So after riding a Nicolai G13 and realising it’s too much bike for me (as per my post on the Geometron thread) I’m still on the look out for a replacement for the Stumpy evo. This has reach of just over 460 and a 68 degree HA. What I want has;

Reach over 480
HA sub 67
Steepish ST angle
Over 130mm travel (because less travel is OK until you need, like, more travel)
Lowish but not stupid low BB, 335-345 ish
Not overly heavy (which kind of rules out the Banshee Prime)
Don’t mind Alu or carbon (looked at Cotic but not long enough to be worth changing)
Decent amount of anti-squat

Don’t want much do I? Looking at the 23″ 2017 Trek Fuel at the minute but my concern with that is the ST angle is effective so when the saddle is up I would still be sitting a long way back, the short chainstays might compound this.

Have ruled out the Process as not enough travel, Smuggler same and a bit heavy, Jeffsy is too short. What am I missing? Think I’ve asked a very similar question before. Could just try an offset bushing on the Stumpy? It’s a good bike and not THAT short….

I know you’ve mentioned Cotic as a no, but I rode their xl 29 Rocket at a demo say, really impressed and well stretched out.

And a pal is just having built a Starling FS, I know it’s steel again but you can have the geometry pretty much as you want it.

Starling Cycles. Handmade Steel Bikes.

Don’t want much do I? Looking at the 23″ 2017 Trek Fuel at the minute but my concern with that is the ST angle is effective so when the saddle is up I would still be sitting a long way back, the short chainstays might compound this.

Yep, with +34″ inside leg I have this issue too, although it does mean that my large Camber actually works for me as the seat is a long way back at full height but the bike is compact when it’s down.

SC Hightower is close to that in XL

There are still not enough good 29ers with long enough reach, eh?

Have you considered the Mega 290?
Slash 29, if you’re minted?
Orange Stage 6 is 479mm reach in XL – can you forgive it 1mm?
Starling is a good shout but expect a long waiting list now.

Clicked on your OP to say Smuggler, but see you’ve already considered it.

It’s pretty much what you’ve described though. Have you test-ridden one? Few people come away thinking they need more travel.

Weight is much more to do with the build than it is with the frame, as I’m sure you realise.

Someone mentioned the Hightower to me the other day and having just looked you’re right, it is close. However I forgot to add to my list of diva-esque demands that I like a decent bit of stack height due to a dodgy back, The HT is low. I know you can get round that with spacers and high rise bars but’s lets be honest, that looks shit.
Also there is a limit money wise, £2500 is an insane amount of money for a frame but SC want £2850 with a bloody Monarch RT3! That is properly taking the piss IMO

Had the same concern with the Trek Fuel EX, had a brief ride car park ride of a 19.5, it felt ok, but by no means a decent test (also had silly chubby tyres, so wasn’t so bothered with riding it any further!).

Ended up picking up a smuggler of ebay, as it was significantly cheaper (and thus less risk) than a Fuel EX frame, forks & boost wheels.
My smuggler is 29lbs with Crests (Minion DHF, Minion SS), pikes, reverb, x01, hope x2’s. Likely to go up another 0.25lb when I have the wheels rebuilt with XM421’s (Crests arn’t really up to the job!)
Perfect for all day rides in the peaks/etc, climbs really well and is more the capable on the desccents

Will be demoing one in the next few weeks, as it could be a replacement for the Smuggler in the future. The ali trek frame and the smuggler have near enough the same frame weight (~3350g), the carbon fuel is ~2530g.

Slash 29 is again going to be too much bike and too much cash

Considered the Mega but I have 140mm forks and it is designed around slightly longer A-C 150s I think, trying to keep costs down. Still an option though. CRC have a few 2016 frames in small super cheap if anyone is looking.

Not ridden a Smuggler, testing XL bikes is always tricky

Will have a look at Starlings, not going to be light though surely?

Never been an Orange fan but hmmmm. will look again. Platform shocks these days are awesome, right? Would rather not be constantly buggering with a climb switch though

A mate had a starling, and the frame weight was around 3300g. Remember there are no rockers or additional hardware.

Banshee Prime is an amazing bike.
They were doing the slack 29 years ago.

I know you can get round that with spacers and high rise bars but’s lets be honest, that looks shit.[/I]

It’s an XL frame, no amount of tarting will make it look good 🙂

Will have a look at Starlings, not going to be light though surely?

Nope, but neither is anything else in XL – probably giving away 2-2lb to a carbon?

True about looks of XL frames, I’m just trying to limit the shitness!

I have a Fuel EX 9.9.

I came from a Patrol, which was reasonably steep at 74.9. Prior to that I came from a Reign, which was 73, which was too slack for me (my only real complaint about the bike). The Fuel sits inbetween the two & feels alright for me – certainly not as slack as Reign. 74/74.7 ESTA seems to be about the norm doesn’t it?

FWIW I use a 150mm dropper, and the top of the collar is maybe ~10cm out of the frame.

Also worth mentioning, I have said it on here before, the numbers on the Trek website are wrong. )I’ve measured 3 bikes now, mostly because i’m curious). In the low setting with a 140mm fork my bike is 65.9/66 degrees in the HA. The BB is lower too. I could measure the STA later, thinking about it.

My Fuel is 25lbs dead. I plan on racing on it all year, the only questionable bit is the DT XMC1200 wheels, which might not last an EWS weekend, we will see.

It’s an XL frame, no amount of tarting will make it look good

To be fair, L & XL frames only look good in 29″ anyway – at least the wheels are proportionately in size with the frame.

Just cast your eyes over the Geometron thread if you want a collection of disproportionate (and disgusting) looking bikes.

The G13 is the best looking one 🙂

I know you can get round that with spacers and high rise bars but’s lets be honest, that looks shit.

Normally with Large/XL 29ers its being able to get the bars low enough! Espiecially longer (150mm+) travel ones (enduro springs to mind)

Yeah I know but bad back is as bad back does innit. It’s been better lately with stretching and planking though.

I had heard the alloy and carbon Fuel geo aren’t the same, or match the published figures for that matter. The step up from the 21.5 to the 23 is massive though, the AT on the 23 is listed as 560! It’s 530 on my Stumpy and with a 170mm Reverb I have 25mm of post out of the frame so it may well be too big for me anyway.

Just been looking on the Orange site, have to say the Stage 5 looks really good. Could do with being a bit longer though and nearly £2300 with an X2, oof!

Won’t an offset bushing in your stumpy shorten it as well as slacken it?

I would also suggest trying the 23 inch trek before taking a punt on it. Whilst my G13 is built heavy a lot of the riding characteristics come from the long front centre. Ok the Trek gives up 2 degrees on the headangle based on HobNobs figures but still, the reach is similar to the Nicolai from what you were saying. The Swarf hardtail is a 490 reach and to me that feels a lot more nimble. Hard to compare exactly as they’re not really like for like but still, it is noticeable and at the same time it still feels like the ‘right’ size. At a guess I would say the 21 inch Trek with a 487 reach might work nicely for you as it sits somewhere between the Nicolai and your Specialized. I suspect the seated ETT is roughly the same given the differences in seat tube angle.

Edit: I’m talking carbon fuel figures above.

What about a Whyte t129? I don’t have one but it looks like it ticks the boxes for most of your needs, bit short on travel though.
(I’m looking for the same sort of thing)

Gotama – Yep, it would.
You might be right on the Trek but there is over 30mm less stack on the 21.5. Which I know is supposed to be a good thing

Whyte are one of those brands that just don’t do anything for me. Isn’t the rear tyre clearance still poor? I know it improved but not much from memory

Slightly shorter on travel, but have you considered a Kona Process 111?

What about one of those Pole Evolinks?

https://www.polebicycles.com/bicycles/enduro/evolink-140-en-29/

I’m not entirely sold on its looks, but seems to get some good reviews.

Canfield Riot isn’t far off…

Smuggler same

I have a smuggler, never once had I thought it didn’t have enough travel. If you can get a test ride definitely give one a go.

Dave, Worth noting Brett from riders guild in chi, is getting an XL orange stage 5 in for him self so at least you could get to ride one of those first before looking at the stage 6

Intense primer 477mm reach, head angle bit under 67degrees with 140mm fork

Cheers Carl, might give him a shout

Nipped down to South Downs Bikes and had a look at a demo 19.5″ 9.8. Think 23″ is defo going to be too big, 21.5″ looks like a better bet. Hopefully taking the 9.8 out next week to get a feel for it. Nice looking bikes

Ghost SL AMR X was a bike that caught my eye a while back. 6mm short of your reach req but hits everything else. They look good as well imo, especially with the cane creek coil inline. Seem a decent price too albeit full bike and no chance of a test ride I suspect.

If you have a bit of flexibility on the reach, I’d recommend trying to get a demo on an XL FlareMAX.

I had a go on the large recently and was very very impressed…

First rides: Cotic FlareMAX and RocketMAX

I’ve read that a few pro riders put a 130 or 140 fork on the kona 111 which makes it a really fun and capable bike.

I’m sure someone on here has some info on it.

Process isn’t in anyway a light bike, no matter what spec you throw at it.

The 2017 stumpjumper has a 67degree HA, maybe you are looking at the 2016?

I just picked up the 2017 Enduro which has a 66degree HA and 75 HA and its excellent, I had an XL 2016 SJ and downsized to the large and even though the listed reach is shorter, 461 to 450, the bike feels longer to me, has a nicer standing position and the front wheel wanders less on the climbs. Im 6.1-186cm

XL RocketMax is pretty pretty 😀

Reach only 463 and a bit but you should at least try one before dismissing it. I’m 6’5″ and it’s a great fit. But more importantly it is an amazing bike to ride fast.

Previous bike was a Stumpy and the Cotic is a much better ride in every way and faster everywhere. Biggest difference is the way the Cotic accelerates when pumping terrain. It just takes off whereas the Stumpy just changed shape a bit and eventually went a little bit quicker.

Not ridden a Smuggler, testing XL bikes is always tricky

We have an XL demo bike, if you are anywhere near (or ever ride anywhere near) south Wales, feel free to give us a shout.

It’s brilliant BTW.

XL RocketMax is pretty pretty

Reach only 463

Strange as the large FlareMAX was 460mm and the large RocketMAX 450mm (but felt longer).

Presumably they’ve gone a bit shorter on the long travel bike to counteract the increased wheelbase?

As Nicolaisam said above, Banshee Prime meets your criteria, the pre 2017 models in XL are 480mm reach the 2017 models are 484mm, they have a low standover so dont look like a garden gate 🙂
And weight wise mine is 31lbs with heavy tyres(conti baron and mountain king) and a brand x dropper, hope hubs, pikes, slx mostly and clipless pedals, could knock a couple of pounds off if I tried but I cant be bothered.
Also the 2017 have a choice of dropouts allowing all kinds of 29/29+/27.5+ shennanigans.

I’ve got a large so I’m a little biased, have slack bushes and a 2 degree headset to stretch the wheelbase and drop it down to 65 degree, to be honest it was great without but i’ts a superb bike with.

That’s just going off their spec sheet Chakaping. Only an idiot would actually measure it 😛

You’re right in that it feels longer. I’m not sure you can go on reach alone though without taking in the stack and ett and all the others bits of the puzzle. I do know that they got it very right.

Christ, now I’m totally confused. That’ll teach me for asking.

I know this is stw and the home of the armchair geometry geek, but I think you just need to forget the numbers and who has the slackest this/longest that and add a bit of give or take to your requirements.

I have an xl smuggler and went to it from a lighter 130mm yeti, ask yourself are you really going to notice 1.5cm difference in rear wheel travel, because I didn’t, and I don’t believe you will notice a 0.5 degree difference in head angle. It’s not a light frame but I don’t think you’re going to get that without splashing out on a plastic frame.

i also have an XL smuggler, with 140mm forks its around 67deg HA
I have carbon wheels & bars etc its not the lightest bike but its fun to ride. Weight of a bike plays a small part compared to rider fitness & skill…….

Yeah, I’m unfit and have little skill. No need to rub it in!

Funny how Canyon and Radon don’t have any nu skool (yes I did just say that) 29ers in their ranges anymore. Rose one looks a bit gank, only YT are really playing the game out of the German direct sellers.