To make that XL Trek 32" fit me, I'd need about an 80mm positive stem and 50mm riser bars. I know there aren't that many people who are 6'6"+, but surely there are more of them than there are 5'2" people who would actually buy that bike, right?
Has anyone heard rumors about when the Yeti "ST" might launch?
not this year.
"The 2027 lineup brings big updates: A trail-ready ASR Lunch Ride built for the backcountry, the new ‘Lavender Pearl’ colorway on the SB120, spec upgrades to the MTe, and new pricing on SB160, SB140, SB120, and ARC."
To make that XL Trek 32" fit me, I'd need about an 80mm positive stem and 50mm riser bars. I know there aren't that many people...
To make that XL Trek 32" fit me, I'd need about an 80mm positive stem and 50mm riser bars. I know there aren't that many people who are 6'6"+, but surely there are more of them than there are 5'2" people who would actually buy that bike, right?
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL sizes disappearing from lineups at a rather rapid pace with no explanation. I know we are a small market in the XXL frame size. But Transition dropped all XXL sizes for 2026 and their 2027 lineup won't see the size return. Yeti offered the SB140 and SB160 in XXL but are not offering it in LT or MT. It's a shame to see companies pulling back from this size as it nice finally riding a bike that fits. I know there is always Santa Cruz for XXL and i've owned one, but I prefer my Transition personally.
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL...
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL sizes disappearing from lineups at a rather rapid pace with no explanation. I know we are a small market in the XXL frame size. But Transition dropped all XXL sizes for 2026 and their 2027 lineup won't see the size return. Yeti offered the SB140 and SB160 in XXL but are not offering it in LT or MT. It's a shame to see companies pulling back from this size as it nice finally riding a bike that fits. I know there is always Santa Cruz for XXL and i've owned one, but I prefer my Transition personally.
Yeah, if Santa Cruz drops XXL there won't be much left. It's getting scary.
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL...
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL sizes disappearing from lineups at a rather rapid pace with no explanation. I know we are a small market in the XXL frame size. But Transition dropped all XXL sizes for 2026 and their 2027 lineup won't see the size return. Yeti offered the SB140 and SB160 in XXL but are not offering it in LT or MT. It's a shame to see companies pulling back from this size as it nice finally riding a bike that fits. I know there is always Santa Cruz for XXL and i've owned one, but I prefer my Transition personally.
I have been running a 32" front wheel on my epic all year. Started out with my normal 35mm stem and riser bars and I had a hard time keeping the front end under control. Tried out a drop stem and it brought my weight back forward and the front end was much better. Bike is very fun still and very fast. I personally think it still handles very well even in the tight stuff. Despite the wild looking stem it's comfortable and feels normal. The bigger wheel just raised the front end so much that the bars are in a similar position now as they were before with the 29" wheel and riser bar/35mm stem.
I briefly test rode 32" XC and gravel bikes already, and altough the later one felt a bit odd with that much wheel, a very slack head angle and narrow handlebars... The XC bike, wich was set up with an integrated handlebar designed for 29ers (so, parallel-ish to the ground stem and flat handlebar with moderate width and angles...) felt awesome to me, very "normal", stable in a way that would appeal to the average trail and enduro biker (or ebiker...) still quick and reactive... but of course, I am just no one with an opinion and 5'9" of height
Commencal quietly dropped the Tempo "V2" with the only revision being they got rid of the headset cable routing. (praise be!)
Commencal quietly dropped the Tempo "V2" with the only revision being they got rid of the headset cable routing. (praise be!)
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in new Nomad launch video), and even Super Boost get through in the first place? To us common folk, this was the obvious outcome of all of those choices, but I want to believe the industry is not really that out of touch with their customer.
The only reason I have the bike I have now and not the TEMPO V1 is the headset routing.
I had decided on the TEMPO and then one day realized it had headset routing. I couldn't believe it. It's SUCH a dumb idea that I didn't even think a bike brand as practical as Commencal seems to be would make a decision like that.
But they did. And I bet it cost them a lot of sales.
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in...
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in new Nomad launch video), and even Super Boost get through in the first place? To us common folk, this was the obvious outcome of all of those choices, but I want to believe the industry is not really that out of touch with their customer.
It's usually because there is some merit to the idea to begin with, and the development happens outside the publics view. Take headset routing, the real merit to it is that it allows for stronger lighter frames with internal routing, and less complicated carbon moulds, the downside is only on the consumer end having to work on it. Superboost wheels are objectively stronger and make a lot of sense, but it's competing with a standard that was more widely adopted and made it hard to swap wheels between frames. Wireless only is for the same reason as headset routing while not having headset routing. It's all trying to predict what people want and usually by the time they see what the people actually want it's too late to make the changes and they have to recoup the costs they have in the development.
Don't forget that these aren't actually universally disliked by the whole market either. Some people do like headset routing, or superboost (I would rather have superboost over boost as the defacto hub width) or they just don't care because it doesn't affect the bike they're buying. They were always getting a wireless drivetrain, who cares that it doesn't work with mechanical.
Agreed.The only reason I have the bike I have now and not the TEMPO V1 is the headset routing.I had decided on the TEMPO and then...
Agreed.
The only reason I have the bike I have now and not the TEMPO V1 is the headset routing.
I had decided on the TEMPO and then one day realized it had headset routing. I couldn't believe it. It's SUCH a dumb idea that I didn't even think a bike brand as practical as Commencal seems to be would make a decision like that.
But they did. And I bet it cost them a lot of sales.
Yeah, when I was shopping for a short travel trail bike a few years back, the Tempo was on the short list, on paper it looked awesome, but the headset cable routing was really the only reason I crossed it off my list. I ended up with a Reeb SST and couldn't be happier.
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in...
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in new Nomad launch video), and even Super Boost get through in the first place? To us common folk, this was the obvious outcome of all of those choices, but I want to believe the industry is not really that out of touch with their customer.
I don't have actual inside information but i know these decisions are pretty locked in a long time before we hear about it - I imagine companies will learn of one brand going all in on a certain technology or design element and a bunch will rush to catch up. So by the time the bikes come to market and the feedback starts coming out, the new frames are already being welded up....
Sure there are probably people within the company who think its a bad idea, but they don't want to be left behind if everyone thinks they need it. Things like BB30 were the same, as well as others which probably came and went a bit slower but you just don't hear about any more
Or lightweight dual crown forks with clip ons!
Now that would be wild
To make that XL Trek 32" fit me, I'd need about an 80mm positive stem and 50mm riser bars. I know there aren't that many people who are 6'6"+, but surely there are more of them than there are 5'2" people who would actually buy that bike, right?
not this year.
"The 2027 lineup brings big updates:
A trail-ready ASR Lunch Ride built for the backcountry, the new ‘Lavender Pearl’ colorway on the SB120, spec upgrades to the MTe, and new pricing on SB160, SB140, SB120, and ARC."
https://www.instagram.com/p/DdEiN1DERbp/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share…
I'm 6'6" here and have zero interest in 32in wheel bikes, my XXL Spire is long enough on tight trails. I'm more concerned with the XXL sizes disappearing from lineups at a rather rapid pace with no explanation. I know we are a small market in the XXL frame size. But Transition dropped all XXL sizes for 2026 and their 2027 lineup won't see the size return. Yeti offered the SB140 and SB160 in XXL but are not offering it in LT or MT. It's a shame to see companies pulling back from this size as it nice finally riding a bike that fits. I know there is always Santa Cruz for XXL and i've owned one, but I prefer my Transition personally.
Yeah, if Santa Cruz drops XXL there won't be much left. It's getting scary.
Luckily there is always the smaller brands that make those
I have been running a 32" front wheel on my epic all year. Started out with my normal 35mm stem and riser bars and I had a hard time keeping the front end under control. Tried out a drop stem and it brought my weight back forward and the front end was much better. Bike is very fun still and very fast. I personally think it still handles very well even in the tight stuff. Despite the wild looking stem it's comfortable and feels normal. The bigger wheel just raised the front end so much that the bars are in a similar position now as they were before with the 29" wheel and riser bar/35mm stem.
I briefly test rode 32" XC and gravel bikes already, and altough the later one felt a bit odd with that much wheel, a very slack head angle and narrow handlebars... The XC bike, wich was set up with an integrated handlebar designed for 29ers (so, parallel-ish to the ground stem and flat handlebar with moderate width and angles...) felt awesome to me, very "normal", stable in a way that would appeal to the average trail and enduro biker (or ebiker...) still quick and reactive... but of course, I am just no one with an opinion and 5'9" of height
Commencal quietly dropped the Tempo "V2" with the only revision being they got rid of the headset cable routing. (praise be!)
That is honestly all that bike needed!
Do any industry folks have some inside baseball into how decisions that eventually get walked back like headset routing, wireless only (Santa Cruz walking back in new Nomad launch video), and even Super Boost get through in the first place? To us common folk, this was the obvious outcome of all of those choices, but I want to believe the industry is not really that out of touch with their customer.
Agreed.
The only reason I have the bike I have now and not the TEMPO V1 is the headset routing.
I had decided on the TEMPO and then one day realized it had headset routing. I couldn't believe it. It's SUCH a dumb idea that I didn't even think a bike brand as practical as Commencal seems to be would make a decision like that.
But they did. And I bet it cost them a lot of sales.
It's usually because there is some merit to the idea to begin with, and the development happens outside the publics view. Take headset routing, the real merit to it is that it allows for stronger lighter frames with internal routing, and less complicated carbon moulds, the downside is only on the consumer end having to work on it. Superboost wheels are objectively stronger and make a lot of sense, but it's competing with a standard that was more widely adopted and made it hard to swap wheels between frames. Wireless only is for the same reason as headset routing while not having headset routing. It's all trying to predict what people want and usually by the time they see what the people actually want it's too late to make the changes and they have to recoup the costs they have in the development.
Don't forget that these aren't actually universally disliked by the whole market either. Some people do like headset routing, or superboost (I would rather have superboost over boost as the defacto hub width) or they just don't care because it doesn't affect the bike they're buying. They were always getting a wireless drivetrain, who cares that it doesn't work with mechanical.
and a straight top tube
Yeah, when I was shopping for a short travel trail bike a few years back, the Tempo was on the short list, on paper it looked awesome, but the headset cable routing was really the only reason I crossed it off my list. I ended up with a Reeb SST and couldn't be happier.
I don't have actual inside information but i know these decisions are pretty locked in a long time before we hear about it - I imagine companies will learn of one brand going all in on a certain technology or design element and a bunch will rush to catch up. So by the time the bikes come to market and the feedback starts coming out, the new frames are already being welded up....
Sure there are probably people within the company who think its a bad idea, but they don't want to be left behind if everyone thinks they need it. Things like BB30 were the same, as well as others which probably came and went a bit slower but you just don't hear about any more
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker