it feels to me that the first product they come up with with more of their input is already "meh", the fact that the fins are...
it feels to me that the first product they come up with with more of their input is already "meh", the fact that the fins are on a separate plate and you need that thickness behind the pads, regardless of how beneficial, seems way too much of a PITA.
Bee Kay already modified a piece of alluminium to replace those fins and claims something needs to be there as otherwise pistons will start to become too advanced with all new.
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of...
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of pads. If you still want fins, doing it the way they did is the best. Having them non removable could be a pain and I see the point BK was making regarding seeing the pistons, having them removable would make it possible to run the brakes without them and causing problems (pistons advancing). But otherwise your comments are very much what is to be expected - haters gonna hate.
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated. You could increase the thermal transfer if you used some kind of thermal compound but I’m not sure how that would stand up to water/mud.
It will do something but just not nearly as good as having the pad bonded to the heatsink.
it feels to me that the first product they come up with with more of their input is already "meh", the fact that the fins are...
it feels to me that the first product they come up with with more of their input is already "meh", the fact that the fins are on a separate plate and you need that thickness behind the pads, regardless of how beneficial, seems way too much of a PITA.
Bee Kay already modified a piece of alluminium to replace those fins and claims something needs to be there as otherwise pistons will start to become too advanced with all new.
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of...
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of pads. If you still want fins, doing it the way they did is the best. Having them non removable could be a pain and I see the point BK was making regarding seeing the pistons, having them removable would make it possible to run the brakes without them and causing problems (pistons advancing). But otherwise your comments are very much what is to be expected - haters gonna hate.
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated...
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated. You could increase the thermal transfer if you used some kind of thermal compound but I’m not sure how that would stand up to water/mud.
It will do something but just not nearly as good as having the pad bonded to the heatsink.
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally the surfaces need to be machined or lapped as flat as possible which just adds another expense. Would be interesting to compare how much these help versus something like a little duct that channeled air through the calliper instead
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of...
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of pads. If you still want fins, doing it the way they did is the best. Having them non removable could be a pain and I see the point BK was making regarding seeing the pistons, having them removable would make it possible to run the brakes without them and causing problems (pistons advancing). But otherwise your comments are very much what is to be expected - haters gonna hate.
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated...
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated. You could increase the thermal transfer if you used some kind of thermal compound but I’m not sure how that would stand up to water/mud.
It will do something but just not nearly as good as having the pad bonded to the heatsink.
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally...
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally the surfaces need to be machined or lapped as flat as possible which just adds another expense. Would be interesting to compare how much these help versus something like a little duct that channeled air through the calliper instead
Just quickly watching the video and reading the comments:
Could they have been looking to thermally isolate the calipers from the pads? As opposed Shimano looking to directly cool their pads?
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of...
It makes very little sense to have the fins integrated in the brake pads and throw them away every time you wear out a set of pads. If you still want fins, doing it the way they did is the best. Having them non removable could be a pain and I see the point BK was making regarding seeing the pistons, having them removable would make it possible to run the brakes without them and causing problems (pistons advancing). But otherwise your comments are very much what is to be expected - haters gonna hate.
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated...
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated. You could increase the thermal transfer if you used some kind of thermal compound but I’m not sure how that would stand up to water/mud.
It will do something but just not nearly as good as having the pad bonded to the heatsink.
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally...
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally the surfaces need to be machined or lapped as flat as possible which just adds another expense. Would be interesting to compare how much these help versus something like a little duct that channeled air through the calliper instead
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in brake performance. Perhaps they'd help in places with more elevation and longer runs, but they felt like a waste of time to me.
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in...
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in brake performance. Perhaps they'd help in places with more elevation and longer runs, but they felt like a waste of time to me.
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as long as the standard.
Prefomance was the same otherwise but the longevity hurt my wallet less despite the higher initial cost
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in...
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in brake performance. Perhaps they'd help in places with more elevation and longer runs, but they felt like a waste of time to me.
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as...
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as long as the standard.
Prefomance was the same otherwise but the longevity hurt my wallet less despite the higher initial cost
Aren't the Shimano versions one piece though? Probably makes quite a difference.
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in...
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in brake performance. Perhaps they'd help in places with more elevation and longer runs, but they felt like a waste of time to me.
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as...
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as long as the standard.
Prefomance was the same otherwise but the longevity hurt my wallet less despite the higher initial cost
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on the outside edge of the rotors.
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as...
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as long as the standard.
Prefomance was the same otherwise but the longevity hurt my wallet less despite the higher initial cost
The pad material is attached to the finned portion and that is attached to a separate backing plate on Shimano pads if I remember correctly.
Correct - on Sintered pads it's [braking material][finned alloy plate][steel back plate], while resin is just [braking material][finned alloy back plate].
While it's anecdotal, I am very pleased with the Shimano finned pads. I don't know what the difference is in a compound between D02S, H03C and N04C. However, going from D02S to H03C has made a very noticeable difference in my brake pads' lifespan. I did make that change at a time I also singnificantly stepped up my riding, so pad wear may reflect that as well.
I had a rattling pad issue once, solved it with spreading the spring a bit more. I'll probably pay more attention to it now that my bike is quieter overall.
I do like the Lewis' approach. Got a pair of the Uberbike pads on my commuter. The downside there is you need their own pads with thinner back plate, and as others have mentioned, the heat transfer will certainly suffer. However it'll still carry some heat away, looks neat and I'm all for keeping brakes consistent. As long as it's quiet, I'm into it.
It's an interesting argument that one would like to see their brake pistons. I try to optimize bikes for on trail performance, and while ease of maintenance sure is a factor, how often do people inspect their pistons? If one side advances more than other is easily visible with fins, and only once in 12 years I've had my 4 piston brakes advance unevenly on one side, where seeing pistons would have been beneficial for diagnosis.
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on...
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on the outside edge of the rotors.
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on...
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on the outside edge of the rotors.
I appreciate how quickly commenters went for the Vala's throat. Not that we were any better with respect to the Vala/Crestline comparison.
I am quite interested to see what Deviate does with the kinematics on this one. I'm a big fan of the Claymore and VPP seems like it could be quite a departure, while retaining the rearward axle path. Deviate is typically rather open with their numbers and hopefully this is no exception.
They shrunk the Large a bit which is probably wise, the Claymore in large is a 490mm reach, which I am on at 6' 2" rather than the gargantuan XL.
Also, shout-out to the reach adjust headset - our favourite around here! Wonder if it's made by FSA?
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on...
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on the outside edge of the rotors.
The life of the current gen range is super interesting. Came out of nowhere kinda received no end of praise but it was never going to be a bike that racers actually used in enduro. Super heavy and squishy. Maybe the existence of the shore at the same time hurt its overall sales since you could buy a squish monster from the same brand for cheaper. Probably tracks way better but if you're a "freeride" guy, do you care? Or do you just care that it has a lot of travel?
Seems to have been a really good practice of "proof of concept" considering the DH rig they have is basically a mega range and there are some other guys that seem to copy it. It is just impressive that they brought a super developed dedicated long travel "enduro" bike to market that I would assume cost tons of money to develop just to kind of scrap it. I don't blame though because I have only ever seen one in person outside of a bike shop, owning one makes about as much sense as owning a DH bike for most people.
The life of the current gen range is super interesting. Came out of nowhere kinda received no end of praise but it was never going to...
The life of the current gen range is super interesting. Came out of nowhere kinda received no end of praise but it was never going to be a bike that racers actually used in enduro. Super heavy and squishy. Maybe the existence of the shore at the same time hurt its overall sales since you could buy a squish monster from the same brand for cheaper. Probably tracks way better but if you're a "freeride" guy, do you care? Or do you just care that it has a lot of travel?
Seems to have been a really good practice of "proof of concept" considering the DH rig they have is basically a mega range and there are some other guys that seem to copy it. It is just impressive that they brought a super developed dedicated long travel "enduro" bike to market that I would assume cost tons of money to develop just to kind of scrap it. I don't blame though because I have only ever seen one in person outside of a bike shop, owning one makes about as much sense as owning a DH bike for most people.
Interesting take,
No more niche than a Dreadnaught, or Slash, or Spire, or Claymore, or......Just a long travel "enduro/freeride" bike, that leans more towards DH performance than most. When compared to what youd actually ride/race, its not really that much heavier, and for the additional performance, worth the penalty.
I went with a Spire, but the Range was a very, very close second. Now I'm on a V2 Dreadnaught.....
See loads of em around here, ridden, raced, at the bike park. Might be location dependant.
A friend of mine tested the Range at Falls Creek and wasn't blown away by it, compared to the brachyuran enduro bikes we normally ride, which gave us a bit of an idea of the kind of trails it probably needs to shine. Falls Creek has a lot of elevation to work with and was a lot of fun, but none of the trails are extremely difficult or fast.
There's no shortage of Ranges in my neck of the woods, which makes sense because my neck of the woods is British Columbia, where there's plenty of Norco dealers and the current Range makes a bundle more sense for the average "enthusiast" level rider in a two bike quiver than the Shore or a bunch of other options.
I don't think you're right in statement that it was "never going to be a bike racers actually used in enduro". Maybe it's not the bike that the pros use, but roll up to any enduro race in BC and you're guaranteed to see solid Range representation (or DH race - it was even raced on 1199 this year at Crankworx, a number of years after release and notwithstanding the fact it was never actually a DH bike). It's up there with megatowers right now, there is truly no shortage of these around. It's a great enduro bike for humans who need that extra 20mm of forgiveness and safety that many pros don't seem to require - although you could say this about virtually all of the "super enduro" bikes - the people at the sharpest end of the sport often select the all-mountain option.
I agree the product cycle of the Range has been interesting. Three year single spec without a colou change, with the only difference being that after the first model year, they introduced the 1.1 frame with dramatically better shock clearance (why didn't they update the colours when they did this frame update?).
But the Range was an important bike for Norco. Not so much a proof of concept, moreso a proof of the rebrand. You know, the new Norco thing on the downtube and the little split apart N thing instead of the shield(?) logo. External reps and brand managers were making the rounds to dealers, and one of their talking points was how they wanted to be seen as the Canadian Santa Cruz, reputation wise. They wanted to create a premium, excellent-riding, compelling, and mountain-focused lineup. They culled the majority of their non-mountain models, offering only an option or two per category outside the new bread and butter. Part of this rebrand was marketing, but another part was doubling the size of their engineering part (no joke, they doubled it!).
Did the Range on its own make a ton of money? I don't know. I don't see their financials, but I kinda doubt it (have you seen how every size/spec option is available for like 40% off now? oops!). Am I convinced they lost money? Not necessarily. But what I can say is that I guarantee the positive press, impact, and unadultered brain-occupying the Range did in the months after release sold a bundle of Sights, Optics, Fluids and various VLT bikes.
The Range was the flagship bike to go along with the rebrand. The category was super hot. The Range was the announcement into a competitive world that they were no longer the discount Canadian mountain bike brand. No, they're a serious contender for YOUR next mountain bike. It had to be good.
To me the current Range has always screamed “money cause I’m top!!!” - all the raging attributes are present on it: carbon, high-pivot, long, low and slack, 29er, double-crown compatible, and last, but not least - it’s an enduro (more like a superenduro). Would be a mistake to change it, in my view!
I love Norco but Canadian Santa Cruz is gonna be a stretch, and should they even shoot for that? $1,500 Fluids, flat bar gravel/commuter bikes and even a steel gravel bike. These are all awesome! I’ll prolly never sell my road bike (2018 Search with a dropper and flat bars) because it only cost $450 to begin with! But, part of the Santa Cruz brand is you can only have it on your downtube if you pony up. It's bling to some extent. (100% bling on the Vala with it being crab link)
The other aspects of Santa Cruz that Norco does not embody are quality and warranty ease. 2020 Sight VLT was the absolute worst quality bike I've had by a large margin. (comparing to: Ibis, Transition, Santa Cruz, Specialized, Nukeproof) Maybe, (hopefully) their quality gone up in recent years. Their warranty department was really great when I broke the chainstays on that bike but that is NOT the experience I hear from others. I hear exclusively negative things about Norco's warranty. They have a looong way to go before they're percived as Transition or Santa Cruz are.
TL;DR: I've owned an XT level carbon Norco eeb and a $450 8sp gravel bike from Norco and the one that's still in my garage is the cheap gravel bike.
I suspect "Canadian Santa Cruz" meant that they wanted to capture the brand's perception of value* and competence rather than "we're going to completely drop all our product offerings that aren't carbon mountain bikes and stop being one of Canada's main distributors". It certainly wasn't something they were saying publicly in any event.
*value can mean more than "this thing sure is a bargain".
I suspect "Canadian Santa Cruz" meant that they wanted to capture the brand's perception of value* and competence rather than "we're going to completely drop all...
I suspect "Canadian Santa Cruz" meant that they wanted to capture the brand's perception of value* and competence rather than "we're going to completely drop all our product offerings that aren't carbon mountain bikes and stop being one of Canada's main distributors". It certainly wasn't something they were saying publicly in any event.
*value can mean more than "this thing sure is a bargain".
Nailed it!. My understanding is that this is exactly what they meant by the SC comparison.
Range is definitely getting dropped. It’s an incredible bike, but heavy. I’ve been contemplating doing the WRP conversion myself…
I heard Range will come back as an independent platform for MY2026. It'll be like the Sight and Optic but even bigger.
There is going to be very inefficient heat transfer between the pads and the heat sink compared to the shimano version with the them being integrated. You could increase the thermal transfer if you used some kind of thermal compound but I’m not sure how that would stand up to water/mud.
It will do something but just not nearly as good as having the pad bonded to the heatsink.
Copper grease should work a treat for this use case.
Yup, any time you have to cross a boundary between 2 different parts the heat transfer will be much slower. Thermal compound would help but ideally the surfaces need to be machined or lapped as flat as possible which just adds another expense. Would be interesting to compare how much these help versus something like a little duct that channeled air through the calliper instead
Just quickly watching the video and reading the comments:
Could they have been looking to thermally isolate the calipers from the pads? As opposed Shimano looking to directly cool their pads?
There's a company here in the UK called Uberbike who offer separate fins with their pads. I tried them and frankly couldn't notice any difference in brake performance. Perhaps they'd help in places with more elevation and longer runs, but they felt like a waste of time to me.
I can’t speak for the Uberbike fins but when I was guiding in the Alps my finned Shimano pads (sintered) would last at least twice as long as the standard.
Prefomance was the same otherwise but the longevity hurt my wallet less despite the higher initial cost
Aren't the Shimano versions one piece though? Probably makes quite a difference.
The pad material is attached to the finned portion and that is attached to a separate backing plate on Shimano pads if I remember correctly.
The clear best solution is to just make water-cooled capable calipers. Water gets cycled through by a pump driven by a little baby pulley wheel on the outside edge of the rotors.
Correct - on Sintered pads it's [braking material][finned alloy plate][steel back plate], while resin is just [braking material][finned alloy back plate].
While it's anecdotal, I am very pleased with the Shimano finned pads. I don't know what the difference is in a compound between D02S, H03C and N04C. However, going from D02S to H03C has made a very noticeable difference in my brake pads' lifespan. I did make that change at a time I also singnificantly stepped up my riding, so pad wear may reflect that as well.
I had a rattling pad issue once, solved it with spreading the spring a bit more. I'll probably pay more attention to it now that my bike is quieter overall.
I do like the Lewis' approach. Got a pair of the Uberbike pads on my commuter. The downside there is you need their own pads with thinner back plate, and as others have mentioned, the heat transfer will certainly suffer. However it'll still carry some heat away, looks neat and I'm all for keeping brakes consistent. As long as it's quiet, I'm into it.
It's an interesting argument that one would like to see their brake pistons. I try to optimize bikes for on trail performance, and while ease of maintenance sure is a factor, how often do people inspect their pistons? If one side advances more than other is easily visible with fins, and only once in 12 years I've had my 4 piston brakes advance unevenly on one side, where seeing pistons would have been beneficial for diagnosis.
https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/nerding-out-brakes-shall-we-not-ano…
Are brakes the crabs of tech rumours?
Just connect them to a piss tube in your pants.
This could have the added benefit of extra cooling conveniently being available at the same time as sudden, extreme braking events......
new Deviate E-bike on the other site, seems pretty good on paper!
I appreciate how quickly commenters went for the Vala's throat. Not that we were any better with respect to the Vala/Crestline comparison.
I am quite interested to see what Deviate does with the kinematics on this one. I'm a big fan of the Claymore and VPP seems like it could be quite a departure, while retaining the rearward axle path. Deviate is typically rather open with their numbers and hopefully this is no exception.
They shrunk the Large a bit which is probably wise, the Claymore in large is a 490mm reach, which I am on at 6' 2" rather than the gargantuan XL.
Also, shout-out to the reach adjust headset - our favourite around here! Wonder if it's made by FSA?
Glad it looks good on paper because it certainly isn't a looker otherwise.
Still less drag than a gearbox lol.
The life of the current gen range is super interesting. Came out of nowhere kinda received no end of praise but it was never going to be a bike that racers actually used in enduro. Super heavy and squishy. Maybe the existence of the shore at the same time hurt its overall sales since you could buy a squish monster from the same brand for cheaper. Probably tracks way better but if you're a "freeride" guy, do you care? Or do you just care that it has a lot of travel?
Seems to have been a really good practice of "proof of concept" considering the DH rig they have is basically a mega range and there are some other guys that seem to copy it. It is just impressive that they brought a super developed dedicated long travel "enduro" bike to market that I would assume cost tons of money to develop just to kind of scrap it. I don't blame though because I have only ever seen one in person outside of a bike shop, owning one makes about as much sense as owning a DH bike for most people.
Interesting take,
No more niche than a Dreadnaught, or Slash, or Spire, or Claymore, or......Just a long travel "enduro/freeride" bike, that leans more towards DH performance than most. When compared to what youd actually ride/race, its not really that much heavier, and for the additional performance, worth the penalty.
I went with a Spire, but the Range was a very, very close second. Now I'm on a V2 Dreadnaught.....
See loads of em around here, ridden, raced, at the bike park. Might be location dependant.
A friend of mine tested the Range at Falls Creek and wasn't blown away by it, compared to the brachyuran enduro bikes we normally ride, which gave us a bit of an idea of the kind of trails it probably needs to shine. Falls Creek has a lot of elevation to work with and was a lot of fun, but none of the trails are extremely difficult or fast.
There's no shortage of Ranges in my neck of the woods, which makes sense because my neck of the woods is British Columbia, where there's plenty of Norco dealers and the current Range makes a bundle more sense for the average "enthusiast" level rider in a two bike quiver than the Shore or a bunch of other options.
I don't think you're right in statement that it was "never going to be a bike racers actually used in enduro". Maybe it's not the bike that the pros use, but roll up to any enduro race in BC and you're guaranteed to see solid Range representation (or DH race - it was even raced on 1199 this year at Crankworx, a number of years after release and notwithstanding the fact it was never actually a DH bike). It's up there with megatowers right now, there is truly no shortage of these around. It's a great enduro bike for humans who need that extra 20mm of forgiveness and safety that many pros don't seem to require - although you could say this about virtually all of the "super enduro" bikes - the people at the sharpest end of the sport often select the all-mountain option.
I agree the product cycle of the Range has been interesting. Three year single spec without a colou change, with the only difference being that after the first model year, they introduced the 1.1 frame with dramatically better shock clearance (why didn't they update the colours when they did this frame update?).
But the Range was an important bike for Norco. Not so much a proof of concept, moreso a proof of the rebrand. You know, the new Norco thing on the downtube and the little split apart N thing instead of the shield(?) logo. External reps and brand managers were making the rounds to dealers, and one of their talking points was how they wanted to be seen as the Canadian Santa Cruz, reputation wise. They wanted to create a premium, excellent-riding, compelling, and mountain-focused lineup. They culled the majority of their non-mountain models, offering only an option or two per category outside the new bread and butter. Part of this rebrand was marketing, but another part was doubling the size of their engineering part (no joke, they doubled it!).
Did the Range on its own make a ton of money? I don't know. I don't see their financials, but I kinda doubt it (have you seen how every size/spec option is available for like 40% off now? oops!). Am I convinced they lost money? Not necessarily. But what I can say is that I guarantee the positive press, impact, and unadultered brain-occupying the Range did in the months after release sold a bundle of Sights, Optics, Fluids and various VLT bikes.
The Range was the flagship bike to go along with the rebrand. The category was super hot. The Range was the announcement into a competitive world that they were no longer the discount Canadian mountain bike brand. No, they're a serious contender for YOUR next mountain bike. It had to be good.
To me the current Range has always screamed “money cause I’m top!!!” - all the raging attributes are present on it: carbon, high-pivot, long, low and slack, 29er, double-crown compatible, and last, but not least - it’s an enduro (more like a superenduro). Would be a mistake to change it, in my view!
I love Norco but Canadian Santa Cruz is gonna be a stretch, and should they even shoot for that? $1,500 Fluids, flat bar gravel/commuter bikes and even a steel gravel bike. These are all awesome! I’ll prolly never sell my road bike (2018 Search with a dropper and flat bars) because it only cost $450 to begin with! But, part of the Santa Cruz brand is you can only have it on your downtube if you pony up. It's bling to some extent. (100% bling on the Vala with it being crab link)
The other aspects of Santa Cruz that Norco does not embody are quality and warranty ease. 2020 Sight VLT was the absolute worst quality bike I've had by a large margin. (comparing to: Ibis, Transition, Santa Cruz, Specialized, Nukeproof) Maybe, (hopefully) their quality gone up in recent years. Their warranty department was really great when I broke the chainstays on that bike but that is NOT the experience I hear from others. I hear exclusively negative things about Norco's warranty. They have a looong way to go before they're percived as Transition or Santa Cruz are.
TL;DR: I've owned an XT level carbon Norco eeb and a $450 8sp gravel bike from Norco and the one that's still in my garage is the cheap gravel bike.
I suspect "Canadian Santa Cruz" meant that they wanted to capture the brand's perception of value* and competence rather than "we're going to completely drop all our product offerings that aren't carbon mountain bikes and stop being one of Canada's main distributors". It certainly wasn't something they were saying publicly in any event.
*value can mean more than "this thing sure is a bargain".
Nailed it!. My understanding is that this is exactly what they meant by the SC comparison.
Did Specialized just break a new record of the most expensive MTB from a big box brand? The non-motorized version (SJ15) is $18,000 CAD
Insane pricing. They will sell the limited production they have though.
What makes me most upset by this is that it's still loaded with house brand components. Put some name brand wheels on the thing at least.
Edit: Looks like only the saddle and wheels are house brand. Everything else is another brand. Still would like to see Enve, DT or I9 wheels though.