First Ride: Pivot's New Trail 429

May 17, 2018
by Mike Kazimer  


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.


Pivot
Pivot uses a DW-link suspension layout for the Trail 429's 120mm of rear travel.

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.

Pivot
The stock build comes with an inline Fox Float DPS, but it's possible to upgrade to a DPX2.
Pivot
The cable routing has been updated, and the brake and derailleur housing now run through the front triangle.


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.

Pivot
The view from underneath the Trail 429.
Pivot
That's right - you're looking at a 120mm 29er with 12 x 157mm spacing.


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.

pivot

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.


Pivot


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.

Pivot

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.


Views: 4,493    Faves: 5    Comments: 1





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.

pivot

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.

pivot

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.







370 Comments

  • + 190
 Super Boost Plus?.... Ok I think I had enough.
  • + 101
 For 2019 it's Super Boost Plus EX Alfa HAAAAARDUKEN!
  • + 37
 Super BOOST Metric 15x160 can't be that far off
  • + 87
 Supa Dupa Boost!
When your girlfriend doesn’t want to touch you but your chainstays will.
  • + 14
 @jollyXroger: yeah, but the actual size will be 158.99 Big Grin
  • + 15
 Yea, like pivot bikes but I don’t buy into this new standard sh1te.
I bet they lose a lot of frame only sales because of this. I wouldn’t consider one because of this...
Sad.
  • + 5
 lmao I literally was just about to comment EXACTLY what you said, and there your comment was. I cant even say it without laughing.
  • + 1
 @Richt2000: you can't buy it as a frame set at this time just like the Switchblade.
  • + 18
 Me: (reads that line in article)
Me: (pinches bridge of nose with eyes closed and exhales slowly)
  • - 9
flag drs140t (May 17, 2018 at 4:51) (Below Threshold)
 ????????????@IllestT:
  • + 46
 you guys are aware they called it that as a joke, right?
  • + 18
 Nobody minded it on the Knolly Fugitive or just about every DH bike....
  • + 4
 @Richt2000: I totally would buy this. It means my bike will be relevant for 3 years instead of 2.
  • + 2
 @IllestT: you absolutely crushed that joke haha
  • + 19
 Holding on to Press Fit is like squeezing your cheeks in prison; you’re still gonna get f*cked.
  • + 0
 Yep. switched off as soon as this was mentioned.
  • + 3
 The spec change no one was asking for...
  • - 3
 Yeah..as soon as I read "Super Boost" I was done...
  • + 13
 Give it 2 years - I predict most other brands are at 157mm spacing on a vast majority of new bikes coming out.
  • + 7
 Bike industry talk

"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.
  • + 6
 The worst part is Pivot say the reason for that spacing is so people can run 27+ with a 2x drivetrain. Why should I have to pay for such a niche setup!?! I'll go hop on my Hightower or Instinct that can run 27+ and the hubs I already have.
  • + 2
 @Weens: it may have started as a joke, but it's a serious standard. one I will not be supporting

the chainstays are 430mm, too. what the hell??
  • + 58
 Yeah it sucks when bikes get better. I sure do miss my Trek Y Frame. Why can't the industry just never progress?!
  • + 0
 6.5 lbs frame, about $6k build and 120mm travel nutt buster equals ,,,, you can take that bike a a shuvit!
  • + 4
 @fecalmaster: this will be another great DWLink bike and I like the Geo for regular trail riding I guess but seriously, why all the weight for a 120mm bike? My Rocky Instinct is like 5.1lbs in medium with 140mm. Weight isn't everything but heck I think this frame might weigh more than the dang switchblade frame and that thing is Burly!!
  • + 4
 @Svinyard: Exactly what I was thinking, 12mm axle, DH frame weight, seems like the designers were on something other than coffee. My 6"X 6" AM build is just under 27 lbs, frame about 5.3ish.
  • + 4
 agreed! Bike industry can fack right off
  • + 2
 You're always going to get a new standard with something. If a company didn't innovate somewhere the consumer would say "Eh, looks like blah blah bike, probably rides like so and so where is the difference, etc?" Go for a demo and then see for yourself.
  • + 5
 @Weens: Pretty sure pivot are actually making fun of the new spacing name.. and by using 157mm more people can use their old hubs (with a disc spacer) kind of suprised that nobody gets that. Shoulda payed for a big fancy press release and used black muted colors like sram!
  • + 5
 @Svinyard: I assume it's because people like me are on their 3rd Pivot frame (warrantied 2x) in three years, and have friends like mine that have both warrantied their 1 year old Pivot frames. Looks like a good bike for regular daily trail riding. Could be bad luck or riding harder than the frames intended purpose, but I won't be buying another Pivot for a while.
  • + 16
 @acetasting1992, you're right, the name is tongue in cheek. And a disc adaptor isn't needed with old 12x157mm hubs - the mounts are in the exact same place. The only difference is the hub flange spacing.
  • + 28
 @ctwheeler: "Yeah it sucks when bikes get better. I sure do miss my Trek Y Frame. Why can't the industry just never progress?!"

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?
  • + 4
 @mikekazimer: oh nice! didnt realize that. even better!
  • + 5
 @Weens: Clearly they don't. One of the things that I love the most about Pivot, is that they have a sense of humor, but, it seems to be a sense of humor that goes over the heads of most of the PB crowd.
  • + 0
 And for once I showed up intending on being unbiased.
  • + 0
 @smithcreek: geeeez man, that is pretty bad. Thankfully the newer frames have a 10yr warranty but still...theys a bad set of experience that isn't exactly a one-off. What were the issues??
  • + 0
 @Richt2000: ME neither... I'm a frame only guy as well and that's just not going to work... Aw well....Next!
  • + 0
 @raditude: Not even.. You might make it to fall tho!
  • + 0
 @fecalmaster: what! I'm still on a 16 fuel ex 9.9 with 120mm rear and it handles north shore hits on da regular! Short travel niners are super capable these days!
  • - 3
 Get on board or get left behind
  • + 3
 @ctwheeler: If super boost is better why didn't we just skip boost and go straight to it?
  • + 3
 @Svinyard: Yes, mine is from 2015 so only the three year warranty. Mine and my friends are all carbon. Carbon at my bottom bracket delaminated on one, threaded insert for main pivot on front triangle delaminated on the my second and both my friends bikes.
  • + 1
 @xeren: I was half way being facetious with that previous statement... I did a thesis in school on the economics of public land and outdoor recreation industries and totally agree with you.

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".
  • - 4
flag Trouterspace (May 17, 2018 at 12:52) (Below Threshold)
 What is your current frame? 135 QR? lol
  • + 4
 @Trouterspace: Yep. And whatdayaknow, it (still) rides great. Who would have thought??
  • + 2
 Cool that old dh hubs will work on it, but that frame weight is heavy for a bike with so little travel.
  • - 3
 @utopic: Then you ride like a wiener!
  • + 3
 @Richt2000: Yup, i was looking at replacing my Rune w/ a Pivot frame but I would have had to buy too many new bits for it to work. So i kept the Rune and bought a YT now I have 2 rad bikes instead of 1 w/ a wide rear end.
  • + 5
 you read the article? It's DH width. Not wider axle. Just wider clearance for flanges.
  • + 1
 @cole-bikeva: Can't run a front derailleur. Therefore not for 2x.
  • + 1
 Where ya been?
  • + 2
 @raditude: hows that? Its uses dh parts that have been used for a long time.
  • + 3
 @taletotell: watch your tone, you'll disturb the on going group think session.
  • + 1
 @sevensixtwo: the voice of experience
  • - 1
 @jrocksdh: Ah, but it takes 157mm parts, not 150mm. SO even though you have a 150mm hub from Razor rock, good luck finding endcaps to make it 157mm Smile
  • + 2
 @raditude: 157 hubs are everywhere. it is an old standard.
  • + 2
 @acetasting1992: Fair, by "old" you mean 2012. I was going older, circa 2007 when my iron horse came with 150mm and 83mm bb. Relative term i guess.
  • + 1
 Thank you for this comment. It is the best so far...

@sevensixtwo:
  • + 74
 One day, in deep forests or tight space, we'll have to be concern about hub width before handlebar width
  • + 16
 They could have thrown us a bone and put a thread fit bb on it to balance out the stupid hub.
  • + 2
 Just wait till 800 mill axles become all the rage
  • - 18
flag mattdawg (May 17, 2018 at 7:31) (Below Threshold)
 Just sayin, I’ve ridin my Switchblade many places and the extra 9mm of hub spacing hasn’t once limited what I can squeeze that bike through.
  • + 9
 I heard Pivot is working on a dually like the F250 with1500mm frame spacing to fit the mega hub.
  • + 1
 @Minikeum This needs to be higher
  • + 56
 The Pivot 429 Trail seems like a sensible bike for sensible people to do some sensible riding. It's the Volvo station wagon of the mountain bike world.
  • + 5
 If you've ridden one you'll realise it can handle being ridden beyond the limits of sensible.
  • + 12
 I have a Volvo wagon Frown
  • + 54
 @WAKIdesigns: It gets 15 negative props to the gallon! ????
  • + 18
 @Atrain93: Anybody that has owned an old Volvo Wagon can tell you they too, can be driven beyond the limits of sensibleWink
  • - 13
flag WAKIdesigns (May 17, 2018 at 5:38) (Below Threshold)
 @bishopsmike: that's because you don't live in Sweden. It's like this bit with Brits coming to Sweden and looking what is driving around: oh no! c*nts! I see c*nts everywhere!!! - you mean Volvos? - uhm yes and no mate
  • + 16
 And the plus side it’s almost the price of an entire Volvo.
  • + 5
 @Fluidworks: That would be the super plus side.
  • + 3
 And then they put the Super Boos Plus along with the Pressfit...... So now it's just another Mercedes "you don't need it, you'll get it, we'll charge you for it" gimmick Smile
  • + 1
 @Atrain93: much like a turbo charged all wheel drive volvo.
  • + 4
 @ukr77: Sensible is a relative limit. But then again the fastest car in the world is a rental car...
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns: In all honesty, I would give my left but for a V60.
  • + 5
 Left NUT. I need my left butt...
  • + 1
 @bishopsmike: it’s the only “modern” Volvo one could call fun to drive. Turns beatifully. And it’s the last one - all the new stuff is straight disgusting, zero feedback. But well, in 10 years everything’s going to drive itself
  • + 1
 more like an Audi Avant
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Volvo is owned by Ford. So if it's a mid 90's and up. You are driving an overpriced Ford lol
  • + 1
 @makripper: Um no. You're so very wrong.
  • + 1
 @makripper: lol. wrong continent.
  • + 2
 @makripper: I know, but not really. The core is Ford but Volvo does add a few luxurious bells and whistles.While it makes no sense in case of stupid car like V40, and you must be a nutter not to go for Focus, it's not that clear with other models. Volvo is not more expensive than German cars which supposedly are the benchmarks. I am a bit parted why I bought V70 instead of Mondeo ST wagon and I may feel, why haven't I spent 20% more on Audi A6 but people I talk to who own German cars paint a rather different picture. Perhaps Volksvagen still keeps the reliability/ price ratio well but Audi and BMW went down and Merc went to sht. A friend has the latest Mazda 6, he'll sell it as soon as warranty goes out because he's been to the workshop twice with it. Gearbox. The quality on interior of Toyota slowly reaches Daewoo, I sat in Kia recently, please tell me why would one chose Toyota or Mazda over Kia? So I would not bash Ford given what it is put against these days. As with bikes, lower end companies climbed up, while big boys cut costs. The World is not what it used to be.
  • - 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Ford is still shit. A Volvo is shit with with extra useless features. Mazda is also owned by Ford lol so not surprised about your friends issue.
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.
  • + 2
 No T47 Bottom Bracket? This was over before it started.
  • + 1
 @makripper: then I am dying to hear what isn't shit
  • + 3
 @makripper: Volvo hasn't been owned by Ford for years and Mazda never was owned by Ford. But it's hard to know anything before making opinions.
  • - 1
 @bishopsmike: yeah Volvo has been owned by Ford since 1998 and officially since 1999. Ford owned over 30% of Mazda at one point and they have been doing business since the 70's. North American engines, power trains, frames etc. Are all based on Ford products. Europe, Asia m, Australia etc are a different story.

Who's "making opinions" besides you? Google is easy to use man. Give it a try some time.
  • + 2
 @makripper: Can you at least argue about bikes?
  • + 2
 @sevensixtwo: e bikes are the best.
  • + 2
 @makripper: ford actually doesn’t own any Mazda stock anymore. The 2007 crash forced them to sell most of their stake. They sold the rest a few years ago. There is no platform sharing between the two. Mazda now is working with Toyota supplying engines.

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.
  • + 0
 @ejj: nope. Mazda and Ford are still tied up together

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.
  • + 1
 Just found it buried on the geely page. They assumed 100% in 2010. Not sure what's worse a Chinese company or Ford owning Volvo.
  • - 1
 @makripper: volvo has ben sold to China, that is irrelevant though since up till latest models of xc40-90, V90, S90 Volvos like my V70 were technically Fords. I wouldn’t be surprised if they still are. That’s still irrelevant. Tell me which cars are not sht if Fords are. I am dying to know
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: there aren't any. There isn't one car company I could openly say hasn't cut corners, made lemons, screwed over consumers, screwed over government, etc. Certain model years of certain brands have proved to be reliable. The Honda Civic until 2015, Toyota Tacoma on average except for a model year here and there, Toyota corolla, 2011 to 2016 gmx Sierra, some more basic classes of BMW like 3 and you have to get into specific years with those. Toyota is at fault for bieng too basic for the cost.

If I didn't need a vehicle in Canada I seriously wouldn't have one.
  • + 0
 @makripper: oh well, that's what I thought. I think you have unrealistic expectations but fear not, it is common. Not sure if it makes you a happy person though... Then you also have to know that certain models of Ford and Volvo have been doing rather well. Like ca 2012+ Mondeos, Focuses and most Volvos V70, XC60, V60 as long as they had front wheel drive only and manual gearbox. AWD and automatic were a recipe for pricey repair but were rarely failing completely during the journey.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: the Ford focus is have a horrible time over here. The double clutch paddle shift issues are endless. If you buy one you are garunteed multiple transmission replacements. Good to hear the manual is somewhat reliable pmsl. I'm glad you didn't mention Subaru or I would cry for you.

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.
  • + 1
 Damn autocorrect. Is having*
  • + 1
 @makripper: I love it when people spout absolute drivel with authority. Ford hasn't owned Volvo for almost 8 years. Try using Google properly man. And by the way Volvo's new lineup is excellent. Since Geely bought them a complete overhaul of all models. Amassive improvement. Andd PS Tata bought Jaguar Land Rover 10 years ago.
  • - 1
 @wilks: I looked for that! Yay for Chinese companies buying classics up... Definitely won't touch a Volvo now. It wouldn't have taken much to improve on the Ford Volvo disaster. wouldn't touch one then. Definitely won't now. Not a fan of Chinese vehicles and supporting Chinese companies.
  • + 0
 @makripper: I don’t support Chinese companies... sleep on it Smile talk to you later. Cheers!
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: I try to avoid as much as possible and support local. I'd rather spend more on something local than get Chinese shit
  • + 1
 @makripper: I can almost see the factory from my window Smile
  • + 40
 Call me old fashioned or whatever but got dang. A 120mm travel bike with a rear hub width that is wider than what the fastest men and women use in the UCI DH WC series. I just don't understand this stuff. It's...it's really not that serious. You don't need a 12mm thru on a 120mm travel bike. Just...just relax.
  • + 59
 157 is the width of DH hubs. Widening the hub flanges makes a stronger wheel. Not sure what’s wrong with that idea.
  • + 24
 @dan23dan23: explain that to someone that just bought a set of Chris King Boost 148 hubs. I think it is very unreasonable that only after 2 years Boost 148 is already an old standard.
  • - 7
flag ccolagio (May 17, 2018 at 1:25) (Below Threshold)
 @dan23dan23: arguably "the fastest bike on the planet" has a 150mm hub. you are mistaken

us.yt-industries.com/detail/index/sArticle/1980/sCategory/261
  • + 28
 @danielfox: nope. 148 is still a current standard. Not every bike needs 157mm hubs, however many bikes could benefit from it. The Chris King Hubs you just bought for your current bike still work! They don’t stop working because a new bike comes out with something different.
  • + 8
 @danielfox: I bought the new firebird and when I did they I remember reading Pivot saying something about not needing to use superboost plus on the bike. I knew that they would this "standard" once they updated the bike in a few years to screw everyone that had an old version. Did not see it coming to a trail bike first. And I also have king hubs on it. Im a little salty with king at the moment since they just came out with the version of the boost front hub they should have started with. The 1st version I got has a lame flange to flange width (like normal hub spacing and the ONLY reason it's boost is because of where the rotor sits) which was the whole f ing point of boost. To have wider flange to flange. When I first got the hubs I actually thought they shipped me the wrong front hub. King just made bigger end caps and spaced the rotor out for boost. Which to me was a shite way to do it. Then they come out with the new version that will let you run a 20mm or a 15 mm axle and is the wider flange to flange. If you guys are gonna come out with new standards the f*cking use them right dont baby step your way each year. Once pivot came out with superboost they should have just used them on ALL the bikes. Now its just gonna be their way of making the old versions obsolete. The trend continues.....
  • + 7
 Who is going to benefit from a 157 hub? 300 pounders?
If I was in Pivot i would be working with designers on their image rather than coming out with ideas from the marketing department.
  • + 8
 @:RedRedRe
Yes, yes it will, and this is my ride. Fat asses of the world rejoice.
  • + 0
 @RedRedRe: I will,because I already have custom build 157mm wheels.
  • + 1
 Same with a piggy back shock for a 120mm rear travel shock???
  • + 3
 Knolly have it on their new trail bike, but also across the whole range. Is there a reason Pivot didn't use super boost on mach 5.5 and mach 6 but they did on this?
  • + 3
 @Creg: because the 5.5 and 6 are dedicated 27.5 wheeled bikes.
  • + 11
 This BS is not going to stop as in business school they teach you to "renovate" the product and make it incompatible with previous version.

Do you want a stiffer wheel?
Get a good wheelbuilder make you one that suits your weight and riding style.
  • - 1
 @dan23dan23: sounds like you have a lot of practice using that that patronizing line about “you can still have fun on the obsolete parts you just spent 1,000$ bucks on”. Spoken like someone who does not care. That kind of attitude is why I won’t buy a Pivot.
  • + 19
 @dan23dan23: It's a 120mm travel bike, wheels were already strong enough. I bet a lot of people knees arn't going to like 170+ q factor cranks
  • + 2
 @danielfox: It doesn't make their purchase any less worthwhile. Just because it exists doesn't mean you need it. There are new Lamborghinis, but the one i don't have is just as fast.
  • + 3
 @ybsurf: f*ck yea! This bike is more freeride than my 07 Iron horse.
  • + 5
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: Exactly - I think the SuperBoostPlus Q-factor is going to wreak havoc on people that pedal their bikes. Fine if you take a lift to the top, though.
  • + 2
 @dan23dan23: no it doesn't. Because they are widening the hub AXLE while leaving the hub flanges almost in the same place. A better approach is the one used by Cannodale, Specialized in its older Demo frames, and Iron Horse back in the day. Asymmetric dropouts/chainstays allow for a better dished, stronger wheel and it doesn't call for axles wider than your handlebars or stupid q- factors.
  • + 11
 @dan23dan23: 130mm no-dish is a spacing that exists and it builds stronger wheels than any of the boost spacings thanks to the even spoke tension. But apparently mentioning this is forbidden.
  • - 3
 @dan23dan23 are you sure the manufacturers widened the hub flanges this time or just selling a wider axel again? Also you can widen the flanges all you want on 29er, but 26ers wheels with 32h/ 135 hubs will always be stiffer!
  • + 0
 @weezyb: exactly how are you 'screwed' by a new bike version? Also, why did you buy your king hubs if you hate the design so much?
  • + 9
 @RedRedRe: You understand that Pivot chose the 157 hub because it already exists, right? It's been the defacto DH standard for years. They're choosing this size to get away from the constantly changing "standards" and to give people the ability to get a readily available hub, that will likely always be available.

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.
  • + 3
 @slipperywhenwet: you understand it is all bs to force people to buy more stuff? 150 and 157 have been around in tandems long before DH. Tell me who needs a tandem hub on a trail bike.
  • + 1
 @RedRedRe: I know a guy who is only 215, and he flexes the old M429T, but his Switchblade, (same hub as this bike,) is rock solid. At 275, the outgoing M429T flexes quite a bit under me, but on the trail it doesn't bug me as much as other flexy bikes.
  • + 5
 @RedRedRe: No one is forcing you to buy anything. My 10 year old 26" bike works great and they are still making new tires for it. I try new stuff because I want to, but no one is forcing us to stop using the old stuff. Hell, this bike just gave new life to your old DH hubs. #toomuchcryinginMTB
  • + 2
 I doubt I'll be cutting up the 26" carb0n hoops for the 157 Hope Pro2 on my DH bike for a trail bike. I recall the SuperBoost press junket showing the SB flange spacing wider than standard; but I've been wrong 100s of times so who knows.

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.
  • + 1
 @drivereight: but nowhere near as fun or fast!
  • + 2
 @SirLapLack: never had dh hubs tho... Just barely got boost 148 hubs.. Not jumping on this train anytime soon...
  • + 2
 @SirLapLack: That flex has nothing to do with the hub
  • + 2
 @slipperywhenwet: They aren't making any joke. While it's 157mm spacing the hub is actually different.
The non drive side flange is further out.
  • + 3
 @danielfox: I feel like I'm from the 1800's, I'm still rolling on 12x142.

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.
  • + 1
 @danielfox: shoot, I got a new bike with 142mm rear 3 years ago. It rides great, and I doubt I would ever notice any benefit from an extra 6mm, but here we are . . .
  • + 1
 @Skooks: I think the point @weezyb is making is that some of us that are in the market for a bike like this have barely recovered from the rectal reaming that was moving to the last new standard - boost. I also bought some pricey new hubs when I went boost and I expect to get many years out of them, so that rules this bike out for me unfortunately.
  • - 1
 @dan23dan23: What is wrong with that is people are not quick enough to realize it is just a standard DH axel width. Been around a long time. The idea of using the same hub on my dh and trail bike... pretty good if you ask me. Pivot not selling the bike as a frame only is the bigger issue. My understanding is because too many riders can not of grasp the hub is basically a dh hub. They get confused very easily, couldn’t build up the bike, and make pb jokes about it.
  • + 2
 @MikerJ: Mostly agree. Some people might want to swap wheels between their DH rig and their trail bike, but that's a distinct minority of users.

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.
  • + 2
 @MikerJ: How many people are going to be using their heavy ass DH wheels on a low travel trail bike.

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
  • + 0
 @ReXTless: no frameset, no sale. cocalis gotta realize the ppl that appreciate the engineering nuances like this also build their own bikes.
  • + 1
 @MikerJ: It also has to do with the availability of cranks with the right chain rings. From what I understand not in every market are the cranks available, for a 56mm chain line using a normal boost cranks. Though some cranks can work, if you flip the ring, no all can work that way. The FAQ's explain this real well on the site.
  • + 1
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: lenz is the only one who had 150 on trail bikes for years (well before boost) and with an actual real reason.
  • + 1
 @RedRedRe: Banshee too. But they had convertible dropouts

Also about the moto bike comment. At some point ill just buy a moto instead.
  • + 1
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: rims are disposable. Good hubs are not. Retiring a beat rear dh wheel leaves a good hub left over for a rebuild. Unless u r a xc racer one burly hub standard fits across the board.
  • + 37
 Standards aside for a minute... this is an xc-ish bike, designed to be pedalled a lot. Basic biomechanics and common acceptance have shown that narrower q factors are more efficient and create a more comfortable pedal stroke; other companies have managed to fit the same tyre clearances onto a 148 hub, with a narrower Q factor, and seemingly no downside. pivot have chosen two particularly bandy-legged cranksets to try to show that it's no worse, but my off-the-shelf job has a 167 Q factor which is 7-10mm narrower than the ones they're quoting; that's a pretty substantial difference, and whilst it works fine with boost, it won't work with this. We don't all have to ride the same thing, but it seems bizarre to pursue stiffness over comfort on a bike designed to cover miles, and that won't be hucked and really doesn't need it.

It's a clean looking frame, miles better than the post-crash bendy stuff of old. Now just to sort out that cable routing...
  • + 20
 This bike accept cranks with a 168mm Q Factor, 1mm wider than your current cranks. Check the stats in the website. www.pivotcycles.com/bike/trail-429

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!
  • + 5
 Still, don't like cable routing under the bottom bracket
  • - 2
 I agree - the Q-factor is too wide. IF the bike takes 168mm cranks, I suppose, that might be fine - but not sure if anyone makes a 168mm q-factor crank with 56mm chainline. And don't want to spend money right away changing cranks - hope the builds come with narrow q-factor cranks...
  • + 6
 @dan23dan23: I've found that figure on their site, eventually. But it conflicts with the diagram immediately below, which says 173-177. I wonder which it is!
  • + 5
 Agreed; if you tend to pedal with your “heels in” even slightly, as I do, then you are definitely going to find that you are constantly knocking up against the rear of the frame traingle a lot. Very uncomfortable over a reasonable distance
  • + 1
 Question? why is narrower Q-factor wanted? No sport ever wants your feet this close together for maximum performance... I could see on a road bike or triathlon bike where you want wind resistance, but on a mountain bike, where you are low, cowboy bow-legged, looking for balance, seems kind of odd to go narrower? even motorcross gets you out there at shoulder width. I'm not saying go crazy wide, but too narrow of a q-factor seems off a bit to me. like narrow handlebars were cool 20 years ago...
  • - 2
 @stuie321: I pedal heals in as well. I have size 48 shoes, I rub the graphics of most cranks... I have no issue pedaling for hours upon hours using the Aefect cranks with the wider Q-factor. I currently have Next SL cranks on my Switchblade. Love that bike!
Everyone should try it, you’ll love it!
  • + 2
 @stuie321:

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.
  • + 3
 @dan23dan23: Please link me a 168 Q factor crank that has a 56mm chainline- or did you miss that little caveat.
  • + 2
 @level4designs: If you have a wide q-factor, it's bad ergonomically for your knees and hips when you pedal for a long time. If you are a gravity rider that pedals only in spurts, as you mention, wider q-factor may be fine. But for trail and XC bikes and will be pedaled up the hill and across flat ground, the wide q-factor is just bad kinematics.
  • + 2
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: I think there are direct-mount compatible SRAM cranks that fit the bill. Just get a 0mm offset ring (that might end up 55mm, but close enough).
  • + 28
 When the biggest (or at least most bitch-worthy) feature of a new bike is a new stupid rear hub spacing, it would be nice to mention something in the review about whether or not there was a noticeable difference in wheel stiffness as a result. The fact that it wasn’t even brought up makes us realize that it probably doesn’t f-ing matter.
  • + 1
 I don’t think it’s something you’re supposed to notice in one ride. I think it’s something you notice after a year of running a lighter wheel set that was able to hold up to abuse that previously warranted a heavier wheel set.
  • + 10
 It's not a review, it's a first look and @mikekazimer has only spent a limited time on the bike so far. There are so many other factors in the way (tire pressure, layup, envelope, wheel tension, etc.) that anyone making a claim one way or the other without extended testing or lab verification is full of it.
  • + 22
 I am waiting for the Hyperboost 160mm Version... It's gonna be so stiff that a year later they gonna "invent" a 10.89mm Axle as 12mm was too stiff.
  • + 12
 Hyperboost 157 Minus. Same width as the old 157 Superboost Plus but with a slightly different brake position!
  • + 17
 I’ve ridden some Pivots and enjoyed them. Quality/fit and finish on the frames is decent for what they cost. Numbers look good. Two things keep me from spending my money on one.

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.
  • + 1
 @wibblywobbly

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.
  • - 4
flag mm732 (May 17, 2018 at 10:55) (Below Threshold)
 I demoed a Pivot Shuttle and had a GREAT time. Pivot folks were nice enough too. BUT I'll be the first to say i felt realllly bad passing all the riders i did on the two-way trail we rode. At least this trail, they just simply don't belong. They are so freaking fast it's a different sport.
  • - 3
 @mm732: Get your motorcycle off of bicycle trails you dumb f*ck.
  • + 2
 @casman86: exactly. it was a DEMO. so i could have an INFORMED OPINION.
  • - 1
 @mm732: It really GRINDS MY GEARS
  • + 15
 According to Chris Cocalis, Pivot's founder, their frame tolerances are tight enough that they haven't had any issues with unwanted creaking.

Is there such thing as wanted creaking?
  • + 14
 Is pivot the new evil for making fun of their pricing? When your bike with the cheapest components is nearly FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS things have gotten crazy.
  • + 12
 It’s finally arrived. The point that I become a Luddite. It’s a flippin bicycle for goodness sake.
  • + 9
 Heyo Pivot, potential customer here. I almost pulled the plug this year on a switchblade, money in hand, and when I found out about the specific cranks and hubs, I was out. Kona got my money. This new bike is fantastic, and once again, I would love to give you my money, but unfortunately you've put yourself out of the market for many riders. Please put more thought into the customer and supply side of the bike, rather than what's excellent on paper, and you'd guaranteed have more success. Cheers.
  • + 3
 Seeing this get downvoted for sharing an earnest opinion is pretty sad. Feel free to post a reply, downvoters.
  • - 3
 @sherbet: Kona's BBs are too low and the bikes are too long for most people IMO.

ill take functional and backwards compatible axle standard over trendy geometry.
  • + 8
 @pinkbike can we get an article on wheel hub widths to either substantiate or debunk the marketing of "wider bracing angles make stronger better wheels" to test against something like the bespoke hub from hope on the HB160 where they have gone for more equal spoke lengths. I hear @mattwragg is chief wheel wrecker maybe he could test out this.

I think @americanclassic were really onto something with their boost hubs with equal size and spacing of hub flanges shame they never took off.
  • + 5
 Basic mechanic at play here for the theory part : larger hub=flatter spokes=better lateral resistance
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.
  • + 4
 @RustyMac I'm just glad you are recognising my talents!

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!
  • + 2
 @Whipperman: absolutely! I've never been a Cannondale fan, as I feel like they're too quick to make new standards in the search for performance gains (i.e. Lefty and Dyad shock) BUT I love their AI Offset rear ends. My Bad Habit runs a 148 rear end and can still clear a 27.5x3.0 tire no problem, while running symmetrical spoke angles. A stronger wheel without resorting to yet another standard.
  • + 3
 @mattwragg: Do it in a similar way Santa Cruz did with the carbon testing, its that sort of step change needed to convince people its worth changing. Again.
  • + 2
 @richard01: Smashing them down steps? I'm in! But I'm not sure how much it would tell us. The hard bit would be to devise a test that is relevant out in the real world and not just the lab - for instance are the anvil drop test appropriate as how likely are you to get such a perfect trajectory for an impact on the trail? (And for whatever it's worth, I've had a massive ballache with Boost as it is and, personally, the last thing I want to see is another size of axle.)
  • + 1
 @mattwragg: At least that test shows a clear difference and is as close as you can get to real world. I was referring to the frame testing not the wheel testing, if it helps. In comparison to wheel testing they make the same claims, create a new standard and ride down the same steps. If this didn't show anything then why print the claim?

Thanks for taking the time to reply, there must but a fair few comments on here.
  • + 1
 @richard01: Increased axle width only increase lateral stiffness not frontal so a test could be applying a constant force laterally and mesure deformation

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
  • + 1
 @mattwragg: dial bore indicator with "hold min-hold max"mounted to the rear triangle contacting the rim. Boostinator 142 vs actual boost with DT 1700s.
  • + 1
 Find a brand that has 142, 148, and 157 hub options, build identical wheels (same spokes, rims, niples, builder) and test?
  • + 1
 @Klainmeister: I think all you would need is the same rim built to those three different width hubs. Pick a good benchmark like the DT XM481 and build it up with double butted J-bend spokes, 3x and brass nipples. Check spoke tension and make sure all three are comparable and then test for lateral stiffness in a lab.....then put them on a hardtail and ride for feel?
  • + 2
 @mattwragg: in my mind there would need to be a 2 part test.

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.
  • + 2
 I've always wondered whether increased stiffness in wheels or frames is a good thing. Of course it's nice for traveling linearly over the ground so that the suspension (if of course there is some) can absorb the impact as designed.

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.
  • + 1
 @RustyMac: I'm testing something along these lines right now, but it's carbon vs ali - ie. stiffness vs compliance (and weight).

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.
  • + 1
 @mattwragg: I completely get where you are comming from. Look forward to your article.

Are you going to discuss any of this with the guy behind bouwmeester composites he has some insight in this field.
  • + 8
 Damn everyone complaining about hub size and Im still on 135x10mm rear ends and non boost front ends still lol but I don't try and fix what ain't broke.
  • + 3
 Amen amen halleleujah eman 135 x 10 fah life
  • + 6
 Most comments I've ever seen on one Pinkbike post lmao. Everyone's pissed about the super duper mega big boost bullshit, which I can somewhat agree on, but come on. They are genuinely trying to give us bike parts that last longer and don't break. Once they can decide on one and stick with it, I think all will be good. Lighten up, people! Your bikes are getting lighter, stronger, and actually cheaper. There's much more to be happy about than to complain about.
  • + 2
 I agree with this right here. Trek brought us Boost and I wouldn't be surprised if they have the 9mm separating 148mm and 157mm split out into three more standards. Next year, 151mm, two years late 154mm, and then 157mm. If Pivot and Knolly let me jump to 157mm now it'll hurt today but I'll be sitting pretty while Pinkbike blows up over the additional incremental steps that, based on how things are going, are no doubt coming.
  • + 6
 Nice looking bike, but I would not buy due to Super Boost Plus. Proprietary and scarcely available parts are a non starter for me after owning a specialized that I couldn't get a shock for after a year. PF BBs aren't great either.
  • + 6
 Remember that time I could run my DH wheelset on my trail bike? Yeah, that time is right now, and that time is stupid. Seriously, Ron STAAAHP With the damn spacing bologna! Or at least prove that it makes for a better riding experience! Because honestly, if the only reason you did this was to let the weirdo who rides 2x with plus tires (and definitely wears lycra and a full face) have his cake and eat it too, I'm throwing in the towel.
  • + 6
 Ace looking bike - loving the matte color choices. Does it seem like @mikekazimer wasn't really into the bike, or more of a wrong bike for the trails problem? It would seem a great bike for mountain-less areas like the Midwest.
  • + 7
 It would definitely be an ideal Midwest, or even East Coast bike - trails with rolling terrain and punchy climbs would be a blast on this thing. It was really only on the one trail I mentioned that it felt a little out of its element - otherwise it's a really fun trail bike.
  • + 8
 Loving these short travel playful 29ers. My tallboy is the fastest and most fun bike i've ever ridden!
  • + 5
 So funny, after the Switchblade madness over the hub spacing, I jumped into the Knolly comments (expecting madness) when they annouced their new 29er with same hub spacing (Fugitive I think?).. I can't remember seeing a SINGLE PERSON complaining about the hub spacing. I was like, OK wow we've come a long way and everyone is cool with this now. LOL...are Knolly fans just more accomodating to whatever they make?
  • + 3
 You're obivously blinded by something if you're a k-nolly fan...
  • + 7
 I think this being an XC-ish trail bike makes a DH-width hub spacing harder to swallow.
  • + 2
 @brianpark: I agree, especially since it isn't a 120mm DH oriented bike like Smuggler. Tried and true efficient trail rider. I don't get the weight and the hub needs. People who rode the switchblade with stiff carbon wheels complained at times about it being over stiff. That may be the case here too, especially for regular Joe's not crushing into G-outs all day
  • + 2
 I want to believe it's because the Knolly release had much less marketing bs. In addition, it came from a company who stuck with the 12x142 spacing until that bike and so clearly must have had some advantage to be added to an alloy 29er. Maybe the fact that the rest of the bike had all the right features also plays a part in it
  • + 8
 Can we talk about how ugly the old one was and how hot this one is? Drool
  • + 0
 I was waiting for this comment...a pivot that isn't an eyesore.
  • + 6
 We have another hub "standard" and sticker shock pricing.... let em have it boys....

If nothing else this is a really good ad for YT and Canyon
  • + 4
 When is this hub dimensions insanity going to end?
.
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 ?
  • + 8
 We need a shootout with the SB 100 and the Tallboy...
  • + 8
 Super Boost?

Stop it, just stop this madness now.
  • + 5
 Super boost plus has been out for two years. Where have you been?
  • + 3
 I know there’s all this “stop changing standards” stuff and I get it. But I really do think Pivot’s on to something with the super boost plus (pains me to say that) spacing. I mean Noel Buckley is a one smart dude and he’s getting behind it. Who remembers when folding wheels wasn’t as regular of an occurrence with 26”? And now that 27.5 and 29 is normal, the angle of bracing just isn’t as strong. 142 was stupid, 148 was a step in the right direction, and I think 157 is where it’s at.
  • + 7
 Short travel shootout... make it so!
  • + 8
 TAKE MY MONEY.
  • + 29
 I'm volunteer, how do we arrange this?
  • + 15
 @RedBurn: through an eastern-european middle-man of course, I only take 100% commission
  • + 6
 Honestly, totally miscategorized the bike. It’s “down country”. Geez PB. Get it right!
  • + 5
 @pivotcycles
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?
  • + 1
 Please elaborate! I cant find anything about the new 12 speed XTR.
  • + 2
 @garygrimm: only a couple leaked pics out there.

11-51 12 speed cassette. four-piston XTR calipers.

www.instagram.com/p/Bi4KzhfHZdK/?taken-by=weightweeniesbrasil
  • + 1
 $7800 for the ‘xtr’ build and all the xtr except the brakes are 4-5 years old...and a DPS shock...
  • + 3
 It's 2018, and these rodeo clowns manage to come up with another hub standard while making the shock inaccessible without taking off the whole swingarm?

This. This is why consumers hate this industry.
  • + 2
 If the only thing people have to complain about is a slightly wider hub spacing, then Pivot are doing something right. I would trust they've done their homework on whether it's worth developing and supplying the wider hub with the 29" wheel sets they offer, compared to existing standards.
  • + 2
 While SuperBoost and PressFit are not things I am crazy about, I understand why they did it, (The outgoing Boost M429T has a lot of rear end flex compared to the current SuperBoost Switchblade, for example.)

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.)
  • + 1
 You can order the bike with two wheel sets. So you can get the exact same hub, rotors and cassette making it an easy swap.
  • + 3
 Srsly don’t understand why I am seeing so many new bikes with cables and hoses exiting/routed under the bottom bracket? SB100 too? A few sketchy sharp rock attacks and bye bye shifting? Or brakes?
  • + 6
 Brake cable doesn't run under the BB.

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.
  • + 3
 Pinkbike needs to interview Noel Buckley from Knolly Bikes about the merits of super-boost plus (12 x 157mm), it has some very strong and well thought out reasoning surrounding its merits.
  • + 4
 Where can I buy the 29x2.4 Rekon? It’s still nowhere to be found. ....also I will be superannoyed if superboost catches on more broadly.
  • + 2
 I was wondering the same thing! I've been anxiously awaiting that tire and last I checked, it was still in testing (I've called Maxxis a few times)
  • + 1
 I spotted it too, but nowhere to be found yet. Was announced at Interbike in September.
  • + 1
 @mikericci: Yep, hopefully it will be coming down the pipes soon. It's the perfect rear tire for the type of riding that I do.
  • + 7
 how much for the impala?
  • + 6
 much stiff such wide very standard wow
  • + 6
 wheres the alloy mule im more interested in that
  • + 4
 It may come out two years later, like the alloy Switchblade.
  • + 2
 It became illegal due to excessive slackness
  • + 3
 Not surprised this bike got overwhelmed on Portal. Definitely out of its wheelhouse but I imagine it was crazy fun on the upper portions of Mag 7 like Bull Run and Great Escape, terrain that the bike was built for.
  • + 3
 Yep, exactly. Given the right terrain it hits the mark as a fast and lively trail bike.
  • + 3
 Trail bikes switching to 157x12, DH bikes switching back to 142x12... WTF is going on???? Industry wants to keep as many things in flux constantly as possible?
  • + 4
 Looks like a super fun bike that could be ridden for hours. That blue is off the hook!
  • + 1
 I dont know why so much hate for superboost. Thanks to this we can have shorter chainstays, stiffer and stronger frames and more room for bigger tires. Like it or not it will become the new standard. That means this bike is future proof. Cocalis is just ahead of the curve.
  • + 2
 I like their new more streamlined aesthetic. I couldn't care less about the rear hub. I'd love to see this new simpler look applied to the Switchblade, oh and a much steeper ESTA too please.
  • + 4
 When your wheel axel is longer than your suspension travel, you have a problem!
  • + 5
 Not trying to be a Dbag, but I really thought it was a Santa Cruz bike.
  • + 1
 Dope bike but enough of this new standards B U L L S H I T. Let's get some actual technology innovation, especially with brands that can flex a Dave Weagle link. **Wink Wink Nudge Nudge **[coughs a little as if trying to hold back some phlegm] Pivot **
  • + 3
 Hub standard aren't standard anymore. I just bought a Boost bike... no way, I'll purchase a superboost bike before 5 years... Respect is lowering every day.
  • + 3
 So ENVE M series wheels are too stiff.... and then we need Super Boost spacing to make wheels stiffer?
  • + 1
 I can fit both the tire sizes on my fuel ex and run normal offset chain rings...the the thought of not having a proprietary shock length is appealing, I don't have any complaints about the fox thru shaft shock on it
  • + 4
 You can stick your super boost up your arse.
  • + 0
 Why does a bike with 120mm travel need super boost any decent wheel on the market will work just as well and cost much less, Maybe they are trying to make a "STANDARD" like 135mm or 142mm or 148 ???? now the standard is 157mm
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
  • + 0
 Everyone who rode the first 429 trail liked it. This thing in red with SLX is a home run. I bet Pivot has a busy day today. 142 and 148 have the same flange spacing and dish problems. 157 can use one spoke length and symmetry to build it strong. Stop complaining.
  • + 21
 Stop complaining...Do you realize where you are?
  • + 5
 There's no need for your common sense here, @Trabes!
  • + 3
 Pivot with Super Boost Plus. Knolly with 157 Trail. What's next? Supa Dupa Hypa Boosta Mega Whateva Hubba????
  • + 3
 Who cares about hub spacing or even this bike. I want that car the bike is leaning against!
  • + 0
 This bike despite the debate causing super boost looks to fix my complaints about my Mach 429 trail. For rough trail riding it always seems like it could use another inch or 1/2 of rear travel. When railing turns the back wheel frame flexes more than I like. Love pivots new matte colors about time they made decent looking bikes. IMHO in two years most new bikes will be super boost.
  • + 1
 What’s with the hate of 157? Pivot (and Knolly) is actually right on this. 148 should have never existed! Good geometry, 148, 130/120 and, finally, a not-ugly Pivot! Here is some $$$$$ for you Pivot!
  • - 8
flag WAKIdesigns (May 17, 2018 at 3:43) (Below Threshold)
 Except what super boost plus was never needed since we already had 157 DH spacing. What it does is it offsets non drive side flange furthest to the brake mount in result further increasing imbalance in tension between drive side and no drive side spokes making it impossible to achieve good tension on DS without over tensioning the NDS. It’s the worst kaka mate.
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns: I would not have minded if they used straight up DH 157....but illl still take SB over BOOST. I hope more muffs get on board!
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns: ds has more tension than nds. You have it backwards
  • - 2
 @mm732: yes, you are correct, sorry
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns: On paper it would seem so. Flange diameters come into play though.

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.
  • - 3
 @WinoBot: asymmetrical rims solve “structural” issues boost seemed to adress. I see no issues with taking 157 DH as a new standard for all, I just don’t buy how 7mm in each direction makes any big problem with heel or obstacle clearance (coming from 142) and still see 148 as sperm of profiteering, confusion mongering evil.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: I will agree that 148 was dumb, and that more rims should be formed as asymmetrical if we're still making hubs that require significantly different spoke lengths.

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.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Waki apologizes! Stop the presses. Screen shot taken.
  • - 2
 @WinoBot but but butt sex, sorry, but isn't spoke triangulation/ angle more important in generating tension than length?... with my shitty pseudo engineer degree I think it is... I'm open to being wrong.
  • + 1
 @WinoBot: FWIW, heel clearance on the Pivot Shuttle is excellent. Qfactor was a complete non-issue and I have a roadie background.
  • + 1
 @mm732: Good to know. I pre-ordered the Knolly Fugitive, which is 157mm but is also aluminum and has a pivot right in front of the dropout, so possibly a little wider there than the pivot. I'll know in a few weeks.
  • + 1
 @WinoBot: what was the difference in tension?

my 148 SP 240 ends up about 19 DS / 16 NDS on a Park tensionometer. Edit: this is with 2mm offset rims.
  • + 1
 @WinoBot: yea alloy could be different. Pivot has very sculpted stays.
  • + 1
 @WinoBot: is the fugitive an emtb?
  • + 1
 @mm732: Thats quite low, unless you're running super thin spokes. My wheel, with straight 14 gauge spokes finished around 1200N/1050N, which is like 25/23 on a park tensiometer.

@DONKEY-FELTCHER
www.pinkbike.com/news/knolly-bikes-launches-fugitive-29er.html
  • + 1
 @WinoBot: Aerocomp straightpull. comes out to 110 kgf or so IIRC
  • + 3
 'I'd have totally nailed it if I had Super Boost Plus spacing'
  • - 1
 Haters gonna hate. If you let a hub width ruin your fun, you've got problems man. People hated on suspension, on carbon frames, on dropper posts.

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.
  • + 3
 suspension and dropper posts represent MASSIVE improvements. just how massive is this improvement? worth adding yet another standard to trail bikes? not even close.
  • - 1
 @xeren: Every improvement can't be massive. Add up all these marginal improvements, and it's significant.

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".
  • + 2
 @Trouterspace: then lets have an "improvement year" every 5 years where the industry updates standards. all these improvements may add up, but individually, they aren't worth it.

and i would argue that this improvement is more marginal than most.
  • + 2
 74 seat angle on xc bike that should be pedaled uphill 50%, cmonn, current enduro bikes have more steeps angels;
  • + 2
 As a tall guy I don't like slack STA, but it really varies due to how they measure it. When that seat goes out, on some bikes like Hightower or Following, its quickly not 74 anymore and my butt is over the rear axle. I think this STA is a little truer and hence might be good enough. When they get real steep like on Ripmo, the bike also gets freaky long which is something I don't like about Ripmo... especially for trail riding on a 29er. I think this will be good enough while keeping the WB much more manageable and fun.
  • + 1
 it was an oversight IMO especially since they allow 140mm forks.
  • - 1
 Love my 2017 Mach 429 Trail -- great bike. The one thing that really pisses me off with this new 2018 model is the addition of the 157mm rear hub. Yet another hub width -- just what we all need. Doubling down on their Switchblade decision. Ugh.
  • + 3
 Does any one else have a problem with this cable routing? Gross...
  • + 3
 Marketing men trying to separate us from our money. Bored of this shit.
  • - 1
 If your handlebar is is wider than your BB your doing something wrong. Now, on the other hand, if your handlebar is wider than your BB, tire size, and hub spacing you should probably quit biking. Maybe take up something more manly like water aerobics, lawn bowling, or better yet t-ball.
  • + 1
 Continuing the under bottom back cable routing...morons. I guess the last iteration was a piece of shit. New models every 6 months.
  • + 1
 Pinkbike: “Riders who don't want (or need) bikes with geometry and travel numbers that are approaching DH bike territory. “

Pivot: let’s use super boost plus!
  • + 12
 Increased wheel stiffness and better tire clearance are two traits that can benefit more than just DH bikes.
  • - 5
flag WAKIdesigns (May 17, 2018 at 4:48) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: except compared to148 Super Boost Plus doesn't increase the wheel stiffness due to big imbalance in GS and NDS spoke tensions caused by flange offset jerry mandering. 150 and 157 Dh spacing has plenty of room between rotor mount and NDS flange for a reason, not because "everyone else in the business missed the opportunity that was right under their noses".
  • + 9
 At least the 157 spacing has kept Press Fit comments to a minimum. Wink
  • + 1
 @mikekazimer: I think the bike industry has well figured out how to get big 29 tire clearance already without new flange spacing tho.
  • + 2
 6.4 pounds = 2.90299117 kilograms
even 34 stepcast fork will not help reduce overall weight for xc machine
  • + 4
 Good catch. The trail bike ranks are getting filled with bikes that weigh the same as 135mm+ machines. I think Specialized was on the right track with the new Stumpy, why make another frame for a trail bike when shock stroke can accomplish the same goal? Especially if that other frame will be nearly identical?
  • + 3
 Yeah, that's ridiculously heavy for a 120mm bike. I would like to see more 140mm options at 5.5lbs max. The Scott Spark is under 5lbs and the Genius also. Intense Primer and Sniper both very light as well.
  • + 4
 @masonskis: Intense Primer is such a good bike and a frameset can be had for $2500. I respect Cocalis and his attention to detail, but 120mm in no frameset options versus a Primer which can EASILY be made anywhere from 115-140mm travel and very efficient/stiff/reasonable weight. Tough to not go Primer IMHO.
  • + 1
 Are we sure the weight isn’t a typo? Why is it so much heavier even than the Mach 5.5 frame?
  • + 0
 Dang $4699 I can get a new fuggin red Volvo fo' dat too, one wit a/c this time shooooowee loogat me comin up in the world wit out a new bike
  • + 1
 What we really need is a new water bottle standard. 998.99 ml for 15% extra wetness.
  • + 1
 What does the little tab on the Fox Float DPS do? ...the plastic thing that says "Pivot Trail"
  • + 2
 It is a sag measurement tool. It displays recommended sag percentages and where sag indicator should be for each recommendation. It does make setting sag easier.
  • + 1
 Is there an aluminum version in the pipeline? This bike seems great but just a little spendy
  • + 1
 As an owner of a steel hardtail, I am offended that they call a carbon bike color steel blue.
  • + 1
 Rekon in the back and DHR II in the front is an unusual combo--I'd like to know the thinking behind it.
  • + 1
 The DHR is a faster rolling tire up front vs. the DHF. And the DHF might be over kill for many areas of the world.
  • + 1
 2 questions: will it take a coil shock, and will Chris take my '04 MotoLite frame on trade?
  • + 1
 This bike is sex. I would buy it. But can I get it with different colored decals?
  • + 0
 The ‘faqs’ section on Pivot’s website is great; they have proactively addressed most of the negative comments mentioned here.
  • + 1
 what is up with the ridiculously low stack height in xl?? Tall ppl would need to run a mountain of spacers!
  • + 2
 If 27.5 inch wheels get phased out, I'm going to quit mtn biking.
  • + 0
 Some of the Pivot bikes have had terribly outdated geometry, but this looks spot on. I hope the 429SL gets the same make over soon!
  • + 1
 On paper it looks great. The review sounds like Kazimet aas really unimpressed.
  • + 2
 I'm going to wait for the super duper boost rear end.
  • + 2
 They can SuperBoost the f*$% right off.
  • + 1
 I look forward to rubbing all the paint off the stays on stupid wide extra dumb super boost plus. Lame. Chris Cocalis sucks.
  • + 1
 is lower link problem solved?
or they just applied piece of helicopter tape.
  • + 1
 "they haven't had any issues with unwanted creaking"

Does this imply that such a thing as "wanted creaking" exists?
  • + 1
 Would have made an easy sale with me.....but then your idiotic new standards. Super boost my dollars away from your company.
  • + 3
 super boost these nuts
  • + 1
 There no such thing as standard in the bike industry only driven by profit!
  • + 3
 Wait, there are industries not driven by profit? Name them. I will wait.
  • + 1
 @FisherFreerider: Clinton Foundation
  • + 1
 Hey nerds: what’s HTA with 27.5+ cup while running 29 wheels?
  • + 1
 I think it added an extra half a degree on switchblade. Probably same here. It'll up the bottom bracket tho, which may not be ideal depending on your use.
  • + 1
 @Svinyard: Subtracted?
  • + 1
 @MtbSince84: oops yes reduced is what I meant
  • + 0
 You lost me at 12x157 spacing. Why would I want to be rubbing my feet on the chainstays and adding weight for no benefit?
  • + 3
 I didn’t have any heel rub with size 11 feet - that’s not an issue.
  • + 1
 heel clearance on these is very very good.
  • + 1
 @casman86: I’m size 13 as well I have no issue in the Switchblade and the little time I’ve spent on this bike I see no issues either.
  • + 1
 this video is life !! awesome looking bike .. design is pure!
  • + 1
 i hate that cable lazy loop under the BB
  • + 1
 Such a nice bike. Not completely sold on the super boost rear end though
  • + 1
 So it does not have room for 29+ then?
  • + 2
 That’ll be the revision that isnt backwards compatible.
  • + 1
 Does knolly make an e-mtb called the felon?
  • - 3
 The moment a company releases a 120 bike and calls it "Something" 429 Down-Country, I'll call @mikelevy and @sickbicycles, propose them running naked through Interbike and we'll be spraying champagne on him. I can drink it from his belly button too, fk it.
  • + 1
 If they call it that in the US it will have to come with a banjo. Down Country is a reference to the Deep South. Now Cross-Hill I can see . . .
  • + 0
 Can we get the geometry chart resolution that we deserve? Can barely figure out some of those numbers. Is that a 460 reach?
  • + 4
 If you’re viewing on a mobile device, click the ‘View desktop version’ button at the bottom of the screen and you should be able to zoom in to see the numbers much more clearly. And yes, there’s a 460mm reach for a size large.
  • + 1
 do like you care about these numbers hahaha Big Grin ... take an L size it will be good
  • + 3
 @mikekazimer: or you could get a developer to write one line of CSS and fix it across the whole site
  • + 2
 You can also view the numbers on Pivot's website.
  • + 0
 Santa Cruz or evil? leaning towards the hightower Lt, not a pivot fan hahahahaha
  • + 1
 Love it, and that color...... Sexy!
  • - 1
 Awesome looking bike with good geometry numbers, but man they lost me at 6.5lb frame....needs to be 1.5-2.0 lbs lighter. 6.5lbs is crazy talk for a 120mm bike!
  • + 1
 SuperBoost is where is at, no Knock block Bull
  • + 1
 Pf92 works fine now news flash 180mm rear rotor is interesting
  • - 3
 Specialized overhyped their most recent Stumpjumper, yet Pivot is bringing the Trail 429 to market with no hype but all performance to back it up. This bike hypes me up, and while I am not a Pivot rider, this puts shame to Specialized.
  • + 1
 @jimbonoob

noobbojim -> both bikes look like improvements over the prior. We need a 429 & StumpyST shootout methinks.
  • + 0
 I'm blind as a bat but that geo chart would be impossible to read even for Batman
  • + 1
 Can we all just agree that this should have been the 420 + 9
  • - 1
 Shouldn't a 12 x 157,99mm rear spacing increase stiffness and durability even more?
  • + 1
 Plusooster92
  • + 0
 DHR II on the front of the bike. Isn't the DHR a rear specific tire?
  • + 4
 Nope, it works well as a front or rear tire.
  • + 0
 Don't they know that 63 degrees is the new head tube standard? :-)
  • + 0
 #itlookslikeaSantaCruz.
  • + 0
 both colors suck
  • + 0
 PF92 = No Bueno
  • - 3
 Super boost is super dumb...eff off Pivot
  • - 3
 I thought 700c are Portal for brekkie?
  • - 1
 *Ate

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2018. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.185321
Mobile Version of Website