And if so, what works? What doesn’t? And how much will it all end up costing?
This is a real mountain bike that belongs to a real mountain biker. The biker’s name is Seb. This bike is a 2016 Santa Cruz Hightower LT. A 150mm travel full 29er.
The Hightower is ten years old. Seb is considerably older than that. But whilst Seb is a fit and capable rider, the Hightower is beginning to show its age a bit.
Seb has ridden more modern bikes over the past few years and he’s starting to wonder about replacing his ol’ faithful Hightower. But does he have to? Is there anything that can be done to this bike that can eek out another few years of (ab)use?
Well, let’s find out
Talking with Seb, there are three main things about the Hightower that feel a bit outdated, or have since been improved upon. Firstly, he likes the way mixed-wheel mullet bikes handle. Secondly, the seat angle feels too slack on the Hightower now (the claimed 73.7° effective seat angle sounds rather optimistic). Thirdly, a slacker head angle wouldn’t go amiss either (66.4° with a 160mm fork sounds very wrong in 2026AD).
(The fourth elephant in the room is the reach figure. At 443mm reach on this Large, it ain’t roomy. But we’re just going to try and ignore this for the time being. Mainly because there’s not much you can do about it.)
What to do? What to do?
We have our plans. We have various bits and pieces in stock or en route.
What would you have a mess with first?
Some things to be aware of: the head tube uses drop-in bearings, and there’s only a few mm of clearance between the swinglink and the seat tube.
Stay tuned…
Free newsletter
Singletrack
Weekly Word
News, reviews and riding from the Singletrack team — no spam, unsubscribe any time.
You asking me? Enjoy it for what it is. Don’t waste money trying to modernise it, that cash would be better put towards a future replacement. Santa Cruz were late to the modern geometry party so it has a slack seat tube and steep head tube and it is short. Maybe a Slack-R could be used to slacken the head angle but that is £££ and will reduce the already short reach, maybe the saddle could be shoved ridiculously forward or even a Fair Bicycles Drop Best fitted but that is going to make the effective top tube short. Offset shock bushings may fit but again it’s compromises.
Others may think differently of course
Im currently in the throws of modernising a 2014 5010.
I’m replacing the frame.
No, is my short answer.
I had a Tallboy of that era and it had the same nuances as this – slack STA, steep HTA, short reach. Felt fine at the time until I rode a Geometron and realised I could have a much better fitting bike.
As per above poster, save the cash towards a future replacement instead and enjoy it for what it is.
Could probably salvage 10mm of reach with a slammed stem and higher rise bars.
Aye. Modernise it with a new frame. All else can stay.
Having done this to a bike that’s 3 years newer I’d say no. I’ve just managed to get away with it on my ebike because it’s just that bit bigger in reach and stack, slacker HA, steeper seat tube, the longer chainstays promote a more rearward hip position so make the bike feel bigger and the battery & motor weight adds stability anyway.
Then again Seb might have already sized up a lot so it might not be that short – but then there’s the dropper post issue…
Is it even possible? Probably not and what can be done won’t be cheap you might say. But hey think again! You could cut the front off the bike, somewhere around the U of Cruz on the downtube, extend the frame tubes and fix it back together whilst changing the frame geometry to give a slacker front fork and a steeper seat post. At the same time increasing the reach. Bearing in mind it’s a carbon mainframe this is tricky but nothing ventured as they say. Also there’s a danger of sawing through the internally routed cables so maybe dismantle brakes and gears beforehand. I think the mullet change might be a step too far but everything else is sorted. Post rearrangement best to avoid large drop offs and road gaps. Problem solved.
Depends on Seb’s height, but that reach is pretty short – barely a medium in most brands now. At 5’9 with short arms I might be finding that a bit short and there’s zero you can really do about that. As above a slackR might knock a degree or 2 off the head angle – at the expense of shortening the reach further.
Even slightly older Santa Cruz can sometimes sell alright just on the name – I’d sell it and move on to something more modern. Saracen Arial 30 can be had as a whole bike with a Bomber Z2, deore 12 speed geoupset, mullet wheels in small / medium or 29er in large / extra large – but they include a spare link to change between both rear wheel sizes.
https://www.saracen.co.uk/collections/ariel-30/products/ariel-30-blue
This. For all the moaning people do on changing standards, everything on a 2016 Santa Cruz will fit a modern frame, save maybe the seat post but all the options that were available then are available now, plus shims are available (assuming you haven’t gone mad when trimming steerer tubes etc, but they’re replaceable if needs be.
As much as I loved my ‘Large’ Santa Cruz (and still do) a seat tube (435mm) that’s longer than the reach (425mm) is never gonna work for someone 6’1” now i’ve tried other modern stuff, and I’m never gonna be able to replicate the geo of a new frame, about 3.5 degrees slacker HT, 6 degrees steeper ST, and 85mm more reach…
Gained around 100mm reach and several degrees difference in STA and HTA when Mrs a11y changed her Sc Tallboy LTc for the Deviate Highlander 🤣
Since this is for a magazine article and not just some chap off the forum, why not approach a few UK frame builders and ask who is interested in building a new front end to bring it into the modern age?
Unique article, check
Promo for UK industry, check
That Santa Cruz looks like it was crashed into a wall it’s so scrunched up / short and tall.
In this dilemma at the moment with a Gen 1 Cotic RocketMax. Considering a -1.5 angleset and going mullet with some higher rise bars. So relatively low cost if I keep it at 11 speed (already have the wheelset) and having written to Cotic they said it would come out not massively dissimilar to an earlier Gen Jeht. Would rather try this than have to go all out for a new frame at significantly greater cost.
As the owner of a similar era Camber Evo the answer is simple. Don’t bother, the economics will never work and you’ll end up with something that’s cost a packet to not really achieve the desired result.
If you want something more modern in geometry then buy a more modern bike with up to date standards.
But still didn’t clean up the pointing or those weeds… tut tut.
If your grips are in the same place, this will make zero difference to the geometry.
Magazines tend to work to deadlines and in general, frame builders don’t seem to do so well with those, especially on custom work.
But they won’t be. Removing the spacers under the stem will shift it forward slightly
This thread highlights how conservative Santa Cruz were for such a long time.
I remember I used to be envious of a mate’s early Bronson until I bought my Geometron.
Once I’d gotten used to the G16 the Bronson felt like a twitchy little death trap. It also ruined my old favourite 29er Stumpjumper which felt like a road bike in comparison.
That’s going to make for one exciting article….
And the higher rise bars will move the grips back again. The critical thing to consider is the position of the grips. If you have the grips at the same level, the effective reach is the same – this is the horizontal length from the BB axle to the point on the steering axis that your grips are set at. If you lower the stem but fit higher rise bars to get the grips back to where they were before, then there is zero change to the effective reach.
The OP didn’t ask what would make an interesting article they asked whether a ten year old Santa Cruz could be modernised. What do you think?
So many bikes of that era though…
I like how jaunty the saddle looks. Bit like an East 17 cap.