Always up for an adventure. Rain chaser. Vital MTB product smasher. Home is where we park it.
Photos: 6120 (475 albums)
Forum topics started: 274
Forum replies: 1208
Profile comments: 40
High five indeed! That first line of jumps was so rad.
This video has 1 comment.
Heck yes! I'd love to ride there someday.
This product_review has 15 comments.
That stoked face at 0:39. Yeah Erice!
This video has 10 comments.
Got you covered! Pick your grip here, then click the "Review" tab.
This feature has 3 comments.
Coming right up. Test Sessions drops in a few weeks!
Thanks, liquid! We try to be as transparent in our reviews as possible. SRAM handled this very well.
This product_review has 6 comments.
The final sentence calls out the pricing. Yes, it's expensive. So are the hours of CNC time it takes to make that incredible cassette so it doesn't weigh five pounds, the team of engineers it took to come up the improvements, and on and on. The price will no doubt improve as SRAM is able to trickle down the technology, just as it did with their 11-speed line of products. In many cases, making affordable versions of rad stuff is actually more difficult to do from a production standpoint. Those mid to lower-end versions also won't have the same level of performance.
For me, Eagle is a performance product. It's exclusive and costly at the moment, but the cost isn't outlandish (like Shimano XTR Di2, which we called out). If acquired as part of a complete bike it gets pretty reasonable, especially from some of the direct to consumer brands. The durability is also greatly improved and brings the cost per mile down.
Would I go out and buy it? If money was no object or if it came on a complete bike, yes. If I had to run a micro-sized chainring on a 1x11 system to get the climbing capabilities I needed, probably so. As standalone components? Not likely until the prices come down a bit, which they are bound to do. For now, 1x11 is affordable and (mostly) reliable. Your perspective on what's awesome will change when you ride Eagle for the first time, though. It's damn good, which is why it received a five star rating.
Yeah bud! Nice ride.
This setup has 6 comments.
It was a Santa Cruz Bronson:
This feature has 8 comments.
Full moto! I dig it. Just be careful not to knock them off.
Good question. Unfortunately it's one I can't provide a clear answer to. The Smuggler was previously equipped with a 130mm travel Pike, and in moving to a 140mm RXF 34 quite a lot changes - the wheelbase, head angle, trail measurement, bottom bracket height, seat angle, etc. Due to the number of changes it isn't a good comparison.
That said, there have been a few good articles and experiments done in this realm to help you make sense of it. Check these out:
As for how the bike feels now? Let's just say that the RXF is staying in place for a while longer. I prefer it with the taller fork for the added bottom bracket clearance in some of the chunky terrain I ride. Plus, that bike can rally!
What a perfect username.
Yes, the placebo effect is a real thing, especially when you're discussing minor changes to the same product. To say that 99 out of 100 riders wouldn't know they had an entirely different fork on the front of their bike is a ridiculous claim, however, and I'll take that bet.
This is my job. I take it very seriously, and I'm constantly learning from the engineers, designers, and even pro riders that help make new products a reality. That's also supplemented by discussions with those outside of our industry for better perspective. "Sounding cool on forums" is never a thought that crosses my mind.
If I've learned anything during my several years as a professional tester, it's to adopt an "all else constant" methodology to really single out what I'm feeling on the trail. Same day, back-to-back runs on the same section of trail. Same dirt. Same line. Just one change.
While I will agree that there is a lot of misinformation being claimed out there, it's important as a reader to identify the journalists you can trust. Read between the lines. Read the details. Ask questions. See if they can explain why things acted the way they did.
Just like a derailleur that is clearly out of tune for one rider and can be "fine" for another, given enough time on enough products important nuances come to light.
As for the customer you lied to, I hope he's wise enough to realize his error in bringing you his ride.
Like a boss.
Some very interesting remarks from 2:35 to 3:35. Makes one wonder what it takes to be the star of wildly progressive films for living.
"You've just got to go for it, and if you don't, then you just feel like an absolute pussy."
From the riding to the filming, it's incredible to see how much of a vision Akrigg has for each of his videos.
This video has 3 comments.
This is indeed a Metric equipped bike, though it's a bit confusing as Trek chose a slightly modified stroke length. They simply chose to limit the stroke 2.5mm using a travel reducer spacer, which is a modification most suspension service centers worth their salt could perform. RockShox offers it for frame makers. When you add in the spacers, Metric shocks can hit 2.5mm increments: 230 x 65, 230 x 62.5, 230 x 60, 230 x 57.5, 210 x 55, 210 x 52.5, etc.
This product_review has 25 comments.
The prototype was the "Short" size with a 400mm reach. I typically prefer something in the 430mm range, so it was cramped at 5'10" tall, but was the only bike available to ride at the time.
This product_review has 17 comments.
Cheers for chiming in, Ozzy! The geo chart is correct. We tested the standard 27.5/650B (non-Plus) model.
This product_review has 5 comments.
This video has 5 comments.
Cheers for the feedback, Daniel! We aim to do more of this.
Concerning those comments, know that the content of Vital's "Tested" features is never paid for. We take testing very seriously and the separation of church and state is strong here. We also know that not every review can end up with a 5-star rating, otherwise what's the point of reading our work?
This feature has 35 comments.
It's great to hear support for brands and pedals that weren't included in this test. We'll work to include them in future revisions of this feature. We plan to update it (and all future Face Offs) on at least a yearly basis.
While we wish we could physically test all of the pedals out there, it's simply not possible. Some are excused from the testing lineup for a variety of reasons, including not meeting certain feature requirements in a good pedal, not being on our radar (which is broad), not being available for purchase by the public, etc. Cost is also a factor we consider, and the $195-$270 that the Twenty6 pedals will set you back is a hard one for most readers to justify.