First Ride: Whyte T-130C

Oct 19, 2015
by David Arthur  

British company Whyte Bikes have launched the Whyte T-130C, a carbon fiber version of its mid-travel, 130mm trail bike - and for the first time, the range will be available in the US. As well as a claimed 580g frame weight reduction and an 11-percent stiffness increase, the new bike also features Boost 148 rear-wheel spacing, as well as the single-chainring specific design from Whyte's previous, aluminum model launched this time last year.

Riders have a choice of two builds with the T-130C, both using the same frame (even the same paint job is the same). The range-topping T-130C Works (£4,599 /$5,499) combines a Fox 34 Kashima fork with a Float DPS Kashima shock, a Shimano XT transmission, a smattering of carbon in the cockpit, and a Race Face Next crankset.

For the more value-minded customer, the more affordable T-130C RS (£3,499 /$4,399) swaps Fox for RockShox dampers and keeps the price down with SRAM Roam 40 wheels, SRAM gearing and Guide RS brakes. Both bikes have a RockShox Reverb Stealth dropper post.

T-130C Details:

• Intended use: Trail riding
• Travel: 130mm
• Wheel size: 27.5"
• Full carbon fiber main frame, aluminum swingarm
• Single-chainring-specific design
• Boost 148 rear axle
• 67-degree head angle
• T-130C Works (£4,599 /$5,499) - T-130C RS (£3,499 /$4,399)
• Available: UK in December, US in January
• Contact: USA, UK


The Whyte T-130 is a mid-travel 27.5” trail bike and was launched this time last year with three aluminum models. This year the range is joined by two carbon fiber models, featuring a main frame made from unidirectional carbon fiber with internal cable routing, a tapered head tube and a clever, “Intergrip” integrated seat clamp system. Whyte claims the frame is 580g lighter, six-percent stiffer in the head tube, and 11-percent stiffer as a whole.

New Whyte T-130C
The carbon fiber frame saves a whopping 580g over its aluminum counterpart.

The T-130 retains the aluminum rear triangle and short suspension linkages of the previous model, and introduces a Boost 148 rear axle. All RockShox-equipped models also get a Pike Boost 110mm front-end as well. The bike is also designed specifically for 1x11 (there’s no way to fit a front mech’ at all) and the wider rear axle has helped to provide more clearance between the tire and frame, a good thing in the muddy UK, where the company’s UK focused designs have seen the popularity of the brand increase over the years. The frame even retains the Crud Catcher mudguard mounts on the down tube and the frame has an external threaded bottom bracket. The new carbon bike features the same Quad 4 suspension design, which comprises a main pivot just above the bottom bracket and a short rocker linkage mounted to the seat tube. The main frame maintains similar lines to the aluminum model, with a sloping top tube for plenty of clearance and space for a water bottle inside the front triangle.

The aluminum Whyte T-130 was well received, a mid-travel bike with the sort of geometry you normally find on a longer travel bike. Whyte’s thinking behind the T-130 is that just because it’s a short travel bike, doesn’t mean it has to have the steep and short geometry numbers you’d expect on a mid-travel bike, and it’s a recipe that many people found provided a very capable trail bike in the aluminum T-130. Whyte actually uses pretty much the same geometry from its old 150 bike in this new T-130. How times have changed.

New Whyte T-130C
The small rocker linkage manages to squeeze 130mm of rear-wheel travel from the Fox DPS shock.

New Whyte T-130C
The 110mm-axle Pike Boost fork matches the widened, 148mm Boost rear end.

Whyte has noticed that there’s been a trend to size up in recent years, and its bikes have been stretched out in response. Whyte felt geometry was evolving too much over the past few years to commit to the high expense of opening up a carbon mold, but feels the time is right now to offer a carbon version. The new bike will be offered in just three sizes - medium, large, and X-large - and the seat tube is 25mm shorter on each size as well. A large measures in with a 67-degree seat angle, 73.5-degree seat angle, 631mm top tube, 449mm reach, 420mm chainstays and an 1176.5mm wheelbase.

Five Minutes With the Designer

Pinkbike sat down with Whyte Bikes designer Ian Alexander to find out a bit more about the new T-130C, and where it fits in the market.

It’s a mid-travel bike, but you say it isn’t short on capability?

We’re much more interested in nailing a really good trail bike, and to do that we had to design a bike with its capability in mind. Its capability and its limitation, and the design, was the limiting factor of the bike. I think the limiting factor of any bike should always be outside of my control, something like suspension, travel, or ultimate grip from the tires - it should never be the geometry of the bike. You shouldn’t be riding down the trail thinking ‘I could go faster if I had a slacker head angle’ or longer front center, or the bars were wider. Trying to design to the limiting factor, which is not anything to do with the geometry or shape or numbers of the bike.

So to do that the 130 bike has geometry of our previous 150 bike, geometry more akin to a longer travel bike than a 130 bike. And that is very deliberate. We want the limiting factor to be the amount of travel the bike has, not its shape or angles.

There’s a trend for sizing up to a larger frame, the new bike takes this into account?

If you put our medium up against everybody else's bikes, our medium would be the length of most people’s size large. Our large is the size of some extra larges from other brands. And so on. And that's partly because we can run the shorter stems available, stem design has come a long way, so you can now have a 32mm stem in the new 35mm diameter size, so why not utilize that and use the shorter stems. So that’s predominantly the thinking behind that, instead of having to size up, which a lot of people do now. So we’ve designed a bike longer in the first place.

New Whyte T-130C
No messing about - a short stem and wide handlebar is fitted out of the box.

New Whyte T-130C
A creak-free zone. An external threaded bottom bracket provides good durability and easy maintenance.

Sizing has evolved a lot of the years then?

We’ve certainly evolved. Part of the reason we’ve only gone carbon now, is we’ve been evolving for the last three years. The geometry has moved. This year it has gone longer, and it’s only now we feel we can invest in carbon molds. If you look at some bikes laid down in carbon three years ago, they’re significantly shorter compared to our bikes. Over the last three years our bikes have got longer. We’re happy with the lengths of our mid-travel bikes now that we can cut some molds, and still be ahead of brands bikes.

Will designed-in-the-UK bikes work well in the US, now that they’ll be available there soon?

I think a progressive bike that works well in the UK will work will anywhere in the world. I think the direction of travel and design direction in mountains bikes is pretty obvious, I think when you look at things like how far downhill bikes have evolved over the years, I see no reason why that hasn’t applied to enduro, mid-travel and even cross-country bikes. For sure there’s been such a lot of change, enduro racing has come and completely reinvented what a 160mm bike is thanks to that format of competition, and we have responded in the same way, our enduro bike is now very specific to that discipline. The requirements are reflected in that bikes design.

With that enduro focus, does that leave mid-travel bikes to have a wider potential audience?

A 160mm bike is a pretty specific product now, and that does leave a gap for a proper good mid-travel bike. One of the T-130C carbon programs first priorities was to make a very capable bike, one that’s not grounded in a cross-country roots, but something that is firmly grounded in trail bikes, and hence its geometry is much more like a 150mm trail bike, than a short-travel cross-country bike. Our priority was to hit a stiffness target: it’s 11-percent stiffer in head tube, overall chassis stiffness is six-percent stiffer, even using the same aluminum rear triangle. Once we hit the stiffness and strength targets, we brought weight into the equation. That was the order. Weight was down the list, the third priority. We ended up being 580g lighter, after all of that engineering. I’m sure we could have been lighter, if we had chased weight, but when you put the capability of a 150mm bike into a 130mm bike, the bike has to be able to cash the cheque (if you like) for the harder riding it’s capable of. We have a 130mm bike with a broad range of capabilities.

Have you made any changes to the suspension?

No, we’ve carried over the kinematics. We design a very flexible kinematic, it’s not reliant on a particular shock, or damping tune, it’s very tunable for personal preference. With the compression, we try not to design a bike that’s reliant on low speed compression to pedal, you can pedal the bike without any low speed compression. Just a reliable and very flexible kinematic that is easily tunable.

bigquotesIt pops and skittles down the trail, it can be easily placed wherever you need it, with a lightness that compels you to keep the speed up and the smiles broad.

I headed to the Forest of Dean with Whyte Bikes, a hugely popular trail center with a thriving cafe and choice of cross-country and downhill tracks, to put the new bike through its paces. I took out a size large T-130C Works bike with Fox dampers and made the most of some pretty good conditions to see what the new bike can do. And it was immediately obvious the T-130C is an impressively capable bike, just as Whyte had intended it to be. It pops and skittles down the trail, it can be easily placed wherever you need it, with a lightness that compels you to keep the speed up and the smiles broad.

It’s a hard-charging and energetic bike, with precise and very direct handling that helps you whip it from apex to apex. I felt pretty good with the geometry, the 67-degree head angle didn’t feel immediately steep, and the length felt good. The 50mm stem and 760mm bars provided plenty of leverage through the winding singletrack. I was soon at home on the Whyte. It’s light (this build comes in about 28lb, but I didn’t have my scales to verify that) and it provides the acceleration you’d expect to find in a cross-country bike, but it’s balanced and very stable when slamming into rooted corners, in a way that reminds you of a bigger bike.

Out of the saddle and it climbs smartly, making easy progress up the steeper climbs. Seated climbing reveals rear suspension that sits up well in its travel and doesn’t squash down when inching up steeper gradients. The suspension is well-balanced front to back, the rear feels firm and taut, giving back plenty of energy when you pop the bike out of a corner. There’s good support through the travel, and it makes good use of the available travel, certainly doesn’t blow through it too easily or ramp up harshly. It’s easy to tune, but I’d want to spend more time fiddling with it to really find its sweet spot. With little time to dial it in though, the T-130C was adept on the rooted trails around the Forest of Dean.

New Whyte T-130C

bigquotesThe suspension is well-balanced front to back, the rear feels firm and taut, giving back plenty of energy when you pop the bike out of a corner.

It might only have 130mm of travel, but I didn’t feel like I was coming up shortchanged on some of the faster sections or landings of the various drops and jumps. The Boost rear-end certainly helps here. Unfortunately, I didn’t get the chance to ride the RockShox model with the Boost version of the Pike fork to see how that compares to the Fox 34 on this bike. The stiffness of the carbon frame is present though, in the way the bike responds to your inputs, with no discernable deflection.

What the T130C isn’t going to do is trouble a 160mm-travel bike on the more challenging trails, but for blasting around local trails and bagging trail centers at the weekend, it’s a real blast. And it puts the fun back into mountain biking that some mid-travel bikes can kill with dated geometry. It flatters you and provides enough capability that you can approach the bikes limits, without the fear that you have to push your own limits beyond what you’re comfortable doing.

Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesI'll admit my time on the T-130C was limited to a first impression, certainly not a full in-depth review. More time in the saddle and a wider range of trails would be needed to really get under the skin of this new bike, but it's clear that Whyte has built a solidly capable trail bike that isn't stunted by the amount of travel it's packing - and the whole range is packaged with some really smart details. If you want some of the capability of a longer travel (dare I say it enduro) bike but with a light build well suited to cross-country trail rides, the T-130C should be on your shopping list. - David Arthur

MENTIONS: @whytebikes

Author Info:
davidarthur avatar

Member since Apr 12, 2015
73 articles

  • 79 2
 Saying the Boost rear end helped it on faster sections and on big landings is a bit of a stretch, surely?
  • 54 2
 Nah it clearly boosts the bikes abilities...
  • 32 0
 I can think of 148 reasons why that's so wrong
  • 52 0
 You've got 148 problems and your Boost ain't one?
  • 65 2
 Yeah, Aaron Gwin wins the world cup overall on a bike with a 135 x 12 back end, but this 130mm trail bikes needs, positively needs to be 148 x 12, it just won't survive without it!
  • 10 0
 lol yea that^
  • 22 1
 I stopped reading at boost.
  • 8 0
 I bet that in a double blind test, the number of people guessing correctly that they were on boost or not would be the same as rolling a two-sided dice. There is an argument for long-term spoke durability, however.
  • 18 0
 But the Boost rear end will fix that creaky bathroom door, make you soup when you are ill and get your girlfriend pregnant. Not many 135mm dropouts will do that.
  • 7 0
 Ray have you gone mad. Boost is the answer to all your rear end stiffness ;D
  • 4 1
 I think the main reason for the boost is to help them with tyre clearance seeing as they've struggled with that on some of their previous bikes.
  • 3 0
 As for Aaron gwin on a 135, 15 is much much stiffer than any other standard. It's like how 26 will always be stiffer than 29. Stiffer frame wise.
  • 14 8
 I bet in a double blind test everybody would crash from being blind while riding a bike Big Grin
It was a joke so don't be mad.

Truth is the wider rear end makes building sturdier wheels a little cheaper and allows for smarter engineering on 1x11 setups. In a double blind test the potential to save money for manufacturers clearly leans in the direction of boost. Add to it that bikes have been good for almost 10 years so to keep the market growing they have to invent new stuff, and stir in a pinch of jaded acceptance and voile! you can quit yur bit#chin about boost!
  • 5 5
 To be fair, the wheel is probably noticeably stiffer if you're riding hard. It's not the wider dropout, but the widening of the spoke flanges
  • 1 3
 Scott should have boost up their Gambler.
  • 9 2
 Are all of you missing the fact that this has a threaded bb instead of press fit? Boost this, boost one is giving praise for this bikes killer looks and threaded BB! Boost is probably here to stay, and with plenty of good reasons that all of you want: It makes the bikes better with hardly any additional cost, wider tire clearance, and shorter chainstays...
  • 3 1
 lol how did I get neg propped for stating a simple engineering fact? Any freshman in a statics course could draw you a force diagram and all that jazz. Some of y'all are so butt hurt about industry changes you don't agree with that you can't even listen to facts!
  • 1 0
 ^^ neg propping you now lol
  • 2 0
 The issue is whether it is noticeable or not. I don't think they teach that in statics. I think a cheap wheel will be noticeably stiffer, but high end wheels are plenty stiff already, to the point where it won't feel any different compared to a 142 rearend.
  • 34 1
 Looks like a very clean and well thought out frame Smile

Some small things...

"The small rocker linkage manages to squeeze 130mm of rear-wheel travel from the Fox DPS shock."
Under the pic of the RockShox shock

"A large measures in with a 67-degree seat angle, 73.5-degree seat angle"
Too many seat angles
  • 12 5
 Also, Specialized called...
  • 15 2
 I shot the RockShox bike because that was the model Sam was riding, but my first ride impressions are based on the Fox model that I actually rode previous to the shoot. Would probably have made more sense to photograph the Fox bike, but there you go. My bad
  • 5 0
 Let you off this time, but don't do it again ;-))
  • 10 0
 one question, you say you didnt get to ride the rockshox damped model and yet, in all the pictures, we see rockshox? whats going on?
  • 16 4
 Looks like a stumpy
  • 2 3
 Ha Ha, or an Orbea Occam...
  • 8 1
 "The small rocker linkage manages to squeeze 130mm of rear-wheel travel from the Fox DPS shock."
Strange Rock Shox looking Fox shock then...
  • 3 0
 Just fyi boost 148 allows for the bearings and flanges of the hub to be further apart, which means that the spokes will be at a wider angle where they meet the rim which means that the wheel will be stiffer, so I dont know about you guys but I like my wheels to be as stiff as possible. Regardless boost is here to stay so hate on it all you want but in 10 years or so or even sooner when you all get rid of the bikes you have now you will be riding it because that will by that point actually be a standard.
  • 2 0
 Looks nice bike. I had a t129 (2014) got fed up with limited tyre choice and poor rear suspension. Changed to a stumpjumper 2016 with a SHORTER top tube, the bike turns and jumps LOADS better, makes me wonder about this long geometry, oh it also has longer chainstays (comes with 2.3 rear tyre)
  • 3 0
 Nice to see they've added an XL to the range. I very nearly bought one last year but the large alloy one I test ride was just too small
  • 1 0
 To be honest guys so what if this new bike looks like something else, if it works on our home trails bring it on! Of all the bikes I've owned and gladly sold there's one I'll never let go of, a 2004 Whyte 19. I hope this new one from Whyte is just as good cos I need something to restore my faith in the kooky world of bike design.
  • 3 0
 They're so popular over here and everyone who has ridden a whyte bike seems to rave about them.
  • 1 0
 I ride t129, granted its been upgraded somewhat with beefier forks etc, but it's one of the most fun bikes I've ridden over the years. Value for money wise (final build cost was about £2,800) it'd be hard to find the same trail ability without spending silly money imho.

That said, until they sort out the tyre clearance issues on the back end, they'll always be open to some criticism, especially considering the UK-based design philosophy (tyre clearance being critical over here with the amount of liquid sunshine that falls on the trails!!!)
  • 1 0
 I brought a G150 last winter. Absolutely love it, swapped the bars and grips the rest was good to go. They even swapped my bearings F.O.C. Great company
  • 1 0
 I've got a 2013 Whyte 905, loads of tyre clearance probably because it's 26" rather than 29er. I actually ride DH trails more than trail centres despite being a XC/trail 120mm hard tail. I guess that shows how good the geometry and parts are..? i'll never sell it, just maybe buy an additional bike with 160mm travel on both ends for riding faster down the gnarly stuff
  • 1 0
 Whyte R7 Series - best commuters hands down. Can get all urban enduro with them when needed.
  • 1 0
 Had a go up and down the road at the back of work on the Carbon Works. Feels so nice and smooth. The front end is also really light and poppy. Would be a great fun bike for ragging round the woods.
  • 4 4
 More of the same...give me an aluminum frame with threaded BB, 180mm travel, and air shock with climb switch that I can build to a 29-32lb. bike. My 2000 Bullit frame is still going and it weighs 6.7 pounds with an air shock. It was mostly retired in 2012 but it endured DH races, XC races, Park days, and countless epic rides between California to Maine.

The Bullit frame was roughly $1k back then and that inflation adjusts to about $1300 today. More of that price to weight and durability ration please.
  • 2 0
 That post was a call for affordability, durability, and reasonable weight that was the standard 10 years ago. Seems like an odd thing to disagree with.
  • 1 1
 Very similar to the Orbea Occam, great bike and believe 160mm bikes are now too Enduro for most peoples riding. Slack, short travel makes for a great attacking trail bike. have a demo Occam.
  • 2 0
 What do people think of the g160?
  • 1 0
 I just preordered one. Looks great to me. Great build, and geo looks good. Love the looks.
  • 2 0
 Ive ordered the cheaper rs model for demo this weekend so i can take it out against a Trek slash 8 be interesting as its between those two for my next bike.
  • 1 0
 I ordered the RS too. The Works model isn't available until January over here. There was an article comparing the Slash and g160 that I just read, but can't seem to find now. I'll keep looking and post a link. The Whyte took the trophy. I was looking at the Slash before reading the article. But riding is a lot better than reading about it. Let me know what you think.
  • 1 0
 Yeah i will let you know how it compares I've read good reviews on both but the whyte is £400 cheaper so be good to see
  • 1 0
 I would just like to correct myself for anyone I led astray. The G-160 Works model is available for preorder for November delivery here in the US. Got that mixed up with the T-130 Works which will be available in January.
  • 2 0
 I got to test ride the G160 on saturday just to warn you the sizing is odd. Im 6ft and the medium fit me. I was told by the staff at the bike shop that the medium top tube length is longer than a specialized enduro XL's. The rear end felt quite stiff to because they've shortened the linkage to make room for a bigger shock. The BB height is really low and i hit the pedals quite a few times i thought it was just me but when i returned it they said that everyone who has borrowed that bike has said the same not saying its a bad bike but it really doesnt feel as though i was riding a big AM bike with 160mm. It is a good bike but i wasnt impressed but hey thats my opinion. But the shop did say theyve not had much good feedback from the customers who have had it on demo. as opposed to the g150 where nearly everyone who demod a g150 went on to buy one.
  • 1 0
 Thanks for the feedback nige-dh. Too bad you didn't like it. I've considered getting the T-130 and keeping my Bronson.

My biggest concern was the sizing as I'm 6' 4" and I was worried the large would be too small. It doesn't sound like it will be a problem. If you don't mind me asking, how much seatpost was exposed? I ran some calculations and I'm going to be right at the max extension on the Reverb.

The bottom bracket height is a little concerning. However I just measured my other bikes and they are both lower than the G160. Sagged and riding height might be a different story, though.

I guess I'll see how rides in a couple weeks. How did you think it climbed? Was there pedal bob and could you stand up and pound? Sorry for all the questions.
  • 2 0
 Sizing wont be an issue it was the biggest medium ive ever ridden. The guys at the bike shop said that nearly everyone who demod a g150 bought one but everyone who demod a g160 havent really like it they think it's becaus they've fiddled with the linkage and messed it up a bit and whyte dont go to much lengths to tune the shock to their bike and linkage like trek, sant cruz and other manufacturers do. But i cant comment on the g130. I cant say how much seat post was showing but i managed to get it to a height i like but im only 6ft. It was a stelth reverb and by the time i had it set i didnt have much hose showing at the front of the bike i pulled most of it through the internal routing. I had an 2013 nomad and i never had an issue with pedal bashing on 170mm cranks. But these i hot more times in a day then i ever had. Climbing felt fine just like my old bike once the shock was locked out it was good get a little bit of pedal bob from the shock because rockshox lock out isnt complete lock out like fox's. But it is still enough to minimose the bob. On smooth flowy trails with jumps berms and drops it felt freat it was when i did the more burley rock gardens and harsher stuff is where i didnt think it was good as the trek that i tried. I wouldnt take my word as gospel though because im a good rider but not the dogs danglers. But in my opinion it wasnt for me and im happy to spend the extra on the trek slash
  • 2 0
 Also forgive my spelling haha its not the best when im on my phone
  • 1 0
 Thanks so much for the feedback! No worries about spelling. Phone typing sucks. I hope you like Trek. It looks like a sweet bike. It never really crossed my mind in my bike search, but I usually avoid the big three brands just out of habit. I just have a few weeks to wait for the G160. I love the looks, the build and the geo. I'll just have to see if it all comes together for me.
  • 2 0
 Yeah man cheers the g160 looks awesome and the geo and stuff is bang on so it may work for you the whyte come with a shorter stem and wider bars than the trek and comea with some fast rolling wtb tyres nobbly up front and semi slick on the rear which i was a fan of
  • 2 0
 Mine is supposed to show up today. I'll give a report as soon as i ride it
  • 2 0
 Krahamgoats have you been able to ride yet? Just got my G-160 RS a couple days ago. Loving it! Still dialing in the suspension. Just getting used to the ride. Long, low, and slack. Had to go with a longer stem and different grips. Such a sweet looking bike.
  • 1 0
 Longer stem!? The front end is so long I can't imagine you'd need that. But yes I did get a chance to ride and i understand what nige-dh felt with it being so long and low and having some pedal strikes. My last bike was a 2011 cove g spot which a a lower BB than the previous bike and i had a few strikes at first but it just takes a few rides to get used to where your pedals are. Same with the G 160. (I like bikes that start with g) I first rode the bike on a few short sections of trail with tight bermed corners to see how the longer wheelbase would work and found it to rail quite nicely. But the bike didn't truly come alive till I pedaled to the top of my favorite local trail (Rat Pack in Cle Ellum Wa). Once this bike gets up to speed you really start to appreciate the roomy front end. It's very stable yet flickable. Going off jumps it feels like it wants to get sideways. The more I rode the more I liked it. The other bike I was considering was a Transition Patrol and a guy at the trailhead had one and let me ride it. It felt comfortable right away but it was alot like my old cove. I'm happy with my choice and won't be taking advantage of the money back guarantee. The extreme geometry takes a little getting used to but it works. I recommend the Whyte G160
  • 1 0
 Yeah, I'm testing a 50mm and 70mm stem. I'm 6'4" which puts me above their recommended hight. I think I'm going to go with the 50mm and a 35mm riser bar. Seems to be the way to go.

I am getting pedal strikes as well. I changed the rear tire to a Minion DHR2, because I had it laying around. That helped some. I'm adjusting to the lower bb, but it'll take time. I might go a little less sag to see if that helps. I run usually run 35% sag, so I can afford to go to 30% and still have it feel plush. I love the long, low and slack, but I really wish there was about 5mm more BB hight.

This bike is so amazing! I've never had a bike climb like this one. I have a Yeti SB95 that climbs like a goat. The G-160 is some-how better. You can really lay the power down and not get wheel spin. I thought the OEM Riddler tire on the back would spin out, but nope. It just held firm. The only reason I changed the tire was for a little more height. Also while climbing or descending, the bike is just so stable. If I come to a compete stop, normally I would have to put a foot down, but this thing just says get it together and let's go already. All I have to do is take a second to collect myself and I can keep going. I've cleared stuff I've never cleared before - up and down. I've only had it for a week, and I don't even have the cockpit setup how I would like it. I wish Whyte would do an XL, 660+mm top tube, 30mm stem so I could use this bike the way it was fully designed to be ridden.

I have the RS model and the Sram/WTB build is superb. Pike, Monarch, Reverb, Guide brakes, X1, Asym wheels. The drivetrain has almost no drag. So nice! The wheels are wide and the suspension is so plush. What a great bike! I won't be taking advantage of the return policy either.
  • 2 0
  • 2 0
 Oh crap damn iphone
  • 3 2
 (SPECIALIZED CAMBER) Look and the geometry are almost identical.
  • 1 0
 Except it has the wrong wheelsize.
  • 1 0
 Specialized has both- 27.5 and 29'' wheel size.
  • 1 0
 Yeah but at 120mm 29" destroy 650b.
  • 2 1
 Head tube a couple of degrees out, seat tube a few more, top tube length 20mm difference in the large. Might look close on paper but in reality these things add up to a very different ride.
  • 2 0
 Tufty- is your choice in difference with the Whyte or the Specialized ?

My comment was pointing out that the T-130 is not an original bike; it is just a copied version of the Camber. Just like a lot of companies copy the Trek-Session.

Though The Whyte may be slightly more "ENDURO".
  • 1 0
 When you say copied do you mean the suspension design? Because there are only so many ways to do rear suspension on a bike. We have had variations on the 4 bar since, and I might be wrong here, AMP research started making them many moons ago.
If we are talking geometry though I wouldn't say they are overly similar. Small changes in angles are actually fairly big changes in reality
  • 1 0
 Are they cool with putting a 140 on the front?
  • 1 0
 how does this compare to a kona process 134. nice bike either way.
  • 1 0
 Lighter ?
  • 2 2
 Habit SE (£2999)or Whyte 130c(£3499)?
  • 4 9
flag blitz66 (Oct 19, 2015 at 3:55) (Below Threshold)
 or lapierre zesty xm (£3099)
  • 1 0
 good choice
  • 3 5
 Canyon Spectral?
  • 2 5
 not sure why I'm getting downvotes on the zesty xm? it's a 120mm carbon framed bike with aggro geometry... the fork's a bit weedy compared to the habit and the whyte but swap that out and it'll easily play with the other bikes listed
  • 1 0
 It's french :-0.........sorry french people ;-))
  • 2 1
 Sweet Stumpy...
  • 1 1
 Lol at this pricing. 4,599 GBP=7,112 USD
  • 1 1
 And one more thing, SRAM, honestly? Where is the Hope boys?????
  • 1 0
 looks great!
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2023. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.045831
Mobile Version of Website