Long travel enduro machines may seem like they're all the rage these days, but the truth is, there's a large percentage of riders out there who aren't constantly seeking out the gnarliest trails they can find, and who don't want (or need) bikes with geometry and travel numbers that are approaching DH bike territory.
That's where bikes like Pivot's brand new Trail 429 come in. With 29” or 27.5+ wheels, 120mm of rear travel, a 130mm fork up front, and geometry that's designed to split the difference between XC and all-mountain, it falls squarely into the trail bike category.
The bike is the evolution of the Mach 429 Trail that was introduced three years ago, but it's different enough that Pivot decided to flip the name to make it clear this is an entirely new machine.
Trail 429 Details• Intended use: XC / trail
• Wheel size: 29" or 27.5+
• Rear wheel travel: 120mm
• Carbon frame
• 430mm chainstays
• Frame weight (med, w/ shock): 6.4 lb
• 12 x 157mm rear spacing
• Sizes: XS-XL
• Price: $4,699 -$8,699 USD
• Colors: steel blue, crimson
• Available now
•
www.pivotcycles.com,
@pivotcycles Key changes include bumping up the rear travel from 116mm to 120mm, increasing the reach to more modern numbers for all sizes, steepening the seat tube angle, and slightly slackening the head tube angle. The Trail 429 also uses Super Boost Plus spacing, which means it has 12 x 157mm rear spacing – more on that in a moment.
Frame Details The Trail 429's carbon frame has a cleaner, less busy, and much more eye-pleasing look than the Mach 429 Trail that it replaces. The top tube angle lines up with the seat stays, and there's now a double-wishbone rear triangle. The 120mm of rear travel is still delivered by a DW-link suspension design, but the shock is tucked a little higher up between the seat tube and top tube, with wider pivots and larger bearings. There's also more room for longer travel dropper posts, thanks to a shorter seat tube on all sizes.
The lower link is 25.4mm wider than before, an increase that was made possible by eliminating any front derailleur compatibility. 1x drivetrains have become the norm, and the benefits of ditching the option for front derailleur outweighed keeping it around for the few remaining fans of multiple front chainrings.
There's plenty of room for a large water bottle, even on the extra-small size, and even when a shock with a piggyback reservoir is installed. The brake, dropper, and derailleur housing are all routed internally through the front triangle, with the derailleur housing emerging on the underside of the downtube and running externally below the bottom bracket shell, while the rear brake line is routed safely on top of the chainstay.
Pivot have also stuck with a PressFit 92 bottom bracket — after all, they're the ones who originally developed the system. According to Chris Cocalis, Pivot's founder, their frame tolerances are tight enough that they haven't had any issues with unwanted creaking, and they see PressFit as a better system for carbon frames, one that's closer to what's used for a headset, as opposed to bonding in a threaded sleeve, and then threading in cups with bearing pressed into them.
Super Boost Plus The
Switchblade was the first bike that Pivot unveiled with Super Boost Plus spacing, and the Trail 429 is the next model to receive a 12 x 157mm rear end paired with a BB92 bottom bracket shell. If you missed the Super Boost memo, here's the quick primer: Super Boost Plus isn't a new axle spacing standard — DH bikes have used 12 x 157mm hubs for years, but on a Super Boost Plus hub the flanges are spread further apart in order to create a better bracing angle, which in turn should create a significantly stiffer wheel.
Would that old DH hub that's been sitting in your parts bin for years work on a bike with Super Boost Plus spacing? It sure will — the only difference between that hub and a Super Boost Plus hub is the flange width. The axle spacing is the same, as is the location of the disc rotor mount. All that's required are cranks arms with a 173 – 177mm Q-factor and a chainring with 6mm of offset.
The wider rear spacing also allows for more tire clearance, and in the case of the Trail 429 there's enough room to fit up to 29 x 2.6” or 27.5 x 3.0” tires.
Geometry The Trail 429's reach numbers have increased significantly, and the size large now has a reach of 460mm, where the previous version measured in at only 423mm. The seat tube angle has been steepened to go along with the longer reach, and it's now 74°, up from 72.8°. The head angle hasn't changed quite as drastically, since Pivot wanted to preserve the bike's quick and lively handling, but it did drop from 67.5° down to 67.3° degrees. The 27.5+ version uses a 17mm lower headset cup to prevent the BB height from getting too low with the smaller wheels, but that cup is also included with the 29" version, where it can be used to slacken the head tube angle.
The other number worth noting is the chainstay length – it's been reduced from 443mm down to 430mm. In short, all of those changes bring the Trail 429 right up to speed when it comes to modern trail bike geometry without getting
too radical. Pivot did experiment with an aluminum mule that had the same amount of travel but some very extreme numbers, like a 62.5° head angle and a 530mm reach on a size XL, in order to see where the limits were, but ended up settling on the current numbers in order to have a bike that handle well going up
and down, and was well suited to a wide range of riders.
Specifications Riders can choose from either the Team, Pro, or Race complete bike options, and within each of those categories there's either a SRAM or Shimano option for the brakes and drivetrain. The priciest model is the Team XX1 version, which includes a SRAM XX1 drivetrain, Guide Ultimate brakes, Fox Factory 34 Float fork, and Reynolds Blacklabel Enduro 29 wheels for $8,699 USD.
At the other end of the spectrum is the Race XT 1x model, which has an 11-speed Shimano XT derailleur, SLX cassette and shifter, SLX brakes, Fox 34 Performance fork, and Sun Ringle Duroc wheelset for $4,699 USD. At the moment, due to the relatively limited number of Super Boost Plus wheel options on the market, Pivot is only offering the Mach 429 as a complete bike, but that could change in the future.
The otherworldly terrain of Moab, Utah, served as the location for the launch of the Trail 429, which meant that there were plenty of chunky climbs and even chunkier descents on the menu for the day's ride — Mag 7 to the Portal Trail. It only takes a few pedal strokes before the bike's high level of efficiency becomes noticeable — there's a snappiness to its handling that encourages standing up and really putting the power down. I never even contemplated reaching down to flip that climb switch, since even in the fully open position there's plenty of support to keep the shock from going unnecessarily deep into its travel.
Moab's trails are about as hard as it gets, and I mean that in the literal sense — they're mostly comprised of sandstone, and there's no shortage of square ledges and rocky fins that are perfectly placed to impede forward progress if you're not paying attention. The Trail 429's suspension felt rather firm over the small bumps, even with 30% sag and equipped with Fox DPX2 shock, but I was impressed with how well it handled bigger hits — a few accidental hucks to flat didn't seem to rattle it in the slightest.
Of course, it usually takes more than one ride to really dial in a bike's suspension, but my initial impression is that the Trail 429 is more oriented towards pedaling than plushness, which makes sense given that there's only 120mm of travel to work with, and that Pivot has other models in their lineup for riders who'd rather aim and pray instead of picking their way through a spicy section of trail.
Speaking of spicy trails, it was on the Portal Trail where the bike's limits began to appear, but that's not exactly surprising — steeper, really rough terrain isn't really where the Trail 429 was designed to excel. On that particular trail, which is comprised of multiple awkward, slower speed sections through tight rock gardens, with some higher speed portions thrown into the mix, the Trail 429 felt a little undergunned — I wouldn't have minded a little more suspension to take the edge off those jarring square-edged hits. The bike was able to handle it all, but I definitely needed to pay extra attention to my line choice and body position in order to avoid getting pushed where I didn't want to go by an erratic rock outcropping.
As far as the parts list goes, it's great to see more and more trail bikes showing up spec'd properly, free from the sketchy tires, long stems, and narrow bars that seemed to be the norm on 120mm 29ers from most manufacturers just a few years ago. I'm still not sold on the WTB PadLoc grips, which are mounted to Pivot's carbon PadLoc-compatible carbon handlebar, but I do like the fact that the Trail 429 comes with a short stem, a 150mm dropper post, and proper 2.4” tires in the form of a Maxxis DHR II up front and a Rekon in the rear.
Overall, the Trail 429 is a welcome evolution of the Mach 429 Trail. It hasn't lost any of the zippiness that earned the prior model a loyal following, but it now has better handling on the descents and in technical terrain. It's a trail bike through and through, with crisp pedaling performance and quick handling that make it a speedy, energetic, and entertaining ride.
When your girlfriend doesn’t want to touch you but your chainstays will.
I bet they lose a lot of frame only sales because of this. I wouldn’t consider one because of this...
Sad.
Me: (pinches bridge of nose with eyes closed and exhales slowly)
"I boost you!"
"I double dog boost you!"
"Oh Yeah...I triple dog boost you!"
Industry, please stop...my wallet can't handle this pissing match.
the chainstays are 430mm, too. what the hell??
Ahmen
That may have been a good argument 10 years ago, maybe even 5 years ago, but at this point, improvements are tiny, geo is dialed, and bikes these days are already more capable than 99.9% of riders will ever be. YOU are what's holding your bike back, not the fact that you have boost 148 instead of super boost+ 157
If "innovation" stopped today, mountain bike frame and component makers could focus on other things like manufacturing efficiencies and economies of scale. Imagine being able to buy a well-kitted FS bike for $1500 instead of $3K or hardtail for $900 instead of $1800.
Cost of entry into mtb is one barrier to picking up the sport. I bet we would see an explosion of people buying bikes, which would ultimately be a good thing. The more people we have advocating for the sport, the more power we have to build new and defend existing trails. What if we were bigger than the sierra club?
Just trying to stir the pot with some fellow pinkbikers and [just maybe] point out that overall the bike industry may have slowed in its progress of actual game changing innovation, but innovation is still a good thing even if it renders a bike "obsolete".
@sevensixtwo:
us.yt-industries.com/detail/index/sArticle/1980/sCategory/261
If I was in Pivot i would be working with designers on their image rather than coming out with ideas from the marketing department.
Do you want a stiffer wheel?
Get a good wheelbuilder make you one that suits your weight and riding style.
They call is Super Boost Plus, because they're making a joke about how the trail bike standards are constantly fluctuating,and forcing people to buy new parts, even when great parts already exist.
Pretty certain in WC DH 135, 142, 148, 150 and 157 spacing is currently being used.
My G16 uses Boost 148 and 83mm cranks so I don't really know anything.
The non drive side flange is further out.
I just ignore all the marketing and go ride my bike. It's all nonsense. Bicycles today are quickly approaching the cost of motorcycles, but yet when I hear all the justifications for that and all these different standards I just laugh. Because its a joke. They are only screwing themselves in the long run.
The different standard is a pain in the ass, but not a true deal breaker for me. The big problem is Pivot not selling frames because of Super Boost Plus. Dumb.
Come on.
Also- How many 29er 150/157 DH rigs are there again? When I tried to sell the wheels off my Lenz
29er 150/157 no bites for months, relaced it 142 and sold in a couple weeks
Also about the moto bike comment. At some point ill just buy a moto instead.
It's a clean looking frame, miles better than the post-crash bendy stuff of old. Now just to sort out that cable routing...
If you visit the FAQ’s section it lists a lot of details about cranks and other compatibility items. You should give one a test ride, I’m certain you’d enjoy it!
Everyone should try it, you’ll love it!
Same here. Fail. Even on many "normal" bikes I'll get a little rub on chain/seat stay. Weird-ass choice for a pedally bike.
But yes, I'll still consider a demo. Cool bike tho.
Kia is also shit. They got the sheet metal down but are still garbage and don't last or retain good value.
Volkswagen is crazy overrated and have always had wild electrical issues and well you know. Straight up lie about emissions.
Who's "making opinions" besides you? Google is easy to use man. Give it a try some time.
Volvo was owned by Ford as well. This is also no longer true—ford needed cash. Geely has owned them for 8 years. No more rebadged Ford Escapes etc.
Stop being patronizing to posters about your knowledge.
Also this:
In January 1999, Volvo Group sold Volvo Car Corporation to Ford Motor Company for $6.45 billion. The division was placed within Ford's Premier Automotive Group alongside Jaguar, Land Rover and Aston Martin. Volvo engineering resources and components would be used in various Ford, Land Rover and Aston Martin products, with the second generation Land Rover Freelander designed on the same platform as the second generation Volvo S80. The Volvo T5 petrol engine was used in the Ford Focus ST and RS performance models, and Volvo's satellite navigation system was used on certain Aston Martin Vanquish, DB9 and V8 Vantage models.
Show me a resource that backs your Volvo claim.
If I didn't need a vehicle in Canada I seriously wouldn't have one.
I have no expectations. Everything fails. Some are meant to fail like the mid 2000 focus. Garunteed engine failure under 5 years.
I've owned quite a few brands of vehicles. There's no Holy Grail.
They started quietly selling the Shuttle ebike in the US. I won’t buy a bike from anyone that sells ebikes. They are prioritizing short term profit over the long term health of mountain biking. Whatever, I get it, it’s a business. People are lazy and want mopeds but they won’t get a cent from me. Not that they care.
That leads me to my second point. Every interaction with a Pivot rep, demo truck driver or sponsored rider has been negative. But the smug arrogance and the disdain with which they looked down on everyone else like they were in a special club... if you aren’t the dentist that puts veneers on celebrities they don’t want you. Whatever, it’s a stupid story and I’m some nobody on the internet, but I didn’t feel welcome so I never bought another Pivot.
Brutal, wibwob! I love it!
I demoed the much hyped Switchblade a year ago in southwest Colorado and it felt good, but not above the competition. It's curious that we're now a couple years after the initial release and they just now dropped the aluminum one. So maybe Pivot is now targeting more than celebrity dentists? Good on 'em for offering a better pricepoint in their lineup.
Is there such thing as wanted creaking?
ill take functional and backwards compatible axle standard over trendy geometry.
I think @americanclassic were really onto something with their boost hubs with equal size and spacing of hub flanges shame they never took off.
I made an excel sheet to evaluate the gains, it is true that you have some BUT is it useful ? No
Assymetric stays/offset wheels/symmetrical spoke bracing is the way to go.
As for your question, I'm not really sure how you would test this, certainly I don't know how to test that out on the trail - suggestions welcome!
Thanks for taking the time to reply, there must but a fair few comments on here.
I suggested a group test on a dyno for suspension after the recent announcements of Fox and RS for 2019 (sensibility blah blah blah). Pinkbike guys associated with Vorsprung could do that quite easily
Part 1 lab test to see which wheel build holds up best to what lab testing can throw at it. Not only a drop test but some kind of deflection testing to see how the wheels react and respond to being pushed out of true ( does more equal spoke tension keep a wheel true longer).
Part 2 give the wheels a right good thrashing on the trails - which feels better, does a stiffer wheel positively or negatively impact how the bike rides (corner, steer, track the terrain) does it impact suspension performance.
Not easy to test but I'm sure you could have some fun.
However, for lateral impacts (say a scrub/whip or moving through a rock garden as well as the minute shifts during everyday riding) it would seem that as things get stiffer and less "compliant" (in the true use of the term) that the bearings/bushings in pivots, wheels, and bottom brackets would take the majority of the beating. I feel like things will just break more easily. Is this not at all the case? And really when it gets down to it is it that stiffness = better power transfer? If not, who cares?
Thanks for the insight. I would test this myself but I don't have money to spend on very expensive bikes.
My issue with your test is that to make it worthwhile we have to define what that "good" stiffness is, and this is an idea that is not widely discussed enough - and until we have consensus there, then testing is a little pointless (in my opinion). I am personally coming to believe that stiffness/compliance is only useful within a system, but at the moment there is no agreement as to what is good - for instance, if you buy frame X, fork Y and wheels Z - how as a consumer can you know how they will function as a system? I would expect the Pivot to feel good with them because it was designed around a (theoretically - I haven't ridden one) very stiff rear wheel, but would my Scott or Orbea feel good with it? To take one of my bikes as an example - I originally had it with a 36 and Ibis carbon rims and the overall feel was quite harsh. I have since switched to a Formula fork, which is not as stiff as the 36, and replaced the carbon rims with ali DT ones and in combination with the (very stiff) mainframe, I think this is a much better - I am getting noticeably more front wheel traction and less fatigue on long runs and I would put that down to reducing some of the stiffness in the system. The purpose of this example is not to say "Formula is better than Fox" or vice versa, but to consider the fork in relationship to the bike it will be mounted on and the riding it will be doing. I think down the line your question is a good one, but in the nearer term, I actually I would like to see more discussion of how stiffness/compliance can be discussed in terms more useful than "stiffer = bettererererer" and until then the test is a moot point.
Are you going to discuss any of this with the guy behind bouwmeester composites he has some insight in this field.
My ride impressions are posted at www.dirtmerchantbikes.com/special-events/2018/11/27/mid-travel-29er-trail-bike-comparison-test-pivot-trail-429-santa-cruz-tallboy-yeti-sb-45-yeti-sb100
.
Since I'm still to my satisfaction using old-age 110x20 front axle with 135x10 rear axle hubs, I now checked randomly only HOPE hubs and SRAM X0 hubs.
HOPE PRO4 135/142mm hub: PCD 57:57mm, flange offset 33:19mm
HOPE PRO4 DH 135/142mm: PCD 60:64mm, flange offset 28:27mm
HOPE PRO4 150/157mm hub: PCD 57:57mm, flange offset 26:26mm
HOPE PRO4 DH 150/157mm: PCD 60:64mm, flange offset 34:34mm
.
SRAM X0 DH 12x157mm hub: PCD 50:57mm, flange offset 41:28mm
.
So, the X0 hub does have the super wide flange spacing, but in reality very asymetrically only on left side. All previous dimension oscilate around value 85° - 86° of spoke-to-hub axle angle.
I tell little secret that you can run your marketing on for the next 2-4 years how you are super boost smart.
.
Disc rotor mounting face on 135mm wide rear hub ( I know, 135mm is not wide enough for you), is 54mm offset from center line. You know what chainline do Pinion and Rohloff use ?
Stop it, just stop this madness now.
If nothing else this is a really good ad for YT and Canyon
12 speed XTR teaser photos are floating around. NEW FREEHUB REQUIRED. hows that for standards. how you gonna get a 12sp shimano freehub on your 157 hubs?
11-51 12 speed cassette. four-piston XTR calipers.
www.instagram.com/p/Bi4KzhfHZdK/?taken-by=weightweeniesbrasil
I am stoked to see that they are getting away from their older, swoopy brokeback aesthetics and going with the functional looking BMX-esque straight lines of the Mach 5.5 bike. 116 seemed like enough for a trail bike on the M429T, but I won't complain about 4mm more on the T429.
I'd like to be able to swap wheels between bikes, so the hub size might be a deal killer, (Unless I end up with a hardtail with a 157 rear end.)
Edit: Also, have you ever tried cutting shifter cable without the proper tool? Lol, ain't happening with a few sharp rocks. You'll break that frame before you cut that cable with rocks. It doesn't look very clean though.
This. This is why consumers hate this industry.
Ok 135mm was shit but just because it had a QR, maybe 157 is better than 148 but can you actually feel the difference just in your wallet.
An old farts 2 cents with that and $5 you can get a beer.
Ride on Amigo's
Pivot: let’s use super boost plus!
I just built a DT swiss straight-pull "superboost" hub onto a symmetrical rim. Ended up with NDS spokes being only 0.9mm shorter than driveside spokes.
Not every hub manufacturer will adhere to this though. Symmetrical 150mm DH hubs are still an option and fit into these bikes without problems.
I have ordered a 157mm spaced trail bike sigh-unseen, and have no idea if this will make for any significant heel clearance issues (obviously i hope that my heels wont hit the mainstays). I doubt it will.
My point was that I also thought that "superboost" was a bad idea because it was sacrificing even spoke tension for a wider bracing angle, but I did the calculation on the hub and found out that it was nearly symmetrical.
my 148 SP 240 ends up about 19 DS / 16 NDS on a Park tensionometer. Edit: this is with 2mm offset rims.
@DONKEY-FELTCHER
www.pinkbike.com/news/knolly-bikes-launches-fugitive-29er.html
even 34 stepcast fork will not help reduce overall weight for xc machine
The wheels of progression keep turning. (Apparently on Superboost hubs.) Looks like a rad bike. If I had unlimited funds I'd get one to go along with my Mach6.
But getting mad over new standards is a lesson in futility. You're just gonna end up as the old man commenting that his XTR 8 speed is "all that he needs".
and i would argue that this improvement is more marginal than most.
Does this imply that such a thing as "wanted creaking" exists?
or they just applied piece of helicopter tape.
noobbojim -> both bikes look like improvements over the prior. We need a 429 & StumpyST shootout methinks.