Printable View
The new Transitions look cool, but it seems like a 64 degree headtube angle is approaching too slack for real trail riding. Wouldn't that be a little tiring to pedal up your average trail all day? Even the Scout went to a 65 degree angle and I thought it was pretty sweet at 67.
https://www.transitionbikes.com/2018preview.cfm
The messed around with the fork offsets. Supposedly that makes things work better. Whether that's actually the case is TBD.
Boost Plus wheels, 'tard wide bars and sofa slack is the new standard.
Your pedaling position is way forward on those things too though. They got rid of the dumb real seat tube angles that happened when everyone went to bigger wheels. The increased front wheel weight should help.
I'm with you for different reasons though. I think some lower speed snappiness is going to be lost but more due to the fork offset changes and wheelbase lengths. I've talked to a few people who have ridden their test mule/figure it out bikes and they seemed to like them.
But generally speaking a 64-65 deg short travel bike is something I've wanted for a long time. Travel aside, that's just good high speed handlin'
Yeah, you can get the same trail with slacker HT angle by increasing the fork offsetQuote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
Slackening the head angle and decreasing the offset substantially increases the trail. You'd need to increase the offset if you wanted the trail to stay the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by DIYSteve
Right. Which is what fork companies have continued to do to make bigger wheels not feel so sluggish.Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
Fox moreso than rockshox has gone a little overboard with this. To the point where there's so much leverage on the wheel when hitting things with one of their 29er setups, the front end gets knocked around. I'm glad to see this. I think it's the bounce back/equalization of taking things a little too far at first.
I thought both Rockshox and Fox were running 51mm offsets for wagon wheels these days?Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
But regardless, the trail and wheel flop numbers for the new transitions makes me question how they'll handle. On high speed stuff I'm sure they're great, but on slower speed stuff, and tighter off camber corners, I don't see how the front end isn't going to push.
Just going from memory RS makes two different offsets for 29 trail bike forks, but yeah one of them is 51/52. The 27.5s are a bigger difference even. Generally speaking all the fox offsets are greater for a wheelsize except some older cast 37ish ones from way back for 26 they still use on the 831s.
The most annoying one I've ridden is the fox dh 27.5 forks (also 51mm). It's too much. It's actually the main reason I still run 26s on my dh bike.
Right, of course. I had it backwards. Brain fart. Edited my post. Larger wheel diameter also corresponds to longer trail.Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
Pay particular attention to bike checks of pro riders, you'll see that many of them are not running the over the top trends that the industry is pushing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vt-Freeheel
A 29er with a 64 degree head angle? Does it steer like a pontoon boat?Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
I'm assuming they publish their head angles at sag height? Most of their bikes are running longer fork length than rear travel, I wonder what the sag assumptions are.
I've actually been wanting a 130mm trail bike with 65* HA w/ 150mm fork ... new Scout geo looks pretty sweet to me!
I personally would love to demo the new Scout w/ a dual position fork. I really like them on "do it all" bikes ... if you ran 120mm going uphill you might be right around 66.5* depending on sag assumptions, which when paired with 76 degree STA might feel okay on the way up.
Besides, if 65 HA is too slack for you just get a Works Headseat and rotate the cups to get +1 orientation.
No one does that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio
Exactly. It makes me sad that every bike made doesn't come with a full 1.5" headtube.Quote:
Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio
Is one of these offset forks the missing piece of the puzzle? Really like to try it. Running a 160 fork on my scout and ordered a works -1 headset over a month ago. If the hs ever gets here I'll be at 65 ha(may drop the fork to 150). I'm ok with 65/65.5 climbing, especially with these steeper sa and 32mm stem. The seat angle has been a noticed improvement compared to my rune. Put a 180mm travel fork on the rune and it now has a 64 ha and it's a little past where I'd like it for climbing. Steeper seat angle would help it. Maybe less fork offset would make it $ ? Definitely curious.
Like toast said. Less offset should do the opposite of what they're claiming as far as climbing/very slow speeds.
I always wanted to try a super slack 29er with a fork that had a lot of offset. But I think the only fork that has more than 51 or 52mm offset is one of the longer travel Lefty's (which has like 60mm). But the Lefty is a deal breaker.
I had a lowrider bike with a dropped spring fork that ended up with like a 2-3ft offset.
'steering' wasn't really in the repertoire of the model per se.
probably just needed some 29" wheels.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Well obviously. Answer to everything.
I had a 12" wheel on it. When you turn the highly stylistic rams head handlebars, the bike would just lift up, and kind of sort of go the direction you wanted. Took a lot of effort though. Much better to just go in a straight line and look cool. Then stop, pick it up and turn it around.
https://www.transitionbikes.com/SBG.cfm
I'll be interested to hear back from non-industry types. Put some time on a Scout, and have been riding a Scout clone for the past week. Hard to imagine it getting much better, but I've been saying that for years.
2017 Patrol is the most fun bike I've ever owned.
I'd say try the 2018s before you knock em.
That said...
For Sale: Lightly used 2017 Transition Patrol.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Quote:
Originally Posted by regct
Isn't that kind of like praising them before you try them?
Attachment 211407
Lowball offer incoming, due to it being old technology and all.Quote:
Originally Posted by regct
A steep seat angle allows for a slack head angle while maintaining good seated climbing behaviour. I am blown away by the uphill handling on my Chromag Rootdown BA (65.5 HA / 75.5 SA with my 150 Pike). Keeping the stack height reasonable is key as well.
Whether a slack HA is what you're after for handling on descents is a different story, but it's definitely possible to design a bike that gets a slack HA uphill quite nicely.
Haha! Yes. Yes it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
The stack is pretty stacked on that BA. is slamming the stem enough for you?Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C)
I don't find. The bike is designed around a 160 fork and I'm running a 150. With Atlas low-rise bars, I actually need to run a couple spacers under the stem to get the bars in a similar place as my 160 mm full-suspension 27.5.Quote:
Originally Posted by xyz
The old Rootdown (non-BA), however, felt quite tall in front, from the brief time I pedalled my buddy's around.
The stack on my ti honzo, w/ 130 mm fork and slammed stem just doesn't put me where I want to be for climbing. Either going to a 120 mm fork or sell in the frame. Was looking at the BA for a hardtail but the stack is pretty high too. I need to pedal one around the chromag parking lot to be sure.
My hei hei stack of 615 mm (large) is perfect.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Anybody with ride time on the new models have input? A year ago I was mostly interested in the Scout but I'm leaning towards the Smuggler now. Not that I'm in the market for a new bike, more just dreaming since my bike is out of commission for the next two weeks.
I haven't ridden the new transitions, but have a buddy with a sentinel who previously had the first generation smuggler. He's pretty psyched on the sentinel, and definitely rides it on "normal" trails.
As a second reference point, I have a trek slash, and I measure the head angle to be about 64.5, so pretty similar to the transitions, although it doesn't have the reduced offset fork. I regularly do decent length / vert trail rides on it. And yeah, it feels like a big bike and the front end is wandery on steep climbs. But it's all pretty manageable. In other words, it's about what you'd expect, and it kills it on the descents, but I wouldn't really call it a well rounded ride.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I test drove a 2018 Patrol. Pretty standard Front Range ride, 2k climb/descent on fairly technical, rocky singletrack. Little bit of everything.
I don't have a ton of time on different bikes. So I'm not going to claim that I know much about different bikes. I currently ride a heavily modified 2013 Giant Reign with children's wheel size, have also been on a 2015ish Pivot Mach 6 for a full ride and brief stints on newer Yeti SB6, Kona Process, and Specialized Enduro, and one day on a DH sled lift-served.
However I REALLY liked the Patrol. If I didn't know that it was a 64* HT before the ride, and somebody told me at the top of the climb, I would have said they were full of shit. The steep ST angle definitely does it's job getting your weight on the front tire. I felt like it tracked just fine at low speeds and I didn't have any issue getting it through precise technical spots going up, or around tight switchbacks going up or down. If anything the front felt more planted than my bike. My two complaints climbing were 1) the aluminum Patrol is heavy as fuck and 2) the suspension is fairly active when pedaling, so using the settings on the shock was pretty helpful to make it more efficient. I did also have to watch for pedal strikes a bit more than I'm used to. The Mach 6 was quite a bit more efficient climbing, I thought.
Going down is amazing on the Patrol. What I really liked about it was it had all the stability you'd expect from a 64* HT bike, but it didn't feel like a tank at all. It was super happy to pop off everything in sight and very playful. It was very confidence inspiring when cornering. By contrast the front end of the Mach 6 wasn't as stable, but the rear end just stayed locked in a line and had very little pop or playful characteristics.
I probably should ride more bikes to compare but I thought the geometry worked as advertised. I probably would have already purchased one if a carbon version was currently available.
I’d like to try one. I’ve slackened my scout to a 65.5 ha and have my rune at 64. The longer tt, steep SA and shorty stem all help a bit. 65 is about the limit for no probs. Front wheel wonders a touch but quite controllable. 65/65.5 seems to be the sweet spot with traditional fork offset, for me. My rune at 64 gives some issues when the climbing is technical, especially around corners the wheel l flops easier. Rune is now mostly my fireroad climber to dh trails. 64 with trad offset wouldn’t be my daily driver. Sounds reasonable that those new offsets would make 64 capable. Watching “counts customs” they rave about the “sugar bear “ front ends on choppers helping them turn around in tighter spaces and ride much more controllable, and they do basically the same thing as these new mtb fork offsets. Curious if that’s where transition came up with the idea
I have an ‘18 Sentinel, I love it but that’s probably to be expected given that I’m coming from an ‘03 S.C. Blur and an ‘04 S.C. VP Free. When I demoed the bike I had big plans to ride a bunch of different stuff. 2 hours later I was back at the shop trying to buy one on the spot.
If I was to criticize the bike it would be that hairpin turns are a bit tricky, and it’s a heavy pig. I am fat and slow though, and uphill has never been a priority.
The thing I like best is that it is just stupid fun going down. Feels as capable as a downhill bike and you can actually pedal it to the top. Easily the most fun I’ve ever had on a bike!
I've had a Sentinel since last fall. Really like it. Obviously does everything really well when pointed down. Surprisingly it's the best climbing bike I've owned (coming off a carbon scout, had an endorphin and a blur LT before that). The steeper and chunkier the climb, the better it does. If you have to ride some flat pedal'y stuff it handles that fine but it's not it's forte.
The only downside I've found is the weight. I've got an aluminum one. It's around 34 lbs with pretty stout tires and a decent build.
So, I'm not sure I can particularly identify wheel flop, as I'm not sure I've ever really felt it, although I understand the concept. I don't quite understand why the reduced offset helps combat flop; in theory, it shouldn't. But the ride I did on the Patrol had a number of slow switchbacks both up and down and I just never felt like the bike had any trouble arcing smoothly around the corner exactly how I wanted it to. It was better than my bike, which feels imprecise and requires a lot of steering corrections on switchbacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
I'm not a bike geometry wiz and can't really explain why it works, I just know it was a non-issue riding it.
That’s probably a good thing. I think you’d feel it/struggle if it was there.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Think of it in extremes. If it was a super crazy chopped out Harley as opposed to a super steep road bike head angle. Let go of the bars on the Harley and the wheel will just fall over. The road bike wheel would better be described as pivoting to turn. The shorter offset allows you to keep the slower steering the 64 ha gives but it isn’t as apt to flop when your at your balancing limit climbing tech up around a switchback. I think that’s the theory . How much the offset accounts for taming the flop is my curiosity . I just happen to have a couple test mules on or just below my preferred HA I switch back and forth between . I’d like to add the reduced offset into the equation now. Rune with the 64 ha is so capable on the downs now, it’d be nice to have it handle like it did at 65 for general trail riding
Slight thread drift - I just put a new (much longer travel) fork on my ht and between the crown and dropouts the difference in offset is pretty significant, at least 1cm, but AC is the same. Slow switchbacks and general slow tight moves I'm getting pretty significant flop and it sends me to the inside of the turn. Is there an easy solution? I have 20mm of spacers under the stem so have some room to play with dropping that down and have plenty of room on the seat rails to move myself forward but I'm loving the railed corner feeling at higher speeds.
I rode the Scout in SC and really liked the way it handled on the up and downs.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
Honestly, I may not be the best critic though. I've loved every bike I've ridden lately from Stumpy, Enduro, this Scout, and I own a Hightower. New bikes rock!
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...58f5756a7a.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...64b26fe141.jpg
Just found this thread...interesting!
I’m pretty new to mtn biking and I still suck but I’ve demoed a ton of bikes recently in an effort to find a new modern bike.
5’11” and have been trying bikes mostly in size large. I’m preferring 29ers in general, but I did ride a Large 2018 Scout and had a blast. Few weeks later rode a large 2018 carbon Smuggler and while it climbed great, it felt like so much bike on the way down. It was certainly taking me for a ride more than anything. Sucker wants to fuckin run!
So I’m confused...smuggler feels too slack and long but same year scout doesn’t?