Hope HB.916 first ride review: The Perfect Bike?

That lightweight V10 is surprisingly sensible.

Formula R0 brakes (bit weak) and carbon chain device are the only two issues that jump out at me.

Apart from that the tyres might be lightweight trail ones?

I notice that V10 thread ends as soon as the bike is finished. Not even a first impressions post. It’s probably still sitting in his office next to his triple monitor investment banking setup. He tells clients about his DH racing career.

Those things were like putting a stick in your spokes with all the subtlety too, at least, they were before they broke them with the silly race levers.

Am I getting them mixed up with the R1 or RX that was a bit weedy (coming from The Ones)?

Am I getting them mixed up with the R1 or RX that was a bit weedy (coming from The Ones)?

The rx were poo.

R1 were the xc race brake, still a good bit of power but definitely a step down from “the one”.
The r0 were a little later and a step up from the “the one” , pitched as the dh brake of the range when the “the one” didn’t keep up with the competition at that end, they rebadged the “the one” to T1 and marketed it to trail and Enduro – which all those years back was trail heavy not DH-lite (and not even really lite these days).

Then they changed the r0 levers to these weird pull lever things, which were pants, and formula disappeared for a while.

The pictures don’t do this bike justice. No that they are bad pictures, but saw one in the flesh at Fort William this year. It is bloody gorgeous.

Plus it had the new V4s, and I’ve never wanted a bike quite so much. Not likely to be able to afford one, but if ever I come into a few quid, it’ll be a serious consideration.

Agree 100% but I would expect with some decent engineering then I should be able to have both.

In this case I suspect there has been a lot of decent engineering involved to make it as light as possible while still being fit for purpose. Let’s not forget this is a purpose built enduro race bike fit to take on and win EWS courses. The fact that some say it is capable of being an all day trail bike is an added bonus. Granted some of the in house components may be a little on the heavy side but with frame only options the owner could spec whatever they wanted weight wise.

Granted some of the in house components may be a little on the heavy

This is my point. If their components are on the weighty side then it’s not unreasonable to assume the same engineering team with the same philosophy have made the frame on the weighty side

Not if they weigh 15.9kg they aren’t.

Well I must be doing something very wrong then, riding both my 15.5kg+ full suspension 150/160mm bike and gearbox 150mm hardtail on multi day trips, with full days in the mountains, with hikeabike, XC sections, climbs…

Granted, I think that weight of my bike is with pedals so about 1kg lighter thank the hope, but 16kg would not put me off riding it all day, not one bit. If fact my next bike will probably be heavier than that, with supergravity tyres as well!

What weight would make a bike suitable for using on day long rides in the mountains or at a trail centre? 14.5kg?

Just for the record, I don’t care about the weight. I think modern bikes like this are perfectly reasonable especially considering what they’re capable of. You can ride them up and along all day and they’ve all but entirely replaced DH bikes for most people.

I’ll take strength and reliability every time.

Exactly, and it’s not just the weight of the bike you’re pedalling up the hill, it’s the weight of the bike, plus you, plus your backpack, plus your water…

An extra kg or 2 on the bike if the rest of the stuff weighs 80kg is a couple of % increase. Congrats, you’ll be up that 5 minute climb 10 seconds faster! 🤣🤣

Sorry for the tangent, but it’s a ridiculous statement that a bike of 15.9kg can’t be used for all day rides.

Sorry for the tangent, but it’s a ridiculous statement that a bike of 15.9kg can’t be used for all day rides.

Agreed. Think it’s the historical greater focus on weight than there is now – still focussing on the past. Some mates I ride with always compared who had the lightest bike, forgetting that they’re all on mediums while I’m on XLs. That simple aspect makes quite a difference. More frame material = more weight. Taller/heavier rider = stronger (heavier) components. It all adds up.

For the record, my two (alloy, XL sized) FSers are 15.0kg and 16.3kg. Happily ride either on full days.

And amen to this:

The pictures don’t do this bike justice. No that they are bad pictures, but saw one in the flesh at Fort William this year. It is bloody gorgeous.

But then I saw the Atherton stand and the bar was set higher for me.

Re the weight thing, I was quite crestfallen when I unboxed my new Specialized Enduro and noted that it was a hefty beast, substantially weightier than my 2016 Enduro and was concerned about how my 48 year old legs would cope winching the damn thing up hills, especially considering that I’d specced 25″ Wide Trail Minions at either end of the former. The geometry is one thing – having a much longer TT (old bike is a large, new bike is an S4) gives me a much better climbing position, but the suspension feels much less troubled by roots and trail detritus. I’d far rather tackle a challenging climb on the new bike than the old FWIW.

Anyway, Hope seems to have made a nice bike.

I’d rather have a heavy bike with sorted geometry for climbing and an efficient suspension system than a something 4kg lighter where I’m sat over the back wheel and which has suspension that bobs about like a boat in a gale force wind!

I would expect to get both. It’s called engineering. Every other branch of cycling is improving performance and reducing weight why not in trail / enduro bikes. There is no sensible reason for trail / enduro bike to weigh more than a DH bike

Every other branch of cycling is improving performance and reducing weight

Increasing performance, yes. Reducing weight, no. Road bikes are heavier because aero, wider tyres and disc brakes. MTBs are heavier because bigger wheels and tyres, droppers, bigger cassettes and a desire to not snap frames.

I’d take all those things over the insignificant difference in total system weight any day.

Enduro bikes can weigh more than DH bikes because they run DH wheels, tyres and inserts, droppers and big cassettes. Only the fork will weigh significantly more on a DH bike over an enduro. Even the frames are comparable.

Some people are clearly just obsessed by the number on the scales and can’t see, or will never experience, the vast improvements we’ve all enjoyed in the last 5 years.

I love the raw carbon but for some reason I don’t like the bike, cant quite work out why.

The occam does come up light but

Based on my [experience] it’s bloody marvelous.

Is the important bit. I think you’d be reasonably surprised to find how well the occam did 80k and 2800m even at a few kg heavier depending on where* that weight was.

*I think this is probably why people tend to find “heavy” bikes unpleasant. Very often it’s not a heavy bike so much, maybe a few 00 grams above the axles and especially on the cheaper spec of the same the dampers are less capable (which can easily make a good bike rubbish) but much of the extra weight is in heavy cassettes, heavy wheels, heavy tyres which are often either utter rubbish OE things or so tacky they’re almost molten and ill suited to anything but throwing down a hill.

Certainly my evil the difference between an xt 11 speed cassette and an xg 1195 is massive. As massive as the weight loss to my bank account of the same? Maybe not, but it genuinely changes the behaviour of the bike. Adding or taking off a full water bottle is 2-3 times the weight difference but completely unnoticeable to me.

Let’s not forget this is a purpose built enduro race bike fit to take on and win EWS courses.

Ah-ha! If this is true then that explains a lot. It’s also not the “perfect bike” if its built for that, unless you do that. In which case. I’m oot.

Let’s not forget this is a purpose built enduro race bike fit to take on and win EWS courses.

Ah-ha! If this is true then that explains a lot. It’s also not the “perfect bike” if its built for that, unless you do that. In which case. I’m oot.

True, a perfect Enduro bike would still be useless as a daily shopper.

a daily shopper.

Still trying to find the perfect one. Come on Singletrack help me out here!

I think this is probably why people tend to find “heavy” bikes unpleasant. Very often it’s not a heavy bike so much, maybe a few 00 grams above the axles and especially on the cheaper spec of the same the dampers are less capable (which can easily make a good bike rubbish) but much of the extra weight is in heavy cassettes, heavy wheels, heavy tyres which are often either utter rubbish OE things or so tacky they’re almost molten and ill suited to anything but throwing down a hill.

can add head angle to that. How many times have you heard that a slack head angle made a bike climb poorly?

Nothing to do with that slack bike of your mates that you tried was a 160 travel squidgy monster on little wheels and DH tyres, the reason your 29er xc bike went uphill faster was definitely the head angle…

its an easily measurable metric that will broadly, correspond to the intended use of the bike, and therefore its overall adeptness at the task in hand.