Review: The Privateer Bikes 141 Is A Little Bike with Big Intentions

May 24, 2021
by Dan Roberts  

Take the brutish character of the Privateer 161 and scale down the travel and what do you get? The 141. And no, there are no prizes for guessing the amount of travel.

Privateer knew the 161 was built to be thrown down the hill with reckless abandon, and sought to bring a touch more versatility into the mix with the 141 while still keeping it true to ideals that the brand, and the 161, were founded on.

Coming from the UK I’ve naturally an affinity to shorter travel bikes with more character. Hell, I still own a steel hardtail despite living in the Alps. So, the recipe that the 141 was baked with sparked my interest.
141 Details

Intended use: Riding
Rear wheel travel: 141mm
Fork travel: 150mm
Wheel size: 29"
Frame material: aluminum
Sizes: P1, P2, P3 (tested) & P4
Weight: 14.9kg / 32.85lbs (P3, w/o pedals)
Price: From $3,949 USD / £3,149 full bike, or $1,759 USD / £1,489 frame only.
More info:

After many a mile aboard the 141, it’s time to delve into the nitty gritty of it and how this little bike with big intentions fared.

bigquotesIt’s a bike that will happily put much bigger bikes in its sights and chase them down. Only up at the ragged edge and chasing DH bikes was it apparent that you’ve actually not got as much travel as the bike in front of you. But it never threw in the towel despite showing its true short travel colours. It’s up for a fight like its brutish bigger brother. Dan Roberts

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The one-piece seatstay pivot and bridge gives good tire clearance while providing little area for mud to collect.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
There's a 148 x 12mm rear hub spacing and 180mm post mount brake.

Construction and Features

The 141 is a 29” wheeled, 141mm rear travel bike paired with a 150mm fork. Given the low stance of the bike it’s probably even possible to run a 160mm fork without too adversely affecting the geometry of the bike.

It’s an all-aluminum affair too, with Privateer's M.O. having a fair bit to do with durability. The rocker link is a big one-piece part, which is good as a trunnion mount shock bolts direct to it, and the one-piece nature keeps the system stiff and can allow both the shock bolts to be as concentric as possible.

The tubing on the 141 is off the shelf, meaning that it comes from the catalogue of the factory rather than being specific to the brand or bike. That does save a bit of cash for Privateer, but does impose certain limits and in some places make the bike look a little less refined than some of the other all-aluminum frames out there.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
A large one-piece rocker link not only helps to give a gently changing leverage ratio but gives a solid and well aligned base for the trunnion mount shock to bolt to.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The back of the seat tube and chainstay bridge form a continuous and almost vertical surface that gives mud a serious challenge to cling to.

There’s a large two-piece construction that captures the BB, main pivot, rocker pivot and lower shock mount all in one fell swoop, which no doubt concentrates a lot of the frame costs to it. The two pieces are welded together to create a large box, if you will, at the centre of the bike while still giving the opportunity to be efficient with the material inside.

The one-piece chainstay yoke also has a beefy section, hollowed out from underneath, and its bridge tucks neatly in and aligns itself with the back of the seat tube to give a smooth transition and fewer ledges for mud to collect. There’s also a one-piece seatstay bridge and pivot, fairly thin and sharp in design, that too resists mud collection.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Speaking from experience, it's probably possible to do a degree solely in cable routing. The 141 uses a mix of internal and external along with bolt on clamps, inserts and cable ties.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The gear cable hides away inside the chainstay tube with a neat little cable tie in the yoke.

Cables are pretty much all externally routed, except for the dropper post and chainstay section of the gear cable. The dropper does a short stretch of external as it goes from the down tube to the seat tube and uses bolt in guides to route it. For the other cables, there’s a mix of zip ties and bolt on pieces holding the cables in place.

The 141 uses all standard, well, standards. There’s a 73mm wide threaded BB, ISCG 05 tabs, a Boost 148 rear end, ZS44/ZS56 headtube, 31.6mm seat tube diameter and 180mm post mount brake interface. There’s a bottle cage mount on the down tube, but sadly no gear strap mount.

The 141 frame is carrying quite a bit of timber, with a claimed weight of 3.7kg, or 8.15lb, despite being for the smallest P1 size without the shock and rear axle. That heft, though, helping define some of the bike's character, as we'll get into a bit further down.

Privateer 141 Geometry

Geometry & Sizing

Akin to some other brands, Privateer size their bikes with a bit different naming. The four sizes go from P1 to P4, which would equate to S to XL. These are quoted to cover riders from just under 160cm tall up to over 190cm.

P2 to P4 sizes use 29” wheels whereas the smallest size, P1, uses 27.5” wheels and a slightly altered geometry for that difference.

Reaches span from 440mm up to 510mm giving a really good coverage, but do watch out if you’re really short as the 440mm in the P1 could still be a lot of bike. Our P3 had a reach of 485mm and was absolutely bang on for my 188cm or 6'2" height and riding preferences.

Head angles are 64.5 across the board with good and generous head tube lengths that mean you're not shortening that on-paper reach with a tower of stem spacers. The stack for our P3 was 636.9mm and I could get a comfy bar height with 22.5mm of spacers and 20mm rise bar.

Seat angles are quoted for the actual tube, horizontal with the head tube and at max extension of the dropper post. Handily, the dropper lengths are also quoted, so with a bit of research you can see at which seat height that would be for. Those seat angles are nice and steep and actually a touch slacker than the 161, but give a good balance between seated position to the bars and the position relative to the BB.

Seat tube lengths play nicely with the current batch of long drop posts, with our P3 having a 450mm long seat tube that combined well with the 180mm drop post and could even have played well with a bigger drop one too.

In the middle of the bike, the BB drops 30mm which should give a BB height of around 340-345mm depending on the tire choice.Out back, there are size specific chainstay lengths that grow from 434mm up to 452mm.

Privateer also quote the span figures, the distance from BB to the top of the head tube. Perhaps not the most used measurement on a bike, but another way of describing where your hands and feet are in relation to each other.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

Suspension Design

The 141 uses the very familiar suspension layout of a four-bar system with a Horst pivot and rocker link. It’s familiar for a reason, with the layout offering the potential for good suspension curves, packaging, stiffness and weight. Privateer used the four-bar layout to give the 141 15.9% of leverage ratio progression that starts at just under 2.6 and winds up at 2.19.

These are pretty low leverage ratios in the usual sea of highly leveraged bikes. Part due to the use of quite a long shock to get the 141mm of travel. The leverage ratio sees a mostly smooth transition from start to finish, with only the first quarter of travel having a pronounced hump of regression and linearity, before going fully progressive.

Privateer 141 Leverage Ratio
Privateer 141 Anti-Squat
Privateer 141 Anti-Rise

There’s quite a chunk of anti-squat built into the 141 too, with around 152% and 140% in the recommended sag window of 21% to 35% shock sag. Anti-squat stays fairly up there throughout the travel too, with it finishing at 84% in the lightest climbing gear.

Anti-rise on the other hand is a little lower, ranging between 38% and 49%. Meaning that the 141 is pretty direct and firm when you accelerate forwards while being a bit more active when you grab a bunch of rear brake and decelerate.

The 141 uses a 205 x 57.5mm shock. That's the same eye to eye as the 161 uses, just with less stroke. It's also worth noting that where the shock bottoms out is not at the end of the shock shaft, so no need to go hunting for those last few millimetres as they're not intended to be used.

Spec, Pricing & Availability

The 141 we tested was the SLX/XT build but did have a few spec details a bit different to what is currently available.

It came specced with a Fox Performance Elite 36 fork and DPX2 shock, Shimano SLX drivetrain with XT shifter, Magura MT5 brakes with a 203mm rotor up front and 180mm out back, OneUp V2 180mm dropper post.

Privateer’s sister brand, HUNT, provided the carbon wheels with a Schwalbe Magic Mary and Hans Dampf tire combination in Super Trail and Soft compound and there was a Deity bar and stem with a Fabric saddle. Our size P3 bike weighed in at 14.9kg or 32.85lbs.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

The 141 is available in the SLX/XT or GX builds with the below specs, or as a framekit. Availabilities are correct as per the article release date. It's best to regularly check, just in case the availability dates, prices or specs change.

141 SLX/XT - Fox Performance Elite 36 fork and DPX2 shock. Shimano SLX drivetrain with XT shifter. Magura MT5 brakes with 203/180 rotors. HUNT Trail Wide wheels with Schwalbe Magic Mary/Hans Dampf tires in Super Trail and Soft compound. OneUp V2 dropper post. RaceFace bar and stem. Fabric saddle and grips.

Available in Raw, Grey or Green. $3,949 USD or £3,149. P2 to P4 sizes available for pre-order with delivery at the end of October 2021.

141 GX - Fox Performance Elite 36 fork and DPX2 shock. SRAM GX drivetrain. Hayes Dominion A4 brakes with 203/180 rotors. HUNT Trail Wide wheels with Schwalbe Magic Mary/Hans Dampf tires in Super Trail and Soft compound. OneUp V2 dropper post. RaceFace bar, stem, grips and a WTB saddle.

Available in Raw, Grey or Green. $4,379 USD or £3,389. P2 to P4 sizes available for pre-order with delivery at the end of December 2021.

141 Frameset - Fox DPX2 Performance Elite shock. Headset, seat clamp and rear axle included.

Available in Raw, Grey or Green. $1,759 USD or £1,489. All sizes available for pre-order with delivery between June and December 2021, depending on size and colour.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Privateer Bikes 141
Tongue out for balance.

Bike Setup

As already mentioned, I tested the P3, which was also what Privateer recommends in their sizing guide.

It was a pretty simple affair in setup. I aired the fork to Fox’s recommendations of 80psi and set the rear shock to 25% sag, with 200psi, as I normally do as a base setup and is bang in the middle of the 20% - 30% shock stroke sag that Privateer recommends. That setup pretty much stayed the same throughout testing - with those spring rates it felt like being in a nice middle ground, with a bit of room each way depending on the trail or how much commitment I was in for that day.

After moving to the Valais region of Switzerland, I’ve been after what I’ve dubbed a Champéry XC bike for a little while. While there are the remnants of the old, proper, World Cup XC course still around, the idea of a bike short in travel but with the stance and intentions of something bigger was a very appealing thought.

Dan Roberts // Technical Editor
Age: 34
Location: Champéry, Switzerland
Height: 188cm (6'2”)
Weight: 75kg (165 lbs)
Industry affiliations / sponsors: Garage Bike Project, former engineer at Scott Sports
Test Locations: Champéry, Morgins, Châtel, Vaud, Fribourg and Thun.

The little 141 was ridden everywhere from the big bike parks of Champéry, Morgins and Châtel to the little winding trails around Valais, Vaud and Fribourg regions and the wonderful city of Thun, which spans a mix of some of the finest natural root filled loamy trails and biggest man-made jump lines in most of Switzerland. And in all those places it saw its fair share of pedalling too, with most of the aforementioned natural trails needing a good dose of pedal turning to get to them.

Privateer 141 Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot


Straight away the 141 felt like a familiar place, almost as if I’d been riding it for a while already. Most of that was due to the bang on sizing and balance of the bike. My hands, feet and bottom all felt like they were in the right position, both standing and seated, and I was never forced to consciously put myself in a better position. I was already in it.

There is a fair bit of heft to shift around in the 141, and that does make for a bit less shooting to the top of the hill in record time. The comfortable seated position combined with a very tight and direct feeling every time you thump on the pedals does means that it still feels efficient and it’s a fantastic companion for long days in the saddle that would have had my lower back screaming only a few years ago.

There’s barely a need for the lockout lever on the 141, with such a dose of anti-squat and support from the leverage ratio. That allows it to climb on the trail with the support you need to feel like you’re moving forwards each time you pedal while still being supple enough to deal with impacts as they come along and take the sting out of them.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

You can feel that the 141 came from the 161, and there’s a bit more of a sense that the 141, despite its shorter travel and slightly altered geometry, isn’t really pining for hours of technical climbing. That’s not to say it can’t do it, as it’s certainly a good climbing bike when it needs to. But it starts to get more of a glint in its eyes when it sees the top of a climb, the dropper is slammed and you summit a crest.

Now I like a steep seat tube angle, but there can also be such a thing as too steep. So, it’s nice that the 141 is a touch slacker than the like of the 161. Something that even Pole have done in recent times. The seated position on the 141 feels enough over the pedals without feeling like you’re perched on top of them. And certainly, never feeling like you’re pushing more forward with each stoke than down.

Privateer 141 Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot


Going down, though, is the forte of the 141. On paper it’s a little bike, but in reality, it’s anything but. The geometry and balance of the bike already give it such a steadfast stance and the suspension does a cracking job of keeping up with it.

The heft of the bike also contributes a bit to the bike's planted and unflustered feeling. It’s a bike that will happily put much bigger bikes in its sights and chase them down. Only up at the ragged edge and chasing DH bikes was it apparent that you’ve actually not got as much travel as the bike in front of you. But it never threw in the towel despite showing its true short travel colours. It’s up for a fight like its brutish bigger brother.

Landing into rough sections of trail, or arriving unweighted into roots does throw up a touch more feedback through the bike’s suspension from that hump in the leverage ratio. Otherwise, it’s a very smooth and dependable 141mm of travel. You’re definitely not clanging off the bottom out bumper all day and there’s good support and plenty of room to add or subtract a bit of spring or damping to cater to the day’s needs.

Privateer 141 Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

It’s a grippy bike that pushes back and supports you well when you push hard into it. It makes for an engaging ride in the big man-made trails that are full of g-forces, big lean angles and gaps. There’s never a sense that it would be the bike holding you back from doing something, it’s always got your back no matter what you want to do on it. And if you get it wrong it’s got just enough to keep you out of serious trouble, even if you do find the end of travel.

When the speeds are slower, and there’s perhaps no DH bikes around, the 141 is still good fun to ride. It does lose a touch of its character though, the same as when you pootle around on a big enduro race bike. It’ll still play around and happily take on anything and everything, but there’s a bit less spring in its step. It doesn’t arrive at the dreaded boring, but you can tell that in the back of its mind it’s definitely thinking about that time it was chasing down DH bikes.

Coming from the UK, I know exactly the crowd that the 141 would cater for and it’s no surprise to see, given Privateer’s location. It’s probably a bike that a lot of people in the UK should be on, instead of the much bigger travel brutes. And while it might not be the exact fit for just frequenting trail centres, it certainly will eat them up and even take in days shuttling in the mud along with, like Privateer mentions, the odd enduro race.


The 141 never threw up any big problems. The frame and components in the spec all did their job amicably throughout a long test period and even through many a muddy autumn and winter ride. However, it’s in the details of the 141 that there are some niggles. Which is a shame, as the fundamentals of the bike are right where they should be.

Cable routing is pretty troublesome. The clamps either side of the head tube don't clamp the gear cable enough, allowing it to slide back and forth as you turn the bars and ending with a big bow of excess cable sticking out on the downtube. It's also tight on the brake cable and the position so forward on the bike that it can crease the hose. It also passes right over the lower shock bolt and rubs back and forth. Along the chainstay, however, it’s held nice and secure as long as you use big zip ties done up tight.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The headtube cable routing parts creased the brake hose. While not causing an issue for the braking in testing, it's not the best.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Those same headtube cable clamps also didn't clamp the gear cable tightly enough, and with big gaps in the cable guides on the down tube you were often riding with quite the loop of cable sticking out.

The rear axle threads into a replaceable chip that sits in the dropout, but our test bike was forever dropping the chip when you poked the axle through the wheel. Given that you already need one pair of hands to put the wheel in, it was a bit frustrating, especially when it dropped in a full rubbish bin, right to the bottom.

The frame protection did an OK job; the underside of the down tube has some coverage but misses out covering the very bottom of the tube, weld and into the BB. Unfortunately though, the chainstay and seatstay protection is just a thin and poorly stuck on effort that not only peels off quickly but doesn’t cover enough of the frame, leaving our test bike looking pretty battered after all the riding. It could be good to go over the bike with some extra bits of 3M tape or Velcro and clear film to keep it looking fresher for longer.

There’s also a lot of really sharp edges all over the 141. Many of the forgings have barely seen the round function in 3D modelling and as such the paint is chipping off pretty quickly on them and looking tired. Those sharp edges are also present on the chainstay tubes and leads to some pretty evident heel rub after only a short period of time.

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Frame protection was pretty basic and poorly stuck on, while not covering all the necessary areas.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The Horst pivot needs tools from both sides to tighten and it's good to know where all the nooks and crannies are on the frame when you're cleaning the bike.

The bike is pretty easy to work on, using standard tools and the same Allen key size in as many areas as possible. The Horst pivot though uses an Allen key from both sides though, so you need to remove the wheel to tighten it properly. Keeping the bike clean is pretty easy, but you just have to know where all the little pockets are on the forgings to give them a blast to shed the mud. And the skinny down tube doesn’t give much area for mud to cling to.

Privateer note all the bearing sizes you need on the website and they’re all in standard 6000 series sizes. Along with that they note all the torque specs for the pivots and shock mounts. The main pivot even has two bearings on the drive side, and one on the non-drive side, for some added durability.

How Does It Compare?

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Privateer 141
Commencal Meta TR 29
Commencal Meta TR 29

The Privateer 141 and the Commencal Meta TR 29 both fall into the burly shorter travel category, bikes that blur the lines between a trail bike and an enduro bike.

They both have stout aluminum frames, and the frame-only price is pretty close between the two, although the Privateer costs a little less. The 141 with a Fox DPX2 shock is $1,759 USD, while the Meta TR frame with a RockShox SuperDeluxe Select+ is $1,848.

As far as geometry goes, the biggest difference is found at the chainstays. Privateer uses different lengths for each size (the P3 tested has 446mm chainstays), while all sizes of the Commencal measure 435mm. Size P2 – P4 of the Privateer all have a longer wheelbase than the equivalent sizes of the Commencal. For example, a P3 141 measures 1266mm, while a large Meta TR measures 1257.

Keep in mind that neither bike is especially short to begin with, but the 141's longer chainstays and overall length do make it slightly less eager to slither through a section of tight turns. It really comes down to personal preference and riding style over anything else – if you're constantly manualing and slashing berms the Meta TR may be the ticket, and if stability takes priority over everything else the 141 delivers. Both bikes have good pedaling performance (weight aside), and the same goes for their ability to deal with bigger hits and rough terrain. Neither bike will hold you back, even if you end up on a ride where everyone else is on a longer travel enduro bike.

Technical Report

Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Two thumbs up and no complaints for the Shimano SLX drivetrain.
Privateer 141 Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Magura's MT5 brakes did a grand job of keeping up with the 141's weight and speed.

Shimano SLX Drivetrain: After riding a bunch on the XT and XTR drivetrains the SLX drivetrain certainly holds its own against the higher end options. On the 141 they match the SLX drivetrain with an XT shifter. This was another Shimano 12-speed drivetrain that worked faultlessly throughout another long bike test and that workhorse character matches the character of the 141 pretty damn well.

Magura MT5 Brakes: While I didn’t get along with the MT7s at all in the DH bike group test, the MT5s were actually not bad at all. They were powerful and positive in their bite point feel and allowed you to modulate fairly nicely too. A bigger rotor at the back would have been nicer, as the 183mm one was looking a bit cooked at the end of the test. But in mellower terrain it would work just fine.

Fox Suspension: I might have to concede that I actually prefer the 36 to the 38. It seems to ride a touch higher in its travel while still being as supple and controlled in its usage of travel. The Performance Elite is a Factory spec fork in a pretty black dress and the recommended setups are pretty bang on, with me only needing to up the pressure a bit when in the steepest of terrain. The DPX2 did a corker of a job with the 141’s leverage ratio and, like the bike in general, packs a lot of party in its deceptively small size.

+ Stable and balanced geo and suspension
+ Much more bike in real life than on paper
+ A lot of bike for the money, if you like aggressive riding
- Pretty damn weighty frame
- Frame details have room for improvement - cable routing, sharp edges, frame protection

Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesWhile the 141 might seem like a short travel bike on paper, out in the real world it behaves like a bike with much bigger intentions. And unlike some mouthy guy who will shy away at the first sign of actual fists flying, the 141 matches its intentions with some serious fight.

The overall balance of geometry and suspension are firmly at the core of why the 141 is such a fast and capable bike, and why it can box so far outside of its weight. And it’s always got one eye on the rougher and tougher rather than on dancing up climbs and across traverses.

It's in the details department that the 141 falls behind compared to higher-end options. For sure, there is a bit more of a focus on price with Privateer, but lots of the details where it lags could have been solved for either next to nothing, or nothing.

Nevertheless, it’s a good bike to have if you’re after a single bike to do it all, from trail centres, bike parks and even enduro races, all with an aggressive riding tinted set of glasses on.
Dan Roberts

Author Info:
dan-roberts avatar

Member since Apr 6, 2019
137 articles

  • 180 3
 My favorite thing the description "Intended use: Riding"
  • 14 32
flag chacou (May 24, 2021 at 9:10) (Below Threshold)
 This should be the new "downcountry" Big Grin
  • 4 2
 More upvotes needed for this comment
  • 5 1
 Mung Beans
  • 2 0
 @nickjaco19: no please nick no
  • 9 0
 It's my personal but light-hearted stand against the over-classification of bikes. A good friend has two bike categories - Big and little. Big is DH bikes and little is everything else.
  • 2 0
 @dan-roberts: 100%. You have a wise friend. Beer
  • 93 5
 Shout out to Shimano/Fox builds
  • 46 12
 Pro: Shimano brakes
  • 39 9
 Con: Shimano brakes
  • 34 3
 SLX with XT shifter. Perfect combo imho!!
  • 2 0
 @thepoolguy: came stock on my stumpy evo comp for a surprise. i think they ran out of slx shifters for my build.
  • 52 0
 @dan-roberts reviewer of the year! I'm not in the market for a new bike but enjoy reading any bike review and your reviews are especially good. Kudos.
  • 26 0
 Could not agree more, this review was a delight to read! I particularly loved the imagery of these lines:

"’s certainly a good climbing bike when it needs to. But it starts to get more of a glint in its eyes when it sees the top of a climb, the dropper is slammed and you summit a crest."

A love letter to that sacred pause before the rush.
  • 37 14
 Aluminium frame and carbon rims. And some champagne for my peanut butter sandwich, please.
  • 29 3
 I love champagne almost as much as my dog loves peanut butter. And I love carbon wheels on my steel hardtail.... and my dog likes to come on rides, and so....... ????
  • 12 4
 @FatTonyNJ: I was just being sarcastic towards an unusual combination. Nothing wrong in my opinion with any of them, although I personally find carbon rims not worth the expense and too stiff in general.
  • 3 5
 @Vindiu: Not that unusual in my book says the person with a Banshee Titan with some burly BTLOS rims
  • 12 2
 @Vindiu: I feel like the right carbon wheels are a prime way to upgrade an alloy bike.
  • 18 7
 @Vindiu : Whether you pay the carbon "premium" in your frame or in your components, it ends up being roughly the same cost to the user (usually around $1000 usd). However, you get different performance returns depending on where the carbon is on your bike. Carbon fiber is most effectively employed within continuous, laminar shapes such as handlebars and rims (also fuselages, wings, wind turbines, rocket casings, pressure vessels, etc.) that can take advantage of its high fatigue limits and its tensile strength bias. Mountain bike frames, with press-fit bearing bores, threaded interfaces, sharp angles, diverse load scenarios, etc. are not the most effective application for anisotropic materials. In frame manufacturing, bulk materials are simply added in certain areas to essentially make a pseudo-isotropic mass. By doing so, manufacturers defeat the purpose of using carbon at all. In the most robust mtb disciplines where durability and isotropic properties are valuable, you can see that the weight of carbon and aluminum bikes is converging. As such, the value of full carbon frames in those disciplines is diminished. This is why many engineers as companies such as Pole, Nicolai, Raaw, and Commencal (among others) have long espoused this view. As you see with Commencal's downhill team, they seem to be doing some things right with the alloy frame/carbon component combo.
  • 1 0
 @grizzlyatom: some say it's also about the feeling. The charter is different on the right carbon.
I can't say anything about that. Never really ridden carbon other then wheels and bar's.
  • 3 0
 @grizzlyatom: Yep. The Yeti SB130 Lunch Ride in size Large is roughly the same weight as this, except with carbon frame and aluminum wheel set.
  • 3 0
 @grizzlyatom: I work in composites engineering, have a look to my pics on Pinkbike Smile
  • 2 1
 @grizzlyatom: To add to your comment: Imo the weight of the 141 is not that bad. Around 1kg heavier than a carbon bike with a simular build and as 'heavy' as the Commencal. As we saw in the last field test, the geo and tires have the largest impact getting uphill.
  • 3 0
 @dennis72: my p4 141 almost weights 17kg
  • 1 1
 @Walfersama:Auch! That's a big difference compared with the 15kg Pinkbike states. 17kg including pedals?
  • 1 0
 @dennis72: it depends how you build those bikes. Heavyweight tires who have alone 1,45 kg or coils. My 161 for P3 wheigts around 16,4kg. But it has those burley tire's, steel braided hoses. Coils front and back, fork alone around 1,6 kg.
  • 14 0
 Haha “little bike”.... Fox 36, wheelbase 10” longer than what I started riding on!! We’ve come a long ways....

Bike looks great but I agree with others, the super steep seat tube and resulting short TT are a bridge too far for me. Would be interested to demo something this extreme though.
  • 13 1
 1 extra zip tie under the bottle mount and nipping up the head tube mounts sorted the cable bulge thing for me. Not noticed the sharp edges - probably will now!

All in mint bike, cant recommend highly enough, looks better in real life as well, although mine is Pike Ultimate / Super Deluxe Coil ultimate combo.
  • 6 0
 On my 161, I ended up wrapping a little electrical tape around the smaller of the two hoses where they're clamped together, which let me pull all the slack out of that stupid cable and kept it from rattling around as much. I then zip tied the brake and shifter cables to my bottle cage which kept everything super snug and off of the frame. It's super silent and tidy now.
  • 8 0
 @emarquar: I was thinking of these exact fixes reading the review. I really like these bikes, but the review is right that these things would cost nothing to fix, and the customer shouldn't have to do ghetto things to a new bike. Says the man with a bottle cage ziptied onto his Mega...
  • 4 0
 @emarquar: Some small P clamps on the bottle cage bolts works also.
  • 1 0
 @Joecx: a great idea too! I have a bottle cage and edc pump there already so I'm not sure there's space sadly.
  • 3 0
 @emarquar: I fixed that with an AXS GX deraileur .

Na before I had that I also had no problems but I had M3 scotch on the double clamp for the head tube. Because I use braided Goodridge hydraulic hose the clamp won't grab the gear cable without it. Never had that problem like on that foto. But the lower part. Near the chainring, there is rub on the chainstay..
  • 13 2
 I've had my 141 for about three months now. I bought the frame and built it up in a similar spec to the bike in the review but with a Lyrik Ultimate fork and my hybrid Shimano XT / Magura MT7 brakes.

Review comments on the frame protection are right - it's a bit basic. Easy to fix though! I just stuck on some Gorilla tape.

Comments on the cables do not align with my experience. You can swap those clips over and tighten them up so maybe it was a build error at the factory. In three months of riding I have never had a cable slip down like that. I've also never experienced the cable creasing mentioned. It was a total ball-ache to route the dropper cable though... 90 mins of swearing to get it through the seat tube.

Other than that the review seems spot-on. It's fairly chunky but that suits my riding perfectly. I don't race anyone up the hill and it just eats up the descents at Golfie, Glentress and Innerleithen. Great value bike.
  • 7 0
 I built my 141 up about 5 weeks ago. Coming off a full carbon bike I was worried about the weight. Yes it is heavy, but it goes up with a purposeful feel. While the XL looks big on paper, being 195cm, it just feels like a bike that fits me rather than being revolutionary long. I love this bike! It does a fantastic job of being a mountain bike.
  • 2 0
 @loneranger3: It's all relative. I came off an XXL Transition Sentinel V1 alloy and this bike is shorter in the seated cockpit mostly because the seat tube but also 5mm less reach and the front center is 12mm smaller than the Sentinel. The sensation of sitting so upright is a bit strange but I might get used to it. Also, the balance point of the BB being so much further in front of the rear axle combined with the shorter front center makes this bike noticeably less confidence inspiring on steep roles and chutes where the front wheel is naturally more weighted. It's not bad, just different and the more balanced position makes this bike more fun on milder terrain than the sentinel while being almost as confident in the steeps. High speed roughness is similar, though brake dive was noticed in steep, poorly executed corners. The bike has a little more tendency to "turn in" or dive into the corner. This might just be me putting too much input to the bike as I'm accustomed to my Sentinel and this bike is more ready to corner. This is the biggest eye opener of the balanced front and rear center as opposed to the short chainstay and long front center of the sentinel. Don't believe the crap about long chainstays not cornering. When the bike is balanced it wants to corners. Also it is easier for me to wheelie this because the float zone feels more forgiving than the short stays of the sentinel. go figure, I suck at wheelies anyway. Two "real" rides in I like it, but there are some things I need to adapt to.
  • 12 0
 If my 161 is anything to go by. This bike should be an absolute smasher.
  • 12 2
 The privateer 141 seems like the perfect trail bike for me. Wish the Meta TR came in a 27.5
  • 3 0
 My thoughts exactly. It's looking like for my next bike I won't have much choice but to go 29, but for someone who's ride fantasy has more to do with jumping/manualing everything in sight than ever looking at the clock, little wheels are nice. I'd love a shorter travel Clash.
  • 3 0
 @gibspaulding: get a WRP mullet link, costly but a mullet meta TR sound sick imo !
  • 5 0
 Banshee Spitfire?
  • 6 0
 Coming from a 2021 Meta AM, yes these heavy duty alloy bikes are heavy but they really do pedal well.

Heck, I completed a the 50km epic at Mt Buller on my AM, thats how capable these are.

But they are heavy, there is no getting round that but Im not racing so its no deal breaker and even if I was racing, I dont think the weight would hold me back in an Enduro (timed descents only) as they are really fast with the crazy geo numbers and the weight.

Whats even better, the money I saved on the alloy frame allowed me to put in top of the line Fox suspension and Code RSC brakes.
  • 5 0
 I checked the manufacturer's website as I was preparing to rag on their lead times, but then saw that these frames have a June delivery date. That's honestly really damn impressive these days. It looks to be a killer bike for 90% of the riding that we actually ride.
  • 6 2
 The bike looks great. There are so many excellent choices out now and so few $$$$ in my wallet. Eventually...

Also when running MT5s do yourself a favor and buy the pins and pads for the mt7 system. They slot right in and are a big improvement over the stock MT5 pads. They're far easier to work on and I think they feel better as 4 individual pads. I use TruckerCo pads myself.
  • 6 0
 You and your wallet can relax and have a nap; there are no bikes on the market right now Wink
  • 4 0
 Because I'm fond of Norco frame designs, also like the looks of the Privateer. They're very similar IMO.

I'd strongly consider if needing a bike and there was availability.

@dan-roberts Wondering how you find the longer reach bikes at your height. I'm 6'0" and riding an XL Optic with 510mm reach - very similar in specs to the P4 Privateer.
  • 7 0
 I can ride longer reach bikes, there's no magic reach measurement cut off where the wheels suddenly become square and it's unridable. It's just that as the reach starts to tickle or pass 500mm then I feel less and less of an active part of the ride. Where I live the terrain can be demanding and require you to be a pilot and not a passenger. And my riding preference is to pilot a bike rather than be passive in the riding. I have more fun out of that style of riding. It's all very personal to the individual and the terrain around them, hence why there's so much variation in what people can feel comfy on and make work for them.
  • 1 0
 @dan-roberts: Thanks for the feedback. I bought my first 29" bike in Dec and didn't have a chance to ride anything else–so I've only had experience on a 510mm reach in modern geo.

I'm hoping to try something in 490mm range to see the difference. Oh, I see you're in Champé I've heard a bit about it in the Pinkbike podcasts.
  • 4 0
 "It’s a bike that will happily put much bigger bikes in its sights and chase them down. Only up at the ragged edge and chasing DH bikes was it apparent that you’ve actually not got as much travel as the bike in front of you."

This comment speaks volumes. Similar thoughts to my bike after switching to the 1st 29er. Only 120mm of travel, with a 150mm fork.
  • 8 5
 My 141 is an absolute riot chasing down longer travel bikes. The geo numbers let it hang with the best of enduro bikes in my opinion and can bail you out of certain bad moves & riding, but the short travel still gives you plenty of feedback in order to help you learn where to improve your skills.
  • 8 1
 Privateer 141 vs Canfield Tilt Ready go
  • 1 0
 I was on the fence between these 2 frames until this week. Both are exactly the bike I need in my life. It all came down to me wanting a frame with a raw finish for a long time. Dropped a deposit on the 141 yesterday. Saved a couple hundred dollars over the Tilt. Looking forward to the build project.
  • 1 0
 Hard to beat that CBF suspension. As a previous Canfield Riot owner, the Tilt is very attractive. The Banshee Prime is another that's worth a look.
  • 3 0
 Hi @mikekazimer: I'd love to hear more about the wheelset. If they are Trail Wide they are aluminium, but everybody here is talking carbon so are they actually the HUNT All Mountain Carbon H_Impact? Could you share your thoughts and experience on them? A paragraph in the Technical report section would be sweet. Smile
  • 1 0
 Interesting. If it is the all mountain carbon wheelset, they are actually heavier than the alloy trail wheelset that would have come with the bike.
  • 5 1
 Privateer if you read this, please make a complete P1. I'm a shorter rider in the market for a complete bike. I don't want to buy just a frame.
  • 12 0
Thanks for the feedback, we're working on it! The industry is just being a bit tricky at the minute...
  • 13 10
 Perfect example of not enough reach for the super steep seat tube angle. Better than a 161 but still not anything like a proper XL when it comes to cockpit size when seated.
  • 13 0
 Interesting point. My 141 has 10mm more reach than my old bike (Whyte 905) but when sitting down feels 'shorter'. Feels great when standing up though. And the 'shorter' feeling actually works out better when climbing - front wheel stays planted.
  • 9 4
 It's not about reach, top tube is incredibly short for sizes
  • 7 2
 The P4 is close to Norco Optic XL geo:

Optic HTA 65; Privateer 64.5
Optic Reach 510mm; Privateer Reach 510mm
Optic STA 76; Privateer 75.5
Optic Wheelbase: 1275; Privateer 1300

Having said that, it still might be missing the mark for larger riders. I'm 6' and ride the above XL Optic, so I suspect riders 6' 5" (for example) are indeed feeling left out.
  • 4 1
 @njcbps: I like longer bikes but ride the Large Optic and feels sufficiently long at 480 reach. As well, Optic is 76 STA effective, this one is almost 79 . But still , I stil get the Norco, such a damn good bike for trail ridding.
  • 5 0
 @njcbps: I'm 6'3" on xl alloy first gen Sentinel. Reach on the privateer is 10mm longer, seat tube angle is pretty much the same. It fits me fine, fwiw.
  • 3 0
 At a hair under 6'5" I can agree on that, I currently ride an XL Pole Evolink 131 with a longer reach and some other different geo numbers, but as a tall person I feel like it fits me like a glove.
  • 6 1
 The XL size is fine. You're asking for a XXL.
  • 6 6
 @Cheesevillage: name any current full suspension XL frame for sale today with top tube under 640mm. The 161 is even shorter. It’s ridiculous, and an obvious knock on effect of off the shelf tubing that was designed for one thing being used in a different incompatible way. It’s a 141mm shuttle rig…
  • 1 0
 @bogdanc: Thanks for the correction. I would have lost $10 CDN betting the 76 degree number was actual and not effective seat tube.
  • 1 0
 @Noeserd: not just with privateer, but downsizing can be difficult with steep STAs if you prefer short bikes. my old medium bike is seated as long or longer than newer large bikes while having a super short reach.
  • 3 1
 @Ianofmcmillan: it´s the same to me, I used to have a 2019 trek slash and climbing the front wheel always felt light(it was size large 460mm reach), now I have a Meta Am 2021 (large, 490mm reach) and feel very short seated, and I do uphills even without lockout
  • 9 1
 @njcbps: it’s not about reach. ETT is still an important measurement. Reach matters for like 10-30% of a pedal powered ride. ETT dictates comfort on the remainder.
  • 1 0
 @mgrantorser: Concur, and good point. Even at 510mm reach I needed to put the seat back on rails, to get a decent fore / aft position. My pedals felt like they were behind me.
  • 4 1
 @DHhack: Good point. But have they done that to maintain a reach that is manageable for the average size large rider? Because if it had a 640ish tt length the reach would be around 515, bigger than most XLs!

The steep seat tube necessitates a shorter top tube length to keep reach within a usable range.
  • 1 0
 Can someone help me out. I'm hovering over the buy button for either a P3 or P4 but can't decide and it's the top tube sizing that is putting me off.

I'm currenly riding a GG Smash with 430 chainstay and 515 reach that I find way too long out front for my riding style / talents. I want something that is more balanced front to rear.

I'm also riding a 21" Stanton Sherpa / XL Evil Following MB which I get on with brilliantly.

I'm 193cm / 6'4" and want to get the right size. Help a brother out!

@DHhack @Ianofmcmillan @Noeserd @njcbps @kcy4130
  • 4 0
 @pwn1: p4 is your size, you can't go with p3 because you will be very cramped in seated position
  • 3 1
 @pwn1: I'd go with P4. Reach is what matters when you're standing. Reach and seat tube angle is what matters when you're seated (ETT is not a great measurement as not all manufacturers measure in the same way, i.e. at realistic seat heights). Treat standing and seated separably, if your gg smash feels fine standing but too long when seated, it's often a seat tube angle being too slack. Measure bars to center of saddle on all your bikes and compare, then compare their reach and seat tube angle to each other and the P4. Idk, I can't say what's best for you, but at least you shouldn't have much trouble selling it if you end up not liking it.
  • 2 0
 @kcy4130: smash is fine seated. climbs are fine. it's when descending that I don't get on with it. I don't ride aggressively enough to keep the front weighted and as my weight slides backwards the front does what it wants and not what I want.
  • 3 3
 @Heckles: reach for an XL needs to be 540-550 if you want that 80 degree seat tube angle and a bike that that actually fits.
  • 2 4
 @pwn1: honestly, don’t buy something with such a steep seat tube angle. You’ll end up with the same fit on the climb that you have now but with less reach and wheelbase to contend with on the way down.
  • 3 0
 @DHhack: I agree, but holy sh#t that's long. How would most riders get on weighting the front with that kind of reach? As @pwn1 points out.

It's all interconnected and every change brings a compromise to some degree. I just wonder whether seat angles need to come back a bit to get reach and tt right. Unpopular opinion, I know.
  • 4 1
 @pwn1: I have a 161 in P4 and I am 189cm tall. Fits like a glove! I have ridden a P3 from a friend for comparison. Felt ok, but P4 is better!

It climbs better than my Norco Optic 2020 by the way and it is about 3,5 kg heavier and has DD tires.
  • 3 0
 @pwn1: I’m 6’3” and on an XL 141. It’s the best fitting bike I’ve ever been on. The seat angle and longer chain stays are a revelation. I had an XXL Hightower before and this is a better bike for me.
  • 2 0
 @Heckles: tall people don’t have those problems. Remember 5’10 is usually the line between medium and large. Someone that size should feel wholly uncomfortable on a XL, that’s the point.
  • 3 0
 @Heckles: and I totally agree with your second point. 76/77 is fine, especially if the actual angle of the seat tube is near that so the long legged folks don’t end up hanging off the back. The problem is when the head tube and seat tube are nearly parallel…
  • 3 0

Sorry, but that's hard to believe. I just think you didn't like the Optic, climbed fire roads with the SDeluxe without the climb switch or poorly sized. The 2021 with the DPX2 climbs incredibly well and I admit, I haven't tested the 161 but it's just too hard to belive a much heavier bike with a very similar suspension design and worse tyres climbs better.
  • 1 0
 @pwn1: I'm riding an XL Optic:

Optic HTA 65
Optic Reach 510mm
Optic Effective STA 76
Optic Wheelbase: 1275

I'm 6'0" (183") with a 6'2" (188cm) wingspan (measured end of finger). I don't have any point of comparison, but the bike fits well. I did end up moving the seat backwards on the rails because the fore /aft positioning was far enough out that it felt like an odd pedal stroke.

This would be exaggerated with a steeper seat tube angle but maintaining the same reach, which would render a shorter horizontal top tube length.
  • 7 0
 I just want to point out, for anyone who might be reading this thread and thinking that DHhack is objectively right that this is very personal thing.

I have a 161, I am 6'3" tall and I find myself more comfortable and climbing faster than on any other bike I have ever owned thanks to the steep seat tube and short top tube. It puts me in an upright position where I can breathe easily without unweighting the front wheel. I won't ever buy a bike with a slacker effective seat angle. It is that much better for me.

I would recommend you test ride before making a decision about what works for you rather than trusting people on the internet to tell you what you need for a bike that actually fits.
  • 4 0
 @DHhack Top tube measurements need to be taken with a huge pinch of salt, given that they are taken at a horizontal line from the top of the headtube. Our seats at pedalling height are rarely on that line, and so the number becomes fairly useless not only as a describer of seated fit but also for comparing between bikes, especially when those bikes have different seat tube angles.

The only time a top tube measurement might be representitive of the real world is on a DH bike, but ironically, there's no time you're climbing a DH bike sat down for an extended period of time.

It's much better to look at the seat tube angles, actual and effective at a given seat height, along with the offset of the seat tube. That will give you a far better idea of where your seat will be and even open up the door to extrapolate your seat position from the geometry tables, if your seat height is a bit different to the quoted one for the effective seat tube angle.

And just as a personal input, after riding bikes with steep seat tube angles for the past few years, a bike recently showed up for test with a really slack seat tube angle, so a really stretched out seated fit, and my lower back has been screaming the whole week, despite slamming the seat as far forward as possible.

In short, top tube measurements aren't the best for deciding bike size or for comparing between bikes.
  • 1 10
flag DHhack (May 28, 2021 at 15:31) (Below Threshold)
 @dan-roberts: as you said in this review, you prefer undersized bikes. It makes sense that you don’t find a problem with a bike that isn’t big enough to be a true XL.

It’s beyond discouraging to realize that you have very little knowledge of the mechanics of bike fit. Estimated top tube is possibly the most important way to determine seated bike fit (see your example of riding the wrong size recently to show that you don’t know bike fit) now that seat tubes have shrank so far in the chasing of longer and longer dropper post lengths. What’s the measurement that you think will tell me my back won’t be on fire and I won’t hit my knees into shifter/dropper levers?
  • 4 1
 @DHhack: Haha, undersized.

It’s effective top tube, and it’s measuring to a point that we never ride at. Using it as the driver to size bikes is dangerous and leads people to be on bikes with reach numbers that can be unmanageable.
  • 1 9
flag DHhack (May 29, 2021 at 7:22) (Below Threshold)
 @dan-roberts: You should probably stop responding to me and go have a zoom call with Seb about this stuff.
  • 5 0
 @DHhack: Instead, I’ll go ride my undersized bike.
  • 1 0
 @kcy4130: I', 6'3.5" on the XXL first gen sentinel. The P4 141 is significantly steeper in the effective seat angle and much shorter seated yet only 5mm less reach.
  • 1 0
 @njcbps: Your effective seat tube angle number for the privateer is wrong. it's over 78.5 and the effective top tube is significantly shorter, this makes seated pedaling a lot different. The optic is a bike that will be able to still rail rolling and flat terrain while the privateer is better suited to winching and plummeting
  • 1 0
 @pwn1: Did you buy. P4 no question at your height. I wish the P4 was 520mm reach. Maybe 525
  • 1 0

What is your inseam? And is your listed height in shoes, or barefoot?

I'm really similar in height (6'1" barefoot, with a 35" and change inseam) and have been looking at the Privateer 141/161/Norco Sight, and am having a hard time trying to figure out which size I'd go with (P3 or P4). I'm curious how much I can use your experience as a guideline for me.

Thanks Smile .
  • 2 0
 I'm almost identical height and inseam and the current Norco Sight fit me perfectly in XL
  • 2 0
 I'm a 34.6" (88cm) inseam barefoot. Plus 0.8" (2cm) with riding shoes. Height is also barefoot.

We're pretty damn similar in terms of height and inseam, so then it comes down to terrain and riding style preference. If you've a penchant for long ass bikes then take the P4, but understand that it needs more piloting to account for the size. I took the P3 and would happily buy that size. It felt long enough to benefit from good stabillity and balance, but not so long as to warrant constant conscious big movements to manhouver it. Basically, a good fit!
  • 1 0
 @dan-roberts could you elaborate on the use of a longer shock causing (or is it compensating for?) the low leverage ratios you describe. I have a frame on preorder and I am even more excited to ride it after this great (as in informative) review, it seems like a great bike for the min-maxxer.
  • 1 0
 It's only a stab in the dark, but maybe it comes from using many of the same frame parts from the 161, which uses the 205mm eye to eye shock.

I stuffed a 60mm stroke shock in the 141 for a little while as a chin scratching experiment and didn't have any problems at bottom out, but I'd leave it up to @PrivateerBikes for the final word on if the 141 officially has enough clearance to do that.
  • 1 0
 Ok I see so I guess I always thought these metrics isolated the leverage ratio that the frame would produce, but these graphs are for the bike with the specific shock. Or am I missing something? I have a Kona process 134 and I am trying to get away from having to put tons of tokens and/or putting a larger air chamber on the shock. I am also a fairly average+ (hit jumps but not too big, go fast but not too fast) 170lb 43yr old guy fwiw. Thanks again for this great review Dan!
  • 1 0
 When you set out developing a kinematic, you have the ideas of travel, shock size and stroke already there. You can also have an idea of leverage ratios and curve shape too, but that needs a bit more development and playing around.

The metrics all work together closely and need balancing carefully, it's not really a case of input one and out pops the answer! There are also some guidelines from the shock manufacturers on leverage ratio ranges that help recommend a certain shock stroke for a certain rear travel.

What's the reason you don't want to use tokens or a different air can? Not saying one is wrong or right, it just seems that's a specific thing that's driving your setup currently.
  • 1 0
 @dan-roberts: Dan this is good stuff! That is a good point why not use the tokens, I guess I feel like I have not had to go there (as much) with other bikes and perhaps Kona just has an odd one here ( I also have to run in almost fully slow to keep from getting bucked). I appreciate the conceptualization behind the numbers, it is for sure something to keep in mind so thanks for that perspective. Only one thing more fun than talking about bikes and thats riding them. Happy trails Dan!
  • 1 0
 I'm in the market for something like this - a hard hitting £3kish trail bike but every review I've seen of this and the 161 mentions the weight which is making me look at other options. Shame as it ticks the box in every other way - price, looks, builds etc.
  • 1 0
 so it looks stunning, rides well, goes down like a bat out of hell and is well priced.

Would love to see how it does against the impossible climb, so many bikes go down well when setup right, its all about the technical climbing for me then, especially for shorter travel bike that is long (generally means it climbs the real tech worse).
  • 5 2
 How much does a P3 frame w/shock weigh? I'm curious how it compares to a Large Meta TR frame/shock
  • 5 2
 My question here would be:
Using the same wheels and tyres, would a 161 be any slower uphill than a 141?
  • 4 0
 Same tank me thinks, there's no difference especially if you see the kinematics work the same with a little less travel. I own a p4 161 at 17kg. Honestly I had to get stronger or give up...
  • 3 0
 This is kind of leading to the same question I had: why would you buy this over a 161? I bought a burly slack 140mm bike last year, and have basically ended up doing everything I could to get more travel out of it because it turns out once you're riding a burly bike anyway, why wouldn't you want more travel?
  • 6 2
 Looks like it'd be fun on some big dirt jumps too.
  • 8 5
 So glad there's another horst-link mid-travel bike option as current selection is incredibly limited.
  • 4 1
 Same here, love horst link bikes!
  • 4 0
 Glad to see a variation of brakes in there.
  • 4 0
 Really enjoy Dan's reviews.
  • 4 0
 to my eye, they nailed the look of it.
  • 3 0
 All thumbs up for the excellent review Dan. It is really enjoyable to have access to such quality content !
  • 1 0
 Reminds me a lot of my vitus mythique. Love those horst link bikes around 140/150mm, just does everything so well. It's amazing what kind of deals are available these days with direct to consumer brands.
  • 4 1
 "Pinkbike commenters tried to defile the Metal, but the 141 smote them down!"
  • 4 0
 Looks like a mini Grim Donut
  • 2 0
 i have a deposit down on one and this review has cemented its the right decision. Looking forward to it even more now! whoop whoop!
  • 1 1
 So the mech cable runs external until maybe a foot at the end, and the dropper cable goes external to internal to external to internal... What maniac thought that made sense? Why put the dropper inside the downtube just to have it come back out and then back in again at the seat tube? Did they realize the chosen external system of clamps was bad but only had time\money to reroute one line? I see this kind of half-assed trend-following (gotta have internal! But only one!) and I have to wonder where-else bad decisions were made. Perhaps there weren't, but you have to admit, with stupid things in such visible places it does raise the question. Like, cable routing is really not hard, so if that's already bad, what about the actual hard stuff?
  • 4 1
 I like big bikes and I cannot lie
  • 3 0
 Is it true that many Privateer frames are out of alignment?
  • 3 0
 Mine was fine. Seattube however was oval...
  • 2 1
 Looks like a belting good bike to me. Made of metal, great proce, good spec and will ride great. More of bike like this please Pinkbike!
  • 4 0
 Carbon wussies
  • 3 4
 "Landing into rough sections of trail, or arriving unweighted into roots does throw up a touch more feedback through the bike’s suspension from that hump in the leverage ratio."

That hump is only 0.025x more leverage, about 1%, and it ends after only 10mm of travel. Sure you're not just feeling the less travel meaning you get into the ramp of the spring faster?
  • 3 1
 Looks like my 2018 alloy Smuggler
  • 3 1
 My 141 p4 with Lyrik, e1900 and DDs weights 16,8kg.
  • 1 0
 What happened to the pricing? At one point, these were selling for ~$3,000 USD?
  • 1 0
 And the frames $1500.
Ehhh It's not a bad price, just in a deposit for a P1 =)
  • 3 0
 This bike is sic
  • 2 0
 Beat me to it but "Intended use: Riding"
  • 1 0
 A Primer 29 Expert build is the same price, is stiffer, has better kinematics, and is lighter.
  • 1 0
 A small dap of Sugru mouldable silicone at the clamps would hold the cables in place.
  • 31 31
 putting the weight of the bike as a con, but then cheering it for how burly it is...... Pick. One. Please.
  • 30 1
 Bike weight doesn’t have all that much to do with strength. The 60lbs freeride bikes broke far more frequently than a modern 35lbs Gambler.
  • 11 0
 At least in my book, weight is not directly proportional to burliness. Weight is one single factor in a bike, and burliness consists of many factors, weight being one of them but very much linked to where and how that weight is used.
  • 20 0
 @conoat, it doesn’t have to be an either / or scenario. This bike could still be plenty burly even if it lost a couple pounds of weight, just like there are heavy parts (cheaper rims and derailleurs come to mind) that aren’t exactly burly.

Weight doesn’t automatically equal strength.
  • 5 1
 That frame is heavier than steel frames....
  • 2 6
flag conoat (May 24, 2021 at 9:29) (Below Threshold)
 @Ttimer: you are correct, if you live in 1988.

in 2021, we are down to the short hairs of what is robust and what is light, and the overlap is nil.
  • 5 11
flag conoat (May 24, 2021 at 9:30) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: sure, regarding the components. I was more refering to the frame weight. I think we all recognize that we are to the point in frame design and innovation that you can't take 3lbs off a frame and have it be as burly as the 3lb heavier frame.
  • 4 1
 @conoat: yes you can. You just have to spec the frame properly. This bike doesn’t spec the frame tubes and is relatively cheap which is why it’s 3lb over weight
  • 2 0
 @hamncheez: yeap, but more sturdy for sure
  • 2 1
 @adespotoskyli: isn't the sell of steel frames that they are the most indestructible frames out there?
  • 1 1
 @CM999: all the fast privateers eat frames. Expensive if you have to pay for your own frames or if you have to replace them under warranty. Might be a deliberate decision. They could have ordered a lighter frame from the manufacturer.
  • 2 1
 @hamncheez: steel as a material yes, as a system is a whole different thing. Selling point isn't always the best way to determine what actually works isn't it?
  • 1 1
 @CM999: nope. no f*cking way. you aren't taking a off the shelf tube built bike and taking 3 god damned pounds off it without sacrificing a good bit of durability. just no.
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: I think for a lot of riders it's the compliance of a steel frame which is the main selling point. And for others it's the aesthetics. And a bit of both for some.
  • 1 1
 @chakaping: compliance is another word for flex
  • 3 0
 @adespotoskyli: Compliance is flex in the desired direction (in most cases, the desired direction is increasing sales)
  • 2 1
 @hamncheez: haha exactly
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: oh yeah next week we are off to start a bar fight in the clydes club
  • 1 2
 @dan-roberts: "At least in my book, weight is not directly proportional to burliness." yeah, ok, but in this review it wasn't the burliness but the actual weight that you both praised and conned. "The heft of the bike also contributes a bit"

If it were light enough to not make weight a con then would it really be heavy enough a notable contribution to the pro of stability? Doubtful.
  • 2 1
 @mikekazimer: maybe they made a mistake in using the term burly. Because the story directly stated the the "heft" of the bike directly contributed to the pro of stable and planted feeling, the explicitly called out the weight as a con. Losing some of the weight, it would lose some of planted feeling. So it is either/or...
  • 1 0
 Give me a 140/130 and I'm sold
  • 1 0
 Saracen Ariel 30 pro. Can run a 140mm fork.... ....and is mint.
  • 6 0
We're working on something...keep an eye out!
  • 7 8
 Trying to wrap my head around how someone 6'2'' says a 485mm reach with a 79 degree seat angle in "bang on." Like, bang your knees on your bars?
  • 1 3
 The cable routing - ugly as f, the weight for trail bike on the enduro side, however buildwise and geo wise if looks quite nice, personally i would choose stumjumper or comencal based on price/ value /overall look and feel
  • 1 4

it makes the 161 redundant ("Only up at the ragged edge and chasing DH bikes was it apparent that you’ve actually not got as much travel as the bike in front of you. But it never threw in the towel... It’s up for a fight like its brutish bigger brother."),

and 141mm is more than 120mm, and 32 pounds is not "light"("isn’t really pining for hours of technical climbing.")
  • 1 0
 looks like a bike that wants to be ridden very hard
  • 2 2
 It says SLX/GX instead of SLX/XT
  • 8 10
 That kind of external cable routing sucks. If bike companies are going to use external cable routing, they should just stick to welded on zip-tie mounts. Easy and simple.
  • 4 0
 If you look twice you'll see they do use the standard zip-tie holes. But yeah judging by that one single picture, it does look like there's an extra retention clip on the headtube.
  • 3 0
 Also not a fan. My V1 Bird AM9 had zip ties mounts which were pretty much trouble free. My current V3 has bolt on clamps which honestly feel like a downgrade
  • 1 1
 But no complete bikes being sold in Europe? Frown
  • 7 0
 Hey @Protato
Thanks for the question. We're working on it, trying to navigate Brexit, shipping charges and duties has been complex but we're making progress.
We'll be back!
  • 1 0
 @PrivateerBikes: Oh great to hear!!
  • 3 4
 For once, I’m on time to make the best comment with +192 upvotes and for once I have nothing to say, life sucks
  • 2 1
 Looks like a Meta
  • 5 7
 "However, it’s in the details of the 141 that there are some niggles."
What the heck is a niggle?
  • 81 4
 It's a small complaint or annoyance, similar to the feeling I get when someone consults the comments section for a word definition instead of the dictionary... Smile
  • 6 0
 @mikekazimer: lol, you would do well as a spelling bee moderator
  • 13 0
 Perhaps @jacob-idk-jander was nervous about googling "niggle" on a work computer
  • 6 0
 @gtill9000: you got that right lol
  • 3 0
 I've consulted Google and Wiki to check what is a "kazimer" and they both told me to go on Pinkbike to get the right definition. I'm not disappointed Smile
  • 5 28
flag JohanG (May 25, 2021 at 3:37) (Below Threshold)
 It's like a normal word, except it steals cars.
  • 9 2
 @JohanG: that's some racist shit, dirtbag.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2024. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.066413
Mobile Version of Website