Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331

    Ibis Mojo SL-R vs Santa Cruz Blur TRc

    Hi,
    I am deciding on a new bike. XC/Trail...
    Just a week ago, I was thinking about SC XC carbon (4.1lbs), but after talking to some guys at my LBS, I am seriously considering Mojo SL-r or SC Blur TRc. Both bikes (about 4.9lbs) are fairly new = almost no reviews on the net yet.
    I really like the versatility of these 2 frames (both could be built as Trail or AM).
    So, I would like to hear your opinions. For mainly XC/trail (occasional AM) riding what the +/- will be? I would like to stick with SC, Ibis or Yeti.
    Thanks a lot!

  2. #2
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,231
    I think my Mojo SL is amazing for that type of riding. The SL-R adds some stiffness and a plusher shock at the same weight, so ++.
    Keep the Country country.

  3. #3
    it's the ride....
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    516
    Wait a month or two until someone can offer actual riding impression on both. For now you can try to search VPP vs DW-Link threads.
    The leverage ratio of VPP tend to raise slightly at early of travel and then flat or down at the end of the stroke. DW-Link tend to decrease, then flat (Pivot, Turner) or up slightly (Ibis). What does it mean on the trail? Ibis SL maybe not as plush in mid stroke as Blur (LT to pick the same travel) or Mach 5.7 in the same suspension case.

    Interestingly, moving from one suspension type to another is not always going to your expectation, at least for me. It takes time to appreciate the different suspension treat which you may or may not like it.
    Try as much as possible to ride both. It big bucks to put on the table if you don't like any of them although I doubt that any will disappoint you.
    Ulating blencong sejatine tataraning lelaku...

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331

    Thanks for your inputs!

    I have been reading a lot about DW & VPP.
    Currently I own a 4-bar linkage suspension system AM Norco LT 2008.
    I have tried an Ibis about 2 years ago and liked it.
    My question was more about suitability of these 2 bikes (Ibis SL-R carbon; SC Blur TRc) for XC/Trail biking.
    I know the SC XC is 100mm travel. Aren't Ibis with 140mm or SC TRc with it's 127mm going to be overkill for XC?
    Also if I want to use a 120mm fork, how is that going to work on them (based on their geometry)?
    Please advice, thank you all!

  5. #5
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,231
    Overkill? Yes, on smooth trails but only with a slight weight penalty and you have thje capability to ride rougher trails faster. Besides the extra pound my bike carries (half in the frame, half in the fork) I don't think it gives up anything to an XC bike when riding XC trails.

    I recommend going no shorter than a 140mm fork on the Ibis. Shorter will result in a steep head angle and not enough front travel to take advantage of the rear when the going gets rough. Get a travel adjust fork. I use the 100mm mode on climbs and the 150mm mode everywhere else.
    Keep the Country country.

  6. #6
    it's the ride....
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzanova
    My question was more about suitability of these 2 bikes (Ibis SL-R carbon; SC Blur TRc) for XC/Trail biking.
    Please advice, thank you all!
    Sorry for my reading comprehension .
    Overkill? With current suspension and shock technology (plus lightweight carbon frame), I wouldn't say it's overkill. It is more versatile in fact.

    I agree with Lelandjt, it will open up your riding stream beyond the xc to the point you may not need your Norco anymore especially if you go the 140 mm travel route (Ibis) with matching fork up to 150mm. If you will keep the Norco, the more "XC" travel of TRc will compliment it. It still can go with 140mm fork though.
    Note that the slacker HA of the TRc may suit you better coming from your AM bike (what is your Norco fork travel?).

    Get any of them, it will make you grin ear to ear.
    Ulating blencong sejatine tataraning lelaku...

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331
    I have a 140/160 rockshox on the Norco (34lbs).
    I am looking for something with better climbing properties+ overall lighter bike.
    (up to 25lbs)
    I am 5'9" 135lbs
    I rented an Ibis Mojo and liked it a lot, have to say I was more confident going DH on it the first time riding it, than on my Norco... + the much better climbing capabilities of the ibis made my mind to switch to a lighter bike.
    Although I have a concern about the standover height of ibis - 30,6" midtube, which was almost too high for me (while standing on the ground) I believe SC TRc standover is 28,3"
    I am kinda confused now, many options, should I go for a very light XC bike (SC XCc) or more versatile one(ibis, SC Trc...) + 29er options (Tallboy..., which I have never tried)
    I know, the best way to decide would be to try them all
    If you can help my dilemma, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks again!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    738
    Is the Mojo overkill for X-C? That depends on your trails and how you define X-C. If the trail has a lot of roots or small rocks, I'll take my Mojo over my hard-tail any day. You can just sit down and pedal through all that stuff on a Mojo. If the trail is very smooth and flowy, I'll take my hard-tail. The Mojo smoothed out this small bump stuff much better than a Specialized Era with brain (100mm, 4-bar suspension) that I test rode a couple of times this season.

    I started looking for a bike to replace my 2002 Ellsworth Truth (100mm, 4-bar suspension). I started looking in the 100 to 120mm range as I didn't want to give up climbing ability compared to the Ellsworth. I also wanted something that would be better in more technical stuff. After a bunch of research and some test-drives of newer 140mm bikes, I was convinced that a good up-to-date 140mm bike could climb at least as well as the 2002 Ellsworth and that it would provide huge advantages on technical sections (especially downhills which I can now rip!) I was sold on the DW link and got the Ibis Mojo SL and couldn't be happier. I have a 140mm fork on my Mojo and would not go shorter. Go to the Ibis forum and you'll see a lot of people who like to ride it with a 150mm fork. Personally, I stayed away from adjustable forks because I think I can get better performance out of a fixed fork. I have no issues with standover on the Mojo. I'm 5' 71/2" and ride a medium.

    My second choice in bike was a Turner Flux (100mm) with a 120mm fork. If I didn't have a hard-tail that I love to ride on smooth, flowy trails, I might have gone for this bike.

    Funny thing between the Mojo and my hard-tail. I feel like I go faster on my hard-tail, but when I time myself (on tight x-c trails with some rooty areas), I'm a little faster on the Mojo...and the mojo has heavier, slower-rolling tires than the hard-tail.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331
    Hmm, Hardtail + Mojo sounds like a good scenario.
    Another thing on my mind is a 29er SC Tallboy. Reviews are great + my LBS claims they have the highest sales with the Tallboy.
    I am planning to sell my Norco and keep just one bike for now.
    I am not sure if that one bike should be a 29er...
    Thanks to your posts I am leaning more towards the Ibis or SC Blur TR-c.
    Tr-c seems to be a little bit more suited for XC since the fork recommendation are 120-140mm + the shorter rear travel (127mm) in oppose to ibis rear travel 140mm and fork 140-160...
    So I am down to VPP vs DW link and XC/Trail vs Trail/AM (+ difference in the frame price)
    Any inputs are greatly appreciated.
    THANKS!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    97
    I am in the same boat as you..... deciding on the Blur TRc versus other bikes. I was actually lucky enough to demo the Blur TRc for an hour last week. I think i am going to drop $60 to take out an Ibis tomorrow to see what I think about the DW Link versus VPP.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331
    How did you like the TRc?
    I will demo a SC Blur C and an Mojo SL tomorrow.
    I have tried a Tallboy around the LBS parking lot and liked it...
    Still where I was at the beginning: TRc vs SLr vs TB vs ASR 5...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    97
    I test rode the bike in Western North Carolina in Pisgah.

    I loved the geometry of the Blur TRc, it had a longer top tube and seat angle that really work well for me to put power to the pedals. It was a very firm pedaling bike that had no noticeable pedal bob even with the pro pedal off - the only time I turned on the pro pedal was when I had a 2 mile or so fire road climb. The technical climbs never gave me any challenges, even the ones I usually have to stop and take a breather on I could stand up any time I wanted and hammer it.

    On the downhills, in the flowing banked and twisting single track the bike begged to go fast. It handled like a dream, the fast the better and never felt any sketchiness from the bike. When the downhills got chunky and rocky it was a little harsher then I would have liked. You really had to keep light on the bike not just plow through it.

    Even though the sag was set for me I think the shock had too much air pressure in it which would have contributed to both the stiff pedaling feeling and the harshness in the large rocky stretches.

    So, as far as geometry and feel I really loved it, and the only debate I am having is if the pedaling feel was as good as I thought or was the shock just set too firm which gave me the illusion of efficiency. Thus, I am looking around to make sure other bikes aren't better climbers..... I completely ruled out 29ers after I had one on the trail, it pedaled along great and could really keep momentum, it just was NO fun. hard to loft and manual the front wheel, bunny hop or preload and pop of dips etc.

  13. #13
    it's the ride....
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial
    I am in the same boat as you..... deciding on the Blur TRc versus other bikes. I was actually lucky enough to demo the Blur TRc for an hour last week. I think i am going to drop $60 to take out an Ibis tomorrow to see what I think about the DW Link versus VPP.

    Any update on Mojo SL(r) comparison with Blur TRc you rode to the OP question..?
    Ulating blencong sejatine tataraning lelaku...

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    97
    I have not been able to test ride the Ibis at this point. I am heavily leaning towards the Santa Cruz and I am waiting for the kits and pricing to come out. I was toward by SC that it would be last week, but the website has not updated.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldManBike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    710
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzanova
    Still where I was at the beginning: TRc vs SLr vs TB vs ASR 5...
    You probably know that Ibis has a 29er FS headed towards release, just to add to your dilemma. And you probably also know that the geometry on the Tallboy is more XC oriented than the other bikes you're looking at, there are a number of FS 29ers with less steep HAs out there that might offer more versatility (but I've never ridden a Tallboy myself, maybe I'd be surprised about how well it descends).

    I'm in a similar boat, struggling with BlurLTc vs. SL-R, 26 vs 29, VPP vs DW, etc. Not feeling at all confident about my ability to make decisions on the basis of a demo ride, I took the radical step of buying a used Blur LT (not LTc) to really get to know over the next couple months. I've only had it out a couple times, but like it so far.

    I think there's probably a number of us trying to make this choice, I'm looking forward to following this thread.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331
    I have rented Ibis Mojo SL, SC Blur, and SC Tallboy. Well, the Blur felt more stiff then the Mojo. They both climbed well. I think I preferred the SC a little more.
    Considering my limited biking skills, it's almost impossible to distinguish the feeling between the vpp and dw-link. After I have realized it, I focus more on the shock travel options and 26er vs 29er decision.
    Unfortunately I crashed with the Tallboy and hit a cactus after about 45min ride
    2 flat 29er tires and cactus needles everywhere...
    I have to say the Tallboy definitely handles differently then a 26er. Climbing was nice, even though I missed the start speed of a 26er and had to fight the bike downhill a little more. Since I had only 45minutes on the bike, I cannot really tell if I like it.
    Another development: the more I read about Yeti ASR 5, the more I think it's the bike I should get...
    I started this discussion about SC TRc vs Ibis Mojo SL, If I was posting it today. it would read: SC Tallboy vs Yeti ASR 5

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    97
    I took the Mojo SL out today to compare it to the Blur TRc I rode. The trail loop I rode involved about a 5 mile climb of 70 percent loose gravel fire road (read pronpedal on) and 30 percent non technical single track. The downhill was a steep rocky off camber descent. Plenty of rough sections and chunky rocks. (if you are familiar with Pisgah it was Black Mountain)

    Both bikes climbed very efficiently - no pedal bob etc. The main difference for me was the geometry. For me, the Mojo's cockpit was much more cramped which led to a less efficient pedaling position and tendency for the back wheel to break lose when I stood up to crank up a short hill.

    If I was leaning for something to be a little plusher and stable on the downs I would go for the Mojo. But I think I will go for the Blur TRc. The downhill on the Mojo did not make up for what I felt I gave up on the pedaling position.

    Both bikes are nice, but given my riding I am willing to give up a little on the downs for the better efficient position.

  18. #18
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,231
    The TR's top tube lengths go in even inch increments 23, 24, 25. The Mojo's are 22.8, 23.6, 24.4. Maybe you need to try the next size up Mojo.
    Keep the Country country.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    97
    I am 5'10" and rode the Large in both bikes.

  20. #20
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,231
    The SC just fits you better then. The xl mojo would be too long.
    Keep the Country country.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    14
    french rider, I'm interesting in the SC Blur TRc.

    I'm looking for a trail bike, I'd like an efficient one on climbing and enough comfortable and light for days trips in the Alps, 120 to 140mm.

    I'm trying to get feedbacks on SC Blur Trc vs Yeti ASR 5c.
    Does any body can help me in this search ?

    I'm currently riding the Lapierre Zesty

    Thanks

  22. #22
    it's the ride....
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by winfre View Post
    french rider, I'm interesting in the SC Blur TRc.

    I'm looking for a trail bike, I'd like an efficient one on climbing and enough comfortable and light for days trips in the Alps, 120 to 140mm.

    I'm trying to get feedbacks on SC Blur Trc vs Yeti ASR 5c.
    Does any body can help me in this search ?

    I'm currently riding the Lapierre Zesty

    Thanks
    I doubt there is direct comparison between Blur TRc and ASR 5c, but there are feedbacks on Yeti and Santacruz (or AM) forum for each bike you can read and relate both.

    TRc will very efficient for climbing, a bit harsh on rocky descending, and ASR5c more on the descending plushness (for it's travel), nice ramp up, but you will have to fight a little bob on climbing. But that's only my thought. YMMV.
    Since you mentioned Zesty, you should realy go back to your want/need either a good climbing bike or more decending prowess. To my knowledge, OST suspension on the Zesty is one of the most versatile and liked by many bike testers (at least in Europe).
    Ulating blencong sejatine tataraning lelaku...

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    14
    Thanks Softtail for sharing your opinion

    TRc will very efficient for climbing, a bit harsh on rocky descending, and ASR5c more on the descending plushness (for it's travel), nice ramp up, but you will have to fight a little bob on climbing. But that's only my thought.
    Though you're right with the Zesty ; it is a really nice all mountain bike, efficient on climbing, known for its XC characteristics (with 140 travel !) and although a real comfortable armchair.
    I like it very much.
    I'm wondering why Lapierre would change their OST rear suspension for the PendBox on the 2013 Zesty and Froggy .

    You could wonder why I'm looking for another bike that suits to the same requirements as the Zesty...
    Well I'm found of MTB and I'd like to own a mythical US trade MTB.
    That's why I'm looking to Santa Cruz and Yeti.
    This dream bike would also be efficient for long mountain trails, light, comfortable and...fun.

    Currently, the Santa Blur TRc, Yeti's ASR 5c are on my top list.

    Unfortunately it's hard to get feedbacks on the new Blur TRc or have cross feedbacks with the ASR 5c.

    Regards

  24. #24
    it's the ride....
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    516
    I think the TRc will be closer to your Zesty than Yeti ASR5c, especially when climbing. This is my view only based on the anti-squat characteristic and virtual pivot design on both TRc and Zesty. The single pivot ASR5c wil exhibit a way different trait when pedaling hard.
    Descending, Yeti could be plusher, ride deep in it's travel but when riden hard TRc could be more stable as it ride higher in the travel.
    Disclaimer, I haven't tried TRc but had some riding on Yeti ASR. I ride regularly different suspension bike: Horst-Link, VPP (Santacruz), and DW Link (and Maestro). FWIW.

    There is a review in an active thread in Yeti forum comparing Yeti SB-66 and 575 (sure it's not direct comparison of ASR to TRc, but if you read between the line, some suspension design will have certain ride characteristic). Note that suspension design is one thing, there are also some other important things on a bike like geometry, fit, etc, which could trump how the suspension design work on you.
    Ulating blencong sejatine tataraning lelaku...

  25. #25
    need for speed
    Reputation: Maverick05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    38
    Well I can give feedback on the Yeti ASR 5 compared to others mentioned here.

    I hated it, if you want low slack stiff rocket ships that can handle the jandal, especially with 140mm travel then up front. That is not it, its a tall feeling XC long legged mixed up bike imo, it felt like I was back in the 90s it felt fast looked sexy but rode like *********** for me and my style of riding, I DH mostly and I felt like I was always about to crash on this thing, dam hated it and I hate saying that about a Yeti.

    For me I've narrowed it down to the SC TRc Blur as well. I've demoed pretty much everything from Spec - to Turner, except the new TRc urgh..

    Ive just come off a 2011 Zesty large rode demo Spicy 2011 and was impressed by both after owning some of the best high end US bikes made these both blew anything else I've ridden owned to date away, not even cockpitted the way I like short stem wide bars..

    The Yeti isnt even close, Ive not ridden a SB66 so it might pull something back, it better, but the ASR 5 I hated it, even though it had full XTR new gen and top Fox . I could get a SB 66 for a test ride I'm scared to try it cause I hate a bad ride life's to short. I do like its looks though, but function is more important to me.

    The Zesty was a 316 not even top specc, I could have lived with that but would go carbon. The Spicy a 516,both SLX but stiff as hell and rocket ships, the Zesty had no lock out or propedal just set and forget one particular long fire road steep as hell and climbs forever, I've only ever made it up using a mix of granny and middle ring even when fit I'd usually run out of legs on the Zesty I was able to middle ring all the way going up and down 2 or 3 rings on the rear as I climbed the only thing limiting them is your legs and lungs, impressive.

    For the first time these are production bikes that bettered bikes I've built up with the best components over the last 10years, I'm talking XTR / XO, Kings/ i9, top of line forks RS /Fox etc custom tuned even.

    It was almost embarrassing.

    2012 Lappiere is OST plus, they are not going to Penbox on these two models.
    Both front Tri angles are the same, the rears share the same specc #s but Zesty rear is 135 std drop out 10mm, Spicy rear is 142mm x 12mm dropout, the Zesty front drops the ISCG though darn it. the Spicy front tri retains ISCG and threaded BB awesome.

    This is the kicker for potential Lappeirre 12 owners though, the new shock mount on both now usues a shuttle to connect to the rear shock, Nico designed both so these shuttles are interchangeable so if you end up with too much bike, change shuttle and everything GEO wise is either a Zesty or Spicy, Only the fork alters the Head angle. This means no bad choices if unsure if you need 140/ 150 or 160mm of travel without stuffing up the GEO or getting wonky BB heights.

    However I also really like the SC TRc, most don't get the new geo compared to other brands or even to the SC Bur LT, its not like the old Blur its more like the old Blur 4X redesigned for modern times, so its lighter longer, stiffer, faster and slacker that can supposedly still go like the old blur XC for speed umm.

    I just want a test ride before I decide and see if it can match or better the Zesty which is one hell of a bike and my current benchmark.

    Oh both are sexy as hell in person too, so hard to tell on paper I'd have both if I could its that tight, a ride might swing it

    Nice vid of the SC TRc too here.

    DirtTV: Santa Cruz TRc Blur first look // Mountain Biking Videos

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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