First Ride: 2019 Canyon Lux

Jun 25, 2018 at 14:32
by Daniel Sapp  


With World Cup Cross Country tracks becoming increasingly technical, companies are working to reinvent their XC race bikes, with the goal of making them not only faster and lighter, but also more capable. Hardtails with 80mm forks are increasingly rare, and dropper posts are now standard for many racers.

Canyon's engineers have been paying attention to trends, listening to their riders, and working to develop a more modern cross-country bike that they believe is up to the task of handling everything from long days at everything from the Cape Epic to XCO World Championships. The newly remade Lux has 29" wheels, a 100mm travel frame paired with either a 100mm or 110mm fork (depending on spec), space for two water bottles, and sheds weight in every way possible, with the top of the line CF SLX build coming in at 10kg.
Canyon Lux Details

• Intended use: XC race
• Wheel size: 29"
• Rear wheel travel: 100mm
• Boost 12x148
• 70º head angle (with 100mm fork)
• Carbon frame
• Two water bottle mounts
• Size: S - XL
• 1660g frame (CF SLX)
• Price: $2,999 - $6,500 USD
• Available now
www.canyon.com

Canyon Lux
The Lux CF SL 8.0 Pro Race is spec'd with a KS LEV dropper post and 110mm fork for increased trail capability.

For those familiar with the previous Lux, it's easy to see that the new Lux is totally different. The shock is now mounted horizontally, rather than vertically, and the entire package is much cleaner appearing with fewer cables and sleeker lines than before. According to Canyon, the shock move accomplished several things, including providing better suspension kinematics, increased durability of parts from a lower air pressure in the shock, weight savings due to the linkage having fewer parts, and the ability to run two water bottles, something that's critical for riders in many endurance events.

The new Lux carries over the same "flex-pivot" design that the previous Lux had, with the rear seatstays flexing through the suspension travel rather than using bearings as many designs do. With the seatstays of the Lux working as part of the suspension, the rear brake is a flat mount design on the chainstay. Flat mount brakes have been standard on road bikes for several years now - Canyon claim that the design works better and sheds a few grams as well in their application on the Lux.


Canyon Lux
The seatstays are part of the suspension, stiff when unweighted and flexing slightly as the bike moves through its travel.
Canyon Lux
Flat mount disc brakes...from the road to the trail.


Frame Details

Integrated chain catcher: Chain retention devices are becoming less common on some bikes with narrow wide chainrings and higher tension derailleur systems. Canyon have decided to lean on the side of caution, knowing that a dropped chain can be the difference between winning or losing a race and have integrated a sleek and minimalistic chain guide to ensure that doesn't happen. To accommodate varying chainring sizes, the guide simply rotates up or down.

Cable tubing: Canyon engineered tubes to nicely guide cables through the frame exactly where they need to go in the Lux. Everything is internal - derailleur, brake, and the lockout for the rear shock, so being able to quickly and easily replace cables along with their full-length housing was important to the design team. The tubes hold the cables snugly and have extra foam around them where necessary to prevent unwanted rattling.

Canyon Lux
The tiny chain catcher weighs only 4.6 grams, but should provide added protection against tossed chains in rough terrain.
Canyon Lux
The cable routing is fully internal and guided with tubes for ease.


Impact Protection Unit: To keep brake levers from destroying carbon frames in the event of a crash or just a poorly leaned bike at the coffee shop, the Lux is equipped with Canyon's Impact Protection Unit (IPU) which is a unique, "winged" headset spacer coupled with a bump stop. The bump stop attaches to the top tube with screws designed to break away in an impact and prevent the rider from breaking the frame.

Quixle: Canyon uses their Quixle through-axle system on the Lux. The rear axle is tool free with the lever sliding into the axle and out of the way when not in use.

Two water bottles: With the new shock position providing more room in the frame, the Lux has room for two full size (800ml) water bottles in all frame sizes.



Canyon Lux
The IPU keeps commonly low XC brake levers from ruining the frame in the event of an impact.

Canyon Lux
Canyon Lux

Frame Options / Build Kits

There are two different frames for the Lux, the CF SL and the CF SLX. Both frames are full carbon but each uses different carbon layup. The SLX is the highest end and lightest carbon and thus employs a higher end build than the SL. It's spec'd with a 100mm fork, fully ready to purposefully show up at the start line of a World Cup XCO race, where the SL has a slightly longer travel, 110mm fork. Prices range from $2,999 USD for the CF SL 6.0 Pro Race, equipped with SRAM's NX Eagle and a RockShox Reba RL fork, up to to $6,500 USD for the Lux CF SLX 9.0 Race Team with Shimano's 12-speed XTR group and Fox Factory suspension.

All of the SRAM builds are equipped with 12-speed GripShift. Canyon's engineers claim that it offers great performance and weight savings - I can verify that it performs better than the 6-speed version I last used in the 90's.


Canyon Lux

Geometry

Canyon's goal in the development of the new Lux was to give riders a tool to win endurance races and the geometry is very race-driven. As far as numbers go, on a size medium CF SLX with a 100mm fork, the head angle is 70-degrees, seat tube 71.6-degrees, the reach is 435mm, wheelbase 1126mm, and chainstays across all sizes are 435mm.

The CF SL gets a 110mm fork which slackens out the head angle to 69.5-degrees, and ever-so-slightly lengthens the wheelbase.







With my home in Western North Carolina experiencing rain and flooding of near-biblical proportions this spring, I was looking forward to heading over to Girona, Spain, to spend some time on the new Lux. That region of Spain typically has hot and humid conditions that are similar to what I'm used to, but as the trip grew closer, it appeared that, just like at home, it was going to be raining.

With the first afternoon having storms that were strong enough to delay over half of the others attending the launch from arriving on time and several previous days of rain in Girona, I knew that the trails were going to be less than optimal. One of the harder things about riding a new bike on new trails blind is doing it in horrible conditions. Fortunately, the trails drained water moderately well and we were graced with some sun for the start of our one day of riding.
Canyon Lux
Soaked from an afternoon shower and not looking stoked, but it was a good time.

With only one long day of riding to be had, I was happy to find that we were going to be covering a diverse amount of terrain with a moderate amount of climbing and descending. The ride was one large loop, starting out through the city of Girona on cobbles and pavement, transitioning to singletrack and forest road. The singletrack ranged from buff to freshly cut with a mix of rocks and roots. The bike climbs incredibly well, with a good amount of anti-squat throughout its travel. I didn't feel the need to lock the bike out, although I did at times just to observe the differences. On the more technical sections of climbing the bike stayed planted and offered up the traction necessary to navigate up roots and steeper pitches. On smoother climbs, the bike didn't experience much loss of power when pushing hard on the pedals.

The bike I rode was the CF SLX Pro Race equipped with a 100mm RockShox SID WC, SRAM Eagle drivetrain, and GripShift. Now, I know where this is going to go, so let's go there. GripShift? Really? SRAM still makes it? Yes, really, and the team at Canyon, along with some GripShift fans are stoked about it. It sheds a few grams and you can slam one way or another through all of your gears at once with the twist of your wrist, something some may see as beneficial for an XC racer. This is not a smooth or delicate way to shift in a real-world application, but hey, you can do it. I can't say I've spent a lot of time using GripShift in recent years, but it did work fairly well. I keep my hands positioned fairly far outboard on narrow XC handlebars anyways, so I didn't have troubles mis-shifting that some people in our group experienced. Personally, I would have rather seen a more typical trigger shifter as the stock spec, with GripShift offered as an option for the small percentage of throttle shifting fanatics out there.

Canyon Lux

Descending, the Lux is fast and precise, but it is most definitely a full-on cross-country race bike. With the 100mm fork and 70-degree head tube, you aren't left with much room for bounding down descents and having fun - it's more about getting business done. Couple that with racy tires and a very progressive suspension designed to stay up and far from wallowing, and you get a bike that is made for the terrain between the start and finish lines. While it could manage more technical higher speed sections, it's more of a survival feel than a blast, with the balance of the scale certainly tipping towards the bike being a much better climber than descender. I believe that with the longer travel fork, the CF SL would be a much more versatile bike for anyone looking to venture outside of the race tape.

The dropper post is a welcome addition to the bike, and I firmly believe that any modern full suspension bike should have one. With the post out of the way the bike corners well, but throughout any situation maintains its race-bred characteristics - it won't let you forget that it's designed more for the climbs than the descents.

With the Lux, Canyon has designed a light, sleek, and fast cross-country race machine. It does what it was designed for well, but its use, at least that of the SLX model that I rode, is of a very narrow scope, even narrower than some other XCO bikes on the market, and it's far from what I would consider an all-round trail bike. The SLX version would be a good choice as a purebred race bike, but I think most riders would be better served by the SL model and its additional travel.







149 Comments

  • 86 2
 Take my mo... Oh wait it only fits 2 water bottles I'm out.
  • 53 3
 WHERE IS THE NEW STRIVE ?
  • 4 0
 It had better be next level after waiting this long! Expectations are high.
  • 2 0
 Also WHY DOESN'T CANYON MAKE A >120mm 29er?!?!?! No 29 Spectral, Torque or Sender, although i'd imagine new Strive is a likely candidate
  • 48 3
 Lux like a session....... I'll get my coat
  • 10 0
 Especially with that knock blo... erm ipu feature :p
  • 35 0
 Why do people who never race cross country get to 'review' a cross country race bike? What's the point? Just in case someone who wants a trail bike mistakenly buys a 4000$ cross country marathon machine? And why doesn't pinkbike have a guy that actually races cross country, to review cross country bikes. And I don't mean, someone who took part in 3 cross country races with his trailbike, ended up last and had some fun. Shaved legs, 400watts ftp, doing 100 miles 3 days per week guy should review these.
  • 6 0
 this!
  • 6 0
 1,000,000% this. It boggles my tiny mind. Biggest MTB site on Earth doesn't have a single high level XC racer on the payroll? I'll put my hat in the ring. If Pinkbike can organize the next XC bike review here in NZ, I'll review it. The review will be vastly more specific to the intended reader, it'll also be solidly entertaining. I'll actually race it too...
  • 58 35
 Geometry is race driven my ass. Geometry is Lake Garda holidays driven. It should come with bar ends and saddle bag.
  • 9 3
 Not exactly sure what you're saying here.. so the geometry of the bike isn't based on XC performance? I'd really beg to differ on that one..
  • 17 7
 I stopped reading at 70deg HTA. Look at that stem. Tinker Juarez called from 1999. He wants his bike back.
  • 8 1
 @huebs037: I think he refers to he kind of person that is often seen riding this kind of bike.
  • 6 0
 Also Lake Garda has some excellent techy riding. Smile
  • 7 12
flag jclnv (Jun 26, 2018 at 8:50) (Below Threshold)
 Dated pile of crap.
  • 4 0
 The Horrible Things that Happened to Wacek in Lake Garda, to which he perenially returns.
  • 11 6
 @huebs037: you say it only because that’s what XC bikes used to be. Current Spark is only a start but not sure whether fireroad warriors will adopt it. They sit on their arses and can’t climb anything else than a fireroad or grass field or they flop. Cesar Rojo said in interview for Vital how shit is current XC geo, how modern am bike has better climbing position. So well, 70 head angle, only for the clueless
  • 11 1
 @WAKIdesigns: People can't think outside the box. They think bikes should be categorized and defined by specific geo numbers but they have no idea why.

It's these kind of clueless ideas that keeps bike geo in the dark ages and moves a head and seat angle 1 degree every 3 years.
  • 10 5
 @jclnv: and then they glue on pieces of aluminium that pray away vibrations to get 3 seconds per lap... because racers know exactly what they need!
  • 4 0
 @theedon: *feeling old for knowing who Tinker is and thinking this is hilarious*
  • 1 3
 @cuban-b: Flippant but untrue. Juarez rode hardtails in '99, according to casual websearch. Even on Ravens, stock stem lengths appear to be road bike-inspired, i.e. >100mm. Plus TJ is probably still faster than Theedon going up.
  • 3 1
 It’s a joke dude. How about Ned Overend ? @ceecee:
  • 2 0
 saddle bag is the new bottle mount
  • 21 2
 I wonder how many of the folk who are micro focused on the geo numbere have actually raced XC. It’s very different to trail riding - races are won and lost on the climbs and weight is everything.
  • 6 2
 Yes. This. Adding a 2nd bottle cage for 2 full sized bottles in the triangle is a huge deal for XCM & Stage racers too. Sick of having a bottle in my jersey pocket or some cobbled seatpost mount.
  • 2 0
 So why do we still have st angles copied from road racing bikes? Wouldn't ht xc bike with 2 or 3 degrees stepper st be a better climber?
  • 4 2
 Listen to Vitalmtb's The Inside Line with Cesar Rojo about XC geometry.
  • 5 4
 30 years of racing XC. And you're wrong, Nino wins races on descents, as does Neff.
  • 4 0
 @jclnv: yes! This and sprints, and climbs too.
  • 8 0
 @jclnv: Think again if you think Nino wins races just on descents. This is what he said after Nove Mesto '182 average heartbeats per minute, 193 max. 367 watts NP during a 1.5 hour race, 745 watts over a 1 minute attack.' If this sounds like a walk in the park to you, why aren't you at world cups smashing everyone on descents, because clearly going uphill fast is useless for you.
  • 3 0
 @Startgas: just listening the podcast now. He says about 20 min: no downsides on use slack geometry in XC bikes, only advantage having steep head angle is to be able to turn in tight places without havin to lean the bike. Im not a XC racer, but had the oportunity to rode Rio 2016 Olimpic Track and saw no place that a steep HA would be benefical. Even the uphill switchbacks had berms. But the downhills and technical parts were scarying AF even with a 160mm bike. www.vitalmtb.com/features/The-Inside-Line-Podcast-Cesar-Rojo-Founder-of-UNNO-and-Cero-Design,2045
  • 1 1
 @Etek: What you don't seem to get is that these days you have to be fast EVERYWHERE.

That's why Absalon lost so many races to Nino. Descents. Why did Gaze not win in Nove Mesto? He flatted trying to ride as fast as possible on DESCENTS. Imagine if he had a more capable bike that allowed him to be more confident and smooth so he didn't flat...

You get it yet?
  • 4 0
 @jclnv: He didn't lose because of the bike. He lost because he was clueless descending. There's a very big difference. Later when he picked up lessons from his brother, he was just as good as Nino, not as flashy, but just as fast on descents.
Stop trying to turn everything around, first you said Nino wins on descents, then you said you have to be fast everywhere. Make up your mind.
Oh yea, and he was one of the first to use a dropper post in World Cup XCO
  • 1 0
 @Etek: If it isnt market led small step "improvements" i dont know what is..

M 2018 EPIC
HTA 69,5
STA 74,75
WB 1123
RE 433

M 2017 Epic
HTA 70.75
STA 74
WB 1103
RE 423

M 2016 Epic
HTA 71
STA 74
WB 1103
RE 423

M 2015 Epic
HTA 71
STA 74,25
WB 1103
RE 423

S 2014 Epic
HTA 71
STA 74,25
WB 1103
RE 423

Im sure that in 2014 Specialized knew that 69.5 head angle is better than 71.. but why change? Lets wait 4 more years and extract a lot of money from the same molds..
Same thing with the Enduro 29 model, in 2014 it was a 67 head angle piece of shit, 4 years later it is in 65. It went thru small steps until reach the "right" modern geometry. The 2014 (designed in 2013) Nomad is 65 from the start (64.5 with 170mm forks) and even today still a "modern" geometry (a bit short reach but u always can upsize).
  • 1 0
 @thelittle: I agree with you here, companies don't like taking big risks and the small advancements make alot of sense in having 'new' stuff to bring out every few years instead of jumping directly to where it will settle.
But then there's me. I'm about to buy a new 4000$ cross country bike, on one hand there's this canyon, with a very good build I won't need to change/update for years and 'classic' 70 degrees HTA. On the other there's scott spark with 68,5 HTA and 30% more price for the same build. Or I could go nuts and get a UNNO for much more money and possible discovering it's actually shit because the guy has no clue what a cross country racer wants, and it's sacrificing climbing too much for a few seconds gained descending.
Yea, I'll go with tried and true versus uncharted terrain when I'm about to put that much money into a bike.
Also, let's take some guys oppinion after he actually rode this bike, instead of theory and what should and isn't.

youtu.be/TpQonaid38A?t=3m8s
  • 14 0
 " The seatstays are part of the suspension, stiff when unweighted and flexing slightly as the bike moves through its travel."

Can anyone explain how something can be stiff when unweighted but flexible when weighed?
  • 9 4
 think of a plastic ruler. it maintains its shape until you bend it. stiff when unweighted but flexible when weighted.
  • 47 1
 Maybe they should have said "straight when unweighted, bent when weighted, really really bent if ur fat"
  • 10 0
 @poah: The rulers stiffness has not changed though whether at rest or under pressure. The only way to measure stiffness is to apply pressure surely? Smile
  • 6 0
 @kiksy: Well, I'm not an engineer, but as I understand it, it's a layup thing. Take the ruler, for example - it's easiest to bend in its resting state, but it takes increasingly more force to continue bending it - i.e., it becomes "stiffer" the farther you go. With these chainstays - and I remember Felt explaining their pivotless design like this - that curve representing force to bend further vs. amount bent has been nudged over. The rear triangle would prefer to be in the shape it's in when the bike is at its sag point - that's its resting state. But the shock pushes the rear triangle to be in a different shape when the bike is unweighted - therefore, the chainstay is in a stressed state and "stiffer". This is all with the goal of making sure the chainstay bends most easily - i.e., is most "flexible" - when the bike is at its sag point, to maximize small-bump compliance.
  • 13 0
 The bike-categories are no longer defined by what you ride on them, but how many water bottles they fit Big Grin
  • 10 1
 70 Seat angle? Wait Head tube angle!?!?
  • 2 0
 Pinkbike is to scared to say
  • 6 1
 Has there sneakily been introduced a new disc brake mount? Back in the days, there was chaos. For a couple of years it was all about the PM standard. Boxxer mount was gone, IS2000 tabs (mostly on frames) required an adaptor. But all recent brake calipers were PM type. What are the advantages of this new flat mount? How is it better other than saving a few grams? The advantages need to be pretty substantial for it to enter the mountainbike scene that is already pretty fed up with changing standards. Sure Hope also has their own mount for their own brake on their own frame, but they're not going to bother anyone else with it.
  • 10 7
 Flat mount is the road standard. It's real dumb, the calipers and pads are absolutely tiny, so the calipers don't deal with heat well and the pads wear out crazy quick. On top of that, adjusting especially the rear calipers is an absolute pain in the ass.
  • 10 1
 @mnorris122: currently used in road, but there's no reason why it couldn't/shouldn't transition to mtb. There's no relationship between the mount standard and the caliper/pad size; flat mount just moves the bolt locations. Theoretically you could have a massive caliper with flat mount bolt standard, it's just up to a manufacturer to make it so. Centering is definitely more irritating, I'll give you that.

The main advantage is that the caliper doesn't have to have PM tabs extending forward and backward - the bolt holes are brought inward. This makes it much easier to fit a flat mount caliper under the seatstay, which means you can make the stays more compliant and thinner (or bendy, as here), as they don't have to handle braking load. This is particularly difficult to do with a PM mount in a non-carbon frame, where it's harder to make good welded connections between the tubes and dropout - space is tight around the end of the brake mount.
  • 1 0
 @dominic54: Wouldn't allow IS type (front) calipers allow you to do that too then? Sure in the OEM market bike builders prefer the PM calipers because they didn't want to face the tabs, but now that most dropouts are already CNC machined in one piece along with brake tabs (not sure how they take care of this in carbon production) alignment shouldn't be an issue anymore. And the bolts are easier to access too.
  • 1 0
 @dominic54: it seems to see more use on flex stay bikes, my cannondale habit has it as well I think?!
  • 1 0
 @vinay: nope, same problem - IS moves the caliper far from the chain stay to create space for the bolts/interface. It's even worse than postmount! Flatmount is the most compact option.
  • 1 0
 @blitz66: yep. For just that reason. Others too - I remember seeing a frame with a FM to PM adapter, allowing common calipers to be fitted whilst transferring all loads to the chainstay. Can't remember who did that one, but it was tidy; only half a solution though as the seatstay still had to be manipulated to fit around the brake assembly. With FM you'd stand a much better chance of creating a straight seatstay which is optimal for butt-loading.
  • 1 0
 "Canyon claim that the design works better and sheds a few grams as well _in_their_application_ on the Lux." Not necessarily that it's a better design in every application. This is a very specific use bike and brake implementation.
  • 2 0
 @number44: 'tis indeed. My interest here stems from a 130mm frame I've been designing which has flex seat stays, so something like this would be perfect - but not with a re-badged road caliper! A few caliper options for this kind of mount would be great, though. Hope are already making 4 pot versions for them too - but again only for road at present. It opens up options in frame design, which is a good thing to my mind. 'Standards' are things you're forced to use; 'options', hopefully, are things you can choose to!
  • 2 1
 The only reason why the used the flat mount is to leave the seatstay flex free. Looks like there's not enough space to fit a PM in the chainstay. Other than that I see no benefit in using a FM for MTB...in road bikes it's more "aero" ;-)
  • 6 1
 They missed another proper place for the 3rd water bottle, over toptube / seattube. With some custom adaptors we could place another two bottles on fork's lower legs, or have there some CO2 bombs being constatly pressurized by fork movement to be ready to instantly inflate your carefree tubeless wheels.
  • 2 0
 Use the movement of suspension to raise the pressure of the tyres. Deflate via a purging button to a fixed pressure
  • 2 0
 Imagine their dual bottlecage at every spot you mentionned, you will never be thirsty a whole year.
  • 9 1
 The conclusion of the review is kind of lame......like you’re disappointed it doesn’t descend like an enduro bike
  • 15 0
 I'm pretty sure no one who will own a Lux will be riding it in baggies and a t-shirt. I'm imaging a fantasy world where XC race bikes are actually reviewed by XC racers. Not a particular dig on PB or this review, it's industry wide and I know XC is small $ compared to trail market. But, can you imagine having your enduro rigs reviewed by people in lycra spending paragraphs bemoaning how heavy and slow it climbs, that it doesn't have lock-out and that the dropper isn't necessary on such an already capable bike...
  • 3 0
 You are so right man! There should be more lighter-weight bike reviews taken seriously here. I mostly rode a 100mm Norco Revolver fully (in baggies & with a dropper).....some of these ‘XC’ bikes make wicked fast trail bikes when you pimp then our a bit @riedelk:
  • 9 3
 Geometry isnt very intersting but finally they dropped the stupid idea to make small sized frames with 650B wheels. Nobody wants 650B wheels for XC anymore.
  • 12 2
 Geometry doesn't need to be interesting, it needs to be right.
  • 9 1
 @Patrick9-32: Right geometry for XC is the Intense Sniper, IMHO.
  • 3 0
 @thelittle: did you ride it? it sounds cool on paper, but how does it actually ride?
  • 4 2
 @grim007: Like the fastest XC race bike on the planet. You know when you're f*cked towards the latter stages of a race? Well the Sniper will still let you relax enough to pin the descents while 100mm road bikes like the above will have you riding like a mong.
  • 1 0
 Wheelbase and reach have increased significantly, tho not as much as on Sniper. At 458mm for a Large Lux, I'd want a 60mm stem. Is 1154mm not enough wheelbase for an XC bike? At least Sniper has a 44mm rake fork for hard flat cornering. But with a stack of 590mm tops, prepare to use an FU40 on yr XC bike with stem slammed, as it should be. Lux geo may be conservative, but it's not dated. We all know its chainstays are too short.
  • 2 2
 @ceecee: It's not wheelbase for straightlining, I'd be tucking that front wheel under in chunky switchback turns with the 70 degree (71 at sag) head angle.
  • 1 0
 @grim007: nope, but my 2012 rocky moutain element with 2 degree works angle set headset is very very close to the sniper geometry. same wheelbase, top tube, reach, head angle. And even beeing old and having some heavy parts rides awesome with that geometry. I imagine a VPP + superlight carbon + high end 2019 parts would be much better. But been a Nomad 3 owner and have seen some Intense frames breaking, my dream XC bike would be a Blur with a Sniper XC geometry.
  • 5 1
 @thelittle: Have a look at the Unno Horn. That's a dream XC bike.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: for sure, tick all the boxes except price. But for sure a dream is a dream. A Santacruz is more real for me hahaha
  • 3 1
 @thelittle: I agree re the cost but what I think it does it shows what XC bikes should look like if they were no compromise and weren't marketing led.
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: this UNNO Horn is outstanding!!! So, why people are this reluctant about adopting XC bikes with less than 70 head angle? I made a gravel/monstercross bike with 69 head angle/74.5 seat angle (wanted 75,5 but the builder advised me against it because of knee position) and it rides awesome well, fell no downsides with "slack" head angle in any situation. And I see new XC bikes, even full sus ones, with 70+ head angle, 72 seat angles... by the way this is the geometry of my Element 950 MY2012 with 2 degree angleset: ep1.pinkbike.org/p4pb15374114/p4pb15374114.jpg
  • 1 2
 @thelittle: I'll believe it when I'll see top cross country racers use it. Until then, it's just some guy claiming enduro bikes climb better than cross country bike and the only difference is the weight. Why should I believe him? Just because he's some enduro legend? As far as I'm concerned he has no clue what climbing 20%+ gradients is like, also mixed with turns and plenty of rocks you try to avoid not to lose traction.
So in the end, he made a bike he's trying to sell by saying everything else is shit. I'll stick with tried and true.
  • 2 0
 @Etek: He kinda prove his point, if you notice the brands are slowing increasing reach numbers and reducing head angles. Check old vs new spark, epic (two of the most "important" bikes in xc racing), oiz, scalpel, anthem and several other bikes that went tru the same process of getting longer and slacker. . Also notice how stem lenght is decreasing. But no brand does it radically (except Intense Sniper, maybe, that probably he helped to develop) afraid to loose sales if the design is "too radical". So the steps are small each year. But I belive in 3 or less years the standard for XC bikes will be about 67/68 head angle and 15~20% longer reach than current generation. Old Large will be new medium (with shorter and steeper seat tubes). So everyone have a reason to "upgrade" the bikes every year to stay in the state of the art. Lets wait and see, if I remember I come back here to comment that I was right hahaha
  • 1 1
 @thelittle: He didn't prove anything. He just said something. That doesn't make it true. Time will only tell. But as far as I'm concerned, why should I buy a bike that's so radical only to find out that it's actually shit for cross country?
  • 2 0
 @Etek: So you are saying new epic and new spark are shit for XC? Because they about 1.5 degree slacker than previous generation. For a XC bike its kind of radical shift, specially for conservative brands like SPZ. About racing, Nino is a high performance athlete with outstading technical skill and he could win on praticaly any bike. The previous generation Spark has a shit progression curve for the rear susp (that changed to COMPLETELY OPPOSITE FOR 2017) and he won many races with it even with 650b wheels.
  • 1 0
 @grim007: this bike sounds sick. I race on a trek top fuel 9.8. It climbs like a dream but I agree, at about mile 30 I wish I had a few more degrees of slack
  • 1 0
 @thelittle: Spark is 1.5 degreess slacker. Unno is 3 degrees slacker. There's a very big difference. And what does Nino have to do with Cesar Rojo? What the hell are you actually trying to say here? If you are so fond of the Unno, and 67 degrees HTA, go buy one. Nobody is stopping you. I'm not going to throw money on something one guy that built it says it's the best thing ever.
  • 1 0
 @Etek: You would rather throw your money at a soon to be outdated design? (when manufacturers can convince luddite racers that a slacker bike only has benefits)
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: There's no proof HTA will go so far as 67 for cross country bikes. My fitness and skill level will always be the limiting factor in these races. It's just some fireroad warrios who can't climb on some forum and one guy who made a bike nobody will buy claiming so. So yea, I'll enjoy my outdated bike in the meantime.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: Racers are no more Luddites than any other riders, they are just not swayed by marketing the way we are.

Everyone said that DH switching to 29 was because of pressure from the manufacturers but the opposite was the case. They all found they were faster on 29ers they had cobbled together so they pushed for their brands to make production versions.

If XC racers found they were faster on longer slacker bikes they wouldn't hesitate for a second to make the switch. However, if they found it to be the same but it meant a learning curve to switch then they won't bother as the time spent adjusting could be better spent training.

These longer slacker XC bikes aren't designed for pure XC racers as I see it. They are aimed at riders who might race some XC some weekends but most of their riding is outside of the race environment where they want to have some fun and snag those sweet KOMs.
  • 1 0
 @Patrick9-32: I've worked with them (XC) at the World Cup level. They're weight weenies above all else. I understand that but not once will you hear the majority of them wanting to experiment with geometry. If manufacturers told them that 71 degree head angle and 120mm stems are the way to go for XC racing, they would all still be racing those bikes.

Go read some of the comments in the Sniper review. So many comments saying that bike will not be competitive in XC racing. Utterly clueless. I can't wait for Nino to destroy everyone on the next, slacker, Spark.
  • 8 2
 Canyon missed an opportunity to make this with more progressive, rider-forward geometry. No reason why they had to adhere to these dated numbers.
  • 7 0
 maybe i prefer orbea from yesterday
  • 6 0
 and they want less than 7ks for their top end build? wow thats amazing really.
  • 3 0
 Jeremiah Bishop has been riding one of these things at local races, glad they released it after months of prototypes and teasing
  • 1 0
 When he showed up at woodberry he was running prototype xtr m9100
  • 3 1
 Gotta love the facial expressions. Confused, Angry, Happy! Same order of expressions in marriage. Engaged, Married, Divorced! Wink
  • 1 0
 Ha- In a roundabout way, you nailed it.
  • 2 1
 Hey PB, you might wanna change "Available Now" to "Completely Unavailable." Every single new Lux model marked "Sold Out" on the US site. Hope that just means Europe gets first dibs.
  • 2 0
 Is the new Lux finally 148 Boost spaced on the rear, instead of 142 like the old frame?
  • 21 2
 I love how PBers went from trying to burn the Boost heretic to accepting, asking, and daresay I even begging for it... lol same for almost anything new I suppose... Big Grin
  • 2 0
 Sure is - 148 Boost.
  • 3 2
 Spec ,looks etc is awesome. Geo isn't upto date tho tbf. Scott spark rc is 68.5 ha. New sc blur an yeti sb100 too. Think they could've gone abit more aggressive.
  • 9 2
 This bike isn’t meant to compete with the Blur or the Yeti, it’s an XC race bike.
  • 2 1
 @stevemokan: exactly
  • 1 0
 Any alternatives to the blur or sb100 that are around ~3k? Cheapest blur is 4.300€ in Spain.
  • 3 1
 @bernat: intense sniper
  • 1 0
 @CullenHerring: yeah... cheapest buid is around 4.500€ in spain, so... nice bikes are expensive
  • 5 2
 Hilarious that people think that XC races bikes should have shit, near road geo.
  • 1 2
 @stevemokan: so is the Scott spark rc. (Which I have) an that has 68.5 ha.
Race bike doesnt mean it has to have super steep ha an dated geo.
  • 3 2
 @jclnv: Agree... when you head tube angle is still steeper than the Specialized Epic FSR and the Cannondale Scalpel, you are behind the times (even if it's only by .5 degrees). Kind of surprising that a forward-thinking company like Canyon settled on 70 degree HTA. But I guess that's only one part of the equation... still, this bike doesn't really excite me. I'll be taking a hard look at the Intense Sniper next season.
  • 1 0
 @Chadimac22: If you look at all their geo, they don't strike me as 'forward-thinking'.
  • 7 0
 How many world cup races did Intense Sniper won, or marathon races? None? Oh yea, it's the bike to get.
  • 2 0
 @bernat: what about megamo track 07?
  • 2 1
 That thing looks sexy (for an XC bike)...but I shudder thinking how those seatstays would snap just looking at my big ass. Razz
  • 2 0
 Also, I want that thru-axle for my bike. That's a tidy out of the way solution for rock avoidance.
  • 1 0
 DT Swiss have a thru-axle with a removable ratcheting handle
  • 2 0
 Rumor has it heavy riders can generate up to 120mm travel when the seat stays bend.
  • 3 0
 Wait... weight?
  • 2 0
 10 kg for the CF SLX.
  • 2 0
 frame 1660 g
  • 3 2
 dry weight
  • 7 5
 full sized water bottles are 700/750 ml not 400 ml
  • 12 0
 Now you can have 2 different beers in a single ride!
  • 1 1
 But it fits two... 2 x 400 = 800 > 700/750 Smile
  • 6 0
 It is 2 x 800ml = 1.6l total.
  • 1 0
 It fits *two* 750ml bottles.
  • 3 0
 @chyu: Or if you're me, a beer and a whiskey...
  • 1 0
 @Patrick9-32: True. Apparently, it's been updated.
  • 1 0
 @telemarc67: bourbon in one and cola in the other perhaps.
  • 2 0
 Also crash tested with real trees in real races!
  • 2 2
 Everyone's frame is looking the same in this category. Did everyone go to the same factory?
- Yeti Sb100
- Orbea
- Canyon Lux

I'm sure I'm missing some.
  • 5 0
 The Yeti isn't competing in this category.. But yes a lot of the new xc frames look similar.. Must be some science behind that linkage design or something.
  • 5 4
 110mm for increased trail capability? Yeah alright lol. That 10 mm is going to unleash the beast..
  • 2 0
 Not downcountry enough for my liking.
  • 3 3
 Pressing that buy now button in 3...2....1... Been waiting on this all year....
  • 3 2
 400ml "full size" water bottles?
What are they? Water bottles for ants????
  • 4 0
 the water bottle has to be at least...three times bigger than this!
  • 2 0
 Pretty bike!
  • 1 0
 lmao thought ht was 78 degrees
  • 2 3
 I'm thinking dropper post for more control on the down hill. Then match it with a 66 or 67 degree head tube angle. That would be modern geo for an XC bike.
  • 1 0
 Tube sizes are getting unbelievably thin.
  • 2 2
 Pretty sure the water bottles are different standard, to make it possible.
  • 2 2
 TWO full sized water bottles? O-face!
  • 1 0
 wrong thread.
  • 1 0
 Can in pop wheelies?
  • 1 0
 No gearbox?
  • 1 4
 When comparing to the new blur or Orbea they should have named it the "Yux".
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.044464
Mobile Version of Website