Page 1 of 24 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 2312
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion

    The new bike has been announced and I think it fits well into the current Yeti lineup. Obviously some people would have liked the ability to run plus sized rubber but I think Yeti doesn't feel this is the time for that project. Instead we get a nice balance with the spec sheet and Geo numbers as this bike will go H2H with the likes of the Remedy, Jeffsy, HighTower, E29 and many others. The big difference is this bike will be so capable go up as it will coming down with switch infinity.

    The Silver is HOT !
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Drool worthy

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-2016_yeti_sb55c_profile_slv.jpg.1280x720_q65_crop_2x.jpg
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    The Numbers

    160MM FORK
    MD LG XL
    A Seat Tube Length 445 483 521
    B Toptube Length 601 626 652
    C Headtube Angle 66.5 66.5 66.5
    D Eff. Seattube Angle 73.6 73.6 73.6
    E Chainstay Length 437 437 437
    F Wheelbase 1168 1195 1222
    G Estimated BB Height 346 346 346
    H Standover 743 754 767
    I Headtube Length 90 105 121
    J Axle to Crown 567 567 567
    K Offset 51 51 51
    L Stack 610 624 639
    M Reach 421 442 463
    N Front Center 730 758 785
    *All measurements are in millimeters
    SIZING
    MEDIUM 5'7" (170 CM) - 5'11" (180 CM)
    LARGE 5'11" (180 CM) - 6'3" (191 CM)
    X-LARGE 6'3" (185 CM) - 6'6" (198 CM)

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-2016_sb55c_geodiagram.png.600x0_q95_2x.jpg
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  4. #4
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    Yeti Cycles – Bikes – SB5.5c

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-yetisb55cgeo.jpg

    29 only, up to 2.4 rear
    Boost 148
    PF92
    No front derailleur mount
    Frame weight 6.0 lbs



    Stock builds come with Boost 36 Float (only comes in 51mm offset), 45/50mm stem, 785/800mm bar, 30t ring. E1900, 350/XM 481, or 240/Enve M70 HV as stock rims/wheels. Crank length and dropper adjustment range unknown.
    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    494
    The lack of plus sized options is a huge miss IMO. Regardless it looks super capable (after you replace that Ardent in the rear)

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    I've got a E-13 Cassette 9-44T as well as 2 Nox Teocalli hoops in my garage ready for the GX build swap. I think I'd be okay with those wheels instead of the Farlows as I'd like to shave some weight off the 28.6 pound estimated. I'm sure the large frame will come in at 29 lbs.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by wrinklefree View Post
    The lack of plus sized options is a huge miss IMO. Regardless it looks super capable (after you replace that Ardent in the rear)
    It's not speced with the ardent but instead the Aggressor which is supposed to be a really capable rear option. Not many available yet as I've looked on a few sites to buy one to try.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Love the new specs ..2.5 dhf and 2.3 aggressor brings inline wth others. Guess start saving again.. Smh

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    It's not speced with the ardent but instead the Aggressor which is supposed to be a really capable rear option. Not many available yet as I've looked on a few sites to buy one to try.
    Hmm specs say Aggressor but pic says Ardent. Hopefully it's the former.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    I'll be interested to hear what Varaxis thinks about the numbers on paper compared to it's competition from the other manufactures.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Float X and Fox 36 160mm shows what the intentions of this bike are along with the 2.5 DHF up front. All business all the time. I think all the guys that rode the SB95 but were waiting will be ready to drop some coin. Not really an issue running 1x with the new casette options.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    Float X and Fox 36 160mm shows what the intentions of this bike are along with the 2.5 DHF up front. All business all the time. I think all the guys that rode the SB95 but were waiting will be ready to drop some coin. Not really an issue running 1x with the new casette options.
    Yup I was one of those guys and bought a 6c. Now I may have both lol damn you Yeti!!

  13. #13
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    I only correct people that try interpret things on paper incorrectly.

    It's the less tangible stuff I'm mostly interested in, like just how stiff is this 6.0 lb frame. They said the 45c was the stiffest frame they ever made, and this one has added mass, besides from the shock. The numbers seem pretty comparable and I'm not a nerd that stresses over HA and CS length differences and try and attribute them to certain characteristics. I'm more of an "entire picture" kind of thinker, and try and pick it apart from different angles.

    For example, with an EVOL air can on there, it would be pretty hard to bottom it out. But since it has a 348 BB, that might mean you can run DH sag levels in the rear (30-35%), considering it doesn't have as wallowy of a midstroke as other air shocks. The med's 90mm HT and the 66.5 HA gets the stack manageable at 610mm. Wheelbase is kept on par with others. Looks to have the same suspension curve as other SB bikes. I don't expect the Float X to have as good of a pedal platform/lockout as the Float DPS inline, due to the nature of its design.

    Personally, I'm not interested, since I don't ride trails that are rough enough to leave enough left over to feel technical, after this thing eats it all up. Not into removing all the challenge from the trail, just to go fast as if that were my only intention. My E29 leaves plenty left over, since it's not the stiffest feeling frame around; kind of feels more like a 29er version of an Ibis Mojo HD3, a sort of long legged trail bike.

    Hmm, wanted to compare the tube shaping and sizes, but it's extremely hard to get the overlay to show well enough. Definitely curvier, maybe trimmer at the junctions, and a bit bigger dimensions throughout:

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-sb45vsb55overlay.jpg

    Ended up making a video to share. Looks like the only real major changes I see from the side are to the tube shaping is the vertical spar connecting the seat tube and chainstay at the pivot point areas being more rounded, chainstay dropping a little more in relation to the BB.

    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  14. #14
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    Ride reviews starting to roll out from the media:

    Yeti SB5.5c - First Ride - Pinkbike

    http://www.vitalmtb.com/product/guid...5-5c-X01,17297 (got the link from the video below, might not be active yet)


    - looks like it turned the rider into a racer, despite him not knowing where he's going
    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  15. #15
    I <3 dirt
    Reputation: Ilikemtb999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,427
    So happy they didn't give into the marketing hype of mid fat garbage.

  16. #16
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,636
    It's a damn nice looking bike for sure and numbers seem spot on for intended usage, but WTF were Yeti thinking with that BS video of Rude and his team mate carving smooth trails in NZ? Does not show what a 140/160mm bike should be capable off, should have had them doing some trails like the EWS stuff, maybe Top Of the World in Whistler, not smooth trails you could rip on a rigid or HT.

    BTW, great video by Vita,that's the sort of terrain they should have Rude ripping on, that's what really tests the stiffness and capabilities of a bike like this.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,220
    get out your credit card skinny haha. looks awesome but no plus compatibility is lame in my opinion. geometry looks great though. i like that they specced it with a 160 fork for the gnar. mid fat is not garbage either. you have clearly never ridden one

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    It's a damn nice looking bike for sure and numbers seem spot on for intended usage, but WTF were Yeti thinking with that BS video of Rude and his team mate carving smooth trails in NZ? Does not show what a 140/160mm bike should be capable off, should have had them doing some trails like the EWS stuff, maybe Top Of the World in Whistler, not smooth trails you could rip on a rigid or HT.

    BTW, great video by Vita,that's the sort of terrain they should have Rude ripping on, that's what really tests the stiffness and capabilities of a bike like this.
    Its just a video.

  19. #19
    I <3 dirt
    Reputation: Ilikemtb999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by invol2ver View Post
    get out your credit card skinny haha. looks awesome but no plus compatibility is lame in my opinion. geometry looks great though. i like that they specced it with a 160 fork for the gnar. mid fat is not garbage either. you have clearly never ridden one
    It's garbage.

  20. #20
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,173
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    Float X and Fox 36 160mm shows what the intentions of this bike are along with the 2.5 DHF up front. All business all the time. I think all the guys that rode the SB95 but were waiting will be ready to drop some coin. Not really an issue running 1x with the new casette options.
    Yep.

    The interesting thing with the 4.5 and 5.5, is that now there is a clear line to take for what you like ride. The 95 was in the middle (but color be built to cater both) and I think many people were confused at the purpose / intention of the 4.5. Now there is a clear division.

    And notice too, the 5.5 is only Medium / Large / XL.
    --------------------------
    Rokworth.com
    MTB Reviews & Tests - for the love of writing and riding

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Ilikemtb999 View Post
    So happy they didn't give into the marketing hype of mid fat garbage.
    +1, its a race bike,

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    503
    Wow, this is a great release for them... just the type of bike the lineup needed.... really can't wait to ride one sometime.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    525
    Holy smokes this is my next bike (after a DH bike but that's another story). I was worried I'd need to get an SB6 and an SB4.5 but this will likely be the replacement for my SB95. The Hightower looked really tempting (sriraccha red? hell yeah) but now I'm a full on yeti fanboy again. Not worried at all about being "limited" to a 2.4 tire. I've ridden plenty of fat and plus bikes to know I wouldn't want to make a bike like this slower and numb.

    Anyway looks like everything has been upgraded from the 95. A bit more travel, a bit more stable, a bit more maneuverable (10mm shorter cs), a bit lighter, probably quite a bit stiffer, and hopefully pedals as good or better...and of course a bit more expensive. Can't wait till the demos roll around...

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    174
    It would be interesting to hear what type of tracks the EWS team prefers a 29'er on.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by wrinklefree View Post
    The lack of plus sized options is a huge miss IMO. Regardless it looks super capable (after you replace that Ardent in the rear)
    Initially I thought the same, but after thinking about it a while, I think the decision to not include an option for 27+ actually fits their design ethos. Yeti has never been about being all things to all riders. John P has repeatedly said that they have an idea of what they want to build, and if it doesn't fit you, then he's stoked if you find another brand that you love.
    They build bikes that are for racing. They have a laser-focus on building bikes that are stable and maneuverable at high speed. They don't go for for the latest trends like short CS because it might compromise those qualities. Accommodating two wheelsize options because other manufacturers do so might require unacceptable compromises to their core bike characteristics.
    This is not to say SC or Ibis are wishy-washy. If you want to have two bikes in one, that's awesome. Having ridden a regular Pike vs a dual-air Pike for example, I see the compromises necessary to have two travel options in one. I just wouldn't want that.
    I love Yeti sticking to what they know best. It's like they have a clear mission statement and their identity is inexorably tied to it.
    D

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 5power's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    438
    BADASS bike... a wrecking ball.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Does anyone know if it will or won't fit a 27.5 x 2.8 rear tire? I haven't seen any formal mention of it.
    2 wheels

  28. #28
    I <3 dirt
    Reputation: Ilikemtb999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by artnshel View Post
    Does anyone know if it will or won't fit a 27.5 x 2.8 rear tire? I haven't seen any formal mention of it.
    The pink bike article specifically says it.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    445
    Pricing is getting out of hand...$3.5K?

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,948
    "There's Boost spacing front and rear, but this bike is meant specifically for 29" wheels - there's not enough clearance for a 27.5+ tire."
    Pinkbike

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PUSHIND's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,880
    My poor photography skills won't do it justice, but this bike is quite the looker! From the moment it rolled in our door I knew I wanted to immediately ride it based on how fast it looked standing still!

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-sb5.5c.jpg

    Darren

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    Drool worthy

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2016_Yeti_SB55c_Profile_Slv.jpg.1280x720_q65_crop_2x.jpg 
Views:	1109 
Size:	149.1 KB 
ID:	1063430
    Man this color is sexy!

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    194
    Wow!
    Thats the bike i always wanted..
    29", 160mm / 140mm and a great suspension system going uphill.. plus some great aggressive geo for downhill

    Sooner or later.. i'll get a frame and put the (upgraded) Parts from my Stumpjumper over!

    The only problem... i can't decide between those colors!
    Both look great!

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,833
    You can put what you want on the front. No design ethos there.
    A wider rim on the rear will get benefits out of rounded profile tires. E1900 is 25 id. Enve M70 is 30mm id. You could probably go 35mm with the right tire.

    Here's some Plus bike 'marketing hype'. Somehow Wade can ride them.


  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,425
    It's good to see a true SB95c replacement, that bike ripped - up, over and down everything, I hope this bike feels just as urgent. This bike could potentially see me back in the tribe...

  36. #36
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    You can put what you want on the front. No design ethos there.
    A wider rim on the rear will get benefits out of rounded profile tires. E1900 is 25 id. Enve M70 is 30mm id. You could probably go 35mm with the right tire.
    To add to this info, EX481 is 35/30 (Outer/Inner).

    Comparison on the different wheel sizes: The Duel of the Tyre Sizes: 27.5+ vs. 27.5" and 29er Bikes | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine (27.5+ shows instability at high speed)

    Daverino has the same opinion I do. This is the premier 29er Enduro race bike. Don't think anything else on the market will be as race tuned as this, but with that said, a race tune doesn't fit everyone for everyday trail riding, hence why I'm sticking to what I got for the moment unless I run into a deal that I can't pass up.
    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by artnshel View Post
    Does anyone know if it will or won't fit a 27.5 x 2.8 rear tire? I haven't seen any formal mention of it.
    Also, in Yeti's FAQ section for this bike, it states that the 5.5 will not be plus compatible.

    All Yeti's are "race bred", so I doubt they'll do a plus bike anytime soon, if ever--unless their riders end up winning on plus bikes I guess.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sml-2727's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,347
    Oh well looks like im going with a Mojo 3.
    2016 Salsa Bucksaw
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower CC
    2016 GT Grade Carbon

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,833
    The point of Plus capability isn't that you have to run them. It's that you can run them. If your terrain warrants that tuning choice. Ride Bookwus on Fromme like in the video and they work. If I had access that a trail like that my bike choice would be influenced. But I'd still want my 29 wheel/tire choice for higher speed stuff. Like two bikes for the price of an extra wheelset.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Well Ibis did add the rear triangle for the HD3 just recently ass an upgrade so maybe it'll be an option in the future if enough people show the interest.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    I already have a Large Silver Bullet Gx build on preorder with BC/CC and my guy tells me 5/20 is due date. I'll have the Nox Teo's built up with hope pro 4's and I'll swap the gx cassette to my e-13 9-44t. then just handlebar and stem and I'm set.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    57
    Awesome. I look forward to reading your experience with it and how it compares with the rest of your Yeti quiver.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by shoopow View Post
    Awesome. I look forward to reading your experience with it and how it compares with the rest of your Yeti quiver.
    I gave up gambling years ago and my kids are in college so with my main job in life accomplished this has become my addiction. Not a bad addiction to have as I'll hopefully stay fit and smile wide. I just decided to add Scotland to my trip list in July so the question will be what bike to rule the highlands ?
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by PUSHIND View Post
    My poor photography skills won't do it justice, but this bike is quite the looker! From the moment it rolled in our door I knew I wanted to immediately ride it based on how fast it looked standing still!

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SB5.5c.jpg 
Views:	7007 
Size:	281.9 KB 
ID:	1063515

    Darren
    Darren or anyone really what stroke shock does it use? Just rented a Hightower and I'm using a lot of pressure to hold up my big ass on the little 2" stroke shock.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,220
    great response. it's garbage. you must be slower then maple syrup. you can go faster on a good plus set up then any 29 on the same bike. the only reason the ews guys don't run them yet is puncture resistance plain and simple. the tires just haven't been developed enough. on a 40mm rim with a 2.8 tire the speed you can carry over anything is actually quite hilarious. but back on topic the 5.5 looks sick. skinny your going to love it

  46. #46
    I <3 dirt
    Reputation: Ilikemtb999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by invol2ver View Post
    great response. it's garbage. you must be slower then maple syrup. you can go faster on a good plus set up then any 29 on the same bike. the only reason the ews guys don't run them yet is puncture resistance plain and simple. the tires just haven't been developed enough. on a 40mm rim with a 2.8 tire the speed you can carry over anything is actually quite hilarious. but back on topic the 5.5 looks sick. skinny your going to love it
    It's just a repeat of 10-12 years ago, the only difference is the wheel diameters are bigger (so instead of a 24x3.0 tire on a 26 bike it's a 27.5x3.0 on a 29) and it didn't work then. To make a tire that can actually go fast, it's going to be way too heavy. Maybe your terrain is smooth and mellow but here in Colorado there are plenty of jagged rocks. Try riding apex (yeti's lunch ride trail) and tell me how well your plus size tires worked as you walk it out.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    invol2ver, I'm loving the rock razor paired up with the hans on the 4.5 thanks again for the advice on the tire. Now if they hold up in our elements i'll be stoked.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    178
    [QUOTE=invol2ver;12578068]great response. it's garbage. you must be slower then maple syrup. you can go faster on a good plus set up then any 29 on the same bike. the only reason the ews guys don't run them yet is puncture resistance plain and simple. the tires just haven't been developed enough. on a 40mm rim with a 2.8 tire the speed you can carry over anything is actually quite hilarious. but back on topic the 5.5 looks sick. skinny your going to love it[/I feel like the speed you can carry thru stuff has less to do with tire size and more to do with suspension setup and quality of travel.
    I think the reason EWS riders aren't using plus-sized wheels is more that under the hard lateral loads that they create, there's more deformation of the tire (especially at the lower pressures you'd run to get the benefits of bigger tires) that leads to unpredictable grip and handling. In order to combat this, you'd need stiffer sidewalls, but then tire weight would go way up.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    77
    Edited because the ****ing shitty insurance company is taking every word on the forum said to weasel out of a claim.

    DO NOT BUY FROM BIKMO or HISCOX UNDERWRITERS; THEY'RE DISHONEST, LYING AND DEVIOUS INSURERS WHO WILL TAKE YOUR MONEY AND DECIDE AFTER 6 MONTHS OF A CLAIM NOT TO PAY OUT! SCUMBAGS!!
    Last edited by properbikegeek; 03-20-2017 at 11:38 AM.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,220
    LOL ... i live in southern utah. my home trails are moab and st. george. the plus tires make the biggest difference in rough jagged terrain. the maxxis tires have not been great for puncture resistance but the specialized tires and schwalbes have been good so far. you just have to get the pressure right. yeah skinny the schwalbe snake skins have been holding up better then the maxxis exo. by the way apex trail is fun but please on the rough trail speak. it's fine that you think plus tires suck but don't be one of the evil forumers and make comments like that on things you have never tried

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Quote Originally Posted by motoguru2007 View Post
    Pricing is getting out of hand...$3.5K?
    Have you seen frame only price for new intense spider?

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Man should I sell the 6c for this lol

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by yeti575inCA View Post
    Man should I sell the 6c for this lol
    If your dead set on a 29'er then this is the bike for you. I think if you could get 5k for your 6c or whatever you deem fair market value then aim for the 5.5 Gx build. You'd break even and have the 29'er you wanted all along that they finally released. I assume your 6c is a 2016 model ? It should get top dollar.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    2015 and I loved my sb95c..I bought the 6c because the 4.5 wasn't the 5.5...ughh

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    I don't have to tell you what a great bike the 6c is because you own one but you can soon get the bike you always wanted Yeti to design. Demo the 5.5 if you can just to be sure and then make your decision.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    I don't have to tell you what a great bike the 6c is because you own one but you can soon get the bike you always wanted Yeti to design. Demo the 5.5 if you can just to be sure and then make your decision.
    Yea I will be ar sea otter and hope to see one and end of the month lbs has a yeti demo and hope they have a XL 5.5 to try...

    Also I noticed a change from previous yetis is the shorter headtube..

  57. #57
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    Quote Originally Posted by yeti575inCA View Post
    Man should I sell the 6c for this lol
    It's pretty much a 6c with 29er wheels. Depends on how raw your trails are, and how much you want it steamrolled. If your trails have a lot of stop and go action (braking, followed by sharp accelerating), stick to the smaller wheels. If it's mostly long distance cruising or has plenty of flow, with minimal brake action (unless it's just to scrub speed, since you're going so f'ing fast and risk going off the side of the trail/cliff), go 29er. Either way, both the 6c and 5.5c threaten KOMs and threaten losing slower riding buddies.
    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  58. #58
    dmo
    dmo is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    571
    I'm glad I got a SB95C when I did. I ride a small and the med 5.5 wouldn't fit me well. I want to stick with 29ers so I'll keep the SB95C. Still an awesome bike

    Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    77
    Edited because the ****ing shitty insurance company is taking every word on the forum said to weasel out of a claim.

    DO NOT BUY FROM BIKMO or HISCOX UNDERWRITERS; THEY'RE DISHONEST, LYING AND DEVIOUS INSURERS WHO WILL TAKE YOUR MONEY AND DECIDE AFTER 6 MONTHS OF A CLAIM NOT TO PAY OUT! SCUMBAGS!!
    Last edited by properbikegeek; 03-20-2017 at 11:39 AM.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    525
    Yeti said they ran their original SI pivot prototype for 3 years with zero maintenance. Other protos were submerged in various types of mud and cycled for weeks at a time. Its been out for almost 3 years now with surprisingly few problems (that I've seen posted on the internets). The worst I've seen was a pic of some wear on the kashima coating. And doesn't everyone use enduro bearings these days?

    Anyway, had a great ride on my 95 last night but man I want this bike. Good thing my 95 is inanimate and won't get jealous...

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by invol2ver View Post
    great response. it's garbage. you must be slower then maple syrup. you can go faster on a good plus set up then any 29 on the same bike. the only reason the ews guys don't run them yet is puncture resistance plain and simple. the tires just haven't been developed enough. on a 40mm rim with a 2.8 tire the speed you can carry over anything is actually quite hilarious. but back on topic the 5.5 looks sick. skinny your going to love it
    Plus tires are great in slow/tight/techy terrain, but there is NO chance EWS riders will be on them any time soon.. maybe a 2.6 tire in the future. Read Seb Kemps review on NSMb or Enduro-mtb's review on plus bikes, they both point out that plus wheels are terrifying at high speeds and lack the precision needed for pinpoint line alterations... there is market for plus bikes, yeti does not cater to that market. end of story

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    27

    SI Maintanance

    [QUOTE=Terp;12578710]Yeti said they ran their original SI pivot prototype for 3 years with zero maintenance. Other protos were submerged in various types of mud and cycled for weeks at a time. Its been out for almost 3 years now with surprisingly few problems (that I've seen posted on the internets). The worst I've seen was a pic of some wear on the kashima coating. And doesn't everyone use enduro bearings these days?



    I've had great luck with the SI system, both on mine and customer bikes.. Never seen a problem yet.. I did see that article (think it was Enduro mag ? they had wear on the sliders, however i doubt it would effect the ride at all)

    My bike developed a rough running Enduro bearing on the side of the SI system but thats a quick fix.. and the switch Infinity itself has had zero problems.
    I lubed it once last year, and rode 5-6 days a week in everything from high desert to rainy east coast, completely disassembled this winter and its good as new !

    Honestly concerns about the Switch Infinity System should NOT keep anyone off one of these bikes... The suspension system is simply amazing, and requires very little maintanance

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by curbhuck View Post
    Plus tires are great in slow/tight/techy terrain, but there is NO chance EWS riders will be on them any time soon.. maybe a 2.6 tire in the future. Read Seb Kemps review on NSMb or Enduro-mtb's review on plus bikes, they both point out that plus wheels are terrifying at high speeds and lack the precision needed for pinpoint line alterations... there is market for plus bikes, yeti does not cater to that market. end of story
    The "Yeti only makes bikes for racers" Kool-Aid is the best Kool-Aid of all. The market Yeti caters to is all of the upper middle class weekend warriors who like to imagine they could race in an EWS. I promise that if enough of that demo starts wanting 27.5+ bikes, they'll make one.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    The "Yeti only makes bikes for racers" Kool-Aid is the best Kool-Aid of all. The market Yeti caters to is all of the upper middle class weekend warriors who like to imagine they could race in an EWS. I promise that if enough of that demo starts wanting 27.5+ bikes, they'll make one.
    As opposed to the "you need another new bike to run these fragile/underdeveloped tires" Kool Aid? Buying a plus bike right now is like buying the first gen 650b bikes that were basically hastily slapped together stop-gaps (including the SB75) I'll take racing kool-aid over guinea-pigging unproven technology all day long.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    The market Yeti caters to is all of the upper middle class weekend warriors who like to imagine they could race in an EWS.
    Heh, maybe so. I fit that description for generous definitions of upper middle class. If you genuinely have a problem with Yeti targeting the high end market it must mean the bike you ride is from the brand that caters to "THE REAL MTB RIDERS" that's not in it for the money and only cares about building good bikes and is run by the last honest bike builder in the country...or something.

    Any you know what? Good for you! Go ride your awesome plus bike from TruthMTB. Hell, tell us what you like about it. Post cool ride pics. I just can't stand people using the "Kool Aid" meme like Yeti is trying to pull a fast one on their fans. You know what? Most of us fanboys have ridden bikes from many other brands...and probably own some....and still chose to spend more money on Yetis!

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Terp View Post
    Heh, maybe so. I fit that description for generous definitions of upper middle class. If you genuinely have a problem with Yeti targeting the high end market it must mean the bike you ride is from the brand that caters to "THE REAL MTB RIDERS" that's not in it for the money and only cares about building good bikes and is run by the last honest bike builder in the country...or something.

    Any you know what? Good for you! Go ride your awesome plus bike from TruthMTB. Hell, tell us what you like about it. Post cool ride pics. I just can't stand people using the "Kool Aid" meme like Yeti is trying to pull a fast one on their fans. You know what? Most of us fanboys have ridden bikes from many other brands...and probably own some....and still chose to spend more money on Yetis!
    My point has nothing to do with the price of the bikes, although they are up there. I'm an upper-middle-class weekend warrior myself, and not very fast. I was just pointing out that a company that only made bikes for racers, or riders with the skill to be racers, would go out of business immediately. Yeti makes bikes for people who want to own a bike that they think is made for racers. That's fine, they are great bikes. But Yeti is a company, and they make bikes to sell bikes.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    My point has nothing to do with the price of the bikes, although they are up there. I'm an upper-middle-class weekend warrior myself, and not very fast. I was just pointing out that a company that only made bikes for racers, or riders with the skill to be racers, would go out of business immediately. Yeti makes bikes for people who want to own a bike that they think is made for racers. That's fine, they are great bikes. But Yeti is a company, and they make bikes to sell bikes.
    As opposed to Santa Cruz ? Who do they make bikes for ? Devinci ? Stupid statement to make....end of story.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    As opposed to Santa Cruz ? Who do they make bikes for ? Devinci ? Stupid statement to make....end of story.
    At no point did I say that Yeti was somehow worse than other companies in this regard. It's the fanboys that keep doing that. My point is that all of these companies make high performance mountain bikes designed to be ridden at speed on technical trails and pedal efficiently. That Yeti has some kind of "race focused" approach to this is 100% marketing BS, but it's apparently really effective marketing BS. If you really think this bike design is "all about racing" I've got bad news for you: long travel 29ers will probably always be a minor situational niche in enduro racing.

    They make amazing trail bikes, though, which is why you should buy one.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,082
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    The "Yeti only makes bikes for racers" Kool-Aid is the best Kool-Aid of all. The market Yeti caters to is all of the upper middle class weekend warriors who like to imagine they could race in an EWS. I promise that if enough of that demo starts wanting 27.5+ bikes, they'll make one.

    My point has nothing to do with the price of the bikes, although they are up there. I'm an upper-middle-class weekend warrior myself, and not very fast. I was just pointing out that a company that only made bikes for racers, or riders with the skill to be racers, would go out of business immediately. Yeti makes bikes for people who want to own a bike that they think is made for racers. That's fine, they are great bikes. But Yeti is a company, and they make bikes to sell bikes.
    And the dudes who actually kill it racing enduro seem to be on sub $3K alloy bikes from Specialized, Giant and Trek and too young in their careers to be able to afford $6K+ carbon wonder bikes unless they have some sort of sponsorship.

  70. #70
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,755
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    I gave up gambling years ago and my kids are in college so with my main job in life accomplished this has become my addiction. Not a bad addiction to have as I'll hopefully stay fit and smile wide. I just decided to add Scotland to my trip list in July so the question will be what bike to rule the highlands ?
    If there can only be one? 5.5c is going to be in the running.

  71. #71
    One Cog Short
    Reputation: PricklyPete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    86
    The bike I have been waiting for to replace my 95. Probably still a year out on a new bike purchase, but this is definitely at the top of the demo schedule.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    525
    Yeah I'm looking at a year from now as well.

    In the mean time...

    To John P, any chance of a matte turquoise color option someday?

  73. #73
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    774
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Yeti makes bikes for people who want to own a bike that they think is made for racers.
    I don't believe that this statement has any truth to it.
    Trek Fuel EX 9.8

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Yeti makes Bad Ass bikes that are capable of tackling any trail, drop, switchback, climb, decent, berm, sweeper, off camber drop, Rooted or rutted, rocky or smooth place you could ever ride a bike and they do it with style and class. Kool-Aid was cool like 20 years ago so instead of some people talking smack about Fanboy's or Kool-Aid drinkers either buy a Yeti or buy something else.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  75. #75
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,755
    The whole concept is 'make a bike that races well', because it'll be a proven platform which can be predictable, stable, and controllable. It works, and it not unique to just one company.

    I'm still amused to think about the reactions I got at a Yeti demo day a six weeks back - I basically asked about how similar the 4.5c is to the 5.5c. Good deadpan response (for the most part), but the 5.5c fills the needed spot in the lineup so well, it's hard to avoid. Given the spec options available, I suspect the professional journo circuit will all have this bike towards the top of their lists in 'best bike period', but also be complaining a little bit about the accessibility to get into one (and that direct sales options can bring a nearly identical spec sheet to the table for a lot less). I suspect this is a bike for people that won't be comparison shopping based on small details of the spec sheet.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    I don't believe that this statement has any truth to it.
    That is fair enough. I don't mean to suggest these are the only people that ride Yeti bikes, just that there's a certain... brand enthusiasm for Yeti that is often expressed in terms that are basically meaningless and involve an appeal to racing or "going really fast." Actual quote from this thread: "They build bikes that are for racing. They have a laser-focus on building bikes that are stable and maneuverable at high speed. They don't go for for the latest trends like short CS because it might compromise those qualities." You'll also find in this thread comments about how the 5.5c is the "most race-tuned 29er" out there. Or that 27.5+ is unacceptable for racing, which is why Yeti doesn't make a bike for it. Kool-Aid is the only way to describe that.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    178

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    That is fair enough. I don't mean to suggest these are the only people that ride Yeti bikes, just that there's a certain... brand enthusiasm for Yeti that is often expressed in terms that are basically meaningless and involve an appeal to racing or "going really fast." Actual quote from this thread: "They build bikes that are for racing. They have a laser-focus on building bikes that are stable and maneuverable at high speed. They don't go for for the latest trends like short CS because it might compromise those qualities." You'll also find in this thread comments about how the 5.5c is the "most race-tuned 29er" out there. Or that 27.5+ is unacceptable for racing, which is why Yeti doesn't make a bike for it. Kool-Aid is the only way to describe that.
    I'm as cynical a person as you'll find, so I feel like I need to justify my quote

    I think we can all agree that bike design is an exercise in compromises. I don't think it's kool aid to say that Yeti's designs lean towards the less-poppy, more stable end of the spectrum. My SB5 has 442mm chainstays and a long wheelbase. It's harder to manual than other bikes of its ilk. Compared to the Thunderbolt, 5010, Mach 4c, and Ripley V1 that I test rode, it was much more stable at speed. Definitely less playful. My conclusion is that the design team made these choices knowing it would be faster down a hill for someone really trying. Somewhere I read that Jared Graves had design input, thus the geo numbers? (Certainly could be marketing hype, I know...)
    I'm not ignorant to the old marketing adage, "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" or other marketing tropes. I like Patagonia, for example, because they are mindful of the conditions their workers work in. They certainly tout it in their marketing and have every right to. It appeals to me, and I feel good about buying their stuff if I can afford it.
    I feel good about my Yeti because it rides like a dream. I like that EWS podiums have been made on the same frame. Am I a good rider? Not really. Did I fall for some marketing hype? Maybe, but I like to think that I'm not an unmitigated fanboy, despite feeling good about my purchase.
    D

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Daverino View Post
    I'm as cynical a person as you'll find, so I feel like I need to justify my quote

    I think we can all agree that bike design is an exercise in compromises. I don't think it's kool aid to say that Yeti's designs lean towards the less-poppy, more stable end of the spectrum. My SB5 has 442mm chainstays and a long wheelbase. It's harder to manual than other bikes of its ilk. Compared to the Thunderbolt, 5010, Mach 4c, and Ripley V1 that I test rode, it was much more stable at speed. Definitely less playful. My conclusion is that the design team made these choices knowing it would be faster down a hill for someone really trying. Somewhere I read that Jared Graves had design input, thus the geo numbers? (Certainly could be marketing hype, I know...)
    I'm not ignorant to the old marketing adage, "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" or other marketing tropes. I like Patagonia, for example, because they are mindful of the conditions their workers work in. They certainly tout it in their marketing and have every right to. It appeals to me, and I feel good about buying their stuff if I can afford it.
    I feel good about my Yeti because it rides like a dream. I like that EWS podiums have been made on the same frame. Am I a good rider? Not really. Did I fall for some marketing hype? Maybe, but I like to think that I'm not an unmitigated fanboy, despite feeling good about my purchase.
    Sorry to single you out. I think that's a pretty balanced take, in that it actually acknowledges the drawbacks inherent in design.

    (I'm a huge Patagonia fan myself, for the exact reasons you describe. People make fun of me on days I end up wearing the hat, down jacket, and t-shirt all at once. I'm not opposed to brand loyalty. I'm just opposed to buying in too strongly to marketing hype that has no objective referent.)

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    That is fair enough. I don't mean to suggest these are the only people that ride Yeti bikes, just that there's a certain... brand enthusiasm for Yeti that is often expressed in terms that are basically meaningless and involve an appeal to racing or "going really fast." Actual quote from this thread: "They build bikes that are for racing. They have a laser-focus on building bikes that are stable and maneuverable at high speed. They don't go for for the latest trends like short CS because it might compromise those qualities." You'll also find in this thread comments about how the 5.5c is the "most race-tuned 29er" out there. Or that 27.5+ is unacceptable for racing, which is why Yeti doesn't make a bike for it. Kool-Aid is the only way to describe that.
    You spend your time in the Yeti forum disecting peoples past posts without ever riding or owning one of their bikes. I'll tell you what, I don't spend my day in the Santa Cruz forum or Evil forum anymore because I respect those owners or prospective owners who want information. Your opinion is noted because you can't leave things alone and you continue to take away from this thread which is about information on this model and it's capabilities and ride reports.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Sorry to single you out. I think that's a pretty balanced take, in that it actually acknowledges the drawbacks inherent in design.

    (I'm a huge Patagonia fan myself, for the exact reasons you describe. People make fun of me on days I end up wearing the hat, down jacket, and t-shirt all at once. I'm not opposed to brand loyalty. I'm just opposed to buying in too strongly to marketing hype that has no objective referent.)
    Lol, so you think that the drawback in the design of the Switch Infinity bikes is that they are long and stable ? Wow man, enjoy your bike because you've got it all figured out.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chicane32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    That is fair enough. I don't mean to suggest these are the only people that ride Yeti bikes, just that there's a certain... brand enthusiasm for Yeti that is often expressed in terms that are basically meaningless and involve an appeal to racing or "going really fast." Actual quote from this thread: "They build bikes that are for racing. They have a laser-focus on building bikes that are stable and maneuverable at high speed. They don't go for for the latest trends like short CS because it might compromise those qualities." You'll also find in this thread comments about how the 5.5c is the "most race-tuned 29er" out there. Or that 27.5+ is unacceptable for racing, which is why Yeti doesn't make a bike for it. Kool-Aid is the only way to describe that.
    We're talking about a mountain bike here and not a big wheel aren't we. A bike you ride on the edge, you know, one small mistake and you may end up the ER, or dead. If a bike isn't built good enough for racing, then I sure the hell wouldn't want to ride it on a trail that may cost me my life. Don't most bike companies build bikes with the input from their riders and bikes they ride themselves. Then in this case, most bike companies build bikes for racing. After all, we are talking about a mountain bike, wheather you ride XC or like to bomb gnarly downhill.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicane32 View Post
    We're talking about a mountain bike here and not a big wheel aren't we. A bike you ride on the edge, you know, one small mistake and you may end up the ER, or dead. If a bike isn't built good enough for racing, then I sure the hell wouldn't want to ride it on a trail that may cost me my life. Don't most bike companies build bikes with the input from their riders and bikes they ride themselves. Then in this case, most bike companies build bikes for racing. After all, we are talking about a mountain bike, wheather you ride XC or like to bomb gnarly downhill.
    To an extent, yes, and that's my point. Racing is a useful context to really test designs. But I'd be willing to bet most recreational mountain bikers would actually hate the feel of Jared Graves's (or your other favorite racer's) suspension set up, tire pressure, etc. Lots of things that people do to race are not in fact the ideal solution for most mountain bikers.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    You spend your time in the Yeti forum disecting peoples past posts without ever riding or owning one of their bikes. I'll tell you what, I don't spend my day in the Santa Cruz forum or Evil forum anymore because I respect those owners or prospective owners who want information. Your opinion is noted because you can't leave things alone and you continue to take away from this thread which is about information on this model and it's capabilities and ride reports.
    How many posts in this thread are reporting on the capabilities of this bike after having ridden one? Is there even a single sentence? I'm just commenting on the fact that we're already hearing how "race tuned" and "race ready" it is WHEN NO ONE HAS EVEN RIDDEN IT. By all means PLEASE post some ride reports.

    For what it's worth, this bike is 100% on my radar, in the top 3 or maybe even 2, for my next bike purchase, which will take place this year.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    Lol, so you think that the drawback in the design of the Switch Infinity bikes is that they are long and stable ? Wow man, enjoy your bike because you've got it all figured out.
    He said the bikes are harder to manual and less playful. That's a well known drawback of longer bikes (the plus being that they can be more stable at speed (in a straight line).

    And I should also note, the 5.5c has a pretty short wheelbase and rear center, all things considered. Funny how that works. (Those are two important qualities to me in a long travel 29er trail bike.)

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinnybex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    How many posts in this thread are reporting on the capabilities of this bike after having ridden one? Is there even a single sentence?
    I've spent enough time responding to you and your thoughts. Thanks for the input you've given and maybe we will have another conversation on another topic that we don't disagree on. Take care on enjoy riding as thats the point of all this being fun and our passion.
    16' SB6c Trail Light
    16' SB6c Shock and Awe
    16' SB5.5c Silver
    16' SB4.5c Turquoise
    16' ASRc Turquoise
    14' ARCc Raw

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by skinnybex View Post
    I've spent enough time responding to you and your thoughts. Thanks for the input you've given and maybe we will have another conversation on another topic that we don't disagree on. Take care on enjoy riding as thats the point of all this being fun and our passion.
    I can always agree to that!

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chicane32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    To an extent, yes, and that's my point. Racing is a useful context to really test designs. But I'd be willing to bet most recreational mountain bikers would actually hate the feel of Jared Graves's (or your other favorite racer's) suspension set up, tire pressure, etc. Lots of things that people do to race are not in fact the ideal solution for most mountain bikers.
    Don't really get your point about having to mimic a racers setup just because Yeti speaks the truth about what they build their bikes after, or for. We all know what works for someone else, may not work for you. Would it really make a difference, if Yeti stated that their bikes are built for recreation, instead? Would people feel differently about wanting to buy a Yeti.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    hillharman is a good dude, he's not trying to be difficult. I get his point, but Yeti's have always demanded a premium... Justifiably or not.



    Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicane32 View Post
    Don't really get your point about having to mimic a racers setup just because Yeti speaks the truth about what they build their bikes after, or for. We all know what works for someone else, may not work for you. Would it really make a difference, if Yeti stated that their bikes are built for recreation, instead? Would people feel differently about wanting to buy a Yeti.
    We all want to buy a bike that makes us feel like a better rider, whether it's true in reality or not. Otherwise these bike/component companies wouldn't waste their time and money on "sick edits" with pro talent.

    I don't see anything wrong with it personally.

    Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicane32 View Post
    Don't really get your point about having to mimic a racers setup just because Yeti speaks the truth about what they build their bikes after, or for. We all know what works for someone else, may not work for you. Would it really make a difference, if Yeti stated that their bikes are built for recreation, instead? Would people feel differently about wanting to buy a Yeti.
    I actually don't think the current iteration of Yeti is actually selling the racing thing all that hard. Most of their marketing is all about designing bikes they'd like to ride, bikes that take in to account feedback from riders, etc. It's mostly just the kind of thing you hear from the hardcore fans (which is a holdover from an older Yeti brand identity, I guess).

    An example of what I'm talking about is how you'd see people explaining the somewhat longish chainstay lengths on some Yeti bikes (SB-5c is a good example) as this intentional thing that's all about the "Yeti feel" and "long low and slack" and "racing" etc. etc. You'll notice that the 5.5c has the same chain stay length as the 4.5c, which is unusual, and an entirely salutary thing. In fact, the 5.5c actually has shorter chain stays than the 5c, which has smaller wheels and less travel! Is one of those good for enduro racing and the other isn't? Has this somehow compromised the "race-ready" philosophy of Yeti bikes? No. The fact that the SB-5c has longish chain stays had nothing to do with racing. Chainstay length on a full suspension bike is almost always an engineering problem, and if someone trying to sell you a bike tells you otherwise, you shouldn't believe them. With multiple iterations of the SI platform, they are probably just getting better at keeping everything tight in there, along with things like Boost, so they chainstays are getting shorter. Just like with VPP3, the latest DW-Link, etc. Sure, at some point, chainstays can be too short, but it's actually very difficult to achieve that on a full suspension bike.

    So to clarify, I think the 5.5c geo looks pretty close to dead-on, and the SI platform seems great, but the idea that Yeti is "bucking the short chainstay trend" is total BS. The 5.5c has very short chainstays for what it is, and much shorter than you would predict based on the geometry of bikes like the 5c and 6c. Just for kicks, if you look at a picture of the 5.5c and the 6c, you'll notice that the SI mechanism is moved significantly forward on the 5.5c relative to the bottom bracket.

    Hopefully this is all sufficiently on topic, since as I've said, I'm actually very interested in this bike, but for reasons that actually detract from what I've been told Yeti is all about, namely, really long wheelbases and long chainstays :P

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    Just for kicks, if you look at a picture of the 5.5c and the 6c, you'll notice that the SI mechanism is moved significantly forward on the 5.5c relative to the bottom bracket.
    On that note, compare it to the SB5. Look how much the angle of the switch stanchions has changed. And also the SI "cage". The 5 has a huge chunk of carbon over the top of it whereas the 5.5's is much smaller. I'm guessing the SB5c is still selling well enough as is that Yeti doesn't think it needs an update even so the SB6 already had one.

    The pivot on the 5.5 also seems to sit higher in on the stanchion than any of the other bikes. I wonder if there is room for a slightly longer (metric?!) shock that will bump the travel up to a nice round 152.4mm (aka 6"). Also its hard to tell from the website but it seems like the 5.5 has the most vertical wheel path out of all the SI bikes.

    I'm already 100% sold on the bike but hopefully someone can chime in and tell me that a vertical wheel path is desirable for some reason that I'll never have the skill to fully appreciate.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    232

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion

    This is looking like it'll probably be my next bike, but since I'm not in a rush, when might we start seeing some of the new offerings on stock builds from SRAM (Eagle 12spd), Fox (new 34's released the other day), Guide (new caliper), etc?

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,745
    Saw them at Sea Otter today and they are sweet in person. FYI silver is darker than website shows. Cody was riding his and I think he is racing it in DH this weekend and guys at Yeti say Ritchie may use it for next EWS!!

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-2016-04-15-15.55.38-1.jpg

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-2016-04-15-15.55.42.jpg

    Yeti SB 5.5c discussion-2016-04-15-15.57.44.jpg

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    194
    That silver looks pretty nice! Love that is is darker than on the website.. thanks for the pics!
    Still can't decide.. lol :-)

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    32
    Yeah, this bike is making my decision on how to replace my '13 SB95a a little tricky. I'm probably better at XC-flowy/grunting out climbs than I am at sending it on technical terrain, but given that I live in the Tetons and try get to Hurricane at least once a year I do end up riding pretty chunky, if not techy, trails somewhat regularly.

    I wouldn't want the 4.5c to bottom out or feel under-gunned when I'm nuking through rocky sections, and similarly would hate to feel like the 5.5c was wallowy or slowing me down too much on climbs just to give me downhill capabilities over the 4.5c that I rarely tap into...not a bad problem to have I guess. I'm going to get on a 4.5c demo down in St. George weekend after next, and was contemplating pulling the trigger shortly afterwards if that ride went well - the 5.5c is going to have me thinking a lot.

    Bottom line: at release, I couldn't figure out why Yeti would have decreased the 95s travel. I realized I probably wasn't exactly pushing the 95s limits to the max anyways, talked myself into the 4.5 all winter, and was one demo ride away from dropping in. Now the big ticket gear merry go round gets turned on again.

    The 95a was such a game-changer for my riding that I'm having a tough time figuring out where on the curve I sit. Will the 4.5 maintain all the capability of the 95 but let me crush the XC stuff even harder, or will it make some of the chunk I'm used to cleaning without a thought on the 95a back to being a challenge? I suppose I could hold off on the purchase until I get a chance to ride the 5.5, but I wouldn't bet on my local Yeti shop getting a demo so I might have to rally somewhere...which with Kid #1 due in June might be a little tricky.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    120
    I would say if you were on a stock 95c and thought it was enough bike then you will be fine on the 4.5. I have been blown away by how capable the 4.5 is. Don't let the 115mm travel fool you, it is high quality travel you want - not just more travel. I was able to set a top time on Captain Ahab gnar segment with my 4.5c so I would say it is enough bike. I am going to try a float x on my 4.5c today to see how it compares. So far I started with the xc tune, now have the trail tune and will see how a float x helps as I had a float x on my 95c and it really helped in rougher terrain and long descents.

    The 5.5 looks rad and I will probably build one up but it will be to replace my 6c as I like 29ers. I think the 5.5c will be like the 6c in that it is a great daily driver but really not that fun to ride unless it is steep terrain.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    32
    Right on Tinsley1, appreciate the direct feedback and reply. I'm definitely leaning towards agreeing with you - I've never really even ridden any beefier bike than the 95, and would assume it was plenty of bike for the majority of my riding. I'm thinking the trail tune would be the call. Definitely looking forward to riding the new Fox stuff, heard great things and wasn't super impressed with the '13 Float.

    Anyone been on any recent generation Talas or have an idea what the weight penalty is? (sorry for minor thread hijack, i know this isn't 5.5c talk)

  98. #98
    EXW
    EXW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityridesitall View Post
    Right on Tinsley1, appreciate the direct feedback and reply. I'm definitely leaning towards agreeing with you - I've never really even ridden any beefier bike than the 95, and would assume it was plenty of bike for the majority of my riding. I'm thinking the trail tune would be the call. Definitely looking forward to riding the new Fox stuff, heard great things and wasn't super impressed with the '13 Float.

    Anyone been on any recent generation Talas or have an idea what the weight penalty is? (sorry for minor thread hijack, i know this isn't 5.5c talk)
    I obviously can't speak to the 5.5c but recently went from a 95c to a 4.5c and can offer some observations. I ride steep, rocky trails and am concerned about climbing as much as descending. The 4.5c does both better than my 95c. I have the trail tune and am using all of the suspension but it never feels like I'm bottoming out or need more. However, I'm also not going off 4' drops at 25mph either.

    For me, the additional 1" of travel is not worth the extra 2lbs, but that is based on how I ride. I would guess, that just like the 4.5c is a better descender than the 95c with 0.5" less travel, the 5.5c will likewise be a better climber even with the added 0.5".

    Good luck, it is a fun decision to make.

  99. #99
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    hillharman is a good dude, he's not trying to be difficult. I get his point, but Yeti's have always demanded a premium... Justifiably or not.
    I see it as hillharman just having a misunderstanding that went a bit far. He read how people more vividly expressed how a ride on a Yeti feels to them, to show how excited they are to get another option with a similar "soul" (soul that makes the rider feel more like a racer). He then seemed to have revised it something along the lines of "Yeti makes bikes for racers" and linked it to other parts of the discussion, like the "$3499 is too expensive" argument, then thinking that the racer soul comments were rebuttals to the too expensive argument. The guys who made the comments about how recent Yetis ride probably weren't even wanting to argue about price, maybe accepting it as what it is. Shows how a simple logical fallacy that isn't dropped just derails discussions. That all said, back to the point hillharman was trying to make, ignoring his kool-aid comment that pissed people off, I do think there's room for a bike like the Mojo 3 in the Yeti line-up, and the SB5c could use a refresher.

    Also, amusing how others are trolling (with no malice), to keep it going... *looks at mlxjohn*

    BTW, is there any discussion on the Yeti branded hydration system, seeing as how not having a bottle mount in the usual spot is point of criticism? First time I've seen it, lying there in plain sight in the pic above. Also, thanks for the pics. I was kind of wondering if they basically revived the SB95a silver color, maybe darker due to the carbon's black base. Also, cue internet exploding if a 29er wins at EWS.
    Spec E29c
    Niner ROS9 SS

    Be part of the solution, not the pollution.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wooly88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    304
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    hillharman is a good dude, he's not trying to be difficult. I get his point, but Yeti's have always demanded a premium... Justifiably or not.



    Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk
    Colin+M = the voice of reason

Page 1 of 24 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 01-27-2017, 09:26 AM
  2. A magazine discussion
    By Finch Platte in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-19-2016, 10:41 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 05:31 AM
  4. Cromoly Discussion
    By WasteMindu in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-04-2013, 06:49 AM
  5. SSC P4 Discussion
    By Low_Rider in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 02-11-2007, 03:28 AM

Members who have read this thread: 898

Posting Permissions

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