Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 54
  1. #1
    The Crow
    Reputation: Iwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    928

    SCOOP: 2018 Giant Anthem X2

    We've managed to get our hands on a 2018 Anthem X2 and took some pics. Full details (like geo) are not available yet, but the rest is there.

    Have a look here:
    Sneak Peek: 2018 Giant Anthem X 29er

    SCOOP: 2018 Giant Anthem X2-ccs-62657-0-65667900-1491991044.jpg
    There's a feeling I get
    When I look to the West
    And my spirit is crying for leaving

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steel Calf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,073
    Not impressed.

    Care to turn the camera a little bit and show some pictures of the new 2018 Reign?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    54
    29er, but down to...

    "The rear travel is said to be 90 mm while the front fork is set to 100 mm"

    I know it's an XC bike.. but you'd think Giant would follow modern trends and keep the 120mm on the front end a 110mm on the back while just changing the wheel size. I mean yay shorter chain stay... but... nothing really else pops out.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chippertheripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    806
    I'm holding out for a 29" ASX, so I can put some b+ hoops on for those rowdy days. and 29/2.6 for the rest of the days.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by K_GIANT_98 View Post
    29er, but down to...

    "The rear travel is said to be 90 mm while the front fork is set to 100 mm"

    I know it's an XC bike.. but you'd think Giant would follow modern trends and keep the 120mm on the front end a 110mm on the back while just changing the wheel size. I mean yay shorter chain stay... but... nothing really else pops out.
    what is most irritating about the new bike is that they have flat out ignored requests for a second bottle cage mount. Maybe its there under the top tube but they haven't said anything. I'll give it once over when I see it tomorrow.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chippertheripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    806
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    what is most irritating about the new bike is that they have flat out ignored requests for a second bottle cage mount. Maybe its there under the top tube but they haven't said anything. I'll give it once over when I see it tomorrow.
    peep the tire clearances too, nudge nudge!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    53
    is it just me or the link is not working?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Chippertheripper View Post
    peep the tire clearances too, nudge nudge!
    No second bottle cage mount and tyre clearance is slightly improved over current bike. It does feel more lively but I didn't get much time with it since its a stock item at the bike shop.
    Overall I think I would still take the 27.5 bike over the 29er

  9. #9
    No good in rock gardens..
    Reputation: Sideknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,990
    Quote Originally Posted by damond View Post
    is it just me or the link is not working?
    Not working for me either.
    Less isn't MOAR

  10. #10
    The Crow
    Reputation: Iwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    928
    Request from Giant to pull the article until the official launch...
    There's a feeling I get
    When I look to the West
    And my spirit is crying for leaving

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Iwan View Post
    Request from Giant to pull the article until the official launch...
    When's the official launch? timeframe?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by forealz View Post
    When's the official launch? timeframe?
    The official launch always was planned for June. This premature "Scoop" may now influence the launch date i.e bring it forward since the details are now out there.

    there's a bit of a global handbag fight going on with certain countries distributors annoyed that they were not part of the pre-launch....

    that's how much excitement this bike is generating

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    733
    Apparently there are a couple shops in South Africa selling them according to their posts on Facebook and they have a lot of information and photos. I'm not going to post links here but it's pretty easy to find them on Facebook


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Apparently there are a couple shops in South Africa selling them according to their posts on Facebook and they have a lot of information and photos. I'm not going to post links here but it's pretty easy to find them on Facebook


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Yes that's correct. They appear to the have the Anthem 2 29 which is the full Alloy frame. Carbon frames are not yet available.

  15. #15
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    [QUOTE=Brad;13129159

    that's how much excitement this bike is generating[/QUOTE]

    I'm happy to see Giant taking the 29" wheel size seriously for something. But honestly, I already have a delicate XC bike. I want a trail 29er. If one is not forthcoming from Giant, they won't be getting my money, and unfortunately, neither will my LBS because none of the brands they carry are making one.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post

    that's how much excitement this bike is generating
    What excitement is this that you speak of?

    It's the same bike they are offering now with 10mm less rear travel and boost spacing.



    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    [QUOTE=prj71;13129184]What excitement is this that you speak of?

    It's the same bike they are offering now with 10mm less rear travel and boost spacing.



    Sent from my SM

    So firstly the rear wheel travel is not confirmed as 90mm. If it eventually is confirmed at 90mm then that's not really such a big deal anyway since its an XC race bike.

    Its a completely different bike from the current X29. New main and rear triangles, new linkages and also new geometry, i.e. a new bike.
    Granted , I would be more excited if it has two bottle cages!! The allot frames don't have two bottle cages. Theres no confirmation on the carbon bikes features yet. Since they alloy and carbon frames fall into different markets there might still be hope

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    350
    Giant is not keeping it a secret elsewhere. This is posted on Giant Bikes South Africa facebook. I do wonder if it is possible to switch a 27.5 rocker link and or lower link to squeeze a little more travel out of it. It appears to use the same 165x42.5 trunion mount shock. The tire might hit the seat tube but it would be a neat experiment.

    SCOOP: 2018 Giant Anthem X2-new-anthem.jpg

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    733
    Seems like an error to me if Giant are releasing an Alloy version 1st then Carbon later this year.

    I'm sure this bike will be appealing to mostly the XC crowd and those who are interested would predominantly want the Carbon version - myself included. I have been waiting some time for this bike to come from Giant, do I wait longer for a Carbon version or buy a Trek Top Fuel or Scott Spark which are also on my radar and are currently available in Carbon?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steel Calf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,073
    Alloy is easier to manufacture, they always use alloy for prototypes and to make quick geometry adjustments, thus the alloy model comes first.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    733
    Alloy doesn't always come 1st. Most manufacturers Inc Giant release both alloy and carbon bikes at the same time. In fact I would say Carbon bikes usually come 1st - this is what Santa Cruz do


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Alloy doesn't always come 1st. Most manufacturers Inc Giant release both alloy and carbon bikes at the same time. In fact I would say Carbon bikes usually come 1st - this is what Santa Cruz do


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Release timing of the models is not related to which go into production first. As mentioned by a previous poster, prototypes are built in alloy to test geometry. Once signed off the alloy model jigs are produced and they start building alloy frames. The carbon frame moulds are only finalised once the geometry of the bike is signed off.

    The bikes are then only launched once there's sufficient stock in the warehouse to satisfy the demand plan. This inventory can take a few months to build

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    125
    So to me, it looks as though they've just dropped the rear travel to allow a shorter chainstay + new geo + boost. Not really all that big of a change is it?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Jubas View Post
    So to me, it looks as though they've just dropped the rear travel to allow a shorter chainstay + new geo + boost. Not really all that big of a change is it?
    Those changes result in a completely new bike. New jigs, moulds, engineering etc. It's not like this is just a different coat of paint

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    Those changes result in a completely new bike. New jigs, moulds, engineering etc. It's not like this is just a different coat of paint

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
    Totally - not disagreeing with you at all.

    But it's not exactly innovation is it? It feels as though they couldn't get a shorter chainstay using Maestro other than reducing the rear travel, which is a pretty poor compromise. Then, it's some industry standards (Boost), some 'cool new things which aren't really' (27.2mm seatpost), and some updates to the geo - longer and slacker.

    I mean, it took them 7 years to make those changes? I'm still riding a 2011 Ax29er which was brilliant when it came out, so i was keen to see how Giant were going to shift the dial..

    ..but to me, they haven't (at least, so far!)

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Jubas View Post
    Totally - not disagreeing with you at all.

    But it's not exactly innovation is it? It feels as though they couldn't get a shorter chainstay using Maestro other than reducing the rear travel, which is a pretty poor compromise. Then, it's some industry standards (Boost), some 'cool new things which aren't really' (27.2mm seatpost), and some updates to the geo - longer and slacker.

    I mean, it took them 7 years to make those changes? I'm still riding a 2011 Ax29er which was brilliant when it came out, so i was keen to see how Giant were going to shift the dial..

    ..but to me, they haven't (at least, so far!)
    I can't see Giant ever innovating in the 29er space. Remember this bike only exists because the xc market has blindly followed the 29er path. GIANT doesn't buy into the Big Wheel thing at all so they were always going to only satisfy the need and not pour resources into it. It's a box ticker. I don't see this bike with LIV branding and I doubt it will be available in sizes below medium.
    The other thing is the travel. It's not confirmed at 90mm. One shop owner mentioned 100mm rear wheel travel, others don't know because they don't have the official word from Giant yet. Bikes that were early releases were intended to gauge interest and south Africa was chosen because it was shouting the loudest for a new 29er. If Giant was really serious about the bike they would have had carbon prototypes running in the ABSA Cape Epic but they didn't.
    Let's also not forget there's a lot of xc 29 ers claiming to be 100 mm but are actually closer to 85-90mm travel actual. The rear travel seems to be more of a category or class rather than an actual true measure of suspension travel these days.

    Let's wait till they officially launch rhe bike and deliver actual specs before investing too much emotion into it. From my past experience it will be a great bike to ride and won't break the bank leaving some change for events. That's enough reason to love giant and get excited.
    Personally I didn't expect anything exciting around this new bike. It has to plug the Xco hole in their range because the market for xco bikes is just not biting on 27.5. The bike can't look too different from the 27.5 Anthem anyway so in terms of styling it was always going to be as conservative as the 27.5 bike

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  27. #27
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    the xc market has blindly followed the 29er path.
    ...and on this point I'll disagree. I saw a LOT of XCO riders on 27.5 bikes several years ago when they were supposed to be the cat's meow. Many of those riders who have options are now back on 29ers. That tells me something. I'm not sure what they see in the 29er, but they see something in it that they don't see in the 27.5 wheel.

    It could be the same thing I see. Now, I'm just fat, slow, old man but I've tested a lot of 27.5 bikes and a lot of 29ers on trails I'm familiar with. Mostly what you'd think of as XC style trails, narrow, rooty, rocky, some a little flowing, some not so much. The one thing that's been universal as far as differences in wheel size is fast flats, or shallow downhills. On these bits of trail where I can stand up and get loose and just relax and let gravity work for me, the 29ers are simply faster when rolling over the roots and rocks. I can be lazy and let the bike go, and it's plenty fast. The 27.5 bikes, I can make roll as fast, but I have to work for it - actively hop roots and rocks, pump off the back sides of them, etc. - it simply isn't as fast if I just stand up and let it go and get lazy.

    Now, I ride mostly for fun, so outright speed isn't the be all end all for me. But my mind works like this. I see the 29er faster down these sections of trail. I figure the same physics probably applies to sections where I'm pedaling as well. So maybe the XC guys are onto something. After all, if I was trying to win a race, I'd want to keep every watt I could in my pocket until I actually needed it. Perhaps they aren't blindly following the 29er path? Maybe it really IS faster?

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Cotharyus View Post
    ...and on this point I'll disagree. I saw a LOT of XCO riders on 27.5 bikes several years ago when they were supposed to be the cat's meow. Many of those riders who have options are now back on 29ers. That tells me something. I'm not sure what they see in the 29er, but they see something in it that they don't see in the 27.5 wheel.

    It could be the same thing I see. Now, I'm just fat, slow, old man but I've tested a lot of 27.5 bikes and a lot of 29ers on trails I'm familiar with. Mostly what you'd think of as XC style trails, narrow, rooty, rocky, some a little flowing, some not so much. The one thing that's been universal as far as differences in wheel size is fast flats, or shallow downhills. On these bits of trail where I can stand up and get loose and just relax and let gravity work for me, the 29ers are simply faster when rolling over the roots and rocks. I can be lazy and let the bike go, and it's plenty fast. The 27.5 bikes, I can make roll as fast, but I have to work for it - actively hop roots and rocks, pump off the back sides of them, etc. - it simply isn't as fast if I just stand up and let it go and get lazy.

    Now, I ride mostly for fun, so outright speed isn't the be all end all for me. But my mind works like this. I see the 29er faster down these sections of trail. I figure the same physics probably applies to sections where I'm pedaling as well. So maybe the XC guys are onto something. After all, if I was trying to win a race, I'd want to keep every watt I could in my pocket until I actually needed it. Perhaps they aren't blindly following the 29er path? Maybe it really IS faster?

    I've been to many XC races and race a few myself. The XC racers are a bit like roadies in that they all tend to follow each other in preferring to be on the same type of equipment as the next guy for fear that that the guy who is different may have an advantage. I've asked mnay guys who have owned 27.5 and went back to 29 why they did so. The only consistent answer is that its feels more comfortable and there I have to agree.
    Its a myth that a big wheel rolls faster. It'll have to be heavier and have less drag for that to be true. All that is moot when fitted to a bike though since its the mass of the system and aerodynamics of the rider and bike that makes the difference.

    Where the 29er does have an advantage is stability in pitch and yaw due to it being a longer bike overall than the equivalent 650B. Stability offers confidence and confidence can be converted into more speed. Just watch the UCI XCO season for examples of this. Absalon is not able to catch Schurter on descents not because of wheel size but because Absalon didn't have the confidence to tackle the technical sections of a course.Absalon himself admitted as much and spent the winter of 2015/2016 working with his brother to overcome his fear of descending quicker. The dropper post has added more speed to him than the wheels did. In fact BMC had to prise the 26er out of his hands cos it was bad for the business (of selling 29ers) and your star rider prefers his 26er.

    Small gains on some rooty sections are also offset by losses on the tight twisty sections of a XCO course. I have compared a 29er Anthem to 27.5 Anthem and found myself quicker everywhere on the 27.5 bike. On other sections of the course, on other 29ers, the pace was closer with a more nimble bike (Cannondale Scalpel 2015). Schurter chose a 27.5 over a 29er for many seasons simply because the 29er Scott had was too high in front and didn't feel nimble. the new Spark is better in these areas.

    For the Anthem 29er to be a better bike than the 27.5 it needs more than just nice paint, L&S geo and bigger wheels. It needs to be as nimble i.e give up some stability and be as playful.

    Ultimately the downhill speed you can achieve is down to your weight, confidence and aerodynamic resistance

    Every XC racer believes the 29er to be quicker and all say because it rolls over roots faster yet that is not borne out by facts because if it was simply quicker then 27.5 bikes should not be able to keep up anywhere

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    Those changes result in a completely new bike. New jigs, moulds, engineering etc. It's not like this is just a different coat of paint

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
    Sure it's a new bike. But at the same time, it's the same bike.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    is it what it is. Love it or loath it. there's plenty of choice out there.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Jubas View Post
    So to me, it looks as though they've just dropped the rear travel to allow a shorter chainstay + new geo + boost. Not really all that big of a change is it?
    Why would you think shorter travel is needed for chainstay length or geometry changes? The Trance 29 had shorter chainstays and longer travel. Its a cross country race bike. Bikes in that category usually are 80-100mm so it seems like a reasonable choice to me.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    I've confirmed with several dealers that it's 100mm at the back and front. Took it for a quick spin and it feels very different from the old 29er.
    Firstly this medium is long,.... It feels longer than the geometry suggests due to the lay back seat post and slack seat angle, I reckon 73 degrees.
    Carbon bikes available end June beginning July.

    So now let's wait for official geometry chart and official word from Giant on the bike.
    The top end full on spare no prisoners XCO race version will be a little longer waiting.....

    This revised 29er turns netter and it manuals and wheelies more easily indicating chain stays are quite a bit shorter. I couldn't do more as the bike was being set up for a customer who hasn't arrived so it had to be returned with no scratches.

    In feel it's about as close as one can get to the 27.5 with big wheels. It feels like a scalpel but I'll have to wait till I can get my hands on a demo and spend a day with it

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,367
    The seat tube angle on the current Anthem X 29 is 73 degrees also.

    The way I see it this 2018 Anthem 29 is nothing more than the current anthem with boost wheel spacing. Meaning you "may" be able to fit 27.5+ wheels on it.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by prj71 View Post
    The seat tube angle on the current Anthem X 29 is 73 degrees also.

    The way I see it this 2018 Anthem 29 is nothing more than the current anthem with boost wheel spacing. Meaning you "may" be able to fit 27.5+ wheels on it.
    No you can't. There isn't enough clearance at the seat stays

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    733

    SCOOP: 2018 Giant Anthem X2

    Not sure why every cares so much about 27.5+?? And why would you - this is an XC bike!

    I still feel a bit disappointed Giant have produced a very similar looking bike with some updated geo. This bike has been a long time coming and there were a lot of rumours flying around that Giant was coming up with something completely new.

    I original A29 was a great bike but I didn't get along with the long chain stays as many didn't either. At least they have fixed that issue with the bike.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by VERT1 View Post
    Not sure why every cares so much about 27.5+?? And why would you - this is an XC bike!

    I still feel a bit disappointed Giant have produced a very similar looking bike with some updated geo. This bike has been a long time coming and there were a lot of rumours flying around that Giant was coming up with something completely new.

    I original A29 was a great bike but I didn't get along with the long chain stays as many didn't either. At least they have fixed that issue with the bike.
    Not sure where those rumours started but certainly not from official channels or from band ambassadors. The Intent of the Anthem 29er was always to plug a whole in the range for a modern 29er XC bike. Giant backed down on their 27.5 for everything stance despite having good data from teir own test riders and racers that the 27.5 wheel had very few areas of deficient performance when compared to a 29er. Competitors have always marketed their products more aggressively and when Giant found itself the only supporter for 27.5 in XC it was always going to be a hard sell to get that market onto 27.5. The XC market is typically more conservative and often a point of entry for new riders to MTB.
    Lastly the older 29er has a great reputation for stability and forgiveness. It was not the most agile bike around but it has carried many a first time and bucket list stage racer to the finish line safely and reliably.

    So maybe the conservative and familiar look of the new bike is a little more obvious now?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chippertheripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    806
    Sure, its conservative, obvious, and familiar, which from what I'm reading here is the gripe. It lacks new-new and sex appeal.

    I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a plus anthemSX, maybe a trance if I'm forced into it. I mostly expect to be disappointed by giant's pattern of conservative and familiar behavior.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    Not sure where those rumours started but certainly not from official channels or from band ambassadors. The Intent of the Anthem 29er was always to plug a whole in the range for a modern 29er XC bike. Giant backed down on their 27.5 for everything stance despite having good data from teir own test riders and racers that the 27.5 wheel had very few areas of deficient performance when compared to a 29er. Competitors have always marketed their products more aggressively and when Giant found itself the only supporter for 27.5 in XC it was always going to be a hard sell to get that market onto 27.5. The XC market is typically more conservative and often a point of entry for new riders to MTB.
    Lastly the older 29er has a great reputation for stability and forgiveness. It was not the most agile bike around but it has carried many a first time and bucket list stage racer to the finish line safely and reliably.

    So maybe the conservative and familiar look of the new bike is a little more obvious now?
    Whatever Giant believed their decision to not build 29ers was boneheaded. And really -
    racers only ride them because they don't like change? B.S. At the end of the day racers ride 29ers not because they are conservative but because that is what they are fastest on. Its not rocket science. All you have to do is get similar bikes with both wheel sizes to know they have different qualities which suit different riding styles and terrain.

    I think its more the case that Giant jumped on the "new wheel size!" marketing train and now realize they made a mistake. Going all in on the 27.5 wheel size saved them a lot of money in R&D, marketing and tooling expenses. Business-wise it made sense and I'm guessing that is why they did it. When people kept buying 29ers and then fat and plus size bikes they stayed the course. Unfortunately they have lost a lot of market share because of it.

    I hope they change course and some more full suspension 29ers back into the mix. Mainly because I like 29ers and my favorite local shop has switched from Trek to Giant this year. I also happen to really like the maestro suspension and Giant is the only big manufacturer that offers a short parallel link design at a reasonable price.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Chippertheripper View Post
    Sure, its conservative, obvious, and familiar, which from what I'm reading here is the gripe. It lacks new-new and sex appeal.

    I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a plus anthemSX, maybe a trance if I'm forced into it. I mostly expect to be disappointed by giant's pattern of conservative and familiar behavior.

    I think if you're looking for a bike thats good to look at then a Yeti ASR or SB, Trek Top Fuel and Fuel EX are probably going to float the boat.

    Giant is pretty conservative and that's a gripe I've given up fighting. They're just not interested in making their bikes look sexy other than through a nice coat of paint on some models.
    Whereas I look at a Yeti and my jaw hits the flaw. Yeti is the Jenny Rissveds of mountainbikes!!!

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by finnlander View Post
    Why would you think shorter travel is needed for chainstay length or geometry changes? The Trance 29 had shorter chainstays and longer travel. Its a cross country race bike. Bikes in that category usually are 80-100mm so it seems like a reasonable choice to me.
    Sure, but look at the actual seat tube angle of the Trance 29er - incredibly slack and a compromise many people can't take. Especially those of a taller / longer leg build.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    I've confirmed with several dealers that it's 100mm at the back and front. Took it for a quick spin and it feels very different from the old 29er.
    Firstly this medium is long,.... It feels longer than the geometry suggests due to the lay back seat post and slack seat angle, I reckon 73 degrees.
    Carbon bikes available end June beginning July.

    So now let's wait for official geometry chart and official word from Giant on the bike.
    The top end full on spare no prisoners XCO race version will be a little longer waiting.....

    This revised 29er turns netter and it manuals and wheelies more easily indicating chain stays are quite a bit shorter. I couldn't do more as the bike was being set up for a customer who hasn't arrived so it had to be returned with no scratches.

    In feel it's about as close as one can get to the 27.5 with big wheels. It feels like a scalpel but I'll have to wait till I can get my hands on a demo and spend a day with it

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
    Latest word from Sea Otter is that it's running 90mm (https://www.pinkbike.com/news/giants...tter-2017.html)

    As you say, let's wait for the final geometry, but it at this point it feels like a pretty lacklustre update

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Mbaction says 90-100, pinkbike says 90mm, lbs says 100mm for alloy, 90mm for full carbon race version. Like I suggested, maybe it better to wait till the bike is officially launched to get all the answers...

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    5
    crap was looking at buying the 2017 anthem X 29er or the 2017 anthem 2 27.5 for my new bike (though only 1 place has the anthem X 29er in stock, no more orders from giant)

    Not sure what to do now. Need a new bike for the season. My 2000 Garyfisher sugar is done..

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    130
    A lot of people getting worked up that it doesn't look very different to the old one even though everything is different and new.
    All giants with the same Maestro rear suspension will look similar. Unless its radically overhauled this will continue. Based on how maestro performs on each platform I can't see it going anywhere soon


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  44. #44
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by BosPete View Post
    crap was looking at buying the 2017 anthem X 29er or the 2017 anthem 2 27.5 for my new bike (though only 1 place has the anthem X 29er in stock, no more orders from giant)

    Not sure what to do now. Need a new bike for the season. My 2000 Garyfisher sugar is done..
    Well, I'm on a 2017 Anthem X 29 frame, and it's a good ride. The frame is a warranty replacement for my 2013 (number 2) and I was surprised to find it had a 12x142 through axle. The only difference the new frame really makes to me is being boost. When the 2017 frame breaks, will they have more 2017 frames laying around for me, or will I end up with a frame that needs a boost rear axle, and a new crank due to spindle length changes? If you're worried about future proof, maybe whip that fisher along for a couple more months. If you just want a solid XC bike, jump on one of those 2017's and see if you can't get a discount on the 29er since this new one is in the wind.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Cotharyus View Post
    When the 2017 frame breaks, will they have more 2017 frames laying around for me, or will I end up with a frame that needs a boost rear axle, and a new crank due to spindle length changes?
    Well this does not inspire confidence

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by BosPete View Post
    Well this does not inspire confidence
    The 2013 frames had a known problem that was addressed in the 2016 model year.
    The problem was also with the alloy frames

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  47. #47
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    The 2013 frames had a known problem that was addressed in the 2016 model year.
    The problem was also with the alloy frames
    Curious - what was the problem that was addressed? I think I know how you'll answer, I just want to be certain.

  48. #48
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by BosPete View Post
    Well this does not inspire confidence
    In all fairness, I'm a big guy. It's really a worst case scenario for the whole thing. I'm a big guy on an XL frame, it's a very, very light AL frame, and while even people on the same size frame as me who weigh less - I mean skinny guys - claim it's a very stiff frame, and I can back up, the ride is as stiff as any XC AL frame I've ridden - I flex the frame under a lot of circumstance. And since it's AL, it fatigues when it flexes. Eventually, it breaks. I know two other guys who ride XL frames - so, as tall as me - but they both weigh close to 50LBS less than I do. I could maybe drop 20lbs, but the reality is I'll never be a light as most of the people this bike is intended for. It's part of the reason I really want Giant to build a bigger travel, burlier 29er. That, and I've completely given up on the notion of racing again. I'm getting too old to compete with the kids, and I'm still too young to compete with the old men.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by Cotharyus View Post
    Curious - what was the problem that was addressed? I think I know how you'll answer, I just want to be certain.
    The problem that was addressed was a weakness in the design of the seat tube to top tube junction. This area was reinforced the 2015 model.
    Some also cracked at the seat tube where the upper rocker is attached. This was found to be a material condition issue that was changed
    I'm not aware of regular cracking in 2015 and newer model Aluminum frames

    Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

  50. #50
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad View Post
    The problem that was addressed was a weakness in the design of the seat tube to top tube junction. This area was reinforced the 2015 model.
    Some also cracked at the seat tube where the upper rocker is attached. This was found to be a material condition issue that was changed
    I'm not aware of regular cracking in 2015 and newer model Aluminum frames
    That's what I thought you'd say. I noticed the beefed up top tube junction, but neither of those spots is where either of my frames broke. And both of my frames broke within a couple hundredths of an inch of the exact same spot. I see no difference in this frame and the 2013 frames in the location in question, so I reckon it's just a matter of time.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 174
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 11:36 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 08:41 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-18-2014, 09:54 AM
  4. 2012 Giant Anthem X 29er 2 or 2014 Giant Talon 27.5 1
    By XDR in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-05-2013, 11:53 PM
  5. 2011 Giant Anthem x2, Giant Trance x2 or Scott Spark 50?
    By dk13 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-06-2011, 03:13 PM

Members who have read this thread: 211

Posting Permissions

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