Page 1 of 21 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 2084

Thread: Yeti SB4.5C

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    70

    Yeti SB4.5C

    I couldn't decide on which existing post to add to so I've created my own...

    I've read a couple of first look, first ride articles and forum posts regarding the SB4.5C and I suppose it's a mixed reception.

    I, for one, was really looking forward to the release of this bike. I'd looked to replace my ASR5C with an SB95C but could not source a demo and didn't want to risk another big outlay for something that I was unsure about from a geo perspective. Whether that geo concern was right or wrong I'll never know.

    One of the reviews has stated how unbalanced the suspension feels (140 F / 114 R) and another stating that it wasn't the best climber due to slack head angle, big forks and more importantly big wheels.
    Yet the SB4.5C cannot be too much different from its predecessor the SB95C? Would any owners care to comment on this?

    It's also close on numbers and style of bike to the Evil Following, Ibis Ripley LS, etc. for which it will be truly compared against.

    Having got these bikes on the list of possible 'next' bikes whilst waiting hopefully to see what Yeti release I don't remember reading such negatives of unbalanced feel and climbing prowess in their reviews. Or that of the riders that have bought them. And I thinking more of the Evil Following with 67.4 HA and 120mm rear travel often coupled to 140mm forks.

    I’m really looking forward to seeing one in the flesh and taking one for a spin but personally I’d probably look to use a 130mm fork rather than the 140mm. Probably a Pike too. I think this would provide a much more rounded feel to the bike in regards to travel (130 F / 114 R) and head angle (67.8).

    Although it’s slightly disappointing that it’s solely 1 x and that there are no ISCG mounts there are other positives in the form of Yeti’s stiffest frame yet with good ETT, reach and stack for the sizes.

    I must admit £3k for frame-only in the UK is also eye-watering.

    What do other Yeti fans think of the SB4.5C and comments made?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    506

    Yeti SB4.5C

    "This big bike felt bigger than it should have on the steep climbs, so while it seems like it fits firmly in the trail category, the cross-country label is a bit of a stretch. "
    Read more at http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/...SSmJaLEPaOT.99

    From bicycling.com:

    "My take: The SB4.5c is the most XC-feeling of the SB series so far. On the whole, it felt closer to Yeti’s ASRc than the SB5c, though it pedals better, is stiffer, and is more capable than the ASR."


    So, which is it?? More XC like the ASR or a full on trail bike?

    I'm guessing the 1x11 is due to the short chain stays and SI suspension. Yeti probably sacrificed the FD for a better handling bike, and realized the majority of bikes they sell were 1x11 setups.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,172
    The velonews reviewer comes to a poorly reasoned conclusion, imo, when comparing the downhill capability of the 4.5c and the 5c.

    "According to Strava, I set PRs going down Enchanted Forest, and I wasn’t even pushing the pace."
    He attributes that to Yeti’s suspension and geometry platforms more than the wheel size.
    I assume he has strava times over that same terrain on a 5c which also uses the same SI suspension and related geo.
    The major difference between the two bikes is the 29 wheel.... and without even pushing the pace--PRs.
    His more logical conclusion should be-- the 29 is fast. The SI suspension and 29 wheel combo blast past other options without even pushing the pace. And that's without even wide rim wheels.

  4. #4
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    I've ridden a Mach 429Trail, similar geo/travel and it didn't feel unbalanced at all. Probably has to do with riding style. If you put your weight far back, you'll notice the less rear travel.

    Like: 1x only. Dislike: No chainguide option at all.

    Question I didn't see addressed. If we're going to be stuck with Boost spacing in the rear, will we at least be able to play with some 27.5+ rubber back there?

    I realize the shock placement isn't well suited to it, but, man this would have been nice with a water bottle. As it is, that completely knocks it out of being used for XC races, well, the Boost does that too, since you wouldn't be able to switch over your race wheels from a hardtail, none of which are boost yet...

    The Mach 429Trail was really fun and fast though, and I suspect this will be as well. Great choice if you're not already invested in nice 29'er wheels and aren't interested in racing, which I imagine is a fair bit of folks.
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,172
    The Procal is a race ht with Boost.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    554
    I was kind of surprised at the reception as well. 6 months of frothy anticipation was replaced with everyone deciding X is a deal breaker for me within 6 hours and one quick review logged over 10 miles (albeit 10 diverse technical miles, Apex is a great trail system). 1x only seems to have turned some people off and the couple $100 bump over the competition got some more. They only have 2 build kits with a front der as is (low spec XC bikes) which probably aren't flying off the shelves and over the 2 year development probably asked a couple shops how many people were still using one. When it came time to decide on a stiffer frame and shorter CS vs front der I'm sure it was a quick decision. SI costs what it costs. Someone's bikes have to be the most expensive. As for those thinking its not "big" enough, they probably don't want this bike anyway: Not enough travel? CS too long and HA too steep? There are only 4 or so 6" 29ers and they haven't been updated since 650B took over. Wishing for an SB8 DH doesn't make this bike better or worse.

    If you look at the Ibis and Pivot forums the prevailing attitude was "shut up and take my money". But out of all the bikes in this class (that I've looked at geo for), the SB4.5 has the shortest CS and slackest HA combination which have been enshrined as MTB gospel to be held above all else.

    According to said Geo Gospel, its a clear improvement on my SB95, on which I never feel the bike holding me back. Instead almost every ride I'm a little faster than the last time just by letting the bike go a little bit more (this after 1700 miles). If they've somehow made it more efficient and stable its certainly worth a look.

    As I look over that text above I probably come off as a yeti apologist/fanboy but so be it. I like my bike a lot and on paper this one is an improvement to say the least. Plus the frame is pretty damn light (bet we'll see a ~24lb build without sacrificing too much strength) and looks really slick with the yeti swoops and internal routing. Of course that's without riding it and even when I do I'm still just some guy on the forum. Guess we'll see as reviews trickle in.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    118
    I agree with you Terp, that it may be hasty to be passing on this offering just based on the limited reviews out there.

    Many of us with SB-95s were hoping for an improvement of X, whatever X may be, in the SB4.5c. I think the problem is that many of us want the SB-95 or SB4.5c to be something that it is not. I really want my SB-95c to give nothing up on the downhill and nothing up when hammering XC. Is the SB4.5 an improvement in both those areas? I don't know.

    What I do know, is that I've come to the conclusion that as my riding improves, there is no such thing as a one quiver bike. Rather than paying to upgrade to the SB4.5, I'll be investing in a Hardtail and an SB6c. Really I don't see any other way around it.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    I was just at the point of going 150mm on the SB95c within the past couple of months and my only real complaint with it is it's an overly flexy bike in terms of pedal torsion translated through the rear swing arm. I'm ok with probably giving up .5" in the rear and I'm betting a 150 Lyrik up front on a SB4.5c will work swell. But what won't work is adding any kind of bail out gear for all day grinds in the way of a 3x front and that's what I wanted a SB4.5c for,...destination riding where you're riding everything from down hill parks to scenic paved green ways when vacationing. At this past tribe I spent plenty of time in the lowest AND tallest gears on a 3x10 XTR drivetrain, not just a 100yds here and there. Somehow I managed to set a top 3 overall time across 7 miles of Continental Divide and fastest Clyde to Strava it so I reckon I'm a decent rider in the least. Not sure if being 210lbs means I need or can use the gear range more effectively but most of my PRs at home are also on this SB95c and using the 3x up front for quick burst over a short climb to keep momentum rather then dumping a rear cassette worth of gears. I already have my play bikes for the local parks set up for our local conditions, I need a versatile comfy rig and this isn't exactly what I was waiting for to be honest but have already sold some stuff off to come up with the coin for a new toy this fall.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    785
    I wouldn't put too much stock in early reviews. Let's face it, some of the reviewers in major magazines seem out to lunch. I'd trust the folks at Yeti to build a good riding bike. It's not like they didn't test out a bunch of prototypes etc. And the amount of nitpicking that goes on these days (e.g., people complaining that the chainstays on the new Turner RFX weren't .00001 of an inch shorter etc.), is crazy. My only beef is price - it's just too expensive. I know, I know, Yeti wants to build the best bikes etc., and all the power to them. When a frame is 2400-2800, I can justify it, save etc., but when things are 3400 or more, and bikes 7-8k, that's just too damn much (and I like to think I earn a decent income and spend a lot of money on bike crap). I am looking for a trail oriented 29 frame, but now I am looking at a Kona or Transition.

  10. #10
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Terp View Post
    I was kind of surprised at the reception as well. 6 months of frothy anticipation was replaced with everyone deciding X is a deal breaker for me within 6 hours and one quick review logged over 10 miles ...
    I resemble this remark.

    The review part, yeah, that's all subjective and based on not much. Just because that guy thought it was too slack doesn't mean any of us would. But I am one of the few who isn't on the slacker-is-better bandwagon. I like a responsive bike. As such, Yetis over the years have proven to be not my cup of tea. My ASRc broke that losing streak because by my standards, it's balanced in terms of responsiveness .vs fast 'n stable.

    My shop will have a full size run of the 4.5 in demo a week after they are widely available, because they will kill here. My little town was apey over 29" wheels before Fisher started building production 29ers. So I will surely ride one. But even if I love how it rides, I won't want one.

    I'm an endurance geek, and my feeding system relies on a water bottle. Not changing it because of a bike I could barely afford anyway. And I use a triple. I do everything on my bike including 100+ mile gravel grinders. I live in Colorado, 3+ hour sustained climbs are part of my normal summer riding. I log big miles and I love the climbing, but I'm slow and large and I need a real granny.

    So yeah, even though it's seemingly knee-jerk, I have definitely eliminated the 4.5 as a bike I would ever buy.

    That said, after I test ride one I'll post my feedback.
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    473
    The geo numbers are spot on for a modern 29 trailbike. The price tag is not as the M429 trail is $2500 Following $2600 Ripley $2900 and the Yeti $3,400??

    Then add the change to boost an a new wheelset...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    I resemble this remark.

    The review part, yeah, that's all subjective and based on not much. Just because that guy thought it was too slack doesn't mean any of us would. But I am one of the few who isn't on the slacker-is-better bandwagon. I like a responsive bike. As such, Yetis over the years have proven to be not my cup of tea. My ASRc broke that losing streak because by my standards, it's balanced in terms of responsiveness .vs fast 'n stable.

    My shop will have a full size run of the 4.5 in demo a week after they are widely available, because they will kill here. My little town was apey over 29" wheels before Fisher started building production 29ers. So I will surely ride one. But even if I love how it rides, I won't want one.

    I'm an endurance geek, and my feeding system relies on a water bottle. Not changing it because of a bike I could barely afford anyway. And I use a triple. I do everything on my bike including 100+ mile gravel grinders. I live in Colorado, 3+ hour sustained climbs are part of my normal summer riding. I log big miles and I love the climbing, but I'm slow and large and I need a real granny.

    So yeah, even though it's seemingly knee-jerk, I have definitely eliminated the 4.5 as a bike I would ever buy.

    That said, after I test ride one I'll post my feedback.
    Sounds like we're on the same page, Just for giggles I compared the final drive numbers of my various 1x11 set ups and my 3x10 XTR,..The 3x10 is just way more practical (when my front derailleur works properly on my SB95c) I spent more time in granny gear on that SB95c than I'd like to admit at Tribe earlier this month but in spite of that we got the job done and wasn't completely trashed after a brisk paced 40 miler at 9,500' elevation. I'm also doing the International Nepal Tribe in November and was really hoping to have a SB95c replacement and not have to make any compromises other than let the pennies loose. I'm not griping about the price and I'd pay another few hundred if that damn thing could take a front derailleur!!
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    81
    For all of you complaining about 1x

    EUROBIKE 2015 | Huge gear ratios and lots of carbon from E13 | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine

    I want to know when we are going to see a boost dt 240s hub. Anyone know what hub is specced on the 45?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    110
    Early reviews are inconclusive? I agree that the dork at Velonews should learn how to climb... but the rest of the reviews have been fairly glowing. Ya'll are looking for that one cloud in a bright, sunny sky.

    As for the "10 minutes on the bike thing".... welp, pretty sure that Brice Minnigh - the editor at Bike magazine - has the early and authoritative review of the bike, having taken it to the Caucasus mountains in Russia for an extended bikepacking trip (!). Yeah, it's been tested.

    Wilderness Tested: Yeti SB4.5c | BIKE Magazine

    " High in the Caucasus Mountains—one of the world’s steepest, most inhospitable chains—and I’m riding the SB4.5c up climbs that my brain is telling me are not worth the effort. And, side note, my bike and back are fully loaded with food, survival gear and camera/film equipment for the Bike mag feature and short film we were working on. Despite all this, I was pedaling the SB4.5c through some climbs that, at first glance, didn’t seem worth the energy expenditure it required to clean them. Yet I was slaying many of them, even though I was tired, underfed and over-weighted. I felt like my initial hunch had been borne out in reality: Even though I was suffering from a weight disadvantage, the combination of 29-inch wheels with the pedaling efficiency of the Switch Technology platform was impossible to overlook, and the technological benefits were allowing me to do things that I might not have been able to do otherwise." (Note to Velonews reviewer.... you suck at climbing).

    "The Switch Infinity system is designed around a translating main pivot, which moves upward at the beginning of its travel, creating a rearward wheel path with distinct anti-squat characteristics. This could immediately be felt through steep, chunky sections of momentum-sapping singletrack. The pedaling was precise, and the rear wheel hugged the ground like a mother re-united with a lost child.

    Okay, the next question is, understandably, “well, how does the bike descend?” And, as is the case with the most capable 29ers on the market, the answer is, “incredibly well.” This is especially true when the bike is pointed in a straight line—it plows through chunder and the most beefy baby heads with the greatest aplomb, the big wheels essentially replicating another solid inch of travel all the way to the bottom."

    Yeah, he mentioned that the bigger wheels could be a bit of a handful in tight, steep switchbacks.... but what niner is not like that? BFD.

    So basically..... it's a freaking awesome bike. Stop fixating on whether this angle or that length is a tenth of an inch from "perfect" and ride the damn thing. I'm sure it'll put a sh*t eating grin on your face like the 95 did when you first rode that... only more betterer.



    TAKE MY MONEY YETI! (that is, after I sell my 95C to someone who thinks that extra 14mm of rear travel is the difference maker).

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: velojonthan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    32
    The velonews review read a bit odd.

    "but powering up and over obstacles on the 29er SB4.5c was difficult because the front end wanted to come off the ground; sections I’ve never struggled to clear became hike-a-bikes due to the unwieldy front end."

    If someone is riding sections of home trails that they clean easily and the bike is making them mandatory hike sections, one would think that the bike has to be very extreme.

    "The dreaded 29er wheel flop reared its head a few times, right when I needed a boost of power through a tech section or pinpoint steering around a switchback"

    Not sure what wheel flop has to do with the guy being gassed and not on the power or poorly positioned through an uphill hairpin.


    A slack 29 will have some wheel flop and (Depending on the riders setup) harder to steer on a steep uphill.

    Seemed like the article needed a better cyclist, or perhaps the editors to come back from euro bike and proofread.

    The new bike is cool but I'll ride my sb95c till the frame is toast then upgrade.

  16. #16
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,312
    Quote Originally Posted by mattwright999 View Post
    For all of you complaining about 1x

    EUROBIKE 2015 | Huge gear ratios and lots of carbon from E13 | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine

    I want to know when we are going to see a boost dt 240s hub. Anyone know what hub is specced on the 45?
    They definitely exist. Graves and Rude are running them on the Boosted SB6c. The new Trek Top Fuel comes with super light DT wheels that I have to imagine are rolling on them, too. Trek Factory Racing's XC guys are almost certainly on them.

    When will they be available to us normal peons? Your guess is as good as mine.
    Death from Below.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    They definitely exist. Graves and Rude are running them on the Boosted SB6c. The new Trek Top Fuel comes with super light DT wheels that I have to imagine are rolling on them, too. Trek Factory Racing's XC guys are almost certainly on them.

    When will they be available to us normal peons? Your guess is as good as mine.
    Actually emailed DT and just got a reply

    "We will not be offering 240s level Boost hubs for sale on their own for at least 6 months. That said, we expect to have 350 level hubs available later this year."

    If you look around 1:23 in this video it looks like he is on a 350?

    Video: Bike Break with Richie Rude | BIKE Magazine

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    I'm wondering if the Boost spec rear spacing is why the SB4.5c is not capable of a FD and yet the 15 SB6 and 5c is. Seems a tad early for the Boost spec, but I think I'll like the extra wheel rigidity with it but being stuck with no high end hubs for a $10-11k MTB is a bit hard to wait for the market to catch up.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,959
    maybe i will just keep my sb95c and add a 6c to the garage..lol

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,715
    Does anybody know the details on the internal cable routing? Has Yeti implemented a way to secure the cables inside of the tubes?

    I've tested several bikes this season and I could hear the cables rattling in the tubes on most of them.

  21. #21
    old but slow
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    9
    Just my 2 cents, I have been riding Yeti's since Juli won Durango and this bike is the best one yet.
    Granted, I only rode it for an hour, but it steers so frisky, pedals so easy, the new suspension is so smooth and fun feeling, the bike has few limits.
    Yes, I want a front der and a bottle without giardia.
    Been going back and forth between SB95c and Sb66c the past 3 years -ride one for a month and switch back, etc.
    The first 20 minutes after changing are usually relearning how to steer or make the 66 go straight .
    The SB45c was just fun and balanced right away, no undo hesitation in steering and the SI is way smoother on the climbs than the previous switch.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigdrunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,148
    The 45c looks incredible. But the price difference between that and the Pivot 429 Trail...... We will see. Its not always about price.

  23. #23
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,524
    Quote Originally Posted by yeti575inCA View Post
    maybe i will just keep my sb95c and add a 6c to the garage..lol
    That's what I would do, if I were you.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,140
    I will win the Lottery and I will have one! (or two...)

    -------------------------------------
    Opinions are like A-holes... everybody
    has one & they're usually full of...??
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    70
    I was pretty much sold on the SB4.5C before it was released and as I said elsewhere on this forum it ticks all the boxes and is what I expected it to be. More so, like the ASR5C I owned before it, suited to me, what and where I ride and my riding style.

    I don't necessarily need a 'big' bike and have been riding local XC/Trail from the door as well as more technical, mountain trails in Scotland and the Lakes on a steel 29er 100mm hardtail with 70 degree HA.

    Granted it's often been like taking a knife to a gunfight but you ride what you have and you ride accordingly. The SB4.5C looks to be the 'gunship' I need. A long, low, slack, aggressive, stiff, short travel 29er FS. A combination between the ASR5C and my 29er HT.

    I suppose I couldn't understand those negative comments from journalists both sides of the Atlantic when there are lots of other bikes in the short travel 29er trail bike category with the same numbers running pretty much the same travel front and rear.

    As others have said though, it's just early reviews and early opinions. Looking forward to making my own. Although, sourcing a demo in the UK may take some time

    Which might be a blessing as I have a build in mind already so will be going frame-only and will need to wait for boost hubs to be made available.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cpolism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    169
    I'm so pumped for this bike, but at the same time so bummed about the price. Saving up 5k for bikes has been hard enough, but there's no way I'll be able to drop that kind of coin on a bike. Maybe I'll nab one next year when the new model comes out. Looks awesome though. Can't wait to ride it.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cpolism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by MostChillin View Post
    Yeti is now the Ferrari of bikes. Gotta pay to play!

    Edited because I didn't mean for my original comment to come across the wrong way. Huge Yeti fan here.
    Haha. Understood. I'm just searching hard for a SB95. I can still make that work, and it's a fantastic bike.

  28. #28
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,306
    I applaud Yeti for the 4.5C... It's pretty well known that the switch infinity hits above its weight (ie. feels like more travel than it is, as proven by the 5C and 6C).

    As an SB66 owner (and 575 before that), I have no desire for a burly long travel 29er. Also not quite sold on 27.5 to be honest (praise it all you like, it was a marketing coup by the bike/component companies to sell more bikes/wheels/tires). So the SB4.5C might be my ticket for a fast, efficient, yet plush riding trail bike. 29er is a big enough delta from my 26er to make a noticeable difference.

    I'm glad it's 1X only. That is the future. The front derailleur is an aberration and I'm glad it's going out of style. Simplifies the drivetrain, less to maintain, more room in cockpit for dropper and/or suspension remotes. It's too bad the Hammerschmidt never caught on (too heavy and pricey I guess) - as that actually resolved the front derailleur problem while still allowing the 2X benefits.

    While the price is crazy, it is what it is. I'd either grab a GX, or more realistically get a frame a build up my own setup with Shimano parts.

    No ISCG isn't a deal breaker. Disappointing yes but not a deal breaker. Narrow-wide rings have eliminated the need for a chain guide (my 2X 575 had a chain guide because it needed it, my SB66 with 1X narrow-wide does need it at all - never dropped a chain even in gnar chunk). To mount a bash guard would be nice, but for my usage (fast efficient trail bike), it's not really necessary. I have my SB66 for bike park, gravity, gnarly/chunky riding.

    I'm going to have to seek out a demo on the 4.5C. Being in MN, that's a bit easier said than done...

    Santa Cruz Hightower LT
    EVIL Following


  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    I have played with 1x plenty but will take a 3x for any destination trip or day ride over 40 miles that has 3k+ feet of climbing or more. I'm a big guy and a fairly strong pedaling one at that. I have issues with chain skip in the smaller cogs when I put the hammer down on anything less than a 34 tooth front on quick climbs up a roller which can put me in a cog under 17 in the rear at the speeds I'm carrying in some sections, but want a 30f/42r for long climb duty. I'm pretty strong in the XC grinding category and while just barely in clyde territory these days I've spent 4 miles in and out of granny in a 3x set up on my SB95c just recently on a long gravel climb with 10% plus grades. The 27.5 bikes are smaller diameter and less weight, so that much easier to get by with a wide range 1x. My fatbike does ok with 1x locally, but I even prefer 2x on it for bail out when the legs have had enough. When Yeti is offering a 29" trail rig chances are they're appealing to some bigger guys and longer range guys,.....so why eliminate a front derailleur? 90% of my riding is local and 1x works GREAT there where I know what to expect and will still use the full range (42-11 XTR) on a short 5 mile trail with the variety we have here.

    I wanted to take my riding to the next level this year and figured signing up for a trip to Nepal would be good motivation to get to where I'm averaging 100 miles a week on a good weather week to be fit and comfy at altitude for a week plus of pedaling. I should be just plain happy with my SB95c and it's a great bike for this kind of thing, however the tail wagging rear and occasional choppy Switch behavior can be a thorn in my ass though. I had my hopes on an almost exact replacement with SI and stiff ass chassis. I'm not worried about bottle holders, this is a destination bike for me and wearing a back pack, even a small back pack on my 10-20 mile local rides for hydration. I can understand loosing .5" in the rear with a more efficient platform, hell I have my SB95c set up on the stiffer side and rarely bottom it out even bombing down stuff.

    So in a perfect world I would have an SB4.5c with Lyrik 150mm fork, Boost spec Chris King's or DT240 all around(whenever they might become available) with Enve M60 HV, Cane Creek Double Barrel AND A FRONT DERAILLEUR. World isn't perfect but the lack of an FD for a 29" trail/AM bike with a clyde like myself is pretty much a deal breaker for blind brand loyalty and just buy the next best offering. I have an ASRc with RS-1 120 travel front that is capable of a FD, I think I'll throw my 140 pike on it along with a FD and see where that gets me but in my head it doesn't make sense to make and ASRc the all day destination bike in my quiver and get a SB4.5 for my local short haul ass strava PR kinda rides. The ASRc does climb pretty darn good 1x11 wide range but I've never loaded up for a long day trip on it to see if 36 oval front and 42 rear is low enough for extended climbing for me and still have legs for the long haul and down hill. It's a bit nervous down hill with the RS-1 but AWESOME on typical XC stuff.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by cpolism View Post
    Haha. Understood. I'm just searching hard for a SB95. I can still make that work, and it's a fantastic bike.
    I don't think you'd be sorry--probably the most versatile bike I've ever ridden. I'm running mine with a 1x drivetrain, db inline shock, Pike 140, Thomson dropper and a set of the Carver Carbon rims laced to King hubs. A little more than 26 lbs, and this bike continues to surprise me for anything other than flat-out xc racing. I raced the BC Bike Race on it, and it was a perfect choice. I take it to Black Rock (free ride area) and it handles more than it probably should. I'm guessing the 4.5 is awesome, but the SB95 is plenty special!
    Keith in Corvallis

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    696
    IMO, 130 rear travel would have set this apart from the 29er competition out there. Otherwise, it's an expensive bike in a crowded field. My wallet thanks Yeti though since now I won't be tempted.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by D_Man View Post
    IMO, 130 rear travel would have set this apart from the 29er competition out there. Otherwise, it's an expensive bike in a crowded field. My wallet thanks Yeti though since now I won't be tempted.
    SB5.25 I like it!!!!!! Just make sure it has a freaking FD!haha
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ReXTless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    I have played with 1x plenty but will take a 3x for any destination trip or day ride over 40 miles that has 3k+ feet of climbing or more. I'm a big guy and a fairly strong pedaling one at that. I have issues with chain skip in the smaller cogs when I put the hammer down on anything less than a 34 tooth front on quick climbs up a roller which can put me in a cog under 17 in the rear at the speeds I'm carrying in some sections, but want a 30f/42r for long climb duty. I'm pretty strong in the XC grinding category and while just barely in clyde territory these days I've spent 4 miles in and out of granny in a 3x set up on my SB95c just recently on a long gravel climb with 10% plus grades. The 27.5 bikes are smaller diameter and less weight, so that much easier to get by with a wide range 1x. My fatbike does ok with 1x locally, but I even prefer 2x on it for bail out when the legs have had enough. When Yeti is offering a 29" trail rig chances are they're appealing to some bigger guys and longer range guys,.....so why eliminate a front derailleur? 90% of my riding is local and 1x works GREAT there where I know what to expect and will still use the full range (42-11 XTR) on a short 5 mile trail with the variety we have here.

    I wanted to take my riding to the next level this year and figured signing up for a trip to Nepal would be good motivation to get to where I'm averaging 100 miles a week on a good weather week to be fit and comfy at altitude for a week plus of pedaling. I should be just plain happy with my SB95c and it's a great bike for this kind of thing, however the tail wagging rear and occasional choppy Switch behavior can be a thorn in my ass though. I had my hopes on an almost exact replacement with SI and stiff ass chassis. I'm not worried about bottle holders, this is a destination bike for me and wearing a back pack, even a small back pack on my 10-20 mile local rides for hydration. I can understand loosing .5" in the rear with a more efficient platform, hell I have my SB95c set up on the stiffer side and rarely bottom it out even bombing down stuff.

    So in a perfect world I would have an SB4.5c with Lyrik 150mm fork, Boost spec Chris King's or DT240 all around(whenever they might become available) with Enve M60 HV, Cane Creek Double Barrel AND A FRONT DERAILLEUR. World isn't perfect but the lack of an FD for a 29" trail/AM bike with a clyde like myself is pretty much a deal breaker for blind brand loyalty and just buy the next best offering. I have an ASRc with RS-1 120 travel front that is capable of a FD, I think I'll throw my 140 pike on it along with a FD and see where that gets me but in my head it doesn't make sense to make and ASRc the all day destination bike in my quiver and get a SB4.5 for my local short haul ass strava PR kinda rides. The ASRc does climb pretty darn good 1x11 wide range but I've never loaded up for a long day trip on it to see if 36 oval front and 42 rear is low enough for extended climbing for me and still have legs for the long haul and down hill. It's a bit nervous down hill with the RS-1 but AWESOME on typical XC stuff.
    I think you've gotten your point across. What you don't seem to accept is that your personal preferences are very much a minority viewpoint. People are far more likely to want the increased stiffness and shorter rear over the ability to run a triple. It's a deal-breaker for you. Understood. But, you can't blame Yeti for making a better bike for just about everyone else.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by ReXTless View Post
    I think you've gotten your point across. What you don't seem to accept is that your personal preferences are very much a minority viewpoint. People are far more likely to want the increased stiffness and shorter rear over the ability to run a triple. It's a deal-breaker for you. Understood. But, you can't blame Yeti for making a better bike for just about everyone else.
    So then why SB5 and SB6(really not a long hauler by most accounts) have FD mount points? There's been no info stating the FD wasn't possible on the SB4.5, so it appears it's merely because cost to benefit ratio wasn't there on paper, and I get it,........doesn't mean I'm happy about it. I might as well had my new Yeti money stolen out of the damn bank!
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ReXTless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    So then why SB5 and SB6(really not a long hauler by most accounts) have FD mount points? There's been no info stating the FD wasn't possible on the SB4.5, so it appears it's merely because cost to benefit ratio wasn't there on paper, and I get it,........doesn't mean I'm happy about it. I might as well had my new Yeti money stolen out of the damn bank!
    Less room in a 29er rear than 27.5. They prioritized travel, chainstay length, and stiffness over 2x and 3x. A front mech is certainly possible, but would have come with unacceptable trade-offs in the other areas.

  36. #36
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,524
    Run an oval ring on a 1x.

    It'll give you the extra assistance you need on the climbs, while still maintaining the speed you desire on the flats.

    The SB4.5c looks cool. Not for me, but looks cool.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: steadyflow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,103
    Quote Originally Posted by D_Man View Post
    IMO, 130 rear travel would have set this apart from the 29er competition out there. Otherwise, it's an expensive bike in a crowded field. My wallet thanks Yeti though since now I won't be tempted.
    This is where I am at on this as well. I am sure Yeti has very good reasons for going with a 29'er with less travel than the 95c, but for me I love my 95c. If I could have gotten into a newer version with more travel, that had an even better pedaling platform I would have.

    For now I will keep riding my 95c and see what comes out in the next couple years. It does seem most of the bike companies are moving away from long travel 29'ers which is too bad, as that is the kind of one bike quiver I like. I am sure I am in the minority though otherwise the industry wouldn't be moving away from those bikes.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    781
    Come on all you SB95C owners, let's see those frames start popping up on ebay, Pinkbike or here so I can replace my alum model. Large or X-Large...(I think I can make either work at 6' 2 '') Thank you!

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,136
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofbiscuits View Post

    What do other Yeti fans think of the SB4.5C?
    Thirty. Four. Hundred. Dollar$.

    Just for the frame.

    No way I can afford that. Alloy option coming?

  40. #40
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    So then why SB5 and SB6(really not a long hauler by most accounts) have FD mount points? There's been no info stating the FD wasn't possible on the SB4.5, so it appears it's merely because cost to benefit ratio wasn't there on paper, and I get it,........doesn't mean I'm happy about it. I might as well had my new Yeti money stolen out of the damn bank!
    Getting rid of the FD allowed for the shorter chainstays everyone was yammering for. Should be great. A 429T ticks your boxes for $900 less frame price (and has a water bottle mount), though even that is double ring only because of boost. I'm pretty sure there's no boost triples. But a double with an 11-42 XT cassette, or a 10-42 SRAM cassette will offer more range than a traditional 3x with an 11-36 anyway. You could go faster on crutches than with a 22T front and 42T rear (unless your spinning like 150rpm, then you'd gain a slight advantage over the guy on crutches)
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    792
    Still glad I purchased a 95c frame when they went on sale. Loving my 95c with a 130 mm PIKE, and lightweight build. 1x drivetrains are not for me, just not a wide enough gear ratio for long high altitude riding in Colorado.
    Looks to me like Yeti had to make some compromises to make SI work for 29" wheels (less travel and no FD), oh well... hopefully my 95c lasts awhile, it sure rips for my XC/Trail riding preference.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Run an oval ring on a 1x.

    It'll give you the extra assistance you need on the climbs, while still maintaining the speed you desire on the flats.

    The SB4.5c looks cool. Not for me, but looks cool.
    Already done that, played with 32, 34 and 36 and running a 36 Absolute on the ASRc with a 11-42 XTR 11spd, however I might change to XD driver body and see what a Sram XG cassette with 10-42 might get me and allow a 34 front for ever so slightly better granny. 24/36 of a 3x is a .67 final drive ratio and 36/42 of 1x is a .86,...still alot of gap to make up of a 1x to a 3x. I'd be fine with a 2x that had a 38 big ring and a 28 little with a wide range 11spd cassette, it'd only loose out at the 35-40mph range which is not so common even on long gravel downs but have the exact same crawl ratio with better ring/chain wear.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    91
    Was pretty excited about the SB4.5 announcement as I couldn't pull the trigger on the ASR-C because I wanted something more trail-capable and I could not sacrifice losing the rear Switch. The 5c and 6c are 27.5's so that was a deal-breaker for me. Everything sounded good until the price of the SB4.5 frame and more importantly, the new Boost 148 requirement. I can't use my custom 12x142 wheels which I thought would be around a lot longer. I have to think about this and whether I want to commit to a frame and new wheels (or hubs). Or I can just enjoy my SB95 and not think about it. We'll see...

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    110
    What new bike out there is made for a triple? In ANY category?

    Give up the ghost dude.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by Shifty Bits View Post
    What new bike out there is made for a triple? In ANY category?

    Give up the ghost dude.
    2x11 would be more than acceptable but 3x is preferred for a destination/trail rig of mine. Redundancy and not having to cassette dump are big for me but not as big as wide ratio for a versatile bike. 1x works great for enduro and DH,..I want that AND long hauler
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by keithrad View Post
    Come on all you SB95C owners, let's see those frames start popping up on ebay, Pinkbike or here so I can replace my alum model. Large or X-Large...(I think I can make either work at 6' 2 '') Thank you!
    I have a xl frame...pm me

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yeti575inCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by GSJ1973 View Post
    Thirty. Four. Hundred. Dollar$.

    Just for the frame.

    No way I can afford that. Alloy option coming?
    YetI stated no more alum frames...carbon only go forward

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ridetheridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    453
    Yeti usually nails the geometry on bikes and I'm fairly sure the 114mm out back will ride on the trail like it has a lot more travel. It's not for me though... I like my current bike quite a bit.
    The Mtn Bike App --> http://mtbphotoz.com

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ReXTless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    2x11 would be more than acceptable but 3x is preferred for a destination/trail rig of mine. Redundancy and not having to cassette dump are big for me but not as big as wide ratio for a versatile bike. 1x works great for enduro and DH,..I want that AND long hauler
    Everyone understands your point. Nobody agrees with you. There are a lot of solutions to your "problem". You don't want to hear any of them.

    Can we move on?

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by ReXTless View Post
    Everyone understands your point. Nobody agrees with you. There are a lot of solutions to your "problem". You don't want to hear any of them.

    Can we move on?
    Only solution to gearing range is well,............gearing range. It's just math, really not that hard to figure out ;-) Show me a solution that provides a .67 ratio climb gear with anything over a 3.50 ratio tall gear in a 1x (crickets)

    I'm not going on about price or water bottles which there are solutions for.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  51. #51
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    Only solution to gearing range is well,............gearing range. It's just math, really not that hard to figure out ;-) Show me a solution that provides a .67 ratio climb gear with anything over a 3.50 ratio tall gear in a 1x (crickets)

    I'm not going on about price or water bottles which there are solutions for.
    There's solutions for it. You just get stronger, or lighter, or both. Luckily there are other bikes you can look at too as another solution if that first one doesn't do it for you. Obviously, you're not gonna fit a double (or triple) on this bike though, so there's no use going on about it.

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    34
    Interesting looking bike! I can't afford one but then Yeti are a high end brand so no surprises there.

    I own a Transition Smuggler and the negative comments about unmatched suspension travel, 1x only and so on made me chuckle. Get with the 21st century people! Party up front, business out back

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    38
    Spot on Jim

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by biggusjimmus View Post
    Interesting looking bike! I can't afford one but then Yeti are a high end brand so no surprises there.

    I own a Transition Smuggler and the negative comments about unmatched suspension travel, 1x only and so on made me chuckle. Get with the 21st century people! Party up front, business out back
    I have enough 1x drivetrain in my garage to easily setup 5-6 bikes,....it's not the be all/do all but does get the job done and in many scenarios an excellent choice, however not for a do it all bike with a man pedaling it ;-)
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  55. #55
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    The best thing about 1x is no more chain drops. On my SB95, that was one of the I disliked about the stock XT 3x drivetrain. I've been doing SS in the meanwhile, to make it so even 1x10 is a dream.

    Technically, a 28x42 is the same as 24x36. With a 28, you're losing top end gearing though. I do miss that on my 1x bikes, able to pedal on downslopes and actually feel resistance... no way am I spinning my cranks fast on a bumpy descent, but "mashing" can get me more speed without losing my footing.

    Still wish Fox would bump up offset on their susp forks more for these slack 29ers. Yeti missed an opportunity here. I thank that velonews journalist for putting up that critical review, that way it can be addressed possibly by this method.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    The best thing about 1x is no more chain drops. On my SB95, that was one of the I disliked about the stock XT 3x drivetrain. I've been doing SS in the meanwhile, to make it so even 1x10 is a dream.

    Technically, a 28x42 is the same as 24x36. With a 28, you're losing top end gearing though. I do miss that on my 1x bikes, able to pedal on downslopes and actually feel resistance... no way am I spinning my cranks fast on a bumpy descent, but "mashing" can get me more speed without losing my footing.

    Still wish Fox would bump up offset on their susp forks more for these slack 29ers. Yeti missed an opportunity here. I thank that velonews journalist for putting up that critical review, that way it can be addressed possibly by this method.
    Agreed on all of it, I find the clutch mechanism of the XT Shadow Plus needs fairly frequent replacement along with fresh RaceFace Turbine rings up front on the 3x to prevent chain drop but I'll take a 10 second penalty to pop a chain on rather than be low cadence climbing killing my legs. Having pedal resistance for all speeds I find is also a plus at keeping the lactic acid at bay. If you coast a long downhill section it's much more likely to build, light pedaling all of the time you're not cranking will keep my legs happy.

    The good news out of all of this is I now have the funds to build some badass Whiskey Carbon fat wheels and freshen up the SB95c with a Lyrik when they are available.

    What I'm also looking forward to is Shimano's development of a narrow/wide 2x that with a 11/40 11spd cassette would be the bomb for Boost spec bikes. Minimal if any chain drop and a 28/38 2x up front would be perfect in that scenario, they already filed the patents, hope it actually works.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    109
    Some dude- fyi, e13's not yet out, but coming soon 9-44 11spd cassette gearing paired to a hypothetical 31t ring would be the exact same high and low gearing of your above stated 28/38 11-40, so a 30 or 32 would be basically the same gearing witb that new cassette.

    I love the look of the bike, but will not pick one up, as i would want to swap my build kit over from the existing rig, and dont want to replace 2 of the most expensive parts of the build (rear wheel and crank/ring), just for a 148mm axle. If it was 142mm, would have already thrown $ down.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    As much of a beta tester I've been, the E13 wide range looks good in theory but not real sure about the construction and the 9 tooth cog (it actually doesn't even have 9 cogs unless my eyes are playing tricks on me which I assume is for shifting performance) along with relying on 4 bolts to hold the cassette together. So I'll let that one play out a bit before I'd buy a $10K+ dollar rig dependent upon it. What I was willing to do is buy a SI 29" Yeti because it's well,....a Yeti. I'm willing to start over on a whole bike build and part off the old one, however there really is a lot of limitation in higher end options for anything boost spec from hubs to cranks for the immediate future along with a delay in frame only option I'm assuming which is a double kicker in the nuts. I like my Chris King ISO and Raceface Next SL cranks, looks like DT350 hubs or Sram are about only boost spec stuff out at the moment. In the back of my mind I'm actually considering Ghetto 2x by running a 36/28 Oval on a front 2x crank and just hand shift as needed, but this is a sucky option for adventure riding new trail where you may not know what climbing or downs to expect and I'm not one for stopping forward progress.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by some dude View Post
    As much of a beta tester I've been, the E13 wide range looks good in theory but not real sure about the construction and the 9 tooth cog (it actually doesn't even have 9 cogs unless my eyes are playing tricks on me which I assume is for shifting performance) along with relying on 4 bolts to hold the cassette together. So I'll let that one play out a bit before I'd buy a $10K+ dollar rig dependent upon it. What I was willing to do is buy a SI 29" Yeti because it's well,....a Yeti. I'm willing to start over on a whole bike build and part off the old one, however there really is a lot of limitation in higher end options for anything boost spec from hubs to cranks for the immediate future along with a delay in frame only option I'm assuming which is a double kicker in the nuts. I like my Chris King ISO and Raceface Next SL cranks, looks like DT350 hubs or Sram are about only boost spec stuff out at the moment. In the back of my mind I'm actually considering Ghetto 2x by running a 36/28 Oval on a front 2x crank and just hand shift as needed, but this is a sucky option for adventure riding new trail where you may not know what climbing or downs to expect and I'm not one for stopping forward progress.
    Just get a ripley or the new pivot 429 trail. you can run 2x and can't really go wrong with either one. The new ripley even ditches the PF BB nonsense.

    I mean, yeti is cool and all, but not worth running ghetto 2x.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,715
    Both Hope and Industry Nine have Boost hubs listed on their websites.

    I am having trouble posting the article from Radavist, but they mention that Chris King will have Boost hubs availabile soon.

    IMO, this seems to make the Boost standard more legitimate.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ReXTless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    359
    I personally need a 3x11 drivetrain mated to an IGH. Nothing else will do. Others who don't demand the same really don't know much about riding bikes...

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    109
    I
    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    IMO, this seems to make the Boost standard more legitimate.
    You mean other than there being no benefit from the boost standard outside of cheap OEM wheel builds in the first place?

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,715
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    I

    You mean other than there being no benefit from the boost standard outside of cheap OEM wheel builds in the first place?
    Nope.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,136
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    I

    You mean other than there being no benefit from the boost standard outside of cheap OEM wheel builds in the first place?
    FYI, Boost is the future for all major brand players, like it or not. Pretty much everyone said all future models will be boost I have been talking with at local demo's.

    SRAM Announces New Hub Standards - Boost 148 and 110 - Pinkbike

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    I

    You mean other than there being no benefit from the boost standard outside of cheap OEM wheel builds in the first place?
    2016 Axle Standards, Part 1: Rear 148mm Thru Axle Coming Fast & It?s About More Than Just Better Wheels

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    I'm on board with the whole boost spec, actually wouldn't mind a 6mm wider crank shaft either as I can really get cranking on out of seat climbs with my Fatbike that has the wider crank and the PF BB on my Fatbike which is wider than typical 92mm is much more rock solid than my ASRc with PF30 BB which I'm on my second one in under 200 miles on it and now going to the Praxxis threaded BB cage set-up to keep from pushing out the typical PF BB and creaking/screaming like a Yeti!

    Reading the article above matches my experience when I went 29, alloy wheels were minorly taco'd in under 150 miles twice, went to ENVE's and it transformed the bike. Boost spec rear Enve ought to be the bombdigity. Now to find a bike someday I want to replace the SB95c with,.........
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  67. #67
    Stupid is, as stupid does
    Reputation: spunkmtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    624
    I agree with the Guy who keeps ranting about no front D option. I did retire my triple though and ended up going to a 2x. But I run 26/40 up front & a sram XX rear cassette. I added a WTC 40t cog on the back. So technically it is a 12-40T cassette.

    So why am I rambling about this, I do not know. Except that I know that Yeti has pretty much lost me. I am a Clyde. 6'2, 230lbs geared up, big bones, and a really long inseam that likes to turn cranks. It is heatwave season here now in LA which makes climbing even more difficult. I will never part with my front D. And now the cost of the frames going up as well is crazy. And please don't tell me that they are more expensive because Yeti makes the best frame possible. You guy's just saved a bunch of $$ by going with a PF style BB. Ibis is a boutique brand as well. Yet their carbon frames can still be purchased by mere mortals like me who don't earn 6 figures a year.

    When I ranted about this last year in regards to the cost of the SB6 John P. Chimed in and told me to Purchase a 575. That was their value model to become part of the tribe if you couldn't afford to play with the Big Boy's. Well John P, where is that rationality now. I understand that Yeti is a small company. But so is Ibis & Pivot. But there carbon frames are affordable, bomb proof, and they even have to pay Mr. DW for his suspension design.

    Anyway, Yeti please make a 29er that is front D compatible and costs the market norm. Or I will just wait for that reasonably priced used frame to show up eventually in an XL (For an SB6) I really see no need to ever replace my SB95C. I have never said that about any frame that I have ever owned. You guy's hit it out of the ball park there. Yes I want to try the new SI design. Itching real bad for that. But, please allow it to be Front D compatible. My rant is done. thanks for reading.
    Yeti SB95C
    Carver Ti 420
    Ibis HD3

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by spunkmtb View Post
    I agree with the Guy who keeps ranting about no front D option. I did retire my triple though and ended up going to a 2x. But I run 26/40 up front & a sram XX rear cassette. I added a WTC 40t cog on the back. So technically it is a 12-40T cassette.

    So why am I rambling about this, I do not know. Except that I know that Yeti has pretty much lost me. I am a Clyde. 6'2, 230lbs geared up, big bones, and a really long inseam that likes to turn cranks. It is heatwave season here now in LA which makes climbing even more difficult. I will never part with my front D. And now the cost of the frames going up as well is crazy. And please don't tell me that they are more expensive because Yeti makes the best frame possible. You guy's just saved a bunch of $$ by going with a PF style BB. Ibis is a boutique brand as well. Yet their carbon frames can still be purchased by mere mortals like me who don't earn 6 figures a year.

    When I ranted about this last year in regards to the cost of the SB6 John P. Chimed in and told me to Purchase a 575. That was their value model to become part of the tribe if you couldn't afford to play with the Big Boy's. Well John P, where is that rationality now. I understand that Yeti is a small company. But so is Ibis & Pivot. But there carbon frames are affordable, bomb proof, and they even have to pay Mr. DW for his suspension design.

    Anyway, Yeti please make a 29er that is front D compatible and costs the market norm. Or I will just wait for that reasonably priced used frame to show up eventually in an XL (For an SB6) I really see no need to ever replace my SB95C. I have never said that about any frame that I have ever owned. You guy's hit it out of the ball park there. Yes I want to try the new SI design. Itching real bad for that. But, please allow it to be Front D compatible. My rant is done. thanks for reading.
    But Rex said I was the only one! Now I don't feel special dammit, haha. I REALLY want a stiffer rear on the SB95c and if pedaling efficiency, specially standing, were better then I'd be in heaven but I'm not giving up front dérailleur,...just in case nobody one noticed 😉

    Maybe Yeti will have a boost spec rear triangle upgrade for the SB95c but I doubt that would stop its tail wagging which in spite of it still rails though the chunk.

    I'm definitely a Yeti fan with more hats and shorts than I'd care to admit and wear them almost daily in short weather months. Sounds like I'm about to face an identity crisis but Ibis and Rocky Mountain haven't done it for me. I'm really digging Salsa, but I can only fat bike so much before I need that feel of a Ferrari kind of thing. I totally get the Switch and Switch Infinity, it's my kind of thinking and have similarly engineered solution in my brands of Motos (BMW GS and BMW G450X, Husaberg FE570) I don't like the norm.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,140
    if it don't have a front der... don't buy the **bleeping** thing!

    'Now, get off my lawn!!'

    -------------------------------------
    Opinions are like A-holes... everybody
    has one & they're usually full of...??
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,637
    Well I kinda miss big wheels on some big rides and I also kinda miss my SB95c on those rides too, hmmm I wonder?...

  71. #71
    Tribe Member
    Reputation: yetirich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    848
    So the largest ring you can put on this bike is 34t. Does that change anybody's opinion now? It is rated as XC/Trail but with only a 34T for racing seems a bit small. I know that some of the fast enduro kids use 36 or 38 depending on how much climbing there is.

    I cant ride 29'ers to begin with so I have no dog in the fight. Short kid with short legs....
    Proud Tribe member since 1992 - looking for better singletrack to be ridden year round

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by yetirich View Post
    So the largest ring you can put on this bike is 34t. Does that change anybody's opinion now? It is rated as XC/Trail but with only a 34T for racing seems a bit small. I know that some of the fast enduro kids use 36 or 38 depending on how much climbing there is.

    I cant ride 29'ers to begin with so I have no dog in the fight. Short kid with short legs....
    this is a double whammy as I run a 36 Oval on my ASRc and still cadence out on small down hills in Georgia. Granted 29" is bigger wheel and typical a guy on a 27.5 may run 2-4 teeth down on a 29", however I've never viewed Yeti as typical.
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    70
    I think 34T is about as large as I'd like to go/I could manage anyway so not really a problem.

    I currently run 26/38 up front with an 11-36 out back. The gear ratios that provides ranges from the largest (38F/11R) 3.5 to the smallest (26F/36R) 0.7. Granted my local XC ride from the door is 32km - 500M up/down so reasonably flat in comparison but I mainly never use the 26F throughout the summer months and only revert to 26F when the slop/winter arrives.

    In comparison, bigger days out in the mountains this year (Torridon, Arran, Lakes - 50km - 1200M+ up/down) meant lots of time climbing in the first 3 or 4 (26F/36-24R) gears. I won't lie.....first gear...a lot

    General riding, I'm mainly in the middle spread of gearing on the cassette (like most I imagine) so the gear ratios I have with 2x is more than achievable with 1x and 32T or 34T up front 11-42 out back. As for wanting low gear ratios for climbing and bigger days out. This is achievable by swapping out the front ring for something smaller surely? 28T or 30T?

    Yes, you'd lose a bit of the top end, but not by much and achieve the same mid to lower range. For example, 32F/11R is 2.9 (basically the same as 38F/13R on my current setup which I probably get into when on decent stretches of fireroad or roadwork between the trails), 32F/42R is 0.8 (basically 2nd gear on my current setup 26F/32R).

    The gear spread and ratios are there!!

    Anyway, the SB4.5C is bang tidy. As said before it ticks the boxes for me and as I'm not looking to transfer parts from an existing frame (which some seem to be and would mean new hubs/wheels for most) then this suits also.

    What I can't see/understand is if they intend to run a Boost 110 front as well as Boost 148 rear. Anyone know? Presume so.

    Not sure if there are typos on the Yeti site either:

    Yeti Cycles - SB4.5c

    66.5 HA? I thought it was 67.5? Eff. SA 67.4? Seems really slack. It mentions 27.5 wheels somewhere too?

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    34
    Anyway, Yeti please make a 29er that is front D compatible and costs the market norm
    Do you also say to Ferrari, please make a car that can take my kids, dog and a full supermarket shop and costs the same as the market norm Toyota?

    This thread is classic internet forum wanting a bike for the brand rather than for the bike itself and then being upset because the bike isn't what you can ride/afford. I've had a minor Yeti obsession for many years but went from my ASR5 to a Transition Smuggler because there wasn't anything in the Yeti line up that compared at the time. Now this new bike has come along and I can't afford it, but I can't afford a performance car either and drive an old Toyota.

    I was skeptical of the no front derailleur but there is no way I would go back to having one now. There is very little I can't get up that I couldn't before, a 42 out back would fix that anyway, and I rarely spin out the top gear.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofbiscuits View Post
    Not sure if there are typos on the Yeti site either:

    66.5 HA? I thought it was 67.5? Eff. SA 67.4? Seems really slack. It mentions 27.5 wheels somewhere too?
    There are usually a ton of typos on Yeti's site.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by biggusjimmus View Post
    Do you also say to Ferrari, please make a car that can take my kids, dog and a full supermarket shop and costs the same as the market norm Toyota?

    This thread is classic internet forum wanting a bike for the brand rather than for the bike itself and then being upset because the bike isn't what you can ride/afford. I've had a minor Yeti obsession for many years but went from my ASR5 to a Transition Smuggler because there wasn't anything in the Yeti line up that compared at the time. Now this new bike has come along and I can't afford it, but I can't afford a performance car either and drive an old Toyota.

    I was skeptical of the no front derailleur but there is no way I would go back to having one now. There is very little I can't get up that I couldn't before, a 42 out back would fix that anyway, and I rarely spin out the top gear.
    Ibis and Pivot are not the Toyotas to Yeti's Ferrari, yet still manage to charge significantly less. But if charging a premium has convinced you that Yeti is the Ferrari of this boutique segment of the market, then I guess the premium pricing/marketing strategy has worked.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    506
    The point has been made. This bike is not the end all, be all bike for everyone. Yeti has made the business decision to sell the bike at the price point the market is willing to accept.

    It does not have a FD, it has limited chain ring capacity. It only has 114mn of rear travel.

    If those are deal breakers...spend your money somewhere else. Or wait a few years and maybe Yeti will release something new.

    As far as pricing goes...big box brands sell frame sets for just as much. Treks new 9.9 fuel framset is ~$3500.

    The pivot is a steal for $2500! It's even cheaper than the Pivot SL @ $3000.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by D_Man View Post
    Ibis and Pivot are not the Toyotas to Yeti's Ferrari, yet still manage to charge significantly less. But if charging a premium has convinced you that Yeti is the Ferrari of this boutique segment of the market, then I guess the premium pricing/marketing strategy has worked.

    Here let me help you to the right section..

    Ibis - Mtbr.com

    Pivot Cycles - Mtbr.com

  79. #79
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,745
    The Pivot 429 Trail is like the Santa Cruz's value level carbon option actually. The frame weight is significantly higher than their regular 429 SL.

    Yetis are winning races, no doubts about that. You should see Dan Atherton's final stage whistler run where he came in 3rd (for that stage, 12th overall), behind Richie Rude. Dan put in no lack of effort to earn that spot. Can't deny the bike playing a role in creating that difference. You guys complaining about price are totally discounting the race-worthiness; if you're complaining about the price, I have doubts that you'd be even worthy of being on such a bike.


  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by mattwright999 View Post
    Here let me help you to the right section..

    Ibis - Mtbr.com

    Pivot Cycles - Mtbr.com
    I've had a glass of the Yeti kool-aid. It's good stuff. You clearly drank two.

  81. #81
    Stupid is, as stupid does
    Reputation: spunkmtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    624
    Quote Originally Posted by biggusjimmus View Post
    Do you also say to Ferrari, please make a car that can take my kids, dog and a full supermarket shop and costs the same as the market norm Toyota?

    This thread is classic internet forum wanting a bike for the brand rather than for the bike itself and then being upset because the bike isn't what you can ride/afford. I've had a minor Yeti obsession for many years but went from my ASR5 to a Transition Smuggler because there wasn't anything in the Yeti line up that compared at the time. Now this new bike has come along and I can't afford it, but I can't afford a performance car either and drive an old Toyota.

    I was skeptical of the no front derailleur but there is no way I would go back to having one now. There is very little I can't get up that I couldn't before, a 42 out back would fix that anyway, and I rarely spin out the top gear.
    A Ferrari would never limit you to a 34T front chainring, more would a Ferrari limit your gearing options to not go as fast as you want. Sorry buddy, not a Ferrari. Maybe a 911 Turbo S, but this misses the ferrari mark by a long shot. As another poster said opinions are like A-Holes.Everyone on here as one and we are all full of our own poop
    Yeti SB95C
    Carver Ti 420
    Ibis HD3

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Hard to believe a 36T won't fit. There has to be a way. Not that I have any use for a 36T anyway.

  83. #83
    Stupid is, as stupid does
    Reputation: spunkmtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    624
    Quote Originally Posted by mattwright999 View Post
    Here let me help you to the right section..

    Ibis - Mtbr.com

    Pivot Cycles - Mtbr.com
    I have owned both. I will take my Yeti SB95C. Both the Pivot & Ibis has left the quiver. I was just using them as an example. I have been riding Yeti's since 2004 & lusting after them since the early 90's. I know this bike hit's the mark for some. For what I was looking for they have missed it. Everyone on here has there own boxes that need checking.
    Yeti SB95C
    Carver Ti 420
    Ibis HD3

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    34
    It looks like it isn't made any more but I'd thought this might be more suitable for those wanting a triple up front and a "market norm" price https://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-us...0/14835/66296/

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Awesome suggestion. A discontinued bike. I think there are few more viable options...

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Awesome suggestion. A discontinued bike. I think there are few more viable options...
    I'll go to ranting about lack of FD, at least it's on topic, ha!
    SB5.5c XL M70HV EagleGold
    BearGrease Bluto XL XTR 2x10/1x
    SB95c L EnveAM Pike140 XTR 3x10
    ASRc L RS-1 120 EnveM60 XTR 1x11

  87. #87
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by biggusjimmus View Post
    It looks like it isn't made any more but I'd thought this might be more suitable for those wanting a triple up front and a "market norm" price https://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-us...0/14835/66296/
    17.8" chainstays and 69.5 degree headangle. It doesn't really fit with the aggressive short-travel 29'er theme going on here.
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    505
    I find it odd that the SB4.5C isn't available in Turquoise.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    506
    Unconfirmed, but I'm hearing yeti turquoise is not popular, and you might see other bikes discontinued in the near future.

  90. #90
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by wrinklefree View Post
    I find it odd that the SB4.5C isn't available in Turquoise.
    Agreed. I think that's the real issue here. Everyone knows Turquoise is the fastest color. I bet no one would even want/need a front derailleur if they had this bike in Turquoise. Or better yet, that sexy 30th anniversary color scheme. I'd be so fast on that I could the front chainring altogether. Freaking 0x. It's the future.
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Awesome suggestion. A discontinued bike. I think there are few more viable options...
    My main thrust wasn't so much the specific bike, but it doesn't matter.

  92. #92
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,078
    Quote Originally Posted by DLd View Post
    Agreed. I think that's the real issue here. Everyone knows Turquoise is the fastest color. I bet no one would even want/need a front derailleur if they had this bike in Turquoise. Or better yet, that sexy 30th anniversary color scheme. I'd be so fast on that I could the front chainring altogether. Freaking 0x. It's the future.
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to DLd again.
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,131
    Quote Originally Posted by MostChillin View Post
    It's clear that Yeti has taken this position in the market. It's not a knock at all - it is what it is and it's not hard to see based on their current model and pricing strategy.

    Strictly from a business analysis perspective (I have an investment/M&A background albeit not in the bike industry), an interesting model to build on for the future. Santa Cruz stood this position for a long time but finally caved and started offering a broader range to appeal to a broader market. Possibly for acquisition? Maybe.

    Every market has at least one of these players, Ferrari being the benchmark, whereby consumers of that particular brand purchase based on actual value ("what am I getting for my money") AND perceived value ("brand value"). Some pay for it; others do not.



    I agree to an extent. Clearly there is a part of the market, based on comments, that do not feel that price point is inline with the rest of the market. And that's OK per my comments above.

    I do think the price point is valid conversation point in consideration of price points of similar bikes. I do not think there is any value in coming into the conversation and just crapping on the price point however, even though that is human nature.



    With regard to Trek's pricing strategy, two comments. One, they want to sell completes, simple as that. Two, "perceived value" per my prior comments. Plenty of Trek fans that won't ride anything else regardless of what is available and will pay to do so. And frankly, most of these consumers won't pay full price because they have that established relationship with their local Trek dealer.

    The Pivot Trail 429 pricing is spot on and hopefully a sign of things to come. The fact of the matter is that carbon and carbon manufacturing costs are coming down. The challenge for bike manufacturers is how to pass those savings onto consumers without hurting "perceived value" (in this case, carbon) and especially without the next big thing on the horizon (I don't count e-bikes). Interesting times ahead indeed.
    One addition to this, Yeti is selling every bike they make and then some. SB5/6's are sold out until January, which again lines up with the Ferrari strategy. An artificial shortage only further increases demand, plus builds additional brand loyalty with current owners.

    And for the people complaining about only a 34T, it is simple geometry.

    Mud Clearance/Short Chain Stays/Big Front Ring

    Pick any two

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post

    Mud Clearance/Short Chain Stays/Big Front Ring

    Pick any two
    Mud clearance/short chainstays/big front ring/No BOOST

    Now you get to pick 3.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    309
    So given that the SB 4.5c shares design elements with the other SB models, is there any way to be able to use a front dérailleur on this one like some of the other models?

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    And for the people complaining about only a 34T, it is simple geometry.
    Mud Clearance/Short Chain Stays/Big Front Ring
    Pick any two

    From Yeti's site on chainring size.
    "Without getting too technical, the max chainring size depends on the crank chainline. On the SB4.5c, Shimano / SRAM Boost cranks can run up to a 36T chainring."

  97. #97
    Int'l Sales Mgr. - Yeti
    Reputation: John P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    655
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    One addition to this, Yeti is selling every bike they make and then some. SB5/6's are sold out until January, which again lines up with the Ferrari strategy. An artificial shortage only further increases demand, plus builds additional brand loyalty with current owners.
    There's nothing artificial about our shortages - we have our factory running at 100%, but the truth is our bikes take a very long time to build in order to hit our QC standards. For what it's worth, we have SB5c's available to sell right now, and we'll have some SB6's available to sell in late October. We'll never have huge piles of these things laying around though, because demand continues to be high and our production capacity as a small company will be finite for the foreseeable future.

    Quote Originally Posted by EricD4 View Post
    So given that the SB 4.5c shares design elements with the other SB models, is there any way to be able to use a front dérailleur on this one like some of the other models?
    Sorry, there is no front derailleur mount on the SB45. There are some super wide range 1x11 setups now though, and I think you'll find that once you get one of these dialed in for your style of riding and local trails, you'll have a hard time remembering why you used a front derailleur back in the day.
    Yeti Cycles// Ride Driven

    Please Email rather than PM: johnp AT yeticycles DOT com

    Instagram: @heyjohnp

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    506
    John P.

    As you so eloquently stated before:

    Yeti pricing

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by John P. View Post
    Sorry, there is no front derailleur mount on the SB45. There are some super wide range 1x11 setups now though, and I think you'll find that once you get one of these dialed in for your style of riding and local trails, you'll have a hard time remembering why you used a front derailleur back in the day.
    That's unfortunate as I disagree with your assessment of the 1x11 drivetrain adaptability based on my experience.

    Thanks for the response

    -E

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by John P. View Post
    There's nothing artificial about our shortages - we have our factory running at 100%, but the truth is our bikes take a very long time to build in order to hit our QC standards. For what it's worth, we have SB5c's available to sell right now, and we'll have some SB6's available to sell in late October. We'll never have huge piles of these things laying around though, because demand continues to be high and our production capacity as a small company will be finite for the foreseeable future.


    Sorry, there is no front derailleur mount on the SB45. There are some super wide range 1x11 setups now though, and I think you'll find that once you get one of these dialed in for your style of riding and local trails, you'll have a hard time remembering why you used a front derailleur back in the day.

    I agree with John on this. My bike came is a 24/38T setup and I ditched it after 2 months (NEVER EVEN USED THE 38T ring). I currently run a 30T ring but for my SB6 I plan on using a 32T.

Page 1 of 21 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2012 yeti asr-5 or 2014 yeti sb95
    By Yetimnstr575 in forum Yeti
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-20-2015, 06:14 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 05:31 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-01-2013, 01:11 PM
  4. Yeti-man's Yeti Pro FRO disc version
    By digilux in forum Vintage, Retro, Classic
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 07-11-2011, 07:56 AM
  5. Yeti 575 vs. Yeti ASR 5C for Grass Valley/Tahoe
    By schweisd in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-09-2011, 12:41 PM

Members who have read this thread: 522

Posting Permissions

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