Pinkbike Field Test: GT Force 29 Pro - A Solid Descender With Room for Improvement

Dec 18, 2019
by Mike Kazimer  


PINKBIKE FIELD TEST

GT Force 29 Pro



Words by Mike Kazimer, photography by Trevor Lyden



Martin Maes may have raced at the Trophy of Nations aboard a Force 29, but GT aren't billing their latest aluminum-framed machine as an enduro bike. Instead, they say it was developed for riders that seek out big hits and a lot of gravity. However you want to categorize it, with 29” wheels, 150mm of rear travel, and a 170mm fork up front the Force 29 looked well suited to the lift-served and pedal-powered laps that we had in store for it in Whistler and Pemberton.

The frame layout is nearly identical to the 27.5” Force, with GT's Linkage Tuned Suspension (LTS) design, their take on a Horst Link layout, handling that rear travel. A flip chip on the lower shock mount allows the head tube angle and bottom bracket height to be adjusted, but it stayed in the low setting for the duration of the test period. That position gives the Force 29 a 64.6-degree head tube angle, 76.6-degree seat tube angle, and a reach of 470mm on our size large test bike.

GT Force 29 Pro Details

• Travel: 150mm rear / 170mm fork
• Aluminum frame
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head Angle: 64.6° / 65.1° (geometry)
• Seat Tube Angle: 76.6° / 77.1°
• Chainstay Length: 442 / 440
• Sizes: S, M, L (test), XL
• Weight: 35.6 lb / 16.1 kg (as tested)
• Price: $4,700 USD
www.gtbicycles.com

The Force Pro's build kit include a Fox Performance Elite 36 fork, a Fox Float X2 Performance shock, SRAM GX Eagle 12-speed drivetrain, G2 brakes, and Stans Flow MK3 wheels. The aluminum frame helps keep the price out of the stratosphere, and as it sits the Force 29 Pro retails for $4,700 USD.



GT Force 29 Pro
GT Force 29 Pro

Climbing

The Force wasn't exactly a rocket on the climbs, due in part to its fighting weight of 35.6 pounds once the Maxxis Double Down casing tires were installed. The good news is that the seated climbing position was quite comfortable, and the fact that it was a little shorter and steeper than the Specialized Enduro made it easier to maneuver around tighter switchbacks. It may be on the stouter side of things, but it's a steady roller, and once the Force got moving that extra heft wasn't as noticeable.

There is a fair bit of suspension movement with the shock in the open position, which meant the climb switch was regularly called into use on longer logging road climbs. It may not be the most efficient feeling climber, but there was plenty of traction, a welcome trait when it came to navigating up and over wet and slimy roots.


GT Force 29 Pro

GT Force 29 Pro
GT Force 29 Pro

Descending

The Force 29's geometry was very easy to get along with – it didn't take long at all to feel comfortable dropping into trails like Dirt Merchant, Schleyer, and Lower Whistler Downhill. It does take a little extra effort to get it up to speed, but there weren't any handling issues, and the bike felt very composed on rougher trails. In its stock configuration there's not a ton of end-stroke ramp up, and even with 25% sag it was relatively easy to use all the rear travel on bigger hits. Adding an additional volume spacer is a recommended step for harder chargers.

Those rough trails did take a toll on the wheels - the rear wheel lost nearly all spoke tension after a few days of riding. It turns out that the while the wheels use Stan's rims and hubs, they're built by a third party, and we suspect that this was the root of the issues.

In addition, the SRAM G2 brakes were underwhelming on longer, sustained sections of braking, with a noticeable lack of power. SRAM's more powerful Code brakes would have been a much more appropriate choice for a bike of this nature.

Timed Testing

Our timed lap for the enduro bikes took place on Schleyer, a Whistler Bike Park classic that includes a variety of features, including drops, chunky rock gardens, longer rock faces, plus a few jumps and stepdowns added into the mix. A few timed runs isn't the final say on whether one bike is faster than another, but it did give us a way to compare our perceived vs. actual speed.

Mike Kazimer: Conditions varied on the two days that I used for my times runs, but my second fastest time of all occurred on the GT, just 1% slower than my quickest run.

Jason Lucas: All my timing was done under similar conditions, and the GT was only 1% slower than the fastest bike for me.

It's also worth mentioning the relatively tall, 460mm seat tube height on our size large test bike. That number is an outlier compared to the 440mm seat tube on the Specialized Enduro, or the 419mm seat tube length of the Ibis Mojo HD5. 175mm and even 200mm dropper posts are becoming increasingly common, but running a post with that much drop may not be possible on the GT.


GT Force 29 Pro


Pros

+ Easy to get along with geometry
+ Good suspension spec

Cons

- Heavy, even for aluminum
- G2 brakes aren’t appropriate for a DH-oriented bike, wheels aren’t up to hard charging
- Poor standover, tall seat tube







The 2020 Pinkbike Field Test was made possible by support from
Race Face apparel & pads, Giro helmets, & Sierra Nevada beer.



236 Comments

  • 72 6
 So far all the bikes seem bad
  • 46 4
 The Enduro and the SB165 are obviously the best two enduro bikes on test in the group. It's no surprise @pinkbike are posting those bikes last.
I know they can't review every bike, but I really wish they could compare the bikes to the current segment leaders as a benchmark, specifically the Scott Ransom and the SC Megatower. I also wish they included the Mondraker SuperFoxy that bike looks amazing, but I don't think I've seen a real test on that bike anywhere.
  • 8 1
 @Davemk: I agree. I'd rather see the segment leaders mixed with some outliers like this GT and the Mondraker than just bikes that hadn't been reviewed yet. Would especially love to see a review on the Superfoxy since I loved 80% of my Foxy 29 and apparently they addressed the 20% I didn't like.
  • 6 2
 @Davemk: I think at the beginning of all this Pinkbike stated that only bikes that were “new for 2020” would be included in the test. Kind of a bummer, but I get they have to draw the line somewhere, and current model year isn’t the worst approach I suppose. But I agree, it would be nice if there were at least a few comments on how the bikes this year compare to the standouts in the category, even if those aren’t being tested here.
  • 16 6
 Its because they've ridden the new Norco Sight and nothing else compares.
  • 6 1
 @Davemk: The SC megatower seems to be an interesting one to leave out as around here it seems to battle the Yeti's for the most coveted bike award. The Scott was in last years field test though along with Pivot and Devinci. I think the initial criteria was that the bike needed to be a new design from this year to make it into the test- or at least that was what was stated last year and why no Transitions have made the test. Super curious about that Specialized given it's complete overhaul and the conversation around some of the design choices as I think the Yeti is largely known given the time people have spent on the smaller versions and likely awesome...like the smaller versions.
  • 1 0
 @Davemk: the SuperFoxy is a rad machine indeed. I have the regular foxy on it's way to me as I type, just because I have a Firebird for big travel stuff. that said, the Mondraker is next years race bike. We just became a dealer here on the west coast for them, and I really think this bike is going to blow people away. best fit and finish in the game and a hell of a ride.
  • 21 3
 We are truly living in the dark ages of mountain biking.
  • 10 4
 @Davemk: I han an Enduro first 2014 and then 2018. Best result in an enduro race on home trails was 10th place. In comes a modified GT Sensor with 140mm rear and front...worst result 5th place...I'd say GT has got some pretty solid handling bikes...Much of it because of Luis Arraiz
  • 2 0
 @lj17: It makes total sense, if they continue every year you will continuously get info on newest models into a category, and then on your own you can go back to past years to compare. This has worked fairly well for the motor industry for decades (Motor trend for example)
  • 2 1
 @dkidd: retweet
  • 4 1
 Basically stay with my 35lbs DH bike and launch to the moon.
  • 3 0
 @Davemk: And the champs bike (Mega 290)
  • 3 1
 @snl1200: I'm not sure if that's the criteria for choosing bikes. The Sight is brand new and it hasn't been featured here.
  • 13 0
 @dkidd, we tried to avoid doubling up on brands in order to include as many bikes from different companies as possible.
  • 4 1
 @dkidd: At least the Optic crushed it (...and didn't get crushed like some others in the field). Well done on some rad looking bikes. I'll have to get out to the next Norco Demo day out this way to give one pedal...or you should just come through on a road trip and bring extras...
  • 12 11
 @Davemk: I agree.

I don't really see why someone in the market for an enduro bike would reference this field test when trying to pick their next bike.

I'd argue that comparing 29ers and 27.5s also doesn't make a whole lot of sense. From my personal experience, it's one or the other right from the start of any bike picking process.

Ideally we would have quite a few more field tests with more specific criteria. I recall one of the PB guys saying there were some issues with making that happen but I still think it's worth pursuing.

What I would love to see in an enduro field test...

YT Capra 29
SC Megatower
Specialized Enduro
Scott Ransom
Yeti SB150
RM Slayer

It would also be nice to have some kind of tabulated summary of all the bikes they tested to conclude the test. This would include values, climbing, descending, cornering, timed averages, spec depth, etc.
  • 3 0
 @jgainey: I think what makes it a little odd is that model years differ quite a bit between bike manufacturers. The ‘19 Megatower was released March ‘19, while the ‘20 SB165 was released July ‘19, and therefore included in this years test. Yes, the Megatower was reviewed a few months after its release, but was too late/too early for the field tests. This obviously is no fault of Pinkbike, and I think they do a great job regardless. I just thought it might be nice to have a few comments comparing the field test bikes to other prominent bikes that may have been reviewed, but were never included in a field test. Maybe they will during the SB165 and Enduro reviews, if not, hopefully next year.
  • 34 0
 @MRwillP, we try to avoid re-reviewing a bike whenever possible, and it just so happens we've already reviewed (or attempted to review) all of the bikes on your list.

YT Capra 29: www.pinkbike.com/news/review-yt-capra-29-cf-pro-race.html
SC Megatower: www.pinkbike.com/news/review-santa-cruz-megatower-2019.html
Enduro: Field Test video airing soon.
Scott Ransom: www.pinkbike.com/news/pb-field-test-scott-ransom.html
Yeti SB150: www.pinkbike.com/news/pinkbike-field-test-yeti-sb150.html
RM Slayer: www.pinkbike.com/news/field-test-2020-rocky-mountain-slayer-carbon-90.html
  • 5 0
 @mikekazimer: I totally understand the need to limit the number of bikes in the test and to avoid duplicate work with bike reviews. Maybe it's for another shootout, but I'd love a "Enduro Bike Year In Review" type article where you give your impressions of each of the bikes on that list and how you think they stack up. It would obviously be biased and just one reviewer's opinion, but it would be cool to know how you see the current field of top bikes in the market.
Also, any chance you will be reviewing a Mondraker SuperFoxy any time soon? I'm really tempted by that bike on paper, but haven't gotten the chance to demo one yet.
  • 3 6
 i said this yesterday and got downvoted af lol
  • 2 0
 Field test is limited to bikes released this year, and only one per brand right? So seems like they called a bunch of brands and asked what their newest bike was, tried to split the hodge-podge of bikes into 3 categories, then "compared" them.

While I love the field test content, I do think it'd make a lot more sense to directly compare 5 category leaders in each segment. That'd allow much more nuanced comparison too. As is, the test mostly identifies outliers in each "category," e.g. Pole is actually an enduro bike, Ibis is more of a trail bike etc.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: Understand if y'all don't want to do a full-on compar-o with the Sight in the mix, but a tidbit in the comments would be pretty awesome. Pretty please.
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer: I feel like a lot of the user feedback is based on the name of the segment and people's expectations as a result. When you read "Field Test" most people seem to be looking for the best of the segment pitted against each other. If it was called something like "2020 New Bike Shootout" I think the feedback would be very different.
  • 3 1
 @MRwillP: You’re right, this field test doesn’t represent the contenders someone would be choosing from.
  • 6 2
 @mikekazimer: I understand not wanting to double up on companies, especially when its something like the new fuel ex with very small changes and something like a very new Top Fuel has been rolled out as well.

But with Norco, that Optic and Sight are huge departures from the previous versions, Some exceptions could/ should have been made. GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT! lol
  • 1 0
 @jimmythehat: blasphemy, nukeproof will never make it to pinkbike. didnt you hear ?
  • 1 0
 @Lagr1980: tongue and cheek right? lol
  • 3 0
 Get a Nukeproof Mega and be done with it! Smile
  • 1 0
 Totally agree I said this same thing yesterday @Davemk:
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer:

Thanks for the reply.

I can totally understand avoiding duplication of efforts.

When picking a bike a lot of people (including myself) look for some sort of comparison so that they can start out of the gate with more knowledge or at least a basic understanding of how bikes stack up to each other in terms of geo, value, etc, etc.

There is a lot of information out there and it's usually in the individual review format (like the ones you have referenced). While those review formats do have a place, I don't think they are nearly as helpful when actually buying a bike as direct comparisons within a single market segment... perhaps the latter is what I was expecting from this field test.

I think a lot of PB users would really appreciate a consolidated comparison list of some sort that would be more useful when new bike time comes. Unfortunately a lot of us don't have the ability to demo a multitude of bikes so this kind of resource would be great as a starting point or at the very least, supplemental info when bike shopping.
  • 7 0
 @MRwillP: I think we can do a better job of including at least one bike we think exemplifies the best of the previous crop of bikes, so we can compare against bikes that people might have demoed or are familiar with.

But in order to do proper testing on a level playing field, we can't make this test that much bigger. It already costs a ridiculous amount of money and takes a huge effort from our team. I'd love to give the people what they want—20 bikes in each category, 10 testers per bike, timed testing broken down into segments and done over 80 total runs, control components for all bikes, unbuilding each bike to weigh frames, lab testing, and eventually doing destructive pull tests on each frame, etc... but I don't think it's possible to understate the scale of these projects, and it isn't going to happen overnight.

I hope these tests are still useful, and can help as a starting point or supplement when bike shopping, even without including previous model years.

@lj17 I agree, we should have included the other enduro bikes we rode this year in the round table discussions. It may not be 100% fair since conditions and tires and other stuff is different, but it could be helpful... something to work on in the future!
  • 1 0
 @diego-b: I have a Yeti Sb130 built to the absolute max, a 2020 Orbea Occam and a 2016 Carbon GT Force. I am up in the air as to which one is the best. The Orbea is the clear winner in ascending, but overall it's a toss between the other two. They both climb moderately well and just eat the shit out of traiI on the downs. I always feel they down talk brands like GT. I also feel like the new Occam got a bad review. "Its the best bike in the category, but we like this bike we broke better because of it's cool aluminum manufacturing"
  • 3 0
 @SnowshoeRider4Life: it's because youre from West Virginia, ya dumb hillbilly
  • 3 0
 Thanks @brianpark. Maybe a good way to address this (and I think others have alluded to this) would be a separate video or series of short videos where you just casually discuss your thoughts on the new bikes that were reviewed and tested throughout the year. Like the round tables during the test, but maybe it should be its own thing, like "Thoughts on the new enduro (or trail, XC, etc) bikes of 2019". Yes, some bikes would be part of the field test, others may have just been reviewed, and maybe others just a got a first impressions ride. Obviously, not all the bikes would have been ridden the same amount, or in the same conditions, or with the same tires, so it wouldn't be as much of a back to back comparison like the field test. But, as long as you have some time on the bikes, you should have a general feel of how they ride and anything that is particularly good or bad. It would be interesting to hear which bike everyone would choose if they were buying one and why.

I think something like that would be beneficial for people shopping for new bikes, especially if they aren't able to demo ride, or can only demo a couple brands. You are already doing this somewhat when you review bikes and include a "How does it compare" at the end, which is nice, but a year end round table discussion would be next level.

You and everyone at Pinkbike are doing a great job already, just some food for thought for the future!
  • 1 0
 Not really complaining though, just bitching cause "my" bikes didn't win. You guys are doing an awesome job on reviews. Video production is tough.
  • 2 0
 @brianpark: Yes, they are helpful for sure! "Internet/MTB site reviews" are important. Please continue, and consistent test tires is a good idea! Maybe not DD casing though...
  • 2 0
 not the Norco Optic!
  • 39 6
 "The aluminum frame helps keep the price out of the stratosphere." These passive aggressive shots at Pole keep coming. LOL
  • 18 2
 The pole is a completely different design, I wouldn't even put it in the same category.
  • 15 3
 I really don't get why aluminum is seen as the inferior, less practical option. You aren't gonna notice an extra pound or 2 and besides a slight increase in stiffness, you won't be able to tell the difference in ride feel. I'd rather save a grand or so and go aluminum. Shit, I'd even go steel!
  • 3 1
 @Behindthetapeproductions: agreed. different grade of alloy and manufacturing process.
  • 3 3
 @stumphumper92: I'm not sure anyone said aluminum is inferior. It's just a less expensive means of manufacturing, so the price will be lower. Just a fact.
  • 9 3
 @stumphumper92:
Metal fatigue, weight, higher differences in geometry&tolerances from bike to bike, less versatile of a material to work with, etc.

A high end aluminum bike can be very good, those are just some of the objective disadvantages. And I don’t know about you, but I certainly notice a pound (or two!) regardless of bike type.
  • 1 0
 @TheR: How about the comment above me?
  • 1 0
 @Behindthetapeproductions: True, this one didn't break.
  • 1 0
 @Behindthetapeproductions: Have you forgotten that overpriced Evolinks are still Pole's bread and butter?
  • 3 1
 That is definitely not what they were getting at with that comment...
  • 4 1
 @stumphumper92: You go for it, but I can definitely feel a pound or 2 on the bike and the right feel is night and day. I would says most PinkBike readers/commenters could feel all of those things. Average Joe, maybe not.
  • 2 2
 @parkourfan: what about carbon glue fatigue? No one seems to talk about that carbon layers are not the only thing that make up a carbon bike.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: Well then I must just be an average Joe compared to these wise and seasoned pinkbikers you speak of..
  • 1 2
 @parkourfan: All of those disadvantages disappear when you use hydroformed aluminum. Every single person who picks up my Giant trance to load it on a truck goes "Whoah is that light". The question is whether you're willing to pay an extra 500-1000 dollars for an aluminum bike where the tubing is made by Giant. I'm not sure if anyone else has the equipment to do it?
  • 4 0
 @friendlyfoe: lol, hydroforming is very common way of shaping aluminium tubes. And no it´s not very expensive, from the looks of it it´s just what was used for this bike too.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroforming
  • 2 0
 @Behindthetapeproductions: Totally agreed, the GT seems far more durable.
  • 1 1
 @Mondbiker: My understanding is that the initial outlay for the machines to do it is incredibly pricey, although maybe that has changed over the last handful of years. There is obviously a certain number of bikes you would need to sell in order to justify the cost of purchasing your own hydroforming machines. Otherwise you have to pay extra to have someone else do it for you.

Hydroforming in general allows you to use thinner walled tubing to achieve the same strength as thicker bent tubes. This GT does appear to have hydroformed tubes so I'm not sure why beyond bad design that it would be so heavy. When you look at bikes like those from Commencal they will always be a pound or two heavier because of using standard bent tubing. Evidence of this is also seen in the massive weight loss the new batch of Knollys have since switching to hydroformed tubes.
  • 2 0
 @friendlyfoe: The thing is, you don´t have to buy those machines, there are companies making frames for multiple manufacturers, even though I doubt such a big company as GT would be going down this route. Why it´s heavier? Perhaps they want the frame to last, it´s pretty good policy, just look at slayer... Most importantly it´s cheaper to make strong heavy bike from low grade alloy than strong and light frame from high grade alloy. .
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: Waki....is that you? That's exactly what I said In my first post. Going to raise the cost of the bike if you have to pay someone else to do it for you vs using bent tubing.
  • 1 0
 @friendlyfoe: No, actually paying someone to do that for you is cheaper unless you sell thousands if not tens of thousands of bikes, that´s why most small-medium sized brands don´t buy machines but buy frames from taiwan companies. I´m not waki but I agree with him from time to time. .
  • 1 0
 @friendlyfoe:
@friendlyfoe:
Hydroforming and butting is incredibly common and doesnt inherently get rid of any of the drawbacks of aluminum.

Like someone else already said, using fluid formed tubes is also still common. I’m a big fan of giants aluminum and have had SL and SLR tubed bikes.

I’d still rather have their carbon. For instance, on that trance moving the upper link to carbon made a big difference in system stiffness. The year they did that, the rep brought a couple links to compare weight and flex.

The aluminum trance is fairly light and solid, but just as much of that weight is down to using decent in-house wheels as it is having a moderately light frame, which is good but nothing insane. I’ve had a couple of both.
  • 54 24
 This bike has 3 issues:

-It's ugly
-It's heavy
-It's expensive
  • 20 1
 Pick 3?
  • 64 3
 - Debatable
- True
- Are you mad ? Considering the specs and that it's not direct sale GT it is cheap as chips.
  • 29 9
 We are reaching the ridiculous weight wise: 36 pounds used to be down-hill bike territory.

Weight, by the way, seems to be the only thing theses "tests" can objectively measure. The rest, starting with the "timed runs" and ending with the bizarre choice of bikes to compare, is the triumph of biased subjectivity!
  • 6 10
flag frix182 (Dec 18, 2019 at 7:54) (Below Threshold)
 @Balgaroth: almost 5k bucks for an Alu bike like that is MAD.

There are dozens of better bikes alu and carbon at a less price.
Top level suspensions are not fundamental.
  • 8 3
 > Mike Kazimer: Conditions varied on the two days that I used for my times runs, but my second fastest time of all occurred on the GT, just 1% slower than my quickest run.

> Jason Lucas: All my timing was done under similar conditions, and the GT was only 1% slower than the fastest bike for me.

Maybe you missed the attributes that actually matter in the review. What % of the cost of the 'fastest bike' do you think it is?
  • 5 0
 @duzzi: The only thing truly objective about weight though is the number- as the way that weight interacts with the ride is going to be largely subjective. I know- a heavier bike is a heavier bike and that is more work to move around. However, there is no clear line between what the sweet spot is with weight- you couldn't go down a list of of EWS winners and find a pattern based on bike weight nor could most of us describe which of our last three bikes rode best based entirely on weight. Yes weight is an important variable- but it is far from the only one that makes a bike ride in a way that we enjoy. My bigger question is why they went with such a high stand-over height? That factor alone makes this bike really unappealing to me as I want a bike with lots of room to move around on. Unless they can argue for a specific performance advantage of that top tube sitting higher...which I'm not sure they can as there are so many bikes that perform at or above it's level with more clearance.
  • 5 0
 besides the bike, Jason, you are awesome, but you are giving me anxiety riding without gloves.
  • 16 0
 @thetrailpup: I sliced my finger open the day before Field Test and gloves wouldn't fit over the bandage so bare hands were the only option!
  • 7 3
 @Balgaroth: how can you possibly say this is a fair deal. You can get a brand new full carbon reign 29 that doesn’t weigh 36 pounds has the same suspension better breaks and it’s only 300$ more. If that 300$ Blows the budget you could get the sx and have all comparable parts and save urself 700$. This bike is not a value. It’s junk.
  • 3 0
 @frix182: top level suspension is the most important part of a bike! Find me a bike priced in that range with that quality of suspension and build that isn’t direct to consumer. Plus the geo and ride is fantastic! Funny everyone is overlooking It basically tied for the fastest bike! 1% for mere mortals is negligible!

I own this bike and it’s superb, you can waste money on bling and crap all you want. If you want to stay in a reasonable price range there isn’t a better option in my opinion!
  • 4 3
 It's REALLY expensive. For reference you can buy a Santa Cruz Hightower Aluminum S build which has the same drivetrain, mostly better other components, and weights 2.5 lbs less for... wait for it... $4200, or a savings of $500 for a "boutique" brand. This bike's price is utterly terrible.
  • 10 0
 @tgent: Except the stuff that matters and is expensive, like forks and shock...And santa cruz is as boutique these days as mcdonalds is gourmet restaurant.
  • 2 1
 I wouldn’t by this regardless how many races were won on it. Its just not something I want in my stable for 4 years.
  • 2 1
 @Mondbiker: Please tell me how the fork and shock on this GT is better than the RockShox Super Deluxe Select+ and Lyrik Select+ that comes on the Santa Cruz. You may prefer Fox, but they're not significantly better. And if you're comparing a Santa Cruz to McDonalds, then GT must be your local chinese restaurant that just got shut down again for rats in the kitchen...
  • 2 0
 Non one actually pays MSRP for a GT
  • 6 0
 @tgent: Whether it´s better or not is a matter of personal preference, one is much more expensive though, at least in Europe. I haven´t seen single one of those GTs anywhere, I see at least 10 santa cruz bikes on every single ride and Slovakia is far from millionaire country. It´s been a long time since they were boutique, only thing that is the still boutique is price tag, other than that they are just another brand produced at far east.
  • 2 0
 @Deeeznuts: no one is saying the bike is bad, the issue is it’s 4700 they are acting like it was a budget bike. They review it because there wasn’t a higher spec carbon one avail yet. I guarantee you the value bike was not something intended to be in this field test. You can get a lot of bikes with a grip 2 36 and a x2 and gx build for 5k and it would be carbon. Yes it’s cool they put nice mid tier stuff on an alum bike, but trying to argue this is some sort of value or reviews well on any aspect besides it was only “1%” slower than my fastest time on any other bike is insane.
  • 1 0
 @jasonlucas: shoulda gone Michael Jackson with one sparkly glove.
  • 1 0
 @frix182: carbon is only good to show off on the carpark and brag on the interballs but having a frame 300g lighter as no impact on real lifeperformance, especially when riding DD or DH casing tires. Suspension is absolutely everything, then brakes, then wheels.
  • 17 2
 Holla the woodfairy, my Freerider from 2010 has the same weight and more travel :-D ... designwise the GT looks better
  • 6 0
 Ya, my kona with 180mm coil travel front and back and a hammerschmidt weighed the same.
  • 3 0
 @hamncheez: and that's saying a lot because kona is known for being the lightest bikes out there! I mean...
  • 2 0
 @gorideyourbikeman: Granted, a bike from 2010 was probably about 3 inches shorter, and no dropper.
  • 4 3
 @TucsonDon: why do people talk about droppers as if they're detrimental to the bike? I never had one till this year and it's nice but far from a necessity and could still go without no problem.
  • 3 0
 @gorideyourbikeman: I don't think anyone talks about droppers as if they're detrimental to bikes. @TucsonDon is just mentioning things that make a current bike weigh more than past bikes.

To that, you could add larger wheels meaning heavier wheels and tires.
  • 1 1
 @MarcusBrody: in this case, yeah, but I say that based on how often I hear people say it,. right down to kids factoring in the cost of a dropper to a new bike as if they can't buy one and ride it without. " the bike cost's $2000 plus $300 for a dropper so it's not a good deal" kind of thing.
  • 2 0
 @gorideyourbikeman: If you adjust your riding style to take full advantage of a dropper, it improves your riding so much, that it does seem like something you wouldn't want to ride without. Sure, I could ride everything I ride now without a dropper, it would just be slower and I like to go faster. The slacker a bike is, the more necessary it is as well, because a slacker bike needs to be leaned over more to go around a corner at the same speed as a steeper bike. If the seat is all the way up, that limits how much you can lean the bike over, before the seat hits your leg, which limits the speed you can take the corner at. You can lean with the bike, instead of staying over it, but then that reduces your traction, so it feels like you're going as fast as possible, since you're at the limit of your traction, but with better technique, leaning the bike under you, you keep your weight on the tires, you have higher traction, so you can go faster, and take advantage of the higher lean angle a dropper allows.

If you're just using a dropper to drop the seat before drops or jumps, then you're not really getting much out of it, and I could see why you'd think it's not necessary. If you adjust your cornering/descending style to descend like a pro downhiller you'd notice how much it's in the way if you can't drop it. Pro downhillers don't descend with their seats dropped all the way down because it's slower.
  • 16 4
 Honest question here. Why are the specs on these bikes all over the place. All these companies offer a GX build, or an XT build, so why not pick a build level and get all the bikes at that spec. You went through the trouble of putting heavy control tires on all the bikes and I think that totally different specs have at least as big of an impact.
  • 19 1
 That's not a bad idea, but remember that a GX bike from one company will often still have different parts than a GX bike from another company. Others have suggested that we swap out the wheels for every bike, but I think it's important to test the bikes close to how they would be purchased. We mention the components that did well, and the ones that didn't, but the overall focus was on how the bike rode, which is tied much more closely to the geometry and suspension performance than the shifting.
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer:
There will always be differences in the specs, but if the bikes were closer in spec it would highlight the difference in the bikes instead of the components.
  • 4 0
 @Chris97a: but then you'd basically have to ignore the price or the overall value.
Swapping tires is an easy job that 99% of us do (or at least are able to do) but swapping out a set of brakes or groupsets goes beyond what many are able or willing to do.

I'd be all for your suggestion if each frame could be bought and built up on its own but as it is it's just not representative of how most people end up on their new bike (i.e. buy and ride as is)
  • 17 1
 @mikekazimer: You guys are doing it right. People complain that you only test top brands, or only test high end dentist builds, then they complain when you have and off brand. I think most of us are having fun watching these.
  • 1 4
 @mikekazimer: As a compromise maybe consider running the same level (or weight) cassette on each bike. Since that is unsprung weight it makes a pretty considerable difference to rear suspension performance.

I've noticed how sluggish a rear end feels even with a GX eagle cassette compared to X01 or XX1.
  • 1 2
 @mikekazimer:

Hey Mike, honest question: Are YT just too douchy to submit a bike or did you feel they didn't warrant inclusion? Seems like a current Capra (or even a Jeffsy) would destroy this ragtag group of troubled (so far) machines.
  • 9 0
 @endlessblockades, the focus was on bikes that were new for 2020, and we've already reviewed the Capra, which is why it's not included here. Nothing against YT, though, and we have another more value-oriented Field Test in the works that they'll be part of.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: Got it - I appreciate your response.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer- I'm loving the reviews and the quality in each review over quantity of total bikes reviewed. I also like the use of control tires as tires, seat, grips and pedals are the most common preference/region swaps when someone buys a new bike with brakes somewhere lower down the list (for many) and then drivetrain/wheels etc. lower. Only once have I bought a bike and immediately swapped the brakes and that was on my previous bike where I pulled some Elixers off cause I had never had good luck with them. My bike this year came with Code's and while I preferred Shimano historically left them on and am glad I did as they have been great (Though the bike came with a 180 rotor in the front and I quickly swapped up to a larger rotor). I like that you are largely riding them as people buy them as it is good info for those buying the bikes to keep in mind as they will likely get builds similar. I also think it is good for bike companies to hear and hopefully listen to what the consumer and media are saying. Hopefully GT can take the feedback from this as it sounds like with some better brakes and better built wheels the bikes performance could be improved fairly easily...and maybe lower that toptube in the future versions?
  • 2 1
 The better thing to control for would be the suspension spec.
  • 1 5
flag tgent (Dec 18, 2019 at 11:14) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: PinkBike hates YT is the biggest mtn bikers conspiracy theory of this decade...
  • 4 0
 @tgent: Thought it was Evil?
  • 1 0
 @tgent: Actually PB has always seemed cool enough with YT - I was thinking it might be the other way around. You are def thinking of the Evil Conspiracy Theory.
  • 2 0
 @wowbagger:
I'm not saying build a custom bike with identical components. I'm saying test the GX build or the XT build, or even the top shelf build, that each company offers. In this category it was an $8000 bike, a $6500 and then a $4700 bike so far. Of course the GT was heavy, it is a way more affordable bike and is meant to be smashed on. I'm just saying to seek out all the same level of builds that the companies offer and do a head to head competition.
  • 1 0
 @cole-inman: No way, that's too big a change. Tires are meant to be changed at will. You can't go changing out major components like susp. Then it's not the "specific model" that people can buy off the shelf. In other words, you can't go change out a Yari for a Fox 36 or Lyric Ultimate. That's a massive change!
  • 2 0
 Control tires which are the same for Trek Fuel and Yeti SB165 is not a good idea either... just saying.
  • 17 6
 Never understood why the top tube would ever be shaped for anything other than standover clearance. You can keep the same geometry, just shape it differently. That additional piece by the seat tube alone would keep me away from these bikes.
  • 13 6
 Toptubes play a crucial roll in making sure your frame stays intact. If poorly designed it can cause a bike to fail. But in this case it may have been designed to help the frame, just with a few sacrifices. Im not an engineer by any means and could not go into anymore specified detail than this. But I can say, designing a top tube around a person being able to stand over it is not the route to go.
  • 8 2
 Personally I don't care about standover [within reason]. I have some bikes with higher than typical standover that fit water bottles and frame bags inside the frame. I've never hit "the boys" despite riding techy terrain and I appreciate the water bottle and tools attached to my bike every ride.
  • 3 1
 @chillrider199: Case in point, some of the Gian't Anthems from a few years back had a tendency to fail at the top tube / seat tube junction. The later ones had some extra reinforcing.
  • 32 2
 @chillrider199: I'm an engineer (required intro). Can confirm: Top tubes are generally needed to keep frame in tact.
  • 1 0
 but but its needed for the bottle
  • 5 1
 also a nod to the 'triple triangle'
  • 4 6
 @chillrider199: "Toptubes play a crucial roll in making sure your frame stays intact. If poorly designed it can cause a bike to fail"

thanks Captain Obvious
  • 6 7
 @MTBrent: You must not be a very good engineer if you can't figure out how to lower a top tube without affecting it's structural integrity.
  • 3 0
 This looks like 100% water bottle decision to me. This is the large and any lower and the bottle would not have fit.
  • 5 1
 @alexeyter: Your sarcasm tank is running low. Might want to fill 'er back up.
  • 2 0
 @alexeyter: He didn't say it can't be done, he was confirming that top tubes are shaped for reasons beyond stand over clearance. You've "never understood", so now maybe you do. A win for you!
  • 3 1
 @vikb: To each his own. I don't care about bottle cage attachment. I ride with a backpack or with a bottle in my jersey/bib back pocket. I know that water bottle mounts are all the rage with the "enduro" people, but I'd never chose a frame because of that. But hey, that's just me.
  • 5 1
 @chillrider199: Also not an engineer- buuuut- don't really need to be to note that there are bikes (lots of them!) with a better stand-over design that have stood the test of time and performed on par or better. So, unless their engineers or athletes can point to why having such a high stand over is an advantage it doesn't really make sense to have it the way it is. Yeti, SC, Norco, Transition etc. aren't falling apart at the top tube, struggling to fit a bottle in, or being reviewed as riding in a less enjoyable/competitive way so I don't think it comes down to engineering necessity here...but again...not an engineer.
  • 2 0
 When you compare with the new norco Sight aluminum, it really looks outdated. It reminds me of my 2006 giant reign. I have a 29" inseam so this bike, although a good value, just automatically gets crossed off the list.
  • 12 2
 Where did all the weight weenie haters go? For the GG trail pistol the comments were loaded about the reviewer acknowledging that it was a heavy bike. Same acknowledgement in the review here but hardly anything in the comments about a pound or two making no difference.
  • 2 0
 Um it was in the downcountry category?

Which are supposed to be light.
  • 1 0
 @reverend27: Yeah, that's my point, the downcountry bikes should be light but the comments where slamming Sarah for pointing out that the GG was heavy. Here, where it's ok to be heavy, there's no backlash for Mike.
  • 1 0
 @Bob12051968: o that's simple. GG got alot of fan boi. Gt has none.
  • 12 0
 Looks like GT will be forcing their way into the long travel 29 market.
  • 17 0
 You maes be correct
  • 3 0
 @pinhead907: He must have his Sensor out
  • 12 0
 LTS not go crazy with the puns.
  • 4 0
 @mlangestrom: you the pun aggressor
  • 1 0
 @mlangestrom: winner comment here, nice!
  • 12 3
 Finally, a bike without an obscene gesture for a price tag. Though it come at the high price of the occasional nut check from the top tube.... COME ON
  • 3 2
 Yes, but you get a crappy wheel build, crappy brakes, and limited seat post insertion. It's a GT this will appeal to the population who buys these kinda of bikes, in between Bike Direct and mainstream mfgs. Personally, I ain't considered a GT since my BMX days, and if this is the best they got then I probably won't consider them in the future. It's kinda sad that they couldn't design their way outta the dropper issue, brakes and wheels are all about quality and price.
  • 5 4
 This is an insane price. How the hell are people considering this a value bike. It’s 36 lbs and 4700$ this is a f*ckinggggg jokeeeeee.
  • 4 0
 I didn't say it was a "value" I said it had a sub-dentist price that still manages to kick you in the nuts
  • 2 0
 If you're comparing to the other bikes in the test ok... But this is a terrible price for the bike. For reference you can buy a Santa Cruz Hightower Aluminum S build which has the same drivetrain, mostly better other components, and weights 2.5 lbs less for... wait for it... $4200, or a savings of $500 for a "boutique" brand. This bike's price is utterly terrible.
  • 2 0
 @tgent:
I don't know if I would agree about the better components.
Hightower has aefect bars, RS select suspension, and code R's.

Force has Spank Oozy bars, grip 2 fork and guide rsc brakes.

As far as the weight, they did not test the GT with it's stock lighter EXO+ tires but put some heavier tires on there.
  • 2 0
 @Chris97a: You can buy a brand new reign29 advance 1 full carbon with same or better geo numbers, gx build code breaks grip 2 36 and an x2 for 5k...if you want aluminum they do that too, it’s 4k

Saying this bike is a value is a huge stretch. This bike is here because they wanted to review the carbon one and it’s not even a real bike yet so this was the next best thing. If the goal was to show you can get a bike that competes with the big dogs for far less then yea maybe but you are never ever going to be able to tell me that 1% or even 5% on a trail of 4-5 min is anyging more than human error, fatigue, or timing errors.

Long story short I’m never spending 4700$ on a aluminum bull shit Horst link 36 lb bike.
  • 1 0
 @dirtbiker6015:
I would say the $4000 reign looks like a good value, but has some components that I would question, like the NX drivetrain and I have no familiarity with giant branded parts so can't compare the wheels, dropper or cockpit. I have a feeling it all is pretty good stuff but I just don't know.

Any way you can think the GT is a bad value, that is up to you.
  • 1 0
 @Chris97a: Ok, at a minimum very comparable components. Suspension is dead even, with Fox Performance Elite on the GT vs Select+ (though people are very opinionated on what they prefer and most prefer Fox). MSRP for G2 brakes, MSRP is $280 for a set and Code R are $310 a set, so again people may prefer one or the other but Code R's are the more expensive brake. Spank Oozy vs Race Face Aefect bars I'd say are also preference and a $20 difference.

Biggest difference IMO is wheels which you get Stans with GT and Mavic with SC, and I'd give an edge to the Stans, but that didn't work out so well with this bike apparently.

Even if you assume the components are comparable, the GT is still $500 more and weighs more with the same tires...
  • 1 0
 @tgent:
The Santa Cruz is a pretty good value, though I like the spec on the GT better. I have really liked Santa Cruz bikes when taking out demo bikes at a shop I previously worked at, but found that you have to fiddle with rear shock air pressure a lot to make them work well. Then they work great, but I still prefer the feel overall of FSR or swingarm suspensions as it just feels so predictable. Short link bikes to me always feel absolutely amazing doing some particular thing(whatever was optimized by the designer), but seem to struggle just a little bit in other areas.
  • 15 4
 its like boredom manifest itself in the form of a bike
  • 1 0
 Couldn't agree more. This bike has no appeal for me personally.
  • 1 0
 Ha same. Good all around bike, but I'd never buy it.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: Sounds fast. Why'd you never buy it?
  • 1 0
 @sir-stinky: Overpriced and nothing to set it apart from any other bike, it's just boring.
  • 4 0
 So this bike was 1% slower. Could you tell it was 1% slower when it was on the trail? I guess what I'm wondering is, if you had to guess which bike was faster or slower at the end of a lap without knowing the times of your previous rides, do you think you could have? It would be interesting to not tell the riders how fast or slow they were for each bike but have them make guesses at the end of each lap and then see how that compared to the actual speeds. Kinda single blind control.

The reason I wonder is that there have been numerous times when I have thought I had totally killed my PR when I find out I'm a good few seconds slow and vice-versa. Being able to compare perceived speed vs actual speed might provide an interesting data point about what a bike feels like.
  • 1 0
 Good point. I had a Foxy Carbon 29 that I (mistakenly) sold because I couldn't get the back end to feel the way I like. It was harsh and "felt" slower to me. Turns out, many of my PRs are still connected to the Foxy, both up and down...
  • 4 0
 1% over a 5 minute lap is 3 seconds. That's nothing and IMO within a statistical margin of error. You can't control mountain biking (even at Whistler) enough that 15 is statistically meaningful.
  • 1 0
 @nouseforaname: there is no way to make any of this statistically significant without crazy time and expense. I was more thinking being able to find out things like "even though I was quite a bit slower, the whole lap felt fast, flowy, but right on the edge. I thought this bike was the fastest". It would be a way to qualify bike speed to bike feel, maybe.
  • 3 0
 @pcmxa: I agree, by making the measure an objective % they are assigning too high a value to that; when at best it's a marginal #. I get that MTB reviews are usually the opposite (very subjective, single reviewer), this % game is silly when measured across such small windows.
  • 1 0
 @nouseforaname: schleyer is like less than a two minute trail so 1% is about 1 second. But they've been pretty honest to take the results with a grain of salt.
  • 7 0
 PB and Mr Kazimer, I'm so proud of you for writing a review that is very short. Well done.
  • 8 2
 I think I'll roll down to the local Performance and test ride one... Never mind.
  • 3 1
 LOL Maybe you mean Dick's Sporting Goods? Performance never carried the high end GT bikes, and they had already stopped selling GT for a year or two before they went under. None of the LBS in my area carry GT anymore.
  • 2 0
 Good point though! I'm not sure there is a GT dealer near me anymore. I like what GT is doing with the new bikes, keep it going.
  • 6 0
 GT has the bones, they just need a new owner.
  • 2 0
 After my 1 year old ali Gt Fury cracked at the headtube along with many other Gt owners I have spoken to there is not a chance I'll ever buy or be interested in an ali Gt again. Also the fact that alot of original owners where refused a warrenty claim,Gt can do one.
  • 5 1
 I would have liked to see this compared to a Ripmo AF but I don't think they have it in this test.
  • 1 0
 I was really surprised they didn't test one here, especially since they haven't done a real test yet. @mikekazimer @brianpark any particular reason you guys skipped the Ripmo AF?
  • 4 0
 @pnwpedal, it was included in the 'Value Bikes' portion of the Field Test - that's still to come.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: nice! Thank you, I'm looking forward to it.
  • 4 0
 Yeah. Its a decent bike. But nothing would make me buy this over a Commencal. Even the supposed climbing ability.
  • 6 0
 Too bad they did not include a Commencal in the Field Test. :/
  • 2 0
 @cool3: Yeah! I would love to see how they compare it to some of these bikes They have done a review in the past.
  • 5 0
 Forget the bikes. I want to know who the fastest PB reviewer is!
  • 15 0
 I am
  • 33 0
 ...not as fast as Kazimer" is the rest of Levy's sentence.
  • 6 0
 @mikelevy: That's what sh....nevermind.
  • 7 0
 I don't know who is faster on a bike - but it looks like Levy is faster to post, but Kazimer is faster with a sick burn.
  • 5 0
 Looks like a fantastic bike for the price. Well done GT.
  • 1 0
 Since when is 460mm seat tube too long on size large frame?Ehm, It used to be 19 inches as standard like a year ago on most frames? If anything is going to stop you from using longer dropper it´s pivot placement or some stupid bend in the seat tube.
  • 1 0
 Two bikes with 470mm reach so far and both reviews have a brief comment about the length/agility relative to the Enduro. The 440mm seat tube mentioned in the review means that PB went with an S4 Enduro with 487mm reach vs the S3 with 464mm, which is closer in size to the large Slayer and Force.
  • 3 0
 True story. I'd ridden the S4 previously and was comfortable on it, and Jason's a little taller than me, so we went with the S4. Keep in mind that head angle and chainstay length also play a role in how maneuverable a bike feels. Bike sizing is still in a state of flux; the reach numbers we ended up with this year were:

GT Force 29: 470mm
Ibis Mojo HD5: 472mm
RM Slayer: 475mm
Yeti SB165: 480mm
Specialized Enduro: 487mm
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Makes sense. I would have liked to see the S3 in the mix for purely selfish reasons as I’m a perennial M-L fence sitter at 178cm.
  • 1 0
 I had the same issue with my Stan's Flow MK3 wheels back in 2016. Had them built up by a shop but the spokes in the rear would come loose after every other ride. Had them re-built by a different shop who used loctite onthe threads and they've been solid for four full seasons since (until I dented the rear rim this year, but bought a new rim and reused the same spokes and it was all good again).
  • 1 0
 The rear wheel wouldn't stay true because it was a Stans rim...tension those up right and the nipple beds (isn't that fun to say?!) start to crack. I'm amazed the rear hub didn't also fail-the drivers on those Stan's hubs are notably fragile.

I love the Stans fluid, but their solid goods aren't too hot.


Having to get a fresh set of hoops (and brakes) right out of the box puts kind of a buzzkill on this bike.
  • 2 1
 Would have liked to see the Norco Sight in this category. More travel and updated geometry from last year. After seeing how well the Optic is being received Im curious about the Sight. Just waiting or the LBS to have one for demo. On paper seems like a pretty badass bike.
  • 1 0
 Kaz is working on a long term review on the Sight. It will be out later...
  • 1 0
 29" hoops with 150mm travel adds up to one heavy effete bike makes zero sense unless you are planing on riding Rampage. If you are riding your bike and not shuttling this mid 30's weight is unacceptable for even a non weight weenie
  • 4 0
 OK, so with good barkes it would have been the fastest?
  • 8 6
 Chances are if you own one of these you also have a set of white new balance shoes and a nascar jacket somewhere in your closet.
  • 4 2
 How about some bike weights in kg? Yes I know google but then so do the PB crew... After googling, happy to find this weighs more than my XL enduro 170/180 650b.
  • 2 0
 You should highlight the rear hub on each bike. I blow through cheap hubs in no time. While rim information is nice, I'd almost prefer to know the hub make and model.
  • 1 0
 Stan's rear drivers seem to be made of paper mache.
  • 1 0
 I'd like to see a comparison with Nicolai G1 or even a back to back test of the G1 vs the Pole Stamina 180. I'd also be curious to know how the Pole Stamina 140 compared in the lap test with all these bikes.
  • 3 0
 Just added the Force 29 Pro to Bikedigger.com for comparison. Looks like a rowdy one.
  • 2 1
 Saying that the wheels aren't up to hard charging because they're not built right??? it's like saying the BIKE isn't up to hard charging because someone forget to torque the stem bolts.
  • 1 1
 swap codes on, DPX2 is lighter and better for most, no DD front tire, cushcore the rear, better/lighter cranks, and you'd have a great bike and probably come out around 35 pounds still for a bike that destroys downhills for under 5000 dollars. what more do you gapers want?
  • 2 0
 my large supreme sx has 180mm front and rear, high pivot and only 33.8 lbs. LOL though its only a 27.5
  • 2 0
 It looks like the inevitable carbon version of the Force 29 will be a better choice.
  • 2 0
 3:54 - is that a cockroach climbing the wall behind Mike? Trying to steal the spotlight...psh.
  • 1 0
 Just noticed Lucas climbs flats with the pedal more mid foot than on the ball.

What does this mean you ask? nothing, just a random observation!
  • 2 1
 They seem to just glance over the fact they went incredibly fast in this bike. Second fastest in test for this heavy aluminum sled is something
  • 2 1
 You guys are really making all of us wait for the one bike we actually want, eh?
  • 1 2
 You mean the Yeti, right?
  • 1 1
 Ordered mine through Nick @ America’s Bike Company in CA. Good guy and fair price/shipp, etc. Online only I think but give them a call.
  • 2 0
 Shout out to the dude hiding in the bush at 3:00.
  • 2 1
 You mean people are still spec'ing Stans wheels... and particularly the MK3?? WTF!!??
  • 3 5
 Good thing this one didn't break like the Slayer. PB would have "slayed" the bike, the brand, and we would never have heard the end of it everytime a GT bike showed up on the site. Yous guys have a big ol' boner for some brands, even when they fail. Merry impeachment!
  • 3 1
 35.6 pounds. Weight doesn't matter.
  • 1 0
 Kazimer fully pinned during the road sprint in the video opener always makes me smile. Dropping the hammer.
  • 2 0
 The weight may be part of its stability. Noice boik.
  • 2 1
 If anyone is looking to get one from a LBS any Cannondale dealer should have access to GT as well.
  • 2 1
 Wasn't mentioned so I assume it was tested in the 'low' setting the whole time?
  • 2 0
 How the hell do you people run these pressures without flatting?!!!
  • 1 0
 Where are Transition bikes at??? The Patrol should definitely be in running. Are you on coil???
  • 2 0
 Sessionish
  • 1 0
 why assegai on this bike and dhf/dhr on the mojo as conrol tires?
  • 2 0
 This was due to the availability from Maxxis at the time. We weren't able to get any 27.5" Assegais. However, all the tires were the same casing and compound.
  • 1 0
 @jasonlucas: Having an Assegai on the front compared to DHF is worth some time in my book. Are the rest of the 29ers on Assegai as well so control is maintained?
  • 1 0
 @heatproofgenie: Yep, all the 29ers were on Assegais.
  • 1 0
 I’m still trying to afford the bike I wanted from the first field test!
  • 1 0
 Unpopular opinion: I would pay a premium for a new i-drive trail bike
  • 1 0
 Are you by chance an XL?
  • 2 0
 Pro
+ It didn't break.
  • 1 0
 Lol. My DHR weighed 35 and change, okay GT...
  • 1 0
 So in short, Maes is currently riding handy capped.
  • 2 3
 Guys awesome review, but when doing the glamour shots make sure it doesn't have finger marks
  • 9 9
 Seriously, who has liked GT bikes since 1997?
  • 2 4
 Totally off topic, but it's so nice to see proper foot/pedal position Jason. So many people come from XC and ride with the spindle on the ball of their foot. Well done.
  • 1 3
 Mine is a Canyon Strive.. looks like same geometry but the mine is mind blowing!..

My last ride in Colombia!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpcuW9wqU9I
  • 1 0
 GT is the new Kona.
  • 1 2
 Prediction: Enduro 2020 wins
  • 1 1
 Looks like a GSessionT.
  • 12 15
 Not sure where they get a price of $4700 for a generic Horst link aluminum frame with junky wheels and low end components.
  • 7 8
 BuT ITSA localBIkE sHOP braND
  • 25 1
 GRIP2 fork and X2 shock are not low end, neither are the G2 RSC brakes (although Codes would be a better choice, these are higher tier brakes).

GX is pretty mid-grade now with NX and SX, so these aren't 'low end components' by any means.
  • 4 0
 I agree but low end? i think not.
  • 2 2
 @shinook: Ok, mid grade components.
  • 3 1
 I'm with you. Other shop brands provide better spec at the price. This isn't a terrible bike, but also not a compelling one. Having to shell out for upgraded brakes and wheels out of the box kind of blunts the value on this.
  • 2 0
 @shinook:

To specify, the elite is the same internals as the factory top tier forms, minus kashima. Other than aesthetics or going to a truly boutique brand, objectively there’s nowhere to go upgrade wise.

G2 RSC’s are SRAMS top tier trail bikes, although code rsc’s would be the better spec.

Wheels aren’t great, and the groupset is run of the mill for the price point. It’s an aluminum frame with the important parts - brakes and suspension well sorted. Not crazy either way on the price I’d say.

If this is “low end” to OP, I’d like to see what he’s riding.
  • 1 0
 The rear shock is different as well too. I would aslo bet that frame is made way cheeper than a few others
  • 1 0
 @freeridejerk888: Frame sounds strong enough though.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.030759
Mobile Version of Website