Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8

    2015 Trek Remedy 29 Size

    Hi guys,

    I'm looking to get a 2015 Trek Remedy 9.8 29er this year.
    I was on the trek website comparing some geometries and noticed that the geometry and sizing for the new carbon frames (9.8 & 9.9) are different than the aluminum frame (9). The 2015 Remedy 9 sizing is similar to the 2014 Remedy 9. Did they change the geometry for the carbon Remedy models?

    Thanks in advance.

    Remedy 9 29 - Trek Bicycle

    Remedy 9.8 29 - Trek Bicycle

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tenacious Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by hjjlee View Post
    Did they change the geometry for the carbon Remedy models?
    Yes they did.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    307
    Good catch! Looks like the carbon version is a touch smaller. Looks like the chain stays and all the angles are the same.... Wonder why they did that.
    2014 Trek Remedy 8 29er
    2003 Gary Fisher X-Caliber - Mid rebuild

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    31
    It might be in response to feedback from their enduro team. Justin Leov said that last year his bike was a little too small, but the new sizes gave him the option to size up for longer top tube without having to get on a frame that's too big. Read more here: (the audio interview is in English)

    Trek Remedy 29? carbon ? la bici di Justin Leov | Mountain Bike Web Magazine - TriRideMTB

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8
    Thanks guys for your responses. I wonder why they didn't change the aluminum models? Cost to change the build jigs?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    31
    That'd be my guess, especially since they're only in their second model year. Plus it's not so much that they changed the geometry as much as they changed the sizes on offer. The proportions seem very similar (and the 15.5" and 17.5" are identical). If I buy one this will work out well for me because the 19" in the alu would be a bit too big and the 17.5" a bit too small, but the 18.5" in Carbon should be just right.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8
    19.5" in the carbon is just right for me.

    I've been told that it should be available in early November.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,701
    I just moved from the aluminum version to the carbon Remedy, and did some quick measurements of both.

    As shown on the website, my 21.5 carbon has a longer top tube measurement than the aluminum one, by about 5/8", which really suits my long torso. Heck, I'd take another quarter inch.

    Not shown on the website, but confirmed by mounting the same wheels on both bikes, is that the BB is about 1/4 - 3/8" lower.

    Better cornering, with no increase pedal strikes, as the new rear shock and Pike keep the bike up higher in the travel than the old shock and Fox fork did.

    Really awesome bike!
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    I just moved from the aluminum version to the carbon Remedy, and did some quick measurements of both.

    As shown on the website, my 21.5 carbon has a longer top tube measurement than the aluminum one, by about 5/8", which really suits my long torso. Heck, I'd take another quarter inch.

    Not shown on the website, but confirmed by mounting the same wheels on both bikes, is that the BB is about 1/4 - 3/8" lower.

    Better cornering, with no increase pedal strikes, as the new rear shock and Pike keep the bike up higher in the travel than the old shock and Fox fork did.

    Really awesome bike!
    Thanks Kosmo. I'm assuming your aluminum remedy 29er was a 21" virtual frame?

    Do you mind letting us know how tall you are?

    Thanks again

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,701
    Quote Originally Posted by hjjlee View Post
    Thanks Kosmo. I'm assuming your aluminum remedy 29er was a 21" virtual frame?

    Do you mind letting us know how tall you are?

    Thanks again
    Yes, the aluminum Remedy was a 21" and the carbon version is 21.5"

    I'm 6'2" with a 32" inseam.

    I have been pleasantly surprised by how much the fancy new shock and Pike fork improve things over the previous versions. The bike is really buttoned down in rough stuff and especially at fast multiple hits.
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    859
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Not shown on the website, but confirmed by mounting the same wheels on both bikes, is that the BB is about 1/4 - 3/8" lower.
    How did you mount wheels from the alum remedy 29 to the carbon remedy 29 given that the Carbon Remedy 29 has the "boost 148mm" rear end?

    I'm considering the remedy 29 carbon but don't want to abandon my quiver of wheels.

    Is it simply a matter of swapping abp hardware/dropouts?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,701
    Quote Originally Posted by rfxc View Post
    How did you mount wheels from the alum remedy 29 to the carbon remedy 29 given that the Carbon Remedy 29 has the "boost 148mm" rear end?

    I'm considering the remedy 29 carbon but don't want to abandon my quiver of wheels.

    Is it simply a matter of swapping abp hardware/dropouts?
    I just put them on the bike quickly for measurement purposes. Sadly, you can't put a 142 wheel on the new Remedy Carbon, and I'm having a dickens of a time finding a blingy rear wheel for the thing. SRAM said they had Roam 60s in 148, and cheerfully shipped me a set of 142s. Oops. When contacted again, the different SRAM rep indicated they did not have 148 wheels, and did not know when or if they would.

    I bought this bike IN SPITE of the new rear hub spacing, not in any way BECAUSE of it. I think this idea may fizzle, but who knows?
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    442
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    Yes, the aluminum Remedy was a 21" and the carbon version is 21.5"

    I'm 6'2" with a 32" inseam.

    I have been pleasantly surprised by how much the fancy new shock and Pike fork improve things over the previous versions. The bike is really buttoned down in rough stuff and especially at fast multiple hits.
    How does it compare to DW link bikes?

  14. #14
    Cassoulet forever !
    Reputation: 20.100 FR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,114
    @kosmo :
    Thanks the info, very interesting that they lowered the BB !

    i'm 6'2" also, but with much longuer legs. The aluminium 21" looked spot on, but on carbon i feel between sizes, the 19'5" has a really short seatube...

    Could you post a picture of your bike please ?
    Frenchspeaking 29"ers community site http://VingtNeuf.org

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Rideon View Post
    How does it compare to DW link bikes?
    The new valving keeps it high in the travel, like a DW bike. The difference is that DW uses chain tension for this purpose, while the new Remedy uses shock valving.

    For an endurance racing bike, I like the DW approach since when you really cane the thing, it really firms up.

    For a big squishy bike, I think I prefer this reactive valving, by a bit (it's still early days with this bike).

    I've got one of each, and I'm no longer currently shopping!

    For me, the big question is whether this reactive damping system will hang in there for the long term, or kind of start going away after significant wear and tear.

    Time -- and an upcoming trip to Moab -- will tell!
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Crazy_Canuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    35
    I've been testing bikes all week and test road this machine yesterday. In short this is one of the best bikes I've ever ridden and I'm planning to get one. You can't find a better setup for the price. I'm 6 foot with a 34" inseam and the 19.5 "just" fit. If I was a 1/2" taller or longer anywhere, I'd have to bump up in size. What a machine!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    7
    Greetings guys, thought I'd share some thoughts on the fit/geometry here.
    I'm 6'2" with a 34" inseam. I generally try to ride large/19" bikes as XL's tend make me feel like I'm on a horse. I've been on a Large stumpy 29er for the past year.

    I'm on the upper end of the 19" spectrum in most brands, but I tend to make it work.
    I ordered a 19" remedy 9 29 without being able to sit on it and got really nervous when I reviewed my research to see that it only has a 23.39" effective top tube in the low position, whereas the XL Tallboy LT, another bike I was considering (large Santa Cruz's are tiny and a no go for me) has a 25" ETT.

    I was wondering why the heck they made the ETT so dang short, but the more I ride it and look at the bike, I think they did it on purpose assuming that users would be running dropper posts. If you just look at ETT the Remedy seems really short, but the reach is actually comparable to most other bikes in a 19" frame and is actually a bit longer than on the XL Santa Cruz. The bent seat tube on the the Trek pulls the saddle forward, which is actually really nice when the post is all the way up and I'm climbing. I haven't had to do the scoot up and poke yourself in the ass with the saddle thing on any of the steep climbs I've taken it on so far here in Utah, and when I drop the post to descend or sprint through Single Track it doesn't feel like I'm on a smaller bike anymore, because ETT stops mattering when you aren't in the seat. That's when reach becomes the important measurement.

    I'm showing a lot of seatpost and Part of me still wonders if I should be on the XL, but Effective top tube really doesn't tell the whole story at all on this bike. I think it's intentionally shorter than on their other bikes to make it a better climber.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tenacious Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    500
    I disagree Konrad! I've ridden a 19.5" 26er Remedy since 2009, the fit has always been ok though I'd prefer a bit more length. I rode a 19" Remedy 29er and found it ridiculously short, especially when seated, the tape measure backed me up, it's a short bike. The 21" sorted the length out, but felt like I was riding a gate.
    It looks like the sizing on the carbon models may have sorted this, but I can't drop that amount of money on a bike. I really feel Trek have dropped the ball on the sizing of the aluminium bikes, especially compared to the way most manufacturers are going- Long front centre designed around shorter stay. I'd love another Remedy but the sizing means I need to look elsewhere.

  19. #19
    Cassoulet forever !
    Reputation: 20.100 FR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,114
    I think ETT is completely useless to know how a bike fit.
    Reach and Stack are what matters, along with the EFFECTIVE angle of the seattube (but it is not so easy because it changes with the exposed seatpost, and so it's not so easy to get a correct idea of the value).

    I tested a 21" aluminium last week with a 60mm stem, and found it pretty small. I don't konw if i'd rather be on the 19,5" or 21,5" carbon...
    Frenchspeaking 29"ers community site http://VingtNeuf.org

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    859

    Re: 2015 Trek Remedy 29 Size

    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    The new valving keeps it high in the travel, like a DW bike. The difference is that DW uses chain tension for this purpose, while the new Remedy uses shock valving.

    For an endurance racing bike, I like the DW approach since when you really cane the thing, it really firms up.

    For a big squishy bike, I think I prefer this reactive valving, by a bit (it's still early days with this bike).

    I've got one of each, and I'm no longer currently shopping!

    For me, the big question is whether this reactive damping system will hang in there for the long term, or kind of start going away after significant wear and tear.

    Time -- and an upcoming trip to Moab -- will tell!
    How about an update from that moab trip? How's the re:aktiv?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,701
    Quote Originally Posted by rfxc View Post
    How about an update from that moab trip? How's the re:aktiv?
    Loved it in Moab. It was a great chance to compare, since I was there in April with the aluminum Remedy. The carbon mutes things a bit, which is nice, the longer TT was nice, the Pike was great, and the new reaktiv shock killed it. I like climbing steep stuff, so the fact that the bike stays higher in its rear travel helped there, and it pedals better through chunk in the T setting, even though it feels firmer there when pedaling the smooth trail sections.

    I'd be lying if I said I felt the carbon version was hugely better, but it's definitely significant, and a worthwhile upgrade.

    SRAM *****: So I can't put a 28t front chainring on an X1 crank to help just a wee bit with the fatigue of six days in a row at Moab? What gives with that approach? I never truly NEEDED a 28, but I would have loved to have it, anyway!
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    SRAM *****: So I can't put a 28t front chainring on an X1 crank to help just a wee bit with the fatigue of six days in a row at Moab? What gives with that approach? I never truly NEEDED a 28, but I would have loved to have it, anyway!
    You might look into a spiderless ring if you want to go smaller. Wolf tooth components sells SRAM compatible rings down to 26 teeth. You might have issues if you try to mount something smaller than a 30 without shortening the chain though.

    -- on second thought, the spiderless rings probably wouldn't work well with the altered chainline. Bummer.

    Great to hear the bike killed it in Moab. I think it'll probably be my next bike.

  23. #23
    Cassoulet forever !
    Reputation: 20.100 FR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,114
    Wolthtooth made a special snowflake ring, for fat bikes, with increased chainline.
    This type of flat ring shall be easier to manufacture than the current ones with ofset, so it would be interesting to ask them.

    The other option is just to get the xx1 specific boost148 spider (stock on the 9.9) and mount a 28t xx1 on it.
    Frenchspeaking 29"ers community site http://VingtNeuf.org

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    546
    How do you guys like the 29er Remedy?
    SWING YOUR LEG OVER IT AND PEDAL

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Crazy_Canuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    35
    KonradKlemm, I've got the 19.5 and I'm 6'1" with a 34" inseam and this bike "barely" fits me. I put a 90mm stem on it and the seat is all the way back on the straight dropper post. I knew it was going to be tight, but I definitely works for me now. I really wish they made a 20.5.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2015 Trek Remedy 9.9 29er
    By Carl.D in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-20-2014, 01:53 PM
  2. Max Tire Size for Trek Remedy ?
    By lee36 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-17-2013, 11:22 AM
  3. What size Trek Remedy should I get
    By Ninjaboym5 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-03-2013, 11:31 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-26-2012, 05:19 AM
  5. Trek Remedy 8 2011 small size
    By angelacos in forum Trek
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-17-2011, 12:16 AM

Posting Permissions

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

Can't find it? Just search our site!