Canyon Sender - Review

Mar 9, 2017 at 10:09
by Paul Aston  
Update: After publishing this review, I discovered a crack on the Canyon Sender's frame. The frame was returned to Canyon, tested and scanned with their in-house CT scanner. You can read the full report here: Cracked Sender, Canyon's Response.





Canyon launched their Sender downhill chassis back in April 2016 and recently announced their new World Cup DH team, starring no other than pinners Troy Brosnan, Ruaridh Cunningham, and Mark Wallace. Not to mention the team is being mentored and led by the legendary Fabien Barel.

The Sender has a carbon fiber main frame joined to an alloy swingarm, and comes equipped with a components package that's ready to head straight to the starting line. Air-supported Fox suspension with a multitude of adjustments are found front and rear, Renthal controls the cockpit, and RaceFace cranks are supplied to stand on. Wheelset duties are handled by DT Swiss, in the form of their FR1950. The drivetrain is a Sram X01 DH 7-speed affair. Maxxis Minion DHRII tires and an SDG I-Beam saddle finish things off. In Europe, €4999 gets your new bike posted straight to your door.

Canyon Sender Details

• Intended use: Downhill
• Travel: 200mm
• 27.5" wheels
• 62 - 64° adjustable head angle with included headset cups
• 430 - 446mm adjustable chainstays
• 12 x 157mm rear spacing
• Carbon main frame and 6066-T6 alloy swingarm
• 4-Bar Suspension System with MX Link
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Weight: 16.2kg (claimed) size Medium
• Price: €4999 / $5340 USD (not currently available in the US)
www.canyon.com
Pinkbike took a First Look at the black and blue beast last year, and you can find out more about the bike's development and construction here. For the last seven months, I've had a Sender to test and have been doing my best to break it.


Suspension Design

Views: 50,178    Faves: 15    Comments: 0


Canyon hasn't gone wild trying to invent an all-new suspension linkage; a four-bar system combined with a motorbike style 'MX Link' drives the supplied Fox Float X2 shock. A matching Kashima-coated Fox 40 is found at the business end of the bike.

The bike comes with a handy suspension sag-o-meter marked on the linkage. Not so handily, it doesn't mention anywhere in Canyon's literature how much the sag would be with the markings aligned. After a quick email to Canyon, I found this relates to 30% of the travel.


Canyon Sender Bike test
Canyon Sender Bike test


Using Fox's Float X2, I had a nightmare attaching the shock pump to the shock valve due to the frame shape. After months of struggle, I sent a moaning email to Canyon. The reply noted that Canyon was aware of this issue and there is a 'valve extender' supplied with the new bike. My valve extender was either missing on delivery, or I threw it away with the recycling.

Reaching the rest of the adjusters on the Float X2 (and the DHX2 pictured) is easy. Other types of shock could have issues with adjuster access and the compact frame design. Shocks with a single rebound adjuster at the non-piggy back end of the unit could be especially awkward to adjust.


Canyon Sender Bike test
Fox's latest line of shocks are easy to adjust on the Sender, this may not be the case with all dampers due to the frame layout.


Geometry/Sizing

The geometry and sizing of the Sender were superbly well thought out from the beginning, introducing a full four sizes from day one. Sizes are well spaced with a 9mm increase in stack height per size and a regular 20mm added to the reach per size. A size Small, for example, sports a reach of 420mm and the XL a more rangy 480mm.

Head-angle adjustment is supplied in terms of +/- 1º headset cups, giving a range between 62 and 64º. There is also an adjustable chainstay insert that swaps length between 430 and 446mm. There is no bottom bracket height adjustment. Naturally, however, a dual-crown fork allows ride height to be tweaked at the front end. My XL-sized test bike, including the -1º headset cups and the chainstay in the long setting possessed a 1322mm wheelbase.

Canyon Sender - Pinkbike First Look.
Canyon Sender - Pinkbike First Look.


Specifications
Specifications
Price $5340
Travel 200
Rear Shock Fox Factory Float X2
Fork Fox Factory 40
Headset Acros / Canyon
Cassette SRAM XG-795, 7 Speed
Crankarms Race Face SIXC
Chainguide E.Thirteen LG1+ Taco
Bottom Bracket SRAM GXP
Chain SRAM PC-1110
Rear Derailleur SRAM X01 DH, 7 Speed
Shifter Pods SRAM X01 DH, 7 Speed
Handlebar Renthal Fat Bar 800mm
Stem Renthal Integra 50mm
Grips Canyon DHX
Brakes SRAM Guide RSC
Wheelset DT Swiss FR 1950
Tires Maxxis Minion DHR II 3C Maxx Grip DW
Seat SDG I-Fly Custom
Seatpost SDG Micro I-Beam SP





Canyon Sender Bike test








Out of the Box

What's the downside of buying your bike online from a direct sale only brand? Not having a local bike shop to order, receive, un-box and get it ready for you to hit the hills.

Luckily, the Sender arrives in a well thought out box (that is also perfect for airplane travel) with inserts to keep everything safe and protected. A basic tool kit is included with instruction manuals. All you need to do is pull the bike out of the box, bolt on the stem and insert the wheels. The bikes are fully built, prepared and checked; this includes torquing all bolts, aligning and bleeding brakes, and tuning the gears before the bike is packed and sent to your door. In short, you need only possess the most basic of mechanical skills before you can start riding.


Handling

The carbon front end of the Sender has superb lateral stiffness, and the hand-to-feet connection is solid and accurate, even in the roughest rough. The front triangle also absorbs the frontal impacts well and doesn't transfer harsh loads through your arms and upper back.

On the flip side, the alloy swingarm is certainly not as stiff as others; this allows the bike to flex and track and hold a straight line with ease. It is not best at providing stiffness on the smooth hardpack of a bike park, but it's a killer through gnarly rocks and roots – the Sender is a downhill race machine and no park rat anyway.

In my opinion, a bike should have the most stiffness between the headtube to the bottom bracket, and from those two points should become continually more compliant all the way to the tire contact patches. For me, the Sender has this sorted. Objectively, preferred or needed stiffness is largely influenced by rider's weight and traveling speeds.


Canyon Sender Bike test


The Sender flies on smooth terrain with a few revolutions of the pedals and gains speed quickly. The downside of this stable pedaling dynamic is that it is hard to keep on the gas through the rough stuff, stiffening the suspension and bouncing my flat pedal feet around, but we shouldn't be pedaling over bumps on a downhill anyway, should we?

The Sender has a close to neutral braking action thanks to the Horst-style pivot, allowing the suspension to continue to move almost freely under braking, but this always gives me the feeling of the bike pitching forwards on the stoppers; less weight on the back wheel means I need to move my weight further back to compensate, which can then cause issues with weighting the front wheel to grip in towards the corner apex. One could increase the spring rate of the fork or add some turns to the LSC to compensate for this, but I strive to strike a good balance to keep me centered on the bike during situations when I am not pulling the brake levers.

Now, not everyone will agree with me here, but I find more anti-rise (brake squat) a benefit on steep trails. Yes, it will stiffen the suspension movement when braking, but not excessively. The perceived adverse effect makes me think more about braking – I try to get out of the rough, brake hard in a strong and tall position with my weight driving into the front wheel, then get off the brakes and lean into the corner and feel the tires tracking. Personally, I would like to see the Sender's suspension squat more under braking. I spoke with Canyon about the previous two points, the anti-rise and the anti-squat. They said they had built adjustable test mules to adjust the characteristics in the prototyping phase, settling on the current numbers gave them what they thought will suit a range of their pro-racers and across the board to their amateur customers. I can only agree that they have created a machine that balances all aspects of design well.


Initial reports of the Sender suggested it needed more progression and mid-stroke support. The Fox Float X2 shock that came packed full of spacers (the Float X2 was delivered with six spacers installed) didn't solve this. In fact, it compounded the issue. I tried the shock with no spacers, for a more linear feel and mid-stroke support; that helped, but it still wasn't perfect. On paper, the Canyon is up there with some of the most progressive machines available. So I think the problem lies in the Float X2. I think the rebound circuit gets overwhelmed and can't return towards the sag point fast enough, this gives the feeling of it being too soft, bogging down, and making the rider want more oomph in the bike or shock to return. I did tune this out, by adding more and more compression and less and less rebound. That tweak did solve this particular bogging issue, but caused some others.
Canyon Sender Bike test
Is coil the new air, that was the new coil? I had a better time on the Sender with the coil sprung Fox DHX2.

I strapped on a Fox DHX2 coil and noticed an instant improvement. It was more supple in the beginning, gave better mid-stroke support, returned faster to the sag point than the air-sprung shock and didn't wallow. I had no issues with excessive bottoming out and it didn't leave me wanting more progression.

As soon as I mounted the DHX2 coil and gave it a run, I felt I was instantly moving faster over terrain with more control. I went to my test track and set both shocks to factory damping and sag suggestions, and did some back-to-back runs. Result: I was consistently three seconds faster with the coil than with the air shock on the sub-two-minute track. This was only over six runs, but on a track I know well, so I'd say it was significant.

I have been told that Fox have a damping-circuit upgrade coming for model year 2018, which could solve this issue. Overall, the Fox suspension is amazing: smooth, supple, superbly reliable with a wide range of adjustment.


Canyon Sender Bike test


Thoughts

Geometry: I'm bored of the short-chainstay marketing exercise. I believe people who say that they like short chainstays on short bikes. But if you always choose the XL option, I think the 446mm setting should actually be the shorter of the two options. I ran the Sender at the full 446mm length for the duration of testing, bar a couple of runs to check the short setting. Some testing by a World Cup racer on my test track suggested he was seven seconds faster on a 1.45min track with the longer CS over the short. He was riding a medium Sender.

The Sender is incredibly stable thanks to its length and layout. So stabIe, that I could live with the bottom bracket being a bit higher, and has me re-thinking whether or not a low BB is always the best route. I didn't strike the ground any more often than with other bikes, but some more clearance would be welcomed, and, I think, would speed up the transitions leaning from one corner to the next, and keeping angled into longer corners and cambers.

• Bearing life: The bearings lasted surprisingly well with no extra grease added since day one. They have developed a slight wobble after seven months of riding (and me not holding back with the jet wash). The bearings are not perfect, but the bike still compresses freely with the shock removed.

• Angle issues: The angled headset cups supplied with the Sender continually rotated themselves around from the correct angle. Pressing them in dry didn't work. Pressing them in with a lathering of fiber grip paste didn't work. Super glue worked; I'm not sure what this means for the carbon, so this is not a recommendation.


Canyon Sender Bike test
The angled headset cups continually rotated inside the headtube.
Canyon Sender Bike test
The Sender's finish was superb, except the chainstay that started to show some wear.


• Finish: The finish of the front end of the bike took a hammering like a champ, and still looks great after a wash and wipe down. On the seat stay, the top layer of black paint isn't as robust and did suffer a few chips, which reveal the blue below.

• Torque settings: Handily all the bolts are etched with torque settings. Not that I needed them: not a single pivot bolt came loose in seven months, now that is a rarity.


Canyon Sender Bike test
Can somebody in the industry fix this waste of space, please.

• Hub sizing: With the ever increasing number of hub standards in the mountain bike industry, can somebody please sort this out? The extra wide 157mm hub has at least 30mm of wasted space, a huge gap on the disc side (to maintain spoke symmetry) and that silly cassette spacer on the drive side. There is a lot of real estate between the disc and frame dropout too. Can we just make bikes narrower, for better clearance, or the spoke angle wider, as we are continually told it would make our wheels better? At least E*13 have sorted some of this problem with their LG1R wheelset.

• Alloy over carbon: After a rock connection, the right-hand alloy lever of the Guide RS was rough and bent; fortunately, they could be filed down and straightened. I think Canyon killed it on the specification choice for the Sender CF 9.0. People will instantly compare this bike to the equally priced YT Tues, and will claim the YT has a better spec because of the carbon cranks, wheelset and brake levers. I agree, better value on paper, but when your warranty has run out and you need to replace broken carbon parts at retail pricing, your wallet will be screaming.

• Details: The attention to detail on this bike is superb: the rear mudguard, the silently-insulated internal cable routing, the chain and heel guards on the chainstay. Dialed.


Canyon Sender Bike test
I'm becoming more of an alloy component fan over carbon. This lever was straightened and smoothed with a file after a rock impact.
Canyon Sender Bike test
I heard of a few riders snapping these mudguards off the Sender. Mine stayed on, but blowing my feet off and ball-riding the rear wheel isn't something that I am into...


Component Check

• Fox Float 40 Factory and Float X2: The Float 40 is fantastic. Even though the recommended service interval is much shorter than the six months I didn't touch them for, the 40 kept on performing superbly. When I finally stripped them down, the oil was filthy and the cartridge squishy with some air pockets. But the fork was still working commendably until then. I only decided to get them sorted after they started getting really sticky.

• Maxxis Minion DHR II: I'd say Maxxis are still the king of the downhill tire. The carcass feeling is superb, the tread is a good width, and you get decent longevity in the 3C version.

• SRAM X0 DH: Now I am not the biggest derailleur fan, but SRAM's X01 DH system was fantastic and nearly issue free. Except for the original B-tension screw and plate that broke within a few rides, it was the only ride ending problem with the bike. SRAM has acknowledged that this is a warranty issue and it was replaced with no further problems. If this happened to you, get in touch and they will fix it. I was a bit upset my replacement came with red stickers, instead of the original blue, though.


Canyon Sender Bike test
There is nothing to fault with the Fox 40.
Canyon Sender Bike test
The DT Swiss wheelset and Maxxis tires, the best choice out there?

• DT Swiss FR1950 Wheelset: These wheels kept on taking the hits like a champ. I dropped the spoke tensions over a full turn, which had a huge impact improving off-camber grip, deflection, and traction. Tensions are low, and not ideal for hardpack berms and smooth corners, but boy, do they track well. The DT Pro Lock nipples also do a fantastic job of staying put, I ran the wheels for months at low tension, and they just never loosened off further. The rims are compliant, and the alloy isn't too hard. The rims have suffered a few minor dings, but nothing major, and none big enough to affect tubeless setup.

• E13 LG1 Chain Device: The E*13 LG1 chain guide and bash guard did a superb job with retention and protection. The lower roller, however, wasn't the smoothest operator, rumbling away whenever I was turning the cranks.




Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesIt's incredibly hard to pick faults with the Sender. Canyon has simply sent the ball out of the park. This machine combines the best value, ride, sizing and build kit on the market; it only seems to have one competitor from the other German direct sale brand. Paul Aston







About the Reviewer
Stats: Age: 31 • Height: 6'1” • Ape Index: +4" • Weight: 75kg • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None • Instagram: astonator
Paul Aston is a racer and dirt-jumper at heart. Previously adding to the list of non-qualifiers at World Cup DH events, now he's attacking enduro and has been since before it was fashionable. Based in the UK, but often found residing between mainland Europe and New Zealand allows him to experience a huge variety of terrains and trails.



214 Comments

  • + 473
 You review a Canyon Sender yet fail to send it over a canyon. You had ONE job.....
  • + 308
 I did, but the cameraman on the day didn't have a lens that could shoot wide enough...
  • + 274
 @paulaston: And I won Rampage. But no one saw it cause the Red Bull media player crashed.
  • + 102
 @paulaston: can I say Paul Aston, your reviews are really different in a good way. I never read reviews by the other writers on PB these days, because they're all the same. Your thought process is fresh, seems honest and often goes against accepted trends. Keep it going!
  • + 8
 Those are Maxxis Shorty's, not HRII's.
  • + 74
 I want to know how it climbs, that section got left out above..
  • + 30
 @bibsack46: There's also no mention of the ample amount of space for a water bottle in that front triangle...
  • + 17
 Hahaha, "blowing my feet off and ball-riding the rear wheel isn't something that I am into..." Me neither!
  • + 70
 The headset cups rotated in the frame and there was no fix, besides voiding the warranty??? Are you kidding me? That is pretty much a deal breaker for me. With all of the testing that Canyon did with this, this issue never came up? Or did it? I think this is a major issue.
  • + 15
 @dmarsh15: that seems like a deal breaker to me too.
  • + 3
 @allballz: That would be terrible for small bump compliance and pedal bob (you could use it for one or the other, but not both). The input forces from small and high frequency bumps would be much to small and fast to spin it up unless it was a small mass and pedal bob (which isn't important in DH, but why make it worse) would be too great a force at such a slow rate that it spin it up with ease unless it was a large mass, making it pointless. Trying to adjust for both would be a nightmare. F1 is only concerned with the high frequency, not both. Very interesting though!
  • + 1
 @bibsack46: Like a scalded cat/over-caffeinated mountain goat/rocketship, etc...
  • - 20
flag AZRyder (Mar 13, 2017 at 9:54) (Below Threshold)
 This bike looks like it blows. 6'1" and you're on an XL? That sizing is absolute crap. How on earth is 6'1" an XL? Sorry bike companies. Make the bikes bigger. At 6'1" the standard should be a large. I'm 6'5" and I'm darn tired of every "xl" being only big enough to fit the worlds tallest midgets at 6'. Another note, it's a possibility the frame pivots started to turn to mush after 6 months because they're plastic over bearings. Guess they gotta do what they gotta do to the keep the cost down. Safe to say I won't be purchasing one of these miniature, plastic pieces of garbage anytime soon.
  • + 8
 @AZRyder: 480 reach on the XL is long for a DH bike. I'm 6'2" and normally ride a large, and 480 would be too long for me. Bearings have never been a good solution for pivots which don't make 360 rotations.
  • + 2
 @dmarsh15: its possible the headset cups are slightly undersize.
Gluing them in is not an option.
  • + 8
 @AZRyder: For reference a V10 XXL has a 470mm reach.
  • - 7
flag AZRyder (Mar 13, 2017 at 10:51) (Below Threshold)
 @dthomp325: Bearings have never been a good solution? Interesting. I'll make sure to ignore the fact that the vast majority of bikes don't use bushings solely in their suspension linkages do to durability issues, as experienced in the review, and I'll just listen to you.
  • + 5
 @Sshredder: I guess nobody uses the old-school centerpunch ping method where you create a little pattern of divots before mounting anymore. I do it with undersize bearings/oversize bores all the time, especially if you can't use bearing mount.
  • + 1
 @jaame: @paulaston:
I agree. Best PB review I think I've read in a long time. And of a possible contender for my new ideal bike too. Everything in the review sounded great to me. Even the braking characteristics Wink
  • + 4
 @skidrumr: machinist do. i dont think bike mechanics do. knurling on a lathe will work as well.
Shame that bike parts have such lousy quality control.
Also making modifications to parts voids the warranty.
I dont think adjustable headsets are cheap!
  • + 1
 @Sshredder: Pretty sure theyre pressing into carbon...
  • + 2
 @AZRyder: He has a point the bearings may at best rotate for a few degrees in a pivot and thats all.
Bushings are used and can work quite well. But plastic deforms faster than metal so bushings need replacing often.
BTW i bet your shock uses eyelet bushings which are oil impreg brass bushings.
  • + 2
 @gabriel-mission9: all head set cups do. Are you suggesting that the textured surface is going to cause issues with the carbon fiber head tube. If so i agree. Thats why i prefer Al. frames.
  • + 1
 @Sshredder: The fact that bearings don't make a full rotation in the frame does pose an issue in their durability because of lack of lubrication. Just keep them greased and you're good. Bushings just wear out with time and when they go is when they go.
  • + 2
 @paulaston: good one Big Grin Big Grin
  • + 1
 @bibsack46: it was left out because downhill bikes are not ment to climb so it would've done a terrible job at climbing. no need to waste time reviewing it on something its not meant to do
  • + 167
 I am never going to buy a Sender but this review was incredibly refreshing and I think I've learned more about this bike from Paul Aston's words than any other review in the last 5 years. Makes a big difference from the usual reads stuffed full of generic terms which give the impression that the tester doesn't actually know what they're doing in a bike. The nuance and personal opinion really helps get an idea of how this thing rides, far better than the cooky cutter approach.
  • + 27
 I second that. I'm also a fan of Paul's reviews.
  • + 23
 I should have read this before posting. Aren't all the other writers just so samey? This review is a real review. Opinion and fact brought together in an articulate way. Top notch!
  • + 8
 I actually read the whole article. Proof positive right there. haha Not to bemoan other writers, it can be difficult coming up with new and fresh ways to say the same thing over and over. Especially when its a read between the lines type of writing style when it comes to finding anything negative about the bike. Bang up job @paulaston you have cracked the code and found an interesting way to talk about the same old same old.
  • + 6
 I agree completely. Probably the best bike review I have read to date, especially for a downhill bike.
  • + 8
 insane detail on opinions regarding geometry and suspension kinematics.
  • + 0
 And there was me thinking the opposite, of someone trying to sound like they know something more than they do. Well each to there own. Yeah its not full of over used cliches and it's pretty different to every other review. But I don't but into half of what I read skimming through.
  • + 1
 If nothing else, I'll be curiously watching their riders at the world cups to see if they end up on coil shocks or air, after his comments on the shock.
  • - 2
 Pinkbike makes it hard to read a review anywhere else.
  • + 5
 @sevensixtwo: i am a fan of reviews on nsmb too
  • + 2
 @adrennan: Thanks man! I'll check it out.
  • + 1
 @ThomDawson harsh... the Sender looks perfect for rocky loose conditions of True dh trails, roles fast, currently better with a coil shock.. its a awesome ride. great review
  • + 2
 @sscantaffordcrap:
My point was that EVEN THOUGH I'll never buy one; this review was the best.
  • + 69
 That is one of the best reviews I have red in a while. Accurate, lots of tech details, no marketing bullshit, and with personal set up details of a rider that seems to know what he wants from his bike. Well done Mr Aston
  • + 5
 Spot on
  • + 1
 This. A refreshing and practical approach, really appreciate it, thanks, Paul.
  • + 48
 Finally the real question :
"Can we just make bikes narrower, for better clearance, or the spoke angle wider, as we are continually told it would make our wheels better?"
  • + 10
 Pivot fixed this with the switchblade. I believe the hubs are out after market now.
  • + 1
 The only explanation I can offer is a wider hub spacing offers better torsional rigidity which is necessary to compensate for the increased leverage the larger 27.5" wheels create. But I do agree, it's a massive waste of space and will just end up smacking off rocks in a garden.
  • + 43
 I don't understand the "Alloy over carbon" argument about carbon parts being more expensive to replace. If you can get them specced on a bike for the same price, then what's stopping you from just buying alloy stuff when the carbon breaks? That way you would at least have had nice carbon parts for a few years. Seems like a win/win.
  • + 3
 Good point.
  • + 5
 well, sometimes manufacturers add small differences between carbon and alloy parts, so you cant just swap it (lever in this case). then you either buy carbon lever or all new brake set.
  • + 14
 I also think Paul could have made the point a little better. The reality is that most alloy components simply offer a better price/performance ratio, so speccing them on a complete bike means you get better value. You don't get the highest-performing version of the bike possible, but you do maximize your fun per dollar, which is always the basic mountain biking equation.
  • + 1
 but would you really install a alloy lever to replace a carbon one? Nope, in the end you'd go for what was there before.
  • + 6
 @Kainerm: If they're compatible? Yeah, why not? Unless you're more concerned about looks and how many grams the scales show than actual performance.

Plus, if the Tues is the same price and has carbon parts, couldn't you sell them right off the bat, replace them with aluminum ones and actually make a profit? (I'm too lazy to check actual prices of the components used, so I'm open to being corrected on this one.)
  • + 2
 I think what he was saying is, he bent the alloy lever back into shape, not ruining his day. Carbon lever would've snapped. End of riding for the day unless you carry a spare lever.
  • + 5
 @schwaaa31: You can't be sure a carbon lever would snap. And you can pretty much eliminate the risk by not clamping the lever down too hard, so it can rotate on the handlebar in case of a crash.
  • + 2
 Carbon levers are pretty fragile even when you run the clamps so it can rotate in a crash, I've done it at a race in a nothing crash and then spent the rest of practice trying to ride with only a rear brake. If I'd had an alloy lever worst case scenario it would have just bent and I'd have got by.
  • + 43
 Looks like a Brosnan podium.
  • + 4
 Hope so!
  • + 9
 Could it have a debute as successful as the YT? That would've pretty sick.
  • - 1
 @Triber66: pretty sure about that
  • - 2
 I mean it looks pretty dang fast!
  • + 29
 @pinkbike give Paul Aston a pay rise!

@paulaston ever thought about starting your own website?
  • + 23
 @paulaston I enjoyed your review layout and content. To the point and very little jibberish. Take note the rest of you reviewers
  • + 15
 Such a good and thorough review. Really appreciate all the details also on the componentry and the hub width. Also finally someone stating against the "short chainstay" rave, maintaining objectivity and stating opinion where it is in place. Thumbs up
  • + 5
 The whole short chainstay thing is one of those deals where people just can't keep their categories straight, or can't figure out that a single variable means little unless you know more about the geometry of the bike and its intended use. DH sleds are very different from trail bikes - so the whole notion that in both you would always be better off with shorter chainstays is pretty silly. And you'll find that there are bikes where you'd think that they have unduly long chainstays even for their category, but they end up being surprisingly nimble, because there's something else about their geometry that's not readily apparent if you only look at a few numbers and ratios in isolation.

I love my Kona's short chainstays and long front center. But that's because it's a trail bike, and I'm of long torso and relatively short legs for my height. If I were long legged/short torso'd, and ran DH laps for time, I'd want more of the overall wheelbase in the rear triangle so as not to hang off the back of the bike all the time.
  • + 1
 @g-42: Excellent points
  • + 1
 @g-42: I'm L.T.S.L. too. I'm 6' tall and have a 30" inseam. For what it's worth, my XL 2016 UZZI is a perfect fit, and feels perfectly balanced.
  • + 3
 @g-42: Trail, AM or DH bike makes little difference and neither does rider leg/torso ratio.

Everyone thinks they're putting force through the bars. It's garbage. 95% of rider mass goes through the BB and subsequently BB location relative to the front and rear contact patches is critical for balanced grip regardless of other geo.
  • + 2
 @jclnv: But it's not "regardless of other geo" that's his point. How the weight is split front and rear through BB is going to be influenced by more than CS. Of course CS plays a role, but i think the valid point is that folks are overplaying CS role. Cool kid thing now to say short CS suck
  • + 1
 @jclnv: Put me (moderately short legs at 32" inseam, moderately long arms, fairly long torso) next to my buddy who's the same height (6'1") but whose inseam is about 3" longer, and the dude I know at one of my local bike shops who is 6' but whose legs are even shorter (roughly 30" inseam), and have us all assume attack position. Our weight has to be balanced over the BB, as you correctly point out - light pressure on the hands. You'll notice that we're positioned very differently in terms of fore/aft balance. Still think that different geometries don't make a difference for people with different proportions? And that's when you're up on your feet, out of the saddle, in attack position - what about seated technical climbing? My long-limbed buddy, no matter how far forward he puts his seat, will be way further back due to his seat being up higher. Seat tube angle might have some impact on how his weight is distributed, meaning he may have to compensate to keep the front wheel from wondering.

And because different categories of bikes have different uses and are ridden in different ways on different terrain, the impact of different geometries on differently proportioned riders very much means different things.

Any discussion of geometry that is all about "the short chain stay makes the bike lively" is, at best, a rather gross simplification. And any discussion of bike geometry that doesn't at least take rider geometry into account is, at best, a missed opportunity.
  • + 1
 Agleck7, front centre/rear centre and the resulting ratio are the only numbers that effect F+R weight distribution.

g-42, my comments were only regarding out of the saddle descending. It's a DH bike test after all. The comparison between you and your friends does indeed show the visual difference you all have on the bike but it doesn't effect what I wrote. I think you're saying that you require a larger reach number than your equal height, yet shorter torso length friend? Obviously that's right but if your have a longer reach, and subsequently a longer front centre, you would have to increase rear centre (chainstays) to maintain front to rear weight/grip levels.
  • + 10
 Huge props to @paulaston. The best review I've read on pinkbike.
And at least a reviewer that don't care about bike industry trends. This guy knows how a good bike must perform and isn't afraid to tell the truth.

I'm tired of those "marketing-driven reviews". Enough feels like a coil, boosted wheels strength and climb like a goat stuff...
  • + 10
 @paulaston
"With the ever increasing number of hub standards in the mountain bike industry, can somebody please sort this out? The extra wide 157mm hub has at least 30mm of wasted space, a huge gap on the disc side (to maintain spoke symmetry) and that silly cassette spacer on the drive side."

Somebody did: It's called 157 Super Boost. It's the same hub spacing as used in the sender but it maximizes the hub flange spacing so it has a much wider spoke angle. I think they would fit right into these dropouts as the rotor offset is the same as the 157 standard.
Your picture illustrated it very well btw. What a waste of space!
  • + 14
 You would still have the wasted space of the silly cassette spacer btw so maybe we need a SuperDuper Boost for DH race bikes only..
  • + 2
 @JorisW: atomlab and reset racing have had that in 7speed DH hubs for a few years.
  • + 1
 @MmmBones:
Ok, cool. You can build some strong wheels with those!
Thanks.
  • + 8
 That wasted space gives the lie to the whole "we need a wider axle standard to maximize wheel stiffness" argument doesn't it. And this is a DH bike. No wonder Spesh just stuffed a 135mm rear end on the D8.
  • + 9
 "It's incredibly hard to pick faults with the Sender."
- The rear shock that comes standard doesn't work well with the bike.
- The angled headset came loose and couldn't be fixed without potentailly voiding the warranty.
- The hub spacing is 157mm wide, with far too small a hub/spoke bracing angle.
- Difficult to attach on air pump
- Rear end has more flex than usual. No I don't think a rear end should be flexy, it's the number one complaint Giant has had for years...
- Suspension stiffens under pedaling load, making it potentially difficult to control when in rough situations - yes some people do pedal DH bikes.

And if the YT comes with a selection of vastly more valuable parts for the same price, than yes it is better value. The argument about replacment part costs is irrelevant, that's rather an argument of practicality and necessity.
  • + 4
 I'm with you. Seems like he brushed aside some pretty big issues. If my shock felt like garbage, couldn't add air to it and my angled headset cups were turning, I'd be super bugged.
  • + 1
 The flexing rear end is a deal breaker for me
  • + 8
 So Canyons marketing is bull about the air shock and time to buy a coil? Having brought one, and seriously struggling to get the rear end to feel good this sounds unfortunately like the only option!
  • + 13
 Don't believe anyone who tells you air is better than coil!
  • + 7
 @jaame: yeah, or even anyone telling you "it feels the same as a coil shock", that's bulls*it.
  • + 6
 who would of thought coil shocks are better on dh bikes?? seriously though i hope this isnt a bad review for the x2 due to not picking the right tool for the job to start with, id go with the air for AM/enduro bikes and coil for dh everytime
  • + 2
 Someone local to me is also struggling with shock setup, cant get things quite right after trying two different shocks, I think he is going after a fox coil now.
  • + 2
 @Racer951: Yup certainly seems to be an issue, Paul and Mojo have advised removing spacers to create a more linear shock so will be trying that before doing anything else! Fingers crossed......
  • + 1
 @whitebullit: it sounds like it just didn't come with the right tune for the job.
  • + 1
 Put an ohlins on mine, feels awesome.
  • + 1
 @elstob15: dammnnn bet that is sexy. i bet that ohlins dh fork would be sick when it comes out.
  • + 1
 @adrennan: i put an ohlins cartridge in the fox 40 made a whole world of difference, just a tad expensive.
  • + 1
 @elstob15: did you need any custom mounting hardware or anything else that could cause a hang up to do this ?
  • + 1
 @bigburd: no just slid right in.
  • + 1
 @elstob15: Thanks man
  • + 7
 not so sure about the chainstay thing. for the last 6 months i rode a (good)enduro bike with 447 cs and thought : nah this short chainstay thing is all marketing, i m fast on this one -and the times showed that i was, although it took me 2 months to feel good on the bike. my new bike has an almost identical geo but 430 cs which was the only thing i was skeptical about. But in reality i felt at home on it from the getgo - my times have come down another 2 sec per minute and i am having way more fun. in particular it is way easier to weight an unweight the front and back -with the previous bike i was somehow lost between the wheels. i guess everything above 440 cs just does not really suit my ridingstyle, and as i am not really a beginner i think long cs can cause serious nonfunissues in this group
  • + 8
 I imagine on a full DH rig and DH tracks you will see higher speeds and less of the situations that you find your shorter chainstay bike faster / more fun.

A DH race bike is pretty specific in its function, a trail bike is meant to work everywhere.
  • + 6
 @Racer951: Ive got 470mm CS and its stable as hell. It suits my riding style as I can't manual anyway.
  • + 1
 @Racer951: probably - i can see that on a wc dh bike longer chainstays make sense. i just wanted to point out that making long cs work can be quite a challenge for riders not charging like the best 1%
  • + 2
 @optimumnotmaximum:

Agreed, though one of the problems with shorter stays is often taller riders on large frames end up sitting over the back wheel due to seat tube angle making the bike climb poorly, they can also reduce stability when the speed picks up - All depends on riding style and terrain though

I think chainstays should increase as frame size does, why does a XL have the same size stays as a small? Some brands do this but not many.

@fartymarty:
I cant manual properly either and like stays at least 440mm usually, I can see a shorter stay bike good in some areas - 470mm is huge though - what bike is that?
  • + 2
 @Racer951: Keewee Cromo 8. Check piccys in my profile. They squeezed the shock between the BB and rear wheel. Awesome low COG but a mud nightmare.

Agreed on the front centre / rear centre balance. The whole bike needs to increase in length, not just the front.
  • + 2
 @Racer951: indeed, for my liking the new norco range geo looks spot on
  • + 2
 short stays are more fun not faster. i am not paid to race so I would rather be able to manual, pop, and turn easier. my balance has 420mm chainstays (slope bike and bmx both notably shorter than that)
  • + 2
 @adrennan: I think they also need to complement your riding style. I'm more of a plower than a popper therefore big wheels and long bikes suit my "style" (or distinct lack there of)
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: very true. paul does a good job pointing out this is clearly a race bike. and the longer stays help with that.
  • + 9
 One of the best looking downhill bikes out there
  • + 6
 Author spends 5 minutes praising direct to consumer business model.... Spends next 5 minutes describing his struggles with his new bike because of direct to consumer business model....
  • + 6
 more braking squat, stiffed suspension, higher bb - this goes contra all recent developments, but definitley has some points
A machine that forces you to think about your braking & cornering habit
  • + 6
 Fabian tested various floating brakes when on Kona which adjusted brake interaction with suspension. If I remember right he ended up going for something that induced squat rather than removing it to help the bike setup for corners - the same thing that Paul is saying here. It is probably something that you can adjust to in your riding style though and the trade off to brake squat is often poor traction under braking which you may or may not see as a bigger disadvantage.
  • + 7
 I definitely prefer the opposite. I've been on both - VPP with significant "brake jack" and FSR with pretty much none at all and I found FSR to descend better in pretty much every way. The bike as a whole feels so much more plush and is able to maintain traction so much better, while the VPP bike would skip over rocks and roots, the FSR bike was able to maintain traction so braking and turning were so much more predictable. This is only for descending though...it's the complete opposite for climbing.

I still like to save braking and major line adjustments for the "safe spaces" in between rock and root gardens though...just like driving a car on icy roads, staying off the brakes and keeping the steering as neutral as possible through the dangerous patches is just smart riding.
  • + 1
 @TheRaven: couldn't agree more regarding Horst link suspension design. I basing my opinion on my experience aboard my previous bike, a 2014, Spec. Enduro. Nothing compares to it on the dh. Super plush and stable. I'd rate it a10 /10 on dh. Climbing on the other hand is a rather poor 5 /10. I am now on a 2016 UZZI. I've found thie VPP to be a great compromise I'd rate it an 8.5 /10 both climbing and descending. Very capable of doing both very well.
  • + 1
 @Doomsdave: Yup - there's one important thing to note, however...FSR can climb if you have a shock with a climb mode. Sure one could complain about having to "turn on a crutch" to get some climbing ability, and losing plenty of small bump compliance in the process, but when the choice is that or harshness that cannot be turned off on the descent, i'll take the setup that at least gives me the choice to firm up the rear for a climb, and leaves the system unhindered on descents.
  • + 1
 @TheRaven: great point. I've been flirting with the idea of going back to an enduro. If I do, I'm doing the climb switch. Best of both worlds. The Horst link is just too good on the dh. I've had single pivot FOES and Santa Cruz, VPP Intense, and the Enduro. The Sp. Enduro is an unreal bike. Its calling my name.
  • + 4
 i was sitting on a Sender 1 week ago and i was surprized about the M size which felt easily like an L frame for me by 1,78m height.....also its felt super supple....so i could tell straight away that this is a mean DH machine.....long,slack and just up for speed......So yes - it's not a bikepark bike at all but for DH riding i guess it will performe amazing!
  • - 2
 Freeride bikes is dead Frown
  • + 4
 #longlivefreeride modern enduro bikes are basically becoming what freeride bikes were supposed to be.
  • + 2
 @torero: no way! Take a look at the Propain Spindrift - just above enduro = great freerider
  • + 1
 @adrennan: enduro is the remarketed pimped zombie from the freeride body but with a dropper post of course
  • + 7
 Regarding the angled headset cups comments, pushing something in dry rarely works well. Just ask the wife...
  • + 4
 don't hate on me, is there a way to convert the float 40 to a coil, i know there is a coil "performance" fork but i want the koshima and idk if the dampers are the same or not.
  • + 3
 I have the rockshox equipped sender (owned for about 6 months) and am really happy with both front and rear suspension performance. The only thing I'm not happy with is the fact that there is a knocking sound as the free hub is enguaged by the pedal kickback on small to medium sized bumps hit when the rear suspension is fully extended. Does anyone else find this happens?
For reference, the bearings in my bike came with pretty much zero grease, but I stripped and greased the whole bike properly before the first ride so I've since had no problems.
  • + 3
 Loosey goosey headset cups?!?!? Nope!!! I'll pass on that entire bike please. Thanks for the review guys! Good to know there are companies getting away with murder in design processes on bikes that actually end up on the market. Someone's gonna have a headtube crack due to this and their front ends gonna rip off. Just watch..
. I'm not recommending this bike/ company to anyone!! Thats just crappy design.
  • + 2
 It seems insane that Canyon wouldn't realise that the headset is the only connection between fork and frame, so has to carry *all* the load from the front wheel, meaning it needs to be pretty damn solid.

Propain solved this problem on the carbon Rage by giving the cups little stubs that key into the frame, locking the cup in correct alignment - such a simple solution.
  • + 2
 I'd like to hear more about the geometry. 480mm reach is the longest on the mainstream market. My trail bike has a reach of 500mm and I love it. The longest DH bike I could afford was a Glory with 460mm and I love it, but would be interested to try longer. Not sure how this longer front centre could work as if you go to say 500mm your wheelbase is gonna be absurd because of the DH bike's HA. Any thoughts on this @paulaston?
  • + 3
 (Copy of my post below) @paulaston how did you find the 480mm reach as I know you are fond of long reach (510mm) bikes. Does the slack HA and long WB make up for the shorter reach.

@sicmoto Pole (510mm) and Nicolai (495mm) maybe in your ballpark.
  • + 0
 @fartymarty: Yea I've seen those. My Glory HA is 63, if it were to have the same reach as my Mondraker (500), I imagine the wheelbase would be daft. That Pole for example has a 1348mm WB vs my Glory's 1257mm. I don't find the Glory much of a challenge in tight stuff, but I can imagine the Pole would be a nightmare. I presume from your CS length comments you have a Geometron?
  • + 0
 @sicmoto: Keewee Cromo 8 (bought in 2004). Paul is reviewing a Pole (soon hopefully) so will be interesting to see how the long WB works.
  • + 1
 2017 XL Kona operator has a 485mm reach... I have been riding a Large 2012 Kona operator for 4 years now and did some comparisons of my bike and the new XL Operator because I always felt my Large 2012 was undersized for me ( I'm 6'2"1/2). Surprisingly the difference in reach is 1 1/8". My Large has a has 455mm reach. Basically what I'm saying is 480mm reach isn't that long for 6'+ riders. All comes down to riding style and preference.
  • + 2
 @steveo54: out of interest have you measured the seated reach (butt to bar) on each for a set seat height? I bet the difference is smaller the the 1 1/8". Modern bike have longer reaches but steeper SA which gives a similar butt to bar dims.
  • + 2
 @fartymarty: no I didn't but you're probably right. I'm only going off of specs that are posted online. I've been doing a ton of research because I'm in the process of deciding what frame size to order for the new operator. The large is almost the same as my older large and I always felt it was kinda tight so I'm gonna go with the XL. Unfortunately I can't demo any so I'm a bit nervous. But yea, I did read that the new operator has a steeper seat angle to make room for the short chain stays.
  • + 1
 @steveo54: I'm in the same boat (re ordering a new bike) and everyone I have spoke to says go large.
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: How tall are you? Are you getting a DH bike? I have a large Giant Reign 27.5 with a 458mm reach and feel it could be longer but great for my local riding because it's tight and technical.
  • + 1
 @steveo54: I think that, depending upon your height, going for a bike with a longer reach generally brings more pros than cons. My past three trail bikes have had 480mm, 480mm and 500mm reach numbers and I have really liked them, I'm 5'11 for reference. I think 480mm could well be the limit on a dh bike though given the corresponding wheelbase, but I'm speculating. When stem length is considered though my actual reach numbers would be around the 510mm mark for both my Glory and my Foxy. It'll take you a day to get to grips with a longer bike because you kind of independently weight each tyre a lot more as opposed to a conventionally sized bike, it's a difficult sensation to explain, but now that I've got used to long bikes some of my friend's machines feel like BMXs to me.
  • + 1
 @sicmoto: thanks for your input man. Your comment about weighting each wheel independently kinda throws me off. What do find better? A "conventional" size position or independent position?
  • + 1
 @steveo54: im 6'1" and getting a starling murmur. Going for 510 reach with 64.5HA (similar geo to Nicolai G-13 or Pole 140). I think @sicmoto maybe rìght about DH reaches being shorter than trail / enduro bikes. I think this is because the front centre is longer with the slacker HA so the front / rear balance is similar albeit with a longer WB. Drop Paul Aston a pm as hes pretty clued up on geo. Also the Geometron thread on mtbr (or singletrack - cant remember which) is worth a read as some of those guys are really pushing the geo envelope.
  • + 2
 @steveo54: I find the "more involved" method required to turn a larger bike to be better. You kind of have to throw your weight over the front wheel more at times. When I was getting on my old averagely sized dh bike I just couldn't get back into the swing of riding in a neutral position. I have found my race results have improved a fair amount on a bigger bike and that I can keep up with my fast friends on twisty stuff as well, the only trade off would be flatter trails which are hardly gonna be a concern for you on an Operator. Like I say, it's a matter of getting used to it, I'd say a week riding and you'll be wishing you'd done it sooner, read the Mondraker dune review from a couple of years ago, it captures what I'm trying to say pretty accurately. m.pinkbike.com/news/Mondraker-Dune-XR-Review.html
  • + 2
 @sicmoto: Thanks a lot for your input man. I really appreciate it!
  • + 1
 @steveo54: glad to help out!
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: The Murmur looks excellent. I was in touch with Starling about getting a Swoop but the warranty isn't great on them and I have a tendency to break frames. Ended up with a Bird Aeris, they're worth a look, especially the new MK2 machine.
  • + 1
 @sicmoto: Ive not looked into the warranties but as its steel its easily fixed.
  • + 2
 I completely disagree with aluminum over carbon. In your hypothetical, who's to say you don't just replace the carbon with the aluminum. It's ridiculous to say the Canyon is a better spec because you're assuming the person is going to replace the components with the same level of components. The reverse is also true, you could replace the Canyon cranks with carbon and now it's even less of a deal. So in the end, the YT comes with a better spec for the same money and it's up to you whatever quality your replacement parts will be.
  • + 2
 While I love the review and in fact have two senders in my household mine and my sons. I have to disagree with one point in the conclusion it's doesn't have just one competitor, you've forgotten the Solid Strike my sons previous bike, another great and well specced downhill bike, with numbers you might well like.
  • + 5
 I like how the "two minute test track" became a "1m 45s" test track later. Damn those speedy World Cup types
  • + 4
 you complain about the hub not being wide enough to take advantage of the extra space but yet you lower the spoke tension to intentionally let the wheel flex?
  • + 2
 @paulaston Do those main pivots undo with a cassette tool? Or is there a socket supplied that fits those keyed pivots? Looks almost like its designed to be undun with a cassette tool which is kinda handy I guess.
  • + 5
 Now do a review of the WC winning Mondraker please.
  • + 1
 This goes against everything I've learnt about suspension:

"Initial reports of the Sender suggested it needed more progression and mid-stroke support. The Fox Float X2 shock that came packed full of spacers...didn't solve this. In fact, it compounded the issue. I tried the shock with no spacers, for a more linear feel and mid-stroke support"

If your bike is wallowing and doesn't have enough progressiveness, or mid-stroke support, you need a smaller air volume - that means more spacers, not fewer. A lack of progressiveness is not fixed by aiming for a "more linear feel" - they are literally opposite.

If you fixed your problems by fitting a more linear coil shock, then it was either all because of a different damping tune i.e. nothing to do with the spring, or your problem was not a lack of progressiveness and mid-stroke support in the first place.

If I'm misunderstanding, I'd love for someone to explain.
  • + 1
 This!

"• Hub sizing: With the ever increasing number of hub standards in the mountain bike industry, can somebody please sort this out? The extra wide 157mm hub has at least 30mm of wasted space, a huge gap on the disc side (to maintain spoke symmetry) and that silly cassette spacer on the drive side. There is a lot of real estate between the disc and frame dropout too. Can we just make bikes narrower, for better clearance, or the spoke angle wider, as we are continually told it would make our wheels better?"
  • + 4
 So which is the other German direct sale brand? Is it Propain or Radon? Both Have superb Downhillbikes and a World-Cup Team.
  • + 5
 Pretty sure he means YT, but I'll stick with my Radon Swoop and will gladly stand it against either brand's bikes.... That being said I'm also a dreamer as I'd also love to see Mannon unseat Rachel this year on an "old" alloy frame that costs 1/2 that Trek and still a grand less than this or YT's bike...
  • + 1
 the really interesting part of the article can`t be read.
the """cracked sender-canyon reply""" doesn't show up, even when logged in...
seems to be that the way they handle warranty-issues is super secret - FOR SOME REASON!!!!
  • + 1
 I love how you "industry" types casually talk about popping in a new £600 shock as not much of an issue.. I'd love to try that but obviously if your buying one of these your budget is gonna be tight already and it's gonna be out of the question to most.. I have this bike and find the bike really good on everything so far but yes the rear is still to soft after 2 months of tweaking. I'm gonna try removing the spacers as didn't think that would help.. as I'm almost the same as you height/weight how did you have it set up that felt best before switching to coil? @paulaston
  • - 1
 That's because to us "industry types".... those shocks are 50-60% off retail cost in most cases. Dude, we work in this industry for the disconuts on sick gear.... because we get payed for shite and couldn't afford it otherwise.
  • + 1
 All I read was that you get a great bike with a crap rear shock therefore...it looks like it rides great, but it will ride like shlt and you can't adjust the dials on the shlt leveraged shock.

So...????
  • + 2
 @paulaston how did you find the 480mm reach as I know you are fond of long reach (510mm) bikes. Does the slack HA and long WB make up for the shorter reach.
  • + 1
 Nice review! Honest and straight to the point! I had the same issue happen to my B-tension screw on my X01DH derailleur. Took a few weeks for Sram to replace but no questions were asked and I got a brand new one back tup
  • + 3
 Seems like people finally starting to realize that rear air shocks dont belong on DH bikes.
  • + 2
 Sounds like a quick dedicated race bike. Shame how most downhill bikes are moving from fun whippy park shredders to solely speed orientated race machines.
  • + 10
 Speed is fun...
  • + 5
 #longlivefreeridebikes
  • + 4
 it's almost like DH is about being the fastest and not the most stylish, who would have thougth?
  • - 2
 @JoseBravo: until skins it's are legal, style will always have something to do with it...
  • + 2
 Isnt this like the 3rd review of a high caliber bike in which the reviewers pointed to the X2 as a problem? The air version that is.
  • + 0
 "Objectively, preferred or needed stiffness is largely influenced by rider's weight and traveling speeds."

Well that scratches this bike off my list for next to own! As a heavier rider that plows the rough and pushes the speed factor due to Alpha type friends that I ride with, I would be pissed at the continual flex turning into seasonal pivot bearing replacement between the carbon and alu parts.

Would Canyon make a stiffer all ALU version for us gnar type riders? No? Then I am done
  • + 2
 the bearings on my strive were horse crap chinese bearings. When they failed they failed bad. In about 6 months of riding.
  • + 1
 wouldn't a lack of rebound (with the float x2) make the feel stiff? whenever I've run too much rebound damping, the bike doesn't feel soft, as reviewer suggests here...
  • + 1
 Does anyone know what the fix is for the broken b tension plate from Sram? It sounded like @paulaston got a whole new derailleur, but I wonder what was different.
  • + 3
 Sram sent me a complete derailleur because that was all they had at the time. The replacement b-plate is slightly different and has a non-sprung washer.
  • + 1
 @paulaston: Thanks for the reply. I've broken a few and I had to start using @TheFix steel B-tension plate, which lasted a lot longer. I'm happy to hear there is a new design.
  • + 3
 And it doesn't even look like a Session!
  • + 2
 Surely you're not going to gain much clearance with narrower hub if you've got pedals in the way?
  • + 3
 Great honest no bullshit review!
  • + 1
 Finally, a fresh and sincerely review of a bike!!! A killer bike mine is Razz
  • + 1
 I'll take one with full Shimano Zee......delivered to the US. Let me know when that's an option. Thanks, Canyon.
  • + 2
 Are those DT FR1950 rims the same as DT's FR570s?
  • + 3
 Yes. The DT FR1950 is the name of the complete DT wheelset. The FR570 is the name for the rim, sold separately. I'm not sure why the names are different.
  • + 8
 @paulaston: Because the number in the DTSwiss names is usually close to the weight in grams. The weelset is of course a lot heavier than the rim.
  • + 4
 @ak-77: mind = blown
  • + 2
 @daweil: ha frikin ha!!!
  • + 1
 how does the centerline rotor fit on a fox 40 when the maximum size is 200mm and the fox 40 takes a 203mm rotor?
  • + 1
 Is there big crash on rearside of seat tube when shiock is completely compressed ?
  • + 2
 best review on pinkbike yet
  • + 1
 What about sizing? Was this a bit big for u at 6'1"? I'm interested in this bike at 6'6" and wondering about fit
  • + 3
 Return to sender
  • + 1
 The question is: Canya Sendert Razz
  • + 1
 German bikes are the new wallmarts.
  • + 1
 Beautiful video. Keep it up
  • - 1
 One way to get rid of all that wasted rear hub space: Run a short/SS rear hub and have a 142mm frame like the Norco/Specialized DH frames.
  • + 1
 Where do the test? Diano Marina?
  • + 1
 I love the lines of this bike and the price is very good
  • + 1
 When are they going to start selling in Canada? North America?
  • + 1
 I"d HIT, err I mean Send that..
  • + 1
 Will someone please get this man some bearing retainer for his headset?
  • + 1
 Beautiful bike, would love to rent this for a day off downhill.
  • + 1
 That back wheel/hub is a mess.
  • + 0
 my dude are you joking?
  • - 2
 " The extra wide 157mm hub has at least 30mm of wasted space..."

Another new rear hub standard I suppose? 135mm is so old, 142mm is still around, 148mm is the current boost, 150/7mm has been around... 127mm seems ok?
  • + 0
 Finding out whos going to send the sender in world cup
  • + 0
 Great review. Keep it up @paulaston
  • + 0
 12x 157mm, is 150mm done with now?
  • - 1
 Sickest bike ever if Thomas Genon and Darren Berrecloth ride it!!!!!!
  • - 1
 Great review...did you send it back?
  • - 2
 not to nitpick, but it's not really a swingarm - it's a rear triangle, no? there are multiple pieces...
  • - 3
 Pinkbike.... dry your bikes before taking pictures.... ugh!
  • - 2
 Sender fender bender ;]
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



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

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.115251
Mobile Version of Website