As changes are incremental each year, do we have a working definition of what “nu skool” actually is in numbers? Say for a large whats the minimum Reach or HA to qualify?

Sorry what? 2016 is ‘older’?

The big change in bikes happens in earlier 2010s I think, then it levels out, when 29 inch wheel geo got sorted out. After that it’s smaller changes.

My ‘modern’ bike is 2013 and it’s great.

There’s been big changes to enduro bike / trail bike geometry over the last few years. I really like my 2016 Transition Smuggler, but the new ones are much different. Designed around a shorter stem again, and slacker angles.

I spent the early part of 2017 in analysis paralysis, shopping for my new FS which ended up being a banshee prime V2. At the time it was longer than most, about a slack as everything else on the market and had a slightly steeper seat angle. Now it’s on the slightly slack and steep side and is a little bit short. So I reckon 2017 is when things really started to see significant changes in the mass market.

Sorry what? 2016 is ‘older’?

The big change in bikes happens in earlier 2010s I think, then it levels out, when 29 inch wheel geo got sorted out. After that it’s smaller changes.

My ‘modern’ bike is 2013 and it’s great.

There’s been big changes to enduro bike / trail bike geometry over the last few years. I really like my 2016 Transition Smuggler, but the new ones are much different. Designed around a shorter stem again, and slacker angles.

Agreed. Early 2010s and as far I can can remember the consumer focus was on stand-over height and travel.

2013 was the last year of 26″ being the mainstream I think, my last 26″er was a Cove G-Spot, it was pretty LLS for it’s time, Cove were always doing that sort of thing, but it’s an Dinosaur compared to my Bird.

Scienceofficer

I reckon 2017 is when things really started to see significant changes in the mass market.

Late 2015 was when all those ideas first started to come to market – long, low, slack, steep SA, short offset, mullet, etc. Current bikes like the Enduro and SB165 are very close to the numbers of the original Mojo G16. Took a while.

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/nicolai-mojo-geometron-first-ride-2015.html

Well I can say that from 2012 I have owned five different 29ers, three HT and two FS, the most recent purchase being last year. I would say the changes in geometry have been pretty radical throughout , I wouldn’t say they levelled out or that they were small changes.

Late 2015 was when all those ideas first started to come to market

Agreed, but they’re not mass market, they’re low volume, premium marque. What were specialised, trek and giant doing at the same time?

@Scienceoficer – yeah, just meant those idea started being talked bout round then, was 5mm or a degree a year from the main manufacturers for a good while after. Trek and Giant still not come all that far

Bought a 905 new in 2019. It’s not as much fun as the 2003 Gary Fisher Tassajara that I dug out of the shed on Sunday. The Tass is way lighter so more spritely in the twisties and when climbing. Mild downhill bits are, er, interesting but doable. Anything rough is best avoided. It’s oddly fast on the road. The Whyte is dull but capable, where the Tass is fun but often out of its depth. I’ll never sell it, yet am already thinking of selling the 905 frame and swoping it for something else.

I started designing a long low slack hardtail frame in late 2015, inspired by the Geometron, BTR Ranger and my 2013 Spitfire. It didn’t get built because in the December Bird launched the new Zero AM and I worked out that with an angleset and a slightly shorter fork the geometry would be near identical in design.

Since then the mainstream has been gradually catching up. I still have the Zero, the fork is up to 150mm and the bars higher and wider but otherwise it’s the same. I’m just taking a pause from some safe exercise/playing in the woods on it.

If you are riding an XL, you might be tall.
For tall riders, the new steep seat angle and long reach numbers are a godsend.

Where a short rider can get their saddle in a decent position over the bottom bracket, a tall rider has to raise the post so far, it end up way back d the BB.

Same thing for a reach. When I had my first couple Stumpy’s I had a 130mm stem on there! Sucked for handling, but felt comfy.
So, in order to use 40mm stem, I’d need a frame with 90mm longer reach!

Courses for horses. Or horses for courses, possibly both. In equine terms of course 😉

Not to worry OP, that new human being arrival will curtail your ponderings on such matters as bicycle geometry 😁

I’m still riding an ’09 Turner Flux (albeit 1×11 with a dropper post). I love the bike but I think I’m almost scared to try a new bike in case I stop liking the Flux!!!
When it breaks though…

2005 Maverick ML 7.5. Still puts a big smile on my face and I still think it is an excellent all round bike.
Last year I did 120 mile road ride, 100 mile Peak off road mile, still get cross country KOMs around Coventry and a few top 30,s in a Peak at 50 years old.

I had a go on my brothers 2018 Giant and it was unbelievable down hill but was quite heavy and didn’t feel as good on the climbs.

As long as I can get tyres I will keep running my Maverick besides I couldn’t justify spending thousands on another bike.

“2008 Cotic Soda here with 130mm Revelations. I can wrap my head around how 29 (or 650b) would probably make it roll better over roots and rocks, but I just don’t have a need for something “better” as it does everything I need.”

I rode my 2010 Cotic Soul with 140mm forks for everything and it was great until I got my Banshee Spitfire – it only reached its limit doing uplift days and for that I feel the Fox 32 was more to blame than the frame. But after riding the Spitfire lots I found it almost impossible to switch back to the Soul for anything vaguely gnarly, it just felt so wrong.

Keep enjoying the Soda, don’t ride anything with modern geometry or you’ll ruin it! (But if you’re only doing XC and less than tech singletrack then it’s pretty much perfect anyway).

Yea, natural xc bimbler happy on a 2006 orange 5 (and a 2017 e-spark), sure the spark is miles more stable when chasing downhill but in the tight stuff through the branches, brambles and nettles the orange is just fine.

My 2015 Canyon Strive actually has fairly progressive geometry – it was very long ‘for its day’ and stacks up fairly well now.

As others have said, the one thing that has happened since is that seat tubes have gotten steeper so it’s easier to ride big, slack bikes up hills these days*. So I’d like a newer bike but it seems a bit silly to buy a whole bike just to get a steeper seat tube angle…

*Notwithstanding the Shapeshifter which was fantastic, but no longer works.

My Patriot would be better if I’d gone for a large, as like P-Jay I am between sizes and back in those days we downsized to make it more ‘flickable’ whereas now longer is more in vogue.

Considering adding a Superstar reach increasing headset and an exzentricker EBB to gain another er… 11mm of reach. For £150. Someone talk me out of it.

Idiotic question coming up….

If long and “sizing up” is so great for “gnar” how come Downhillers are on shorter bikes??

“If long and “sizing up” is so great for “gnar” how come Downhillers are on shorter bikes??”

Are they? Some aren’t on such long reach (although horizontal reach gets longer when you point down a steep hill) but with long offset long A2C dual crown forks and slack head angles extending the front centre, plus long chainstays, the wheelbases are long.

Long reach is good for fast and rough. But when it’s really steep then too long a reach can stop you from staying balanced over the bike.

I couldn’t flog my 2010 geometry 26” quick enough after buying a longer slacker 2016 hardtail

Are they? Some aren’t on such long reach (although horizontal reach gets longer when you point down a steep hill) but with long offset long A2C dual crown forks and slack head angles extending the front centre, plus long chainstays, the wheelbases are long.

Thanks. So its wheelbase rather than reach that improves DH capability? I was looking at reach rather than overall wheelbase. For example the Hightower has longer reach that the V10 in the same size. The Jeffsy has more than the Tues.

I think apart reach bikes were pretty sorted just before they went to 2012. So if you don’t ride anyone else’s bike you’ll carry on loving yours.

I swapped my 2012 26″ medium Rocket frame for small V1 Airdrop Edit because I wanted a longer dropper post other wise I’d still be riding the Rocket.

“For example the Hightower has longer reach that the V10 in the same size. The Jeffsy has more than the Tues.”

The DH bikes usually have more stack height which makes the bike feel bigger and increases the reach at a given bar height. But it looks like the 29” versions are similar or longer reach anyway – and the way WC DH has gone, most racers have gone to at least a big front wheel if not both. Will the 27.5 DH bikes stay smaller for bike park and freeride use?

Lots of good insights. Good job I can’t afford a new bike or I think I might have been persuaded to demo some! Oh well, very happy on the stumpy!

Similar story…….

I have a PACE RC303 totally mint that I bought / built in a 2007 it’s 26”, I stoped riding on 2009 due to injury and returned 2018 so recently thrown some money at it as a tinkering project but i love it more now and never sell it.
Far better than I’ll ever be and due to serious spine and now knee issues suits me fine.
The industry has changed a lot and I understand the geometry aspect is crucial in “some” people’s riding but from mine it’s about comfort and putting a smile on your face which sometimes means sticking with what you know.
I also run 640 bars for total retro ride !
Tried posting pics but struggle to upload photos.

Mondraker were producing the Foxy R with forward geometry in 2012, with bikes getting to the line up for MY 2013.

It’s absolutely pointless comparing reach on a DH bike to another from the same brand (V10/Hightower)

I sold my 2012 Commencal META AM last year as I wanted something more up to date, but that was more about wheel size, as my other bike was a 29er, and I just preferred those to the 26″ wheels. The META AM was heavy as well!

Still havent replaced it though as my mk 2 Cotic Solaris is such a great bike and i’m not riding as gnar as I used to these days…..

Next bike will be a mid travel FS modern geo 29er, will be keeping the Solaris though.

I’d love my old Kona Explosif or P7 with 80-100mm travel set up as single speed about now.

Yep, still riding a 2014 Orange Five29 as my ‘main’ bike. Other that the usual 1x/dropper and wide bars its not change much since then. One of the first none XC 29ers IFAIK looks short and stumpy against new stuff but I still love it.

It’s absolutely pointless comparing reach on a DH bike to another from the same brand (V10/Hightower)

But why though? I’m not arguing i’m honestly trying to understand. I regularly read on here that longer reach bikes are better downhill. Yet often a given brands downhill bike has a shorter reach that their trail bike. Is this because they need to be a lot more manoeuvrable than just straight line speed? And therefore the overly simplistic “more reach is better downhill” is incorrect and there are a lot more factors to play in?

I clicked on this thread and was surprised to discover that “old” is apparently 20 years newer than the bike that I’m perfectly happy riding.

there are a lot more factors to play in?

What have thunk(sic) it?

Yet often a given brands downhill bike has a shorter reach that their trail bike.

I was surprised by this but you’re right! My straw poll included SC V10 vs Megatower, Trek Session vs Slash and Spesh Demo vs Enduro.

It’s not completely explained by a slacker head angle on a DH bike, though this contributes. The BB-front axle measurement (called front centre, sometimes) is also a bit shorter in each instance on the DH bike than the enduro bike. However, all the DH bikes have longer wheelbases, which presumably must be due to longer chain stays. So longer is probably still faster, but DH bikes have more gubbins at the back behind the BB so their front ends are slightly shorter to compensate?

Alternatively:
DH bikes aren’t as popular and so they aren’t heavily redesigned each year?
There’s no desire to hype the “longer / slacker each year” mantra for the DH market?
DH bikes are typically ridden by people who are more athletic / stronger / better riders (on average).

I have looked at the geometry chart for my bike but I’ve no idea if it is modern or not so I think I’m better off not looking again to work it out. It really could do with a dropper post and I often dream of forks that weigh less than the old coil pikes it has, but it’ll have to do.