4li2k73z Share your Vital activity on Facebook (More info)
close
Added a comment about photo Prototype Carbon Rim 3/24/2015 4:17 PM
C138_roto_n3x3867

Yeah, for sure the lense. Looks cray though!

0 0 0

This photo has 20 comments.

Added reply in a thread 2015 Racing Rumours - MTB Musical Chairs 3/17/2015 10:38 PM

More on the new Specialized knee pad. Seems the southern hemi got them already?

Added a comment about feature First Look: 2016 FOX Factory 34 Float 27.5+ 3/12/2015 10:18 PM
C50_straightshot_icon_web_3.1_1388865220

Interesting that it was Fox and Shimano that forced the issue with the 15mmx100 standard, and as soon as the rest (well, pretty much) go full in to it, they flip back to 110. Only, rather than admit to it its wider benefits, they simply add a wide tire to cover it off as new. Will be interesting to see where this goes.

0 0 0

This feature has 13 comments.

Liked a comment on the item First Look: 2016 FOX Factory 34 Float 27.5+ 3/12/2015 10:14 PM

hold up a second whats the spacing on the 20mm axel..... hhhmmm it appears to be 110mm. Bravo FUX youve done it again *clap* *clap*

Liked a comment on the item First Look: 2016 FOX Factory 34 Float 27.5+ 3/12/2015 10:14 PM

Rockshox beat them to the fatbike fork so we get this in response? Has the industry become so nervous about missing the next 'big' thing that they're just chasing niche trends now? Interesting that it's pitched as a fork for semi-fat bikes rather than 'a fork with the same hub spacing as a...more

Added a comment about product review Tested: Trek Fuel EX 9.9 3/11/2015 7:08 AM
C50_straightshot_icon_web_3.1_1388865220

Thanks for the feedback guys. We actually had the option to try pretty well anything from Trek and chose the Fuel. With the recent surge of incredibly capable and fun short travel trail bikes we wanted to get our own experience, and Trek's geo hit the spot. Regarding the rating, were it not for the fork in a few situations, and value of the Fuel, it would have received more stars. It is an excellent bike and an absolute blast to ride. Tinkering is inevitable (at least for some) and to give a thorough review we wanted to be sure we tried all the options. Trek supply the volume reducers now and are open to riders having the ability to work the tune to their liking. We think this is great for everyone and in order to give a conclusive review we need to test all of the options.

Any and all bikes are tested on a range of trails to give you the whole picture. We feel it's important to give a well rounded outline of a bikes capabilities and despite a few situations where the fork struggled, the bike put the smack down on trails. The situations where it wasn't quite 'there', a number of riders would have had a dh bike in, but many in this area still ride these on trail bikes. The lines have been blurred over the last few years with the new breed of very capable, climbable bikes and it's important to outline all situations for you all. Were it not for the Fuel's confidence we would not have pushed it as hard as we did, which speaks bounds to this ultra fun, short travel bike.

Make no mistake, the bike is incredible and aside from a couple nuances, it would have deserved an even higher rating.

This product_review has 7 comments.

Added a new video Follow the Trek Fuel EX 9.9 Test Bike 3/8/2015 11:00 PM
C138x104

This video has no comments yet

Added a new video Follow the Trek Fuel EX 9.9 Test Bike 3/8/2015 9:01 PM
C138x104

This video has no comments yet

Added a blog post Tested: 2015 Santa Cruz Nomad 3/8/2015 8:52 PM

Review & Photos by AJ Barlas

Early in 2014 Santa Cruz released the long awaited update of their staple all mountain slayer, the Nomad. Previously, the Nomad had gone through a range of what was for the most part minor amends. The earlier models had a characteristic 'hunch' near the headtube,...more

This blog post has no comments yet

Liked a comment on the item Tested: Five Ten Kestrel Clipless Shoe 3/4/2015 10:59 PM

I don't have a pair of Impact VXi shoes in the garage at the moment, but they have just as much as the Maltese Falcon LT. You can also see from my cleat position in the photo that I have tons of room to move further back.

Even folks that want to run the pedal nearly in the...more

Added a product review for 2015 Trek Fuel EX 9.9 27.5 Bike 3/4/2015 9:03 PM
C138_trek_fuel_ex_9.9_27.5

Tested: Trek Fuel EX 9.9

Rating:

The Good:

The Bad:

Overall:

Review by AJ Barlas // Product Photos AJ Barlas, Riding Photos Jon Anthony

Almost a full year ago now, Trek revealed to the world a special sauce they'd been working on with top motorsports racing outfit, Penske. That technology was the RE:aktiv damper, a unit that took onboard Penske's advanced regressive suspension tech used in their F1 race car suspension, and a range of similar applications.

After initially enjoying a couple of days aboard the RE:aktiv equipped Trek Fuel in South Carolina, we were eager to spend more quality time on this bike and suspension technology, on trails we commonly ride in the Pacific Northwest and Sea to Sky region. After a number of months now and a range of incredibly varying conditions, we're happy to report on our experiences with this very interesting, shorter travel trail bike.

Trek Fuel EX 9.9 Highlights

  • OCLV Mountain Carbon frame and stays
  • 27.5-inch wheels
  • RE:aktiv DRCV Fox rear shock
  • 120mm (4.7 inches) of rear wheel travel // 120mm (4.7 inches) front travel
  • E2 tapered headtube
  • 68 degree head angle
  • 73 degree seat tube angle
  • 333-mm (13.1-inch) bottom bracket height
  • 433-mm (17.1-inch) chainstays
  • BB95 bottom bracket
  • 142-mm rear spacing with 12-mm through axle
  • Measured complete weight (size 21.5-inch, no pedals): 25-pounds (11.34-kg)
  • MSRP: $8,799.99 USD

Initial Impressions

Black beauty! Who would have thought that an almost fully blacked out bike with barely legible branding could look so, so sharp? The black chrome XTR 1x11 on the 9.9 was the icing on the cake!The rest of the OE spec on this build is absolutely dialled as well, both in regards to appearance and functionality, but it all comes at a price. If looking to ditch the front mech but carbon is not a must, there is an aluminum version available for $4,299.99 USD.

This trail bike is light - the lightest XL bike we have ridden that is still capable of ripping aggressive single track, while also entering an XC race. Our stock build came in at 25-lbs on the nose (11.34-kg) and with the bar/stem switched for a shorter/wider set-up and the tires swapped for some more aggressive rubber, it weighed in at 26.7-lbs (12.2-kg). The light weight was instantly noticeable on the trails, making it very easy to move the bike around, or accelerate quickly and efficiently.

We set the bike up with 25% sag in the rear and 20% up front; about 5 clicks of rebound damping in the rear (from full open) and 4–5 clicks in the front. After a parking lot test we were fairly happy with these initial settings and set out on the trails to gather up some real world experiences.

On The Trail

Since early December, we've been riding the Trek Fuel EX 9.9 on everything in the Sea to Sky. From aggressive downhill trails on Cypress, parts of the classic North Shore network of Vancouver, to the flowing tech of Pemberton, the Trek has seen a wide array of terrain. Conditions for this time of year have also been a challenge for equipment, with monsoons and the wettest trail conditions experienced in years, frozen solid velcro dirt and ice, to dry, dusty loose dirt and heroic brown pow; the Trek has literally seen it all.

Without a doubt, the RE:aktiv damper is the key piece, or heart, of the updated Trek Fuel series. The technology was first taken to the trails mostly as an external addition to Trek's already established DRCV, until such a time that Trek and Penske were happy with the ride characteristics. Once they reached this point the shock was passed along to the clever tech team at Fox, in order to make the technology ready to build for the masses.


This partnership resulted in a damper that has the ability to create a solid platform for both rider and smaller external inputs, yet when a larger velocity impact occurs, the valves open and the suspension takes action. This is different to the more common tactic of shutting off the valves altogether, or at least heavily restricting their ability to allow oil through, and it grants riders a little of the best of both worlds. A strong platform to mash on, but retaining the ability to smoothen out the trail and theoretically, retain traction when climbing more technical terrain.

Wide open, the rear shock was very neutral when adopting an efficient pedal technique and climbing in the saddle. However, standing was another story altogether, with the bike liking to bob a bit more than we're used to. Despite the improved platform that the RE:acktiv damper provides, the Fuel still likes to have the dials flipped in order to show riders its most efficient climbing traits; similar to Trek's of the past.

In "Trail" mode - the middle compression setting - the bike climbs very well, retaining reasonable traction thanks to the damper's ability to accommodate higher velocity hits. This was, in our experience, the most useful mode for climbing, as we found the "Climb" position was too harsh. The result was opting not to use the "Climb" mode unless ascending bitumen roads.

Another thing to consider with the RE:aktiv damper is that because it shuts off the low speed, or low velocity impacts, it remains quite high in its travel when using the Trail mode, and even more so in Climb. If pedal strikes are a common issue on a particular piece of trail, or you're approaching an incline that would benefit from a steeper headangle, flipping the compression dial will assist greatly with this. We did find a downside on the climbs though…

The terrain that we rode the Fuel EX 9.9 on was primarily rooty and rocky, mixed with loose dirt. Climbs ranged from mild and smooth, to very steep, rubble infested hills. If the dial was flipped to either Trail or Climb, we found that the Fuel would loose traction in some situations that it probably shouldn't have, with the damper struggling to react enough for the small, traction sucking, looser terrain. Obviously this would be the same, or worse, for many of the dampers already out there, and the RE:aktiv damper did outperform these in some situations, but was not far ahead when it came to loose, smaller root and rock infested climbs.

Leaving the rear shock wide open in these situations it was amazing, but the obvious downside was that it required a little more effort and a more aggressive body position to beat the trail. We generally preferred to leave it wide open and allow the suspension to track the ground on the more technical climbs experienced in the Sea to Sky, opting to run it in Trail mode for moderate climbs and dirt roads, and flicking it to Climb mode on the bitumen - which wasn't often. The 73º seat tube angle was pretty average, especially given the more aggressive angles showing up on geo charts nowadays. Had it been 1º, or even 0.5º degree steeper, it would have helped with positioning on the tougher, steeper and more technical climbs we encountered.

When descending, the Fuel came to life! We opted to leave it wide open after some initial experiments resulted in the bike being too harsh in Trail mode. Our initial couple weeks of riding resulted in some large bottom outs, front and rear, with the suspension wide open. The first major one was within 100ft of trail on Cypress, with the bike bottoming at both ends, hard enough that we felt and heard it happen. This was not the first time we had bottomed the bike's clever suspension, but the first time that it was so pronounced - real hucker head banger type bottoms, sounds and all. It happened another 4 times that ride, each as harsh and obvious as the first. In the bike's defense, it was in beyond its pay grade when these and others happened, but it's worth noting these limitations.

These situations resulted in the 32 up front being flipped to Trail mode pretty early on, as descend mode was deemed pretty well useless for us. With the fork in the Trail setting we were also more well balanced front to rear, granting us a good deal of confidence when coming into rougher corners hot, or in steeper, chunky terrain. Unfortunately the same for the rear didn't cut it, with the suspension losing a lot of its finesse in Trail mode, and no longer tracking the terrain suitably. It was especially noticeable on high speed chatter and successive medium sized hits.

At this point we decided to utilize the Push volume reducers. These little beauties go in the top of the shock, are super easy to install and make a world of difference if seeking a more progressive end stroke, or some more mid stroke support. We wanted the changes to be incremental, and began with the smaller of the two 'chips'; the 7-cc volume reducer. With this installed a slightly more supportive mid stroke was noticed and it ramped up nicely at the end to prevent the harsh bottom out we were experiencing without it. The suspension performed exceptionally, tracking the ground well and utilizing the travel efficiently, while remaining well balanced with the front.

After some experience with the 7-cc reducer, it was time to try the 10-cc version. We found that for a 165-lbs rider this was too much, and provided a rougher ride. The ramp of the suspension was noticeable earlier in the travel and was not something we were enjoying in more technical terrain. Even on larger hits it was too abrupt, resulting in the bike being unstable on impact. The 10-cc reducer also threw the balance off and during steeper descents we found ourselves being pushed over the front too much. Adjusting the fork at this point to level it out would only have resulted in a loss of front end traction which would not have helped the situation.

The bike still handled reasonably well on flow trails and jumps, and we could see this being a potential benefit to a heavier rider, but it had lost its butter smooth traction experienced both with the 7- cc reducer (or no reducer at all). For us, the 7-cc option was the reducer of choice and remained in the shock for the majority of the test.

With the 7-cc reducer installed and the Fox 32 Float set to Trail, the bike excelled. The rear suspension is very, very predictable and reliable, never doing anything unexpected and always where we wanted it. The rear suspension did outshine the 32 up front, leaving us wanting more. Despite this being a 120-mm trail bike, it can punch above its weight class! It was in these situations that the fork would be noticed, simply because it wasn't keeping up. In fast, rough descents with large compressions it felt as though the fork was being stressed to the limit, at times with a "the front end is going to collapse, or tear off" kind of feeling, yet the rear remained composed.

The ability to really see just how high above its weight class the Fuel could punch was hindered somewhat by the front end. The 32 could not take high speed, consecutive medium sized hits or deep compressions the way the rear could, often resulting with us off on some tangent that we never intended to be on, or worse, in the bush next to the trail. It was unfortunate how distracted the fork was in this type of terrain, with the rear of the bike seeming like it would be up for more while the front end wandered off to do its own thing.

Putting the Fuel EX on 'flow trails' means preparing for a good time. Cornering, the bike was on rails thanks to its low 13.1" bottom bracket and its predictable nature. It jumps incredibly well, urging you to lift harder and huck as far as possible, off everything! The light weight coupled with the geometry had it feeling akin to a BMX bike down at the local skatepark - try not to smile when jibbing flow lines down the hill on this bike; it's not possible! In fact, it reignited a whole style of riding in us that we had almost forgotten, and we're so glad that it did.

Build Kit

The Trek Fuel line comes with Fox suspension front and rear. Our 9.9 test bike was fitted with the 32 Factory Float up front, a fork that as mentioned, struggles to keep up with the rest of the bike in technical situations. The rear is the evolution of Trek's custom tweaking and new partnerships, with the Fox manufactured DRCV shock receiving additional love by way of the RE:aktiv technology developed with Penske. The damper performs well, but really excels when special attention is taken to set it up correctly for your riding style. Flipping the compression dial will assist on the long grind climbs, but we found it to track better wide open when in more technical climb scenarios.

Taking care of transmission duties was the new 11 speed Shimano XTR kit. In typical Shimano fashion, the shifting is impeccable. Quick, sharp shifts in pretty well any situation, regardless of thick mud, trail debris, or poor execution, it does a great job. The appearance of the new XTR crank is better in the flesh as well, but cover the arms up with some clear tape - our cranks showed noticeable signs of wear after the first ride. The Fuel also came without a guide and was the only 1x unit that we have not dropped a chain on. Some have lasted a fair amount of time prior to dropping, but eventually did and perhaps that would happen here once there is more wear. Nevertheless, it was flawless during testing.

The gear range on our test bike was taller than some may enjoy, fitted with a 34t front chainring and a cassette that maxed out at a 40t, while the other end was an 11t. We found the range to be fine for our terrain and long limbs, with only the most aggressive of climbs resulting in a click up into the 40t. When doing this it was a quick, smooth change, with no delays or stalls in the process. During testing, the drivetrain has needed little more than chain lube and one twist of the barrel adjuster - pretty impressive!

The Shimano XTR brakes performed as many have come to expect. They're consistent, don't fade, don't do anything unexpected and slow the bike down in a heartbeat when needed. They do offer less modulation than we prefer, but once we got used to them it wasn't an issue.

The Bontrager Rhythm Elite wheels could be deemed a little 'light' for the performance this bike is capable of delivering. The inner rim width is narrow, making for a bit more tire squirm than we would like to have. Upping the pressure a couple of psi helped curb this, but is not ideal. They also were softer than what we commonly ride, adding to our unsuccessful line choice at times and lacking a little zest when exiting corners. Our test bike wheels also seemed to feature a higher end hub than the stock Rhythm Elite wheels - one that had Bontrager's Rapid Drive Engagement which was a nice touch.

We swapped out the stock Bontrager XR3 Team Issue tires, which may perform okay in hardpack, but generally didn't grant any confidence in the terrain they were tested in. Initially they were ridden in wet conditions, which they definitely have no place in. They were replaced with a firmer sidewall, more aggressive set of Maxxis EXO treads, which we chose to setup tubeless. This was very straightforward and simple to accomplish with a hand pump, thanks to Trek's TLR system.

The bar and stem that came on the bike were beautifully made carbon numbers, but that's where their draw stopped. The bars, at 740mm wide, are not only generally too narrow for the size of human that will typically ride an XL frame, but they lack the stability granted in stressful situations with the wider bar. Add to that the 90mm stem (you read that right) and we had to laugh. They were replaced with a 780mm bar and a 40mm stem, centering us on the bike perfectly and granting a comfortable riding position.

The bike arrived with a stealth Rockshox Reverb, which performed flawlessly during the test. The internal routing kept the bike looking sleek. Unfortunately it came with a left side lever, despite the bike being specced as a 1x. Given the 1x drivetrain, we would have preferred a right side lever, flipped and placed under the bar on the left side. Something that many riders do when running Reverb posts and 1x systems.

We should also mention that the bike is incredibly quiet, with no cable clang thanks to the clever mix of internal and external routing. The brake line runs externally along the top of the down tube, making for easy servicing and access, and is mated with the stealth Reverb line, which ducks into the frame through the down tube, as it nears the bottom bracket junction. The rear gear cable runs internally and is tensioned, preventing it from making any noise inside the frame.

Things That Could Be Improved

Given the potential trail destroying abilities of the Fuel EX, a more capable fork than the spec'd Fox 32 would be a good starting point for improvements. We feel that aggressive riders will get a lot more out of this bike with something like the Fox 34, or perhaps a Pike (we know, there it is again). Either of these would increase the bike's already impressive abilities and perform in line with the rear of the bike. For the less aggressive, or those riding in smoother terrain, the 32 will work fine.

The 90-mm stem that came on our Fuel seemed ridiculous. We completely understand that this is a trail bike, but with the long and low geometry, something that the industry has been pushing toward for some time, why there was a stem reminiscent of something from the Tour De France, circa 1995 (only in carbon), on the front of the bike is puzzling. Fitting this bike with a 50- or 60-mm stem seems totally reasonable to us - the 90-mm that came on it was just alien.We would also have preferred to see a Reverb lever that can be placed underneath the left side of the bars. It's a more natural and easily accessible position and it also keeps the lever out of harm's way a lot better. It's a minor gripe, but nevertheless, an oversight in the spec.

The persistence to spec narrow bars is growing tiresome as well. Educate retailers to cut bars down when the consumer needs it, rather than require the customer to either ask for an exchange, or purchase a different bar from the get-go. If not for all frame models, at least for the those size large and up. Add to this, that if throwing down large for a new bike then generally the exchange of parts should not come into play, at all. Obviously some riders are going to tinker and customize to their preferences, but we still feel it should be a solid build from the get go, with any part swaps done purely for the sake of personalization.

We found that the stack height for the XL was too low and even with the stem perched above 3 10-mm spacers and a set of 20-mm rise bars, an extra 5-mm would have been nice. It would be appropriate to allow for little adjustment up, or down, rather than simply being at the upper limits of the frame. We also feel that a slightly steeper seat tube would help with the bike while climbing in technical terrain, placing the rider a little more over the bottom bracket. It climbs reasonably well, but could be better.

Long Term Durability

The Trek Fuel frame has seen a good amount of action since early December and has needed little by way of maintenance. The frame is running great, with the bearings still friction free and tight. The Shimano drivetrain has been flawless as well, despite seeing some ugly conditions. Our rear wheel is out of true, but not terribly so and the rear hub has come loose as well. Aside from these and given our experiences thus far, we don't see any long term issues with the bike outside of regular maintenance.


What's The Bottom Line?

A bike that's this much fun on flow trails and pretty capable in technical terrain should be illegal - the country will lose all sense of productivity as hordes of people flip work the bird and head out to ride as much as they can humanly manage! The Fuel isn't without its nuances in stock form, but it's a more common trend than one would think it should be. The fork struggles to keep up in aggressive situations, however, outside of these situations the whole package performed flawlessly and were it not for the overall capabilities of the bike, we doubt we would have even noticed the fork struggling.

The Fuel is composed, predictable and inspires a surprising amount of confidence for such a small bike. It has its limits, like any 120-mm trail bike but despite these, we think it's of the more capable in its class. If seeking a smaller travel do it all bike and money is not an object, then the 9.9 is a must look. If the price tag of the 9.9 is a bit much, most of the ride characteristics can be obtained in lower tiered packages.

For more on the Trek Fuel EX 9.9, check out www.trekbikes.com.


About The Reviewer

AJ Barlas started riding as most do, bashing about dirt mounds and popping off street curbs. Not much has changed, really. These days the dirt mounds have become mountains and the street curbs, while still getting sessioned, are more often features on the trail. He began as a shop monkey racing downhill since day zero, only to go 'backwards' and start riding and racing BMX later on. He then came full circle once moving to Whistler. AJ loves riding everything from 8 hour mountain pass epics (bonking) to lap after lap in the park and 20 minute pumptrack sessions at sunset. Driven by his passion for biking and exposing people to the great equipment we ride, AJ started and maintains the Straightshot MTB blog. So long as wheels are involved, and preferably dirt (the drier and dustier the better), life is good.

This product has no reviews yet

Added a comment about product review Tested: Five Ten Kestrel Clipless Shoe 3/4/2015 7:49 PM
C50_straightshot_icon_web_3.1_1388865220

Hey guys. I'll leave Joel to confirm this, but from shooting them for the review, I can confirm that the cleat range is further back than the shoes of the past. Not sure if it's positioned as far back as the new Impact, but it's certainly on par with the more recent Maltese Falcon.

This product_review has 10 comments.

Liked a comment on the item 2015 Test Sessions: Santa Cruz Nomad Carbon X01 2/27/2015 7:29 AM

That Verdone guy excluded, finding a bad review or test ride experience of a Nomad is like trying to find a photo of Gwin bottoming out his fork and shock at the same time. I mean it's possible, but technically so are unicorns.

Added a product review for Alpinestars Alps 2 Knee Pad 2/26/2015 6:35 PM
C138_alps_2_knee_front

Tested: Alpinestars Alps 2 Knee Pad

Rating:

The Good:

The Bad:

Overall:

Review by AJ Barlas // Product Photos by AJ Barlas, Riding Photos by Lear Miller

Knee pads in the bike industry have come some way since the early Dainese or Qrank knee/shin, robo-legs of the early days. Softer materials and the use of 'tech foams' are the most obvious changes and have resulted in what often resembles more of a big neoprene knee warmer than leg armour. Despite their soft appearance, there are a number that still meet the stringent CE standards put forth in Europe and the Alpinestars Alps 2 is one of them.

Aimed at the more aggressive rider, the Alps 2 was designed to be a "flexible and lightweight knee guard", which we interpret to mean "aimed at the rider looking for solid protection in a more pedal friendly, comfortable package." Does the Alps 2 live up to its ambitions in the real world? We've been ripping about the trails in a pair since December in order to find out!

Alpinestars Alps 2 Knee Pad Highlights

  • Breathable laminated rip-stop, PE foam and poly mesh
  • Integrated soft shell, PE patella piece
  • Abrasion resistant and durable external fabric
  • Snug design offers compression fit and soft tissue support
  • Velcro elastic straps top and bottom
  • Silicone ribs on the inner of the openings to prevent displacement while riding
  • CE Certified
  • Size: S/M and M/L
  • MSRP: $64.95 USD

Initial Impressions

The Alps 2 showed up in the usual mesh bag that armour tends to arrive in these days. Upon initial inspection we were pleased to find the pads offer protection on the sides of the knee, in addition to the main pad that covers the patella and extends partway down the shin. We think the length of the Alps 2 is bang on, not all the way down the shin, but far enough to offer ample coverage. All the protective pieces are soft PE foams, rather than the firm shell variety.

The pads are designed with a pre-curve to them, in an effort to help with ergonomics while on the bike. They feature the commonly seen opening in the back of the knee as well as a mesh sock that encloses the leg in the pad completely - these are of the slip on slip off variety, and require removal of ones footwear to put on and take off. The velcro straps, one above the knee and the other below (resting atop the calf), are there to do most of the work when it comes to holding the pads in place.

Putting them on for the first time, we were taken aback by the silicone ribs that are there to help hold the pad in place, as they ripped at the hair and skin on our legs. For obvious reasons this had us a little wary of how they would feel when riding, but we gave them the benefit of the doubt, setting out to see how they performed in the real world.

On The Trail

New pads often feel a little alien hanging onto your knees in their previously packaged shape, unable to decide how best to conform to the new owner's leg. With this in mind we ignored the initial, odd feeling of the pad and the nagging bites from the silicon ribs, opting to stay focused on the trail ahead. However, after a couple of hours in the pads we could no longer ignore the discomfort. Attempting to adjust the pad only irritated the skin more and had we been wearing a pack, they most certainly would have been removed completely and placed in solitary confinement for the remainder of that first ride.

Completely open minded to the whole 'break-in' process that appears to be common with a number of available pads, we tried again, only this time with a lightweight knee-warmer between the pads and our skin, in an effort to curb the discomfort caused by the silicone until they broke in. This worked in our favor to some degree, but before the ride was over we were again experiencing some discomfort, this time in the back of the knee. As a result we were forced to forego the knee warmer, and went through the break-in process in the normal sense. After months of riding in the Alps 2, the silicon ribbing has mostly stopped bugging us, but the chaffing in behind the knee remains - it's not as drastic as when the pads were new, but if out riding for any longer than an hour or so, it will begin to irritate the skin.

This, for obvious reasons, is one of the motives behind riders placing pads around their ankles when climbing, and while this keeps the knees cool and unirritated, many would no doubt prefer to have a pad that can be put on and left alone until the ride is over. Where the Alps 2 are concerned, the silicon ribbing is enough to pretty much exclude the idea of moving them up and down, at least during the initial break-in period. They're not the lightest of pads thanks to the use of PE foams throughout, which also makes for a somewhat stuffy environment inside. The mesh backing helps to some degree, but our knees still sweat a good amount when riding in them, even during the winter testing period, so being able to comfortably wear them around the ankles would have been helpful.

So where do the Alps 2 pads fit in then? Given the poor comfort when pedalling in them, which we did on rides that were anywhere from 1–6 hours during testing, perhaps they are more well suited to shuttling and park laps? While standing and descending is definitely when they were noticed the least, we're not sure we would recommend them for park use. Yes, they pass CE (level 1, the lower tier), which is more than a number of pads currently on the market, but personally, we're wary of using soft foam pads for aggressive DH riding. Add to that the shifts in pad placement we experienced during small scuffles while testing, and we're sure they would struggle to stay in place in a larger spill.

Things That Could Be Improved

We quite enjoyed the full wrap of the pad as well as the compression fit of the mesh around the back of the leg and over the top of the calf. The pads stayed in place well when descending average length descents (a couple minutes max) and the strap at the top of the calf is a clever piece that contributes to this aspect. Unfortunately, due to the lack of flexibility required to accommodate the anatomical movements of the knee when pedalling, the pad would slowly work its way down the leg - never completely off, but to the point of requiring adjustments a number of times per ride. This could have been improved with a more well thought out construction around the sides of the knee, and more suitable materials to improve this aspect of the pad's functionality.

Better flexibility would no doubt improve the comfort of the opening behind the knee as well, as the seams here contribute to the chaffing in this area. With the current design, the bunching up of the Alps 2 would wear on the skin more as the ride progressed.

Long Term Durability

If one were able to put up with the ergonomical nuances of the Alps 2 pad, and didn't crash often, they could last a while. Given that after a couple of admittedly small spills there is already a pulled thread or two on the front of the test pad, it's safe to say that they would likely tear up quickly with a lot of use. Unlike some pads of the past, the velcro straps didn't get caught up on the pad too often, though considerable care is required to make sure they are strapped up when packed, in order to really prevent this from becoming an issue. General construction of the pads appears to be pretty good, with the majority of the seams remaining intact to date.

What's The Bottom Line?

We really wanted to like the Alpinestars Alps 2 pads. Their shape is solid, the coverage good and for a soft pad design, they feature materials with decent shock absorption capabilities. Unfortunately the lack of comfort experienced in use means that unless explicitly seeking a lighter weight downhill knee pad, riders may want to look elsewhere. Couple that with a fabric on the front of the pad that is prone to catching on objects and tearing in the event of a crash, and it's hard to recommend the pad for any serious, prolonged use on the trail.

These pads were designed for all mountain riding, but we'd caveat that by saying that in order to enjoy them, you 'll need to be ready to remove them for the longer climbs. Of course, doing so also requires removal of your footwear each time, so make sure time is on your side if you choose to go this way.

For more visit www.alpinestarscycling.com.


About The Reviewer

AJ Barlas started riding as most do, bashing about dirt mounds and popping off street curbs. Not much has changed, really. These days the dirt mounds have become mountains and the street curbs, while still getting sessioned, are more often features on the trail. He began as a shop monkey racing downhill since day zero, only to go 'backwards' and start riding and racing BMX later on. He then came full circle once moving to Whistler. AJ loves riding everything from 8 hour mountain pass epics (bonking) to lap after lap in the park and 20 minute pumptrack sessions at sunset. Driven by his passion for biking and exposing people to the great equipment we ride, AJ started and maintains the Straightshot MTB blog. So long as wheels are involved, and preferably dirt (the drier and dustier the better), life is good.

This product has 1 review

Liked a comment on the item 2015 Test Sessions: Orange Alpine 160 RS 2/25/2015 12:40 PM

Kind of ironic coming from a guy who criticized another poster in the 2013 Test Sessions Knolly Chilcotin review by saying "let's not get butt hurt because the review isn't exactly the same as how you feel about the bike."

...more

Liked a comment on the item 2015 Test Sessions: Mondraker Foxy Carbon RR 2/23/2015 8:19 PM

Gonna back up Brandon on this one. If an XL isn't the intended size for a 6'5" tester, I don't know what world we're living in.

Added a comment about product review 2015 Test Sessions: Mondraker Foxy Carbon RR 2/23/2015 8:17 PM
C50_straightshot_icon_web_3.1_1388865220

There's some interesting stuff Chris has going on there!

0 0 0

This product_review has 28 comments.

Added reply in a thread Crankworx World Tour an Alternative to UCI Racing?? 2/19/2015 6:10 PM

Time will tell. If there were a couple more and the teams fully got behind it… The UCI would wanna look out.