These definitely sound like what i want.

What i want is efficiency and fun. Short travel and big wheels make it efficient, geo and big wheels make it capable, strength and short travel make it fun, is this how it works out in reality?

I’ve never seen written anywhere in any of the reviews of these types of bikes strong statements of what they think these bikes are good for. It’s always “climbs pretty well” or “more capable than the travel suggests”, doesn’t really tell you much of the character of the bike.

I’ll be using the bike where others use HTs all the way through to peaople are normally on 160mm bikes, maybe even DH bikes.

I tried out a whyte 129, weren’t impressed, i put it down to the demo bike being in a haggard state, thin slick tyres, flexy wheels, long stem, narrow bars, couldnt actually tell how the bike rode.

Both singletrack and MBR reviewed bikes im looking at, didn’t really tell me much.

For example MBR commented that the camber was good for the XCer that wants a bit more, really?

What do you mean by character? They’re all bikes. Some are better than others at certain things, but that’s it. They’re all fun, they’re bikes! The Kona Process and the Orange Segment are great descenders, with pop and agility, at the slight expense of climbing. The Pyga is slightly better at climbing than the others at the expense of (you guessed it) descending. But I’m just one guy – I can’t tell where you like to ride, how you like to ride or what you ride on, so all I can offer is my opinion based on the riding I do. My suggestion is to ride them all and see which one you like the best. Use reviews as a starting point.

I’ll be using the bike where others use HTs all the way through to peaople are normally on 160mm bikes, maybe even DH bikes.

The first bit of this works out really well IME, but not so sure about DH. What sort of tracks?

And while the big wheels let you float over the top of a lot of rough ground, you can get in trouble from time to time in big rocks due to short travel.

I have stiff-ish alu wheels on mine and there’s still a slight twang when pinning it into rocks, which usually works OK but can be disconcerting.

Hope that helps.

Kona Process 111 might be what you are after

tried out a whyte 129, weren’t impressed, i put it down to the demo bike being in a haggard state, thin slick tyres, flexy wheels, long stem, narrow bars, couldnt actually tell how the bike rode.

From the test ride I had on the Whyte 129 I wouldn’t call it a fun bike, it was a very very quick bike, but felt quite nose down arse in the air xc bike

I wouldn’t class the Whyte129 or Camber with Process111, Segment or Phantom. Totally different intentions, the first 2 are XC bikes the last 3 are tough trail bikes (Enduro in this years marketing guff-speak).

I can only tell you about my experiences on a Banshee Phantom when comparing it to a 26″ heckler and 650b Banshee Spitfire but:

Uphill – Very capable, short travel makes lockout unnecessary, big wheels work better. Climbed better than the Spitfire or Heckler (by quite a margin). Steeper head angle and bigger wheel of 29ers eliminates the floppy front wheel feeling I always disliked about slack 26ers/650b bikes. The 29ers also behave better on tamer trails as the fork geometry doesn’t give that wheelbarrow effect. It has allowed me to enjoy a much wider variety of riding on one bike than previously.

Downhill – Phenomenal. Feels like a big wheeled BMX but with suspension. Much more playful and manouverable on the trail than the Spitfire of Phantom (less suspension travel to fight). Needs a more physical riding style but that feels more rewarding to me anyway. Just rides over everything. Big wheels give me much more confidence on very steep stuff. The only down side I have found is that you don’t have the get out of trouble free extra suspension so you have to stay on top of things mentally. It is up to you whether that is a plus or minus.

The only time I want more travel is when faced with big drops (>5ft to transitions) but that is more for my confidence. I accidentally rode a 4ft to flat and didn’t even notice the size until I turned around to look at it. The design of the phantom makes it very supple at the top but ramp up fast at the end so it deals with trail chatter but doesn’t leave you bottoming out on bigger stuff.

I rode mine in Colorado and will be taking it to the Alps next year without hesitation. Bikes like the Phantom are the 29er equivalent of the Spitfire or Bronson. Rough, tough, brawling bikes that want to play. They can take on the 160mm bikes without problems and are much better for all day affairs or natural riding but I’d hesitate to do big downhill drops on them, but then I would on a 160mm bike anyway!

I guess if you want to ride hard trails and do DH/park riding with big drops then you may be better off with a 160mm 650b. If you want to ride everything except WC DH trails then the new breed 29er would be my choice.

I read your post and thought about the banshee phantom, Sounds exactly what you’re after in the right build.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/banshee-phantom-review-2014.html

I’ll be using the bike where others use HTs all the way through to peaople are normally on 160mm bikes, maybe even DH bikes.

Don’t you ride the Surrey Hills and Swinley…?

I have just built up a salsa spearfish, and loving it, with only 80mm travel at rear and 100mm forks, it seems a lot more, certainly doesn’t feel any less capable than my old asr5, in fact feels more capable, and a lot lot better rolling, and better at climbing, I’d say if your normally a 140mm travel 26″ bike then 100-120mm in a 29er

A Pyga OneTen sounds like it’d be right up your street. If you’re anywhere near mid-Wales and would like to give one a go…

I don’t really understand the less-travel-to-do-the-same-job thing, maybe I’ve just ridden a good one yet but things like the Camber- not actually any faster up a hill than a Stumpy, barely any lighter, miles worse coming back down, it’s almost all drawback. Is it like singlespeeding, just getting the satisfaction or challenge of doing the same with less? Same with the Gyro vs the Five, and the T129 vs (ok, arbitrarily) the Remedy 29. Wheels, tyres etc need to be just as heavy and strong and grippy to do the job after all. They seem to play towards the “too much bike for my trails” thing but big bikes doesn’t have to equal too much bike

Perhaps I am just scarred, I had a 26 inch camber and it was ****.

I like my Pyga 29-Ten. I take Northwind’s point, but 130/110 (no idea why the test one had SiDS on it) and it’s a good climber in terms of traction and geom and okay in terms of weight. Downhill it’ll eventually run out of travel but not generally until I’ve run out of bravery. It’s lots of fun in flat singletrack and what I notice most (over my 26in mega for example) is how it keeps its speed.

I just happen to ‘get on’ with that bike. I didn’t like the 650B version anywhere near as much. I’d give one (or something like it) a try and see how you get on. It It’s a good ‘all round’ bike and I’ve ridden it all over the UK and a trip to Spain. When I went to the Alps tho, I took the Mega!

FWIW I’d love a go on the pyga, if anyone’s going to have done it right I reckon it’d be them

Shackleton – they are the sort of comparisons im after. Most of the reviews are reviewing them as a 29er, not as a bike, ie positioning them as to where they actually sit in the spectrum of bikes you can buy.

Life long BMXer, so having to tell the bike what to do and harsh landings aren’t a problem, rough landings might be a concern though, would they be a concern of yours?

Njee – yea my week in week out trails are surrey hills/swinley/tunnel hill/minley. I’ll generally do loops and then session the “DH” spots where all the kids hang out, and cheeky visits to rogate/tidworth/local gaps and stuff, those “DH” places where the big bike is a bit much really.

deanfbm – Rough landings may be a problem in terms of jolt but the bike would be fine! I keep being surprised by how well it copes as I keep doing the “I’ve only got 105mm travel” thing in my head and then having no issues what so ever. Your rough landing may be different to mine though. If you are in a situation where you need 160mm travel to ride it out just having bigger wheels aren’t going to help.

Northwind – I think it is a different style of riding and what you want to get out of it. I rode an Orange 29er five in the Alps and it was remarkably capable but in a juggernaut style. It was a sod to get round switch backs as it was so long and you couldn’t “feel” any of the trail, but that didn’t matter because it flattened everything without you being aware of it. It may as well have been tarmacked! The same held true for the Prime I tried (although the prime was much more nimble). In the end both just made the ride, well, dull, as far as I was concerned. I rode the Prime on some of the scary or fast stuff I now ride my Phantom on and it was brilliant but no better or quicker than the Phantom and worse to ride around on anything milder. I guess they just have a bigger margin for error compared to shorter travel bikes. The longer travel ones were also, without exception, harder to pedal up a hill, particularly if the hill in question was loose or broken up.

Maybe the best description would be that on the bigger 29ers I felt like a passenger whereas on the shorter travel ones I felt like a (fighter) pilot.

The shorter travel bikes in my experience are much more playful and easier to throw about and just hands down more fun. They have the geometry of the big bikes so coming down really isn’t an issue. Maybe there is a bit of the hair shirt about it as you need to concentrate more but it is the bike that suits my style of riding 95% of the time. I spent 6 years demoing all sorts of bikes to find this one so I’m pretty certain of it now. If all I rode was baby head rock descents I may feel different but most of my riding is central and NE scotland.

I have just built up a salsa spearfish a new Giant Anthem, and loving it, with only 80100mm travel at rear and 100mm forks, it seems a lot more, certainly doesn’t feel any less capable than my old asr5, in fact feels more capable, and a lot lot better rolling, and better at climbing, I’d say if your normally a 140mm travel 26″ bike then 100-120mm in a 29er

Fixed that for me. The Anthem is not the bike for you before I get flamed, I’m just agreeing with the above sentiments.

By the sounds of it OP, this is the type of bike you are after. I think you’ve got to buy a bike that’s the best for what you do most – you’ll still be fine on DH tracks. What do you ride at the moment?

I have a Process 111 and have read the review in Singletrack. Although it’s not very in-depth, I think it’s pretty spot on. I think it climbs “pretty well” as apposed to “adequate”, but I’m sure the tester will have much more experience of riding different bikes to me, and will be better able to place it in the spectrum of goodness. All I know is it’s better that my last FS bike (a Mount Vision)!

I mainly ride the Surrey Hills on a Honzo hard tail with a couple of weeks in the Alps each year and the odd trip elsewhere. I love the Honzo and thought the 111 would compliment it well, which it does. As I’m a lanky git, I don’t ever really ever get a chance to test ride bikes before buying them, so haven’t ridden any of the others.

It would help if they could at least agree on what constitutes “nu skool” geometry.

There now follows a lot of confused rambling:

I have a Five and a Solaris and have the occasional (but probably erroneous) thoughts about replacing them both with one bike. You know the thing? Best of both worlds. I don’t need (or really even want) two mountain bikes. I like the Solaris, but my 50 year old back just doesn’t like hardtails. The Five is the most fun bike I’ve ever ridden and feels perfectly balanced, but I don’t need a 140mm bike for the sort of XC mincing that I do.

So, that’s easy enough; just replace both with a full-suss XC 29er. The problem is that I lack skill, nerve or even the desire to acquire either, yet I want to ride up and down anything. I don’t care about being fast, but I don’t like having to get off. Basically I want as much skill-compensation as I can get. So, not a (twitchy) XC bike then. In fact it has to feel at least as confident going down as the Five.

OK, how about these nu-skool 29ers. Lots of skill compensation, but snapper handling and better uphill than a “big” bike. So, off I go to check out the Singletrack and MBR reviews and now I’m even more confused than I was before.

Apparantly “nu-skool” geometery includes the PYGA with its 69.5 degree head angle and normal looking top tube dimensions (because the reach is longer than you might think). It even seems to include the venerable old Camber. In fact that wins the MBR test by a mile. So, nu-skool geometry is rubbish? We maybe if you just go by the MBR numbers, but looking at the actual text for the Segment they seemed to really like it. In fact, despite its low score, the only criticisms were that the shock lacked adjustability (easily fixed by selecting one of the other shocks that Orange offer with this bike) and that the price is a bit high. But let’s face it, if your aim is to spend as little as possible on your toys you are not going to be looking at Orange anyway.

Actually the one thing I thought I knew before reading those reviews was that the Segment wasn’t for me. It’s for those aggressive enduro types, right? But Singletrack say that the climbing is not just acceptable but actually good and MBR say that it has all the Orange fun and is super stable. So, it looks as though it would be faster up and along than my Five, while also inspiring even more confidence on the way down. Sounds perfect #confused.

roverpig
#confused

😉

Worryingly enough though, as a 29er ht / 26er fs (120mm though) owner I do know where you are coming from!

I’ve got the Pyga as well, but with 140mm Pike on it, which will slacken the head angle a bit. Not really sure if geometry is nu school or old school but it is definitely fun and turns you into a bit of a loony. What Mountain Bike tested it with a Pike and loved it. I have XC raced and gravity enduro’d on it, and everything in between

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/category/bikes/mountain-bikes/full-suspension/product/review-pyga-industries-oneten29-14-48762/

compared to my ASR 5 I haven’t found a downside yet – tight woods and UK stylee switchbacks are all fine. Seems to get better the harder you push it. Haven’t tried any Alpine uber-gnarr though. It’s about 1 1/2 lbs heavier with same drivetrain, finishing kit and brakes, so comes in at 30 lbs with reverb and xt trail pedals (arch on hope, nobby nic / r ralph, xt double, hope mono m4 203 / 183 mm)

In fact, despite its low score, the only criticisms were that the shock lacked adjustability (easily fixed by selecting one of the other shocks that Orange offer with this bike) and that the price is a bit high. But let’s face it, if your aim is to spend as little as possible on your toys you are not going to be looking at Orange anyway.

Actually the one thing I thought I knew before reading those reviews was that the Segment wasn’t for me. It’s for those aggressive enduro types, right? But Singletrack say that the climbing is not just acceptable but actually good and MBR say that it has all the Orange fun and is super stable. So, it looks as though it would be faster up and along than my Five, while also inspiring even more confidence on the way down. Sounds perfect #confused.

I also found it strange that they really seemed to rate it but then gave it a 7?

I’d say the Segment seems like the obvious choice for you, coming from the 5.

Worryingly enough though, as a 29er ht / 26er fs (120mm though) owner I do know where you are coming from!

You should be worried 🙂

I’d say the Segment seems like the obvious choice for you, coming from the 5

Yes, but what I like about the Five is the balance. The ratio of front centre to rear centre on the Segment is nowhere near the same as the Five. A Whyte T129 or Process 111 is a lot closer. I’d also be going from 425mm stays to 450mm and it’s not as if I can manual for toffee as it is.

Getting back to the OP’s comments the reviews just aren’t telling me what I want to know. The Singletrack one kept talking about how easy it was to lift the back wheel, but never mentioned lifting the front one! But what really gets me are the comments about X being better than Y, which is unhelpful and misleading as what they really mean is “I preferred X”. Take the MBR review for example, the suspension on the Whyte was criticised but the Specialized was perfect, despite both being Horst style designs. I’m quite happy to put my cynicism to one side and accept that the reviewer really did prefer the feel of the Camber, but why? What exactly where the differences between these two implementations?

Yes, but what I like about the Five is the balance. The ratio of front centre to rear centre on the Segment is nowhere near the same as the Five. A Whyte T129 or Process 111 is a lot closer. I’d also be going from 425mm stays to 450mm and it’s not as if I can manual for toffee as it is.

I can manual my Spitfire (439mm stays) much better than my Soul (425m).

Funnily enough, I can manual my Solaris (440mm) easier than my Five (425mm). I’d always put that down to the suspension on the Five sucking up some of my kick forwards. That wouldn’t apply to a Spitfire and a Soul though. Maybe it’s down to BB height. Either way, I take your point, that there is more to it than chainstay length. It would just be nice if either review actually discussed this issue, especially as both included bikes with 430mm stays and ones with 450mm stays.

For what it’s worth, I rode the Phantom & Transition Smuggler back to back the other week, here’s what I thought. I rode the Remedy 29er too, I’ll have something up on that soon.

Nice one Dough. Very interesting. Would you mind teesting the Segment and T129 for me 🙂

Nice write up Doug.. sounds like a fairly close run thing – were the build kits / prices comparable?

I’ve got a Phantom frame turning up today to replace my MK2 Salsa Horsethief so looking forward to seeing how they compare.

I like the idea that you can still get the downhill stability provided by a slacker geometry even if you don’t need the travel for big jumps / drops.

Who gives a shit about manualling? Are you going to enter Slopestyle comps on it?

Camber Evo’s are a riot.

No, but having broken my arm going through a muddy puddle that turned out to be deeper and more rutted than I expected I’d kind of like to be able to manual through the next one.

Nice write up Doug.. sounds like a fairly close run thing – were the build kits / prices comparable?

I’d say the main difference, between the two, as noted in the review, was the Banshee did have heavier wheels and chunkier rubber on it, but my view was even aside from that, it didn’t feel as nippy under power as the Transition, either uphill or under hard acceleration downhill.
The shop I got them from is adamant with lighter wheels and a Cane Creek DB (both bikes had Monarchs) then I’d not feel the same way and would prefer the Banshee, which is interesting given they sell both bikes so don’t have a vested interest in trying to sway me either way. Thing is, it’s difficult enough trying to get a demo on such non-mainstream bikes at the best of times, trying to get them on demo while removing the variables of spec is pretty much impossible so I had to draw conclusions based on the spec of the bikes as they came and make my best judgement as to how the spec impacted things- Which was wheels would improve it would still not be as sprightly.

Really good write up Doug.

Yes, but what I like about the Five is the balance. The ratio of front centre to rear centre on the Segment is nowhere near the same as the Five. A Whyte T129 or Process 111 is a lot closer. I’d also be going from 425mm stays to 450mm and it’s not as if I can manual for toffee as it is.

As mentioned before, I went from a 26″ 5 to a 29″ 5. The 29″ ‘feels’ like a 5 but more so if that makes sense. I imagine the Segment will still feel like a 5 but not quite as big as the 5 29. Basically what I’m trying to say is that if you want a bike like your 5 but with the benefits of your 29er the Segment should fit the bill.

Mate of mine’s got a 2014 Specialized Camber and likes it very much. From having a play on it I think it is a comparable bike to the Segment, unlike what was suggested earlier. He fancies sticking 130/140mm forks up front though.

Goad to hear the smuggler is good. On paper, transition have really nailed it on their 2015 bikes. Geo, suspension gragh and build all look really good.

I think my bike debate boils down to a smuggler (could be far better than what i know) or scout (same as I know but better). Though the segment gets an outside shout due to being single pivot, ie I wont feel rotten pointlessly spinning away in muck on it.

As mentioned before, I went from a 26″ 5 to a 29″ 5. The 29″ ‘feels’ like a 5 but more so if that makes sense.

Yes, that makes sense. Much as I like to try and understand geometry and how it affects handling, there is something to be said for leaving bike design to the designers. They all have their own preferences for how a bike should feel and there is more than one way to get that feel. So, chances are that whatever the geometry sheet says an Orange full-suss trail bike will feel like an Orange full-suss trail bike.

I’d say the main difference, between the two, as noted in the review, was the Banshee did have heavier wheels and chunkier rubber on it, but my view was even aside from that, it didn’t feel as nippy under power as the Transition, either uphill or under hard acceleration downhill.

The heavier wheels and chunkier rubber would make the bike feel less nippy under power, either uphill or under hard acceleration downhill – that’s what heftier wheels do! All the new Transitions look excellent though, from a geometry and suspension standpoint. I do like being able to drop/slack my Banshee for more gravity driven days and then bring it back up for more pedal clearance and slower corners back home. It was utterly sublime last weekend in Wales.

The heavier wheels and chunkier rubber would make the bike feel less nippy under power, either uphill or under hard acceleration downhill – that’s what heftier wheels do!

Indeed, but the sprightly feel of the Transition suspension coming out of said uphills and corners compared to the Banshee cannot be explained by wheels, only suspension design, or shock.

Just to be clear – the Smuggler does pedal REALLY well, a bit better than the Phantom, but there are other things like the adjustable geo, very durable ano finish, and the speed you can carry downhill with the DB Inline that make me love my Phantom. Then again the Smuggler is £130 cheaper.