First Ride: 2024 Trek Supercaliber G2

Aug 10, 2023 at 7:16
by Troy Templin  

It's hard to believe that we are heading into 2024, and the Trek Supercaliber was released in 2019. Launched as a pure cross-country race bike, the Gen 2 version builds on that and adds 20mm more of rear travel. The new Supercaliber now offers 80mm of rear travel, but beyond that, Trek has designed the geometry around a 110mm travel fork.

Cross-country race courses at the highest levels are getting more and more demanding, and while Trek will tell us about all the pro athletes that wanted and even needed more travel, in reality, the real winners are the consumers.
Trek Supercaliber Gen 2 Details

• Wheel size: 29"
• Carbon frame
• 80mm rear travel, 100-120mm fork
• 67.5° head angle
• 435mm chainstays
• Sizes: S, M, ML, L, XL
• Frame + shock weight: 4.3 lb (1950 grams)
• Actual weight: 21.06 lb / 9.5 kg
• MSRP: $4,200 - $11,700 USD

It's no surprise that Trek is designing bikes for the top level of racing, but the consumers are the ones purchasing these bikes. Without sales, World Cup racing itself is not enough to validate a new bike, and it sounds like customers were also asking for a bit more from the Supercaliber too. Trek's response, in my opinion, is a truly solid response, but is it enough to compete with their largest competition in this segment?

Trek is hitting the market with a total of seven Supercaliber Gen 2 complete models. Five modes will feature the SLR OCLV carbon frame, with prices ranging from $7,000 to $11,700. Two models will utilize the slightly heavier SL OCLV carbon main frame but have the same rear end as the SLR for $4,200 and $5,700.


Frame Details

The Trek Supercaliber has always had a very clean aesthetic. The new RockShox SIDLuxe IsoStrut rear shock that is essentially built into the top tube opens up a significant amount of room in the main frame triangle since it really only uses a single pivot near the bottom bracket. One of the benefits of this top-tube shock layout is that it provides plenty of room for carrying two water bottles. In the real world, during a regular XC ride, having two water bottles is essential if you don't want to wear a hydration pack. For pro athletes that have a crew and support, it's not a huge issue, so many bikes in this category overlook it, but for the general consumer, that's a huge bonus. Plus, marathon cross-country races have always been a popular segment for this style of bike, and two water bottles are key in those events.

One of the most impactful frame designs is the flexing seat stays. Flex in the design is not a new concept by any means, but focusing that resistance in the seat stay rather than a chainstay delivers more lateral stiffness as well as controlled isolation. The seat stays extend from the rear axle all the way up until they become the shock body. These seat stays act as a progressive flex point to support the shock's travel. Essentially, between the progressive nature of the low-volume shock and the flexing frame, there's a good deal of end-stroke ramp up, and full travel is hard to achieve when sag is set correctly.


There are two versions of the frame - the SLR and SL. Both use the same swingarm, but the SLR forgoes internal guide tubes and receives a different carbon layup in order to save 250 grams compared to the weight of the SL model, which does have internal guide tubes for easier cable routing. Complete SLR builds have wireless shifting, although that doesn't mean they're cable-free - our top-tier Supercaliber SLR 9.9 XX AXS still has three cables that control the shock and fork lockout remotely and a cable-actuated dropper post. That's still a lot of cables.

The Supercaliber Gen 2 frame uses 148mm hub spacing and has a UDH (Universal Derailleur Hanger.) The UDH can be removed for a hangerless T-Type SRAM Transmission compatibility. The frame has a proprietary floating direct post-mount brake caliper adapter that is only compatible with a 160mm rotor. This isolates the caliper from the rear end's flex and offers consistent brake performance.

Unsurprisingly, the frame is designed specifically for a 29" wheel, but there is also room for a 2.4" tire. That's a lot of rubber for a short-travel XC bike.



The Trek Supercaliber Gen 2 geometry has been updated with a slightly longer reach and slacker headtube angle. The Gen 1 had a 69-degree headtube with a 100mm travel fork. All of the stock Gen 2 bikes will deliver with a 110mm fork and a 67.5-degree headtube angle. Even if you swap the 110mm fork for a 100mm version, you still get a 1-degree slacker frame at 68 degrees. If you opt for a 120mm fork, you bump half a degree from stock to a 67-degree headtube angle.

The longer reach is only about 1cm, but the overall wheelbase has been extended between all of the geometry tweaks. As an easy comparison, the Gen 2 size large with a stock 110mm fork has a 117.2cm wheelbase, the same as the Gen 1 XL. I point this out because the length makes a difference on technical and tight singletrack.

The bottom bracket drop has also been raised just a bit to help offset the sag and longer travel. This has also affected the stack, with Gen 2 having a slightly lower stack. This is even with sizes L and XL getting longer headtubes.

Overall, the geometry has been tweaked to add stability along with more travel. While most of us aren't racing the demanding World Cup courses, it expands the bike's versatility with little compromise to pure race performance.



Build Kits

I was surprised to see that none of the complete builds come with powermeters, even the top tier 9.9 AXS model. Maybe it is just the XC races I frequent, but they are incredibly competitive at all levels, and almost everyone is training with power. Don't get me wrong, an XC bike doesn't need a power meter, but the top few builds should definitely be delivered with, at the very least, a single-sided power meter. Both competitors, Scott and Specialized, have it on the spec sheet of their pinnacle builds. That said, the SRAM XX SL cranks on the top model are designed to easily accept the SRAM / Quarq power meter.

Enough bagging on Trek for skipping on power meters. Honestly, looking at the builds, Trek has hit most of the other marks. There are SRAM and Shimano builds at multiple levels, allowing riders to pick their preferred drivetain. To cut weight, the Fox Transfer SL with internal routing is on a few versions. I am a fan of the fast action and lightweight, but the two positions, up or all the way down, are not ideal on an XC race bike, in my opinion.

Without getting into the details of each build, all the bikes have a remote lockout that simultaneously controls the front and rear. You are either all open or all closed. The new RockShox SIDLuxe IsoStrut is on all models and unlike the Fox version that was on Gen 1, the Gen 2 version doesn't need any specific tools for service.


All of the SLR builds get carbon Bontrager Kovee wheels. On our test bike we have the RSL version. I like the 29mm internal width, but I was surprised to see a small hooked bead. All of the builds will be shipped with the Bontrager Sainte-Anne RSL XR, Tubeless Ready 29x2.40" tires except the one I got. Because the top tier model has the RockShox SID SL Ultimate fork, the 29x2.20" version comes stock.

Also on all of the SLR builds is the one-piece cockpit—the Bontrager RSL Integrated handlebar/stem.


Ride Impressions

The Supercalibler is very light on the scale, but overall, the tweaks made from the Gen 1 are much more impactful than just scale weight. Climbing on the Supercaliber is crazy efficient. The new RockShox SIDLuxe IsoStrut rear shock combined with the rear swingarm flex offers a progressive stroke allowing me to leave the system unlocked almost all the time. It is small bump compliant but doesn't take away from your pedaling.

The slacker geometry doesn't seem to hinder it when climbing technical trails or maneuvering obstacles at slower speeds. In reality, I'd say locking the suspension hindered most of my climbing more than the new geometry. That's because, unlike many lockouts, this one actually feels locked. I mean, like old-school close the valve and burst-a-seal locked. For those that are considering a hardtail, this might be the best of both worlds.


For me, the real downside was that I rarely want to lock both front and rear, and when I do it is just the road sections that connect trails or maybe a paved climb that creates a loop, not really mountain biking. Sure, those heading to Leadville this weekend would love it for some of the long connector roads, but I'd prefer separate controls when on the trail. If there is one small detail to this system that I do like, it is the fact that its default setting is open, meaning if a cable breaks or the is an issue, you get the benefit of an open system. Maybe I'll just disconnect one of the cables.

The new geo and additional travel truly shine when you point the Supercaliber Gen 2 downhill. One of my favorite XC loops is always buzzing with full-face helmets and 140-160mm trail bikes, but after riding it for nearly 20 years, these modern XC bikes are a dream and the best balance for the punchy climbs and fast technical sections. I can't say that the Trek Supercaliber Gen 2 was perfect, but the 80mm of travel in the rear was more than enough. I did a few extra laps with 35% sag rather than the 25% I had set it up with originally, and ven with the softer setting I had a hard time getting a full stroke out of the shock.

No matter if you choose the SL or SLR, the Trek Supercaliber Gen 2 has made significant changes that benefit pro riders and deliver a more versatile bike for consumers. Trek listened to pro riders, consumers, and mechanics while designing the Gen 2, and that is something that I think more brands should be doing in this segment.

Author Info:
ttemplin avatar

Member since Dec 29, 2010
2 articles

  • 190 13
 Kashima post with black everything else is a crime
  • 14 40
flag mariomtblt (Aug 10, 2023 at 9:31) (Below Threshold)
 brand sheep
  • 31 7
 Should have specd' a Reverb AXS IMO
  • 27 0
 it is a bizarre combination since the whole bike is specced in Sram...
  • 11 0
 @MrDiamondDave: its on the xo one. Guessing its the weight…

Should have done a performance elite with black.

Shun the PM
  • 4 0
 Naah- you missed that I matches the tanned arms and legs of the rider.
  • 21 0
 @kusa: It's only a bizarre combination until you look up the weight of the Reverb AXS and see that it's 250 grams heavier. Lol.
  • 9 1
 allways a crime kashima post... it´s not suspension..
  • 12 1
 But the Transfer SL is the one Fox product even Fox haters can love. It’s just sooooo gooood.
  • 15 2
 Gravel bike of the year!
  • 3 12
flag ethanrevitch (Aug 10, 2023 at 21:24) (Below Threshold)
 Running a Fox post on a full Rockshox/SRAM build should be a crime.
  • 8 0
 That transfer SL is a seriously light dropper though. They probably put the kashima on there because the people paying the price for it want the”nicest.”
  • 1 0
 @kusa: not if they based their decision on previous experiences with past Reverbs...
  • 2 0
 Get the performance elite
With a tiny bit of tuning you can get it down to 324g (30.9x100mm)
  • 2 0
 Fox definitely needs “Blackashima”
  • 1 0
 all you kooks crying and today Dario's bike check drops and it has a kashima DPS with a Pike. lmao
  • 2 0
 @WRCDH: kashima doesn't really do anything imo
  • 72 0
 nobody noticed the cable routing? they read the comments at Trek Smile
  • 9 18
flag Xaelber93 (Aug 10, 2023 at 10:31) (Below Threshold)
 I gotta say that I start to like the look of integrated cables when looking at this bike. Not necessarily the hidden cables itself, but the cockpit, spacer head tube area that's looking so much nicer on other bikes with integration.
  • 27 4
 It's still a press fit BB so maybe not.
  • 23 17
 @Snowytrail: so i have yet to need a BB re pressed more than once in 3 years. Where i had to remove and regrease a threaded every season. Once my LBS does press it vs the factory it never becomes a problem again.

Not sure why so much pressfit hate. Guess people just dont like supporting their local shops?
  • 3 0
 @Xaelber93: those bikes usually are pictured with wireless everything.. not with all 6 cables that you can have . I truly do not get why they spec a clamp for the dropper remote instead of a matchmaker though...
  • 1 0
 It's XC bike, be gentle
  • 4 0
 @skimons: So you can adjust it where you actually want it?!
  • 16 0
 @solarplex: I'm not hard over on either pressfit or threaded, I've got tools and experience to do both at home. But to suggest that pressfit is a good idea because it would increase the amount of work going to local shops is specious, at best. My experience with LBS is really mixed, some absolutely suck balls and some are absolute boss, and some are not very local. I think that the more maintenance people are able to do on their own bikes is the best win; there is no better incentive for doing good work on a bike than being responsible for your own up-time, enjoyment and safety.
  • 2 1
 @kosmowf: thats what a matchmaker does in a way, too, isn't it? works for me, at least... but yes, a clamp gives you more options
  • 47 0
 Hell of a good writeup. Thanks.
  • 10 1
 Is @ttemplin a new tech writer?
  • 36 0
 @FensterM, you'll mainly find Troy's work covering road and gravel over on Velo, but he'll be doing the occasional Pinkbike piece as well.
  • 32 0
 @mikekazimer: Clearly, from the statement:I was surprised to see that none of the complete builds come with powermeters

Not sure if any PB writers would even think to drop that line.
  • 2 0
 @ReformedRoadie: the 9.9 SLR XX has a power meter in the crank spindle
  • 40 3
 covfefe wheels?
  • 46 0
 If they were painted gold or orange, had a freehub that made a lot of noise, and the marketing would say they are the best wheels ever...but truthfully, they're were over weight, outdated and really didn't perform well at all. But for some unexplained reason, some people still love them.
  • 11 0
 @ReformedRoadie: I think the answer to the conundrum at the end of your comment is that a lot of people are also over weight, outdated, and don't perform well at all. So they see a common ally.
  • 4 0
 @seraph: I resemble that comment!
  • 31 13
 that top tube is killing me
  • 7 2
 The curve upwards just looks off. Even other bikes with weird curved top tubes don't look as weird because they curve downwards and the lines just flow better and match the down tube a bit more.
  • 29 4
 News Flash: We are all slowly dying, from the day we are born.
  • 1 0
 It doesn't really stand out as much in the photos with someone riding it.
  • 10 2
 At least no cable tourism..
  • 1 4
 It looks way too much like an old road bike that hit something head-on and got the top tube/downtube/fork pushed backwards.
  • 7 2
 Haters hate, but I think that's a sexy bike. The color/seat post combo featured in this article isn't the best, but in other colors and builds, it's a looker if you ask me.
  • 3 0
 2014 called, they wanted their Rocky Mountain back.
  • 3 0
 @WestC0astWanderer: your comment sounds like an add for peyronie's syndrome treatment.
  • 1 0
 @j-t-g: I was thinking the exact same thing !
  • 17 0
 Wow, you can already see wear on the handlebar from the silly "stealth" brake hose positioning.
  • 4 0
 They fixed an issue that wasn't an issue, so that way they can undo it in the future to fix the cable rub issue. Progessss
  • 15 0
 Fixed bar stem combos without a host of options for fit at time of purchase……. Is just wrong on so many levels.
  • 12 0
 Bontrager Saint-Anne RSL XR Tires? The heck are those.

I'm amazed they got the weight down. Ready to see some folks send some hucks to test out that extra travel!
  • 4 0
 i came to say DON'T huck it to flat
  • 5 0
 Look at the weights of all other models. Though. The very next level down, $9K, is almost 25 pounds without 25.5 to 26 pounds. Then it jumps all the way down to 20.8 for the top model. That seems like a crazy huge jump doesn't it?

The 9.8 model that I was looking to buy is the same weight. I was hoping 20.8 for top, maybe 22.5 for the next down, then 24, up to GULP,..27 pounds for a 80/110 XC race bike? Is that for real too?

Man oh man. that just seems like a lot for a brand new bike. But what do I know.
  • 6 0
 @shorttravelmag: maybe it's a brocountry bike, you know, heavier is more stable
  • 1 0
 @shorttravelmag: That $9k build is a weird build. Not for racing. It has a wireless drivetrain but heavier rims, 4 piston brakes, super heavy dropper, etc. The $9500 XTR build is only 21.5 lbs.
  • 7 2
 They didn’t get the weight down, the frame is still 200g heavier than an Epic EVO that has 30mm more travel.

This bike makes no sense.
  • 2 1
 @mtallman2: stiffer. Pedals way better. Doesn't creak.
  • 1 0
 @mm732: I’ve never met a Trek that didn’t creak.
  • 1 0
 @mtallman2: I've got six that are ninja-silent. Come on over for a meet and greet!
  • 12 2
 "WC courses are getting more demanding"
Tired stuff. They got more demanding almost a decade ago. They haven't been getting any more demanding for years now.
  • 3 0
 Until now there are two gap jumps. Is that a first? Definitely more demanding
  • 11 0
 If I buy the $11,200 model will I suddenly become good at XC riding?
  • 5 0
 If you're carrying that much on your person while riding and its in loonies, yes.
  • 8 0
 You will look fast on the starting line.
  • 10 1
 Why come out with a bike that has less travel than your previous XC bike and then a few years later update it with more travel?
  • 1 0
 *update it with more travel that is still somehow LESS travel than the bike the old one replaced
  • 11 1
 I still love my 2022 Supercally! The most fun bike in my quiver of bikes!
  • 9 0
  • 7 0
 Finally rolled all the way back around to my 2001 Trek Fuel with flexy stays, no rebound adjustment, and a 80/100 adjustable fork.
  • 3 21
flag ThatOneGuyInTheComments (Aug 10, 2023 at 8:58) (Below Threshold)
 News flash: The Supercaliber isn't a new idea from Trek, it's Trek trying to relapsing back to the ultra-short-travel bikes of the past. There is no such thing as a new idea from Trek.
  • 1 0
 @ThatOneGuyInTheComments: pinarello's trying to steal some of the thunder by naming their bike "dogma"
  • 9 0
 Dear Trek, please bring back the Superfly SS frame.
  • 2 0
 You get it. I sold my black and purple one and have regretted it ever since. Imagine a procaliber in single speed. It'd be perfect.
  • 5 0
 Great write up. Thank you. A few constructive comments:

I found my G1 SC worked best with 20% sag and the smallest VR, or none. The OEM VR was too large to allow for low sag and full travel.

The rear lockout on the G1 was essentially useless, to the point that a 3-position lever was better, since it only got toggled on actual roads. Wish the G2 offered this, along with a remote fork. Perfect xcm setup.

The lack of a power meter doesn't matter a lick to me, but it is weird, given that my mid-level Domane SL7 endurance road bike has one?!

A little more tire clearance is great, though the G1 fit a 2.4 just fine, even though that size was not officially blessed by Trek.

It will be nice if the new rear shock is more easily serviced. The G1 required a trick or two. To give credit to Trek, these were covered nicely in the owner's manual. No secret handshake required.
  • 4 0
 How many grams are the tubes alone, without the fancy layup? Considering how many grams of foam tubes, loop-side velcro strips, and various shapes of rubber tapes are commonly spent to achieve virtually complete silence, why bother stretching the gram-saving so far at the expense of adding so much noise potential?
  • 7 0
 Sweet, let’s skip to the part where these aren’t selling and get discounted 20-30%
  • 7 1
 This doesn't have a motor how are us fluffy Americans supposed to get uphill
  • 3 0
 The PM Spider for XX SL adds another $483 to the price. Once ProjectOne builds become available, perhaps it will be an option to add.

The Bontrager 35mm bar and stem that came on my Gen1 build was incredibly stiff. I replaced them with a ENVE M5 bar and stem and it made a huge difference in terms of vibration dampening. The integrated bar/stem combo on a bike I've never ridden would make be pretty wary. First concern would be how the feel and if they got the carbon layup right on the bars. Second, are dealers going to be able to do swap outs if the fit is bad? Or is it going to be a shoulder shrug....
  • 3 1
 Interesting that the chose to give SRAM that platform and say... hey.... yeah Fox helped us with all the RnD on the frame and suspension development... but go ahead and build a new version of that shock for us... What was wrong with the old one... nothing... go ahead and cut it apart if you want and design your own. Just make it simpler so we can use normal tools... because you know... people that own these are going to work on them themselves... And as for the dropper... for XC race I would think 2 positions is all you need. You're either climbing or you're defending. If you can't ride the rollers with your post up then you've gotten spoiled. Simple is better. Less to fail. Lighter weight. Only think I'd say could be cool is if it was a 3 position so you could do it in the middle... But then it's more complex... and heavier...
  • 5 0
 The real question is which Supercaliber is better. Specialized or the og Trek? We need shootout!
  • 1 3
 The specialized pretty obviously 200g frame weight difference and trek typically doesn't have the stiffest frames according to tour testing
  • 3 1
 Every honest review of the Supercaliber, G1 or G2 should lead with “the same weight as other full suspension XC race bikes, but with less travel”.

The whole pitch for this bike was splitting the weight and travel difference between a full sus and hardtail bike. The managed the travel part, just not the weight. Same criticism for the new Epic WC. I assume that’s why most of the Specialized riders have been favoring the Evo.

As far as I can tell, there’s zero engineering advantage in integrating the shock on the top tube. It just restricts the travel and constrains the kinematics. It does look slick though, and that probably sells more bikes.
  • 3 0
 It's pretty crazy that the epic Evo is the lightest frame
  • 1 0
 @XCplease: It's a good design! Just super basic with no form-over-function tube shapes. Turns out if you design around engineering goals instead of looks, you end up with a light bike that rides really well.
  • 5 1
 Have you ridden a supercaliber?. I have a G1 and it is the fastest most efficient bike I have ever ridden. In fact it's the only reason I purchased it in the first place. The frame has to be stiffer for the isostrut system as it adds more stress to the frame (or so I read) and the front triangle has to be strengthened more therefore it's not the lightest weight frame ever (it's far from heavy though) but the real benefit is how well it rides and carries speed. It's very impressive how fast this bike is. Also my 60mm travel G1 honestly feels like it has more like 100mm travel when I ride it but more for it's trail smoothing properties I mean because for its efficiency it feels like a hardtail.
  • 2 0
 @rabidmonkfish: “The frame has to be stiffer for the isostrut system as it adds more stress to the frame (or so I read) and the front triangle has to be strengthened more therefore it's not the lightest weight frame ever ”

I’m an engineer and this entire phrase is nonsense. If your design causes more concentrated load at the geometric high point in the frame and needs to be overbuilt relative to higher-travel competitors, it’s a bad design. Lots of frames are out there where the primary load path of the shock goes through tiny mounting tabs with no issue.

As far as whether it’s fast - I’m sure it’s not enough of a hindrance to prevent Jolanda and Evie from winning on it, but show me the lap-to-lap comparisons with controlled conditions, otherwise this is just hand-waving. Humans are super bad at perceiving what is fast vs what “feels” fast. And the G1 had outdated geometry on the day it launched, besides the weirdly super low and pedal-strike-y BB height. It’s like a cm lower than my Epic, which already is a hazard over a lot of choppy terrain. Hard pass.
  • 3 1
 OK, someone please help me out here. Why would I run a 110 mm travel fork, when that fork is identical in all respects except travel to a 120 mm fork? If I have the 110 mm fork run at a certain sag, I can run the 120 mm fork at a bit more sag, and have everything be the same geometry-wise, but the longer travel fork performs better as suspension. What am I missing?
  • 6 2
 I was really hoping this would be the bike Trek used to debut their new 32" wheels.
  • 4 0
 1. I'm not yet heading into 2024, really. 2. 2019 is like last year in practical terms.
  • 1 0
 Looks like a nice update. On the power meter tangent, will a Stages arm clear?

It doesn’t on my Ripmo AF (yes, some of us want power data even on our bigger bikes) and it’s not a dealbreaker.

On an XC bike it would be.
  • 1 0
 Claims there lighter than outgoing model's but all but the highest spec model are heavier than my 2022 9.8gx. My m/l version was actually lighter than claimed as well. 10.5kg with light pedals and invisiframe and a 20gran carbon bottle cage.
  • 1 0
 I was debating between 9.9 XTR and XO builds. I went XO, based on the performance of the transmission. I really wanted the RSL wheels, but Pros are fine! I'm going to drop the dropper and ride a RSL seat post. I may remove the option to lock out the suspension. I ride a ton of XC in S.E. Michigan and race a couple times a year. No need to make this thing rigid in my area and no downhills that require a dropper. 25 days and counting! I also get a nice discount from the LBS I ride for, otherwise I would have settled for GX build.
  • 2 0
 For once, I want the CHEAPEST model. (but that's just b/c of the color...changing out everything will bring it in line with current obscene pricing!
  • 2 0
 I would like to see this bike in Pinkbike's huck-to-flat test. I wonder what would happen to those seatstays when the shock bottoms out?
  • 3 0
 I have absolutely no need for one of these but for some reason I want one anyway
  • 17 14
 every trek is ~15% heavier than claimed
  • 4 9
flag plustiresaintdead (Aug 10, 2023 at 9:28) (Below Threshold)
 Vitals XX model was 2lbs heavier than claimed.
  • 19 1
 @plustiresaintdead, no, the weight Vital published for their test bike is with pedals and bottle cages. Trek's weights are without pedals.
  • 7 3
 @mikekazimer: Its still 1.3lbs off
  • 3 3
 How is this frame 200-300g heavier than an Epic Evo, Oiz, and other 110mm+ travel bikes? It's a little disappointing that this frame is that heavy... and that it's a Rock Shox rear shock.
  • 1 0
 @plustiresaintdead: They also had a wider front tire.
  • 1 0
 @petemacmtb: more complex suspension design adds 100g~ compared to something like an epic Evo (1660g)
  • 3 0
 Cool. Now Trek can do a downcountry build and call it Superstache.
  • 5 5
 sexy ...but on the top spec....why not just throw a wireless dropper on there? What's another $400 if you are already dropping $7k+
  • 28 0
 they are heavy?
  • 3 1
 Looks like a sick gravel bike!
  • 2 0
 IFHT - we need a new promo-vid!
  • 2 0
 Stem and top tube curves look like it was involved in a head on collision.
  • 2 1
 I reckon by 2026 XC bikes will be near identical travel and head angle to 2013 trail/all mountain bikes like the Meta AM
  • 1 0
 Figured Levy would have done the first ride. Maybe waiting for the full review?
  • 1 0
 Looks like i could snap those seat stays, no problem!
  • 2 0
 Where's my new remedy
  • 2 5
 Couple gripes with the spec…no power meter feels like Trek is cheaping out on it. Reverb AXS post would have been nice to see it on the 9.9 model. As well as the skinnier tires on the 9.9 model with the use of a SID SL when all other models use the 35mm SID
  • 3 1
 now THAT'S a gravel bike
  • 1 0
 Cherry Canyon ftw, such a sweet spot!
  • 1 0
 14% cheaper than the 2023 model...
  • 1 1
 The slight bend in the top tube makes it look like a Wally world hardtail from any angle outside of straight on.
  • 1 0
 Thank you Trek for not raising the price $1000 for the new model
  • 1 1
 Would be sweet if the new rockshox rear shock would fit the previous models
  • 4 4
 Looks like it's specialized for epic rides...
  • 1 0
  • 7 7
 Waiting for the Specialized lawsuit.
  • 2 0
 Beats the Epic WC by 5mm of rear travel
  • 15 2
 Hey Trek, we copied your bike and we'll see you in court... Signed, Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe Representing Specialized Bicycle Company
  • 8 0
 @lumpy873: Don't ride like my brother!
  • 3 0
 @RayDolor: having just moved, I'm just trying to get out and ride...
  • 1 1
 I wish it had integrated cables NGL
  • 2 3
 It looks exactly like an Epic WC.
  • 3 4
 Who cares how long it takes climbing..what's the rush..
  • 2 4
 Is it me or are XC seat angles to slack?
  • 16 0
 it's you ;-)
  • 2 0
 it's a different application. Trail or enduro bikes have a steep seat angle so you wind up a climb in a comfortable position. XC bikes are designed for efficient power delivery both on climbs and on flatter sections, which is not aided by a steep seat angle. That's why you will rarely see a seat angle upwards of 76 degrees on an xc focused bike
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2023. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.031007
Mobile Version of Website