Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 95 total)
  • New Yeti SB5.5c
  • Mark
    Full Member

    We don’t normally do this but we got an early test ride on it and it’s gorgeous

    Yeti Launches New SB5.5C – We Ride It!

    thepodge
    Free Member

    Long Low & slack = journalism speak for middle of the road

    wwaswas
    Full Member

    Looks lovely but a 1300g front tyre?

    All the inertia of a fatty without the comedy levels of grip?

    chubstr
    Free Member

    Nearly 7 grand…..get a grip

    barney
    Free Member

    Long Low & slack = journalism speak for middle of the road

    Well, it’s *quite* long (admittedly, not as long as a Mondy, but hey) – not the longest reach, no, as you’ll see if you read the article,but the frontcentre is up there thanks to the HA and the fork travel. It’s got a very low standover though, and is 66.5 degrees HA on a 29er not classified as slack these days?

    thepodge
    Free Member

    barney – is 66.5 degrees HA on a 29er not classified as slack these days?

    66.5 is slack if you take nothing else into account, its running 160 forks so its about the same as a 68.5 on 120 forks or 67.5 with 140 forks… ish… sort of, which isn’t very slack for a modern bike, in fact its steeper than the SC Hightower.

    sillyoldman
    Full Member

    SC High Tower is shorter in CS and longer in reach too. Bit of a reversal! Yeti used to be relatively long, and SC were short.

    I’m going for a High Tower.

    PJM1974
    Free Member

    Sure, it looks lovely…but as someone has already mentioned, it’s £7k and no doubt some arseholes will be along next week with some new standards which will render it obsolete.

    It’s 1980s bedroom poster material, along with a Porsche 959 and the tennis player scratching her bum and is just as relevant to the real world.

    rhayter
    Full Member

    Short stays by Yeti standards which probably accounts for some of the…

    poppy spring in its step

    noted in Rich’s review. It’s also a little steeper in seat angle. A 601mm top tube on a medium – that’s pretty damned long!

    barney
    Free Member

    66.5 is slack if you take nothing else into account, its running 160 forks so its about the same as a 68.5 on 120 forks or 67.5 with 140 forks… ish… sort of, which isn’t very slack for a modern bike, in fact its steeper than the SC Hightower.

    Well, no, that’s not true. How do you set up sag on *your* bikes?
    The SC Hightower is also pretty slack for a 29er, with a 67 degree HA (on the 140mm fork – put the chubbies on there with 150mm fork and it’s a bit slacker again). Set them both at 20% sag though, and the Yeti is still slacker. Although it’s hard to tell the difference on the trail unless you’re going hard, at which point you notice the extra 20mm on the Yeti.

    thepodge
    Free Member

    rhayter – A 601mm top tube on a medium – that’s pretty damned long!

    Not compared to other modern bikes, its about average

    mikeep
    Free Member

    Looks lovely but a 1300g front tyre?

    All the inertia of a fatty without the comedy levels of grip?

    I’m not sure where they got 1300grms from. States as 1005grms on the maxxis web site and I have one on my enduro 29er, weight in at 1050grms on my scales, not light but you don’t notice a massive difference in inertia over a magic mary.

    The grip levels are insane BTW, and digs into mud really well.

    bigjim
    Full Member

    How am I going to afford this?!

    It’s about 2cm shorter reach than my Smuggler, but then I certainly wouldn’t want anything longer than the Smuggler, which I’m running a 35 stem on. Wheelbase is a touch longer though. Looks lovely!

    mikeep
    Free Member

    I’m thinking Richie Rude will be on this round 5 Aspen ews.

    barney
    Free Member

    I’m not sure where they got 1300grms from. States as 1005grms on the maxxis web site and I have one on my enduro 29er, weight in at 1050grms on my scales, not light but you don’t notice a massive difference in inertia over a magic mary.

    Mikeep – I took the tyre that’s downstairs, and I weighed it.

    wwaswas
    Full Member

    I took the tyre that’s downstairs, and I weighed it

    damn you and your empiricism.

    thepodge
    Free Member

    barney – Well, no, that’s not true. How do you set up sag on *your* bikes?

    Apples and Oranges, Yeti has 160s, SC has 140s so of course the Yeti will win first glance slackness awards but comparing like for like the Yeti is steeper per mm of travel.

    It may be longer, lower and slacker than something from the 90s but its not long low and slack is it?

    My fiesta is faster than my old clio but I wouldn’t call it fast

    mikeep
    Free Member

    @Barney, sorry, I didn’t realise there was a grammar moderator on this forum. My is bad.

    bigjim
    Full Member

    It may be longer, lower and slacker than something from the 90s but its not long low and slack is it?

    Wasn’t it you calling the hightower short and steep? Someone on here always goes round every new bike thread saying that!

    Wookster
    Full Member

    It looks lush, and I like the mismatched travel, ( I’ve got a smuggler which even with a lot less travel seems never to find its limits) but 160mm travel is a lot and I wonder if I’d need it?

    At £7k I’ll pop it on paper for consideration post lottery win! 🙂

    thepodge
    Free Member

    bigjim – Wasn’t it you calling the hightower short and steep?

    It was me, then I looked properly at the numbers and apologised. I still don’t think its particularly LLS but I’ll admit its not short and steep, its just average for a new bike these days, much like the Yeti is about average for a new bike these days but it has a longer fork on it.

    LAT
    Full Member

    Wasn’t it you calling the hightower short and steep? Someone on here always goes round every new bike thread saying that!

    I do wonder how long, low and slack (regardless of sag) the bikes are that some people ride. I also wonder if they trade in their existing bike whenever a longer, lower, slacker bike come on the market. I’m also interested to know what would be too slack. Or too long. We’d all know when it is too low

    I’m also intreagued that no one moans about short chain stays. I thought short chain stays were as bad as a short reach or a high BB. And haven’t 29ers been proved to be slower than 650b? I thought a chap in Wales had done a lot of fine work on bicycle geometry and come to those conclusions.

    For the record I have a 29er with 66.7* head angle but it is a little cramped and the stays are too short. I have another that has geo all over the place. Fine bikes, the pair of them.

    barney
    Free Member

    Mikeep – I wasn’t actually deliberately commenting on your grammar; I was telling you where I got the weight from. We’ve got two of those tyres in for Fresh Goods, and I went downstairs and I weighed one of them 🙂

    thepodge – first-glance slackness awards? Set it up with the appropriate sag, and ride it. The Yeti will be a teensy bit slacker. Your novel concept of ‘steeper per mm of travel’ is nonsense, like measuring digestion by turd length.

    Wookster
    Full Member

    Your novel concept of ‘steeper per mm of travel’ is nonsense, like measuring digestion by turd length.

    I just snorted my coffee out of my nose! 😆

    bigjim
    Full Member

    I’m also intreagued that no one moans about short chain stays. I thought short chain stays were as bad as a short reach or a high BB.

    I guess it depends on the application but on a 29er short chainstays keep the turning nice and there’s generally a push to get them short as poss. My smuggler is longer than an oil tanker but still turns nicely around my body. Still got to steer that long front round mind!

    Or too long

    I wouldn’t want to go longer than the smuggler, riding where I ride. It’s a big old thing to turn through tight turns, and hop etc.

    I thought a chap in Wales had done a lot of fine work on bicycle geometry and come to those conclusions.

    You say fine work, others might say hot air…

    oldejeans
    Free Member

    please include “like measuring digestion by turd length” on next edition’s spine

    wrecker
    Free Member

    10mm higher BB than a hightower and a lot more standover height. Longer reach on the HT and lower stack (as I would like) Also 5 year vs lifetime warranty (and bearing replacement) for comparable costs.
    I know where the smart money is.

    LAT
    Full Member

    I’m sure a couple of manufacturers make bikes with shorter chain stays than the smuggler, so I’m going to have to say that your chain stays aren’t short. Sorry. And they gave the second iteration a little more ground clearance, so it isn’t low. Not to mention the head angle, it is a wonder you aren’t over the bars the whole time! It is long, I’ll give you that.

    I am, of course, just kidding. I would use one of those little faces to indicate that, but I’m never sure I’m using the right one. I once unwittingly accused someone, with better knowledge of these things, of being a penis. Life can be so confusing when you report to a young(er) person.

    Trimix
    Free Member

    Looks lovely, but its made in the US where its sunny and at worst a bit dusty. A few months in the UK winter and the bearings will wobbly then fall out.

    At £7+k its just too expensive for what it is.

    You can buy a XC bike and an Enduro style bike and still have change for that – especially if you take advantage of direct mail order suppliers like YT etc.

    Recently I’ve bought a XC plastic fantastic for less than £2k and am about to order an Enduro rocket all bling spec for about €3.5k and still have change for an Alps holiday, or some skills lessons.

    STATO
    Free Member

    I know where the smart money is.

    You love Jeffsy?

    Trimix
    Free Member

    Can I test ride it as well, just to see if it is worth £7+k ?

    thepodge
    Free Member

    LAT – I do wonder how long, low and slack (regardless of sag) the bikes are that some people ride. I also wonder if they trade in their existing bike whenever a longer, lower, slacker bike come on the market. I’m also interested to know what would be too slack. Or too long. We’d all know when it is too low

    67 Hardtail / 66 full suspension, both running 140 forks with about 430 reach & 60 stem. I have no plans to trade in my bike as there really isn’t much slacker or longer on the market for a given seat tube size.

    barney – first-glance slackness awards? Set it up with the appropriate sag, and ride it. The Yeti will be a teensy bit slacker. Your novel concept of ‘steeper per mm of travel’ is nonsense, like measuring digestion by turd length.

    A number is a number not a definition. The same HA on a 100mm bike versus a 160mm bike would make one slack and one steep… good phrasing though

    rhayter
    Full Member

    This is descending into one of those argumentative threads where someone, convinced they are correct, is actually spouting inaccuracies and other people get upset about it. BUT THAT’S WHY WE LOVE THE INTERWEBS, RIGHT?

    LAT
    Full Member

    67 Hardtail / 66 full suspension, both running 140 forks with about 430 reach & 60 stem. I have no plans to trade in my bike as there really isn’t much slacker or longer on the market for a given seat tube size.

    But what about the cs length and bb drop? Seat tube angle? Stand over? Distance between bb and end of your handlebars? Rake? Frame size?

    LAT
    Full Member

    other people get upset about it

    I’m not upset, quite the opposite. I am convinced I can help the Internet become a better place.

    chrismac
    Full Member

    Is it really that long or low. Compare it to the long in the tooth Spesh enduro (large) not often noted as a long bike and you get remarkably similar numbers as this so called long yeti

    reach yeti 442 spesh 445
    wheelbase yeti 1195 spesh 1186
    chainstay yeti 437 spesh 430
    front centre yeti 758 spesh 757

    So the extra 9mm length is in the chainstay.

    honourablegeorge
    Full Member

    wrecker – Member
    10mm higher BB than a hightower and a lot more standover height. Longer reach on the HT and lower stack (as I would like) Also 5 year vs lifetime warranty (and bearing replacement) for comparable costs.
    I know where the smart money is.

    HT has the plus wheels thing too, and SC are less likely to leave you high and dry on warranty than Yeti, and the HT’s the better looking bike for me.

    thepodge
    Free Member

    LAT – But what about the cs length and bb drop? Seat tube angle? Stand over? Distance between bb and end of your handlebars? Rake? Frame size?

    Same, for my max seat tube size (450mm) you’re only talking a few mm here and there, sometime its in a perceived negative direction as I have to downsize the frame.

    thepodge
    Free Member

    chrismac – Is it really that long or low…

    See, there are now at least two of us

    STATO
    Free Member

    All the numbers are very very similar to the Jeffsy. Put a 140mm fork on the Yeti and they would probably be even closer.

    The yeti also has the same problem regarding seat tube lengths. 483mm on a Large and 521mm on the XL.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 95 total)

The topic ‘New Yeti SB5.5c’ is closed to new replies.