Forum menu
from mtbr: http://forums.mtbr.com/specialized/will-2019-stumpjumper-get-overhaul-1068244-2.html
The geometry looks pretty sorted though a bit conservative.
The prices in the bottom left (in euros or swiss franc) look similar to the current prices.
Nice. Been due an update. I have a 2016 stumpjumper and it's a lot of fun to ride. Would be seriously tempted to update it looking at that.
Those reach figures can't be right, surely?
The geometry looks pretty sorted though a bit conservative.
Is this the new vertically compliant/laterally stiff?
Those reach figures can’t be right, surely?
Look pretty normal, 445mm seems the new default for most mainstream large, then +/-25mm on each size from that.
Those CHF prices are quite eyewatering....
445mm seems the new default for most mainstream large
Nah, more like for a medium in the mainstream brands these days.
425mm medium is shorter than the medium I was riding four years ago, before I started geeking out about reach figures!
Those reach figures can’t be right, surely?
The 2018 Enduro is 462mm in L so they aren't going to make the trail bike in their range to too close to that.
Nah, more like for a medium in the mainstream brands these days.
425mm medium is shorter than the medium I was riding four years ago, before I started geeking out about reach figures!
Maybe true anecdotally, but it's not overall. It's identical to a Santa Cruz 5010 and Calibre Bossnut, a few mm off a Giant Trance (the XL trance isn't as long as the stumpy though), CBA to keep checking any other sites.
Not everything is full on Bird/Geometron/Pole/Mondraker.
Even a medium Aeris (which is pretty bloody long) is 'only' 13mm longer than a L in that table.
CBA to keep checking any other sites.
Yep considering it's probably going to be one of the easiest bikes to sling a leg over, easy just to wait and see 🙂
Those reach figures can’t be right, surely?
It's a trail bike. Not everything has to have 900mm of reach.
I would of liked a 450 for a large, however the 445 reach matches the Yeti SB5.5 which is a solid bike. There will be an evo model so it is likely the reach will be pretty aggressive on that.
Small increase in reach and small decrease in head angle.
Nothing massive, but that's a good thing - some people like to turn tight corners 😀
Well it would feel like riding a kids' bike to me, but it's not like Specialized don't know what's going on - so maybe they've sussed that some people still want short bikes.
Without trying to upset anyone, would it be fair to say the Stumpy's developed a bit of a fuddy-duddy image in recent years anyway? Seems to be what the Americans might call a "dentist bike".
Without trying to upset anyone, would it be fair to say the Stumpy’s developed a bit of a fuddy-duddy image in recent years anyway? Seems to be what the Americans might call a “dentist bike”.
Dunno, it's the bike of choice for some of the EWS rounds, it's all about what you do with it. We can all prance around a spreadsheet and muse over 5mm of reach or go ride one. As I said above it will be one of the easiest bikes to demo when it's out, they could have made it work well.
Without trying to upset anyone, would it be fair to say the Stumpy’s developed a bit of a fuddy-duddy image in recent years anyway? Seems to be what the Americans might call a “dentist bike”.
Duno, I've never thought of it like that.
It's a 135mm trail bike with a 66.5deg head angle, it's not quite an Elsworth.
I suspect that (as you confess) people who geek out about reach numbers aren't going to be swayed anywhere other than towards Bird's. geometrons etc. It's the currently fashionable easily quantifiable bike stat du jour.
In the 90's and early 2000's it was weight, you couldn't possibly ride anything over 30lb, and if it was over 25lb it was for poor beginners only.
Around 2005-2010 it was travel, less than 100mm was decried as unrideable, 5" became a trail bike and 6" was what you really wanted for an all round bike (unless you actually tried to pedal a ~2005 150mm travel bike up a hill).
Then it was wheel size, which morphed into head angles and fork offsets.
Now it's reach.
What do all those have in common? They were all spearheaded by some left of center brands, they all went a bit bonkers (drillium cranks, 170mm trail bikes, 29+), they were taken up by a lesser extent by the mainstream and then all got scaled back to something a bit more 'normal' when the next big thing came allong.
I would of liked a 450 for a large, however the 445 reach matches the Yeti SB5.5 which is a solid bike. There will be an evo model so it is likely the reach will be pretty aggressive on that.
Be honest, the reason most bikes go up in 15-25mm increments is that's about as small an increment as actually has any effect.
I don't put my winter gloves on and suddenly become more stretched out because they add 5mm of padding.
I've just picked up a 2017 medium stumpy (413mm reach) - I was aware that they don't have that 'cool' image like SC Nicolai etc and are often seen as being too short by modern standards which I hate to admit was putting me off a bit, but it's hard to deny that they are sorted bikes that just seem to work (for me anyway)
I don’t put my winter gloves on and suddenly become more stretched out because they add 5mm of padding
Well duh, that's Bcoz there's 5mm of paddin in the fingas stretchin you out and 5mm in the palms slamin you bk like, obvz*
*sorry but that somehow felt like the correct way to type that.
Those reach figures can’t be right, surely?
Considering how tall the front is with a 560mm fork, and looking at the front-centre dims, seems sensible.
Reach is related to stack after all, more so on a slacker head tube than a road bike. 450mm reach on a higher stack / higher head tube or fork gives you a fair bit longer F-C than it does on a short stack, head tube or fork.
I'd look at reach with +/-10 or 15mm in mind based on this, rather than reach being an absolute number, as longer reach is really about longer F-C relationships.
<span style="display: inline !important; float: none; background-color: transparent; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans'; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 22.4px; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">Those reach figures can’t be right, surely?</span>
Seems about right for an 'average' trail bike. It's rare for a true, big brand to push the boundaries of geometry, as they are catering for the masses, not the very, very small number of people who want to ride limo's.
They probably sell more SJ's in a month than the quirky collective do over the course of the products entire lifecycle.
Again. Good to have choice. I've ridden a large SJ (2017) and yes it's short for me at 6'1" but its still a well balanced trail bike that's fun to ride 🙂
I don't totally follow you TBH jameso, but I'm comparing the numbers to other slack 29ers with the same forks - and since reach has started to be used by most bike manufacturers I've found it a really accurate way of predicting how a bike will handle.
For the record, I'm not a full-Geometron long, low & slack evangelist (yet), 460mm reach is good for me.
I don’t totally follow you TBH jameso, but I’m comparing the numbers to other slack 29ers with the same forks – and since reach has started to be used by most bike manufacturers I’ve found it a really accurate way of predicting how a bike will handle.
A long headtube (taller stack height) angled back 66deg will make the reach look smaller than if the headtube was as short as possible.
To measure 'reach' in isolation would need to change it to measure reach to the lower headset cup or something. For example that stumpjumper with a hypothetical 0mm headtube would be 80mm longer reach. So if one brand is measuring reach to a stem 95mm above the fork crown and another measures it at 160mm (the difference between a typical small and XL) then the difference is 25mm (65 x cos66.5 = 25) or to put it another way, for every 10mm of headset stack/spacers you lose 4mm of reach.
*sorry but that somehow felt like the correct way to type that.
Top bantz bruv.
To measure ‘reach’ in isolation would need to change it to measure reach to the lower headset cup or something.
Ah that explains why the spreadsheet of the last couple of bikes rode so badly, I've updated the formula and it really makes them come alive 😉
Ah that explains why the spreadsheet of the last couple of bikes rode so badly, I’ve updated the formula and it really makes them come alive
Sumproduct() really makes the cells come alive.
but I’m comparing the numbers to other slack 29ers with the same forks
In that case fair enough, comparisons work assuming stack / HT length and BB drop is about the same. Perhaps me using your comment to base a more general point on was misleading.
To measure ‘reach’ in isolation would need to change it to measure reach to the lower headset cup or something.
Which is why MBR used to measure the down tube length many years before reach as we know it now became the way to measure MTBs.
Anyway... I'm a bit OT now.
A long headtube (taller stack height) angled back 66deg will make the reach look smaller than if the headtube was as short as possible.
The bike we're discussing looks fairly standard in the HT lengths, even a bit short on the medium.
.
I had a go on a bike with 500mm reach today (my current bike has a reach of 410). The 500 had a stem that was shorter though, so "true reach" (can I trademark that?) was probably around 60-70mm different The two are so different overall (26v29, slackness etc) that comparisons are a bit daft
however, ... 😉
The long one felt much better, especially climbing (even less wandery, which is supposedly a big potential flaw, isn't it?). I'd felt for a few years that my current frame was too short and now I'm going to HAVE to replace with a new trendy one.
Missed a couple of apexes early on (yes, I know that's a ****y phrase, even without "apices"/"lexi") but cornering was fine too, considering I've done no outdoors riding for months and I'm old and not ded rad. Slightly wondering about having a go on an even longer bike but I think that's probably bollocks
Full details now online. I wonder whether the short travel version means the camber has been scrapped. Specs aren't great for the price, as usual. No longer using their own droppers in favour of xfusion. Frame looks nice though. Intense primer looks much better value.
Camber has been binned, says so in the article.
FWIW, I **** hate all the press embargo stuff that every single product launch now has!
Ahh I'd only seen it on the spesh website. Didn't realise it was there on the front page 😐
FWIW, I **** hate all the press embargo stuff that every single product launch now has!
Very much this!
Evo looks awesome!
Evo looks awesome!
Yes, I'll take an evo in that mint green please.
“Yes, I’ll take an evo in that mint green please.”
Between that and the Capra you’ll be perfectly equipped for all the gnar the South Downs can offer!
The St 29er looks like it could potentially bust my bank
FWIW, I **** hate all the press embargo stuff that every single product launch now has!
LOL, the only problem is when people start leaking otherwise you wouldn't know about it. It just makes sense though as by the time you hit go, everyone has the info to answer your questions, people know what they are getting, what the price is and when the first lot will be delivered.
And finally some good news from spec
<h3>Say Goodbye To ‘Proprietary Bullshit’</h3>
According to Specialized’s marketing team, the new Stumpjumper boldly says “goodbye to proprietary bullshit”. So if you’re expecting fancy new hub and bottom bracket standards, or some whizz-bang custom fork offset, you’ll be one of the two people on planet Earth who will be disappointed.
Threaded BB according to Bikeradar
https://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/2019-specialized-stumpjumper/
Details here - well I guess that is why they need pop ups to tell us anything 😉
that brace thing. Wil it not rub through if your riding it in mud with baggys? Ive taken the paint off every top tube ive got through winter riding.
Anything on uk prices ? Saw US dollars on pink bike which made me assume this thread will end up with someone explaining inflation to someone who paid £1200 for their stumpy in 1999
“Yes, I’ll take an evo in that mint green please.”
Between that and the Capra you’ll be perfectly equipped for all the gnar the South Downs can offer!
Now they have taken the tag off of my ankle I am allowed to ride elsewhere 😀
Ive taken the paint off every top tube ive got through winter riding.
How many tubes have you worn through?
Anything on uk prices ? Saw US dollars on pink bike which made me assume this thread will end up with someone explaining inflation to someone who paid £1200 for their stumpy in 1999
Prices are on the Specialized UK site. Can't help with inflation explanations though
never gone through a top tube as they hav been alloy. Id by concerned about the carbon?
RIP Wu Post...did anyone like that post?
Hopefully the 160mm dropper will be available after market in 34.9, I really liked the action and feel of the SRL over the droppers I've had since chasing more drop.