if they'd like.

What exactly makes the Sight so fun? It's a mix of things, but part of its appeal is the amount of grip it has on wet, loose trails. Here in the Pacific Northwest, shiny, polished roots are a near constant presence in the winter time, serpentine obstacles waiting to pull unsuspecting riders to the ground. The Sight exhibited an uncanny ability to find traction where I fully expected things to go sideways. The rear wheel dug in tenaciously when necessary, hugging the ground without getting hung up, but it was still easy enough to pop the bike up and over bigger roots and holes.

When the Sight did reach the end of its 130mm of travel, it did so without any harsh clanging or scary noises, and in most cases I didn't even notice it until I looked down at the end of a ride and checked the shock's o-ring fun-o-meter. It is possible to add more volume spacers to create more end stroke ramp up, but the stock configuration worked well for my needs.

It was only at higher speeds on extremely rough tracks where the Sight began to lose some of its composure and get knocked around by bigger hits, but that's to be expected, and the Sight's handling in those type of situations was right on par with contemporaries like the Fuel EX and the Santa Cruz Hightower. All of those bikes have their limits, but they perform at a higher level than what you'd expect from a bike with 130ish millimeters of travel.

Norco Sight 2017
The 140mm Pike was smooth and trouble-free, but I could see some riders going with a 150mm fork.
Norco Sight 2017
Schwalbe's 2.35" Magic Mary was a good choice for damp, loamy trails.

Component Check

Norco's BC roots really shine through on the Sight's parts kit, and it's clear that whoever chose the final spec put some thought into equipping the bike with components that are capable of handling aggressive riding in all conditions. The Race Face cockpit, XT drivetrain, and beefy Schwalbe tires all have a well-deserved reputation for being durable and reliable, the type of parts selected by hard chargers looking for high performance without an exorbitant replacement cost when that time comes.

• RockShox Pike RC: At the front of the bike, the 140mm RockShox Pike RC felt well matched to the 130mm of travel provided by the Deluxe shock, but I could see some riders swapping out the Pike for something like a 150mm Lyrik to create an even more potent machine. Sure, Norco has the Range for riders looking for a long-travel trail smasher, but not everyone needs (or wants) that much travel – the Sight is more manageable on tight terrain, and its liveliness helps keep things entertaining at slower speeds. Bumping up the front travel by another 10mm would slacken the head angle a touch, while also providing a little extra cushion for when things get really wild.

• XT drivetrain: The Shimano XT 11-speed drivetrain lived up to its workhorse reputation, and it survived months of mud and grime without any issues. I still think the jump from the 37 to the 46-tooth cassette cog is too drastic, but it does provide an easy bail-out gear for those leg burning climbs.

• Magic Mary / Nobby Nic tires: Remember when there were barely any decent tire options for 29ers? I do, and I'm so, so glad that those days are over. The Magic Mary / Nobby Nic combo was fitting for the wet conditions that prevailed during testing, and they easily set up tubeless on the 30mm-wide Race Face rims.

• Non-QR axles: The Sight's fork and the rear wheel both require a hex wrench to remove them; make sure to bring the right tools with you, lest you run the risk of finding yourself cursing whoever forgot to include a 6mm bit on the multi-tool you tossed into your pack. That little incident aside, I'm actually a fan of bolt-on thru-axles – it's one less part that can hang up on a rock or a tree.

Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesWhen you're shopping for a new bike it's easy to find yourself sucked into a confusing world of numbers; grams, millimeters, angles – they all start to blur after a while, making it difficult to differentiate one model from another. With the Sight, there's only one thing you really need to remember: this bike is all about fun. Uphill, downhill, and everything in between, the Sight C 9.2 is an all-mountain bike in the truest sense, with the right angles and parts for it to excel almost anywhere. Mike Kazimer

About the Reviewer
Stats: Age: 34 • Height: 5'11" • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 160lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Twenty-two years deep into a mountain biking addiction that began as a way to escape the suburban sprawl of Connecticut, Mike Kazimer is most at home deep the woods, carving his way down steep, technical trails. The decade he spent as a bike mechanic helped create a solid technical background to draw from when reviewing products, and his current location in the Pacific Northwest allows for easy access to the wettest, muddiest conditions imaginable.

Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,668 articles
Must Read This Week

  • 68 2
 Really like this aggressive style trail bike. Makes a lot of sense for mixed riding.
  • 94 1
 It definitely looks like the type of bike that should be ridden on mountains.
  • 12 4
 Yup, love my Scout for XC to DH, seems this bike is similar.
  • 22 0
 almost like it's a mountain bike.
  • 8 1
 @RRMonster: I don't know, you could probably ride it on the way to mountains as well
  • 8 5
I dunno, definitely looks like they've matched an aggressive-trail rear end with a light-all mountain front end... it's a hopeless mess.
  • 2 4
 I love 29ers until I think about spinning in the air... Still want this bike though.
  • 65 6
 No mention that there is space for water bottle inside the frame makes me wonder if this review is serious at all.
  • 7 1
 On my 2015 alu medium it only fits a 500ml which just fits, i think the large takes a 750ml bottle. This is the serious information we need...
  • 38 1
 Ha, you're right - I neglected to mention that important fact in the review, so I'll do it here. I was able to fit a full size water bottle without much trouble; a side loading cage works best due to the slope of the top tube.
  • 29 1
 Not a single comment about the lack of a head badge. the review is seriously failing to adress the real problems the bike has.
  • 10 3
 @fercho25: Only reason I'm looking at the Hightower over this
  • 3 0
 @ermoldaker: and me the fuel ex 9.9!
  • 11 0
 @bohns1: Treks don't really need a head badge as every trek headtube looks like a penis from the front.
  • 2 0
 Yeah, that's great and all, but does it have a bottle opener?
  • 2 0
 @DonkeyTeeth: spokes, chainrings, and pedals can all double as bottle openers, there may be other options I'm overlooking as well...
  • 2 0
 @ermoldaker: @bohns1: As an owner of a Trek Fuel EX 9.8 and multiple times demoing the Hightower I can say with certainty you can't go wrong with either one. I'm excited for you. i got a great deal on the Fuel so it made my decision easy, but without that I would have been very torn on the decision.
  • 3 0
 @Roobar: not sure how u see that but, uhhhh, ok
  • 1 0
 @kjjohnson: Sweet man.. Ya I got a 16 frame on clearance when 17s were coming out so I can't complain.. Built her up the way I wanted.. Enjoy yours!
  • 1 0
 @kjjohnson: thank you sir, the prospect excites me greatly!!
  • 53 3
 Site C Damn
  • 11 0
 Nice but nobody will get that reference lol.
  • 8 0
 Peace out
  • 6 2
 is dead..... ty minority gov
  • 4 0
 Lol, new bike trails will soon be built in Dawson Creek and Tumbler Ridge.
  • 3 0
 @kurmo: you mean fort St John....
  • 1 0
 @DIYsandvich: yeah northern bc
  • 33 2
 "I'm actually a fan of bolt-on thru-axles – it's one less part that can hang up on a rock or a tree."

Amen -- plus the Maxle-style QRs tend to go bad over time because the notch that your lever slots into when you're tightening the damn thing tends to bend if you're using a wee bit too much force. And it's relatively small, delicate moving parts that constantly get grimed with mud/dust from the trail - so all you're doing is add unnecessary complexity.
  • 14 3
 The quick release was a solution to flat repairs mid race. It is not stronger or better in anyway I'm aware of. Now that we have all pretty much gone tubeless, I can't understand why anyone is still messing with QR, when bolt on is stiffer and prob lighter
  • 46 8
 @speed10: Those of us that have to remove the front wheel for transportation.
  • 9 4
 @alexf86: the thru axle is the same amount of work as loosening a bolt. The only convenience is it is tool free, but there is no excuse why you wouldn't have an allen key on you when going to ride.
  • 4 0
 That's the maxle lite: thankfully, most brands seem to have swapped to specing the maxle ultimate, which doesn't rely on that thin piece of metal for leverage.

That said, I swapped to tooled axles on my bike, front & back.
  • 3 1
 Thank you! There's so many good solution for storing you multi tool these days, there's really little excuse not to have it with you all the time.
  • 11 3
 @KrazyKraut: the problem is not carrying it, it's the fact that most bolts are made of f*cking plywood, cause even though ur paying 5k for a bike they are shit and after a couple of times using them, they are already messed up and you can´t remove them proprely. That's the truth, downvote me all you want, I couldn't care less, but if you are trasporting you bike regularly and need to take wheels of, thru axles are just soooo much better!!!!
  • 12 1
 Have never had anyone wreck a maxle, let alone have it catch on a root or a rock. And how much lighter are we talking? as a percentage of the bike? We're just splitting hairs at this point.
  • 6 0
 @Pennyrisk: I've seen many broken Pike QR Maxles.
  • 3 0
 @Pennyrisk: I've broken two, and both have been very expensive to remove. Having an axle that sits flush with the dropouts is definitely worth that extra 30 seconds it takes to get your multi tool out
  • 1 0
 @xenon512: again its not about the time it takes, it´s about the fact that the bolt gets rounded... not sure if it´s the way you say it. And they will snap just the same!
  • 1 0
 @Pennyrisk: agreed. We are talking about a tiny little weight savings. That said, I know people with Ti bolts. I know people with carbon headset spacers. I know people who pay for XTR. This saves weight, is prob stiffer, and would cost less to manufacture. they could still offer the QR option as an aftermarket, to those people who unfortunately have to remove the wheels to transport the bikes and refuse to use a tool.

Question: When you switched to dropper post, did you still want the QR seat collar, or were you ok with the bolt option. Again, the way we ride changed when a new tech was introduced.
  • 16 1
 Engineers got it right, no need for a " knock-block"
  • 8 1
 @mikekazimer did you ride the 2015 Sight w/ CC DB inline shock and have the experience you mention above? I put 1500 miles on that bike last year and it was one of the best pedaling bikes I've owned to date (I'd say better than the 3 Anthem's I owned) - near zero pedal induced bob when in the saddle with the shock wide open, it did move a bit with out of the saddle efforts - but I've never ridden a bike that doesn't. And the climb switch worked wonders, this was all with the stock recommended tune from Cane Creek. That bike shredded the Fritter 50 for me in Oakridge, good for 2nd place with 8500' of climbing.

I just sold that 2015 Sight and picked up an Optic. The Optic has the type of pedal induced bob you mention which really surprises me - and bugs me. It takes my best pedal stroke to keep it to an acceptable level of bob with the shock open while climbing a road. I'm going to buy the new Sight 29 and really hope it pedals as well as the 2015. Totally sounds like it does from your account - but my experience with the 2015 is the polar opposite of what I see here. And I never heard anyone complaining about the anti-squat or pedal bob when the 2015-2016 sight got glowing reviews from Bible of Bike tests and many other outlets.
  • 1 0
 Re. the Sight another website writes: "Norco has tweaked the kinematics to deliver a more efficient pedalling platform. The main change as come from the rearward chainstay pivot, which is now a touch higher than it was on the previous generation Sight. The result is a less rearward axle path, which reduces overall chain growth, and there’s a fraction less progression too."

IIRC on a Horst Link design, a higher chainstay pivot will result in less anti-squat. Combined with less progression, more pedal bob is to be expected.

The Optic and Sight seem to be similar in this aspect. Seems like they traded pedal efficieny for suppleness.
  • 4 0
 @KrazyKraut: It's certainly confusing how the term "pedaling efficiency" gets thrown around. Some folks mean pedal-bob and the associated loss of power, while others seem to be referring to how efficiently and accurately the rear suspension tracks the ground.

I saw references to both the Optic and new Sight dialing back the chain growth to increase pedaling efficiency. This seems backwards, unless there was way too much chain growth before.

Either way - all accounts of the new Sight C9 sound good. Really hoping it delivers with the Deluxe shock as well as my 2015 did with the CC DB inline!
  • 2 0
 The previous Sight had 150% of AS at sag. Ridiculous.
  • 3 2
 @KrazyKraut: I have a Norco Revolver (100 mm) that, as every single Horst I owned or tried, bobs happily with the shock in the open position. A Horst needs a shock with a platform, put the lever in the middle and you are ok, otherwise be ready to bob and bob and bob happily ... might not be inefficient but certainly feels so.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: Do you have a source for this? or other bikes? I've been curious but haven't found that info published.
  • 1 0
 @duzzi: I have a Canyon Nerve (110mm, also Horst link) and bob is manageable when seated. But once you get out of the saddle it's horrible. Unfortunately the Float CTD shock it came with has a very soft "climb" platform. The effect is so minimal you might as well leave it open.
  • 11 3
 I can see where they are going with this bike
  • 8 0
 when do the aluminum models come out ???
  • 3 1
 Aluminium models haven't changed since the 2013 killer b geometry wise (except for a longer fork). Hope they make a significant update soon.
  • 3 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: I chatted with a Norco employee on a 29" Range and he mentioned there is a new aluminum version coming out just no sure when though .
  • 7 2
 Ha, its nearly identical to the Trek Fuel ex in geometry. I guess the main difference is the reactive shock VS the new superdelux.
  • 3 2
 Except the new fuels run a deluxe as well, albeit not trunnion-mounted and w/ reaktiv tuning. + plenty of room to add the Super with a piggyback.
  • 2 0
 @mkowitz: oh, i thought they were on FOX
  • 1 1
 Love the Reaktiv! Got a 16 9.9 fuel with it and it is a beast with a 140mm pike no doubt! Rides like an older Remedy with way better climbing ability.
  • 1 0
 @the new fuels run fox. Deluxe on the Remedies
  • 1 0
 @mkowitz: super doesnt come in a short enough stroke length can only run the Delyx... I know this because my fuel once had a Re:activ on it and well... Tossed that in the trash...
  • 6 0
 internally routed dropper and shift cable, externally routed brake line . This is how it should always be!
  • 2 4
 although the brake line is not internally on the sight.
  • 5 0
 That's what he just said...
  • 5 3
 Ok couple of problems I have.
@Andrext constantly tells us the more chain growth there is, the more anti squat present. Which means a better pedaling bike. How is it not the case here?

Also tokens do little to help with mid stroke support on a fairly large airvolume situation as in forks. Only the last few mm of travel where the volume is very small
  • 5 1
 At a certain point, it's possible to have too much chain growth, enough so that rather than pulling the shock into its travel, it actually extends it during pedaling. Finding the right amount of antisquat is a balancing act, and Norco have done a good job with the new Sight.

As far as mid stroke support, I've found that tokens do make a noticeable difference, and I wouldn't really call a fork a large air volume situation This image is pretty basic, but it illustrates what happens when you install a token:
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: On every bike I tried to improve mid stroke support by reducing air volume I ended up effectively reducing total travel by some percent. Your graph perfectly illustrates this. Even with just one spacer, you need "almost twice" the force to achieve full travel.
  • 4 1
 @KrazyKraut, well, that is the point of adding volume spacers - increased ramp up, mainly at the end of the fork's travel. You many want to try experimenting with different air pressures as well - keeping the same air pressure as you had before adding a spacer may create a harsher rider than you're looking for.
  • 6 0
 @mikekazimer: I feel like that image is a bit misleading because it doesnt take into account that people are usually aiming for the same amount of bottom out force. If you add volume reducing spacers to a fork or shock you will have to reduce pressure to not have a much higher bottom out force. Once you have the same bottom out force, the extra volume spacer actually puts the new force curve lower than the original till it ramps up at the very end guving you more ramp up, and less mid stroke support.
  • 3 0
 @KrazyKraut: Midstroke support has more to do with the chamber volumes and won't have a really massive change with volume spacers. Alternative volume cans like the Vorsprung products are the way to go. Both Fox and Rockshox have started addressing the midstroke support issues with the newer shocks with Debonair and Evol Sleeves.
  • 1 0
 @KrazyKraut: get a luftkappe
  • 1 0
 @RoboDuck: Exactly. Simplified: You want to move the mid-range of the spring curve higher up the "force" axis. If you ignore everything else you can more or less achieve this by adding spacers. But the end stroke is much more affected. Even a moderate improvement of mid-stroke support will come hand in hand with an extreme effect on end stroke, if you do it this way. Many people probably won't notice this (at first), but effectively, you are reducing travel.
  • 7 2
 Honestly, quick release is over rated. There's nothing better than getting to whip out your tool!
  • 2 0
 Any plans to test the 650b version? A lot of the reviews I've read of bikes that come in both wheel sizes tend to indicate that they feel significantly different. In other words, the review of the 29r version won't translate to 650b wheels, which is what I'd be contemplating.

Also, how much does it ramp up? You compare it to the Jeffsy... and say it's less snappy; I'm a heavy, moderately hard charger and can easily get to the end of travel without lots of pressure, and lots of bands on a bike with a high leverage rate at the end of its stroke. Where does this one sit?
  • 4 2
 Am I the only one who still can't get on board with the prices of bikes these days? The base level is 3.9k? WTF?

You've got 3 choices here...
Carbon 140/130 Pike, Deluxe, XT, RF cockpit, XT/RF wheels - Rocky Mountain: 5k
Carbon 140/140. Pike, Monarch, X1, RF cockpit/crank, e*thirteen wheels - YT: 4k
Carbon 140/140, Fox Elite, Fox Float, Eagle, RF cockpit/crank, e*thirteen wheels - YT: 4.8k

Even TY's entry level bike is one thousand freaking dollars less. It's a no brainer... YT, and the companies whose prices are comparable to theirs (Rose and Canyon, for example), are the only sane ones out there, I swear.
  • 5 2
 I have an older sight that I like a lot, they seem to have addressed all of the issues that I do have. Time to check the credit cards.....
  • 3 1
 Or to apply for a new 0% card!
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer any plans to review the 27.5 version of the same bike? Planning to buy a new Sight and torn between wheel sizes, would love to hear from someone that's ridden both.

Seems like all the press is on the 29 version. Have heard nothing but good stuff. And Bryn Atkinson seems to love it.
  • 1 0
 It's 2017. And a lot of the bikes being released look the same. Just mean that it's hard to get excited over these designs. Really wish we'd see reviews on more interesting suspension designs like the Antidote, Propain, and likewise other deisgns that are unconventional.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer Nice review. I'm an old XC guy here in the NW that's moving towards longer day rides and more technical terrain. What are your thoughts on this bike for that need? And do you have other suggestions? I've been looking at bikes like the Yeti SB4.5, Pivot Mach 429 Trail, and Pivot Switchblade. I'm interested in your feedback.
  • 1 0
 And I suppose I should add the Tallboy 3 to my candidate list.
  • 1 0
 Put together my Sight C9.2 a few weeks back and have had a smile ever since :-) . I have a 3 year old Sight 7.2 and this is definitely not the same ride - it's much better. The big wheels give a bit more traction on the climbs, the feeling on decent is approaching the confidence I have on my Range C7.1. I'm looking forward to a summer on the trails with this. Thanks, Norco!
  • 1 0
 Question for you - do you have any issue with the "slack-ish" seat tube angle and weighting the front wheel on steep climbs? Do you have to use a lot of body language to keep the front from lifting?
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer Thanks for the review. I can't seem to find the size of your test bike.. I am of near identical proportions and am on a Large C7.2 - Which seems more comparable to the Medium C9.2. Thoughts? thanks!
  • 3 0
 I rode a Large 9.2 and found it to be a good fit for my height.
  • 1 0
 I'm at 5'10 and 160lb with longer arms/legs. 2015 Large C7.2 felt good. Just test rode a new Medium Sight C9.2 and Large C9.3 and the medium felt pretty short, I think I gotta go large.

It's a little confusing tho - I'm currently on a Medium Optic C9.2 and it feels OK but on the shorter side. And Bryn Atkinson has both a Medium and a Large Sight 29er and he hasn't decided whats best, he is 5'11". Wish we had a M/L size!

It's also interesting the Reach and Top Tube are 10mm longer on the 29er, but stem lengths are adjusted to keep the actual reach to bars the same.
  • 1 0
 @cajohnst: What did you end up going with. Currently have a large my self but debating if it's a bit much. I threw a shorter stem on over the winter to see if that will help.
  • 1 0
 @bainer66: I went with a large sight C9.2 I’ve had a couple medium mountain bikes over the years and they are playful and fun but always feel a little cramped for long rides. I really think I’m right in between sizes.

The large sight feels pretty good with 50mm stem and super wide bars. But I haven’t had nearly as much Trail time as I’d like. Need to fix that!!
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Hey Mike! Now that's it's 2020 and the 2020Norco Sight Large has a reach just over 485mm - would you still feel the reach of 458mm is a good fit? Has geometry really changed that much in the last 3 years that 458mm is now *too* short?

I'm looking at getting my first mountain bike and wondering if the new longer front center + reach is 1) really that much better, and 2) suited for all riders or only appreciated by very agrressive riders.
I live in BC, rented a MTB in Squamish over the summer and really enjoyed trails like Angry Midget and Creditline. I'm not going to be riding crazy fast or taking jumps - but I did enjoy the more techy trails over Half Nelson
  • 2 0
 Hey Mike the Sight and Range 29 versions are offered in m/l/xl sizing not s/m/l
  • 15 0
 Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
  • 1 4
 @petebike: ...this one goes to 11
  • 2 0
 @petebike: FWIW the difference is that the sizing for a 29er M/L/XL is exactly the same as the 650b M/L/XL. The 650b just also adds a XS/S size.
  • 2 0
 Just blew my shock on my 2013' 26 Sight 1. $175 PUSH rebuild, or $3,000 new bike?? Arghh!!
  • 2 0
 Why not simply buy a new shock? You can easily get a barely used one on ebay for way less than 175 $. Just make sure to check the spec for the correct tune. Luckily Norco provides that info.
  • 2 0
 @KrazyKraut: yeah says M rebound and L compression. New shock is an option also and it a common 200x57 size. bunch of take off shocks available. Never had a shock PUSHED before so i was considering using them cause i have heard great things.
  • 1 0
 If you on stock Fox shock, then throw that peace of shit away. And for the money you are going to spend on PUSH get your self a Manitou McLeod and you will be chocolate.
  • 1 0
 @Rainallday: Picked up a CCDB Inline freshly rebuilt by Garageworks. I called them to confirm the full rebuild. Garageworks said they have been super reliable post rebuild. Picked up it for less than a PUSH rebuild. hopefully i don't regret it. As a plus the bike is also Black with Gold accents so it matches too!
  • 2 0
 This is what i think about when i see that price tag:
  • 1 0
 How come that Bryn has got a x2 float mountet on his new Sight but the shock length is 185 mm while the minimum shock length Fox offers with the x2 is 200mm?? Pls. help
  • 1 0
 Metric shock. I don't think fox is offering aftermarket sales for metric sizing right now.
  • 1 0
 I have last year's Sight A7.2 and love it. The prices keep going up though whether they're aluminum or carbon. Definitely a solid bike on all terrain!
  • 4 1
 Very Trek Fuel-Exy
  • 2 0
 Front tire selection, ACE.
  • 2 4
 I will just assume Ellsworth's ICT patent has expired, because the virtual pivot spot for that Sight lines up ahead of the front wheel about six inches beyond the tire edge and roughly level with the upper chain path and front axle, like on ICT bikes.
  • 2 0
 this time, fork color is on point
  • 4 2
 Got to "PF92 bottom bracket" and closed the tab
  • 9 1
 So much PF hate out there. I'm on my third bike with a PF BB and never experienced a single creak (until tomorrow as I probably just jinxed myself). If it's done right PF is all good.
  • 1 0
 @tunnel-vision: Yup. No issues with our 2 PF BB bikes with 5yrs of riding between them. Threaded BBs creak and fail as well. We seem to forget that conveniently when bagging on PF BBs.
  • 1 0
 You must close a lot of tabs... Lol
  • 1 0
 love my 27.5 Sight c7.2, would love to try the wagon wheel version, looks fun!!
  • 1 0
 Irish Death hype! That's a sweet shot of jumping the stump between the trees.
  • 1 0
 Just picked up a left over ‘17 9.2 c yesterday. Only one ride in, but very impressed.
  • 1 0
 any plans for this to come in Aluminium as well?
  • 2 0
 That is the word on the street. I would guess by end of year.
  • 1 0
 Good review! The new Sight looks very promising!
  • 1 0
 Good looking bike.
  • 1 3
 Thanks for putting this in our Sight!
  • 3 6
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2023. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.071267
Mobile Version of Website