Much like the uphill characteristics of the Heretic, the same is true when you point the bike downhill - there is a lot of movement from the suspension. The suspension does track the ground quite well and the thick rubber chainstay protector keeps noise to a minimum. That Horst-link suspension is a progressive system with plenty of movement at the beginning of the stroke that soaks up a lot of the high-frequency chatter and the air shock ramps up sufficiently for big hucks.
That’s all well and good, that is until you apply the brakes and the rear suspension extends, pushing weight onto the front wheel when you least want it there. Although the rear wheel can remain active under braking, I find the change in geometry to be more problematic.
Since the braking forces pitched the bike forward and the head angle wasn’t the slackest to begin with, I toyed with a 170mm fork for a couple of rides and found that it warded off that forward movement while braking. I actually preferred the balance of the 160mm fork since the rear suspension is progressive and changes the dynamic geometry quickly as it reaches the sag point. This action would suit someone who prefers a softer, more progressive fork than I do.
The suspension rise became the least of my concerns when a loud chattering began in the suspension linkage after a fair amount of vertical descending and hard cornering. Looking at the rear triangle construction, where there's small-diameter tubing and no seat stay yoke, or cross brace, I wasn’t surprised when I found that the seatstay/rocker link pivot had given up the ghost. Even though the pivot hardware stayed tight, the bearings ovalized their seats. Whether that was due to the amount of flex in the stays or just poor machining tolerances, I could push the bearings out by hand.
In their defense, Rossignol intentionally built the rear triangle to be laterally compliant after receiving feedback from their enduro team. Opinions about frame flex versus body fatigue can be a personal preference at such a high level of racing, but that shouldn't lead to frame reliability issues.
Rossignol sent out a new rear triangle and I read into the 5-year limited warranty that would earn any original purchaser the same replacement frame components. The replacement rear triangle and links arrived with the bearings installed and new hardware. Mounting the parts was straightforward because the housing is routed externally, but I noticed more problems when the trunnion mount didn’t align with the shock. There was even play in the box-fresh chainstay pivot and a replacement rubber chainstay bumper was missing.
In this day and age, even at this price point, that’s tough to look past. Bikes like the Specialized Status are much less expensive, at $3,000 USD, but are built to higher standard. Although it wasn’t a catastrophic failure, it's an issue that shouldn't occur in such a short period of time (or ever, for that matter).
Even though the pivot bolts stayed snug, the bearings began to wander in and out of the machined seat in the rocker link.
I can tell you in my Canadian experience I've owned 3 GT's, known people who raced them, but never saw one outside of that circle. After 5 fall/winter months in Lyon, haven't seen one here either. And commenting about ESL based solely on a internet user's handle is bad form.
The Bandits? A less organized group than the Syndicate and less threatening than The Mob.
So is it really worth mentioning exponential growth to a power of 1.0039?
IE: short people can't move their hands and feet as far for a given range of movement from the associated joints, so a bike that allows for a full range of inputs with less absolute movement of hands and feet is pretty nice.
Interesting that you've identified the XT build as a pro, but highlighted two specific issues/challenges connected directly to the XT parts (brakes and spoke/hub interface).
Editing could use some work- extra zip ties to keep zip ties out of the spokes and Deore builds for both $2799 or $3599... unless this is a new marketing model- don't overwhelm customers with spec choices, just let them choose from different prices for the same stuff.
Swiss made Rossignol skis had a circular Swiss flag in the tip.
The true logo for Rossignol has always been the stylized capital R with a circle.
Kids these days……
Rooster or die. Get out of here with that stupid circle R!!!!
Not bike related but could not let that one sit….
Wrong - study history of manufacturing and marketing.
Equipe de France and that logo is a real source of pride for the French.
Besides, Rossignol skis has the circled R clearly on the base at the tips.
On most current Rossi skis the bird is nowhere to be found.
The Rooster is/was displayed by Trappaur, Heschung, Ramy, Moncler and many others.
Anyway, go get your current bike dirty in that PNW mud.
My main point is that it’s a made in France logo.
And yes, some Rossignol skis are still made in France so they get to use the Rooster.
Decal right in the middle.
Also used by Kerma poles and others.
For an Asian made product to sport this logo it’s kinda off.
Could you put some numbers on the anti-rise value? Cos I find it hard to believe that any bike these days would actually extend under braking. It's difficult to tell if this is a genuine issue with the frame design, or just rider preference.
Unreal value. No wonder my used bike isn't selling haha
27.5 front wheel, air shock with volume reducers. Don't be afraid to tune your bikes people.
Keep in mind that wheel size in itself does very little for you unless you are into big tricks and spins. The thing that wheel size affects is geometry. Because a 27.5 rear end requires shorter chainstays than a 29, its going to be more agile.
Bringing the front end closer through a steeper HTA will do the same thing.
Yet, in the Airdrop review, the high leverage ratios (3.1 starting and 2.85 at sag versus 2.9 average here) were praised as "happy to get moving whilst in its travel"
150x50 and 160x55 is pretty common nowadays, and modern shocks seem to be up to the game, especially considering that lighter tunes are becoming popular.
This lesson was learned years ago, small shocks for long travel makes it more difficult to adjust and creates more heat.
160x55 is more in line with a trail bike…
So you needed more slack to move the seat, but bends caused it to bind, so you got too much slack because of the binding? I don't understand: if it bound up, wouldn't that mean you couldn't slide it through enough and would not have enough slack to move the seat at all?
Or you overshot pushing it in and it bound up so hard you couldn't pull the housing back out the front and there was extra slack inside the frame? Who cares as long as there was enough at the front to turn the bars?
Maybe someone who rides 20 times a year, those poor tolerances become a problem after 5 years. Someone who rides 200 times a year, maybe thats a problem in 6 months. That was kind of what i was thinking anyway
Shimano is wicked, if you love to haul on the brakes and skid down with less control.
Have you ever messed with real brakes on a race car? Could easily give the Brakes a heap of power but thats useless as theyd just lock... any high level Racer will tell you brakes arnt all about power.
Astro is from Taiwan, I doubt that they missed the chance to go to China, Myanmar, Vietnam to save some €€€
What spec Deore builds come on the other trims? SLX? Base Deore?
The team uses a *custom* rocker link for 27.5 wheels, yeah?
The wandering bite point might be affected by brake line routing. If you tip the bike into a corner and the hose sits higher than the reservoir, the bite point dives. I’ve had that issue only on one (of a dozen) Shimano-equipped bikes.
Sounds like the sizing/geo was focused around rider size and ergonomics versus on-trail practicality, perhaps?
Also sounds like Matt isn’t the target demographic / riding feel for the bike. The design ethos on this bike seems a bit more up my alley
Component sizing according to rider height is something that came over from road bikes and there is sense to it, but the different demands of MTB require a different approach to component sizing. It is definitely a subject for an article as there are a lot of competing factors that determine how to apply scaled component sizing (if at all).
Me, I haven't tried either, because my brakes have never had that problem.
IMeasureStuff: It can work. Like George Costanza, there is no lie because I believe it. "Santa Cruz makes good skateboards and bikes".
boopiejones: No. Santa Cruz bike people don't make skateboards.
IMeasureStuff: Well, there you go. The stuff I didn't measure at all and just typed out...I had no idea.
And these guys have no room to complain when the dust settles and they’re stuck with unsold bikes.
IDK how they justify that price. Why should the consumer be stuck with the bill for a component group that doesn’t belong on that frame?
But the bike guys didn’t seem to grok that. Instead they just threw some tubes together while looking at a “modern” geometry chart.
I bet the ski guys could have done better.
Probably owned by some conglomerate behemoth by now that finds X amount of failures at that price point acceptable.
You heard it here first.
I and loads of my friends have used a variety of Shimano 4 pot brakes over the years - Saint, Deore, Zee, XT and SLX and none of us has ever had this issue. The one common factor is that we all use the same ex World Cup DH mechanic to bleed them,. This can just be a coincidence.