Review: Specialized Stumpjumper EVO 29
The new Stumpjumper was released earlier this year, ushering in the next era of a model that's been in Specialized's lineup since the very beginning. There are three different versions: the Stumpjumper, the Stumpjumper ST, and the Stumpjumper EVO. The standard and the ST versions aren't really drastic departures from the previous models; yes, they have a new one-sided frame, and they're a little longer and a little slacker than before, but the geometry is still on the conservative side of things. But then there's the aluminum EVO model...
If the Stumpjumper is the clean cut, goody-two-shoes model, the EVO is the tattooed and pierced rebel, a bike that doesn't fit into the conventional mold. It's significantly longer, lower, and slacker than the regular Stumpjumper, and there's no carbon model to be seen (at least not yet). In fact, there are only two sizes – S2 and S3 – and one complete option, which retails for $3,620 USD.
If the Stumpjumper is the clean cut, goody-two-shoes model, the EVO is the tattooed and pierced rebel, a bike that doesn't fit into the conventional mold. It's significantly longer, lower, and slacker than the regular Stumpjumper, and there's no carbon model to be seen (at least not yet). In fact, there are only two sizes – S2 and S3 – and one complete option, which retails for $3,620 USD.
Stumpjumper EVO 29 Details
Intended use: all-mountain
Travel: 140mm rear / 150mm front
Wheel size: 29"
Frame construction: aluminum
Head angle: 63.5º
Chainstay length: 443mm
Sizes: S2, S3
Weight: 32.6 lb (14.8 kg) size S3, w/o pedals
Price: $3620 USD
More info: www.specialized.com
Intended use: all-mountain
Travel: 140mm rear / 150mm front
Wheel size: 29"
Frame construction: aluminum
Head angle: 63.5º
Chainstay length: 443mm
Sizes: S2, S3
Weight: 32.6 lb (14.8 kg) size S3, w/o pedals
Price: $3620 USD
More info: www.specialized.com
Highlights of the build kit include a Fox 36 Rhythm fork, DPX2 shock, and SRAM NX 12-speed drivetrain, and Code brakes with 200mm rotors front and rear.
 | It's on steep, rough terrain that everything clicks into place... The bike's ultra calm demeanor at speed made it feel like I was out for a casual cruise. |
The S3 Stumpjumper EVO has a stubby 105mm headtube length.
Construction and Features
The Stumpjumper EVO looks more like a test mule than a production bike thanks to its polished, raw aluminum frame and the lack of any giant logos. I'm a fan of the understated look – there's no unnecessary flashiness, no garish paint or strange stickers to be seen.
Like its siblings, the Stumpy EVO has what Specialized call their 'Sidearm' design, where a brace joins the top tube to the seat tube on the driveside of the frame, but is absent on the non-drive side. The design was implemented to bump up the frame's stiffness without needing to relocate the shock.
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
Specialized's unique chainstay protector design inspired a bunch of copycat versions to pop up on the World Cup DH circuit this season. It turns out that having raised and lowered rubber sections helps quiet down chainslap by a significant amount – imagine slapping a belt on to a table, and then imagine slapping that belt onto a table that had a bunch foam rollers spaced out over it. The design disperses the impact force, a simple but effective idea that works quite well.
Other details of the EVO frame include full internal cable routing, a threaded bottom bracket, room for a water bottle, and plenty of clearance for running wide tires. In other words, all the details you'd hope to find on a modern frame.
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
The Stumpjumper EVO looks more like a test mule than a production bike thanks to its polished, raw aluminum frame and the lack of any giant logos. I'm a fan of the understated look – there's no unnecessary flashiness, no garish paint or strange stickers to be seen.
Like its siblings, the Stumpy EVO has what Specialized call their 'Sidearm' design, where a brace joins the top tube to the seat tube on the driveside of the frame, but is absent on the non-drive side. The design was implemented to bump up the frame's stiffness without needing to relocate the shock.
Those ridges do a good job of keeping the Stumpjumper nice and quiet.
There's plenty of room for running a longer travel dropper post.
Specialized's unique chainstay protector design inspired a bunch of copycat versions to pop up on the World Cup DH circuit this season. It turns out that having raised and lowered rubber sections helps quiet down chainslap by a significant amount – imagine slapping a belt on to a table, and then imagine slapping that belt onto a table that had a bunch foam rollers spaced out over it. The design disperses the impact force, a simple but effective idea that works quite well.
Other details of the EVO frame include full internal cable routing, a threaded bottom bracket, room for a water bottle, and plenty of clearance for running wide tires. In other words, all the details you'd hope to find on a modern frame.
There's no longer a proprietary shock mount or AutoSag - instead, the EVO has a 210 x 50mm Fox Performance DPX2.
A flip chip allows for two different head angle and bottom bracket height settings.
Geometry & Sizing
This is where things get interesting. The Stumpjumper EVO truly is long, low, and slack – those three buzzwords are absolutely accurate in this case. In fact, that 63.5-degree head angle (with a 150mm fork) is the same as Specialized's current Demo 8 downhill bike. There's a flip chip that can be used to “steepen” things up to 64-degrees, which also raises the bottom bracket height by 6mm.
At the moment, Specialized is only offering the Stumpjumper EVO in two sizes, which roughly equate to a size medium and a size large. The S3 version I tested has a reach of 475mm, and a seat tube angle of 75.6-degrees, which is quite a difference from the 445mm reach and 74.1-degree seat angle of the standard Stumpjumper. It also has a longer chainstay than the regular Stumpjumper - 443mm vs. 437mm.
The EVO also uses a fork with 44mm of offset, another trend that's catching on with 29” bikes no matter the travel amount – even Specialized's Epic cross-country bike has gone that route. The idea is that the reduced offset (compared to the 51mm of offset that was previously the norm) improves the front end handling of the bike at higher speeds, while also shortening the wheelbase slightly.
This is where things get interesting. The Stumpjumper EVO truly is long, low, and slack – those three buzzwords are absolutely accurate in this case. In fact, that 63.5-degree head angle (with a 150mm fork) is the same as Specialized's current Demo 8 downhill bike. There's a flip chip that can be used to “steepen” things up to 64-degrees, which also raises the bottom bracket height by 6mm.
At the moment, Specialized is only offering the Stumpjumper EVO in two sizes, which roughly equate to a size medium and a size large. The S3 version I tested has a reach of 475mm, and a seat tube angle of 75.6-degrees, which is quite a difference from the 445mm reach and 74.1-degree seat angle of the standard Stumpjumper. It also has a longer chainstay than the regular Stumpjumper - 443mm vs. 437mm.
The EVO also uses a fork with 44mm of offset, another trend that's catching on with 29” bikes no matter the travel amount – even Specialized's Epic cross-country bike has gone that route. The idea is that the reduced offset (compared to the 51mm of offset that was previously the norm) improves the front end handling of the bike at higher speeds, while also shortening the wheelbase slightly.
Suspension Design
Specialized have been using various versions of a Horst Link suspension layout since the dawn of time, or somewhere thereabouts. The Stumpjumper EVO keeps that streak going, with the rearmost pivots located in on the chainstay, below the rear axle. One welcome change is the elimination of the proprietary shock mount, which makes it much easier to find compatible replacement shocks. There's even room to fit a coil shock, although there's not quite enough room to squeeze in the larger air can found on a Fox Float X2.
The frame dimensions and geometry may be different than the standard Stumpjumper, but according to Specialized, the kinematics of the EVO are almost identical. There's a moderate amount of anti-squat, and although Specialized say the leverage ratio is more progressive than before, it’s still not that progressive - riders may need to go up a spring rate to avoid bottoming out with a coil shock.
Specifications
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
| Specifications | ||
| Price | $3620 | |
| Travel | 140mm | |
| Rear Shock | Fox DPX2 Performance, 210 x 50mm | |
| Fork | Fox Float Rhythm 36, 44mm offset | |
| Cassette | SRAM NX 12-speed, 11-50t | |
| Crankarms | Truvativ Stylo, 170mm | |
| Bottom Bracket | SRAM DUB, threaded | |
| Rear Derailleur | SRAM NX Eagle | |
| Chain | SRAM NX Eagle | |
| Shifter Pods | SRAM NX Eagle 12-speed | |
| Handlebar | Specialized alloy, 31.8 diameter, 800mm width, 27mm rise | |
| Stem | Specialized Trail 45mm, 31.8 | |
| Grips | Sensus Lite | |
| Brakes | SRAM Code R, 200mm rotors F/R | |
| Hubs | Specialized, sealed cartridge bearing | |
| Rim | Roval Traverse 29, 30mm inner width | |
| Tires | Specialized Butcher Grid, 2.6" | |
| Seat | Specialized Phenom Comp, 143mm width | |
| Seatpost | X-Fusion Manic, 34.9mm, 150mm travel | |
Test Bike Setup
Specialized has a handy little widget on their website that spits out the recommended settings after you put in your height and weight. I discovered the tool at the end of the test period, but it turns out that the numbers I'd settled on were within 5 psi of the calculator's suggestions, so I'd say it's a good place to start the suspension setup process.
For my 160 pound weight, I ran 195 psi in the Fox DPX2, which equated to 30% sag. Up front, I ran 77 psi in the 36, with three volume spacers. Other than trimming the bars down to my preferred 780mm width I didn't need to anything else to get the bike ready to roll. With bikes at this price point, it's not uncommon to need to swap out uncomfortable seats or grips but that wasn't the case with the Stumpjumper – I got along well with Phenom saddle and the Sensus lock-ons.
Testing took place in Bellingham, Washington, at the tail end of a very dry summer, and extended into the rainy fall season.
Specialized has a handy little widget on their website that spits out the recommended settings after you put in your height and weight. I discovered the tool at the end of the test period, but it turns out that the numbers I'd settled on were within 5 psi of the calculator's suggestions, so I'd say it's a good place to start the suspension setup process.
For my 160 pound weight, I ran 195 psi in the Fox DPX2, which equated to 30% sag. Up front, I ran 77 psi in the 36, with three volume spacers. Other than trimming the bars down to my preferred 780mm width I didn't need to anything else to get the bike ready to roll. With bikes at this price point, it's not uncommon to need to swap out uncomfortable seats or grips but that wasn't the case with the Stumpjumper – I got along well with Phenom saddle and the Sensus lock-ons.
Testing took place in Bellingham, Washington, at the tail end of a very dry summer, and extended into the rainy fall season.
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 36
Height: 5'11"
Inseam: 33"
Weight: 160 lbs
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 36
Height: 5'11"
Inseam: 33"
Weight: 160 lbs
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Climbing
Usually when a bike comes in with a flip chip I end up putting it into the lowest and slackest setting and leaving it alone, but not this time. In the low setting the Stumpjumper's bottom bracket height is a ground-scraping 328mm, and after one too many pedal strikes I ended up putting it into the higher position for the majority of the test period. Yes, that does steepen the head angle by .5 degrees, but it's still only 64-degrees in that high setting, which qualifies as being very slack in my book, especially for a 140mm 29er.
Despite those pedal vs. ground battles, the Stumpjumper is a surprisingly decent climber, especially considering that its geometry looks like it was lifted from a DH bike. It's not going to set any speed records, and it can feel a bit sluggish on flatter or slightly rolling terrain, but the slack head angle and relatively long chainstays do allow it to crawl up and over technical sections of trail without any issues. There's a reason those crazy hill climb motorcycles are so long – the extended wheelbase makes it easier to keep the front end on the ground.
It's the opposite of a twitchy and skittish XC machine, and rather than encouraging out-of-the-saddle attacks on technical climbs, the Stumpjumper EVO makes it possible to stay seated, or at least not make as drastic of a position change, when tackling steep bits of trail. It felt like I had more time to decide how to unlock the puzzling parts of a climb, due to the fact that I didn't need to make as many micro-corrections.
I typically flipped the DPX2 shock into the middle setting for big fire road grinds, but for chunkier climbs, I left it in open to get as much traction as possible. Specialized didn't go crazy with the Stumpjumper's anti-squat numbers, but I still found that there was plenty of support to keep the shock from cycling too deep into its travel, even when standing up and sprinting out of the saddle. All that being said, the EVO is still a bike with a clear focus on the descents – climbing and getting through mellower terrain are simply tasks that need to be taken care of before the fun begins.
![Stumpjumper EVO review]()
Usually when a bike comes in with a flip chip I end up putting it into the lowest and slackest setting and leaving it alone, but not this time. In the low setting the Stumpjumper's bottom bracket height is a ground-scraping 328mm, and after one too many pedal strikes I ended up putting it into the higher position for the majority of the test period. Yes, that does steepen the head angle by .5 degrees, but it's still only 64-degrees in that high setting, which qualifies as being very slack in my book, especially for a 140mm 29er.
Despite those pedal vs. ground battles, the Stumpjumper is a surprisingly decent climber, especially considering that its geometry looks like it was lifted from a DH bike. It's not going to set any speed records, and it can feel a bit sluggish on flatter or slightly rolling terrain, but the slack head angle and relatively long chainstays do allow it to crawl up and over technical sections of trail without any issues. There's a reason those crazy hill climb motorcycles are so long – the extended wheelbase makes it easier to keep the front end on the ground.
It's the opposite of a twitchy and skittish XC machine, and rather than encouraging out-of-the-saddle attacks on technical climbs, the Stumpjumper EVO makes it possible to stay seated, or at least not make as drastic of a position change, when tackling steep bits of trail. It felt like I had more time to decide how to unlock the puzzling parts of a climb, due to the fact that I didn't need to make as many micro-corrections.
I typically flipped the DPX2 shock into the middle setting for big fire road grinds, but for chunkier climbs, I left it in open to get as much traction as possible. Specialized didn't go crazy with the Stumpjumper's anti-squat numbers, but I still found that there was plenty of support to keep the shock from cycling too deep into its travel, even when standing up and sprinting out of the saddle. All that being said, the EVO is still a bike with a clear focus on the descents – climbing and getting through mellower terrain are simply tasks that need to be taken care of before the fun begins.
Descending
Okay, so the Stumpjumper EVO might feel a little underwhelming on tamer terrain, but that's not what it was designed for. It's on steep, rough terrain that everything clicks into place. There's a certain trail that I regularly include in my testing due to its sustained steepness – there aren't many places on it where you can let off the brakes and relax, a prime recipe for vicious arm pump. On the EVO it was a different story – the bike's ultra calm demeanor at speed made it feel like I was out for a casual cruise. I also managed to put down a personal best time, which I would have been tempted to chalk up to lucky satellite positioning if it hadn't happened more than once on several different trails. The bottom line? The EVO is sneaky fast in the steeps.
Of course, it may have DH bike geometry, but don't forget there's only 140mm of rear travel on tap, and if you blast full speed into a chunky section of trail it's not going to feel the same as if you were on a bigger, squishier machine. The good news is that the Stumpjumper's travel is very well managed. It's not overwhelmingly plush, but it is supple enough at the beginning of the stroke to filter out the little chattery bumps, with plenty of mid-stroke support and end-stroke ramp up to keep the shock in the sweet spot.
Speaking of jumping, the Stumpjumper's no slouch when it comes time to get airborne. Super tight, lippy kickers aren't really its forte, but it has a satisfying amount of 'pop', and feels extremely stable on bigger, floatier hits.
More aggressive riders will get the most out of the EVO – if you're hanging off the back, and don't make a conscious effort to weight that front wheel it can wash out, especially on flatter sections of trail. Weight the front end properly, though, and there's a seemingly unlimited amount of traction on hand that makes carving through steep turns a breeze.
Okay, so the Stumpjumper EVO might feel a little underwhelming on tamer terrain, but that's not what it was designed for. It's on steep, rough terrain that everything clicks into place. There's a certain trail that I regularly include in my testing due to its sustained steepness – there aren't many places on it where you can let off the brakes and relax, a prime recipe for vicious arm pump. On the EVO it was a different story – the bike's ultra calm demeanor at speed made it feel like I was out for a casual cruise. I also managed to put down a personal best time, which I would have been tempted to chalk up to lucky satellite positioning if it hadn't happened more than once on several different trails. The bottom line? The EVO is sneaky fast in the steeps.
Of course, it may have DH bike geometry, but don't forget there's only 140mm of rear travel on tap, and if you blast full speed into a chunky section of trail it's not going to feel the same as if you were on a bigger, squishier machine. The good news is that the Stumpjumper's travel is very well managed. It's not overwhelmingly plush, but it is supple enough at the beginning of the stroke to filter out the little chattery bumps, with plenty of mid-stroke support and end-stroke ramp up to keep the shock in the sweet spot.
Speaking of jumping, the Stumpjumper's no slouch when it comes time to get airborne. Super tight, lippy kickers aren't really its forte, but it has a satisfying amount of 'pop', and feels extremely stable on bigger, floatier hits.
More aggressive riders will get the most out of the EVO – if you're hanging off the back, and don't make a conscious effort to weight that front wheel it can wash out, especially on flatter sections of trail. Weight the front end properly, though, and there's a seemingly unlimited amount of traction on hand that makes carving through steep turns a breeze.
Stumpjumper EVO
Transition Sentinel
How does it compare?
The EVO isn't the anomaly it would have been a few years ago, but there still aren't really that many bikes that fall into this category. Transition's Sentinel is the first bike to comes mind, and there are more than a few similarities between the two. The large Sentinel's reach number is the same as the EVO's, and both bikes have slack head angles, although the EVO wins the slack battle – it's .5-degrees slacker in the low setting, and that's with a 150mm fork compared to the Sentinel's 160.
The similarities aren't just on paper – both bikes are happiest on steep terrain with room to let things run, although the Sentinel's rear suspension had a plusher, more forgiving feel, likely due to a lighter compression tune. There's also that longer travel fork, which gives it a slight edge over the EVO in really blown out terrain. I don't get that hung up on chainstay length, but the Sentinel's rear end is 11mm shorter than the EVO's, which can make it feel a little snappier in tighter sections, but neither bike is really the best choice for tight, slow speed stuff.
How about the regular Stumpjumper? How does its performance stack up compared to the EVO? After all, both bikes have the same suspension design and amount of travel, but the EVO has a reduced offset fork and much different geometry. Well, the regular Stumpjumper feels more like an aggressive trail bike. It's quick and nimble on the climbs and descents, and can handle a healthy serving of rowdy terrain without flinching. It's much easier to find its limits compared to the EVO, though; the EVO's longer reach and slacker head angle make it much easier to feel comfortable dropping into steep terrain, and they make it feel more stable at higher speeds.
It's a matter of deciding what type of riding you think you'll do the most. If your rides typically include a pretty even mix of up or down, and usually don't involve shuttles or chairlifts, the regular Stumpjumper is the way to go. But for the gravity fiend who's more concerned about downhill performance than slow-speed nimbleness, the EVO takes the cake.
Looking Ahead
The Stumpjumper EVO is an extremely interesting bike, in part because it comes from one of the largest mountain bike companies in the world, not a small builder who can build whatever they feel like at a moment's notice. Of course, Specialized didn't jump all the way into the deep end of the new school geometry movement, which is why there's just one alloy model, and a seemingly endless variety of options for the 'regular' Stumpjumper models.
However, there have been rumors of a carbon-framed EVO being produced in the future. If it were up to me (and it's obviously not), the carbon version would have a slightly higher bottom bracket and *gasp* a steeper head angle. Remember, we're talking about a bike with 140mm of travel here. It'd be nice to see it become just a touch more well rounded, and it's not like a 64.5-degree head angle is going to hold it back on the descents. Plus, you could always install a 160mm fork to get things back into the super-slack realm... We'll just have to wait and see if my daydreams come true.
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
![Specialized Stumpjumper EVO]()
The Stumpjumper EVO is an extremely interesting bike, in part because it comes from one of the largest mountain bike companies in the world, not a small builder who can build whatever they feel like at a moment's notice. Of course, Specialized didn't jump all the way into the deep end of the new school geometry movement, which is why there's just one alloy model, and a seemingly endless variety of options for the 'regular' Stumpjumper models.
However, there have been rumors of a carbon-framed EVO being produced in the future. If it were up to me (and it's obviously not), the carbon version would have a slightly higher bottom bracket and *gasp* a steeper head angle. Remember, we're talking about a bike with 140mm of travel here. It'd be nice to see it become just a touch more well rounded, and it's not like a 64.5-degree head angle is going to hold it back on the descents. Plus, you could always install a 160mm fork to get things back into the super-slack realm... We'll just have to wait and see if my daydreams come true.
There's no carbon here... Specialized spec'd the EVO with wide, 31.8mm aluminum bars.
I ended up preferring the feel of the air shock vs. a coil for everyday riding.
Technical Report
X-Fusion Manic dropper: The Manic often gets classified as a ‘budget’ dropper post, but that doesn’t mean it can't compete with the other options on the market that cost hundreds of dollars more. In this case, Specialized equipped it with their own lever, but the action is nice and light, and it worked flawlessly for the duration of the test period.
Specialized Butcher Tires: It may say 2.6” on the hot patch, but on the EVO’s 30mm rims that equates to a 2.4” width. The tires themselves worked well - the tread pattern is predictable in almost all conditions. I didn’t have any issues with flats, but I can see some riders swapping these out for an even thicker casing, especially in extra-rocky areas.
Shock Swapping: Curious as to how the EVO would feel with a coil shock, I swapped the DPX2 out for a DHX2. The feel of the coil makes it even easier to plow straight through the rough stuff, but it does come at the cost of some of the poppiness delivered by the air shock. I also found myself bottoming out a little more than I would have liked. Going to a firmer spring rate helped, but then some of the initial suppleness was eliminated. I felt the behavior of the DPX2 was a better fit, but for riders who want the most comfort and traction it is possible to run a coil.
Fox 36 Evolution: The GRIP-damper equipped 36 is another component on the EVO that performs well above its price point. It may be lacking some of the adjustments found on the top-of-the-line option, but the difference out on the trail isn't that drastic. Even if I had unlimited funds I wouldn't be in a rush to swap this out for something else.
![Stumpjumper EVO review]()
X-Fusion Manic dropper: The Manic often gets classified as a ‘budget’ dropper post, but that doesn’t mean it can't compete with the other options on the market that cost hundreds of dollars more. In this case, Specialized equipped it with their own lever, but the action is nice and light, and it worked flawlessly for the duration of the test period.
Specialized Butcher Tires: It may say 2.6” on the hot patch, but on the EVO’s 30mm rims that equates to a 2.4” width. The tires themselves worked well - the tread pattern is predictable in almost all conditions. I didn’t have any issues with flats, but I can see some riders swapping these out for an even thicker casing, especially in extra-rocky areas.
Shock Swapping: Curious as to how the EVO would feel with a coil shock, I swapped the DPX2 out for a DHX2. The feel of the coil makes it even easier to plow straight through the rough stuff, but it does come at the cost of some of the poppiness delivered by the air shock. I also found myself bottoming out a little more than I would have liked. Going to a firmer spring rate helped, but then some of the initial suppleness was eliminated. I felt the behavior of the DPX2 was a better fit, but for riders who want the most comfort and traction it is possible to run a coil.
Fox 36 Evolution: The GRIP-damper equipped 36 is another component on the EVO that performs well above its price point. It may be lacking some of the adjustments found on the top-of-the-line option, but the difference out on the trail isn't that drastic. Even if I had unlimited funds I wouldn't be in a rush to swap this out for something else.
Pros
+ Incredibly stable and solid on the descents
+ Excellent price vs. performance
+ It actually is a downhiller's trail bike. In fact, it might be longer and slacker than your DH bike.
Cons
- Limited size range mean shorter and taller riders could be out of luck
- You'll run out of suspension travel before the geometry starts holding you back
- Very low bottom bracket height
Pinkbike's Take
| The Stumpy EVO isn’t as well-rounded as the standard Stumpjumper, but it’s not meant to be. It's more of a niche bike, a specialist aimed at riders looking for something with boundary-pushing geometry that can take on seriously rowdy terrain. It's ready to rock right out of the box, with a price vs. performance ratio that's hard to beat, but it's also one of those bikes that's ripe for a few upgrades to make it a little bit lighter once the original components wear out. |
Author Info:
Member since Feb 1, 2009
Must Read This Week
Though I will be honest I will like anything that comes in brushed aluminium!
Big slice of the market nowdays. Probably is unsafe to ride a bike notorious for cracking rear triangle.
Besides that, s seems to spend more $ in market research, advertising and graphic design than how much they spend in product development... sure bet they are not putting out a niche product, if anything it is the opposite as people start to understand that a 120 is more fun for most.
those guys know what theyre doin', so do their lawyers
Personally i always liked the camber better than the stumpy. The way the reduced travel shifted the angles and reach was favorable for riders with long arms and upper body like myself.
You have no idea what you are talking about. But you don't care because you are nothing more than a hater.
I think that precisely why they chose to first debut such mental geometry on the trail bike rather than the enduro bike. Specialised know what they’re doing.
@jaydawg69: I thought it was only the one racer and he chose the stumpy because he loves him some short chainstays (of the older stumpy) and the BB was lower meaning he could up-fork it and slacken it out without ruining it completely. But I don’t follow the racers themselves too closely tbh.
BTW I agree with @iqbal-achieve, this should be standard geometry for lower level bikes. Not saying that it shouldn't be on the Enduro, but it is a huge advantage for newer riders. It is like cheating for anything remotely technical up or down.
You’ve created a good bike at an excellent price point.
The Stumpjumper keeps getting better and better.
This bike is a third of the price of your top end bikes, and still performs well for its intended use and audience.
1. From one of the largest bike manufacturers which should yield a comparatively lower price
2. 150-140 travel which is medium in today's market
3. More than 32 pounds without pedals which is heavy for the price of
4. More than $3500
Yes, $3500 is cheap for a mountain bike today,and there's no doubt that this bike is a great performer,
but I am asserting that $3500+ is no godsend for a bike with okay spec and the above traits.
If I'm dishing out the big buck$ (BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT 3.5K IS) I better have some hot stuff.
Anyhow, just advocating that this bike is by no means a steal at its list price. I still bet this bike kicks absolute behind. The inflated industry may make it seem like a deal, but you can still get more for less, brand new, right now.
Are you comparing msrp to msrp? Sale prices online will always beat new msrp prices.
As for the weight, given the travel, wheel size and price it’s right point.
“Cheap, fast, light, pick two.”
K. Bontrager
Back in the 90’s, a Merlin titanium frame was $3,000
So in bike world terms, not actual dollar and cents, $3,500 is a good deal for a dh capable, ready to ride, full suspension bike.
I really hate it that I need to think alot more about that stuff. It is to expensive...
does
that
one
only
the
are
you
@kfccoleslaw
No,
All sorts of claims are being made in regards to 44mm offset forks without much data or even while seemingly misunderstanding the concept of "trail." A common claim is that it "speeds up steering by reducing wheel flop." Which is incorrect. Reduced offset INCREASES trail, which INCREASES wheel flop. What reduced offset does do is initiate the turning of the front wheel earlier in the lean of the bike. Is that desirable? Is over steer a benefit or drawback? I can feel the over steer on a 44mm offset fork such that it requires me to counter steer somewhat to counteract the force. I've done back to backs on the same bike, one with 44mm offset and one with 51mm offset, and I prefer the 51mm offset for this very reason. Out of the saddle sprinting this turn initiation via lean is very noticeable on the 44mm offset fork.
Now, another argument is that it "improves traction" by moving the front wheel closer to you and therefore more weight is distributed over the front wheel. Moving the wheel back 7mm is going to improve traction to a noticeable point? Prove it. Where's the data? Where's the testing? The claim is made but that's all it is. And I suspect this is the case because developing a reliable, and more importantly, valid, method of proving this claim would be very complicated and difficult to do. You could of course prove this claim by using extreme examples (i.e. 10mm offset vs. 70mm or something). But I'm talking about a difference of 7mm in real world applications.
I'm not necessarily knocking it but I would like some data to support the claims being made. And as far as reducing "wheel flop". No. Higher trail increases wheel flop. So let's just put that one to bed. I hope the bike industry isn't just playing another gimmick here because it's "new" (it isn't) and "different" and somehow is going to add "magic" to the way a bike feels. Getting a little tired of marketing over-hype honestly.
Pros:
Overall "slower" steering
- This helps with climbing on a slack bikes like the sentinel, as the front wheel wanders less on climbs. I'd say it also
makes steep bikes easier to climb as well because there is less need for those micro-adjustments of your front
wheel. You also gain noticeably more stability and confidence at speed.
More front end grip
- Brings the front wheel closer to center of gravity and allows you to lean into turns harder.
Turn in
- Hard to put into words but dropping your shoulder into a turn just feels awesome and gives a "turning on rails"
sensation through the corners.
Cons:
Overall "slower" steering
- Pro and a con. While it is good for what I mentioned above, your bike will not feel as nimble as with a normal offset
fork. Think plowing through regardless of line choice vs carefully choosing a line.
Coming out of turns
- The fork wants to maintain its current line. Once you commit to a line, the short offset makes your bike want stick to
it, and it can also be hard to make quick direction changes mid turn. Not a huge deal, but it is definitely a different
feel than you are used to and you have to learn to corner a bit differently.
Overall, I'd say it comes down to your riding style. If you are wanting a slower, more controlled, and stable feeling front end then I'd go for the new short offset. If you like a more nimble and easily place-able feeling front end I'd stick with the normal offset. I will add that the new offset does have a learning curve to it. I initially didn't like it, but after learning how to properly turn and shift my weight onto the front wheel I much prefer it now. I think it actually made my cornering technique better because without proper technique it won't turn as easily. Hope this helped.
Personally one of the things I hated most was climbing (where you’re always going slow) over rough terrain, every undulation will try to grab that floppy wheel and turn it around and so essentially I found it to wander a lot more than a standard offset and wasted a lot of energy fighting the flop, trying to keep trucking right.
@mikekazimer does a great job of characterizing the qualities of this breed of bike. Don't trust the reviews? Try the bikes yourself, ask a friend, whatever. The proof is in the pudding.
@iqbal-achieve: I absolutely loves the handling of the Sentinel. It smashes corners and steeps. Baaaaaa
Nailed it. After riding the Sentinel and sb130 back to back, I hopped on the new (standard) Stumpjumper and it felt twitchy by comparison. I think after most riders adjust to the reduced offset that’ll be their preference.
And like I said we all adapt so in the end it probably doesn't make a difference anyway. I'm just getting tired of over-hyped "newness" of standards that are pushed as doing something they're not actually doing.
HAHAHAHA!!!! Yeah, I don't ride very fast. I live in the Sierra chief, used to race downhill and competed in Trials comps. I hold 9 or 10 downhill KOMs and am in the top 10 for many other downhill segments in my area (not that that matters). I'm so slow I know the difference between high and low trail....wait....do you even know what I just said? I hate to break it to ya but a 44mm offset fork isn't going to make you go any faster (wow) or inherently change the dynamic of your bike at high speeds.....you do know this right? Or have you drowned yourself entirely in the cool-aid?
More traction more faster.
You sure are making a lot of assumptions about me Bud, you know what they say about making assumptions. If you'd been paying attention you would know what I ride and what I've ridden and how those bikes pertain to the topic at hand b/c I stated that above. You did read the material before jumping into the thread and spouting off, right?
"I guess your faster than Lars Stenberg and know more."
Uh, that's some pretty tight logic you got there. Let's see how it holds up to scrutiny, ready? (pay attention here): "Loic Bruni is fast. Loic Bruni rides 27.5 wheels, therefore 27.5 wheels are superior. Oh but wait. Greg Minnaar is fast. Greg Minnaar rides 29er wheels, therefore 29er wheels are superior." This is just all so confusing. If you think Lars is fast because of a short offset fork I've got some Speed Glue™ I'd love to sell you (at a very "special" price too).
Lastly, you've conveniently ignored my references to "trail" and how it affects handling of a bike so it appears you have no idea what I'm talking about. For you Lars Sternberg is fast and that is all you need. Since this seems to plumb the depth of your knowledge of geometry and how it affects handling I think you and I are done here. And so with that, a good day to you sir.
www.pinkbike.com/video/489074
One huge advantage of this reduced leverage caused by the reduced offset is that when you have a slack head angle it is still very easy to control the front wheel on very steep and slow technical terrain. Have you ever had your front wheel flop to full lock because you applied the front brakes while trying to turn on a steep, descending, rocky corner? (Spoiler alert: I have far too often until I learned better). Reduced offset means that it takes much less force to control the wheel flop in this kind of situation, making these sorts of maneuvers much less sketchy feeling. On the flip side, at high speed this reduced leverage also makes it easier to control front wheel deflection due to hitting roots and rocks, and it still allows you to overcome the inherent stability caused by the larger amount of trail when you do need to turn.
While some people may not like the feel of the reduced offset, and it may not work well on a bike that has a head angle steeper than 65 degrees, I think it is the ideal setup for an all mountain / enduro bike in the Pacific North West, both for steep, slow tech and high speed bike park riding."
Quoted from another site.
Since trail is the distance from the steering axis, the larger your trail number, the larger the torque about the steering axis. Basically, the trial number IS the length of your lever arm.
You can see this if you put your bike up in a work stand and do a bit of an experiment: push with your finger on the lower leg of your fork (this is a trail of approx zero. You can get closer to zero with most forks by pushing slightly behind the lower leg, as most crowns are offset from the steering axis). Now push on your axle (this yields a trail number equal to the offset of your fork). Now push somewhere on your wheel that is not in line with the fork tubes (this yields a bigger trail). It's important that you make sure to apply the same force, in a direction parallel to the axle for all these trials. You should find that it's easier to rotate the steering axis/handle bars as you push further away from the steering axis.
Trail is a well understood concept applied in bicycle, motorcycle, and automotive industries. You can do a lot of research to learn more about it if you like. But basically, a trial number of zero means that the point of contact with the ground is directly in line with your steering axis, and therefore creates a lever arm of zero. The speaker who you quoted was incorrect about increased trail creating a reduced lever arm about the steering axis. Not that he didn't experience the things he experienced; I'm just saying his analysis of the mechanics is incorrect.
@mikekazimer experience echoes mine. It was an epiphany riding this long and slack of a bike, never want to return to 'traditional' geometry again, whatever that is. It isn't hype folks, give it a try.
Also, he explicitly stated that this is not a bike for all terrain, to 'infer' means to conclude from evidence or reasoning without explicit statements. Mr. Kazimer stated it directly, "If your rides typically include a pretty even mix of up or down, and usually don't involve shuttles or chairlifts, the regular Stumpjumper is the way to go." So I think it is fair to assume that individuals have come to the comments with that understanding already.
They nailed the geo on the Foxy. They are extreme where they should be be (TT, Reach), progressive where they should be (seat tube angle) and traditional where they should be (BB, Head Angle).
Some of these new bikes are going to be backtracking on some of their geo choices next time around, count on it.
I find 165s work much better for pedalling for a whole host of reasons, mostly biomechanical but also for clearance but I’d take a wider stance on my non pedal bikes every day. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me that people want longer cranks to pedal and shorter ones to not pedal.
The fact is the closer your legs are together the more vertical extension you have, and the more you can affect weight distribution and absorb impacts. It also means stresses and muscle fatigue is reduced as you don't have the majority of your weight on your trailing leg. If you've been riding a long time go and do some single leg squats and you'll see what I mean. One leg will be piss weak by comparison.
Now, true wider stance, from using something like pedal axle extensions is something different and probably offers enough benefit to be worthwhile.
@ceecee: Humans aren't static objects, bad comparison. Telemarkers? If that's your counter I rest my case!
Happy new year
I was talking to a downhill skier whose legs I had 340mm apart just the other day....
When it comes to actual technical climbing, no, I don't think that it makes as much of a difference, and I've found that a slack head angle tends to create a bike that feels more stable and easier to keep on track while climbing.
As you know, the long rear centre and seat angle make this thing climb pretty good. Do you try it with lighter wheels? It transforms it.
Agreed.
I doubt the durability is any better either.
And slamming the saddle doesn't mean I need a smaller size - reach and top tube length are two different numbers. I moved the seat forward to get the upright pedaling position I prefer, and on the descents I found the 475mm reach to be a good match for my 5'11" height.
I got it sight unseen, having never had a bike with longer than 445mm reach, but took the leap and don't ever see myself going back now.
Yes, in this case there are both wheelsize options, but I chose the 29" version because I'd already spent time on the 'regular' 29" Stumpy.
Don't worry, though, there are some 27.5" bike reviews in the queue.
The way people use their bikes is changing, and while people used to ride 180/200mm bike for bikepark/shuttle only, and used to ride their trail bikes on trail in a "earn your turn" way , now, people use the more and more capable trail bikes for shuttle laps and park riding.
So obviously, the requirements (in frame and specs solidity) for trail bikes have changed, and if you combine this to longer frame + the 27.5 to 29 switch, you get an increased weight.
Did you only ride it uphill?
Spec doesn't get much credit for the innovation they have brought to the game. Long line of Evo builds pushing trends for trail/enduro bikes.
Rephrased to clarify that I'm excited to ride it and compare it to the Sentinel. The review would lead me to suggest that the Sentinel has the edge in the rough stuff and is a bit snappier, so maybe outside of climbing, it would come out the winner.
And did you pull the trigger?
www.pinkbike.com/u/andyrm/album/2019-Stumpjumper-Evo-S3-275
It doesn't "feel" fast, especially in my coil setup, but the clock says otherwise. Next up is an MRP Ribbon Coil to replace the 36 Factory, then I think it'll be perfect.
Not sure if anyone ~in the know~ would be able to comment on this, but I'd be interested to hear more!
Looks like a sick bike, good on them for putting something in at this price point!
That they’ve learned something they should have known before.
Proprietary shit sucks. Dicks.
Wait a minutes wasn’t pf30 these a*sholes idea
too?
From other perspective, made in china should be compared only to made in china
Still shorter than my hardtail, and I think you need ~20mm of spacer rings more
Firstly spesh copied frame from orbea and now it’s gone with raw alu frames, what next they start to produce frames in house to justify prices??
@dennyg1968
A 140mm travel bike that's pushing 34lbs(with pedals, cuz nobody rides without 'em).
That bike should be 4lbs less
I would prefer this polebicycles.com/machine , it has enough travel and it looks OK.
You should go for a 29er Capra(less weight,more travel) instead.
I like the idea behind aggressive trail bikes, but in 2018 it's just not a good value for money and weight IMO.
What cant be ignored is the slack head tube of the stumpjumper and the pricing of the Capra. 2* slacker is pretty significant and will help out on descents more than I think an extra 10f/20r mm of travel will. However, the Capra AL Comp is $2999usd. The SJ Evo price point puts you into carbon YT territory. Availability is a big factor as well. Not sure what the availability of the SJ Evo is, but you have to wait until next year for a Calra. And hope you can get your hands on one before it sells out.
I'm quite happy with my Capra AL 29.
Seat post angle on the Capra is the reason I did not buy a new one...that mixed with e13/SDG builds and the fact its a plow bike...Lets hope YT has a new Jeffsy up their sleeve with some modern geo numbers.
The Stumpy really is the best trail bike out there at the moment. Checks all the boxes people are looking for.
Yep Tim, direct bike buyers are not exactly a discerning bunch. They'll ride any old shit if it's cheap.
To say that “direct Bike buyers will ride any old shit” shows that you’re an arrogant dunce. Plenty of guys riding direct sales bikes will wreck you, while you harp on the fact that your geometry is “better”. Haha what a joke. Your bike better be groundbreaking, because the cost for the spec you get isn’t. Later.
But I’ll call you out when you’re calling Capra geometry a joke (when you’ve probably never ridden one), or saying that direct sales bikes are shit. That’s where you are arguing from ignorance.
You don’t have to defend the Evo like crazy to everyone who says something negative about it. And you really don’t have to go after people who only said that the Bike they own is enjoyable to them. Relax!
@Timroo1 My ignorant arse (despite working the last decade in the MTB industry, including 2 jobs working with Specialized bikes) will continue to enjoy the laughable kids wheeled Capra, how about you?
So, a single crown 29" DH bike.
Moar please, I would like to hit -50. Common, you can do it!