Review: Specialized Stumpjumper EVO 29

Nov 5, 2018 at 11:51
by Mike Kazimer  
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.
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:

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.

bigquotesIt'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. Mike Kazimer

Specialized Stumpjumper EVO
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
Those ridges do a good job of keeping the Stumpjumper nice and quiet.
Specialized Stumpjumper EVO
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.

Specialized Stumpjumper EVO
There's no longer a proprietary shock mount or AutoSag - instead, the EVO has a 210 x 50mm Fox Performance DPX2.
Specialized Stumpjumper EVO
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.


Views: 28,646    Faves: 5    Comments: 0

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.

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

Specialized Stumpjumper EVO

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.

Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 36
Height: 5'11"
Inseam: 33"
Weight: 160 lbs
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer

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.

Stumpjumper EVO review


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.

Stumpy EVO 2
Stumpjumper EVO

Transition Sentinel
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.
2019 Specialized Stumpjumper

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.

Stumpjumper EVO review

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
There's no carbon here... Specialized spec'd the EVO with wide, 31.8mm aluminum bars.
Specialized Stumpjumper EVO
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


+ 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.

- 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
bigquotesThe 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. Mike Kazimer

Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,668 articles

  • 191 4
 I just like that a big corperate company like Specialized are breaking out of their 'safe' demographic. It's probably not a bike for 99% of riders but thats cool with me - the more options the better!

Though I will be honest I will like anything that comes in brushed aluminium!
  • 27 169
flag RedRedRe (Nov 12, 2018 at 8:31) (Below Threshold)
 What is unsafe about this bike? 140 29er is what every mtb magazine in the world is pushing.
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.
  • 56 74
flag jclnv (Nov 12, 2018 at 8:51) (Below Threshold)
 @RedRedRe: Wrong. Twat.
  • 153 3
 I like anything brushed in BBQ sauce. To each their own.
  • 23 0
 On the Dealer Site they have also a 27.5 version of this bike.
  • 74 2
 @RedRedRe: To say that Specialized spends less on R&D than other companies shows a complete lack of research and market knowledge in general. They have by far one of the most extensive R&D facilities in the world, which other manufacturers are known to send their bikes to for testing. You may not like their bikes and that's fine, but to claim they don't do their homework on R&D is factually false.
  • 22 2
 This bike is suited for many more people than convetional brands would have people think. And so is pole, nicolai, bird, transition and all the longer slacker lower steeper seat tube angle bikes. Just don't be afraid to throw a leg over one.
  • 18 2
 Nice, sounds like Specialized is finally listening to its customers. So glad the proprietary nonsense is gone too. This bike has to be a real headache for YT, Canyon, Airborne, etc.
  • 9 20
flag wtmorgan1 (Nov 12, 2018 at 18:15) (Below Threshold)
 This bike cost almost a $1,000 more than YT’s aluminum model and has a lower spec. Why do you think it would cause them headaches? @madriaanse:
  • 24 2
 @wtmorgan1: Dealer support, 0% financing and a base model alloy stumpjumper is almost $1000 cheaper than the jeffsy
  • 22 2
 If it aint Down Country then its Clown Country.
  • 8 0
 @wtmorgan1: Because this one has a bottle holder everyone knows that! HAHA
  • 3 0
 Yes. There is a 27.5 and 29 version of this bike In both sizes and 2 colors, brushed aluminum and brushed black @endurocat:
  • 2 0
 @RedRedRe: spesh Trek Giant spend more on r&d then other brands get in sales.
  • 2 0
 My girl said it stings @IamTheDogEzra:
  • 181 1
 A mountain bike review where the flip chip was left in the high position and wanted a steeper head angle. Nearly fell off my chair!
  • 12 0
 You could leave it in high, install a 160mm airspring and the bb height would still be 1 or 2 mm lower (343mm) than the Sentinel at 345mm.
  • 31 4
 You need a steeper seat angle...
  • 5 2
 Put it in the High setting and add 160mm airshaft gets you 63.5° HTA and 76°or 75.6° STA depending on S2 or S3. Plenty steep.
  • 65 0
 @MikeAzBS: I was referring to the seat he almost fell off...
  • 70 1
 Woah, a specialized and a 29er I wouldn't mind owning..... what is this witchcraft?
  • 38 18
 Spec has always been making good long travel 29ers starting with first evo stumpy 29 then being unquestioned segment leader with Enduro 29. Took others quite a long time to catch up. The only genuinely lame 29er they made was Camber.
  • 8 2
 @WAKIdesigns: why no love for the Camber?
  • 23 8
 @nicokirsten8: because I rode Process 111 and Following Smile
  • 4 68
flag RedRedRe (Nov 12, 2018 at 11:04) (Below Threshold)
 @WAKIdesigns: Specialized did not even have a long travel 29er until 2013/2014.... while others such as SC, Intense, Kona, Transition, Banshee, Cube, Yeti, Rocky Mountain, Lenz, etc. etc. already had them out for a while-if not years.
  • 41 5
 @RedRedRe: check your facts before posting. Stumpy Evo 29 is a 2013 bike. Enduro 29 is 2014 bike. Cube? That is laughable. The only good bike they made at the time was Stereo 26. The rest was Garda hero stuff. Spider ot Tallboy LT were cumbersome cows, take a quick look at geo charts. I rode TB LT It looked sweet but it sucked.
  • 4 0
 There must be some kind of catch, bearings looks smallish, I wonder if they are in any standard size Wink
  • 9 0
 @WAKIdesigns: The og Camber evo 29 on the other hand...what a beast. One of my all time faves with the og 26" stumpy evo and demo 7 and 2015 demo 8

those guys know what theyre doin', so do their lawyers Wink )
  • 4 37
flag RedRedRe (Nov 12, 2018 at 15:48) (Below Threshold)
 @WAKIdesigns: Yeah Specialized did not have a long travel 29er until 2013/2014, can you read? They barely had ht 29ers until a couple of years before. Calling a Kona, Banshee, Rocky Mountain, Norco or Lenz, Garda bikes... I guess there are not many people riding is sweden? Their "Stuff" is always a copy or something becoming popular, and it becomes "benchmarks" for clueless people because they spend tons on $ on ads and you are not going to see a bad review of their crap ever (same w sram). From nose wheelies to nose browning...
  • 3 1
 @WAKIdesigns: the Camber that was just a stumpy with a different link in the rear?

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.
  • 12 1
 @WAKIdesigns: The Camber shredded! Especially with the pike at 130-140
  • 2 1
 The best looking paint job ever!...
  • 2 0
 @WAKIdesigns: I rode a hire stereo 160 275 at garda haha. the bike was pretty meh but wow, fox GRIP and whatever low end shock was on there was amazing! also lake garda has some of the most incredible trails i've ever ever ridden, its the pot at the end of the rainbow
  • 21 1
 @RedRedRe: The Enduro 29 was released in spring of 2013. It was the first GOOD long-travel 29er. Specialized was well ahead of the curve with great 29ers. So much so that they actually had to back-off for a couple years and let the industry catch up - remember they were the ones trying to ditch both 26 and 27.5 back in 2014 but the 26-fer-life crowd wasn't having it. Here we are well on our way to that inevitability.

You have no idea what you are talking about. But you don't care because you are nothing more than a hater.
  • 48 3
 This is the geo the Enduro needs to be... just more travel and obviously more build selections.
  • 17 32
flag iqbal-achieve (Nov 12, 2018 at 11:50) (Below Threshold)
 Disagree. This type of geometry is most beneficial to novice riders who need every bit of help with confidence, rough and steeps and can stand to sacrifice manoeuvrebility for the pleasure. The Enduro is (or ought to be) a thoroughbred Enduro race ready machine with more rounded geometry that skilled handlers can use to tackle anything that comes at them in a heart beat.
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.
  • 11 1
 @iqbal-achieve: the racers choose the stumpy due to suspension kinematics. The Enduro doesn't have enough progression. They can bump up the stroke on the shock to have more travel as well.
  • 3 1
 @iqbal-achieve: do you think that with more aggressive geo a better rider could push their limits even further? Or rode the same speed more easily?
  • 6 6
 @russthedog: no I don’t think that. If we’re talking the enduro category I think a ‘sportier’, less barge like, more rounded approach is going to be the better way. I don’t think you can make it more and more slack, more and more long, more and more low and go more and more fast. It ain’t that simple.
@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.
  • 9 0
 Carbon is coming in the Evo, it has flashed on the Specialized website several times. Having owned a 2017 Enduro I can honestly say I don't notice the difference in travel. The Evo has the best suspension curve I have ever ridden. Supple off the bottom to absorb the chatter, but very progressive to handle the big hits and provide awesome mid stroke support. Also you could theoretically pull the 5 mm spacer in the rear shock and get ~155 mm of travel.
  • 9 2
 @russthedog: a skilled rider can definitely push harder on the Evo. So much traction and it makes technical sections almost laughable.

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.
  • 4 9
flag downhillnews (Nov 12, 2018 at 13:05) (Below Threshold)
 @iqbal-achieve: Then you see how short the frame is a realize that Smurf's are still engineering for them. My LG frame has a 590mm Reach on it the 575 here is a MD basically. Nothing about this GEOMETRY is aggressive except the HA. BTW my 29" has a 65 or so HA. One day they will make bikes for riders above 6' 2" or so....
  • 2 0
 @iqbal-achieve: I bet Matty Miles would have something to say about this being for novice riders
  • 7 1
 @downhillnews: 590mm reach?
  • 2 4
 @jaydawg69: This is not progressive at all - I'm running a 535mm reach and it feels more lively than traditional frame specialized enduro, santa cruz stumpjumper. The industry is off the back on what enduro/DH trail bikes should be like.
  • 4 0
 @Soilsledding: you realize the @downhillnews said 590mm reach? The XL Pole is 535mm.
  • 1 1
 @jaydawg69: Sorry meant 490 just a wee bit of difference. (that's what she said)
  • 1 0
 @jaydawg69: Thanks I'm a little blind.
  • 2 2
 @beast-from-the-east: Matty Miles? Plays for Leicester right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 5 0
 Specialized were ahead of the curve back in 2011. My Enduro had a 66.5 ha and 477mm reach. That bikes shock and rear kinematics were the weak link. It was a great bike for it's time though. The latest enduro has vastly better kinematics and with a 180mm fork is only a degree less slack than the evo. It's more than slack enough for most terrain.
  • 35 2
 Nice work Specialized,

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.
  • 14 21
flag NRogers27 (Nov 12, 2018 at 11:48) (Below Threshold)
 Sadly I still blow the whistle of the bikes are too expensive train, but let us still consider that this bicycle is the following:

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.
  • 6 9
 I would also like to point out that you can go build a bike on Jenson right now that is near equivalent for the same price. In that case yes, buying the complete bike is undeniably a better deal. However, you must also ask yourself what you truly want from a bike. Will you swap out parts? Do you care about some things more than others?

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.
  • 3 12
flag SirWonky (Nov 12, 2018 at 12:20) (Below Threshold)
 @NRogers27: 32+ lbs is way too heavy for a trail bike today- esp form Specialized. My Specialized Enduro from 2010 is 32 lbs
  • 6 1

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
  • 10 9
 @NRogers27: Unfortunately, due to a lot of factors (i.e. Tangerine Presidente) $3500 is the new $3k
  • 5 1
 @Saidrick: $3500 bike is cheap?
  • 9 3

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.
  • 4 0
 @NRogers27: Agreed. The spec is not great. An aluminum bike over $3k should at least have GX components. It is a cool bike and an okay price, but I don't think they are trying to sell tons of these. Probably hired some consultant who explained that most people who would actually buy this kind of bike would buy a frame for their own build anyways.
  • 3 0
 @NRogers27: I agree and I just need to rethink more and more my decision to buy new stuff. Atm I need a new crank, 400$ is cheap right?
I really hate it that I need to think alot more about that stuff. It is to expensive...
  • 1 0
 @Saidrick: Pretty sure it was "cheap, tough, light - pick two" but the message is the same. Something for all the mail order bike company fans to keep in mind. Ask Canyon . . .
  • 41 6
 Does anybody else read reviews backwards? Start at the bottom and work your way up?
  • 38 5
  • 139 1
  • 19 1
 Sadly so, I read the conclusion 1st. And then decided on weather to read the full review.
  • 27 0
 @PG-23: it's raining, I'll read.
  • 7 0
 @Cordall: one of the greatest responses ever!
  • 25 4
  • 6 1
  • 7 4
 Looks like a Pole
  • 7 2
 @WilleKn: Feels like a Pole
  • 19 3
 Would someone explain to me how a reduced offset fork (and I quote) "(compared to the 51mm of offset that was previously the norm) improves the front end handling of the bike at higher speeds..."?

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.
  • 9 0
 you gotta flop it before you can flip it.
  • 4 0
 @underhawk: Oh yeah? Prove it. Wink
  • 9 0
 @Lotusoperandi: hold my beer.
  • 6 4
 Been saying all this for a couple years around here. Just let it go, the sheep want what’s ‘new’ whether it works or not. Im not a fan, imo there’s a very good reason we have the offsets we do. I don’t know how anyone can say it’s better, boggles my mind. Quick turn in also equates to harder turn out....but you can’t sell a concept by repeating “slower turn out”. No, people like words like ‘quick’ etc. Wheel flop is the most disgusting thing I’ve ever experienced, the whole front end drops as the wheel turns (of its own accord). It’s just janky and makes all sorts of problems and gives f*ck all in return but placebo when accompanied by some pseudo science marketing crap.
  • 8 0
 I prefer shorter offset.
  • 5 3
 @iqbal-achieve: Transition and Geometron did numerous testing on offsets and both liked the shorter offset. Plenty of 51mm 29er forks on the Buy and Sell now.
  • 4 4
 @jaydawg69: they’re both developing bikes to make average joes be more than average and I commend that. At one time I would have been all over it. But now I don’t feel I need the bike to do the work for me, especially as it comes with such large trade offs to general manoeuvrability.
  • 17 1
 I own a Transition Sentinel with the reduced offset fork, and while I can't tell you the exact mechanics behind how the shorter offset works I can tell you the upsides and downsides in my experience with it. I have swapped between a reduced offset and "normal" offset rs lyrik so I can attest to the handling differences.

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.

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.
  • 6 0
 @Qbikes47: well put together there dude. You’ve experienced pretty much everything I have. Only difference is I lean very heavily in favour of the tried and tested offset.

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.
  • 5 0
 @iqbal-achieve: I have felt what you're talking about, I was talking more about the flop you experience on steep climbs due to lack of weight over the front wheel which the short offset does help with in my opinion. But yes I do think that the normal offset has an edge in climbing on rough and awkward terrain.
  • 3 2
 If your bike has long stays and steep sta, wheel flop isn't an issue no matter what offset.
  • 3 1
 @jaydawg69: I disagree. All my experience has been with (some very) long chainstays and steep seat angles. Wheel flop regularly made me want to be sick on my own penis.
  • 1 2
 @iqbal-achieve: your experience doesn't jive with physics. You should ride an old Enduro.
  • 3 0
 @Lotus. Is there 'proof' of geometry? How do you quantify the feel of a bike? Is your outcome metric the same as mine?
@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
  • 3 0
 Lotus - the bikes I’ve ridden this year with reduced offset forks (Sentinel, Ripmo, sb130) all felt great in the steering department. Just referring to feel and not marketing claims or scientific testing. Hopping on a normal offset bike after a couple shorter offset (back to back demos) made me appreciate the reduced offset. Both work just fine. Just preference. Is the industry conspiring against us yet again? I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Run what you brung. No need to sell all 51 offset forks.
  • 2 1

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.
  • 7 2
 @beast-from-the-east: And others, I should have noted that this year alone I've owned a Transition Smuggler (44mm offset), Pivot Switchblade (51mm offset) Giant Trance Advanced 27.5, and a Heller Shagamaw 27.5+. Also, this year I switched between 44mm offset and 51mm offset forks on the same bike to do back to back testing so I've got real-world experience on both. I've been mountain biking for over 25 years. I'm not new to this. I've probably ridden every type of format that's been developed for mountain biking. My current favorite is 27.5+ but I've been trying to like 29ers (as you can see from my bike ownership for this year). Sold the Smuggler, Switchblade, and Trance. Not sure what the next project is going to be (how about the new Giant Trance Advanced Pro 29 with 27.5+ wheels!). All I'm trying to say though is that the feel of the short offset fork, the over steer specifically, is not a desirable trait for me. Very noticeable and after having ridden it on different bikes and trying to see why(?) it is being pushed I'm left scratching my head. Hey, if people like the feeling of over steer, great. I know that we humans adapt quite quickly to different bikes. What feels strange at first our brains have a remarkable ability to adapt to and normalize. So there is that. It's just an observation I've made between the two offsets and I'm skeptical of manufacturers pushing it as "curing" something or "improving" something over the 51mm offset. I don't see it curing or improving anything at all, in fact just the opposite. BUT, if manufacturers can find any little "new" thing to say they've designed the next greatest bike well then they will.

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.
  • 2 6
flag jaydawg69 (Nov 12, 2018 at 16:22) (Below Threshold)
 @Lotusoperandi: It doesn't cost anything for an offset fork not really marketing or standards. It's from real world experience from a bunch of riders. I suspect you don't ride very fast so probably won't benefit from a shorter offset.
  • 6 11
flag Lotusoperandi (Nov 12, 2018 at 17:02) (Below Threshold)
 @jaydawg69: "I suspect you don't ride very fast so probably won't benefit from a shorter offset."

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 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 do know this right? Or have you drowned yourself entirely in the cool-aid?
  • 3 1
 @Lotusoperandi: now im not jumping in to comments about whos fast and whos not --- but on the topic of offset/trail and steering, I suspect the offset would have to change the dynamic of your bike at high speeds....unless your local tracks dont have corners.
  • 2 4
 @Lotusoperandi: I guess your faster than Lars Stenberg and know more. You probably still ride on 26" wheels.

More traction more faster.
  • 2 4
 @beast-from-the-east: It won't change the dynamic in any significant or noticeable way. Got it?
  • 2 0
 @Lotusoperandi: Why four bikes a year?! Trying to find the mythical perfect beast?
  • 7 1
 @jaydawg69: "You probably still ride on 26" wheels."

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.
  • 4 1
 @BiNARYBiKE: Well yes, sort of. I work in the industry part-time (and have throughout my life with now 25 years of mtb-ing and wrenching) as a bike tech and so I like to experiment and play around. I enjoy building bikes and trying out different things and seeing how they perform. I have to experience things for myself before I buy any kind of marketing speak or hype. And clearly there's a lot of that today (as in the past). And some things pan out while others don't. When I talk about bikes with customers or friends I like to come from a place of knowledge rather than theory as much as I can. I know there's no perfect bike or setup. And bikes have gotten so good I have to say we're living in a golden era of mountain biking for sure. This year the 4 bike thing was an anomaly. I wanted to give the 29er format a good go, a fair shake, and I feel like I have. Not thoroughly decided on it yet but I'm currently leaning away from it. We'll see. Normally I'll go through a bike or two a year, which means some lucky soul (or souls) gets to buy a slightly used bike for a great price from me. Pass it on, you know? Spread the love and all. Smile
  • 4 5
 @Lotusoperandi: maybe I should explain more.... Lars from Transition tested offsets and much preferred the shorter offsets.
  • 6 2
 "Shorter Offset increases trail just like a slacker head angle does BUT it does not have exactly the same effect on handling, especially at low speed because it also reduces the torque / force / lever arm applied to the handle bars around the steering axis. What that means is that you get all the same things that more trail normally causes like high speed stability and more wheel flop (which means it is easier to turn using weight shifts rather than just turning the bars). However, it also takes less force to turn the wheel or keep it straight, especially as slower speeds. This is why one of the ingredients of Transition's SBG setup is a very slack head angle to start with. If your head angle is not slack enough and you put a short offset fork on the bike, it can feel twitchy, especially at low speeds.

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.
  • 3 1
 @Lotusoperandi: changes in geometry are always measurable, maybe your sensors aren't sensitive enough/anymore. But in a highly dynamic sport like dh enduro the weight shifting/ personal preferences trumps the subtle changes most if the time
  • 3 0
 @jaydawg69: longer chainstays will put more weight onto the front wheel...meaning the feeling of wheel flop will be more aggressive. It’ll turn in quicker and be harder to turn out. Transitions approach with the shorter chainstays they tend to use makes more sense with a reduced offset imo. But I still don’t like it Razz
  • 2 0
 @Lotusoperandi: huh? I notice the affect of the offset in turns at speed. Actually the faster and harder the corner, the more I notice it.
  • 2 0
 @jaydawg69: I'm pretty sure that the speaker who you quoted has done an incorrect physical analysis of the sensations he was experiencing.

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.
  • 15 2
 Have the EVO 27.5" S3, truly amazing bike. The 27.5 S3 has 490mm reach and a slightly lower BB than the 29er. Also swapped to the high setting immediately.

@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.
  • 16 7
 Try a Geometron with different wheel sizes R27.5 / F29" travel (155/160mm) and you'll realize the core of the industry has very little understanding of bike kinematics and geometry. Transition pulled their approach form Nicolai and Pole and a few other outliers and only a few folks really understand how to implement changes which result in better performance. If you want a pretty bike buy a carbon ___, ___, ____ but if you want a performance machine look to Mojo or Pole.
  • 6 1
 @Soilsledding: I bought a MOJO G16 and can't go back now.
  • 2 0
 I sold my Bronson and got a Foxy. It is night and day. I can’t go back to something that doesn’t have a long slack geo.
  • 4 2
 @PtDiddy: The Foxy is not that slack at all
  • 6 1
 Not sure you read the review, but he frequently infers that this bike suits steep and rowdy and open traills. So that on the less steep, rolling and tight and twisty stuff it is underwhelming. This is why he says it is niche and not well rounded. That's all good of course if all you never ride any rolling or tight or less steep terrain.
  • 1 0
 @Braindrain: Not sure who you are referring to, I simply stated I have the 27.5 model and that I believe this geometry has a place. I made no mention of the type of trail it is suited for. However, you are correct. I have taken it on rolling, flatter trails and it is certainly not the type of bike I'd recommend for that. You definitely need trails that are steep and difficult. Which luckily I have right out my door.

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.
  • 2 0
 @Nizhoni: You're right and I am totally with you. I am so used to reviewers playing up positives and worming around negatives that I chose infer. Even in that quote, he isn't directly saying the reviewed bike is bad at those things, and in the following sentence the positive spin is put back towards the reviewed bike.But yeah it's not as hidden away as it is sometimes. I also wanted to add some balance to the comments.
  • 1 0
 @chri92: The Foxy 29 is a hard AM/ light Enduro bike imo (I have one). 66 degrees, with the optional 65 degree insert, is as slack as I want to ever be for my trails.

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.
  • 12 0
 saw the evo yesterday on the trail in my local woods. absolutely lovely bike. the brushed alloy without big logos is a looker!
  • 11 1
 I own one, size S2. I wanted to know how a geo like this rides on all kind of trails and not only on the ones this model was mostly designed for. This projekt ended with a 160 36/44mm, a Dhx2 coil and some 165 cranks. All i can say is it is heavy for a trailbike but it can climb anything from classic fireroads to super techy stuff with ease - as long as you have the legs... Down the hill i couldn‘t find its limits yet this season. Truly an inspiring bike and i can not imagine to ride some more traditional geo again ????????????‍♂️
  • 2 19
flag jflb (Nov 12, 2018 at 20:39) (Below Threshold)
 You put 165 cranks on a pedalling bike, what are you an idiot?
  • 5 0
 @jflb: nope, smart choice. Xc needs lots of pedaling standing up not trail or enduro so why long cranks? Skipped leg day?
  • 10 2
 @jflb: Good luck finding some evidence for longer cranks equalling a performance increase.
  • 1 0
 @jflb: @jflb: a theory: if a dh bike is a non-pedalling bike then why bother putting short cranks on there? Why not use 175s and gain 20mm wider stance? After all you’re barely pedalling so no need to worry about the Pedal Strike™
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.
  • 1 0
 @iqbal-achieve: Because the consequences of a crank/pedal strike tend to be more severe on bikes one barely pedals. Platform pedal riders could start with larger but thinner pedal and be less exposed. Fun argument though!
  • 1 0
 Just wondering your height and weight and inseam size as I’m about to buy one myself.
  • 1 1
 @iqbal-achieve: Longer, not wider stance, has zero benefit.
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: disagree
  • 1 0
 @iqbal-achieve: Try convincing dirt bike riders or downhill skiers that they're be better off with their legs 340mm apart. Good Luck!

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.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: good arguments. Still disagree tup
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: Oh tell it to the telemarkers and sideways pyramids
  • 1 1
 @iqbal-achieve: You can disagree but those are the facts.

@ceecee: Humans aren't static objects, bad comparison. Telemarkers? If that's your counter I rest my case!
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: thanks for your permission to disagree. I will now continue to do so with with complete abandon.
Happy new year Pimp
  • 2 3
 @iqbal-achieve: Fair enough. Just don't spread anymore fake facts alright?
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: You must be that specialized lawyer they keep talking about.

I was talking to a downhill skier whose legs I had 340mm apart just the other day....
  • 2 0
 @ceecee: Disgusting.
  • 10 0
 I've had an s2 29er since it released. I swapped the rear shock to a DVO Topaz and it made a huge difference. I found the FOX DPx2 to be very firm but also bottomed out easy. I wasnt a fan. I'm also running a 160mm Lyrik with a 42mm offset and the bike can handle nearly anything my DH bike does. So amazing. It also climbs better than most bikes a ridden. its not fast uphill, but you sit "in" the bike and it just powers up everything with ease. I bought it as my shuttle/rowdy trail bike, but its so good it became my main trail bike.
  • 14 1
 Has there been a bike tested where the climbing didnt surprise you??
  • 27 2
 Plenty of times. The Ripmo's climbing performance was on par with what I'd anticipated, same with the SC Hightower, and the list goes on. But for a nearly 33lb bike with a 63.5 head angle, I'd say the description of the Stumpy EVO as being a 'surprisingly decent climber' is accurate.
  • 8 14
flag jclnv (Nov 12, 2018 at 8:45) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: Do you still think head angle affects climbing performance Mike? Come on, it's not 2010 anymore.
  • 7 3
 @jclnv, head angle's obviously just one part of the equation, but it is a factor, especially on mellower terrain, where a super slack head angle can make a bike feel 'lazy', compared to something steeper.

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.
  • 10 0
 @mikekazimer: Turns out, you might be a super strong climber Wink
  • 4 3
 @mikekazimer: That's just a side effect of wheelbase rather that specific head angle.

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.
  • 6 3
 @jclnv: "That's just a side effect of wheelbase rather that specific head angle."........ I disagree... The slack head angle would surely keep you on track better, vs being jerked around with a steeper head angle. I like climbing with a slack head andle MUCH better than steep'ish.
  • 9 10
 @jclnv: in the age of lockouts wheels and tyres always deciding factor for climbability. Very few geometries are an issue for a rider who is not shying away from cranking out of the saddle at harder gear and using plenty of body language when situation calls for it. Problems arise when riders only strategy to make a tricky climb is to spin faster. Percentage of riders that will swap this chainring to 28t is surely (and sadly) high.
  • 9 1
 @WAKIdesigns: couldn't disagree more. having a steep seat angle (and an ACTUAL steep seat angle vs virtual) has made a huge difference for me - went from about 72 to a 78 and it was life-altering. our climbs aren't always tricky, but they're steep and long. changing body position and getting out of the saddle isn't an option for an hour long grunt, nor is spinning really. Why not let the bike position your body better and use your muscles efficiently? everyone has an opinion on chainrings until they come here and ride, and then they wish they had at least one size smaller, sometimes two.
  • 2 1

  • 6 1
 Amazing how many people are stuck 5 years in the past on geometry.
  • 9 5
 @powderturns: I didn’t condone 72 deg seat angles... but if we are at it, just wondering when 85 will be the new awake as fuk. I have 75 and ride steep stuff where the problem is front wheel lifting even though I have the tip of my saddle literally in my bum hole. I am not proud of it, but I did some climbs after which my sphincter hurted a lot for a day or two. So if you really do ride steep stuff often maybe you should advocate for awake as fuk solution called forks travel adjustment... we had an excellent, super reliable one with no performanc drawbacks, called Uturn coil, but snowflakes couldn’t live with the added weight...
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: thanks for the replySmile in recent memory, what longer travel bike has impressed u most in terms of climbing?
  • 3 0
 @robokfc: I can confirm this. Gonna make him carry the camera gear next time.
  • 14 3
 $250 groupset on $3600 bike. Nice job bean counters.
  • 3 1
 I do agree with you here. Should have upgraded a few things to make it a killer value. Definitely not to far off though.
  • 4 0
 worst thing is that aftermarket price of GX against NX is almost same
  • 2 2
 @mironfs: In use nobody would be able to tell the difference!

I doubt the durability is any better either.
  • 2 0
 @jclnv: you can absolutely tell the difference in use. the shifting of the nx compared to the gx is very clunky.
  • 1 0
 @sdarner: Really? I can hardly tell and I ride both all the time. What I will say is GX goes out of tune more often than any groupset I've ever used.
  • 6 0
 The pics in this review are banger!! Eric Mickelson, that pic above "test bike setup" is phenomenal. Captures everything I love about mountain biking, Thank you, thank you, thank you. Where can I find an image that is not labeled "Riding the Stumpjumper Evo"?
  • 3 0
 Click on the image and it takes you to a version without the text.
  • 1 0
 That is a great shot hey. Awesome work
  • 1 0
 @SpillWay @mrtoodles Thank you! Glad you liked the shot. Fall riding is the best.
  • 7 1
 I have to say something. You beat your PBs down a bunch of tracks on a bike that is relatively new to you (awesome!), yet you would prefer a steeper HA and shorter chainstay? Some of your points just seem a bit absurd, sorry. The Evo geometry is clearly faster as you are more centred/balanced on the bike with a correct riding position. More bikes should be like this, I feel!
  • 2 0
 I never said I wanted shorter chainstays, but I do think a little steeper head angle and higher BB would make the bike more of a 'do-everything' machine.
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: I am supposing that the Evo was not designed to be a 'do-everything' machine, but rather it favouring being a murderous on the descents. It sounds like it ticks that box! I am looking forward to your thoughts on the Pole Machine's capabilities... Thanks for your review.
  • 1 2
 @mikekazimer: f*ck that. The market is full of do-everything (compromised) bikes. Do you think Porsche should build a 4WD GT3RS? It'd be a much better all-rounder...
  • 1 2
 @mikekazimer: Or the smaller size with an unslammed saddle...still has same WB as e.g. a Large Maiden, but more length owing to wheel size. You're in a half-lid on ungroomed trails in photos; how fast should you be going?
  • 3 0
 @ceecee, I should be going as fast as I feel like. That's the whole point of mountain biking - there aren't any speed limits.

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.
  • 1 4
 @mikekazimer: Well, that and doing it again the next day without surgical intervention. I have no way of knowing whether saddle position is to accomodate seated pedaling or reach, top tube length being as theoretical as ESTA, and was only posing an alternative all-rounder setup. Fit of Machine is more convincing, based on Instagram photo. Thanks for the review.
  • 6 0
 This Bike looks awesome, and I'm sure its a blast to ride. I have owned many specialized bikes, including the 2014 Specialized 29er Enduro. That bike was incredibly well rounded, it could be built up to be a downhill machine, or a heavy hitting trail bike. Saying this, I have also ridden many other bikes and I'm currently on a 2017 Rocky Mountain Slayer. I wouldn't give up the Slayer for the Stumpjumper Evo because the Slayer is very versatile with its ride 4 geometry and is so much fun to ride. I love what Specialized is doing here and believe that although they get a lot of hate, they make incredible good bike, some of the raters just need to ride a Specialized bike so they can see for themselves how good Specialized bikes are.
  • 7 1
 Nice review. I have a standard Stumpy with a 160mm 36 and can say with confidence its the best bike I've ever ridden. It climbs VERY well and inspires confidence on the decent. Specilized really killed it with these bikes.
  • 6 1
 The 27.5 evo actually has some out there geo, the 29er is close in numbers to a few different rigs. I wish that the 27.5 bike would have been reviewed. I think that the design concept of 27.5 wheels with absurd wheelbase has legs.
  • 2 9
flag jclnv (Nov 12, 2018 at 8:48) (Below Threshold)
 I think the bike needs 29" wheels. Too much of a pig to pedal without them.
  • 36 0
 @jclnv: Cover the pig in BBQ sauce. Wheelsize doesn't matter when you have BBQ sauce.
  • 7 1
 I own a 27.5 S3, which is 490mm reach and a even lower BB than the 29er. Best bike I've ever ridden, hands down. Set a PR/KOM this weekend by 22 seconds on my favorite descents, and for the past few years only been able to make incremental gains of a second here or there.

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.
  • 6 1
 @mikekazimer Is this the future for Pinkbike, just quietly ignoring 27.5 or if reviewing a bike that comes only in 27.5 it's referred to as a negative (i.e. SC Bronson)... There are those of us who do still prefer 'little wheels'
  • 2 0
 @NickB01: I agree. Getting tired of the constant bias of PBs top reviewers.
  • 2 0
 @NickB01, @headshot: It's not as much bias as it is the fact that there are more new 29ers coming out than 27.5" bikes. And since it's our job to cover the newest products, well, that's how you end up with more 29er reviews than 27.5.

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.
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer: Thx, looking forward to them.
  • 7 0
 @mikekazimer , how does it compare to the Specialized Enduro 29? The current, redesigned mode (2017+) specifically. Thanks!
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer I second this Q - was really interesting watching Graves and Keene ride the overforked stumpy instead of the enduro during the EWS last year - is this bike the answer that need? Does this have a little bit more of a sharp and aggressive, fast feel compared to the forgiving and super plush enduro 29?
  • 1 0
 The Stumpys have better suspension progression. Also the evo's are lower, slacker and longer.
  • 5 0
 I bought an Evo about two months ago and have almost the exact same feedback. Suspension is awesome compared to any price point (I have an ACS equipped 36 RC2). It is a monster on steep technical tracks and I don't even notice that it "only" has 140 mm of travel. The Manic post has been trouble free. The BB is LOW, planning on moving to the High position and then increasing the fork travel to 160 to maintain the geo. Also it weighs within 1 lb of my full carbon (frame, wheels, etc) HTLT with a few smart upgrades. The HTLT is a better option for a lot of riders that don't monster mash steep blown out trails on a regular basis, but here in Socal the Evo is a weapon.
  • 10 1
 Jumped straight to the comments for puns, stumped to not see any.
  • 3 0
 Built with 160 forks, coil damper, 165 cranks i really fell in love with my S2. With 15,2 kg it‘s maybe on the heavier side of a trailbike but it climbs everything i threw at it and on the descents i couldn‘t find it‘s limits yet.
  • 5 0
 S sizing (S2, S3) it. The marketing dept. has solved the awkward discussion of "is that a large size? Well...uuuhhh...I have a medium."
  • 3 0
 @worldsafckngtrail: you're right, it's an heavy bike. But this is not a "trail bike", it's a trail bike made to sustain bike park riding.
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.
  • 3 0
 Exactly. When I think about something like Morzine (or whatever). This is a great choice. Those dh bikes just sucks on the flow trail and this bike will hold pretty well on the steep lines.
  • 3 0
 @shaked: and if the lifts close because it's windy, you can "easily" pedal your way up so you don't have a day down in your trip.
  • 1 2
 Try an offset bushing in the forward shock bolt.
  • 1 5
flag shaked (Nov 13, 2018 at 1:42) (Below Threshold)
 @zede: I really want to down vote you, because you don't pedal your way up in a bike park, it's illegal. But you're probably right, it's one if the biggest advantages of this type of bikes.
  • 3 0
 @shaked: what?
  • 6 1
 Just goes to show that you don't need overpriced carbon bikes to produce a fantastic ride. This bike looks great. Nice one Specialized.
  • 3 0
 I just wish to see this (okay maybe only 64.5 or 64 HA) but with a 120-130mm bike. I'm on a 19 stumpy short travel 29 with a 140 fork. 67 HA I believe. It's a monster. I love it, but want to go a bit slacker without gaining travel. It's cool seeing 100mm bikes get slacker and more aggressive, 150-160mm bikes get really slack and aggressive, but I feel like 120-130mm bikes arent being pushed at the rates of it's longer and shorter travel brothers.
  • 3 0
 I'd say the closest thing to what you're looking for is a transition smuggler. 120mm rear, 140mm reduced offset fork, and 66 degree hta. You could slacken it out even more with a longer travel fork, around 0.5 degrees per 10mm increase in travel.
  • 1 0
 You should try Works Components headsets.
  • 3 0
 I tried this bike a couple months back, and honestly didn't love it. I had the opposite experience as @mikekazimer with the technical climbs - to me, I felt like I had to lean way forward to keep that front end from "flopping" around, and then lost traction in the rear. I just had a hard time figuring out who this bike was /for/, when I'd argue a longer-travel bike gets the job done with less compromise.
  • 3 2
 "I just had a hard time figuring out what this bike was for".

Did you only ride it uphill?
  • 3 1
 @jclnv: What I mean is that I'm not sure why someone would buy a 140mm bike with a 63.5 HA for descending when you could argue that a 160mm bike would be a better match, and still climb pretty well, and probably be a bit lighter.
  • 3 0
 Great review Mike, I’ve been on an S2 for a couple months now and have been overwhelmingly impressed. Have kept the bike in high mode for now and waiting for low mode for lift access days. For me it has been the best price per performance bikes I’ve owned. I was initially put off by the Rhythm fork spec but after removing 2/3 spacers it has been as good as anything else. I do believe there are benefits to this geo going up or down the trail and for the advanced and novice alike. Can’t wait to see where it goes from here.
  • 3 0
 For such a huge company, I like that Spesh is building something so radical. It really shows that there are some very passionate real riders in their design group. Cool bike, it's 'too much low and slack' for me personally, but I'd love to spend some time on one.
  • 6 0
 Props to such a big brand for making a genuinely contemporary bike
  • 4 1
 Pretty accurate review. Put some GX 165mm cranks on the bike. You'll be amazed at what 5mm can do. The tweaked geo bike you want Mike will probably be the next stock Stumpy.
  • 1 0
 That's what I did. Totally agree.
  • 5 0
 "raw aluminum frame and the lack of any Giant logos" That would be funny eh
  • 6 0
 The riding pictures are fantastic. Well done!
  • 1 0
 Thanks! Glad you enjoyed them.
  • 2 0
 So much different than the 2013 Stumpjumper I had. 69 degree HA. 90mm stem. Squishy fox 32 fork. I got bucked off of that on a decent/jump and injured my shoulder. After I got better I swore I needed something slacker. Got a HD3, which isn't even slack by today's standards. I've been off that jump a ton of times with no problems since. Granted part of that is rider skill, but 69 degrees was too steep.
  • 1 1
 If it was the 26" I promise you it was the short chainstays, not the HA.
  • 3 0
 IMO that's a great looking bike... but no XL. Bummer...

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.
  • 4 0
 I love the Sentinel in theory (only have a short test ride), so I'm excited for another comparable bike to test out.
  • 2 0
 You might want to check the "How does it compare?" section!
  • 1 0
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.
  • 5 0
 @MarcusBrody: I cant say I have ridden either but to me the Sentinel seems like it would be a better all rounder, but I'm a transition fan so maybe im a bit biased! The stumpy evo does look like a rowdy machine though and I will say having worked with Specialized as a LBS mechanic their customer care is second to none! Always a pelaure to deal with them!
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer the shock is actually 210mm x 50mm for the 29er. You have 210x55. 52mm for the 275.
  • 4 0
 Good catch - that's been corrected.
  • 15 0
 @mikekazimer: I took out the travel spacer on my S3 29, yielding that 55mm stroke. Napkin math says 154mm rear travel now, and it helps the suspension keep up with the geometry.
  • 1 0
 @knarrr: Can that be done on the smaller sizes too without any inappropriate touching?
  • 1 0
 @killerisation: Also interested to know this. I tried a DVO 230 x 60/65 in my S2 SJEVO 29 = Didn't fit, defo too long.
  • 6 1
 190+ cm riders need not apply.
  • 1 0
 Had one of the original evo stumps and it was awesome dh but going up could have really done with a set of forks you could reduced the travel on as the front end used to flop all over the shop on technical climbs. Sold it because of that in the end. Sounds like this one has improved on the climbing
  • 4 0
 I was ready to pull the trigger on this bike... Told my wife I was buying it... Got to sleep on the couch that night...
  • 4 0
 Did you tell her you were going to buy it or have sex with it?
And did you pull the trigger?
  • 3 0
 I'll wait to see what the new Enduro looks like but this frame is on my wish list. I'm over having to baby carbon frames on bikes that are meant to be ridden really hard.
  • 1 0
 I would really like a halfway-to-Evo. Slightly longer and slacker than the standard Stumpy, not quite as long and slack as the Evo. Only 435mm reach on the medium Stumpy right now, still feels short compared to other modern geo bikes. Wish it was closer to the S2, 445-450mm ish.
  • 3 2
 Yep reach is too short on the standard bikes.
  • 1 0
 Specialized, please continue to make long geo bikes, coming from a tall person who can only just make a current model enduro work. they do a lot of things well but not all, having said that depending what comes out my next bike probably wont be from spesh.
  • 4 1
 I see people putting at least a 160mm fork up front and trying to find a way to overshock the rear too and slap it back in the low position
  • 5 1
 I've just done mine (275 version, S3) - 170mm 36 RC2, 216x63 Vivid R2C with a 3mm offset bushing to shorten it, run in low setting with a 4mm spacer to cap stroke at 59mm. 170mm travel F&R, 336mm BB height. First ride in and it feels FAST. Never expected Specialized to come out with a bike like this!
  • 1 0
 Do you have pics on what you did? I have the S2 29 EVO and would like to try what you did to yours. Thanks Arthur. @andyrm:
  • 1 0
 @andyrm: how does it compare to your Edison?
  • 2 0
 @killerisation: itsike chalk and cheese! I was on a 2016 Edison Evo before the Stumpy Evo, first thing I noticed was the extra room meant I was breathing better on climbs. As for descents - unbelievable. Wet UK winter runs after a month off the bike post EWS Finale were within 1-2 seconds of PBs (set in the summer) on the old bike - and that was first runs.....

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.
  • 4 1
 Definitely missing a trick, no frame only, some of the components are terrible for the price, offer a frame only, then I can build my own bike
  • 3 2
 A couple guys who ride in the rockies with me have Sentinels with superb results, climbing too, I bet this bike actually works (spesh stole the geo from Transition or something if it actually works, I rode last years enduro 29, ewwwww)
  • 4 0
 This makes me think, what the new Enduro 29 will look like. Time for an update.
  • 1 0
 I got to test ride this bike today, and it was awesome. Rode it at soqeul demo forest in Santa Cruz on Braille Trail. It loved the steep and rough sections. I liked it so much it made me realize my current bike is definitely too short for me. I want to try a few more bikes now, especially that transition sentinel.
  • 1 1
 Seems like this geo was a later addition to the line. The lack of a full size run (from such a huge company!) and the aluminum only options would mean a shorter development timeline.
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!
  • 5 0
 To me it's more of a publicly available beta made in the sizes they sell the most.
  • 1 0
 @yzedf: I could see that.
  • 2 0
 @yzedf: Did you see what came out today? Looks like they had a carbon in the works...
  • 1 0
 @robokfc: I did!
  • 2 1
 That’s the best look Specilized I’ve seen in a very long time. It makes sense and looks nice. Shame they make an XL version of it. Mind you it doesn’t come close to my Bird AM9
  • 2 2
 yeah yeah...well changes in geo are a point. it hasnt really gone to extremes yet...but when it does, the justification and reasoning behind any improvements on handling and performance with new models will be real funny. and I will be laughing & coughing up my morning coffee reading these reviews.
  • 1 0
 Bikes pretty light at 32lbs Slacker than the rallon but 10mm less travel... Evil offering comparison... Most bikes seem to be built with 170 cranks these days no matter the size frame which hasnt been discussed too much.
  • 1 0
 "Stumpjumper's bottom bracket height is a ground-scraping 328mm"............bummer, still no design change to fix the instantaneous accidental ejection seat mode after smashing your pedal into a rock.
  • 3 0
 What's with the L/XL bikes now? Us tall guys need the full XL reach, otherwise the bike looks rad!
  • 2 0
 I have no hate towards the 27,5'' or 29'' wheels..just wondering how far the wheel size standarts will 29ers seem to be THE THING..but for how long?
  • 3 0
 It looks antiquated and cutting-edge simultaneously. Cool.
  • 3 0
 Fu%king love it !! Please Santa put it in my basket this x-mas!!
  • 3 0
 So happy to see an alu bike…
  • 2 2
 All these companies with '' new geometry'' must say a big thanks to Mondraker. Also, maybe i' m mistaken, but this chain slap protector, it's not Lori's vergier's mechanic who did the first that type of protection?
  • 1 1
 Feels like the Pole Evolink 140 was the groundbreaker in their category. Not the very first but certainly the best riding/testing version of it.
  • 2 0
 What's your super steep test trail? My sentinel wants to know, I am boring it with my riding recently.
  • 2 0
 A Banshee prime sits between the evo and the standard stumpy in terms of geo but with 29 inch wheels and a 160mm fork.
  • 3 1
 Looks like the guys at transition had a good idea. A lot of the new bikes are comming in the sentinel like geo.
  • 1 2
 @pizpisoc they just copied the logic but pulled in the fork chassis people.
  • 1 2
 That’s great to see that after ruining a bunch of people’s riding seasons with proprietary shocks that blew up and couldn’t be replaced for my reasonable price or within a reasonable time period.
That they’ve learned something they should have known before.
Proprietary shit sucks. Dicks.
Wait a minutes wasn’t pf30 these a*sholes idea
  • 2 0
 Did anyone else end up watching a full 20 minutes of motorcycle hill climbs?
  • 1 0
  • 2 3
 its presented as “modern” geometry bike why its not compared to pole or Geometron??
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??
  • 2 0
 Nothing like looking through pinkbike comment fights right after waking up.
  • 2 0
 Banshee Prime with 160mm fork and offset bushes......very very similar (except a more realitstic BB height). Just saying Smile
  • 6 3
 I love 80mm wide bars
  • 20 4
 What are these? Bars for ants?!
  • 1 0
 Any pointers on how it compares to the new Giant Reign Sx, which is a bit cheaper and has DVO suspension?
  • 2 1
 Damn, reasonable price. Too bad I just fucked myself for money, for like the next year.
  • 2 0
 Sick bike, but what about the 27.5 version?
  • 1 1
 Seriously thought it would be a 160mm on rear bike?! 140mm is playing it way too safe and not getting the full gnar potential. Rad bike though.
  • 2 0
 Just picked up my S3 29er tonight! Quite pleased with the build.
  • 1 2
 @jflb: Wow - what a slap in my face.. . Maybe i am an idiot. But maybe i‘m also a professional bikefitter and maybe i know a thing or two about bicycles and biomechanics.. . maybe
  • 1 0
 It’s a simple thing called leverage.
  • 1 0
 If 26" cuts like a stilletto, 29" is a tractor. A tractor that send it like a tractor.
  • 1 0
 I have one.(27.5) It took a sec to get used to it but I love it. It is fantastic! That is all. OK bye bye
  • 1 0
 This bike is a tank. The shop I went to weighed it for me, and it came in at 35lbs. You get what you pay for.
  • 1 0
 can someone give me a frame weight for the s3 alloy 27.5, or any frame size weight? comparing to a commencal clash
  • 2 0
 Solid Review
  • 1 0
 Any chance you could post he link to the suspension widget for settings?
  • 3 2
 good value for money ? wtf specialized is that you ?
  • 2 2
 did pinkbike really make a review where a borderline enduro bike doesnt actually climb as well as an xc bike? whoa.
  • 1 0
 I dont see a DHX2 listed in 210x50mm ???? Its not on the Fox website
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: what’s the size of the Fox DHX2 you were running?
  • 1 1
 JUST BUY THE TRANSITION! It not only looks waaaay better but performs better too!
  • 1 0
  • 1 4
 Seems like most of these long slack 29'ers are Pole Evolink wannabes?! Not much risk to take when Pole's getting 4.5 star reviews from everyone. It works.
  • 2 2
 is that a sentinel?
  • 1 3
 Yeah, no.
A 140mm travel bike that's pushing 34lbs(with pedals, cuz nobody rides without 'em).
That bike should be 4lbs less
  • 3 2
 It's got 2300g wheels, an NX groupset, and is massive. You're clueless.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: do you know the actual weight of the roval traverse wheels? is it really 2300g?
  • 2 3
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2023. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.064719
Mobile Version of Website