Orbea Occam TR and AM – First Ride Report

Occam’s Razor: If you’ve got a number of competing hypotheses, all of which predict the observations equally, pick the simplest one.

It makes sense: keep things simple. Don’t overcomplicate unnecessarily, and, with a bit of luck, you’ll have something which makes sense.

The marketing types at Orbea thought that this should be the over-riding message of the Occam – which has essentially been their go-to trail bike, until now. Because the Occam has had a makeover. Oh boy, has it.

As I explained in my story here, Orbea have split the bikes into two categories, to essentially cover the whole range of what people call ‘trail’ riding – so an XC tinged 120mm long legged trail 29in bike (the TR) to a more feisty, longer travel 140mm 27.5in machine. Although they both have similarities…

Occam TR

The Occam TR is a 29er. It’s 15mm longer than the previous iteration of the Occam (which was itself a 29er), and it’s 10mm shorter in the chainstays. the 120mm travel is 15mm longer than the 2013 model. And it’s light. The L carbon frame, without shock, weighs a scant 1990g, or 4.4lbs. It uses flexible stays instead of a pivot; the resultant spring is about 5kg, or 1% of the total once the bike is built and the shock is up to pressure.

My test TR was the XL, which sports a 647mm (25.4in) top tube, and reach and stack of 472mm and 629mm respectively. It had a 70mm stem, and relatively narrow (for me) RaceFace Next SL 740mm bars. It was dripping with XTR, and would’ve had DT Swiss Spline wheels, had they arrived in time. As it was we rode slightly lower spec. wheels, but the bike performed no less well for all that.

Swinging my leg over it, it felt strangely short – not by any means uncomfortable, but less long than the numbers suggested. That slightly more upright seat tube may well be the culprit. But in very short order the bike became invisible. Climbing on the initial test loop was a very affirming experience – the pivot placement just above the bottom bracket seemed to do a pretty good job of negating much pedal feedback; the TR felt good and immediate to climb on, even out of the saddle. I’d have appreciated some wider bars, perhaps, but I’m at the upper limit of what the bike is designed for height-wise, and in any event, were the bike mine Orbea offer a comprehensive tailoring package. Descending seemed sure-footed, although this bike was brand new, and it took some time for the brakes to bed in.

Then it was off for some serious trail riding. An hour-long shuttle to the top of the most ridiculously picturesque pass, a spot of leg armour and we were ready to go. Woop!

There followed the most fabulously fun trail I’ve ridden in years. Techy in places, swoopy in others. Alternately closed in and wide open, totally exposed and hemmed in by turns. Over several hours we descended for over 2,500m and climbed 800m. Those 800 were pretty invisible, though. An occasional steep grind; a thrutchy climb here, a longer spin there. The TR rode them all extremely well.

And oh, the descents. By turns rocky, grippy, scrabbly, ultra-steep or off camber, they were hugely, hugely fun. Hammering down, I did find myself wondering how the bike would perform with a bigger fork – although the Boosted 120mm Fox 32 was pretty good in most situations, I did find it somewhat lacking a little when pushing hard; when cornering steeply at speed for example – it’s on occasions such as this that a 34 or even a 36 would’ve perhaps come into its own. But Orbea tells me that at present Fox doesn’t make a Boosted 29er 34, and in any case there are few occasions in the UK that I’d push a fork to the limit in quite the same way.

And (as I’ve already mentioned) I’m a fairly substantial chap; a lighter rider would arguably have fewer issues. Other downsldes I noticed were few and far between – there was perhaps some heel-rub on the chainstays, although it was slight and I ceased to notice it after a while, and the internal routing cabling became a little rattly. This may well have been a one-off though; the remaining carbon bikes I rode with similar internal routing displayed no such problems. I’ve already mentioned that I’d perhaps have liked it to be longer, but honestly I’d need longer on the bike before I made up my mind. Initially getting on it it felt short, but actually *riding* it, admittedly on unfamiliar trails, it felt pretty good.

Beyond that though, I got the feeling the bike was *extremely* capable. It’s slack enough to handle arguably more a gnarly trail than it’s designed for, and it’s pert enough not to feel wallowy. I loved the way it pedalled. I didn’t feel the need to use the 3-way switch on the Fox Float shock at all; I kept everything open, and I didn’t feel that I suffered as a result. I wasn’t over keen on the tyres (Ardents feel a bit too sketchy to me), the saddle (my arse is too wide) or the grips (I am a delicate princess) but you can switch these things out anyway. And if that is your major gripe, you’re doing something right.

Occam AM

Here’s the rub with the AM – arguably it’d be my favourite of the two. Just as I found myself wishing that the TR had a more capable fork at times, I found myself with a slightly more substantial issue with the AM – they don’t make one in my size. The 29in TR is available in M,L and XL, but the 27.5in wheeled AM is available in S,M and L. There are good reasons for this, sadly. Reasons you can think of, such as ‘its hard to make a smaller rider fit a 29er’ and ‘tall riders wouldn’t be balanced on 27.5in wheels’ belie another issue – market forces. These things are pricey. To buy, yes – but also to make. And an extra large AM or a small TR probably wouldn’t sell enough to justify the tooling required to make frames in those sizes. So I got a Large instead.

…which is, naturally, a bit short. But I instantly liked the wider bars (760mm FTW). The stem was the same length as the TR, in an attempt to ameliorate the shorter top tube, and I ran my Reverb dropper about 5mm higher than the maximum recommended height (shhh, don’t tell anyone). And even then it was only just long enough.

But despite all this, I loved the AM in our brief encounter. I only rode it for a (long) morning, which started two thirds of the way up the same trail I rode on the TR the previous day. And it had rained overnight. So very large, very slippery limestone boulders were the order of the day initially, and the bike despatched them with aplomb. The fork instantly – and perhaps not susprisingly – felt more capable than the 32 on the TR – despite the fact that it isn’t boosted (I suspect a boosted 34 is coming soon), and notwithstanding the limited time I had on the bike and the sizing differences, I didn’t think that climbing was overly affected either. It’s helped by the fact that the  medium version of this – the whole thing, without pedals – weighs 10.95kg. Yes, this is the ultra-blingy one, but that’s 24.2lbs. Which is pretty good going. Again,we didn’t get the ultra-swish DT wheels, so my bike was a little heavier, but even so.

The AM also came with a High Roller II on the front, which is a better front tyre in my opinion than the Ardent (which it still sports on the rear). Other than the fork, the bars and (naturally) the wheels, the spec. was very similar to the TR – no bad thing.

Overall

Obviously, I can’t give you a definitive conclusion based on one and a half days riding two bikes on unfamiliar trails. But I can say that these are well thought out, well designed bikes. If I don’t like the sizing policy, I can at least understand it. Nevertheless, the TR seems very capable indeed; I’d love to try one with a stiffer fork – and I think the AM may well be a fantastic little ripper. We’ll get them in for a longer review and let you know.

For more details, check out our (updated) report here

Review Info

Barney Marsh

Barney Marsh takes the word ‘career’ literally, veering wildly across the road of his life, as thoroughly in control as a goldfish on the dashboard of a motorhome. He’s been, with varying degrees of success, a scientist, teacher, shop assistant, binman and, for one memorable day, a hospital laundry worker. These days, he’s a dad, husband, guitarist, and writer, also with varying degrees of success. He sometimes takes photographs. Some of them are acceptable. Occasionally he rides bikes to cast the rest of his life into sharp relief. Or just to ride through puddles. Sometimes he writes about them. Bikes, not puddles. He is a writer of rongs, a stealer of souls and a polisher of turds. He isn’t nearly as clever or as funny as he thinks he is.

More posts from Barney