Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 104
  1. #1
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331

    2018ish Carbon riot Geo wish list.

    So since I know the bros sometimes get on here I figured I would post up what people want for the new riot. If it stays the same it will be a sweet bike. However, I do have a few wishes.

    Wish 1 keep the short chain stays step one.
    Wish 2 drop the bottom bracket to 13.3ish people will learn to pedal it after a few rides where they just need there timing adjusted.
    Wish 3 65.5 HA with a 160mm fork!! I would love a bigger fork on this bike. The bike over rides my fork on pretty much every ride I go on.
    Wish 4 add .5 inches to the reach/ front center. Will help make the bike a bit more roomy on the ETT for climbs. Also bring in the shorter stem option. I feel the bike was built around a 50mm stem with a short top tube in mind. A bit longer would help while still being able to run a short stem.
    Wish 5 Make the Riot a balls out enduro bike and come out with a 29er trail bike with 130mm front and 120mm rear bike called the wowzer.

    Anyone else feel free to chime in and discuss for the sake of something to talk about.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    Haha, I was thinking they should make a shorter travel bike and call it a Civil Unrest. I like the idea of adjustable geo, like flip chips for BB height, and head angle.

  3. #3
    Chris Bling
    Reputation: dustyduke22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,466
    27.5+ compatible, longer reach, shorter seat tube so we can run longer droppers, PLEASE NO CANE CREEK!, internal tube routing for easy cable routing

    I really like the idea of a short travel option. I have loved the Following style bikes and see a lot of value in that option. I think my dream bike will be a 120mm B+ compatible carbon shredder.

    I have liked the 140mm fork, but can see the lure of a bigger fork as well. Go full enduro! Maybe make it "acceptable" to run a longer fork without voiding the warranty.

    Keep the steep STA and the slack HTA (or slack it a tad more).

    I know the frame will wither be boost or super boost, so no need wishing for 142.

    Threaded BB, nice big pivot bearings and post mount rear brake.

    Stoked to see what they come up with and even more excited to get one!

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    The obsession of wheels fused with the passion of cycling
    Affordable Custom Wheels

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jkidd_39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    982
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    Haha, I was thinking they should make a shorter travel bike and call it a Civil Unrest. I like the idea of adjustable geo, like flip chips for BB height, and head angle.
    I'm all about this idea too. Would love an aggro short travel 29er from Canfield. ROFL Civil Unrest...

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raleighguy29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
    What he said.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Yeah, I'd be happy with a slightly longer ETT and reach.

    But I tell you what, if Canfield released a 120mm carbon 29er with very similar geo to the Riot (lower BB please) that could be built up as light or bury as you like. I'd have one in an instant. Just dreaming about a 25/6 pound mini Riot gets me excited.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: twd953's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post
    27.5+ compatible, longer reach, shorter seat tube so we can run longer droppers, PLEASE NO CANE CREEK!, internal tube routing for easy cable routing
    As a member of the long legs/short torso crowd, I'd put in a vote to not go too extreme BOTH long reach AND short seat tube.

    The current seat tube length on a L puts me at the max extension line on a 150mm dropper. XL fits me nicely in terms of reach and ST length with a 35mm stem and any length dropper. I'm running a 200 mm dropper on my '17 balance, which gives me more leeway in terms of seat tube length, but if you go extreme on the reach and short seat tube, I'd be forced to downsize to the L and run 200mm dropper, of which there is only 1 on the market.

    I don't like being in the position of having an entire bike hinge on 1 component, from 1 manufacturer. If 9Point8 decide it's not profitable to keep making that length I'd be SOL.

    I'm OK with internal shift or dropper cable routing, but no thanks on the rear brake line being internal.

    I hear ya on the no cane creek though. When I was about to order my '17 balance, I was going to order with no shock and pick up a DVO Topaz. The Bros came out with the DVO options a few days before I placed my order, so that worked out nicely.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: acfsportsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
    Couldn't agree more

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,213
    I'm on an XL Riot so I would like to see a bit longer reach and taller stack height. 150mm front/ 140mm rear stock splits the difference and makes it easy to bump to 160mm in the front. The rear end needs to be stiffer...a one piece upper link would go a long way. The seat tube angle could be a bit slacker but I'm betting it is where it is to make room for all the travel and super short chainstays.

    All that said I heard from the most credible source possible that the carbon Riot geo will mimic the aluminum version with boost in the rear but no metric shock. He said nothing about fork travel so that could always increase while keeping the geo the same.

    It's amazing the people you run into at Moab.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    201
    My only request is a shorter seat tube. I'd like to run a longer dropper. My 150mm dropper is slammed all the way to the seat tube and it's coincidentally the exact height I need.

    Other than that don't mess with it.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Joules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,988
    I wish the back end of my AL riot was stiffer. I suspect it's the upper links where the flex is mostly happening - just looking at how big and strong everything else is, then how tiny the upper links are, and not even connected to each other.

    Other thing: steeper seat angle. Or more accurately, I'd like to see them do like Guerrilla Gravity, and go back to having the seat tube in line with the BB, so you have a true seat angle rather than the slack actual seat angle, biased forward to make the effective angle what they were going for.

    The 142 horse is dead, it's time to move on. More tire clearance is always better, stiffer wheels are better. Your old wheels can be spaced out. There's no [valid] reason to stick with 142.

    More reach is always better as far as I'm concerned. If the XL had 500mm reach, I wouldn't complain.

    pie in the sky wishing: chainstay length scaling with size. I know there are manufacturing reasons this probably won't happen, but as it is now, the larger the bike, the shorter the stays as a fraction of the wheelbase, so tall riders get crazy rear-weight bias.

    The DVO option solves the Cane Creek issue, wish they'd had that when I got mine. If they're going to stick with CC, they should include 2 shocks so you can still ride the 4 weeks a year your shock will be in warranty.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    216
    I'm sure if it's coming out next year. It's built and being tested already this year. Those guys don't put out stuff they don't test the hell out of!...👍

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    476
    I'm probably the only one in the whole wide world that has this wish - but i'd like to see the Riot be made out of STEEL. Fancy steel full suspension 29er....


    ok, I'll see myself out of here now....

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    This has turned out to be a new bike conversation... not really a wish list for a carbon Riot.

    With that being said,

    Super boost.... cause honestly, boost just isnt commitment enough for its purposes.
    Travel in the rear end increased to 150 at least.
    Slacker HTA by at least 1/2* with recommended fork length by the Bros.

    I like where the Riot sits in the line up. Making it a full on enduro race bike would take away from the Balance and going to short of travel would leave people wanting more travel.

  16. #16
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by A_street View Post
    This has turned out to be a new bike conversation... not really a wish list for a carbon Riot.

    With that being said,

    Super boost.... cause honestly, boost just isnt commitment enough for its purposes.
    Travel in the rear end increased to 150 at least.
    Slacker HTA by at least 1/2* with recommended fork length by the Bros.

    I like where the Riot sits in the line up. Making it a full on enduro race bike would take away from the Balance and going to short of travel would leave people wanting more travel.
    I hear you. But I have a balance as well and it is a beast of a bike for long enduro races. My large frame with CCDBA was 9.5lbs without headset. So 34lb. bike with exo tires and a 36. That is free ride bike territory Damn near full DH weight. A MUCH lighter full enduro race bike is needed. The riot could fill that gap my riot now still weighs at 31.5 pounds with carbon hoops, bars, cranks and full xtr with exo tires. but it is lacking the length of a big fork on the front end. Basically I want a yeti 5.5 but with canfield geo ( which honestly is the only reason I own 2 of them).

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    It sound like there should be multiple shock mounts, and adjustable head angle, so everyone will be happy, pick your travel, pick your head angle and BB height.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raleighguy29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    843
    Seems like everyone wants the carbon riot to be more like this bike or that bike. I guess I'm all alone in wanting it it to stay the bad ass Canfield original that it is. It's nothing like any other bike on the market and I want it to stay that way. I've had mine to pisgah all over my home state and to windrock bike park. And this bike never stops to impress me. I just want the bros to keep doing what they do best. Building and designing bad ass bikes to be ridden the way they ride.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by Raleighguy29 View Post
    Seems like everyone wants the carbon riot to be more like this bike or that bike. I guess I'm all alone in wanting it it to stay the bad ass Canfield original that it is. It's nothing like any other bike on the market and I want it to stay that way. I've had mine to pisgah all over my home state and to windrock bike park. And this bike never stops to impress me. I just want the bros to keep doing what they do best. Building and designing bad ass bikes to be ridden the way they ride.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I agree with 99% of what you are saying here. To include the biggest "Problem" with the current Riot, is that the BIKE out rides the shorter 140mm fork. If they kept everything the exact same as it is now but said I could put a 160mm fork on it I would be happy! This is just a wish list of small things I would change.......well other then a longer Fork. I do think not having that as a option in the future would make me move onto a different company. Which sadly mean the balance would have to go as well. I like all my bikes ( N plus 1. I have 3 canfields, not as big as your fleet but I call that loyalty ) to be from the same company so they have the same kind of feel.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raleighguy29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    I agree with 99% of what you are saying here. To include the biggest "Problem" with the current Riot, is that the BIKE out rides the shorter 140mm fork. If they kept everything the exact same as it is now but said I could put a 160mm fork on it I would be happy! This is just a wish list of small things I would change.......well other then a longer Fork. I do think not having that as a option in the future would make me move onto a different company. Which sadly mean the balance would have to go as well. I like all my bike ( N plus 1) to be from the same company so they have the same kind of feel.
    I love all 3 of my Canfields. I have the riot a epo and a nimble9. And I'm hoping to build up a balance in the near future. I have my riot built up full dvo so I haven't had the problem if my fork not keeping up with the back of the bike. But had those problems with other bikes in the past. If they could keep it as balanced as it is now with a longer fork I'm all in but I'll let the bros figure that out.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: In2falling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post
    I really like the idea of a short travel option. I have loved the Following style bikes and see a lot of value in that option. I think my dream bike will be a 120mm B+ compatible carbon shredder.
    2017 Yeti SB5c will take 2.8 tires with clearance and they have a SB5+ also. The Devinci Marshall carbon also looks nice, it's 110mm but can be setup with longer stroked shock getting it up to 125mm.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    I think the current Riot is super close to perfect. I would like to be able to bump front to 150 so I could run a Lyric vs Pike. I am happy with tire clearance but understand if more could be fit without compromising the short stays (which I love and I ride a large frame). I don't want more travel in the rear, think 140 is the sweet spot. I have accepted that Boost is a thing but I am still very unhappy about metric shocks. Are more manufacturers on the bandwagon or is it still just RS? If only RS, I ask that they stay away from it.

    In regards to short travel option, I have a shorter stroke but same eye to eye (7.88x2.0) rear shock on my current Riot that gives me same geo but around 120mm of travel and I love it for my local trails. Bike is so lively and snappy and pumps terrain superbly. I throw the other shock back on for the bigger days, setup almost has me selling my nomad.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Joules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,988
    Quote Originally Posted by Raleighguy29 View Post
    Seems like everyone wants the carbon riot to be more like this bike or that bike. I guess I'm all alone in wanting it it to stay the bad ass Canfield original that it is.
    I get that, but really who's going to throw down the credit card to get a more expensive version of a bike they already have? If the only difference is that it's ever so slightly lighter, who cares?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    I get that, but really who's going to throw down the credit card to get a more expensive version of a bike they already have? If the only difference is that it's ever so slightly lighter, who cares?
    I think you would be surprised on how many would. I would. Also, there are people who are in the market for this but want carbon so overlook the frame.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Raleighguy29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by aenema View Post
    I think you would be surprised on how many would. I would. Also, there are people who are in the market for this but want carbon so overlook the frame.
    Your right so many people over look this bike since it's not a carbon wonder bike. I sold a 2016 carbon stumpy to build me a aluminum riot. And I couldn't be happier that I did. But I'm glad so many people over look the riot since it's not carbon. Most of those riders wouldn't be able to really apreciate what a bad ass bike this really is.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jkidd_39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    I get that, but really who's going to throw down the credit card to get a more expensive version of a bike they already have? If the only difference is that it's ever so slightly lighter, who cares?
    I already have a spot cleared on my cc. Saving for a total build

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
    Agreed.
    Leave it to the Pros/Bros!!

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by Joules View Post
    pie in the sky wishing: chainstay length scaling with size. I know there are manufacturing reasons this probably won't happen, but as it is now, the larger the bike, the shorter the stays as a fraction of the wheelbase, so tall riders get crazy rear-weight bias.
    I trust the Bros to make badass bikes, but this is the first time I'm hearing someone else mention the rear-weight bias that I have noticed a lot on my Riot. I'm on a Large, and maybe have long legs. So yeah, it's the most rearward biased bike I've ridden. I'm fairly used to it at this point... but I had to bump up rear tire PSI by a couple of points to adjust for it. Kind of interesting.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    Are you saying that its biased rearward due to the short CS length? I find that with the effective seat tube angle it puts the rider in a neutrally balanced, and comfortable, riding position. One thing that I do find is that because of the real top tube length it makes the sitting position feel a little cramped. Im 6'1", have long legs, and ride a large frame too.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    I've noticed a slight rear bias (5ft9 but 33" inseam) but it's so so so much better than my old Following in that regard. It would want to lift the front wheel on mild climbs. The Riot is about perfect, but I'm one of those weight conscious guys and would love to be able to build one up around the 26lb mark while retaining it's burliness.

    I did some sums a while back and you could theoretically build the current medium Riot at around 28lb with a non piggy back shock, fox 34, light hubs/carbon rims and medium duty tyres. So I think 26 should be doable in carbon.

    That's coming from someone with a 31lb Riot on 2.5" tyres lol

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,659
    26 pounds seems optimistic for a bike like the Riot, 28ish would make me happy with a mostly carbon build.

    Assuming the carbon Riot will go Boost, I'd be all over an aluminum Riot if it was updated to Boost to allow an easy swap of parts.
    Last edited by OldHouseMan; 04-05-2017 at 06:28 PM.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    216
    I was told you would see 1 to 2 pound difference. I'm to large to feel that...🤣

  33. #33
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by sdm74 View Post
    I was told you would see 1 to 2 pound difference. I'm to large to feel that...🤣
    I will take 2 lbs. Please

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Like I said, I did up a spreadsheet a while back (yeah I know, I sound like an weight weenie lol) and you can build the current medium at 28lb with 34mm stanchion forks and decent tyres (just no double down casings or 1kg 2.5" wide things).

    A 2lb saving would give a 28 pound bike built up with 2.5" tyres (what I currently run and love). But It'd be cool to see a crazy, throw money at it weight conscious trail build come in around that 26lb mark.

    I could build a 26lb Riot now, but I don't think anyone would ride it with 2.0 tyres, 32mm forks and 24 spoke wheels haha. Let me go get that lycra hanging up in the cupboard

  35. #35
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Must be a big weight diffence between medium and large. I feel like I have a pretty goochi build on my current riot and it is still almost 32lbs. Tires is pretty much the only place I could save a little weight but I am already running a 2.3 dhf and 2.3 aggressor.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Yeah, I don't have the spreadsheet anymore. But I do remember it used a crappy fox CTD shock over the Cane Creek. Hubs is another place you can save some serious weight. Eg. Tune or DT240s over Hope/Oynx can net several hundred grams.

    But it's getting picky. I'm never going to go super lightweight on a bike like this. Give me a 28lb Riot with my Pike, 2.5 Minions and all the durable stuff, I'll be the first one in the announcement thread flashing my credit card saying "shutup and take my money" haha.

  37. #37
    Captain Climber
    Reputation: Jem7sk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post
    27.5+ compatible, longer reach, shorter seat tube so we can run longer droppers, PLEASE NO CANE CREEK!, internal tube routing for easy cable routing

    I really like the idea of a short travel option. I have loved the Following style bikes and see a lot of value in that option. I think my dream bike will be a 120mm B+ compatible carbon shredder.

    I have liked the 140mm fork, but can see the lure of a bigger fork as well. Go full enduro! Maybe make it "acceptable" to run a longer fork without voiding the warranty.

    Keep the steep STA and the slack HTA (or slack it a tad more).

    I know the frame will wither be boost or super boost, so no need wishing for 142.

    Threaded BB, nice big pivot bearings and post mount rear brake.

    Stoked to see what they come up with and even more excited to get one!

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    Dusty, being a great wheel builder why do you prefer the non-boost? At least I read your review of the GG and the Riot on your website and it seemed to me that you liked the Riot non-boost over the GG Boost.

  38. #38
    Chris Bling
    Reputation: dustyduke22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Jem7sk View Post
    Dusty, being a great wheel builder why do you prefer the non-boost? At least I read your review of the GG and the Riot on your website and it seemed to me that you liked the Riot non-boost over the GG Boost.
    I an not saying that I like 142 better than boost here. I was just saying that inevitably, it will be boost, so folks shouldn't be asking for it to stay 142.

    From a wheel builder point if view, boost does up the stiffness factor, but nit by much. I just wish they (Trek) had put a little more thought into it before they released it. A measly 6mm?

    I see boost being a temporary solution, which will most likely be updated in a couple years to "super boost" across the board. SB makes a lot more sense from a clearance, stiffness and future proofing standpoint.

    So in short, boost is stiffer than 142, but a mere mortal like myself probably won't be able to feel the difference. Especially when i am on an asymmetrical wide carbon rim.

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    The obsession of wheels fused with the passion of cycling
    Affordable Custom Wheels

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    I have a large Riot with a pretty bling build and its about 30.5 pounds. Sram roam 60 Carbon wheels, X0 cranks, carbon bars, Maxxis Ardent rear, HR2 front tubless of course, canfield flats, Monarch non piggy back short shock, Pike fork, XX1 drivetrain. I do have a 9.8 7 inch dropper so I could drop a pound or so going non but that will never, ever, ever happen. I guess 28 is possible but I think your spreadsheet is missing some real world things.

  40. #40
    Captain Climber
    Reputation: Jem7sk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post
    I an not saying that I like 142 better than boost here. I was just saying that inevitably, it will be boost, so folks shouldn't be asking for it to stay 142.

    From a wheel builder point if view, boost does up the stiffness factor, but nit by much. I just wish they (Trek) had put a little more thought into it before they released it. A measly 6mm?

    I see boost being a temporary solution, which will most likely be updated in a couple years to "super boost" across the board. SB makes a lot more sense from a clearance, stiffness and future proofing standpoint.

    So in short, boost is stiffer than 142, but a mere mortal like myself probably won't be able to feel the difference. Especially when i am on an asymmetrical wide carbon rim.

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    Thanks for that

    I know I monitor the latest posts on this forum to try and keep up with everything and the Riot seems to be the most talked about bike on the forum IMO.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by aenema View Post
    I think the current Riot is super close to perfect. I would like to be able to bump front to 150 so I could run a Lyric vs Pike. I am happy with tire clearance but understand if more could be fit without compromising the short stays (which I love and I ride a large frame). I don't want more travel in the rear, think 140 is the sweet spot. I have accepted that Boost is a thing but I am still very unhappy about metric shocks. Are more manufacturers on the bandwagon or is it still just RS? If only RS, I ask that they stay away from it.

    In regards to short travel option, I have a shorter stroke but same eye to eye (7.88x2.0) rear shock on my current Riot that gives me same geo but around 120mm of travel and I love it for my local trails. Bike is so lively and snappy and pumps terrain superbly. I throw the other shock back on for the bigger days, setup almost has me selling my nomad.
    You can run the current aluminum Riot with a 150 mm fork with a zero stack lower headset. This preserves near stock geo as well.

    You can also run a Lyrik lower than 150 mm if you know how to read the Rock Shox small parts catalog and just order the correct air shaft. 140 mm Lyrik would be great on the Riot.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Joules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,988
    Quote Originally Posted by A_street View Post
    Are you saying that its biased rearward due to the short CS length? I find that with the effective seat tube angle it puts the rider in a neutrally balanced, and comfortable, riding position. One thing that I do find is that because of the real top tube length it makes the sitting position feel a little cramped. Im 6'1", have long legs, and ride a large frame too.
    What I'm saying is with my seat up, seat is basically directly over the rear axle. With the chainstays the same length on all sizes, but the wheelbase changing, larger sizes can't help be more rear-biased than smaller.
    Even with the fairly low leverage of the Riot, I have to run a lot of pressure to keep sag reasonable when climbing. I could see this bike benefiting from something like that new Cannondale shock gizmo that lets you change shock volume with a lever.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    I don't know about how the other sizes fit for larger people. But the small fits me perfect at 5'6" with a 35mm stem. Only feel a little cramped on climbs, but this does help keep the front wheel strait and down.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post

    From a wheel builder point if view, boost does up the stiffness factor, but nit by much. I just wish they (Trek) had put a lit. A measly 6mm?


    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    I'm no wheel builder but I always thought that myself. I wondered why everyone flipped out about gaining a whole 3mm on each side. If you want to go stout do what pivot did. Or go full DH spec.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by aenema View Post
    I have a large Riot with a pretty bling build and its about 30.5 pounds. Sram roam 60 Carbon wheels, X0 cranks, carbon bars, Maxxis Ardent rear, HR2 front tubless of course, canfield flats, Monarch non piggy back short shock, Pike fork, XX1 drivetrain. I do have a 9.8 7 inch dropper so I could drop a pound or so going non but that will never, ever, ever happen. I guess 28 is possible but I think your spreadsheet is missing some real world things.
    That's what I was thinking.....

    My Fatboy Riot has the jade and a 600# spring and I'm at 34-35lb. All out fat WT minions 2.4 rear 2.5 front. Saints brakes. Stan's flow ex wheels on hope 4 hubs. I'm also 240lb so WTF do I care....lol
    Probably equals to a 175 lb guy on a 25lb bike...lol

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    191
    I said this in the other thread but its true for both a carbon or aluminum version. I wish for a zs56 lower headset cup, ISCG-05 and 160mm fork compatibility. Otherwise the basic formula is there and just needs some updating and tweaking to keep it relevant.

    I like the idea of using different stroke shocks with the same eye to eye for a bike with a different personality. It's basically what Guerrilla Gravity has done with their regular Megatrail and the SS versions. Change shock and air spring in the fork and you can have a park capable bike and a trail bike all in one. My wife is a math teacher and can somehow find flaws in the n+1 equation. If a shock, an air shaft and an extra set of wheels is all it takes to have a bike with multiple personalities I'm down.

    I also wouldn't mind seeing enough room for 29+

    For that matter I would like to see Canfield do a FS fat bike too, but that's for another thread...

    I trust the brothers recognize that they are going to need to come out swinging with something that is just as, if not more BA as the current Riot. It will need to have those last few check boxes clicked off to compete with other carbon bikes like the Wrekoning, Following, Slash, SB5.5, Hightower, Switchblade, Smuggler, E29 and even the Stumpjumper that occupy a similar niche in the market. Simply the same in carbon might not be enough for some.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: acfsportsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by titusquasi View Post
    You can run the current aluminum Riot with a 150 mm fork with a zero stack lower headset. This preserves near stock geo as well.

    You can also run a Lyrik lower than 150 mm if you know how to read the Rock Shox small parts catalog and just order the correct air shaft. 140 mm Lyrik would be great on the Riot.
    I'm running a 140mm Yari (same chassis as Lyrik) with AVA Cartridge on my Riot.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: acfsportsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    274
    I really like my Riot, I think I'll just go ride and let the brothers worry about what's next.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,659
    How about price? The EPO seems reasonably priced compared to other carbon hardtails.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by acfsportsfan View Post
    I really like my Riot, I think I'll just go ride and let the brothers worry about what's next.
    Haha. This. After this bike and its personality, Im a fan for life. They will make good bikes.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    How about price? The EPO seems reasonably priced compared to other carbon hardtails.
    Direct to consumer is what keeps the price down. Typically for other companies carbon is $1000 more than its alloy counterpart.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    227
    Whatever the Bros do with a carbon Riot, I will have one. I think 140mm rear travel is probably the best rear travel for 29" wheels. You start getting into to many compromises when you increase travel past that. It will probably be designed around 150mm fork and able to run 140-160mm. The rear triangle will be stiffer, just being carbon instead of aluminum. Don't like flip chips, but can see how you can satisfy more customers with one bike. I like less adjustments. Some people like to be change things more. I trust the Bros. in this. I think they will keep building the aluminum version, as is. Then make a burly, Enduro eating carbon machine. Which is what I want. Then make a 120mm carbon bike that can run 120-140mm fork. A light weight Following/whatever bike, killer. That will cover the full spectrum and make everyone happy. I will take one of each please. My Balance for park, big carbon Riot for Enduro races and burly trails, short travel, lightweight Riot for tamer trails and aluminum Riot for backup bike/loaner. Then just get a Jedi for serious DH and N9 for fun. Then I will never have to buy another bike ever. Ha

  52. #52
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,758
    I do think a shorter travel, full-party rear end bike would absolutely rule. An EPO with some 'I got chu fam' of rear travel would be it - 140/125mm is probably spot-on.

    For the consummate two-bike conniosseuer - having an EPO and one of those would be mint. Have a good set of 29er wheels/tires and a good set of 27+ rubber - and that's like owning 4 bikes, for the cost/space of two.


    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
    I kinda have to agree with this.

    My list for a carbon Riot as a 160/150mm bike would see chainstay growth, HTA slackening, reach growth, a straight but short seat tube, making space for a bottle cage w/ a trunnion shock, and unnecessary bolstering of the upper linkage just to suit my riding style better... but it wouldn't necessarily be the better bike. Some of this makes sense (a bit of reach growth, slacker HTA, straight short seat tube) but the rest would take away a non-trivial amount of what makes it ride like something the Bros have put together.

    A stock build - ditto. My idea would involve a Diamond/Topaz/Garnet kit and lots of RaceFace bling (SixC/Atlas), and an e13 transmission -- but it's hard for that bike to stay close to $6k [not that it's bad - the carbon Riot WILL embarrass the full-bling bikes from the big manufacturers]... but they can probably come up with something better... especially if the Beryl gets a shock-friend, and DVO can do some bespoke shim stacks.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slo_rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    238
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd_39 View Post
    I want the bros to design it exactly how they want it. Input from my dumb ass would have no translated to success I'm sure. LOVE my alum riot

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
    Hard to argue w this ^^^, as the bros have been nailing it consistently.

    Having said that, there are great thoughts on here too:

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    ...they should make a shorter travel bike and call it a Civil Unrest. I like the idea of adjustable geo, like flip chips for BB height, and head angle...
    Quote Originally Posted by dustyduke22 View Post
    27.5+ compatible, longer reach, shorter seat tube so we can run longer droppers, PLEASE NO CANE CREEK!, internal tube routing for easy cable routing

    I really like the idea of a short travel option. I have loved the Following style bikes and see a lot of value in that option. I think my dream bike will be a 120mm B+ compatible carbon shredder.

    I have liked the 140mm fork, but can see the lure of a bigger fork as well. Go full enduro! Maybe make it "acceptable" to run a longer fork without voiding the warranty.

    Keep the steep STA and the slack HTA (or slack it a tad more).

    I know the frame will wither be boost or super boost, so no need wishing for 142.

    Threaded BB, nice big pivot bearings and post mount rear brake.

    Stoked to see what they come up with and even more excited to get one!

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    I had my "aha!" moment riding a 1st gen Nimble 9 about 5 years ago, and buying it was one of the best decisions I ever made.

    I dig the lightish weight of my Following, but find haven't yet found the secret tuning sauce for it's rear end that provides both small bump sensitivity and bottom-out support. So I'm patiently waiting to buy a carbon Riot (or whatever carbon FS 29er Canfield releases). My $0.02:

    • keep the geo formula of short chainstays + slack HA + steep SA
    • keep ample rear tire clearance to run 27.5+ tires
    • if boost vs "super boost" allows the bros to satisfy having both short chainstays AND plus tire compatibility, then do it


    Although it'd be cool if they ultimately produced both short travel and long travel FS 29ers (like Evil's Following/Wreckoning combo), I'd be happy with one mid-travel bike that's optimized for a 150-160mm travel fork.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,213
    Adding something to my wish list: A lower bottom bracket.

    My stock style setup is at 13.75" with 2.35 Nobby Nic/ Magic Mary tires...too high. I think this may be a factor in the high speed instability some have noted at times (myself included).

    I'm doing an experiment to help with this issue. I've installed an offset bushing in the front of the shock and installed an internal lower headset cup with the 140mm Pike. Going by guesstimates on how these changes will affect the head angle the single 8mm offset bushing should slacken the H.A. by 0.25 deg and removing the external headset cup should steepen it by around 0.5 deg. New head angle should be around 66.75 deg. The main benefit is that my bottom bracket dropped by over 1/4" so it's now just under 13.5". In addition I dropped 5 psi out of my rear shock and increased low speed compression in the fork by a notch to help mimic the stock geo a bit better. The change is noticeable and welcomed. I don't think I could do a second offset bushing as the worn rear tire is currently very close to the seat tube at full bottom and I would bet that a new Nobby Nic and a hard bottom could make slight contact. With a second offset bushing there would be no question. Size XL btw.

    So...carbon Riot: Longer reach, taller stack (XL), lower bottom bracket, stiffer rear end.

    Either way, this frame is anxiously awaited!

  55. #55
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    I have decided, I want my riot to feel like my balance. Only 29er and lighter. My balance is so stable even at 36mph on single track at Angle fire last weekend I felt 100% comfortable and relaxed. I would have started "comfort braking" long before that on my riot. So lower, longer, slacker, bigger, a less bouncy rear end. Please.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2
    (1) lighter (carbon)
    (2) more reach in XL - 490-500mm
    (3) more stack in XL - 650mm+
    (4) NO lower bottom bracket (!) in XL
    (5) and really much stiffer rear end - this is not good in the actual version

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    I have decided, I want my riot to feel like my balance. Only 29er and lighter. My balance is so stable even at 36mph on single track at Angle fire last weekend I felt 100% comfortable and relaxed. I would have started "comfort braking" long before that on my riot. So lower, longer, slacker, bigger, a less bouncy rear end. Please.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
    I really believe the riot needs a decent coil shock. The rear feels planted. The BB is higher which I'm not complaining about. Since it makes a nimble good climbing bike. But feels twitchy at 30mph. So i won't complain if the new bike has adjustable BB height or a litte lower(please not too much) for now I'm probably going to reduce the offset of my fork to slow it down some so not to change anything else.
    Last edited by Cerberus75; 05-27-2017 at 10:03 AM.

  58. #58
    Chris Bling
    Reputation: dustyduke22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,466
    After being on The Wreckoning for a month, I feel even more strongly about a 160mm Riot. The Wreckoning pedals so good, I don't really notice a difference between it and my 140mm Riot. I am positive the Bros can make a 160mm bike pedal even better

    Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
    The obsession of wheels fused with the passion of cycling
    Affordable Custom Wheels

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Yeah, I've shifted and would like to see a bigger bike from the Bros. I've moved my Riot parts to an Intense Primer and have been enjoying a few differences, mainly the lower BB and weight. Not as confidence inspiring as the Riot but it's basically my idea of a carbon Riot.

    I'd like to see a bigger, 160mm version so it gives me an excuse to own both 😁

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,659
    It looks like there will limited frames due in September or October. How the hell do I get in on this?

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14
    Dear Canfield Santa, here is my Riot wish list:

    • Carbon Frame
    • 160mm travel up front
    • 135mm travel in rear
    • Superboost

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    298
    What we know based on Dusty's interview w/Chris:
    • It will have a new name
    • Carbon front triangle
    • It will look like a Canfield, with more squared off tube profiles
    • Geo adjusted to support 150mm fork, will also be tested w/160mm
    • 140mm rear travel
    • Aluminum rear triangle in 2 chainstay lengths (414 & 430) - no geo changes besides wheelbase
    • 6.15 lbs without shock
    • No flip chips or other geo adjustments
    • Frames (30 of each size - M/L/XL) later this year for early release / media events

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: beer_coffee_water's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    728
    Didn't Chris also say it was going to be boost? I was listening while driving with kids.

  64. #64
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    What does the current riot frame weigh? How much weight was shaved?

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  65. #65
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Also...Thank God for 160mm fork! That makes me very happy. I love my balance but a longer fork on my riot would make the riot the #1 choice more often.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Old frame in a medium was 7.7lb minus shock. New weight is a decent saving. I've just sold my Riot and moved my gear over to a Primer. Was going to wait for the carbon Riot but a deal too good to be true came up on the Intense so I've been giving it a shot.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    I agree that the Riot is almost perfect. Best bike I've owned by far. I do wish for a slightly lower bottom bracket, shorter seat tubes, lower stand over in XL size.... blah blah blah. The biggest thing I'm hoping for is that the bridge between the chain stays and seat stays will be come a solid piece rather than that X shape to keep debris out of my lower links! Drives me batty when rocks get stuck in there.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Crankmiester View Post
    I agree that the Riot is almost perfect. Best bike I've owned by far. I do wish for a slightly lower bottom bracket, shorter seat tubes, lower stand over in XL size.... blah blah blah. The biggest thing I'm hoping for is that the bridge between the chain stays and seat stays will be come a solid piece rather than that X shape to keep debris out of my lower links! Drives me batty when rocks get stuck in there.
    Side note. In the interview they said the Carbon 29er was going Boost. Do you guys think that means super Boost or just plain old 148? Does Boost use a regular 73mm BB or 83mm?

    I currently am riding a 2015 Riot and am so excited about what the Bros are cooking up I'm starting to put together my kit now. Just need to know what parts to start stockpiling.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Boost still uses the 73mm BB. But the cranks generally have the chairing offset a touch.

    I'm hoping they just use regular 148 boost. It's what most people are going to have and makes wheels interchangable with other boost bikes. Super boost is all well and good but there's only one bike doing it.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    I haven't really felt the need for nor stiffness out of the rear end of my Riot... I know a lot have complained. I'm 220 so a big boy. So I'm fine with boost. I just wish I could predict what it's gonna be so I can start putting a kit together. I guess I'll just have to buy generic items first...

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cpolism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Crankmiester View Post
    I haven't really felt the need for nor stiffness out of the rear end of my Riot... I know a lot have complained. I'm 220 so a big boy. So I'm fine with boost. I just wish I could predict what it's gonna be so I can start putting a kit together. I guess I'll just have to buy generic items first...
    I'd be shocked if they went superboost. My bet is on 148.

  72. #72
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by Crankmiester View Post
    I haven't really felt the need for nor stiffness out of the rear end of my Riot... I know a lot have complained. I'm 220 so a big boy. So I'm fine with boost. I just wish I could predict what it's gonna be so I can start putting a kit together. I guess I'll just have to buy generic items first...
    Your lucky! Mine feels quite flexy compared to my balance. I think it has to do with the one piece link on the balance (which I hope is on carbon riot) as well as making it adapt the old models as well as the longer swing arm so we do not HAVE to unload our old bikes for pennies on the dollar. We are already kinda getting "shimanoed" with the bros blowing them out for 400 bucks less then we paid 6 months ago. I really hope they make the old ones upgradeable otherwise I have a 8lb paperweight since it will be pretty much worth scrap rate as soon as the new fancy carbon boost model comes out and them already selling new frames at a discount.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    It might have some flex but in some ways I appreciate it springing me out of corners and what not. Defiantly not as robust as the process 111 I came from but I have yet to feel hindered by it.

    I thought I heard Chris say the upper link will be one price in that podcast.

    Sadly depreciation is real with Canfield, but I don't really feel it's any worse than other bike brands. I purchased my frame over a year ago still for $1400 and I'm still fairly confident I could get $1300 if I tried to sell it. I'm not planning on selling... I think my wife is going to inherit it. Canfield Family!!! Get rid of her Santa Snooze.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GlennW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    Your lucky! Mine feels quite flexy compared to my balance. I think it has to do with the one piece link on the balance (which I hope is on carbon riot) as well as making it adapt the old models as well as the longer swing arm so we do not HAVE to unload our old bikes for pennies on the dollar. We are already kinda getting "shimanoed" with the bros blowing them out for 400 bucks less then we paid 6 months ago. I really hope they make the old ones upgradeable otherwise I have a 8lb paperweight since it will be pretty much worth scrap rate as soon as the new fancy carbon boost model comes out and them already selling new frames at a discount.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
    Does your existing bike suddenly become a pile of crap or ride any worse just because a new model gets released? Of course not. Just ride it & enjoy it. If you are worried about resale value of mountain bikes, you probably need a new hobby.
    Not really doing much Ridin' or Diggin'

  75. #75
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennW View Post
    Does your existing bike suddenly become a pile of crap or ride any worse just because a new model gets released? Of course not. Just ride it & enjoy it. If you are worried about resale value of mountain bikes, you probably need a new hobby.
    No not a pile of crap..... however, when something new comes out value takes a hit. Plus if they fix all my issues I have with my current riot I would like to sell my current riot to fund a new one. Some of us do not have the luxury of just going and buying a new bike that cost as much as a motorcycle and then sell the old one for whatever I can get later. So when something new comes out value goes down, compounded by manufacturer discounts of that model. I would be a fool to think I could get more then a grand for my frame once the new one comes out. You would not be willing to take a 50% loss in under a year for your car, or house, or motorcycle, would you? Why do people think when they sink 6k into something it is ok that next year it is worth 3, if you are lucky? Saying I need a new hobby is stupid just because I would like to think when I invest in a company with what I think is a pretty large investment, for that investment to be worth something more then half a year later. I do not have the luxury of riding these bikes before buying, so they are bought on name alone. Is it too much to ask to hope that the value is held by the manufacturer for more than 2 product years? Do we get a $500 credit to a new carbon riot frame since we are taking that hit? No we do not. So is it too much to ask that we can hope there is some backwards compatibility with the current bike we have? I do not think so. I own 3 canfield bikes, purchased off name alone so I feel I have the right to talk and hope about ways to help keep value in my investment. Some might think I am way off on wanting for my bike to be worth something even after I own it for a short bit.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GlennW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    No not a pile of crap..... however, when something new comes out value takes a hit. Plus if they fix all my issues I have with my current riot I would like to sell my current riot to fund a new one. Some of us do not have the luxury of just going and buying a new bike that cost as much as a motorcycle and then sell the old one for whatever I can get later. So when something new comes out value goes down, compounded by manufacturer discounts of that model. I would be a fool to think I could get more then a grand for my frame once the new one comes out. You would not be willing to take a 50% loss in under a year for your car, or house, or motorcycle, would you? Why do people think when they sink 6k into something it is ok that next year it is worth 3, if you are lucky? Saying I need a new hobby is stupid just because I would like to think when I invest in a company with what I think is a pretty large investment, for that investment to be worth something more then half a year later. I do not have the luxury of riding these bikes before buying, so they are bought on name alone. Is it too much to ask to hope that the value is held by the manufacturer for more than 2 product years? Do we get a $500 credit to a new carbon riot frame since we are taking that hit? No we do not. So is it too much to ask that we can hope there is some backwards compatibility with the current bike we have? I do not think so. I own 3 canfield bikes, purchased off name alone so I feel I have the right to talk and hope about ways to help keep value in my investment. Some might think I am way off on wanting for my bike to be worth something even after I own it for a short bit.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
    Bicycles are never going to be investments. They are depreciating assets. The rate of so-called innovation in the industry dictates a calamitous rate of depreciation.

    I appreciate (no pun intended) that's not going to be palatable when you are throwing down your hard-earned dollars on new bicycles, but maybe allocating more value to the enjoyment you get from riding them might help (perhaps start at $0.50 a mile and see where you land?).
    Not really doing much Ridin' or Diggin'

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    I agree with your comments hitech but want to add that this is not specific to any company. I blame the ever changing "standards" more than anything and think you all agree with me. I think small manufacturers are even more of victim of this as if you invest the years and money to bring a model to market, you need to have it be viable for a certain production number run to get a return on that investment. Boost, metric, all this B.S. makes old frames old before their time and any frame an absolute terrible investment. Small companies have to pick and choose and hope and if they do get burned, it hurts them a lot more.
    This day and age, we can't expect to get anything for a used bike. I recently sold a Nomad that got pennies compared to what it should have been worth. It wasn't boost, it wasn't metric, and they new one was announced. It is still a great frame and should make somebody very happy but its obsolete. It sucks but its become just part of the game. Bikes lose 50% of their value in the first year. We have to realize that going in and can't blame any manufacturer, especially the small guys who are doing their best to keep up with these ever changing, worthless changes to try to make us customers happy. If you want to be angry with anybody, its the big players in the industry who are doing this to us, the consumers, and likely purposely making it difficult to the smaller companies out there like Canfield.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by aenema View Post
    I agree with your comments hitech but want to add that this is not specific to any company. I blame the ever changing "standards" more than anything and think you all agree with me. I think small manufacturers are even more of victim of this as if you invest the years and money to bring a model to market, you need to have it be viable for a certain production number run to get a return on that investment. Boost, metric, all this B.S. makes old frames old before their time and any frame an absolute terrible investment. Small companies have to pick and choose and hope and if they do get burned, it hurts them a lot more.
    This day and age, we can't expect to get anything for a used bike. I recently sold a Nomad that got pennies compared to what it should have been worth. It wasn't boost, it wasn't metric, and they new one was announced. It is still a great frame and should make somebody very happy but its obsolete. It sucks but its become just part of the game. Bikes lose 50% of their value in the first year. We have to realize that going in and can't blame any manufacturer, especially the small guys who are doing their best to keep up with these ever changing, worthless changes to try to make us customers happy. If you want to be angry with anybody, its the big players in the industry who are doing this to us, the consumers, and likely purposely making it difficult to the smaller companies out there like Canfield.
    Sad but true. I usually avoid losing too much by buying used and building bikes slowly with discount parts I find online. It is a really good way to avoid that painful sting of depreciation.

    However I am so impressed with my Riot I will buy the carbon new from Canfield because I want to support these guys who are truly building bikes for the love of the sport and like nothing else the other guys are cooking up. I'm happy to spend my hard earned cash on their product because they do it right and I want to see more of if. However, I fully anticipate depreciation because it's a bike and that's how it's been since I got into the sport... not Canfield's fault at all.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    227
    Don't sell your old Canfields and you won't loose any money. If you have to always have the latest and newest bike, you will always be spending more. Bikes are improving so fast it's hard not want next years model because it has improved so much. Your only choice is to buy used. Then when you sell, it won't be at such a large loss. I keep bikes long enough that they aren't worth much when I do sell them. But I enjoyed them and when that is over, I'll sell. And somebody can cheaply get into the sport or get a better bike than the one they have. To have the latest, you have to pay for it. Don't plan on selling my Canfields. I'll sell when I don't enjoy riding them anymore. Don't see that happening. Plus it's good to have a loaner. Especially a cool one. Yea I want the new carbon bike, but just built a Riot. So I'm going to go ride it today.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: acfsportsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    274
    I've always sold cheap or given my bike away to someone who doesn't have one when I'm ready to move onto a newer frame/bike. I would say it's about every 3 years or so I'll get the new bike itch. Not really nostalgic about keeping them besides they get pretty abused over the seasons. This time however I bought 2 Canfield's in 2016 and loving the variety of riding 2 different bikes.(I'm pretty sure I'll be keeping these for a long time) When a carbon FS Canfield does eventually come out, let the people who have to have lastest/greatest first do all the real world testing. The Brothers will listen and make little tweaks to the frame to improve it, there's always something. I'm so glad I didn't get the 15 Balance because the 16 is such an improvement and the first Riots had the longer seat tube until real world testing told them to shorten them. Even the EPO went through a few small changes like internal routing for the seat post, I'm just saying it's not always wise to be first.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    227
    acfsportsfan, I totally agree with those comments. Glad I got the '16 Balance and also glad I got the refined Riot when I did, before the name change. Sometimes it pays to be patient. Taking them both to Angelfire!

  82. #82
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    I understand I am in the minority here about worrying about resale value. So I understand that the backlash about that is going to come. However I do feel that the industry is OUT OF CONTROL right now with prices and the next big thing. So in order not to constantly take a kick in the pants when I want something new I MUST sell what I have to fund that. So it becomes pretty important to me. I feel that since the main upgrades of the new carbon riot seem to be mostly "bolt on" other then the carbon front triangle that it is not too much to as for them to be backwards compatible.A new one piece link, or a boost rear triangle with a longer chainstay I feel should be a option to buy as a upgrade to your existing bike. Or they change it around so much that they kinda just openly admit the first go around was a poor design but you can buy a whole new bike to fix your flex instead of this one piece link.

    I hear the talk about "the little guys" having to try to keep up with the big players in the industry and they take the risk which I understand, but that is why I think the upgrade option is even more important as they go through these "growing pains" of a new design or bike. If it is a bolt on change they are making, why not make it a option to upgrade and show people that the original bike they bought is still worth something. The geo is supposed to stay the same so other than material on the front triangle everything else is a bolt on. Show them that not everything in this society is throw away and buy new. That they are different from the big guys that are just chasing a buck with marketing dollars and 6mm of new super fancy hub spacing. I think of all the 2015 balance owners that are now on Nomads, or Enduros because they took a huge bath on their bike since it was upgraded and they were left out to dry. I do not know if they were offered a big discount on a 2016 or not but I sure hope they were.

    I feel it is not too much to ask to worry and ask for such things. As well as knowing and wondering what will my bike be worth in the near future. That is weighed into purchase thoughts in the future. Bike brands like yeti, santa cruz hold their value from both the bling factor and the brand keeping the MSRP up through the entire model year so people buy new knowing that they will have something that is worth something when they go to upgrade. Companies like intense for example cannot move their new inventory because they are known for slashing the prices to move inventory so why buy now when in 6 months you can pay half. I would much rather look at the Bros as the yeti and santa cruz side of things. The costumer service is top notch and the bikes ride well so overall I am very happy with them. It is more of a want and desire for a upgrade option to help with current "issues" I have with the bike that seem to be getting addressed with the new model ( flex, boost, longer chainstay option for taller riders) and with the staying relevant with current models/trends to hold value longer so when I do get the option to upgrade I am not left with a paperweight to sell. I get I am about to get hammered about cost for the company, and blah blah blah and its all part of the sport but honestly I feel it is not too much to ask to have the "little guys" that we support by giving our dollars to look out just as much for the "little guys" that gave them those dollars. Its a small community of canfield riders that on this forum are very vocal on many threads about supporting Canfield bikes. Why not give us all one more reason to sing praises?

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: acfsportsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    274
    I like and support your idea of backwards compatible for the "RIOT". Am I remembering correctly that an updated link for the 15' Balance was offered for purchase. I would certainly be interested if the same was made available for the Riot.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    I think an updated link would be great. I can feel Hitech if you bought a bike and everything you wish it was able to do or be changes (lighter,stiffer, longer fork) in a year or 2. Maybe the brothers can give a discount if you bought a bike in the past year or 2.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    I dont know about other riders, but my Riot is going to be at least a 5 year bike. I have two children at home and extra funds for a new bike are, most likely, just not going to be there. Having the ability to upgrade bolt on parts, like I did with avy suspension parts, would be a huge plus for me. I would definitely buy a new link and rear triangle if it became available and the necessity was presented right. An upgrade that added more stability and stiffness would be welcomed over buying a whole new frame prematurely. It would also, as others have stated, hold my frame in a better position for resale if needed.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    I like this discussion, thanks hitech. It really should be had and it makes me think. I honestly think it would be very, very difficult and potentially counter productive to make the carbon bike's rear triangle backwards compatible. Changing pivot/linkage points by millimeters has an effect on a lot of factors that make a bike ride like it does. I also picture the connecting points being literally a different type of interface since different materials offer different properties that can be offered of have to be designed around.
    Frankly, if you design the next model to be compatible with the last, it seems like you would be limiting your progression of that model.

    In regards to an updated link like they did with the Balance, maybe. But I recognize that they have limited finances and resources and are focusing on the new carbon one right now so I get why that would be less of a priority also. Personally, I notice some flex out of the frame but nothing I would say is negative unless a pivot bolt comes loose. When that happens it is definitely too much play. I am not a small dude and like to think I can ride hard from time to time and just don't really see this as a problem that needs to be placed at a priority to solve.

    I do understand and agree with hitech's frustration though. This industry seems to be doing its best to alienate its long term customers. I don't agree that other brands hold a premium as my Nomad I sold went for next to nothing. Nothing wrong with it, in great shape. Just not boost or metric so it falls under the realm of irrelevant because of stupid reasons and industry mania.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by acfsportsfan View Post
    I really like my Riot, I think I'll just go ride and let the brothers worry about what's next.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    How about price? The EPO seems reasonably priced compared to other carbon hardtails.
    Quote Originally Posted by aenema View Post
    I like this discussion, thanks hitech. It really should be had and it makes me think. I honestly think it would be very, very difficult and potentially counter productive to make the carbon bike's rear triangle backwards compatible. Changing pivot/linkage points by millimeters has an effect on a lot of factors that make a bike ride like it does. I also picture the connecting points being literally a different type of interface since different materials offer different properties that can be offered of have to be designed around.
    Frankly, if you design the next model to be compatible with the last, it seems like you would be limiting your progression of that model.

    In regards to an updated link like they did with the Balance, maybe. But I recognize that they have limited finances and resources and are focusing on the new carbon one right now so I get why that would be less of a priority also. Personally, I notice some flex out of the frame but nothing I would say is negative unless a pivot bolt comes loose. When that happens it is definitely too much play. I am not a small dude and like to think I can ride hard from time to time and just don't really see this as a problem that needs to be placed at a priority to solve.

    I do understand and agree with hitech's frustration though. This industry seems to be doing its best to alienate its long term customers. I don't agree that other brands hold a premium as my Nomad I sold went for next to nothing. Nothing wrong with it, in great shape. Just not boost or metric so it falls under the realm of irrelevant because of stupid reasons and industry mania.
    Isnt the new carbon Riot supposed to be exactly like the current Riot save boost spacing? Is the rear triangle supposed to be alloy or carbon? Excuse me if I missed other 'updates' that were announced at some point.

    Hobby industries have to keep updating products in order to make their customers buy new stuff and keep the used market from getting to big. The used market is tough if you have anything over a couple seasons old. If you can hold out and part out the bike that is best way to sell and maximize money. Choosing a frame and components that hold resale value higher helps with turn over too.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by A_street View Post
    Isnt the new carbon Riot supposed to be exactly like the current Riot save boost spacing? Is the rear triangle supposed to be alloy or carbon? Excuse me if I missed other 'updates' that were announced at some point.

    Hobby industries have to keep updating products in order to make their customers buy new stuff and keep the used market from getting to big. The used market is tough if you have anything over a couple seasons old. If you can hold out and part out the bike that is best way to sell and maximize money. Choosing a frame and components that hold resale value higher helps with turn over too.
    Was said rear triangle will be aluminum, but one piece so not to flex

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slider_phil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    411
    Ibis is a company that offered rear triangle upgrades when they shifted a frame to boost. It'll be interesting what Canfield comes up with.

    I sold my Riot frame for half of what I paid for it after 18 months on it, not too bad. Bought a second hand Primer frame for a decent price so hopefully the depreciation doesn't hit as hard lol.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    276
    Rear triangle already is one piece, and stiff as hell. The issue, which I definitely perceive as a 250 ex BMXer, is the two piece upper link...that is moving to a single piece like the balance and will be a huge improvement on an already amazing bike.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by Glenngineer View Post
    Rear triangle already is one piece, and stiff as hell. The issue, which I definitely perceive as a 250 ex BMXer, is the two piece upper link...that is moving to a single piece like the balance and will be a huge improvement on an already amazing bike.
    This is what I am hoping for. I don't feel the chain stays to be much of an issue. I feel the bike handles, jumps, corners very well without feeling like a bus.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    188
    It is worth it to note that if the bike got longer the handling might change in a bad way for flatter more pedally trails. It may take steep terrain to get the bike to liven up. This is the plague that the wreckoning and trek slash face right now. I am basing that opinion based off of reviews alone. I have no saddle time in either bike.

  93. #93
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    Quote Originally Posted by A_street View Post
    It is worth it to note that if the bike got longer the handling might change in a bad way for flatter more pedally trails. It may take steep terrain to get the bike to liven up. This is the plague that the wreckoning and trek slash face right now. I am basing that opinion based off of reviews alone. I have no saddle time in either bike.
    I use my riot to race on as well as play and I welcome a longer bike with open arms. If my bike can feel dead until I his 25mph then just barely start to come alive that would be awesome. The balance is very close to that and I am much faster going down on the balance but It weights almost 34lb and my riot is 31 with carbon everything so you feel those extra pounds on the sprints and short climbs in a race. Hell if my rear tire did not hit my seat tube on my black with 29er wheels on it I would just swap everything over and have a long travel 29er.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    79
    I am 6'3" on a Large Riot. Too small for me I know. I'm hoping to move up to the XL in the carbon version. If the make it longer I have to agree that it could ruin the snappy nature of the bike. I hope demensions stay basically the same with the exception of lower top tube in XL and lower BB.

  95. #95
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,331
    As far as the 1 piece link. If they have one designed in solid works or one of the others I would be willing to make the CNC prototypes on my weekends so they would not have to pay for that.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    As far as the 1 piece link. If they have one designed in solid works or one of the others I would be willing to make the CNC prototypes on my weekends so they would not have to pay for that.
    That would be sweet!

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,213
    My guess is that they would have to make a one piece upper link specifically for the aluminum framed Riot. If you look at the two piece upper links on the current bike you would have to make a big heavy link that wraps up and over the main triangle to make it one piece. This would also interfere with the stock internal dropper routing.

    I would assume that with a carbon front triangle the main triangle can be made such that you wouldn't need to make an obnoxiously shaped upper link...thus no backward compatibility.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: titusquasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,213
    I am also preparing to sell my XL 2016 frame. I understand that I will have to sell for less than half what I paid a year ago to get under the current new frame price. Sigh...

    On the other hand, the EPO price is very enticing...and I'm not even needing a hardtail!

  99. #99
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,758
    Quote Originally Posted by A_street View Post
    I dont know about other riders, but my Riot is going to be at least a 5 year bike..
    To me this is why I find it silly giving CB any grief about resale value and closeout frame pricing -- these aren't intended to be flavor of the month bikes that are so common across the rest of the industry, they're built to be ridden hard for multiple seasons (at least a few), and when you're replacing them a couple of product development cycles later, there should actually be a big enough performance difference to warrant going from a worn out frame to a new shiny one... everywhere else they're relying on marketing to try and make a 5% performance improvement upsell at a 50% bike value write-down seem worth pursuing.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mayha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    573
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    I use my riot to race on as well as play and I welcome a longer bike with open arms. If my bike can feel dead until I his 25mph then just barely start to come alive that would be awesome. The balance is very close to that and I am much faster going down on the balance but It weights almost 34lb and my riot is 31 with carbon everything so you feel those extra pounds on the sprints and short climbs in a race. Hell if my rear tire did not hit my seat tube on my black with 29er wheels on it I would just swap everything over and have a long travel 29er.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
    It sounds like you just bought the wrong bike...You seem to have quite a lot of issues with this frame. I and many others can't complain about this bike at all. It has by far been the most fun bike I've ever ridden. I've literally taken it on every type of trail and it is simply incredible. I had an Evil Wreckoning that my friend was nice enough to give me for a week. I rode it 7 times and was very impressed by how well rounded it was. It did everything exceptionally well. It was stiff and climbed very efficiently. It descended amazing well and was surprisingly great at slow speed tech too. What I realized, however, was that it wasn't nearly as "FUN" as the Riot.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. List of seat posts for use with carbon rails
    By raganwald in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-03-2016, 10:50 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 06:52 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-07-2011, 08:27 AM
  4. Add one more carbon framed f/s 29er to the list
    By vizsladog in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-05-2011, 07:48 PM
  5. X carbon headset list
    By the_pilot in forum Titus
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-08-2011, 11:06 AM

Members who have read this thread: 228

Posting Permissions

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