Descending The first thing I noticed on my initial outing on the Murmur was the smooth steering that was especially predictable as the bike leaned and carved into corners. It may be the best steering I have experienced to date on a 29er, thanks in part to the 46mm offset of the Selva fork, matched to a 45mm stem and 64.5º head angle.
As speeds increase, the stability is massive. Thank God for some forward-thinking lads that started making bikes much longer a few years ago. I found the longer chainstay and more centralized riding position on the bike allows more aggressive use of body weight to balance between the front and rear contact patches when grip is needed. Also, deliberate shifting of your weight forwards and backward to lift and un-weight the front or the rear wheel as you take on severe gradient changes into chutes, over edges and large obstacles is easier - and provides a more dynamic ride characteristic with practice.
The Murmur holds a line and tracks superbly in the array of angled and wet limestone the bike was subjected to, with masses of grip around flat and loose corners. I seemed to hold a line however irregular the trail was – sometimes feeling the rear wheel fishtailing behind me while the front was making progress. The Murmur carries speed over obstacles and "pops" easily. I did notice some chain slapping noise, which was quieted after a lathering of rubber tape on the left stays.
| As speeds increase, the stability is massive. Thank God for some forward-thinking lads that started making bikes much longer a few years ago.—Paul Aston |
Well, all of the above sounds great doesn't it? I loved the ride, and I would happily ride this thing all year in my terrain. The weak point of this bike is the suspension bottoming. It needs more end-stroke progression. I could improve this with volume spacers and more high-speed compression. Bottoming out the steel frame was not harsh, but if I were hitting more jumps and flat landings I would be more concerned.
The major characteristics of this bike are its compliant steel frame and smooth damping, which in most aspects, make it a very easy bike to ride bike as conditions toughen and you weaken. If you ride smooth hardpack, love railing berms, and trying to out-sprint your mates from of every corner, you will probably want something stiffer and more responsive.
The flex of the frame will be impacted a lot by total rider weight; at 75 kg the bike didn't seem out-of-control flexy to me, but riders weighing up and over 90kgs could find this chassis too vague. A little more stiffness in the front triangle and the front portion of the swingarm would firm things up, while retaining that "steel is real" feeling.
no eye to aesthetics at all on most of these. for a road/cross bike, i can get it.
dirtmountainbike.com/gear/bike-reviews/trail-enduro-bikes/starling-murmur-steel-bike-thats-blown-us-away
on PB, right?
I listen to what Levy, Kazimer, and RC have to say. Aston has no credibility to me.
I don't like some bikes myself but can completely see how many people would. Im not saying Paul does a bad review, I would just like to see more 'standard' bikes being put though the ringer by him with the view of how the bike stacks up for the average rider.
Paul does one of the better reviews on here and his tech stuff is far better than the other guys, his WC bike checks are awesome, so I'm not criticising Paul so much as the breath of the product being reviewed.
I agree with Mr. Aston on many aspects of bike geometry and setup and look forward to his reviews eagerly. The few reviews Paul has done on more normal bikes he has found the geometry lacking so personally I believe that may be why he sticks to these non standard bikes.
In 5 years time when the rest of the bike industry realises that long, slack bikes with steep seat angles and long chainstays are actually better then I'm sure we will see Mr. Aston reviewing Trek and Specialized bikes.
I think if you want reviews of bikes for the average rider then you better look at reviews by other pinkbike editors (no disrespect to them).
I just can't understand why PB users can't see, that any product content here falls between advertorial and infotaintment . It's really enjoyable to read and what not, but to base any purchasing decision solely based on "reviews" here isn't something I would advise to anyone.
The thing is that it’s NOT better. NOT worse. Just different. It’s not an evolution, it’s a mutation.
The guys and gals who’re making these huge bikes are doing cool things and much of what they’ve done has been observed and the best bits have been taken and used to great success on more moderate and arguably more considered bike design. But they want you to think it’s better. There’s a notion that any bike that’s not 500+ reach 63°HA and 460 chainstays then it’s old hat. Those guys are sleeping...pah one day they’ll realise. This is not the case at all, it’s what the producers of the huge bikes want you to think. And if you truly believe they are better FOR YOU then good for you. But you’re not everyone. They really are like the vegans of bike design.
Having italian and british-made parts doesn't make a bike more specific, it just makes the parts made closer to people who live in those countries, and allows employees and buyers in those countries know more about the manufacturer. I use hope, mrp, velocity, white industries, chris king, and profile racing products wherever possible for this reason (yes it takes me 10 years to save for my bikes, but that's not my priority).
Show me a mass market bike with the numbers of this bike or a G13 etc?
My Mrs is a vegetarian, it fits with her well and I’m cool with it. If she ever tried to tell me to be a vegetarian too that’s when I’d stop being cool with it. Cus I’ve tried it and for me it sucks.
Every reviewer on the site has preferences/biases and that's what makes things interesting.
If Stella Artois brought out a shitty, unfinished ‘real ale’ would it sell? No because everyone who tried it would say “wow this is awful, you can really tell it’s been made in a shed, I hate it”.
Some boutique brewery does exactly the same thing and suddenly it’s quirky and “wow this is incredible, you can really tell it’s been made in a shed, I love it”. At the end of the day though you can still get drunk and if you’re having fun doing it that’s all that matters.
Thanks to people like Chris Porter some people seem to think that bike design by big brands is somehow outdated and playing catch up and it really is not the case. They’re just designing bikes with A LOT more consideration to their vast end user base and their locations throughout the world. “Moar wheelbase” is hardly a clever or enlightened view on bike design.
I reiterate, if a big, long and slack bike is working for you or anyone else then have at it. Just don’t keep telling me about how those bikes are superior and how all the big brands have been caught with their pants down. It ain’t so.
Yes I suck up to English brands, I am a sell out.
Finally: isn't Paul Aston the fastest or at least most stylish riders among the whole PB staff? I know both Mikes are jealous that's whay they made him test E-bikes to undermine his credentials.
Clearly geometry is a matter of personal preference so all bikes should definitely not be the same. There’s also the other obvious caveat that the geometry of the bike you’re riding needs to match the terrain it’s ridden on.
And like Waki I’m glad the trend has moved this way. Downsizing is a lot more fun than upsizing. I’m also glad that taller riders have more reasonable options, I’m just not sure that those options necessarily need to be longer and slacker than a DH bike. Especially if the build of the bike would render it flexy, imprecise or even weak when ridden like a DH bike.
So I’m not totally against the like of Pole et al. I just don’t like the notion I keep seeing that they’re the ones leading the way, at the cutting edge. I don’t see it that way at all. I think they’re just big enough to fit taller riders and just slack enough to make people feel like heroes but I don’t think they’re very well rounded.
As far as other brands going slacker...I reckon there’s a good few brands who’ve had their bikes dialled for a few years at least now. One of them won and is winning the EWS right now. Of the ones that are making alterations I don’t think they’re changing their bikes to play catch up to a better bike, they just need to have a slacker angle, a longer reach otherwise the current consumer will go elsewhere. Nobody can feel 0.5 (change a tyre or use a different fork and effect the same thing) but you can read it on a geometry table and right now that’s how you make a sale.
Sorry for he massive post
It's not such a hot take to scream out to anyone that will listen "Specialized and Trek know what they are doing and make well rounded bikes". Nobody on the internet is going to come and tell you how smart you are for having that enlightened opinion. And some small builder in a shed that you are friends with isn't going to send you free stuff for that opinion either.
Could it be that Paul Aston was hired to actually look at such niche bikes? Because with his DH racing background he is actually able to look beyond obvious shortcomings in a bike?
It's ok to bemoan that obvious shortcoming, a misaligned frame, but it's something every average reviewer would have done. If that closes the book on a bike or even brand, then there are many brands that shouldn't be out there. Including Specialized. I once saw an SX Trail with completely off down tube shock mounts.
Being able to look past such things, and actually inquiring about those with the builder, and getting a valid response that the issue is resolved, is to be highly commended imo.
c)These current "huge" bike are longer than DH bikes because DH bikes are too short as it is.
d) I do agree that most people can't feel slight geo difference or even know how to set up their suspension or tire pressure!
Bit bizarre behaviour really. Kind of as if you are just mouthing of because you hope someone will agree with you.
It is a beautiful bike (I love steel), but I'm shocked that the misalignment isn't considered unacceptable.
Because Aston.
This guy seriously claims that the bobbing is due to the oval chain ring affecting the anti-squat!?!?
What about that regressive leverage curve?!
Hey Aston... you’re fired!
On the other hand the leverage ratio is essentially flat, it changes by 0.1 over the bikes full travel, do you think this amounts to a regressive curve? You are confusing yourself because of the graphs scale.
But re: the 2 tooth difference, I find that to be a ridiculous comment. I’m aware of how changing the chainring size affects antisquat (and PK), but this guy is saying he can pinpoint that differential twice per revolution and separate out the cause of pedal bobbing?
That is absurd. If he had ridden with a regular chainring and them compared it, his comment would be more credible, but without that “control” factor there’s no way even the most sensitive rider would feel that.
And as one who has experimented with different chainrings for exactly this purpose- increasing and reducing anti-squat- as well as having used several different oval rings, I find this comment to just be silly.
Blaming it entirely on he 'regressive' curve, which is probably around 0.02 change between no compression and sag is more absurd though, it won't have anything to do with it at all. At least admit that.
How do you feel about bikes like some specialized, Niner etc that are deliberately regressive at bottom out to ensure you get full travel when using an air shock?
A simple change in shock volume or spacers would help with bottom out.
I get that the overall ratio isn't as disastrous as some of the bikes you mention. The 650b Stumpy is a really bad example as the overall ratio is high and it's regressive at the end of it's travel, meaning that for larger guys that bike was literally unridable, even with 350psi in the shock...!
Many bikes need to be more progressive IMO. I can think of dozens of examples of guys struggling with excessive bottom out. Trance's, Reigns's, Enduro's Stumpies's, etc. I can think of one example (the previous Capra) where the opposite was the case.
I guess there's an element of subjectivity and personal preference going on. I'm all about active, low anti-squat and anti-rise bikes that rely on the shock and a flat/progressive leverage rate (flat meaning a straight line, not horizontal) for support. They're the easiest to tune as nothing wacky is going on like counter-rotating links (VPP) etc and the shock is running lower pressure around sag point for less dynamic friction.
Blah blah...
That said, I wouldn't quite accept the alignment issue for a frame for this kind of money, no matter what material it is.
If shock eyelets and pivot are aligned, this is a non-issue, thrust me.
They have frames made overseas, so it is their factories QC that was lacking, of course this has been brought to their attention and shouldn't be repeated - There is nothing to gain by badmouthing them online.
I am part of an engineering company and sometimes we make things that have pretty tight tolerances and are not easy to 'locate' but it is our responsibility as the manufacturer to ensure that we choose the correct method of production and deliver a quality product - We cannot make the excuse that because our company is small an out of tolerance product is acceptable.
In reality, if you cannot ensure alignment with the tools you have available, purchase, make better tools, get somebody else to deal with that aspect or change your manufacturing methods but if the misalignment was clearly visible to Paul then it would have been clearly visible to Joe - Its not looking good in support of the 'buy british' mantra in that the Taiwanese made frames are probably made a tighter.
Joe, why oh why did you send a frame with misalignment and paint issues to Paul of all people for review on here?!
Note - I would still buy a Starling.
Guys who have never seen one in person: "It's too heavy, it's out of alignment, It obviously rides terribly, its a piece of crap, why does this guy even review bikes, I clearly know better than he does?"
Why do you bother to read reviews if you immediately ignore anything the reviewer says and stick with your own opinion?
You can make a decent single pivot now since you don't need to create a rapidly rising rate at the end of travel to compensate for the linear spring. Damping is a lot better (and tunable) than it used to be too.
Also, do you propose this would have higher or lower anti rise than a bike such as a nukeproof pulse? How about a Kona? - The linkage makes no difference what so ever.
I don't have a solution for it as far as suggesting lower/higher anti-rise rates, it just anecdotally would seem to perform similar to these past designs. Maybe you can provide insight if that is the case or not?
Also, you say multi-link designs may have braking characteristics similar to single pivots, but then say linkages make no difference...so which is it?
> rear end would stiffen and perform poorly while on the brakes
This is exactly what I experienced on these bikes, suspension would almost completely lock out while hard on the brakes. They were also regressive, so shock performance was harsh around the sag point, but then it would bob a lot if you pedaled hard and would blow through travel on hits. I eventually landed on a Manitou SPV shock that had more progressive damping than a standard shim stack, which helped.
Multi pivot being non single pivot (Santa Cruz) and linkage bikes being kona etc which are the same as this starling in terms of mechanics with the addition of a linkage to alter leverage ratio and obtain desirable shock packaging, frame stiffness and insulate from shock side loads etc.
What I'm saying is people don't moan about Kona etc having poor braking from just a picture as they are visually more complicated but are essentially the same in many ways.
And my 111 definitely does. But in real-world riding it hardly presents itself. The back it skips across breaking bumps a little more than other bikes I have owned but it's kinda fun.
It's really unfortunate from Joe to have sent a missaligned frame with paint issues to the biggest mtb site, and is sad to see that the price of the frames has doubled up since the first time I heard about them (bye bye, purchase chances), but please cut the crap on steel being a poor material or single pivots to perform bad just because.
Haven't even seen one in real life but f*ck, every single review of these bikes is north of awesome, and I don't think Joe has anything to do with any media payroll.
Mad respect to a guy who starts a bike company welding in his backyard these days. I just hope as the company grows and the new investment returns profits the prices come down to earth again.
Regarding steel enduro frames I know someone who was riding a Swarf for a while there and absolutely loved it. Price aside I would certainly like to try a chromoly dualie, even if it was just for comparison's sake. Always had a soft spot for my steel HTs and cross bikes but would be interested to see the lateral flex with a linkage in the mix.
The criticisms of @paulaston is disappointing to see also. I always appreciate his gear freakery and attention to fine detail. While some like the rich fondue which is Levy's writing I personally find it verbose. I refer to read something which is keenly analytical, perhaps what some would describe as dry; rather that reading something which is 'lite' and seems more focused on cracking funnies than discussing the things that actually matter (when you're reviewing a mechanical product).
My yeti sb has cracked nearly every time I have spoke to it in a harsh tone and it has a 5 year warranty. I wouldn’t take the chance on 1 year which is a shame. 2 and I coulda turned a blind eye
So the thing was so far outta alignment he needed to tape the nds?
90% of bikes have too short rear centres.
Except for the one in the seat tube. And speaking of routing, might have done better with a different line to the rear caliper.
Also, I can't relate to this review as it's out of my $ and component range. Except for the misaligned frame; I know a bit about those and can spend less $ to get one.
He seems adept at finding a fine distinction between "weight" and "gram saving", but he does not even realize that that relationship can be altered to your desire simply moving your saddle?
Go figure how these people get to write reviews for Pink Bike: by the end of the story he seems to be happy with a flexy bike with misaligned wheels!!!!!!!!
another good review here... singletrackworld.com/2018/03/review-starling-cycles-taiwanese-made-murmur-factory-29er
Steel is no good for full suspension. This has been obvious from day 1 and should not be discussed again.
Price is insane, for the same or less you can get a top end Lenz or GG.
I can only imagine how the stiff formula fork and renthal cockpit make the whole front triangle flex.
If it flexes under 160 pounds rider....
Why don’t they just make a front suspension, 130mm trail bike? This is oviously the next “big thing”
Who?
All the people making full suspension bikes from day one?
Flex is different than noodle.
Just look at the video, every slight turn he is taking, the rear is slightly flexing sideways. And those can be barely considered turns. 160 pound rider.
For bikes where weight is not a concern, sure, go ahead and add 2-3 pounds to have the same stiffness.
So yes, I weigh 195lbs and I own a Starling Murmur. My reach is 490mm so I went a bit more conservative than Paul and I'm just about an inch taller.
The thing with how this bike rides and flexes is that where as I'd get my Evil Following to jump and skip in hard turns over bumps the Starling is a LOT calmer. Also even though this bike is considerably longer than my size Large Evil Following, this bike turns in as sharply as this bike when committed to weighting the front wheel properly. It also wants to drift in a more balanced and predictable manner than my previous bikes, which may have to do with the wheelbase and my position within that.
Paul's point on the end of stoke progression for the rear shock is valid and I do have my shock (DVO Jade) stuffed with spacers to get the type of response and bottom out support I need for typical PWN riding. Somehow that shock still exhibits great sensitivity on smaller trail noise even with that set up.
It's sad that this frame showed some alignment issues. My frame seems pretty good (I went and rechecked it this morning after I read this) as I hadn't noticed anything. After 6-7 months of hard winter riding my lower shock bush has worn out... so yes that end of the shock takes a lot of load, but the shock is all good even after a winter of abuse.
The Starling certainly isn't a frame for everyone... I get that, I'm sure Joe gets that too. There's definitely a bunch of folks that are pushing the geometry discussion and get the advantages it can provide and Joe is part of that and providing a product for a niche of riders.
Because both are better.
One thing I cannot understand of the videos in PB showing how the rear suspension works are that every single one of them pushes the bike down so easily that they bottom the shock down to the limit. Wouldn't it be better to show the "normal travel" of the shock/suspension, let's say by showing a guy on top of the bike working the suspension down, instead of bottoming it up?
It is a pretty bike indeed.
Cheers!
A far from ideal rising rate/regressive leverage rate on this bike. Very strange in this day and age.
With the BTR layout you can get as much or as little progression as you want, easy to get more proegression than even YT are using.
The linear rate will eat up trail with a basic set up, but if you adjust for bigger bottom out impacts it will really stiffen up the suspension. I never found a happy medium on my single pivot set up that was truly versatile across a wide range of terrain, in the end I gave up bottom out for better small bump.
I'm glad he changed his mind.
Sadly so what is point of buying a bike from a small frame builder if it’s just going to ship out of Taiwan? Shed bike that shreds sounds good to me. Keep it home brewed and out of Asia. Bike manufacturing needs to be in Europe and North America.
PB commenters are an odd bunch. They loved the BTR, which broke mid-test, but they hate this Starling for being slightly out.
@IllestT: The headtube ovalized, it didn't break. They could fix it. If a customer expects to not do basic care like regularly checking preload on the headset, one could also use a headset with taller insertion of th cups, like Nukeproof has. It is one solution, but best approach is definitely just to just learn some basic maintenance and practice it.
You may want to read the bottom part of the respective article again (starting at "issues").