Powered by Outside

Review: 2024 Orbea Rallon - Enduro-er Than Ever

Apr 5, 2024 at 8:46
by Seb Stott  
The previous version of the Orbea Rallon released in 2022 was impressively versatile and predictable, but compared to the current crop of enduro bikes, we found it struggled when things got steep and gnarly. The 2024 version answers that criticism with a slacker head angle and more suspension travel - up from 160mm to 167mm at the rear.

Now that the enduro category has become so refined, small changes can make a difference. The extra travel brings the Rallon into line with the latest enduro bikes that are designed to excel on the gnarliest courses in the world.
Orbea Rallon Details

• Full-carbon frame
• Travel: 167mm rear, 170mm front
• 29" or MX wheels
• Head tube angle: 63.5-64°
• Reach: 435, 460, 485, 510mm (S-XL)
• Chainstay: 440mm
• Weight: 15.1 kg / 33.3 lb (actual, XL)
• Lockr downtube storage
• Price: £7,999 / €7,499 / $7,999 as tested
orbea.com

But don't worry - the Rallon hasn't become an uplift-hungry sled. Climbing has long been a strong suit of previous Rallons and the latest iteration is no exception. It's also among the lightest enduro bikes these days, at a shade over 15 kg (33 lb) in the biggest frame size. It's primarily designed as a race bike with 29" wheels but can equally accept a 27.5" rear wheel for park riding or to suit shorter riders.






bigquotesThe Rallon is a great all-rounder that feels out of place approximately nowhere, but shines on rides that involve a lot of climbing and trails that reward maintaining speed through rough terrain. Seb Stott




photo

Frame Details


The Rallon ships with two different shock extenders that accommodate either rear wheel size while keeping the geometry the same. You can order the bike with either wheel setup, but the alternate extender is included in the box. The 29er extender has a flip chip to fine-tune the geometry, with a 7 mm bottom bracket height and 0.5-degree angle change. The 27.5" extender doesn't have this flip chip, and the mixed-wheel geometry matches the lowest setting in 29".

photo
photo

There are four models of Rallon and all use the same full-carbon frame and carbon fiber layup. A single-sided strut stiffens the frame while allowing access to the shock. A water bottle fits underneath although clearance is tight with longer bottles when combined with the Float X2 shock. There's a downtube storage compartment with a rattle-free door but a narrow opening. Another neat feature is a small tool hidden in the rocker link pivot, held in place with a magnet, which provides hex keys from 3 to 6 mm and a T25.

photo
photo

Cable routing helpfully bypasses the headset and goes via internal conduits for minimal rattling. Frame bearings get extra seals for longevity and there is extensive co-moulded frame protection.

While the geometry and suspension have been tweaked, the construction and features of the frame is similar to the 2022 Rallon.



photo

Suspension Design

The Rallon still uses Orbea's Concentric Boost suspension, where the chainstay and seatstay pivot concentrically about the rear axle, but Orbea says they've totally revised the suspension kinematics to give a more progressive leverage curve and a more rearward axle path. That's in addition to the bump in travel from 160 to 167mm.

Orbea Rallon 2024
Orbea Rallon 2024
Anti-squat.
Orbea Rallon 2024
Anti-rise

According to Orbea's kinematic charts, the leverage curve is about 27% progressive, which means it should play nicely with coil or air shocks and resist bottom-out without being too extreme. The main pivot is fairly high and forward, which means there's a generous amount of anti-squat throughout the travel. This results in a firm and efficient pedalling response.

Orbea imply that the more rearward axle path helps it better deal with bumps than its predecessor, but this is probably a marginal benefit. The amount of anti-rise (how much the brake caliper forces act to compress the suspension and resist brake dive) is middle-of-the-road. Because anti-rise levels increase throughout the travel, this may help the suspension remain sensitive and consistent under braking compared to some other designs where anti-rise drops off throughout the stroke.

Orbea say the travel measures 167mm, but when I measured the useable travel by compressing the suspension with a ratchet strap until it bottomed out hard, I could only access 159 mm. It's difficult to define exactly how much travel a bike has because it's impossible to fully compress the bottom-out bumper, but most bikes measure closer to the quoted travel when measured in the same way. That's not to say the Rallon isn't capable of delivering the full 167 millimetres, but with this specific shock, I wasn't getting that much out of it. In a separate test, I removed the air from the shock and bottomed it out (really) hard, and I could only use at most 61 mm of the 62.5 mm of shock stroke, so it seems the Fox X2 is restricting the travel in the case of the specific shock on my test bike. I asked Orbea about this and they say the bike should deliver 167 mm exactly with the mullet shock extender and 166 mm with the 29" one, so any shortfall from that is down to the shock.

Either way, we are only talking about millimetres here, but I think this makes a difference on the trail when comparing the Rallon to other long-travel (> 165 mm) enduro bikes.



photo

Geometry & Sizing


Enduro bikes have matured into the era of minor tweaks rather than reinventing themselves. Aside from being half a degree slacker, Rallon's geometry chart is almost identical to the 2022 version.

Measuring the bike's geometry myself reveals a few differences from the geometry chart, though. My XL test bike is longer - I measure 1,305 mm wheelbase and 445 mm chainstay. It's slacker - I measure 63.1° in the low setting and 63.6° in the high, while the effective seat angle at my pedalling height measures 76.4° / 76.9°. It's lower too - I measure 333 mm or 340 mm.

There are four sizes (S-XL), with recommended height ranges of 150-170 cm (S), 160-180 cm (M), 170-190 cm (L) and 180-200 cm (XL). At 190 cm, the XL was the obvious choice for me.



Specifications
Release Date 2024
Price $7999
Travel 167 mm
Rear Shock Fox Float X2 Factory 2-Position, custom tune 230x62.5mm
Fork Fox 38 Factory, Grip2, 170 mm, 44 mm offset
Headset Acros Alloy 1-1/8 - 1-1/2” Integrated
Cassette Shimano CS-M8100 10-51t 12-Speed
Crankarms Race Face Era, 165 mm 32t
Chainguide e*thirteen CL55 30-36t black
Bottom Bracket Race Face Era
Pedals N/A
Rear Derailleur Shimano XT
Chain Shimano M7100
Front Derailleur N/A
Shifter Pods Shimano XT
Handlebar OC MC10 Carbon, Rise 35, Width 800
Stem OC MC10, 40 mm
Grips Ergon GE10
Brakes Shimano XT M8120, Galfer rotors 203 mm / 180 mm
Wheelset OQUO
Hubs DT350 6IS
Spokes 32 Sapim D-Sprint / Race spokes
Rim OQUO MC32TEAM, alloy, 30 mm
Tires Maxxis Assegai 2.50”, Maxx Terra EXO+ / DHR II 2.40” Maxx Terra Exo+
Seat ERGON SM Enduro Comp Men S/M
Seatpost OC MC21, 31.6mm, Travel 230mm


photo

photo

photo

As well as being able to customise the frame colours to your heart's content, Orbea allow you to pick and choose certain components on their website, which is a huge advantage. I specified a 35 mm rise handlebar, 40mm stem, 165mm cranks and 230mm dropper post. I would have liked the option for DoubleDown enduro tires, but Orbea only offer EXO+ or DH casings, neither of which seem like the Goldilocks choice for this bike.




Test Bike Setup

I settled on 29% (18 mm) sag in the shock, with stock volume spacers. This equated to 220 psi for me, at 85 kg. I opened up the damping to maximise sensitivity, ending up with these settings: LSC 12 HSC 7 LSR 9 HSR 7 (from closed).

In the fork, I settled on 98 psi with 1 volume spacer, rebound pretty open (LSR 14 HSR6), and compression depending on the terrain. The saddle was slammed forward to steepen the seat angle and I alternated between the high and low flip chip settings. I only tested with a 29" rear wheel.

Tire pressures were 22-23 psi (front) and 26-28 psi (rear).

photo
Seb Stott
Location: Tweed Valley, Scotland
Age: 31
Height: 6'3" / 191cm
Inseam: 37" / 93cm
Weight: 187 lbs / 85 kg, kitted


Testing Info

Testing took place in the Tweed Valley, Scotland, at Glentress, Cademuir, Thornilee and Innerleithen. The Rallon is a great all-rounder that feels out of place approximately nowhere but shines on rides that involve a lot of climbing and trails that reward maintaining speed through rough terrain. Alistair Lee's trail at Innerleithen is where I was most impressed. It's rough, rocky and not especially steep.

photo

Climbing


The Rallon pedals very efficiently and stays on top of its travel nicely on steep inclines. And I don't mean "considering it's got 167 mm of travel" - it pedals well full stop. There is a climb switch but unless you're trying to save every last watt you can just ignore it. I didn't notice the suspension hanging up when pedalling over bumps either. Some bikes create a more isolated sensation while pedalling through chunk (the Hope HB.916 for example), but in this situation there is something to be said for the long-travel and lightly-damped suspension that relies on anti-squat to pedal efficiently. While the BB is low, the suspension doesn't slouch and the optional 165mm crankarms increase clearance, so I had no problem with pedal strikes.

However, in the low setting, the seat angle was too slack for me. In back-to-back tests, it was noticeably harder to keep the power down and control the front wheel on steep climbs in the low mode. Even in the high setting, I would prefer a steeper seat tube for tackling those trickiest of inclines. But for all-day pedalling missions, the Rallon is comfortable and quick.

photo

Descending


I felt comfortable quickly on the Rallon thanks to the self-selected high-rise bar, long dropper post and 40mm stem. The shock needed some fettling to unlock the best performance and improve suppleness, but it was never the bump-swallowing "mini DH bike" that the 167mm travel would suggest. I rode it back-to-back with the Scott Ransom, which has similar suspension and geometry numbers, and the Scott felt a little more comfortable on rough terrain and big hits.

I measured the useable travel after this test and discovered I was struggling to get more than 159 mm of squish out of the Rallon (the Scott over-delivered at 172 mm measured in the same way), The helped explain the difference in plushness between the bikes. It's not that the Rallon is harsh, but it's not a plow. The X2 has a substantial bottom-out bumper, which in this case probably restricts the useable travel and makes the suspension less good at soaking up the big hits than you might expect from the quoted travel. The combination of a progressive linkage, air spring and bottom-out bumper which affects a significant fraction of the end-stroke add up to make the Rallon less good at erasing bumps than some bikes in this travel bracket.

Don't get me wrong: the small-bump sensitivity is good, (really good if you optimise the shock setup for it) it just feels like a 160 mm travel bike rather than 167 mm, because that's effectively what it is. The flip side is that there's no hint of harshness when you get to the end of the (usable) travel on a heavy landing (I have a 2-meter drop with a flat-ish landing that I use to test this), and there's plenty of support deep in the stroke when pushing into a berm or compression. Pump or pedal out of a corner and the support is there to get you going quickly.

photo

I tried both high and low settings, but I didn't have a strong preference on the descents. Even on tight twisty steeps, where I usually prefer lower bikes, I didn't notice much benefit to the low setting, and in the higher setting the suspension felt more balanced through flatter sections and berms. The high setting is noticeably better for climbing too, so that's what I used most. But even then, the BB is low and the head angle is slack, so it's very stable and surefooted on steep and techy trails. The low mode is there if you want it, but the high setting offers a great balance for climbing and descending that you can set and forget.

On flatter sections and flow trails the Rallon offers good support and balanced handling, making it easy to carry speed. It responds well to pedal inputs too, making it as rewarding on faster, less demanding trails as it is on steep and gnarly ones. If a Rallon was your only bike you wouldn't wish for a trail bike to go with it.



photo

photo

What's the Best Value?

All four models use the same full-carbon frame. The two entry-level builds get Fox Performance level suspension with the Grip fork damper - which is less supportive than the Grip2 but more forgiving and easier to set up - and Float X shock, which might get closer to the full 167 mm of travel than the X2. The M10 uses the Shimano XT drivetrain and brakes while the M20 makes do with an SLX drivetrain and Deore brakes. That's no bad thing as the Deore brakes are more consistent than pricier options in my experience. The M20 build is all you need, but it's still a lot of money for a "good enough" spec.


How Does It Compare?


The Scott Ransom is comparable in many ways - it's another highly versatile lightweight-yet-long-travel enduro weapon. Check out the video for my in-depth impressions on how they compare, but the bottom line is that I marginally preferred the Scott for both climbing and descending, although the Orbea is probably easier to live with thanks to simpler cable routing and suspension layout.



photo
photo
photo
photo

Technical Report

In-frame storage: The Rallon's downtube storage compartment has a narrow slot which makes it tricky to get bulkier items like tubes in and out. There's a big range in the usefulness of the concept, and Orbea's implementation is relatively limited in what it can stash away. Similarly, the tool located in the rocker pivot could get you out of a scrape on a local hot lap, but it's far from the full complement of tools so I always rode with a 19-function multitool in my pocket regardless - and always reached for that when things needed tweaking.

Shimano XT brakes / Galfer rotors: The debate about whether Shimano has addressed the wandering bite point issue rumbles on. It seemed to be improving in recent years, but these brakes were inconsistent out of the box, and after a thorough bleed the problem soon returned. This is the first time I've tried Shimano brakes with Galfer rotors and the first time in a while it's been this noticeable from day one, so perhaps they'd work better with Shimano's rotors, but I can't say for sure. Either way, I'd prefer a different brake spec.

Shimano XT drivetrain: It seems like every high-end bike has to come with SRAM Transmission, and while I like the electronic shifting for e-bikes, I was happy returning to mechanical. The shifter is more intuitive to me because the levers give you instant tactile feedback rather than interchangeable buttons. I never had to worry about charging it either, and the shifting was almost as consistent.

photo



Pros

+ Lightweight and efficient when pedaling
+ Geometry balances steep terrain stability with enough agility for tighter trails
+ Carries speed nicely on flowy terrain
+ Component customisation adds value and helps with setup
+ Versatile all-rounder


Cons

- At times I wished the seat angle was steeper
- The shock's bottom-out bumper restricts access to the full 167 mm of travel, and makes the suspension less forgiving than some long-travel rivals
- Not the best value, especially if you're buying in the UK


Pinkbike's Take

bigquotesThe Rallon has always been a pedal-friendly enduro bike. The latest version has lost none of that quality, but by relaxing the head angle it's become more capable when things get steep and hectic, which is where the previous version lost ground. This makes it even more versatile because you can set the flip chip to the high setting and forget about it, whether you're riding a leg-burning trail loop or steep shuttle laps.

It's not perfect, though. It's difficult to access all the travel which makes the rear suspension less forgiving than other bikes with north of 160 mm travel, and even in the high setting, I'd prefer an even steeper seat angle. But the Rallon is still a great option for those who want one bike that can take on just about anything - and do it well.
Seb Stott






Author Info:
seb-stott avatar

Member since Dec 29, 2014
321 articles

115 Comments
  • 111 0
 What I'd really like to know is how this compares head to head with a Scott Ransom, preferably delivered in video format, but I doubt anyone will do that for me.
  • 49 0
 @bigtim You're not gonna believe this...
  • 39 5
 - At times I wished the seat angle was steeper

wow, 77 is not steep enough? 90?

- The shock's bottom-out bumper restricts access to the full 167 mm of travel, and makes the suspension less forgiving than some long-travel rivals

last 7mm of travel is a gift from Orbea, basicaly it is 160mm travel frame, yeah


- Not the best value, especially if you're buying in the UK

it's best value in Spain, you need to fly with Ryanair/Easyjet from Britain to Barcelona/Alicante etc, get yourself some sun and pick up an Orbea! Saludo!
  • 24 5
 Haha he says it feels like 167 instead of 160, yet doesn’t like how it doesn’t get the full 167.

Bike reviews are ridiculous!
  • 31 1
 No worries, the X2 will die in no time and you can get a different shock for full travel.
  • 2 2
 @Muckal: I thought latest word on this is they "fixed it". Not sure how true. I am curious thought because so many bikes ship with this shock.
  • 2 0
 @neatoneto: Sure but everyone who bought one will have problems, if you're a muppet like me you bought it used and now have pretty landfill.

Screw the extra weight I've gone full coil on everything forever, less thinking the better.
  • 3 0
 you might as well fully travel to spain for a bike that doesnt get full to travel
  • 2 0
 @Muckal: they've been updated with a new bearing (damper head) which now has two orings for better sealing. It can be purchased separately and included in a service. I have to say that little detail during service makes them waaay more durable without changing anything. That being said it's the best air shock in the market
  • 1 0
 He is also 191 cm tall (with long legs) so like me is testing the extremes of an XL fit.

All the little deficits like a degree of seat angle and 5-10 mm of chain stay/ rear centre are really noticeable and exacerbated by the leverage effect that our height and leg length bring to the physics of bike set up.

I think a lot of the XL frames that do adjust for the taller rider are actually computer modelled but the best frames were also test ridden by a properly tall and capable rider (eg one of Norco's design engineers is 193-195 cm tall).

On an XL in that travel category 78º-79º is better and probably the minimum.
  • 21 0
 "Orbea says they've totally revised the suspension kinematics"

Bollocks! Looks exactly like the 2022 model that Matt Beer reviewed 2 years ago. Even the published kinematics curves match. Which makes me doubt whether Seb had read that review before taking this on.
  • 4 0
 It has not been revised. Just long shocked. Source: I have a 2023 one and ran the numbers to decide how I would build it up.
  • 7 1
 @RoboDuck: Guys I've a 2022 model and love it, and love what Orbea has been doing in terms of enduro and trail bikes recently but you're absolutely right, this is proper bullshiting people.
My bike (and yours RoboDuck) came with a 230x60mm shock and 160mm of travel.
The "new" model comes with a 230x62.5mm shock and 167mm of travel
If you do a three simple rule (62.5x160)/60=166.6(6) and according to an orbea dealer I spoke to, all the part numbers for any frame parts (front triangle, linkage, rear triangle bits...) are the exact same so it won't matter if you're ordering it for a 2022 or 2024.
On the R5 they've developed a new link to increase travel and progression and made it available for whoever wanted to upgrade which was great. This is just patetitc.
  • 2 0
 @fmgaspar: FWIW I wouldn't change anything with the kinematics if I had the chance. It works well. It is a weird way to message it though.

My only really complaint with the bike is some rattling from the storage door.
  • 2 0
 @RoboDuck: the head angle is slacker?
  • 3 0
 @fmgaspar: I'm in the same boat. I have a 2022 Rallon and love it. With support from a World Cup mechanic, I up-stoked my bike from 230x60 to 230X62.5 about a year ago. So I guess I have a 2024 rallon now? The only thing that actually needs changing on this bike is the lower captive nut of the flip chip. 1/4" of aluminium to hold your shock in place is ridiculous. I have a stainless hardware store bolt into a Nylock nut and it works great Smile
  • 6 0
 @blanshard16: I know that was a typo, but we should all up-stoke our bikes Big Grin
  • 3 0
 @chakaping: I was just going to say the same. Never has a typo been so adequate.
  • 1 0
 @RoboDuck: Mine is yet to rattle, but I'm expecting it to do so at some point. As you said, otherwise, no complaints. Maybe one of the bolts from the linkage which uses an 8mm alen key and the in-bike kit only goes up to 5 plus the 6 on the rear axle. And it's not something that's tighten with that much torque, so a 5 or 6 would have been fine. But I'm just being very picky, mainly because I found it to be loose on a ride and i didn't have an 8mm with me. Still my fault for not noticing it on a pre-ride bolt check.
  • 1 0
 @blanshard16: True enough, it was the same on the R5, but i haven't noticed it on the R6 as I've been running mullet and the mullet linkage doesn't have the flip chip.
  • 1 0
 @RoboDuck: I put electrical tape around the perimeter of the opening to quiet it down.
  • 16 1
 " At times I wished the seat angle was steeper"

The first pic says it all there
  • 20 0
 Yeah, but find a Seb Stott review that doesn't look like that.
  • 6 0
 do people really ride with the seat forward and angled like that or is it just meant for generating interesting banter?
  • 12 0
 @spenceratx: Yes. I do. I have long legs for my height so I end up further over the back wheel on bikes with slacker ‘actual’ seat angles. Effective angle only useful for average proportioned bodies…
  • 5 0
 @rich-2000: same here!
  • 3 1
 @rich-2000: I too am very leggy. Slack seat posts put us too far back, Steep, too far forward.
  • 2 0
 @spenceratx: I do that on my Capra.
  • 2 0
 @thingswelike: Steeb Stott says it aint Seb enough, might be just well.
  • 1 0
 @spenceratx: I have pretty long legs and don't set up my saddle like that. No problems with it being centered.
  • 8 0
 Nice Bike. I like the shape, the weight, the geometry. It swallows long droppers despite its short seat tube. Still not standard in 2024. But. I am pretty sure this frame comes from the same mould as the last version. They just added 2.5mm of shock travel to reach 167mm at the rear wheel.
  • 3 2
 And the version before that. I have the 2019 version which is just a few mm different without frame storage. Still a brilliant bike.
  • 2 0
 And reading the cons..that added travel is moot with the bottom out bumper on the shock
  • 2 0
 This is definitely the same frame upstroked.
  • 3 0
 @RoboDuck: It makes you wonder if they forgot to remove that travel spacer for the test bike.
  • 2 0
 I have a 2022 bike and it's the same bike with more stroke, frame parts numbers are the same, I still love the bike but why do they just throw sand in peoples's eyes?
  • 3 0
 @ratedgg13: I had a 2019 and now a 2023. I was surprised how much of a difference the little changes added up. Still had all the good traits of the 2019, just more capable.
  • 3 0
 @PaulC290: The Rallon 2019-2021 was a completely different frame. Kinked seat tube, way shorter and steeper and less travel. They added 3cm of reach and slackened the head angle by one degree from 2021 to 2022 model.

Since then: No further changes to the frame despite using shocks with more travel.

Afaik it is even possible to run 65mm of shock stroke anyways. So stay tuned for the Rallon 2026 ;-)
  • 8 0
 Seems fine, but in a category with bikes that are great I don't know who is spending top dollar for 'fine.' The suspension marketing garbage is really off putting. It's a very conventional single pivot, rearward axle path my ass. It's got seatstay pivot concentric with the rear axle, like half a dozen other bikes, classic faux bar stuff with their own acronym. It's not a bad design, how common it is is proof enough of that, it's just the obnoxious spiel on top of it I don't like it.
  • 3 1
 It's a split pivot, like in Trek. Still the axle path is like a low single pivot 29er, means rather forward and thus a bit harsh plus lots of PK which is supposed to be non existent but put an ochain on and you can feel bike having much more traction.
  • 2 0
 Isn’t suspension marketing garbage basically what every brand is doing? Not that I approve, but it’s super rare to find a bike without it.

And this seems like an excellent bike for tons of riders. For all those who do a lot of climbing but still want a bike that can tackle anything on the way down. E.g. everyone living in alpine regions.
  • 2 1
 @Ttimer: Honestly, most bikes can tackle anything these days, they just differ in feel. Most low-pivot 29ers are harsh yet they are fast and pedal well. Some people just like more forgiveness and that's why we have high pivots, some need more agility and we have mullets for them. This particular bike is pricey and just ok, but not very good, you can tackle anything on it, you can also tackle anything for 50% of the price of this one. And when it comes to climbing a 150-160mm bike the weight is not really that important, seat angle and suspension are much more dominant here. And the wheel size, mullets are really struggling with rear wheel grip compared to 29ers.
  • 1 0
 @lkubica: I have a 2023 Rallon and it's not harsh. Maybe not as plush as some bikes, but certainly not harsh at all. It climbs very well and is a great bike for our big mountains. Also, they're not all that expensive in the USA.
  • 7 0
 That forward position of that seat leads me to believe the marks on the rails mean nothing.
  • 2 0
 This is how I mount every saddle on every MTB I owned since 2003. Nothing wrong with this :-)
  • 9 6
 The Scott isn't an amazing comparison, half the reason the Rallon is attractive is because it has smart, well thought out details and zero nonsense, can't say the same for the Scott. Plus it would be nice to compare to something more people have actual time on, SC Megatower, Canyon Strive, Nukey Mega/Giga, the ancient but still relevant Spesh enduro??
  • 4 6
 Pretty crazy how long the Enduro has reigned, and to this day I don't see why you would buy any other 170mm bike. What would be a reason to NOT just get an Enduro? Other than to try a high pivot/idler setup.
  • 11 1
 @venturavin: didnt it have a frame cracking issue? Might just be a case of so many of them out there that you hear about it a lot of issues but the rates arent that high
  • 2 2
 @mtmc99: ya I think it's just a case of hearing about it because of how many are sold, and the loud-mintority effect. Anecdotally I and about 6 other friends have had Enduros in the past few years, all used for riding DH trails, and no cracked frames. Overall I think it's pretty safe to say that Specialized knows how to make carbon bicycle frames so even if they had a bad batch I'm pretty sure they'd adjust swiftly.

In fact thinking about that statement some more... do you really think it is possible that there is a widespread issue with a frame that has been mass produced for 4 years now?
  • 3 1
 @venturavin: I work at a pretty big Specialized dealer, and the Enduro definitely had/has a cracking issue. Unlike most bikes that crack in say, a specific area (like Santa Cruz Nomad 5 around the cable ports), the Enduros seemed to crack all over. I've seen seat tube, chainstay, top tube, and around the headtube. I've seen holes punched in the frame when the chainstay crunches rocks into the shelf behind the BB too. The very worst case was the headset cups that are integrated in the frame pulled through the headtube. That was the only "catastrophic" failure I've seen though. And I'm not talking about people crashing and breaking them (that happens too lol).

A pretty solid reason not to buy one, besides the cracking, would be the amount of bearings they use, and how quickly they go through them. I'm not trying to hate on them; they are clearly a great performing bike, but they do have more than their fair share of issues relative to other bikes we sell.
  • 3 2
 @leon-forfar: Have you been able to check out the % of Enduros sold vs. those that crack and compare that data to other 170mm bikes? I'm still inclined to believe it has more to do with how the bike is ridden, especially based on your report that no particular part of the frame is prone to breaking. Did you notice it mostly in the 2020 models by chance? Maybe they tried to hard to shave weight the first year, then beefed it up?

I can't possibly fathom that the 2024 Enduros are lemons. There's just no way that a big brand would mass produce a bike for 4 years running if it was a statistical anomaly in warranty rates.

Also don't forget that nobody goes to their shop to let everyone know their bike is running great. While you have the benefit of knowing the bikes inside and out, you also have a very skewed/jaded view of them since pretty much everyone walking in your door is there because they have a problem.
  • 1 0
 @venturavin: IIrc, the sizing jumps are big.
  • 1 0
 @FatSanch: Ok are you guys just trolling me to reveal my big S fanboy-dom? The S sizing they use is about as flexible as it gets. Humans are all odd shapes so I'm sure there's groups of folks the Enduro doesn't work for, but generally speaking most people could ride at least two sizes of the Enduro and be pretty happy.
  • 1 0
 @venturavin: I would say it is the opposite of a skewed/ jaded view, rather a data pool larger than most peoples anecdotes out there. It makes no difference to me. And I know that they are an amazing riding bike. One of the best in recent times.

We have sold about 140 at our location since 2019, and I have seen about 20 with some form of cracking (not including crash replacements). So about 14%. I would say that is pretty bad for a modern day bike, especially considering the R&D budget the big S has. In fact, when the S-works Enduro launched, it had a carbon link, which was SUPER prone to breaking. Spesh made a running change and just put the normal link from the lower end frames on and called it a day. I'm by no means saying they are lemons, and our terrain here (North Shore and Sea to Sky) is obviously known to be pretty hard on bikes. But relative to our other brands, the Enduro specifically had its fair share of issues. The big issue is that we had one actually catastrophically fail at the headtube from honest normal use JRA down a trail. Something I haven't seen from any other brand we carry in a LONG time. As I mentioned, other bikes definitely crack, but they were usually in a specific area across all of those frames. In other words, it's an isolated issue that can be (and was) easily rectified with a running change. When you find cracks all over the bike from various different riders, then there is a bigger design flaw at hand.

I'm not anti- Spesh. I have had an Enduro, and two drop bar bikes from them. I also think they are leading the way with E-bikes as a whole package.

S-sizing is marketing. People get sucked into brand's size guides, and then think they HAVE to be on a large because the brands SiZe ChArT sAiD sO. People could probably squeeze between two sizes depending on preferences and be totally fine. It doesn't matter if it's called Medium or Large vs S3 or S4. If you want playful, size down, if you want stability, size up.
  • 2 0
 @leon-forfar: Bearings/linkage is the reason I don't own one, just mildly unpleasant bike to service in general from my experience. So many great 170 options to pick from, I don't think the Enduro did anything particularly crazy, they just hit on a formula earlier than everyone else.
  • 7 0
 Long live XT!
  • 5 0
 Is it possible the shock had a wrong spacer.. Maybe set as a 60mm stroke instead of 62.5mm...
  • 1 0
 That was my suspicion as well.
  • 2 1
 I think that it simply has a good bottom out bumper. On a coil shock you just cannot compress this bumper 100% without applying a lot of force, I mean a lot lot. Just compressing a shock even with a strap may be not enough.
  • 1 0
 @lkubica: That's why I think the internal spacer might be wrong.. The bottom out spacer is firm, hence the 1mm into the stroke..
  • 2 0
 "Because anti-rise levels increase throughout the travel, this may help the suspension remain sensitive and consistent under braking compared to some other designs where anti-rise drops off throughout the stroke"

I think you have that backwards? Although the anti-rise is overall fairly low and linear/flat post sag so I imagine it would be predictable.
  • 5 0
 shocks bottom out bumper restricts travel? seems like that would be the case for all X2's if true.
  • 1 0
 Agreed
  • 2 0
 I feel like it should be the standard for every bike brand to list the weight of the largest size, not the small or medium like they usually do. Better for everyone to know what the heaviest the bike can be vs knowing the lightest IMO
  • 3 1
 I picked up a Rallon at the beginning of 2023. It was an option that ticked all of the boxes: a 170/160 that I could pedal and ride park, had moderate geo, in fame storage, able to run a 240mm post, ability to mullet was a plus but not needed. I knew the bike didn't have the best suspension kinematics but it was really one of only a few bikes that ticket all of the boxes.

The best thing of all is that it didn't have silly cables running through my headset or a shock buried in my frame. I'd rather go with my girlfriend to HomeSense on a Saturday to pick up crafting supplies than be subjected to owning a bike with those features. Lord Jesus please, I'll take the Specialized Enduro looking, single/ split pivot whatever, vanilla Orbea every time before the over engineered Scott.

Heading into the second season, the bike rides consistently from Whistler Bike Park to 7 hour pedal missions. It does everything I want from it and doesn't act up but it's not perfect... the bottle cage/ down tube port rattles in the lightest breeze, the multi tool was useless (thankfully doing everyone a favour and fell out on the second ride), and the down tube storage door needs to be bigger so I can get one bag of Haribo gummies inside.

All of those issues could be overlooked except for one last one... It would get hung up on small/mid sized hits. I tried upgrading to coil with only some minimal luck. I was debating getting something else this year until I put an O-Chain onto it.... HOLY SHIT. The bike now motors over everything and is still a pleasure to climb.
  • 1 0
 Try an American Classic 225 hub, it has similar traits to the O-chain without all the complexity. Truly ahead of its time, too bad it didn't get any praise before the company went south.
  • 3 0
 I’d like to know more about this ‘Deore not exhibiting wandering bite’ comment.

Has anyone tested this? Is it caliper or lever or both? I’m about to go buy a Deore brakeset!
  • 2 0
 It’s nonsense. Shimano wandering bite point is a matter of mismatch between engineering and manufacturing tolerances. Every model can have the issue but not all individual units are affected.
It’s not restricted to caliper or lever, but rather to the interaction between the two.
  • 6 1
 Shimano wandering bite point was solved by the internet roughly 4 million years ago. Just use less viscous brake fluid so that the fluid can flow more easily, problem solved. The fact that Stott mused that different rotors might be whats causing the issue shows a worrying lack of understanding for a professional product reviewer.
  • 4 0
 @gabiusmaximus: Lighter brake fluid is not a guaranteed solution. Sometimes the issue is resolved, sometimes reduced, sometimes nothing helps.

Many people use Putoline HPX 2.5 suspension oil. There have been some reports that in the long run (several years), caliper seals swell and grow soft when run with Putoline.

Agree that the comment regarding rotors seems kind of clueless.
  • 11 6
 Nothing about an Orbea excites me.
  • 2 0
 What bike does excite you?
  • 2 0
 I have a question: I own an 2022 Rallon in M and because the new vivid coil came out i can get a cheap superdeluxe coil in 230x 62,5
Does that transform my 2022 Rallon to a 2024 one?
Thanks
  • 2 0
 Yeah you can.
  • 2 1
 Con: "Not the best value, especially if you're buying in the UK".
Brexshit apart, you've got plenty of nice brands across the Channel... which are not the best value for us living on the other side of that bloody Channel. Everything is relative once again. Cheers from Frogsland Smile
  • 1 0
 We really just need a 160MM bike where we can pick our own components from the factory, that pedals like a 130MM bike, weights 33lbs for xl with a Fox 38, has downtube storage, room for a water bottle and rips downhill like the best current 160 enduro sleds. Is that really too much to ask?
  • 1 0
 Before purchasing, I suggest reading and watching content about this suspension system. Also, look for experiences with Orbea's warranty.

www.pinkbike.com/forum/listcomments/?threadid=248057&pagenum=1#commentid7230377
  • 4 0
 Dang. That ain’t no looker.
  • 4 0
 The size XL doesn't help
  • 5 1
 Stumpduro
  • 5 0
 Rallumper
  • 1 0
 I wonder if the strut is shorter on this new model? Otherwise just don't try to get that full 167mm out of a coil shock or you might have a bad time.
  • 3 1
 Get a $4k Capra, hip pack, and have your consumables paid for a year or two (including beer!)
  • 8 0
 Or spend 3200 on last years rallon like I did
  • 5 2
 shitty yoke design again.
  • 3 1
 Been on mine for almost two years with a DHX2. Had the shock serviced once. No issues.
  • 3 1
 @ericolsen: google a bit and you'll see not everyone has been so lucky, it's a shit design regardless.
www.reddit.com/r/MTB/comments/1by60p8/warning_orbea_rallon_snapped_shock_strutmount
for example
  • 3 1
 Do tell how your accurately measuring the effective seat angle yourself? ..and quoting numbers within 0.1 degree?
  • 1 1
 Ooh, is Alastair Lees open in full again? I'm sure half was closed last time I was up there. Or was that the lower Quarry trail?
  • 1 0
 The lower section was destroyed in storm something or other, they are currently felling and clearing that section though.
  • 2 0
 Thank you for suspension charts.
  • 1 0
 when the saddle is pushed that for forward it resides in a different postcode
  • 2 1
 This bike seems to have everything in sweet spot. Everything smart!
  • 1 0
 My Galfer discs also rusted like in the picture, no excuse for that
  • 1 2
 I don't count 34lbs as particularly lightweight...
  • 5 1
 For a 170mm bike it is. Have you ever seen the articles on PB where they weigh enduro race bikes? They're usually around 36-41 lbs.
  • 1 0
 Compared to what other enduro bikes?
  • 1 0
 I agree. That's why they're notthatfast !
  • 2 0
 @tmwjr777:
Race bikes are usually covered in non-spec parts that make them heavier. I’d say 34lbs for a bone stock bike is pretty normal.
  • 1 1
 @notthatfast: Every "enduro" bike I've owned has been hovering around 36-37 lbs by the time I swap some parts to make it capable of withstanding hours of bike park abuse. And that's with no tools, tube or anything strapped to it. But I suppose you could get it down to around 34 with a carbon frame, carbon wheels and lots of other carbon bits. That's not in the budget for a lot of us tho.
  • 1 0
 @tmwjr777:
That's my point. The weight on this Orbea isn't for a bike that's got all the things strapped to it, it's the bone stock bike. 34lbs is about in the ballpark for most similar enduro bikes. It ain't that light.
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.048648
Mobile Version of Website