[Closed] First world problem - strive or aeris?

You probably can't go wrong with either. Which do you like the look of the most?

Regarding Canyons warranty, when I had a problem with my forks I dealt with someone in the UK and posted them to their UK office. Was pretty simple really, although I've heard good things about Bird too.

I have a strive but the AL version. I ride this everywhere including FOD, cwmcarn, Afan and trips to the Lake District. It's nice having the extra travel sometimes.!

Will one of the Canyon owners / founders send you a new reverb so you get it less than 24 hours after the one you sent back arrived? Both great bikes but Bird's service is impeccable.

It's the potential problems with warranty replacements that is stopping me for going for the strive. That and the shapeshifter which just seems like another thing to go wrong.

But full carbon bike with fox front and back for under 3 grand.

Based in communication this week alone, I'd not touch canyon with the shitty end of the longest stick I can find whereas bird haven't been too bad.

Or an Airdrop Edit...

2nd the suggestion of the airdrop. Looking at one of those later. Might be the frame to bring me back to reality and away from the carbon wonder bikes.

What size do you need? There's a guy selling a medium mk1.5 Aeris on the Bird Owners FB group with XT, Pikes etc. for £1800. Looks to be in pretty good nick and the frame warranty is transferable.

Direct sales in UK vs Direct sales in EU - I know which I would prefer to deal with long term.

The Bird is also a great bike to ride but I get the appeal of carbon for the price point. Given the choice though of.an average riding carbon frame vs an excellent riding aluminium frame, I'd go down the aluminium route each time despite my own personal love affair with carbon.

AirDrop looks a good option on paper but the two standout things for me are the warranty isn't as good as the one from Bird and that they are a catalogue frame.

I've got a small aeris that I want to sell. XT, Pikes and the like. Never got on with it so only lightly used.
I'm based in Edinburgh if that's any help.

Given the choice though of.an average riding carbon frame vs an excellent riding aluminium frame,

Have you ridden them both? The carbon Strive has an excellent ride feel.

AirDrop looks a good option on paper but the two standout things for me are the warranty isn't as good as the one from Bird and that they are a catalogue frame.

Pretty sure Airdrop is not a catalogue frame.

I'd go with the Carbon Strive. Or perhaps Spectral.

Pretty sure Airdrop is not a catalogue frame.

Pretty sure the Edit is a slightly modified Alumate AA6522, there is a lot of commonality in the design and construction detail.

http://www.alumate.com.tw/e-catalog/04/p1.htm

That's not to say the Edit isn't a good bike. A riding buddy has one and he loves it. I prefer my Aeris. So in the tradition of recommend what you have I vote go for Aeris.

I can see a bit of similarity, but I'd say there are [i]at least[/i] as many differences as there were between the original Aeris and the similar other frames Caribou had produced before.

Personally I'd consider "catalogue frame" to mean you order the exact bike and they slap some stickers on.

In your terms then it's not a catalogue frame as it has different cable routing, seat tube brace and head tube gusset. Possibly different geo to, but hard to say given the lack of figures. As I said it looks like a modified version of the one from Alumate, whether or that means it's not a catalogue frame depends on your point of view and that's not an argument I'm bothered to have.

I'm certainly not looking for an argument either.

Just thought it was worth taking issue with what seemed like a lazy slur on the part of the other poster.

I'm almost certain the geometry will be custom on them BTW, they are very modern compared to mainstream bikes.

I'm sure you're right on the modern long geometry, which isn't far off the original Aeris. I suppose it's kinda like a stretched Patrol. Not a slur, just saying where I can see similarity/inspiration. Little is 100% original these days.

We keep meaning to do a back to back comparison of the my Aeris vrs mates Edit when we're out (possibly session the Twrch freeride section), but it hasn't happened yet. Though the Edit being a large when I'm on a medium doesn't help. Initial impression on the carpark test is the Edit is more 'active' suspension and feels more bobby, that could be down to setup, though both running the same shocks.

strive owner here and its by far the best bike ive ever owned.
xc rides in the UK, DH in the alps and local jump spots etc it excels in all conditions.
I've had 2 warranty issues both sorted in super quick time with excellent comms from the UK office.
I'd not hesitate to buy from them again.

I'd be looking at an airdrop edit if I was getting s bike the now. Wouldn't want the hope enduro wheels either, too heavy and too narrow.

chakaping - Member
I'm certainly not looking for an argument either.

Just thought it was worth taking issue with what seemed like a lazy slur on the part of the other poster.

I'm almost certain the geometry will be custom on them BTW, they are very modern compared to mainstream bikes.

Why take issue with it? It's not personal. No need to take it as such. (Large font not intentional)

I'll state up front I have a degree of bias here on the Bird front but I'll just say that service and support counts for a lot.

I can see a bit of similarity, but I'd say there are at least as many differences as there were between the original Aeris and the similar other frames Caribou had produced before

I couldn't comment on other bikes (well other than those I am 100% sure are factory catalogue bikes - there's more than you might think) but the Aeris shared only 4 tubes with the Caribou stock frame. No pivots, linkages etc. were from a catalogue bike - all designed by us in the UK but we did use a frame to get started from, something with the layout we wanted and redesigned from there. By the time the Mk1 came around almost everything on the bike was different to the original that we based it on, but of course it has some visual similarities using some of the same tubes and the same basic layout. But then we'd not have chosen it as the starting point if we didn't specifically want something a bit similar out the other end.

I guess from my perspective the difference between factory and catalogue is whether you get someone else's frame, change the geo and make a few tweaks and consider that to be 'your own', or whether you borrow elements of a catalogue bike to help you build your own, but still build all your own 3D models, design your kinematics, work out the anti-squat, design your own linkages, make your own axles, even down to speccing your own preference on bearings.... etc.

There are cars with different badges, dash boards etc. but are basically the same car, and there are cars that might use an engine borrowed from another brand, and maybe some switches, but they are not the same car as the one they borrow from. For me thats the difference. Changing up the badges, adding some LLS geo and what not would be a cheat for sure if you wanted to claim its not a catalogue frame - lets not kid ourselves it is. Thankfully (from my perspective) though as far as I can tell pretty much every company that's done that other than the really big ones go pop eventually when you find out that the Taiwanese might weld a good bike, but they generally suck at designing things that will last in UK conditions and your warranty gets out of hand, and when someone comes along and does something like drops boost and metric shocks on you then you are stuck with no real control.

The new 120/145 is made at a different factory and is again our own design, this time leaning much less heavily on factory 'ways of doing things' and really setting our own path, like the CNC box section yoke, one piece dropouts, mini-collet axles etc. You'd be very unlikely to spot a catalogue frame with anything like the amount of CNC work as on the new 120 and 145s as they would be just too expensive to make for that target audience of people looking for a catalogue frame where cost is generally the number 1 priority (as well as being able to buy in low volumes). Yes it has a couple of open mold tubes that you might spot on more expensive bikes, points for anyone that figures out which tubes and where you've seen them.

That was a rash comparison Ben, I'm not in a position to know such things and I apologise. I was kind of reacting to what I thought was an unfair comparison.

I do think it's irresponsible and disrespectful to label something a "catalogue bike" with no real evidence.

I have no connection to Airdrop but I'd read [url= https://www.airdropbikes.com/blogs/news/112515335-dirt-interview ]this interview[/url] before and the process described doesn't fit what I think of a catalogue bike.

Ha that's ok. Mine was a bit of a diatribe too , must have been bored! Sorry.

I spent some time with Ed and the Airdrop Edit at the weekend. It's a cracking bike, I'll probably put some thoughts about that in a separate thread. It's not a catalogue frame. The geometry and kinematics are Airdrop. Like lots of other bikes, there is the odd part that is used elsewhere by someone else. What's the point in reinventing the wheel when you don't need to. Using those existing bits also keeps the cost reasonable which is a high priority for riders and small companies alike.

given the choice though of.an average riding carbon frame vs an excellent riding aluminium frame

True but whats that got to do with the strive? Ever owned a canyon? I have had 2 of their carbon frames and the quality is excellent. They aren't like planet X generic moulds.

I think the fact that they are ridden by some of the top cycling teams in the world tells you all you need to know about how average they are.

OP you've mentioned Bird for the Boost..fyi the Edits recommebded max tyre width is a 2.4 on a 30mm rim. HTH

given the choice though of.an average riding carbon frame vs an excellent riding aluminium frame
True but whats that got to do with the strive? Ever owned a canyon? I have had 2 of their carbon frames and the quality is excellent. They aren't like planet X generic moulds.

I think the fact that they are ridden by some of the top cycling teams in the world tells you all you need to know about how average they are.

Everything given I'm not talking about the quality. Try reading the meaning and context of the post rather than looking at words. Difference of opinion I can deal with but not even using the information that's in front of you to properly form your arguement just frustrates... [i]Average riding[/i] does not relate to build quality does it? There are plenty of boutique brands that are less than inspiring out on the trail.

Compared to the other two options of Bird and Airdrop, the Strive is more conservative in my opinion. And no, I've not ever owned a Canyon but I very nearly pressed the button on the Grand Canyon when in the market for a 29er hardtail so I have no issue with their quality.

P.S. Riders will ride anything given enough money and sponsorship.

Try reading the meaning and context of the post rather than looking at words.

And I'm going to suggest you try looking at the words before you start to hand out advice on interpreting posts as..

Average riding does not relate to build quality does it

Where on earth did I mention build quality? I said it was a quality frame, ie well designed, its stiff, comfy, well made, and rides briliantly. I didn't signal out one specific virtue.

Difference of opinion I can deal with but not even using the information that's in front of you to properly form your arguement just frustrates

Think you could do worse than to heed your own advice in future. Patronising comments and responses only work if they aren't going to come back bite you on the ass.

And no, I've not ever owned a Canyon but I very nearly pressed the button on the Grand Canyon when in the market for a 29er hardtail so I have no issue with their quality.

So never owned one...have you ever ridden one? Genuinely interested in why you think its an average riding frame when the vast majority of folk who have owned them appear to think they are great.

as someone who owns 2 canyons (not a strive) id go for the bird 😛
but i'm not bothered about carbon and bird are pretty local to me. I bought a spectral over the orginal aeris only because the wait for the bird was too long (oh the irony) but would have gone for the bird otherwise. no regrets though the spectral is awesome.

you cant go wrong with the strive they are great bikes.

If the bird guys do a raw ally colour option i'll 100% get one for my next bike! (probably will anyway :P)

tpbiker - Member
And I'm going to suggest you try looking at the words before you start to hand out advice on interpreting posts as..

Where on earth did I mention build quality? I said it was a quality frame, ie well designed, its stiff, comfy, well made, and rides briliantly. I didn't signal out one specific virtue.

Think you could do worse than to heed your own advice in future. Patronising comments and responses only work if they aren't going to come back bite you on the ass.

Ever owned a canyon? I have had 2 of their carbon frames and the quality is excellent. They aren't like planet X generic moulds.

I have spent a couple of hours on a strive. Didn't hate it, didn't love it either. Not that I ever criticised it, just to reiterate. Just average.

I explained the context already.

It a quality frame, well designed, stiff, comfy, rides well. Unlike a generic px frame which is flexy and distinctly average.

Quality doesn't just refer to how well its built, it can refer to any aspect of the frame. Not sure why I needed to explain that twice.