2016 Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro - Review

Sep 14, 2015
by Richard Cunningham  


Turner Bicycles spent the better part of three years developing its second carbon-framed mountain bike – the 2016 RFX v4.0 Enduro. The back story is that RFX was first introduced in aluminum in 1999 as an all-mountain/freerider and had earned a loyal following. Founder and designer David Turner was nearing the production phase with a carbon fiber version when the industry abruptly switched to 27.5-inch wheels. Turner considered the options and decided to scrap the substantial investment he had in molds and prototyping costs for the 26-inch RFX, and forge ahead with an all-new 27.5-inch wheel machine.

Looking back, Turner said that starting once more from scratch gave he, and suspension designer Dave Weagle, the opportunity to incorporate knowledge learned from the rapid evolution of enduro-specific bicycles which took place at the time he was working on the original 26er. As a result, the new RFX is longer, a bit slacker up front, and its suspension is better suited for high-speed runs down trails that were once the realm of big bikes. But, unlike many contemporary enduro bikes that prioritize downhill performance well above pedaling efficiency, the RFX V4.0 balances its edgy frame numbers with a crisp-pedaling dw-link rear suspension. That, and Turner's switch to carbon construction, has produced a wonderfully versatile, 27.7-pound enduro racing machine that that should become a favorite among all-mountain trail riders as well.





Details: RFX v4.0 Enduro

• Purpose: Enduro competition, all-mountain/trail
• Frame: High modulus carbon construction, 160mm-travel dw-link rear suspension, external hose and cable routing, 142/12mm axle, threaded bottom bracket, ISCG 05 chainguide tabs.
• Wheel size: 27.5, clearance for 2.4-inch tires.
• Shock: RockShox Monarch Plus with Debonair sleeve.
• Fork: 160mm stroke recommended (RockShox Pike furnished with builds).
• Adjustable head angle: Tapered head tube designed to use FSA +/-1 degree headset cups.
• Front derailleur compatible: Direct mount and cable guides for Shimano side-swing mechs.
• Screw-in cable guides: Adel-type clamps secure hoses and housings to the frame.
• Suspension pivots on Enduro Max sealed ball bearings.
• Sizes: Small, medium, large, and X-large.
• Weight as tested: 27.7 pounds (12.6 kg). (Frame weight: 6.5 pounds/2.96kg with shock and hardware)
• MSRP: Five complete builds from $4573 for the GX, to $6533 for Shimano XTR (Frame and shock - $2995).
• Contact: Turner Bicycles


Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
The RFX V4.0 has ball-bearing pivots instead of composite bushings.

Enduro Max bearing
Enduro's Max bearings have deeper races and are cageless - which allows for additional balls, and creates a bearing that is better suited for high loads at low shaft speeds.

Construction

Turner designs its frames at its headquarters in Murrieta, California, and then outsources the aluminum manufacturing to a US frame maker in Portland, Oregon, while the carbon manufacturing of the Czar and the new RFX v4.0 is delegated to a high-end frame maker in Asia. Neither should be cause for concern, as Dave Turner has been in the game since 1994 and has relied upon outside manufacturing since day one. To ensure that all the bits are up to snuff, Turner does all of the final checks, machine work, and assembly in Murrieta. Complete builds are also assembled there, ride-checked, and then partly disassembled for shipment.

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
(Above) Caliper-mounting screws thread into aluminum dowels. (Below) Well-executed external hose and cable routing.
Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
From below, the Turner reveals a screw-on downtube rock guard, reinforced ISCG-05 tabs, and generous tire clearance.

Toray is a Japanese carbon fiber supplier that is considered by bicycle makers to be the number one source for high-performance composite materials. Reportedly, the RFX chassis is laid up exclusively with a blend of Toray's high-modulus uni-directional carbon products, which results in a lighter, stiffer and extremely strong frame. Turner did not stray from the proven profile of its aluminum frames when he penned the carbon RFX, including a nod to their traditional rectangular seat stays and steeply sloped top tubes. The suspension is also similar, with a Dave Weagle-configured dual-link system driving the shock parallel with the seat tube. Call it antiquated, but there can be no argument that the bottom bracket area is the strongest part of the frame to mount a shock - and doing so leaves room for a single bottle mount on the down tube.

Taking full advantage of a high-strength molded material, the RFX's swingarm is widened to provide ample clearance for 2.4-inch tires near the bottom bracket and up top, the traditional seat stay bridge has been eliminated to provide room for the tire and also to clear the seat tube at full compression. Dave Turner has been a shorter-is-better proponent when it comes to chain stay length, so it should come as no surprise that the RFX's rear end is designed around 17.25-inch (438mm) stays - pretty good for a 160-millimeter-travel bike with a 27.5-inch wheel and DH-width rubber.

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
The performance of the Turner's RockShox Pike fork needs no introduction. The big surprise was how well the Monarch Plus Debonair damper played with the RFX's dw-link suspension.

Details abound on the newest Turner, beginning with the use of ball bearings in the pivot locations. Turner, who had been a staunch supporter of composite bushings, switched to Enduro Max ball bearings for the RFX because they allegedly enhance the suspension's response to small bumps, and because their full-compliment ball configuration is specifically designed for a bicycle suspension's high loads at low rotational speeds. The post-mount rear brake caliper features threaded aluminum dowels that eliminate the possibility of stripping a threaded insert bonded inside the carbon swingarm. The one place you will find a threaded insert is the bottom bracket, which is also endowed with ISCG 05 chainguide tabs.
Geometry:
Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro geometry
Click on graphic to enlarge.

Up front, the RFX's tapered headset interface is designed around FSA's angle-adjust headset cups. Stock frames are shipped with zero-degree cups, but customers can order the adjustable, plus or minus one-degree, cups directly from Turner Bicycles. The stock head angle is 66 degrees, so RFX owners can opt for either a 65 or a 67-degree angle depending upon their skillsets or theaters of operation

RFX frames buck the internal cable and hose routing trend, and perhaps that is a good thing. Turner uses threaded bosses and a combination of Cannondale-style T-stops on the downtube and Adel-type clamps elsewhere on the frame to secure full-length housing and hydraulic hoses. A port on the seat tube facilitates internally actuated dropper posts. Most RFX builds will leave Turner with one-by drivetrains, but the seat tube is offset to the left and a pair of threaded bosses are included to mount a front derailleur for customers who desire a side-swing Shimano front changer and a multi-ring crankset.

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016


Five Build Kits

Turner Bicycles offers five build kits that include three with SRAM drivetrains (GX, X01 and XX1) and two based upon Shimano's XT and mechanical XTR ensembles. The SRAM GX and both Shimano builds can be configured as one-by or two-by drivetrains, while the X01 and XX1 are obviously one-by only builds. Base prices for the Shimano XT and XTR builds are $5610 and $6533 respectively, and the SRAM GX, X01 and XX1 builds start at $4573, $5737, and $6207.

Our test bike was assembled with a mix of components that Turner admittedly had laying around because their MY-2016 component shipments had yet to arrive. The mix of parts was eclectic to say the least: SRAM's entry-level GX one-by transmission, Enve M70 wheels with 2.35-inch Schwalbe Nobby Nic tires, a Thomson DH handlebar and 50mm stem, and a KS LEV dropper post. Suspension was RockShox's best: a 160mm Pike RCT3 Solo Air fork paired with a Monarch Plus Debonair shock. While our test bike did not match up with any of Tuner's official build kits, it is safe to say that its overall performance would be close enough to provide a fair evaluation of any of the five available options.





bigquotesThe Turner responds naturally to body English, so lofting the RFX over short drops or rock gardens becomes intuitive in one or two rides.

Take the time to get the RFX's suspension tuned and you will be rewarded with a bike that holds a tight line in the bends and jumps like an alley cat. The Turner seems to work best with the fork's spring pressure slightly higher than the shock's, which is typical of bikes that use dw-link rear suspension. For reasons unknown to us, the dw-link system is sensitive to spring pressure and compression damping. Overdo either by a small margin and the bike's tail end will ride high and overdrive the fork. Get it right and the bike will hold its pre-set ride height almost everywhere, which turns out to be a massive confidence builder.

Cornering: We expect long-wheelbase bikes with head angles in the neighborhood of 66 degrees to oversteer when pushed hard into a corner, and as cute as that may look on every Pinkbike video posted in the past three years, a bike that holds a tighter line and bleeds off speed with both tires when its rider overcooks a bend will always be the faster and more maneuverable. The Turner's geometry blends those two traits with a light feel at the handlebar and the ability to hold a precise line on just about any surface. When it is pushed beyond its cornering speed, both wheels will break traction at about the same moment, but the rear tire will initiate a slight oversteer. As a result, the RFX feels easy to control and when drifting, its line can still be adjusted midway through a turn to steer around a rock or rut, instead of forcing its rider to wait out a stylish rear-wheel slide.

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
Drifts were easy to control and the rear wheel tends to follow the front while braking hard into corners.

Climbing/acceleration: The RFX does not waste energy while climbing, and its mush-free feel at the pedals encourages short bursts of acceleration. The cockpit feels long and roomy and its 73.5-degree seat tube angle has a just-right feel. That said, there is no denying that the RFX is a 160-millimeter-travel bike, shod with aggressive rubber, so it doesn’t exactly leap forward with each press on the pedals. When the time comes to grind up a long ascent in the saddle or to stand up and power over a roller, the Turner gets the job done as well or better than any enduro superbike that has come through PB for a review.

Interesting to note is that the RFX handles best with the shock sprung quite softly, and yet the dw-link rear suspension maintains ride height while climbing some fairly steep grades. The rear suspension feels stiffer under power, which usually translates to a loss of grip in wet or gravelly conditions, but there was adequate traction available to scratch our way up most technical trails. On the subject of ride height, we are happy to report that the RFX, with a 13.4-inch bottom bracket height, does not bang its pedals on every protruding rock and root that stands in the vicinity of its crankarms.

Those who spend significant time pedaling out of the saddle will want to switch the shock’s low-speed compression lever to the middle or the semi-locked position to keep the Turner’s tail end hardtail stiff, but there is enough anti-squat in the suspension so that most riders will opt to leave the shock open or at most, in the middle position, for just about any kind of climbing.

Descending/technical: Skilled or not, most trail riders will find the RFX hard to fault on the downs. While not exceedingly stiff, its chassis is rigid enough to hold a precise line across ragged off-camber terrain that would have most lightweight trailbikes bending and twitching like the front row at a rave concert. In a straight line, the Turner's 66-degree head angle and generous front center measurement make easy work of rock drops and chunky chutes. When a difficult section of trail rears its ugly head, the RFX is just as happy to wiggle its way down the safest option, or take the "we shall see" straight-line approach. More often than not, we exited steep or technical sections with a sense that we could have pushed harder or carried more speed.

Like all good trailbikes, the RFX allows its pilot to do most of the work from a centered position over the bike. That, and the Turner's tendency to remain at ride height keep the rider positioned to handle just about any surprise that may pop up on an unfamiliar trail - which is an attribute that will come in handy for enduro racers. Another positive in the RFX's technical handling quiver is that the rear wheel tends to follow the front under braking. The rear suspension remains supple enough when the rear brake lever is squeezed to keep the tire on the ground and rolling, so the chassis remains quite calm in situations where some of its well-reviewed competitors would be bouncing around on the chatter.

With its suspension biased to be slightly softer in the rear, the RFX becomes an excellent jumper. The chassis remains level with very little pull-back required to keep the rear end from lifting over peaky ramps. In fact, the bike has a tendency to jump front wheel high, so an over-zealous pull back can result in a "Hail Mary" moment. The Turner responds naturally to body English, so lofting the RFX over short drops or rock gardens becomes intuitive after one or two rides. The RFX is one of the easiest handling bikes we have ridden since the Intense Tracer 275 Carbon or the Santa Cruz Nomad.
Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
bigquotesIn a straight line, the Turner's 66-degree head angle and generous front center measurement make easy work of rock drops and chunky chutes.

Technical Report

Few customers are going to order a Turner RFX outfitted with a mix-and-match component spec like PB's test sled, so it makes little sense to dwell upon the merits of every part on the bike. There are a few components, however, that warrant a shout out. If we were asked to recommend a particular build from Turner, it would be either the SRAM XX1 or the X01 (ours used a SRAM GX one-by drivetrain). We are not squeezing on Shimano here, just underscoring that a SRAM one-by eleven offers the whole package for all-mountain and enduro riders: Just-right gearing, no fuss shifting, chain-drop security and best-in-class feedback at the shift lever. Shimano brakes would be our first choice, but SRAM's Guide stoppers are up to task, and would not be a deal breaker by any stretch of the imagination.

FSA angle-adjust headset: Long-travel trailbike development is nearing the stabilization point, but vocal factions remain that are pushing for steering geometry which only makes sense for dedicated gravity racers. Turner's solution, the FSA Orbit Extreme Pro headset allows non-believers from both DH and XC/trail camps to adjust the RFX v4.0's head angle one degree in either direction - which should be enough to tune its steering to suit without ruining its handling altogether.

Enve M70 carbon wheels: We know that most riders will not be willing or able to shell out Enve wheels, but the precise feel that they give to the Turner when pounding over erratic rock piles and rooted sections should be a reminder to anyone who is moving up to a long-travel enduro racing machine to spend the money on a high-quality, stiff wheelset that has wide enough rims to stabilize tires in the neighborhood of 2.3 to 2.4 inches. It makes a difference.
Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro test 2016
You don't have to muscle the Turner. It only takes a small pull on the bars to make the RFX jump nose high.

Schwalbe Nobby Nic tires:Schwalbe's 2.35-inch Nobby Nic excels as a rear tire, but it falls short on hard-pack surfaces as a front tire. Up front, it grips well until it doesn't grip - and then all hell breaks loose. Pair the Nobby Nic in the back with Schwalbe's Magic Mary up front and the RFX would feel invincible in the turns.

Turner RFX v4.0 Enduro review 2016
The Turner's pedal-friendly rear suspension firms up slightly under power, which can send the tire in search of traction up steep pitches. Usually, it only required a slight weight shift to set things right.


Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesTurner's RFX v4.0 Enduro is the real deal. Considering that it is only their second carbon offering, we expected it to have at least one glaring shortcoming, but truth be told, it checks all the boxes. Dave Turner didn't overreach when he penned his first carbon fiber long-travel chassis. He incorporated trail-proven numbers and suspension metrics into a conservative frame design that was optimized for carbon construction methods - and that is a good thing.

Turner has been punching out winners in aluminum for over two decades, and has collected a substantial fan base along the way. The RFX v4.0 offers loyal customers a chance to make the jump to carbon and follow Turner into the future. And, for those new to the brand, test-riding an RFX will be an unexpected pleasure. David Turner is one of the more talented riders to occupy the top seat of a bike-making business, and his vision of the perfect mountain bike - versatile, balanced, and confidence inspiring - reflects a lot of saddle time. As an AM/enduro racer, the RFX v4.0 is all of those things - with a big serving of attitude. - RC


View larger-format and additional images in the review gallery.



About the Rider
Stats: Age: 38 • Height: 5'9” • Weight: 170lb • Industry affiliations: Owner, iMountainbike
Harold Preston hails from Johannesburg, South Africa, a skate boarder who discovered mountain bikes when he made his home in San Diego, California, in 2015. Preston is an all-mountain crusher, a well-respected rider among the area's gravity community, a mentor to a number of youths who have done well in national and international competition, and often a guide to pro riders who show up each winter. Harold was first rider to show RC around San Diego's secret trails and has since become a PB test rider and one of his most trusted friends. Most will recognize Harold as the rider who often appears in RC's photo shoots.



178 Comments

  • + 136
 "which allows for additional balls, and creates a bearing that is better suited for high loads at low shaft speeds"

Giggidy
  • - 20
flag chyu (Sep 14, 2015 at 2:27) (Below Threshold)
 This bike has more balls than your average ones.
  • - 22
flag carfreak2000 (Sep 14, 2015 at 7:00) (Below Threshold)
 How does he sit down with balls that BIG?
  • - 13
flag Nocturnal7x (Sep 14, 2015 at 8:07) (Below Threshold)
 Lol beat me to it.
  • - 12
flag yoshiro (Sep 14, 2015 at 8:36) (Below Threshold)
 But it prevents stripping, so how could we see those high load shaft n balls?


#nohomo
  • + 9
 Pretty much all good bearings are cageless these days. It's not particularly special. Can't keep my balls in a cage, no sir!
  • - 7
flag yutarosan (Sep 14, 2015 at 11:01) (Below Threshold)
 Bwaahha first thing i noticed too when lookin at the Addtional Balls diagram
  • + 1
 That's typical engineering speak but I see where they're coming from. The design creates lower ball friction and better lube distribution as well.
  • + 0
 Higher load capacity would be nice, but two balls suit me just fine thank you very much.
  • + 1
 I skipped right to the comments to see what people wrote about the additional balls
  • + 5
 MOAR BALLS!!!
  • + 2
 in the famous words of Archer... "seriously... is no one gonna touch that?"
  • + 122
 When I found out this bike had thru axles and disc brakes I stopped reading and decided to take my money elsewhere. I'll keep my 135mm quick release hubs and linear pull brakes thank you very much!
  • + 1
 @thebigschott
My thoughts exactly.
Damn the man! Save the Empire!
  • + 5
 You still rockin the biospace gears too? right on!
  • + 17
 Comment of the month! But personally, anything that doesn't retain the characteristics of the original Penny Farthing, isn't a real mountain bike.
  • + 1
 I heard Columbia is updating their Penny Farthing for model year 2016. The HA slacks by 0.25 degrees to 88 degrees overall. Trying to keep up with Santa Cruz I guess...
  • + 3
 "So you don't like old timey bikes eh?"
  • + 1
 Cant bend rotors if you don't have em!
  • + 69
 What's that? A threaded bottom bracket AND 142x12 rear hub? Let the comment section love flow for this fine steed!
  • + 5
 Apparently its a press fit according to the Turner forum on another site :/ I hope PB are correct, while a press fit wont stop me from buying one, its not exactly a selling piont in a very competitive market.
  • + 7
 you can see the bottom bracket in the photos above, and it's not press fit.
  • + 3
 BB looks like it could be from WMFG. Good option for any bike with a pressfit style BB if you want to use a HT2/GXP style crank. Got one on my CX bike, much better than the BB30 it was designed to take! tinyurl.com/WMFG-BB
  • + 5
 Now buy it because it is not boost compatible
  • + 9
 Its not a threaded shell, the diameter is too large, in fact...According to Turner's website....

"The RFX v4.0 utilizes a PressFit 30 bb (PF30). The bottom bracket shell is 73mm wide."

Praxxis and Wheels Manufacturing offer PF30 BB's which use shells and cups which thread together inside the frame to each other, doing the job of pressing themselves in, which have step down bearings to run shimano or sram 24 and 24/22mm cranks. Externally they look close enough to regular external cup english thread BBs that those uninitiated in the things would be fooled.

wheelsmfg.com/bottom-brackets/pf30-outboard/pf30-outboard-bottom-brackets/pressfit-30-to-outboard-bottom-bracket-for-24mm-cranks-shimano-black.html

www.praxiscycles.com/conversion-bb
  • - 14
flag ninjatarian (Sep 14, 2015 at 7:05) (Below Threshold)
 The pictures in the article show a threaded BB all day long (even if there's some trickery going on). Santa Cruz uses a threaded BB in their carbon frames as well; I wouldn't be surprised if they were manufactured in the same facility.
  • + 1
 Maybe a PF adapter with a threaded BB in it. It was an assortment of parts after all
  • + 2
 Enduro torqtite bottom.brackets have a threaded sleeve and come in any pressfit bb size...torqtite BBS are the shit, 2 year warranty on all of em..!
  • + 8
 @ninjatarian really? then why does it says "praxisworks" on the side of the bottom bracket cup ? They only make one kind of bottom bracket that has their brand label in that spot, and its not the english threaded ones.
  • + 5
 Nearly every Fuji made of carbon that I assemble has those Praxis adapters. I don't get it, just put the threads there to begin with. I understand the reduced manufacturing cost and reduced weight, for those that know their shit- that is an instant turn-off. I have seen so many S-Works PF cups work themselves out. Cannondale needs to be re-pressed every other ride to not creak. I mean, I would let my bike creak a little, but as a mechanic- these designs reflect on me to the "uninitiated."
  • + 3
 Pretty sure it's PF30 with external bearings for 24mm cranks. Though I'd be pleasantly surprised if it wasn't.
  • + 5
 If they used and adapter AND and external BB, that would be super stupid. Praxis did a great job creating a solution for a problem that shouldn't exist.
  • + 3
 Actually all the praxis BB really does is eliminate the need for an expensive press tool, since it installs using a standard shimano hollowtech 2 type BB cup wrench. I do find it amusing how on their web page they poo-poo on adapters yet THAT's how they got started in making BB parts for PF30/BB30... They must employ ex-politicians the way they're trying to hide their company history.
  • + 0
 Think how much wider that downtube/BB area could've been if we just accept PF BBs!
I would've liked to see an 8.2x2.5 shock like the proto DW RFX had a few years back but they did reduce the travel on this carbon version so I understand.
My mind is officially blown as to why no Boost 148 though?
  • + 2
 The Praxis BB aligns bearings, prevents loosening, and essentially takes us back to a threaded BB. It is great, but unnecessary before PF30.
  • + 1
 @gonecoastal
Why boost? It is literally the most pointless "improvement" made to bikes since....

Actually I can't think of anything as pointless as boost.
  • + 5
 Actually I can. The "brake pressure regulator" found here: www.pinkbike.com/news/outdoor-demo-day-1-randoms-interbike-2015.html
about as pointless as boost
  • + 1
 @gabriel-mission9
I'm seeing more bikes being released with Boost rear end including DH frames.
When I go to 650B I want the ability to switch wheelsets from AM bike to DH bike and visa versa. Boost seems to be a good idea on mini-link bikes as the lower link has the be squished between the BB and rear wheel still.

A few bike companies have said they DIDN'T make a new bike Boost due to lack of hubs, but now almost all the hub builders are coming onboard; including Chris King.

I'll give you a more pointless "improvement" made to a bike; QR15 front axles.
  • + 0
 But how does Boost actually help? Other than your wheels will fit other boost bikes. Moving the flanges 1mm further apart does almost nothing. The difference is fractions of a percent. AND that improved flange spacing can be achieved in sooooo many ways that don't involve buying a new frame. Its like moving your seat forward 2mm by buying a frame with a shorter tt, rather than just sliding the seat on its rails a bit. Utterly retarded.
  • + 2
 Ok first off its a net 6mm increase in flange spacing in the rear and 10mm increase in front, second there actually isn't any other ways to easily achieve the same improvement in the wheel strength and stiffness. Increasing the flange diameters won't do it because you'd need to increase it significantly, and that then puts a limitation on how many crosses you can achieve with the spokes, which then weakens the wheel again in terms of durability of the spokes. Really we (the whole industry) should have gone wider many years ago now. The last real increase in rear hub dimension standards was TWENTY FIVE years ago.
  • - 1
 Erm. What?

A) The hub gets 1mm longer. How does that allow for 6mm increase in flange spacing without the cassette/disc hitting the frame? I admit that the disc caliper can be moved outboard slightly on the rear, but that isnt the flange that wants moving, its the drive side flange that desperately needs to move outwards. Correct me if I'm wrong (I may well be) but I don't think boost improves the position of the drive side flange by much at all.

B) Ever hear of an offset rear end? Fixes the problem of uneven spoke tension in the rear wheel (which is a much much bigger prob than the flanges simply being too close), and uses standard components. At worst, it requires you to buy new spokes.

C) How is a 148mm hub any better than a 150mm hub? Hope 150mm hubs give you almost perfectly even spoke tensions on the rear. I don't believe the chainline argument at all. Moving the cassette (in the region of 45mm wide) 0.5mm in any direction isn't going to take a chainline from perfect to unworkable.

Don't get me wrong, I am perfectly ready to be corrected, I just don't see the advantage boost is claimed to give.
  • + 2
 A) Where do you get that the hub gets 1mm longer with boost? From something your best friends cousins sisters boyfriends college roommate told you ? Boost hubs grow 6mm in hub shell width in the rear (3mm per side) and the cassette and disc mounts move outboard as well compared to a 142mm hub.

B) Yes, I've built them many times. But uneven spoke tension isn't the goal of boost. The goal is to widen the base of the triangle to change the bracing angle the spokes tension the rim at.

C) Its better for two reasons but the first thing that you and dozens of others on here need to learn is that 150mm hubs only compare to 135mm hubs. Except for the thru-axle they function the same way as a QR skewer hub in that the hub end caps fit flush against the inside faces of the dropouts. The only rear hubs that operate the same way, in that the end caps fit into slots in the dropouts are 142, 148 and 157. But 142 and 157 were designed to the same rotor/cassette/flange position standard. All 157 does over 142 for the majority of hub makers that still use full length freehub bodies is increase the end cap lengths to allow a wider swingarm and more tire clearance. It doesn't actually make the wheel any stronger. 148 however actually does make the wheel stronger, at the same time as improving tire clearance possibilities for designers.
  • + 0
 A) My bad. I got the number 147 into my head. Must be a conglomeration of 142 and 157. Hard to keep up when they keep changing it every 5 minutes. But yes, I now get where you got the 6mm number from. So we have made the base of the triangle 6mm longer. This does indeed help. A little. However even spoke tensions would help a shed load more. The spokes on the driveside of boost hubs are still nearly parallel with the hub flange. Better than non-boost, but no where near the improvement given by an offset rear end or 150mm hub. This is the biggest issue regarding rear wheel strength.

C) 157 makes the wheel massively stronger than 142. It gives even spoke tensions (when flanges are positioned like hope do). Some hub manufacturers do position the non-driveside flange right next to the disc mount on their 150mm hubs. This gives better bracing angles yes, better than boost even, but also massively reduces the non-drive spoke tensions, leading to a weaker wheel.

157 gives no advantage over 150 other than offering a little cup for the end caps to sit into, making wheel fitting slightly easier.
The same is true for 142 over 135. Exactly the same performance, just with little cups to aid wheel fitting.

I now see that 148 gives improved flange spacing over 135/142, but not quite as good as 150 allows and still has the hugely uneve spoke tension issue. How is 148 any better than 150/157, or an offset 135/142, both of which solve the uneven tension issue?
  • + 2
 148 is better than 157 because its a fundamental change in hub design along with disc rotor and cassette positions for frame makers and it works well with 73mm width BB shells without increasing Q-factors. With few exceptions, 157 hubbed frames all run 83mm shells and have increased Q-factors. Not so important on DH bikes where riders only pedal for 6 minutes... but for people who actually expect to ride up the hill... widening your feet can play hell with your efficiency.
  • + 0
 Ok, so if you really can't deal with the added chain wear you might possibly see (only) when you are in the very easiest gear, I can see why 150/7 or an offset 142/35 might be a prob. But when compared to how much weaker your wheel has to be, I think buying a new chain every 10 months instead of 12 is a fair compromise. Better than buying new spokes and paying for a wheelbuild every 2 years instead of 4.

Really, you will only see increased chain wear in your very bottom gear. You know, that one you hardly ever use. You will always have a weaker wheel tho. And this still goes back to my "using standard equipment instead of having to fork out for new wheels when I buy a new frame" point.
  • + 1
 New spokes every 4 years? You must either be a crappy wheel builder, an abusive rider, or you pay for crappy built wheels.
  • + 0
 I'm pretty confident about my wheelbuilding.
If you've built many you will know what I mean when I say that when applying force to the rim, either while untwisting the spokes during building or hard cornering while riding, it is extremely difficult to flex the rim towards the cassette, but actually worryingly easy to flex towards the disc side. Even with the driveside spokes done up to the max specified tension on the rim. This is entirely due to the ridiculous amount of dish normal wheels require. It is literally right on the limit of what is possible.
The inherent flex combined with the massively differing spoke tensions, again right on the limit of whats possible, is why I tend to replace the spokes on lighter rear wheels that see a lot of use every few years. At least the driveside ones. Tbh I haven't done much off road riding on any wheels that require much dishing for a few years, its all been 150's or single speeds. The spokes on these will pretty much last forever, as they do not require huge compromises during the wheelbuild.

Yes boost will help cure this problem, but the difference really is minimal, and really the non drive flange shouldn't be getting any further from the hub center until the driveside has moved out enough to make the tensions at least vaguely level. Moving the non drive flange out is almost gonna make things worse at this point.

Offsetting the rear end would give better spoke tensions than boost and would require little more than new spokes. Q factor surely isn't a problem now everyones on 1x anyway. Just put the chainring on the outside of the tabs and you've suddenly got acres of room to play with. You could even widen the stays for bigger tyres if you must.

Total cost of changing to an offset rear end frame? New spokes + labour
about 40 quid.

Total cost of changing to a boost frame? New wheels, tubeless kit, and don't you need some sort of offset chainring anyway?
about 400 quid.

And the offset rear end arguably works better.

Oh and don't forget boost forks. Nevermind that 29ers and fatbikes have been riding around on 100mm qr wheels for years, suddenly the standard 20mm axle and flange spacing dh bikes have been using for god knows how long isn't good enough. Your super hardcore 27.5 xc bike needs boost or your front wheel is just gonna be too weak to rely on. Seriously, whens the last time you broke a front wheel?
  • + 1
 Boost isn't meant to be backwards compatible and people need to stop insisting on new innovations being compatible with their backwards components. I have a fat bike. Totally different hubs and rims to any of my other bikes. Didn't stop me from buying it. I won't limit my frame shopping to what wheels I already own and neither will millions of others and the bike industry knows that.
  • + 0
 Those 3.5mm slots aren't just for convenience, they shoulder some of the loads of the wheel so the axle isn't the only piece preventing independent movement.
It would be MUCH better if the axle were pinched. This would truly distribute the stresses.
PBers seem to love to hate on Ellsworth, BUT their (Manitou as well for that matter) rear axle addresses this.
If you are buying their bike- who cares about a new standard?! Just a frame; and you want to use clapped out, dated wheels?! Dumb.
Flange height can improve bracing angle, but at the expense of increased spoke stress and nipple angle.
6mm may not seem like much until you take the integral of the cross-sectional area. Then, it matters.
Not to most riders, but to the machines that determine the limits in the 1st place.
I ride a new bike everything ≈18 months. I'd feel gypped if shit hadn't changed.

I need to not read PBhyperbole.
  • - 1
 Shoulders do bugger all once axle is installed. Infact the spacers don't even really touch the shoulder once the axle is in.
The axle should be pinched yes.
Flange height can improve bracing angle, in return for DECREASED spoke stress and worse nipple angle. Moving the flanges does exactly the same thing, it doesn't somehow sidestep the stresses put on the nipple. However on well made rims with angled holes this isn't really a problem.
The integral of the cross sectional area doesn't matter. A sensible bracing angle + sensible spoke tensions matter.

I buy a new frame second hand whenever I need one. Having to buy new hubs, rims, tyres, cranks, forks, seatpost, every time I need a new frame is a big problem. For years we have had incremental changes that mean any bike can be upgraded. Occasionally some change comes along that does require new parts to fit, but the advantage is so great that it is worth it. Disc brakes are a prime example of this.

However these days we get non incremental changes. Now even the most insignificant change requires pretty much an entire new bike, and often offers no real advantage. Like boost. I am not even slightly tempted to buy an entire new bike just to move my flanges out 3mm. Im not even slightly tempted to buy a boost frame next time I need a frame, as that would mean buying pretty much an entire new bike in order to get it rolling. For no speed advantage, and next to no durability advantage. The slightly improved lifespan of wheels certainly isnt going to save me as much as it costs me to get in the first place. An offset rear end however would work better and only require spending a little on some new spokes. The improved lifespan of my rear wheel would then pay for itself pretty quickly.
  • + 0
 Ceteris paribus; the integral of volume is everything.
You will buy a new bike; it will have new technology. If you don't like it, search "vintage" on eBay.
  • + 0
 But everything else does not remain equal. Such as spoke tensions. That is my entire point. And as I said before, I am all for advances. Just not ones that do little more than advance the whole in my pocket. Boost is pointless. Disk brakes arent. I was perfectly happy to upgrade my frame forks and hubs when discs came along, as the advantages were real. I tried to think of a more recent example of a change to standards that really justified replacing almost everything on the bike. But I cant think of any. Gearboxes will be worth it. When they finally become mainstream. But thats gonna be a long time cos there's too much industry money tied up in drivetrains. No industry money tied up in on particular hub width tho, so they are free to change that as often as they want, in order to extract more money from you. Not improve the sport.
  • + 1
 That may be your opinion but it isn't mine or any of the brand designers who've adopted it. And the ones who will happilly buy a boost equipped bike far outnumber the ones who'd rather whine about it.
  • + 0
 Ill bet you more people moan about boost than buy boost equipped bikes...
  • + 32
 This build kit might just have been cobbled together from parts that were lying around, but in my mind it's perfect - low-end drivetrain and mid-range brakes with high-end suspension and wheels. When it comes to GX vs XX1, there's no difference in performance, just in weight, but there IS a huge difference in price - almost $1000 MSRP. Much better to save that cash for nice carbon wheels, where you save weight, improve acceleration AND increase stiffness. Same with Guide RS (or R) brakes vs Ultimates - if you don't need the extra functions and you aren't a weight weenie, you might as well stick with something solid and fully functional and get better suspension instead. Mixing GX and ENVE isn't all that eclectic to my eyes - it speaks to a smart consumer. I wish I saw it more often.
  • + 30
 "and the rear wheel tends to follow the front while braking hard into corners"... noted. Rear wheel follows the front. Now that's innovation.
  • + 11
 SHIT! I'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG THIS WHOLE TIME!!!
  • + 2
 Not to mention, "responds naturally to body English"...hmmm
  • + 22
 Thanks Pinkbike for saving my Monday morning (from that Ellsworth news)!
  • + 6
 Looks better than that Ellsworth for damn sure
  • + 10
 A lot of marketing being lapped up here - just because Turner say it is long and slack doesn't mean it is. 'Generous front centre measurement' - sorry, not having it. 431mm reach on a size large is tiny (my old size medium Specialized Pitch was 445mm), likewise the 'short' 438mm chain stays are anything but short, being about 20mm longer than 650b offerings from Specialized, Canyon and others. I'm not saying it's a bad bike, but on paper at least the geometry is still pretty old fashioned.
  • + 1
 Yeah marketing, but comparing geo numbers from different brands is a bit of apples vs. oranges. Being a current Turner Burner owner makes me think RFX geo numbers will make for one sweet riding bike!
  • + 2
 Geo numbers similar to Mojo HD3, Rocky Altitude, Tracer 275, some of the best bikes out there, and all better bikes than the Pitch.
  • + 1
 Yes, lies. 447mm on the 27.5 Burner is short?
  • + 1
 Nobody said that. Long chain stays for many people are the chief complaint against the Burner. To be clear, I would welcome the tucked rear wheel of the RFX after riding my Burner for a season.
  • + 1
 Know lots of guys with Burners, no one is complaining about the long stays.
  • + 0
 Compared to the 5 Spot I had before it they looooong. Not really a huge thing, but my Burner requires much more effort to bunnyhop effectively. Bike climbs like a champ, however.
  • + 6
 I loved Turner bikes for raw simplicity covering one of best suspensions and geometries out there and that carbon seems to try to play tribute to that past. Cool bike. Not sure though if applying square edge tubing shape goes well with carbon material... Anyways, I love it, would not hesitate for a moment to give it a try. All the best to Turner for staying true to simplicity without banals.
  • + 3
 It does look very sexy though.
  • + 0
 I hadn't really connected the dots until you said that, but the last carbon creaknfail I saw had a softspot on the seatstay which was squared. I'm sure square is a good shape there, but maybe not elsewhere where impacts will occur more randomly.
  • + 2
 I've never seen anyone use banal as a plural or a noun.

Did I learn something new today, or did you?
  • + 7
 You know the industry has changed a lot when you see the price of the top of the line build is "only" $6,5000 and catch yourself thinking "Oh, that's not too bad". *slaps self back to reality*
  • + 10
 I hope Ellsworth are reading this and taking notes
  • + 6
 ^^^ ...just read that.
  • + 7
 4.5k for the base version, I would have expected a higher price tag from a turner. Good job.
  • + 3
 I would expect a higher price tag from any brand. Turners are actually less expensive than even some of the big box brand names. A Turner Czar frame is $2,695; Giant Anthem Advanced frame is $2,500, but the rear triangle is aluminum. Giant is a Chinese company who manufactures their own bikes in China. Turner licenses the DW-Link; Giant does not. Tell me how this makes sense.
  • + 4
 Giant is Taiwanese, but they do have factories in both China and Taiwan. Meh
  • + 2
 sorry my bad. but yeah meh.
  • + 1
 Turner's warranty is 2 years only on defects, anything else is $600 trade-in on a new frame but IS transferable to another owner with the original sales receipt.

Giant's warranty is lifetime for the original owner on defects.

Manufacturing in china/taiwan only helps so much when US customs slaps duty and tariffs on it the moment its imported.
  • + 0
 Don't you live in Canada?
  • - 1
 I do, but turner's are made in the USA and therefore what canada customs charges makes no difference for explaining the prices of Turners and Giants in the USA.
  • + 6
 Turner's have a 2 year warranty but they seem to do better than that,i cracked a 4 year old DHR and they repaired it for free,had it powder coated the color of my choice and sent me a couple of decal kits.Pretty stand up company in my books.
  • + 3
 Lifetime warranty is great and all, but when it takes months for them honor it, not so much.

Giant Australia, looking at you... I know a bunch of guys who have cracked top tube/seat tube welds.
  • + 7
 Hello again, IH 6point) Now..in carbon!
  • + 4
 Even my dad knows who this guy is. He told me he had met him through off-road racing back in the day and that the guy knows how to fabricate. Never took much interest in any of the bikes until this one. Thing looks perfect.
  • + 5
 nice bike. I agree about the Nobby Nic. Makes a good rear tire for fast, aggressive riding. Would be nice to have in a supergravity casing... hint hint Schwalbe....
  • + 4
 Who would put nobby no grip on the front?!
  • + 0
 Have you tried the new nobby nic? it's a different beast altogether. especially in mixed conditions.
  • + 1
 Not since some of the very first ones which weren't great (understatement), it'd have to improved a lot to make me take the Magic Mary off the front! May give it a wirl on the back though if the do make a super gravity one like you said Big Grin
  • + 2
 Hey I'm from the future. There are E-Bike specific tires now!
  • + 5
 Another example how new "industry standards" are not only driving us nuts, but also represent a threat to smaller companies in the industry.
  • + 5
 Highly appreciating the external cable routing! (Except the one on the right chainstay but that's fixable).
  • + 2
 I am riding a 5 spot and it is one of the funnest, most durable bikes I have ever ridden. Beside catastrophic failure there isn't many bikes I would trade it for but maybe this one.
  • + 2
 Same. Riding an '09 5 Spot and haven't' come across a bike I'm willing to replace it with (aside from MAYBE the Transition Scout) until I saw this.

Plus, the low standover height of Turner bikes REALLLLY helps out someone who is 26 years old but stuck at 5'2". Nearly every other bike brand's size small racks my family jewels.
  • + 2
 Damn you Canadian dollar! This bike is so perfect. So nice that it takes a water bottle on the frame and fits the wheels and components I already own. Too bad there isn't an aluminum version
  • + 1
 been on the small prototype (medium would be my size) and it was bitchin; although just around the parking lot and some stairs. plush and stand up and climb without the soul sucking sag of an fsr. head angle slack for sweetness. looking forward to getting on a medium when I'm healthy.
  • + 1
 I rode an RFX today in San Diego at North of the Border bike shop / Turner's demo day. It felt like cheating. I've been riding a Mojo HDR w/ 180mm fork. (Trails were XC/AM -- Penasquitos / Tunnel 3 / Del Mar Mesa area with singletrack, small jumps, rock gardens, and some whoops.)

Pros
- Surprisingly light (sorry, forgot to ask exact weight)
- Cruises over rocks / roots compared to a 26". The bike is def faster than mine.
- Long TT on paper, but certainly didn't feel like it when riding.
- Whippy but neutral handling. Balanced F/R off jumps.
- Lots of front end traction. The bike didn't push or wash out in places I expected it to.
- Pedaled just as well as a Mojo HDR (no surprise)

Cons
- Just a bit slower uphill initially (27.5 wheel intertia maybe?) compared to my 26".
- Not free? (can't bring myself to buy one just yet)

Turner were awesome too. Very friendly and they made sure to set up the bike properly, and ask what I thought when I returned.
  • + 1
 there's a lot to like about this bike. DT should be especially applauded for top shelf fork spec and really nice shock spec on even the lowest priced build. Nice!!!

The derailleur routing on the top of the chainstay seems like a really bad choice though? A rubber stay guard that routes the cable inside and protected would be a really nice change.

Could have used a bit steeper seat tube. Though I guess if you use the slacker headtube insert it would also steepen the seattube? But not sure I'd want the lower BB that comes with that?

And personally I'd rather have boost on a new bike. Might as well just be as future proof as you can on any new bike purchase? It's an inevitable change, so might as well get with it now. And what's wrong with stiffer wheels?

A lot to like!
  • + 1
 Well Done to Mr Dave Turner for making another awesome bike.
Goes to show that hard work and countless years of R&D are not only worth it for his business... But also for the lucky people that buy this trail shredder.
142x12, threaded bb, and sweet geo numbers have got this thing looking spot on
  • + 1
 Seen the Marin Attack Trail anyone? Same/same saving a few parts of a degree here and there (and those sweet post mount dowel inserts). All of the ride characteristics mentioned line up with what I remember of the Marin too.

freehubmag.com/articles/marin-attack-trail-c-xt9-review
  • + 3
 so nice, I love Turners and their warranty policy! stick a 36 on there and that's my perfect bike
  • + 2
 Beautiful looking bike. I know they're nice bikes to ride but was never a fan of their swing arms, this looks the dogs danglies though.
  • + 3
 Does the rider bio really say that the tester of this new RFX started mountain biking in 2015?
  • + 1
 "driving the shock parallel with the seat tube. Call it antiquated"

RC, can you elaborate on this statement? Where are they supposed to mount the shock to make it cool? Top tube?
  • + 1
 @RC, can you elaborate more on the Debonair? I'm curious as to why the performance surprised you? My first choice of rear shock would be a CCDBair but perhaps that not necessary in this case?
  • + 3
 I mis admiring the weld quality from boutique bike companies. plastic is so ...plastic.
  • + 2
 You learn something new everyday. "Complete builds are... ride-checked...".
  • + 2
 I guess I've been desensitized by all the nearly $10k bikes out there, but this seems like a really good deal.
  • + 2
 too bad those proto 26-inch RFX had to be scrap, ill take one if theres one kicking
  • + 2
 me too
  • + 3
 Best bike I've ever had the pleasure of shredding
  • + 2
 Does anyone know where that trail is with the big berms? The picture right before the climbing and acceleration part
  • + 4
 Bangkok, Thailand
  • + 0
 sweet. plane tickets ordered!
  • + 0
 Nice bike! All the die hard Turner Alum fans are going to be Carbon converts just like that. Lol. I would give the Intense Tracer T275c the trail bike of the year award in the 650b category. Hands down.
  • + 1
 And what would win the the 26" category: a used bike?
  • + 2
 Finally a product that should make Pinkbike happy. If only was it pink though...
  • + 0
 You're forgetting about all the old schoolers who hate anything that isn't a DH race bike...
  • + 3
 Glad they dumped the iron-horse-esque elevated chainstay
  • + 2
 One cool thing about those e-stays is they would allow for extremely short chainstays. We're talking like sub-400mm if DT so desired. I had a brief conversation with DT about it via email, and unfortunately he has no interest at all in designing something like that. Kind of a shame in my opinion. It seems like the new Canfield Riot is getting nothing but positive feedback. I'd love to see how something like that rides. Maybe not under 400mm necessarily, but at least down to 415mm or so with 650b wheels and DW Link suspension.
  • + 1
 @hamncheez With the exception of the DHR and Kahn, the traditional chainstays are only found on Turner's two carbon frames.

This RFX looks sick, though. I hope Dave sells a ton of em.
  • + 1
 The elevated, drive side chainstay puts a ton of stress at the junction of the chainstay and the protuberance that connects to the lower link. There is a compression force with each pedal stroke, bending it back and forth. There is stress in the opposite direction each time the suspension is compressed or a bump is hit. Nearly every single ironhorse frame with that design ended up cracking when ridden hard. Carbon probably holds up better, but this is exactly the kind of fatigue failure that aluminum is infamous for.
  • + 2
 Have the Turner frames with the elevated chainstay been known to fail in the same way?
  • + 2
 Dave's been using that elevated stay since 09 on the DW bikes, hasn't been a problem. IH had issues for sure though.
  • + 1
 I have ridden the ever living hell out of my 09 5Spot with no issues. Just this season did the original pivot bushings need replacing. Bullet proof bikes.
  • - 2
 "The RFX V4.0 has ball-bearing pivots instead of composite bushings" My 2005 Giant Reign had bearings in all the pivots so was it ahead of it's time. I took it for granted that all bouncers above at least £900 had bearings !
  • + 2
 @Skadakar . I have no idea about Turner's suspension history. The comment I quoted made it sound as if bearings are a new discovery.
  • + 1
 @Skadakar Depends on your weight. If you're on the lighter end of the scale, a bushing rear end can feel very sticky, kinda like a fork with new seals(but forever.) heck, I replaced a bushing with a needle bearing in one of the shock mounts on my bike & it's night & day.
  • + 3
 make an aluminum one
  • + 3
 for the same price, I'd go aluminum every time.
  • + 3
 hate if you want, but I hate carbon fiber, and I only ride US made frames.
  • + 1
 I don't buy "bikes". I buy frames, and probably one of the most important things to me is material. oh and 26 for life.
  • + 2
 Don't you just love it when measurements are given in imperial and metric
  • + 2
 Aaaand I just fapped myself dry! Me gusta!
  • + 1
 Reach a bit on the short side, and a 30.9 seatpost means no 150mm Stealth Reverbs. But I think I could live with it...
  • + 3
 I still have a 150mm Reverb stealth in 30.9? Were they discontinued?
  • + 1
 Seem to have been. Looks like KS is the only option for a 150mm 30.9 currently. Maybe RS will re-release the 150/30.9 at Interbike.
  • + 1
 Good to know. I guess the RF and Easton posts will be too, once they're available, since they're based on the 9point8 design.
  • + 2
 Gravity Dropper.
  • + 2
 Not made in the USA, not interested. Guerilla Gravity FTW
  • + 3
 same here, I was excited to see turner step up to the enduro plate, till I saw Taiwan. hoping for a U.S. made aluminum one soon
  • + 2
 san diego trails! where is that first set of berms at?!?
  • + 1
 Does anyone know the shock length? 200x57mm or 216x63mm?
  • + 1
 RFX or UZZI... hmmmm....

www.intensecycles.com/bikes/uzzi
  • + 2
 I need more balls
  • + 4
 I appreciate your candor, but question your choice of venue for such an announcement.
  • + 2
 They ride beautifully. I loved my 5 spot! Just aesthetically.......meh
The ride is far more important Smile
  • + 1
 rismtb? is that you Lance Amstrong?
  • + 1
 icas are you saying balls ride beautifully? Not an image ineeded. This reminds me of something: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLxg0dbvokQ
  • - 2
 Turner makes such good bikes and I don't believe better customer service exist. Don't care for the dowels at the rear brakes or threaded bosses for the cable routing (more parts to lose). I guess it's a small issue
  • + 5
 @milohead Those dowels are awesome because you'll never strip or booger a brake mount bolt (which I have done). Just replace the dowel (which you won't since they are hardened to the point of being idiot proof). Miss you bro!
  • + 3
 I Second the dowels...My 5 Spot and now my Burner both employ dowels at the brake bosses. I've not stripped one yet, nor have they ever come loose. As far as the cable routing goes, unless I'm standing there, actually standing there looking at it, I don't notice the cables at all while riding.
  • + 2
 @milohead get a parts tray and some loctite (blue) and this shouldn't be an issue. For the people that service their own bikes this design in a godsend. Turner bikes are so easily serviced and maintained
  • + 1
 Still the most balanced and perfected enduro bike out there
  • + 0
 Put Enduro in the name just to emphasise the sweet hucks you'll be doing while riding
  • + 1
 do you complain when it says xc on bikes too? It says what it is for. king of like gt cars. . .
  • + 0
 Looks like it's made of the same stuff your chocolates come in in a chocolate box!
  • + 1
 that would be a very expensive chocolate box
  • + 1
 I'll swing a leg over for a rowdy test drive.
  • + 1
 God bless Turner. No Sram Boost Hub. No PF BB. No internal cable routing.
  • + 0
 Am I the only one that does not like this bike... how am I to explain to my wife that I need another bike now.... haha
  • + 1
 Hello iron horse is that u?
  • + 1
 ...
  • + 1
 so enduro
  • + 0
 Turners rule
  • - 2
 It's a trance
  • + 1
 I do remember thinking the prototype DW link 5 spot looked like a home made 'erector set" Trance.

However I don't think that's a fair statement of the RFX 4. I think it's got a unique enough look compared to all the other carbon bikes that have been out there for so long.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.155836
Mobile Version of Website