Field Test: 2021 Specialized Epic EVO S-Works - The Most Versatile
PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
Specialized Epic EVO S-Works
Words by Mike Levy, photography by Margus Riga
Specialized Epic EVO S-Works
Words by Mike Levy, photography by Margus Riga
Specialized’s race-focused Epic platform has been around for something like two decades now, and they’re saying that the latest version is the lightest, fastest Epic they’ve ever made. Sarah Moore tested that race bike, but we’re here to talk about the equally all-new EVO version.
Specialized applies those three letters to models that are a bit more capable than their standard fare. In this case, the Epic EVO gets more travel - a 120mm fork and 110mm out back - whereas the race-ready Epic has just 100mm on both ends. On top of that, Specialized also uses traditional suspension on the EVO as opposed to the pedal-assisting Brain system on the normal Epic.
Epic EVO S-Works Details
• Travel: 110mm rear / 120mm fork
• Carbon frame
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head Angle: 66.5°
• Seat Tube Angle: 74.5° (effective)
• Reach: 460mm (size L)
• Chainstay length: 438mm
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 21.88 lb / 9.92 kg
• Price: $11,525 USD
• www.specialized.com
• Travel: 110mm rear / 120mm fork
• Carbon frame
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head Angle: 66.5°
• Seat Tube Angle: 74.5° (effective)
• Reach: 460mm (size L)
• Chainstay length: 438mm
• Sizes: XS, S, M, L (tested), XL
• Weight: 21.88 lb / 9.92 kg
• Price: $11,525 USD
• www.specialized.com
While the race-focused Epic has the latest version of their Brain shock, the 110mm-travel EVO gets a SIDluxe from RockShox instead. The Brain-equipped shock makes sense if efficiency is the name of your game, but it’s also not as forgiving or predictable as a traditional system. Given that the EVO isn’t solely about watts and winning, Specialized made a good call. Like many cross-country bikes, it employs a flex-pivot near the axle that allows them to skip the bearings and hardware that'd normally be required. That means less weight, of course, and the design can easily handle the few degrees of movement required. The shock is compressed by a carbon fiber clevis, and there's a split flip-chip that lets you alter the head angle by half a degree.
Another thing to note: The standard Epic and Epic EVO do share the same front triangle, but the EVO gets an entirely different rear-end. Why? Well, the Brain shock integrates with the chain and seat stays, but the EVO doesn’t use it. That means that the EVO frame is actually 100-grams lighter than the Brain-equipped race frame, with a hardly believable claimed weight of just 1,659-grams. For some perspective, the Scalpel SE frame is said to weigh 1,900-grams and the Ranger frame 2,900-grams.
Climbing
The Epic EVO's character seems a bit more climbing-biased compared to the Revel and Transition that roll with wider bars, shorter stems, and seat posts with more drop. That, along with its 21.88lb weight - no, that's not a typo - and especially the 1,240-gram wheelset, add up to a machine that says "I'm ready to climb for as long and as hard as you want,'' much more so than the two bikes previously mentioned. It just has that attitude about it, and that's exactly what it delivers.
Much of that climbing was done in wet, slippery conditions, and while the Scalpel SE 1 consistently dominated those traction-limited moments, the green Epic was a close second in my post-ride notes. Sure, it's obvious that the EVO isn't a pure race bike when you're struggling up some boulder field at what feels like 0mph - more attention is required to keep it on-line, of course - but any dabs were my fault, not the bike's. Speaking of dabs, while the Spur had me putting a foot down here and there, the EVO would keep on chugging. If you're the kind of rider who's always counting dabs, you'll probably be more at home on the EVO or Scalpel. On the other hand, if you climb with your kneepads around your ankles and aren't in a huge rush, the other bikes might be more your flavor.
On rolling terrain that requires you to put in work - the stuff where you want to carry good speed up and over that short rise to get the most out of what follows - is where the EVO can be mind-blowingly quick. None of the other bikes were slow on that sort of stuff, but I was always highly motivated when aboard the Epic EVO. I think that's pretty telling.
No Brain, no cares. The EVO might not be as race-y as normal Epic, but it sure as hell never feels slow. Light, fast, and capable, and with thick cross-country DNA, this would be my pick of down-country bikes if I wanted to race some cross-country as well. In other words, the EVO is the quintessential down-country bike.
Descending
All five of my test bikes look at the challenge from different angles, with Transition taking the most extreme approach and Cannondale doing the opposite by assembling their's around the standard Scalpel frame that gets a bump in travel. Not a bad way to do it, especially if you aren't aiming to make a bike that's on the bleeding edge of the category; don't assume being the first is always a good thing. Specialized split the difference with this bike by using the standard Epic's front triangle and then attaching an EVO-specific rear-end for better suspension performance.
And on the trail, that's exactly how it feels. While the Spur does a good job of pretending to be a short-travel trail bike, and the Scalpel SE does a good job of being a long-travel cross-country bike, the Epic EVO sits somewhere between them. Let's get the grumbles out of the way first, with one being the combo of a 470mm seat tube (remember, same front triangle as the race-y Epic) with a 150mm dropper post.
And on the trail, that's exactly how it feels. While the Spur does a good job of pretending to be a short-travel trail bike, and the Scalpel SE does a good job of being a long-travel cross-country bike, the Epic EVO sits somewhere between them. Let's get the grumbles out of the way first, with one being the combo of a 470mm seat tube (remember, same front triangle as the race-y Epic) with a 150mm dropper post.
Timed Testing
Our timed lap for the trail bikes was just shy of 20 minutes long and split into three sections. First, we powered up a smooth section of switchbacks before starting up a more technical, twisty section of trail that tested the bike's slow-speed handling and traction with tired legs. After that, we evaluated how the bikes maintained speed on a short bumpy traverse before the main descent, comprising of a small rock roll before a series of rough, suspension-testing corners and straightaways. Nothing too rowdy, but representative of the terrain the trails these modern cross-country bikes were intended to see.
Don't forget that timing is just one of many ways to judge a bike, and fast doesn't always mean it's the best for everyone.
Mike Levy: "The Epic EVO had the quickest loop time, 1.40-percent up on the Scalpel SE1 and 5.58-percent ahead of the SB115. It placed third on the descent, 1.41% behind the Spur."
It wasn't that long ago that this wouldn't give me anything to moan about, but not so in 2020 when many bikes have shorter seat tubes and longer stroke posts. When the trail got rough and fast, the EVO's seat would use a little love tap to remind me that it was awfully close. That doesn't do it any favors on challenging terrain, and I never felt as comfy as I could have been when the bike was getting knocked around under me on a chunky trail. In those moments, there was no surpassing the Spur's longer footprint that provides a sense of calmness, even if the EVO leaves most of the others wondering which direction it went.
All of the bikes being on matching tires provided the ideal situation to compare performance, especially in the corners. It's here where something about the EVO clicked with me and I consistently pulled brakeless two-wheel drifts through berm after berm, as well as any and every flat corner. You know how a go-kart tells your ass precisely what's happening under you as the kart slides around the track? It's the same thing with the EVO, and there's almost no better feeling in mountain biking than absolutely nailing a corner.
If you're riding a three or four-year-old short-travel bike, you'll be astonished by the EVO's suspension performance. Actually, to be fair, that's true of all of my test bikes; the SID Ultimate offers slipperiness, support, and bottom-out resistance that just wasn't possible with 120mm only a few years ago, and the same goes for the rear-end. That said, the EVO's SID did develop a bit of premature bushing play - RockShox says that they'll look after any issues that arise with customer bikes ASAP.
Listen, I know that Transition Spur has got you all hot and bothered - it should; it's a wildly capable short-travel bike - but it's hard to look past the EVO's well-rounded versatility. Let me put it this way: Yes, the Spur is a more confident bike at the outer limits of what you should be doing with small amounts of travel, but if you're the type of rider that is - or pretends to be - sporty and capable, or you just want to cover all sorts of terrain exceedingly fast, the Epic EVO would be my choice
Pros
+ Amazing in the corners
+ Very versatile
+ Light, fast, efficient
Cons
- Long-ish seat tube, 150mm dropper
- Did you see how much it costs?
The 2020 Pinkbike Field Test was made possible with clothing, protection, and support from Giro. Control tires provided by Schwalbe, and power meters provided by SRM. Filming took place at The Backyard pub in Squamish.
Photos: Margus Riga
Video: Jason Lucas, Cole Nelson, Max Barron
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41781 views
41781 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
As well you should. Specialized - like every other bike company in the world - is trying to make money selling bicycles. If you don't want wheels that are hand built from the rims up buy something cheaper.
Simple, motor + battery only costs $ 300.
First off I agree, the price of some push-bikes is really absurd. I think the main difference is that a cutting edge XC bike can't be over built at all, or it ceases to be a cutting edge XC bike. If the bike is on the ragged edge of performance where a 200lb+ person will break the bike if they get too aggressive, then they have to factor in warranty replacements into the cost that everyone pays.
The E-bike can be over built a lot more, so their engineers probably know it's a bike that way fewer people are likely to break.
I understand that, as you get to the sharper end of competition, small advantages become of bigger importance. And this is where the S-Works tier validates itself.
For ordinary folks, it seems completely unnecessary. But people buy them. And they're free to do so i suppose. But i was passing these people on my cheap 2nd hand road bike and i am far from a strong rider.
Eh, if people got the money to spend on it, up to them. No different from people buying performance sports cars to drive at the same travel at the same traffic speeds as someone in their bog-standard motor really.
Maybe all the money from sales of top-tier bikes can subsidise better value lower-spec models that are all most folks need. We can dream...
The only reason I said that is bc everytime someone argues prices they get all uptight about "supply and demand" and R&D, etc. Obviously I understand how the industry works. It was more towards the people that get all defensive about pricing (*cough cough.*) Which is weird af to defend in the first place unless you just love spending money or you sell the products.
With the global demand for bikes so high at the moment they can pretty much define their own prices supply and demand and all that....
At the same time, you can find used S-Works bikes WAY cheaper than new. So just because you see people riding them to work doesn't mean they paid full price. Likewise, I see people driving $50,000 Jeeps to work, or $100,000 Porsches. The Jeep will never get used off road, and the Porsche will never see a track. Do you judge them equally to the person who commutes on an S-Works?
I don't suggest people shouldn't buy them and i did equate it in my comment to people who buy performance cars that never get used for their intended purpose.
For the sake of clarity, the people i started seeing riding them were in their 50's-60's, quite out of shape and were slow cruising along the promenade. Shouldn't judge a book by it's cover i suppose, but they certainly did not look like the athletic rider that would benefit from the race-orientated advantages that S-Works provides. To me it's like someone who doesn't exceed the capabilities of their lower-spec fork wanting Factory Kashima. If you're not exceeding what the low-spec fork can do, the benefits of factory-level tech will be lost on you.
Again, if they want an S-Works, they can crack on, i really have no issue with it (beyond any flipant "more money than sense" comment). My comment was just that i can't see what benefit they can be getting out of it over much lower priced bikes.
Each to their own as they say though.
I expect it to go lower as time passes and supply of the new model increases.
The current generation Stumpy is worthy and capable
The Enduro is basically top of the class
The Levo SL is a breaking new grounds in what an ebike can feel like on the trails
And now the new Epic looks like a winner too (especially the Evo)
I know their corporate practices can be pretty shitty, but they're making some killer bikes right now (and the working man spec is inline with everyone else pricewise).
I guess if by "shitty" you mean spending buckets of $$ on mtb R+D and sponsoring some of the best athletes in the world.
My taller friend got pretty fired up about the effective seat tube angle and found himself further back than he wanted to be. He's been going on about how other bikes with the same effective seat tube angle get a lot of criticism while the Enduro seems to have received a pass some how.
This example you chose to use as an argument only reinforces my point.
But I suspect you are just talking out of your rear in order to justify some irrational hatred you have toward a bike company.
www.caferoubaix.ca
If you're this worried about them even after they came to a good solution seven years ago maybe you should order some parts from them?
Short of an out and out Enduro race most riders would be substantially faster overall on the Epic tested here, imo.
Also, don't forget the Volagi bikes lawsuit. But here's a rundown on some of the rest:
drunkcyclist.com/2014/03/12/now-know
Here, I'll amend my initial statement:
-no, by "shitty" we mean threatening or initiating trademark litigation with small companies,** with brands like Volagi, Mountain Cycle, Cafe Roubaix, Epic Wheelworks, Epic Bags, etc., with lawsuits that specialized would have no chance of winning if the small companies could afford to actually go to court. These lawsuits threaten the very existence of the smaller brands, while they are used by the Specialized legal department to justify their budgets.**
There I fixed it.
Many consumers, myself included, would not like to support this type of shitty corporate behavior in the bike industry. This is not a new conversation. You are being disingenuous by pretending not to understand my point.
Just try not to go apoplectic tomorrow when they name this bike best in class. That will be two for the Big S this year, counting the Enduro in that field test.
Im sure the bike rides great. I, along with most people I ride with, will never buy one because we have experienced Specialized's shitty practices, either byreading about it in publications like this, or in bike shops that sell specialized, or in the specialized offices. I am close friends with a few people who worked there, many different departments and roles. None of them will ever spend money on specialized products. But i guess they are ill-informed.
As for you, you are so informed that you couldn’t even back up your simple statement without going to Google first. Seems pretty convenient that you know so many people who worked there, and I’m even more skeptical that they’ve all sworn off Specialized for life, but I can’t prove it and suppose anything is possible. So I guess there’s no point arguing that.
But on the off chance you are one of the informed ones, I guarantee you’re one in a thousand of these parrots in the peanut gallery who always chime in with “lawsuit” any time Specialized is mentioned.
Here is one of many articles on it.
www.dbllawyers.com/can-lose-trademark-rights-dont-sue-infringers
Ive already clarified my language from the initial post, but im sure you will keep pointing out that i havent named a company that theyve put out of business. you got me. keep pretending as if that invalidates my point.
"I just dont have an irrational hatred of a corporation"
yes, an irrational hatred of business models that are stifling innovation, consolidating capitol, bullying small businesses, treating their employees like shit, and *literally destroying our planet*. sure, your right, its silly of people to have an opinion about things and to vote with their dollar.
Stop being willfully stupid. you are dishonest. Defending a corporation you have no relationship with from some a*shole in a comment section on a mountain bike website is a strange hill to die on.
great argument bro.
And I'm pretty certain that everyone, aside from you, gets Beeftard's point. Going out of business isn't the only measure. How much time, effort, worry, headaches, and $$$$ did these companies expend b/c what was an obvious bullying tactic?
In the case of Cafe Roubaix, Speshy's "misunderstanding" was "straightened out" in part b/c Fuji bikes (owner of "Roubaix" TM until 2019) told them to knock it off. Being forced to back off from suing a small coffee shop is hardly the hallmark of a "reasonable" company.
hers something for your research
twitter.com/i/status/1275956194717208576
Look, I know you’re all determined to dislike Specialized, and that’s fine. Just don’t pretend it’s rational, or that you know any facts about it to support your claim.
@beetardfoozer: Again, lots of snark, but it’s pretty clear you’re reaching. You’re assuming a motive when you can have no way of knowing what the motive was. And you’re assigning a motive based on your own bias.
Stop pretending you don't know how the world works.
I'm not determined to dislike them...I even (gasp) own some Speshy stuff. I only commented b/c being willfully ignorant or stupid is just annoying.
Look, at this point, I’m tapping out. I enjoy a good debate, but this one wasn’t good, and whatever it was, it has run its course. I apologize to whomever has taken offense. If we had met on the trails, chances are we’d have had a good time.
The fox logo issue is not my favorite, but its not as gross as specialize suing a wheel builder called epic wheel works. They are actually protecting a brand logo, as well as a specific product they sell(replacement logos). Epic wheelworks wasnt slapping specialized logos on their wheels.
The shimano issue also feels a little gross, but they have a pretty good argument in terms of managing their new technology in a way that allows some oversight of production of compatible parts from other companies to preserve intended function, or make sure the other companies shit operates properly with their new groupset. the licensing has already been opened up, and will at some point go away all together.
False equivalence arguement.
In terms of trademark and copyright, the laws apply the same for a brand name as with logos, with the added caveat that the brand names must have a connection to the industry in which the brand name is applied. Something like "Epic Helicopter Tours" of the Grand Canyon or something like that would probably not get the attention of Specialized, nor would they have ground to stand on. Epic Wheelworks has a direct connection to cycling, and therefore Specialized is obligated to protect its trademark within the industry or it will lose it within the industry. It's the exact same thing as Fox protecting the Fox Head or Fox Tail or whatever. Every single company ever protects its trademarks and copyrights in the exact same way -- they have to, or they will lose them. What you have done is applied a subjective double standard -- it's OK for this, not for that. Fine, but the law doesn't work that way, and companies are out for their own interests. All of them.
You can do I search you aren't obligated to sue everyone and no you don't automatically lose your trade mark if you don't.
Just one article by lawyers:
www.dbllawyers.com/can-lose-trademark-rights-dont-sue-infringers
From another:
"A trademark owner is not required to uncover all possible uses that might conflict, or immediately commence a lawsuit against every possible infringer. At the same time, a complete failure to enforce will lead to a weakening of an owner’s marks, loss of distinctiveness over time and, as we saw in this case, potential forfeiture of certain available remedies. So, at a minimum, owners should establish an appropriate level of proactive monitoring of USPTO registration applications, the Internet and other uses in commence. "
You are responsible for defending your trademarks. I am not a lawyer, so perhaps I misunderstood or mis-used "lose your trademark," but that second sentence was essentially my point.
Notice how they didn't go after Fuji bikes? Wonder why, they make a bike with the name, but they went after a small shop with the name of a bike model- not even close to the same thing.
www.bikesdirect.com/products/02fuji/fuji_roubaix.htm
Why didn't Fuji sue the shop? Why did they step in instead of suing the shop?
Proves the point everyone has been making and you're wrong on.
I'm glad you made copies for some TM guys...maybe you know them well enough that you can ask them about this issue personally...so they can tell you you're wrong. shrug>
You bring up Fuji, so I assume you're back to Roubaix? Maybe you have a point. I couldn't tell you why they don't go after Fuji -- maybe the two companies have an agreement that you and I are not aware of? Also, and I've brought this up several times now, Specialized dropped the whole Roubaix thing with the shop. Worth noting, yes?
My main point in my more recent post was the fact that this guy said he was cool with Fox going after a small sticker company in defense of their logo, but not with Specialized for defending their brand name in other cases. It's an arbitrary double standard used to support his already-formed biases. It's essentially the same thing, yes?
1. Every corporation doesn't do that (i.e. Fuji didn't do that);
2. You could tell him why they didn't go after Fuji...if you just read the multiple links in this thread and what I wrote. The answer is: b/c they couldn't.
3. Specialized dropped the whole thing b/c Fuji TOLD THEM TO...b/c Fuji OWNED THE TRADEMARK (in the U.S....which Fuji made clear to Spesh that they risk using "Roubaix" in the U.S. if they kept messing with the Canadian cafe (b/c you can't really own a worldwide TM)).
4. Fox owns the logo and makes aftermarket stickers...Speshy didn't own anything...they licensed it in the U.S. from Fuji.
5. No...it's not a double standard...they're different. And, Fox got plenty of flack...and the issue was resolved within a week...without a 3rd party getting involved.
If it hasn't been made clear enough yet or you can't understand it, maybe you're just out of your depth and should stay silent.
"That said, the EVO's SID did develop a bit of premature bushing play"
Maybe a connection there? I'm sure Rockshox has to balance out-of-the-box feel with bushing play. It took my skinny butt 6 months to break in my Pike, but I bet the bushings never get loose.
It seems like suspension tune and geo has come along way.
I’ve now got light rims, and Dissector Exo+ fr/Slaughter Grid Trail w/cushcore xc on the Trance. I brake early and try to ride light and quick rather than fast. For the 5+ minute descents in the alpine, I ride a Stumpjumper Evo/36/Cascade link. It’s so much faster and so many fewer sketchy moments.
Of course the same goes with the true XC bikes with Sarah as well.
I liked the blue, but I've had it with matte paints, such a pain to keep clean.
I got the Comp in black version. Looks killer.
I’ve ridden it on some long, fast downhill trails, including today, which was about 9 miles up and about 11 miles down some classic Rocky Mountain single track. .
When it was down. I noticed the saddle more than I do on my Enduro, but it also never really felt like it was in the way. It didn’t keep me from finding jumps, popping off trail features or getting in some little manuals here and there.
I might try a longer travel post, but it’s definitely not necessary to ride fast and hit all sorts of features along the way. It’s such a great bike!
Looks like SRAM is using consumers as guinea pigs again....and without their once solid warranty coverage.
I have never loved RockShox forks but I was getting along pretty well with this one until it broke, pretty disappointing.
Old gen Stumpy/Camber is a bit too short, prev gen Epic too stretched, current gen Stumpy felt...weird. Had to weight the front a lot. It would be so much easier if we could just size our bodies to bike frames.
Many (most?) buyers are going to be looking at the $4-7k builds.
How significant is the weight penalty w/ those (still very capable and high-end) build kits?
Are there any major compromises to those kits that make them a poor value?
(Things like heavier and cheaper suspension, wheels, cassettes, etc) I'd especially love to see a breakdown of which components on these cheaper builds really add extra weight... with the Evo I'm guessing the wheels are the #1 place where major weight savings is achieved over the cheaper models.
I weighed the wheels (with tires, tubes, rotors and cassette):
2735 gr rear, 2050 front. I subtracted the claimed weight of components and got 2120 grams for the wheelset.
I know it got asked in the Spur review, but do you think if you rode a medium Spur it would be closer to the Epic, as the numbers looks similar on paper, the reach, stack and wheelbase are within a few mm of each other, whereas the large Spur is more like the XL in the Epic. That Evo is hella pricey too!
At 5' 9.5", my medium Spur climbs like a billy goat, hops around on every small jump like a rabbit, and still descends like a rocket with only slightly more concern for line choice than my trail bike.
It would certainly be very interesting to put Mike on a medium Spur for a few hours.
As far as price... If you pay MSRP for a specialized you are a moron or your shop is ripping you off. They have the most margin and the best bro deals. You have to get in a knife fight with the shop or be friends with a rep but you can get four figures off this bike no problem.
Also, margins completely depend on the model and ( unless things have changed massively since 2018 ) Specialized dictates how much of a discount you can give when selling their bikes. I used get around this by tossing in free service, kits, helmets, etc when people purchased higher-end models.
Seems Transitions sizes are one larger than the competition a large Spur is closer to a medium Epic Evo
Here, here! Especially when you dive in right at the limit. So good.
One compelling reason for me with the Spur is both the pricing which I think for the X01 is very good and also as a rider a bit taller than Levy the large is about perfect whereas the large EVO with a reach of 460 might start to feel short and I'm not sure I want to ride a stem longer than 50mm. Revel's pricing was actually pretty good too considering the build yesterday had their wheels which are quite interesting.
I recently switched from a 5 year old set of Sidis that were deathly stiff to the Giro Sectors which are noticeably flexier and have been pleasantly surprised. No change in timed loop laps, and I'm starting to think super stiff shoe efficiency might be marketing hype.
No one needs to spend more than 5k on a new bike. Performance per dollar starts dropping once you get over 3.5k and by 5k you not getting much more for every dollar you dish out.
/done.
My winnder of the 2020 XC DC filed test is the Giant Trance
It was ahead of it's time other than the 1 degree too slack seat tube.
Thus the third mounting point. It'll fit a full sized tube, CO2 + Head, Tire Lever, Dynaplug Micro PRO Pill and Wolf Tooth chain tool just fine. If you use a Tubolito Tube you've got all kinds of room for other stuff since only about 1/3rd the size of a standard tube, The SWAT Box is also light and easy to access in a hurry. Super piece if kit.
I'm a big fan of the SWAT room on the Stumpys, but I often neglected to keep the contents clean and lubed, leading to rusty tools & frozen cables during winter. Too lazy.
When I'm in XC mode I already have a bunch of stuff in my jersey pockets, food, gels, etc. The SWAT box is a great way to get all of the stuff I mentioned off your body. Lower on the bike too. I really wish they made one that fit the Stumpy too.
Here in the US desert SW two bottle are needed for anything over 20 miles or so. I do a lot of 40-50+ mile rides on my Epic so two bottles and good route planning for refills is essential. At least in the months outside of Nov. - Feb. The heat here literally kills people. If it doesn't kill you the kidney stones from dehydration will make you wish it did. Right now it's after 1AM and it's still 95* F outside.
As for the "lazy" issue all I can say is take care of your tools/toys and they'll take care of you.
I sweat a lot, so desert riding would probably make me go blind from salt before death by dehydration
30* C = 86* F, an absolutely beautiful day around here!
I would absolutely freeze to death in your winters. Anything under 80* F and I'm looking for more clothes to bundle up in.
A single degree can be adjusted in the saddle rails, but still not ideal.
I think the only bike you can get close to even on the frame cost is selling the pro parts but even then it's not really worth it.
I consider buying a Comp, or expert and selling the parts, but they kinda go cheap on the parts. The SID Select shock and fork don’t get much on the private market, the wheels, drivetrain and bars on the Comp are worthless. The Expert doesn’t even have full XO, and those Rovals are only worth $800-$1000.
I was able to find a couple rides old Spur and been on it a week or so.
I'm not anti ebike, but they have them all
Step cast 34: 959
Axis drive: 1600
Axis Dropper: 800
G2 ultimate: ~800
Seat: 200
Bars, stem, grips: 500
Sc Wheels: 2000
Tires: 160
Misc: 156
=10,700
Tack on the specialized s-works tax of 825.
Totally get that. But Specialized sues people at the drop of a hat, so rooting for stiff competition/choice away from the major brands would be nice. Those options exist, but aren't as well-rounded. The Spur is gorgeous and I wanted it to be my next bike, but I care a little more about climbing than descending performance.
Low(er) margin bikes would keep us all on square wheels and 3x drivetrains. You can have your low budget build from the parts bin, but after the business I’ve built to support my family and myself blooms and profits come in I’m buying the nicest damn bike I can afford. It will cost more than my 01 Tacoma.
It isn’t about the bike, it’s about kicking ass and reinvesting in to something that I’ve sacrificed for a long time to shift focus elsewhere. If you don’t like it, that’s your prob.
1) set goal
2) kick ass
3) reap rewards
You really wanna tell me you can’t count a bike as a reward? Like there’s some moral tie-in with the dollars paid... wtf
Get over yourselves
That being said, stiffness is comparable and the weight penalty is ~100 grams.
Hump
However, if you compare a M Spur (which is more equivalent to a L Epic Evo)...a 25mm decrease in WB (compared to Epic) or 29mm (compared to L Spur) along with corresponding decreases in stack and reach...and you'd have to have a more nimble bike.
I'm sticking with: Levy had the wrong sized bike to compare to the rest of the field.
Also, if he was the "right" height, how would that have compensated for the issues he noticed in those specific situations? The bike is still the same size and I doubt just being 2" taller is going to change skill, rider positioning, line choice, etc.
How hard is it to understand that those bikes quite simply had different design goals? Transition intended the Spur to feel long and stable in the recommended size and Spec intended the Epic to feel racy and nimble. It's that easy.
You can experiment with sizes all you want when you buy your own bike but it would be absolutely dumb for Levy to choose test bike sizes to match the reach or WB between bikes instead of evaluating them as the brands intended. It would totally screw up the results.
PB actually have done what you're suggesting in the past and it was so stupid. For example it resulted in them saying the Process (then still at the forefront of long geo) was short and twitchy (LOL) because they had it in a medium to match the reach of the other bikes in large - completely missing the point of that bike's geometry and its intended ride characteristics. Glad to see they've changed their approach.
It seems like you really wanted the Spur to be brilliant at everything and don't want to see it's got pretty out there geo for what it is, sacrificing versatility to excel in the fast and gnarly stuff. Of course you can buy it in a size too small for you and pretend it's nimble if you really must have it. I mean, you can downsize a Geometron too if you want, it's your money. Or you can admit it's not the bike for you and get a different one that's been designed to handle the way you want in the right size for you.
For example: b/c PB says its for the downs...so that's what it has to be? Transition says: "...with all these lightweight and uphill oriented character traits the Spur requires no adjustment to descend like you're used to..." Well gosh...that doesn't sound at all like it wasn't made just for descending? Is it the 66 deg HTA...well I guess the .5deg less that Epic EVO really messed up the Spur's climbing chops????
Re size: As others have noted, 5'10" is exactly in the middle of the size. I can just as well type: he should have chose a M Spur, b/c that is the size recommended for his height...and not be any more wrong than what you typed.
As I wrote in another post: would a M all of the sudden be a brilliant climber and still stable...or would it not climb much better and lose descending stability? Would a XL EVO climb worse than a L? Compare like things to like things.
I don't care if the Spur is brilliant...but, I'll go with what ceecee wrote.
At 5' 9.5" -- just a half inch shorter than Mike -- my medium Spur climbs like a billy goat, hops around on every small jump like a rabbit, and still descends like a rocket with only slightly more concern for line choice than my longer travel trail bike. I feel extremely comfortable with the medium geometry and can't imagine the extra long reach and wheelbase of the size large would provide any tangible benefit for me.
Then again, I don't ride 99% out of control like Mike, so maybe that's the only distinction and reason for upsizing? He's obviously much more skilled than the average mountain biker. I guess that could be enough to explain the larger size preference, but it still doesn't resonate with me since I can't relate at all.
Oh, and Transition themselves recommended the medium for my height. I communicated with them directly on that subject.
Yes, yes I did.
WTF?
That's more than I have in both my bikes, that's twice what my wife's Shuttle cost.
Did a bunch of dentists buy Pinkbike?
Damn!