First Ride: 2022 Canyon Spectral 125 - A Trail Bike With Enduro Geometry

Feb 11, 2022 at 17:45
by Mike Kazimer  
photo

Last year felt like it was full of new long-travel enduro bikes, many of them equipped with idler pulleys and DH-bike geometry. Looking into my crystal ball, I have a feeling that a decent portion of the focus this season is going to shift towards trail bikes, those do-it-all machines with 125 – 145mm or travel, give or take a few millimeters.

Canyon is kicking things off with the new Spectral 125, a bike that shares identical geometry to its longer travel sibling. That's right, you're looking at a bike with 125mm of rear travel, a 140mm fork, and a slack 64-degree head angle. Unlike the standard Spectral, which is available in a variety of wheelsize options, the Spectral is only available with 29” wheels front and rear.
Spectral 125 Details

• Wheel size: 29"
• Travel: 125mm, 140mm fork
• Carbon or aluminum frame options
• 64.1º head angle
• 437mm chainstays
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Claimed frame weight: 2,500 grams (carbon) / 3,000 grams (alloy)
• Weight: 30.6 lb / 13.9 kg (size L, CF9)
• Price: $2,899 - $6,299 USD
www.canyon.com

There are five models in the lineup, two with aluminum frames and three with carbon. Prices start at $2,899 USD for the Spectral 125 AL 5, which has a Shimano Deore 12-speed drivetrain and brakes paired with a RockShox 35 fork and Deluxe Select+ shock.

The top-of-the-line model is the $6,299 USD Spectral 125 CF9. Its build kit highlights include a SRAM GX AXS wireless drivetrain, Fox 36 Factory fork and Float X Shock, SRAM Code RSC brakes, and DT Swiss XMC 1501 carbon wheels.

photo
The carbon frames have fully guided internal cable routing.
photo
There's just enough room for Canyon's 600mL bottle to squeeze in under the shock.


Frame Details

The Spectral 125's carbon frame is 100 grams lighter than the longer-travel Spectral, coming in at a claimed 2,500 grams. That weight savings was accomplished by using slightly smaller tube cross-sections, and a smaller rocker link between the seatstays and seat tube. Even with those weight reductions, the 125 frame receives a category 4 designation, which means it's built to the same standards as Canyon's enduro bikes. That's a good thing, because a bike with this spec and geometry isn't meant for toodling around on gravel paths.

There's space for a water bottle, although the space is a little tight due to the shock placement. To get around that, Canyon have their own bottle that's a little stubbier than the norm, making it possible to haul around 600mL of liquid. Two bolts under the top tube can be used to attach a tube or tool holder, and Canyon even makes their own little zip-up pouch that can be strapped to the frame there.

photo
The chainslap protector does a good job of keeping things quiet.
photo


Other features include a threaded bottom bracket, ribbed chainslap protection, and fully guided internal routing on the carbon frame (the aluminum models use foam sleeves to keep things quiet). Tabs on the frame can accept an ISCG adaptor that's available separately for riders who want to run a chain guide of some kind.

Although the geometry is the same, the Spectral 125's kinematics do vary slightly from the 150mm version. The leverage curve is slightly steeper, which means the bike ramps up a little more quickly in order to keep riders from blowing through the travel. Canyon recommends running 25% sag, another factor that helps give the bike a snappier, more energetic feel on the trail. For those of you who are scheming about putting a coil shock on this bike, Canyon doesn't recommend going that route, and in many cases there won't be enough room to make that a possibility in the first place.


photo

Geometry

As I mentioned, the geometry is almost identical to the Spectral 150 – the reach, chainstay length, and head angle were all copied and pasted onto this new model. By now, saying that a bike is long and slack is about as useful as saying that it has two wheels – of course it does – but that description is very apt this time around. The size large has a 64.1-degree head angle, a 486mm reach, and 437mm chainstays on all sizes. The seat tube angle is 76 degrees, and Canyon provides several reference numbers to help riders get an idea of what it'll be at different positions.

A flip-chip at the rear shock bolt makes it possible to steepen the head angle by .5-degrees, which also raises the bottom bracket by 8mm. The aluminum models don't have a flip-chip, but they do have what seems to be best-of-both-worlds geometry - the alloy frames get the slack head angle and low BB of the carbon frame's low setting, combined with the steeper seat tube angle that you'd get in the high setting. I do wonder why Canyon just didn't do that for the carbon model too - there probably would have been a couple bonus grams of weight savings by going that route.


Models & Pricing
photo
Spectral 125 AL 5: $2,899 USD / €2,449
photo
Spectral 125 AL 6: $3,499 USD / €2,949

photo
Spectral 125 CF 7: $4,199 / €3,399
photo
Spectral 125 CF 8: $5,199 USD / €4,399

photo
Spectral 125 CF9: $6,299 USD / €5,649

photo
Spectral 125 CF9

photo


Ride Impressions

Categorizing bikes is a tricky thing, especially now that there are so many sub-categories. At what point does a downcountry bike become a trail bike? And when does an enduro bike turn into a freeride bike? I have my own opinions, but there are certainly no hard and fast rules. However, as easy as it is to poke fun at all the names, I do think they can be useful, a way to show where a bike fits in the grand scheme of things. With the Spectral, I'd put it in squarely in the aggressive trail category. This is a bike that goes uphill moderately well, but it's decidedly more focused on the descending side of the equation.

For riders who actively search out challenging climbs, or who are a little less intent on riding more technical trails, the Spectral 125 may feel like too much bike. The 64-degree head angle and overall wheelbase length give it relatively subdued handling on tighter, twistier climbs. It gets the job done, and 76-degree seat angle creates a riding position that's comfortable on a variety of terrain, although I personally wouldn't have minded if it was a little steeper. That won't be the case for everyone - at 5'11" I'm right on the border of the medium and large sizes, so taller riders may not find this to be an issue.

On tight, slower speed sections of trail the Spectral 125 is easier to maneuver than a full-blown enduro bike would be, thanks to the supportive suspension, but it's more of a handful than an Ibis Ripley, or a Santa Cruz Tallboy, for example.

As you'd expect, it's on the descents where Canyon's geometry decisions pay off – this thing can carry some serious speed, especially on trails that aren't super chunky. My local riding area contains a mix of moderately rough trails interspersed with plenty of berm- and jump-filled trails, which I'd say is the Spectral 125's ideal habitat. It's easy to get airborne, and it's an absolute blast on jump lines, with enough end-stroke ramp up to take care of those moments when the landing ends up being a little flatter than expected.

On a component-related note, I did need to pull apart the dropper post and wrap a piece of electrical tape around the inner cartridge to keep it from rattling when fully extended. It's something that I had to do on the new Torque as well, so I knew what to expect and it only took a few minutes. Still, it could be an annoyance, especially for less mechanically minded-riders.

The spec choice of a Fox 36 and Code brakes makes a lot of sense, and helps keep things from getting too out of control. I have had a couple of moments where I felt like I was approaching the bike's speed limit (or at least my brain's speed limit) – it's easy to forget there's only 125mm of travel, and the next thing you know you're rocketing straight into a mess of roots faster than seems safe. That's part of the fun, though, trying to find the limits and then dialing it back ever so slightly.

Canyon's obviously not the first company to come out with a short travel 29er that's meant to be ridden hard – Kona's Process 111 is the example that immediately comes to mind as demonstrating what big wheels and just enough travel could do, and more recently the Norco Optic picked up the torch. As it turns out, the Spectral 125's geometry numbers are very close to the Optic's, except for the fact that the Spectral's head angle is a degree slacker.

We're going to be putting more miles in on an aluminum Spectral 125 very soon for an upcoming Value Field Test, where it'll be compared to a whole bunch of other bikes and subjected to all the usual pseudo-scientific tests, including a saguaro cactus-filled Impossible Climb.








Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,722 articles

259 Comments
  • 255 4
 Canyon website- "Low on travel. High on stoke. The new short travel Spectral is ready to tear up trail."
Canyon warranty department- "We are sorry but our laboratory has concluded that this bicycle was used in the act of tearing up trails at an inappropriate stoke level which does not constitute legitimate usage of this bicycle."
  • 24 5
 This category also covers the requirements of categories 1-3. In addition it includes use on very harsh, obstacle-scattered terrain with steep gradients and consequently higher speeds. Regular, moderate jumps pose no problem for experienced riders when using these bikes. Extended and regular use in bike parks and tackling “North Shore” sections should be avoided. Due to increased stresses, these bikes should be checked for damage after every ride. Full suspension bikes with mid-level travel are typical in this category.
  • 10 0
 @chmod: Canyon marketing though: "THE ROWDY ONE" "A bike that gives you a more direct and in-tune feel with the trail, yet still has the chops to tackle serious terrain." "The Spectral 125 is a shredder’s short-travel whip. It’s a poppy, little machine that’s perfect for jibbing off every trail feature in sight. It also has the aggressive geo to tackle steep and sketchy trails."
  • 25 0
 "Not Intended for Off-Road Use"
  • 1 20
flag joshslewis1 (Feb 17, 2022 at 12:51) (Below Threshold)
 Sorry bud, but that's not my problem.
  • 6 1
 @chmod: a head angle that slack and you're supposed to avoid the gnar=fail.
  • 22 2
 whoever downvotes this skis in jeans
  • 8 0
 I've never had trouble with Canyon warranty. I cracked a chainstay and they replaced it without any trouble. I dented my main triangle in a crash and they gave me a great deal on a replacement.
  • 7 0
 @johnnyo5: used to own a Spectral and never had an issue with their warranty. They didn't ask any question about what I was riding or give me the run around. I just provided photos of what was broken and they sent the new part out*.

*During the early pandemic I broke my chainstay and they didn't have one in stock at the time so it took 2 months to send me a part but I think lots of companies had similar issues at the time.
  • 4 0
 @TommyNunchuck Who hurt you like this?

I've bought 3 Canyons so far and they've done right by me. I even prefer that I can call and talk to them instead of having to go through a LBS/middle man.
  • 148 18
 Imagine if bike companies made it so you didn't have to smash the seat all the way forward on the rails every goddamn time.
  • 13 4
 You need a Privateer 161, 80Degree effective angle and a steep actual angle means that I don't think you would want to run it all the way forwards. I run mine a bit forward of halfway on the rails
  • 8 4
 @mrtoodles - genuinely curious - how tall are you?
  • 28 3
 @melonhead1145: but there are folk around by me who moved from Privateer to slacker seat angles (Santacruz) and instantly went faster up the climbs with less effort..... and much faster down the hills too!

Seat angle is only 1 part of climbing, the bike has to be efficient too Wink
  • 59 21
 I'm more annoyed about the dh head angle on a 140/125mm trail bike. Long stretched out bikes are not fun to ride in the trail and are only good for stability going dh everything else is like pedaling a boat through the trail. 65-66.5 is where a good trail bike should be.
  • 6 0
 @betsie: The only thing holding the privateer back on the climbs in the weight. It's got a good amount of anti-squat. I find it comfortable climbing and feels like it will go up anything, sure it's probably not the quickest but it gets there
  • 38 7
 @betsie: last year I went from 74 to 78 and biy I was not surprised that my climbing didn’t get any better. For long climbs on fireroads though, the steeper seat angle will be more comfortable. On 29ers the seat height of people between 170-180cm tall will end up at the stack height or below so close to effective seat angle. Taller folks will have their seats higher so if you extend the seat above typical stack where ESA sits, the seat will end up 2-5cm further back than given in geo chart.

The solution is simple. Effective Seat angles should be steepening per frame size. Aside of chainstays that should be growing. The issue is though: when you steepen the ESA with each frame size it gets tricky with keeping pivot points of suspension where you had. them
  • 2 2
 @melonhead1145: Everyone is different I guess.
The wheels and drivetrain are the same pretty much between the bikes.
I doubt that a bottle on the SC and nothing on the Privateer would be a game changer for climbing ability.
Some bikes are just not as good at climbing as others.
I have a 2016 Mega and its a terrible technical climber, my old 26er Nomad would out climb it on every technical climb!
  • 7 1
 I don’t have any issues with a 75 degree seat angle, seat right in the middle of the rails. Different geometries suit different people. Lots of options for steeper seat tube angles, this just might not be the bike for you!
  • 9 7
 @calmWAKI: growing chainstays works for certain types of riding only, for traditional trail riding, enduro and old school dh it is not a good idea.

But then again, look at the top enduro guys on smaller frames, with narrower bars too!!!!

Loner and slacker is more stable, not necessarily faster (I think Peaty dispelled pretty much every myth last year when he got on his old, un-serviced V10)
  • 10 1
 @betsie: But Peaty was faster on his new bike, by quite a bit too if I remember right. Newer bikes with bigger wheels, longer and slacker aren't necessarily faster, but they are easier to go fast on, and can carry speed better. A bike is only as fast as the rider
  • 9 3
 @betsie: I believe that 2cm or 1 degree has never made it or broke it for anybody. If only for the fact that humans vary even if they have same inseam or are equally tall. It's not ahar dto imagine that you will easily two lads who are both 180cm tall and their arms or spines will differ by 2-3cm in length. I'd personally like to have a possiblity to change chainstay length in less than 15 minutes but it's a wish straight out of my bottom.

But since industry bombards us with optimization buzz words, it's no wonder folks want it exactly as they think they need it. The old tragedy of being stuck between two frame sizes.
  • 2 1
 @betsie: Totally agree what you saying.. its all about the skills and the legs !
  • 8 1
 @betsie: the issue, to me, with chainstay length is that it needs to be growing as front ends grow. Otherwise, the bike will feel every unbalanced and require an excessively forward riding position. I'm coming from a bike with 430 chainstays and 450 reach to a Stumpy Evo with 443 chainstays and reach, and I find the Stumpy Evo much easier to ride without being any harder to corner, largely because it's so much easier to weight the front wheel.
  • 5 2
 You don't. And not everyone rides straight up a wall and straight down a wall. Steep seat angles can suck on mellow terrain if you're not a taller rider, or you end up having to push the seat BACK and then your reach can be too long or you have to down-size. We have mellow terrain around here locally (weekday rides) and many riders in the 5'10" - 6' range that I've seen on 77ish HTA bikes struggle on mellow/flowy terrain.
  • 5 0
 @betsie: How exactly does the steep seat angle helps you down hill?
  • 7 1
 @mhoshal: agreed. 65-66ish seems pretty ideal for a trail bike.
  • 15 0
 @mhoshal:I have good news, you don't have to buy it. Canyon still makes the Neuron for you, and there are about 250 other bike models that will give you what you want if you don't like Canyon. I think this looks like great fun.
  • 3 2
 @jcc0042: there is a nice calmness to longer stays. Not only the bike seems more settled through whatever, the rear suspension 'seems' to work better. It's a different kind of fun but it is still fun.
  • 1 0
 @calmWAKI: I actually slid the saddle on my 77.5 seatangle bike all the way back. Still climbs good and not too much pressure on the hands on flat sections. With the saddle in the middle the pedaling position also felt a bit cramped. For me 77 with a steep actual seatangle seems like a good compromise on an enduro bike.
  • 10 11
 @jcc0042: The chainstay length will impact how the bike handles, regardless of the size of the rider, the contact point is still the pedals for the feet and below the axle for the tyres (add in some suspension virtual centre to that and how the rear end moves under load, rearward axle path etc).
Make the rear end too long and the bike is a boat, doesnt matter if you are 5ft6 or 6ft5, its still a boat.
Make the rear end too short and the bike is too twitchy, again, doenst matter how tall you are, your contact points have not moved.
Yes, you are taller and when swinging off the back you may need a longer rear end, but that is down to rider kinematics and not the height of the rider.

Break the rules....
Bruni swigs off the back of a bike with a short rear end whist Pierron weights the front of a bike with a long rear end and rearward axle path at the same time as Danny stands tall and very neutral on any bike!

There are no "rules", no "one size fits all solution".
We like to think there is a magic formula for a bike, but there isnt, some people can ride a Commencal really fast (I cant), whilst others can ride a V10 really fast (I cant to that either, but I can ride it much faster than a Commencal). Both totally different bikes.
The cool thing about bikes is, my right bike is not going to be your right bike, only believe what works for you on the trails.
PB is great for a baseline or peoples opinions, but when you are in the start gate and the pips go.... those opinions/theories count for nothing Smile
  • 6 0
 @betsie: just so you know, Bruno’s new bikes have much longer chainstays. His older shorter ones bothers him so much that he would use an eccentric BB and rotate it 90* so that it would actually lengthen his chainstay 6mm and shorten the reach and create better balance
  • 6 4
 @jcc0042: I agree 100%
Chainstays definitely need to grow! Some bikes are still stuck in the short fad(which I believe is just a cost cutting thing because they made all sizes have same chainstay and it was always built around a medium).
Now that reach is growing horrendously huge, the rear needs to follow to bring balance.
The problem is especially prominent in larger sized bikes and as an XL/XXL, I feel it. Balance is horrible and the bike corners horribly. For my most recent build(trail bike), I did the best I could at meeting other requirements and also finding balance and it’s mind blowing good when I finally felt it after riding my XL V10 with 460 chainstay and 490 reach.
New build is 445 chainstay with 488 reach which is the best I could do. It rides so well!

Anyways, balance is a thing and helps with all aspects of riding, from stability in rough to the cornering as well(yes, even the cornering when you ain’t a slasher or skidder)

Look at balance numbers between all the top guys. They all ride a size or bike that has pretty proper balance. Not that what they do is what we have to do, but it’s saying something..
  • 14 3
 @stormracing: We need more park bikes like Status, Clash or Furious. A park bike is better off with shorter stays, it's just that the front must be shorter too. WHat works for pros doesn't exactly translate well to what works for us. Particularly when someone has average or below average riding skill and rides tighter turns on easier flow trails. They will be worse off with a long bike. After w compensated geo for shorter stems around 2012, Long reach trend is dictated by seat angle steepening anwyays.

@betsie - I think most geometric masturbations fail to understand biomechanics, the fact that we have joints and while small differences change a thing or two they don't change much in the big picture. At least far less than what geozealots think. There will be little difference in max deadlift of someone lifting a barbell from the floor (classic deadlift) or barbell on from 3cm support (pin deadlift) or by standing on 3cm taller surface (deficit deadlift)

However there are bikes with messed up geo like current Meta AM29 where large has 480+ reach and 430 stays.
  • 5 6
 @calmWAKI: I have always said that 430mm is too short. around 440mm has been the magic number for years and.... its still is the magic number in my opinion.

@stormracing : I am not talking about Bruni's new bike, but the bike that has data available for it at WC level on the race track! Lets see who does what in 2022, its going to be a hell of a season with most riders fit and a real winter of training behind them.

I have tested lots, raced lots (even though I started late for racing at 32), talked sh!t about bike setup and what works and doesn't work for many years. We are all entitled to our opinions on what does and doesn't work, what works for us and what works for WC racers.
My view is always and will always be... never believe what you read online or from a sponsored rider (they are paid to tell you their sponsors are amazing), always test something and believe the results from testing for you, then the results on the race track.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer has said he does this on every frame regardless of geometry.
  • 1 0
 For a 125mm bike and its intentions I'd think Mike might be better served on the medium with a 460 reach.
  • 3 1
 @melonhead1145: id rather have fun than go fast
  • 2 2
 @stormracing: yea but its harder jib and spin with longer stays (which is the only riding i do)
  • 3 0
 @Jonahn1234: Fast is fun. I get my kicks going as fast as possible down a trail. I guess it's my DH background
  • 1 1
 @mhoshal: Yes I agree, I rode the super slack 2019 stumojumoer evo. Front end too floppy for general trail riding. I have the new 2022 Stumpjumper Evo and run it at 65 degree HTA. Perfect
  • 2 0
 @betsie: I am speaking on brunis bike that has all the write ups and data on it too. That’s the one with great balance and longer chainstays that he got by rotating an eccentric bottom bracket
  • 1 0
 @betsie: also, I definitely agree on test your own stuff. That’s why my latest trail bike is a frankenbike. But it works! And I’ve found exactly what I want and like
  • 4 0
 Proportion is the key. Frames should have a ratio of front centre to rear centre and should be the same ratio as sizes grow. Until this time the small, med and large will all ride very differently and vary between riders/reviewers. It makes it very hard to come to any solid answers until you have ridden the bike in your size.
  • 8 0
 @melonhead1145: I love doing bmx tricks on my enduro bikes. I guess its my bmx backgro... never mind
  • 2 0
 @mhoshal: Really? I'm running my Cotic with a virtual HA of 63⁰, and the same travel as this, and it is bags of fun on everything
  • 3 2
 @mhoshal: quick note to the guy from London Ontario, where we ran hardtails in O-cup DH races because of the lack of vertical. There are a tonne of bikes on the market that fit your narrow definition of what a bike should and shouldn’t be. Maybe let this slide, cause where I live, where it’s winch and plummet, this is exactly what I’m looking for.
Different strokes they say

Keep having fun out there kids!
  • 3 0
 If only everyone was the same exact height/weight/proportions. /s
  • 4 1
 Tell me you don't pedal your bike very far without telling me you don't pedal your bike very far. Steep seat angles on flat ground basically take your biggest cycling muscles (glutes)out of the equation forcing quads to to all the work which is not great.
  • 6 0
 @betsie: Sorry for the late response! Stupid job.... I completely agree that riding style varies significantly. However, for me, it's nice to have a bike that feels very balanced when my weight is in the pedals. That way, when I do need to weight the front or the rear, I'm starting from a place of stability. I honestly think I can be more dynamic on a more balanced bike because I can be more explosive with my movements without worrying about my weight distribution; it takes more force to slide the back end of my Stumpy Evo around, but I'm more comfortable applying that force on a more balanced bike. I think we are seeing similar things from a lot of pros, with examples of Yeti riders sizing down for more balance and Sam Hill showing up to an EWS with 450 CS and 450 reach.

I'm not saying we need to go insanely long with chainstays and give every bike equal rear center and front center measurements. I'm simply saying there's a value in a balanced bike, regardless of riding style. Thus, we need chainstay-specific sizes, and we need to increase rear center whenever we increase front center. That may mean we need to reign in these front center lengths if we aren't willing to have excessively long chainstays. I think the concept of bike balance was initially missed when the long-low-slack movement started, and companies are correcting their early mistakes.
  • 1 1
 @OnTheRivet: while I am steep STA skeptic myself, we went from 72 to 78 in 20 years. 6 degrees don’t magically turn off your glutes.
  • 2 0
 @stormracing: For racing and average riding long stays make sense, but as Waki said FREERIDE bikes need to be SHORT, reach and stays. I wish the furious and clash had 20mm Shorter reach and I think it would be cool to test out 420-425mm stays
  • 3 3
 @OnTheRivet: or, and here me out here, we all don’t ride the same terrain, in the same way, or have the same requirements/expectations.

The steep seat angle helps ME on steep fire road climbs (which is what I typically ride to access downhill oriented trails) means I can have a shorter chainstay, which for ME is more desirable, while keeping the front end planted on climbs.
Pretty cool eh, like it suits ME, but maybe not YOU or OTHERS, and that’s OK cause there’s a million other bikes out there to choose from….
No disrespect intended in any shape or form
  • 2 0
 I'm always surprised that more companies haven't adopted banshee style replaceable dropouts. Pretty easy to implement and the give the end user choice in how long a chainstay they want
  • 3 1
 @chize: Banshee has the best drop outs in the biz
  • 1 1
 @yupstate: This is my life right now. Steep ST puts me in a weird pedaling position for mellow elevation gains and drops near my new locale.
  • 1 2
 @jcc0042: I know a few pros and most are given a bike to ride and have to pick a frame size.
As a consumer we have significantly more choice than the majority of pros who are looking for their next job all of the time.
Some pros bikes just don't work for them or other riders on their team and the season is about getting the most out of a bad design.
Data logging etc brings more.... Data to the pros, but it's subjective and the only real thing that counts is the time on the clock.
There are so many examples of top riders changing team or a new bike coming out and riders making up and down the field.

Balance on the pedals should change from off season to race season. The likes of Peaty would change his setup a fair amount from first run to race runs. Going firmer as the speeds increased which impacts the balance of the bike.
Tubeless, tube, insert, quantity of sealant all impact the balance of the bike as well as braking and acceleration forces. Not that I have tested many many things in my time racing, and I do ok for my age Wink
  • 4 0
 @Doogster: pedalling over drops? Well there's your problem.
  • 1 0
 @jcc0042: 100% spot on! Well said
  • 1 1
 @NoahJ: I can agree with that for sure
  • 2 3
 @calmWAKI: On a 29er it's impossible to have an actual seat angle above ~74 degrees without the chainstay being over 450mm+.

This is a geometry trade off that you can't engineer around.
  • 1 1
 @jcc0042: Just to throw a spanner in the works re: Sam's bike - flat pedal riders will likely have their weight and foot location distributed differently on the bike than someone clipped in. So angles and geometry isn't easily comparable if you ride clips.
  • 2 0
 @Linc: with level pedals and weight in their feet, a rider's weight would still be centered in the bottom bracket, regardless of foot placement on the pedal. Otherwise, the pedals wouldn't be level. Also, if we are talking about the rider's foot position relative to the bike, flat-pedal rider's tend to ride with their feet further forward, so, if anything we would expect a flat-pedal rider to want a shorter chainstay than a clipped-in rider.
  • 2 0
 @Uberbox: Check out the YT Izzo
  • 2 3
 @jcc0042: Ding ding. I feel like a lot of the short vs long CS geo debate is actually a clipped vs unclipped debate in disguise.
  • 2 0
 @calmWAKI: 198cm here. Geo is shocking for me. Tiny standovers,as the bike is made for shorter people to ride long.. what about long people?! 240 dropper is cute, I need 340 to get it slammed in my S6 sj Evo. Seat has to go all the way forward too. Such an eyesore. Any suggestions to the manufacturers?
  • 1 0
 @chize: I agree, and I own a Banshee. My guess is manufacturers are too lazy, plus the extra cost however inexpensive it is, keep them from doing it.
  • 1 0
 @Linc: Sorry I meant the actual actual seat angle (let's call it true seat angle haha) measured between the flat ground and a line connecting the BB with the top of the seat post where seat rails are resting. When it comes to actual seat angle in the common nomenclature you are absolutely correct. You could achieve straight seat tube - BB to rails, with long enough stays and/or rearward axle path.
  • 2 0
 @jcc0042: Interesting point, but I would say that clipped in shoe makers should redesign their shoes to make them closer to how you would ride on flats. I already dremelled new holes in my 5.10 hellcats to shift cleats as far back as I can. We would also need to mention that not all flat pedal riders ride mid foot whether they care or not.
  • 1 0
 Pretty sure Kaz just does that out of habit at this point.
  • 2 0
 It's called a size medium. Just as likely that saddle is forward to accommodate the 486mm reach, despite 40mm stem and combined stack of 632mm +20mm spacers +30mm handlebar rise +/-unknown roll. Does a large frame with this travel need a 1259mm wheelbase, and a cs:wb of .347? Also, will it be USD 6299 +tax when it becomes available? Nice price if so vs Stumpj Pro or Element Carb 70
  • 1 0
 @boozed: decreases in elevation may be a better way to say it. Bike feels great when standing.
  • 1 0
 @calmWAKI: Have a Look at Last Bikes. They are doing all that
  • 68 16
 I still have a hard time understanding the point of these bikes. You have a geo to hammer it on the down but the reduced travel still doesn't help it pedal better as travel doesn't really have an influence once you lock the shock. Wheels and tires do much more towards pedal efficiency than travel. So what is the point ? And if you have more mellow trail and don't need the travel, you probably don't need the 64HA and long reach either. I'd love to see an efficiency test of one of these vs a DH bike fitted with identical tires, wheels and transmission and a shock locked out. I'd bet there is F-all difference. Preaching the Paul Aston believes here but some data along those lines would be usefull.
  • 49 4
 Because most trails aren't actually that rough - and even when there are rough bits, you can get away with 125/140mm anyway if you go light. And shorter travel bikes can be more engaging most of the time.
  • 15 2
 Well I get it in theory, if you lived someplace with short ups and downs, you might want a snappier pedaller. It isn't just the travel, but how the suspension is setup which we can imagine is quite responsive and harsh.

But I get a bit lost as to why a 125mm bike, the cheapest one specifically, weighs as much as my YT capra. Same price and wheelsize. Like, how did they manage to make a short travel bike that heavy with exo tyres? I agree with the idea that weight isn't that important, but that is one heavy little bike.
  • 9 0
 @chakaping: Agree, but it's also much more tiring if you take it on the rougher trails or in bike park.

My previous bike was 150/135 and it was supposed to be perfect for my local trails.
However, on more demanding trails, Pike was kinda flexi, I blew a non piggy shock, tyres were too fragile, 180 rotors were overheating on long descents and in bike park I was using all the travel all the time even if I'm not much of the rider. That was tiring.

A year ago when I suddenly had to buy a new bike I could choose from one of this new breed of agro trail bikes or an enduro one. Geo numbers were pretty much similar, similar equipment, similar weight and the biggest difference was in 10-20 mm of travel.
I took an enduro. On long climbs I switch the lever anyway and on descents I still have all the travel in the world
  • 18 0
 i very much enjoy my Norco Optic, which is very similar to this. The lack of travel doesnt hold the bike back. Yes its more fatiguing than a full enduro bike, especially on longer trails, but its fun and engaging. Line choice becomes more of a consideration.

I guess it depends on what you want from your ride, straight up ploughing through stuff or delicately dancing down a trail.

I have ridden mine on EWS trails in Finale Ligure, Bike Park Wales, mellow flow trails and everything in between. The one common thing is the smile on my face. (i am a very average rider BTW).
  • 7 4
 @chakaping: If they are not that rough then you do not need a school bus wheel base and a slow floppy 64 HA.
My favorite bike is still my 2013 Devinci Atlas with a stupidly short WB, short CS and 68 HA, its like a snappy 29" BMX trail bike.
  • 4 1
 @pakleni: Sorry to hear you could only have one MTB Wink

I think one of these and a proper enduro bike would cover a lot of riders' needs really well.
  • 8 0
 I understand your point, I have an Optic (125/140) and it weighs 31.5lbs which is insane for a short travel carbon frame bike (it does have a Push coil which adds some weight). There's just something about the suspension platform that feels so firm yet forgiving. I had a 160mm bike but this bike is way more appropriate for Midwesr riding. Obviously if you rode out west or in BC a longer travel bike would work better, but a lot of people love this setup. Pretty sure in the Optic review Kaz said he would ride an Optic at Whistler for tamer stuff.
  • 5 0
 @in2falling: Yes I do. The geometry is for steepness and for composure at speed.
  • 5 1
 They are made for people who want enduro bikes but ride XC trails. Make a good 4X bike?
  • 10 1
 I don’t agree.

My local trails are steep loamy goodness, but without any chunk or drops over 1m

So I want enduro geo with short travel.

If the seat angle was steeper then I’d consider this.
  • 4 2
 @Mugen: Same question here, the CF9 comes with 13.8 kg?? Do they weigh with a full water bottle?

My 2015 Spesh Enduro 160mm weighs 12.4 kg including pedals!
  • 4 2
 @yoobee: I don’t get how, or why you’d want to have an enduro bike that light. The absolute minimum I could get my carbon fiber 29er enduro bike down to and feel comfortable racing is maybe 16-15.8kg. Right now it’s at 16.6kg
  • 7 0
 @Mugen: I had multiple 150/160 travel bikes over a few years, I got on the first gen Transition Scout and I sold my "enduro" bikes. The 125 rear travel with 150 fork was handling all the stuff I wanted and was way more fun! My "usual" trails are techy but not big dh so have a flicky bike works, but even when I've traveled to elevation the bike has worked for me. I sometimes consider getting a longer travel bike to have, in case..but that's a lot of money for a bike that would mostly be feeling sad and neglected
  • 3 0
 @Caddz: that’s fair… but they are also great on intermediate trail and they are a lot of fun on medium sized jump lines because they pump and pop easily. You can still ride really technical stuff on a slackish 120/140 bike, just not as fast as an enduro bike.
  • 1 0
 @GlassGuy: Similar story for me actually as I had only 160mm bikes for years and then a few years back every article on pinkbike claimed everyone was "overbiked". Bought a 140mm Jeffsy, beat a lot of my best times around my local trails (short and well known), but ended up having horrendous crashes far too often in races and bigger rides. Just demands too much focus on longer descents, with too little a safety net as well. Much happier back on 160mm again, but I live in the alps...
  • 7 0
 Another '21 Optic owner here and 140/125 is a perfect range for a lot of riding most places which is similar to this one. Wish it were a bit lighter but it goes everywhere and puts a smile on my face. Taking it to Quebec this summer so I'm probably going to be under biked but it will still be fun.
  • 2 0
 For me, I’m, uh, as the use name says, now too old to die young. I like to imagine I’m fast, but I’m not. I can ride an aggressive, short-travel bike the way it's meant to be ridden and get closer to its limits* than I could with an aggressive long-travel bike. Getting closer to the limit is where fun starts for a lot of people.

* Not the bike's _actual_ limits, but the limits of the combination of rider, trail, and machine.
  • 8 0
 The same could be said some of the modern long travel hardtails; essentially much of the geo of a DH/FR bike, none of the rear travel. And yet, BTR, Chromag, Pipedream etc are popular bikes; they're highly capable, extremely good fun and in the right hands, can absolutely fly. I think part of the appeal is that it's that bit easier to feel like you're riding on the limits of the bike a little more often, and that's the case for the shorter travel FS bikes too.
With respect to locking the shock, there's plenty of situations when climbing where you don't want the shock to be locked, you want that extra traction but not at the expense of excess chassis movement that a longer travel bike can feed back. If you're riding rolling trails, or trails with tons of quick short steep techy climbs & descents, having a bike that is generally more reactive and dynamic bike can appeal for a variety of reasons. And yet, you've still got geo numbers that hopefully won't hold you back on steeper / rougher / more technical descents, the sort that might start to make an XC or Downcountry (cough) bike feel a bit uncomfortable.
I've got a Forbidden Druid, and a few aggressive HT's that I'll sometimes use on the same trails. Great fun either way, but a different experience each time. I'm sure a 160ish bike (like Forbidden's own Dreadnought) would also deliver a different (& still fun) experience again, with different pro's and con's. Ultimately it's nice to have these choices and options.
  • 2 0
 @yoobee: Did your 2015 have 26in wheels?
  • 7 1
 Pick a travel length and be a dick about it
  • 4 0
 Also agree—about 5 years ago everyone in MTB seemed to want an Enduro bike because they pedaled so well relative to how much travel they had. Now these “short travel” bikes are en Vogue and all the bike companies and rushing spit out their own short travel “down country” bike or whatever you want to call them. Length of travel is an easy way for marketing departments to come up with a new hype campaign, rather than focus on how well designed, efficient, etc. their suspension platform is. I recently was in the market for a new bike and was set on a Transition Spur or an Ibis Ripley as I have more “mellow” trails in my area. On a whim I rode a new SC Bronson at my LBS and loved it—it pedaled just fine and has enough suspension in reserve for the occasional bike park day or big mountain ride. I bought the Bronson.
  • 3 0
 I'd love a bike like this Canyon but full 27.5 or at least a mullet.
  • 2 1
 @Uberbox: it’s the Evil Following craze all over again, just with a slacker head tube and steeper seat tube this time. Nobody rides those around here anymore.
  • 1 0
 Can the middle compression shock setting be used to firm up a 160mm/170mm bike and make it feel more poppy, or no?
  • 4 1
 For folks who are older and want to hit a thing or two every now and then, the extra travel is a nice insurance policy with extra margins. Extra Travel weighs pretty much nothing extra and given quality shock, climbing will always be determined mainly by weight of wheels and tires as well as tire pattern.
  • 1 0
 I ordered the 150 version some time ago, waiting to arrive. I don't live in the mountains, but have a few short trails (~1 min) with bigger jumps and rougher lines, which I use to progress my skill. Those trails are rideable even on an XC bike, but feel like an abuse of the equipment. Every article is saying how capable short bikes are, so I guess 125 is, supposedly, a better fit for the terrain. But considering that I want to progress, make mistakes and not feel like I am torturing the bike, 150 seems to also make much sense. I am so confused.

Any advice?
  • 1 0
 @blazersdad89: Yes of course Big Grin Maybe that's part of the difference - 29 vs. 26.
But I did not put too much effort in weight saving. It is the Expert version, carbon without coat, aluminum rear triangle. Pike/Monarch, Carbon rims, Nobby Nic TL, carbon bar.

@TheSlayer99 : Well, it pedals up like nothing. And handles like a feather. tup
  • 2 0
 @yoobee: with a bike that light I’d be spending what it’s worth in wheels and tires every year. I’d rather the weight and have a bike that’ll actually last me the season then handling and climbing performance.
  • 2 1
 @chakaping: absolutely!
Currently on a V1 Sentinel, have a Spire on order..
Sentinel is going when the Spire arrives, and I’m looking to add a bike with geo just like this. Optic, and Element were the front runners. .
64Deg HA works great for me, and the trails I ride!
  • 1 0
 @TheSlayer99: Well then you're a bike slayer lol
I'm more of a freerider and believe me it did take some hits. And I'm not a pro enduro racer. Look what they do with these machines... Eek
And btw I spent 4000 € only. Bargains.
  • 1 1
 @blazersdad89: My '14 Spesh Enduro with 29 Carbon Traverse Fattie Wheels weighs only 26.2 lbs with pedals MD size! Just wish the HT was slacker than 68 degrees...
  • 1 1
 @guitfred: what tires do you run? Rocket rons?
  • 2 0
 @calmWAKI:
Ha ha Rocket Rons. I ran those for my one and only XC endurance race about 10 years ago. Got three puncture and lost about 1/2hr messing about lol
  • 3 1
 @rich-2000: I am just blasted by the idea of Enduro 29 weighing 26lbs. I had a Blur TRc in 26" with RP23, Fox32, Rocket Ron back and Nobby nic front, formula r1 brakes, 10sp X0 incl carbon cranks that weighted this much. The frame incl shock weighted 2.4kg, your Enduro frame weighs more without shock.

I don't mean that you are lying just wonder what is your secret Big Grin
  • 4 0
 @calmWAKI: Broken scale?
  • 1 0
 @rich-2000: I'm running Maxxis Minions 2.5 width, and the 2014 Enduro has an aluminum rear triangle! The previous owner was riding Bootleg Canyon outside Vegas, so it's pretty beat up but the frame held up, despite the lighter weight. Maybe the jumping is what's making manufacturers beef up the frame material and weight on today's bikes?
  • 36 2
 In 2019 I got a brand new AL6 Spectral (to this day best bike dollar for dollar I've ever owned). Bike had a Fox 36 Elite, Fox DPX2, M1900 Wheelset, Full GX, Code R brakes for $2699 - 3 years later the same spec bike is $800 more expensive with a full level drop in components.

That's 30% price increase for less bike.
  • 8 0
 I'm surprised it's only 30% with how the industry has gone.
  • 2 2
 Every single brand has done the same
  • 25 3
 "I remember when you used to be able to get a Hershey for a nickel. A nickel!"
  • 8 0
 $2700 in 2019 dollars is roughly equal to $3000 2022 dollars. Tack on all the extra shipping expenses and whatnot and there's your difference.

Not condoning the increases, I'm frustrated too. Especially for the drop in component spec, if it was 1:1 spec level I'd be less incensed. That's the world we live in today unfortunately.
  • 3 0
 Welcome to the post-pandemic world. These prices are here to stay as long as people keep buying.
  • 1 2
 time to ask your boss for a raise
  • 7 1
 @rickybobby18: "sorry there's no room in our historic profits to pay you any extra"
  • 1 1
 Yeah prices suck atm. That being said, if I had a bike brand I'd do the same.
First off, inflation affects everybody and not only consumers. Then the demand skyrocketed and stayed high for some time. On top of that you have all the supply chain issues transport and raw materials and energy etc getting more expensive all the while the Covid Situation changes every two weeks 180 degrees so you cannot plan your company long(ish) term. Sure they're making absurd profits, but if people keep buying more and more why blame the manufacturer?
Different Story when a brand whines out a fake press release, in the case of Canyon I do like their boring neutrality.
What do I Do? Keep riding my old bike and wait it out. The current Situation is not sustainanble long term.
  • 1 2
 @daweil: And then you'd go to media groups to brag about making vastly more profit this year than any other year? I spit on your morality. These excuses made a lot of sense as the market started to shift, two years in, if you think they're being honest and not greedy, you're not paying attention.

Why blame the manufacturer for taking advantage of a broken market where people are losing their careers? Yeah why on earth would anyone see an issue with that. Come on.
  • 7 0
 @iian: Yes driven by constant printing of money and planned inflation. This is not some random event. It's economics 101. But the sad thing is how it works and how little the average citizen understands.

The WEF and Klaus Schwab are very well aware of the global economic platform. The entire covid plandemic made billions for big business and destroyed small business while at the same time setting up a planned supply chain crisis (supply vs demand) and boom - there ya go - planned inflation backed by constant money supply - just making money appear from nowhere.

Anyone that thinks Canyon and all these bike companies are not making record profits are ignorant. Yet we all pay to play. I'm as guilty as anyone. We're all puppets in a big show.
  • 1 0
 @sherbet: my morality? Its Business. You dont like, you dont buy.
Thats it. People buying means the price for the product is okay.
People losing careers and the World going to shit is not Canyons fault. Why should they be motivated to try and "fix" this.
  • 1 0
 @daweil: people aren't buying because the price is okay, people are buying because they have no other option. New bikes are overpriced. Used bikes are overpriced. Pick your poison.

I do agree with your last line though, Canyon is just doing what every other business is at the moment. Its not their fault nor their responsibility to fix the economy.
  • 1 2
 @ibishreddin: Nope, there are plenty who haven't increased their prices that much while decreasing the spec.
  • 19 0
 Lots of misgivings in the comments, but I think it's pretty cool. One of the advantages of modern geometry is not just the way the bike interacts with the terrain, but the way the rider interacts with the bike...really getting after it with aggressive lean angles, working your weight across the wheelbase, etc, is a lot of fun and can get you around tamer trails faster... where I live long descents and big features are rare, so I've got to make my own fun by rallying everything as hard as I can. Big travel wallows and insulates you from the comparatively sparse features out there... I'm not on the market, but this bike reminds me of my old Riot, or an Evil Calling.
  • 8 0
 Exactly. And then there's the fact that this is one bike in a sea of options - riders that don't want or need something this slack have plenty of other great choices.
  • 3 5
 Slacker is better. Even for XC use. But these things are likely to have a high fail rate and Canyon has a high refuse to warranty rate. Which is not better.
  • 18 0
 "The Spectral 125's carbon frame is 100 grams lighter than the longer-travel Spectral, coming in at a claimed 2,500 grams vs. 3,000"
Are there 600 grams to an American Kilo?
  • 6 0
 quick maths
  • 10 0
 Spectral Units
  • 3 0
 3000gr is the aluminium frame.
  • 5 0
 2.5kgs for carbon bike and 3kgs for Aluminium. The 100g difference is to the 150mm bike
  • 4 0
 Math is hard
  • 3 0
 That 3,000 gram figure is for the aluminum frame - sorry for the confusion. The carbon 125 frame is lighter than the regular carbon Spectral frame by 100 grams.
  • 2 7
flag wyorider (Feb 17, 2022 at 14:07) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: seems like 100g that shouldn’t have been pared.

This bike isn’t rated for aggressive use, if it only takes 1/4 pound of carbon to beef up the bike to handle “north shore” riding they should have kept it a wee bit more stout.

There will be many of these broken. Canyon won’t warrant them. I have foreseen it.
  • 5 0
 @wyorider, it is rated for aggressive use, and part of that weight savings is simply due to the shorter link required by the reduced travel compared to the regular Spectral.
  • 3 1
 @wyorider: did you miss the part of the review where it stated the frame is built to cat 4 standards, which is the same as Canyons enduro bikes….
Maybe not dual crown compatible, but I don’t think that’s the intent
  • 14 0
 It would be great to see some direct comparison between the Spectral 150 and the Spectral 125. If the weights and geo are similar, what are the pros and cons of the different amounts of travel.
  • 3 0
 Yes please! This is only logical to do. I'm sure it just comes down to terrain and use-case. I used to have a Transition Scout, which was 150 front 125 rear. It was fantastically fun on most trails, but got overwhelmed at the bike park and in fast/rough chunk. Now I've got a sentinel, which has more travel and bigger wheels. It honestly pedals better, and while it may have lost a touch of playfulness, it more than makes up for it in giving me the confidence to try silly lines or flat hucks.

If you aren't charging through rock gardens at mach-chicken, the shorter travel bike is probably more fun for most riders. If you've got demanding terrain, then go for more travel.
  • 13 1
 So a 125mm bike with Enduro geometry and almost enduro weight. Just with less travel that could save your ass. I'd choose the normal Spectral and setup my suspension a little stiffer if I want a poppier bike.
  • 11 0
 For those complaining about the HA, are the brakes also too burly?
It's my opinion that 64° and 4 piston brakes both make for a really fun bike, and it's cool to be able to have them without more travel that takes extra work to pump.

This seems like it would be a blast in the Creekside zone at Whistler for example. Blue flow trails, plus a sampling of some easier double black tech where the proper head angle is very helpful even at low speeds.
  • 15 5
 Struggling to see the point of this bike. Same Geo as a 'All Mountain' bike, same build kit specs (Fox 36, Minions etc) but less capable, for a 500g/1lb weight saving. Just buy the full fat Spectral, and put more air on your Tyres and Suspension for those Downcountry rides?
  • 5 0
 Actually, it's only a 100g savings over the full travel Spectral. The 500g savings is for carbon over aluminum.
  • 2 4
 @stevemokan: yeah, kind of pointless. I think if the headangle was around 65 degrees you could make a case for a shreddy trail bike, but at 64 degrees you're really sacrificing snappiness and maneuverability, only to make it more capable on terrain where the rear suspension can't cash the geo checks.
  • 4 2
 I am decreasing sag in my 160 bike for local rides and get at least one click of according rebound. Makes the bike more lively right away. I also run intermediate tires to slide more winning on rolling resistance.
  • 5 0
 Do you dudes not realize that different travel levels ride and feel different? Weight and geometry isn't everything. Some of us like it short travel and poppy.
  • 2 3
 @sherbet: it’s ok now. People who wanted to try short travel bikes tried them and don’t call 150mm+ being overbiked anymore. We are no longer offended.
  • 2 1
 @sherbet: I like shorter travel bikes, I have a 5010. It has a Fox 34, lightweight tyres and geo that matches the intentions of it travel, unlike this Canyon.
  • 1 0
 @ashfordakers: exactly, I mean I'd give this bike a try because you can't ride geo figures and components, you gotta ride the actual bike. But in theory, I don't get the point of all these burly components and enduro bike geo, combined with rear travel that can't cash those checks on the terrain where the geo makes sense. Whatever, to each their own, but it seems like a bike without a home.
  • 12 0
 I beg to differ, Norco accomplished that feat no more than 3 years ago with the Optic.
  • 6 0
 "What? I didn't break it. I was just testing its durability. And then I placed it in the woods, because it's made of wood, and I just thought he should be with his family."
  • 12 0
 I heard the 250 has more Torque
  • 5 0
 Spectral 125.
Spectral 250.
Torque 500.
Sender?
  • 4 0
 But try the 350 trust me
  • 1 0
 Only if it's a twostroke.
  • 8 0
 There is a lot of criticism on this bike's geo which, personally, I think is spot on. A short travel, 29'r with slack geometry is going to ride like a modern DS bike. Hard pressed to find a better trail ripper. Especially on modern trails with berms, flow features and controlled rock features. Most of us already have our enduro bikes, jumpers, DH rigs, this bike scratches that itch for something you can take out on a long ride, and then absolutely shred your favorite sections in between.
  • 10 1
 Instead of Canyon investing money and time into a new bike they should focus on their horrific customer service.
  • 3 1
 It was so bad when I tried to buy a bike from them in 2015 I'd not go near them again. Seems they haven't got any better then.
  • 1 0
 @cogden2: Gave up waiting and emailing them for a replacement chainstay for my 2019 Stitched.
  • 3 0
 Weird, I’ve had really good CS from them. I consider myself lucky. Had a paint issue on my GF’s spectral and they had a new frame out to me in Perth in just over a week.
  • 2 0
 It's a trend with the Germans. YT had same issue. USA employees have been trying to get the Germans to re think that.
  • 1 1
 @Afterschoolsports: that’s wild, i have no idea how you or they pulled it off. I had a broken seatstay and it took them 19 weeks to send back the bike
  • 7 1
 I love both this and the Status 140, which seems to be aimed at similar people. Everyone complaining about the head angle for this travel seems to have forgotten that is hasn't been that long since 68 was unridably slack for a 29er, and now that's World Cup XC territory. I also think experienced riders may not realize the feeling of safety that comes with a slack head angle for newer riders. A sub 65 HA opens up so many trails around here for people.
  • 8 2
 "Categorizing bikes is a tricky thing, especially now that there are so many sub-categories. At what point does a downcountry bike become a trail bike?"

The only reason there are no many subcategories is because every time a new bike comes out Pinkbike needs to make up a new subcategory to classify it under. There's no such thing as downcountry so you don't need to worry about it.
  • 4 0
 Exactly. It's like as bad as the music snobs now with genres. "What that isn't metal?! Its hardcore industrial progressive rock". "What that's not a trail bike?! Its a aggressive mid-travel downcountry bike". Stfu, its a mid-travel mountain bike. Use it for whatever style of riding or trails as you want.
  • 8 0
 Wow, they really don't want to give us that new strive do they
  • 7 0
 I'm holding out for a 100 mm xc race bike with enduro geometry. And room for no bottle whatsoever.
  • 6 0
 Is seat tube angle at lowest seat height even relevant?

Looks like a fun bike.
  • 3 0
 Given that they already have the oppositebike to this (Neuron with 140mm travel and 67HTA) , and the lux trail and regular Spectral, I would say that the 'trail' section of the Mtb spectrum is quite densely filled at Canyon.
  • 6 3
 Don’t waste your time… I tried the Izzo Blaze with “aggressive trail” geo and ran out of travel when the geo actually worked and was capable. I agree with anyone questioning the purpose of these bikes, especially with very little weight savings to an enduro bike! Just get the enduro bike. A 64 degree head angle was so uninspiring on my Transition Patrol unless you were hitting tough blues and blacks regularly. And yes, I had to slam the seat all the way forward to get the front down when climbing even with a 76 degree STA. A 64 degree HA needs a 77-78 STA to counteract front wheel lift when climbing, although the longer chain stays on this bike will help.
  • 3 1
 Thank you! I thought the problem was with me not getting this: IF you want, you can pump the shock on the 150 Spectral to have 25% sag of the 125 travel, put in some tokens, and bingo, you have the short travel version with some emergency travel. But most prolly you never will after trying the 30% on the 150, lol.
  • 3 0
 some people still realy think about THE one bike to do it all? as an enduro/freerider rider I would like to have a XC bike to go fast as hell on flatters trail, then I though it's too light & fragile, so this spectral could be fun, but then it's too heavy, then it's not enought travel... c'mon!
  • 5 2
 I think that most of the points that were criticized in the test on the handling are only because of the too large size of the test bike. Why is a complete size too large tested, if you Look at the sizing recommended by Canyon.
Why is not the recommended size tested? Does Pinkbike get the "wrong" size from Canyon, or was L requested?
  • 6 0
 As I mentioned, I'm in between sizes. I typically prefer bikes with around a 480mm reach, and the vast majority of bikes I've tested over the last two years have had reach numbers between 470 - 490mm. I spent a ton of time on a Commencal Meta TR last year and got along well with that bike, and it had a 490mm reach. The same goes for the Torque I'm currently testing - 490mm reach, and it's a good fit.

In an ideal world, there'd be some sort of M/L size, but that's not the case here.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: What is your height?
  • 2 2
 @mikekazimer Are you sure you're between sizes? Aren't you 5'10"/178cm? Forgive me if I remembered wrongly from previous tests.

Canyon says M for 172-185cm and L for 180-194cm. If I got your height right, then @ridingloose is correct. The bike was too big for you.
  • 3 0
 @bananowy, nope, I’m not 5’10”, and I haven’t been since I was still growing in high school. I’m 5’11” / 180cm. The bike was not too big for me.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: Cool cool, I stand corrected then. Poor memory.
  • 3 0
 I've been waiting for Neuron to adjust the geometry, but this is better. Neuron has a range very short for the ideal size, but here I do not have to look at the size just look at the reach
  • 17 13
 So, this is Canyons new Down Country bike? Where is the 27.5 and mullet options? Not all of us like 29" wheels. Give us a 27.5 wheeled version!!
  • 5 1
 I would order one right now if it came in 27.5. Hell I will probably order one anyway as I need a bike to replace my neuron and have really liked the spectral 27.5 that I bought my GF 18 months ago.
  • 4 1
 Dude, this bike with shorter chainstays and 27,5/MX setup... *dreaming*.
  • 4 0
 @Afterschoolsports: 100% agree. If this came in 27.5, I would sell my Polygon Trid and use this for jibbing lol
  • 7 1
 @eric-w: Santa Cruz makes one. It is called the 5010.
  • 6 0
 @Vanguard: Have you seen the price of the 5010 frameset...
  • 2 0
 @constantly-broken: I want to jib more with my short travel trail bike. The neuron is great for chewing through the km, but it doesn’t really excel at popping off every bump along the trail.

What’s the trid like? I’m tossing up what DJ to get. I’ve been riding 24” BMX for the last year since my super old haro DJ bike was pinched. I’m ready for a 26” bike again. Trid looks nice but I’ve not enjoyed dealing with bicycles online in the past. I want a dmr rhythm, my LBS can’t get their hands on one for a while though.
  • 1 0
 @eric-w: your dream called Spec Status 140
  • 2 1
 seems like with 27.5 wheels and (dare I say it??) a degree steeper HA this could be such a fun jib bike
  • 2 0
 @Afterschoolsports: mate I 100% rate the Trid. The uurban myth about it being a test mule for the Ticket S, and it shows in the design. Such a fun little bike and super playful. Would also make a sweet little dual rig with a mini mullet set up (if only dual wasnt dead here). Only thing I dont like is my rear axle stripped out the thread, so now the back wheel is held in by a DH rear axle (150mm) and 19mm nylock nut (and yes, was done to correct torque specs)
  • 2 0
 @Afterschoolsports: don't have any photos up here but just finally got the lady's 24 dj back from powder. 24 is where it's at for dirt! Anything wood or concrete and the 20 is king though.
  • 1 0
 @valrock: they are most certainly awesome, but felt HEAVY. Maybe too much heft for delicate bike thrashing.
  • 1 0
 @dirtyburger: that sounds sick. What colour did you go? I miss 24” mtb being a thing. The Sunday Model C is my favourite impulse purchase. I barely rode it the first year I owned it but now it’s constantly in use. It’s so much fun and super reliable. I wrecked a rim recently, just waiting on a replacement. I might strip it down and get it powder coated in prismatic universe.
  • 1 0
 @constantly-broken: ahhhh bummer on the axle. Stoked to hear that it’s solid. I will continue to consider one. BTW it’s the DMR Sect that I’m keen on. Steel for hardtails everyday. Also eyeing up a Surly Lowside for cruising around between buildings at work.
  • 2 0
 Funny to see they have the same seatstay layout as the older Capras. Ticks all the boxes, except the colour scheme. And it is a Canyon - so, no thanks. I really would like to ride one of those downcountry bikes, still wondering what they are good for. At least the CF version is very light and could even be lighter.
  • 5 3
 I live in an area where the trails are generally pretty mellow, and a 140mm fork will get you down the few short, rough tracks. So I can see the Spectral being a good choice. BUT... a proprietary bottle? And only 600ml? Yeah, I'm THAT guy.
  • 1 0
 If it's the same as its big brother spectral, the SIS 600ml is the same fit.
  • 7 1
 Funny how little weight a CF frame actually saves on a MTB.
  • 7 0
 Most CF around now is basically just for marketing, they seem to overbuild to provide "capability" / protect warranty, eating into any real weight saving.
  • 4 1
 Yup not really about weight its about ride feel. Flex properties/dampening.
Hilarious to see so many 'eco warriors' buy carbon over AL.
  • 1 1
 @Caza1232: ride harder. You’ll be glad your new Slash (for example) is a pound heavier than the previous model.

For a mellow jaunt to the coffee shop a lighter bike feels great. For riding no-fall or mandatory air lines, frame failure is literally not an option.
  • 5 3
 This bike just does not make sense. 29er and 120-130 mm of travel makes sense, but this geometry....confusing. Bikes like the 5010 and Mojo 4 (both 27.5) make sense with that travel, but their geo is much more reserved and responsive. This longish-slack short travel 29er stuff just is a bit confusing. I honestly just don't see where this bike fits.
  • 3 5
 27,5 is dead
  • 2 0
 @GZMS: tell that to my Mojo that's the best bike I've ever ridden
  • 1 2
 @steezysam: just a question of time till you find a 29er that will be better
  • 2 0
 I find myself jumping past the "parts spec" sections in bike reviews these days as I just don't find it to be relevant. GX is GX and Shimano is Shimano regardless of the frame it's attached to. Maybe it's that I already have a clear understanding of how certain parts perform as I have either ridden them or read about them before? I'm more intetested in how the bike rides, NOT it's spec.
  • 3 0
 “The Spectral 125's carbon frame is 100 grams lighter than the longer-travel Spectral, coming in at a claimed 2,500 grams vs. 3,000.”

Sorry what?
  • 1 0
 Similar to a Bird Aether 9, but looks a bit smarter. I've had my Aether almost a year, but it's not really light enough to make the most of the short travel. As a 150mm trail bike it would be great. For this reason I think the standard Spectral or the down-country Lux are more interesting
  • 1 0
 I was looking at a Canyon bike shipped to Canada but I suggested anyone else interested take a look at their shipping/taxes/duty policy. www.canyon.com/en-ca/customer-service/faq/?fdid=sf-canada-faq-taxes-and-import-duties

Price you pay does not include 13% duty charge + provincial tax + $99 shipping fee + fee for UPS courier (that is a mystery until it shows up). Which to me, was a dealbreaker. And good luck getting any of that back if you have to return the bike. Not sure why Canyon hasn't figured out to include taxes etc into the cost of the order to simply purchasing like a number of other direct-to-consumer brands and online shops have done. Or have a local warehouse distributor (Commencal, YT, 4Frnt Skis, etc).

Any other Canadians confirm they had to pay all these things on delivery? Or is it like many other things where it depends if it was inspected by customs or not?
  • 2 0
 I haven't had a order from Europe not get properly taxed so far and I get 3-4 a year(parts and other accessories). I doubt a bike would sneak by them with no charge so I'd consider the Canadian price to be about $4750. It's not really a huge value vs the Optic C3 or Rocky Mountain Element. For me, the local support beats the few hundred in extra value.
  • 2 0
 @JayUpNorth: Agreed. The potential headaches of dealing with warranty issues and back-and-fourth with Germany for little overall savings hardly seem like a deal to me compared to other direct to consumer brands out there. Or even bike shop brands.
  • 1 0
 Yes, you're right. I've got this bike in my shopping cart as I write. To me the CF9 is a lot of kit for the money. Compared to let's say a comparable Yeti, the specs are better and Yeti is thousands more. But... as you note once the tax (can't avoid that!) and duties are added it gets closer... but still cheaper. And then there's the fact that any bike I might consider isn't available in my local LBS... what's the solution?
  • 1 0
 @mtbKelly: I'd say if it would be your first choice if available locally, then easy choice is to grab it. If it's the best bike for your budget and the other bikes don't compare, get it. If you would rather have X bike but the Canyon is a few hundred cheaper then get X bike if you can afford it.
  • 5 4
 I don’t see the point of this bike. If you want to get rowdy then buy the 150 version. If you don’t then why do you want to carry the extra weight in the frame wheels and forks. To me this bike would make more sense with a 130mm fox 34 a cat 3 frame and lighter wheels and tyres. More of an Izzo competitor
  • 3 0
 A manufacturer listing frame weight AND actual seat post angle (and not trying market their way around those details). It's a miracle.
  • 2 1
 I'm surprised they're still pushing the front end slacker on a trail bike–but considering the popularity of any MTB's that hit the shop floor, why not? Great time for beta testers to give product feedback.

My last bike had a HTA of 71 degrees, and current one has 65. So I don't need anything slacker and it's never held me back.
  • 4 0
 It looks extremely similar to the YT Jeffsy
  • 1 1
 That was my first thought: makes my 2018 Jeffsy look totally fresh!
  • 4 0
 So, that's the death of the now pointless Neuron.
  • 6 0
 I wonder if they'll keep the neuron as the conservative trail bike. I'd personally be much more interested in an updated neuron with a 66 hta 76 sta and maybe flex stays to make it significantly lighter than this spectral.
  • 4 0
 The Neuron is the climber's trail bike. XC bike for people that don't race XC. People who ride for exercise lol. Just hard to market and make "cool". We don't know how well the Neuron sells, but maybe they have to many bikes now between the Lux trail, Neuron, and Spectral 125
  • 3 0
 Nice reach numbers. Seems like they could have gone steeper seat angle though and sacrificed lil reach.
  • 5 0
 Reach is independent of seat tube angle. You're thinking effective top tube length.
  • 2 0
 @blensen: ya probably right. Just thinking the steeper the seat tube angle the closer you get to the bars while seated(when it matters/climbing etc).
Reach is technically from BB right..
  • 2 1
 So from what I’m reading this is a bike for Lilliputians and for a rider of a height beyond 20.3cm (aprox 8”) long they are sh!t out of luck? Come on, at least proofread your sh!t.
  • 2 0
 Has anyone ran an angleset (I.e. 1 degree slacker) in their Norco Optic? Assume it would then be the same as the Spectral
  • 6 0
 All the people here saying "don't understand the point of this bike" when the Optic was bike of the year a few years back with pretty much the same specs except 1 degree head angle.
  • 1 0
 Yes. I would say a little better handling in rougher terrain like the North Shore, without really any downsides; I think in more rolling terrain the stock HA would be more appropriate.
  • 3 0
 Running a 150mm air shaft in my Optic's 36s, which puts it around 64.5 degrees HA. No downsides to report, still climbs well and is fun on even the mellowest trails. The positive is that the 150mm provides a little bit more oomph on the front as the local trails are quite rocky.
  • 1 0
 @Nicksen: Do you find it imbalanced with 150F 125R? Considering getting an optic frame myself and overworking was a thought.
  • 1 0
 @MaplePanda: no, not at all. It raises the front up a bit which makes it nicer in the steeps. If you only ride mellower / flatter trails then it might not make a huge difference to be honest. But I do ride the odd bike park lap or DH track amongst my usual trail rides and for that the 150mm made sense to me and I love it.
  • 2 0
 Only 100 gms between 2500 and 3000 grams in frame weight to bigger brother, German engineering at it's finest...
  • 2 0
 Similar geo and travel to my Tallboy V4 that I love. I can firmly say that I think this will be a good bike.
  • 3 0
 Aggro Downcountry
  • 2 0
 Unduro
  • 2 0
 Can we call this a hardcore softtail?
  • 1 0
 ok, canyon, what will the new neuron be like? because this spectral actually took this place
  • 1 0
 However, since we at PinkBike invented the names, they can be useful. Ugh!!
  • 2 0
 Would be cool to see an edit from Simms on this thing
  • 2 0
 Dude what is the deal with those awful Canyon headset spacers?
  • 4 0
 Ugh, I know. One of my pet peeves is headset spacers that aren't round, or with weird interlocking tabs. Canyon, Scott, and Trek are all guilty of going down that route.
  • 2 0
 I see this and think... single speed DJ bike...
  • 2 0
 I'm confused at why this is using a 36 and not a 34.
  • 2 0
 Slopedurtro...
  • 1 0
 lol
  • 1 0
 Well, not in wheelsize. But yes in travel
  • 1 0
 Proprietary water bottle??
  • 1 0
 great looking geo numbers!
  • 3 1
 Looks like a Jeffsy
  • 1 0
 title should be " An mtb with mtb geometry"
  • 2 0
 sounds heavy for 125?
  • 3 3
 Terrain that demands a 64 HTA also demands more than 125mm of travel.
  • 2 2
 WhY are we Talking about this bike?
  • 1 1
 Don't we just need the new Strive, not this bike?
  • 1 0
 I wouldn't mind having both TBF
  • 1 3
 Wheeew, thank the tyre lords. They have Maxxis tires on them.
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.046214
Mobile Version of Website