Powered by Outside

Review: Knolly Warden LT

Aug 3, 2021 at 8:58
by Dan Roberts  

Knolly Bikes, the small brand out of British Columbia, was originally born out of a desire to make a better freeride frame. While the interpretation of freeride has modified itself since then, the company’s focus has remained firmly on high quality and well made frames.

Those frames coming with what seems like a bewildering amount of consideration behind them when you talk to their founder, Noel Buckley, and carry a unique look that makes them pop out from the crowd. They're unmistakable on the trail, even when not coloured gold. That frame aesthetic comes from their Fourby4 suspension layout, something that Knolly has carried through from the first to their latest bikes.
Warden LT Details

Intended use: All-Mountain / Enduro
Rear wheel travel: 168mm
Fork travel: 170mm
Wheel size: 27.5"
Material: All aluminum
Sizes: S, M (tested), L & XL
Weight: 15.0kg / 33.07lbs (M, w/o pedals)
Price: $5,370 Dawn Patrol build or $6,305 Extra Credit build. Frame only from $2,501.
More info: knollybikes.com

While Knolly are well known in their own slice of the world, they’re less known over the pond in Europe, so that’s exactly where we tested the Warden LT to see how it fares in a land of never ending mountain passes, ringing cowbells and people dangerously close to being addicted to cheese.

bigquotesIt’s a bike that’s going to transport you to the top of a hill in a non-rushed fashion, and then make you smile on those technical, steep and tricky descents, the ones where your satisfaction comes from clearing a section of tech rather than death gripping and hitting it as fast as humanly possible. Dan Roberts

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Knolly's signature might be their frame aesthetic, coming from the Fourby4 suspension layout.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The all-aluminum construction prioritizes a full straight seat tube for long dropper posts, and in the process there's ample soil sampling technology built into the Warden LT.

Construction and Features

The Warden LT is an all-aluminum, 168mm travel, full 27.5” bike. That last point being something of a diminishing breed, with the full 29” and mullet bikes having taken over the market in recent years.

The biggest thing that jumps out to everyone who first lays eyes on the Warden is the extra pair of links. We’ll get a bit more into that in the suspension section, but this is part and parcel of Knolly’s Fourby4 suspension system and allows them to have a bit more separation between handling the acceleration and deceleration responses and squishing the shock.

The 6066 aluminum frame uses Knolly’s own tubes and forgings. One of the big focusses is on the seat tube, with its kinkless design allowing for the long insertions needed for big drop seat posts. That design does make for one of the biggest loam shelves in the business though. But maybe you’re a fan of collecting and admiring the dirt from your ride?

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Titanium pivot hardware is used, with printed torque settings.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The bolt-on down tube protector does a good job of protecting the Warden's protruding underbelly, and also doubles as the storage space for a Di2 battery if that's what you prefer to run.

The frame and links are held together with titanium pivot hardware that should result in no worries about corrosion. There’s also a mix of angular contact and regular bearings along with bushings on the dog bone link that drives the rocker.

The pivot designs almost do away with additional washers between the bearings and frame parts. Only the dog bone link, with its bushings, has some captive washers in there. That does mean that a lot of the bearings are sitting out there in the elements but there is less to fall under the washer when you’re taking the bike apart.

There’s space for even a 750ml bottle inside the mainframe, and while there are no dedicated gear strap mounts, like we’re seeing on a lot of new bikes, there is plenty of space in the mainframe to strap all the essentials you need for a ride.

Cable routing is internal in the mainframe, entering via some rubber bolt on pieces that actually double up as fork bumpers should you wish to run the Warden LT with a dual crown fork. The cables exit at the back of the seat tube via another bolt in piece and then run externally across the top of the seat stays.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Cable routing is internal in the mainframe, popping out on the back of the seat tube and running externally along the top of the seat stay.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
There are two geometry settings for the Warden LT, Slack and Neutral. They also have an effect on the leverage ratios and progression of the bike.

The 73mm wide threaded BB includes a bolt-on ISCG tab part that has both versions of the ISCG standard. There’s an additional S3 or E-Type mount for a top chain guide. Headset is a standard ZS44/56 affair and the rear brake mount is a 160mm post mount, which is pretty small considering that nowadays even gravel bikes are coming with 180mm rotors.

Out at the back of the bike is a 157mm wide rear hub spacing, which along with the skinny tubing at the rear does mean that the Warden does have a lot of tire clearance. So much so that Knolly states the biggest tire that the Warden can fit is 2.8” wide.

The underside of the belly on the down tube is well covered by a bolt on protector that when removed grants access to a Di2 battery compartment. The chainstay is protected well in the middle of the tube, but a bit scantily clad at the ends along with the underside of the seat stay.

Knolly Warden LT Geometry

Geometry & Sizing
The Warden LT comes in four sizes from S to XL. While the sizing names may be familiar, it’s worth delving into the geometry as what is an M size for Knolly lines up closer to an L size from a lot of other brands. The Warden LT is also adjustable in geometry via two lower shock mount positions. The Slack position is labelled on the bike with the other, Neutral, position being what the majority of the geometry table is displaying.

Reach ranges from 452mm to 520mm and is joined by low stack heights that range from 588mm to 613mm. A lot of that is due to the very short head tubes on all sizes, something that isn’t communicated in the geometry table. Our M size had a 110mm long head tube which can be closer to S sizes from other brands.

The BB in the neutral position is quoted as 348mm, and when in the slack position measured up at 344mm on our test bike, which is a bit more in the realm of even longer travel bikes than enduro style bikes but isn't sky high.

Head angles are either 65.25° or 64.5° depending on the setting and out back the chainstay length is the same 431.5mm for all sizes. It’s weird to be calling that short, but given the current norm, it is definitely on the short side of things when you’ve been looking at big travel 29ers for a long time.

Effective seat tube angle is 77° degrees across all sizes, and with no other information on the seat position in the geometry table it’s a little hard to know exactly how the seated position is going to feel. If you know that effective top tube isn’t the best measurement, but can use it to roughly gauge the seat tube slackness then the 635mm top tube length starts to indicate a fairly slack actual seat tube angle - 69° on the M size I tested.

Seat tubes are also very short, and along with the kinkless design of the tube mean that they play well with long dropper posts. The M size had a 405mm seat tube, some 45mm shorter than the Privateer 141 that I recently tested. This is also another point to be aware of when sizing your Warden LT along with the dropper post drop you’d prefer.

Picking a size for the Warden LT was a little tricky. Looking at only their general sizing guide I was smack bang between an L and XL. But looking at the sparse geometry table, and as reach numbers approach and pass 500mm, which is what would happen on the L and XL, I start to feel less and less an active part of getting the bike to the bottom of the hill. Plus, with that slack seat angle those reach numbers would yield a very stretched out seated position.

I settled on an M size for its manageable reach measurement that I know to work well for my size and riding preferences, along with the chance to get a more comfortable seated position. But I was aware that I had a very short head tube and seat tube to deal with.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

Suspension Design

The Warden LT uses Knolly’s Fourby4 suspension system. This works out as a four bar Horst pivot system that has an additional two links that then go on to drive the shock. That short dog bone and rocker do add in extra pivots to the bike, but Knolly claims this allowed them to separate the braking and acceleration characteristics of the bike a bit more from the shock compression.

The four bars, made up from the chain stay, seat stay and red upper link, go into positioning the bike's instant centre and determining the axle path. The extra two links take what those four bars are doing and go onto compressing the shock, with the additional links and pivots giving Knolly more options to adjust the leverage ratio while leaving the instant centre position and migration unchanged.

Unfortunately, Knolly doesn't publish much information around the specific suspension graphs of leverage ratio, anti-squat and anti-rise. But delving into the topic further with Noel, he's not really an advocate for solely using anti-squat and rise to explain how a bike is going to pedal or brake. And this is true, as anti-squat and rise only explain how a bike's suspension is going to react to the load transfer from acceleration or deceleration, not the bigger topic of how they ultimately pedal or brake. Nevertheless, some information on these factors would be good as the public become ever more aware of these factors and start to understand how they explain how a bike is going to perform. If you fancy learning more about load transfer, anti-squat and real world considerations for them then check out our Enginerding on the topic.

The Warden LT uses a 205mm trunnion mount shock and 62.5mm stroke to get the 168mm of travel. Suspension leverage ratios are also changed when moving from the Neutral to Slack positions. In Neutral the bike has 28.5% progression starting at around 3:1 and in the Slack position the progression rises to 30% and starts around 3.2:1.

It's also possible to play around with the shock stroke on the Warden to adjust the rear travel from 160mm to 175mm. That Is usually accompanied by a corresponding change in fork travel, from 150mm to 180mm, but it can be mixed around and tweaked and is something that Knolly attributes to it's small size to be able to allow this as a possibility to customers.

Spec, Pricing & Availability

The Warden LT is available in two build options, Dawn Patrol and Extra Credit, along with a frame only option. All builds and frames start with a RockShox SuperDeluxe Ultimate RCT, but have the option of a Fox Float X2 Factory shock for $150 US more.

All orders though Knolly’s web shop are processed in USD, so if you order outside the US then you also need to consider the VAT, duties and taxes applicable to your country. At this moment there are only Large frames in a few colours still in stock, but there will be a new delivery of frames and build kits in Fall 2021.

Dawn Patrol - RockShox Zeb Ultimate fork. SRAM GX drivetrain. SRAM Code R brakes with 200/180 rotors. Spank Oozy Trail 345 wheels with Maxxis Assegai and Minion DHRII tires in EXO+ and 3C compound. RockShox Reverb dropper post. Spank bar, stem, saddle and grips.

The Dawn Patrol build also has the option of a wheel upgrade to Industry Nine Enduro-S Hydra for $450 US.

Available in Raw, Defender Green, Mclaren Papaya Orange, Black or Gold. Starting at $5,350 USD.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

Extra Credit - Fox 38 Factory fork. Shimano XT drivetrain and brakes with 203/180 rotors. Industry Nine Enduro S Hydra wheels with Maxxis Assegai and Minion DHRII tires in EXO+ and 3C compound. RaceFace Turbine R dropper post. RaceFace Next R bars with Aefect R stem. Chromag saddle and grips.

Available in Raw, Defender Green, Mclaren Papaya Orange, Black or Gold, depending on size. Starting at $6,300 USD.

Frame Only - Available in Raw, R8 Avus Raw, Defender Green, Mclaren Papaya Orange, Black or Gold. Starting at $2,501 US.

Our test bike came with a mix of the Extra Credit and Dawn Patrol builds, but with a RockShox Lyrik Ultimate fork alongside the SuperDeluxe Ultimate shock and Reverb dropper post, SRAM GX drivetrain and Code R brakes. All finishing kit was Chromag and the wheels were the Industry Nine upgrade option. The full bike without pedals came in at bang on 15kg, or 33.07lb.

Bike Setup

The Warden actually arrived in two boxes, so required a bit more assembly than some of the other bikes that arrive in one box and pretty much completely built. But it went together with ease.

With a preference for a higher bar height, I raised the stem to the max of the steerer tube while maintaining a full clamp on it. That meant 30mm of spacers under the stem and as testing went on it could have benefited from an even higher rise bar.

Setting the seat height then became a bit of a problem. With a 90cm inseam with riding shoes on I was bang on the minimum insert on the 175mm drop Reverb that was installed. That meant a lot of seat posts sticking out. It seems a bit of a shame to have the ability to fit long dropper posts but then not take advantage of it in the specs. Granted, my legs are long and I was just on the min insert, but this was a tricky setup point and I’m not the biggest fan of being forced to ride a size larger, with a longer reach, just to not have all the seat post poking out.

Dan Roberts // Technical Editor
Age: 34
Location: Champéry, Switzerland
Height: 188cm (6'2”)
Weight: 75kg (165 lbs)
Industry affiliations / sponsors: Garage Bike Project, former engineer at Scott Sports
Test Locations: Dorenaz, Verbier, Rochers de Naye, Monthey, Champéry and Vaud region.

The seat also needed nudging forwards in the rails a touch to get a comfy pedalling position. The slack actual seat angle and high seat height combined to give a stretched out feeling that needed addressing.

Rear shock sag was recommended at 30% sag from Knolly, and for my 75kg all kitted up weight the SuperDeluxe needed 140psi to get it. There were two volume spacers installed.

Going off the sticker on the fork and the Trailhead app, it suggested 68psi with -9 clicks of rebound for the Lyrik Ultimate, with 1 token installed.

After spending the last five years riding a lot of 29er bikes in different guises I was interested to see how a long travel 27.5” bike would feel like again. I spent the best part of 18 months traveling the world with an older Transition Patrol not all that long ago, and had bundles of fun on that bike. So the small wheels weren’t completely foreign to me, but it had been a while.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot


With the seat slid forwards and a tower of stem spacers the seated position became comfortable for short blasts where you’re pushing really hard on the pedals to make best use of the diminishing light, or long days in the saddle grinding up some never-ending climbs.

It’s also a bike that never gave me the urge to lock the shock out all that often. Only on the longest of road climbs was it maybe necessary, but with a smooth pedalling technique it never shouted for the lock out. If you tend to pull a bit more on the bars and bob your head and torso around then you might find yourself needing to lock the shock out more often to account for that added body movement.

With the shock left in open for most of the time, there's a nice amount of suppleness in the suspension to generate good levels of traction and grip, ripe for tackling tricky pitches in a climb or clawing up damp trails. There's also a good level of support that helps keep the bike from feeling like there's a delay when you want to burst forwards.

While climbing around on technical sections of trail the Warden is very manoeuvrable around the tight and twisty, and also getting up and over obstacles on the trail. It never really gets flustered or becomes unstuck when climbing off-road and could take on any climb that came its way. It's a good bike to be on to tackle any sort of climb put in front of you.

While it is unflustered when climbing, it can feel quite muted. There’s definitely no sense of urgency to it, but it will get you to the top of every climb. There’s no spring in its step, but then does a bike like this need to have that? Sure, it’s nice to have it, but perhaps it's not a necessity.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot


Cruising around on trails at a slower speed it does feel a bit like the bike isn’t really giving you anything back and is sometimes a bit hard to hold a line with. The bike also barely came out of the slack setting, mainly to try and get the bottom bracket down to avoid the feeling of being top heavy and toppling over into the corners. Increasing the speed on trail does make the Warden give more back. It’s a bike that can go really fast and attempt to keep up with some of the 29er enduro bikes that are more common today. But there’s a bit of a window to where the Warden feels at its best on the trail as up at the ragged edge it does begin to get a bit wild aboard it.

It also isn’t a bike that eggs you on to go faster and push harder. While pottering around at slow speeds you don’t get the sense you’re being nudged by the bike to pick the pace up a bit. You tend to just end up riding the bike faster and then discovering that in the middle zone is where it goes best.

The window of operation started to become more apparent on much rougher sections of trail that are best hit at speed and with a bunch of aggression. In those sections the Warden LT started to feel less precise and more unsettled. While it could hustle along through those fast rough parts, I really had to pay less attention to what was going on beneath you and just get on with it. If I paid attention to it a bit too much then I'd likely reduce the speed to get it back in its comfort zone. So, while it can go really fast, you need to ignore a bit of the chaos happening and just get on with the job in hand. Up at these speeds and aggression levels it didn’t feel that it’s where the Warden LT excels.

When the trail is a little more mellow and a touch less demanding, then the Warden starts to shine and everything starts to slot into place. Over in the Alps there are a few trails that really have a Canadian feel to them, those secret trails around the Sea to Sky zone being my reference. They’re soft, loamy, undulating and starting to become just a touch more rooty and rocky as the soft ground breaks up and exposes them. While I call them a little slice of Canada here in Switzerland, they’re somewhat replicas of the stomping ground for Knolly and this was the light bulb moment with the Warden LT.

Give it something like this, and it is in its element. Not absolutely at the ragged edge but still cracking on and terrain that just undulates so smoothly up and down as well as left and right that you’re not getting all twisted up and chucked around. All the while needing to absorb the constant pitter patter of those roots and rocks that are just breaking through the soil as well as support you in the undulations as the trail makes its way down the hill.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot

Despite the angular contact bearings, there is some noticeable flex in the bike. You can notice the rear of the bike moving around when you really get motoring in particularly rough sections of trail that have a lot of twisting input from terrain and rider alike. The pivots are very small in diameter and the rear tube sections are very thin. This increased flexibility doesn’t lend itself well to inspiring the utmost confidence up at the ragged edge and when you need to be precise but forceful and aggressive with your riding. But again, that doesn't seem to be where the Warden excels.

That slightly higher than normal bottom bracket, and low bar height, might also be contributing factors to the recommended 30% sag, and the Warden LT does feel better with more sag in the back, along with a much stiffer than recommended fork setup. I even experimented with sag approaching 35% to get the bottom bracket lower and counter some of that deadlift position feeling to it, but that was getting too far into a corner of setup and the negatives of the big sag began to outweigh the positives. But, even with 30% sag in the shock the Warden LT wasn’t banging off the bottom out bumper all day long. While I could bottom it out with some good hucks to flat, it felt like there wass a good dollop of bottom out support in there and the increased sag didn’t yield too much of a sluggish feeling in the suspension.

On that note, it is an easily manoeuvrable bike, some of that attributed to the slightly shorter reach in real life than on paper with the tower of stem spacers and high amounts of sag. It’s a bike that does like to play on the trail. A manual here, a nose bonk there are all welcome, possible and encouraged.

Over the past few years, I’ve been riding a lot of bikes so focussed on speed and aggressiveness of trail. Understandably, too, as there are so many of them out there right now that need testing. But having ridden over in that Canadian area the idea of a big pedal out to ride a big tech line, maybe not at the highest of speeds, seems to be what the Warden LT is for, and so excels at. If there’s a stopwatch involved then the Knolly would rather go grab a beer. This is also something that Knolly were alluding to when we were discussing setting up the test bike. While the Warden LT could enter an enduro race, that’s not really i's forte.

It’s a bike that’s going to transport you to the top of a hill in a non-rushed fashion and then make you smile on those technical, steep and tricky descents where your satisfaction in riding is going to come from clearing a section of tech rather than death gripping and hitting it as fast as humanly possible. And in those soft and meandering trails, often described as loamy, it's actually a joy to ride. There’s many a way to have fun on a bike and with all these ridiculously fast but sometimes single minded 29ers of late I might have forgotten about some of the other ways to have fun on a bike other than just scaring myself with speed.

Knolly Warden LT Review
The cable routing isn't properly secure and so rubs back and forth pretty aggressively on the link. That link also took a beating from the onslaught of debris from the rear wheel.
Knolly Warden LT Review
Another area that took a beating was the chainstay and seatstay. Extra protection is needed to keep the bike a bit quieter and looking fresher for longer.


While there’s no overlapping and scissoring design, nor any really hidden nooks and crannies in there, the Knolly does have some details in there that either need attending to or keeping a close eye on during testing.

The straight seat tube is great for getting long drop posts on all bikes, but it does make for one of the biggest loam shelves in the business down at the bottom bracket. The additional link arrangement up above the seat stay also creates a great place for mud and debris to collect, and with the constant movement of the bright orange link while riding it means that it’s often grinding around in that mud and debris.

The cable routing coming out of the back of the seat tube also acts as a big anchor point for mud and allows water to get into the frame, given that it’s right in the firing line from the back wheel.That cable routing at the rear of the bike is pretty unsecured and prone to rubbing to the point of wearing a significant chunk of the orange link away. There’s not a lot to do about it either - you pull more cable through to give some clearance and two impacts later and the cables are back to rubbing on the link.

The protection on the chainstay is fairly minimal too, leaving the ends unprotected. The underside of the seat stay is also unprotected and looked pretty battered after testing had finished. So it’s best to go over these areas with some extra protection before you head out for your first ride.

The pivots use 5 and 6mm Allen keys and most have the torque values printed on them. But during testing quite a few of the pivots would repeatedly come undone and needed tightening up to much higher torques to stop them from undoing so regularly. While there’s no pivot washers to drop under the washing machine on most of the pivots, the dog bone does have some sleeved washers that key into each other, so it’s good to make sure they’re back together properly when you assemble them.

How Does It Compare?
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
Knolly Warden LT
2021 Nukeproof Mega 290 Factory
Nukeproof Mega 290

Up against something like the Nukeproof Mega, with its 160mm travel out back, 170mm travel fork and full 29” wheels the Knolly definitely starts to feel like a bit of a slouch. The Mega has already got its thoughts at the fastest route to the end of the trail before you’ve even summited the climb. The Knolly is taking the chill option to the top and its eyes are more on the tech lines that you figure out like a bouldering problem. Sure, it can try and follow the Mega down the same tracks, and if you hold on it might go the same speed through most of the sections. But the composure up at real race speeds and race tracks isn’t quite there as much as the Mega and that breed of long travel 29er.

On paper the M size Warden LT and L size Mega 290 are identical in reach, but in the real world the Mega rides much more like its on paper measurements. The 10mm longer headtube and 44mm higher stack have the Mega in a good hands to feet position a lot easier than the Knolly, which needs a lot of stem spacers to raise the bars up and some more rear shock sag than the Mega to drop the bottom bracket a little, cutting that on paper reach down a bit.

Compared to something with shorter travel but still with 29” wheels, like the Privateer 141 we tested, the Warden LT is definitely a capable bike. When the short travel 29er might start to remind you that you’ve only got a bit of squish, the Warden feels like it has much more in reserve in the squish department. But against many of the modern short travel but big intentioned 29ers on the market today, the Warden still lacks a bit of that efficiency in ground covering. The Warden is a bike that dances to a different rhythm. It’s a bike for having fun in finding the gnarlier lines to ride down and meandering down the slightly mellower of trails.

Technical Report
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The Code R brakes were good on power, but did need some fiddling to keep them working at their best.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The RockShox suspension was easy to set up, especially the SuperDeluxe shock.

SRAM Code R Brakes: While this slice of the Alps does give brakes a hard time, the Code Rs did throw up some problems while testing. The 180mm rear rotor is too small and with long runs the brakes would fade considerably to the point of pulling to the bar by the bottom. They were bled repeatedly but the problems persisted and the hose even became loose in the fitting at the lever.

RockShox Suspension: Easy to set up with the guides and performs well. But the active character of RockShox is there and the Lyrik Ultimate had an with the damper, giving almost no indents in the rebound clicks, and on long runs the rebound damping decreased enough to be noticeable. The Reverb dropper post was also not without its problems, with the lever blade coming loose on the lever body and the post consistently being slow to return from day one.

Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
The Industry Nine wheels took a beating and remained true and tubeless despite hitting the rim a few times. The rear was a bit on the noisy side, though, especially when braking or pedalling hard.
Knolly Warden LT Review Photo Kifcat Shaperideshoot
All the Chromag finishing kit worked flawlessly and was really comfortable to use. While a lot of these parts are personal choice, there was never the need to swap them out at all.

Industry Nine Wheels: The Industry Nine wheels did stay true for the testing period, but the tension of the spokes did drop quite a bit, especially in the rear wheel. This resulted in some very noisy wheels when braking hard or pushing super hard on the pedals. They did hold the tires and tubeless pressure very well and shrugged off hits from the ground when the EXO+ tires bottomed out.

Chromag Finishing Kit: The Chromag bars, grips and saddle were all very comfortable. I know that these touch points are very personal but the angles of the bar were easy to get on with and the touch of the grips and saddle worked really well for long days riding and for holding on for dear life alike.

+ Confidence in steep and tech lines
+ All-day and all-trail ability
+ Fun, maneuverable and calm character
- Not the best option for flat out and rough terrain
- Geometry and sizing quirks to be aware of
- Cable routing, protection and pivot details need attention

Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesOn paper and real world are two very different things, and while the Warden LT might have enough travel to put it squarely up against some of the new generation big wheeled enduro race bikes, it certainly dances to an all around different rhythm. It’s worth looking over the geometry and sizing carefully and considering your terrain and riding preferences, as there are some quirks in there.

Perhaps the location of Knolly should point firmly at where the Warden LT might excel. And anyone that has ridden around Canada’s Sea to Sky area will certainly find, or create, a slice of it in their own area of the world. Long rides out to conquer those really steep and tech lines and wonderfully undulating and soft trails that meander through the forest are where the Warden LT feels at home then, unsurprisingly.

In a modern age full of flat out fast 29ers, it was a nice reminder that there are more ways than one to get your fun out of riding. Just make sure that this is what you're after when you buy the Warden LT, as it does get a bit out of its comfort zone if you expect it to keep up with those aforementioned 29ers day after day.

Either way, it made me look forward to a trip to Canada and some time riding steep tech in and amongst the loam.
Dan Roberts

Author Info:
dan-roberts avatar

Member since Apr 6, 2019
137 articles

  • 219 6
 6'2" and you rode the medium??... hmmm. Probably would have had a much better time on a Large. Knolly's website says you'd be on the end of the Large size, approaching an XL. Medium: 5'7" to 5'10", Large: 5'10" to 6'2".

From what I know about Knolly's... yes reach is long, but it's part of why their headtubes are so short. Some people love that low head tube feel and will ride it long and slammed... but then you can put 20mm of spacers under your stem, shorten that long reach by 10mm and you're all set.

Your stack would have been much higher and you would have been wayy more comfortable on a Large.
  • 9 0
 hides the weight well on climbing and flickable but I would have bought a large
  • 167 4
 Yeah, that jumped out at me right away. After he said he was between an L and XL based on Knolly’s recommendation, but went with a medium, it made me question the rest of the review.
  • 31 15
 How do you figure 20mm of spacers reduces reach by 10mm? The hta isn't 45 degrees. Trig it out and post your results.
  • 12 4
 That bike has a really long effective top tubes for its size, especially with the super slack actual seat tube angle. It leaves you deciding between having the correct reach to make for good descending, or having a less stretched out top tube that's comfortable on climbs. Apparently the reviewer chose the latter.
  • 31 0
 I'm 5'7" and ride a medium Warden...
  • 17 0
 @Tmackstab: Ha, I don't rely on my math that's for sure!! But, any of the online geo calculators show you that with a 64.5 HA, 20mm of spacers effectively shortens your reach by amost 10mm. This is the one I use (madscientistmtb.com/bike-geometry-calculator), plug in the numbers and it shortens the reach from 475.5 to 466.6. Which means a guy who is 6'2" is riding a bike with a reach of 466! Although I don't think most people realize how much the spacers under their stem actually affect their reach Maybe those calculators are wrong? But anecdotally, just experimenting with my own bike, feels like it's about right.
  • 20 0
 I’m 6’2” and my Large Warden seems like a natural fit for trail riding. I have an XL chilcotin on order for racing.

I generally agree with the reviewers ideas on ride characteristics but think he would have been better served on a L.
  • 12 1
 @toast2266: Knolly measures their effective top tube differently than other manufacturers giving them artificially long top tubes. You kinda have to go by reach with their bikes. So with the spacers... a 6'2" guy was riding a bike with a 467 reach... that's very short. There's no way that bike didn't feel weird! And their effective STA is basically measured at bar height I think? So he definitely would have had a much better time on a Large.
  • 18 0
 @Tmackstab: LOL - take your own advice.....20mm spacers @ 65 HTA = 8.5mm shorter vs your 45 HTA = 14.1mm shorter....so he was actually closer than you
  • 5 5
 @islandforlife: Well - Jack Moir @ 185cm rides a L with a 464 reach and he adds a good 20mm of spacers too....not saying it's the right call on these Knolly's....but by the numbers, it's not unreasonable
  • 5 0
 @islandforlife: How do they measure it? Looking at their website, they don't even list ETT, so I guess I'm not even sure where the ETT number in this review came from.

But yeah, agreed - the bike must have felt comically small while descending. I'm 5" shorter than the reviewer and ride bikes with a longer reach.
  • 38 4
 You have to sudscribe to have access to his L review
  • 7 0
 @islandforlife: all true - really you should fix your stack height with a taller bar instead of spacers.
  • 7 11
flag baldybrucetires (Aug 9, 2021 at 9:55) (Below Threshold)
 the author clearly talks about their thought process for picking size medium; I agree the M decision seems atypical. IMHO the long part of long, low, slack geometry is probably going to max out and bike makers might need to dial back limousine reaches soon. As a 5’8” rider I would never pick this size M bike (for which knolly recommends for me) with a reach of 475.5 reach. My ripmo AF size M reach of 458 already feels stretched for up and down.

I like the non kinked seat tube as I love mashing in a 210 dropper onto my bikes and I generally size down on bikes.

Finally, a rant about significant digits (“sig digs”): when manufacturers’ state lengths in mm it is stupid to report it to 1 decimal point (ie 475.5mm). It’s really stupid and is literally splitting hairs
  • 30 2
 This is what happens when you only look at the reach number and pick a size. A low stack bike is a shorter bike. Dude had no business on a M at 6'2". Probably contributed to a less favorable review.
  • 23 1
 @flattire: right?! How does pinkbike always manage to botch the knolly reviews? I'm 6'3" on an XL fugitive... sizing down to a medium is ridiculous
  • 48 0
 @baldybrucetires: Ya, saw his reasoning.... but I'd disagree.. again, he's 6'2" and so is always in the middle of any bikes companies' L and XL sizing.. but he picked a medium?? The Warden size Large does have a 500mm reach but the head tube is short, so he'd still need spacers which would lower that reach 5 to 10mm. His other recent reviews and the bikes he compares it to (Privateer 141 and Nukeproof Mega) he rode in size Larges with 485 and 480mm of reach, which are closer to the Warden's Large reach than the stacked Medium he rode of 466. If he's reviewing other size Large bikes shouldn't he be sticking to size Larges for a proper and true comparison of the bikes intended feel and ride?

It's also a lot more than just reach... sizing way down to a medium means he's not just riding too short of a reach for the way the bike was designed, but his stack is too low (as he talked about), his wheelbase is too short (talks about it being not as stable during high speed) and his seat tube is too short meaning he needs lots of seat post and will end up too slack of a SA... changes the whole perception of the bike.

Personally I don't like when reviewers stray from the manufactures recommended sizing for reviews. They build bikes and sweat the geo numbers in each size so that the bike rides and feels a certain way for that size of rider. When you sizing way up or down like that it messes with the feel and intentions of the bike and I think it clearly comes across in the review... he just didn't feel all that comfortable.

Sure, buying a bike for yourself and you know what kind of reach/wheelbase/stack/HTA/STA relationship you like, then ya, pick your size based on that. For a review... no thanks, I want to know how the intended design of the bike rides for intended sized rider.
  • 11 5
 @islandforlife: how does Knolly measure tt differently? Roberts' saddle is fully forward, stem is prob 40mm, and a Large has an inch longer tt--presuming they measure differently the same way on different sizes--plus a whopping four mm of additional stack. Frame will never fit at pedaling height. So...weird geo, frame eats itself from start due to faulty cabling and stay protection, swingarm is flexy, and pivots don't stay tight. But hey, welds are uniform and it's fun in loam, unlike so many other bikes. This is a generous review. Meandering book-length engineering-themed explanation incoming

@baldybrucetires: a human hair is a tenth of a mm. So it's literally splitting five hairs
  • 7 1
 What I don't get is how can companies sell 27.5 and 29er frames with basically the same length head tube?
The 29er has a 20mm longer axle to crown and 20mm larger wheel radius, so whan accounting for head angle you have a front end that is like 30mm lower for the same fork travel. Santa Cruz an Ibis more or less take this into account, their 27.5 bikes have 130-150mm head tubes but I think it's wild so many companies don't.

Are they actually meant to fit totally differently?
  • 3 0
 @ceecee: "figuratively" splitting a hair then...
  • 19 3
 This review is worse than the deleted status review lol
  • 11 1
 @KennyWatson: which is why people need to stop focussing on reach only, and also consider stack as an equally important measure in determining bike size. Sheesh!
  • 19 0
 I cannot believe that Pinkbike tech editor does not understand reach and stack... Knolly in the M size is a typical M. Reach is nothing without the stack, which is really short on Knolly. Which means when you bring it to your normal stack the reach will get much, much shorter.
  • 5 0
 @flattire: Help me out, please. Doesn't lower stack height stretch you out more? In my mind, the higher the grips the more upright I am, and hence a shorter reach. I must have this wrong but can't visualize it.
  • 8 1
 @VelkePivo: Yes, so Knolly builds bikes with a really low stack height to give options. If you want low and long, keep it as is... but want to shorten your reach and bring your bar up a bit, add spacers.
  • 15 13
 6 2 on a medium???? What was he thinking?? What an a*shole! This is intentionally obtuse.
  • 42 0
 @Dyceman: "I went 1-2 sizes down from the manufacturers sizing recommendation and now i'm going to complain that it isn't so stable at speed." lol seriously a joke
  • 11 38
flag anothermtnbiker (Aug 9, 2021 at 13:16) (Below Threshold)
 @dontcoast: you people are crazy if you think he’s on too small of bike, 475 is a proper size large bike and at 6 foot 2 this is plenty big for him. Maybe he doesn’t like riding bikes that feel like a boat, or having to lean so far forward on his wrists when climbing if he rode the 500. KNOLLY is the joke here making a medium with a 475 reach with short a ST and HT. I don’t get it. Maybe Dan likes a maneuverable bike and doesn’t always just ride full on plow & downhill. Maybe he actually rides all mountain trails??? I bet if knolly called this medium a large you folks wouldn’t be complaining. I never read in the review that he said it was too small. Oh well I’m 5’11 and selling a 475 reach bike to buy a 455 reach bike because it’s actually faster and 10x more comfortable for me and I can hit drops in the middle of steep chutes better. Oh well have fun drinking Kool aid and pedaling your boat around switchbacks and your genitals going numb on climbs. Have fun with your sprawled out riding style.
  • 15 1
 @j-t-g: Certainly seems that way. How is someone supposed to take this review seriously when the reviewer doesn't understand the correlation of reach and stack? And, given that, how is someone supposed to trust Dan Roberts' reviews in the future? This is just bad, so bad.
  • 17 4
 The photos show how comical the sizing was on this test. WTF is going on? Are they loading tests by intentionally picking wrong setup?

I ride one of these. I'm 5 foot 10 and on a large and it's perfect. A medium would be too small for me.
  • 3 1

Was thinking this myself. I’m 5’10.5” and a tweener with medium and larges. Have checked out the Warden and a 6’2” rider on one seems far too small.
  • 7 2
 @anothermtnbiker: No. To their credit, Knollys size chart actually takes the low stack into account which is why it seems like the reach is long for a given size when not consideredin context of the rest of the geometry. But, between that and their...nonstandard... ETT measurement it's easy to get confused and end up with a bike that's way too small which is unfortunately what appears to have happened in this case.

It'd be nice if manufacturers kept reach and stack similar between wheels sizes for bikes if the same wheel size and travel but at least Knolly did try to compensate they just overestimated people's ability to take l the numbers into account.
  • 2 0
 @baldybrucetires: completely agree
  • 5 0
 @KennyWatson: good point about reach....it would be nice to have a "reach at height number" kind of like some of the geo charts I've seen that have STA based on saddle height (can't remember who did that) and a few different heights.
  • 3 0
 @RadBartTaylor: Nukeproof has the most useful measures in G) saddle height at saddle offset and H) saddle offset at saddle height. According to their customer service these dimensions do take into account height of saddle itself at 4-5cm; measure from intersection of seatpost axis and top of saddle. Add H to A (reach) and there's a dimension one can compare to their current bike. I'd like to know H at Roberts' saddle height on Medium Warden 168, so I can add it to A
  • 6 0
 @flattire: Agreed. Reach is such a misleading number. I've been advocating for looking at wheelbase first, then look at head angle, rear center and BB height. This gives me a good picture of where my hands (I can usually situate my hands relative to the front wheel in a consistent manner using spacers / bar rise) are relative to the wheels and my feet. This is my descending position, and most important to me. I can then look at the seat tube angles and reach to work out my climbing position.

Size wise I'm 6' and thought the Large was too small for me. The reviewer being 2 inches taller and on a medium, is far too short a bike IMO.
  • 3 9
flag ccrida-pnw FL (Aug 9, 2021 at 18:41) (Below Threshold)
 @VelkePivo: picture a line from your feet to hands - the higher the bars the longer the reach.
  • 8 0
 Very well said, at 6'1", I can't fathom riding any brand's medium based off any preference. For a review, that would hold even more true as you are completely changing up how the bike was intended to handle. How you can make the choice to size down one or possibly two sizes, and then note a bunch of quibbles regarding bike setup and handling that are directly caused by that is absolutely bizarro. The entire review pretty much sums up how any bike is going to ride/feel if you are sized down.
  • 7 0
 @ceecee: I don't ride a warden but do ride a Fugitive LT. The cable routing is fantastic except it does rub above the link. The XL Geo is perfect for me at 6'2" and a 35" inseam. My bike has zero of that chain damage by the dropout (it's almost 2 years old). My swingarm isn't flexy and I'm 240lbs. Don't know what the reviewers problem is.
  • 2 1
 @toast2266: That what I was looking at. At 5'8"...I don't see how I can ride a "medium" with a 635 ETT and a 475 reach. How do they calculate the eSTA? My current bike has a 71 degree actual STA...but a 75 degree eSTA. The ETT is 585 and a reach of 430. In order to ride the Knolly...would I have to run a 30mm stem and slam my saddle forward? That would be like riding a unicycle...or am I looking at it wrong?
  • 3 0
 @ccrida-pnw: incorrect - reach isn't measured that way
  • 4 5
 Sorry to break it you guys, but a longer reach doesn’t mean it’s better
  • 4 1
 5'9" and my medium Warden LT fits just fine.
  • 2 1
 @islandforlife: ya re-reading those reaches on the Warden, Privateer, and Mega I think you’re right and I agree with ya. Because of the giant down sizing from L/XL to M, it does really take away from the review and comparison. If I were 6’2” I’d be a bit disappointed w the size M choice too.

Guess I’m just sour about something entirely different: after looking at a knolly chilcotin 151 (which fits my riding style most), I’m bummed to find out the smallest size is medium w a reach of 466 and I’d want a bike w a reach of 435-440. Obvs I also consider sta, hta, wb, stack, etc. As an “average height” 5’8” dude just feels weird that I can’t find a knolly chilcotin in the size I want.
  • 6 1
 " ...smack bang between an L and XL."
Chooses a medium. Complains seat tube too short and stack height too low. wut.
  • 3 0
 @baldybrucetires: think you should demo a medium and see what you think. Give them a call, they have access to bikes across North America and may be able to set you up.
  • 8 2
 @baldybrucetires: I am 5’6” with short legs (like 29” inseam) and a medium fits me well. I was on the fence and almost bought a small, but the guys at @knollybikes recommended a medium — glad I trusted them since with a small I would have had to deal with some of the issues described in this review . . . because I would be ridding too small of a frame . . . like the dipshit in this review.
  • 7 0
 I would be disappointed if I had had to pay to read this review. @billtastic85:
  • 4 2
 @islandforlife: "Personally I don't like when reviewers stray from the manufactures recommended sizing for reviews. They build bikes and sweat the geo numbers in each size so that the bike rides and feels a certain way for that size of rider."
There are some limits though, Knolly seems to sweat the numbers, but when Commencal Meta 29 has 433 CS from S to XL with 445 to 520mm reach, I don't believe all 4 sizes can be balanced. Following manufacturer recommendations blindly isn't the answer either, even though with this review I also would have picked the L.
  • 4 0
 5'9" and ride a medium with a 50mm stem and a 2mm spacer. It felt long for the first ride and now feels perfect. Excels at low speed / steep tech moves and high speed stability. Not the greatest on gravel roads or tech climbing (170mm fork)

As knolly says,
"nimble enough to get you into trouble and burly enough to get you out"
  • 7 0
 Seriously. I'm 187cm and looked the geo chart and thought "nice to see a mfgr where I probably will fit a L and not have to size up". The reviewer put his personal preference/sizing hunch over what would be reasonable and customary for a prospective buyer. Not much usefulness in impressions where you are 1-2 sizes out of intended fit.
  • 10 0
 @islandforlife: THIS!
Nike says I should wear a size 9, so I got a pair of size 7.5's to review.
Guess what, my feet hurt and it's difficult to run in them...
One of the worst reviews I've ever read on PB (and they want to charge us money to read this lol!?)
  • 4 7
 @ridestuff: no, what happened is he wears a size 9 aka 475 reach in Adidas, but Nike’s size 9 is 520 mm reach. So he went with a nike 7.5 at 475 reach.
  • 2 0
 @anothermtnbiker: Reach us no way similar to a shoe size. It is a number that only means something if you also consider other geometry like stack, seat tube angle and other numbers.

If you like shoe analogies, it would be more like picking your shoe based on how wide it is and not considering how long it is. If you picked your shoes that way you could get the right size shoe, from companies that use typical proportions, but if a particular shoe company made their shoes a bit wider per length, those shoes wouldn't fit.
  • 2 9
flag BenTheSwabian (Aug 10, 2021 at 10:07) (Below Threshold)
 Riding a size XL would probably just have accentuated the characteristics that Dan Roberts didn't like. Upsizing would hae probably made the bike more stable due to it's longer wheelbase, but it doesn't fix the suspension characteristics.
  • 11 1
 @BenTheSwabian: Except all the characteristics that he talked about that he didn't like literally had to do with being on too small of a bike. Everything else he said about the suspension was great, but said in a weirdly negative way.

Anyway, anyone that misunderstands the fundamentals of bike geometry and sizing so badly can't really be trusted to offer a credible opinion. So for me, this review is useless.
  • 3 14
flag BenTheSwabian (Aug 10, 2021 at 11:24) (Below Threshold)
 @islandforlife: The guy is an engineer, worked for Scott and designed DH bikes. He's probably one of the most qualified people in the entire PB editorial team. I think if he didn't like a bike that simply means he didn't like the bike and not that he misunderstood it. The thing about upsizing is, that in the case of the Warden the frame would have gained 25mm of reach. That sounds like a lot on paper, but really is just about the width of a finger. How much stability can that really add? A truly significant amount that would be noticeable under real life conditions? I kinda doubt it.
  • 11 1

Except there are riders 5’10” and 5’9” on the same size? The tester is 4 to 5 inches taller and its abundantly clear that he was far too tall to be on a medium sized Warden. Yes, sizing up would have made a difference for overall feel, not just stability. This was a blatant oversight and mot a credible review as a result.
  • 8 1
 @BenTheSwabian: You'd be surprised how many engineers do stupid &$(#, I work with them all the time, they lose site of reality when only looking at numbers.....just sayin'
  • 14 1
 "Huh, I tested the smallest possible size that would be still theoretically rideable and why is the stack so low and this dropper not long enough? Memo for my notes: could be more stable"

He looks like a monkey humping a football in the ride shots.
  • 4 0
 @Tmackstab: 20*cos(64.5) =~8.6. Bit less than 10, but close.

As a rough guideline, on a modern enduro bike, adding x spacers reduces reach by x/2
  • 3 0
 @hansbauck: judging by his upvotes - some other folks on here obviously skipped math class too...
  • 11 1
 @BenTheSwabian: Engineer's syndrome is a real thing. Once you start being able to solve really complex and difficult problems on paper, you start figuring you can solve essentially any problem on paper, even outside of your specialty. Dude looked at geo numbers he called "sparse," ignored the advice of the people who built the bike, and wrote a review that boils down to all the downsides of a downsized bike.

Just look at the pictures. He looks like he's about to put some high rise bars on that thing so he looks cooler hopping curbs on his way to buy a pack of pall malls and a 40. I'm surprised nobody reported the bike as stolen after seeing him ride it.

Not a knolly owner or fan, but I've learned nothing useful about their bikes from this review.
  • 3 4
 @insertfunusername: okay let me simplify for you, he prefers a a 475mm reach. So he chose the bike with a 475mm reach.
  • 4 0
 Yall got played... this was just PB adding some controversy to the website to keep the comments section ALIVE for the PayWall change... this is Textbook Reality TV/Bad press is still Good press/Trump POA right here!!! Smile
  • 4 0
 @anothermtnbiker: You can't look at reach by itself, you need to take the stack into account as well to determine the "spread" I think the bigger issue is he disregarded the designer's intent for how the bike is to be sized, this would be like getting the smallest possible geometron or pole which is the whole point of those brands.
  • 3 0
 @anothermtnbiker: I prefer shoes with a width of 4 1/8" width at the ball of the foot. Is that the only dimension I should consider when buying a pair of shoes?

If you isolate reach, that it becomes a totally meaningless number. Look at some of the work that PVD has done on that. I think some of his bikes have a reach of 530 mm and he is shorter than 6'.
  • 3 0
 @anothermtnbiker: in three of his most recent reviews he rode larges. One at 480, one at 485, and one at 490 reach. All of which had stack heights 35-40mm higher. So I dunno if this preference for shorter reach theory holds up.
  • 4 0
 @kylar: yeah, that's where this "he's a genius engineer" story really falls apart. I didn't know to look at stack height, either. But I listen when people at bike shops (that I know) tell me stuff. I'd listen to people at the manufacturer selling me the bike when they tell me which one I'll enjoy the most. Reviewer just thought he was too smart for that.

Those pictures are comical.
  • 2 0
 Came here to say this. Sounds like he chose the size based on numbers, and not in person based on feel. Kinda taints most of the impressions... seems like a solid rider on a not-so-solidly sized test bike
  • 3 0
 @shmarv:"Kinda taints most of the impression".... yeah, he should have chode the size L, would have been a gooch fit for him....
  • 3 0
 @ceecee: Generous review? The guy complains about how the seatpost sticks out too far, when he selected a bike arguably 2 sizes too small. Maybe his views weren't quite so favourable because he thought his numbers analysis was more accurate than manufacturer recommendations.

Would love to know if Dan used to ride XXL bikes 15 years ago if his bike choices are based on reach measurements
  • 2 3
 After actually "reading the article" and looking at the geo chart I do get his point. You can't always sit on the bike before buying. How many people have a Knolly dealer down the street where they could go test ride? And on that point how many people have ANY bikes in stock down the street where they can go and test ride sizes to find their new ride right now anyway...?? Smile

Even pre pandemic shortage it's still true that you VERY OFTEN have to pick bikes based on geo charts and compare them with the geo charts of bikes you already know fit good and then just roll the dice. I've never had a shop offer to order me an XL bike for me to try out without me being on the hook to buy the bike whether it fit OR not. (and because of that I have bought large bikes that were too small and XL bikes that were too big) I'm just a smidge over 6'2" and I'm most often between L and XL's. But I've also considered and rode mediums and XXL bikes depending on the geo numbers. So again, I get where he was coming from.

ON the flip side... it's not really fair to the manufacturer if you review their product outside it's intended purposes and I think especially for mountain bikes fit/sizing is part of the product they are selling. If this was an A+ review nobody would care what size he was on. But as a product tester, if you have issues with the product the first thing you have to do is make sure your using it right... And if your complaining about the short seat tube when your reviewing a smaller frame then the manufacturer suggests then it should have been a "light-bulb" moment.

First thought is that they should have shipped the bike to a shorter tester and just said the timing wasn't going to work out so the 2nd tester could have a go without preconception. 2nd option, order in a large frame and repeat the testing and compare the results from the two sizes. (never know, maybe the riding impressions wouldn't change?) 3rd option, not as good as the first two. But at the very least "this" review should have been written with the mindset of "maybe I should have got the large". Honestly it would have been a poor review at that point because you'd be like, "it's really playful, but I wonder if that would be true on the large". Or, "it's not as stable at speed, but I wonder if it would be in a large". Course at that point you should have known this review wasn't going to fly and went with option 1 or 2!! Smile

Still, as someone who has struggled with bike fit their whole life I do appreciate the issues that were raised.
  • 124 1
 As someone else that is 6'2" and never ridden a knolly, I can not fathom why you'd test a medium and not the manufacturer's recommendation.
  • 18 1
 It's odd that Knolly would have sent a 6'2" tester a medium.
  • 20 2
 @alexsin: But would that change the gripes? The loose hardware, the areas of exposure and rubbing etc...
  • 29 4
 @schlockinz: That's all stuff that could be fixed, you can't fix a frame which is too small for the rider.
  • 4 1
 @alexsin: i am 6'1 & 1/2" and any medium feels like a kids bike maybe that was the ONLY spare frame they had
  • 13 0
 Maybe this was destin for Levy...you know, before he was suddenly, and without warning sent to "curling camp"
  • 7 11
flag KJP1230 (Aug 9, 2021 at 10:45) (Below Threshold)
 He's pretty clear that he is 6'2" and long-legged, which implies a shorter torso. He probably felt more comfortable on a 475.5 reach than 500 reach bike.

As someone who is also 6'2" with long-ish legs, I get it. My current rig is a 170mm+ enduro bike with 487mm reach on my size Large. It feels long. Dare I say, a touch too long, especially with my preferred bar width. If I had a gun to my head and had to pick a 500mm or 475.5mm reach, I would happily go for the 475.5. No question.
  • 23 0
 @KJP1230: The problem is he then stuck 20mm of spacers under the stem which shortened the reach to 466, so he's a 6'2" guy riding a bike with too short of w wheelbase as intended, too short of a reach as intended and as a medium has a really short seat tube so he's using a ton of seat post and ending up with a slack STA. You can't just pick reach and size wayy down. You have to look at stack, seat tube height, and wheelbase as well.

He should have picked a large which still has a short head tube, put 10mm of spacers under it and rode the size that was designed for him... as he did with the other bikes he tested and then compared against this bike. Doesn't make sense for reviewers to be picky about size. They should review the size intended for them so that we get an accurate understanding of how the bike's intended size rides, not just most bikes in size large, then one in medium.
  • 7 4
 @KJP1230: I'm in the same boat: 6'1" with a 36" inseam. I have a large Evil Following with a 452mm reach and a 2021 Chilcotin with a 490 reach. While obviously not an apples-to-apples comparison, I have to say the 490 reach feels enormous to me. I'm slowly getting used to the bigger bike, but for weeks I was thinking of selling it and getting a medium. The Evil is soooo much more playful, and I think the shorter reach is part of the reason (for me). I'm thinking 470-475 would be ideal for me
  • 6 8
 @islandforlife: By your logic, he would've selected a size L, ended up with an effective reach of ~495mm (after adding the spacer). I'm telling you, man - that is simply too long for a lot of folks. I said it to you below - entirely possible that this bike sizing simply didn't work for this guy, but you can't fault him for trying to make it work.
  • 22 0
 @KJP1230: Then he should have tested the correct size bike and complained about the long reach.
He's a tester, not a buyer.
Or maybe he would have found out that it worked well for him with the long reach. We'll never know.
I'm 5.9" on a Medium Warden and it works well for me. I probably would not be happy with a Small one.
  • 15 1
 @schlockinz: The rubbing is build error with the cables too short. Dunno if knolly did that. My cables don't rub.
  • 7 0
 @Marcolino1 100% agree.
  • 64 3
 This bike is a hot mess. That said, you should have ridden a large or XL. Bizarre review.
  • 53 0
 "Give it something like this, and it is in its element. Not absolutely at the ragged edge but still cracking on and terrain that just undulates so smoothly up and down as well as left and right that you’re not getting all twisted up and chucked around. All the while needing to absorb the constant pitter patter of those roots and rocks that are just breaking through the soil as well as support you in the undulations as the trail makes its way down the hill."

what the f*ck did i just read? dan roberts, the king of logorrhea
  • 17 0
 I hate to say it but I agree. It was a very hard review to read. Some copyediting, or maybe just a copy of Elements of Style, would go a long way.
  • 6 0
 I agree with the sentiment about the bike at the edge of speed it definitely takes commitment and can feel a little skittish. I regularly ride mine through some very rough and chunky descents at speed though and maybe I am used to it but doesn’t feel like it’s holding me back.

I think some slightly longer chain stays on the larger sizes would be a benefit.

I am also 5’11 on a large but have a few spacers under the stem.
  • 8 1
 I interpreted that as, “It’s real pleasant on green and blue flow trails!”
  • 6 0
 @dmondave: Outside will spring for Grammarly Pro
  • 3 0
 I came here to post the same thing.
  • 2 0
 @suspended-flesh: ahh yes, those big co perks!
  • 51 5
 Of course the bike can’t go full throttle and smash when it’s 1-2 sizes below where you should be.

Might as well not even have posted the review. Trash
  • 37 5
 The way the seat tube intersects the downtube above the bottom bracket is genius. I cant believe no one else has thought of that. Oh wait...
  • 24 2
 They should patent that!
  • 10 5
 @sspiff: No.. Knolly is just one cool bunch of mountain bikers. Not some huge company with only money on their minds like big S. They would never say that, for example, only Knolly is allowed to make bikes with straight seat tubes. They are not like that..
  • 5 2
 Knolly was doing that with the original V-Tach frames waaaaay before anyone else was.
  • 5 1
 @aushred: I think @pakleni was joking
  • 30 1
 How I can believe to this review if the reviewer is completely out of size? In fact, if the bike doesn’t excel in fast flat out sections and it is great in tech terrain, maybe that is a consequence of the rider height versus reach relationship.
  • 26 1
 Going to have to agree this seems like a pretty poor review based on incorrect sizing resulting in:
Extra slack effective STA
Shortened reach (30mm spacers)

For all of the technical reviews that Dan usually performs, it is hard to understand the apparent lack of intelligent decision making in selecting a size medium. I mean it looks like he just looked at the reach number in isolation and selected a bike based on that sole measurement?

Seems pretty obvious on paper that the reach would end up being much shorter to achieve suitable stack height and the seat post would have been extended to the max resulting in a much slacker STA.

disclaimer: I have never ridden a Knolly and have no bias either for or against the brand (though they are not particularly interesting to me)
  • 17 1
 You nailed it. That's what we are all thinking....why Dan didn't think that completely destroys his credibility and any other insights he might have from riding it. It's a better review of why to buy the right size...which would've been a large. If you're going to try and make a review, it's most useful to follow the manufacturers suggestions. That is going to actually give people useful information, and you might actually realize you like something about it. If you never try something new, you never know. What a waste of everyone's time...
  • 12 0
 @takeiteasyridehard: Yep, especially because every other bike he's reviewed has been a size large, including the the two he compared it against... like wtf were you smoking Dan.
  • 27 1
 I'm 5'8" and ride the M 2020 warden. You are on the wrong size
  • 29 8
 Ah, finally what the industry has been asking for: a long-travel, 27.5"-only bike with a slack seat angle, short stack, high BB and Di2 battery housing.
  • 17 4
 77 degree STA is slack? As for long travel 27.5's... you know this isn't the only bike they make right? They also make long travel 29rs, short travel 29rs and short travel 27.5's... just providing options. Sounds like you want a long low and slack 29r... go check out the Chilcotin. And his comment about high bottom brackets is a bit strange... since when is 338mm high? Isn't that like one of the lowest in the industry? As for the Di2 housing... the removable guard is there anyway, ya it fits a Di2 battery, but you can put whatever you want in it. Complaints about providing options for all customers is a strange take.
  • 11 12
 @islandforlife: nah, @KJP1230 is right, weird bike
  • 4 3
 @islandforlife: only at a very specific point is the effective STA 77 due to the crazy amount of (formerly patented) seat tube offset.
  • 4 13
flag KJP1230 (Aug 9, 2021 at 11:23) (Below Threshold)
 @islandforlife: 1st on the STA: the reviewer was pretty clear that the stated 77 degree seat tube angle worked out to an actual angle of 69 degrees the the bike was configured, ridden and tested.

As for the BB: the geo chart from Knolly says that the BB is either 348 or 338, depending on the setting. The reviewer put it in "slack" and measured: 344mm was the BB height. This is high - dare I say "very high" - for a 170mm, 27.5" bike. Want to compare? The current 130mm travel, doesnt-even-have-a-rear-pivot Specialized Stumpjumper has a BB heigh of 333mm. That is on a XCish trail bike with a 65.5 degree head angle and big wheels.

You got me on the Di2 thing. But in my defense, I'm just making a sarcastic comment on a bike forum.

To me, this bike is just bizarre. HTA from a trail bike, BB height in line with XC/Trail bikes, Reach of a downhill bike, Suspension Travel from an Enduro/Freeride bike. This reviewer felt pretty confident that this bike didn't do anything particularly well, and was best suited for a very specific type of trail. I would argue that the type of trail that suites this bike is actually better suited by other bikes. There are plenty of lighter 130-150mm bikes on the market that are better on the way up, and on the way down.
  • 2 5
 @mm732: ya, they measure it at the typical rider height (which I think is with seat at or just above the bars)... so as long as you're near that you'll be at 77 or within a 10th or degree or two.
  • 2 5
 @Assclapp: Thank you. Wink See the last section of my response above. You call it weird, I call it bizarre.
  • 5 1
 @KJP1230: STA... if he was on a Large it would probably have been bang on 77 degrees. He's 6'2" riding a bike wayyy to small for him which means he's using wayyy too much seat post. That's just part of the reason you should ride the right size bike.

Weird... not sure how he measured that high of a BB, but my Chilcotin is 338 when measured on flat concrete. Which is low for a long travel bike. Lower travel bikes can have lower BB's because they don't drop as far as full travel or sag compared with long travel bikes... so you have to compare to other long travel bikes. When you do, it's one of the lowest.

HTA of 64.5 makes sense. BB is one of the lowest of long travel 27.5 bikes. Reach is long because head tube is short so it gives more options (long and low keep as is, add some spacers to shorten the reach and increase stack). Bike didn't "do anything well because he was riding a kids bike for his size so his review doesn't hold water for me... I'd like to hear is thoughts on how he feels riding a size large.

This review where they rode the proper sized bike makes a lot more sense - www.bikemag.com/2020-bible-of-bike-tests/bible-review-knolly-warden
  • 8 0
 @KJP1230: just gonna point out that in your comparison to the Stumpjumper, wheel size doesn’t matter for BB height, it matters for BB drop. And also, wouldn’t you expect the static BB height to be lower for a bike with 40mm less travel? If the static heights were all the same, then you’d end up with your pedals flat on the ground riding long travel bikes.
  • 6 7
 @islandforlife: Simply put: 500mm is pretty long. I sympathize with the reviewer and his choice to size down - something that is actively encouraged by lots of brands today.

I am also 6'2", and my current rig is a 170mm enduro bike with 487mm reach. For my preferred bar width, 487mm is quite long. I would not want my bike to be longer, and my previous bike (Yeti SB150) was 480mm and felt appropriate. So the ask from Knolly seems to be to accept a 500mm reach if you are ~6' tall, or size down to 475.5mm.

Simply put, this bike may not have worked for this reviewer's proportions. That said, even the Bike Mag review that you linked (I remember it) effectively said that the Knolly was pretty good, and rode like a trail bike despite having 170mm of travel. Of the bikes in category, none of the editors chose the Knolly as a favorite - but glad you like yours!
  • 2 8
flag anothermtnbiker (Aug 9, 2021 at 13:25) (Below Threshold)
 @KJP1230: nope 348 is low. Try riding some real tech if you think that’s “very high”
  • 15 7
 Knolly fanboys unite like Voltron
  • 8 0
Looking at just reach on a bike with a really low stack makes no sense. It ends up being all about where your hands end up, and there is a ton of ways to vary that. If a bike is a bit short, less spacers and a tall bar, if the bike feels long, lots of spacers and a low-rise bar. The testers downsized to medium and then downsized again by adding a bunch of spacers. Going down in size 2 different ways likely, made the bike handle way different than intended.

The testers could have chose the large and then put a bunch of spacers and a flat bar and had his hands in about the right spot that he likes and given the bike a chance to be ridden in a state that Knolly intended.
  • 3 1
 @Assclapp: I don't agree with any of your comments except: points for Voltron.
  • 23 4
 I'll be honest - visually not the best looking bike, but I've always wanted one since I know how well they work in the intended terrain....engineering function over form, it's a beautiful thing in it's own right....
  • 1 0
 I was hoping to take a look at the Mclaren orange but the website only shows a small dot. Most sites show the frame in whatever colour you choose once frame colour is clicked on. Weird oversight given they're asking someone to drop multiple thousands on their product.
  • 1 0
 @rrolly: agreed it's a weird approach but you can find lots of pics on IG. The papaya orange is stunning
  • 22 2
 Knolly must have some pretty clever engineers, being able to fit that much welding on to one frame is no small feat. Chapeau.
  • 4 7
 Hence the weight. It's a very heavy frame.
  • 15 1
 If he's going to compare a Knolly to an enduro race rig, and if that's (clearly) all he knows, then he should have reviewed the Chilcotin. And if he's riding a new bike with no experience with the company, he really shouldn't have second-guessed their recommended sizing. But who knows this bike was probably meant for Levy until Levy took whatever that weird hiatus was and PB got left holding a bike with no proper person to review.
  • 5 0
 Totally. Knolly has a Chilcotin 167 to compare to the Nukeproof. That and the med size that should have been a large makes for a somewhat weird review all around. PB fail....
  • 5 1
 Totally… In other news: the Yeti SB165 isn’t as good as the SB150 at high speeds lol
  • 14 1
 Apart from getting the wrong size (which I think we’ve covered by now!) why does Roberts then continuously compare it to 29er race bikes? It’s not a 29er or a race bike and it’s clearly not trying to be, so how about judging it for what it is, which seems to be a 27.5 long travel all mountain/trail bike for recreation, not racing. Really bizarre review all round.
  • 13 0
 "and with all these ridiculously fast but sometimes single minded 29ers of late I might have forgotten about some of the other ways to have fun on a bike other than just scaring myself with speed."

Bingo bango.
  • 12 0
 Seriously, the size choice alone makes this review hardly relevant. I tried to let it slide, and i do get why choosing a bike by reach makes sense, but the discrepancy is just too big and leaves any potential buyer scratching their head whether the reviewer's opinion is even valid.
  • 19 4
 Back in my day (2019) you could get a whole alu bike for $2500
  • 4 8
flag Theysayivebeentheone FL (Aug 9, 2021 at 8:12) (Below Threshold)
 You still can brother alubike is a Mexican bike brand that makes aluminum bikes lol n krbo bike is the same company making Carbon bikes lol
  • 4 1
 with 9 by 3 and a shit fork and Hayes brakes
  • 7 2
 Even a year ago...

2020 Capra AL 27.5...MSRP $2300
  • 1 1
 I got my Status 160 for $2600 in December, pretty happy with it
  • 1 1
 I feel bad for anyone who didn't buy right before the pandemic. So lucky I got my new bike end of Feb.
  • 14 3
 I've had two of them (endorphin & delirium) tough as nails, reliable, stiff , geometry way ahead of the curve (on those bikes) lightweight when compared to carbon (frame) they work super well in the wet (where they are designed for). Very well thought out bikes, they are a work of passion and it shows. The devil is in the details with these things, and you have to see one in Raw aluminum.
  • 19 8
 Details like cable rub and chain slap?
  • 12 5
 @PHeller: And constantly loosening bearings?
  • 6 0
 @neimbc: have never had any bearings loosen in 4 years on them. I have had the little T-nuts on the push link loosen though. If Loctite & torque wrench is used on them, they don't budge though. Have had friends lose those things, user error usually.
  • 7 0
 @PHeller: I dont have any more issues with cable rub or chain slap on my Endorphin (2016) or Delirium (2017) than any other bikes from that time. These are pretty minor IMO and I'd much rather have this on an alloy bike than carbon, I'd be curious to see photos of those same areas on carbon bikes tested @ PB.
  • 8 4
 @PHeller: If you build the bike properly with proper cable lengths, you get rub at all.
  • 1 0
 @PHeller: one way or another I'll be raw aluminum. may as well order it from the factory!
  • 5 0
 Agreed. I recently got the new Chilcotin in raw and it looks amazing; so much better than I was expecting. Oh, BTW, rode a podium for two full seasons at Whistler and currently riding bike parks with my Chilcotin and no loose bearings or other issues. Rock solid
  • 5 0
 @VelkePivo: the new chilcotin is rad. I've had the 151 since January and absolutely love it. Zero similar complaints to the review on loose bearings and cable rub. And the raw is just too pretty
  • 3 0
 @PHeller: I agree about the chain slap and I had to add extra protection to my chain stay and seat stay to avoid damaging the paint too badly. No issues with cable run though.

I have also never had an issue with loosening bolts once they have been torqued to spec.
  • 11 0
 Size comments pretty well covered... I'm also wondering about the build and the state of the derraileur clutch. I'm on a fugitive, a fundamentally very similar frame, an dmy sweaty, chain stay and swing link have nowhere near that kind of wear. Like... none...in coming up on 2000 miles.
  • 4 0
 'and my sweaty' Thanks phone. You guys know what I mean.
  • 6 3
 800 miles on my Fugitive. Chainstay and seatstay are probably more beat up than the test bike. My frame eats bearings and the pivots all had to be re-loctited & over-torqued to get them to stay on. I added small fenders around the chainstay yoke and seatstay pivot to help with the contamination.

The suspension behavior is nice, but not worth all the problems.
  • 2 1
 @WinoBot: Weird. Like @Glenngineer's bike, mine also doesn't have much wear to speak of. Haven't had the bearing issue either. What kind of terrain do you ride?

I also have a fender on the seatstay pivot but I ride through PNW winters so it's more for a clean(er) butt than to prevent wear.
  • 1 0
 @awoodward: PWN year round. Been through 3 sets of bearings in 800 miles
  • 14 1
 cons -Not the best option for flat out and rough terrain pros- Confidence in steep and tech lines i am so confused.
  • 10 0
 I think that is the epitome of the sizing down vs sizing up argument. He sized so far down the bike only excels in tight techy rock gardens. It then isn’t good at just barreling over rough lines like a bigger bike would do.
  • 5 0
 Because they say what ever to get clicks & sell bikes.
  • 3 2
 @DJR2013: Every DH line is a tech line and is considered rough terrain.......next...........it is a big bike it looks like an oaf
  • 13 2
 So basically this is a worthless review where the test rider arbitrarily decided to ride a medium even though he is 6‘ 2”
  • 15 4
 One thing Knolly does have going for it is some really pretty-looking welds....
  • 19 8
 Ouch. Pretty sure the real reason they reviewed it in Europe was to protect the reviewer from the Knolly fan club.
  • 18 2
 It won't help; "We don't know who you are reviewing for. We don't know what you want in geo number terms, particularly reach. If you are looking for a (Scott) Ransom, we can tell you are looking in the wrong place.
But what we do have are a very particular set of skills; skills we have acquired over a very long career, safeguarding Knolly reviews everywhere. Skills that make us a nightmare for people like you. If you let that negative review go to the "Trash" folder now, that'll be the end of it. We will not look for you, We will not pursue you.
But if you don't, we will look for you...
We will find you...
And we will make you ride a bike with a 69* HTA, tiny reach and no water bottle mounts....
  • 9 1
 So they release the review in the wrong medium ( interpretive dance please). Then they do the review on a medium and create a large kerfuffle in the comment section. Heads are going to roll! The new corporate overlords don't tolerate this deviation from Outside standards. Nobody will pay for access to the comments section to complain about this!
  • 9 1
 Hey this is the bike I have! Got the Dawn Patrol version almost exactly a year ago (has a Lyrik - this was just before they started to spec the Zeb).

I disagree with the author's take on the overall ride impressions. As other's have noted, sizing down that far is likely the culprit of his problems. It's no enduro sled but it does handle the rough stuff well while also being fun on jumps and whatnot. It also climbs better than what he made it out to be, imo. I've demo'd a Pivot Firebird (XTR/XT build) and I'd say the Warden is a slightly worse climber - I think mainly due to the weight difference more than pedaling efficiency. I'd say it climbs on par with the Nomad - maybe a bit better, even, but I didn't feel very comfortable on the demo Nomad so I probably just didn't have it quite dialed in for my preferences. (These demos were in Sedona and Seattle respectively.)
It's all around much better than the YT Jeffsy AL I had previously (no surprise there).

Frame wear and loam ledges are definitely an issue. Thankfully they're easy to fix. Slapping one of the bendy plastic mudguards on the back protects the linkage (and your bum!). Clear frame tape on the other bits. My chainstay wear is nowhere near as bad as pictured - I wonder if the derailleur needs more tension? I have a chainguide which might be helping . . . one of those STFU things would probably do wonders too.

My reverb lever also fell out so I'd throw loctite on that bolt as soon as you can. It needs regular venting too. Honestly I'd get a different post if possible. I plan to eventually replace mine. My rear wheel also needed spokes tightened after a few months of riding - isn't this expected of pretty much any wheel, though?

But yeah, overall it's a good bike. You can probably get better bang for your buck - this is a pricey "boutique" aluminum bike after all - but I don't think you'd regret buying it (assuming it suits the trails you ride). I even just bikepacked the Olympic Adventure Trail on it and had a blast so it's doing great as my quiver killer.

Feel free to AMA!
  • 10 0
 Definitely seems like one of those bikes that is focused more on performance than looks.
  • 7 0
 I'm surprised either Dan Roberts or Knolly bikes hasn't chimed in here.

Also surprised at this Con, considering it does have an image of being a proper smasher:

- Not the best option for flat out and rough terrain

I wouldn't buy one, but like the colour and don't mind the style.
  • 13 6
 total bullshit review you were on the wrong size bike 29ers aren't the end all be all Knolly's designed the way it is for a reason they last forever do not break and the big industry giants don't like them for that reason and you can get parts 10 years later... Knolly is the best company out there for customer service and longevity of their products... go back to ride your 29er
  • 11 0
 Did Outside fire all the copy editors?
  • 7 0
 I am the perfect market for this bike. Slow fire road pedals to have fun on the downs. Not necessarily fast at either of those things. But the problem is, very few people in this part of the market want to admit to being in this corner of the market. We aspire to be hard edged enduro racers or free ride gods, so want a bike that allows us to be one of those things.
  • 6 0
 "he's not really an advocate for solely using anti-squat and rise to explain how a bike is going to pedal or brake"

Yes!! Even the linked PB article only deals with "load transfer from acceleration or deceleration", completely ignoring how the actual geometry and locations of the components can effect the suspension far beyond the load transfer and chainline effects.

For example, a huge part of why a 4-bar or SplitPivot/ABP usually feels way more active under braking than any single-pivot (including faux-bar) is because the rotational forces from the wheel going through the brake aren't directly trying to rotate the main swingarm and compress the suspension.

Those anti-rise graphics showing the intersections of pivots and CG and contact patches and such only tell a part of the story, just the weight transfer, completely ignoring the location of the brake itself. So sure, more info about anti-rise is great, but ignoring part of the equation is almost as bad as, or maybe worse than, not having the equation at all, since it then breeds misinformation.
  • 2 0
 Just noticed the indication that there are "real world considerations" in that Enginerding article, hahaha. It literally only looks at pivot and contact patch locations related to an an idealized and static center of gravity. That's pretty damn far from "real world".
  • 1 2
 @justinfoil: that very unorthodox (for modern bikes) looking lower pivot placement makes me wonder if the rear introduces more pitch than other designs that could contribute to some of what OP is describing.
  • 6 0
 235 days until April 1st!!!
I am just shy of 6foot and have a large chilcotin 26, A medium Delirium 26 and a medium podium 27.5/26 and can't fathom riding 2 sizes down. ( perhaps contacting Knolly and asking may have been a better plan)
And i have never been on a bike that is so controlled and fast going down(It climbs like a billy goat as well) Anyone not feeling that on their K bike.. may be worth a look at shock adjustment or changes. Not a fan boy but know how a planted suspension should feel and this platform has it in spades when correctly shocked and sprung. Mine are all coil sprung. One Avalanche, one Marocchi, one DVO.
  • 10 0
 I can't wait for Dan's long term review of the XXXXS Grim Donut.
  • 10 1
 Mike Kazimer: messes up Mezzer review.
Dan Roberts: Hold my beer, there is a Knolly in the shed.
  • 6 0
 I am on my 5th Knolly bike and have loved every one of them. Currently on a Fugitive LT and am always impressed with how well the suspension works and how much fun the bike is to ride. My bike uses the same cable routing and the cables never touch the bike. They may have a bit more friction, but they stay out of the way and are well thought out. I haven't ridden the latest Warden but I had 2 of the previous versions and they were definitely not flexy. I think this review is completely off the mark. I am 5'6" and ride a medium Fugitive, so IMO the reviewer was definitely on the wrong size frame.
  • 6 0
 Even the worst reviews can shed some light on where there might be opportunity for improvement... Knolly's RD cable routing, I'd say, is too long with too many bends. Will someone please put a few cable stops/ties on the belly of the down tube and chain stay - super easy, unobtrusive way to permit the easiest, smoothest, likely shortest, routing that is also visually appealing. Headtubes - they are too short on Knolly's in general. Its hard to find a bike anywhere that does not have a stack of spacers under the stem. All that said, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who's sung more praise for Knolly bikes than me. My die hard Endorphin, with a rear coil shock, and proper tires, rides downhill more like my full bore DH rig than any bike I've ever owned. It is so composed and capable, yet nimble, in the rough I can't believe the bike doesn't have more travel. Some sort of magic going on there. On the climbs it is also extremely capable. I think its a combination of not being overtraveled, and I run a slightly stiffer coil (I let heavy duty tires soak up the fine chatter). When the climbing is super steep or not rough I flip the Cane Creek's climb switch and it works wonders. I'm still a fan of well designed climb switches that bump up the LSC - it lets the back end ride higher and weight shifts are negated. Durability-wise, my Knolly and its pivots have held up well.
  • 3 0
 Just to chime in on the cable management... I have a new gen bike and whoever built this bike cut those cables far too short. You just need an extra inch or so and the cables never contact the link, it's pretty dead simple.

Again, the short headtubes are a feature Knolly offers to give all riders choice. They go hand in hand with the very long reaches. If you want very long reach and love that low attack position, then slam you stem. Like modern but more "normal" reach... add a few spacers... and anywhere in-between.

But yes I agree, the suspension design does provide some magic that not many others can replicate.
  • 14 5
 Probably the best looking Knolly to date and still fugly.
  • 5 0
 Lots of 29’er bias in this review. Every couple of years I demo a 29, and I still haven’t found one that jumps and corners like a 27.5. I agree that they have their merits, but I like a more playful bike. He really struggled to say anything positive about this this bike.
  • 2 0
 I have one. It's wheelbase is quite big so I wouldn't say it categorically beats 29ers in cornering. It does still feel more nimble than most of the 29ers I've ridden, though - despite its weight.
  • 5 0
 @mikeyrides: The bias in nearly every review. Most reviewers/bike journalists are focused on the "all-out speed" that 29ers provide or whatever other attribute they believe makes them appealing. What I find strange is that not one of them seems to be objective enough to recognize any of the disadvantages. They certainly hype the merits, but interestingly act like there aren't any associated downsides. Really? Not even one??

I wish they could assign 27.5 reviews to someone who actually likes them. When the reviewer is a died-in-the-wool 29er fan, I find their review of any 27.5 bike pretty useless. Before reading, you know the con is it doesn't have 29-inch wheels...
  • 6 0
 @Climbtech: Yeah, this review makes me miss Levy. Even though he had his biases, at least he'd imagine who a bike could be for. Now it's just all people pretending that every bike needs at steep STA and 29er wheels.
  • 5 0
 This is a ridiculous review. I have an older gen Warden. I have never had an issue with a linkage bolt loosening, cable rub, chain rub or anything actually despite 3 years of solid use. They have a lot of thought behind every aspect of their bikes. All you have to do is speak with Noel for 10 minutes and you'll realize that he has spent way more time thinking about bikes than you ever will. As has been said over and over, why would this guy test a medium. Geometron starts their reach at 470 and goes up to 555. These reach numbers on the Warden aren't crazy. This reviewer seems to think he knows best seeing as how he got the absolute wrong size, tried to extend everything up, then complained he had too many spacers and too much seatpost!
Pinkbike should not have published this rubbish review. In fact, if I were Knolly, I'd make them re-do the review with a properly fit bike.
Finally where was he riding in the sea to sky that he describes the trails as "soft, loamy, undulating and starting to become just a touch more rooty and rocky as the soft ground breaks up and exposes them." I think he missed all the good trails when he came here. Perhaps he just lapped 1/2 nelson?
  • 5 1
 I'm 5' 11" and ride a large Warden LT and the fit is perfect. I had come off the previous gen Warden that was also a large, and when standing the two bikes side by side, the current Warden LT has amazing geo. That combination of the longer reach, short HT, while running an i9 stem at 32mm is pretty amazing. I have loads more control at high speed then the last gen Warden, and the climbing not bad. Just got a podium in an XC race on my LT the other day, yet it reminds me of my DH bike when pointed down. Amazing bike.
  • 6 2
 If you're a bike reviewer, your job is to review the bikes as they would be recommended to the consumer. Therefore, I don't see why you (or anyone else, since I've seen others do this) would ever go against manufacturers recommendations. That doesn't help us as a consumer. I don't wanna hear a review of a Porsche 911 RennSport that you got modified off tge showroom floor if I'm looking to buy the base car.
  • 3 9
flag Linc (Aug 9, 2021 at 21:26) (Below Threshold)
 Dude - bike sizing is just geometry numbers on a page. Once you're an experienced rider, you know what works for your body and what doesn't. No competent bike rider selects a bike based on the manufacturer recommendation.
  • 5 0
 @Linc: obviously. But you're missing the whole point of what a review is supposed to be. Bike manufacturers created the bike for a person of a certain size. If everybody just sized down and always did what they were used to, then Mondraker and GeoMetron would never be who they are and bike geometry would have never changed. The point of reviews is to tell us, without having to go ride or buy the bike ourselves, whether a new change in geometry is worth considering.
  • 2 0
 And when I said "anyone else, since I've seen others do this" I just mean other bike reviewers. Not other consumers.
  • 8 2
 WE, the pinkbike commenters, demand the author gets a proper size warden and re-evaluates the bike, a posts an addendum. You owe it to Knolly.
  • 5 0
 And just like that… I shrunk a whole bike size. Thanks industry… felt good about myself as a Large… now I’m just medium.
  • 3 3
 Haha I felt the same way with that article on what size bikes the EWS pros were riding. Especially Jack moir and Richie rude. Both over 6' riding mediums. Makes you start wondering if we'll see a turn away from longer and longer bikes. At 6'3 I'm pretty content with 490mm reach.
  • 4 1
 @DylanH93: Rude is 5'9-10"
  • 6 0
 Same thing happened when you reviewed a large YT Izzo instead of XL. You are 6 foot 2, man!
  • 4 0
 Pictures of a giant person riding a tiny bike look like… don’t be mad this is just honesty here… look like a circus gorilla.

I’m 6’2 and ride an XL and I feel like a circus gorilla on a medium anything.
  • 3 0
 Disregarding the whole 'actual vs real STA' issue....

The seat tube itself seems to be a really interesting and neat bit of manufacturing, I can't quite work it out from the photos as the resolution is not quite enough.

I THINK the upper half is a regular tube that is then welded into a formed, roughly hexagon section lower half that has a small tubular piece welded in, presumably with a recess at each end to act as the bearing seat for the orange linkage. And perhaps a closing plate over the top (weld visible above the orange link).

Its a really nice bit of design and fabrication, and allowing for the upper truly tubular section to pass all the way through past the bearing mounts to allow for full seat post insertion is a key move that many get wrong. Nicely done!
  • 3 0
 I think this article should have been about the new Chilcotin 167 if he's going to keep comparing it to 29" race bikes. It seems like it'd be more appropriate to compare like to like, instead of a "freeride inspired" all mountain bike to an "EWS" race sled.
Also, my 2014 medium Warden fits my 5'7" frame great and I have short arms and legs. I can't imagine being over 6' on a medium, even with new geometry from my frame.
  • 4 2
 I’m 183 and have owned a warden LT since January. Riding the adventure park plus usually one or two 400m climbs to get the legs going. Large feels about right for me. I previously had an HD4, an endorphin, and prior to that a Spartan.

Pro’s - the climbing position is comfortable, I have bettered my old HD4 climbing times (seriously). It’s good going down.
Con’s- pretty lifeless and really does not hold speed on mellow trails. The short head tube puts you too far forward on steep terrain, it’s unnerving. I run 30mm spacers plus a 30mm rise bar to counter (and lose the nice reach.) finally the suspension is very linear. I had lots of pinch flats until I finally got the shock settings tightened up.

I think the reviewer should have been on a longer bike, but otherwise was pretty fair.
  • 2 1
 I'm not sure how a linear suspension would cause MORE pinch flats since it allows more wheel travel (and therefore time) per impact and thus less force to the tire.
  • 2 0
 @conman1395: because hard bottom outs cause pinch flats and linear suspension is more prone to hard bottom outs.
  • 1 0
 My issue was that it blew through the travel really easily, even at 25 sag. Improved with adding high speed compression clicks. Basically had to max out the fox. Was able to back off a bit when I added volume spacers.
  • 1 0
 @KennyWatson: ah, yes that makes sense
  • 8 4
 "Geometry and sizing quirks to be aware of"

You just don't know what tf you're doing. A medium when you're that tall? How'd you get your job?
  • 5 3
 Whoa, a bit harsh, no?
  • 2 0
 @danroberts why did you compare this free ride 27.5” to an enduro race 29”???? How about a nomad or an sb165

Also, medium? I just swapped my 2020 stumpy evo s3 (495 reach) with his large warden and it felt smaller - I’m 5’-11”
  • 5 3
 What's really dissuaded me from them aesthetically isn't the fourby4, it's that the squashed front end looks like they ran into a wall. That said, just like Orange bikes, something doesn't need to look great to ride great.
  • 9 18
flag Reelchef67 (Aug 9, 2021 at 9:23) (Below Threshold)
 These are some of best bikes for real mountain biking on technical alpine trails made. Free ride legends bike of choice...
  • 9 5
 @Reelchef67: Yea! All those other dozens of bikes with better performance both climbing and descending aren't for REAL mountain biking! YEA!
  • 3 7
flag whateverbr0 (Aug 9, 2021 at 11:32) (Below Threshold)
 @KJP1230: I'm not sure you understand what Knolly is trying to accomplish with their philosophies on climbing and descending, and I'm not sure you've ever even ridden one to make a comment like that
  • 2 0
 For some reason I like the look knolly has going on. It's more of that "pregnant belly" look compared to the sharp straight lines. But on ibis bikes I'm not a fan. Funny how little changes can throw someone off or make them a fan.
  • 6 0
 Nice colors !
  • 10 4
 Makes me want an Orange
  • 6 4
 So a subpar suspension design and overpriced frame?
  • 11 2
 @Kruetters: Did he stutter?
  • 5 0
 Miss my old Knolly, glad they are still kicking around.
  • 6 1
 Plenty of room for a water bottle behind that seat tube
  • 4 0
 Its a great place to keep your spare tube/ C02 / Tire levers / tire plugs etc.
  • 7 2
 how soon until the cables saw through that link?
  • 15 4
 If you build the bike properly they don't even touch it.
  • 13 1
 The brake/der cables are too short and should not be connected with that cable clip thing. Mine has zero rub at 1500 miles.
  • 7 1
 @alex345: same
  • 8 1
 @alex345: Same (both Knollys)
  • 5 1
 I don't have any mark on that link on my Fugitive LT (same cable management) after 2 years of abuse... Even if i think that my cables are "short".
  • 6 0
 I find that various mechanics cut their cables too short this way... apparently “expert review site,” pinkbike is also a culprit
  • 5 4
 @islandforlife : the author clearly talks about their thought process for picking size medium; I agree the M decision seems atypical. IMHO the long part of long, low, slack geometry is probably going to max out and bike makers might need to dial back limousine reaches soon. As a 5’8” rider I would never pick this size M bike (for which knolly recommends for me) with a reach of 475.5 reach. My ripmo AF size M reach of 458 already feels stretched for up and down.

I like the non kinked seat tube as I love mashing in a 210 dropper onto my bikes and I generally size down on bikes.

Finally, a rant about significant digits (“sig digs”): when manufacturers’ state lengths in mm it is stupid to report it to 1 decimal point (ie 475.5mm). It’s really stupid and is literally splitting hairs
  • 9 1
 I'm 5'9" and my size medium has a reach of nearly 500mm... it feels great.

There is no getting around the fact that the medium frame was a very unusual choice for a 6'2" rider.
  • 16 1
 Ya, saw his reasoning.... but I'd disagree.. again, he's 6'2" and so is always in the middle of any bikes companies' L and XL sizing.. but he picked a medium?? The Warden size Large does have a 500mm reach but the head tube is short, so he'd still need spacers which would lower that reach 5 to 10mm. His other recent reviews and the bikes he compares it to (Privateer 141 and Nukeproof Mega) he rode in size Larges with 485 and 480mm of reach, which are closer to the Warden's Large reach than the stacked Medium he rode of 466. If he's reviewing other size Large bikes shouldn't he be sticking to size Larges for a proper and true comparison of the bikes intended feel and ride?

It's also a lot more than just reach... sizing way down to a medium means he's not just riding too short of a reach for the way the bike was designed, but his stack is too low (as he talked about), his wheelbase is too short (talks about it being not as stable during high speed) and his seat tube is too short meaning he needs lots of seat post and will end up too slack of a SA... changes the whole perception of the bike.

Personally I don't like when reviewers stray from the manufactures recommended sizing for reviews. They build bikes and sweat the geo numbers in each size so that the bike rides and feels a certain way for that size of rider. When you sizing way up or down like that it messes with the feel and intentions of the bike and I think it clearly comes across in the review... he just didn't feel all that comfortable.

Sure, buying a bike for yourself and you know what kind of reach/wheelbase/stack/HTA/STA relationship you like, then ya, pick your size based on that. For a review... no thanks, I want to know how the intended design of the bike rides for intended sized rider.
  • 5 0
 @bishopsmike: yeah he should be riding a bike that is the size the company intends for the the rider, that's how most people will buy it
  • 4 0
 your ripmo has a stack height of 620 the knolly is 595. So, to end up at the same stack height if you added 25mm of spacers you would reduce reach on the knolly ~10mm which would make it long ~465 but not very far off your ibis.

The size large here would likely need 30mm spacers to get to an equivalent stack height and the reach would end up around 485-490 on a size large which is long but again not far off many other bikes.
  • 2 0
 @islandforlife: Best response on here.
  • 2 1
 So the current trend from brands is to make long bikes, and the current trend from riders is to size down...

So does that mean bikes were already pretty good?
  • 3 0
 @Dogl0rd: I think the current trend is to just buy your size...
Only company I know who doesn't follow suit is Pipe Dream

But if you are stuck between sizes I guess you could argue sizing down or up depending on use. Trail bike, down size ... bike park, upsize.
  • 16 12
 Get someone who can actually ride to review your bikes. Let alone pick the right size
  • 13 4
 Username checks out..
  • 2 9
flag bigmeatpete420 (Aug 9, 2021 at 12:27) (Below Threshold)
 Wow! Really sharp you is! @bikefuturist:
  • 5 1
 I think it makes sense to have shorter reviewers do the 275 bike reviews. That seems to be their future niche.
  • 3 2
 Sizes to a large but tests a medium instead - calls the bike "playful". says seat tube is too short. Uhuh. Yeah that's what you get when you need a large and ride a size medium... I'm just jabbing though.

Does anyone know how long he road the bike for? Seems like a lot of paint missing off of the rear end.
  • 5 1
 I’m no doctor, but I think the Mega is about 12-16 weeks along while the Knolly is almost full term.
  • 5 1
 Man I bet knolly regrets giving you a bike, you didn't give it a proper chance at that size.
  • 1 0
 It’s really disappointing that you wrote this entire review based on riding the wrong size. Why even bother? You knew you made the wrong choice as you were setting it up. And if you didn’t, why are you reviewing bikes in the first place?
  • 12 8
 The only people I’ve seen riding Knollys are their ambassadors.
  • 11 4
 There are a ton of them out here in New England, but (if I'm honest) it's not a brand that I would purchase another bike from again. Their customer service is absolute garbage and their business model is questionable at best...
  • 1 0
 @jlevandoski: what's the deal with their business model?
  • 3 0
 I find BMX kids who can rip it up on the trail to be very common. Although they are often times riding a 2nd hand off Craigslist.
  • 9 15
flag Reelchef67 (Aug 9, 2021 at 9:28) (Below Threshold)
 Knollys are every where in BC the technical riding mountain bike Mecca..
  • 8 7
 @RadBartTaylor: Noel won't bring in any capital to support the development of new bikes, so they rely entirely on selling current frames. So when frames aren't selling, they sit in limbo since the actual manufacturer (in Taiwan) won't release the frames because Knolly hasn't paid the bills.

I know it's a touchy subject, regardless of how good the bikes are, but it's something to consider when purchasing a Knolly since they're [literally] riding that line between being in the red or black.
  • 3 2
 @RadBartTaylor: don't get me wrong, I do love the Knollys that I have owned and they've been more or less bulletproof (my current Warden Carbon has a nice cracking sound coming from somewhere). However, they were more interested in making the sale than answering question I have (like trying to figure out what's going on with the above mentioned calamity) or getting parts (like a rear derailleur hanger) when s**t breaks.
  • 3 0
 Last time I was in Whistler, 2015, there were a lot of them there
  • 6 0
 @jlevandoski: curious how you would know what you say about the business model? Unless I'm missing something there are no end of private small business' in any industry (and especially the bike industry) that dont or cant "bring in capital". what's questionable about that type of business?

And then if the bit about not paying the bills is true, how do they manage to develop new bikes with a manufacturer who develops special tooling for them (as they claim for their gravel bike)? I cant imagine a manufacturer doing that for a small and unreliable customer.
  • 6 3
 @lwk: I have my "ins" with Knolly, especially those who have been dealing with them for a long time. Is it a touchy subject? Clearly because I'm being downvoted as fast as an article from DCA...
  • 5 0
 @jlevandoski: north shore billet usually has hangers if you can't get oem.
  • 4 0
 @jgottya1: Yep, North Shore came through for me - Knolly hasn't had theirs in stock for a while it seems like, nor any local dealers.

@jlevandoski: Customer service - specifically Ken - was fine for me. He kept me updated on status (my parts kit was ready but my frame was delayed due to Covid) and answered my questions in a timely manner. I doubt they're "absolute garbage" - I'm curious what makes you say that?
  • 2 1
 @Reelchef67: by everywhere do you mean all the old guys at Burke ride them?
  • 1 0
 Lots of people riding Knolly bikes on the North Shore and Squamish that aren't ambassadors.
  • 1 0
 @royalsrule: I resemble that remark!
  • 9 4
 Such weird geo numbers.
  • 8 24
flag Reelchef67 (Aug 9, 2021 at 9:29) (Below Threshold)
 They are made for riding in actual mountains not Cali fire road "mountain biking"
  • 4 0
 @Reelchef67: yeah Suicide is a fire road now that I think about it
  • 4 0
 Which numbers did you think were off?
  • 2 1
 I have the non-LT Warden and his review is very, very accurate. I bought this bike to handle burly technical climbs and medium/high speed, technical descending out here in Santa Cruz. A+
  • 2 1
 Why don't frames use bushings instead of bearing in frame pivots? Is there too much friction? I don't own a full suspension yet but from what I see online frame bearings need to be replaced ridiculously often.
  • 1 0
 Not the biggest expert here as I've only ever had my one legit FS bike. But it seems they can typically last a decent amount of time assuming you're not pressure washing them, letting dust get into the bearing seals, and occasionally clean them off and pack them with fresh grease. A new set of bearings is about $40 for my bike, but installing them is the bigger issue. Some bikes are known to eat bearings though.
  • 1 2
 We tried that before and they sucked. Rotating parts are always better off with a bearing if possible. We use bushing on some landing gear on our aerospace projects but that’s to reduce complexity and doesn’t influence any pilot controls and feedback. Our control surfaces are all bearings.
  • 4 0
 Where’s the paywall and why isn’t this behind it?
  • 1 0
 Based on the article description, "Flat out speed isn't the Warden's forte, but it excels in the steeps and in softer terrain." My take away was this is the anti-Yeti/Colorado bike. LMAO
  • 4 1
 But is it pronounced "knaaaaally" or "knoooooolly"
  • 22 2
  • 3 0
  • 6 4
 @Jvhowube: its a silent K (after the founder Noel, nickname Noel'y) Like the word knoll (not pronounced keh-noll)
  • 12 0
  • 1 0
  • 1 0
 @ReformedRoadie: I think you just named my new Warden, thank you!
  • 2 0
 @knuckleheadmtb: new spin on the line: “leave the gun…take the cannoli”
  • 4 2
 Given the company founder's background, the odd geometry couldn't help but make me think of this: xkcd.com/793
  • 3 4
 " the negatives of the big sag began to outweigh the positives. ... it felt like there was a good dollop of bottom out support in there and the increased sag didn’t yield too much of a sluggish feeling in the suspension."

If it doesn't feel sluggish, and bottoming is not really an issue (we all know volumes reducers can solve that if it does pop up with the extra sag), then what's the negative to more sag?
  • 2 1
 Pedal strikes, and feel less sporty
  • 2 0
 @anothermtnbiker: maybe, though the author indicated the bb was already high. 5% more sag is like 8mm bb height, just enough to get it in the range of many other bikes.
  • 2 0
 @anothermtnbiker: also he said it didn't make it more sluggish which would correlate to not feeling "less sporty"
  • 6 4
 does people buy di2 for park/freeride bike? Geometry wise I would not buy this bike.
  • 1 2
 What aspect of the geometry doesn't work for you?
  • 3 1
 @Skooks: stack height, I would prefer much higher; I understand that you can use spacers, however 4 - 5 sm of spacers is not something I wanna to put
  • 3 3
 Look at that seat tube that intersects the down tube forward of the bottom bracket....the tasteful shape of the intersection....engineering beautiful enough to launch a thousand lawsuits!
  • 2 3
 I've had a Knolly Endorphin and it was brilliant, one of my favourite bikes but the rear cable routing on this is pretty average. I'm keen on a Fugitive 138 but will re check the cable routing, not keen on cables that follow the line of maximum movement or exit where crap can enter.
  • 5 1
 I've had one for 6 months and it's been easy to deal with.
  • 4 1
 Thatt seat tube offset makes me want to take Ketoprofen.
  • 4 1
 polite way of saying it's slow.
  • 3 1
 The crazy low stack heights I found strange. I do have a 35" inseam though. I'd like a reason to not use an 80mm riser bar.
  • 2 2
 Works great for people with at 30" inseam. I am 5'6" on a medium Knolly and it fits perfectly.
  • 2 0
 For a moment,
I thought that was a "spotted" again !
  • 4 2
 Feel like someone is bringing a lawsuit against me as I read this…
  • 9 7
 seat tube angle can fuck off
  • 4 5
 in general or on this Knolly in particular? For me, it can f*ck off in general.
  • 5 6
 Yea this bike will be awful for long legged people.
  • 8 3
 Im long legged and the seat tube angle is great for climbing and allows for a super long dropper that gives tons of standover on steep stuff.
  • 6 0
 I'm 6'1" and rode the v1 Fugitive once (XL) and the sta was fine. I think effective is pretty close to what they say in the geo charts. Maybe the offset doesn't quite compensate for the slack actual for the tallest riders tho but for most it's a non-issue while riding.
  • 2 0
 @Kruetters: Im short legged (30" inseam) )and the seat tube angle is great for climbing and allows for a super long dropper that gives tons of standover on steep stuff.
  • 7 9
 I purchased a Knolly fall of 2019 and ordered a large I am 6' and have to say I wish I either went with an XL or spent more time on research and chose a different brand of bike which I ended up doing very soon into the beginning of 2020. Knolly's are sized very differently and have alot of quirks. I would not reccomend one and would be better off going to a brand that doesn't need to ship there bikes/frames with a bottle of loctite
  • 3 1
 Dan, You were the chosen one’
  • 5 2
 That’s f*#ck ugly
  • 1 0
 Loam (/lōm/): a soil with roughly equal proportions of sand, silt, and clay.
  • 3 1
 Finally a frame to match my underbelly.
  • 1 0
 Considering the sizing choice, I think there's a reason he's a former engineer at Scott...
  • 1 0
 New bike but not a high pivot?
  • 3 1
 It is the almost the opposite of a high pivot,
  • 2 1
 @ReformedRoadie: also not 'old,' but probably 3 years old at this point.
  • 2 1
 Turner alloy bikes were about 2500 and the cable routing was spot on.
  • 3 3
 WAY too short of chainstays on those bigger sizes.. need to bump those up for some actual balance!
  • 3 2
 Pick a frame size and be a dick about it
  • 4 5
 This is a 2021 and it's looking pretty 2009. Frame looks like a toothless pregnant truck stop hooker, saggy pregnant beer belly of a down tube.
  • 2 1
 shit another 29er brown noser
  • 1 3
 Welp, after looking at the new Firebird review today as well, this just isn’t pretty… sorry. Bike’s gotta work and gotta be something you love. Don’t love the looks of this.
  • 1 0
 Knolly, some of us still remember. GL posers
  • 1 1
 Yep they do well to keep going tbh. Time for a change.
  • 9 9
 Canadian bike, Canadian site, American dollars = No thank you.
  • 9 2
 PB is no longer a Canadian Site. Recently acquired by big USA $$
  • 7 1
 They sell bikes all over the world and a lot across the US... easier for them to work in USD
  • 6 20
flag JohanG (Aug 9, 2021 at 11:49) (Below Threshold)
 You canada people should be happy we even let you be a country.
  • 6 0
 @islandforlife: its still shit that they don't sell to Canadians in our Currency...that will never sit well with me. They pay all of their suppliers etc in USD so I can understand why this is done, but it ends up pushing the cost (2% fee) onto Canadian customers.
  • 1 1
 @DGWW: Was talking about Knolly. Not PB
  • 3 1
 @islandforlife: Then they should move their operations there. They wanna proclaim how Canadian they are then charge us out the ass in USD for a bike. If you're Ok with that you're a pleb.
  • 7 2
 @JohanG: You America people should be happy China hasn't come to collect it's debt. Dingus.
  • 2 7
flag JohanG (Aug 9, 2021 at 13:41) (Below Threshold)
 @m1dg3t: ah, you're one of those Fox news watchers that has never looked up how much debt the US actually owes to China.
  • 6 1
 @JohanG: Fox News? LoL GTFOH with that weak sauce. IIRC US debt to China is ~$1.2T. Only Japan holds more US debt at roughly $1.3T.

Jag off.
  • 2 0
 @DGWW: @m1dg3t : Call them up, they'll happily work with you in Canadian funds.
  • 3 0
 @JohanG: thank you for letting us be a country! Please come and visit us as the border is now open to Americans.
  • 4 1
 @islandforlife: I dealt with them directly , they would not take cad at the time.
  • 1 0
 @DGWW: Did for me.
  • 5 2
 PB turned global years ago, get over it
  • 3 2
 @m1dg3t: Wow, China owns a whole 4% of US debt? But I bet when Tucker Carlson says it, it seems like a lot more.
  • 3 0
 Yep - it should be sold in Canadian dollars. It doesn't sit well with me either.
  • 17 6
 We are a Canadian company that processes orders in USD because being a global brand selling to a global market, this is the most broadly accepted currency to do business. That said, we realize the importance of being able to pay in multiple currencies and are currently working on a solution to support this.
  • 2 0
 @KNOLLYBIKES: thank you ! start at home Smile
  • 6 6
 Why is this dude still reviewing bikes here?
  • 2 2
 That frame aesthetic aint it my G
  • 2 4
 Such a breath of fresh air that's its a 27.5 and not a stupid, ridiculous, hidious Mullet.
  • 3 4
 Most fun you will ever have on a bike .
  • 1 3
 An enduro bike that doesn't really like to do enduro things... Seems odd.
  • 1 3
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.068700
Mobile Version of Website