First Ride: Devinci's Chainsaw is a Canadian-Made Park Ripper
What’s more Canadian than a locally-made Devinci Cycles aluminum frame called the Chainsaw? This new bike can be built for enduro or downhill riding, and the name pays tribute to the late, great Steve Smith.
This high-pivot bike focuses on descending in a more affordable package, with prices starting at $3,899 USD. The Chainsaw shares the same shapes and suspension layout as Devinci’s enduro-race bike, the Spartan HP, but has more travel and is much slacker.
There are two configurations of the Chainsaw: a full 29er with 170mm of travel at either end, dropper post, and wide-range gearing, or the gravity fuelled “DH” build that comes with mixed wheels, a 190mm dual-crown fork, fixed seat post, and compact gear selection.
Devinci was sure to convene with Tianna Smith, Steve’s mother, regarding the name of the bike and makes an annual donation to the Steve Smith Legacy Foundation.
This high-pivot bike focuses on descending in a more affordable package, with prices starting at $3,899 USD. The Chainsaw shares the same shapes and suspension layout as Devinci’s enduro-race bike, the Spartan HP, but has more travel and is much slacker.
There are two configurations of the Chainsaw: a full 29er with 170mm of travel at either end, dropper post, and wide-range gearing, or the gravity fuelled “DH” build that comes with mixed wheels, a 190mm dual-crown fork, fixed seat post, and compact gear selection.
Devinci was sure to convene with Tianna Smith, Steve’s mother, regarding the name of the bike and makes an annual donation to the Steve Smith Legacy Foundation.
Devinci Chainsaw Details
• 6061 T6 aluminum frame made in Canada w/ lifetime warranty
• Enduro configuration: 170mm front and rear travel, 29" wheels
• DH configuration: 190mm front/170 rear travel, mixed wheels
• 62.1-62.9° head tube angle
• 79.6° seat angle (MD)
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Reach: 449, 469, 494, 519mm
• Chainstay: 425, 430, 435, 440mm (static)
• Weight: 16.3 kg / 35.9 lb (MD - GX model)
• Complete price: $3,899-4,999 USD / $4,799-5,999 CAD
• Frame only: $2,599 USD / $3,399 CAD
• Devinci.com
• 6061 T6 aluminum frame made in Canada w/ lifetime warranty
• Enduro configuration: 170mm front and rear travel, 29" wheels
• DH configuration: 190mm front/170 rear travel, mixed wheels
• 62.1-62.9° head tube angle
• 79.6° seat angle (MD)
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Reach: 449, 469, 494, 519mm
• Chainstay: 425, 430, 435, 440mm (static)
• Weight: 16.3 kg / 35.9 lb (MD - GX model)
• Complete price: $3,899-4,999 USD / $4,799-5,999 CAD
• Frame only: $2,599 USD / $3,399 CAD
• Devinci.com
Frame and Suspension details
Based in Saguenay, Quebec, Devinci Cycles manufactures their high-end alloy frames in-house and that’s exactly where the Chainsaw is built. They’ve stayed on board with the high-pivot train and like the Spartan HP, a thermoplastic guide captures the derailleur housing and encloses the idler pulley wheel. Devinci designed the suspension kinematics to work in conjunction with either an air or coil shock.
170mm of rear wheel travel is achieved with a long 225x70mm trunnion mount shock and can be boosted to 180mm by removing a 5mm internal shock spacer.
There is a flip-chip on the lower shock mount to adjust the geometry, but that’s best reserved for swapping between 27.5 or 29” rear wheels, depending on which bike setup you opt for.
The Split-Pivot point co-rotates around the 157mm wide rear axle and the threaded bottom bracket is spaced to use a 56.5mm chainline. Under the front chainring lies a two-bolt ISCG 05 mounting tab for e*thirteen’s lower roller guide, although a skid plate isn’t part of the stock equipment.
Up front, the head tube features simple ports for the internally routed cables guarded by foam tubes and ZS44/56 style cups are used. There’s room for a 500 mL water bottle inside the front triangle on all four frame sizes without compromising the standover height or seat tube length on the medium frame.
Throughout the rear triangle, there’s ample chain-damping material, although there isn’t a protector to cover the downtube. If you transport your bike on a pickup’s tailgate pad, sticking an aftermarket rubber bumper under there is a worthy add-on.
Geometry
We wouldn’t expect Devinci to build a long-travel enduro and park bike that wasn’t rowdy. The Chainsaw uses a short size-specific chainstay for each frame and a slack 62.9-degree head tube angle.
The four frame reaches range from 429, 469, 494, and 519mm, pairing with 425, 430, 435, and 440mm chainstays. Those tailored chainstays are calculated statically, so at a recommended 25-30% sag, they will stretch by nearly 10mm due to the bike's axle path.
When in the DH mode, all of those numbers get trimmed down by the longer fork and flip-chip adjustment.
Specs
Three build kit options exist in the Chainsaw lineup; two enduro builds with air shocks, and one coil-sprung DH model, all of which primarily use SRAM and RockShox components. Since the idea behind the Chainsaw was to keep the pricepoints reasonable and grow the gravity side of the market, there are no expensive carbon frame options.
The SX and GX enduro builds start at $3,899 USD / $4,799 CAD and $4,699 USD / $5,499 CAD with SRAM Eagle 12-speed drivetrains, dropper posts, air shocks, and a single-tone paint job. There’s also a frame-kit that includes a RockShox Super Deluxe Air shock, TranzX dropper post, FSA headset, and SDG saddle for $2,599 USD / $3,399 CAD.
The dual crown offering comes in a mixed-wheeled platform with a 190mm RockShox Boxxer Select RC and uses a 70mm stroke Super Deluxe Select+ RC coil shock. That’s finished with SRAM Code R brakes, alloy Race Face rims and controls, plus Maxxis DoubleDown and DH casing tires for $4,999 USD / $5,999 CAD.
Devinci Chainsaw DH GX - $4,999 USD / $5,999 CAD
Devinci Chainsaw GX 12S - $4,699 USD / $5,499 CAD
Devinci Chainsaw SX 12S - $3,899 USD / $4,799 CAD
Ride Impressions
High pivot bikes aren’t playful right? Wrong. The ride isn’t taxing on rolling blue trails, yet doesn’t hold back when you dive into the steeps. Devinci has found a unique balance in the geometry that keeps the ride alive, without detracting from the magic carpet ride of the high pivot suspension design. If you could smash together a Specialized Status and Norco Range, you’d probably end up with something along the lines of the Chainsaw.
That may be due to the frame sizing as well. I opted for the size medium with a reach of 469mmm, which seemed much more appropriate than stretching up to the size large and its massive 494mm number. On paper, those 430mm chainstays sound short, and they are when you need them to be, like popping the bike into a manual, but under heavy compressions they grow to recapture stability for mobbing straight down chunkier bits of trail.
That’s another area where the head angle plays into the stability of the bike. You get a sense that there’s a lot of front wheel ahead of you, which encourages you to attack on steep trails. Despite the larger rear wheel, getting away from the seat and over the back wheel isn’t a nuisance either. However, I did need to stop and lower the post for long, steep descents. The dropper post length of 150mm on the size MD bike was on the short side for my 80cm inseam.
As smooth and relaxed as the Chainsaw was on the descents, climbing posed a few challenges. I can’t nitpick about the weight of the 170mm travel alloy frame that’s built on a tighter budget, because it’s reasonable at 15.6 kg / 34.5 lb, but the extra lower tension does drag you down a bit. That’s an easy work around. After removing the guide, and swapping out for a protective skid plate, I noticed a reduction in chain friction. So far, I haven’t dropped a chain, but we’ll see how that story develops as the drivetrain wears.
The lack of a climb switch is a larger worry since that’s more of an expensive upgrade. A steep 79.4-degree seat tube angle does help to keep you in an upright climbing posture, however, pedal bob is noticeable on the Chainsaw.
The seldom seen SRAM G2 RE brakes use a Code R caliper and G2 lever, delivering a decent amount of power. For more control and modulation, this would be one of the first components I’d upgrade if you’re consistently riding steep trails, like on Vancouver's North Shore.
Considering the target market for the Chainsaw, Devinci has built a unique bike that caters to enduro and park riders without breaking the bank. The overall feel of the bike is burly with a strong “fun-factor” built into the smooth and quiet operation of the high pivot. In due time, we’ll be experimenting with the Chainsaw in DH mode and seeing how that stacks up against full-on downhill bikes in the park too.
Author Info:
Member since Mar 16, 2001
Must Read This Week
wtf wtf
what we STILL have going on is basically a weight weenie XC standard - ON DH BIKES
In practice, I have no clue how noticeable this would be. Probably more noticeable than using larger diameter 220mm rotors, though.
when i take a look at caliper (and it's a big caliper) on my front saint with 200mm rotor, caliper/rotor size ratio looks ridiculous
And yes, the pad is effective enough. The saint will have a larger hydraulic ratio and therefore higher brake force compared to a guide for example, even if they used the same pads as a guide. Making the caliper bigger in general improves the heat capacity and therefore the leads to a more consistent performance over longer descents
you're just trying to pose as knowledgable while you're a total fake and disinforming the less knowledgeable/gullible.
aka, troll
1. The deformation in the system of a steel rotor and brake pad is orders of magnitude smaller than the deformation of rubber on the street.
2. no it is not. The pad size is effective enough because you don't overheat the brake and therefore decrease the friction coefficent within the first seconds of pulling the lever. I am not considering heat managment on longe descents right here where a bigger pad helps.
3. The size of the caliper itself has not a lot to do with the braking force. If the stiffness of the caliper is big enough so it doesn't drastically deform during braking, it's the hydraulic force of the pistons deciding how big the force on the pads and therefore on the rotor is.
If you look at the brake pads on the trickstuff maxima they measure 38.6x16mm. That's the strongest mountain bike brake on the planet. The guide t's on the sx version of this bike are 36x16mm. The guide re's are 40x16mm.
The smaller brake pads available on this bike are a fraction away from being dimensionally identical to the pads on the most powerful bike brakes on the planet and the bigger pads available are actually a fraction bigger.
If someone is cooking these pads it's a compound or rider problem.
how big are trickstuff pistons and how much pressure do they apply and how big are guides? apples and oranges
therealcarsreviews.blogspot.com/2013/11/carbon-ceramic-brakes-vs-conventional.html
"This composite construction offers lighter, stronger and *more durable* disks than their steel counterparts"
As far as the piston size that's what @bashhard is saying when he says hydraulic ratio. What you said was "wouldn't need more force with bigger pads." Bigger pistons = more force.
Which is it? Is it your original argument of bigger pads or is it bigger pistons? You were insulting him for saying pad size wasn't the issue.
are physics different where you're from?
Tires are a solid, but they are filled with air. Air is a gas. The other thing is tires have to deform to have traction because they have to conform to a road which is an imperfect surface.
A brake is not an imperfect surface. You wear brake pads/rotors to each other (bedding them in) and then they are fitted to each other. Wear does not equal deformation. They are not the same thing. Your brake pads do not bulge when you squeeze them.
Deformation is when something changes its shape under pressure.
Wear is when something loses part of it's mass due to friction or use.
The difference between deformation and wear is when something deforms it does not lose any of its mass.
Go sit on your bike. Do you see the tires bulge? That's deformation. But the tires are not wearing because you are just sitting there.
Now get off your bike, lock your rear brake up and drag it around the parking lot for a few hours. Your rear tire is wearing because of friction. But it's not deformed because you aren't sitting on it.
Now take a belt sander to your rear tire. It's still not deformed, you still aren't on it, but it is wearing at a much faster rate. Because of coefficient of friction.
That's how different pad materials change your braking.
You can sit there and squeeze your brake levers for the rest of your days but unless you apply friction when you release your brakes those pads will be the exact same as when you started.
None of this changes the fact that you aren't even arguing the same point as you originally were. All of this started because you were saying the brakes needed bigger pads, which was proven wrong like 20 comments ago so you dropped that one real quick and changed subjects to another one you're wrong about.
skilled riders: put DH brakes on XC/trail bikes
bike industry: puts XC/trail brakes on DH bikes
It was a very limited edition 09 Nissan Versa that's why it went for money.
1. Aluminum frame and reasonable price
2. Full "enduro" and overbuilt/too slack for most - but exactly what we want
3. Variable chainstay lengths
4. High pivot
5. Fits a water bottle
6. Name for the legend himself...
It’s in the third paragraph dude.
Sounds like it bobs quite a bit, so it probably wouldn't suit me, but I'm intrigued to try a high-pivot bike and this one looks more interesting than most.
The medium’s 469 reach sounds perfect, but the super steep 79* STA means the ETT / cockpit will be too cramped…
Love this thing otherwise, looks sweet!
9point8 makes a dropper with 25 mm rearward offset at the head and/or you can slam the saddle rearward on the rails. As long as your hips get to the desired place, it doesn't matter how they get there.
Or maybe the killer OEM deal....?
I also agree 11 is plenty - 10 or maybe even 9 could be enough for my taste.
www.instagram.com/reel/CgKiyiCFVXm/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y
I used to think the same way you did until I did ‘the Rental Bike Series’ for my YouTube channel and came to realize that once you’re in the 170mm and greater world, you’re asking the bike to handle some pretty gnarly stuff and that’s where the larger 29” wheels really shine. It’s also why I purchased a Transition Scout — 150mm front / 140mm rear & dual 27.5s. It’s a very, very capable bike but if I’m looking for something to send the big stuff, I would be reaching for the dual 29” 170mm Spire every time.
Rotational inertia is next to irrelevant in bikes. Spin up the front wheel, lift it in the air, and turn the handlebars, you would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between wheel sizes. Same thing for accelerating the wheel, the amount of extra torque required to do spin up a 29 vs a 27.5 in the air is unnoticeable. If these were significant effects, you would see the pro scene optimizing for tire lightness to increase maneuverability, but nobody is doing that.
Anything handling related for bikes solely has to do with geometry, which not only determines the bikes dynamics, but also changes how the rider fits into the bike and where the weight bias is. A bike "handles" by using the friction of the ground against the contact patch of the tire, an nowhere in there does the diameter of the actual tire matter for handling purposes. 29er xc bikes are more nimble than 27.5 enduro bikes, and bikes like Norco Shore are way more sluggish than some 29er enduro bikes.
When you change up the wheels, on a bike, you affect the geometry by quite a bit. Putting a 27.5 wheel on a 29er bike will make the rear end sit lower, with you being more upright and more rear wheel weight biased. When you point this bike downhill, you naturally feel a lot more confident in handling of the bike because you can ride off the back more without having to worry about the front pushing.
I use a 29er on my XCish bike but those tires are only 800 grams so have less inertia but on my AM bike we're talking about 1200-1400 grams each and the difference is much greater. That is why I feel a 27.5 is better for me.
As to the geo changes I've got that covered with different links/shocks and forks so the difference between setups is less than .3 degrees & 4mm BB height.. A bit less than changing the fork travel 10mm.
Ride what you like, I don't care.
Physics is pretty clear on how rotational inertia is computed and how it affects gyroscopic precession that generates body torques. No matter what you feel, it doesn't override the laws of physics. That 120 grams per wheel isn't doing anything that you can feel.
The only thing that it may do is make the overall bike feel lighter by 0.5 lbs which can make it feel sharper, but that has nothing to do with the wheelsize. If you take your 800 gram wheels on your XC bike and tape weights to them (while removing weight somewhere else), its still going to be just as agile. Simple test you can do to convince yourself once and for all.
As for geo changes, that 0.3 degrees and 4mm of bb height matter. So does changing the rear linkage or the rear shock that makes the bike sit more or less into the travel depending on the compression damping, air setting, leverage ratio, e.t.c.
Ride what you like, but don't spread misinformation about how 27.5 wheels magically make the bike handle better.
STFU AND GO RIDE YOUR BIKE!
27.5 wheels are the chisel to 29 inch wheels sledge hammer. Yes, you can more easily hit bigger items on the bigger bike. However, when you hit the same stuff on 27.5 , it is a complete different style of riding. Sure, you can't just roll over the huge rock. However, being forced to change your riding style allows you to pop off a root, and simply jump over the rock, carrying more speed than you would have with the 29 wheels.
Also, one of your captions that says GX should say SX me thinks.
Stretching the front end out means that you still have the rear weight bias, but you no longer need to run a tall stack, which means your CG can stay lower for better climbing.
The disadvantage is quick flicks and line changes, which is why EWS riders prefer more twitchy bikes.
I feel like the sweet spot for a lot of 5'11-6'2 riders is 480-485 reach. Oh well - I suppose this points to the "park" ambitions of this bike.
Ahh, that does make way more sense.
Because my Banshee Titan (sort of similar in materials/intent), is like 37-38lbs, and I'd be amazed if a high pivot version somehow dropped 3-4lbs off of that weight.
Still pretty reasonable.
Well, that sounds VERY appealing. And it's under 5k!!
Is it Husqvarna compatible by the way?
Go check and report back, I have a coil shock so it's not that easy.
So 170-180mm rear travel, and 180-200mm travel front, depending on the bike.
Then I guess the Norco Shore for 27.5?
Would love to throw a leg over one of these!!!
The bikes geo and price point are pretty on point. The hub spacing is the only thing that is on my list of “if I had a magic wand I’d change this”.
From what I can tell, Superboost 157 seems to be what boost "should probably have been". But the difference between the two seem pretty insignificant in most cases these days. And maybe unfortunately, since it came after a "good enough" boost 148, most frames had already gone to 148.
So at this point I'd mostly like frames to all come with the same size, for compatibility reasons. And since 148 seems to be more common, thats what I'd prefer.
Personally, I'm looking for a frame only, and it's easier to justify if I don't need another new rear wheel.
Makes sense to me
If this was a pure DH bike, 150/157 spacing would make the most sense, as you said those are the standard. But since its being sold in a single crown version, the lines are bit blurry. But I guess the lines are already super blurry. The Propain Spindrift ,Transition Spire and Norco Shore Park are similar bikes, with 148 spacing. But then you also have the Specialized Demo running 148, while most other DH bikes are on 150/157DH. Hub spacing is unnecessarily confusing :/.
I'm sure you're right about most people being interested in chainsaw coming from DH, but with so few DH bikes being sold vs trail/enduro bikes, I'd guess more people have spare 148 wheelsets? Who knows!
Glad it looks like it might work out for you though, it looks like a fun bike
In other words, there is very few people that want to go out pedaling around on trails and then hit a gnarly dh style rock garden at speed, or a 40 foot gap jump, or a 15 footer drop with less than optimal landing in the middle of their ride.
See it all the time here in the PNW.
3/4 - 4/5 of the vert last year I pedaled. The remaining bit was lifts (2 park days).
Although maybe my bike doesn't count, as its "only" 155mm rear, 170mm front, and 38lbs (Banshee Titan with DH tires).
200ish mm rear travel should probably be paired with about the same in the front, which would require spec'ing a double-crown fork at all price points. Product managers believe:
1. Few riders will perceive a bike with a double-crown as suitable for riding uphill.
2. The added OE price of a double-crown fork will diminish the value of the bike and hurt sales of an already niche product.
3. Too few riders want such a product to justify creating the bike.
None of these are about the actual performance, of course, which could be quite good. There's no reason a 200ish mm chassis has to pedal significantly differently from one with 190 mm.
A 180mm/180mm single crown bike should be able to take a 203mm dual crown if its built strong enough. You could probably get away with just doing a special link or a flip chip or something to get 203mm in the rear.
This can already be done with the Canfield One2, Norco Range with special link, and a few others.
The problem with a flip chip for adjusting travel is that it affects the motion ratio, requiring different springs (if coil) and different damping. An air shock with adjustable high- and low-speed compression and rebound would work, though that's quite a bit of hassle for a little change in travel. Of course, it's not absolutely necessary to adjust all the damping settings, but the suspension will be less than ideal if you don't, and the whole point of the flip chip is to optimize the bike for specific use cases.
Those are just details, though. Overall, I agree with you, it's just a question of whether there's enough demand for such bikes to be profitable.
Regarding single- vs. double-crown: Again, I agree! If a person "needs" (whatever that means) more than 180 mm of travel, saving a pound is probably less valuable than the mechanical properties of a double-crown. And again, it's a question of whether enough people agree for such a spec to be profitable.
Yes, it does immensely help with technical climbing, but most enduro/gravity oriented riders _hate_ technical climbs and mostly do fire road or less techy climbs to get to the top (that I know, at least).
Roadies have figured out long ago that the optimal STA for power output--which is what you want for a grind to the top--is 73/74-ish degrees. Technical climbs are usually short and punchy, so if you avoid these types of climbs anyways then why bother with a steep STA?
I prefer around 76* for this style bike, otherwise there's too much weight on your hands in flatter terrain, and more importantly, it requires a stupidly long reach to make a comfortable seated ETT.
I want the reach of the medium, but the ETT of the large...
I would say try the Large, it should fit well for up and down at least!