The Cotic Rocket looks like nothing else. And it outperforms every other eeb out there.
- Brand: Cotic
- Product: Rocket
- From: Cotic
- Price: from £7,599*
- Tested by: Benji (and others) for a month
*The bike tested was essentially the Di2 version of the Gold build which starts at £8,799. Cotic can also do a frame/shock/drive system option – where a rider can swap all their bits onto an ebike frame – for £5,999.
Pros
- Flexibility (in every sense)
- Sorted geometry
- Offers everything that actually matters
Cons
- Cost
- Unconventional aesthetic
Our rating
Yes, this bike technically launched in 2024. But it launched in November 2024. In other words, too late to factor in our end-of-year round-up stuff.
Also, back in November ’24, I only had a few hours playtime on the new Cotic Rocket. Enough to give me a sneaking feeling that it was easily the most capable Cotic mountain bike ever. As November 2025 approached, I requested the Cotic Rocket back in for a proper test period. I was not disappointed.
The claim that the Rocket is the most capable Cotic ever may sound rather unsurprising – seeing as it has a motor – but I’m not just talking about climbing capability. Although it is an extremely adept ascender; steeper actual seat tube, longer chain stays and grippy rear suspension in full effect. It is its capability on descents and traverses that is also a step up from any analogue Cotic I’ve ridden before.
If you’ve followed Cotic over the years you’ll probably have noticed that it doesn’t really release bad bikes. It also doesn’t really release ‘safe’, conservative or retro-minded bikes either.
First and foremost a Cotic bike is designed to handle well. It is also designed to be easy to live with. You’ll not see any cabling passing through headsets on a Cotic.
And it is absolutely because of its steel tube fabrication that it rides the fantastic way it does. Going from the Rocket back to other ebikes is revelatory. All other eebs ride feel ‘dead’ – in a chassis sense – compared to the Rocket. I’ve aways been of the opinion that the down tube is the single most important tube on a bike in terms of dictating ride feel. The fact the the down tube of the Rocket is not a drainpipe-sized bit of metal or carbon is significant.
Anyone who’s been on any bike website with a story about the Cotic Rocket on it can’t fail to have noticed the haters. The main contentious aspect of the Rocket. That externally mounted battery.
It is not an ‘old fashioned’ location for a battery. It is not a ‘cheaper’ location for a battery. It is not the ‘easiest’ location for a battery. Cotic has gone with an externally mounted battery because it is the best location. It is the best location from a flexibility point of view.
And I mean flexibility in every sense.
The easy-on easy-off nature of the external battery makes it possible to choose what battery to run (Cotic has 418Wh, 504Wh or 630Wh option). You have flexibility in terms of what weight-to-range ratio you wish to run. Run the lower capacity and have a considerably lighter bike. Or go all in with the 630Wh for big mileage days.
And not having a whacking great down tube means you can actually have some compliance in your frame. There is no point in a Cotic that doesn’t offer controlled chassis flex. Compliance is the whole flipping USP of the brand.
Aluminium e-bikes with internally mounted batteries housed in oversized down tubes are incredibly stiff. So are most carbon e-bikes with similar designs. Not all carbon ebikes, mind. Some are okay. But not everyone wants carbon fibre.
I’d actually say that having the external battery weight where it is on the Cotic Rocket is pretty much the ideal spot for it. A lot of brands may state that having the battery nearer the bottom bracket is beneficial as it’s “low and central” but I’ve not found that to be the case.
First of all, the BB is not the centre of the bike (the centre of the wheelbase is the centre of the bike). And secondly, low slung weight can make bikes handle worse; like you’ve got an anchor between your ankles. Having the battery weight basically at the midpoint between your feet (BB) and your hands (cockpit) is a good thing in my experience. It makes traction much more predictable and controllable and also improves the bike’s turn-in feel.
So yeah. I’m a big fan of the externally mounted battery. I have frequently bemoaned the move away from them.
Before we get on to the bike handling stuff, let’s go in to the motorspeak. The Shimano EP801 should probably have been given a whole new number name. It is not the same as the previous EP8. It has the same headline power numbers (85Nm of torque, 600 watts peak power) but it’s quieter both when delivering power and when coasting (there’s minimal rattle). Anecdotally the EP801 is way more reliable too.
One thing that really stands out about Shimano motors is their fuel economy. For the same capacity battery and same Nm/watts stats, we get more range out of a Shimano system than any other. Obviously, ‘your mileage may vary’ (as they say) depending on a whole swathe of variables but for us, Shimano are the rulers of range. The modest 504Wh battery is very possibly all most people will ever need.
I don’t think there’s any magic to this fuel economy. I think it’s just a by-product of Shimano motors not giving you maximum assist levels as eagerly/early as other motor brands do. You do get 85Nm/600w, just not as frequently as, say, with a Bosch motor. I haven’t yet ridden an EP801 with the new ‘Race’ firmware, which may make things a bit more Bosch-y (with an attendant loss in mpg too no doubt).
I like the Shimano bar remote. Simple, two-buttons. I kinda like the beside-the-stem display from a size and location point of view but I just wish the specced display would show the current time permanently (instead of defaulting back to current speed after a minute or two). The Shimano EN600 (I think) display with its customisable multiple screens would be a good option.
I will admit that I find the five-blocks battery level indication rather crude on the specced display. I also do wish that Shimano wouldn’t make the motor go into ‘limp mode’ quite so early in its battery depletion level.
On the whole though, I’m a big fan of the way Shimano motors feel. They feel much more like an extension of yourself, with no surprises, nor any underwhelming delivery.
The overall sensation of riding the Cotic Rocket was that it was very similar to the analogue Cotic RocketMAX but with even more calmness and grip. And more standover by virtue of the improved seatpost insertion from the revised rear suspension layout. Cotic’s Droplink suspension design has been… er, dropped. The new design (without a pivot passing through the seat tube and limiting dropper insertion) is called Rocklink.
The Rocket ducked and dived into all of the more challenging trails and pretty soon felt like the best bike I’d ever ridden, full stop. E or otherwise.
I rode the Rocket everything and anything. For most test rides I ran the 504Wh battery, with the motor in Boost mode, with mud tyres on front and rear. This setup was perfect for my standard 20km (700m climbing) local looping. Running a less OTT set-up (Trail mode and normal tyres) I could easily get over 1,000m of climbing out of the battery. It’s worth mentioning that ground conditions – and tyre dragginess – have a significant effect on an e-bike’s range.
I did also get hold of an additional battery (630Wh). This gave approximately 20% more range than the 504Wh battery. And due to the easy-swap nature of the Rocket’s battery location, it is possible to do some huge rides using both batteries. Either by circling back to the start point to swap batteries, or carrying one in a backpack. Without being overly cagey with the support modes (ie. keeping it to Trail with occasional Boost-ings) you can do 2,000+ metres of climbing.
Overall
In terms of what matters, the Cotic Rocket is a total winner. Great geometry – the best geometry from Cotic so far in my opinion. An impressively retained classic Cotic chassis feel. Super suspension. Good motor. Excellent range. Impressive overall weight for a capable full power eMTB (21.7kg for a larger size bike). Oh yes, it ain’t cheap. But that is literally the price you pay for getting things made in the UK. Regardless, the Cotic Rocket was easily the best eMTB of the past 12 months.
Cotic Rocket specification
- Frame // Reynolds 853 steel w/ alloy chain stays, 150mm
- Shock // Cane Creek DB Air IL G2, 185x55mm Trunnion
- Fork // Rock Shox Lyrik w/ custom damper, 160mm
- Wheels // Reserve Alloy MX
- Front tyre // Various
- Rear tyre // Various
- Chainset // Shimano
- Drivetrain // Shimano XT Di2
- Brakes // Magura MT7 Pro, 203/203mm
- Stem // Cotic SHORTERSTEM, 35mm, 35mm
- Bars // Cotic Calver
- Grips // Cotic Lock-on
- Seatpost // One-Up V3 Dropper
- Saddle // WTB
- Motor // Shimano EP801, 85Nm
- Battery // 504Wh (and 630Wh)
- Size tested // C5
- Sizes available // C1, C2, C3, C4, C5
- Weight // 21.7kg (504Wh battery)
Geometry of our size C4
- Head angle // 64°
- Effective seat angle // 76.5°
- Seat tube length // 450mm
- Head tube length // 130mm
- Effective top tube // 654mm
- BB height // 36mm BB drop (from front wheel)
- Reach // 495mm
- Chainstay // 456mm
- Wheelbase // 1,306mm
“is a standout product in the market for various reasons that make it interesting, inspiring even."
Really, in what way? From the outside it looks like a bike that the company needed to make but had to compromise to keep on brand. I don’t think they made it look like a Sports Direct bike because they wanted to?
The (openly shared) prototype was an aluminium front triangle with an internal battery. I trust Cy enough (currently on my third Cotic) to think that the shift to what the Rocket has become was about more than branding…The looks have become less jarring to me (I really didn’t like it at first, but maybe – I’m a photography teacher – they’ve just got better at photographing it?) and when I finally need an ebike the Rocket will be on my list if I have the cash.
I’d be interested to know if the battery case was custom to cotic or, by dint of production volumes, it had to be picked out of a catalogue. Assuming it’s injection moulded the tooling for a bespoke case would have been unrealistic surely for the number of units they could expect to shift.
Someone above mentioned a longer slimmer battery might have been easier on the eye. I think I probably agree. With the advancements in 3D printing for production quality polymer components in short production runs, I might have been tempted to go that route. A load more faff I’d imagine.
I’ve had 2 cotics and still enjoy riding my gen 2 flare max but I’m not sure about the ebike . I haven’t ridden many ebikes and I’m pretty sure my next bike will be a normal pedal bike but I am curious . I’m stuck between thinking I’d want something with a TQ style motor for that more normal feel with just a bit of help when I’m not feeling strong or getting something with an Avinox because If you’re going to go electric you might as well go all in . If cotic built something with those motors I’d be really interested even if I’d be unlikely to be able to afford it although i dont know how realistic that is for a company of cotics size to deal with those companies. The downtime podcast with cy is worth a listen and he explains all the decisions and I’ve no doubt they got a bike that rides the way they wanted it to , he was also pretty open about it not being a mass appeal bike .
If they’d make a Jeht with that style of frame layout I’d sell a kidney to get it .
Having the balls to do things differently to where the mainstream is right now, for a start.
Loads. It’s a stock Shimano battery isn’t it? Making your own battery pack and casing means a lot of £ on testing. New battery legislation is coming in all the time, better to let someone else deal with all that.
Indeed – hence my last sentence. But insurmountable? After all, every firm going down the integrated battery approach is essentially making their own battery casing – it’s just the shape of a bike main triangle!
Big firms like Specialized are, many just use the standard Bosch/Shimano units. Canyon had a go at making their own batteries, most of them fell apart and it took them months to recall and replace them.
The other reason not to go ‘longer and slimmer’ as suggested above is keeping the weight lower down.
I don’t own or have any deep knowledge of ebikes, but maybe the forte of this one is how the rest of the bike rides around the battery and motor?
Although based on pretty much every forum thread I’ve read anywhere on ebikes absolutely nobody cares – all judgements seem to be strictly about the motor and battery. They now seem to be regarded just like any other expensive, semi-disposable Tech – out of date or just generally worn out in 2 or 3 years as the technology progresses so fast.
I totally get it, I’m just not in a financial position to pay to play. Even if I could raise a few grand in the first place, I can’t really justify spending it on something with the lifespan of a phone.
What would get my attention though… and this might be a totally ignorant suggestion, I genuinely don’t know… would be a bike like this Rocket which could switch out batteries and motors as the tech advanced. If 5 years down the line I still had a great steel framed bike that could have a fresh, up to date motor and a battery half the size retrofitted, that would be an entirely different prospect.
Sure, I was posting to add/ agree 🙂 So many of the integrated DT batteries are made to fit open mold down tubes. Some can be bought as matched battery and tube. There’s also added cost in testing when you mix and match battery and motor, overall it’s far more expensive than regular ISO mechanical tests.
if I was buying an e-mtb that’s exactly what I would be looking for. The lifespan of the bike would need to outlast the electronics >3x.
As it already is the Intradrive motor will fit Shimano EP8 pattern mounts and the Shimano battery mount is used by a few battery pack makers in Asia.
I can understand a steel hardtail winning bike of the year etc as it offer something different. Whether this offers anything that much different to all the other 150/160mm rear travel emtbs out there i’m not sure.
Motor choice is a bit of an odd one, it’s not pushing the boundaries in terms of power/weight/integration yet has a pretty locked down motor system so this is one of the worst motor options if something internal breaks after warranty or you want to change wheelsize etc
It’s pretty well explained in the review at the start of the thread. Makes a lot of sense once the reasons are on the table. The looks have grown on me fwiw, probably prefer to normal chunky ebikes although doubt I could ever afford one.
I wish they’d made a “universal" cradle mount, to which a variety of welded cradles could be bolted to take a selection of motors
I’ve a 2018 Vitus Esommet and you can buy an upgrade kit to fit the newer motor and the bigger battery
Regarding the battery, it is the standard Shimano external battery. We did look into custom packs, and actually Shimano are one of the brands that are more open to this than most, but the legislation, testing, validation and just general making-it-safe work is a massive, massive amount of work, and Shimano won’t work with you unless you commit to buying a LOT of drive systems because of the work they need to do.
All the other brands aren’t making custom batteries, they’re putting (extremely ugly I might add) standard batteries from the motor provider inside the down tube.
I don’t think the casing shape of the battery is fundamentally bad, it’s just that it’s been the same for 10 years so there is an association with older ebikes there. I can’t help that, even if the internals and cells are all much better than those older batteries. The interesting thing for me from a performance perspective (and it’s one of the bigger reasons why the external battery and sensible sized frame tubes made more sense) is that they are lighter than the internal batteries for the same capacity. I don’t know why, but they are.
As for upgradability, nothing I have seen from Shimano leads me to believe that you won’t be able to bolt a newer motor on the bike in years to come. Certainly the current battery plug/architecture will continue for some time as well.
All the delivery riders seem to manage it fine 😉
Honestly can’t believe all the fuss about this eMTB. First and foremost it’s a bike to which it’s had a motor and battery added in a way that makes most sense from a designer/engineer’s perspective. Is that not what we’d all want from an eMTB? Something that rides like a MTB first and foremost, but with the assistance for the ups? Sounds perfect to me.
I’d bloody love one. Just not in a place to be spending anything close to that on a bike of any sort.
More than happy to be told I’ve bought into the marketing bollocks as a Cotic fanboy 😀
But my Levo rides like an MTB – a 160mm travel carbon enduro MTB. Yes, it’s heavier obviously, but other than that it doesn’t ride differently to an ‘MTB’
As does my Heckler SL – one of reasons I went with a lighter eMTB* was after riding Mrs a11y’s 26kg Cube FSer and hating it. Levo might be different but that **** Cube definitely didn’t ride like a normal MTB.
* reason definitely wasn’t for the Fazua motor 😆
I appear to remember an article in STW (yes, there’s a magazine) de-bunking the myths around frame “compliance”.
I know on my fancy steel road bike the biggest improvement to handling and comfort is from high TPI tyres and in my, albeit limited, knowledge on a full suspension bike a stiff frame is better so that the suspension can do it’s work?
Surely a flexible frame (even though barely perceptible) will inhibit the correct suspension action, as bicycles were designed in a triangulated form for a reason, strength and stiffness?
Sounds like it should be the case and maybe all the time your bike is upright it’s true but as soon as it’s leant over it all gets more complicated. At least that appears to be the case for bikes, e-bikes or motorcycles
@Rubber_Buccaneer I appreciate that having had the good (?) fortune to have ridden a tuned KH500 over the Cat and Fiddle I would have loved a much stiffer frame with no “compliance”!
😀 never ridden one but is the compliance at wet noodle levels?