Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 106

Thread: Solo or Bronson

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jet fixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    210

    Solo or Bronson

    If you had a Nomad and wanted to add a bike to your stable which would you choose between a Bronson or Solo and WHY?
    Too fat for XC, and not skilled enough for FR

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: expatrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,105
    Solo - because the Bronson is too similar to the Nomad, so what's the point.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    164
    If you are set on trying the bigger wheels but also plan to keep your nomad, a solo built up light is the way to go. I got a bronson to replace a stolen nomad and am very happy. But I would not have picked up the bronson if I still had my nomad. Different bikes for sure but I would use a bronson and nomad for a lot of the same stuff.

    Or, sell the nomad and get a solo AND a bronson.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,983
    Quote Originally Posted by OGRipper View Post
    If you are set on trying the bigger wheels but also plan to keep your nomad, a solo built up light is the way to go. I got a bronson to replace a stolen nomad and am very happy. But I would not have picked up the bronson if I still had my nomad. Different bikes for sure but I would use a bronson and nomad for a lot of the same stuff.

    Or, sell the nomad and get a solo AND a bronson.
    Also if you looking at bigger wheels and have any interest in trying a 29er, wait. Lot's of speculation that the new bike will be something like a 120mm Tallboy.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TwoHeadsBrewing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,917
    Solo, if you're going to keep the Nomad. Build it up light for more XC rides, and keep the Nomad burly for the chunky downhills and shuttle days.
    "Got everything you need?"

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    216
    If you are looking to keep the Nomad then as said above, get the Solo.

    My dilema is that I had a TrC 650 conversion and an Al Nomad. The TrC is so fun I never rode the Nomad so I just sold it to fund my next project. Do I build a proper (non conversion) 650 trail bike by moving components over to the Solo or go bigger with the Bronson? The only time I missed the 'mad was on chunky DH, but not enough to choose it over the snappy handling pedal happy TrC. If I move to Bronson will I lose too much on the xc side for a all around trail bike?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,341

    Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    If you are looking to keep the Nomad then as said above, get the Solo.

    My dilema is that I had a TrC 650 conversion and an Al Nomad. The TrC is so fun I never rode the Nomad so I just sold it to fund my next project. Do I build a proper (non conversion) 650 trail bike by moving components over to the Solo or go bigger with the Bronson? The only time I missed the 'mad was on chunky DH, but not enough to choose it over the snappy handling pedal happy TrC. If I move to Bronson will I lose too much on the xc side for a all around trail bike?
    I was just thinking today that the idea of too much travel is now somewhat antiquated due to the fact that these long travel bikes pedal so well. Also, the fact that the geometries seem to be designed with the idea of a dropper post in mind. The Bronson has a relatively steep ST angle 73* I think, for a long travel bike, which is great for climbing but wouldn't be great for descending without a dropper. If I had the money I'd get a Bronson right now (I also have a 650b TRc). It would be "too much bike" for most of my trails. The only penalty I would be paying for that though would be a little extra weight.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    261
    All depends on the type of trails you will be riding. My answer would be neither. I admit I haven't ridden the Bronson or the Solo, but a 125mm travel 650b bike has no appeal to me for the trails I ride (maybe I just don't know what I'm missing out on). I would much rather have a 29er if looking for a bike in that travel range (perhaps a Tallboy with a 120mm fork).

    The Bronson seems like it would be overkill, unless the Nomad is built up more for the bike park, in which case the Bronson might be perfect. Again, it all depends on the trails you wanna ride.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    82
    Once you ride a Bronson, you will want to sell your Nomad.

  10. #10
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,213
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Also if you looking at bigger wheels and have any interest in trying a 29er, wait. Lot's of speculation that the new bike will be something like a 120mm Tallboy.
    What makes you think that SC has another new bike?
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by jet fixer View Post
    If you had a Nomad and wanted to add a bike to your stable which would you choose between a Bronson or Solo and WHY?
    That's my situation. I have a Nomad built up fairly beefy with heavy duty wheels and tires.

    I am planning on getting a 650B bike. If I were to buy one today I would get a Bronson and build it up on the lightweight side of things. Lightweight would be good for longer rides, but I still want long travel for the rough trails I ride.

    I think I could make the Bronson different enough to make keeping both bikes worthwhile.

    I don't have a use for a Solo with 125mm travel and very low BB. I would be slamming my pedals into rocks a lot.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,983
    Quote Originally Posted by 007 View Post
    What makes you think that SC has another new bike?
    The moving of the TBLT to the All Mountain column of their website.
    I could be wrong, but I doubt that the Solo is going to be the only bigger wheel trail bike for them.
    That would leave a 29er gap being filled in by a lot of their competitors.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    621
    There are no more new SC bikes this year! New colors for the TBLT though...no revision.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    216

    Bronson!

    Quote Originally Posted by mestapho View Post
    I was just thinking today that the idea of too much travel is now somewhat antiquated due to the fact that these long travel bikes pedal so well. Also, the fact that the geometries seem to be designed with the idea of a dropper post in mind. The Bronson has a relatively steep ST angle 73* I think, for a long travel bike, which is great for climbing but wouldn't be great for descending without a dropper. If I had the money I'd get a Bronson right now (I also have a 650b TRc). It would be "too much bike" for most of my trails. The only penalty I would be paying for that though would be a little extra weight.
    I agree, or at least I did before I discovered how much better the TrC pedaled than the Nomad. Is that due to the 'trail' geometry vs 2009 all mtn geo, 5 lbs lighter build, Carbon vs Al, 125 vs 160 travel, or ???

    My TrC conversion is built with a 36 fork dropped to 140mm so the HT should be right around 67* like the 'mad, but it hands down pedals better and is more fun to ride. Like I mentioned, I do miss the stability on chunky downs... Is this because I'm limited to a 2.1-2.2 tire, shorter chainstays, rear end stiffness, less travel or ???

    Enter the Solo v Bronson debate:
    Solo- 142x12 rear plus can run a bigger tire
    Bronson- Plus 25mm travel

    I think I'm leaning Bronson with a Pike 275 fork as my do all 1 and only bike. Just hoping I don't regret it on 30+ miles days.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    I agree, or at least I did before I discovered how much better the TrC pedaled than the Nomad. Is that due to the 'trail' geometry vs 2009 all mtn geo, 5 lbs lighter build, Carbon vs Al, 125 vs 160 travel, or ???

    My TrC conversion is built with a 36 fork dropped to 140mm so the HT should be right around 67* like the 'mad, but it hands down pedals better and is more fun to ride. Like I mentioned, I do miss the stability on chunky downs... Is this because I'm limited to a 2.1-2.2 tire, shorter chainstays, rear end stiffness, less travel or ???

    Enter the Solo v Bronson debate:
    Solo- 142x12 rear plus can run a bigger tire
    Bronson- Plus 25mm travel

    I think I'm leaning Bronson with a Pike 275 fork as my do all 1 and only bike. Just hoping I don't regret it on 30+ miles days.
    The issue with the Nomad is that it hasn't been updated in awhile now. It used to be the do everything bike, but just can't keep up
    with other 6" bikes with regard to pedaling. I would almost say that by today's standards the Nomad is a bike park bike.
    A 6" travel Bronson pedals as good as if not better than the TRc. That's what I'm referring to, the current generation of bikes.
    I would put the Nomad in the "old" generation at this point.

    A Bronson with a Pike will be a beast (if the Pike is anywhere as close to the hype about it). It's what I would drop my money
    on today if I could.

  16. #16
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,213
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    The moving of the TBLT to the All Mountain column of their website.
    I could be wrong, but I doubt that the Solo is going to be the only bigger wheel trail bike for them.
    That would leave a 29er gap being filled in by a lot of their competitors.
    Well, the category labels are completely arbitrary/meaningless . . . the bike itself is exactly the same, regardless of what "category" its in. I'll be very surprised if anything else comes out this year.
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: expatrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,105
    Quote Originally Posted by mestapho View Post
    It used to be the do everything bike, but just can't keep up with other 6" bikes with regard to pedaling. I would almost say that by today's standards the Nomad is a bike park bike.
    I dunno. Seems a little extreme to say the Nomad is now almost obsolete. But I guess that's the point of marketing. What other 6" bikes are you referring to that the Nomad can't keep up with?

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,341
    Quote Originally Posted by expatrider View Post
    I dunno. Seems a little extreme to say the Nomad is now almost obsolete. But I guess that's the point of marketing. What other 6" bikes are you referring to that the Nomad can't keep up with?
    The only real world experience I have is on the Bronson, which out pedals my TRc. I know my TR out pedals a Nomad.

    I didn't mean to say that the Nomad is obsolete, but if you are going to be climbing on your rides a Bronson is going
    to be much more capable. The Nomad, I'm guessing, will still be better for straight up descending.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,983
    Quote Originally Posted by 007 View Post
    Well, the category labels are completely arbitrary/meaningless . . . the bike itself is exactly the same, regardless of what "category" its in. I'll be very surprised if anything else comes out this year.
    I get that, but why bother moving it. Not saying the TBLT has changed. Just that moving it might indicate something is coming in that category to replace it.
    SC is getting left behind, a lot of 120mm 29er are out, they need one in that space.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,560
    Subscribe

    Thanks for the insights, all. Intriguing dialog.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TwoHeadsBrewing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,917
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I get that, but why bother moving it. Not saying the TBLT has changed. Just that moving it might indicate something is coming in that category to replace it.
    SC is getting left behind, a lot of 120mm 29er are out, they need one in that space.
    I wouldn't say they're getting left behind at all. Two new 650b bikes, and a redesign on the Tallboy? And I agree with their approach going with longer than 120mm on their 29er. I've ridden a few 120mm 29ers, and it's not enough travel. However, the TBLT at 135mm feels great, as does the Stumpy 29er at 130mm. Why conform to what the industry is doing when you can do it better?
    "Got everything you need?"

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    416

    couple of references to new bike

    Here's Chipps from STW, might not be coming out this year but I'm hoping for a tweener TB (TBtr)

    "We were also riding the Santa Cruz Solo and another, still hush-hush bike too. All seemed pretty capable "

    Singletrack Magazine | Santa Cruz launches the Tallboy 2
    Last edited by velez3000; 06-11-2013 at 04:10 PM. Reason: no need to reference quote

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBrewing View Post
    I wouldn't say they're getting left behind at all.
    +1 - even though the exact flavour of 650B bike I want hasn't arrived yet. I don't think there is any complaining with a lot of good product to choose from and undoubtably a bunch more new bikes coming out for next year.

    I was keen on the Ibis 650B line up and when you compare what's what I think SC is well ahead in that area.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    219
    Bronson I wanna get, bank don't wanna give.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by mestapho View Post
    The issue with the Nomad is that it hasn't been updated in awhile now. It used to be the do everything bike, but just can't keep up
    with other 6" bikes with regard to pedaling. I would almost say that by today's standards the Nomad is a bike park bike.
    The Nomad pedals fine vs. other 6" bikes:

    - Ibis Mojo HD
    - Knolly Chili
    - Specialized Enduro
    - Banshee Rune
    - etc...

    and the Nomad is under gunned at the bike park. I wouldn't pick one as my park bike if I was a regular at Whistler.

    I think calling it outdated in its category is wrong. It remains one of the top versatile all mountain bikes.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sooner518's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,938
    I can't wait until the day comes that a bike company has a bike for every wheel size, in 5 mm travel increments from 100 to 180 in carbon and aluminum. I'll have a real tough time deciding between the 145mm "all-trail" bike and the 150mm "mountain trail" bike.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,983
    Quote Originally Posted by 007 View Post
    What makes you think that SC has another new bike?
    Quote Originally Posted by 007 View Post
    Well, the category labels are completely arbitrary/meaningless . . . the bike itself is exactly the same, regardless of what "category" its in. I'll be very surprised if anything else comes out this year.
    Well just maybe the TB2 didn't count as a release and is just considered an update, after all they just announced the 650B Heckler as an update. But they also moved the LT back to Trail. Funny how simple things like that can get hope up or dash it.
    One can still hope.
    First Look: 27.5" Santa Cruz Heckler - Pinkbike
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4
    Looking for a replacement for my old Banshee Spitfire, and am trying to decide between the Solo and the Bronson. Love that mountain rescue orange color of the Bronson, and truly hate the two colors on the Bronson...but just how much of a difference is between 5" and 6" of travel? Thanks.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Levendis View Post
    Looking for a replacement for my old Banshee Spitfire, and am trying to decide between the Solo and the Bronson. Love that mountain rescue orange color of the Bronson, and truly hate the two colors on the Bronson...but just how much of a difference is between 5" and 6" of travel? Thanks.
    I'd say roughly an inch.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Levendis View Post
    ...how much of a difference is between 5" and 6" of travel? Thanks.
    I'd be asking myself how happy I am with the travel on my existing bike, what terrain I want to ride most in the future, and how I want to ride it.

    You know those short chainstays on the Solo will provide a snappier ride. Are your trails/riding lower-speed tech maneuvering type stuff or more open let-off-the-brakes trails? How much do you pedal through rough terrain? Consider BB height there.

    Try to be color blind. Get the bike that will work best for your riding as opposed to aesthetic sensibilities. The color won't mean a damn if you're wishing you had (or didn't have) that extra inch.

    Cheers,

    Mike

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hoban's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    417
    If you want a little ripper that jumps and cross countries pretty good, get the Solo. If you want to hit rougher downhill runs and bigger drops and jumps, get the Bronson.

    I had a Nickel, now have a Butcher. I'll be getting a carbon Solo for general rides.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by She&I View Post
    Try to be color blind. Get the bike that will work best for your riding as opposed to aesthetic sensibilities. The color won't mean a damn if you're wishing you had (or didn't have) that extra inch.
    +10 - great advice. You are better off getting the right bike from a different company if the finish at SC bugs you that much.

    How important having 125mm, 150mm or 160mm of travel depends entirely on where and how you ride.

    I'm on a Nomad right now. I'd probably be fine on a Bronson, but a Solo wouldn't be the right bike for me.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    53

    回覆: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by Motosc View Post
    Once you ride a Bronson, you will want to sell your Nomad.
    I just did it and happy with that


    從我使用 Tapatalk 2 的 GT-N7105 發送

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    164
    Like others have said, the travel itself is only part of the equation. Differences in geometry make them distinct bikes for sure. It's kinda sorta like how a TRc and a blur LT are not too far apart travel-wise, but they still have distinct personalities.

    Also, keep in mind that all things being equal there is only a small weight penalty going with a bronson, so if you are on the fence and think you want the bronson, don't worry about it being much heavier. I went full pimp but my bronson is just under 27 lbs with pedals. And that's with HR II's, not the lighest option.

  35. #35
    Illuminati
    Reputation: scant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,685
    Quote Originally Posted by OGRipper View Post
    I went full pimp but my bronson is just under 27 lbs with pedals. And that's with HR II's, not the lighest option.

    sorry if I've missed it, but can you remind me of the parts spec please, or a pic?
    thanks

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    164
    Bone-stock XX-1 Enve kit with the TR HR II's (tubeless) and XTR pedals.

    And actually, I just swapped the 34 for a 32 tooth chainring. So it's two teeth lighter, woohoo!!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4
    Well played, TwoTone, I think I deserved that!
    Appreciate the helpful comments from the others too.
    Normally I'm not too fussy about colors, but then that "Mountain Rescue Orange" on the Solo is just outstanding...
    My local terrain is very varied, but most trails are hiking trails with long stairs that are about 9 inches per step, off-camber deep ruts and crisscrossing tree roots. Occasional bigger drops that I normally wimp out on. Probably bigger issue is that I haven't been riding offroad seriously for more than ten years and have lost most of my basic skills (of what little I had to begin with!)
    I would say having half an inch less of BB height is probably manageable, as well as having a head tube angle that's one degree slacker. Local shop is telling me that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between 5" and 6" of travel front and back, and it is the suspension difference that I don't have a feel for...what do you guys think?

    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I'd say roughly an inch.

  38. #38
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Levendis View Post
    Well played, TwoTone, I think I deserved that!
    Appreciate the helpful comments from the others too.
    Normally I'm not too fussy about colors, but then that "Mountain Rescue Orange" on the Solo is just outstanding...
    My local terrain is very varied, but most trails are hiking trails with long stairs that are about 9 inches per step, off-camber deep ruts and crisscrossing tree roots. Occasional bigger drops that I normally wimp out on. Probably bigger issue is that I haven't been riding offroad seriously for more than ten years and have lost most of my basic skills (of what little I had to begin with!)
    I would say having half an inch less of BB height is probably manageable, as well as having a head tube angle that's one degree slacker. Local shop is telling me that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between 5" and 6" of travel front and back, and it is the suspension difference that I don't have a feel for...what do you guys think?
    Unless you're hitting drops more then 3' I don't think you need a 6" travel bike. If its easily traversed on foot (ie. hiking trails) then I would think the Solo would be plenty of travel.

    Define "bigger drops" and that will help . . .
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4
    My "gnarly trails" aren't that "gnarly", and "bigger drops" are never more than 18 inches...that said the landing spots are very small and often rocky and not flat...does that extra inch of suspension make a useful difference?

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Levendis View Post
    Local shop is telling me that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between 5" and 6" of travel front and back, and it is the suspension difference that I don't have a feel for...what do you guys think?
    If your LBS is competent I'd go with what they recommend. They know your local terrain like nobody on MTBR can.

    Both bikes are expensive so it's not like they'll lose out if you buy a Solo vs. a Bronson. So they don't have any reason to mislead you.

    I'd rather make the error of having an inch more travel than I need than an inch less.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  41. #41
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Levendis View Post
    My "gnarly trails" aren't that "gnarly", and "bigger drops" are never more than 18 inches...that said the landing spots are very small and often rocky and not flat...does that extra inch of suspension make a useful difference?
    I agree with vikb to listen to your LBS, so long as they are competent riders who know they stuff.

    That said, based on what you've described, the Solo would be my choice, hands down.
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4
    The boys at the LBS said that:
    1. There is a significant difference between 5" and 6"
    2. For my trails, even a hardtail would be fine assuming that I develop some "skills", but a longer travel bike would make more local terrain available for riding

    So I have been attending quite a few MTB workshops, but because I'm old / fat / not too coordinated, progress has been coming quite slowly. I guess my question is would the Solo make it easier or more difficult to learn basic trail riding, do a few jumps and ride with more confidence?

    Thanks again!

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    971
    Im sure it's been said - but if you can - ride em both! you'd be surprised how the test ride will provide some clarity

    If at all - pick a test trail that has the elements most representative of your terrain and the riding you want to do. ride the same trail, the same direction and see what the bike tells you

    don't let color, or "perception" create an argument - let the "seat of your pants" feeling tell you which bike is right - trust me - easier said than done but if you go with the one that feels right - you are likely on track to have much better initial experiences and will increase your confidence and ability long term through simply getting out to ride because the bike works for YOU

    good luck -

    btw - what have you been riding in the skills clinics?

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    164
    Read my comment above - the difference between these bikes goes beyond and inch of travel. Yes, 1" is "significant" but there is more to it.

    Also, although I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, the LBS comment about a hardtail sounds like typical shop-guy blabber about how awesome a rider they are compared to everyone else.

    That said, if the biggest obstacle/drop is a foot and a half, the solo is probably plenty of bike for your trails, even if your skills are not very advanced.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrozCountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,381
    A bronson can easily replace your nomad and fill your lighter bike spot as well. Its a killer paddler. Unless something is really keeping you from selling the nomad (like a present from your wife or a sick build with 180mm fork)

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by Motosc View Post
    Once you ride a Bronson, you will want to sell your Nomad.
    Funny, I had the opposite experience. The Bronson made me realize how amazing and "hot rod" my Nomadc is!

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by kamper11 View Post
    Im sure it's been said - but if you can - ride em both! you'd be surprised how the test ride will provide some clarity

    If at all - pick a test trail that has the elements most representative of your terrain and the riding you want to do. ride the same trail, the same direction and see what the bike tells you

    don't let color, or "perception" create an argument - let the "seat of your pants" feeling tell you which bike is right - trust me - easier said than done but if you go with the one that feels right - you are likely on track to have much better initial experiences and will increase your confidence and ability long term through simply getting out to ride because the bike works for YOU

    good luck -

    btw - what have you been riding in the skills clinics?
    Perfect advise for you Levendis! I was in the same boat. Tried about 20 bikes. I was told that when the right one came around, I would know right away. I was dead set on getting a Specialized for some reason before riding one. When I did, I took it off the list right away, didn't feel right for me. Near the top of the list was a Cannondale Trigger, until I rode the Tallboy LT. Just before I picked up the LT, the Solo came out and within a minute, knew this was the one. I was fortunate to be able to take it on some trails around here when I decided on the size.

    Ended up with a L, when the book said I should be on a M. Took both back to back, same trail, but the L felt better.

    I was lucky as well, LOVE the rescue orange. Color shouldn't be a factor, I just got lucky

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by nuccadoc View Post
    Perfect advise for you Levendis! I was in the same boat. Tried about 20 bikes. I was told that when the right one came around, I would know right away. I was dead set on getting a Specialized for some reason before riding one. When I did, I took it off the list right away, didn't feel right for me. Near the top of the list was a Cannondale Trigger, until I rode the Tallboy LT. Just before I picked up the LT, the Solo came out and within a minute, knew this was the one. I was fortunate to be able to take it on some trails around here when I decided on the size.

    Ended up with a L, when the book said I should be on a M. Took both back to back, same trail, but the L felt better.

    I was lucky as well, LOVE the rescue orange. Color shouldn't be a factor, I just got lucky
    Love this message great info for my solo purchase.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lazymuf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    229
    Sold off my Nomadc(too much bike for local trails)and was thinking of getting the solo....thing is I am 6' and 275pds with gears...will the solo rear shock be able to handle my weight and should i get a size XL...my nomad was a size L and I felt cramp on it and a few times when over the handlebar. Any advice is much appreciated thks.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    36
    yes, XL for sure. The SC bikes are running small. As for the rear shock, I would think you're good...I'm 250 with gear...

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by lazymuf View Post
    Sold off my Nomadc(too much bike for local trails)and was thinking of getting the solo....thing is I am 6' and 275pds with gears...will the solo rear shock be able to handle my weight and should i get a size XL...my nomad was a size L and I felt cramp on it and a few times when over the handlebar. Any advice is much appreciated thks.
    Take a close look at the bike sizing and geo charts. I've owned an XL Nomad and I would get a L Bronson. They are a fair bit different in how they fit. I haven't looked closely at the Solo, but don't assume because you would pick a XL Nomad that you'll want a XL Solo.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Don't you guys think the Solo was supposed to be a bit lighter?
    I am just comparing it to my
    650b TRc, which is 4.69lbs, the Solo is 5.1...
    Solo is just too close in weight to the Bronson.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    621
    You're talking about less than half a pound. I would be stoked on having a more robust/stronger frame and don't forget most of that weight difference is probably due to the rubber downtube and chainstay protector.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Take a close look at the bike sizing and geo charts. I've owned an XL Nomad and I would get a L Bronson. They are a fair bit different in how they fit. I haven't looked closely at the Solo, but don't assume because you would pick a XL Nomad that you'll want a XL Solo.
    Yeah, I'm coming from a Blur LT large, tested an XL Bronson last weekend at De Lavega, and fit perfect. I'm 6'1".

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dmx1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    424
    Same problem here. My park bike is a Driver 8. Built as a mini DH-bike with Fox 40, single ring, burly wheels.
    For my Sunday tours in the Ardennes (the famous randonnées) I have my GT Xizang 9r. That's an XC bike but it can hold it's own against the Zaskar 100's everyone in our group has.
    Now I need something in the middle of that. Something I can use in the Ardennes if the tracks have dried out, but also for the enduroraces organised in Belgium. And take it to Morzine, Livigno or Finale Ligure. I've been in the past to Finale with my Blur LT and that bike was too light for the trails they have there. If I was going to stay in Belgium, a Solo would be enough but ...
    So the possible combinations are : Bronson-Fox 34, Bronson-RS Pike, Solo-Reduced RS Pike or Solo-RS Revelation? Not easy...

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lazymuf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    229
    Thks for the advice guys....thing is I ve got only one SC dealer here in my country n to demo a bike is impossible well almost....checked the geo of the nomad n solo n iys almost identical n the reason I went with Nomad in the first place is because I can put a coil shock on it for my tiny weight...thats my concern when going for a dually.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    64
    My head hurts. I'm in a similar position to a lot of people it seems. I have a BlurC and a Mk1 Nomad. Before the 5010 came out I was considering a TRc but the Bronson and 5010 changed the goalposts some.
    I've never really gotten on with the Blur, sure it's fast and feels like a mini Nomad when it's set up soft, but I have a habit of breaking XC bikes because of too much enthusiasm, I like to try different lines lets just say.
    The Nomad on the other hand is bomb proof, a Vivid Air on the back and a 170mm Lyric DH on the front and it handles the rough with more aplomb than the Mk2s I've tried. But, it's too much bike for most situations.
    I'd like to be able to the odd marathon (used to be called enduro down here) event still, so I'm thinking the Bronson would be too much bike for that. Pretty much all the riding here involves a fair bit of climbing to get to the fun, and that invariably turns into a race just as much as the descent turns into. And to confuse things more, SC go and post the video of four different bikes doing the final of the World Enduro series. And now the only thing left to upgrade in their fleet is the Nomad, it's gotta be on the way, surely?
    So if anyone has had a chance to take their Bronson or 5010 on longer marathon type rides yet, I'd be interested to hear your feedback.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    44
    Sorry for bringing a thread back from the dead, but I am stuck in analysis paralysis!
    I currently live in Arlington, Texas. Ton of great trails with some heavy roots and (very minor) drops. A lot of XC stuff, but I was looking to take the bike virtually everywhere... Colorado parks/New Mexico! So I was heavily leaning towards the Bronson, which wouldn't be completely ideal for my local area.

    I spoke with the guy at the LBS for about an hour discussing how with today's modern suspension how the Bronson can pretty much climb like a billy goat for my local trails and still shred at parks.

    So I guess my question is, with the Solo (5010), would it be feasible to take it to parks? Or should I just go with my gut and get the Bronson.

    Thanks!

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Auzy View Post
    I spoke with the guy at the LBS for about an hour discussing how with today's modern suspension how the Bronson can pretty much climb like a billy goat for my local trails and still shred at parks.
    I've been riding a Nomad as my do everything bike for the past 6yrs. I'm looking to get a new bike and it will be Bronson-esque because it will do everything I need and be a more efficient climber than the Nomad. Although I don't need the Nomad's capabilities on every ride I'd rather have some suspension and gnar-bashing left in my pocket then go at it from the other end with a shorter travel bike.

    One thing I love about the Nomad is that no matter where I go or what trails I hit I know I'll have a great bike for it.

    The times I have hit flowy buff XC trails where the Nomad was way too much bike I still had a blast.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by Auzy View Post
    ...the Bronson can pretty much climb like a billy goat for my local trails and still shred at parks.

    So I guess my question is, with the Solo (5010), would it be feasible to take it to parks? Or should I just go with my gut and get the Bronson.

    Thanks!
    I do not know how your parks look like, but the Bronson is a trail/AM bike. It will be ok for occasional park riding, but not ideal. Solo is definitely not a park bike.
    The best would be to have a Solo for regular trail riding and at least 6.5" DH oriented bike for parks.
    The Bronson is a very capable AM bike, but the feel is more XC than DH.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smmokan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Auzy View Post
    A lot of XC stuff, but I was looking to take the bike virtually everywhere... Colorado parks/New Mexico! So I was heavily leaning towards the Bronson, which wouldn't be completely ideal for my local area.
    Don't buy a bike for the occasional trip out west... buy it for what you're going to use it for all the time. For that reason, definitely get the Solo. You can then bring the Solo with you to CO and NM to ride XC inbetween park days, and you'll absolutely love it out here. Rent a full-on DH bike for the days at Winter Park, Keystone, Angel Fire, etc.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by smmokan View Post
    Don't buy a bike for the occasional trip out west... buy it for what you're going to use it for all the time. For that reason, definitely get the Solo. You can then bring the Solo with you to CO and NM to ride XC inbetween park days, and you'll absolutely love it out here. Rent a full-on DH bike for the days at Winter Park, Keystone, Angel Fire, etc.
    Agree 100% Good advice.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    44
    Awesome advice, thanks Smmokan. Also, you just saved me $100!

  64. #64
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    10,673
    5010 is hardly a park bike, not that you couldn't ride it in there. What is your current bike? If something similar in travel to the Bronson, it would surely do a lot more, and better. I've talked to a lot of riders going from Nomad to Bronson and they are more than satisfied.
    Wait whuuut, who did he tell you that!?!?....

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    5010 is hardly a park bike, not that you couldn't ride it in there. What is your current bike? If something similar in travel to the Bronson, it would surely do a lot more, and better. I've talked to a lot of riders going from Nomad to Bronson and they are more than satisfied.
    Currently riding a 29er hardtail Airborne Goblin. This would be my first squishy bike and i'd like it to last for at least 8-10 years. So I was really looking for a do it all bike that I could possible travel with.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by Auzy View Post
    Currently riding a 29er hardtail Airborne Goblin. This would be my first squishy bike and i'd like it to last for at least 8-10 years. So I was really looking for a do it all bike that I could possible travel with.
    With do it all bike you will need to compromise. 5-6" bike for trail riding would be the best, but not so good for parks.
    6.5"-8" for parks, but obviously not great for long Xc/trail rides due to weight and not very efficient pedaling.
    Bronson is closer to a do it all bike than Solo though.
    Lots of great 650b bikes out there this year. For do it all, I would look at
    Pivot Mach 6, Pivot 650b Firebird, Bronson, Devinci Troy, Norco Range or shorter Sight, Rocky Mountain Attitude...
    Last edited by jazzanova; 01-20-2014 at 02:05 PM.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    I'm From grapevine Texas... Started mountain biking in Texas yrs ago (north shore, Samson, Erwin) moved to Utah for the mountain biking about 4 yrs ago.. Just got back from moab on my solo.. Fantastic bike that can handle most of Utah.. Not trying to be an elitist but the solo in my opinion is the perfect bike for the Texan rider who wants to venture towards the west for more aggressive riding.. Unless you're some bad arss downhiller stuck in Texas the solo will be plenty of bike for you're needs.. I was riding a tallboyC with a 120 fork last season and that's what I would recommend for Texas riding.. It can handle plenty of Utah as well...

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14
    Hi guys I have a solo it's now 8 weeks old, I had the same dilemma, I'd come from an orange 5 pro, and instantly looked at the Bronson, but for what I do trail and the odd mad downhill the bike was too all mountain for me, that being said there isn't much differences in the 2 bikes to be honest. So what I did was buy the solo but upgraded the forks to 140mm fox kashimas, so best of all worlds

    I do 18 milers on a weekend mainly flat trail, but this weekend. Just gone I went out with my brother who pro, he was on an Orange Blood and we did some maniac downhill stuff, some I couldn't do I had to walk, but the bike did it all with ease. Lovely riding

    one thing to think about the shop I got it from in the uk most of the staff have bought solos, not Bronson's and they do the alps. They just buy them with longer forks that's all you need,

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: regularbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    223
    Not sure if this thread is considered closed but I thought I would add my two pennies since I struggled with the same decision. The 5010 and Bronson are terribly similar, and I say terribly because it's a terrible decision for us to make when both bikes are so good and are so capable.

    Most of the feedback I have read says that both bikes have a very similar riding feel, which is something I noticed in my demo. From the feedback I have deduced that the Bronson gives it up a little to the 5010 on climbing ability and the 5010 gives up a little to the Bronson on the downhill capability. The 5010 apparently handles very well and corners very well (which is illustrated nicely in Peaty's promo video) which I think would definitely help with going downhill but the Bronson with it's slightly longer travel will feel more composed when bombing down the bumpier sections.

    My interpretation of this feedback is that the Bronson would be your pick if your trails have sustained long ups and downs. Meaning your trails are such that you would consider your climb up as a means to get to the actual trails that you want to enjoy bombing down (or if you have lift or shuttle access). Whereas the 5010 would be you pick if your trails have a lot of winding up and down and if you consider the various climbs as part of the trail enjoyment. The key point here being the ratio between climbing and descending, and the altitude that you are travelling either way in any given stretch. I'm guessing that a quick evaluation of how technical your climbs are vs. how technical your descents are and how much time you spend doing either during your average ride will give you the best idea of which bike to get.

    To give you an idea of how similar these bikes are, here are the 5010 and Bronson compared...

    Weights:
    M Solo Carbon frame: 2.27 Kg (5 lb)
    M Bronson Carbon frame: 2.4 Kg (5.3 lb)

    Geometries:
    L 5010 with stock FLoat CTD @ 130mm
    Fork Height (A-C): 519mm (20.4")
    head angle: 68°
    seat angle: 73°
    wheelbase: 1140.1mm (44.9")
    toptube: 609.6mm (24")
    bb height: 334mm (13.1")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.1")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 426.3mm (16.8")
    stack: 599.5mm (23.6")

    L Bronson with stock FLoat CTD @ 150mm
    Fork Height (A-C): 544mm (21.4")
    head angle: 67°
    seat angle: 73°
    wheelbase: 1164.7mm (45.9")
    toptube: 609.6mm (24")
    bb height: 346mm (13.6")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.3")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 428.1mm (16.9")
    stack: 593.7mm (23.4")

    The main differences between the 5010 and the Bronson frames are:

    chainstay length:
    5010: 434.8mm (17.1")
    Bronson: 439mm (17.3")

    BB height:
    5010: 334mm (13.1")
    Bronson: 346mm (13.6")

    There's also the head angle but both the HA and the BB height can be increased a little by using a fork with longer travel and a longer A-C, as illustrated in the 5010/Pike example below. However, this will then change the angle of the seat tube.

    The similarities are so close that you could build the 5010 up beefy or build the Bronson up lighter, and then the gap can be filled even further (depending on the changes you make). Here's an example of what the geomtery would look like on a 5010 if you used a Rockshox Pike fork lowered to 140mm.

    L 5010 with Pike @ 140mm (geometry according to geometryCalc)
    Fork Height (A-C): 532mm (20.9")
    head angle: 67.4°
    seat angle: 72.4°
    wheelbase: 1145mm (45")
    toptube (effective): 611.6mm
    bb height: 338.6mm (13.3")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.1")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 420mm (16.5")
    stack: 604mm (23.77")

    I ended up going with the 5010 even though the Bronson is so very appealling to me. Mostly beacuse my trails are up and down and are winding and all over the place. My longest climb is 50 feet at the most in altitude. So it's really difficult to justify getting the Bronson. Also, the climbs in my local trail are generally quite technical and are very winding and so I could definitely benefit from the 5010's shorter wheelbase and lower BB height. The only downside is that the Bronson would have been the better pick for the DH trails near me in Ontario. But then again, I won't be riding these trails often and most of these DH trails are nothing like Whistler or anything out west so I might be able to get on okay with my Solo by using a Pike fork lowered to 140mm.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by regularbob View Post
    Not sure if this thread is considered closed but I thought I would add my two pennies since I struggled with the same decision. The 5010 and Bronson are terribly similar, and I say terribly because it's a terrible decision for us to make when both bikes are so good and are so capable.

    Most of the feedback I have read says that both bikes have a very similar riding feel, which is something I noticed in my demo. From the feedback I have deduced that the Bronson gives it up a little to the 5010 on climbing ability and the 5010 gives up a little to the Bronson on the downhill capability. The 5010 apparently handles very well and corners very well (which is illustrated nicely in Peaty's promo video) which I think would definitely help with going downhill but the Bronson with it's slightly longer travel will feel more composed when bombing down the bumpier sections.

    My interpretation of this feedback is that the Bronson would be your pick if your trails have sustained long ups and downs. Meaning your trails are such that you would consider your climb up as a means to get to the actual trails that you want to enjoy bombing down (or if you have lift or shuttle access). Whereas the 5010 would be you pick if your trails have a lot of winding up and down and if you consider the various climbs as part of the trail enjoyment. The key point here being the ratio between climbing and descending, and the altitude that you are travelling either way in any given stretch. I'm guessing that a quick evaluation of how technical your climbs are vs. how technical your descents are and how much time you spend doing either during your average ride will give you the best idea of which bike to get.

    To give you an idea of how similar these bikes are, here are the 5010 and Bronson compared...

    Weights:
    M Solo Carbon frame: 2.27 Kg (5 lb)
    M Bronson Carbon frame: 2.4 Kg (5.3 lb)

    Geometries:
    L 5010 with stock FLoat CTD @ 130mm
    Fork Height (A-C): 519mm (20.4")
    head angle: 68°
    seat angle: 73°
    wheelbase: 1140.1mm (44.9")
    toptube: 609.6mm (24")
    bb height: 334mm (13.1")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.1")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 426.3mm (16.8")
    stack: 599.5mm (23.6")

    L Bronson with stock FLoat CTD @ 150mm
    Fork Height (A-C): 544mm (21.4")
    head angle: 67°
    seat angle: 73°
    wheelbase: 1164.7mm (45.9")
    toptube: 609.6mm (24")
    bb height: 346mm (13.6")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.3")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 428.1mm (16.9")
    stack: 593.7mm (23.4")

    The main differences between the 5010 and the Bronson frames are:

    chainstay length:
    5010: 434.8mm (17.1")
    Bronson: 439mm (17.3")

    BB height:
    5010: 334mm (13.1")
    Bronson: 346mm (13.6")

    There's also the head angle but both the HA and the BB height can be increased a little by using a fork with longer travel and a longer A-C, as illustrated in the 5010/Pike example below. However, this will then change the angle of the seat tube.

    The similarities are so close that you could build the 5010 up beefy or build the Bronson up lighter, and then the gap can be filled even further (depending on the changes you make). Here's an example of what the geomtery would look like on a 5010 if you used a Rockshox Pike fork lowered to 140mm.

    L 5010 with Pike @ 140mm (geometry according to geometryCalc)
    Fork Height (A-C): 532mm (20.9")
    head angle: 67.4°
    seat angle: 72.4°
    wheelbase: 1145mm (45")
    toptube (effective): 611.6mm
    bb height: 338.6mm (13.3")
    chainstay: 434.8mm (17.1")
    headtube: 110mm (4.3")
    reach: 420mm (16.5")
    stack: 604mm (23.77")

    I ended up going with the 5010 even though the Bronson is so very appealling to me. Mostly beacuse my trails are up and down and are winding and all over the place. My longest climb is 50 feet at the most in altitude. So it's really difficult to justify getting the Bronson. Also, the climbs in my local trail are generally quite technical and are very winding and so I could definitely benefit from the 5010's shorter wheelbase and lower BB height. The only downside is that the Bronson would have been the better pick for the DH trails near me in Ontario. But then again, I won't be riding these trails often and most of these DH trails are nothing like Whistler or anything out west so I might be able to get on okay with my Solo by using a Pike fork lowered to 140mm.

    Great post, and its exactly what i did, i added 140mm Fox, ive also just lately gone to 2/10 on a 36T which give me a little extra.
    But im mainly a level rider and trail center, ive done downhill and followed my Brother on his Orange Blood, and nothing stopped me, she did well.

    My choice was the same as yours, but after listening to the guys at Stif, and what they do, it helped me choose. Most of them have gone solo also.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrozCountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,381
    I wonder what the Bronson gives on the climb to the solo. It paddles really well. Probably a pound + change more weight, anything else?

  72. #72
    Appalachian Singletrack'n
    Reputation: Endomaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,428
    A major difference in the bikes I don't see discussed is the pivot hardware. the Bronson's pivots are much more substantial the axles are 50% larger and there castings are imbedded into the carbon a good bit more. The Solo has basically the same Xc pivots as the tallboy. If you ride hard or are heavy this should be a substantial consideration. Sc has had issues in the past of pivots becoming unbonded from the carbon.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    83
    Just got done building my Bronson C a couple weeks ago and had decent weather this past weekend to get out and ride it. We rode 17mi Saturday and 16mi Today.

    The first day we climbed about 4 miles, flowy trail 9mi, and about 4mi downhill..

    Second Day we did a 10+mi straight up hill, 2 mi flowy trail, and 4mi downhill...

    Point is, this bike climbs very well. I've come from an 26er Yeti ASR-5 and have a 29er XC and MUCH prefer the Bronson especially for climbing. Downhill it's just a dream..

    I rode both Solo and the Bronson back to back several times at demo days and rented a solo for a 27mi ride. They are really so close, the biggest thing I found different between the two was the increased head angle of the Bronson and it's slightly plusher suspension. I'm 225lbs and wanted a slightly beefier bike anyways since I tend to ride aggressive. I'm in east Tn so we have a bunch of hills but not really any ski slopes around that are specific downhill oriented.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: regularbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by CrozCountry View Post
    I wonder what the Bronson gives on the climb to the solo. It paddles really well. Probably a pound + change more weight, anything else?
    From what I remember from the various threads, the HA, the shorter wheelbase and lower BB height have some affect on the climbing handling, particularly on technical climbs. In my demo I noticed a slight difference in the climbing but it wasn't very noticeable all the time. As a lot of people have said, both bikes climb very well.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: regularbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac View Post
    A major difference in the bikes I don't see discussed is the pivot hardware. the Bronson's pivots are much more substantial the axles are 50% larger and there castings are imbedded into the carbon a good bit more. The Solo has basically the same Xc pivots as the tallboy. If you ride hard or are heavy this should be a substantial consideration. Sc has had issues in the past of pivots becoming unbonded from the carbon.
    Thanks for mentioning this, I wasn't aware of this myself. I honestly thought that the pivots were the same but just the carbon tubing was thicker and beefier on the Bronson.

    I had failed to mention that I have read quite a bit of rider feedback saying that the Bronson is definitely a better pick for the clydes of 200+ lbs.

    At 145 lbs, I'm most definitely in the feather weight category and I doubt my Solo will even be aware that I am riding it. Hopefully, that means that I can use the Solo for light eastern Canada DH and for the odd jumps in the flow trails.

    I have seen videos of guys getting 3-4 feet in the air with the Tallboy and with the Solo so I'm thinking I'll be okay.
    Last edited by regularbob; 01-21-2014 at 07:18 AM.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nathanbal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,425
    Clydes at 180/200lbs? Seriously?

    Quote Originally Posted by regularbob View Post
    Thanks for mentioning this, I wasn't aware of this myself. I honestly thought that the pivots were the same but just the carbon tubing was thicker and beefier on the Bronson.

    I had failed to mention that I have read quite a bit of rider feedback saying that the Bronson is definitely a better pick for the clydes of 180/200+ lbs.

    At 145 lbs, I'm most definitely in the feather weight category and I doubt my Solo will even be aware that I am riding it. Hopefully, that means that I can use the Solo for light eastern Canada DH and for the odd jumps in the flow trails.

    I have seen videos of guys getting 3-4 feet in the air with the Tallboy and with the Solo so I'm thinking I'll be okay.

  77. #77
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Endomaniac View Post
    A major difference in the bikes I don't see discussed is the pivot hardware. the Bronson's pivots are much more substantial the axles are 50% larger and there castings are imbedded into the carbon a good bit more. The Solo has basically the same Xc pivots as the tallboy. If you ride hard or are heavy this should be a substantial consideration. Sc has had issues in the past of pivots becoming unbonded from the carbon.
    Pretty sure that this is a non-issue. The way in which the pivots are bonded to the frame is the same across the SC line now, and has thus far, addressed the issue with the pivots separating from the frame.

    Yes the axels are larger on the longer travel bike, but I don't think thats going to make any difference. The axles and pivots are designed for the bike, so if you're worried about breaking axles, your riding beyond what the bike was designed for in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by regularbob View Post
    I had failed to mention that I have read quite a bit of rider feedback saying that the Bronson is definitely a better pick for the clydes of 180/200+ lbs.
    Schweeeew! I'm only 178. Not a clyde (yet)
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: regularbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by nathanbal View Post
    Clydes at 180/200lbs? Seriously?
    Apologies, didn't mean to offend. I changed my posting.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nathanbal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,425

    Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by regularbob View Post
    Apologies, didn't mean to offend. I changed my posting.
    Haha, I found it funny. No offense taken! Cheers.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: regularbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by nathanbal View Post
    Haha, I found it funny. No offense taken! Cheers.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Funny thing is I actually had to look it up to correct it. Still getting used to the terminology on the forum.

    Btw, googleing "clydesdale weights" brings up "male's average weight is between 771 to 998 kg (1,700-2,200 lb.)". That made me laugh. That's what I get for using a poorly worded search query.

  81. #81
    gd2
    gd2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    24
    Same dilemma. Solo vs Bronson. What do you think?

    I want a do it all.
    My rides consists of both really long climbs (1,200ft +) with really long descents on trails and park stuff and My rides consist of trails that have ups and downs all over...
    I like to ride for as long as possible (2-6+ hours)
    I like to go fast! I like to go far! I want to boost some airs! I want be able to keep up or pass most XC riders on their own turf..

    Could the Solo Handle trails like Porcupine Rim and boost airs on some downhill runs?
    Would the Bronson climb as quick as an XC bike and feel good all day?
    Im coming from a tallboy LTC in which I did all the above on and was quite happy. but I want the playfulness of a 26er mixed in there.. Kind of wish they would make a 27.5 right in between Bronson and the solo.. 135 out back 140 or 145 up front. if only..
    Thanks

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smmokan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,519
    Sounds like you want a Solo with a 140 fork up front... plenty of people have that setup on here.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by gd2 View Post
    Same dilemma. Solo vs Bronson. What do you think?

    I want a do it all.
    My rides consists of both really long climbs (1,200ft +) with really long descents on trails and park stuff and My rides consist of trails that have ups and downs all over...
    I like to ride for as long as possible (2-6+ hours)
    I like to go fast! I like to go far! I want to boost some airs! I want be able to keep up or pass most XC riders on their own turf..

    Could the Solo Handle trails like Porcupine Rim and boost airs on some downhill runs?
    Would the Bronson climb as quick as an XC bike and feel good all day?
    Im coming from a tallboy LTC in which I did all the above on and was quite happy. but I want the playfulness of a 26er mixed in there.. Kind of wish they would make a 27.5 right in between Bronson and the solo.. 135 out back 140 or 145 up front. if only..
    Thanks
    WilliamK tried a longer stroke shock on his Solo. 137mm
    The tirre clearance was OK, about 3mm left in the back with the shock fully compressed.
    He claimed no noticeable difference compared to the original 125mm. He has a BOS Kirk shock.
    140mm Pike in the front.
    I found a bit more beast - a Solo story

    I think the Solo is a very capable and playful bike.
    I particularly like the shorter CS and lower BB.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by smmokan View Post
    Sounds like you want a Solo with a 140 fork up front... plenty of people have that setup on here.
    Exactly how mine is, fox kashima 140 up front. Removed outer ring in favour of 36t and bash guard. I've done everything on it, big drops reds blacks downhills, bikes not missed a beat yet. Even kept up with my brother on his orange blood, and some of his downhill I had to get off it was that nuts, he is a rock climber though so no fear lol, I'm in IT I have lots of fear

  85. #85
    gd2
    gd2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzanova View Post
    WilliamK tried a longer stroke shock on his Solo. 137mm
    The tirre clearance was OK, about 3mm left in the back with the shock fully compressed.
    He claimed no noticeable difference compared to the original 125mm. He has a BOS Kirk shock.
    140mm Pike in the front.
    I found a bit more beast - a Solo story

    I think the Solo is a very capable and playful bike.
    I particularly like the shorter CS and lower BB.

    Do you own a solo?
    I also would like to pass downhill riders on their own turf.. downhill. I know Im kind of being unrealistic but hey if I'm dropping that much coin...
    Can you adjust the solos stock shock to 130/135 or would i need a whole new get up? and how does he not notice 10+mm of rear travel difference.. is he using it?

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,828

    Re: Solo or Bronson

    Quote Originally Posted by gd2 View Post
    Do you own a solo?
    I also would like to pass downhill riders on their own turf.. downhill. I know Im kind of being unrealistic but hey if I'm dropping that much coin...
    Can you adjust the solos stock shock to 130/135 or would i need a whole new get up? and how does he not notice 10+mm of rear travel difference.. is he using it?
    No I do not own a Solo.
    I have had only 2 day demo ride on a M and about 3h on a L one.
    I have demoed a M Bronson as well.
    But I own a converted 650b SC TRc.
    I am not sure if there is a spacer in the fox shock, but it is highly possible to extend the travel by removing it, If there is one.
    You should probably ask William about the difference in the travel...

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    You guys are over complicating this.. Buy the bike for the application and stop F'n with frames/suspension to have it do something its not intended to do.

    Solo - If you're riding mostly cross country and light all mountain use. I live in Utah and own a Solo C, the Solo can handle all of northern Utah single track and a lot of Moab including the occasional trip to Porcupine rim. If I were riding mostly Moab and the occasional northern Utah single track, then I would own a Bronson.

    Bronson - If you're mostly all mountain. When I say all mountain I mean "lots" of 3 to 4' plus drops or tons of rocky and rooty down hill. If you're only riding this occasionally get the Solo. The Solo can handle it on occasion.

    I think people get confused on XC/Trail and all mountain. I see some of the longest travel bikes with people wearing full faced helmets on trails that I pass them on with my 4" travel Tallboy.


    Speaking of Tallboy... If you're an average sized man and live around flat lands (like Texas).. Get the Tallboy... Dont be the d-bag that buys a 6 inch travel bike just to have that enduro look.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Utah29er View Post

    Speaking of Tallboy... If you're an average sized man and live around flat lands (like Texas).. Get the Tallboy... Dont be the d-bag that buys a 6 inch travel bike just to have that enduro look.
    Maybe the TBLT and a fullface helmet if you really have to go Enduro...
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,387
    I wish they would make a bike between the bike between the Bronson and the Solo and the Bronson... something like 145mm rear travel. I'd probably put a Fox 40 on the front reduced down to 150mm. Maybe throw some offset shock bushings on there and convert it to 26" wheels. That's my ideal bike.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    I wish they would make a bike between the bike between the Bronson and the Solo and the Bronson... something like 145mm rear travel. I'd probably put a Fox 40 on the front reduced down to 150mm. Maybe throw some offset shock bushings on there and convert it to 26" wheels. That's my ideal bike.

    Awesome!!!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by Utah29er View Post
    You guys are over complicating this.. Buy the bike for the application and stop F'n with frames/suspension to have it do something its not intended to do.

    Solo - If you're riding mostly cross country and light all mountain use. I live in Utah and own a Solo C, the Solo can handle all of northern Utah single track and a lot of Moab including the occasional trip to Porcupine rim. If I were riding mostly Moab and the occasional northern Utah single track, then I would own a Bronson.

    Bronson - If you're mostly all mountain. When I say all mountain I mean "lots" of 3 to 4' plus drops or tons of rocky and rooty down hill. If you're only riding this occasionally get the Solo. The Solo can handle it on occasion.

    I think people get confused on XC/Trail and all mountain. I see some of the longest travel bikes with people wearing full faced helmets on trails that I pass them on with my 4" travel Tallboy.


    Speaking of Tallboy... If you're an average sized man and live around flat lands (like Texas).. Get the Tallboy... Dont be the d-bag that buys a 6 inch travel bike just to have that enduro look.
    Or a 5010! Just cause its Texas it don't mandate them wagon wheels!
    believe in yourself! I believe in you!

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzy View Post
    Or a 5010! Just cause its Texas it don't mandate them wagon wheels!
    True dat!! However, I've owned both and if I lived in Texas I would totally sale my Solo (I refuse to call it 5010) and get my Tallboy back... I only went from my Tallboy to the Solo because of the downhill/jumping aspect on a 29er in Utah.. Leaving the ground on a 29er just doesn't do it for me... Other than that the Tallboy is the shiz-nit!!!

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    477
    I've been 29er curious, but 30yeas of BMX still has me feeling 26 is big!
    believe in yourself! I believe in you!

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrozCountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Utah29er View Post
    True dat!! However, I've owned both and if I lived in Texas I would totally sale my Solo (I refuse to call it 5010) and get my Tallboy back... I only went from my Tallboy to the Solo because of the downhill/jumping aspect on a 29er in Utah.. Leaving the ground on a 29er just doesn't do it for me... Other than that the Tallboy is the shiz-nit!!!
    Interesting, thats the only reason for me to switch back from a tallboy to smaller wheels. I got used to jumping with a 29er. As long as you jump and drop straight its totally fine. If you want to add whips and tricks, I guess the 29er is a liability. But how many of us really do that? My biggest concern when doing a little whip on the tallboy is that the rear wheel will taco if I don't land perfect, something that I never think about on a dirt jumper (which has bomber wheels).

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by CrozCountry View Post
    Interesting, thats the only reason for me to switch back from a tallboy to smaller wheels. I got used to jumping with a 29er. As long as you jump and drop straight its totally fine. If you want to add whips and tricks, I guess the 29er is a liability. But how many of us really do that? My biggest concern when doing a little whip on the tallboy is that the rear wheel will taco if I don't land perfect, something that I never think about on a dirt jumper (which has bomber wheels).
    Totally agree.... There is a difference though; those 29er wheels feel awkward in the air, there's no getting around that.. Like you said though, its totally doable if doable is okay with you. I also forgot to mention that cornering is also more fun and easier to lean in with the 27.5.. Just my two cents..

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    44
    I test rode both a lot here in Texas. The Bronson felt better for me...so i bought it. I think both bikes are more than capable of handling anything. More capable than any rider

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    9
    I've hesitated between those two bikes and ordered a Bronson carbon frame (medium size - matt carbon) few days ago.
    I'm 5'9.5" tall (inseam : 33 in.). I hope medium is the correct size for me (rather long legs and short torso). I haven't had the opportunity to test one before ordering.

    Hum … well it's a little risky but we'll see. By the way it's my first SC, I'm riding in the swiss Alps.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by jl32 View Post
    I've hesitated between those two bikes and ordered a Bronson carbon frame (medium size - matt carbon) few days ago.
    I'm 5'9.5" tall (inseam : 33 in.). I hope medium is the correct size for me (rather long legs and short torso). I haven't had the opportunity to test one before ordering.

    Hum … well it's a little risky but we'll see. By the way it's my first SC, I'm riding in the swiss Alps.
    I think you'll be fine, Im 5.11 with 31inch inseam an ive got a large SOLO

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    362
    I have both and prefer my solo with 140 fork for 90% of my riding. Like others have said for more agressive AM riding the Bronson is a better ride. Im 5.9" and ride med on both.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Auzy View Post
    I test rode both a lot here in Texas. The Bronson felt better for me...so i bought it. I think both bikes are more than capable of handling anything. More capable than any rider
    Bronson in Texas?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Bronson with a Fox 36
    By jeffus in forum 27.5
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-22-2013, 04:32 PM
  2. WTB Bronson 2.1 ???
    By Biohazard74 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-03-2012, 11:58 AM
  3. WTB Bronson 29 vs. WTB Bronson 29 Race
    By teachndad in forum 29er Components
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-13-2012, 09:28 AM
  4. Where is 104 Bronson?
    By oldcabin in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-15-2011, 03:01 AM
  5. WTB Bronson
    By Maheoway in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-18-2011, 09:59 AM

Members who have read this thread: 4

Posting Permissions

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