Review: 2020 Norco Sight C1 - Bigger, Burlier & Better

Feb 4, 2020 at 19:51
by Mike Kazimer  

Norco shook up their catalog for 2020, and while the model names may be the same, the bikes themselves are significantly different. Take the Sight, for instance. It previously had 130mm of rear travel and fell squarely into the trail category, but the latest version now has 150mm of travel and a 160mm fork up front.

Norco call it an all-mountain bike, a term that I actually like, even though it's fallen out of fashion in favor due to the rise of enduro. Enduro turned into something of a catch-all term for all longer travel bikes, but now we're starting to see a split emerge – on one side you have bikes that fall into that all-rounder category, and on the other you have even longer travel bikes that can still be pedaled to the top but are more focused on the descending side of the equation.
Norco Sight C1 Details

• Wheel size: 29" (27.5" options available)
• Carbon frame, aluminum chainstays
• Travel: 150mm rear / 160mm front
• 64-degree head angle
• 440mm chainstays (size L)
• 12 x 148mm rear axle spacing
• Price as shown: $6,697 USD
• Weight: 32 lb (size large, as shown)
www.norco.com

Carbon or aluminum, 29” or 27.5” wheels – the Sight is offered in multiple configurations, and Norco even has an online Build Your Ride program, where riders can select things like frame color, frame material, and select from a few different suspension and drivetrain packages.

The combo reviewed here goes for $6,697 USD, with spec highlights that include a SRAM X01 12-speed drivetrain, RockShox Lyrik Ultimate fork, Super Deluxe Select + shock, and Code RSC brakes. DT Swiss M1700 aluminum wheels are mounted with a Minion DHF / DHR II EXO+ combo.


bigquotesThe geometry numbers that make the Sight such a comfortable climber work even better on the descents, where the balanced positioning really comes into play. Mike Kazimer

Norco Sight 2020 review




Norco Sight 2020 review

Construction and Features

The new Sight retains the Horst link suspension design and trunnion mounted shock as before, but it has a more refined look, and there have been improvements in a few key areas.

There's internal cable routing, with a port on the underside of the downtube that a zip-tie goes through to cinch everything down. The housing no longer goes under the bottom bracket, eliminating the chance of it getting pinched against a rock or root. A full-size water bottle easily fits inside the front triangle, and there are two bolts under the top tube that can be used to secure a tube or tools. A ribbed chainstay protector helps minimize chainslap, and two rubber pads protect the downtube from flying rocks and shuttle-related scratches.

Norco went with a 34.9mm seat tube diameter, a dimension that's becoming increasingly common as dropper post travel amounts increase and seat tubes shrink, a scenario that means the loads put on posts are larger than ever. On that note, the size medium and large frames come with a 175mm dropper, and the XL gets a post with 200mm of travel.


Norco Sight 2020 review
Norco Sight 2020 review



Norco Sight 2020 review

Geometry & Sizing

The Sight has a 64-degree head angle, and the size large has a 485mm reach and 440mm chainstays. That chainstay length changes depending on the frame size in order to maintain the same balanced ride no matter the size.

The seat tube angle is a relatively steep 77.7 degrees, and it actually gets steeper, rather than slacker as you go up the size range. That way, taller riders don't end up sitting over the rear axle when they have their dropper post fully extended.


Norco Sight 2020 review

Suspension Design

The Sight's overall leverage rate has been increased compared to the previous model, which was done to improve the bike's small bump compliance and grip. The leverage rate goes from 3.2 to 2.6, a change of 18.75%. Norco's goal was to create a smooth ramp-up at the end of the stroke without going overboard on the amount of progression.

The Sight's anti-squat number is 126% off the top, and 110% at sag, numbers that were selected to give the bike a supportive platform while climbing no matter if the rider is seated or standing.


Specifications
Price $6697
Travel 150mm
Rear Shock RockShox Super Deluxe Select+
Fork RockShox Lyrik Ultimate Fork, 160mm
Headset FSA #57 E internal
Cassette SRAM Eagle XG1295 10-50T
Crankarms Truvativ Descendant 7K 32T, 170mm
Chainguide e*thirteen TRS Race, w/Direct Mount Bash
Rear Derailleur SRAM XO1 Eagle
Chain SRAM PC 12
Shifter Pods SRAM X0 Eagle
Handlebar Deity Ridgeline 35, 800mm, 25mm rise
Stem Norco 40mm
Grips Ergon GE10 EVO lock on
Brakes SRAM Code RSC Hydraulic
Wheelset DT Swiss M1700 wheelset
Hubs DT Swiss 350
Tires Maxxis Minion DHF 2.5" EXO+, Maxxis Minion DHR II 2.4" EXO+
Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth Dropper 175mm




Norco Sight 2020 review

Norco Sight 2020 review







Test Bike Setup

Norco's online bike setup guide is about as detailed as it gets – you put in your height and weight, and then select from nine different skill levels ranging from beginner to professional. Be honest when choosing your ability level - you might have dreams of being a pro, but that doesn't mean you necessarily need to same suspension settings as one.

Once all that's done, the suggested settings are spit out, including tire pressure and bar width recommendations. There's even button you can select that changes the setup offset. Basically, some riders have their weight more forward, while others are more centered or slightly rearward, and that means different suspension settings are required.

For me, it turned out that the second offset position worked best. Remember, all of those numbers and click recommendations are meant to be a starting point; they're not written in stone. Experiment, and if you find something that feels better go with that. My final settings were 195 psi in the shock, which equated to a little less than 30% sag, with three volume spacers installed (one more than stock). In the Lyrik Ultimate fork, I ran 80psi with 1.5 tokens.




Me.
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 37
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer

Norco Sight 2020 review


Climbing

The Sight's climbing position is excellent, and it felt just right for my 5'11” height. That 485mm reach number may seem quite long on paper, but don't forget about that 77.7-degree seat tube angle. That creates a modest 621mm top tube length, which meant that I never felt too stretched out while seated. It also creates a very central position over the pedals, and I was able to sit and spin my way up sections that I'd usually stand up to clean. Even on flatter trails or when pedaling out to the trailhead, the positioning was very comfortable.

The 64-degree head tube angle does mean that the front end doesn't feel quite as snappy as something with steeper angles, but for the most part I'm not usually faced with multiple fast uphill corners in a row, and the tradeoff is that the front wheel feels nicely stuck to the ground, without any unwanted lifting when things get steep. There's not much unwanted suspension movement either, with enough anti-squat to keep the shock from sinking too deep into its travel, and even out of the saddle efforts didn't upset the bike's calm pedaling manners.

I did find it kind of funny that the short-travel Optic gets the SuperDeluxe DH shock, which has adjustable low-speed compression and no lockout lever, while this bike has a lockout lever but no way to adjust the low-speed compression. I rarely used the lockout on the Sight, and personally, I would have rather had the ability to adjust the low-speed compression instead. According to Norco, they considered both the Ultimate and Select+ and chose the latter because it best met their damper demands for "square edge tracking and optimized wheel movement," not because it had a lockout lever.



Norco Sight 2020 review


Descending

The geometry numbers that make the Sight a comfortable climber work even better on the descents, where the balanced positioning really comes into play. I didn't need to make any drastic weight shifts to stay in the sweet spot on sustained steep sections, and there was plenty of stability for opening it up on high-speed straightaways.

The overall feel is a little more planted than poppy, but there's enough zip to the Sight's handling that it didn't feel overly lethargic or dull on mellower trails. It's more versatile than the geometry numbers suggest, and while there are better options if all of your trails are on the flatter side of the spectrum, it never felt like it was a struggle to pilot the Sight through tighter, slower speed trails.

It did take a decent amount of experimentation before I settled on a shock setup that I was happy with. At first, I found myself bottoming out a little too often on larger drops with 30% sag, so I increased the air pressure and tried running 25% sag. That was all right, but I was missing the softer feeling off the top, and the bike felt a little rougher on chopped up sections of trail. I ended up adding an additional volume spacer and dropping back down to 27% sag, which did the trick, although I still wouldn't use the term 'bottomless' to describe the Sight's suspension feel.

In chunky terrain, there's plenty of mid-stroke support, but on bigger hits, typically with flatter landings, I'd still feel a 'thwunk' indicating that the end of the travel had been reached. I'm curious if the Fox Float X2, which has a larger bottom out bumper, could be the ticket here.



Norco Sight 2020 review

Norco Optic C2 review Photo by Trevor Lyden

How does it compare?

I've received a number of messages from riders trying to decide which way to go - the shorter travel Optic, or the longer travel Sight. The Sight's extra travel, combined with its slacker head angle and slightly longer chainstays means that it doesn't have the same level of responsiveness when pedaling or in terrain that you really need to pump through compared to the Optic.

The geometry may not be dramatically different, but the Optic does feel more energetic, and if I was heading out for a big, more XC-oriented ride I'd rather be on the Optic. On the flip side, for rougher, steeper trails, the Sight is the way to go - that 160mm Lyrik can plow through obstacles that the 140mm Pike can't, and the longer wheelbase does make it easier to turn off your brain and let go of the brakes.

I've also been spending time on a new Banshee Titan lately, so let's throw that into the mix. The Titan has 155mm of rear travel and a 170mm fork, with a 64.5-degree head angle, a 470mm reach on a size large, and 452mm chainstays. While there are geometry differences in a few key areas, there's only a 3mm difference when it comes to the overall wheelbase. That doesn't mean they handle the same, though.

The Titan feels more like a freeride bike, an aluminum machine that's happiest plowing through obstacles rather than going over them, and it has an impressive ability to soak up hard landings without skipping a beat. It's not the quickest in tighter turns – those long chainstays are noticeable, and the Sight feels more manageable at slower speeds and on less steep terrain.

The Sight’s pedaling position is similar to the Titan’s, and they both pedal decently while seated, but when it comes to standing up and putting the power down, the Sight feels more efficient – the Titan cycles deeper into its travel during those hard efforts.


Norco Sight 2020 review
Norco Sight 2020 review

Technical Report

RockShox Lyrik Ultimate: The Lyrik was simple to set up and worked very well for the duration of the test period. The extra-supple off the top feel came in handy during wet, slimy rides, providing extra grip to keep the front wheel on line.

Ergon SM 10 seat: We don't focus on seats all that often since they're such a personal item, but the Ergon SM 10 deserves a shout out. It's super comfy, even if you're in the no-chamois club, and there aren't any sharp edges to be seen. Good work, Ergon.

SRAM X01 drivetrain: I didn't run into any issues with the X01 drivetrain, but I do think it'd be nice to see a GX option available in Norco's Build Your Ride program; I'd rather spend money on suspension and brakes and save a little on shifting. It's also worth noting that the cranks are aluminum, not carbon - in fact, considering the price, there's surprisingly little carbon to be found on this bike, other than the frame.

Cable rattle: There's a little port in the downtube that lets you zip-tie the housing to the inside of the frame, except that it's still free to rattle around inside near the head tube area. I put a little foam in there to quiet things down, but it'd be better if it was like that out of the box. The same goes for the chainslap protection – the shape of the chainstay protector seems right, but the rubber is a little too soft, and it doesn't deaden the noise as much as it could.


Norco Sight 2020 review

Pros

+ Very versatile – not just focused on the steepest, roughest trails
+ Wide range of spec options allows for customization
+ The geometry – it has that 'just right' feeling that you want while climbing and descending

Cons

- Needs a little extra attention to quiet it down
- It can take time to dial in the rear suspension; hard-chargers might find themselves needing to run less sag than usual to avoid bottoming out.




Pinkbike's Take

bigquotesThe Sight is for the rider that likes more technical trails and doesn't mind pedaling to get to them. That 150mm of travel provides a little more room for error than your typical mid-travel trail bike does, while still remaining manageable on slightly mellower terrain. It's certainly capable of being called into duty as an enduro race bike, but for riders looking for a plush, bottomless trail smasher this might not quite scratch that itch.

For everyone else, the Sight's versatility and wide array of possible configurations make it a strong contender in this travel bracket. 
Mike Kazimer








261 Comments

  • 58 1
 Nice looking bike and good review - thanks @mikekazimer. Wonder how it compares to the Sentinel?
  • 19 1
 livelier, but not twitchy, more fun to jump. not quite as stable in the rough stuff at speed, but has a similar front end traction feel to the sentinel... my experience at least. I thought it was a super fun bike.

edit: the one i rode was dead silent as far as cables and chain noise go, but that all depends on how you manage your cables I'd say
  • 9 29
flag scjeremy (Feb 10, 2020 at 9:08) (Below Threshold)
 Came here to comment, in 27.5” it’s literally a geo copy of the Patrol.
  • 20 2
 @scjeremy: The Patrol's ST angle gets slacker as you go up in size and they have the same CS length across the board. So how is the Sight a geo copy..?
  • 13 1
 @scjeremy: If you *actually* look at the two geo charts side by side the ONLY thing that is the same between the 27.5 Sight and Patrol (size Large) is the BB drop, fork offset, and HT length. The geo numbers are in the same range, but not the same. The head tube angle isn't even the same. The Patrol has a coil shock and the travel isn't even the same. So, uhhh, yeah.
  • 2 1
 @scjeremy: geo is a part of the equation but suspension link design plays a huge role as well.
  • 4 0
 @scjeremy: Geo update, maybe. I'd agree it's in the same spirit as a Patrol though.
  • 5 0
 @scjeremy: The steepening SA and the growing Chainstay length is a big differentiation between the two bikes. I suppose we'll know soon enough if Transition decides to go this route as well.

I think I'm in to try the XL Sight this season, my only complaint is I would have liked to see a longer eye-eye shock.
  • 4 2
 @robnow: Agreed on the shock. One of the issues I'm reading about is it can be a bit hard to really dial in the rear susp. I'm starting to suspect it's because the shock is a little too small for that travel...
  • 7 0
 @mybaben: Took me a bit to dial mine in. Kind of a narrow set of settings that work well where I ride, and it took a minute to find em. Now that I have, the bike is fantastic.
  • 2 0
 @scvkurt03: Very cool! Glad to hear it. I def think it can be done, it's just a little trickier. Also, another option is to simply get another shock! Lots of options out there and of course, one with a climb switch! Sort of bummed Norco didn't spec one. (at least on the C2, which is what i like.)
  • 2 0
 @mybaben: I felt the same way about a climb switch for about 5 rides, but I got over it. It’s pretty efficient seated, and the STA leaves you in the saddle in situations where you might get out of it on another bike.
  • 1 0
 @scvkurt03: Nice! Glad to hear it. Seems like it has a ton of potential! It's in my No.2 spot right now. I'll demo before I buy anything...
  • 13 1
 being a current owner of a 2019 sentinel and a 2020 sight I would say the sight is a little more happy on the climbs and the sentinel is geared a bit more towards the downhills. I think a reasonable analogy would be both are really similar, but the sight's roots are a trail bike that has been beefed up into an enduro bike, compared to the sentinel, which i would say is closer to having the roots of a downhill bike that has been scaled down into an enduro bike.
  • 4 1
 Came to ask exactly the same thing. Seems Norco have done something very similar to the Sentinel which is great as the Sentinel is an awesome bike but I feel like Transition aren’t getting the props they deserve
  • 5 10
flag scjeremy (Feb 10, 2020 at 14:30) (Below Threshold)
 @WheelNut: I’m a medium. I guess copy is not the right word, and judging by my downvotes triggered all the Narco fanboys. But as a recent owner of a Patrol the numbers struck me as quite similar. The Narco is a sick bike and was towards the top of my list.
NS. TP
Reach 455 450
Stack. 594 605
HTA. 63.5 64
Fork os. 37 37
STL. 435 400
STA. 77.3 77.1
BBD. -15 -15
Chst L. 435 430
BB H. 342 340
TTL. 588 583
WB. 1220 1209
SO. 677 685
HT. 110 110
  • 5 5
 @scjeremy: wtf is a Narco, bro?
  • 10 2
 @scvkurt03: I think it’s a tv series about drugs and a miss type of a bike brand......bro.
  • 1 0
 The color also made me think of my Sentinel as they look to have the same "Ron Burgundy" paint scheme going on for them.
  • 4 0
 @scjeremy: The word copy triggered me for sure haha. It's a bit like comparing a Mustang and a Camaro. Very similar, but different.
  • 5 0
 @mybaben: Kazimer adding tokens and running 195+ in the shock at 30% sag makes me wonder how this would work for my fat ass at 200lbs.
  • 1 0
 @codypup: I bet it can be done. You may need a different shock... There are riders your size out there!
  • 2 0
 @codypup: 200lb Sight rider here. Works freakin' awesome.
  • 1 0
 @scvkurt03:
Hmoh...Nice Narco Cuz
  • 1 0
 @beast-from-the-east The XL has very similar geo to my XL Starling Murmur. I would agree with all of Mike's comments on geometry and it being a good all rounder.
  • 34 2
 3 spacers and reduced say to keep it from bottoming out for a 160# rider - I have no doubt you get more sendy than most of us, @mikekazimer, but it might be good to highlight that a bit more so heavy riders considering one of these don't miss it.

The whole issue of how suspension setups work differently at different ends of the rider weight spectrum might deserve a bit more attention - seems like that's a pretty big issue especially for Horst link and Maestro bikes.
  • 21 1
 i really like the fact that Raaw adressed this very issue on their v2 Madonna with two options of rocker links (90kg/>90kg).. damn i want one so bad
  • 10 6
 The super deluxe is a shock with very little bottom out support. If it’s a concern for you then you should run a megneg, or a Fox DPX2 which can be set up so it’s impossible to use full travel, depending on the volume spacer you use
  • 2 0
 100% correct that is the issue i had with my range, i could never get it set up right so i sold it, i had the x2 on that bike, i see people shredding on norco's but reading that comment makes me think it is just how they set up their bikes.
  • 14 6
 It's not about weight unless you're a guy who maxes out the shock pressure just getting reasonable sag. Rider weight is also not relevant to linkage style. What's most relevant here is riding style - not weight. Weight is almost always addressed through air-spring pressure. Nowadays you have all sorts of shock tune options, but if you set the sag properly then the bike is probably riding with the characteristics designed into it. Horses for courses!
  • 5 1
 One thing to note is that the bike reviewed here is spec'd with the 185 x 52.5mm version of the Super Deluxe, while the Fox X2 spec'd Sights have a 185 x 55mm shock. That equates to roughly to 7mm of wheel travel difference between the two stroke lengths. That, along with the changing rear center lengths, will alter the travel AND the bottom-out height of the bike in a fairly noticeable way. This might contribute to the feeling that the bike bottoms out too soon. I think the bike will behave much better with the 55mm stroke shock. I'm building one up right now and I've already fitted a Super Deluxe Ultimate with LSC adjustment and 55mm stroke. I don't anticipate that I'll have the same issues as the shorter stroke bike, but we'll see when I get it finished... Not sure Why Norco did the slipped that little travel change under the radar. Frame clearance doesn't seem to be an issue.
  • 15 1
 @grizzlyatom, you're going to run into a frame clearance issue - the air can on that Super Deluxe will hit the frame at the lower shock mount before full travel is reached if you run it with a 55mm stroke.

The 55mm X2 is spec'd because the bottom out bumper is firm enough that it actually reduces the stroke by 2-3mm at full bottom out.
  • 10 6
 @mikekazimer: I know that is what Norco will tell you. I have no air in the shock and a 260lb friend bouncing on it. There is still more than 2mm of clearance around the shock mount and the the air can. The X2 doesn't have the same issue because it's "upside down" and the end of the stanchion is not near the shock eye as it is on the Deluxe. The Deluxe clearance is definitely tighter than a company would design around, and I'm sure that is the reason Norco made the change, but I feel comfortable doing it. Not speaking for Norco here, just letting it be known that there is a travel difference between shock specs, and that will certainly affect the bottom-out feel.
  • 1 0
 My Bronson V2 came with a float x. Had to pump that sucker up to 325 psi to set the sag, and it rode like crap.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer:

That’s a negative been running that shock in that stroke for 2 years without issue, I don’t imagine it would be any issue on the new frame either.

Good choice on your setup Griz, you’re gonna like it, the extra dampening of the super deluxe is awesome.
  • 4 0
 @Maverick18T, wait, you've had the 2020 Sight for two years? The stroke of the shock isn't the issue - there are plenty of bikes out there designed for that exact shock size, but if you put a 210 x 55mm Super Deluxe on the 2020 Sight there's a good chance that the air can will hit the frame itself before bottom out.

There's less clearance at the lower shock mount on the new frame (www.pinkbike.com/photo/17918619) compared to the old one (www.pinkbike.com/photo/14581303).
  • 1 0
 @grizzlyatom: Let us know when your Sight's downtube grows a crunchy soft spot, and you try to claim "warranty".
  • 2 2
 @PinkyScar: Haha, not worried about the downtube at all. I don't think I'll have to warranty anything. The bike is well built, there is no frame contact with any part of the shock, and I'm running the shock length/stroke that the frame was designed for (as seen on the bikes with the X2). I think the 52.5mm stroke was simply a bandaid to fix a small clearance issue (www.pinkbike.com/photo/18274429) with the Super Deluxe that Norco didn't see until it was too late. I can't blame them for erring on the safe side, but I'm not going to buy a 150mm travel bike to only be able to use ≈ 140mm of it and not get the full progressivity designed into the linkage. Anyone who wants to avoid the issue altogether can just buy an X2 model.

Ultimately, I just wanted to note that the bike will feel "different" with a stroke that's shorter than intended. The only reviews I've seen that mention difficulty setting up the rear suspension have been on board the short-stroked Super Deluxe.
  • 1 1
 @grizzlyatom: Setting up mine with the X2 as well. How do you like yours?
  • 38 4
 So, 32 pound GX spec'd bikes with aluminum chainstays cost $6,700 now? This industry is toast.
  • 8 2
 The C2 with SLX groupset at $5.1k seems like the one to get.
  • 3 6
 @jwrendenver The E bike segment is alive and thriving!
  • 36 3
 @roma258:
You’re statement alone says so much about the industry right now... we’re happy with SLX on a $5k+ bike lol full XT groups were on $3,500 bikes not too long ago
  • 9 9
 @joalst:
a.) Inflation is a thing.
b.) The aluminum A2, with a mix of GX/NX and same suspension as C2 is $3,599. Go knock yourself out!

Top-line, newly re-designed carbon bikes are expensive. You want one at a discount, buy used or last year's model. It's pretty straightforward.
  • 13 1
 @joalst: $3500 for a carbon XT build? That was never.
  • 8 0
 @scvkurt03:
You’re right lol wasn’t thinking. I guess it’s just crazy to think that slx at 5k is the new norm.
  • 13 0
 @roma258:
You’re right. That seems like a solid deal.
But don’t you think it’s a little strange that SLX is now acceptable on a $5k bike? Inflation doesn’t move that fast lol
  • 2 0
 @joalst: It's really not mate. It's just the new norm if you want a rad build kit. If you're cool with a more intermediate kit or cool with alloy, you can totally get into a nice bike between $3K-4K.
  • 5 0
 @roma258: The C2 has a Performance Elite fork with a GRIP2 damper while the A2 has a Rhythm fork.
  • 2 13
flag benmoosmann (Feb 10, 2020 at 15:40) (Below Threshold)
 Also its a Norco. A company famous for their bad quality control...
  • 5 0
 @joalst: Then again, SLX has gotten so damn good, it's really hard justifying the step up to XT, much less XTR. If you think through where your build kit dollars make a real performance or longevity/reliability difference - well, you've got suspension, brakes, hubs, rims, dropper before you really get to drivetrain. I've been thinking through what I want to do for my next bike and will probably build from a frame because I don't like the everything SRAM specs and will-soon-fold wheels and will-very-soon-crap-out rear hubs (I'm a heavy guy...) that most mid-level builds come with. In thinking that through, I keep coming back to SLX drivetrain and SLX 4-piston brakes, Hope hubs with a nice beefy rim (like a Spank), and a Marzocchi Z1 for beefiness (but without all the knobs to fiddle with). Probably spend about the same as what I'd do with the stock builds and the first year of replacements, but without the annoyance of brakes that require DOT fluid and don't have enough power, creaky pinned cassettes, wheels that die too soon, etc.
  • 2 0
 @joalst: Aren't most entry level carbon builds SRAM NX? I'd rather have SLX, and maybe pay a little more.
  • 2 0
 @roma258: Oh definitely. I’m not saying SLX is bad at all. I can’t stand NX. It shifts well for a month or so then loses its feel. I’m sure switching to an X01 shifter with an NX drivetrain would be a good compromise.
  • 3 0
 @roma258: I think the root of the problem I see is that SRAM has had a monopoly for the last 5 years on stock builds. NX performance doesn’t match its asking price
  • 5 0
 Not sure where you're getting this. Reviewed bike is full XO with the exception of cranks which may be alu for the sake of alu. Current pricing on Norco's website is $5K for a mostly XT build (SLX cassette) with Fox suspension which seems more than reasonable.
  • 1 0
 Should also note that I’m on a size large frame, might be a problem on smaller frames.
  • 28 2
 Tall riders rejoice! ( I'm not tall)

All you whiners better put your money where your mouth is. Longer CS and steeper STA as you go up in size. Perfect combo.
  • 6 1
 Agree, nice geo numbers for tall riders, similar to what Pole did a few years ago.
  • 5 2
 @rossluzz: Norco have been doing this since at least 2015!
  • 13 0
 I bought an XL and have to say it's the best fitting bike I've ever ridden. Climbing and descending, it just fits!
  • 6 7
 Not at all. Top tube of only 621mm in large and 649mm in extra large. Bikes has settled on 640ish in size large. I’m not quite 6’4” and I need 645mm at a minimum with a 50mm stem and 800mm bars. Companies are so scared of a 500+mm reach on a large that they would rather make an undersized bike.
  • 1 1
 @DHhack: If you look at the size chart for the Sight it only goes up to 6'3", at just under 6'4" the XL is borderline too small for you still. Maybe they'll make an XXL one day?
  • 4 1
 The stack is too low - pass.
  • 1 0
 @GeorgeHayduke:
Yep, so close but still not perfect. I definitely commend them for what they've done but one needs spacers and higher rise bars to get Norco bikes to fit in my case at least.
  • 7 1
 as a 6'4 guy who's ridden this sight and the optic, i thoroughly disagree. give me the shortest chainstay length possibly and the longest front end possible. 425-435 rear with a 500-525 front is my jam. but maybe you like blueberry, that's pretty cool too if that's your thing
  • 2 0
 @5afety3rd:
It's the choice which I find valuable. There's always going to be differing tastes so it's great the long and short CS crew get to decide rather than all bikes must be one or the other. :^)

Previously it felt like a race for the shortest rear across most bikes.
  • 1 0
 @The-Reverend: choice is great yea. i agree the long rear is more stable at speed, and if was still racing, i'd be after that. it's seemingly more difficult every year to find XL bikes with a short rear ends or non 29er. It's unfortunate the 27.5 version of the Sight has the same chainstay length as the 29 or it might be perfect. i need to experiment with putting the rear end of a medium on the XL, assuming pivots are in the same locations
  • 1 0
 @The-Reverend: also, these come out of the box with a high rise deity bar and plenty of spacers.
  • 6 0
 @5afety3rd: If you like a long reach and short chainstays, Kona has you covered on that front. 425mm chainstay with a 510mm reach for both the 29er and 27.5 Process 153. Similar story on the 134 if you're more after a trail bike. Choice is indeed great - the longer chainstay on the Norcos in bigger sizes make folks looking for that sort of thing very happy. I've been riding a Process 111 for a while and would hate to give up the short rear end because it's just so much damn fun, but yeah, if I were racing, that wouldn't do the job so well.
  • 1 2
 @5afety3rd: a high rise bar and a fist full of spacers is a bad fix for trying to make XL bikes work for L people looking for longer reach.
  • 2 1
 If yall want extreme geometry, go with a Pole or Geometron. For most bikes and riders, the Norco reach sizes are not too short. At the end of the day, tall riders ride on the same trails as shorter ones, so a dramatically longer wheelbase is going to handle too differently across sizes if you get limo lengths on the largest sizes. Thats why in the past most brands had stupid long stems and slacker STA in the larger sizes- to try and keep the wheelbase consistent across all sizes. While that isn't as important as we thought in the past, it still matters somewhat.

This bike is billed as an All-Mountain bike, not an Enduro race bike. A super long wheelbase is much more specialized to one type of riding, pure straight line speed, and not for varied trails/terrain.
  • 2 1
 @hamncheez: I was talking about ETT. Their XL is essentially a L. ETT is even more important on a do all the things mountain bike, if you’re riding a cramped bike that only feels good while descending...
  • 1 1
 @GeorgeHayduke: a high rise bar and no spacers is good though
  • 1 0
 @g-42: you get it. Cheers! FWIW I test a lot of bikes (industry gig) I hate the process bikes though. Too harsh riding and suspension isn’t active enough for me, a different carbon layup and kinematics would go a long way. Cornering beasts though. The 111 was great aside from the shock size limitations. 3000+ ft descents really got that damper hot and inconsistent. I’ll likely end up on the new Warden.
  • 2 0
 @DHhack: ETT isn’t nearly as important as you think. It matters to a degree of roominess on a long travel climb, it’s a hinderence in tech climbs though. Stack/reach ratio preference is the ticket to go by.
  • 1 1
 @hamncheez: my hard tail has a 52” wheelbase. It easily has a 0” wheelbase when I manual around corners though
  • 1 1
 @5afety3rd: if you’ve got short legs that don’t hit the bars on those tech climbs, sure.
  • 3 2
 @DHhack: if your femurs are more than 27" you got bigger problems
  • 3 1
 @5afety3rd: my bars turn? Some power moves require moving up and forward? Sometimes all three at once?
  • 1 1
 Tuck no handers is my only scenario
  • 24 0
 @mikekazimer

Any chance for a comparison to the Raaw Madonna v2, since we know you have one in the stable atm? The geo numbers seem quite similar on paper. And I’d love to hear how they compare.

Maybe even a future article on the Raaw, titan, and privateer 161? All of those are super enticing frames, but will be hard for most of us to demo because they are smaller manufacturers. The Sight “seems” like about their equivalent, and something most people could find to demo, which is why I bring it up.

I am really glad you compared it to the optic and the titan though, both were useful comparisons.

Thanks for all the hard work!
  • 19 0
 Nice review. Looks like a solid bike.

Pet peeve alert: Bike manufacturers, stop putting a minus sign in front of the bottom bracket drop figure! It's wrong. A bottom bracket *drop* of -25 implies that the bottom bracket is 25 mm *above* the axle line (which of course it isn't). By calling it "drop" you've already communicated the correct direction (BB below axle); don't mess it up by adding the minus sign.
  • 16 2
 Wow, that is quite the pet peeve.
  • 1 1
 @scvkurt03: It's possible I have many pets. :-D
  • 16 1
 "which is partially due to the saddle's positioning over the shock. Because my weight was more or less above, rather than behind the shock, there was less leverage available to make it bob up and down."

The location of the shock relative to the saddle has NOTHING to do with bob or "leverage". The saddle position relative to the suspension as a system has impact. If they changed the rocker and moved the shock mounting points forward so the shock is further forward relative to the saddle, that alone isn't going to change a thing with bob. It is possible that moving the shock means they wouldn't be able to achieve the same kinematics, but that's completely different that the shock's position relative to the saddle.
  • 4 3
 Was gonna write the same. Read those two lines. Then re-read them to make sure. They make zero sense. Mike: where the shock is placed literally only effects bottle placement (significantly), aesthetics, and (very slightly) center of gravity. Nothing to do with pedaling behavior AT ALL.
  • 1 0
 More puzzling is @mikekazimer stating there is no bobbing, while some other reviewers saying the opposite. Mike?
  • 2 0
 What about Bob? It seems like a saddle's position relative to the *main pivot* has an impact on the suspension system's seated pedaling characteristics and the general design overall. Having that main-pivot below the rider will probably result in a nicer design because you need less anti-bob/squat to support the rider's bobbing. If they were behind the pivot they would weight the rear suspension more. The effect is probably small on the Sight, but to illustrate my point - Think about a bike that has a real slack sta with main pivot ahead of the saddle. It'll be prone to bob and still have nasty pedal kickback. Reminds me of the first Heckler. The STA might also come into play here because it'll put the rider closer to the BB (where main pivots like to end up)? Anyhow... I am just speculating here.
  • 2 0
 @just6979, sorry, I should have explained that more thoroughly. The point I was trying to make was that the rider's weight is fairly centered over the bottom bracket / main pivot, and that, combined with this particular Horst Link suspension layout, creates a bike without a ton of suspension movement during seated pedaling.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: Makes a bit more sense.

Still, rider's position fore and aft isn't really going to change the bob factor much. If it's further aft, it's just going to need more pressure to get the same sag, and less pressure for a forward bias.

Anti-squat counters the acceleration-driven rearward weight shift, but if the weight is already rearward, it's just going to counter a _further_ rearward shift due to acceleration, it's not going to counter that shift more or less.
  • 17 1
 Similar travel and geometry to the Range. No updates to the Range in the past few years. Think we can expect a new, bigger Range coming soon... Perhaps a HSP version?
  • 3 0
 that's what the rumor is... I bet we will see it get launched at Whistler Crankworx
  • 2 0
 HSP Range would be the shuttle day/park bike killer. If you're not racing DH that'd be the bike to get hands down.
  • 2 0
 @jaydawg69: That seems late. Maybe Sea Otter?
  • 4 0
 @cole-inman: HSP bikes are fine for pedaling. Look at the reviews for the Forbidden Druid. Curious to see how the long wb with more travel will be with cornering. It would be nice to see timing on dh trails compared to a conventional bike
  • 2 0
 @cole-inman: already sold my dh bike, if the new Range is a HSP single crown slack sled, I’m in!
  • 1 0
 @jaydawg69: Sounds like there is issues with the tight, technical climbing as to be expected with this sled.
  • 2 2
 @ridayobike: could care less about technical climbing... it's all about how it goes dh.
  • 2 2
 @jaydawg69: So your pretty much admitting there is an issue with climbing performance... but deflected to DH use. Thanks for solidifying my point.
  • 1 5
flag benmoosmann (Feb 10, 2020 at 15:41) (Below Threshold)
 Yeah, seems like Norco these days makes exactly one bike and just rescales it and gives it differently sized suspension each time.
  • 2 0
 @ridayobike: never ridden the bike or know if it actually exists so I can't comment specifically on the bike. Refer to Forbidden Druid for climbing performance.
  • 2 0
 check gasserdiaries on yt... one of them appears to be riding a high pivot norco with a single crown fork.....
  • 2 0
 @Civicowner: www.pinkbike.com/photo/18269504 it has Commencal stickers on the bike and looks like the Supreme a little bit?
  • 1 0
 @jaydawg69: dammit, now i look like an idiot.... its a commencal.... but has a single crown and a high pivot
  • 10 1
 Someone should tell Mike he's wearing the wrong stuff, if you wear enduro goggles and enduro pants on an all-mountain bike, your wheels turn into triangles and your fork catches on fire. Dont worry, I got it. You're wearing the wrong stuff, Mike. Get your fire extinguisher ready.
  • 11 1
 when will we get the Titan review?
  • 9 1
 Got a C2 29", first ride today! Replaced a Sentinel. Should be a fun Ahab shake down ride.
  • 6 0
 Would be curious to hear your thoughts on how it compares to the Sentinel once you've spent some time on it....
  • 8 0
 @Mikekazimer you should do a review on the MegNeg with the sight. I’m thinking of getting one for my sight.
  • 10 5
 "That 485mm reach number may seem quite long on paper, but don't forget about that 77.7-degree seat tube angle."

Why is reach frequently discussed involving the seat tube angle? Isn't the whole point of the reach measurement to delineate how a bike would feel when you are standing, also commonly known as the position where you are NOT SEATED?
  • 11 0
 I think its linked because if you had an extremely long reach and slack seat tube angle the seated riding position would be bad. You would be bent really far over and probably feel stretched out.
  • 5 3
 Reach is unfortunately becoming a fairly bad measure of what a bike feels like. You have to talk about them together because the ESTA has a massive impact on how the same reach number will feel. Seems dumb, and it is.
  • 9 0
 Bikes are not just ridden from the standing position. They have to be ridden seated too. So where the seat is in relation to the handlebars is necessary information. Reach is a poor tool for determining bike fit BY ITSELF. That's the reason a Geo chart has a whole bunch of numbers.
  • 2 2
 Isn't that what "top tube length" measures?

Just trying to make a point that reach should not be discussed together with seat tube angle. They measure two independent things and do not belong in the same equation.
  • 6 0
 The point I was making is that while the reach may seem long, when you're sitting and pedaling the bike doesn't feel like a big lumbering beast, and that's due to the steep seat angle and the resulting shorter top tube length.

This article goes into it a little more: www.pinkbike.com/u/mikekazimer/blog/opinion-why-is-everyone-talking-about-seat-tube-angles.html
  • 1 2
 @mikekazimer: Thanks for responding Mike. I appreciate the link to expound your statement.

I think that when terms get mixed up in sentences together, those who are still learning the ropes and unattenuated to the nuances can be further confused in this world where myths as speculation are abound. Everyone thinks of themselves as a discerning consumer; whether that is true or not. Let’s bolster them with accurate information.
  • 8 0
 the yellow one is super nice.
  • 4 0
 We are putting megneg air cans on the super deluxe on these for our race team. Also we upgraded the shock to and super deluxe ultimate to get the low speed adjuster in open - You can do this through a dealer for a minimal upcharge when doing the custom bike build Norco offers. I got mine a few months back and noticed I was bottoming out with 3 tokens at 28% sag (I weigh 175 lbs ) - Not a harsh bottom out but I'm using all my travel on even fairly chill trails. You can use a gnar dog token to get up to 4.5 tokens worth in the shock but they don't seem to be available anymore...
  • 2 0
 So you've upgraded to Super Deluxe Ultimate with a Megneg? With how many tokens? What differences have you noticed?
  • 3 0
 @razzle: We don't have the megnegs yet but if you compare the progression curves it should provide more mid stroke support and end stroke progression - It's also just more tuneable. You can also experiment with the compression tune if need be... Best to first find out if you need to adjust the progression or the amount of compression damping. It's always best to ride the bike for a while and get confident and comfortable on the stock(ish) setup before making any of these more drastic changes.
  • 1 0
 I'm very curious why Norco isn't speccing exactly that configuration on the stock bikes. The price difference can't be relevant at the pricepoints these bikes are at. The only simple explanation i can think of is a product management mistake. Maybe the PMs don't understanding suspension well enough to buy the right shock, or there wasn't enough communication between PM and Engineering.
  • 1 0
 @CurtisLeblanc:

I don't seem to be bottoming out my shock. I was just curious.
  • 1 0
 @Ttimer: I think the stock setup will work fine for most people including myself. I think the upgraded shock and megneg will be a easy upgrade for the people out there really pushing the limits racing this bike.
  • 7 4
 Was looking forward to building up an aluminum frame but they went and cancelled the option! Gone ripmo af instead, looking fwd to it but was looking fwd to riding a canadian frame again. Made the humming and hawing easier i suppose!
  • 24 7
 You mean a Canadian frame produced in Taiwan? What difference does it make who chooses the geo, built kit and paint scheme, they are all coming from the same factory.
  • 4 21
flag DirtMcGuirk07 (Feb 10, 2020 at 7:31) (Below Threshold)
 Humming and hawing lol..If ur gonna use Merica slang, get it right lol. It's hamming and hawing lol geez lol
  • 23 1
 @DirtMcGuirk07: If you are gonna comment on Canadian slang, get it right. Geez. Its clearly 'humming and hawing'. Er'body knows that! Smile
  • 3 0
 You mean the bare frame option? You can still "build" an alloy with their custom build tool.

Which shock did you go with on the AF?

I'm split between the two as well for my next bike. I'm disappointed Norco doesn't have a dvo build option like they did on the 2019 (of course no alloy option last year for custom).
  • 17 2
 @PHeller: The difference is that Norco still employs a whackload of Canadians.
  • 4 2
 @j-t-g: You're totally right. I just find it funny that some people will be like "argh I can't afford carbon but I want to support my local bike company but argh that extra couple of weeks of savings just isn't worth it to keep my fellow countrymen employed!" I ride a Guerrilla Gravity (manufactured in Colorado) and it's amazing the excuses people (who normally all vegetarian, shop local, reduce emissions, etc) will make for not supporting the local company.

Also Norco has the 2020 Sight A1 in aluminum with a top-end build kit for $4600 or the C3 for $300 less. Hype can be a determining factor in what guides purchases and the Ripmo AF had/has a ton of hype surrounding it.
  • 6 0
 @PHeller: All this commenting sounds like sour grapes. It's not too late to buy a Sight. :-)
  • 15 0
 @DirtMcGuirk07: Actually the expression is "hemming and hawing"
  • 4 2
 I loved my Norco Sight back when it was a “trail bike”. I will say that I like the DW link Ripmo AF even better. Pedals a bit crisper and it’s more progressive than the Carbon Ripmo. The Ibis crew is just over the hill from me an they are pretty cool guys and gals!
  • 7 0
 @PHeller: I tried to buy from my local company by getting my petrol from the local oil well, batteries from the local lithium mine, mangos from the local plantation and medicine from the local Big Pharma. But then I realised that was f**king stupid because I live in Wales and most of the cool modern stuff I like is predicated on not needing to source it locally. I mean does Guerilla Gravity source their epoxy resin from the local er... epoxy resin trees, and their carbon yarn from the local er... carbon sheep? Or do they just buy it from elsewhere because it's easier...
  • 2 1
 @Yetimike2019: I see the Carbon RipmoAF should be out very soon.
  • 4 2
 If you are looking for an aluminum frame from a Canadian company, you should check out Knolly. Their bikes are very well designed/manufactured and they flat out rip.
  • 1 0
 @preston67: no bro it's homming and howing
  • 9 1
 Bikes are rad
  • 11 8
 I'm a Norco fan (still own a '17 Sight), but they need to step up their game when it comes to details. This bike is $6700 US and it still rattles? Come on Norco. When you were a value oriented brand, some of these things were acceptable. However, now you are in the big leagues, asking big $. My new bike (another brand) is all but silent. ZERO cable rattle and chain slap. I chose to replace my Sight with a different brand because of the details. With a little fine tuning from Norco, its not hard to see this would be a world class bike.
  • 21 1
 They are still a value oriented brand. Look at the lower ends of their range. The fluid fucking slaps for the money and the opening price point optic, sights, and ranges are great. They also sell bikes at the higher end too. If everything else about the bike is fantastic, chain slap and cable rattle are pretty damn minor things. They both can be solved with a good bike shop. You can't fix things like shitty suspension designs, poor geometry, fit, etc.
  • 8 3
 @j-t-g: Nope. They offer a full range, I grant you. You're letting them off the hook easy if you are ok with fixing things immediately after spending $9000 CAD!
If your new Tesla needed some rattles fixed after purchase, would you be impressed? Not me. Cheers.
  • 6 3
 @j-t-g: The opening price points on all Norcos kind of suck compared to some other good deals, lately. Sight A3 vs Ripmo AF is an absolute no-contest in the Ripmo's favou, for example.
  • 8 2
 @jayacheess: Does it "no contest" suck compared to the Ripmo AF? The norco has better brakes, but worse suspension (from a feel standpoint) ... but it's cheaper, and I've seen a very, very high warranty rate with DVO in recent years relative to rockshox's area. It seems like it's subjective rather than a "no contest".
  • 10 0
 @CircusMaximus: this is a funny comment because Tesla’s are notorious for poor QC and long lead time for repair parts even on brand new cars. Tesla owners still praise them
  • 4 2
 @jj12jj: Fair comment. But yah, I wouldn't be buying a Tesla, either. Smile
  • 2 1
 @j-t-g: Well subjectively, I'd rather a bike come with better suspension. Brakes are a much cheaper swap-out. And that's the Ripmo at *600 dollars* less. Like, come on. I really don't think there's any contest.

About the warranty numbers - where are you getting those? I've only got anecdotes from a few friends on DVO, but they're overwhelmingly positive.
  • 6 1
 Its anecdotal from making the return authorizations.
  • 1 2
 @j-t-g: So don't buy used.
  • 10 2
 I just built this bike frame up, has no rattles so far. Shimano drivetrain. Also, it came with Float X2 shock, considerable upgrade. Really stoked on the ride! 6’2”, XL frame 27.5 wheels, feels like the first bike in 25 years that actually fits me.
  • 2 0
 @jayacheess: hahaha sorry for the misundrstanding. I'm filling in return authorizations to get warranty work for people who bought the bikes Smile
  • 1 0
 @j-t-g: Preach! Nailed it!
  • 4 1
 They don't rattle. Kazimer had extra cable inside without knowing it. I have an optic and my closest ride buddy has the sight. Neither bike rattles.
  • 1 0
 @j-t-g: Oh no, I just meant, I shouldn't buy used DVO. ;D
  • 1 1
 They're still value oriented the way I see it...$3000 frame only vs. $4000+ for the competitors, and I've only had a quick look at the parts specs but I still see about a $2000 price difference.
  • 1 0
 @robnow: compared to what?
  • 2 2
 @CircusMaximus: ??? Everybody. Sentinel=$4200, Hightower=$4500, RipmoC=~$4000, SB150=$4500

Correction: Sight=~$3400 (yes it comes with alloy chain stays, I thought it was priced closer to $3000 earlier)
  • 1 0
 @robnow: uh-huh. So you picked 3 boutique companies to compare too? Factor in the alloy stays and I just don’t see Norco as a value leader any longer. Not dissing the brand guys - I like Norco. But it is what it is.
  • 4 0
 @CircusMaximus: Even a Kona Process (with alloy chain stays) showing zero geo progression is marked at $3500. Who else do you want to compare to?

And again, I'm seeing larger price differentials on fully built bikes.
  • 1 2
 @robnow: kinda proved my point. So now are you saying Kona is a value brand???
  • 5 0
 @CircusMaximus: Why is the aluminum stay eliminating value from the bike - Is it a parking-lot thing or performance?
  • 1 3
 @jcklondon: cuz its cheaper?
  • 1 1
 @TheBearDen: He did? Kaz care to comment?
  • 1 1
 Sentinel is under 3899cad at Canadian dealers, a sb150 is almost 5k cad. Sight is listed at 3700 for frame set on the website. @robnow:
  • 2 0
 @ukr77: Sight at $3700 with X2...so ~$3400 with SuperD as I said, apples to apples. Sentinel regular price $4200, on sale $3900. So whats your point?
  • 2 0
 Edit: Sentinel on sale $3360 but regular $4200 still stands.
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer

As this bike seems (at least on paper) to be replacing the 2018-current Norco Range, I was wondering if you'd be able to comment on how those bikes compare. Would a person who is currently happy with the Range be just as pleased with the new Sight? Or would they be better off waiting until the 'ext3me fr33r1de' new Range model is launched.

Thanks!
  • 9 0
 Ex 2018 Range owner here who's now on a 2020 Sight: I'm definitely happier with this new Sight. It climbs noticeably more efficiently, feels more balanced front to rear on the descents and is more willing to "play around" on the trail. There is no substitute for absolute quantity of travel in certain situations (depending on where you ride), but it excels just about everywhere else!
  • 3 0
 @dastone: Thanks!
  • 1 0
 @dastone: 27,5" or 29? Thank you
  • 3 0
 @cekoss: 27.5" medium for both!
  • 1 0
 @dastone: *shakes head in disappointment*
  • 2 0
 @dastone: cheers man im on 27,5 M, C2 now and i guess you've just told me everything i needed to know. Thanks again
  • 8 1
 @mikekazimer when are we getting the review of the Titan????
  • 3 0
 This and the Nukeproof Mega 290 Elite were on my shortlist. Almost got the Sight but the Mega was a better deal - $3700 for carbon and good components on the Mega (full SLX) vs. $3600 for alu and similar suspension but inferior drivetrain (mostly NX) on the Sight. Very similar geo.
  • 1 0
 Good call mate. The reviews, media and consumer, are consistently stellar on both size Megas. I'm 90% ready to order one too...
  • 2 0
 I’m there with you. All the talk about shock tuning and spacers has me worried with the sight. I weigh 215.

Just wish I could demo the mega... and I wish it would fit a water bottle. Small gripe though.
  • 1 0
 @ThSlug: My mate got to demo one and thought it was amazing. I'm willing to take the gamble... I don't race, so the water bottle is not an issue for me. I'm always on trail for 2-3 hours, with no going back to the car...one little bottle isn't going to get me through a ride, so I always have to carry...
  • 4 1
 Great review on the NORCO SIGHT Mike....It’s a NORCO we’re reviewing.. not comparing... people rant on and on about other bikes on these reviews... if you don’t believe the the review... find a demo and try out a NORCO SIGHT for yourself..C’MON MAN ..????
  • 3 1
 You're gonna need to start adding the "size large, as shown" note on chainstay lengths in Details sidebar, because everyone should be doing size specific chainstays!

I'm lucky that at 5'10" I usually fit a medium or large, so chainstays and front center are usually well balanced for myself and other average build males. But it's pretty stupid that short folks get the balance shifted forward automatically because chainstays stay long while the front center gets shorts on smaller frames, and that tall folks automatically get sent to the back seat because XL and bigger frames have much longer front centers on the same relatively stubby chainstays.

Look at how many short guys felt more comfortable on 27.5 or mullet bikes (shorter chainstays) vs full 29ers (longer chainstays AND butt buzz), and how many tall guys are starting to extend chainstays (Minnaar's custom dropout extensions, for example) now that the front centers on XL and XXL frames are nice and long.
  • 3 1
 Also the placement of the rear shock relative to the saddle has absolutely no impact at all on pedal bob or the leverage ratio. The seating position, or better the position of the center weight of your body, has an impact on the suspension as a closed system, but if they kept the kinematics the same and just moved the shock around without changing the seating position relative to the kinematics, literally nothing at all would change.
Therefor saying that the bike doesn't have a lot of pedal bounce just because you're sitting above the rear shock is wrong. It has not that much pedal bob simply because the rear kinematic has a low leverage ratio around the sag point (aka it has a high anti-squat value in the mid of the stroke).
  • 5 1
 Norco is on a roll! I just hope our local distributor brings in 2020 Optics.
  • 1 1
 Loved the Optic, can hardly wait to try a Sight!
  • 4 1
 Interesting to see their sizing recommendations. At 5'9", I've never seen a company squarely suggest a Large for me, especially one with a 485mm reach.
  • 3 1
 Yeah, I'm 5'10" and my ideal real is right around 455, I think. 485 MM seems bonkers!
  • 8 4
 Focus on ETT.

My current bike I bought based on Reach, but lost 20mm of ETT from my last bike. I still sorta regret it. I can adapt to the new bike, but sometimes I wish I could have that longer ETT back to run a shorter stem and have more adjustment in the saddle fore/aft.
  • 2 0
 I'm 5'8" and Medium feels bang on. I would highly recommend you test one beforehand, as I definitely felt like a Large would have been too big for me.
  • 3 0
 Size L fits me (5'9" / 180cm) very well!
  • 1 1
 @PHeller: AGREE! ETT is the KEY! I'm 5'-11" (180cm) and I rode a size L for years across several brands. Now I ride size XL on most brands to get the same ETT. Slack heads & steep seats changed everything.
  • 4 0
 @mrti: 180cm is closer to 5'11", so it makes sense that you'd feel more comfortable on a Large. Also a lot depends on your limbs obviously, I have relatively short inseam and torso (all neck, ffs) for my height.
  • 2 0
 I'm nearly 6' and got an XL and it feels great tbh (I'm at the very bottom of the height range for that size). There are a lot of things that affect sizing, including suspension setup. If the front end is dive-y and doesn't support you, you'll tend to ride with a rear bias making the bike feel longer than it potentially looks on paper. If the front end supports you, you can get over the front wheel/bars more and then it doesn't feel as long as you're not hanging off the back all the time.
  • 2 0
 Though the reach seems long the effective top tube isn't because of things like the seat-tube angle and frame stack. Judging a bike on a single geometry number dimension isn't the best (IMO). Consider that seat-tube height can be an issue if you buy a size down or up depending on one's inseam. Stem length, bar width... Lots to consider, including the fact you have to get used to something. The safest way to get a sense of fit is to sit on one...
  • 4 0
 @jcklondon: Even with a tiny effective top tube, reach can still be too long. ETT pretty much only effects seated climbing, and in general shorter is better (to a point, don't want to feel cramped in the cockpit). Reach really only effects standing up, ie: descending.

Kaz saying "the 485 reach seems long, but the steep seat tube keeps the ETT short" is only half the story. Sure, the relatively short ETT means seated climbing will be fine, but a monster reach (and the long front center that comes with it) can cause issues in weighting the front wheel when standing, regardless of what the ETT is.
  • 3 1
 I've gone from 405 to 425 to 455 over the past couple years, and 455 (and a 50mm stem) is a great number for 5'10" rider on a fun bike. Enough room to move and still be "in the bike" enables easy weight transfer to maximize traction levels fore and aft, but not so much that I have to work to maintain enough traction on either end.

I'd only get 485 reach on a race bike. And I'd still have to get my shoulders/arms wicked strong to maintain the forward weight shift I'd need to keep weight on the front wheel when ripping fun flat corners on loose shit. Finding the edge of that "in the bike" pocket takes more effort with a huge reach. Or I'd have to get a tiny stem and end up with crazy fast steering that nukes a bunch of the stability that comes from being long, low, and slack.



Kind of the opposite of the too small reach: no room to move "in the bike" means the weight transfer is exaggerated and you get outside the comfort zone much faster. Leads to riding off the back seat when descending and getting all scrunched up over the bar when pounding tech climbs.
  • 2 0
 @PHeller: Focus on both. ETT only effects sitting, reach only effects standing. My last two bikes I tried to maintain ETT but added a bunch of reach. ETT did end up a bit longer each time, but with stems shrinking by about the same length each time, saddle to bars stayed within a few mm, so sitting and pedaling feels about the same. But with the longer reach comes a larger "comfort zone" where you can shift you weight around to maximize traction in dynamic situations. All the while staying further away from the "death zone" of potentially endoing on a gnarly descent, or getting front wheel lift on a punchy tech climb. Of course, too big of a comfort zone means you might not be able to get the maximum traction, especially from the front wheel, without a fairly large effort of weight shift.
  • 2 0
 @just6979: Ya, my point wasn't that this reach is correct for him, only that folks shouldn't look at the reach and then freak out. Get on the bike and try it out. And yeah... Without being personal, people who're on the upper limit of a size recommendation (like yourself i assume), but with short arms or legs for their height should probably downsize... and vice-versa? Honestly everybody could stand to have their own custom frame in that regard. While I agree about weight transfer, there are other measurements like headtube angle and trail that can will alter the steering. I still don't fully understand it all myself, so probably the best way is to get on a bike and try it out.
  • 1 0
 @jcklondon: Not 100% sure what you mean by "upper limit of a size recommendation"... Specialized lists 5'5" to 5'10" for medium Stumpy 27 and 5'10" to 6'1" for large Stumpy 27 (interesting there is a larger spread on the medium than any other size). So I'm at the bottom of the large range and the top of the medium range.

I'm at the bottom of the Large range, and I went with that mainly because the reach is just what I wanted, and as a bonus the seat-tube is short enough and deep enough that I can fit a 170mm PNW dropper. With ~30% sag, I can sit on the saddle at full drop and have both feet flat on the ground! Though I'm maybe a tiny bit longer in the legs than arms than average.

On the medium, where I'm at the top of the chart, the reach would be a little short for my liking. I would probably only run it in the high setting and maybe even install a slightly longer stem, both to open up the cockpit a bit. But I could probably run a 200mm dropper if I wanted!

I would say that mostly only really short arms for your height really necessitates a downsize. Can't really shrink the reach or top tube without going with a shorter stem, and a large change there has the potential to change the steering dynamics in unwanted ways. Rather go with the smaller size and just run a long seat post (long dropper FTW!) to account for the (relatively) longer legs.

While short legs for your height just means you might not be able to fit a really long dropper, and maybe also check there is room to lower/slam the stem, to be sure your bars won't be too high relative to your seat. Though on some frames (much less so these past couple years), the seat-tube is so tall that someone 5'10" with short legs might only get away with a 100-125mm dropper, and that might mean a downsize is preferable.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: Sorry, I meant the scenario where a person is recommended a size (based on their height) that's actually at the upper-limit of a fit for what their proportions, style and yadda yadda are. The main idea here was that people pointing out the reach is too long or short should realize they're making a (necessarily) subjective complaint and should temper it with the other numbers in the bike's fit. Like wheelbase, HTA, trail, stack, BB drop or effective top-tube.

It would be interesting to see manufacturers develop an ape-index recommendation for their bikes along with the usual height based ones. I think Norco is crawling towards this with that setup guide on their website. Getting people on bikes that fit them and are applicable to riding style is important to their having fun.
  • 3 3
 I think the contrast of approaches between the Norco and the new Pivot Switchblade is really interesting. Norco seems to be going all in on the "longer, lower slacker, steeper seat angles" trend, while Pivot has taken a more a restrained approach. On a philosophical level, I like Pivot's approach better, but it would be interesting to ride the two bikes back-to-back.
  • 4 1
 @roma258 I agree with you about Pivot's approach - it is a much more usable bike for most "all-mountain" trails. I wouldn't doubt if Pivot does release a bike that is much more aggressive, in between their new Switchblade and the Firebird. I am soon in the market for a new bike and it will probably be between the new Switchblade or the Ibis Ripmo.
  • 4 0
 I gotta say, going from a 66HA bike to a 64HA bike, and a 74SA to 77SA, has made climbing WAY better and has made the downhills more fun. The slacker bike is more stable and planted, so I have more confidence on it. That translates into making doubles out of janky rocks with janky landings, because I know I have a lot of margin for error. I take bigger risks because the bike supports it, and that makes trail riding more fun even in stuff that's not double black. I'll take modern geo any day.
  • 1 0
 @gumbytex: where do you ride?
  • 3 0
 Thank you for commenting about noise/silence! It‘s quite an underrated topic in many reviews.
  • 7 1
 I have the Sight, zero rattling!!! Super quiet!!!!
  • 5 1
 Mine is also silent.
  • 3 0
 I'm sure this comment will get lost but it is worth noting that the Sights seem to be shipping with dropper and shift cable in a foam tubing bit that should keep everything fully silenced. At least on the alloy builds coming into my bike shop I cant imagine there is any possibility of rattle.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer how would you say the Sight compares to the Nukeproof Reactor, or is the Optic a better comparison to the Reactor?
  • 1 1
 Mistake in article. The previous sight, or any sight for that matter did NOT have 130mm rear travel. It always was 140mm.they upped it 10mm not 20..... and its a Norco anyways. Overpriced garbage wanting into boutique and high end categories but just can't get there.
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer
Did you run flats or clipped in when test riding?
  • 13 0
 and what colour socks did you wear?
  • 7 0
 @preach, I regularly switch it up. In the winter I tend to ride flats a little more often, but I can ride either setup comfortably.

And @mh731, black, obviously.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: thank you sir, I kinda figured.
  • 7 4
 32lbs is the new 28....might as well ride my 34lb DH Bike!
  • 5 4
 Yeah, $7k for a 32 pound 150 mm non motorized bike? Was there something I was supposed too be excited about here?
  • 2 2
 @ButtermilkBar: If you’re not buying due to its weight, then you’re missing the whole point of this bike.
  • 1 0
 @ButtermilkBar: How the bike rides!
  • 4 1
 Norco are looking great for 2020
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer how does this compare in climbing to the 2019 Sight?
  • 1 0
 It doesn't make anything more clear to the reader to compare the Sight to two other bikes the reader has no familiarity with.
  • 2 0
 Nice bike, its a shame you can't actually get your hands on a frame to build only 3 months after the release.
  • 3 1
 I ride a 2020 Banshee Titan and not sure what Freeride bike actually is. But the thing is badass. Maybe I like Freeride?
  • 2 2
 Funny how all the geometry numbers of enduro/trail bikes of almost every major brand have finally converged to the extremities that Porter and Kokkonen have been pushing the last five years Smile
  • 2 0
 LOL. Almost. Wink Chris' stuff is still huge though. Every time I start considering a Geometron I get freaked out bc they're so long. My trails are too tight and twisty...
  • 3 1
 Looks fab - so many great choices these days.
  • 3 1
 I wonder what a coil would feel like on the back end
  • 6 1
 Kazimer in the review said that he felt like going to the travel too quickly/ bottoming out too frequently so the leverage curve is probably relatively linear. A coil isn't going to help with that at all.
  • 1 0
 @benmoosmann: Ahh cheers. Thanks for the intel.
  • 3 2
 Shouldn't these bikes be half the price since it's half carbon and half aluminum?
  • 2 1
 Carbon front tri, carbon seat stays, alu chain stays... probably more like 85/15.
  • 4 0
 So an all-aluminum frame should be free? Sign me up.
  • 4 4
 Jesus Christ. 14.5kg for carbon frame with high end components and no coil in sight. That's crazy weight.
What's mid range aluminium version supposed to weigh? 16-17kgs?
  • 8 3
 If you're asking these questions then it's not the bike for you.
  • 3 2
 @panaphonic: What's that supposed to mean? Specialized makes an ebike that's just little bit heavier and other companies like Giant have their own similar bikes that are good 1-3g lighter for the asking price, especially in alloy variant.

Inability of the company to make a properly engineered bike should be scrutinized.

Now, if this were a bottom of the barrel priced bike with great value for money, one could forgive slightly porky frame
  • 4 1
 @msusic: It means other people don't care at all. I don't know how much my A2 Sight weighs nor do i care. It rides really nice through and also the rider could stand to lose 2 or 3 kilos.
  • 3 1
 This is an enduro racers trail bike if ever I’ve seen one
  • 1 0
 Geometry is in the database for comparison purposes...
geometrygeeks.bike/bike/norco-sight-2020
  • 3 1
 Can not wait for mine!
  • 4 5
 Played around on the builder and for $4400 it seems the better buy is on the Ripmo AF no? They seem like very similar bikes...
  • 1 0
 Can’t wait for mine! With *ahem* fox
  • 1 0
 Why oh why does the optic not come in this color?!!!!!
  • 3 4
 Nice bike industry. Wake me up when a 27lb bike with Optic sizing and geo arrives.
  • 6 2
 You ridden a 27 pound Enduro bike? You could save a lot of money by just buying a mini table version of plinko.
  • 3 0
 @TheBearDen: Have you seen Nino Schurter descend on his 21lb bike? 120mm is fine, no Enduro needed.
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: Yes, but there is a limit to that.... If you're a rider who can really shred a super aggressive rock garden at speed, etc., you don't want to do that on a little 26-27lb bike! You'll get the shit beat out of you. LOL. Wink
  • 2 0
 @mybaben: That’s all down to suspension. A 1200kg WRC car will go 100kph down a forest road but put 500kg of ballast in it and it’ll be bouncing off the bump stops and will end up in a tree. Adjust the suspension and it’ll do better but it will never stop, change direction or accelerate like the lighter car.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: you should do some reading on unsprung weight and it's affects on offroad race performance. And I'm not just talking about bikes.
  • 1 0
 @TheBearDen: I’ve done a bit. Not a life’s work, but enough I think.

I’ve driven a 750kg car that has a ride/handling compromise on bumpy English B roads that larger cars can’t get close too.
  • 1 3
 Kazimer , probably the toughest guy to listen to doing a bike review in the industry. Although He is very thorough in every detail. It's a Sick bike!
  • 2 4
 @mikekazimer
Can you compare to the Bronson V3?.. yes, 29er blah blah but same front and rear travel so I'm curious.
  • 3 4
 Nailed the geo but still can't pick colors that I like
  • 3 1
 Exactly my thoughts.
If the frameset had at least the color of the C SE. Would look rad with a boxxer red Lyrik.
So, I have to look elsewhere Frown
  • 5 0
 The women's C2 is my fav!
  • 14 17
 T®AIL will be big. When you can't stand Enduro and DownCountry hype but you don't want to call it All Mountain
  • 4 5
 Free-duro and trail-duro bikes will be so hot next year
  • 4 9
flag WAKIdesigns (Feb 10, 2020 at 9:05) (Below Threshold)
 @kiddlivid: Free-duro and elitists will be like: get the fk out of here! - we didn't go for an SWorks Enduro over the equally good Capra for half price to deal with you people
  • 1 1
 @kiddlivid: Wait ? What happened to Downduro ? Is that over already ? Damn need to buy another bike now.
  • 1 1
 Cross Hill all the way for me (or XH if you want a fancy acronym)
  • 11 13
 Where is Grim Donut?
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.
dv56 0.036853
Mobile Version of Website