Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    170

    Giant Anthem vs Turner Flux?

    Has anyone ridden both of them? I'm wondering how they'd compare?

    I think the Anthem is a bit lighter being carbon.

    Obviously your going to tell me everything great about the Anthem versus the Flux, but I'd love to hear some non-biased knocks that the Flux has over the Anthem as well....

    Thanks,
    Chris

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7

    to confuse you -

    Nice summary of the flux here from a normal guy:
    http://www.mountainbiketales.com/reviews/tflux.htm

    I have demo'd the anthem for a few days and enjoyed it, but unsure about a long term relationship with 3 inches of travel since I don't race but enjoy going fast. If I could afford two bikes, one would definitely be an anthem! On paper the flux has relaxed, but still xc range, geometry and more travel. I'm trying to figure out how much travel I need here in east tennessee, and I'm thinking the terrain is steep enough to warrant 4+ inches of travel on a more stable bike. 70+ degrees and 4 inches seems about right for xc in mountainous areas. The anthem is crazy fast but you still need to avoid tall rocks and when you get real tired it's like drunk driving. Search the boards the comparison of the flux versus a titus racer x, as it is a similar contrast, sorry I don't have the link. Tough choice - blur xc, flux, anthem, trance 1 - the guys at the bike shop are irritated with me 'cause I still can't decide.

  3. #3
    Quack Attack
    Reputation: dfioc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    238
    Only the Anthem Advanced is carbon.

    Ride both and then decide. For the money, you'll get more with the Anthem.
    2011 Ibis Mojo SL-R & 2008 Giant Trance X0

  4. #4
    Live Free or Ride!
    Reputation: GiantMartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    604
    Anthem gives you more bang for your buck, but it all depends on your riding. If you need the travel the Anthem might be bottoming out everywhere. How bout a Trance?
    2007 Giant Anthem 1
    2009 Giant XTC 0

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: NJ-XC-Justin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Jank
    Has anyone ridden both of them? I'm wondering how they'd compare?

    I think the Anthem is a bit lighter being carbon.

    Obviously your going to tell me everything great about the Anthem versus the Flux, but I'd love to hear some non-biased knocks that the Flux has over the Anthem as well....

    Thanks,
    Chris

    I would buy a Flux in a hearbeat if I raced XC and could only have one bike (and had the $$$). I would (probably) buy the Anthem if I already had a trail bike and was looking for a single-minded race machine. If cost is a factor, Giants are a ridiculously good value.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    290

    jank and tnewton get a 4.2" Trance......

    The Trance performs great.

    Tnewton,
    The Trance should be plusher than the Blur XC on steep technical climbs,
    Maestro suspension is superior in all regards to the Flux's single pivot design, providing a plusher suspension less influenced by chain tension and brake forces.

    I would recommend the Anthem to anyone who plans to race, otherwise the Trance just feels much more comfortable.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7
    I can't demo the blur xc but was preparing to buy one, so I can't compare it to the Trance 1 I rode. Turner flux is just too expensive - but it is a 4 bar, not a single pivot, and I haven't heard one negative comment about it. Giant doesn't have much confidence in the Trance 1 as they don't put xc components like full XT on it - unless an XT version will be a anthem X in 2009. I'll talk to my bike shop about switching components, but that may put me close the blur price range again. The full XT on the anthem performs flawlessy, including the brakes. If a trance 1 would suffice, that's lot $$ saved. My demo of the T1 was tarnished by bad shifting on the raceface crankset and I didn't like the brakes.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: farmertan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    659

    I've owned both

    I've had a Flux. Now I have a Giant Anthem and a Trance X, due to the fact that the shop I ride for is a Giant dealer and not a Turner dealer. The Flux is a great, great bike. If you can only have one bike, and you race XC, the Flux is amazing. It is not as fast as the Anthem, but it is more versatile. You may also want to consider the Trance X. The frame weighs 1/2 pound more than the Flux, but it is quite a bit less $$. The Trance X could be raced XC, and it would be perfect for endurance racing on rougher courses. My T-rex (so I call it) weighs 25.5 lbs if I put my I-9 wheels on it. The T-rex has a great pedaling platform. I have not taken it to the mountains yet, but judging from the way it climbs steep hills around my house, it should climb very well.

    But like I said, if you only want one mountain bike, and you want to invest in a bike that will last a very long time, you can't go wrong with a Flux.

    Hope this helps.

  9. #9
    "Its All Good"
    Reputation: Whafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,716
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro
    Maestro suspension is superior in all regards to the Flux's single pivot design, providing a plusher suspension less influenced by chain tension and brake forces.
    Bro, this is totally incorrect, the Flux or Turners for that matter are not Single Pivot suspension machines...
    The_Lecht_Rocks: whafe - cheeers - may i offer an official apology for the wagon wheeler "dis-belief"

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laurenlex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by Whafe
    Bro, this is totally incorrect, the Flux or Turners for that matter are not Single Pivot suspension machines...
    I agree with Pedro. A Turner is a linkage actuated low single pivot.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    290

    flux has a single pivot wheel path with linkage

    actuated shock.
    They used to be Horst Link, but mr Turner got fed up with the liscensing bit from specialized and then from Mr Ellsworth.

    I do remember well, Turners were some of the first bikes ever with a 4 bar linkage; that was about 15 years ago.

  12. #12
    Ride Life.
    Reputation: theilluminati's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    122
    get an anthem
    BIKES: ZERO GALLONS PER MILE.

  13. #13
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Quote Originally Posted by laurenlex
    I agree with Pedro. A Turner is a linkage actuated low single pivot.
    And you and pedro believe the Specialized four page ads they've been putting out since 1999 to get an edge on the competition. Hell, it was so good that even GT ended up calling their first i-drives "modified four bars".

    What you and Pedro fail to understand about the so called "FSR" pivot is that it's just a pivot. It is a design element of a whole suspension. In and of itself, it's not a suspension design. It can be applied to many different suspensions, including the pure mac struts. Even the term "four bar" is so dubious that the Spec guys must sit back and fold their arms, proud of how they managed to get an entire world of mountain bikers to this day to believe their hocus pocus. So what you have is a "Non-Horst Link Four Bar" or "Non-Horst Link Multi Linkage Rocker Beam Suspension" as opposed to 05 and earlier "Horst Link Multi Linkage Rocker Beam Suspension" for the Flux and similar.

    I am one of the people that had non horst FSR look alikes at the end of the 90's, and the suspension worked under braking and pedaling and felt way better that the S offerings. I got two Horst Link bikes after that and there was no difference. The suspension worked. I am now on a non-horst Turner and it still works. This is actually backed up by Specialized's own German scientific studies they used at the head of the advertising war they committed to the buying public that persists to this day. They obviously realized that the buying public isn't very intelligent, and doesn't actually read anything other than the length of the bars in graphs. What the majority of the buying public didn't notice was that the series of graphs were altered in scale to make the deviations between bikes tested look massive, when in some cases, the actual deviation was less than ten percent, but due to the altered scales, they looked massive. And to this day, actual deviations are small to none, especially when one considered that DT was using the horst link until 2005 in a nearly "disabled" position because it was moved to a nearly horizontal configuration with minimal impact on the axle path, which is how he designed anyhow. That's why when he eliminated the FSR link altogether, he observed a nearly unchanged axle path and he designs primarily by axle path and manipulation of the three upper pivots as his most important determinants of his designs.

    Other horst link containing designs included the GT RTS and LTS, which both had massive jacking issues under braking and bounced around like crazy. The Giant NRS was another story altogether, falling under the FSR patent blanket as well.

    I'm not a "horst link" or Turner snob. The fact of the matter is there are many different suspension designs out there, along with many suspensions that look the same and vary slightly to massively in appearance. The fact is the test riders are put on terrain that is thought of to be ideal for the design and it is the test course that is used to determine the suspension arrangement and final design characteristics for any frame. Some perform better, some worse. And yes, many times a non-Horst link containing design is the right tool for the job. With the years of research and files from years of CAD and FEA, the gap has closed between the two pivot placements. Now design is much cheaper instead of tweaking actual models by mere mm to try and get a characteristic.

    Now you can talk about how a Flux is supposed to ride, or you can ride one and speak about it accordingly.

    And for the OP, get what you think is the best ride. You have great choices. Assess your needs by everything else but wording of "single pivot" or "four bar" and you'll pick the right tool for the job, whether it be a high single pivot (Superlight type), VPP, DW, Maestro, rocker beam, or otherwise. There are more important things to determine the choice than that one small, and proven negligible design element. FWIW, Turner had his best sales in the company's history since his move to eliminate the Horst Link. 2008 thinking, not 1999.
    Last edited by Jerk_Chicken; 04-16-2008 at 07:41 AM.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laurenlex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    And you and pedro believe the Specialized four page ads they've been putting out since 1999 to get an edge on the competition
    Not me dude, I believe Specalized orders (not builds) average bikes and has an excellent team of lawyers and marketing gurus.

  15. #15
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    You could believe that, but your agreement with Pedro says otherwise. You mentioning your hate for Specialized perhaps is indicative of the fact that their marketing campaign permeated the consumer body so deeply that they don't even know that some of these ideas came from Specialized in the first place.

    That's incredible marketing.

Posting Permissions

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