I ride a Stache 9 and love it but you will hear this again I am sure...Do you have a local shop where you can demo each bike? It is tough for anyone to give you good advice without knowing the type of riding you do and what your local trails are like. Even with that, there is nothing better than riding them for yourself and getting a feel for which you like best. Good luck!
Woodsmoke should be lighter with its carbon frame. I give the nod to the Woodsmoke as well for having a better tensioning system. The dropouts and rear axle on the Stache are prone to creeking (based off my experience with the Superfly that shares the same design).
Don't think the Woodsmoke is out yet, but if given the opportunity you should try to demo both.
I wouldn't assume that. Carbon doesn't always mean "lighter." Logan @ bikepacking.com posted a review of the Woodsmoke recently, with a large Woodsmoke weighing in just shy of 30lbs. And that was with Whisky alloy rims, 1x11 drivetrain, tubeless.
The difference between that and the stock Stache 9 is splitting hairs.
Here's the deal, unless you rent one, you're very unlikely to get a demo at a bike shop that's worth anything. A lot of shops will rent you one then apply the rental cost back against the sale if you so choose. If you aren't in a hurry, I put the links to the demo days down below. I'd also befriend my local shops that sell the models that you want because shops can sometimes arrange for demo days that aren't on the list.
The demo days are a great way to test because they set you up basically on a trail so you can try it in real conditions. Parking lots are always a bad test and even more so on 'unusual' set ups like + bikes.
Haven't tried a woodsmoke yet so can't tell you between them. I do love my Stache though. My experience with Salsa has been historically mostly positive.
I read some reviews: the Woodsmoke should have somewhat larger space for a frame bag, extra bottle (or bag) mounts on the bottom and top of the frame, slightly higher bottom bracket (less pedal stroke, but I don't know if it's a benefit), and arguably larger tire clearance.
Many people may disagree. I personally don't care about the "style", but the Salsa just looks more versatile (more wheels and drivetrain options, more adaptable to bikepacking). Still wondering how the Stache could be 2 lb less, even if it's not a deal breaker for me. Maybe lighter tires?
Edit: I just checked, maybe 50g more per tire, not a big difference.
I can't speak to the Stache, but I rode a Woodsmoke on a Salsa demo day. Can't say I was that impressed. They say it's intentionally flexy, but it felt like every bump send a vibration reverberating through the frame. Very unnerving in a rock garden. That said, it's probably nice on a dirt road tour where you're on the bike all day.
All ATMO of course, and I'll admit I rarely like the way carbon rides.
Huh. That's interesting feedback. I didn't notice any real flex during my week with the Woodsmoke, but you're not the first I've heard that from. Granted, I didn't get a chance to ride it on any super rocky stuff, but I did push it fairly hard. Frankly, I was focusing a bit more on BB flex during climbing, and how the bike cornered.
We have our Salsa demo day coming up next month at our local ski area. I'll hit some rock sections with this in mind.
Trek has more options for frame material and models. New Stache 7 looks like a great bargain.
I don't know if I would use a carbon bike for bikepacking even if it saves a little weight.
Stache BB is around 13 inches which is not what I would consider low particularly for a hardtail. Most hardtails are closer to 12 inches.
We sort of know the Stache pros and cons by now but not the Woodsmoke's.
I really like my Stache 5 both rigid and with a Manitou Pro fork on it.
I have been tempted by the Stache a couple times. I keep reminding myself I don't need another rigid/HT bike in addition to the Mighty Krampus, but I do find myself occassionally perving on the Stache page over at the Trek website.
I was lucky to met a guy riding the Woodsmoke 29+ X01 yesterday... (the guy is testing the bike for Dirtragmag). I tried the woodsmoke myself for a few minutes, and I was impressed by how much it did not feel like a 29+. Seemed very nimble and light.
Aesthetics just looked great, not that I really care...
The long reach made the large framesize look huge. I ride XL usually but this large size actually felt ok.
I could jump and carve curves, everything was beautiful and my wallet will cry.
Coming from personal experience and riding both the Stache is a nicer bike in technical and climbing conditions probably because of its slightly steeper headangle. The carbon Stache is sweet but stiff like the woodsmoke and the aluminum Stache is significantly more supple than both and rides fantastically with either 29+ or 27+.
Has any one else noticed the rather "affordable" price for Stache carbon frameset compared to e.g. woodsmoke? I am in Europe and with 10% discount on Stache 2017 frameset I can get it almost 1000 USD cheaper. Is there a reason for that. Is Stache some cheap carbon or what?
I'd have more faith in Trek's carbon layup than Salsa's if I had to pick one as superior based on the capabilities of the company's engineering muscle. That said I don't have any concerns about riding either bike. Trek is a much bigger company so I would expect it can do anything it wants cheaper than Salsa simply due to economies of scale - all else being equal.
If you are in Europe you may also be dealing with a distributor margin getting tacked onto the Salsa that is either not on the Trek or is lower on the Trek - again due to huge difference in sales volume between the companies.
The Stache looks great. If I had room in the fleet for another 29+ along side my Krampus I wouldn't hesitate to ride one.
Making the frame is the easy part, it's all the work that goes into it beforehand that matters...and let's not forget that Salsa isn't the Salsa of the past. It hasn't been for a while, none of the QBP brands are, nor will they ever be again.
I guess if you want to pay more for less, go ahead. Maybe the UCI will make a 27lb minimum weight limit for 29+ bikes and make the Stache 9.8 illegal.
My level of aggression in this reply is directly commensurate with how wrong is the above statement. As someone in manufacturing and design for about 30 years, you have zero authority and experience relative to this subject. You won't find anyone with OEM experience to agree with your ridiculous comment above. Please retract it now.
...and let's not forget that Salsa isn't the Salsa of the past. It hasn't been for a while, none of the QBP brands are...
I went in to a local Salsa dealer and was interested in the Timberjack, however I was surprisingly drawn to the $3000 Woodsmoke (29+ GX build) instead. I did some research on other 29+ bikes, which led to the Trek Stache, and I ultimately purchased a 17 Stache 9.6.
For me, it wasn't cost but differences in the details ... I liked that the Stache has some integrated frame protection, a better frame warranty, and a slightly better build kit in places. The long exposed down-tube and BB area of the Woodsmoke worried me the most - I could see rocks, etc causing damage in that area. Also the Trek seemed to me to offer a more upright riding position, which my old back appreciates.
Both are great bikes in 27.5 +. Have both and the salsa is by far the nicest and it's night and day
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
15.4M posts
515.2K members
Since 1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!