# Thread: Transition Sentinel

1. Originally Posted by Sid Duffman
This thread has got me thinking about geometry and head tube angles . . .

How is rear travel measured? I always assumed it was the vertical distance the wheel moves between full extension and full compression. If that's the case, it seems that if you want the front and rear travel to be "balanced" you would need the fork travel to be longer than the rear travel because the vertical travel of the fork will be less than the nominal travel. As the headtube angle slackens, this becomes more pronounced.

My trig is a little rusty, but I think the vertical travel of the fork = sin(HTA) * fork travel. So for the sentinel, sin(64 degrees)*160mm = 143 mm vertical travel. Pretty closely matched to the rear.

Seems like the math supports Whalenards observations.
Yep. Considered this calculation before in the process of over forking many(most) previous bikes. The converse is having to explain why the 160/160 bike(built up from the 140/160 bike parts, including fork) seemed more balanced. Factors involved include design intent, rear suss kinematics, running more rear sag (30vs20%) and more rear weight bias(60-70%) depending on riding style.
Certainly would expect the Sentinel, designed for that travel, to feel balanced and more dialed in than an aftermarket Frankenforker.
Just excited so many great bikes being built with unique fit and feel, hope to ride them all!

2. Not to throw off the tech talk, but what are people's thoughts on going from carbon (SC "C") to an aluminum Sentinel? Will it be super noticeable, or is modern aluminum pretty solid?

3. Originally Posted by Travis Bickle
140 or 150, 10mm isn't going to change anyone's life. Only those people upset that someone put a pea under their mattress would really notice.
Ha. I like that.

4. Hi all

I assume that nobody has ridden the Sentinel but I have a question and I must set up my mind.

I struggle to choose between the Sentinel and the new Kona Process 29".
I am not talking about comparison between spec. only pure geometry

The main point that I worry about is that the Sentinel feels too much a bike only because of the slack HA (64) compare to the 66 HA of the Kona.

what do you think guys?

5. Originally Posted by alonmil
The main point that I worry about is that the Sentinel feels too much a bike only because of the slack HA (64) compare to the 66 HA of the Kona.

what do you think guys?
I think that's the wrong way to look at it. Go re-read the SBG info Transition has posted. Trying to parse it down to a HTA and draw conclusions from that is leading you in the wrong direction.

6. I don't believe that the HA alone makes a bike too much or too less.

Having said that a few friends have bought quite slack bikes (around 65) and at least at the beginning they have straggled with front tire traction because they required a different way of riding with more forward bias.

I have also experienced the same when I placed an angleset to my current bike so I decided to remove it even though I use a 29 160 fork with 44 offset in a forward geometry bike.

I understand that the whole geometry and fork offsets can influence the above but only to a certain degree so I would (and I will) wait to try one before deciding.

7. these bikes are a new paradigm and i agree, they need to be ridden before coming to any conclusions. i want to try each of them, i can't wait for them to be up and running.

8. This new Sentinel is really intriguing me. Would be really nice to read some more test reports. I'm planning on moving to a modern 29er from a first gen Kona 153 and the Sentinel is on top of the bunch for me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

9. I would like to demo a Sentinel as well.

And I am wondering how a Sentinel compares to a Whyte S150 given that they have the same wheelsize, travel range and a similar geometry concept (smaller fork offset, etc.). Can anyone offer insights on the ride difference between these two bikes?

10. Originally Posted by F-Bomb
Can anyone offer insights on the ride difference between these two bikes?
Both bikes are not at dealers yet so unless you know a magazine tester that rode both (not sure if there is anyone that actually did it) it will take a bit of time to get a comparison between the two.
Having said that,just by looking at the numbers ׁ(HA mostly) it seems the Sentinel will potentially be a bit more aggressive .You can also see that the s150 doesnt come with a piggyback shock or a Lyrik/36 which can also suggest that its not meant to be as aggressive.

11. Numbers on the Sentinel is kind of in line with Pole Evolinks 140 model. Know they´ve been testing forks with shorter offset too. The reviews on the Pole is that it really can carry a lot of speed on flat terrain as well as climb very well. Poles wheelbase is even longer though, would love to try both out..

12. ## Fabulous Bike!

Just got back from Outerbike. This was by far my favorite bike I rode. The suspension has all the FSR/HOSRT/GIDDYUP supple love. It's sooo easy to ride. I don't think it gives up anything from turning perspective on slower techy stuff to XC type tights. It pops off little and big things so easily. I kept thinking --- 64 degree head angle! How is this possible. Climbing it's amazing - I think it's the best climbing bike I've ever ridden (the new Mach 6 maybe a close second).

I also tested the new Rocky Mountain Instinct as it's more in line with what I currently ride, a Stumpjumper 29. It just felt like a lighter, and nicer version of my stumpy. Not as ground breaking as the Sentinel or as fun to ride – even thought it's lighter.

I then rode the Kona Process 153 27.5. This felt too harsh/racy – the rear is so stiff under pedaling that small hits and bumps were jarring. Super stable – but harder to loft and play with than the Sentinel. Also felt beat up after a 20mi ride.

Lastly I rode the new Mach 6 carbon. Whoa - close contender. I was tired – but that bike pedals, climbs, takes the small stuff well. However, for the money I'd go with the Sentinel – and I feel you don't give up anything with the 20 mm rear travel difference but gain the awesome roll over of the 29.

Again – I know my review is choppy – but man. TR has really done something special with this bike. It was aluminum and I didn't care that it was heavy. It was soo much fun. Steep stuff - was stable, climbing - where do you want to go? - XC type stuff - playful and not a handful. If I had more time I'd like to have tried the new Smuggler.

Cheers!

13. Nice review.

Would you ride the Sentinel on a multi-day multi-thousands of feet of climbing ride? (I'm thinking San Juan Huts or Kokopelli Trail or BC Bike Race)?

14. How does the 140mm rear end handle sharp edges and chop compared to the 160mm front?

15. Originally Posted by skiahh
Nice review.

Would you ride the Sentinel on a multi-day multi-thousands of feet of climbing ride? (I'm thinking San Juan Huts or Kokopelli Trail or BC Bike Race)?
I've never done more than 2-3 days of 3K+ feet of climbing. But I'd take this bike – cause if I was tired it's still easy to maneuver. However, I don't think it's light by any stretch of the imagination.

How does the 140mm rear end handle sharp edges and chop compared to the 160mm front?
It's just fine. The front and rear balance really well.

16. Originally Posted by dblom
Numbers on the Sentinel is kind of in line with Pole Evolinks 140 model. Know they´ve been testing forks with shorter offset too. The reviews on the Pole is that it really can carry a lot of speed on flat terrain as well as climb very well. Poles wheelbase is even longer though, would love to try both out..
'can carry a lot of speed on flat terrain', now there's a unique selling feature. not a lot of mtn bikes can pull this off well.....

17. Originally Posted by cunningstunts
'can carry a lot of speed on flat terrain', now there's a unique selling feature. not a lot of mtn bikes can pull this off well.....
Yeah was obviously talking about sections of trail thats flatish.. See a lot of guys out in the woods at home with those and they´re all really stoked on them.

18. for all the "between sizes" out there,
I have pre-ordered the Sentinel in my local LBS but I'm still struggling what size to take, L or XL.

My height is 187cm (6' 2"),

currently I am riding a Kona Process 134 2014 size L.
it has a reach of 460 and it's Top-Tube length is 631mm
it feels bit short while I'm pedalling on the Saddle, out of the saddle, on descent it feels perfect

The L sentinel has reach of 475mm and 611 mm Top-Tube length.
it is shorter than than my Kona by 2 cm, so actually it will feel much more cramped when I'm on the saddle and maybe it will feel bit "small" for me.

By looking on the Numbers of the XL Sentinel, it is much bigger and longer bike, and I afraid that it will be too big for me to maneuver and "play" with it.

what do you recommend to do?,
what size to take?

19. I'd go large, focusing on the reach more than the top tube. If you're worried about being cramped in the saddle, you can move the seat back on the rails a bit or go with a wider bar to spread yourself out a bit more. To me, the wheelbase on these bikes is getting to the point where they can be hard to handle on tighter terrain. I'm 6' 3" but it's mostly in my legs, I'm going from an XL Patrol back to a Large.

20. I would most probably choose the XL based on my Mondraker experience. I am 1.83 and ride a L Crafty that has similar reach numbers to the XL Sentinel and I wouldn't want anything less than that and the same applies to the effective top tube numbers that are affected by the seat angle.

I understand the benefits of the steeper seat angle but it affects the effective top tube and definitely feel much more comfortable on a longer bike overall (reach, effective top tube, wheelbase etc).

But at the end of the day it's all about personal preferences.

21. Originally Posted by alonmil
for all the "between sizes" out there,...
I'm 6'1 and riding a Patrol in L, but I wanna size up because the L feels a bit cramped to me. I wrote TR for an advice and if the new SBG bikes (in same size) with longer reach would help here:

"If the LG felt short for you, the new one will still feel short. The longer reach is part of the SBG setup and sizing. If you use a shorter offset SBG fork on a "regular" bike it makes it feel quite a bit smaller and out of balance. We know that the longer reach longer wheelbase can be intimidating, but it's part of the whole package. You may find that a 35mm stem in place of the 40mm stem makes sense, but I am confident that the XL won't be too big for you. On the other hand, the LG could still work, but I would be worried you will find it too small. Most people get on a new SBG Patrol and their first comment is something along the lines of "That doesn't actually feel that big" so don't be scared... "

Don't get fooled by numbers - they are an approach, not more. When in doubt I would size up & use short stem. I'm pretty sure most will get used to a bigger frame when they are stuck between two sizes.

22. Interesting regarding sizing. I'm pretty proportional at 6', but also found the Large patrol too small. Given that I am serious about getting this bike, i guess I ought to find a demo. Poo

23. No demos around here, but pulled the trigger on a XL frame yesterday. I’m 194cm 6’5”, hope it will be good!

24. I'm just throwing this out there too. I started on a medium patrol last year and ended up on a large by the end of the season. I'm only 5'8". I agree with sizing up. I think even with these new bikes I'd still ride a large. At least with the patrol.

25. I got my hand at riding the Sentinel last night. I went out for a quick evening ride at my local spot and saw the Transition guys set up for a last minute demo on their way back from Pisgah. I wish I would have had time to ride all the SBG bikes, but I ended up spending my time on the Sentinel. I did a few laps on green flow trails, blue jump lines (some 20'+ tables and step ups), some twisty tech forest riding, and finished it off with the area's only double black run.

My first thought was how well mannered it was when pedaling around. The climb up to most of the DH trails in the area is a bit of up and down, well packed and smooth. I was expecting it to feel more like a wet dog, but I was presently surprised how little wallow there was. Traction was great, and it didn't feel like I was towing an anchor. It took a little more body english than I was used to to make it around some of the uphill switchbacks, but nothing that was overly difficult. Overall much better than I had expected.

Once I got to the downhill I could echo some of Mike's review points on pinkbike. The Sentinel is definitely more down than up on the spectrum, and it's length really lended itself to speed, if you have the room to really let it stretch its legs the bike really comes alive. I got this in bits and spurts, as the trails here aren't west coast loooooong descents.

However it jumped remarkably well, very balanced in the air and solid. Even a few sloppy landings which would have jostled me up more felt smooth, the suspension was remarkably potent even for "only" having 140mm of travel.

The few rock sections were absolutely gobbled up, and it had that distinct floating carpet feel over the boulders. Suspension setup obviously comes into play here, but if you prefer a more direct to the ground feel, I wasn't finding it.

It definitely lagged for me in the tight forest. SBG trickery aside, there's no getting around the fact this is a looooooooooong bike. And I had to wrestle a few spots to get it around a tree or power through off camber stuff. Again, there's nothing keeping you from riding this as a trail bike, you're just going to have to work a little harder than you would on other options.

Overall, I had a blast on the bike, and would highly recommend it for someone who gets enough time on the DH to appreciate it. For my active style riding and up/down/up/down area, I would prefer the Scout or smuggler.

26. Originally Posted by Fluidworks
I got my hand at riding the Sentinel last night.....
eccellente! thanks for that review!
I would also be really interested in a comparison Sentinel vs (new) Patrol.

27. Originally Posted by Fluidworks
I got my hand at riding the Sentinel last night.
Hey thanks for the review! Wish I could demo some new TR bikes! Did you ride the Sentinel in Pisgah? What trails?

28. I'm kind of surprised by the reviews saying this is such a downhill oriented bike, and not as sprightly on the up and flat. I wonder if this is a weight thing? Like if the frame and wheels were carbon if that would help.

29. If a 140 bike is such a downhill beast what would a 170 be? A Rampage killer? (Needless to ask about an actual DH bike).

I understand that new bikes become more and more capable but somehow I find most reviews to repeat the same stereotypes.

30. Originally Posted by bhsavery
I'm kind of surprised by the reviews saying this is such a downhill oriented bike, and not as sprightly on the up and flat. I wonder if this is a weight thing? Like if the frame and wheels were carbon if that would help.
why are you surprised? do the geometry numbers make it appear more like a general trail bike to you? on all levels, it looks like it could have been called Patrol 29er, which is what it is in approach. it ain't a Smuggler that's for sure.

31. Anybody know the bible of bikes line up yet?
Would be curious to see if the sentinel is in there.

32. Originally Posted by monts
Hey thanks for the review! Wish I could demo some new TR bikes! Did you ride the Sentinel in Pisgah? What trails?

No, not as Pisgah, here in Knoxville, TN.

33. Originally Posted by gpgalanis
If a 140 bike is such a downhill beast what would a 170 be? A Rampage killer? (Needless to ask about an actual DH bike).

I understand that new bikes become more and more capable but somehow I find most reviews to repeat the same stereotypes.
I found the same feeling during my (albeit) short ride. I think geometry and kinematics have a bigger role to play in modern bikes than just the travel numbers indicate.

34. I have a similar bike with 160-140, long reach, 42 fork offset etc and while it is really capable there is a limit to what 140 rear travel can do especially in drops, jumps etc.

If it wasn't then the Patrol would also have 140 rear travel and the same applies for other similar bikes.

35. Delivery date March on my XL frame..

36. @dblom What color?

37. Is there any rumor for a carbon version?

38. Black. But I’m in Scandinavia, could be different in North America maybe..

39. Originally Posted by Ntinos P
Is there any rumor for a carbon version?
There's been some speculation but nothing definite that I know of...

40. Originally Posted by dblom
Delivery date March on my XL frame..
Bummer. There are rumors about the first shipment being sold out and as far as I can tell no Sentinels in the US yet, but March sounds really late.

UPDATE: Transition has a new website, and you can purchase the Sentinel frame. Everything else is sold out. https://www.transitionbikes.com/Stor...ntinel&P=11847

41. All sizes of Sentinel out of stock now too. Must have went fast. Hopefully Transition will see the big demand and step up production.

42. Just got word my TR Blue Sentinel will be ready late January/Early February... the wait...

43. Originally Posted by monts
Just got word my TR Blue Sentinel will be ready late January/Early February... the wait...
Damn when did you order? What size?

44. Originally Posted by delarosa
Damn when did you order? What size?
Just a couple weeks ago, so yeah, kinda late... it's an XL. Initially I thought I was going to be waiting longer for a blue one so I'm okay with Jan/Feb. Probably won't be able to ride regularly at that time anyway in the Northeast so be it.

45. Originally Posted by monts
Just a couple weeks ago, so yeah, kinda late... it's an XL. Initially I thought I was going to be waiting longer for a blue one so I'm okay with Jan/Feb. .
Wait, so is it the color that is the delay? Or all the frames aren't coming until 2018?

46. The black one would have been early January I was told. So either way I was waiting until 2018

47. My LBS told me they got shipping notification on my blue XL. Hopefully it's here in a few days.

48. Originally Posted by dfinn
My LBS told me they got shipping notification on my blue XL. Hopefully it's here in a few days.
When did you order? I ordered mine on September 6th... still waiting to find out when it's coming.

49. I don't remember exactly but it was probably somewhere around that same time.

50. Originally Posted by adrian.bee
Wait, so is it the color that is the delay? Or all the frames aren't coming until 2018?
Also, there's always hope that some people backed out of their orders and that moves their bikes closer down the line to ours! wishful thinking I guess.

51. Ok looks like my frame and fork will be here Wednesday!

52. I just got a crash replacement seat stay for my patrol, while on the phone with TBC yesterday they said they were very busy as a new container of bikes was delivered.

53. Originally Posted by mikeburnsie
i just got a crash replacement seat stay for my patrol, while on the phone with tbc yesterday they said they were very busy as a new container of bikes was delivered.
yesss!

54. Got my Sentinel frame yesterday! Interestingly enough my bike and a pre-ordered patrol are the only bikes to arrive so far at my LBC even though they ordered a demo fleet.

55. Originally Posted by delarosa
Got my Sentinel frame yesterday! Interestingly enough my bike and a pre-ordered patrol are the only bikes to arrive so far at my LBC even though they ordered a demo fleet.
Sweet! just the frame? when did you order?

56. Originally Posted by dblom
Good video and review! I had the same experience and conclusion on my new Patrol, regarding how the bike rides. Transition nailed it.

Are you going to be getting a Sentinel?

Thanks for posting that vid

57. Originally Posted by monts
Sweet! just the frame? when did you order?
Frame fork combo. September 6th.

58. Originally Posted by delarosa
Frame fork combo. September 6th.
Dang, I should've ordered one before I sold my bike. Gonna be looking at 2019 before a Sentinel is available

59. Originally Posted by adrian.bee
Dang, I should've ordered one before I sold my bike. Gonna be looking at 2019 before a Sentinel is available
i got in on the second run, supposedly Late Jan early February, 2018 that is! haha

60. Originally Posted by DBY
Good video and review! I had the same experience and conclusion on my new Patrol, regarding how the bike rides. Transition nailed it.

Are you going to be getting a Sentinel?

Thanks for posting that vid
Yeah I got a XL frame and fork on order to Sweden via the Finnish distributor. Was just in touch with Transition about how long of a dropper they though I’d be able to fit with my 35.5 inseam. 170mm should work they said.. Can’t wait but looks like I have to, delivery in feb/march..

61. I could demo a Sentinel GX size M this week. My first impressions are:
i) It is comfortable to go up (god body position) and has good grip. But this particular bike weighted nearly 16 kg with tubes and heavy tyres. You are going to feel the extra kgs if you are in the saddle all day.
ii) Coming from 26", the large 29" wheels definitely need 1-2 crank revolutions before the bike really gets rolling. But after that, on more open trail sections, I was surprised at how much speed it carried.
iii) The bike felt stable and composed at lower and higher speeds. In comparison, a Specialized Enduro 29 I tried recently had a twitchy feel from time to time.
I think the Sentinel is a very capable bike. At 1.75m tall, I would not describe this bike as very playful, but it is nonetheless very manageable and fun.

62. Originally Posted by F-Bomb
I could demo a Sentinel GX size M this week. My first impressions are:
i) It is comfortable to go up (god body position) and has good grip. But this particular bike weighted nearly 16 kg with tubes and heavy tyres. You are going to feel the extra kgs if you are in the saddle all day.
ii) Coming from 26", the large 29" wheels definitely need 1-2 crank revolutions before the bike really gets rolling. But after that, on more open trail sections, I was surprised at how much speed it carried.
iii) The bike felt stable and composed at lower and higher speeds. In comparison, a Specialized Enduro 29 I tried recently had a twitchy feel from time to time.
I think the Sentinel is a very capable bike. At 1.75m tall, I would not describe this bike as very playful, but it is nonetheless very manageable and fun.
thanks for the review, I don't know, bike looked pretty playful in the video posted above... but rider height could affect that, I'm tall so I like the 29, I often find myself riding 29 the same way I would a 650b

63. Nice pic!

64. Originally Posted by dfinn
How was it on Porcupine Rim? The Sentinel is the perfect rig for TWE.

65. Originally Posted by adrian.bee
How was it on Porcupine Rim? The Sentinel is the perfect rig for TWE.
I was fiddling with suspension setup and a few other things but for the most part it felt really good on TWE. That rim section was the only part where it did kind of feel like a lot of bike.

66. Originally Posted by dfinn
I was fiddling with suspension setup and a few other things but for the most part it felt really good on TWE. That rim section was the only part where it did kind of feel like a lot of bike.
Maybe we're talking about different segments. I'm referring to the last 2-3 miles along the rim, where it's fast, rough and techy. Seems like a 140 29r would be ideal for keeping your speed and bashing thru the rough stuff.

Are you talking about the flat segment on LPS?

67. I think the part I'm referring to is technically called UPS but yeah, the flat'ish section where you're going up and down through chunk along the ridge. Everywhere else the bike felt really good.

68. Originally Posted by dfinn
I think the part I'm referring to is technically called UPS but yeah, the flat'ish section where you're going up and down through chunk along the ridge. Everywhere else the bike felt really good.
Gotcha. Either way, congrats on the new rig, looks real good!

69. Looks like all the TR builds, including Sentinel come with 170 crank arms. Think they did this for pedal strikes? I always ride 175 but i got a good deal on the kit so i guess I'm getting the carbon crank set with 170 arms.

70. I bought mine as a frame/fork and moved all of the parts I could from my Scout. I'm running 175mm cranks and I think I'm getting more pedal strikes than I had been on the Scout.

71. Hmmm.... maybe 170 is the way to go then, but all my other bikes have 175 so I'll feel it at first. Kinda strange the build kits do not offer the option??

72. They did it because of pedal strikes. There is absolutely no reason to run longer cranks than 170mm. Pedal strike city. I am will never buy another 175 crankset again.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

73. Originally Posted by coolhand80
They did it because of pedal strikes. There is absolutely no reason to run longer cranks than 170mm. Pedal strike city. I am will never buy another 175 crankset again.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nah, you’re running 170 because your RF 175 fell apart! Haha, no I hear ya, hopefully it works out for best

74. Crank arm length is realistically a function of your femur length and whatnot for proper pedalling. Generally you can err a little bit on the length to account for ground clearance, but try to stay with what works for your physical size for best ergonomics. This might mean training yourself on pedal placement to avoid rock strikes.

Luckily I munchkin cat legs so I can get away with 165/170mm cranks pretty easily.

75. does 5 mm make all that much difference either way? i can imagine it would reduce a few pedal strikes, but if your hitting at 175, you're still going to hit at 170 no? or do pedal strikes simply disappear at 170?

76. my mate just rode the Stl size large around the streets in front of the LBS today. he said it rocked. how's that for a review.

77. They don't disappear, but having ridden both on Patrol and Scouts here in Arizona where there are tons of rocks, it's surprisingly worse with 175. I know it doesn't seem like it would matter that much, but it does help. (I still have pedal strikes, just not as many).

78. How much does this bike weight ?
is the weight irrelevant in 2017 ? seriously i cant find the numbers anywhere ! and even if the bike pedals well, a 16kg rig is still 16kg and too for a 40-50km trips...

79. Mine in it's current form weighs 34 pounds. That's with maxxis double down tires in front and back. I'll be switching to a single ply tire up front and I have some new wheels on the way that will shave a little bit more weight off as well.

When I threw it on the scale I was a little worried but it's been a non issue. The bike definitely pedals well and for me puts me in an absolute perfect position for climbing (I'm 5'11 and on a L).

80. Don't know. I never weigh my bikes!

81. Pinkbike had a L @ 32 lbs.

Maybe a touch portly but well within expectations for what it is.

82. Originally Posted by cunningstunts
does 5 mm make all that much difference either way? i can imagine it would reduce a few pedal strikes, but if your hitting at 175, you're still going to hit at 170 no? or do pedal strikes simply disappear at 170?
It does make a difference. Had 175's on my N3 and now 170s on my Patrol. N3 had to be super careful pedaling through the chunk or I would definitely strike. The 170's clear MUCH better and dont think I've had a bad crash yet from a strike. Definitely ate it a few times on my N3 because of strikes. BB is about the same on both bikes too.

83. Interesting. For example, if I went to shorter cranks, would I need to lower my saddle and vice versa?

84. Originally Posted by adrian.bee
Interesting. For example, if I went to shorter cranks, would I need to lower my saddle and vice versa?
If you went to shorter cranks you would need to raise your saddle. Your leg will extend 5mm less or whatever amount shorter cranks you try.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

85. What do you guys think of the build kits?
From NX to GX, you gain 12 gears and better suspension.
But from NX to X01, you get carbon cranks and slightly better complements? Not sure how that translates in practice? Lower weight? More reliability? Is that worth 1000\$ in your opinion?
Cheers!

86. Originally Posted by F-Bomb
What do you guys think of the build kits?
From NX to GX, you gain 12 gears and better suspension.
But from NX to X01, you get carbon cranks and slightly better complements? Not sure how that translates in practice? Lower weight? More reliability? Is that worth 1000\$ in your opinion?
Cheers!
I have been debating this for awhile. I think the main problem I have is for the immediate future there will not be much availability of forks with the correct offset if I ever plan to upgrade that fork. Transition has said they will have the correct forks available when buying frames so they are out there. Just not enough out there to pick one up at a discount. I have never ridden a Yari, or Lyrik for that matter but let’s say you want to buy a Fox 36......they have a retail of \$800-\$1000 depending on what model you get.

My other issue is just buying a bike with all these SRAM builds......just not a fan of brakes that have DOT fluid, XD drivers, and all the other PITA quirks that SRAM seems to engineer into their parts.

Anytime I buy the entry level build kit I inherently start upgrading things anyway. I gotta stop doing this and buy the mid or upper level package to begin with.

87. Originally Posted by BluePitch
I have been debating this for awhile. I think the main problem I have is for the immediate future there will not be much availability of forks with the correct offset if I ever plan to upgrade that fork. Transition has said they will have the correct forks available when buying frames so they are out there. Just not enough out there to pick one up at a discount. I have never ridden a Yari, or Lyrik for that matter but let’s say you want to buy a Fox 36......they have a retail of \$800-\$1000 depending on what model you get.

My other issue is just buying a bike with all these SRAM builds......just not a fan of brakes that have DOT fluid, XD drivers, and all the other PITA quirks that SRAM seems to engineer into their parts.

Anytime I buy the entry level build kit I inherently start upgrading things anyway. I gotta stop doing this and buy the mid or upper level package to begin with.
The fork availability is a question of concern. But I think your going to see them start popping up soon. Believe it or not, i already snagged a 29 inch Fox 34 SBG fork in the used market. Haven't seen a 36 yet.

Keep in mind with the NX build you do not get the DPX2 shock, that's around a \$250 difference alone, also factor in cheap hubs on the GX and NX builds... the other notable price difference is the brakes. RSC can run you around \$400 a set, the T level brake on the NX build is an \$80 brake.

88. Originally Posted by BluePitch
I have been debating this for awhile. I think the main problem I have is for the immediate future there will not be much availability of forks with the correct offset if I ever plan to upgrade that fork. Transition has said they will have the correct forks available when buying frames so they are out there. Just not enough out there to pick one up at a discount. I have never ridden a Yari, or Lyrik for that matter but let’s say you want to buy a Fox 36......they have a retail of \$800-\$1000 depending on what model you get.

My other issue is just buying a bike with all these SRAM builds......just not a fan of brakes that have DOT fluid, XD drivers, and all the other PITA quirks that SRAM seems to engineer into their parts.

Anytime I buy the entry level build kit I inherently start upgrading things anyway. I gotta stop doing this and buy the mid or upper level package to begin with.
I can agree with you on some of that, however an XD driver is the only way to be 12x. I do the same (upgrade parts) doesn’t matter the build level I’ll still upgrade things as time goes on. I would have liked to see better hubs for the top build, that might have pushed me to that build. I went GX, it’s good enough

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

89. What do you guys think about anvl components? I’ve never heard of them

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

90. Originally Posted by rad3144
What do you guys think about anvl components? I’ve never heard of them

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I like them, they are made by Transition. Well built, good quality, I've been using the Forge seat and ANVL stem on a couple of my other bikes.

91. Ok that’s what I figured (that it was transitions House brand) looks pretty good.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

92. not a huge Sram fan either. i would be ordering frame and shock options on one of the new bikes if i go that route.

93. Originally Posted by rad3144
I can agree with you on some of that, however an XD driver is the only way to be 12x. I do the same (upgrade parts) doesn’t matter the build level I’ll still upgrade things as time goes on. I would have liked to see better hubs for the top build, that might have pushed me to that build. I went GX, it’s good enough

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I didn’t even think about the 12speed, I’m still on 11 speed! I have been on XT 10 speed and never needed any more gears. My current bike came with the XD driver and 11 speed so now I got XD, but extra Shimano driver wheels.

This is another thing about SRAM and that XD driver, the cassettes derailleurs are so expensive compared to Shimano stuff. I realize it’s new technology(cost is expensive right now) but I don’t need the new tech right now.

So I thought about going with frame and fork route.......\$2800 for both, which is almost the price of the NX build.

So sell my bike and buy the GX build, or buy the frame and fork and sell my frame and use my parts, or buy the NX and have two bikes?

94. Originally Posted by cunningstunts
not a huge Sram fan either. i would be ordering frame and shock options on one of the new bikes if i go that route.
Yup. For my money an XT 11sp gruppo can be picked up pretty cheaply now, it's good "working class" stuff and great bang-for-buck, I'd rather buy the frame/fork and spend the extra money on wheels. Don't need a 12-speed cassette with a 50t cog that's going to require a second mortgage when it needs to be replaced.

95. Originally Posted by David R
Yup. For my money an XT 11sp gruppo can be picked up pretty cheaply now, it's good "working class" stuff and great bang-for-buck, I'd rather buy the frame/fork and spend the extra money on wheels. Don't need a 12-speed cassette with a 50t cog that's going to require a second mortgage when it needs to be replaced.
This ^

96. The NX cuts to many corners, specifically with suspension. The GX is the sweet spot for me.

97. Originally Posted by ruppguts
The NX cuts to many corners, specifically with suspension. The GX is the sweet spot for me.
Totally agreed.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

98. Originally Posted by David R
Yup. For my money an XT 11sp gruppo can be picked up pretty cheaply now, it's good "working class" stuff and great bang-for-buck, I'd rather buy the frame/fork and spend the extra money on wheels. Don't need a 12-speed cassette with a 50t cog that's going to require a second mortgage when it needs to be replaced.
A GX 11spd set up is marginally more expensive if you shop around but IME better quality than current XT. Agreed GX eagle (or any eagle) gets too \$tratosphere for me. Hope that E13's 9-46 cassette drops in price over coming year, that cassette pretty much cancels the need or usefulness of 12spd options.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 7 First 123456 ... Last

#### Posting Permissions

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