Review: Yeti's Back in the XC Game With the 2024 ASR

There are six complete builds, with prices starting at $5,600 USD for the C2 model, and climbing all the way up to $13,900 for the T5 Ultimate XX – that model has RockShox's Flight Attendant suspension system, and uses a wireless-only frame.

---

---

Frame Details

The ASR's carbon frame design has a typical XC silhouette, with a top-tube mounted shock that leaves room for two water bottles, and routing for running a remote lockout. It may look fairly simple, but a serious amount of time and effort went into figuring out the optimum carbon layup for the frame – 36 unique configurations were tried during the development process.

The goal was to keep the weight down by eliminating any excess carbon, while also creating a frame that was strong enough to withstand the demands of modern cross-country courses. Special attention was paid to the areas around pivot points, where it ended up being possible to remove material without affecting performance or frame longevity. Even the 7075 aluminum rocker link's shape was designed with weight savings in mind.

The result of those efforts is a frame that weighs a claimed 1530 grams for the frame without shock, and 1830 grams with a shock. There's an even lighter version, the T Series Wireless, that forgoes the drivetrain and dropper cable post ports, dropping the frame to 1448 grams without a shock, and 1813 grams with one.

Those numbers aren't the absolute lightest, but they are very competitive – for comparison, a Scott Spark SL weights 1870 grams, an Orbea Oiz is 1750 grams, and the new Specialized Epic 8 is 1965 grams for the regular version, and 1795 for the S-Works version.


Thankfully, the ASR doesn't have thru-headset cable routing – the cables run through a port in the side of the head tube. There's also a little hatch in front of the bottom bracket that makes it easier to route the dropper housing. Unlike Yeti's longer-travel frames, the ASR doesn't use tube-in-tube construction, a design choice that was made to save weight. Instead, the housing is clamped at the entrance port, and foam tubes are used to maintain silence. For the full-on weight weenies, removing those tubes off is one way to knock off a few extra grams. You could also take off the rubber downtube protection and little rubber mud flap on the swingarm, but that seems excessive to me.

All of the models (with the exception of the Flight Attendant version) are equipped with RockShox's 3P remote, which uses a twist shifter to toggle between Open, Pedal, and Lock, and changes the compression damping on the fork and shock simultaneously.

Other details include room for 2.4” tires on 30mm internal width rims, a threaded bottom bracket, and a custom chainguide that is integrated into the main pivot bolt.

Geometry

Looking back at the 2015 Yeti ASR is a quick way to see just how far cross-country geometry has progressed recently. That bike had a 69.1-degree head angle, a 73.8-degree seat angle, and a 443mm reach for a size large, and those numbers were thoroughly modern back then. Nine years is a lot of time between models, so it's not surprising that the 2024 ASR's numbers are substantially different.

The ASR's head angle is 66.5-degrees, the seat angle is 75.5-degrees, and the reach on a size large is 465mm. The chainstay lengths vary slightly, starting at 433mm for the XS frame and increasing in 2mm increments, topping out at 441mm for the XL.

For the sake of comparison, here's a brief list of other modern XC bikes and their head angle / seat tube angle / reach (size L).

Specialized Epic 8: 65.9° / 75.5° / 475mm

Orbea Oiz: 67°/ 76.5° / 475mm

Scott Spark RC: 67.2° / 76.6° / 472mm

Cervelo ZFS-5: 66.6° / 75° / 457mm

Suspension Design

While many companies suggest running 25% sag on their XC offerings, Yeti recommends 30%, in order to make sure that all 115mm of travel is accessible when necessary. The leverage ratio change is fairly linear, with a 10% progression rate. Anti-squat sits at just above 100% at sag, and decreases slightly as the bike goes through its travel, although it always remains above 82%.

---

Testing Info

Testing took place over the course of the last five weeks in Bellingham, Washington. Trail conditions tended to be on the wetter side of the spectrum, but there were a few hero dirt days thrown in for good measure. Techy XC trails are where the Yeti feels at home, and this loop from last year's BC Bike Race is representative of the type of a modern race course where the ASR would fit right in.

Climbing

The overall fit of the ASR felt perfect for my 5'11” height – it's more upright than the fully stretched out XC machines of years past, but not so much that it puts too much pressure on your hands, or creates a strange pedaling position. Even with a 50mm stem I didn't have any trouble keeping the front wheel weighted on steep climbs, and the transition from seated to standing pedaling didn't require any odd body movements to find a balanced position.

As XC bikes become slacker and slacker, some riders have expressed an understandable concern that'd the ride experience is going to be dulled too much, that the liveliness that makes XC bike so fun will disappear. I understand the sentiment, but I don't think we're there yet. Yes, the handling of the ASR does feel calmer than its predecessor, which had a 69-degree head angle. However, the handling is still plenty quick, and if anything the slacker head angle makes it easier to stay on line while climbing; there's less twitchiness, and you can relax a little more when navigating tricky technical bits.

I've ridden plenty of cross-country bikes that don't really need the lockout that they're spec'd with, but it's a slightly different story with the ASR. The Open position really does feel open, and by that I mean there's some noticeable suspension movement during hard pedaling; it doesn't have the extra-firm, extra-efficient feel that's typically associated with an XC race bike. Now, we're still talking about a bike with 115mm of travel here, so the suspension movement I'm referring to is fairly subtle, but the overall feel is noticeably softer than something like the Orbea Oiz.

That's where the 3-position remote comes in – with a quick twist to Pedal (or Lock mode if there's not a bump in sight) and the ASR's suspension stiffens up, giving it a much more efficient feel. I used the Pedal mode for most climbs, unless it was extra slippery and technical, in which case I'd open things up in order to maximize the amount of traction.

I'm not totally sold on the twist shifter setup, mainly due to the ergonomics of the short, push-on grip that butts against the shifter, but it does make it very quick and easy to switch between modes. In my ideal world there'd be some sort of blip button, or a low profile toggle that could be used to switch between the three modes. The new Flight Attendant recently launched, and that's an option on the fanciest ASR, but that's still not exactly what I'm after. For now, the 3P twist shifter gets a passing grade, but I'm going to keep trying to figure out an even better solution.

Descending

The softer suspension feel in the Open position pays dividends on the descents, or really on any rougher sections of trail. For a 115mm bike the ASR does an impressive job of maintaining traction, an important characteristic when you're rolling around on a low profile tire like the Rekon Race. On a longer travel bike I'd likely call the sensation 'fluttery', but that term doesn't fit as well here, since the rear wheel isn't really moving up and down that much. 'Muted' would probably be a more accurate descriptor – you can still feel the trail under you, but it's as if the really sharp pointy bits have been dulled down.

The RockShox SID and SIDLux fork / shock combo work very well together, and the lack of noise from either suspension unit is worth a note – there were no squawks or squelchs to be heard, one of those little details that seems especially nice when you notice it.

As far as the overall handling of the ASR goes, it hits the mark that I thought the SB120 missed – it's light, smooth, and capable of tackling a relatively wide range of terrain. Now, we're still talking about a sub-24 pound XC bike here, and more moderate, flowing trails are still its happy place, but if a jump or drop with a good landing happens to pop up, or a tangled mess of roots on a steeper section of trail presents itself, the ASR can handle it. Again, all things in moderation, but the geometry and overall suspension feel coalesce to make the ASR a much calmer, more composed ride than I'd anticipated.

How Does It Compare?

The Orbea Oiz is the XC bike that I've spent the most time on recently, so we'll start with that comparison. As far as geometry goes, the ASR has a .5-degree slacker head angle, and a 1-degree slacker seat seat tube angle. The Orbea has a 472mm reach and the Yeti's measures 465mm for a size large, but the top tube length of both bikes is identical due to the difference in seat tube angles, which means the seated pedaling position feels very similar on both bikes.

On the trail, the Orbea has a firmer suspension feel, firm enough that I was happy racing it without any remote lockout at all. That makes it feel a little snappier than the Yeti (when the ASR is in Open mode), although that does come at the price of reduced traction – the Yeti does a better job of filtering out trail chatter, and overall provides a smoother ride while climbing and descending.

The Orbea will appeal to the rider who's looking for a more traditional XC experience, with firm suspension characteristics and snappy handling. The Yeti delivers a smoother, calmer ride than the Oiz, which can come in handy on those extra-long rides, the ones where your response time starts to slow and tunnel vision starts to take over. It really comes down to personal preference more than any one factor in this case (well, the Oiz does have thru-headset cable routing, so there's that) – both bikes are very capable of being raced at the highest level.

As far as pricing goes, Orbea offers a deeper model lineup, which includes aluminum-framed options, as well as a custom parts picker.

Which Model is the Best Value?

Out of the five version of the ASR that Yeti offers, it's the $5,600 C2 that strikes me as offering the best value. That model has a cable-operated GX drivetrain, RockShox SID Select suspension, Level TL brakes and DT Swiss M1900 wheels. The frame is Yeti's C level, so it'll be slightly heavier than the Turq series option, but that does help keep the cost down.

Yeti offers the option to upgrade to the Ultimate level suspension and the 3 position twist shifter for an additional $600, something I'd say is worth considering. After that, I'd recommend putting a ton of miles on it, and upgrading parts as they wear out or your budget allows. Things like carbon wheels, bars, and cranks would be easy ways to knock off a significant amount of weight; it'll just come down to deciding how much you're willing to pay for that weight savings.

Technical Report

Maxxis Rekon / Rekon Race tires: I'm a fan of the Rekon and the Rekon Race tire combo. It's quick and predictable, as long as you keep in mind that you're on cross-country tires – the limits come up a little quicker than a big meaty enduro tread. In addition, the Rekon Race tire isn't the best option for really wet conditions, since there's not much tread to bite into the ground on slippery climbs, or to help with braking traction. Other than that, though, the range of conditions that this fast-rolling combo works in is pretty impressive. I ran 21 psi in the front and 23 psi in the rear and didn't have any punctures during the test period.

Fox Transfer SL dropper post: The Transfer SL post only has two position – up and down. It drops and raises very quickly, with an audible 'thwunk' that leaves no doubt it's fully extended. With the 150mm version, I found myself missing the ability to stop it anywhere in its travel. On rolling terrain there were times when dropping the seat halfway would have been a nice option. The two-position concept makes a lot of sense for the shorter travel versions – a middle setting's not going to be that useful when there's only 125mm of drop – but on the longer travel version it's a little less convenient.

DT Swiss XR1200 carbon wheels: These wheels are a new addition to DT's catalog, with a new carbon rim design, DT 180 hubs with ceramic bearings, Revolite spokes, and a weight of 1303 grams. The majority of my time on them was trouble free – they've stayed true, and are nice and quiet, free of the nerve-wracking 'twangs' that some light XC wheels emit during hard cornering.

I did have one issue arise on a winter ride, when the temperature was hovering around freezing. I went to put in some pedal strokes after a hard corner and was met with... nothing. The ratchet ring didn't engage, and there were two full crank revolutions before the hub engaged. I've been on several rides since then without any issues – I have a hunch the freezing temperatures played a role, but it's worth a mention. I'm going to be putting more miles on these wheel for a longer term review, so we'll see if the issue repeats itself.

What about a Lunch Ride version?

There's no Lunch Ride edition of the ASR, the overforked and slightly overbuilt option that Yeti offers with their other models (at least not yet) but it's worth tossing a few ideas out there for riders that have a downcountry itch they want to scratch. If this were my bike, there are really only two things I'd change to smooth out some of the XC edges a tiny bit. The first is the brakes. At the very least, I'd install metallic pads in order for better wet weather performance. Switching to Codes would be a good option too – that's the spec you'll find on the recently release Epic Evo. Codes weigh around 100 grams (total) more than the Levels, and that's a quarter pound weight penalty I don't mind taking.

The other change I'd make would be to the SL post. Even though I typically run 210mm of drop on trail and enduro bikes, the 150mm of drop on the ASR is well suited to its XC intentions. I miss the infinite height adjustment, though, and I wouldn't complain about a little more drop, so a 170mm post would likely get substituted in.

What about a 130mm fork and beefy tires? Honestly, I wouldn't go that route. A longer fork would slacken the seat tube angle even further, and heavy tires would take away some of the joys of riding a light bike with fast rolling tires. Plus, it's good for a bike like this to have at least some sort of reminder that while it's plenty capable, there are limits to the terrain it's supposed to be ridden on.

---

Pinkbike's Take

---

---