http://www.mtb-mag.com/en/comparative-test-15-enduro-bikes-back-to-back/
[img] 
[/img]
Now obviously everyone will point out it's all wrong as their favourite didn't win 😉 but it's a good starting point for drawing up your list.
Spot on results apart from the GT in first. Nomad > Capra!
Enduro spreadsheets ftw
[img] 
[/img]
Inevitably missing loads of brands. Winning bike got an underwhelming score on bike radar, doesn't have a dropper post interestingly, and the seat tube is such a weird shape it won't fit a long drop one either.
Strange test that one. I read it and thought that there were a bunch of important bikes missing. How can you do that test without including the Orbea Rallon for example, if only because it's geometry is at one edge of the envelope. There are other missing bikes but I'm doing the classic, where's my bike thing. The GT is an impressive machine, definitely not an all rounder I would have said. I've not ridden the Nomad yet so can't comment.
As much as i love my Nomad, i think there are a few other bikes that are 99% as good for a lot less money. I wanted one purely because it was my dream bike, when it comes time to replace it i doubt i would get another SC bike.
They got 15 bikes in a group test, they can't get every bike in the segment.
There's a few big names missing from the test. Some of bikes on the list seem a bit random and make me wonder if there was some financial incentive behind them being picked.
Why the nomad? For true Enduro shouldn't it be the Bronson?
Doesn't the sanction have a reverb?
Interesting about only 1 of 15 bikes having a shimano rear mech too. Bit confused as to why the front suss scores are different for every bike, given that there were multiples of the same fork?
[my bike should have won] if the sanction and the nomad were running the same fork the nomad would have won which, given that they were both custom builds, is a not insignificant point as the nomad was the only one with a fork from a manufacturer new to the game. [/my bike should have won]
How can you do that test without including the Orbea Rallon for example
Easy. It's a small brand with very limited reach. Brands like Norco, Liteville and Orange would be more deserved and relevant.
How Canyon isn't on there is a mystery. Makes a mockery of the test really as does the fact that some bikes were custom builds.
cokie - MemberThere's a few big names missing from the test. Some of bikes on the list seem a bit random and make me wonder if there was some financial incentive behind them being picked.
Why the nomad? For true Enduro shouldn't it be the Bronson?
Because the Nomad is marketed as an "Enduro Race" specific bike. That's probably why.
Some deep analysis there - stuff you just wouldn't know by looking at the bike for 5 seconds.
Plus: suspensions.
Jesus, this sort of guff just drives home how subjective it really is.
And I'm saying that from an objective POV, since I don't even have an "enduro" bike.
Not at all Wrecker! Orbea is a massive brand with a lot of R&D money to spend. They just haven't made an enduro bike before or pushed for the UK market. The Rallon pushes the geometry of an enduro bike way, way more than Orange, liteville or Norco. Way more. The Canyon point I agree with though, that bike is innovative and the geometry is impressive too, it should have been in there as well as the Rallon.
Maybe they asked and those companies couldn't be arsed providing test bikes. It is pretty stupid expecting them to include every bike in the test, 15 bikes is a decent number.
Maybe MSP, could well be the case. My point isn't that they need to include every bike, just that there are a few bikes which are at the edges of the pack of enduro bikes. To be a good test it should include those I think. The Canyon, Rallon, Sanction etc.
The Rallon pushes the geometry of an enduro bike way, way more than Orange, liteville or Norco.
It doesn't look particularly revolutionary to me, not incomparable with the Norco Range and a host of others. Adj geo have been done many, many times (Knolly springs to mind as a recent example).
I just don't buy it that an obscure Spanish bike (which you happen to own) should be in there before the bikes I mentioned, or Kona, Ibis etc etc.
It is an interesting test. I think the fact that the scores are grouped so closely is pretty revealing. Basically: avoid the Nukeproof and the Rose, and then pick the one you like the look of seems to be a perfectly sensible strategy.
🙂
It's about the most wide-ranging group test I've ever seen and it still gets criticised for not including more bikes. They can't win. can they?
(Obviously Nicolai would have won if included)
Ridiculous test. How can you benchmark off the shelf bikes against bizarre custom builds on others?
Just noticed the Mega gets the 2nd worst score for tech uphills, yet they list its climbing prowess as a positive 😆
We tested only Enduro bikes with between 160-170mm of rear travel.
No you didn't
Only one bike had less travel: the Lapierre Spicy Team (150mm).
Nothing to do with adjustable geometry, although it is great. The Rallon is very long and low. That is what I mean. FWIW when it came out it was properly revolutionary, although some other manufacturers have caught up with the long and low thing. Read any of the reviews of the Rallon and you will see why I think it should be included. I'm not saying it should have won, just that it should have been there. I didn't mention Ibis because their new enduro bike maybe wasn't available when they did that test. Similarly for the new Commencal. The Range and Process are fantastic bikes but not as long or low as the Rallon. Again I'm not saying that the Rallon has the best geometry, just that it would have been nice to see that geometry compared to the other bikes. Ie some indication of whether they thing that enduro bikes are going to keep getting longer, lower and slacker or if bikes like the Rallon have already gone far enough in that direction.
The Rallon pushes the geometry of an enduro bike way, way more than Orange, liteville or Norco. Way more.
Really? Comparing it to the Alpine, the Alpine has a longer ETT, similar reach, slacker HA & longer WB.
The only thing the Rallon has is shorter stays (questionable if that's a good thing or not) and a slightly lower BB.
It's not exactly ground breaking.
not read the article, but all I can glean from that spreadsheet is that with those arbitrary weightings, most bikes are all equally identical scores at ca 75+/-1 (and half the bikes are missing, as mentioned already)
personally, i'd increase the weighting for up. it's injooro. aka riding a bike. not linking between downhills.
It's not exactly ground breaking.
My thoughts exactly.
The Rallon is 1mm higher than the Range and when you consider that the L rallon is more akin to the XL Range, then you'll see that the Range is longer and has better standover too.
I get that Doug wants his bike included, most of us do/would (except me, I'm on 26" wheels!) but I'm not feeling the rationale.
Longer and lower than an alpine, unless I am reading the figures wrong Shorter chainstays too like you say. Obviously a very different bike to the alpine. It is exactly groundbreaking, that is my point. Admittedly more so when it was launched than now as other frames have caught up. It's been a while since I sat down with all the geometry numbers of other bikes but for long, low and slack it was right at one end of the spectrum. I think the new canyon is about the same now. I would have loved to see one of the long and low nicolai bikes in there too.
Not a criticism of the other bikes and once again I'm not saying the Rallon is the best because I have one or for any other reason.
It looks like 'these are the bikes we got hold of' test, and credit for being able to test so many. In an ideal world it might have been better to do two tiers based on price point/ off the peg vs custom.
And the custom list could then be full of drool worthly Nicolai/Liteville/Devinci/Knolly offerings... and the winningest SB6...
The only thing is that we'd then be complaining that they were all running different spec builds... And if the reviewers did build them like for like, we'd all just go 'Meh, but i ride (insert brand) and they are the best...' 😀
my bike is best and they missed it out, look at that long low slackness, its enduro for sure, coz kneepads
[img] 
[/img]
Come on, you must know the Rallon isn't an "obscure Spanish bike"?
It's one of the most-respected Enduro race bikes and was pretty out there a year or two ago, as far as I can see.
Lots more long bikes have popped up now of course.
BB drop 10mm on the range and 14 on the rallon Wrecker?
Longer and lower than an alpine, unless I am reading the figures wrong Shorter chainstays too like you say. Obviously a very different bike to the alpine. It is exactly groundbreaking,
Comparing mediums, the alpine is 40mm longer in the WB, at least a degree slacker in the HA (f you run the Orbea in it's slack/low setting), and the grand total of either 3 or 10mm lower in the BB. So slightly lower, but significantly shorter.
There are other bikes that arn't tested that have a longer TT, reach, WB, slacker HA & lower BB than the Rallon - it's certainly not groundbreaking at all.
Agreed Hobnob, the m rallon is between the m and l alpine. Around the same in tt. BBdrop 7mm more on the rallon. I hadn't looked at the Orange sizes properly. I agree there are other bikes now that are close to the Rallon, I think I've said that a few times. The Canyon for one.
That said - it looks quite a nice bike, regardless of the numbers!
Surely can't be a complete enduro bike test if it doesn't include the world champions bike? Yeti sb6
my bike is best and they missed it out, look at that long low slackness, its enduro for sure, coz kneepads [b]and fluro orange[/b]
BB drop 10mm on the range and 14 on the rallon Wrecker?
Orbea BB height 345mm
Range BB height 344mm
It's one of the most-respected Enduro race bikes
Strange thing to say. Who by? Do you own an Orbea?
I would like to have seen a Nicolai in there, but that's just a personal thing.
A good test, some notable omissions ,Rallon,orange alpine and few others , but then I guess its pretty hard to test every single bike of that style.
That test was published back in november, which might explain why some bikes are missing - I read it back then when I was trying to decide what bike to buy (went for a rallon in the end).
I fancied the Sanction as well, but on the GT website its listed in the 'gravity' section along with their downhill bike, so that pretty much implied to me that even GT dont see it as much of an all rounder.
All I can conclude from that, is that Enduro bikes are just getting more and more like downhill bikes. If Enduro course designers were sensible they'd change the courses to somewhat resist this trend IMO.
And while STW will get in a lather about some odd esoteric brand, the reality is for most of us the Specialized would be the best choice.
Orbea BB height 345mm
Range BB height 344mm
That height is for the orbea in the high setting, in the low/slack setting its 338mm or 14 mm drop
It looks as though they've used whatever tyres happened to be on whatever bike, which again means a lot of the comparisons are pointless.
Wrecker, is it not best to look at BB drop? BB height is influenced by tyres etc.
I would have liked to see the 29er enduro too, see what they make of that debate. Just to say once again, although I've said it a few time, in not saying the Rallon is the best because I own it. Just that it was an omission to the test. I guess the "respected enduro bike" is from one of the reviews in Pinkbike, Dirt etc. In fact just since I remembered pinkbike said "this is a pretty extreme bike - on the edges of how far you can go with trailbike geometry right now". Although that was about 10 months ago!
dragon - MemberAll I can conclude from that, is that Enduro bikes are just getting more and more like downhill bikes. [b]If Enduro course designers were sensible they'd change the courses to somewhat resist this trend IMO[/b].
I'm just curious, why do think that?
My bike is best too, as it is goodandlongandlowandslack.
Kimbers- i'll take your enduro (some would say AM) kneepads and raise you with openface helmet and goggles. #enduro
I would have liked to see the 29er enduro too, see what they make of that debate.
I think they did another comparative test between the 650 and 29er enduro, the conclusion was that the 650 came out top on the stopwatch but that they preferred the 29er.
Simply because as you push it nearer to downhill it starts to loose that 'just a ride with your mates thing' that makes it popular.
That height is for the orbea in the high setting, in the low/slack setting its 338mm or 14 mm drop
Really? Is this wrong then?
[img] 
[/img]
160-170 is endooro? that's a lot of travel, what are downhill bikes in terms of travel?
Typically 203mm - 230mm
Really? Is this wrong then?
yes, theres a typo in the BB height row, they have put 345/438, should be 345/338, the drop row is correct.
200mm+
Wonder how a full on DH rig would fare in that test, as they have put so much weighting on the dh ability of the bikes
Really? Is this wrong then?
Yes, looks like a typo in that table for bb height
edit: beaten to it ha ha 🙂
Although far from ideal, I'd much rather read this sort of test than the drivel spouted by most mtb journalists who write reviews on bikes.
I'd take some large spoons of salt. They slate the Marz fork, which everyone else considers at least as good as the Pike.
dragon - Member
Simply because as you push it nearer to downhill it starts to loose that 'just a ride with your mates thing' that makes it popular.
I can't agree with that. How does increasing technicality and steepness of tracks take away that feeling? I'm actually finding that race tracks are mellower than the riding I do with my mates every weekend, so race tracks have still got a way to go. With my bikes over the past couple of years I've also found that pedaling efficiency is staying the same or getting better while downhill ability has carried on increasing. So for racing,
the current trend for bikes is perfect. Tracks are slowly getting more technical and now are heading the same way. Why restrict development of bikes by taming trails down? The trails should dictate the bikes being developed, rather than making trails for certain bikes.
Basically, everything is getting progressing nicely.
jim25 - MemberSurely can't be a complete enduro bike test if it doesn't include the world champions bike? Yeti sb6
Well... He did half the season on the SB66 didn't he? And 2 rounds on the SB6C.
Similiar though, covering the Trek Slash and not the EWS-winning Remedy 29. I think Leov switched from Sash to Remedy but Tracey Moseley was on the 29er all year and the carbon 29er for the end of the season.
Re the Orbea... I wouldn't want to bet much money on it but in terms of obscurity I'm reasonably sure they sell a bunch more Rallons than Alpines. Orange are a titchy niche manufacturer really, IIRC they make about 40 full suss frames a week total and most of those are Fives.
I'd take some large spoons of salt. They slate the Marz fork, which everyone else considers at least as good as the Pike.
They also aren't frothing at the mouth about the capra, which seems to be claimed as some sort of wonder bike by some people.
The test is far from perfect, but I like the idea. Ride a load of bikes back to back over a number of days and then compared them. You never know, it might actually catch on.
It'd be good if someone conducted a group test on these journalists. Get the top bike testers from the top 5 magazines/websites and pit them against each other in "Enduro" style event. Give them bikes with forks and shocks covered and randomly change them out and see which they preferred and why, and which they were faster on.
See who's the best rider, and who can tell what they are riding.
Depends if the bike manufacturer has a market in Germany (where the mag is from?)
I was looking at the GT. But that suspension linkage and tyre clearance is going to create a few headaches in this country i.e. mud!
Yeah other countries don't have mud.
if i had to ride 15 bikes and rate them id be absolutely useless, so many variables with set up:, tyres, shocks, pressure-rebound-compression, bars, grips, brakes, I struggle getting my 1 enduro bike set up how i like it!
[i]That test was published back in november, which might explain why some bikes are missing [/i]
I've just been talking to Marco, the editor of MTB Mag, maybe people should take into consideration the difficulty in getting bikes in to test, particularly in November when some models won't be available...
Well my bike's the best and it's not on there so it's rubbish!
You don't even need to chat to the Editor, he wrote it in the article...
[i]Although there are 15 bikes, [b]some brands are not present in the test because their bikes were not available[/b], however the response from the industry in general was amazing and we would like to thank all our partners for their help.[/i]
With my bikes over the past couple of years I've also found that pedaling efficiency is staying the same or getting better while downhill ability has carried on increasing. So for racing,
the current trend for bikes is perfect. Tracks are slowly getting more technical and now are heading the same way. Why restrict development of bikes by taming trails down? The trails should dictate the bikes being developed,
This.
The whole 'going for a ride with your mates' thing was simply a hook to get people interested in and attending Enduros...as nobody in this country seemed to know what it was....pitching it as a social event, transition stages that meant you could cycle alongside your riding buddies and chat made it sound less intimidating than 'its several timed downhill stages linked together, fastest cumulative time wins'...
...it really grates on me as the only time you're with your mates is when on transition stages anyway, the actual racing is done one at a time!
A good read that, and whilst I agree with most of the ads/disads for my bike (Rune), a heavy bike as it is, why stick SuperGravity Magic Mary on front and rear?!! That would be a biatch to climb! I've tried trailstar v SG MM on my bike, and the SG are noticeably slower/heavier.
Thought they could do with a VFM and a pedally, less DH singletrack category too (more like we have in UK enduros). This is were the Rune suffers most I find. Unsure about the finishing quality, mine seems fine, those photos dont look great 😐
Just read it again. Spot on article. I wouldn't even know where to buy a GT or an Orbea.
Poor old Nuke Proof
[s]Interesting that they scored the Pike the same as the 36 , bog price difference and I'd expect the fox to have been better[/s]
Oops just seen they had a formula on the nomad !
I think the real trick they missed are the 29ers; remedy, enduro, codeine 😉 etc
It's hard to do this kind of test, as a lot of people have said with so many variables however I think it gives people the general idea, I also think they should have maybe factored price into the equation ? I don't think that changing tyres should be done either(for a test/review) because They are the tyres the manufactures have chose to put on and sell it to you and therefore if they've put the wrong tyres on it should show in the results.
Also I have the cube stereo sla that they tested, a horrendously capable bike maybe slightly heavier here and there but still comes around 30lb however I think it's the cheapest in the test ?? Which does make me wonder why they didn't use the more expensive team 160 one, at £4500 it would have been more in the ball park with the likes of the nomad with a carbon frame, fox 36's better drive train etc etc.
I think they also should have chucked a 29er in there to see how they compare ?
Of course Enduro is moving toward dh stages with linking transition stages! Nobody wants an xc race! 😉
I'm surprised the Orbea Rallon isn't on there. I don't own one but looking at other reviews (Dirt, Dirt 100, Pinkbike) it seems to be rated highly, certainly in the same ball park as the Capra
Executive Summary: All modern bikes are pretty good. Buy the one you like the look/colour of.
😉