Review: The 2020 Revel Rascal's Suspension Design Lives Up to the Hype

Jun 2, 2020
by Daniel Sapp  

Revel bikes is a brand still in its infancy, launched at the start of 2019 with two bikes in its line-up, both using Canfield's CBF suspension design.

The Rascal is the Revel's take on a versatile trail bike, with 29" wheels and 130mm of rear travel, that's mated to a 140mm fork.

The frame on its own sells for $2,799 USD and is available in a blue "Alaska" color or the silver "T1000". There are also options to buy a frame and fork, and there are three different SRAM-centric builds ranging from GX Eagle up to the top-of-the-line XX1 Eagle AXS.

All of the builds have RockShox suspension, and wheelsets based on Industry 9 hubs. With the introduction of Revel's RW30 composite wheels, the X01 and XX1 builds are equipped with those rims.

Revel Rascal Details

• Wheel size: 29"
• Full carbon frame
• Travel: 130mm rear / 140mm front
• 66-degree head angle
• 433mm chainstays
• Lifetime warranty / lifetime crash replacement
• Price: $6,999 USD
• Weight: 30.2 lb / 13.7kg (size medium, as shown)
The build here is the X01 Eagle, which sells for $6,999 as tested. With Revel's updated spec following the release of their composite wheels, the build now costs $7,199.

bigquotesPointed in the more fun direction, the Rascal is lively and active, the type of bike that encourages you to get airborne any time there's an opportunity. Daniel Sapp

Construction and Features

The team at Revel is comprised of several industry veterans, including Jason Schiers, who have a wealth of experience in getting creative with the use of composites. Schiers claims that he likes carbon as a material because it's extremely tunable - a bike can be made stiff or compliant in the zones it needs to be.

According to Schiers, mountain bike frames have historically used a mixture of 0, 45, and 90-degree fibers to make a frame, with the wall thickness built up where it's needed to get the desired characteristics. Schiers is of the opinion that the fiber angles should be dictated by the load going through that specific part - that you should tailor those fiber angles to do very specific work. Revel uses more 30/60-degree fibers to produce what they say is a lighter yet stronger frame.

The bike has internal tubes for routing cables, an integrated chainguide, and room for a water bottle inside the front triangle, although on the small and medium-size frames only a 20oz bottle will fit. The cable routing is nice and clean and there's a threaded BB to round things out.

Geometry & Sizing

With a 140mm fork, the Rascal has a 66-degree head tube angle, 75-degree seat tube angle, and 433mm chainstays. The size medium has a reach of 444mm. Those numbers are on the more conservative side of the spectrum, especially the reach and seat tube angle measurements.

The bike can be ridden with a 130mm or 150mm fork as well. This, of course, steepens or slackens things out a touch in either direction.

Suspension Design

The Rascal's suspension uses the Canfield Balance Formula (CBF) suspension design which Revel licensed from Canfield. CBF focuses on having a suspension system that has a high level of anti-squat to help it pedaling performance. To achieve this, the links are aligned so that they line up with the chain line throughout the entire travel range.

This gives a high amount of pedaling efficiency and lots of anti-squat. The shock ramps up a lot at the end of its travel to prevent bottom out, but is soft off of the top for a lot of small-bump compliance.

With those large amounts of anti-squat also comes a good anti-rise number. With the anti-rise number near 100%, the geometry of the bike should be preserved even under heavy braking.

Views: 14,769    Faves: 3    Comments: 0

Release Date 2019
Price $6999
Travel 130mm
Rear Shock RockShox Super Deluxe Ultimate
Fork RockShox Pike Ultimate
Headset Cane Creek 40 Series
Cassette SRAM X01 Eagle
Crankarms SRAM Descendant
Chainguide Revel
Bottom Bracket SRAM Dub
Pedals None
Rear Derailleur SRAM X01 Eagle
Chain SRAM X01 Eagle
Front Derailleur N/A
Shifter Pods SRAM X01 Eagle
Handlebar ENVE M6
Stem Truvativ Descendant 31.8mm x 40mm
Grips Ergon GE10
Brakes SRAM G2 RSC
Wheelset Industry 9 Enduro
Hubs Industry 9 Hydra
Spokes Industry 9 System
Rim Industry 9 Enduro
Tires Maxxis Minion
Seat Ergon SM10
Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth 31.6mm

Test Bike Setup

I aired the RockShox SuperDeluxe shock up with 180psi to get 28-30% sag and 5-6 clicks of rebound, from open. For the fork, I had 87psi and 4-5 clicks of rebound. I ran the LSC on both wide open. I opted for a 50mm stem but have also ridden the Rascal with the 40mm option.

I've been riding the Rascal for nearly six months at this point, putting hundreds of miles on it in the process. All of my testing took place in the Southeast US on a variety of terrain, just about anything East Coast one could imagine, from flowy singletrack to the rugged roots and rocks of Pisgah National Forest, to GNCC style rake & ride loam tracks.

2018 Pinkbike Field Test
Daniel Sapp
Location: Brevard, NC, USA
Age: 33
Height: 5'10" / 178cm
Inseam: 32" / 81cm
Weight: 150 lbs / 68 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @d_sapp1

Photo by Michael McQueen


The Rascal's climbing prowess echos my sentiments of the longer travel Rail. Although the seat tube angle isn't as steep as some of the competition, the seated climbing position worked very well for my 5'10" height. The CBF suspension does a great job of keeping the bike sitting higher in its travel; there's no wallowing or feeling like you're sinking in deeper than necessary.

With the RockShox SuperDeluxe shock fully open, there's next to no pedal bob, and throughout the several months I've been riding the bike, I haven't found myself reaching for the lockout switch at all. In both flatter and steeper terrain, the position on the bike is comfortable and pleasant for anything from a quick jaunt to an all-day trudge.

The bike was extremely easy to handle on tight, slow, and technical climbs, and the traction offered up is impressive. I have pedaled up many bits of trail that have left me floundering on other bikes due to slipping on roots or rocks, but the Rascal just motors on.

Photo by Michael McQueen


Pointed in the more fun direction, the Rascal is lively and active, the type of bike that encourages you to get airborne any time there's an opportunity. It's a prime example of an aggressive trail bike - it climbs well, it doesn't mind charging into rough terrain, and it's spec'd to do so and make it out without hesitation. The traction available while descending is parallel to the Rascal's uphill grip, with the bike feeling extremely smooth and composed, especially in nests of rocks and roots.

The shock is very sensitive to small bumps, yet it ramps up nicely when bigger impacts strike. While it's plenty capable anywhere, the Rascal really excels in tight, twisty, technical, "old school" style terrain. It's quick around the corners, and it never felt like it was too long or cumbersome when faced with those tighter trails. As I mentioned earlier, the reach is on the more conservative side, but I felt it was appropriate, and it's part of the reason the bike worked so well on slower speed sections of trail that require lots of body English to navigate.

I've also spent time riding the Rascal with a 130mm fork and feel that the performance difference is negligible in regards to steepening angles.

I've been on the bike for several months now, long enough to comment on a few nuances and durability. I do think that the paint could bear to be a bit tougher as I've seen a number of chips and scuffs. Additionally, although I have experienced no issues with it, the bike can collect dirt in the area of the pivots/bearings and it's challenging to clean. While this is something that could lead to problems down the road, especially with as many pivots as the bike has, the tester I'm on is still running as good as it was on day one.

Photo by Michael McQueen

Revel Rascal
Yeti SB130

How does it compare?

It only makes sense to compare two similar bikes from companies that are both based in the state of Colorado. Both bikes have 130mm of rear suspension and 433mm long chainstays. For the medium-sized frames, the wheelbases are also similar, with the Yeti being a mere 3.6mm longer. The Yeti gains a little travel with a 150mm fork out of the box. Its head tube angle is a half-degree slacker than the Rascal, and its 77-degree seat tube angle is 2-degrees steeper than the Revel's.

On the trail, both bikes score at the top in overall ride quality and experience. The Revel does a better job of handling and managing trail chatter, with more small bump sensitivity than the SB130. If you're a rider that has tighter and more technical trails, the Rascal is an easy choice. It is more nimble and intuitive to ride than the SB130 in those situations.

For riders who crave flat-out speed and ride more aggressively, the SB130 delivers, as it feels its best when pushed harder. That's not to say it doesn't feel really good the rest of the time, it just takes a little more pushing to unlock its full potential. When both bikes are pushed to their limits, the SB130 has a slight edge, with a little more travel up front and a little more stability at those higher speeds, but at the end of the day, neither bike will disappoint you.

Photo by Michael McQueen

Technical Report

SRAM Drivetrain: Revel spec's all of their bikes with SRAM Eagle drivetrains. The X01 Eagle system is tried and true, and didn't cause any issues during testing. With the full-SRAM spec, there's also a RockShox Reverb Stealth post included. Compared to other cable-actuated posts, the hydraulic lever felt sluggish, and required more effort to push than I would have liked.

Tires: The Maxxis DHF/DHR II tire matchup is one of the most common combinations out there, and for good reason. It's nice to see the EXO+ casing spec'd over the EXO, and I've had no issues with flats whatsoever through plenty of encounters with sharp rocks and low air pressures.

RockShox Suspension: RockShox's Pike Ultimate and SuperDeluxe rear shock performed flawlessly and the smoothness of the suspension was one of the most noticeable qualities of the Rascal's ride. The suspension is easy to set up and has 100% trouble-free over the last several months of riding.

Industry 9 Wheels: Industry 9's fancy system wheels with high-engagement hubs are difficult to beat. Revel's bikes all come with i9's in some form or fashion. The only update to the 2020 Rascal from the one I've been riding is that it has Revel's RW 30 composite wheels included, which ups the price by $200 overall. I've been riding the wheels for a few months now and have nothing but good things to say about them, and they're an excellent value for a lot of performance in the complete bike package from Revel. The i9 Enduro level system wheels can be a little stiffer than some other options available and certainly contribute to a stiff but good quality ride.


+ Excellent ride quality both climbing and descending
+ Attention to detail
+ Suspension design lives up to its hype


- SRAM only spec leaves Shimano fans out
- Dirt pockets / loam shelf are difficult to clean
- Paint durability

Pinkbike's Take

bigquotesQuick, lively, and nimble, Revel's Rascal is a unique bike that delivers a high-performance ride. In fact, it's one of the best riding 130mm trail bikes I've been on in recent memory, and it's a bike that I have been able to recommend to a number of riders without hesitation. 
Daniel Sapp


  • 208 49
 This may be a little extremist, but any company that doesn't have an SLX 12 speed build needs to think about their actions! Regardless of the OE pull Sram has with Rockshox, Truvativ etc, We (I) want Shimano and Marzocchi
  • 42 8
 Yea I asked Revel about Shimano builds and they said soon. This was September 2019. Nothing has changed. The lack of Shimano builds on Revel bikes is partly the reason why I went with an SB130 T1 build with the M8100 XT groupset and brakes. Daniel is right about the SB130. There are no chill rides with it.
  • 11 11
 I'll agree. Nothing wrong with SRAM but I got my latest bike in x01, went to AXS to see if it will shift smoother and it does but defiantly not worth the money. At the time Shimano didn't have the new stuff out so I didn't have a choice.
  • 18 11
 Orbea Occam H30. SLX (W/ sunrace HG cassette) and Bomber fork
  • 45 18
 poor Sram gets no love... but rightfully so in comparison to Shimano
  • 32 4
 @Frank191: Missing the Shimano cassette from a 12 speed drivetrain is a heinous crime. Hyperglide+ is real.
  • 97 8
 Just buy the frame and build it up the way you want then. No company is going to make everyone happy with complete builds. They could have done all Fox and Shimano and then people would complain about no SRAM.
  • 13 21
flag Foolcyclist (Jun 2, 2020 at 7:36) (Below Threshold)
 Exactly this. I was really wanting to get a Rascal, but the lack of options for Shimano was the deal breaker. Ended up with Orbea Occam M10 with full XT build and Fox Suspension. Revel is missing out on a huge segment of riders.
  • 23 0
 @Almazing: The deals for the model year OEM parts kit are done months, sometimes a year in advance. Most likely when you spoke with them in Sept 2019, all deals for OEM 2020 model year bikes had been signed way prior with Sram. They were probably starting to discuss OEM 2021 parts kits as early as March this year.
  • 11 18
flag pensamtb (Jun 2, 2020 at 7:54) (Below Threshold)
 @Bliss503: who is going to give me back the money I have to spend extra if I build up my own? OEM spec is usually a good chunk cheaper.
  • 18 1
 @pensamtb: yes and you usually get those awesome Guide T brakes with them $5000 bikes too!
  • 17 0


You can't please everyone. I prefer to build my bikes from scratch, including the hoops and usually buy a new frame every 12-18 months and just transfer everything over. Lastly, the frame only options from Revel are priced pretty competitively too.
  • 10 1
 What is wrong with just building up a frame?
  • 25 5
 @ATXZJ: you mean except for every third year where they change all the standards and none of your parts fit anymore.
  • 4 22
flag Rubberelli (Jun 2, 2020 at 11:01) (Below Threshold)
 Y'all realize that the two EWS champions ride Sram drivetrains don't you?
  • 10 2

Ah yes. Because drivetrains have ALL to do with winning championships. I heard the current MotoGP champion as well as 2nd and 3rd place were on Michelin tires since 2016! Those must be some magic tires!
  • 14 3
 @Rubberelli: Yeah, I'm sure Sam Hill would be half as fast if he rode a Shimano Drive train. Rude is super slow also, so is Minnaar Big Grin
  • 11 4
 @Almazing: of course drivetrains don’t win championships, but they sure as hell can lose them. I think the comment was pointing out that the PB comments braintrust can be a little overdramatic about what works and doesn’t.
  • 2 1
 @ATXZJ: Agreed
  • 9 4
 I put XT 12 on my bike and honestly I don't see what the hype is about. Came from XT 11 and so far I've had more problems and worse shifting with XT 12. Yes I set the chain length and B screw correctly. Had to rebuild the clutch after 1 month of riding.
  • 14 6
 @DrPete: it isnt about working and not working. Shimano shifts better than sram. I'm not at all a shimano fanboy, but the difference to me is night and day. I would shy away from a bike that I couldn't get with a shimano drive train.
  • 9 4

Gonna have to strongly disagree on this one. Maybe at lower levels, but my sram X01 11spd shift action is way lighter and responsive than the M9000 and 8000s ive owned. Just switched my park bike from M8000 back to X1 because of this. I will say 11spd shimano SLX is the AK47 of drivetrains, and wouldn't hesitate to use it on a budget build.

JMHO though so take that for what it's worth.
  • 5 0
 @friendlyfoe: Since buying my components in 2016, I had to swap a rear hub on my existing wheelset. Far from a crisis in any way.
  • 3 1
 @ATXZJ: I spent all last summer trying to "pick a sram drivetrain" after having it suggested. I demoed somewhere around 30 bikes and everytime I hated a drivetrain it was sram, and everyone I loved was shimano. A few times I couldn't really tell.

I would say neither of our opinions are worth anything, you have to go out and try this stuff, because obviously we are having different experiences with the same equipment.
  • 9 1
 @ATXZJ: You are on point there. XO1 Eagle or XX1 Eagle, pretty dame nice. Sram is pretty much crap below those.
I am sure a few GX fanboys out there will diagree but what ever. Shimano is damn good across it ranges that we see on modern MTB's
  • 4 0
 If you go through a bike builder like Bike Fanatic, wouldn't that fix the problem?
  • 5 15
flag thenotoriousmic (Jun 2, 2020 at 16:51) (Below Threshold)
 @bman33: Shimano doesn’t compete with srams high end products. I run a lot of m8000 and m7000 on my hardtails and the x01 / guide rsc’s are older and still perform way better. There’s not much difference at the NX / SLX level and sram need to stop giving their crappy oem parts the same name as their high end stuff. Guide T’s really shouldn’t be associated with guide ultimates.
  • 3 0
 @thenotoriousmic: 60 grams difference between XX1 and XTR9100. Really all preference.
  • 3 5
 Personally I trust Japanese engineering, over any other kind, if you haven't seen the stuff they make. They go to school/work themselve's to death a lot of times. If you can't trust that then.....................
  • 2 1
 @flymiamibro22: that's because you are not coming from a SRAM drivetrain.
  • 8 2
 @RonSauce: if the difference is “night and day,” then the SRAM drivetrain wasn’t set up correctly or there was some other problem. They both work great and while there are difference in feel there is nothing “Night and day” about the difference between them.
  • 2 2
 Here, here!

I was shopping for a complete bike for my daughter in law, when it came down to comparing four similar bikes, the bike I purchased was the one that had a Shimano drivertrain.

Maybe all buyers aren't as particular, but some are, and some mfgs should take notice.

Bikes I was looking at: Spec. Fuse, Trek Roscoe, Kona Big Honzo, Salsa Timberjack.

Salsa Timberjack for the win!
  • 3 0
 @nouseforaname: I run 12-speed XT w/ SunRace CSMZ903 cassette.

Instant shifts, up or down.

Hyperglide to me!
  • 7 4
 @DrPete: yeah, maybe every sram drivetrain I've ridden has been setup poorly and every shimano one was set up perfect, I guess that makes more sense. Considering there was nearly zero setup involved in my deore and it shifts amazing I guess we can chalk that as another +1 for shimano having a dead easy setup.
  • 8 0
 @thenotoriousmic: I have been running XTR 12-speed for 9 months after being on Sram Eagle for a several years. It's as good and better on a few areas like shifting under load (lots of climbing here in Colorado). Sram brakes ...most likely never again. Shimano brakes are ok, but I've been on Hope for 6 or so years. I'd take SLX over NX every single day without exception.
  • 6 3
 This focus on hate for SRAM again...

Some bike companies are founded bike enthusiasts. Maybe those bike companies simply prefer working with component suppliers like SRAM who are also founded & run by bike enthusiasts (not fishermen).

Both SRAM & Shimano bring awesome stuff & keep pushing each other in performance and quality - and we benefit with awesome bikes.

Please - back to focusing on the Rascal!
  • 5 2
 @RonSauce: I suppose that the rest of us, from beginner to elite pro, should just be glad that we aren’t as discerning as you are when it comes to the quality of our drivetrains and accept that our years of trouble-free riding on SRAM-equipped bikes didn’t actually happen.
  • 3 2
 @Dlakusta: Get a Shimano HG+ cassette and chain, then the shifting is much much better. tup
Shimano 12spd is leagues ahead of anything Sram makes.... including AXS.

@flymiamibro22: Sorry man, but if you have worse shifting with Shimano 12 than you did with 11 its almost certainly down to user error and poor setup. It's not just about setting the B tension.
  • 3 0
 Gotta love those Rascals...
  • 5 6
 @DrPete: Every time I have owned a Sram product, it has failed (guide rsc, reverb, wheelset), or I’ve absolutely despised it (x01 11sp, apex, revelation fork). Never again SRAM.
  • 1 2

Okay but rude and Minnaar are on Shimano drivetrains. So that’s kind of a weird example. Rude was actually instrumental in product testing the new 12 speed xtr and played a significant roll in several revisions.
  • 6 2

Careful, the Shimano hype on Pinkbike from all the people who don’t own it but have a classic case of “grass is greener on the other side” is pretty high. Now is a poor time to start a riot.

I like my xtr 12 speed a lot. It’s sick as f*ck. I also liked my SRAM GX that came stock on my bike, and thought that was super crisp quick shifts.

We’re spoiled for good choices right now.
  • 4 16
flag thenotoriousmic (Jun 3, 2020 at 4:31) (Below Threshold)
 @DrPete: It’s just the noisy minority of deluded pinkbikers living in the past, talking in urban myths again. Let’s be honest. Shimano have been left behind. Nobody’s choosing saints over codes, shimano’s dropper over a reverb etc. Sram have killed shimano in every department. They’re clutching straws, shimano’s mechs and shifters are just as bad as everything else they make and the only reason you’d buy a shimano cassette over a xx1 / x02 is funds. Literally everything they make is better than shimano’s offerings. I’ve just worn out a set of 8 month old ice tech rotors and replaced them with some perfectly straight five year old centrelines and replaced a slx calliper that pissed all over the rotor during isolation again. The last time I was impressed by a shimano product was when I bought a Saint chain guide in 2015, everything else has performed poorly and not lasted before failing but it’s cheap and does the job. Honestly you get what you pay for when you pay the extra from sram.
  • 2 3
 @William42: the top 3 EWS men's riders are all on Sram drivetrains, including Kevin Miquel who is not even sponsored by Sram (nor is his Sunn team), but he chooses to ride XO. As for Minnaar, or any other world cup DH racer sponsored by Shimano, I don't believe any of them are on stock components. They all ride modified shimano road cassettes and modified shifters since Saint is still 10sp and almost every WC mechanic mods it to simulate Sram's 7speed DH group. So unless you have your own high level mechanic, you really only have Sram or Gwin's new Box drivetrain if you want modern DH performance that is rock solid.
  • 2 0
 @William42: That was my point, that the ARE fast and on Shimano, not Sram like Rubberelli was inferring (only Sram riders can go fast)
  • 3 3
 @bman33: I was inferring no such thing. I was, in fact, inferring that those who claim Shimano is vastly superior and that Sram is not even worthy of comparison are having to intentionally ignore real world results to make such outlandish claims.
  • 3 1
 @DrPete: I'm not saying sram is horrible, or unridable. Calm down. I prefer shimano after my own personal testing with my style of riding and terrain, I guess you're just gonna have to live the rest of your life with that bothering you, or you can get over it.
  • 3 3
 @RonSauce: you have greatly overestimated the importance of your opinion to me.
  • 5 1
 @DrPete: you have greatly overestimated your own reading comprehension.
  • 5 1
 @thenotoriousmic: you're a broken record. Why are you such a passionate SRAM fanboi? It's honestly just kinda weird. You even went as far as to praise the reverb... why? SRAM and shimano both make good drivetrains. Use what you like. A lot of people prefer shimano, for good reasons. Let it go dude.
  • 4 1
 @thenotoriousmic: @thenotoriousmic: You sound delusional. Absolutely none of that is accurate. Yes they were late to the 12 speed game but they're catching up and you can actively see more and more companies spec'ing Shimano on their bikes, especially now with Deore 12s.

Sram really isn't as bad as people make it out to be. People just have their preferences, and with preference comes bias. They both work well. And once Shimano comes out with their gear box, they'll be the leaders in migration to many bikes being spec'd with them.

But ya... Everything you said about Shimano is completely inaccurate. Do you even read the comments on PB? Everyone is a Shimano fanboi. It's cool to like a different brand, but no need to exaggerate.
  • 4 8
flag thenotoriousmic (Jun 4, 2020 at 8:21) (Below Threshold)
 @nmilot92: I don’t care about 12 speed. 11 is more than enough. I’m talking about build quality and performance. Shimano doesn’t work well and it doesn’t last and not just that there’s a whole list of issues they’re failed to address. They’ve done absolutely nothing to address the issue with the brakes. The new brakes are exactly the same as my current XT’s except with a second point of contact on the lever. They haven’t improved the quality at all, it’s the same old tat now just with a extra gear. They don’t listen to their customers, they don’t care about mountain bikes anymore. They’d rather sell fishing rods and components for road bikes and low end mtbs. They’ve done the bare minimum to stay relevant and that’s it. They haven’t even updated the Saint groupset in like ten years or something let alone doing something innovative. I just like picking fun at these deluded fanboys when they say something ridiculous on the internet. Like I said it’s no coincidence we’re all riding sram while shimano’s flogged on the cheap online, if the demand was there that wouldn’t happen.
  • 4 1
 @thenotoriousmic: cool story. Can you tell it again please
  • 4 0
 @thenotoriousmic: I've been on Sram 12spd for 3 years. Am really glad to be back on a bit of Shimano.
I can feel what gear I'm in and don't need a clunk and some clanging noises to clarify it every time I make a shift. That's not being a fanboy, it's just an opinion- I like my bikes to be quiet and operate smoothly so I can get the most out of riding them. tup
You wouldn't accept clunky, noisy gears from your car, why are you happy with that on your bike?
  • 3 6
 @timbud: I still use both shimano and it’s nowhere near as good as my sram stuff. Shimano’s works for a year / 18 months and it’s ready for the bin but it doesn’t really matter because it’s cheap but let’s not pretend that it’s a better product because it clearly isn’t. Have a look at this and watch sram absolutely shit on shimano in slow motion.
  • 3 1
 @thenotoriousmic: You are using a great bit of hyperbole. Shimano XT, XTR, Saint (long in the tooth, but bullet proof) is excellent and endless examples of out lasting Sram, ESPECIALLY the cassettes. Brakes, I don't use Sram or Shimano so I don't care either way. Shimano cranks, especially XT are one of the best values out there are vastly superior to Sram snap away carbon cranks. Sram has good Derailleurs and the XO1 and XX1 cassettes are nice, but wear out way to soon.
  • 2 7
flag thenotoriousmic (Jun 4, 2020 at 10:58) (Below Threshold)
 @bman33: my x01 cassette is over three years old and still out performs my less than a year old XT / SLX and GX cassettes. If you catch a pedal or land one footed you can definitely rip the insert out of a XO1 crank but other than that they’re supposed to be pretty good. I’ve never actually used them myself however I’ve broken more shimano cranks than I can actually remember. The metallic pads in my guides out lasted my ice tech rotors might be my fault though as they might not be designed to work with metallic pads but still replaced them with some five year old centre lines that came out of the dishwasher looking new and perfectly straight. Did I service on my dads XT / LX equipped trek so he could ride during lockdown and the new stuff is almost identical to what’s on his bike. Absolutely no progression at all. The only reason they improved the 12 speed cassettes is because the 11 speed stuff couldn’t handle ebikes. If they didn’t want a slice of that market it wouldn’t have happened. Shimano doesn’t care about mountain bikes anymore.
  • 4 1
 @thenotoriousmic: Dude, no one makes a good e-bike drivetrain yet. Shimano's 12spd HG+ is the best at the moment though. It is quite convenient that you forgot to mention Sram's 8spd e-bike drivetrain that was diabolical and was quietly discontinued about a year after its release. hmmm. Their only update for e-bikes is a single click shifter
Those Icetec rotors (RT86/96) have an aluminum core so no they don't last long at all. They're designed to dissipate heat really well, not last your lifetime. If you want a long-lasting rotor stop braking so much and just make sure its a good quality steel one...Everyone knows Japan can do some unbelievable things with steel.

It is quite obvious you haven't tried a full HG+ system yet.
  • 1 2
 @timbud: even still id expect them to outlive my brake pads. 8 months of light use and they’re ready for the bin... typical shimano. To be fair I usually get them to last longer with resin pads but I won’t be getting them again, they’re pointless and warp ridiculously easy.

I don’t care about ebikes, road bikes or fishing rods. I’m only interested by what effects me.
  • 4 0
 @thenotoriousmic: Just as a note, 'fishing rods' or reels to be specific are the very reason we have indexed trigger shifters today....all of them. Sram, Shimano, Campy, etc. Shimano invented it via their fishing gear tech. If you don't like Shimano, fine. However, their shifters are top notch in their tiered catagory. Sram has great stuff too, neither is 'miles' ahead of the other. It's a Ford/Chevy comparison (or the UK equivalent).
  • 2 2
 @bman33: I do actually own a shimano fly rod and real. Haha. I have no idea if it’s any good though.
  • 4 2
 @thenotoriousmic: I don't know how you've managed to form such loud and misinformed opinions, but if you could stop repeating them that would be great. Cheers
  • 1 5
flag thenotoriousmic (Jun 5, 2020 at 0:06) (Below Threshold)
 @thegoodflow: it’s because you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Try listening and you might learn something.
  • 1 2
 @thenotoriousmic: Hope brakes suck, shimano everything sucks, any other wisdom you'd like to bestow on us? I'm here to learn
  • 1 0
 @Norse: AMEN, How did this become a groupo war? I have a Revel with Push fork 150mm kit and I love the way it works. Here in San Diego we have everything from fast single to rocky tight trails, this bike eats up anything and is SO smooth and nimble. The Rascal fits well between the Levo S-Works and Spark RCWC that I bought before this bike. I feel this will handle anything from rolling single track to jaunts to Big Bear or Greer ranch. The guys at Revel are great to deal with as well and are totally into riding and the bikes they build. If I had to only have one bike this would be it!
  • 1 0
 @Almazing: In case you aren't being facetious, even the last place MotoGP rider is on Michelin. They are the spec tire for the MotoGP class. You can't run anything else.
  • 1 0
 You have to realize though that it isn't always up to the bike companies what will work out for them. They all pay different prices for groupsets depending on when/how much they buy, and it also comes down to Shimano and Sram commitments lining up with the frame production. Shimano has been known to say no to smaller brands because they need to meet the demands of larger companies etc
  • 74 13
 Dinged for not-so-aggressive geometry? I mean, not officially, but it was mentioned... come on, it's a trail bike, not everything needs 63* HTA 77* STA 500mm reach...
  • 17 34
flag benmoosmann (Jun 2, 2020 at 2:08) (Below Threshold)
 I'd disagree. I'm actually kinda done with trail bikes trying to do a little bit of everything and ending up doing nothing right. Usually when companies try to build a bike that's versatile like that, they end up building something which is not that exciting in any environment. I'd rather have a trail bike like the Norco Optic which at least is going to excel in one category.
  • 29 40
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 2:35) (Below Threshold)
 @mtbikeaddict - it will take at least 5 more years for people to realize that. Right now everyone is into undertraveling bikes, overtiring and overgeoing them. You have to wait for overgeoing to become passe. All the big mouth about underbiking, but keepeing slow rolling Minions or MMaries on and getting DH bike geo with reach for Magic Johnson. Some do manuals for miles, hop from every little rock they can find - some do manuals never. Rubber on the ground at all times. Ridiculous.
  • 61 12
 @benmoosmann: I demo'd an Optic a month or two back, partly because of the reviews/hype on here. It was totally underwhelming. Good at one thing only, except without the travel to pull it off. Crap on the climbs and about as nimble as an oil tanker.
Short travel "trail" bikes with DH geo and over 2.5 kg's of tyres make no sense to me at all. Riding it made me realise that my current trail bike, with "conservative" geometry, already does everything well and certainly better than I can anyway. Saved me a fortune.
  • 16 0
 Was it really dinged for this? It was mentioned, but mostly in relation to what it did well. The only negative was in comparison to the SB130 at the limit and that was very much a pro/con comparison.
  • 14 3
 @JiminOz: agreed regarding the optic, except I bought one off reviews alone and sold it two weeks later ????
  • 22 2
 @mangoe5: Ooh, that's gotta hurt. I paid $100 for a demo and it was money well spent. Very disappointing, but also highlighted to me just how much crap is reported about what what bikes we should be riding.
  • 17 17
 @JiminOz: I installed light weight, fast rolling XR3/XR4 tires on my 160 bike, upped the preload and keep rebound a tad too fast. If this isn't lively for local trails, I don't know what is. Acceleration is great, there's more feedback and there's no careless moto-gp leaning on Minions DHF so whole ride experience is generally more loose. I am even considering lowering my fork to 140 for local rides. Then mountains come - suspension all plush, DH casings and 180 fork front.
  • 5 1
 @JiminOz: wonder why the optic won bike of the year then.
  • 8 0
 @JiminOz: of the more trail oriented bikes I’ve ridden lately, the evil offering (140mm 29er) was the most satisfying up and down.
  • 4 1
 @MarcusBrody: I suppose it wasn't really dinged... like I said not officially. I actually rather liked this review. Just the way I heard it, and the fact that it's mentioned in almost every review. Slacker HTA! Steeper STA! Longer reach! Like what longer bars/shorter stem was not too long ago.
  • 3 2
 @JiminOz: it did hurt but I picked up a second hand Druid for the same $ I sold it for and it’s better in ever way, including playfulness which I wouldn’t of expected. Another awesome linkage, along with CBF
  • 5 0
 @DHhack: I rode a variety bikes last summer in search for a new proper trail bike: Following, Top Fuel, Oiz, Ripmo, HD4 & 5, Occam and the Offering. The offering was an easy pick - love it
  • 4 2
 @mtbikeaddict: chain stays too. And note they are getting longer again, and they want longer ones for every size! These reviews are mostly for entertainment.
  • 2 0
 Love the sb130 and all, but honestly would not want it as a just for fun trail bike. That thing handles enduro riding just fine, which makes it such an ideal 'one bike', but I think anyone would be happier with a more responsive ride that doesnt require huge weight shifts all the time for any given feature. Add the reportedly greater small bump sensitivity and the revel is a winner in my eyes.
  • 1 0
 @DHhack: The Rascal can compare. I had a Rascal for last year and an Offering for this season. They are both amazing all rounders and I'd be hard pressed to pick a favorite.
  • 5 0
 @me2menow: The sb130 is very easy to handle as a trail bike.. I ride the tight twisty jank of the north shore on it just fine. Once you are used to a bike it just becomes second nature.. The weight shifts are over blown in these reviews... Once youve made the riding adjustments and set the bike up to to your riding style, it becomes evident why it is one of the nicest rigs out right now. I find these are the type of attributes that simply can not be detected on a simple one time test ride.
Also, the 2 degree steeper seat tube angle is a no brainer for us dudes over 6ft.
  • 1 0
 @bohns1: Ive had some pretty good rides on the sb130, that's just my personal experience compared to other bikes I've ridden without super modern geo. At the end of a long day epic it definitely felt like noticeably more effort. That said,the long tt position helped a ton on the steeps and that sta was great.
  • 1 0
 @bohns1: Yeah, I wondered that too. Fat wad of cash maybe?
  • 6 0
 I’m having a blast on my new stumpjumper, which is also way too short and steep for the PB comments section. I think we’re reaching a
Point where the super slack HTA/super steep STA/long reach craze may have hit peak and we can rightly start backing off, at least for most riders and trails.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: Only of the trails become easier and flatter, which I don't see happening around where I live.
  • 5 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: I mean, I own a SB130 too and it’s not like I’d give up the geometry where it’s helpful, but not every style of bike has to come from the same mold.
  • 2 0
 @JiminOz: man, the Optic has blown me away in terms of both climbing and descending performance, and yours is the first negative review I've heard (except about the Shimano brakes). And it won over the Pinkbike reviewers as well. I wonder if the one you tried wasn't set up right?
  • 3 0
 @bohns1: it's a sick bike to hop on when youre used to riding the same kinds of bikes. It's different, and a treat for people with access to many bikes. But it wont be the ideal long term one bike ticket for all.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: it's almost like having choices is good
  • 2 1
 @clink83: imagine that!
  • 1 0
 What the addict said. For the local homegrown trails, so many new bikes have shot past the point of diminishing returns. This spring I went from a Yeti SB 4.5 to the new Trek Fuel EX XT build and on my twisty, punchy, rocky trails, the Trek felt long in comparison but confident and capable. In the end, bikes like the Rascal and the Fuel EX and Evil strike that perfect balance that excels for the every day ride.
  • 40 1
 Thank god, finally a bike review, feels like it has been ages...thanks guys! Smile
  • 26 8
 But where's the grim donut part 2?
  • 1 0
 The good news about bike reviews now. If you think sweet I need one of these right now your disappointment will be great. Bet you can’t get one for months. The bike looks good though.
  • 32 4
 The CBF suspension design is the best pedalling platform I have ever ridden. I wish there were more bikes made with it.
  • 13 30
flag RaZias (Jun 2, 2020 at 3:03) (Below Threshold)
 Too much pedal-kickback
  • 15 1
 @RaZias: Are you speaking from experience or just speculating because you're wrong.

Also, I don't believe CBF has loads of anti-squat. Isn't the design based on exactly 100% anti-squat through the entire range of travel?
  • 4 4
 How's it compare to VPP or DW Link?

Having ridden both VPP and DW, I find they're very similar in their most current iterations. I'm back on a VPP after spending a couple on DW, and I very much like the platform they both provide (VPP being a little more pedal friendly).
  • 6 3
 @NotSorry: CBF uses multiple linkages to create a virtual pivot point that is always at the point of force on the chainring

  • 9 9
 Yeah... But it's going to be real fun replacing twice as many bearings as all your mates at each rebuild!
  • 9 1
 @drpheta: coming off delta link, giddy up and the new vpp I’d say cbf is better again than the new vpp. Pedals slightly better but with more grip and just as good perhaps just a bit better again on the way down. I bought a rail a year ago when they launched and it’s been amazing...
  • 17 0
 @landscapeben: not if your mates ride Evil or Knolly
  • 12 3
 @landscapeben: That's why I ride an Orange.
  • 27 6
 @landscapeben: That's why I ride a hardtail.
  • 13 0
 @Paddock22: I'm always curious how the designs are affected by bigger or smaller front chainrings since it changes the "point of force" Say someone runs a 28 versus a 34
  • 9 0
 If anybody is interested in the actual numbers behind the anti-squad etc, Antonio from Linkage-Design analyzed it last year:
  • 4 6
 @RaZias: Way to much pedal kickback.
14° @130mm in 21/30
25° @130mm in 50/30
And despite the STA being 75°, the saddle seems way too far back, above the rear wheel comparing with the Yeti ont the last pic (and the rascal is not level).
  • 11 1
 @Paddock22: @drpheta: I've only demoed the Rascal and Rail a few times and have owned many DW and VPP bikes over the years. I own a Bronson now and just sold a 2020 Hightower. The difference between CBF and VPP is traction. I don't know that it transfers power better or worse but it does allow the wheel to move out of the way better than other bikes I've ridden in recent memory. Almost like a well designed high pivot idler bike would. So when pedaling up technical sections the wheel moves over obstacles without loading the pedal stroke too much which provides excellent traction. In back to back tests with my old Hightower and the Rascal over a steep rooted climb the Hightower spun out on roots while the Rascal didn't. The Rail is a whole other animal. With more travel it is almost like it hovers over chunk while pedaling. On flats I noticed that I could pedal as hard as I wanted over pretty rough terrain without my feet bouncing off.
  • 2 3
 Could you put a shock with a longer stroke to up the travel and give it a more Enduro feel?
  • 6 6
 @RaZias: I dont think so. Some people care too much about kinematics without understanding how they really ride. Cbf feels like it is in a different category of superior suspension to anything I have ridden. I rode one at moab, where there is ample opportunity to feel pedal kickback if it was going to be prominent, and I didnt notice it once. It may show up in these pseudo science kinematic analyses, but it does not show up in the real world....I suggest you try a cbf bike as soon as possible. It is better than everything else, in a very noticeable way.
  • 1 1
 That’s what I was thinking too get a 150 fork on it. RockShox and then you can adjust your suspension 130/140/150@Shred-BC:
  • 1 0
 @NotSorry: That sounds amazing. I'll be on my VPP for a while as I JUST got it. CBF will me on my shortlist when I decide to upgrade my ride.
  • 1 0
 @NotSorry: Good feedback. I have never ridden one but every one who has is impressed! It was on my shortlist to try/buy but then I bought a used bike instead.
  • 3 1
 @NotSorry: Sooooooo like a proper Horst-link bike then ehh
  • 4 0
 @SvenNorske: Haha, it pedals way better than than though. It really is a great design.
  • 2 0
 @blowmyfuse: Great point. I also wonder if an oval chainring would throw it off? I wonder how sensitive the kinematics are to messing with those things?
  • 11 3
"It may show up in these pseudo science kinematic analyses, but it does not show up in the real world"

It's exactly the opposite.
Analyses results are reproductibles and figures produced have a mechanical meaning : they are opposables and objectives. If you don't get them, just educate yourself.
Testing bikes is purely subjective and the "it's better than everything else" only mean something for yourself in your own real world (and is a bit genuinely ridiculous given the amount of bikes designs you probably never even thought of)...
You don't buy a 1000 $ computer, a 30 k$ car or whatever costing more that 3-400 grands on testing it in the shop (or maybe you did), you buy it first on specs. Because specs have a meaning and " it limb like a goat and goes down like a bobsleigh" mean nothing.
  • 5 0
 @Paddock22: I've only used an Oval once. I didn't realize I was until I pedaled the pavement to the trail & thought the tires were 'lurching" or had an imbalance. It was on a Mondraker high end Foxy 29er. Took me a minute to realize it was the oval ring not letting me "spin up" to speed but kind of "power on/power off".

Didn't notice anything once I hit dirt and root but it was also a high end demo bike so I was hovering in bike whore heaven the whole ride anyway.
  • 11 1
 @NotSorry: When comparing this bike to a VPP or another DW bike as you did, it will feel quite different. However, if you compare it to a well-designed linkage-driven single pivot or long-link 4 bar bike, it's very similar from a kinematics standpoint. If anyone cares to connect the dots on the links to find the instant center, you'll see that CBF is simply a short-link, 4 bar design that is attempting to mimic a single pivot bike as closely as possible. Antisquat, antirise, axle path, leverage curve, and chain growth are all in a very similar range to many long-link bikes. Taking into account the compromises made in CBF (seat tube angle, giant shock yoke amplifying side loads on the shock, additional bearings), I don't see the appeal when compared to other simpler, more reliable designs that accomplish the same feel. I owned two Hightowers, later tested a Rascal, an Enduro, a Ripmo, and then a Sight. I bought the Sight due to its similar ride qualities with much better geometry and simpler design.
  • 3 2
 @blowmyfuse: I had an oval chainring and took it off after about 5 rides. I didn't notice any advantage in climbing (steady or technical climbing). Where I noticed a big disadvantage (at least for me) was during hard, out of the saddle pedaling it felt like there was a dead spot in my spin. It was almost like my hub would lose engagement for that split second.

Could be attributed to my poor pedaling form or other things but I personally didn't like it.
  • 2 0
 @landscapeben: bearings very rarely need replacing?
  • 6 0
 @grizzlyatom: fair point about the side loading. My rail destroyed an EXT storia and I’d love to be able to run a coil because it was so good. You should of tried a Druid too if you didn’t, awesome linkage.
  • 1 0
 @djm35: me too mate Beer
  • 1 0
 @f00bar: my mates don't...
  • 10 5
 @gnralized: I agree with what you said.
I am educated enough to know I wasn't using the terminology correctly. I just didnt take into account that I would lose ethos with my audience...apparently.

I just think people who dont ride enough get too hung up on trying to become better riders by using some sort of scientific basis, or YouTube, or whatever their takeaway is from reading these suspension analyses that have recently become so popular.

It's really quite simple, and subjective as you said. Ride bikes, choose what feels best. I think most people only research the hell out of it, never test more than two bikes, and then get on here and try to prove how the bike they invested in is the best.

I will try to be more accurate with my use of terminology in order to sway the scientific OCD and opinionated audience in the future. You have made it clear that I lost credibility due to my improper use of words. I'm pretty sure you knew what the meaning of my statement was. You just are hung up on details...but I dont care, you can ride whatever you want...

And btw, I am currently in school educating myself. I also work at a shop, go to tradeshows, know a lot of industry people, and have ridden the majority of the suspension designs out there. CBF is the best in my opinion for trail bikes. And it was startlingly better than anything else I have tried (which of course is not everything, but is a significant amount of what it out there). And yes that is highly subjective, but it is based on more real world tests than most people on this site referencing kinematic details they read online....
  • 8 1
 @NotSorry: PSA, because there's a ton of very bad bro-science here. You cannot have good traction and efficient pedaling at the same time because of physics. The Revel physically can't pedal better AND have more traction than other bikes, it's one or the other. Also high anti-squat will always result in high pedal kickback, unless you use an idler, so again you can't have both.

That being said, I would argue that the CBF suspension platform doesn't have "high" pedal kickback like they say they do. High is all relative to other bikes and most manufacturers today are shooting for 100% anti-squat. The Revel's anti-squat drops consistently from about 117%-80% in the 32-50 gear combo. That's not that high, and at the blog post above, you can see many other bikes with higher levels of anti-squat. That results in pedal kickback of about 20 deg at full travel, which is pretty average because the anti-squat is pretty average.
  • 2 1
 Switch infinity seems like a waste if this bike had better small bump compliance..
  • 1 1
 @Paddock22: It will be a personal preference, and a lot does depend on pedalling form. Fir me, oval chaining have been a game changer. The consistency of the power delivery makes technical climbs significantly more doable, and I can get away with a harder great on those climbs. I've had them on a Spot Mayhem and a Trek Top Fuel, and I'll never go back to round rings. An oval ring shouldn't mess with the kinematics perceptibly, if at all That had been my experience.
  • 1 1
 @tgent: Ok bro. Perhaps my description of "good pedaling" is off then. What good is pedal efficiency if there's no traction to turn it into forward motion?
  • 4 1
 @RaZias: - makes a valid point.

After riding Revel’s Rail for two weeks, I couldn’t believe how easily the rear hung up on larger roots and rocks when pedaling uphill.

Not sold on CBF just yet.
  • 2 1
 @Ecar: Strange that I had the exact opposite experience.
  • 3 0
 @NotSorry: Well, the Revel has about 105% anti-squat at sag, the 2020 Hightower has about 110% anti-squat at sag, both in the 32/50 gear combo. That means the Revel will be slightly less stiff while pedaling than the hightower that will lead to better compliance and ability to move over rocks/bumps, which I believe you're referring to as traction. It will also be less efficient as the suspension will be moving more. That being said 5% is a pretty small difference and both bikes will feel very similar in terms of pedaling efficiency and traction. There are a lot of other factors like geo, leverage ratio, and shock tune that will make the bikes feel different as well, so you can't just look at anti-squat and say X bike will pedal better than Y bike, but it's a good place to start.

Also, the Rascal has higher pedal kickback at full travel than the Hightower, even though the hightower has more travel, about 20 degrees vs 18.5 degrees.
  • 2 0
 @tgent: Very quickly, ring size has a significative influence over AS/PK too, even for a 2t difference, which can lead to very different appreciation between two bikes, on wit a 30t ring, the other with a 32t.
For instance, SC sells the Hightower with a 30t ring.
PK for the Rascal in 30/50 is around 22-23°, which is in the highest value for a trail bike.
AS is not constant too across the travel, so two bikes with same AS curve but different sag will feel different as pedallling, too.
That and shock stroke and ratio are the most influencing parameters on AS/PK perception, in my humble opinion.
The VPP-like group of bikes from Linkage Rascal comparison have all a very high PK (they just miss a Pivot to be complete). That's Antonio Osuna's way to present things. If he had put a Stumjumper ST or a Knolly Fugitive LT, the difference in AS/PK enveloppe between bikes would have been greater.
  • 1 0
 @Paddock22: It feels fine with a oval. Had a few with one on it. The chain line moving up and down on a oval only changes the Anti-squat by about 2-5%. Nothing anyone would feel.
  • 1 0
 @mangoe5: Too bad about the Storia, that's an amazing shock. I toyed around with a friend's Druid for a few rides. It was a couple sizes too small for me so it wasn't really a fair test. Very cool feel and decent linkage design. If they get the geometry sorted a little better, I would definitely consider one in the future. That growing rear center is a bit long considering the shorter-than-average front center. Deviate are doing good things as well. Cool to see so many companies working on new twists to the single pivot.
  • 22 1
 Always loved Canfield and wanted to own a Riot at one stage. The Revel was a top candidate for my current bike.

Would be awesome if they release an alu version. Either that or if Canfield release a new Riot. Smile
  • 21 34
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 0:16) (Below Threshold)
 Don't fool yourself. In nerdy engineer circles it's either Canyon or Geometron. Nothing else makes any sense Big Grin

Look at the seat angle on that thing - unrideable!
  • 24 2
 @WAKIdesigns: nah, Engineers choose Nicolai/Geometron, Knolly or Last. Canyon not so much.

/Mega nerdy engineer riding Knolly Smile
  • 10 0
 @FredrikWestman: definitely Knolly! Noel is the man
  • 22 0
 @WAKIdesigns: "how dare you" compare Nicolai to some china post order disaster

triggered engineer
  • 14 1
Canyon?, who, in the right mind, would buy a Canyon?(except maybe of you are in road riding..maybe there)
  • 9 16
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 1:56) (Below Threshold)
 @eugenux: erm... someone who is new to the sport?
  • 3 0
 I know of someone selling a Riot here in Jämtland. 415mm chainstays!
  • 5 13
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 2:05) (Below Threshold)
 @hurmårdinpappa - why could anyone want something so short? How dare you? Who are you? Emil J?
  • 15 5
 Take note of this ^^Revel. Alu all the way. The planet needs a bit less plastic.
  • 12 33
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 2:59) (Below Threshold)
 @nhlevi: yeah cuz alu bikes are to Polar bears what Broccoli sprouts are to Karen. How about you quit MTB all together?
  • 5 1
 @santabooz: Knolly is an approved vendor according to engineering standard work requirements.
  • 18 11
 @WAKIdesigns: how about you get a life outside of your single-minded, ratification-seeking trolling mission off pinkbike–and while you're out there, consider the only blue rock we have for oh-so-merrily riding our bikes on.
  • 4 0
 @WAKIdesigns: You're forgetting Bird for the nerd engineers who can't afford Nicolais
  • 2 0
 The riot looks nice but has a problem with the pivots having play in them. My friend had one and could never get the play out and it was very flexy. He even tried different shocks and it always had play in the linkage.
  • 4 0
 @WAKIdesigns: the actual seat tube angle or the virtual?
  • 5 14
flag WAKIdesigns (Jun 2, 2020 at 4:45) (Below Threshold)
 @powderturns: I don't know, people here whine mostly about the virtual. Since after it crosses effective plane it tall people have no idea what to do with these two numbers
  • 20 17
 @nhlevi: how about you for a moment consider the carbon and toxic footprint of all the parts stuck to a bike no matter what the frame is made of and get off your rainbow painted high horse that your ride inside a dark colored bubble you view the world through. There are no medals for good intentions.
  • 3 0
 @WAKIdesigns: some trigonometry would reveal the change in eff tt as you went higher I suppose. If they gave virtual and effective...
  • 9 2
 @WAKIdesigns: Somewhat agreed. I’ve never bought into aluminum is better than carbon for the environment argument. Maybe in it’s raw material phase but for bikes?

What about petroleum bearing grease, rubber tires, paint, tire sealant, etc. not to mention, I’ve never seen a drawn tube of 6061 just growing in a field. It all has to be processed.

And while yes aluminum can be recycled,
Go to a bike shop and ask them how many times they have rebuilt a wheel or frame and recycled the aluminum. It all gets binned and buried.
  • 4 0
 @weaselssubie: I have a 2016 balance a that rank would survive an h-bomb.. No play anywhere, doesn't scratch, likes being rebuilt with new parts that get destroyed year after year
  • 2 0
 @Lagr1980: I completely agree about that. I had a 2017 balance. Great on the downs. But a tank on the climbs. I ended up selling it and getting a Foes FXR and does both best bike I have ever owned.
  • 17 12
 If anybody develops a web browser plug in to automatically neg rep Waki I'm in and willing to pay. I have a feeling that I'm not alone.
  • 4 0
 Can confirm. The Riot is still my favorite bike. Even though the design is over 5 years old, it still will out class nearly any newer bike. The only non-modern piece is the shorter reach compared to current standards. The only bike I will replace it with is a new Riot!
  • 3 0
 @Paddock22: raw frames and wood wheels all the way
  • 6 9
 @WAKIdesigns: I would indeed need to be an utter hypocrite to buy an alloy frame for the sake of the environment and then hang carbon stuff on it. That's why I don't. I at least do my part, instead of writing it straight off as a lost cause because "I don't believe in climate change" or whatever your shitty excuse is for hiding from responsibility. Talking strictly about my bike and not mentioning any other lifestyle choices, I'd bet my decisions are at the very least *somewhat more* sustainable with tires and brake oil and all that, than your's, and the reason for that is that I simply choose to give a shit rather than live my life steeped in my "dark bubble."
  • 3 3
 @WAKIdesigns: at the end of the day, I only came to give feedback/request because that is ultimately how bikes (and cars, and everything) is developed, not to convert you or anything (partly because that's not my purpose and partly because you indeed are a lost cause), so no need to resist.
  • 3 4
Nah, true engineer(d)s choose Dave's extra legit travel apparatus, AKA Evil ????
  • 4 1
 @OriginalDonk: did someone not make an extension on Chrome that blocked his comments....
  • 4 0
 @OriginalDonk: It would really save us all a lot of time
  • 1 0
 @eldsvada: sure, Evil is definitely also on that list. Great, fun, mean looking bikes.

My hotlist for my latest build actually included Knolly Fugitive, Evil Offering, Revel Rascal and Last Clay/Glen. True story. Must be a true Engineerd.
  • 1 0
 RAAW also comes to mind, if they would only do a 130mm mini Madonna feat shorter Chainstays for playfulness.
  • 14 0
 This bike is pretty f-ing amazing. Been on one since last October, and whatever the geo numbers are...they just work. The Suspension is magic. I have a lot of days on mine, and so far the paint and pivots have all held up brilliantly. 100% would/will buy again.
  • 3 0
 What kind of terrain are you riding?
  • 4 0
 Me too. Been on mine since June 2019 (when they made a sweet black one!) Came from the Canfield Riot (140mm rear travel), so it was the suspension that drew me to it.

The Revel Rascal (130mm rear) is a total blast on big days, climbing 4-5K ft in alpine. Would definitely purchase it again, and am very glad to be riding it for my second summer this year.

I think 140mm is the sweet spot for a 29er trail bike, but haven't been held back by this bike.
  • 6 0
 @roma258: I live in Western NC (Pisgah, Bent Creek, Dupont, also ridden it up in VA around Harrisonburg). The Rascal is fun for just about everything. The way the suspension stays active under braking in chunky Pisgah and VA rocks and roots has been a revelation for carrying speed through sections I used to skirt around. It is playful and poppy enough to keep less challenging trails fun. I have ridden it on several bigger days with 5k-6k feet of climbing, and it just does everything I ask of it. I have been running it with a 150mm fork for a while now, and it seems to make it even more capable without giving up much/anything on the climbs. Previous bikes were Ripley LS, and an Intense Primer with Recluse link and 150mm fork. Both were good bikes. The Rascal is not as "peppy" of a climber as the others, but it offers more traction and can hold its own. On the way down there is absolutely no comparison.

The Forbidden Druid looks like the only thing I'd be interested in considering for a direct replacement.
  • 1 0
 @roma258: also I am just under 6' with a pretty long inseam and ride a large with 35mm stem
  • 19 3
 "lighter yet stronger frame" ?
13.7kg is quite heavy for a short travel trail bike specced with top-shelf components
  • 4 2
 My nukeproof reactor is 15.2 kgs, with top suspension(ultimate-ultimate), xx1, x01, gx eagle, syntace cockpit, (heavy)one-up dropper, (heavy)e13trs+ crankset, flow mk3+tune hubs and 1250(+/-) grams dhfs per wheel; sub 14 kgs seems light enough.
  • 19 3
 @eugenux: a Hightower with a similar price tag is 100g lighter and burlier - with 150/140mm travel, a Lyrik instead of Pike, heavier Code RSCs etc... This bike is heavy for what it is - no matter how heavy *your* bike is.
  • 28 1
 Seems like many carbon bikes are going heavy. The market is pushing companies in that direction, because one broken frame and it's pasted all over the internet with blowhards jizzing all over themselves in glee.
  • 4 3
I was ref. to be "light enough" for general trail riding. If I'd still wanted a light bike, I could have kept my sub 10 kgs Oiz.

Also, 100 grams is a joke. Spec for spec, if the SC HT was 13 kgs and the revel was 13.7, then you could argue that there is a meaningfull diff. For 100 grams, I wouldn't bother and just take the bike I like/wanted/suit my needs the most.
  • 6 1
 I will say this: I demo'd the Rascal and SB130 back-to-back and my impressions were similar to Sapp's. I was surprised when the Revel guys said the XL was around felt very nimble and flicky while the 130 felt more "enduro-ey" and smashy. It wasn't that one was better...just went about the task in different ways.

But, the Rascal "rode lighter" than its weight suggests...if that makes any sense.
  • 5 0
 Since I'm not winning any XC or Marathon races on this thing, I'll stick with the 13.7kg bike, I'd rather it be overbuilt than easy to break.
  • 2 0
 @smartyiak: coming from a 2015 stumjumper fsr comp, my 130LR feels
Like bmx bike in terms of flick.. Tech has come a long way.
  • 4 1
 This is a product of the intentions of bikes changing a lot. It used to bet that most people considered 120mm to be XC/TR and jumps, drops, and rowdy terrain was avoided. Now you've got these Ex-DH riders and freeriders hucking to flat on 120mm bikes, and they've bulked up to deal with that.
  • 5 1
 Nice bike, and what a "Little Rascal"! That CBF suspension design looks like it would be a great bike to ride. However, I agree with f00bar, 13.7kg (30.2lbs) is a bit heavy for a trail bike with this top end spec, although heavier seems to be the new way. At this weight, I do question Revel's claim that they produce what they say is a "lighter" yet stronger frame? For example, my 2019 Giant Trance Advanced Pro 29 0 (now that's a mouthful..) weighs only 26.4lbs (approx 11.93kg) size M. This is a weight difference of over 4lbs, and both builds are very similar (X01, carbon wheels & bars, etc). The biggest difference is the Rascal has EXO+ casing and wider Minions compared to the Giant, and a slight weight difference due to the different carbon cranks. The other negative is the Rascal only fits a 20oz water bottle (many camelbak bottles are at least 21oz to over 32oz). If you wait for the year end clearance sales, my top end Giant cost me only CAD $6,000 out the door.
  • 10 0
 I complain about this on every bike review thread...What is the raw frame weight ? Then we can make our own decisions. So simple and yet so elusive.

Frame weight, what size, what shock, and what accroutements (ie with rear axles, with cups ? )
  • 3 1
 @preston67: At 30lbs complete with carbon wheels along with Sapp's mention of riding a Medium Frame, you can probably predict the frame weight. Roughly 7.5lbs with Super Deluxe shock.
  • 5 0
 @preston67: My XL frame weighed 3603 g (7.94 lb) with Super Deluxe Ultimate, rear thru axle, seat post clamp and chain guide.
  • 1 0
 @sdm9465: Thanks for bringing the data !
  • 2 0
 @smartyiak: rode both bikes back to back and walked away feeling exactly the same way. It’s hard to pin it down but the bike just rides “light”
Ended up ordering a 130 frame build due to getting a killer price that dropped the 130 below the price of the Rascal.
  • 3 5
 Yea, no offense to the probably awesome folks at Revel, but their frame pricing is a bit wacky. Canfield sold bikes with the CBF design for years at bargain prices, and nobody is paying more just for the suspension design anymore. While they may ride awesome, potentially better than most everything the market, they are as heavy (or heavier), more expensive, less dealer network, less build options, less established brand than others on the market. Now granted, you can find a Rascal sold by a retailer for as little as $2800, but Revel is selling that same frame for $3500 direct. Which is also what the Yeti SB130 is selling for. Pivot 429 is $4000, but includes cranks. Tallboy is $3100. Ripley for $2800. I'm biased, but you can get a Manufactured-in-Colorado Guerrilla Gravity for $2600.
  • 8 0
 @PHeller: That is the price for the frame AND fork.

The frame only (with shock, headset and seat clamp) is $2800.

The Guerilla Gravity has an aluminum rear triangle.
  • 5 2
 @Paddock22: Thanks for the correction. $2800 is pretty good then. Comparable to Ibis.

Only advantage to carbon rear triangles anymore could be a slight increase in stiffness. Frame weight of the GG is similar if not a hair lighter than the Revel stuff despite that alloy rear end.

It's nice not having to worry about laying down my GG. I watched it tumble into a rocky wash, picked it up, and proceeded to go do some drops on it.
  • 1 0
 I thought the 3500 included a fork(pike)@PHeller:
  • 2 0
 @PHeller: lol FYI brands like Ibis, Pivot, and Revel are having trouble making enough bikes. So it’s not that nobody is buying them, just not you. Second point, what happened to Canfield again? People are simply buying these bikes like candy weather you like it or not.
  • 2 0
 Or whether lol.
  • 2 0
 @Yetimike2019: Canfield is alive and well and putting out new bikes. Chris Canfield helped with Revel and Lance Canfield is running Canfield Bikes.

Loved my Riot (like a kind of dated, aluminum version of the Rascal) and currently holding out for a longer travel 29er from them. Sounds like they've got more stuff coming later in the season, so we'll see.
  • 2 0
 @PHeller: Yes, carbon rear triangles do add stiffness, but that is "not" the only advantage. Carbon rear triangles also provide a more tunable rear end, and produce a lighter frame. An aluminum rear triangle is definitely heavier than a carbon rear triangle. To also keep weight down, some bike manufacturers even use carbon for the rear suspension links...
  • 3 2
 @Yetimike2019: You're right. I'm not. I try to buy local, American manufactured when I can. I'm on my 2nd Guerrilla Gravity product.

GG doesn't do much sponsorship, nor do they offer shop deals, EP deals, etc. so they don't have paid fanboys to drive the hype-train. It's all owners who mostly paid full price.

Despite having an aluminum rear end like the poors, a 160/170 Guerrilla Gravity Gnarvana weighs the same as a Revel Rascal, maybe even a little less depending on shock.

My point is, the Revel products offer a great suspension design at an average weight and price, but they aren't the lightest or the cheapest. The CBF design is the main selling point.

...and if your a fan of poor man's alloy, Canfield has got you covered.
  • 1 0
 @PHeller: Yep, For me how a bike rides, suspension/geo is the most important part of buying a new bike. So demoing really determines what I buy. That being said I’m privileged enough to afford that priority. If the priority is to buy a solid bike that’s fun to ride, there are plenty of really good bikes, and often better spec’d alloy bikes, that ride really good. For me weight means very little. If a good suspension design helps create enough pedaling efficiency, I think the weight become less relevant. Sometimes on short travel rigs like this that are quite expensive, I do understand why weight might be a concern for some. I have personally learned that I like suspension travel, over a aggressive geo short travel bikes. But people are buying these up and loving them.
  • 1 2
 What is up with the weight?, why every one seems to think it is important?, again, that is coming from a guy(me) who had a world cup lvl, sub 10 kgs(with saints on it) cross country bike. 1 kg might be sensed..2 kgs, for sure but, if the suspension design is good, weight goes to 3rd plane of importance(yes, 3rd, not 2nd). Basically, it is on the same lvl with a stem or a dropper post!, as in, whatever brand from the top 10 you will use, it will still do fine enough.

So please, stop worrying about how much a bike weights and start focusing on how it rides(up and/or down)!, cheers.
  • 3 0
 @eugenux: the problem is when youre comparing multiple bikes that all ride great, but one is more expensive and heavier, another is cheaper and lighter, and another just climbs a little bit better or a little bit worse, we typically do a value calculation to try to determine what 2nd or 3rd criteria matters the most. In general, modern MTBs are awesome, but there are big differences in terms of pricing and in some cases, weight. Thats why it matters. Most aren't going to buy a bike because its 1lbs lighter, they are going to buy a bike because its priced better, lighter, and rides just as good.
  • 2 0
 @smartyiak: couldn't agree more, my last bike was had a DW link and was 2 pounds lighter...the rascal rides like it's 5 pounds lighter - soooooo much more fun!
  • 1 0
You mean, let's say in the price bracket of 4500-5000 USD, you will have to think at anything else beside how the bike rides?, personally, I would take a 10% higher priced bike if it rides better, even though it is heavier and whatever else presumably lesser atributes. Maybe it is just me but, if a bike rides well, I will not care about the fac that is 500-1000 USD more expensive and 100 grams heavier than some other option. If I have 4500 USD to pay for a new bike, I can pay 5500 if I deem necessary. So, really, it all depends on how the bike rides and if it suits my needs and my terrain(as it should be).
  • 2 0
 @RowdyAirTime: I need a North American version of Cube but with better geo. Cheap Vietnam made full carbon frames that are LIGHT. Their long travel bikes are in the 2100-2300g frame weight range.
  • 18 3
 If a bike is specced with a Reverb, it should automatically be listed in the "Cons" category. Other than that, this bike looks killer, can't wait to get on one soon!
  • 13 0
 So, where's the 'behind the numbers' on this one? Seems like a good candidate for that series.
  • 7 2
 Certainly more so than the Unno.
  • 11 1
 Late to this party but adding my 2c as someone who came very close to buying this bike. I test rode it for an hour last year. This review is on point- incredible climber with bar none the best rear suspension over chatter. So good in fact that it makes travel numbers irrelevant. It was faster and smoother than the 160mm Ripmo I ended up buying instead. One thing this review doesn't touch on is bb height and bash guard. The frame has no bash mounts- ok. It is also the lowest bike I've ever ridden. More pedal strikes, more chainring strikes. I was able to repeatedly strike the chainring on a steep roll that everything else at demo day cleared. Lifetime frame warranty so not a problem for the patient. For me, too many injuries on my Evil from pedal strikes, couldn't go lower. It kills me though as this was the bike that got away. Best looking bike I've ever seen, best rear suspension, incredible all-around geo, great climber. They've got a winner. I test rode the sb130, 4.5, a ripmo, a pivot, a hightower, a stumpjumper, bunch of other bikes, this stood out.
  • 3 0
 Did the bike you test rode have a 140 fork? Do you think going to 150 would make enough difference in raising the BB and also bridging the gap to the bigger Ripmo?
  • 4 0
 @mikenettleton: I don't review or ride bikes for a living and I don't know enough to say. I think my problem with pedal and bb strikes has a lot to do with my conservative riding style. When in doubt, get a demo. Always worth it.
  • 2 0
 Pedal strikes was my one issue. The Rascal had more pedal strikes than any bike I've ridden in recent memory....I even ate shit two times. I was using XT not exactly high stack.

When I asked the Revel guys about it, they said they hadn't really heard of the problem...but they also said a number of people asked for 170 cranks...and the bike can be run at 20% sag. I never got to demo at 20% b/c it was just too popular to get another turn.
  • 2 0
 I've got 170mm cranks on my size L Rascal and have not had any issues what so ever with pedal strikes. The no bash guard complaint is legit, i'm sure it'll be there in the next iteration.
  • 2 0
 @huckschwinn: seriously! I run 170 on most modern bikes. They even make 165 for bikes that are extra low...
  • 1 0
 @Yetimike2019: I agree with you. I just wonder why it seems that every XL comes with 175. Not much (if any) difference in pedaling 170 vs. why not just help the issue by spec'ing 170s from the jump???
  • 3 0
 @smartyiak: Industry inertia. Everyone expects 175, maybe 170 on a Small, and maybe maybe 165 on an XS. So if company X started putting 170s on XLs people would question it and possibly make it not worth the trouble for company X to do it.

But yeah, it's been shown that crank length doesn't have much correlation to power output, especially in mtb type situations (track is a bit different). I'm 5'10 and usually ride a size Large from most companies, and have run 170 cranks forever now. I've had to make swaps on all my bike except the last, Stumpy 27.5 2018+ Large, which came with 170s

(SRAM DM though, so I still swapped them to a RaceFace 104BCD because I need a real bashguard, but that's another story. Also gained even more clearance because the SRAMs are the same casting just drilled differently, so the 170's crank arm itself is still as long as a 175, where-as RaceFace is doing different castings as of 2019, and that's yet another story.
  • 2 0
 @huckschwinn: Sure you're sure? ISCG mounts (which aren't really for bashguard... hence the ChainGuide part of the name) are not as common as they used to be, and with DirectMount rings everywhere, getting a real bashguard onto a modern bike often means spending extra money (104BCD cranks, ring, and bashring; or WolfTooth stainless DM ring with custom WT stainless bashring)
  • 9 0
 Excited to hopefully see Revel expand their lineup over time, really like the suspension design on paper and based on the reviews. I also agree with the middle-of-the road geometry for a bike like this. Everyone wants a big-wheeled 29er, but I'd love to see a 100-120 bike next similar to the SB100 from Revel. Wouldn't mind a little lighter carbon layup either, this one being 30.2lbs on a $7000, medium build isn't fantastic.
  • 8 0
 Ah, the elusive east coast trail bike....out of Colorado.

Dan- as a fellow 5'10" inbetweener, did you intentionally choose a medium or was that just the size you ended up with. Did you ever feel that the "short" reach was ever an issue or did it help with the lively feel of the bike?
  • 3 1
 yep, normally 178 (5'10") would be on a large, not surprising this bike was nimble on old school trails!!
  • 14 0
 @Murfdog: As an east coast rider (US), the thing to keep in mind is that our terrain is not quite as steep and our downs are not as long. It's more of an undulating terrain, and much tighter trails. So that translates to quite a bit of sitting. So having moderate seat angles and decent top tube length (so you're not cramped), can be a positive here. With most bikes going steap SA, long reach (but relatively short top tube) and massive wheelbase, it's nice to see a company make a viable modern alternative.
  • 4 0
 @roma258: People don't get. I've been saying it for a while, seems like everyone is building west coast bikes.

It's why I sold my Ripley V4 and bought a LS instead. Wish I had never sold my Riot. Waiting to see what Canfield releases as it's replacement then it'll be that bike or a Rascal.
  • 12 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: Exactly, winching up steep fire roads and railing down long, steep descents is just not how most people ride, or have access to. I really do wish more publications would address that.
  • 7 0
 @roma258: BUT BUT BUT ENDURO BRO!!!!
  • 2 0
 @clink83: Shit, I've raced some enduros. Trail riding and enduro racing are....not the same thing Smile
  • 2 0
 @roma258: yea..a bike like this is more appropriate to actual real world riding than the geometry people on here are always pushing. I'd actually reduce the front travel on this bike to 130mm and have a blast on it on my local trails.
  • 4 0
 @roma258 - I did choose a medium intentionally. I have a slightly longer leg length than wingspan so mediums fit really well for me, across the board, typically. I never had any issues with the short reach.
  • 2 0
 @danielsapp: if your legs are longer than your wingspan you really have the T-Rex look all the way.
  • 3 0
 I'm 5'10'' as well, and on a Large Rascal. I personally would not fit well on a Medium.
  • 10 0
 Have I missed the suspension compression video? If so, where is it? If not, I'd like to see it with a design like that.
  • 4 0
 Hit refresh and there you’ll have it!
  • 6 0
 @danielsapp: OK so I watched the video of the dirty bike cycling through it's travel and now I'm strangely aroused?? What kind of bike filth is this?
  • 1 0
 @danielsapp: thank you
  • 13 2
 My wife let me ride her Rascal, it is amazing!

  • 7 0
 "I've also spent time riding the Rascal with a 130mm fork and feel that the performance difference is negligible in regards to steepening angles."

What the f*ck? You guys bitch and moan about single digit millimeters of "too short" reach and single degrees of "too slack" seat tube angle. But changing the head tube angle and front travel (and wheelbase, and front center, and trail, and axle-to-crown) is negligible to handling?

That's some Grade A Prime BullShit (TM) right there.
  • 10 0
 What is old school terrain? Where did you find it?
  • 23 0
 Not a bike park.
  • 5 0
 @danielsapp: ...and trails that weren't cut with a Dingo.
  • 2 0
 @hellbelly: I regularly nail the locations of trails when they post something local. This trail's got me stumped.
I've burned so many bridges I don't get invites any more. Need this one...
  • 1 0
 @blowmyfuse: It kinda looks like the top of Daniel Ridge going counter clockwise. There are plenty of similar rock features all over Brevard and the entire region though. It's definitely been far too long since I've visited.
  • 1 1
 @hellbelly: Dead giveaway is that the ground is mulchy in those pics. No mulch in Pisgah trails. They all have a line burned down to the bedrock & clay.

If you see mulch, it's someone's private spot...or a new pirate line.
  • 1 0
 @blowmyfuse: I don't know. Kinda looks like it does after a rain. @danielsapp probably ain't gonna spill the beans here.
  • 3 0
 @hellbelly: You're right...there's no dirt left in Pisgah and I'm not blowing up the spot.
  • 9 0
 I want to see a Rail review, there was a « first look » a while ago but the real review never happened
  • 4 0
 I recently got a Rail and it really does live up to the hype. The CBF platform absorbs so much and the bike is crazy quiet. Doing some decent sized drops recently and almost no noise upon landing, it's the craziest thing. Climbing with it feels pretty comfortable as well considering its a 170/165mm bike.
  • 4 0
 The Rail was on a Bible of Bikes test last year. Got really good reviews!
  • 7 2
 Is it me, or Shimano is ignored by a vast majority of bike brands ?
Most of the builds comes with SRAM. Some with Shimano, but not often.
Don't know about the industry (maybe Sram has a better commercial/marketing department), but that's a shame. SLX/XT/XTR would be so nice if standard on bikes.
  • 2 1
 Now Shimano have their 12sp Deore, SLX and XT groupsets available, watch SRAM fall off a lot of new's all about what people think they want. SRAM has been specced on everything for the last few years because of the Eagle 12sp range - even if everything from GX down was utter shite.
  • 6 1
 Sram can get OEM deals with drivetrain, brakes and suspensions, that's a big part of the thing
  • 4 3
 OEM are discussed 1 to 1.5 years ahead of production, so way before public realease. I guess they will start to pop up for MY22 which begins in eastern 21... Shimano should acquire a suspension company though, and invest more in their dropper posts. Tough to beat a company that can provide such a comprehensive package like Sram does, which drives me crazy 'cause I really am a die-hard Shim' fanboy....
  • 4 0
 I've demo'd the Rascal twice (in different type terrain) as well as the SB130. The Rascal definitely has the best rear suspension design for repeated trail chatter and brake bumps that I've ever ridden. However, I didn't feel it was playful or wanted to get airborne as the author/tester suggested. It climbs as you would expect I guess but is no world changer. The SB130 for me was a fantastic climber, maybe the most comfortable I've been on a bike going up but I was not a fan of it going down....too much business I guess from a "race bred" company for my tastes and not enough plush or comfort. Maybe if I owned one, I could have made some changes. What really turned me off the Rascal was both demo bikes, which were relatively new actually, had a "knock" in the rear suspension. With it's complicated multi-link design, I had no desire to be chasing down any noise issues.

I ended up going with the new Ripley. It gives up a little going down to the Rascal which I hope to fix a little bit with a rear shock swap but I find it more FUN to throw around as well. It also climbs soooooooth and as like a scalded cat if needed. It blew me away on my local climbs.
  • 3 0
 I was considering the SB130 and Rascal last year as my new bike. I went with the SB130. Though I don't think I would have been disappointed with the Rascal. Daniel is absolutely right. There are no chill rides with the SB130.
  • 1 0
 Yeah, you do need to be on the SB130 all the time to get the best out of it.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: huh. Heard similar things about the SB66, small bump compliance was improved on the subsequent generation of SB5 and SB6, now it sounds like it’s back to get-after-it mode? Took a while for me to get the SB66 feeling the way I wanted it to. (Softer)
  • 1 0
 @twozerosix: for me it’s more about the position. You need to be forward and really attacking to get the most out of it. I will say that over shocking the SB130 with a 210x55 Float X2 really improved small bump compliance and some of the harshness on the chunk. Personally I think the “lunch ride” version should come with a X2 stock.
  • 1 0
 @twozerosix: Body positioning is key. More weight up front. On long days, I sometimes find myself getting lazy and not having enough weight up front so it just plows through corners. It's a bike that's 'always on'. So that can get quite a bit tiring if you're not used to it. But when I'm in sync with the bike, I can't imagine anything better for where I ride.
  • 2 1
 Very slack bikes (65-ish for trail riding) and very short stems mean you have to be in full aggro front position over the bar all the time to get them to turn in. If you are riding less aggro then they are just more sluggish.
  • 3 1
 @FredrikWestman: Too much work just to ride a bicycle.
  • 3 0
 "For the medium-sized frames, the wheelbases are also similar, with the Yeti being a mere 3.6mm longer."

But the reach is 16mm longer, at 460.2mm, on the Yeti. With, half a degree slacker head tube and longer fork, something doesn't add up. The Yeti should have much more wheelbase relative to the Revel. One of these measurements is not like the other...

(The headtube length is ~10mm short on the Yeti, but the 10mm longer fork means the top of the headtube is pretty much the same height, so that small potential difference in reach can be factored out.)
  • 5 1
 Just wish it came with a shorter seattube, long seattubes like this keeps us short legged overgrown midgets clear out of the picture.
  • 3 0
 To be fair, 445 seat tube length on a large is actually pretty short. I'd like to see it even shorter, but that's not bad. Overall, I know the struggle.
  • 1 1
 @roma258: Yeah but the Large has very short reach for a Large so many people who normally run Large look at the XL. Me included. I crossed the Rascal off my hot list because of sizing, I'm 187 / 6'2 and find myself between L and XL as I want reach around 475-480.
  • 2 0
 How about a comparison between the Rascal and the Izzo? Obviously a different rear shock lay out,and the Izzo is somehow 3 pounds lighter, but other than that the two look very similar. Are they in the same circle of the Venn?
  • 2 0
 @danielsapp: Curious as to why you rode a M vs a L. Did you ask for a medium or is that just what they sent you? I'm the same height as you and I'm always right between sizes for lots of frames, but based on this particular bike's geo, I think I'd prefer the large. Cheers!
  • 4 0
 @mikenettleton - I'm right on the cusp of those sizes. With a shorter wingspan and long legs, I almost always choose a medium. I end up running a lot of seatpost but, it's comfortable. If we're testing a bike, we are always on a size that works for us.
  • 1 0
 @danielsapp: Cool. Thanks for the reply.
  • 2 0
 Ok so I'm struggling to understand how this rear suspension design is any different from a DW Link design. I'm not seeing how that additional link between the swing arm and the rear shock would make a difference in performance.
  • 4 0
 From the CBF website- CBF points the chainline and corresponding drive forces around the top of the chainring through 100% of the travel resulting in maximum pedaling efficiency, regardless of where you are in the travel, what terrain you are on, or what kind of power you’re putting down. All the power you put into the pedals goes into turning the rear wheel, allowing the suspension to do its job completely – independent of drivetrain and braking forces and making the sag setting much less critical.

A DW hits only hits it a SAG.
  • 1 0
 @keralinn: Very clever design.
  • 5 1
 I'm not reading any bike reviews from Pinkbike, until after we get the Grim Donut Review.
  • 4 0
 The hydraulic lever was sluggish and harder to push than a cable lever?
  • 2 0
 The reverb also looks to be the old one. Weird.
  • 3 0
 @revelbikes Slap some 27.5 wheels on this I’m sold for my next bike. I’m thinking full coil suspension.
  • 4 0
 yoke driven shock is a deal breaker on any bike for me.
  • 1 0
 how come? haven't heard this before
  • 1 0
 "To achieve this, the links are aligned so that they line up with the chain line throughout the entire travel range."

Umm, you can see in the video that the bottom link's alignment to the chain changes through the travel...
  • 1 1
 "the smoothness of the suspension was one of the most noticeable qualities of the Rascal's ride"

So you could put that fork and shock on any bike and it would be awesome? Because if they were the "most noticable", then the rest of it just doesn't matter as much... Chain growth? Anti-rise? Who knows?! I only noticed how smooth the shock was!
  • 1 0
 I have a SRAM GX on one mtb and XT on the other, really have no issues with either ( i have both serviced yearly, do my diligence on them between services). Guess I am not picky.
  • 4 0
 A Revel without a Cause!
  • 4 0
 A Revel with a Cost.
  • 1 0
 So, $9788.00 after exchange to Canada Dollars, plus a 15% import tariff on complete bikes, and if you live in Ontario 13% sales tax....$12,528.00.
Just one word. No.
  • 1 0
 @woofer2609 Makes my sb130 LR look like a bargain bin deal of the century at that price.. Haha
  • 1 0
 I've been waiting since corona started to demo one of these from The Hub near you! Once I drive out there, where should I take it for a good test nearby?
  • 2 0
 Ask for Nathan, he'll tell you where to go.
  • 2 0
 i've see'n the price...just go one site back Big Grin
  • 3 0
 My next bike.
  • 1 0
 So im guessing this is not the Revel bikes of many years ago? Like 1980's, UK cheap bikes?
  • 1 0
 seated climbing position worked very well for my 5'10" height. This is about inseam not about height.
  • 3 1
 489 reach, 433 chainstays for someone 6'7" is laughable.
  • 1 0
 Tried a DVO kitted Rascal tonight. It lives Up to the hype! Super nice linkage and fun geo.
  • 2 1
 Pinkbike! Get some heavier riders testing bikes! The average dude isnt 150lbs!
  • 1 0
 You're right, the average dude is lighter.
  • 1 0
 @bananowy: That's human body weight. OP said "dude", probably means male body weight
  • 3 0
 @just6979: fair point. Still, the average male is not THAT much heavier than Daniel especially if you look worldwide and not just North America. At least not to the point where it would cause problems with setup or durability, or render the review unrelatable. If anything, your suspension will work better and bike weight will matter less. If you're at the limit of shock pressure and/or destroying stuff just because of weight, I'd say you're in a small minority of the mtb population (safe to assume most of us are fairly fit but not bodybuilders?) and you may need to adjust your kit. Get a burlier frame, coil shock, DH wheels etc. If you're heavy 'cause you're super tall, get a Geometron Wink At that point you're far beyond "average dude" though. Actual average dudes will be fine with Daniel's impressions.
  • 2 0
 @bananowy: "If anything, your suspension will work better and bike weight will matter less." f*cking nailed it!

I'm the biggest rider in my group at 100 kg, and my bike is expectedly the heaviest as well (I run strong tires, big dropper, big alloy bars, etc), but when it's considered relative to body weight I actually have the lightest bike!

I do have a fairly high leverage frame (Stumpy 27.5 2018+) so I've got a ton of air in the shock, but still 1/7 out from maxing it out, so all good there! Someone heavier might want to switch to coil, but isn't everyone just looking for an excuse to go coil anyway? Haha!
  • 4 2
 Looks like a habit
  • 7 5
  • 4 3
 Mine cost 4 grand less, and I was able to put I9s on it and slapped a big 36 on it. It weighs 32 lbs ish. It’s alloy. These new carbon bikes.
  • 2 2
 Or better yet, the Izzo. $5300 will get you all the carbon bits and 26.5lbs weight.

Suspension design matters, but I think value matters more.
  • 4 3
 Pros: Standard 148 spacing.
  • 1 0
  • 1 0
 How was that Yeti even tested? It doesn't have pedals!
  • 5 0
 Switch infinity pedals for you.
  • 5 0
 @jtforester - That tech is under embargo...shhh!
  • 2 3
 @benmoosmann: You just explained exactly why I have not "invested" in a "gravel" bike....its not a good road bike, it is not a good mountain bike....
  • 1 0
 Please straighten up that seat clamp ????????????????
  • 1 0
 Rear suspension looks good! High five.
  • 2 1
 464mm reach on a size large is tiny these days get with the times lads
  • 2 3
 5 pivots? No thanks. And that actual seat tube angle is killer for those of us with long inseams. I'd be sitting on the cassette.
  • 1 0
 Anyone had a chance to test ride this bike and a meta tr 29, any comments?
  • 2 2
 Is sram XO1 tried and true?
  • 7 1
  • 1 0
  • 1 0
 Fusion fiber rascal?
  • 2 2
 Have they fixed their broken frame problems?
  • 2 1
 Looks like a Habit.
  • 3 2
 Looks like my old Jeffsy
  • 2 3
 Except not.
  • 3 2
 Looks like a Jeffsy.
  • 2 4
 Except not.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2023. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.079636
Mobile Version of Website