Yeti SB5+ First Look - Eurobike 2016

Aug 31, 2016
by Mike Kazimer  
Yeti SB5

Yeti has a new bike on the way for 2017, the SB5+. As the name suggests, it's the Colorado-based company's entry into the burgeoning Plus bike market, equipped with five inches of rear travel and 27.5 x 2.8” tires. The carbon fiber frame shares a similar aesthetic to the rest of Yeti's Switch Infinity bikes, with the exception of the elevated rear chainstays, a design that helps create the necessary tire clearance and minimizes the chance of heel rub.

Key numbers include a 67.1-degree head angle, 437mm chainstays, and a reach of 448mm for a size large, figures that place the new ride squarely in all-round trail bike category. A 150mm fork is matched to the SB5+'s 127mm of rear suspension, suspension that's delivered via a Fox Float shock.

There will be two different options for the carbon frame, Carbon and Turq. The frame's stiffness and ride characterisics are said to be the same, but the Turq series frames use more high modulus carbon fiber and weigh between 250 – 400 grams less. The different frame options aren't solely for the SB5+ though; riders will also be able to choose between the Carbon or Turq series for the rest of Yeti's lineup.


Yeti SB5


The Turq series versions of the SB5+ will be available in October, with complete prices starting ranging from $6,499 all the way up to $10,499 for the higest end model decked out with ENVE wheels and a SRAM Eagle drivetrain. Carbon series complete bikes will be available in mid-November, starting at $4,699 USD for the XT / SLX spec'd model. Frame weight is a claimed 5.67 pounds, and depending on the frame and parts spec completes are expected to range from 27.2 – 29 pounds.

Yeti SB5


www.yeticycles.com


150 Comments

  • + 75
 I'll be the first to say it - raised chainstays make a lot of sense in this age of wide tires and short rear ends. Sidesteps an awful lot of problems (see Trek Stache). But, Christ, if Yeti can't make them look good, who among us can be saved?

On another note - at least on paper, this overforking business is getting pretty absurd.
  • + 36
 Its starting to look like an Orange. I'll sit on the fence on this one.
  • + 15
 I loved that bit from TREK when releasing Boost: Says it allows for building a shorter chainstay and gives more tyre clearance - raises chainstay to bypass the chainring/tyre bottleneck on their own fkng bike.

And on your other note - C'mon, everybody in this 120mm fuzz do that. Sells 160 Enduro bike saying it is too big for what he does - buys 120 bike, puts 160 Pike and Minions DHR2 into it.
  • + 1
 I am assuming you are talking about the 150mm fox 34 paired with 127mm on the rear? It seems silly. I bet it rides better with a 140mm fork. Wouldn't look so jacked up at the front either. It's confused, the 127mm rear suggests trail bike for long days on singletrack, whereas the 150mm front suggests it's built for bigger things.
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: the bike leans to the right or you lean to the right?
  • + 75
 Over forking is just a small step in bike evolution to the eventual goal - THE HARDTAIL!!!
  • + 10
 @thomaspearson: that 23mm difference is not much. Only like riding a hardtail with a 23mm travel fork. Wait a minute, some of them come with 160s hey?
  • + 8
 @WAKIdesigns: 160mm enduro bikes will be the big thing next year when this 120mm phase has been flushed through by the marketers. Or maybe it will be 170mm????!!!!!! just to screw with all you 160mm guys.
  • + 0
 @jaame: the bike tends to lean to the right, like my other bike which has the rear rim off the center. I have to point my knees to the left all the time. Most of other bikes that i tried just go straight no problems. (speaking of wheelies and manuals)
  • + 3
 Was GT the first big name to start this overforking trend?

www.gtbicycles.com/eur_en/2013/bikes/mountain/enduro/distortion-1-0

Short rears and long fronts is subtly pushing people towards adopting cheaper hardtails as the manufacturer's are unwittingly making it seem like rear suspension travel is less important with this overforking trend

... or I'm just completely wrong
  • + 4
 So they think SC Bantam is a competition. Haha
  • + 3
 @jaame: You make a good point, and I don't really have a solid counter argument other than that I ride a transition trans am, so should know better. *Slaps wrist*.
  • + 1
 Fork travel can be reduced by replacing the air shaft assembly.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: sounds like me... Sold 160 bought 120.. Difference is, I put a 130 pike upfront and have never looked back..
  • + 21
 A bike with 23mm more travel up front is overforked?! I say there's no such thing as "overforking", so long as the geometry works. My next hardtail will be overforked by 140mm!
  • + 4
 @Spark24: Banshee Spitfire, Orange Blood, Orange Five, Turner 5Spot, Jamis Parker...

It's not a new thing and there actually isn't a problem with it. It's not unbalanced or uneven. It's just a way of having a fast and agile pedaling bike that can still take some hits. I had a Trek Liquid with a 36 on the front so 160/127 mm and it was a bloody fun bike to ride. Later on had a Spitfire with a Revelation (150/127) and it was also a blast! I think it's the best of both worlds when you're nailing fast and clean singletracks with some jumps and small rocky sections.
  • + 4
 @bohns1: I sold 120 before it got cool and bought 160 after it stopped being cool. Now I'm slowly crawling up local Strava boards beating XC 29ers on pedally courses... All local KOMmers use at least 150 in the rear. It's in the legs man. When it comes to fun, well... you will look back, you will... New big thing, a bit of hormonal change - Honeeeey I need me a new bike!

Very few are not subject to this mechanism... Who knows I may be riding a 120 bike in 2 years... I'm actually extremely tempted to try a 100mm rear 120 front XC racer with slack&long geo like XC bikes from Pole and Unno. Because I see no point in running little travel with heavy duty Enduro componentry.
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: i thought the same, except orange likes to fill the gap in between haha
  • + 6
 Different tastes really. To me this looks better than any Yeti I've ever seen, I really like this. Looks like it gives you a lot of room to move around. I also like raised chainstay and I thought it was common. Orange does it, my Cannnondale Prophet has it. You can take a chain on and off without opening it (if you don't mind opening the rear mech cage). Finally I don't see why having different travel front and rear suspension could be such an issue. Both the older SC V10 as well as the Demo 9 did well with more travel in the rear, a hardtail does fine with a suspension fork. Arms and legs have different strength and different "travel" if you will. You'll never have the front and rear suspension moving synchronous, they'll be in different positions in their travel. It may also just be me as I mostly ride hardtails, that I'm used to letting the fork do a lot of work whereas I don't expect much from the rear. I agree others might prefer some more rear suspension to pair with such a long fork.
  • + 4
 @bohns1: This. I'm on a 29er with 120r/130f with a Pike RCT3. Absolutely amazing for all-day singletrack and general riding.
  • - 2
 A way to avoid always changing bikes is to just buy a 165 travel enduro bike, then when the fashion changes and says lower travel is better, simply run your suspension harder. If you only use 120 out of 165, you're only riding a 120 bike. The beauty of it is, you didn't have to buy one!
  • + 8
 Too me, it's the nicest execution of an elevated stay I've seen yet. It's not ugly, just different. Of course nobody on pinkbike likes different.
  • + 4
 @jaame: not true at all. You're still stuck with longer chainstays, a higher BB and a slacker head angle. Simply adding air to the suspension in my Nomad makes it nothing like my Tallboy. It is all in the geometry.
  • + 3
 @jaame: Not at all. Not only are the numbers different, bigger bikes are heavier. Travel usage is no factor here, it simply means you are not running your suspension properly and your hands are suffering. Friend of mine runs 15% sag on his nomad and his forearms looks like he's an addict. But he still rides Enduro on it...
  • + 4
 @jaame: Dood, you are a genius. I'm gonna get me a really long DH bike and run it Gwin stiff to get 100mm out of it.
  • + 4
 I actually like a good amount of over forking. The bike climbs better without the rear end all mushy and on descents the front end plows through stuff and the back end just takes the hits without sinking too much. I mean it's a trail bike after all.
  • + 4
 @bridgermurray: high cockpit works for me as well! At least for technical climbs. If I lived in Alps I'd get a travel adjustable fork for few hours long climbs

@bogey @siderealwall2 I am quite sure Jaame was joking...
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: You mean a Lemon.
  • + 1
 @likeittacky: I was being a little sarcastic, it would ride pretty badly.
  • + 4
 @thomaspearson: didn't Jared Graves run a 160mm 36 during the 2015 EWS on this bike?
  • + 0
 @bosnianrider: If the 34 is the same as the 36 a disassembly is all that is needed.
  • + 1
 @Spark24: Specialized had the Evo bikes out in 2011 I believe.
  • + 1
 @panchocampbell: on the 5 not the alpine 160..
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: I ran anthem x with 100/120,works comp 2deg. Headset and burgtec offset bush.made no difference to me personally,just my wallet.load of bollocks.
  • + 2
 I don't think that overforking (can you really ever fork too much? he he) by an inch is a big deal. For a rider who loves a crisper pedaling bike that doesn't wallow too much in the rear, but wants an nice cushy margin of error and plowability up front it works.
  • + 1
 @thomaspearson: I like it. Same shtick as the (now defunct) GT Sensor X and DB Release (130/150). A little more up front to help my sissy hands and forearms but pedals and responds better to inputs than a full on 150mm rear bike. It's okay to get into a little trouble sometimes. It is kinda silly to see 160 forks on 130 and under frames, though, like some of the enduro-bros do, though they're pushing it much harder than me, I admit.
  • + 1
 probably somebody already mentioned this. But probably in this case, (and many others), it's about sourcing the front triangle from an existing model to mate with a new rear triangle to get into a different wheel size for cheap. So the only way to get a decently modern head angle on the bike is to over fork it.

FYI, my Rocket 88 way back when, the Rock Shox Judy was able to be switched up internally from 80 to 100. The salesman was trying to convince me to buy that over a Diamondback V8. So I had him change the fork before I picked it up. Been over forking pretty much always since then....
  • + 1
 Paging Santa Cruz from the 90's see the super 8, Bullitt, super light, etc
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: On the new trek fuel ex 9.9...destroy all my old stravas hands down..
I best most enduro riders to the top yet come pretty close and on the exceptional riders tails on the way down.. Cool means nothing to me.. ITS WHAT WORKS FOR ME is how I base my decisions..
  • + 1
 @Nizhoni: Ya man I'm even hitting decent senders on that set up.. Not Rampage by any stretch but nice fun gaps... Love it..
  • + 69
 Its very strange... normaly i like to buy bikes and parts... but since 2 or 3 years I just got bored. They throw out new models every 3 months. Everything is the best now... 650B, 29, 650+ and so on... l lost track, the bike industry made me dont care any more. Every time I see someting I like... yeah! But wait in 6 month everything will change. So at the end... I buy nothing, ride my 26 er bike more then ever and be happy Smile Thank you bike industry... I have saved a lot of dollars today... and tomorrow too. Best regardes from Switzerland... and happy trails Smile
  • + 18
 I feel the same way. I start looking at possibly buying a new bike and just get so stressed about spending $5000+ on something that will be outdated in a few months that I just give up. I'll probably ride my Canfield until the end of days lol.
  • + 2
 I've just bought a second hand nomad c and promised my wife it's the last one...
  • + 2
 I was going to build a hardtail with my stockpile of model year '14-15 bike parts. Now i can't find a frame that fits everything without buying boost adapters for the wheels. Oh well, im just going to sell them off at this point
  • + 2
 Rene1234 Amen
  • + 5
 Your sentiment is perhaps why there is a big big rise in inventories. Consumers are more confused than they've ever been.
  • + 1
 @stikmanglaspell: It's very true. I work in the bike component manufacturing, the new "standards" are seriously putting a huge tole on aftermarket parts manufactures... :/
  • + 5
 Couldn't be more true. I bought an sb6 frame and before it was worth a few hundred dollars and before I even bothered to build it up, I sold it here on PB. I haven't been able to find a new bike I like at a price point I can justify in a couple years so I just pulled the old transam out and built her up with some bike bin parts and been beating the shit out of that thing waiting for these industry twats to figure their shit out.
  • + 1
 Now we all know why Pricepoint.com shut down 2 months ago... Mother F@ckers
  • + 1
 @o2a6k:

It was terrible management from everything I've read.
  • + 32
 wow yeti actually made a bike that doesn't look good
  • + 22
 Am I the only one not seeing 27+ on the trail? Manufacturers seem to be spewing these things out and the only place I'm seeing them is as a novaulty demo or with a clear out price on the sales floor...
  • + 2
 I've seen like two in the past year. I've seen more Ibis Bow-Ti's on my trails than plus bikes. I have absolutely no clue who is buying them, but apparently they're selling...

I even owned a plus bike (Stache), and I still don't know anyone else who does.
  • + 2
 I was talking about this with a buddy the other day when I thought I spied a "plus" size tire footprint on the local mountain.
  • + 2
 Last week a saw 3 new riders on 6fatties. One of the shop guys bought a tallboy plus and they just built a tallboy plus for another customer. Everyone is saying the 2.8 maxxis tires are where it's at now and those are suppose to ride well. Don't understand how they're so much better than a 2.5wt DHF tho
  • + 1
 Most who own plus bikes are 45 year old dudes just riding smooth XC routes.
  • + 4
 I honestly think they are pushed for new riders with less experience/skills. Like ''dude, the +size tires gives you so much more forgiveness and grips than regular tires, but they are not as slugish than fat bike and with the 27,5'' you get the benefit from 29 and 26 in one package''. It's mostly pointing out the middle ground to create a confort zone. I did try all wheel size and sticked with 27,5 (altough I would have a 29'' too), but the larger tires are much less energy efficient and in most condition will make your ride a lot harder physicaly, but easier technicaly. If you got the skills, you go for the energy efficiency.
  • + 2
 I saw my first plus in action the other day, some guy was poaching a short section of PCT on a hardtail plus bike with bikepacking gear loaded up.
  • + 3
 I bought the 2017 Santa Cruz Hightower 27.5+ and have a couple weeks on it now. I'll never go back to a smaller tire after getting used to this. You can just hammer everything. Lovin' it!
  • + 1
 @GSPChilliwack: Probably just a sasquatch tho.
  • + 1
 @YukonLT: Interesting, I'm demoing that bike in Moab in a couple weeks. No doubt it'll destroy all that rocky goodness, but not sure how it'd handle 'normal' western singletrack. Makes sense for rooty, rocky NE tho.
  • + 2
 @WasatchEnduro:

I'm curious to hear how it goes. I bet it would be awesome in sandy sections, but I'm wondering how it will take square edge hits from all the ledges in moab
  • + 2
 I just bought a fuse a few weeks ago and I'm actually loving it! My Enduro has only been out once or twice since, and only for a gnarlier shuttle runs.
  • + 2
 @WasatchEnduro: honestly, I haven't found any terrain yet that I haven't loved riding it on. I rode everything in the Kingdom trail system, which is a lot of super buff terrain with different soils and some roots here and there, etc etc.. Most of the terrain right in my area is pretty tech, and it has been awesome through all of that. It really make easy work of any root sections, and the plus tires are bad ass on rock climbs. Overall it's easily been the best bike I have had so far. But of course, every rider is different!
  • + 2
 @UtahBikeMike: Took it down the Enchilada on Saturday. Of course the fatty rims and tires give it a little more heft, and didn't seem super easy to loft the front wheel, though not bad. No surprises, traction was insane and I just bulldozed through tons of nasty rocks. Agility was better than I thought.

I dug it but kept wondering how it would handle compared to the 29er version. Pretty fun and would consider the Hightower for my next rig. Rear end hung up just a little through some of the successive square edged poundings, but that's down to the vpp design. Climbing and big hits were fine. Super solid and stable bike with tons of traction. It was a hoot, I can definitely see the appeal of owning this bike with both setups. Climbed maybe a tad slower due to the big tires, but better than I had anticipated.

Would live to try the Stumpy 6-fattie for comparison. Not ruling out 2.8-3.0 tires on my next bike.
  • + 21
 Kill it before it lats eggs
  • + 15
 is it just me or does it sort of resemble a carbon orange?
  • - 2
 Yep
  • + 13
 £3600 for the top end frameset.

Today, we enter a new age of piss taking.............
  • + 4
 man, what folks are saying about + bikes now is EXACTLY what folks said about fat skis cir. 1996. For lazy, old, slow, novice skiers; definitely not for anyone with talent. I figured the folks with talent were just upset that their considerable skills just got made irrelevant. I don't think + tires will do to MTB what they did to skiing, but I do think it is way too early to write them off as only for grandpa. I have tried the NN 2.8 and it does not suck. Now give me a similar size tire with some beef and real puncture resistance and I think it will be fast, fun and could be a serious enduro contender.
  • + 3
 With all the bike options (SB5.5, 6, 5, 4.5, ASRC and ARC) and now added choice of Carbon or Turq for each model, I would assume that they are selling a great many units as they wouldn't be investing all that money in molds etc. for a boutique business.

So the question now stands: When will they start reducing the prices to sell even more units and bring them into reach for us not blessed with padded bank accounts?
  • + 15
 Well the carbon/turq is just a different fiber layup, they are going in the same mold.

There are soooo many good carbon enduro bikes on the market, it's a great time to be alive. Let Yeti be Yeti, someone has to be the lamborghini of bikes.
  • + 1
 @lys3rg0: It's really impressive/surprising how far manufacturers are going to make high end bikes.
  • + 2
 Yeti's entry level bikes are the same price as YT's entry level carbon models (in the US anyway). To me, competing with mail order bikes counts as lowering their prices...
  • + 2
 @Sardine Couldn't find a quick comparison for entry level bikes, but YT Capra with XO1, Fox 36 and X2 shock is 4999EUR full price - not counting the Gwinning discount they have at the moment.

SB6c with XO1, Fox 36 and Float X comes in at ~7500EUR.

Looks like it pays to live in the States as far as Yeti's are concerned.
  • + 1
 Its called the Santa Cruz approach, change from a boutique manufacturer into a mass market one but somehow manage to get away with keeping up the boutique prices, nice trick if you can pull it off.
  • + 6
 I would love to see Richie Rude do a race on one of these so we can see how it matches up against the standard version
  • + 11
 you mean how the tires hold up ?
  • + 5
 Where is the market for a $10,500 plus bike? I thought they were more of a beginner thing.
  • + 2
 And a $10,500 bike that probably still weighs over 30 lbs
  • + 1
 @jbroehl: Ehhh I doubt it. The base model 5 (read: heavy parts) weighs in at 28lbs. So a high end plus bike ought to be about the same. Now that's not considering rotating weight, so this might pedal "heavier" but I bet pound for pound it's lighter.
  • + 1
 @0gravity: 27.2 pounds, says so in the article
  • + 3
 i´ll be the first to say...
these yeti would in pinkbike first page in 2030 in "NOW THAT WAS A BIKE"... that switch infinity...
back in the days, these ones look great too:
www.pinkbike.com/product/yeti/303-DH
  • + 6
 I know a lot of people that would like them to make 303s again.
  • + 3
 I still ride my 2007 Yeti 303 DH. Every time I think about buying a new bike I just go out and ride instead, seems to be the best way to avoid falling into the pit that is new industry standards. I would be hypwd to see a new gen 303, but in the end I would more than likely just go ride my old lunker and be happy my bank account isn't empty.
  • + 1
 i believe the 303 is a good bike... but that design? was it really needed? i think the same of the switch infinity... inovate or die???
i can look to a 2005 santa cruz nomad and still seems like a bike from XXI century...
  • + 2
 I plus sized my SB66c two seasons back ( before the plus marketing) with 31mm internal China carb wheels running 2.4 nobby nicks and I love traction on tech climbs (17-22 psi) I guess the bike is a 26 plus bike. Tire height from floor is @ 26 3/4 inch and with the lower pressures has better rollover tendency in rocks and roots. I ride a fatbike all winter and will not be riding anything fatter then a 2.5 in the summer. Shocked that they bother with a Enve version?
  • + 3
 Think the chainstay needs to be higher for SRAM future 1x15, 9-68T cassette because we just don't have enough choices already.
  • + 1
 No mention of 29" wheel capability. The only advantage I saw with the Plus movement was the ability to run two wheelsets and adjust the BB height for the smaller of the two. Now we're seeing bikes designed specifically for 275x2.8 tires.
  • + 2
 Good point. Given that a lot of riders aren't sold on 27.5+ yet (especially the more experienced riders that will spend this kind of money) it seems risky to put out a 27.5+ that doesn't also take 29er wheels. Do we think this really can't take 29er wheels? If so that seems like a bad strategy
  • + 5
 People sure love to complain.
  • + 5
 Didn't they say they wouldn't go 27.5+? Or am I missing something.
  • + 8
 They always do, my young apprentice... They always do.
  • + 2
 No they didn't say that. When they released the 5.5 they said they wouldn't make a 27.5+/29'er as switching wheels is too much of a compromise.
  • + 3
 @TrevorPage: and 6 years ago they said they would never make a bike with "clown wheels" - yeti's words, not mine. So, @yeticycles, how bout it? Lolol the money tastes good don't it?
  • + 2
 @SeaJay: In their defense 29ers did suck 6 years ago unless you were an XC racer.
  • + 1
 This looks amazing! Liking the elevated chainstays. Looks like a single pivot but deep down inside it uses the switch infinity link which will work wonders out on the trails. Looking good yeti tup
  • + 0
 I havent ridden a plus bike, but have run derby 27.5 with 2.5 DHF WT's and thats a good setup. Better than 2.3's. The plus thing loses out on sidewall flex. If somebody could figure out how to stiffen sidewalls without too much weight the plus thing could work. That said - a lot of effort for minimal gain.

The 2017 SB5 (non plus) is freakin nice though. I stayed away from the 5c originally because no water bottle but mostly because of overly short front end, sky high stack - and most of the most is it was F-n hideous.
  • + 5
 Plus is THE new thing...
  • + 3
 Doing 27.5+ and 29 right as two separate models making no sacrifices to geo.
  • + 3
 Horrible plus size tyres. Nobody seems to like them in reviews, so why do they keep on producing bikes like this?
  • + 1
 'round and 'round the money bush we go. All these "new" things to have that all cost 5G+ getting tiring....starting to check out of industry. Bike looks rad, although will never afford it.
  • + 2
 The high prices and limited lifespan of standards these days makes it hard to justify even considering a new bike at this point. I can't afford $5k+ every few years to keep up with the industry, but I guess plenty of people out there are eager to get in on the new thing, so the bike industry is gong to keep raking in the cash.
  • + 4
 ...Now that is one fine looking bike...
  • + 1
 so .. is it boost axles or not?? mentions 2.8" wide tires - is tha a limit, is this just a 29er frame with some 2.8 650b on it?
  • + 1
 Yes, Boost spacing front and rear.
  • + 3
 not this plus shit again...seriously this dumb fad needs to end soon
  • + 1
 Sits patiently until they unveil a regular SB5 with that stunning new front triangle and rear triangle like the old one with 17" stays
  • + 2
 Updated SB5c V2 was also released Creg
  • + 1
 @skinnybex: yeah I guess I'll be waiting for v3 lol
  • + 2
 @skinnybex: sorry bit slow there, just saw the SB5v2 has got a normal rear triangle
  • + 2
 That SB5 v2 is really nice (not +, thats not really nice at all). Beautiful and more managable for rolling hills
  • + 1
 27.5+ is a phase. 29 has finally been figured out and not many know it, but it is the fastest of all 95 wheel sizes.
  • + 2
 No, Yetti.....not you too....
  • + 2
 I think they said they wouldn't do the interchangeable 29 to 27.5+ Bikes
  • + 2
 What do I have to do to see the entire yeti booth?
  • + 1
 Looks like there's a bit of a Santa Cruz influence in the graphics on this one.
  • + 1
 If it takes 27+ wheels and tyres does it work with normal 29er wheels and tyres. I mini SB5.5 effectively could be good fun
  • + 1
 I wish they would tweak the normal SB5 frame to look like this. It's starting to look a little dated.
  • + 1
 You guys all sound like my two year old...you say a whole lot of stuff about nothing!
  • + 2
 Looks amazing I have to say....just a bit out of my price range! Wink
  • + 1
 And by the way... most of all this new gadgets and standarts I iven dont no what they talking about Smile Smile Smile
  • + 1
 Shame on me for thinking the updated SB5 would be 140mm in the back and 150 up front. Fine, I'll save my money
  • - 4
flag Creg (Aug 31, 2016 at 3:24) (Below Threshold)
 Buy a bronson v2, I just did
  • + 1
 @Creg: currently riding a 2014 Norco Sight 7.1 C, still waiting to see if Norco ruined the bike by adding boost crap and 27.5+
  • + 3
 Pinch flat in 3, 2, 1,..
  • + 3
 I think there was an article yesterday about stuffing your tires with old yoga mats.... problem solved!
  • + 1
 Finally! It's about time Yeti bikes got more expensive!!!
  • + 1
 Www an e-stay bike! Kill it with fire. Big Grin
  • + 0
 Seems like bad strategy to put out a 27.5+ that doesn't also take 29er wheels, if that's really the case here
  • + 1
 Sweet! I'm really digging the new SB5+ but too many decals IMO.
  • + 1
 Yeti made a version of my old Prophet
  • + 1
 at first glance it looks like a carbon fiber Orange
  • + 1
 I'm wanting to like this bike buuuut...... Those chainstays....
  • + 6
 but you can run a belt drive with it
  • + 3
 @funkzander: let me know how that works out... as your effective chainstay length changes through travel
  • + 1
 @rideyobike86: +1. Also not possible to combine with a derailleur system and the drop outs are non-slideable.
  • + 2
 plus bikes rule!
  • + 0
 This is what a new ASX would look like.
  • + 0
 Turq that booty
  • - 1
 "metric Fox Float shock"
:-(
  • - 2
 This bike is fucking dumb
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.192451
Mobile Version of Website