Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndesJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    105

    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1

    Anyone own one of these bikes yet or have heard anything about them to share the ride experience or info on it? Looks like a great option in 27.5+, can convert to 29'er/single speed... The head angle seem a tad steep at 69 although the seat stay is at 71 on a large. This seems to be my only real concern as my Rune has a slack 65 HA.
    When in doubt, Accelerate!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    I just ordered one.

    The problem to me with giant bikes ( I own an anthem advance 1 and XTC advance 1) the cockpits are tight. I'm dead in-between sizes. I'm 5'10 and the medium is a little tight and the large is a tank. I go smaller every time. If you're 5'9"(medium) or 5'11"(large) you should be good to go.

    Funny call me old school but I would like to see 70.5 HTA again. One of my salsas had a 73 HTA not that was a bit crazy. I wouldn't worry too much as the bigger heavier wheels will slow it down a bit.

    Depending on geometry you are used to, you may not like the 71.5/71 STA. Many think its too hard to keep front down when climbing. You will have is plenty of weight over the rear tire for traction, however that may not be needed with the plus tires.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,053
    Quote Originally Posted by AndesJack View Post
    Anyone own one of these bikes yet or have heard anything about them to share the ride experience or info on it? Looks like a great option in 27.5+, can convert to 29'er/single speed... The head angle seem a tad steep at 69 although the seat stay is at 71 on a large. This seems to be my only real concern as my Rune has a slack 65 HA.
    Look at the reach of the bike you're riding now. The XTCs are incredibly short. Compare carefully and demo to make sure you'll fit.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    I research like crazy before bikes and no joke Giants feel tight, but their numbers have always matched up. Here is part of an interview from bike bible
    Review: Giant Anthem Advanced | BIKE Magazine

    Following along with the theme of neo-aggression, the Anthem is a quick handling, compact bike. The wheelbase is a solid two inches shorter than some of the other XC bikes of same relative frame size we were testing. This differentiates it from other bikes in this segment, but our testers had some sharply diverse opinions about bike fit as a result. Some welcomed the compact cockpit and playful handling, others felt it was difficult to really stretch out on the bike and breathe. You are not a small man, what size frame do YOU ride, and how do you feel the Anthem caters to the ergonomic needs of the modern XC racer?

    HA! At 6’5”, I’m right at the outer limit for a size XL. A centimeter taller and I’d probably be riding some other brand’s XXL. That said, I’m a bit confused by your testers’ comments on the compact cockpit. The 2017 Anthem’s toptube is 5mm LONGER than the outgoing (2016) Anthem. Yes, we spec’ed a shorter stem to compensate, but that’s an easy switch (for those feeling “cramped.”) At 23.9-inches (medium) the 2017 Anthem toptube length is almost identical to our core competitors’ (Trek, Specialized) toptubes, so I’m not exactly sure where you guys are coming from? The shorter wheelbase simply comes from the fact that our competitors are most likely running 29-inch wheels and we offer 27.5…in order to run ‘wagon wheels’, you’ll easily have to run longer chainstays (ours are a tidy 16.9-inches).

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndesJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    105
    I went out and bought one a couple weeks back and have to admit I'm impressed. Not riding on a HT in many years this bike is rad to ride. I'm 6'2" and bought a large frame. Receiving the bike and setting it up I realized that I'm on the limit as the seat post had to be raised to the limit to accommodate an efficient pedaling position. The bike pedals like a dream and with the plus tires they just roll over anything in front of them. I was looking to find some details on the rear hub (DT Swiss 360) as it engages well but doesn't feel as quick as the Mavic hub I run on my other bike. Also I'd like to change the standard chain ring to an oval ring, these definitely enhance the pedal efficiency imo. Going downhill with the steeper (than I'm used to) HA hasn't really affected the feel of the ride. I usually feel as if I'm going over the bars on a steeper head angle but the rear geometry of the bike compensates for that as I can get right behind the seat when things get rough. All and all happy with it, just need to get out and ride it more.
    When in doubt, Accelerate!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,053
    These are the reach numbers on an XTC 27.5+
    M/18 403mm
    L/20 414mm
    XL/22 431mm

    Spec Carbon Fuse 27.5+
    M 420mm
    L 440mm
    XL 458mm

    Trek Carbon Stache 29+(27.5+ also)
    16.5/17.5(virtual) 422mm
    18.5/19.5(virtual) 451mm
    20.5/21.5(virtual) 470mm

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    59
    I own the SS version in medium and at 5'9" with a 30 in inseam it fits perfectly. I did throw on some wider bars though.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndesJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    These are the reach numbers on an XTC 27.5+
    M/18 403mm
    L/20 414mm
    XL/22 431mm

    Spec Carbon Fuse 27.5+
    M 420mm
    L 440mm
    XL 458mm

    Trek Carbon Stache 29+(27.5+ also)
    16.5/17.5(virtual) 422mm
    18.5/19.5(virtual) 451mm
    20.5/21.5(virtual) 470mm
    Now this has me thinking of rider position and overall feel throughout the trail, ups and downs and overs. I also compared it to these bikes before purchasing the Giant.

    When comparing the head angles and seat stay angles (XTC 69/71; Stache 68.4/68.4; Fuse 67.5/73) it would have been nice to know the height at which the top tube joins the seat stay.. seems the XTC do have a tighter cockpit, personally I prefer it smaller rather than bigger
    When in doubt, Accelerate!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    To clarify, Ive been riding Giants for years and I did not look at the number on the XTC plus. I'm a medium in giant and that is what has worked for me.

    Those numbers are so wonky I wonder if there is an error. They are way smaller than my anthem or my XTC.

    I'm no geo expert and I know reach and stack are supposed to give us a better indication of fit when comparing bikes, but when geo are so different how does that work out? Can you/should you compare trail designed bikes vs race designed? I don't know. Perhaps you could fill me in a bit, as the HTA and STA are so different for all the bikes.

    I added the Scott Scale numbers too. However with the 66 HTA and 72.8STA it too is very different.

    Giant definitely seems stuck in the past from geo numbers. The industry is going longer top tube shorter stem steeper STA. If you like this type of geo the Giant will probably not be to your liking. If you are an older racer You will probably like it.

    XTC 27.5+
    M/18 403mm
    L/20 414mm
    XL/22 431mm


    Scott Scale 275+
    16.2 411mm
    17.1 434mm
    18.0 457mm

    Spec Carbon Fuse 27.5+
    M 420mm
    L 440mm
    XL 458mm

    Trek Carbon Stache 29+(27.5+ also)
    16.5/17.5(virtual) 422mm
    18.5/19.5(virtual) 451mm
    20.5/21.5(virtual) 470mm

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by AndesJack View Post
    I'm 6'2" and bought a large frame. Receiving the bike and setting it up I realized that I'm on the limit as the seat post had to be raised to the limit to accommodate an efficient pedaling position.
    Seems like you should be on an XL especially on a giant, but if its working out for you thats all that matters.

    S/16 5'6" 5'7"
    M/18 5'7" 5'10"
    L/20 5'10" 6'"
    XL/22 6'" 6'4"

    https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/xt...lus-1#geometry

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    Ok I have my XTC Advance 1 plus built.

    First off I have to say I did not research this bike before buying it. It's the only time I haven't done so in my life. Ive been buying Giants for years. Currently have an Anthem advance 1 and an XTC 1. This thread had me concerned about the geometry. The verdict is still out on it as I haven't ridden it yet.

    This should never have been called an XTC. XTC is synonymous with racing (like epic for specialized). I wish it was more XC related. Lighter wheels/ race tread tires. I grabbed one on a good deal and thought I would give it a try thinking it was an XTC.

    Also this frame has ISCG. I would never buy a frame with it. I just don't find it is needed, especially with todays technology and the weight penalty is not worth it.
    There are a few other frame characteristics that really make this a trail bike. Which is is through and through.

    I'll Get more info up eventually, but here are some tidbits.

    The red is not so red. Its closer to hunter orange thats been muted a bit.
    Front wheel with rotor and tubeless, no sealant. 4lbs 10oz
    Rear wheel with rotor, tubeless, no sealant with stock cassette 5lbs 14oz

    The dropper post is 600 grams.

    Stock bar is portly and already swapped out for a Giant carbon SL riser. I think it saved like 150g

    I was thinking that the Advance 2 might weigh in the same as the 1 with the lighter tires and narrower rims.

    I have seen two videos online (one bike on the scale) that reported the stock 2 to weigh 27.3(on the scale) and 27.10

    I will get the bike and the scale and then add the difference in parts back into get the stock weight. Tubes alone are 13.9oz

    Ill be back later with more

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    675
    If 27.3 / 27.1 lbs weight is correct, that's a bit disappointing. can only think the dropper/possibly heavy tyres/tubes/fork/rims add to it. 24/25 lbs would have been lovely, but I'm dreaming

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    675
    weights here from the Spanish site (so nice of them)

    https://www.giant-bicycles.com/es/bi...-advanced-plus

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by lucifuge View Post
    If 27.3 / 27.1 lbs weight is correct, that's a bit disappointing. can only think the dropper/possibly heavy tyres/tubes/fork/rims add to it. 24/25 lbs would have been lovely, but I'm dreaming
    Had the LBS weigh Ibis 742 wheels, Industry 9 hubs, Eagle cassette, tubeless, Rekon+ tires. Those came in at 4lbs 3oz front, 5lbs 2oz rear. So you'll save about 1.6 pounds getting down to 25.5 with those rims, but your kids will lose about $2k from their college funds.

    Bring lunch to work for 50 days to save $2 per day and you can have some nice carbon bars for another 150grams with no impact to the college 529s. 25.2 pounds.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: imtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    77
    Here is mine. Been riding for a couple months. I like the bike but, the bottom bracket is low with 27.5 plus tires. Around 11,1/4-1/2", A differnt fork would raise it up some. I put 170 cranks on and that help pedal strikes.
    Mine is right at 22#'s.
    The carbon frame is awesome and boost spacing is good. Not that crazy about color.
    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-xtc1.jpg2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-xtc2.jpg

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by imtb View Post
    Here is mine. Been riding for a couple months. I like the bike but, the bottom bracket is low with 27.5 plus tires. Around 11,1/4-1/2", A differnt fork would raise it up some. I put 170 cranks on and that help pedal strikes.
    Mine is right at 22#'s.
    The carbon frame is awesome and boost spacing is good. Not that crazy about color.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	xtc1.jpg 
Views:	469 
Size:	141.3 KB 
ID:	1127730Click image for larger version. 

Name:	xtc2.jpg 
Views:	2248 
Size:	119.5 KB 
ID:	1127731
    I reckon it looks great. How far do you feel the extra air volume aids in living with a hardtail in terms of the rear? Does it help a lot?

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,034
    No Not a lot!do not mistake + with suspension.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by njperson View Post
    Had the LBS weigh Ibis 742 wheels, Industry 9 hubs, Eagle cassette, tubeless, Rekon+ tires. Those came in at 4lbs 3oz front, 5lbs 2oz rear. So you'll save about 1.6 pounds getting down to 25.5 with those rims, but your kids will lose about $2k from their college funds.

    Bring lunch to work for 50 days to save $2 per day and you can have some nice carbon bars for another 150grams with no impact to the college 529s. 25.2 pounds.
    Did a bit more research at the LBS and found the following:

    The wheelset set & tire combo that comes with the 27.5+ Advanced 1 is quite hefty. Measured with tubes, Shimano XT rotor, SLX 11-42.

    [F] Schwalbe Nobby Nic, 27.5x3.0, Snakeskin, TL Easy, Trailstar
    [R] Schwalbe Rocket Ron, 27.5x2.8, Snakeskin, TL Easy, Pacestar)

    [F] 5.36 pounds
    [R] 6.62 pounds
    TOTAL 11.98 pounds

    FWIW...Ibis 742 rims, tubeless with 3oz sealant, Guide RSC rotors, Eagle XO1 cassette, Rekon+ tires came in at:
    [F] 4.19 pounds
    [R] 5.13 pounds
    TOTAL 9.32 pounds

    Investing in the wheelset, tubeless, and a lighter cassette will get the bike to 24.5 pounds.

    I think the smart move is to get the Advanced 2 or the SS and upgrade through that path.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by njperson View Post
    Did a bit more research at the LBS and found the following:

    The wheelset set & tire combo that comes with the 27.5+ Advanced 1 is quite hefty. Measured with tubes, Shimano XT rotor, SLX 11-42.

    [F] Schwalbe Nobby Nic, 27.5x3.0, Snakeskin, TL Easy, Trailstar
    [R] Schwalbe Rocket Ron, 27.5x2.8, Snakeskin, TL Easy, Pacestar)

    [F] 5.36 pounds
    [R] 6.62 pounds
    TOTAL 11.98 pounds

    FWIW...Ibis 742 rims, tubeless with 3oz sealant, Guide RSC rotors, Eagle XO1 cassette, Rekon+ tires came in at:
    [F] 4.19 pounds
    [R] 5.13 pounds
    TOTAL 9.32 pounds

    Investing in the wheelset, tubeless, and a lighter cassette will get the bike to 24.5 pounds.

    I think the smart move is to get the Advanced 2 or the SS and upgrade through that path.
    awesome, many thanks for your research.

    did your bike come with a dropper btw and you swapped it out?

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by lucifuge View Post
    awesome, many thanks for your research.

    did your bike come with a dropper btw and you swapped it out?
    The Giant rep who happened to be at the shop, knew nothing about the dropper post. On the Giant website it's listed as "TranzX YSP-11 Dropper Post, 27.2x400mm", but there isn't a lot of info on it.
    http://tranzx.com/wp-content/uploads...OPPER-POST.pdf
    TranzX ? inspiring your ride
    Looks like German design for some products, Taiwan design for others, and mfg in Taiwan or China?

    To answer the question, yes I am keeping the dropper on the bike. Mainly bc there aren't many lightweight dropper options at 27.2mm and the weight savings on the ones available (KS Lev) amounted to about 30g of savings. I'll replace it when it breaks.

    For just the dropper alone (no cable, no trigger release) I think it came in at 560g on the LBS scale IIRC or maybe it was less...old age is a horrible thing.

    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-2017-03-23_224923.jpg
    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-2017-03-23_224958.jpg
    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-2017-03-23_231144.jpg

    And from left field...Googling TranzX returned results from Home Depot. Home Depot sells bike parts?
    2017 Giant XTC Advanced 27.5+ 1-2017-03-23_231748.jpg

Similar Threads

  1. 2017 Giant Advanced XTC+ Fork issue
    By nre7766 in forum Giant
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-11-2017, 02:33 PM
  2. Giant xtc advanced 2017
    By earworm in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-25-2016, 11:31 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-05-2016, 09:03 AM
  4. Giant Advanced XTC 29er 1 (2017)
    By Wolfen68 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-10-2016, 06:59 PM
  5. 2016 - 2017 Giant Anthem X Advanced 29er
    By maynard in forum Giant
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-27-2016, 03:32 PM

Members who have read this thread: 29

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •