Orbea Rallon 2016: First Look
Orbea released the Rallon in 2014 and it was received with rave reviews across the industry, quickly becoming one of the enduro bikes of choice for people in the know. For 2016 the Rallon keeps its shape, but gains some size in all directions. Pinkbike took a First Look and a posted a comprehensive Review of the Rallon last year. Here we take a quick look at improvements after two years of racing, riding and customer feedback as Orbea strive to keep the Rallon on the cutting edge for 2016.
 |
Orbea have stuck with the numbers that made the Rallon a success in the first place: long top tubes, short chainstays and a low bottom bracket. There are still three sizes to choose from and the generous sizing means that even tall guys should find a comfortable fit. The frame's reach has grown slightly by 5mm on all sizes to give even more breathing space. Head tubes have grown by 5mm on small frames and 10mm on larger sizes, Orbea noticed in general riders were hiking up the handlebar for attacking steeper terrains, so a longer head tube means less stem spacers and increased stiffness and surface area for welding.
The head angle slackens half a degree to 66 degrees in the high, and 65.5 in the low setting. Orbea found that nearly all Rallon users set the bike in the previous low setting with a HA of 66 degrees and rarely went higher. For 2016, this angle becomes the high setting and now riders can drop a further half a degree with the low setting . Switching to the low setting also means the bottom bracket height drops 7mm to a ground hugging 338mm.
 |
Rear hubs have been boosted up to 148mm x 12mm, compared to the previous 9mm x 135mm QR or 142mm x 12mm thru-axle options. This increases stiffness and has allowed the 'Concentric Boost' pivot/drop out system to be simplified. The wider Boost hub and chain line adjustment also allowed Orbea to gain more tire clearance which was an issue on the older Rallon, now 2.4" tires in the short 420mm chainstays are no problem.
The high D-Mount front derailleur has been changed to a removable, rather than a fixed mount. With 1X systems becoming the norm, and more affordable, Orbea decided to to clean up the lines of the frames and save a few grams, although the front derailleur option is still there if riders desire. The 'Cable Highway' on top of the down tube has been also been modified, neatening up the routing and allowing all cables to head down the same path before splitting off to their respective destinations.
Existing hydro-formed tubes have been tweaked slightly across the entire bike, not to reduce weight but to increase stiffness and give a slightly more refined look. The alloy frame still comes with Orbea's lifetime warranty.
 |
 Orbea Rallon 2016 |
The Rallon's suspension has also been updated, working in conjunction with BOS and FOX to supply bikes with custom tuned dampers. Shock bushings have been replaced by bearings to increase sensitivity, and the suspension curve has become slightly more progressive at the end of the stroke for absorbing big impacts. Dependant upon model, you can choose from BOS Kirk V2 shocks and the updated BOS Deville FCV fork which now has updated 27.5" lowers. FOX equipped bikes have options between 34 and 36 chassis, and Float or Float X shocks with EVOL air cans.
 |
| Orbea Rallon 2016 |
Rallon X-Team $5,999 USD
There are three standard models to choose between, the X30, X10 and X-Team. Orbea also offer their MyO customization service where you can pick and choose any aspect of the bike. The frames are fabricated in Asia, but are painted in Spain, then bikes built to order. This means you can choose a base model then mix and match components or colours to suit your desires, and have the bike delivered to you within three weeks.
Rallon X10 $4,499 USD
Rallon X30 $3,249 USD
Find out more at Orbea.com
 |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
As stiffness is "over rated", the second choice makes a lot of sense. For bigger 29 wheel, you may need more stiffness, but for smaller 26 or 27 ones,I'll take durability over stiffness.
YT has the torque specs too...
Torque specs are way overrated in the cycling world... what really matters is the bolt tension, and the error you get measuring it with a torque wrench is way too big to really care.
Bos Suspension, Check.
Threaded Bottom Bracket, Check.
Boost 148, SON OF A @#$%^
If we as consumers let the industry keep doing this, they'll take the piss forevermore. And this is from someone riding 650B!
If we as consumers let the industry keep doing this, they'll take the piss forevermore. And this is from someone riding 650B!
f*ck OFF bike manufacturers. go sell to someone else, especially your c*nts at scott w/ your adoption of the bullshit new 'standards'. f*ck. off.
As stiffness is "over rated", the second choice makes a lot of sense. For bigger 29 wheel, you may need more stiffness, but for smaller 26 or 27 ones,I'll take durability over stiffness.
it becomes hard to distinguish between sarcasm and seriousness, esp on the internet.
also sarcasm is a skill, and i see a total lack of skill in your first comment
carry on
I very much doubt any body less than a high ranked pro would even tell the difference between a boost and non boost bike
Make whhels bigger but, now they're heavy
Take some spoke out but, now they too floppy
Ok let's make hubs wider......
In 2-3 years 26+ will be a 'new' standard
Ya heard it here first
for most of the existence of bikes, changing speeds meant a change in rear dropout spacing, which usually meant a new frame & wheelset, or at least bending the dropouts(on steel frames.) We've been spoilt by having the same spacing for the last 15+ years, & it's time for drop out spacing to catch up with all the changes we've made in the other parts of the wheel.
I don't mind change nearly as much as I mind making parts less & less standard, cause that's what really increases prices.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFcUJ1tDqDA
Its unfortunate, and with no disrespect to the pioneering fabricators and machinists making do with what they had, but mountain bikes have never really been engineered as an entire optimised system. Id say this is mostly because of the hundreds of companies looking to score our $$ by producing effectively the same thing (and hence the requirement for standards). Until the industry consolidates you can expect progression to continue via slight incremental improvements. Imagine if the big three each developed a frame and components completely optimised as a system without conforming to external standards. Inter-company standard changes could be limited to when there are significant advances in materials and/or technology and maybe then bikes would reduce in price and perform as best as they can with the current tech.
B - short stays are a FAB, expect really long stays on DH and Enduro bikes in tcoming 5 years. Minnaar and Gwin are already running stays longer than stock. As with every situation, overdriving a parameter has equal number of pros and cons.
C - Boost allows for a better spoke triangulation of a extra wide rim where optimal placement of spoke holes lies away from the center of the rim. Otherwise it offers microscopical gains for regular wheels and rims.
D - boost has been developed solely with plus sizes in mind, and it is economically wise to run it through all the range.
A big part of why they can get away with boost now is that they have more real estate out front with only having to worry about 1x & 2x chainlines. going any wider than 148 is going to introduce some serious problems that will compromise either chainline or q factor.
Or we'll all be riding fat bike cranks, q factor be damned.
Oh, & as someone pointed out in the past, the stiffness problems that SRAM talks about is probably more about lower spoke count wheels. widening the flanges a few mm is lighter than adding 4 spokes, or at least that's their spiel.
but then, i guess thats a lot of effort to go to so maybe just buy a new rear hub. as for the front, i really don't see the advantage of boost here. front wheels are not sufficiently weakened by having to accommodate disc mounts for us to be worried about their strength, unlike the massive dish that has to be applied to rear wheels to accommodate a cassette and the allowance for a disc mount thus making them inherently weaker than front wheels.
it seems buying a new rear wheel/hub is one thing but buying a new front wheel AND fork is a whole new kettle of fish in terms of price.
just some thoughts from a wheel builder...
A few normal trail runs, and couple of blacks (no hucking though). Nothing my EX 471s haven't shrugged off.
I ran 35psi too, as I felt them bottom out a little with lower pressures on the smaller stuff.
First, I had to warranty one of the two I ordered because a piece of the weld was broken off, & too large to escape out of a spoke hole.
Second, every single rim I've seen built & ridden has a crack in the gold logo, right over the weld (it looks like a decal under the clear coat to me, as opposed to paint, FYI.) It almost looks like what you would expect out of a cheaply pinned rim that had the two sides moving independently of each other.
But they haven't had a single problem in actual usage. Like I said, they just make me... nervous.
A Rallon Team in europe costs the equivalent of £3700, however in the UK one will set you back £4200. Where does that extra £500 go?
I know about exchange hedging, but why don't you just do what Nicolai do and publish prices in euros and state that purchase is according to exchange rates?
The excuse is normally that they "hedge" the UK price against the euro but they always kick the arse out of it and the Brits get bent over.
Things are going to get interesting in Aus because the AUD has weakened against the US drastically since this time last year, and US bikes here are becoming exorbitantly priced. Maybe the distributors will have to start cutting their margins to keep their products competitively priced? Either way, its a good time to be a Canadian brand and to a lesser extent an EU brand selling bikes in Australia. I have my eye on Orbea
If we as consumers let the industry keep doing this, they'll take the piss forevermore. And this is from someone riding 650B!
it becomes hard to distinguish between sarcasm and seriousness, esp on the internet.
also sarcasm is a skill, and i see a total lack of skill in your first comment
carry on.
^^^ I typed and submitted "Just a test"
Too Funny. I'm probably messing with someone now at this point. I hope it isnt just me.
very strange.
As stiffness is "over rated", the second choice makes a lot of sense. For bigger 29 wheel, you may need more stiffness, but for smaller 26 or 27 ones,I'll take durability over stiffness.
Is this true in general? I made myself the idea that in general bushings were better, but maybe it is just down to quality...
Anyone?
so no I am being censored and anyone else with negative opinions about this brand.
I was told to refresh and all would be ok. Not buying it.
Bring back the old days where we argued like dirtbags.
and thats EXACTLY why Orbea raised the front, cause the stem mounted at the highest from last year, requires your brakes to be pointed almost flat frontward... I know, i have one. I would like the half degree slacker for sure ( and the cm more on top, so in case I crash, I won't get a second scorch on the top tube) :-)
still, its a very fun bike ( I know I have one :-D).