PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
YT Capra 29
Words by Henry Quinney, photography by Tom Richards
The third generation of the Capra was launched earlier this year, returning to YT's lineup with updated geometry, a mixed wheel or a 29" version, and improved water bottle holding capabilities.
It's a good looking bike, with an asymmetrical frame design that gives it a clean silhouette and a striking appearance. The bike uses the brand’s V4L suspension to deliver 165mm of rear travel via a four bar layout.
The new all-new Capra takes on some adjustments over previous versions to help it keep in line with expectations of a modern enduro bike.
Capra Details • Travel: 165mm rear / 170mm front
• Wheel size: 29" (there is a MX version also)
• Head angle: 64.2/64.5°
• Seat tube angle: 77.6/77.9°
• Reach: 467mm (lrg)
• Chainstay length: 438mm (lrg)
• Sizes: S, M, L (tested), XL, XXL
• Weight: 33.69lb / 15.28kg
• Price: $5,999 USD
•
yt-industries.com The ability to hold a water bottle was accomplished by removing one of the wings that help brace the front triangle. The access is only via the left side. Us righties have had it our own way for so long with various models I think it’s about time that left-handed riders get that easy access, even if it didn’t suit me. It requires a bit of a refined technique but it’s in there. It holds water. I think we can all agree this is a good thing. It also has top tube rivets should you want to double-down on storage.
There are a lot of sensible build options to keep the masses happy - and that’s important because YT have affirmed itself to be a huge bike brand in recent years and I imagine they intend to sell a lot of these. In fact, I have no doubts they will.
There’s no-moto guided internal cable routing, a SRAM universal derailleur hanger and lots of chainslap protection. Not only that, but the bike also includes a flip chip on the shock. However, the 0.3 degrees on offer isn’t an overwhelming amount of adjustment.
The bike features updated geometry, but be sure to check the sizing. With a reach of 467mm the size large is more of an extra medium compared to most other brands sizing charts. This is no bad thing, but a buyer would be best to check for themselves. The head angle sits at 64.2-degrees in the slack setting, which is combined with a seat tube angle of 77.6 degrees. The 445mm seat tube could be a little shorter. It was fine for me but it might be a little long for somebody who is closer to size chart's target audience.
This bike, the Core 4 model, is the highest end 29” model available and comes with a
very solid spec. It has a retail price of $5,999 and comes equipped with Fox Factory suspension, SRAM X01 Eagle, Code RSC brakes and carbon Descendant cranks. I would say, on paper, this bike represents the best value of all the bikes on this year’s field test. If I was nit-picking I would say 150mm drop seatpost on the size large is on the short side and that the 200mm rotor on the YT, while ample, was somewhat outgunned by the 220mm rotors on the front of some of the other enduro bikes.
With our control tires installed the bike weighed 33.69lb / 15.28kg
ClimbingThe model name Capra is derived from the Latin word for goat. So how does this bike climb? Well, it was a tale of two halves.
In general, this bike is a good climber. When using Fox’s base settings, the YT’s suspension has a different flavour to some of the other bikes on test. It's got bucket loads of support, so it tracks well even when out of the saddle and unlocked. It’s a bike that prioritises traction under load rather than a wheel that just gets up and over obstacles. For instance, the Transition Spire is on the other end of the spectrum. Both are good climbers but go about it in very different ways. The Capra is a little punchier and less about patiently spinning up things with a high cadence. .
If it was my bike, again with the base settings, I might use the lockout lever on smooth climbs, but I think on single track or anything remotely chunky I would let the rear shock do its thing. At 33.69lb / 15.28kg it’s relatively middle of the road in terms of weight but its high level of traction and solid platform means that it is a capable climber and a bike that is very happy to tick along and get the job done.
It worked well up switchbacks and tight climbs, and the short top tube really did let me manipulate my weight on the bike. Would I trade this off for a bit more room, especially on long gravel road climbs where the extra weight in your hands isn’t always wanted? Perhaps. I think these problems would melt away though had I been on the XL though, which is not only longer but also has nearly 10mm extra in frame stack.
So, the second half? Well, I eventually ended up fully opening the compression adjustments in my pursuit of better small bump sensitivity and tracking on descents. This did help, but it did compromise climbing somewhat. A degree of bob crept in, and although there was still good support and traction, it definitely felt a little softer under power. All of that said, many people might not need to open the compression dials fully for one reason or another and can enjoy the climbing prowess this bike offers.
Descending
So, what first? The geometry or the suspension feel? Let’s start with the former and then go from there.
This bike is going to offer something really important to a group of people that often find themselves in between sizes. If you’re 5’10” this is probably going to fit you better than many other bikes out there.
The geometry is certainly progressive but I would say compared to the GT, Norco and Transition it’s a bit more measured and is dialed back half a turn from those rather extreme machines. Is just over 64 degrees slack enough? Absolutely. It’s not that far off the numbers of the Specialized Enduro, a previous winner of the Enduro Field Test, and a bike we used as something of a benchmark.
It’s a well balanced bike, although I’d be very curious to try the 5mm longer rear end of the XL or XXL sizes, even if on the 467mm reach size large.
The Capra isn't a bike that lets you just plow. It feels quite taut, and whether that's a good or a bad thing probably depends what you're riding it on. It does feel that bit more agile compared to the big bruisers, but it also feels like it gets pushed around a bit more too.
On smoother trails, the amount of pop and support it offers does come into play on the exit of turns or when picking up over small lips. However, in straight lines over rough parts of trail it lacked the planted feel of the Norco or Transition. Regarding the shorter reach numbers, there were times where that dimension got lost in the noise, but when you were hanging on through rough stuff it felt distinctly less stable.
The suspension performance of the YT was on the firm-feeling side compared to some of the others on test for my personal tastes. I eventually fully opened both compression adjustments in a bid to try and help the bike track better but it never really felt like it was quite achieved. It moved it in the right direction, although never quite gave me the feeling I wanted.
Riders that have a more active or poppy style may well really enjoy this high level of support throughout the whole stroke, but for me it felt like it just bashed its way through things rather than soaked them up. I’m not averse to a supported feel, but would rather it was just more compliant off the top. To give credit to the Capra, I think the way the shock moves through the second half of its travel is great.
Who’s the ideal candidate for the Capra? I’d say it’s going to be a rider that probably sits on the edge of wanting the travel of an enduro bike while also wanting the liveliness of a trail bike. Yes, you could take it to the mountains and ride some really rough and wild trails but it’s probably happier on things that are a little smoother and the odd day going full send in the bike park. It’s an easy bike to ride, but not the easiest bike to ride very aggressively on full-blown chunder.
325 Comments
ETA for warranty: ...buffering...
Silver lining i guess is at least they did not pull a Dorel (Cannondale, GT) or Evil and accuse you of crashing the bike, refuse warranty, and offer you a 5% off msrp "crash replacement"
On a COVID supply related note, I wonder how many brands are cutting corners on frame quality/standards right now given the limited frame and part supply........
Sorry guys, but what do you think a low weight frame is capable of? Try not casing every 2. jump, and you will not have to go through warranty hell...
Aluminum SC are outrageous lately
I had a GT Fury in Europe and the customer service is a joke, they didn't even have I drive parts. The Fury was a piece of junk. Even brand new the frame / I drive bolt were not tight enough and the big bolts snapped when I was riding.
I would stay away from GT, Norco. Anyway good luck with your claim, at least they replied
YT apologised when I met them out in Morzine at PDS and promised me a good discount if I wanted to buy another bike off them in future. When I was in the market for a trail bike I fancied a YT, tried to get that good discount and what do you know they denied all knowledge and refused to honour their promise.
That combined with the horrendous warranty stories have taken them permanently off my list. If you make a promise as a company you should honour it.
Same here, 2017 Jeffsy CF1, Been all over Moab, St George, Salt Lake City area trails. Can’t seem to kill it.
I just upgraded parts as I wore them out, but the frame is solid as a rock and still extremely capable.
It’s actually a great bike, I’ve no real desire or drive to replace it with something else right now.
If Jack Moir winning EWS on a bike that does not follow any of those trends does not make you think twice I don’t know what else to say
It does seem that shorter bikes are in general better for pros, longer bikes better for average riders. The trick is figuring out which end of the scale you are closer to.
If you're riding a large you're historically in the 5'10" ish camp...no need for you to have a 500 reach...its probably making you worse actually.
Ninja Edit: Forgot Troy Brosnam going with a stock link, size, reach and head angle on his canyon earlier this year.
I think people routinely get in there head that they ride a size X, and just keep riding that size even though the industry has started to make the size range cover more heights. Like, bro....It doesn't make your peepee smaller to ride a medium instead of a large. LMAO
Frustrating part is that if Moir, Rude, Remi etc were all winning on super long bikes, people would say "OH that's the ideal geometry", but now people just say "well its because they are pros". I think there's a bit of truth there and a bit of BS too. The EnduroMag guys certainly weren't pros. It'll be interesting to see if Bike geometry stabilizes. I'm guessing manuf's don't want it too for obvious marketing reasons (your last gen bike sucks!) but we've def hit the limit on bike length.
Not only that, they're just more fun.
When the author of this article says, "If you’re 5’10” this is probably going to fit you better than many other bikes out there," I'm wondering, How? With 467mm reach? Maybe for someone else. Being 5'10" I've ridden reaches this long and have gravitated back towards 440-455 (455 being the max I would ever ride anymore). This movement towards making bikes super long has run its course. Look at the number of racers in this height range that have gone back to mediums from larges. The ability to maneuver the bike around, rather than driving a bus, is not only more fun but it is faster (if you care about such things). Also, neck pain. Being that far forward in the attack position puts more stress on your neck (and shoulders). With a shorter reach you can still properly weight the front wheel while also adjusting body position to a more upright position to relieve stress on the neck and shoulders. With long reaches you're locked into the more forward position with little room for adjustment. I've personally experienced this difference and am glad I went back to mediums. Several different manufacturers urged me onto larges and I listened, only to regret it later. Never again.
That being said....
it has two short links, with the top link being longer. Often this creates a progressive/regressive suspension curve, very much like the DW link. When paired with an air shock this is arguably the best compression curve to have. This puts the progression earlier in the travel than most purely progressive designs, giving mid stroke support without having a wall of progression, allowing you to more easily use all your suspension.
The rear axle path of a DW link is initially very rearward, but then the instant center drops and the axle path changes to be more forward, to keep chaingrowth under control. With the WAO, since the top link is longer, and the lower link is more vertical, I'm guessing that it will be different than a DW link and instead be more like the Canefield design, where the rear axle path stays rearward throughout the travel, sacrificing less chaingrowth deep in the travel for more chassis stability.
If I'm right, then these changes aren't dramatic. They are small, but many small bricks build a large house, so to speak.
The YT is more comfy in the attack position, and just rolling down steeper stuff. But anything that requires dynamic movement, it feels too stretched imo. Wanna push the bike infront of you on a bigger drop/pop it over a decent sized rock/pull a manual on off a smaller drop, etc- I feel almost too stretched out and in less control.
Meanwhile, the Levo SL is significantly easier to ride dynamically even though it weighs 15 pounds more. But it does feel a little cramped just in the attack position and you're a bit over the back in the steeps. Methinks something around 465 mm reach would be a perfect compromise. Really wanna try this Capra tbh.
I'd love an Arrival vs Sentinel v2 comparison.
Thing is, the long camp have never brought any evidence to support their own assertion, it's just all in the feels yo.
Interesting, my main takeaway from that same enduro-mtb article, was that balanced bikes were best, not necessarily that “short bikes” are best.
Most of the bikes in the test had fairly short rear centers. So the bikes that were easy to ride fast with short rear centers were also short in reach (like Richie Rudes Medium SB150).
The “worst” bikes had super short rear centers and really long reaches (Commencal Meta AM iirc), and were pretty unbalanced.
Which personally makes me happy to see that more bikes with scaling/adjustable rear centers, so there is more than one size with an ideal balance.
My new(ish) bike: Medium Ripmo AF. Reach 455. The reach and front center feel annoyingly long. Calculate the bike's RAD -> way too long for my height 5'8" (and yes I did all the adjustments w stems, spacers and bars)
My old medium 2016 Kona Process felt perfect. Calculate the RAD and it's perfect for my height. Reach 435mm. Check my roadbike, fatbike, and dirtjumper and they all have the perfect RAD.
Today's bikes - as far as the reach measurement - are 1 size larger than bikes from 3 years ago. To me, the "longer" part of "longer, lower, slacker" means longer wheelbase through a slacker headtube angle while maintaining the same reach. DH bikes' HTA's are usually ~63.5 and I don't think we'll be able to go much slacker than that as DH bikes haven't really slackened at all over the years. Curious what PB thinks of that super slack Transition! Grim donut is an extreme example of "too slack".
I noticed that with my Jeffsy (reach a bit long) so I cut down to a shorter stem (35mm, from 50mm stock). It makes a big difference and I much prefer it.
When doing a corner correctly it will give you higher exit speed, and therefore more speed on the straights.
If you follow a friend and miss a little obstacle in a straight line, you lose a little time, if you mess ut a corner, hes gone!
to put it otherway:
on my trail bike, there is no reason to go big as the terrain does not requires it and it would be mostly a drag.
on my big bike, for the rough, steep and fast stuff.. yeah.. big wb, big reach. Then again, I'm not the most confident dh-er so maybe that's why.
Slow motion through rock garden with tires inflated to 50 psi? This should be a thing...
"The Enduro mag article where they discuss how compact pro EWS bikes are was really interesting. Like Richie Rude is on a medium sb150 (160mm reach) with 760mm bars at 5'11" or something like that."
enduro-mtb.com/en/enduro-race-bike-mtb-review
Rode the 2020 capra 29 recently and have ridden the current version of the jeffsy 29 a couple times. They feel like very different bikes but the capra didn't feel as unwieldy or wallowy as I thought it would, even though the one I rode was alu, coiled (rear), and about 35.5 pounds. I can see how this version with the lighter frame and steeper sta and same supportive suspension could easily be setup as more of an all arounder or enduroAF with a coil rear and maybe even 180 up front.
Might be that non-pro riders benefit from the increased confidence a longer and slacker bike gives while fast riders who don’t need the extra mental boost are faster on a more nimble and manageable bike. Might also be that I have no idea and am just talking shit, but would be interesting to get some in depth testing done with different sizes and riders.
I'm starting to think thats the whole bike industry....
It will probably be a bike that bike reviewers dislike because they are drowning in bikes and prefer exciting unicorns.
'In Stock' maybe ?
Also PB nice review's, always enjoy reading and watching your field test's
A .3° chip allows for slightly tweaking the bike to your needs (maybe you want a slightly higher BB or steeper HTA). The STA changing .3° isn't that important since that's less that what can be compensated for by saddle adjustment. I run my Tallboy in the high position because I use it on mostly XC trails.
@Mattbeer I don't think its a surprise that you are faster on about the same reach bike as Rude, Remi, etc. When those hacks at EnduroMag are quicker, and the pros are quicker...and you are quicker. At what point do we just say...welp the smaller (or appropriate sized bikes if you will) are...quicker.
It's not a surprise that Enduro-mag found the same thing in their time tests:
enduro-mtb.com/en/enduro-race-bike-mtb-review
"If you check out the race bikes on test, you’ll probably be asking yourself how Richie Rude, who is 180 cm tall, can be so fast on a bike with a reach of only 460 mm. Jack Moir is 1.91 m tall and rides a size L Strive, which, due to the extremely tall cockpit, is guaranteed to have a reach under 460 mm. The mullet conversion on the GT Force Carbon that Martin Maes rides has also shrunk the bike down to less than 460 mm in length. The reason for this became clear during the course of our test. Not only did the shorter bikes record faster times, they also allowed our test riders to change direction more quickly and position themselves better before corners to carry their speed through them. On top of that, the agile handling of compact bikes is usually more fun. Anyone who thinks that these bikes aren’t composed at high speeds can rest assured: handling stability is heavily determined by the suspension and all the bikes on test performed brilliantly in this regard."
Which is more typical of an EWS stage? IDK.
Which is more typical of the trails you ride? Thats only what you can answer.
And then there's individual physiology to take into account. Maybe everything is normalized if you looked at enough pros, but I recall reading that Moir's arms are shorter than average for his height, hence the need for shorter reach / higher stack.
Anyways if I'm on the Grim Donut and racing Moir and his Strive straight down a mountain on Mars he still wins by enough margin to catch a few waves on Europa before I even get to the bottom.
BTW awesome racing and I hope Hill can move up the board a bit in these last few races.
Nothings perfect but this has to be better than the marketing departments telling you what works or not: (or our post-purchase justification)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHagRovHSYs&t=303s
If the media would slow their roll a bit in pushing the "looonnnnggger" bikes, I think this quote goes away and manufacturers start focusing on innovations that matter.
"We are making our bikes longer because that’s what the market demands, but the people who work here, and the people we size at demos, and our elite racers, are going down a size. If a top pro can’t control a longer bike, a normal rider can’t."
– Chris Cocalis - Owner of Pivot Cycles
fwiw I think Bernard Kerr (5' 10") just won Hardline on a size Large Pivot bike with 460mm of reach and a shorter wheelbase\reach than the Norco Range. Is it a coincidence that Matt here (5' 10") just laid down the fastest speed with similar reach/fitment as Berndard, Rude, Moir, Remi etc. over real long bikes...maybe not.
Remember its longer than the bike that won...Hardline. Yet its meant for less rowdy terrain.
EWS pros have amazing fitness and skills that allow them to handle shorter bikes, which in the right hands, has advantages. Average riders may find that longer bikes inspire confidence and are less fatiguing. As PB members have discussed, the size of bike you ride will depend on the flavour of trails and style of riding you prefer.
EnduroMag guys on why they thought the Meta AM was so slow for them. Note that the longer bike was MORE fatiguing. It makes sense in that you have to work harder wrestle the big bike.
"The main reason is its long front centre with a reach of 495 mm in combination with a short 433 mm rear end and slack 63.6° head angle. This combination means that you have to ride the bike very actively to generate enough grip on the front wheel when cornering. In tight sections, the META AM tends to understeer a lot and if you don’t reduce your speed, you’ll simply slide through the apex of the turn. Besides costing you a lot of time, it’s exhausting. The bike’s length also comes at the cost of precision through rough sections."
Do you mean "taut" or have YT been teaching it some tricks...
170/170 is enduro
I think the Endurmag guys showed hints that its not just the studs like Matt, Remi, Rude etc that benefit from less extreme reaches/length. And perhaps their more fun.
www.mtb-news.de/news/forschungsprojekt-mountainbike-geometrie-teil-1
Did everyone suddenly forget when the ultra slack and long Grim Donut smoked the Commencal Meta in a timed race? @mikelevy I think the GD should have made a guest appearance in this test!
Because the tracks they ride aren't 100% rock gardens. Linear suspension is great for plowing chunder, but it's slow on anything flowy and less technical. Too little anti-squat and it becomes a lot harder to pre-jump over a small crest at high speed for example. Linear suspension is better for plowing the gnar, and progressive suspension is better for man made jumps, and less-steep sections.
Also keep in mind that pro riders have different linkages and whatnot that they can change to alter these progression curves to match different track conditions.
In contrast, my 2020 Transition Patrol feels much more planted when it gets gnarly like an old school DH bike and I think would let most riders go faster without feeling nervous, but it will likely be a little less engaging and playful then Capra on easier trails (which is why they have the Scout!).
Made me laugh (in a good way).
Do I go with smaller size at 450 and use higher rise bars, or get longer bike and put shorter stem on it to bring reach down to 465?
others run long bikes indeed: bikeboard.at/Board/attachment.php?attachmentid=223094&d=1631179808
And listening to the reviewers, this seems to be the case with the Mk3 Capra.
(the Mk2 Capra indeed doesn't stiffen-up that much under chain-pull -- at the same time it seems to have been plusher)
DTC and ecommerce is the future. If local bike shops can't provide exceptional, competitive service, let them fail.
I’m not saying that justifies people’s behavior, but there’s definitely a non-bizarre reason to explain it.
Join Pinkbike Login