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
The problem with internal cable routing really comes down to the fact that suspension forks currently don't allow for hidden hoses. I think, based on what happened in road and gravel, that if that possibility existed, headset cable routing would become extremely common.
I think a lot of brands were worried about the sales floor problem that happened with road bikes of having a rats nest compete with an integrated bike. Imagine how much money some brands lost as a result of that. Add to that, they are in a position where they have to predict the future, and they can't ask customers what they want; the whole stated preference vs revealed preference thing. But they had this signal, and this past experience, that people want cleaner, neater looking bikes.
Some brands REALLY hedged and allowed for both in their design. I'm kind of surprised that wasn't the route we saw most often. They could even have marketed the extra space in the headset as alternatively for reach adjust/angle adjust blah blah.
For some bikes, the lack of accommodation for derailleur cables really doesn't matter. Effectively no one is buying a $15k S-Works Epic to take their XX SL derailleur off and swap on a mechanical one to have the added benefit of making their flight attendant stop working... For other bikes, like the nomad, it makes no sense to me.
The problem with internal cable routing really comes down to the fact that suspension forks currently don't allow for hidden hoses. I think, based on what...
The problem with internal cable routing really comes down to the fact that suspension forks currently don't allow for hidden hoses. I think, based on what happened in road and gravel, that if that possibility existed, headset cable routing would become extremely common.
I think a lot of brands were worried about the sales floor problem that happened with road bikes of having a rats nest compete with an integrated bike. Imagine how much money some brands lost as a result of that. Add to that, they are in a position where they have to predict the future, and they can't ask customers what they want; the whole stated preference vs revealed preference thing. But they had this signal, and this past experience, that people want cleaner, neater looking bikes.
Some brands REALLY hedged and allowed for both in their design. I'm kind of surprised that wasn't the route we saw most often. They could even have marketed the extra space in the headset as alternatively for reach adjust/angle adjust blah blah.
For some bikes, the lack of accommodation for derailleur cables really doesn't matter. Effectively no one is buying a $15k S-Works Epic to take their XX SL derailleur off and swap on a mechanical one to have the added benefit of making their flight attendant stop working... For other bikes, like the nomad, it makes no sense to me.
Most of the people I know don't buy the $15k bike - they buy the frame from the $15k bike, and then their favorite components, since the factory builds don't have the parts they want.
The other thing to consider: what was likely the anticipated sales experience? A non-bike-dork walks into a shop, likes the look of the bike, asks the shop if having that brake hose go like that is a big deal. A smart bike shop says, honestly, "Not really. How often do you replace your headset? If you have to replace your headset then you have to bleed the brakes, but that's a major service and you're probably going to want to bleed the brakes at that point anyway."
That is obviously to say nothing of what turns out to be bad designs, which the bike industry never ceases to produce. (My personal favorite was the Acros headset from a few years back with the integrated steering stop in the lower headset cup that had the added benefit of literally SHOVING dirt directly into your lower headset bearing.)
The other thing to consider: what was likely the anticipated sales experience? A non-bike-dork walks into a shop, likes the look of the bike, asks the...
The other thing to consider: what was likely the anticipated sales experience? A non-bike-dork walks into a shop, likes the look of the bike, asks the shop if having that brake hose go like that is a big deal. A smart bike shop says, honestly, "Not really. How often do you replace your headset? If you have to replace your headset then you have to bleed the brakes, but that's a major service and you're probably going to want to bleed the brakes at that point anyway."
That is obviously to say nothing of what turns out to be bad designs, which the bike industry never ceases to produce. (My personal favorite was the Acros headset from a few years back with the integrated steering stop in the lower headset cup that had the added benefit of literally SHOVING dirt directly into your lower headset bearing.)
Those shitty plastic headsets are popping up EVERYWHERE. Like, okay, you want to have headset routing, fine. Yes, that’s slightly annoying when you change the headset once a year. But now it becomes infinitely more annoying when the headset starts to fail on the first ride
Looks like new sentinel about to drop? Pics I saw has a link behind the seat tube not sure why you’d do that but it’s there. Modular lower shock mount but no modular dropout.
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can full of ball bearings going down the trail.
Regarding headset cable routing... it obviously sucks. One thing I wish we had gotten out of cable tourism period is headtubes that can accommodate reach adjust headsets. I was honestly hoping that the chunky head tubes that headset cable routing were ushering in would normalize ZS56/ZS66 headsets. I feel like that adds value to the tip of the spear tinkerer users and detracts nothing from the average consumer.
On that subject, is there really a reason some brands are sticking with integrated headsets? With stack heights now growing on seemingly all sizes we now have ample room for a couple of mm of headset assembly. I feel like I've had/seen the same amount of frame failures at the head tube with integrated headset races as I have ec/zs headset bores.
I would honestly love to see brands provide provisions for reach adjust in their frames (provided it doesn't make them universally ugly... looking at you gorilla gravity, RIP). I feel like it would provide broader appeal and help those that are in between sizes and grow your potential customer base. I suppose the devils advocate side of that equation is the number of consumers that is are picky about fit geometry that they won't budge off of their targets is pretty small overall.
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can...
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can full of ball bearings going down the trail.
Regarding headset cable routing... it obviously sucks. One thing I wish we had gotten out of cable tourism period is headtubes that can accommodate reach adjust headsets. I was honestly hoping that the chunky head tubes that headset cable routing were ushering in would normalize ZS56/ZS66 headsets. I feel like that adds value to the tip of the spear tinkerer users and detracts nothing from the average consumer.
On that subject, is there really a reason some brands are sticking with integrated headsets? With stack heights now growing on seemingly all sizes we now have ample room for a couple of mm of headset assembly. I feel like I've had/seen the same amount of frame failures at the head tube with integrated headset races as I have ec/zs headset bores.
I would honestly love to see brands provide provisions for reach adjust in their frames (provided it doesn't make them universally ugly... looking at you gorilla gravity, RIP). I feel like it would provide broader appeal and help those that are in between sizes and grow your potential customer base. I suppose the devils advocate side of that equation is the number of consumers that is are picky about fit geometry that they won't budge off of their targets is pretty small overall.
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can...
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can full of ball bearings going down the trail.
Regarding headset cable routing... it obviously sucks. One thing I wish we had gotten out of cable tourism period is headtubes that can accommodate reach adjust headsets. I was honestly hoping that the chunky head tubes that headset cable routing were ushering in would normalize ZS56/ZS66 headsets. I feel like that adds value to the tip of the spear tinkerer users and detracts nothing from the average consumer.
On that subject, is there really a reason some brands are sticking with integrated headsets? With stack heights now growing on seemingly all sizes we now have ample room for a couple of mm of headset assembly. I feel like I've had/seen the same amount of frame failures at the head tube with integrated headset races as I have ec/zs headset bores.
I would honestly love to see brands provide provisions for reach adjust in their frames (provided it doesn't make them universally ugly... looking at you gorilla gravity, RIP). I feel like it would provide broader appeal and help those that are in between sizes and grow your potential customer base. I suppose the devils advocate side of that equation is the number of consumers that is are picky about fit geometry that they won't budge off of their targets is pretty small overall.
You're right about that, I forgot how hard I got burned on the zs66 lower headset on my transition relay. Works is the only option... which, hopefully you want reach adjust cause that's the only option that won't creak.
Not looking to put a stop to the brake discussion… but here’s a new shimano saint rumour.There’s a DH being released in about a month. When...
Not looking to put a stop to the brake discussion… but here’s a new shimano saint rumour.
There’s a DH being released in about a month. When it’s released the full range of build kits won’t be available until spring of 27’ because of certain drivetrain and brake components.
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...
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.
Don't just base sizing off of XL vs XXL as a lot can be just marketing. When you cross reference geo charts, you'll find XL's from some brands that are bigger than XXL's from other brands.
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...
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.
Don't just base sizing off of XL vs XXL as a lot can be just marketing. When you cross reference geo charts, you'll find XL's from...
Don't just base sizing off of XL vs XXL as a lot can be just marketing. When you cross reference geo charts, you'll find XL's from some brands that are bigger than XXL's from other brands.
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
The problem with internal cable routing really comes down to the fact that suspension forks currently don't allow for hidden hoses. I think, based on what happened in road and gravel, that if that possibility existed, headset cable routing would become extremely common.
I think a lot of brands were worried about the sales floor problem that happened with road bikes of having a rats nest compete with an integrated bike. Imagine how much money some brands lost as a result of that. Add to that, they are in a position where they have to predict the future, and they can't ask customers what they want; the whole stated preference vs revealed preference thing. But they had this signal, and this past experience, that people want cleaner, neater looking bikes.
Some brands REALLY hedged and allowed for both in their design. I'm kind of surprised that wasn't the route we saw most often. They could even have marketed the extra space in the headset as alternatively for reach adjust/angle adjust blah blah.
For some bikes, the lack of accommodation for derailleur cables really doesn't matter. Effectively no one is buying a $15k S-Works Epic to take their XX SL derailleur off and swap on a mechanical one to have the added benefit of making their flight attendant stop working... For other bikes, like the nomad, it makes no sense to me.
Most of the people I know don't buy the $15k bike - they buy the frame from the $15k bike, and then their favorite components, since the factory builds don't have the parts they want.
The other thing to consider: what was likely the anticipated sales experience? A non-bike-dork walks into a shop, likes the look of the bike, asks the shop if having that brake hose go like that is a big deal. A smart bike shop says, honestly, "Not really. How often do you replace your headset? If you have to replace your headset then you have to bleed the brakes, but that's a major service and you're probably going to want to bleed the brakes at that point anyway."
That is obviously to say nothing of what turns out to be bad designs, which the bike industry never ceases to produce. (My personal favorite was the Acros headset from a few years back with the integrated steering stop in the lower headset cup that had the added benefit of literally SHOVING dirt directly into your lower headset bearing.)
Those shitty plastic headsets are popping up EVERYWHERE. Like, okay, you want to have headset routing, fine. Yes, that’s slightly annoying when you change the headset once a year. But now it becomes infinitely more annoying when the headset starts to fail on the first ride
Looks like new sentinel about to drop? Pics I saw has a link behind the seat tube not sure why you’d do that but it’s there. Modular lower shock mount but no modular dropout.
A+ changes to the tempo. I've always been commencal curious but all of them that filter in/out of my riding crew sound like a coffee can full of ball bearings going down the trail.
Regarding headset cable routing... it obviously sucks. One thing I wish we had gotten out of cable tourism period is headtubes that can accommodate reach adjust headsets. I was honestly hoping that the chunky head tubes that headset cable routing were ushering in would normalize ZS56/ZS66 headsets. I feel like that adds value to the tip of the spear tinkerer users and detracts nothing from the average consumer.
On that subject, is there really a reason some brands are sticking with integrated headsets? With stack heights now growing on seemingly all sizes we now have ample room for a couple of mm of headset assembly. I feel like I've had/seen the same amount of frame failures at the head tube with integrated headset races as I have ec/zs headset bores.
I would honestly love to see brands provide provisions for reach adjust in their frames (provided it doesn't make them universally ugly... looking at you gorilla gravity, RIP). I feel like it would provide broader appeal and help those that are in between sizes and grow your potential customer base. I suppose the devils advocate side of that equation is the number of consumers that is are picky about fit geometry that they won't budge off of their targets is pretty small overall.
Fuck zs66 no one makes a good quality one
You're right about that, I forgot how hard I got burned on the zs66 lower headset on my transition relay. Works is the only option... which, hopefully you want reach adjust cause that's the only option that won't creak.
From what I’ve heard yes, Norco Team DH release on Sept 25 (Whistler WC weekend).
But that’s just what I’ve heard. Maybe my ears don’t work well.
Don't just base sizing off of XL vs XXL as a lot can be just marketing. When you cross reference geo charts, you'll find XL's from some brands that are bigger than XXL's from other brands.
Found this yesterday at MTB-News.de. Looks like silver painted carbotec but should be milled alloy...
Looks AI to me. Anyone else?
True - norco S5 numbers are looong
The guy who posted it wrote that he’d already held it in his own hands... 🤷♂️
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker