All

Going out on a limb here: Maybe, just maybe a higher stack on most bikes would make it less necessary to use high rise bars? It's no coincidence that bikes like the Atherton, Raaw Madonna, the Megatower etc. are praised for their superb handling. 10-20mm higher stack throughout the size range of modern bike geometry would certainly help.

No, we haven’t been measuring sag wrong. Any method of measuring sag that is repeatable is an acceptable way to measure sag. As it is something that must be tuned as opposed to setting to a specific percentage, being able to repeatably measure sag is the most important thing. You can do this seated and measuring at the shock just fine. If someone wants to measure it with a whole bunch of kit that’s fine, but telling everyone they are wrong and do it wrong is silly. It is definitely worth noting that on more progressive bikes you shouldn’t be...

If you see a guy using a screwdriver as a hammer, you'd say something too.

The shifting is great, but so is XT when it's fresh. The gear spacing is great, but I'm not that picky. The cost is absolutely ridiculous, and you would be shocked at how little I care what other people think. 95% of all the people I know think riding a bike after age 10 is silly. I bought my Transmission in September and it has been flawless. The chain is even still well within tolerance. Sram or Shimano, 11 or 12 speed, I would be on at least my second if not third chain and derailleur by now. They just...

I thought it was funny. I laughed. https://www.masterclass.com/articles/veblen-good

I always appreciate tinkering like this. We need more of it... and others to do it successfully so I don't break stuff and waste money!

So the TLDR is that Transmissions benefits over eagle are: 1. Better shifting ramps, so multiple shifts or shifting under load is MUCH better 2. Better gear spacing 3. More Expensive (the most important part when showing up at the trailhead to ride IMBA carpeted trails)

SRAM be like "delete this"

It isn't average, that's my point - it should be though, for all mtbs. So when bikes are under 65 they can be described as 'slack', and equally when bikes are over 65 they can be described as 'steep'. I'm not entirely saying steep bikes are inherrantly wrong (ok, I kinda am), but they are that - steep

65° should be seen as 'about average' for any mtb in 2020. You wait, in 2022 the Reactor Mk2 will have this 'revolutionary' new geometry. Face, palm... I've actually got a Vitus Mythique and it's great now I fitted a Superstar -2° angle set. At least you used a 44/56mm head tube, so it's a simple fit

Very true, none of our Reactor models would be considered "extreme" or win a game of Top Trumps. However we put a lot of of effort into the engineering, R&D and testing to ensure they perform for riders in the real world on the trail. So far most riders, racers and media seem to enjoyed riding them (check Vitals review the other week). But happy to accept that they may not be for everyone- the beauty of the bike industry is there are a lot of brands to choose from.

Yet another brand new high end bike that requires an angle set straight out of the box. Why are we still obsessed with near-vertical head angles? It's 2020, I thought we'd been through this? To be clear: 66.8° is not, has never been, and will never be what should be considered "slack" or even close to.