Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68

    Slayer Sxc 30 Vs 50

    I'm looking at getting a new frame. I am in bet/w the Slayer 50 and 30. What are the differences? I'm more of a XC rider than anything. I live in MT so lots of downhill but plenty of climbing to get there. Please explain the differences bet/w the two frames. Which is better for primarily XC bet/w these two? The are both on sale online for the same price but apparently the 30 retails for $1500 and the 50 for $1200. Why?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68
    Can I throw a 120mm fork on a slayer? I see that the 30 vs 50 vs 70 primary differences are the component spec on complete bikes. Seems as though frames are the same...correct??

  3. #3
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    The 2009 Cdn list prices were.

    SXC-30 $2799
    SXC-50 $3599
    SXC-70 $3999

    No huge differences in frames, mostly a difference in the shocks and componets. The SXC-30 has an aluminum seatstay and the RP2 shock, the 50 has the carbon seat stay and RP-23 shock, and the 70 has the DHX. The best value shock is the SXC-50 with the lighter RP-23.

    A 120mm fork would steepen the head angle up by a couple of degrees to 70d and would likely make the bike a very twitchy beast going downhill, if you don't need a 160mm travel bike you'd be better off with an Altitude.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68
    well i decided to go w/ the slayer sxc 50 for the same money as the 30. Sizing. I'm 5'9" ish w/ a 31" inseam. I'll be mainly using this for xc riding. 16.5 or 18"? I have a 16.5" cannondale hardtail that feels about right size wize...should i stick to the same? I'm ordering the frame online so can't really try it on for size. thoughts? I talked to my lbs about the 120mm fork and they said they can make it right w/ shims if need be.

  5. #5
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    You should match top tube length between your current bike and the SXC. The 16.5" has an HTT of 565mm and the 18" has an HTT of 591mm when the bike is equipped with a 160mm fork. .

    Your LBS is wrong about the 120mm fork, they can adjust handlebar height with spacers but they can't make up for the change in head angle and the increase in twitchiness for descending, that happens below the headtube, that's a function of axle to crown height. A 160mm of rear wheel travel with 120mm of fork travel will be a very odd duck to ride and will likely be an over the bars crash generator. That will also change the effective HTT length.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  6. #6
    Subject to Whimsy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    403
    As Rockyuphill mentioned and I'll agree with, you're much better off with an Altitude or even the Element if you're primarily doing x/c type riding.
    Dumbing down the Slayer to accomodate what you're attempting to accomplish probably won't make a very fun bike.
    The Altitude can accomplish easily 9/10th's of what the Slayer can in the right hands and makes for a more versatile ride. It will even work as an x/c race bike if you're inclined.
    I'm a reasonably aggressive rider and as much as I love how the new Slayer is designed & spec'd out, it's too much bike for what I'm generally up to.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68
    Well, I pulled the trigger on the Slayer sxc 50. I can't pass up the deal on this frame. I have a Rockshox Reba Race w/ 120mm of travel. I hope I can make that work, if not it would seem that a new fork will be on the horizon...

  8. #8
    DGB
    DGB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    464
    I predict a new fork on your horizon.
    I have an SXC70 with a Fox 36 TALAS and for reference I'm about the same size as you and I ride an 18". I use the 130mm setting regularly along with the 160mm setting, but never use the 100mm setting as it is way too steep.
    I'm not sure of the A-to-C of a 36 @130mm compared to a Reba @120mm but I'd think the Reba is going to be short in comparison.

    Good luck.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68
    So i'm a bit confused. If I throw on my 120mm Reba wouldn't it just make it more of a xc style riding position? Difference from 120mm to 160mm is 1.57". Is that really going to change the geometry of the bike enough to make it "unrideable?" or at the very least super twitchy? I'm confused. My lbs is very knowledgable and professional. They didn't seem to think it was a huge deal. Is it worth not getting this frame? Please help me out here.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    68
    I will probably get a new fork down the road but would like to use my Reba at least for this coming season.

  11. #11
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    If it was a hardtail you could ignore the rear suspension action, but you have to take into account the fact that you have a much larger change going on at the rear of the bike and that interacts with the fork.

    It's a 2 degree steeper head angle about 70d instead of 68d, so when you roll into a drop and load your fork and compress it, and you unload the rear shock, it will try to toss you over the bars like a bucking bronc, that's because you're already at the equivalent of 25% fork sag without sitting on the bike. Once you set the fork for proper sag of 25%, it will be shorter by another 1.25"

    It also changes your seat angle and relation to the pedals. It will be fine going uphill, just like running a TALAS 36 on the shortest travel setting, but it will be some kinda sketchy going down hill. Just put a 160mm fork on it and you'll have a nicely balanced bike.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14
    Hi guys! I'm also confused which one to buy, the 30 or the 50..If the 50 has a carbon seatstay and a lighter RP23 rearshock, does that mean that the 50 is supposed to be lighter? How come at the online shop wherein I plan to buy one, the ads sez its 7.9lbs for the 30 and 8.09 for the 50..are these accurate? How come that the MSRP of the 30 is higher than that of the 50? Which is a better buy? help me out guys..I'm planning to build an all around bike that can go up or down, tecnical or straight..
    Last edited by punchypee; 01-18-2011 at 06:50 PM.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14
    I'm talkin about the frame alone not the whole bike..

  14. #14
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    The carbon seat stay is a bit heavier and a lot stiffer. The RP23 weighs a touch more than the RP2, so the 50 does weigh more. Not sure why they have the 30 listing for more, that wouldn't be the case.

    Just make sure you stick a 150-160mm fork on it...
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14
    Ok that would be of great help..I prefer the 30 just bcoz of the available color and it has nothing to do with technical consideration..I think I'll stick with it then..I do have a marzo55 160mm fork..Thanks.

    But what if I buy the 30 and decide to replace the seatstay with the carbon later on, ,,you think it will fit?

  16. #16
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    The carbon seat stay is hot swappable with the aluminium, I think it's a couple of hundred bucks.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dr.Zoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    690
    I thought the alum seatstay on the slayer was heavier than the carbon for the SXC but the other way around for the altitude?

    the 50 offers 3 different platform settings for the shock vs 1 setting on the 30. Makes it more versatile for differing terrain trails if you are into that sort of thing. Some people are just ride and forget though,

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14
    so technically the 50 is the better choice..could it be that the 30 is anodized unlike the 50 that's why it retails more? anyways, they are of same price now..thanks Doc Thanks rockyuphill

  19. #19
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,652
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Zoidberg
    I thought the alum seatstay on the slayer was heavier than the carbon for the SXC but the other way around for the altitude?
    The SXC has the same carbon seat stay as appeared on the 2007 Element and it weighed about 100gms more than the 2006 carbon Element seat stay, it likely only weighs half that difference compared to the SXC 30 alloy seat stay. It was designed for more stiffness not more lightness.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

Posting Permissions

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