First Ride: Privateer 161 - An Affordable-ish Race Ready Machine

May 16, 2020 at 13:48
by Mike Kazimer  

Privateer recently announced the full details of the 161, a bike we first caught a glimpse of at Eurobike in 2019. It's aimed at privateer racers and hard chargers in search of a sturdy, reliable aluminum-framed machine that won't break the bank. Privateer offer a complete bike that's priced at $3,075, or the frame alone is available for $1,535.

There are four sizes, P1 - P4. The P1 size has 27.5" wheels, while all of the other sizes have 29" wheels. According to Privateer, running the bike as a mullet setup (29" front / 27.5" rear) isn't recommended, as it would lower the bottom bracket too much, while also slackening the head- and seat-tube angles.

Privateer 161 Details
• Travel: 170mm (f) / 161mm (r)
• 6066-T6 aluminum frame
• 64-degree head angle
• 80-degree seat tube angle
• 490mm reach (size P3)
• Wheelsize: 29" on sizes P2 - P4, 27.5" for P1
• P3 frame with shock: 9.8 lb (4.4 kg)
• Weight as shown - size P3: 35.2 lb (16 kg)
• Frame w/shock: $1,535 USD
www.privateerbikes.com

Privateer 161


A frame and shock recently showed up for review, and I built it up with a selection of parts that fit with the bike's intentions. Those parts include a Shimano SLX 12-speed drivetrain, SRAM Code RSC brakes, and a 170mm Fox 38. I was also able to squeeze in a 210mm One Up dropper post without needing to add shims to reduce the amount of travel. The 161 is currently equipped with a set of Stan's wheels and a Maxxis Assegai / DHR II tire combo, but given that this bike will serve as a rolling test platform that's very likely to change depending on the day.

Getting the bike up and running didn't take any longer than usual, although the dropper post routing through the seat tube is a little bit of a pain. The hole that the housing needs to pass through to get into the seat tube is tiny, and took some finagling to get that all situated. That was the only small hiccup in the assembly process – everything else went into place without any issues.

As shown, the Privateer weighs in at 35.2 pounds without pedals, and the frame with shock weighs 9.8 pounds. Keep in mind that that weight is with EXO+ casing tires – toss on some heavier DH rubber and you're looking at a bike that's pushing 37 pounds. Weight matters more to some riders than others, but it's worth noting that the 161 is on the heavier side of the spectrum. Even if you threw all sorts of lighter weight (and more expensive) carbon parts on it it would still be a challenge to get it below 33 pounds; something to consider if the numbers on a scale are important to you.

Privateer 161
Big bearings, and a tried-and-true Horst Link suspension layout.
Privateer 161
There's a generous amount of tire and mud clearance.

Initial Impressions

I have a handful of rides in so far, which means I'm just past the initial setup process and into the best part of testing – putting in the miles. On the trail, there's no getting around the fact that 161 has a big, solid presence. I've said similar things about other bikes in this category, but with the 161 having the appropriate terrain is even more essential for an enjoyable experience. It's simply too much bike to make flatter, mellower trails all that entertaining – the weight, length, and that super-steep seat angle make it feel out of place in those situations.

Luckily, I have access to plenty of steep logging roads that lead to rowdier trails, terrain that's much more fitting for this big rig. The 80-degree seat angle works well on those uphill grinds; it's like being on a Stairmaster with a seat. The positioning makes it possible to remain in the saddle on steeper pitches due to the fact that your weight is nice and centered, rather than being behind the rear axle.

On the descents, the 161 feels best at higher speeds, on trails where there's room to really let it run. The feel of the rear suspension isn't wildly supple, even with 30% sag. It's well supported, but the Super Deluxe shock and its low compression tune doesn't erase the small bumps as much as I'd expected – a coil shock might be the ticket for getting a more ground-hugging feel out of it.

There's tons of stability, and with an assertive pilot the 161 can be a serious speed machine. Don't get lazy, though; I've had a couple of instances where it felt like I was on a runaway freight train, and I had to really focus on being aggressive to maintain full control.

Stay tuned for an in-depth review later this summer once I've spent enough time in on this intriguing new ride.


289 Comments

  • 190 7
 Ooooh, so close. However, I was looking for something with 162mm of travel. Shame.
  • 42 2
 I'm on the other end, though. I've been looking for something with 160mm of travel.
  • 54 0
 160mm and 162mm is way too much bike for me. I'm looking at 159mm.
  • 61 7
 Don't worry, sram will come out with a shock with 161.98mm
  • 33 3
 The Firebird 29 is exactly what you're looking for then, just sell both kidneys and your first unborn child.
  • 65 0
 Hitchhiker: Think about it. You walk into a bike store, you see a 160 mm bike sittin' there, there's 161 mm right beside it. Which one are you gonna pick, man?

Ted : I would go for the 161mm.

Hitchhiker: Bingo, man, bingo. 161 mm. And we guarantee just as good a ride as the 160mm folk.

Ted : That's right. That's - that's good. That's good. Unless, of course, somebody comes up with 162 mm. Then you're in trouble, huh?

[Hitchhiker convulses]

Hitchhiker : No! No, no, not 162! I said 161 Nobody's comin' up with 162. Who races enduro with 162 mm? You won't even get your heart goin, not even a mouse on a wheel.
  • 12 0
 @SoDiezl350: 5-minute abs
  • 37 2
 I've always been a 154mm kind o guy, so when I heard about the Kona process 153 I was interested but I knew it would come up too short. My particularness, some would say fussiness, has meant I have never actually ridden an MTB and probably never will but where would we be without our principles eh
  • 2 0
 @maxgod: You won't get too far with no kidneys!
  • 1 0
 @SoDiezl350: Now tell me about that conversation you had with your friend about cleaning the pipes.
  • 2 0
 Me too, so it would match my 162cm snowboard. ...I'm gonna go keep shovelling.
  • 5 0
 @fingerbangextreme: you should try the Process 153, everyone I’ve talked to that has ridden says that it really feels more like 154mm travel cause it is so well designed.
  • 2 0
 @iduckett: you could get a 161 board though..
  • 2 0
 doogan: Step into my office.

@SoDiezl350: Why?

doogan: Cos you're fukn fired!
  • 2 0
 @SoDiezl350: Step into my office!
  • 3 4
 The new Radon Swoop 9.0 is pretty comparable in price and spec. I’d probably take it over this bike.
  • 6 0
 162mm? I have just the bike for you - geometronbikes.co.uk/bikes/g1

I ride one, and I'd never go back to 160. That extra 2mm les me reach places 160mm just can't touch.
  • 59 2
 $1500 for frame with shock? Sign me up!
  • 41 0
 The full builds are even better value!
  • 26 0
 @mountainsofsussex: It's nice to see more affordable bikes in the ever so expensive mtb industry. Hopefully other brands take notice and offer more valued options like this and Vitus
  • 17 1
 @nmilot92: There have always been "affordable" bikes out there.. what we're seeing now is good design and decent spec with them.
  • 16 2
 I love everything about this but ~10 pounds for the frame? Dang. That’s a lot of bike to pull up a hill. Yes, I’m old and tired.
  • 5 0
 @scvkurt03: I think the idea of "affordable" in mtb is a lot different from most people's idea of affordable
  • 2 4
 @nmilot92: People can't have everything... Do you want cheap or do you want a good bike? It's like the frame breaking conversation. People complain about frames cracking, but at the same moment, they complain if bikes are too heavy. If you want a frame that absolutely won't break, it's going to be a 37 lb bike...
  • 15 14
 Affordable is the wrong word. Affordable is dependent on the financial status of the buyer, and therefore cannot be applied to a product generally. Only an individual can deem any given item “affordable.” (If you’re Jeff Bezos, pretty much everything on earth is “affordable”.) It shouldn’t ever be used in marketing to describe a product, but of course it often is. “Lower-cost” or “cheaper” would be better terms, because they are based on the price vs. other products and can be applied generally.
  • 14 1
 @BiNARYBiKE: If you're in marketing, these are likely called "value-oriented products," not "cheap." Smile
  • 7 5
 @BiNARYBiKE: Oh really? That's a relative term? Thanks for the analysis.
  • 10 5
 @BiNARYBiKE: its a subjective generalism. Don’t be so black and white about it.
You could argue anything over £€$1 is not affordable and get offended by the price of everything.
This bike is affordable when compared with bikes if a similar class/spec (etc). Just because some folk can’t afford it does not make it unaffordable
  • 2 1
 @spankthewan: ya. “Cheap” is taboo. Too much negative connotation.
  • 11 7
 @timbud: wow, triggered everyone. To be clear I am not complaining about the price at all. I think it’s a killer deal. I’m just nerding out about word choice and definitions. Every time a bike is called “affordable” some teenager gets bent out of shape at the idea that $3000 is deemed affordable. I really don’t care.
  • 5 2
 @scvkurt03: No problem. First one is free but the next one will cost you. Don't worry, my services are affordable. Smile
  • 5 0
 @timbud: I mean, their name is @BiNARYBiKE, so they're consistent about the black and white thing.
  • 5 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: Bezos affordable or former child celebrity affordable?
  • 5 1
 Finally "mainstream" bike manufactures are figuring out there's a market for well designed, well spec'ed mtb's, that doesn't cost 10 grand, and come with plastic frame/electronic bits.
Well done privateer!
She's on my future "buy-it' list Big Grin .
You can kiss junkie sram drivetrains goodbuy! I'm a shimano guy for life (except the brakes, I love my Guide R's Smile ).
And seeing it's spec'ed with killer suspension, makes it even more of a better deal.
The ball is in privateers court now, let's see what the big boys come up with to match/beat it.
  • 35 4
 @BiNARYBiKE: 3 friends agree to meet at a bar. One of them drives his brand new Mustang which he spent 30k on. Another rides in on his 15k Ducati. While the last guy pedals his 5k Specialized. They agree to do a survey of the bar patrons asking which purchase seems the most reasonable. Losers have to buy drinks for the winner. The car owner wins by an overwhelming margin and ends up having a wonderful time drinking for free.

After a few hours they call it a night, and say their goodbyes. The cheerful Mustang owner stumbles to his car while the other two close the tab. He's probably had a bit too much to drink but he only lives a few miles away from the bar so it will probably be fine.

As the two riders exit the bar, the Specialized owner is shocked to find that someone managed to steal his bike during the brief time it was out of sight while he was closing the tab. While he waits for the police to file a report, the guy with the Ducati is not even a 100 feet from the bar when he gets smashed into by a car.

With the police already on their way,they divert from the bike theft incident and proceed to investigate the accident. It appears the driver was texting while driving. They find that a few minutes before the accident the driver had texted "Yeah, sure!" as well as an unsent message which appeared be spelling out the words "Almost there". The Ducati driver is taken by ambulance to the hospital, while the Specialized owner being the buddy he is follows in an Uber.

It is right around this time that the Mustang owner gets home and finds several missed texts. One is from a girl he recently starting seeing, while the other is from his friend telling him about the accident. He feels bad but is clearly too drunk to drive anywhere. He is however excited by the message he finds from his female friend. He had drunkenly texted her if she wanted to come over and watch netflix, but to his surprise, she responded with "Yeah, sure!". As time passes he texts her multiple times inquiring as to when he can expect her, or if she was still even planning on coming over. Feeling ghosted, he ends up lying in bed alone thinking that he probably should have just leased a BMW instead.
  • 3 1
 @SoDiezl350: lmao, I need more of that.
  • 14 10
 Oh shut up all you peasants! Yeti, Unno and Antidote are a great value considering what Trek, Scott or RM take for their high end bikes. You pay thousands and thousands, and get no respect from anybody!
  • 8 10
 @SoDiezl350: I wish to congratulate you. Thank you. We need more of this sort of comments. Thank you for entertaining me.
  • 3 2
 @SoDiezl350: Man. I've never thought of it that way.
  • 1 2
 @scvkurt03: Pinkbike Buy-and-Sell *Like New* affordable.
  • 1 2
 @SoDiezl350: If you love Jesus share this with 10 friends
  • 5 1
 I’m here to complain about the title of this article. Anyone who disagrees with my complaint will be labeled as “triggered”. Just thought I’d warn you all prior to engaging in this exchange.
  • 4 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: I agree with you. Yes, weight isn't the end-all be-all, but the trek session weighs 7.6 lb with a coil shock, and it's a full-on DH bike
  • 2 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: Me Sentinel is about the same and I hardly notice...
  • 9 6
 @WAKIdesigns: You are full of shirt Waki… Nobody could care less, how much you paid for your overpriced plastic machine. Same goes for fancy cars, huge homes, and limited edition sneakers.
Pfffff, how much does a SB165 cost?... 4 grand for the frame alone.
How much does the Burn cost?... 5,000 euros.
How much is the Carbonjack?... 3,500 euros.
I can tell you right now, I ain't paying over $10,000 Canadian for a bike, not now, not ever. Period.
And most people are in the same boat as me, humph.
Even if I was a full-on, sponsored everything racer, I still wouldn't ride 10 grand bikes. How great does that make you look/feel to other young kids trying to get into the sport... I lead by example, want to make it as accessible to as many people as I can. It's like showing up to burger king in a new Lambo, or Ferrari 488, it may jack you up in the moment, make you think your the biggest j**k in the world, but in truth, there's always going to be someone else that has 1 better then you. The cycle never end... Wink .
That's why I love bikes/bike companies like Privateer, they are making extremely well made/kitted out bikes, that a accessible to anyone. And who cares if it weighs a few pounds heavier then a plastic machine, this is built like a tank, can take all the abuse you can throw at it, and still come out on top, 5 years down the road...
Can't say that for a lot of carbon machines, plastic is very expensive/time consuming/just overall nuisance to repair, especially when you pay 5 grand for a frame, expecting it to take everything. Just like carbon wheels, very niche, only the rich, and broke can afford stuff like that.
Give me a good set of aluminum hoops, that'll keep going for 5 years, and i'll be happy. Like what was stated on the other thread, if they don't get the layering of the fibres perfect, then it's a no-go. Aluminum wheels on the other hand, are predictable, wheel after many wheel. If you get the design right from the get-go, you will have no issues turning out, strong, well made wheels, for the fraction of the price of carbon. Who here knows of anyone still running there 10 year old carbon hoops?...
Same thing with aluminum/steel bikes vs carbon. Ya, they may be awesome when first new, few months/years in, but when they reach the point that the plastic is getting fatigued, from just age alone, there toast. Not can be said of aluminum bikes... You can take most any high quality, 25 year old frame, buy some cheap components, slap em' on her, and go ride, just like the day you bought her, try that with a plastic bike, and you tell me the outcome.
So the longer you plan-on keeping a bike for, aluminum vs carbon, the more and more it would make sense to go with metal, cost per bike over time. Most people can't even afford a nice $20,000 car or truck, let alone a $10,000 bike, use your bloody head Waki! Don't let your elitist attitude, cloud you sound judgement. Put yourself in my, and most other peoples shoes. Hopeful mtbers, who's incomes maybe around 50-75 thousand dollars a year, what would you do?...
I'm not saying to buy junk, that's just as bad as spending 2 months salary on 1 purchase. For the normal cyclists like yours truly, a bike like these are a dream come true! Built to last for the long run, with components that aren't going to break on the second ride, or break the wallet over time.
And comparing this bike to top of the line superbikes doesn't make sense... It's not made/priced to compete against them, more like the GT Fury, Orange Stage 6, Giant Rein, ect. ect.
I get your whiff... At least it made me think, and that's something you rarely do Wink .
Big Grin
O' what say you, master of ridiculous trolling.
  • 11 3
 @wcr: that was a sarcasm... I am not there yet to call people peasants and mean it Big Grin
  • 1 1
 @nmilot92: I think the key word here is 'relatively'
  • 53 4
 Watch out. That sizing (1,2,3,4) is a great way to get specialized to sue you lol
  • 34 1
 Hearing they have patented the numbers 3, 4, and 5. Still working on 2, and 1 is next.
  • 46 3
 Is it black or is the gravitational field it emits sucking in all light in the visible spectrum?
  • 5 0
 Both
  • 5 0
 I am glad to do it raw to save weight... LOL
  • 5 0
 @gravitysucks53: That's what she said.
  • 1 2
 objects don't emit gravitational fields
  • 2 0
 @mtb-scotland: That's what she said.
  • 24 0
 I'm starting to get flashbacks from 15 years ago... Grinding up logging roads on my close to 40lb "Freeride" bike, spinning my 22t granny ring and 32t cassette aka the same ratio as current 34/50 gearing, low speed compression cranked up aka the cheater switch, full face strapped to my pack, suffering the climbs to enjoy the descent. Luckily bike geometry is different or I'd think this is 2005 all over again.
  • 11 0
 They are wanting to put dual crowns back on trail bikes so we are almost there again
  • 5 0
 Ha...I've been saying the same thing and watching this trend for the past 3 years. 2014-16 is was all "who has the lightest Enduro frame". Seems like we are a year away from 35lb bikes being the "thing" again. Already 2-3 outliers like this making a comeback. I'm a big fan of durability. 30-31lbs with DD tires is a sweetest for me in the All-Mtn segment, and with modern geo 35lbs for a FR/Park bike that can be thrashed is spot-on IMO.
  • 8 0
 2002, me riding my Santa Cruz Bullit with a Monster T, 1×9, Azonic bar and stem of course, Tioga DH saddle, trail riding, sometimes pushing... Good times.

Sometimes I wish I could go back and do it again.
  • 4 0
 @Beez177: nothing but the best memories from those days. I still miss janky wood stunts...
  • 1 1
 This scenario is why ebikes, love em or hate em, will continue to grow.
  • 25 0
 Nice! I would like to see how it fares against the Commencal Meta AM 29.
  • 49 1
 Budget high end group test would be nice

Commencal, canyon, yt, privateer, propain, raaw, cube Etc etc

Damn there’s quite a lot actually
  • 7 0
 I'd love to see that shootout
  • 23 1
 @toad321: I want to know which Yeti rider downvoted you.
  • 8 1
 @toad321: Add Guerrilla Gravity to that list. Would love to see this!
  • 4 0
 @toad321: enduro bike just done this
  • 3 0
 @toad321: Ibis Ripmo AF too
  • 2 0
 @korev: , this month enduromag has it
  • 1 0
 @toad321: Fuji Auric LT 1.3 for some long travel 27.5 action!
  • 27 5
 So...how about the next bike "first ride" is the first ride of the Grim Donut?
  • 19 0
 At this rate geometry of available bikes will have surpassed the Grim Donut by the time the post a review. This bike is only 3 degrees off the GD in seat tube angle...
  • 5 0
 Wait, I thought that this was the grim donut? Oh, nevermind, I see that they accomplished fitting a water bottle into the frame.
  • 1 0
 ...did they ever say what it cost to produce the single frame?
  • 26 4
 Sorry, seat angle is far too slack. 90 degrees or I just don't want it.
  • 8 1
 Take that kneez
  • 10 0
 I'm not buying a new bike until head angle is 30 degrees and seat angle is 135 degrees
  • 5 1
 90? what is this, 2013? 100 degrees or die
  • 2 1
 Get with the times
  • 2 0
 25/145 degrees or die Y!
  • 3 0
 This seat angle crosses a line I'm not willing to.
  • 1 1
 @makripper: so, the Grim Donut?
  • 21 1
 I think the internet officially gives you permission to call a $3k complete competition-ready bike "affordable" full-stop, no "ish" hedge required.
  • 4 0
 Agreed, but while the internet may give you permission to use "affordable", certain advertising customers may disapprove of such blasphemy.
  • 12 1
 @pinhead907, you'd be surprised... There will always be someone who says "$XXX? I could buy a XXX for that much money." Check the YouTube comments for proof...
  • 1 1
 Define “competition-ready.”
  • 5 0
 @mikekazimer: I'm usually one of those guys. For example, I see the TRP derailleur a couple stories up this morning and I'm like "SLX for $75!!!11!". But with this bike I've got nothing.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: I was reading the youtube comments...it was painful.

So many people have an incredibly narrow range of bike prices they thing is acceptable and anything outside of that is either overpriced or cheap crap. "Oh, its not between $1200 and $1500? Don't even waste my fukin time reviewing it so called "pinkbike""
  • 8 1
 I’ve recently been looking into a new bike... possibly the first one I’ve ever bought new, and I’m very tempted by this! It would be a big step-up though as I’ve never owned a full-suspension bike or a 29er. It’s a good looking bike though and the price is very appealing!
  • 23 2
 This would probably be like a full on DH bike for you then. I might suggest getting something in between this and a trail bike. Like a that canyon aluminum mule they tested. I think if you go too big and heavy on your first full sus, and first 29er, you might find it a bit too large and and heavy and slow feeling. If you had the ability to buy two bike, this would be rad to have in a quiver with a lighter trail bike. But as your only full sus, it would probably only make a lot of sense if you live in squamish or something like that.
  • 1 0
 @takeiteasyridehard: Yeah, I definitely agree. It’s a ‘hardcore’ hardtail I currently own (of the older variety), and it’s a more modern one that I’ve been primarily looking at. Having said that, for around £3000, bikes like these are pretty tempting!
  • 2 0
 @brucemacd: yeah I was doing a bit of reflecting also. When I was younger I had a dh bike and a hardcore hardtail that I raced dh on prior to the true fully dh bike. It was a blast, and I didnt regret it. But I was young, fit, stupid, and only cared about the downs. There was not much trail riding unless it linked to a good dh trail. If that's you're style (whether or not it includes stupid), maybe it would be good. Learning to throw around a big bike makes lighter stuff seem like its bmx flickable. So it could be good. Just depends on your priorities.
  • 3 1
 Do it up! It's cheap and looks sweet!
  • 5 7
 @brucemacd: don't waste money on a short travel full sus trail bike. Full enduro or bust! Your harcore hardtail is enough of a trail bike. It's probably faster than a short travel fs too.
  • 3 1
 I recently moved to a FS 29er (Polygon TCool and it was the best bike related purchase I have made. 140 front and back is plenty of squish for me and it climbs better than my old 29 hard tail. Outside of little extra maintenance, I can't think of a single drawback.
  • 1 1
 @Burningbird: you bring up a good point with the labor costs of owning a full squish. Probably doubles maintenance at least. Evey couple years those frame bearings are expensive. And you can get away with letting fork service intervals go, but rear shocks need love often....
  • 4 1
 @takeiteasyridehard: lol what? Bearing kits are cheap. If you go completely ghetto you can buy from non bike shops for even less. Bikes are expensive to maintain. If your going hard on a hardtail more shit will wear out in some ways than one a fs.
  • 2 3
 @makripper: If you can do it all yourself and have the tools it is cheap(but still not even there on a hardtail). I am just saying this from the perspective of many customers (obviously not yours). Linkage bearings run $6-$15 each. There are usually 4-10 of them that could need replaced. That plus the rear shock is a significant difference in the cost of maintenance for most people. I agree wheels will take a beating on a hardtail, but that can be true of both bikes. I have also seen cables and housing consistently wear faster on full sus due to the constant movement between the two parts of the frame. There is just more that wears out, and it wears out faster on a fully...maybe not wheels, but most everything else...You could argue that wheels are more expensive and it offsets, but I haven't seen this to be the case on most budget hardtail riders bikes versus budget fullys.

Try to see things from other people's perspectives sometime. I already know you dont like me, so maybe you're just trying to be a dick....But I can say from 17 years of shop experience - you're stance and opinion are far less common that what I am suggesting.
  • 2 0
 @takeiteasyridehard: huh? Bearings aren't very expensive. What you just stared is high but even what you stated is cheap relative to a bike.

Its not like many people replace bearings every season anyway. Its good to take apart the linkages and test for rough spots.

Basic suspension maintenance to keep everything running has higher intervals anyway.
Strip the lowers of your fork and clean and add oil. Good to go.

I have no idea who you are but you are over exaggerating what the average person needs to do to their bike.
  • 3 1
 @takeiteasyridehard: A lot of people do their own maintenance for that reason, and you dont need to replace all the bearings, just ones that are bad. Hardtails beat the piss out of rear wheel, and from experience seem more prone to putting the rear mech in to the spokes. so is all relative.
  • 1 3
 @zyoungson: it for sure is all relative, and everyone has different experiences and expectations or standards for how they want their bike to run. Pb is an audience where more people are mechanically handy than most. I never do all the bearings...for my own, or my customers...just what is needed like you suggest. My only point is that I think [by witnessing through years in a shop] on average, it is [significantly] more expensive for most people to maintain a full suspension bike.
  • 1 0
 They are rumoured to have a 130-140mm more trail oriented one in the works. I would probably suggest that instead.....
  • 7 0
 I’m riding a P2. It’s 35lbs on my scale at home. Definitely the heaviest bike I have owned in the past several years. It’s also the first aluminum I have owned in that same amount of time. The bike feels really balanced descending. Heading up hill it feels fine as well. I do feel the heft on the ups but it’s not earth shattering like everyone is making it out to be. The way I see it there’s an opportunity to get more fit. I really like this bike and it will be sticking around for a while. If the short travel bike comes out I will probably spring for that as well and just run both. For reference I have owned these bikes: wreckoning, capra, sb150 and no I’m not a doctor or dentist I just have a spending problem. It’s actually quite laughable that this bike is my favorite out the bunch.

Normal day for me looks like equal parts climb and descend with about 2k vertical feet over 10-12 miles
  • 1 0
 Didn't you just sell your bike?
  • 6 0
 For anyone wondering - The coil in the rear does make this a ground hugging machine.

I was lucky enough to get one in the first dispatch and It is different to anything I have ridden previously, in a good way.
I can be riding steep tech, jumping into offcamber roots, or simply trying to nail the smoothest line by squeezing the tyres between two rocks, and the line i pick is the line it takes, youre low and want to get high to gain better corner entry? no worries, it feels so planted and confidence inspiring you'll find yourself looking at things differently.


Its not the most playful bike in the world, and its definitely not the kind of bike id be jumping at the opportuinty to take out on a 40km loop, but thats why i have a trail bike.
I bought this bike as a park bike/race bike and its met all expectations I have had for descending, and surpassed them, and on the other hand its not a bad climber, I get very little pedal bob if any, and i find the centred position very comfortable.

In summary, this bike is the funnest bike I've ridden simply because how easy it makes riding fast and hitting your lines, you get to the bottom and think "wow that was epic, I'm going to brake later next run"
and i think if you size up on this bike you're probably doing yourself an injustice, with the size appropriate rear triangle it creates a balanced ride.
  • 1 0
 What size did you get, and how tall are you? Thats my current struggle.

I grew up riding dirt bikes (trail, not MX), and I think I'm just used to longer feeling bikes, as even my Kona Process 153 29'er feels twitchy to me at speed (with its tiny 425mm chainstays). I'm just having a hard time doing the mental gymnastics of jumping to a bike geo that far out from what I've ridden (without a test ride).
  • 2 0
 Hey buddy, did you get it shipped to Australia? if so what taxes have to be paid? ta
  • 2 0
 @bigad28: sure did, it arrived within a week of shipment which was cool considering the current circumstances.
I only had to pay import tax.
  • 2 0
 @ocnlogan: Im 180 cm tall and i went with the P2 - 470mm reach, my other bike has a 480mm reach but slightly shorter wheel base, and i find the privateer to be extremely well balanced for my height, more so than my other bike.
  • 1 0
 @JARTassie: cheers. may consider one
  • 1 0
 @JARTassie: guess they chase that when it arrives in the country.
  • 8 1
 Question for Kazimer: Reach is very roomy, but ETT is very short on paper (probably because of that STA). How does the seated riding position feel?
  • 4 1
 Being on the new Sentinel, which is similar but not quite as aggressive as this, it feels great on long, steady, steep climbs. Seated pedaling on flat terrain does feel a bit weird, like too much weight is being put on your hands. Especially being a tall rider, getting my weight off the back wheel and being able to sit a bit more upright has felt great.
  • 6 0
 @justwan-naride, like BiNARYBiKE said, it's a very upright position. The front center length of the bike keeps it from feeling too cramped - if you put that steep of a seat tube angle on a bike from a few years ago it'd feel like your knees were going to hit the stem. That's not the case here, but it is a bike that's best suited for winch and plummet type rides - the seated position can feel odd on flatter trails.
  • 9 0
 @mikekazimer: I've never had the best posture. Or character, for that matter. Do you think this bike will make me a more upright person?
  • 11 4
 @mikekazimer: I am waiting the day when you guys test a too long bike...
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer:

I've not had a chance to ride a bike with a properly steep STA and short ETT like this, so its hard to how it fits based on the numbers.

Would it make sense to try to get the size that has the ETT most similar to my current bike (hoping the stack is high enough to not feel super akward), or buy based on what reach I'd expect would feel good?

I'm 6'1", and am right between sizes for the P3/P4. So its kind of like buy based on reach (P3), or ETT (P4).
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer: so a race bike, then. I appreciate that they designed a bike true to its intentions. If I had the $ to spend on a park bike, this would be it.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Same here Wink ..
  • 2 0
 @CircusMaximus: I was lucky enough to get one of the first batch of these frames and the way i have been describing it to my friends is "its a race bike."
  • 2 0
 @ocnlogan: @ocnlogan: I'm not Mike, but I'll pipe up. Seems like you're right on the money for P3 according to their size chart. You have a little flexibility with your saddle as well, you can move it back and forth and add or remove a bit of ETT. How much shorter is the ETT on the P3 vs. your current bike?
  • 1 0
 @BiNARYBiKE:

My current bike has an ETT of 632mm, and a reach of 475mm.

The P3 has an ETT of 603mm with reach of 490mm, and the P4 has an ETT of 629mm with a reach of 515mm.

So the P3 has a close reach to my current bike, but P4 has close ETT.

The way I read their chart is that the bars at the top are the height range. So the P4 ducks quite a bit below 6’3”, while the P3 goes up to there. So it looks like I’m in the crossover area.

Maybe not though? Hard to know without a demo. Maybe I can find something like a sentinel nearby to try that might give me enough of an idea.
  • 1 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: The new Sentinels are also shorter in ETT compared to the old Sentinels by size, so it's weird that you'd say you have too much weight on your hands? Shorter ETT should make you sit "up" more and so there should be more weight on your butt! comparatively?

At least the Sentinel has the XXL so if you were on the previous XL and prefer that ETT you can size up. (course if you were on the old metal XXL your shit out of luck now) Of note is that at Eurobike or something like that when the 161 was first shown whoever was riding that bike had the seat pushed pretty far back on the rails. So at lot of people said the STA was too steep, but the other argument was just that Privateer needed a larger size so the ETT would match existing bikes. Course the issue with that is DAM that would be a LONG bike...

I was of the mind that my 18 Sentinel was a touch too short in the ETT. BUT I've tried lowering my bars a touch and that seems to have been enough of a change that I'm thinking I'm good for now... (my other bike has a longer ETT, so the Sentinel always seemed short when I jump on it)
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: " @mikekazimer: I am waiting the day when you guys test a too long bike...
they already did, Grim Donut. It rode so bad they took it out in the woods in the middle of the night and cut it up and buried the evidence...

Now they just pretend the bike never existed as they slowly scrub the website so that by this time next year it will be GHOST...
  • 1 0
 @stiingya: I could be wrong but I don’t think it’s the ETT distance, it’s the steepness of the seattube. It puts you in a nice position on steady climbs but feels a bit weird on flat ground, like you’re sort of sliding forward. Like Mike said, it feels a bit odd. Also the stack height and bar height end up being a big factor. If your bars are low, it shifts more weight onto your hands. If your raise your bars, it shifts that weight back. I think, no matter what, the bulk or your weight is on the saddle. Nothing is changing that very much. I think it’s just the downward force from your shoulders. Again, largely theorizing about all this but that’s my experience. I also wouldn’t size up beyond the recommended size to get a longer ETT. My hunch is we’ve all been excessively stretched out while seated pedaling. To be clear this is isn’t a complaint about the bike. I’m pretty much never seated on flat terrain.
  • 2 0
 @BiNARYBiKE: Stack heights are pretty high though? But in the end I guess were all built differently, so we experience fit/feel differently!!

I think you have to be a bit stretched out for really effective climbing? (I mean there has to be a reason XC race bikes are built the way they are!) I don't think you get the best use of the muscle groups without it? Again, I'm not saying we should be XC stretched out, just normal? A 630 ETT is more of a large than an XL.

It makes me wonder if the new Sentinel's geo was intentional and like you said Transition thinks we've all been too stretched out? OR was it just because they are sharing molds between bikes and that's just how it turned out and that's why we got a carbon XXL frame this time? It's always a compromise somewhere. The "large" 161 has a wheelbase that's the same as the current XXL Sentinel! Smile

Anyway, sweet bike!!
  • 5 0
 Reminds me a of an 18/19 Slayer. I don't know if RM was the first maker to come out with that profile, but since then, I've seen a lot of bikes with similar profiles. And I'm not complaining cause that profile is bang-on.
  • 5 1
 Would it be possible to state metric weight, if only in brackets. The majority of the world is no longer part of the British Empire, or in our case, we still are to an extent but switched to kg’s and meters a while back Wink

Thanks in advance!
  • 2 0
 To be fair, the UK switched to metric weight in 1965, Australia didn't switch till 1970.
  • 1 0
 @subwaypanda:

Thanks for the history lesson Wink Even funnier; the US fought a war to get rid of the British Empire and are the close to the only ones still using this archaic system.
  • 1 0
 @kusanagi72: let's not forget that Myanmar and Liberia also use empirical measures! I fully agree, kgs/grams and cm/mm would be nice addition to the tech details. Any time someone mentions an eighth of an inch my brain starts to bleed.

Ps: Im Australian by the way.
  • 1 0
 @subwaypanda: Myanmar and Liberia too, wow, maybe empirical is making a comeback. These are real economic powerhouses Wink

The number of times I had to type 25.4(mm) multiplied by X in my calculator in my life.... And yeah, don't get me started on a 3/8" or 5/16"!

Or look up how much gram an LBS is again. PinkBike is Canadian isn't it? Last time I visited, they used the metric system.

Ah, someone can always hope! @mikekazimer
  • 2 0
 @kusanagi72: You think Canada uses the metric system. LOL. Canada is maybe the most messed of us all. They mix in match depending on what they are measuring.

They measure speed in metric, but height in imperial. They measure outside temperature in C but cooking temperature in F. The measure heavy things in kgs and light things in lbs.
  • 1 0
 @georgiamtbiker: OMG... Is there a difference between Quebec and the rest too. (As in French user more Metric versus English speaking states more Imperial?)
  • 7 2
 Dear PB team,
could you start putting the kg weight in brackets behind the pound weight? Having grown up with the metric system, I always need to calculate/google the weight in kg first...
Thanks a lot
  • 4 0
 Not quite sure where they are getting the numbers from for the weight. The standard spec doesn't weight as much as they are quoting. My friend has one and his is just over 33.5lb. So a few tweaks will easily get it down below 33lb
  • 5 0
 I have to say I'm really bummed that Fox is forcing us to go to the 38, if we want 170mm up front. That thing is super heavy. That's part of why this bike is so heavy.
  • 1 2
 Manitou Mattoc Pro
  • 2 0
 You can put a 170mm air shaft in the 36. Totally agree the 38 is mostly hype and weight... and it sounds like it's not quite ready and needs work - www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS-VzI2JbrI&t=7s
  • 1 0
 @JohanG: or more so the Mezzer Pro...
  • 1 1
 Mezzer pro - lighter, better air spring and damper and a lot cheaper to boot.
  • 6 3
 Apparently just mentioning weight gets you downvoted now. This bike will not suite almost every rider here yet people are still fawning over it. Almost 36 pounds is too heavy. And for everyone saying weight doesn’t matter because of Geo then I ask you at what point does it start mattering if not at 36 pounds.
  • 5 0
 Not sure where the limit is, as long as It doesn’t pedal like a wet mattress. I’m sure there is one though.

But I’ve been pedaling around a 36lb bike for 2 years as my only bike (Kona process 153 AL 29’er). And it hasn’t bothered me at all, even the more XC stuff. It’s just what the bike weighs, and I’ve gotten used to it. If I was racing up hills I’d care more... but usually I’m waiting for buddies on the climbs anyway.
  • 1 0
 38 lbs. Anything over that is getting too heavy.
  • 1 0
 The only time I notice the weight on my bike is when I put it on the rack. Where the bike is heavy is what matters. A 23lb bike does you no good if the wheels weigh 10lb each.
  • 2 0
 In comparison for what you get VS what it costs it seems a little unrealistic to also want it to be lightweight too? The idea is a non sponsored race bike so price VS performance means something's got to give...
  • 3 0
 I consider pinkbike as the leading global source of information for mountainbikers. Thus you could start adding weight/length measurement units that 'everyone' understands. I am mainly talking about (kilo)grams. It's a bit painful to always look for conversion programs.
  • 5 0
 They should make dh bikes. I'd be sold not really worried about weight at all.
  • 5 1
 I really like the look of this bike. It looks burly, strong and tough. Also I love the fact that Privateer have gone with Aluminium.
  • 8 2
 Hey, bike industry, this is what we want, please provide more of this !
  • 2 1
 Put your money where your mouth is.
  • 1 0
 @RonSauce: bring me the same in 27.5 please
  • 6 0
 More metal bikes like this
  • 6 1
 Seriously looking at this machine. Hoping they offer a Fox shock option later.
  • 4 1
 You know you can buy any shock in the world and put it on yourself, right?
  • 12 0
 Since they are focused on price/performance I don´t think so as fox is perfect antithesis of that.
  • 2 0
 Same here considering the next lot isnt coming til september, it might be worth the wait
  • 2 0
 Excited for the full review.

I really, really want to like this bike. It ticks all the boxes I find important (high value, good geo, chainstay lengths that make sense, easy to maintain).

I'm just a smidge worried its too much bike, as the P4 is a shocking ~98mm longer than my current bike in WB, which seems like a huge jump (even though I do think I need a bigger bike than my current one). I wish I could test ride one.
  • 2 0
 For what it's worth, I just made a jump that big in wheelbase with my new Sentinel. I was going to size down and they encouraged me to get the recommended size. It seems crazy, but with the combination of all the modern geo, I swear it corners and handles better than my previous bike that was 4 inches shorter. It's long, no doubt. about it, but I love it. I've found that with my previous smaller bike, I would compensate by shifting my weight backwards. With the new bike, I'm able to stay centered and keep my weight over both wheels better. It's taken a bit of adjustment but I really like it. Just my experience. The only catch is, if your trails are super tight and/or not very steep, you may feel otherwise.
  • 2 0
 I'm VERY curious how the 80 degree seat angle feels on long climbs. Is it really better directly over the pedals? It also looks like it makes the cockpit (VTT) a bit on the short side while seated. Just saying....
  • 2 0
 He touched on it. It really comes down to how steep the long climb is. If it's truly steep, then it should feel good.
  • 2 1
 @mybaben: See I don't get how a "kind of" cramped position is good for really steep or technical climbing? Yes the steep STA is great for center mass and traction, etc. but you need to be a little stretched out for tough climbs unless they are just fireroads where I could see it not mattering at all? (not crazy XC stretched out, but just normal. A 630 ETT is more of a large than an XL)

I mean jump on somebodies bike that's a size down from what you ride now. Obviously that doesn't replicate the geometry of the 161 because it's a very long slack bike, but that should let you easily experience the ETT of the bike compared to what you ride now. I ride some of my old bikes now and then, again can't compare the geometry cause the bikes were shorter, steeper in the HTA and slacker on the STA. BUT, sitting and spinning on the bikes feel SHORT!! and way to upright when your seated and just doesn't feel like you can put down the power you can when pedaling a bike with a longer ETT? Feels like a "greenway cruiser"... Smile (and then when you stand up it feels even shorter! like a heavy BMX bike which is FUN and super maneuverable, etc., but you also feel like your going to endo at any moment!!!)

Anyway, I think the 161 is a totally sweet bike and definitely worth considering. And I could see how it is a really good race bike when your climbing is "often" intended as a sort of working rest period between stages? In that perspective I guess it's kind of cool Enduro race bikes are getting to the point where they are specialized enough that they no longer make the best everyday ride, even when you have steep enough terrain for it...? (unless all your climbs are fireroads?)
  • 1 0
 @stiingya: You got it. The steep seat angle trend is a compromise. It allows for more comfortable seated pedaling up moderate to steep grades without as much rider input to shift their weight forward. The compromise is that it takes you out of a more powerful pedaling position and ETT inevitably gets shorter unless you are ok with an extremely long wheelbase. For unhurried sit-and-spin type climbing, this tradeoff is fine and thus makes sense on an enduro bike where ascents aren’t timed and the only important riding is performed standing. It certainly wouldn’t be an acceptable tradeoff in XC, where they need to put the power down aggressively on the climbs (gentle and moderately steep) and the flats. There’s a reason these guys are stretched out low over the bike and don’t look like they’re pedaling beach cruisers. For trail bikes steeper is the trend, but not everyone is convinced, or at least people haven’t been consistently pointing out the issue until the seat angles started getting around 80 degrees.
Ultimately, I think what you said last is most apt. This geo (or close to it) probably makes sense for enduro racing and it is interesting that the format is sparking its own geometry customizations. What makes me pause is that all bikes are following the same trend, where it really doesn’t apply optimally. Many light trail bikes aren’t being ridden in a “winch-and-plummet” style and a cramped seated position arguably makes these bikes worse for the intended purpose. When you like the reach and wheelbase of the medium and the ETT of the XL, something seems a bit off…
  • 2 0
 @Climbtech: I think it's pretty much ALL a compromise in some way or another.

I think we both need steeper STA's and ALSO normal ETT's. I don't see any reason to ride a 73* STA anymore personally?

As much as I see the "race bike specialization" here. I also think this is just one designers interpretation. I mean Pole still gives you a 660 ETT. Geometron I think gives you even more? And as much as a LOT of new bikes have steeper seat tube angles. It's still a rarity of bikes that are really steep and short like this one. And most new bikes are still giving normal ETT's.

It would be interesting to know how many 161 riders who end up pushing their seat back on the rails like the one they originally showed at Eurobike/wherever it was...
  • 1 0
 Any advice from owners or in general please. 6ft2” do I go for p3 or p4?? Come from a stumpjumper so a fair jump ... what will be the advantages of each sizes for me... I am on the sizing threshold and can’t decide on size!!! Thanks
  • 1 0
 Hello. Any advice please ? 6ft2” p3 or p4 for me? Coming from a stumpjumper so fair jump but want to ensure I order correctly ... what will be the advantages of each size ? I’m ok the threshold ... so hard to decide and get this right !!
  • 1 0
 I'm 6'2" and I got a P4 in the first batch. I was coming from a XL Radon Swoop with a 487mm reach and I spent ages deciding what size to order. No regrets in going with the P4. Really comfy when climbing seated. It looks massive when just looking at it but it doesn't feel huge when riding it.
  • 3 1
 That geo is interesting. 80 degree STA, super stretched reach, super tight pedal position, and higher stack height. It would be an interesting ride.
  • 6 2
 4.4kg or 9.7lbs ... the weight of a downhill bike :/
  • 5 1
 But can pedal up. Basically a freeride bike but not for big drops. Like a speedride bike I guess?
  • 1 0
 @makripper: could be more of a freeride than an enduro bike.
  • 4 0
 Then buy that super lightweight Last enduro bike and stop whinging.
  • 4 1
 @Euskafreez: freeduro?
  • 1 0
 @Euskafreez: it's probably not meant for hucks to flat
  • 7 7
 I am a little bit irked that the label "progressive" gets thrown at bikes with a very specific, and frankly narrow, type of riding in mind. As the review itself states, it's really intended to wench up and bomb down, which I will venture to guess....is not how most people ride. I mean it seems like it's great for that purpose, but my personal pet peeve is that all bikes are headed that way. It leaves people who don't have immediate access to big terrain, or ride tight, twisty trails, or have to (maybe even enjoy to) climb tight techy trails kind of out of the conversation. I get that for an org based in Squamish, this is indeed the kind of riding you might do quite a bit of. But there's a whole big world out there where a 35 pound bike that makes no sense on anything but fire-road climbs and big wide open descents is kind of pointless. I wish that was acknowledge more often.
  • 9 10
 This is clearly not the bike for you, no need to moan just move on.
  • 7 1
 Exactly my thoughts. This is a bike for steep terrain,and it's fine. But measuring all bikes tested by steep terrain standards is just wrong. It's a big world out there,and different people who ride different trails need different bikes.
  • 9 4
 @zyoungson: My point is that there is more than one type of riding, but the trends seem to be moving in only one direction. If you disagree, feel free to correct me, otherwise it's not a comment for you, no need to moan just move on.
  • 2 0
 Yeah, as cool as this bike is it wouldn't be right for me either. I do live near some nice mountains but a lot of my riding is still in the foothills. My 140mm trail bike is already perfect and a lot of times my 120mm hardtail is great too. This is 100% a bike for an enduro racer, or even a bit of a park bike.
  • 1 0
 @roma258:

I agree to an extent. All bikes shouldn't be the same of course.

But I do think that while all riding isn't winch and plummet, there are certain geographic regions that while small, have a large user base/market for bikes like this. And clearly they're selling somewhere (id assume, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing so many bikes like this come out).

Also, I'd also argue that to some extent, we're just learning that different geometry is better for offroad riding (instead of having geo more immediately descended from road bikes like we were in the past), regardless of the travel it has. I'd point out that even XC race bikes are "longer and slacker" than they were a few years ago. And that was one of the last holdouts of "traditional" geo.

I'm of course not saying all XC bikes have angles like the Privateer, but even bikes like the Top Fuel, Ripley, and Tallboy 4 are pretty long and slack compared to most all mountain bikes of 5-6 years ago, and those are still pretty firmly on the XC/"downcountry"/trail side of the spectrum. And from what I can tell most people still really like how they climb/manage the tight stuff.
  • 2 1
 I think you must be looking at the wrong section of the MTB industry, maybe youre focusing on the Enduro/freeride market as opposed to the Trail/all mountain section.
It may appear that there has been a resurgence in long travel progressive geo trail bikes recently because up until 4ish years ago there werent any, you had XC and DH and slowly they are bridging that gap, starting at the xc end, slowly moving closer to the DH end.
the geo on a bike that was progressive 4 years ago is now going to look tame, but those bikes are now labled as trail bikes, and they are still available and being refined every year.
Every big bike company, and even the niche companies make bikes targeted at trail riding, but as there isn't the world trail riding series they maybe dont get the same publicity and spotlight as their longer travel siblings.
  • 5 4
 @JARTassie: Not really. Let's look at some at some recent trail bikes shall we:

Transition Scout- ST Angle 76.8 degrees, HA 64 degrees, wheelbase 1248 mm (size large)
Norco Sight- ST Angle 77.7 degrees, HA 63.5 degrees, wheelbase 1259 mm (size large)

Neither of these bikes occupy the DH or Enduro spot in their manufacturer's range. Basically to get the slack head angles and steep seat angles with significant reach, the bikes have to be massive. Now you could argue, these are on the pointy end of the trend, but that's kind of the point. That's where the trend is going. The Privateer is just pointier yet. And like I get it, they're made for the terrain where these companies are located. But that's not the terrain that everyone rides. And anything that gets a shorter wheelbase or slightly steeper head angles is called conservative because the major pubs that do the reviews are also mostly based in the Northwest (I get that this is a very North American perspective, but this is a North American publication).

Now I'm not saying we need to get back to the short, steep and tall bikes of before, but it'd be cool if there was some diversity of perspective in terms of what kind of bikes work best in what kind of settings/geographies. Like lots of places have a more rolling terrain where you have to climb up technical single track and even some flats or tight/twisty trails along the way. I think Mike Levy tries to speak to that experience at times (see Spot Ryvve review), but he's kind of a voice in the wilderness on this.
  • 4 2
 @roma258: This sounds like the same argument as when 29ers started coming in a few years ago, people were moaning then they tried them and shut up about it. There is no shortage of more regular bikes to ride/buy in the mean time.
  • 2 0
 @roma258: haha youve picked two bikes that suit your arguement very well.
and I agree, them bikes really do blur the line of trail bike, I wouldnt buy one with the intent of it being a "trail bike" more an all mountain bike that you could spec up to race enduro on.

But what about bikes such as the yeti sb130, the giant trance, the pivot 429, the forbidden druid, the norco optic, the kona 134, the specialised stumpy, the YT Izzo, the canyon spectral .. the list goes on, almost every single brand is still producing trail bikes, and they are still refining them.

And yes the privateer is at the pointy end of being progressive, it is a race bike, it was designed to be a race bike, and i personally think they have nailed it.
I bought a privateer and the size i got is actually 10 mm shorter reach than my last bike, yet with the longer rear triangle and the slacker HA i consider it to be a better fit for me, it is simply more balanced.
ultimately you get to decide what you purchase and what you think is going to work best for you.

I think progression in the design of bikes is awesome, and i think there is more variety now than ever to find the perfect bike or bikes to suit your needs, but you need to make the choice yourself and not get caught up in the hype; therefore buying a bike simply because the newest release is longer, slacker, and lower
  • 3 1
 @roma258: totally agree with you.....been saying the same thing for a while now. I love my trail/all mountain bike with 140mm travel each end but in some places it feels a bit too long on some sharp turns and its not anywhere near as slack or long as these. Sometimes my much shorter and steeper xc bike is quicker on the same trails that i dont expect it to be just because its so light and agile i can control it much quicker and hop over things easier. heck im quicker than a lot of people on one of the rougher tracks in my local area on my carbon xc hardtail than many others using full suspension trail and enduro bikes.
have slogged around on a commencal supreme fr with 180mm travel and although it was awesome on descents when riding black trails in north wales i was always so bloody tired that in the end i sold it and just used my 120 travel commencal meta sl1 as once i got to the top of climbs i was so much fresher that i could overcome the massive difference in travel and lack of slackness of the little bike with ease and the little bike was sooo much quicker even on the descents because of this.
  • 2 2
 When I look at this in sideview, my knees begin to hurt. Unfortunately I doen´t live in the Alps, where you have to press up 20% slopes for two hours, my rides always begin with at least 1hour mellow ride to(not that extreme) trails.
Perhaps next Mullet Privateer with more moderate STA(but... have a Patrol, which is already more than i need)....
  • 1 0
 Layback dropper post, fixed. Vic from up north did that on his Guerilla Gravity way back in the day as GG was an early adapter of STEEP STA's. (but at least they also stretched out ETT's to match!)
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer I also noticed harshness on small pumps with included shock. But found out that bottom shock mount is very thight and also bolt wass tightened way too much. Loosening that made huge difference!
  • 7 4
 Let me know when you have a mullet link.
  • 4 1
 Too bad you can only run 27.5” wheels on the P1
  • 18 0
 You want your butt crack scrubbed clean with a DHR?
  • 5 1
 "Focused on Privateer Enduro racing"

A.k.a speed, for which 29 is better.
  • 3 0
 @kittenjuice: with the toilet paper shortages I'd say this is an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone
  • 1 0
 You can run a mullet with a 160 fork to bring the goe numbers close enough.
  • 2 1
 @phops: not if your to small for the big wheels
  • 11 1
 Surprised no-one has pointed out that chainstay length goes up with size. With the reach of the P1 being 440mm, you'd have almost no weight on the front end with 29er chainstays. Seems crazy more bike brands don't do this actually. An XS Tallboy has 400mm reach, while an XXL has 515mm. They both share the same 430mm chainstays. I can't imagine the person on the XS is experiencing anything remotely similar in handling to what the rider on the XXL is feeling.
  • 7 1
 @SoDiezl350: one of the most frustrating things in the bike industry!
Size proportionate chainstays are where it’s at. Wish more did it! But it’s too easy to cut cost by making all the same...
Everyone on the small bikes and Xxl bikes don’t get the same balance as the mid sizes of M and L.
Much respect to the companies that have size specific chainstays
  • 7 0
 @SoDiezl350: "With the reach of the P1 being 440mm, you'd have almost no weight on the front end with 29er chainstays" it´s the other way around as long CS puts more weight on the front but yes, same CS length for all sizes is not what anyone should call balanced.
  • 3 1
 @Rubber-Buccaneer: No mullet for the 29 version because if you put a 27.5 in the back you are going to put a very low bottom bracket.

In P1 (27.5) you put in front a higer wheel so just not a problem
  • 2 0
 @Mondbiker: You're right!
  • 1 0
 @boarder3: You need to shorten fork more for any 27.5 bike to work as a mullet without seriouusly unbalancing geometry. A 10mm difference won't cut it, it's closer to 30mm. I wouldn't try to mullet this one in the smallest size.
  • 1 0
 @justwan-naride: it’s already been done,
I believe privateer themselves have said it works okay on the p1
www.instagram.com/p/B_NkgNEHYz8/?igshid=1d4omorqvigmm
  • 1 0
 Kind of wish this was available when I was in the market a few months ago. Happy with my Sentinel, but this would have been really nice.
  • 2 1
 Now Ive listened to the PB Podcast on first ride reviews, I dismissed this as nothing more than skids and wheelies in the car park. Waiting for the full review . . .
  • 3 1
 The specs and weight are sooo close to those of an E-bike, it’s just missing a motor.
  • 2 0
 I'm still trying to figure out how the frame got to be near 10lbs. I'm almost impressed!
  • 2 0
 Pre-ordered mine. Waiting until the end of September. Going to get a month off work.
  • 5 5
 Phew what a relief. First video I’ve been able to watch all the way through in a long time. Kazimer should be doing all of them
  • 4 3
 Kaz is great, but would rather watch Chappetta doing anything.
  • 1 0
 Does anyone know about a bike with a 100/10 degree seat angle I had one just before my frame snapped and it felt nice
  • 3 1
 10# frame? Well, I guess it'll be durable Wink
  • 4 0
 Strong, light, cheap. Pick 2.
  • 1 0
 Must be nice getting paid in USD. Everything is still expensive when you make the conversion to CAD.
  • 1 0
 You guys are crazy. I don’t ride a bike unless it has a switch that adjusts the seat angle mid ride.
  • 7 0
 I don't usually ride bikes without dropper posts either.
  • 2 1
 How can you ride it without pedals!?
  • 8 0
 Magnets.
  • 1 0
 The Grim Donut is better!!!
  • 1 0
 Really appreciate this bike, stoked to try it sometime
  • 3 2
 @mikekazimer how much did the custom build with the 38 cost. (USD)
  • 5 4
 9.8 lbs for frame +air shock is a fail.
  • 2 1
 @mikekazimer Please review the actual build that’s for sale!
  • 1 0
 I wonder if you could make this a DH bike.
  • 1 0
 it looks like a production grim donut
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer where did my comment go?
  • 1 0
 Which comment? Some comments are 'below threshold' - check the bottom of the page.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: I'm not keeping up with the new features! Cheers!
  • 2 2
 Too bad that stocks are signed for september
  • 1 2
 For a split second, I thought this was another episode of the new Privateer. Bummer.
  • 3 5
 I'd buy a remedy off the shelf any day before this, proven sled still going strong!!
  • 2 4
 Price must be wrong. It's £1489 on their uk website.
  • 13 0
 Take off the vat and do the conversion again. North American prices don't include tax.
  • 4 0
 @Bob-Agg: yeah completely forgot about that, my mistake. Think I was just shocked at the price.
  • 1 2
 And better looking
  • 2 3
 IT LOOKS.... FUNNY.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



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

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.050858
Mobile Version of Website