Forum menu
Santa Cruz Blur TR ...
 

[Closed] Santa Cruz Blur TR - opinions or alternatives

Posts: 14174
Full Member
 

I've been on my Spitfire exclusively for quite a few months now but I rode the Soul today and it's pretty odd getting back on a bike that I was so tuned into and it feeling too short when standing up and long when sitting down. They're both 590mm ETT but because the stack height is lower and seat tube slacker on the Soul the saddle is further horizontally from the bars whilst the reach is quite a lot longer on the Spitfire (which is running a shorter stem and wider bars too).

What I'd say is that although I can quickly adapt back to the Soul it's never going to have quite as stable and powerful body position for shredding as the Spitfire.


 
Posted : 07/07/2015 10:34 pm
Posts: 3382
Full Member
Topic starter
 

Bowglie - I'll email you.


 
Posted : 08/07/2015 9:06 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

You may be right.
All I want is an 18" seat tube, 24" top tube, 67 head angle, 72 seat angle, 26" wheels, 44mm head tube, threaded BB, 5" rear travel, dropper post compatible full sus frame that can handle xc rides in the lakes, jump trails, 20ft + gap jumps, 8 ft + drops and weigh under 30lbs fully built.

Is that a lot to ask?...

You are describing a medium Yeti SB66(c) then. 66.7HA, 71.7SA, 24.2"TT, 18"ST, threaded BB, 44mm head tube. Extra inch of rear travel for free. Seems strong too, here is a friend testing the strength of his:

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 08/07/2015 9:46 am
Posts: 3382
Full Member
Topic starter
 

Funnily enough I did have the SB66 on my radar for a while. Not sure why it dropped off, possibly I wasn't convinced by the suspension action (yeah I know Jared Graves blah blah).
Your pic doesn't work for me BTW.


 
Posted : 08/07/2015 10:13 am
Page 2 / 2