[Closed] New bike thoughts: Bronson - Over hyped??

Interesting to read the shock comments in this thread, over in the Alpine 160 one it's considered normal to replace the shock with something else to make the bike useful (on a frame that is comparable with the Alu Bronson price wise)

I understand that it is the Boost Valve in the Fox shock that contributes to the harsh feeling over fast repeated hits, TFTuned take it out when they do the PUSH tune. Which is a little strange when you consider that SC designed the linkage around the BV shock! @njee20 I agree that you should expect better at that price but it's still a great bike IMO even without changes to the shock.

and their warranty is less good (on paper and in real life IME) than many of the mainstream brands.

Happy with outcome.

Any bike will benefit from a shock tune as the one size fits all the manufacturers use does not fit all.

Thing is, what ever bike you buy, from a £150 BSO to a £7k wonder Enduro(tm) machine might always need slight mods to fit an individual and how they ride. Things like bars, stems, saddles and pedals and even crank lengths etc are very personal. So "having" to change those on an expensive bike is not an issue, especially if you can afford to drop several K on a wonder bike, you can stump up about £100 for some new bars!

I tested a Trek. It had 710mm wide bars. I asked why I couldnt come with a wider bar so that the owner could chop down to length desired and their answer was that it was the most popular size.

SC bikes are also so easy to service, that's why I think it's worth paying that extra.

I'll let you know how service goes on the VPP when it happens, 18 months in on one, not needed, 10 months on the 2nd nothing required, the other is only 2 months old.

Grease ports are a great thing and free bearings for life.

SC bikes are also so easy to service, that's why I think it's worth paying that extra.

Which is lucky, because various models have had serious problems with eating linkages and pivots!

I don't buy into the 'boutique' brand thing being better. You're paying for exclusivity and not benefiting from economies of scale. Nothing wrong with that, but that's about the size of it!

The bike I've had most problems with was a Titus (from when they were a proper standalone brand, rather than part of P-X). It kept snapping linkages, in the end it went back to the US, who refused to accept any problems with it, charged me for a new swingarm and took 3 months to return it. Perhaps unsurprising they then went out of business!

Things like 'easy to service' are massively clutching at straws, and their warranty is less good (on paper and in real life IME) than many of the mainstream brands. Needing a shock tune out of the box is proper shit IMO, if there's unanimous agreement on that, why don't they change the stock setup?

Sorry, that's probably heresy on here!

I think your experience of one "boutique" brand is pretty narrow minded, just because one is like that doesn't mean the rest are. Sure some of the smaller brands simply don't have the warranty of other brands, Titus and Evil spring to mind instantly, but they are tiny companies and can you fault them for being a small company and not being able to compete with Specialized or Trek who have hundreds of people doing warranty work? Some of the "Boutique" US brands have a great rep for Warranty, Santa Cruz even with the known carbon issues on old Blur's and Tallboy's, Ibis have a great rep for warranty, even outside the terms of the warranty, folks getting new frames even though they aren't the original owners, Yeti have great warranty too and so on.

In the case of Santa Cruz, problems with the pivot points cracking has pretty much been resolved with the newer bikes (Solo, Bronson etc) and you can't argue with a 5 year defect warranty, lifetime crash replacement and lifetime bearing warranty either. The bikes look incredibly easy to work on and are thoroughly though out, the threaded BB and grease ports for example are sensible choices and in comparison to Mojo, which needs new bearings/linkages every 12/18 months at £120 odd a pop, over the course of 5 years a Santa Cruz would save me £600, which is a lot of cash.

I'd have to agree that many bikes would require a shock tune to get the best out of the bike, sure you might get lucky with a bike that's sweet spot is right for you, but suspension setup is so personal you simply can't cater for everyone. in my experience it's best to ride the bike until it needs a shock service, figure out where it needs improving and get it tuned. It's a minimal cost as has been said, around the £40 mark and it will make a big difference to how any bike rides. My Mojo HD felt so much better once it had been tuned to my weight and riding style.

The solo was also great bike but the I needed more bb clearance and travel. I wasn't convinced that the Solo would tackle Alpine riding as confidently as the Bronson. UK riding I think it would be superb.

The Solo I think is a better bike for the UK than the Bronson. It can take serious abuse, you just have to look at Josh Bryceland racing one in the EWS last season and the Blur TR video to see the shorter travel bikes can take a helluva pounding. I think for mere-mortals in an alpine environment the extra travel of the Bronson would be a help but in the UK I don't think you need any more bike than the Solo.

My thoughts lawman91 exactly being a mere mortal.

I think your experience of one "boutique" brand is pretty narrow minded, just because one is like that doesn't mean the rest are. Sure some of the smaller brands simply don't have the warranty of other brands, Titus and Evil spring to mind instantly, but they are tiny companies and can you fault them for being a small company and not being able to compete with Specialized or Trek who have hundreds of people doing warranty work? Some of the "Boutique" US brands have a great rep for Warranty, Santa Cruz even with the known carbon issues on old Blur's and Tallboy's, Ibis have a great rep for warranty, even outside the terms of the warranty, folks getting new frames even though they aren't the original owners, Yeti have great warranty too and so on.

Wind your neck in, I said that was the bike I'd had most problems with, not "my sole experience was with Titus".

I worked in a SC dealer for many years, and sold loads, as well as Litespeed/Merlin and Ibis before they reinvented themselves. My counter was just that we've got people cooing over the exceptional warranty, whilst 5 years is less than most of the big companies offer. It's not a bad thing specifically, but don't expect to be looked after better by a 'boutique' brand. That's not looking through the rose-tinted spectacles of ownership either.

They're great frames/bikes, and a nice company to deal with, but don't fool yourself into thinking that spending more on a frame buys you favours!

It's a minimal cost as has been said, around the £40 mark and it will make a big difference to how any bike rides

£40 on top of a service, which you'd not otherwise need on a brand new shock... So more like £150. But yes, accept that's not the sole preserve of boutique brands.

I'm not trying to say the customer service is better than the mainstream brands, just it's not bad either.

It's a minimal cost as has been said, around the £40 mark and it will make a big difference to how any bike rides

£40 on top of a service, which you'd not otherwise need on a brand new shock... So more like £150. But yes, accept that's not the sole preserve of boutique brands.

Agreed, doing it to a new shock is silly, but that wasn't my point -

In my experience it's best to ride the bike until it needs a shock service, figure out where it needs improving and get it tuned.

I’m not sure that I’d class SC as a boutique brand these days. In my eyes they’re more of a small mainstream brand because they’re very popular and a pretty common sight anywhere that MTBer’s congregate. There are also loads of dealers knocking about, ranging from Stif and Leisure Lakes to small, independent shops.

When I first started riding, the Chameleon for example seemed pretty exotic because there weren’t loads about, they were made in the USA (that still meant something in the late nineties), were not that common and there weren’t loads of dealers.

This doesn’t make them bad bikes (I like their bikes, just not the sizing) in the same way the Spesh and Giant are not bad bikes because they’re big. In my experience though you’ll often be treated better by the big guys because they can afford to write a few frames off for the warranty process. When I worked in a shop, Spesh were amazing at helping people out.

SC do seem to have maintained their ‘boutique’ status in the UK despite the numbers sold though.

Super expensive carbon superbike?

Hows about this one?

[img] [/img]

Is the frame in line though? 😉

Pink Bike were gushing about the Carbine in their review.

a few mm mud clearance with the fitted tyres on the intense apparently, would be a worry for the UK

I thought I had reasonable clearance on my kona at the Afan round of the UKGE series last year but the rear clogged up stopping the bike dead on one of the fresh cut stages

I'm not trying to say the customer service is better than the mainstream brands, just it's not bad either.

Agree, again, my point was to counter folk saying "I buy SC because the warranty is totes amazeballs" (I may be paraphrasing).

they were made in the USA (that still meant something in the late nineties)

Really? Plenty of stuff was made in the US in the late 90s, I'd say that holds more cache now, as hardly anything is! All Blur frames used to come with a little booklet on the shock saying who made the frame, complete with their signature and a little caricature, impressive touch I must say.

Really? Plenty of stuff was made in the US in the late 90s, I'd say that holds more cache now, as hardly anything is! All Blur frames used to come with a little booklet on the shock saying who made the frame, complete with their signature and a little caricature, impressive touch I must say.

What I was getting at is that back then, stuff made in the States was considered to be much better quality than the mass produced stuff from the far east. Whereas today, they are probably leading the way with regards to production methods etc. In some cases the quality is often better (e.g. Intense and their wonky rear ends).

I still remember people pulling faces when SC moved production of the Chameleon from the States to the Far East.

I'm not trying to say the customer service is better than the mainstream brands, just it's not bad either.

Agree, again, my point was to counter folk saying "I buy SC because the warranty is totes amazeballs" (I may be paraphrasing).

I just want one because it rode incredibly! 😆 Add in the fact when I started MTB 10 years ago I always wanted a Santa Cruz, for no other reason than they looked cool. I think practically they're a great purchase too, when compared to their competitors, the lifetime warranty on the bearings and decent mud clearance is a huge thing in the UK. As a slight side note I love how Trek's warranty basically says we cover our bikes for life... except this model, that model, ohh yeah and that one... ohhh nearly forgot that one too... and our swingarms are only covered for so many years as well, but not on this model, that's different 😆

they were made in the USA (that still meant something in the late nineties)

Really? Plenty of stuff was made in the US in the late 90s, I'd say that holds more cache now, as hardly anything is! All Blur frames used to come with a little booklet on the shock saying who made the frame, complete with their signature and a little caricature, impressive touch I must say.

Rocky Mountain used to do similar, the chap that built the frame signed it, likewise the wheels were signed as well. Just a small detail but makes it a little more personal.

a few mm mud clearance with the fitted tyres on the intense apparently, would be a worry for the UK

Exactly! I think a lot of riders are scared of longer chainstays but there are quite a few benefits, including more mud clearance, it being easier to balance the bike when drifting and more stability at high speed. Short chainstays are cool too but not if you can only use the bike in dry weather!

a few mm mud clearance with the fitted tyres on the intense apparently, would be a worry for the UK

Can still get short chainstays and good clearance, the biggest problem that makes chainstays longer is the front mech, which needs adequate clearance with beefy tyres. One of the reasons 1x makes sense for mountain bikes. Couple short chainstays with a longer front centre and the bike will just as stable but feel a little more agile.

Couple short chainstays with a longer front centre and the bike will just as stable but feel a little more agile.

This isn't entirely true - anything that increases agility/responsiveness automatically decreases stability, it's a balance of compromises.

When my much loved Blur Classic finally got its marching orders last November after a massive OTBs (a constant fight to stop the front wheel from burying itself, despite angleset and 140 fork) I was on the lookout for a new frame. Having enjoyed my Blur (when not descending), I looked at what SC had on offer. In the end I didn't buy one because:
-If I went 650b I would need masses of new parts.
-If I stayed with 26" my new frame could be obsolete within a couple
of years.
-The new SC bikes are still not that long, low and slack (look at the
people on this thread buying anglesets for them).
-They are overpriced and not really that light.

In the end I got a Liteville 301 aluminium frame (mk10 XL) which was £1200 (Kashima RP23 + X12 bolt through included) in the Bromley Bike sale in December.
-Can run 26" or 650b wheels.
-Head angle 65.5 deg with 160 Lyrik
-option of 140 or 160 travel with different rocker.
-wheel base 100mm longer than old Blur (L) so no more summersaults!
-with Lyrik, Mallets, XT, Flows and Minions it weighs 29.5lbs (someone's carbon Bronson was 30lbs!)
-10 year warrenty on frame, regardless of owner
-just as nimble as the old bike (even with the Rev wound down to 110mm)
-climbs and descends like a dream!

Really can't be arsed with top end stuff anymore, I always end up trying to make it lighter to the point where the bike is crap. I've owned 2 carbon frames, an Ibis and a GT, both were sent back for cracks, I've owned dozens of aluminium frames, I've never broken one. I'm 6'6" and ~200lbs.

Besides, the £4300 Deore model is going to weigh loads, the £5600 model weighs a hardly staggering 30lbs. I'm not saying it's heavy, but you could have very similar weight/style bikes for half that.

[url= http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/04/02/santa-cruz-27-5-bronson-carbon-actual-weight/ ]http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/04/02/santa-cruz-27-5-bronson-carbon-actual-weight/[/url]

I'd get a Trek/Specialized/Giant/Orange or something personally.

My counter was just that we've got people cooing over the exceptional warranty, whilst 5 years is less than most of the big companies offer.

The Bronson was sooo last year, looks like there's a new nomad around the corner 😀

http://forums.mtbr.com/santa-cruz/spotted-whistler-new-650b-nomad-882489-7.html

Couple short chainstays with a longer front centre and the bike will just as stable but feel a little more agile.

Long front centre with short rear centre = crap weight distribution, low front grip, large front to rear spring rate differential.

my kona process lifetime warranty is lifetime! - they only do 5 years for carbon frames tho

and the long front centre and short chainstays gives it great weight distribution and loads of front grip

and the long front centre and short chainstays gives it great weight distribution and loads of front grip

The physics says otherwise. As does Aaron Gwin...

Believe it or not there is an optimum rear centre length. Just as there is a optimum BB height, head angle, seat angle.

It ain't just a case of slapping a 420mm rear centre on every bike. In fact on large bikes that kind of length is ridiculous. Sure does keep production costs down though...

what about the kinematics JCL?
As for Gwin he doesn't seem to design many bikes.

It's amazing how many people want a paint by numbers bike.

No but Gwinn couldn't ride the standard Demo for toffee because the short rear centre.

The kinematics will be as flawed as any other SC VPP. It's impossible to have a flat leverage rate with counter-rotating links.

Still, they'll market the hell out of them and sell a truck load.

But many will enjoy riding it, love riding it and ride it to the top step of podiums all over the world, is it possible the major flaw you see is it's not a 29r Enduro? Having ridden plenty of bikes the VPP ones are standing out as my favourite and preferred choice these days. I wish I had the time to be able to over analyse the numbers on bikes to try and decide if they are any good or not but I'll stick to the ride them test.

The Gwinn issue didn't seem to impact Troy Brosnan much.

The bottom line is an air shock (or any shock) is only as good as the loads placed on it and they don't perform well with wildly varying leverage rates. That's why you see guys like PUSH doing more custom damped shock tunes for SC and Intense VPP's than any other design.

The E29 is far from perfect. Sure I like 29" and I own an E29 but I'd still change things about it. The suspension however is hard to fault.

Two things re Gwinn/Brosnan. Gwinn had spent two (three?) seasons on a Trek with a 450mm rear centre. Troy doesn't know any better, he's been riding the bikes for years and he rides a small so the rear centre is better balanced with the front.

Also, IMO, Brosnan is an unbelievable talent.

The Gwinn issue didn't seem to impact Troy Brosnan much.

Much as I hate to get involved in a pissing match between two internerds, Brosnan is a teeny-tiny guy - so you're sort of supporting JCL's point there.

Is Norco the only company that scales the rear end of their bikes? Or the only one that made a fuss about it?

Liteville do too.

It's an idea that I could buy into anyway, was it Dirt wrote a few years ago that you should always buy a bike designed by someone the same height as yourself?

It's an idea that I could buy into anyway, was it Dirt wrote a few years ago that you should always buy a bike designed by someone the same height as yourself?

I think being average-ish height and weight puts you in a much better place when it comes to frame sizing and stiffness and fork/shock tunes! More effort required to get as good a bike if you're tall/short, heavy/light.