Revel Rascal vs Ibis Ripley V4- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 27 of 27
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    508

    Revel Rascal vs Ibis Ripley V4

    I am looking to replace a 29er medium travel bike frame with something a little newer in design. I will be using my Fox 140mm forks from my existing bike, XO1 group (more or less) and a mix of other decent parts. Looking to build a trail bike that is good for climbing and all day (central Rocky Mountain area) trail riding on the bike. I think I have narrowed my choice down to Ripley V4 vs Revel Rascal. Although I haven't yet ridden either. I am checking to see which bike others would choose in this situation.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    120
    Iíve only pedaled the Ripley on the parking lot for a minute. I own the rascal.

    My opinion is the Ripley is a bit lighter and climbs a bit lighter. A bit better in tight places. And comes alive quicker on easier terrain.

    The rascal is a couple notches more aggressive, and capable. While being just a tiny bit worst at climbing.

    I think the rascal gives up 1 point on the climbs but makes up 2 points on the descents. They are both great in the flats/traverses, with Ripley being a little snappier and the rascal handling flat chunk better.

    Obviously Iím extrapolating and making some assumptions here.

    If your emphasis is strongly on light weight build and climbing, I think the ripley wins out. Otherwise I think rascal wins out. If your emphasis is on mountain biking: rascal wins.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    539
    Quote Originally Posted by Gratefulone View Post
    Iíve only pedaled the Ripley on the parking lot for a minute. I own the rascal.

    My opinion is the Ripley is a bit lighter and climbs a bit lighter. A bit better in tight places. And comes alive quicker on easier terrain.

    The rascal is a couple notches more aggressive, and capable. While being just a tiny bit worst at climbing.

    I think the rascal gives up 1 point on the climbs but makes up 2 points on the descents. They are both great in the flats/traverses, with Ripley being a little snappier and the rascal handling flat chunk better.

    Obviously Iím extrapolating and making some assumptions here.

    If your emphasis is strongly on light weight build and climbing, I think the ripley wins out. Otherwise I think rascal wins out. If your emphasis is on mountain biking: rascal wins.
    Similar experience on the Ripley, and a good chunk of time on the Ibis DW platform, and a Rascal owner.

    I think Gratefulone nailed it. I tested most 130mm bikes in the class prior to buying a Rascal (sight unseen), and am so happy with it.

    My bias is towards suffering more on the ups, to have more fun on the downs.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    5
    Can anybody compare the Smuggler of 2018 with those bikes? I'm riding a Smuggler but uphill it really feels like an Enduro... Something quicker would be nice with the same fun at the descend

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,230
    I had my mind set on the Rascal (before the price went up). For my needs of 10000' vert days, the Rascal frame was too heavy and it pedaled poorly compared to the Ibis. And I snagged a new Ripley V4 with Factory rear shock for hundreds less than the Revel. Revel couldn't match that. If I had a 140 fork and wasn't concerned about climbing prowess, I'd be on a Rascal as my top choice. Gorgeous frame.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigdrunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,300
    What did they cost before the price increase? Rascal frames still seem pretty well priced at $2,800 (with a headset).

    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    I had my mind set on the Rascal (before the price went up)

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    191
    A ripley frame with factory shock is almost $3,000 so it would seem ripley would be hundreds more unless there are deals to be had

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,638
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdrunk View Post
    What did they cost before the price increase? Rascal frames still seem pretty well priced at $2,800 (with a headset).
    The price didn't actually go up. They now ship their bikes in an Evoc roll away travel case which you can decide to keep OR send back to them and they refund you the $200 or so. Simply was a new policy (and smart one too)... and they're STILL cheaper than a Ripley! I know for my riding style this would be a no brainer - Rascal for sure (Canfield Balance owner so I know what their suspensions can do).

    Have FUN!

    G MAN
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbrockenchain View Post
    A ripley frame with factory shock is almost $3,000 so it would seem ripley would be hundreds more unless there are deals to be had
    I, and many others, were getting them delivered in the US for $2500, and that's with the Factory rear shock.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    The price didn't actually go up. They now ship their bikes in an Evoc roll away travel case which you can decide to keep OR send back to them and they refund you the $300 or so. Simply was a new policy (and smart one too)... and they're STILL cheaper than a Ripley! I know for my riding style this would be a no brainer - Rascal for sure (Canfield Balance owner so I know what their suspensions can do).

    Have FUN!

    G MAN
    When I was interested, around April, Revel told me the EVOC was for complete bikes, and it was a $200 refund. The frame shipped in a cardboard box, and it was $2599 plus shipping before the price increase. Ripley V4 with Factory rear shock are $2500 delivered.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,638
    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    When I was interested, around April, Revel told me the EVOC was for complete bikes, and it was a $200 refund. The frame shipped in a cardboard box, and it was $2599 plus shipping before the price increase. Ripley V4 with Factory rear shock are $2500 delivered.
    I corrected my post with the proper refund amount but still... the Ripley is $2999 in the US with Factory shock so how do you come up with $2500 unless you're a dealer maybe?
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,322
    I am a bit in a similar situation. From my HT 100mm 29er i was looking for some wider rims, some more travel and finaly i decided i will stretch my fork to 120mm. This 21 pounder is a good match for a small rider like me and all the components do a great job.
    Maybe a new bike will be your solution or maybe an upgrade?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    I corrected my post with the proper refund amount but still... the Ripley is $2999 in the US with Factory shock so how do you come up with $2500 unless you're a dealer maybe?
    I am not a dealer. Not in the industry at all. Simply called a well-known Ibis dealer, and a large black Factory V4 frame showed up a week later. It was word-of-mouth via mtbr, no "catches" or funny business.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigdrunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,300
    Nice. That is a killer deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    I am not a dealer. Not in the industry at all. Simply called a well-known Ibis dealer, and a large black Factory V4 frame showed up a week later. It was word-of-mouth via mtbr, no "catches" or funny business.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    439
    I was looking at both of these bikes myself. I picked up a Rascal from the Revel headquarters in Carbondale and took it on a 3 hr demo ride. I really liked it. It pedaled great and I was amazed by the rear suspension. I've ridden a lot of bikes and this was the first one I've tried where the suspension actually worked while braking. Noticeably so. Some are better than others but usually when you grab the rear brake, the back end stiffens and you end up skipping around. Not on the Rascal. However, I had quite a few pedal strikes. The cranks were 175 mm and the fork was set at 140.

    A week later I demoed a Ripley from my LBS. My impression is that it is more plush than the Rascal yet still pedaled just as well. The Ripley seemed a little more nimble, too. Being able to ride my local trails, which I know super well, may have helped but I bought the Ripley. With more time to tune the suspension to my liking, I may have gone for the Rascal but straight from the shop floor to the trails on the Ripley felt fantastic and that was only with the shop kid setting sag. I didn't touch anything else. The pedal strikes on the Rascal were a downer for me, too. They are both amazing bikes and you really can't go wrong with either one, though.

    One thing to consider is availability. My LBS tried to order a Ripley frame for me and Ibis said it was going to be November before they could deliver it. I had to call around to a few places but Velorangutan had one in stock and gave me a good price on it.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    417
    Has anyone compared a rascal to a Guerrilla gravity Trail Pistol or Smash? I'd like to get time on one. I would also ask the same for the new Orbea Occam, but I really doubt anyone has tried this one yet!
    French line enthusiast and expat in Denver, ig; lazoup

    Knight 650b wheelset FS

    I Like bikes, I really do

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by 12snap View Post
    ..... The pedal strikes on the Rascal were a downer for me, too......
    Both bikes are listed with a BB height of 13.2 - are you saying you don't get pedal strikes with the Ripley? (I understand pedal strikes in earlier versions of the Ripley were an issue for many riders, but I think the BB was even lower.) thanks!

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    439
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Both bikes are listed with a BB height of 13.2 - are you saying you don't get pedal strikes with the Ripley? (I understand pedal strikes in earlier versions of the Ripley were an issue for many riders, but I think the BB was even lower.) thanks!
    I get an occasional pedal strike with the Ripley but they're not nearly as prevalent as they were on the Rascal. I'm running a Pike 140 fork and 175 mm cranks on the Ripley. The Rascal I rode had a Fox 34 and 175 cranks. I think the Rascal just rides a little lower in it's travel. The Rascal was set up by the Revel guys themselves so it was done correctly. If I remember correctly, it was a little on the softer side of the setup range but within acceptable standards. I like a little softer bike so I had them leave it as it was. That could have contributed as well. I've read other reviews of the Rascal that also commented on pedal strikes.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by 12snap View Post
    I get an occasional pedal strike with the Ripley but they're not nearly as prevalent as they were on the Rascal. I'm running a Pike 140 fork and 175 mm cranks on the Ripley.....
    Thanks for your input. I think what happened is the 140 fork on the Ripley has bumped up the BB height just a bit from the listed BB for a 130 fork (could you check?) giving you a bit more clearance. The Rascal's BB is listed for a 140 mm fork. I'm looking for 13.5 and up - pedal strikes are very annoying for me climbing uneven terrain.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigdrunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,300
    That sounds like the case. Running a 140mm fork will raise the BB enough to make a difference. I had the original LS with a 12.8Ē high BB and pedal strikes were unbearable with a 130mm fork and 175mm cranks. I ended up bumping the fork to 140mm and running the shock sag a touch on the firm side which made a huge difference.

    Anyways in this situation the Rascal would need to run a 150mm fork to be fair comparison to the Ripley at 140mm I think?

    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Thanks for your input. I think what happened is the 140 fork on the Ripley has bumped up the BB height just a bit from the listed BB for a 130 fork (could you check?) giving you a bit more clearance.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    539
    Both great bikes, but different enough to suit personal preferences I think.

    I could eliminate most pedal strikes and get a stiffer climbing platform via shock set up, but I think it dulls what I think makes the Rascal suspension characteristics great.

    It used to be Iíd test ride to weed out bikes that didnít ride well, now itís to pick between great and greater.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by NS-NV View Post
    Both great bikes, but different enough to suit personal preferences I think.

    I could eliminate most pedal strikes and get a stiffer climbing platform via shock set up, but I think it dulls what I think makes the Rascal suspension characteristics great.

    It used to be Iíd test ride to weed out bikes that didnít ride well, now itís to pick between great and greater.
    Pedal strikes is just something i hate. I have long legs(34.5in inseams).
    I switched from 175 to 165 and it is all good.
    IMHO 175 is only for road.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: starre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdrunk View Post
    That sounds like the case. Running a 140mm fork will raise the BB enough to make a difference.
    apologies for obsessing over the point - bigdrunk - after getting in a few more rides on that gorgeous Alchemy (same class bike as the Ripley and Rascal), any plans for modifications (shorter cranks, longer fork, etc) or are pedal strikes a non-issue on the ST? thanks!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigdrunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,300
    I switched to 170mm cranks for the first time when I built the Alchemy. There have been many situations that I braced myselffor a pedal strike and nothing happens. Not sure if it is the bike, the ever so slightly shorter cranks that make the difference there. After a few rides I am starting to think pedal strikes are not going to be a problem. I got a lot on my Ripley LS and Fugitive LT with 175mm cranks.

    The Alchemy as-is is perfect. Still cannot think of anything remotely negative to say about it. Flawless handling with the 42mm offset Pike Ultimate.


    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    apologies for obsessing over the point - bigdrunk - after getting in a few more rides on that gorgeous Alchemy (same class bike as the Ripley and Rascal), any plans for modifications (shorter cranks, longer fork, etc) or are pedal strikes a non-issue on the ST? thanks!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    439
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Thanks for your input. I think what happened is the 140 fork on the Ripley has bumped up the BB height just a bit from the listed BB for a 130 fork (could you check?) giving you a bit more clearance. The Rascal's BB is listed for a 140 mm fork. I'm looking for 13.5 and up - pedal strikes are very annoying for me climbing uneven terrain.
    I finally got a chance to measure the BB height on my Ripley. I get 13.5 inches with a Pike 140, Minion DHR 2.4 front and Specialized Ground Control 2.35 in back. The stock 2.6 tires that come on the Ripley would add a bit of height as well.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BacDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by starre View Post
    Thanks for your input. I think what happened is the 140 fork on the Ripley has bumped up the BB height just a bit from the listed BB for a 130 fork (could you check?) giving you a bit more clearance. The Rascal's BB is listed for a 140 mm fork. I'm looking for 13.5 and up - pedal strikes are very annoying for me climbing uneven terrain.
    One of the reasons I got rid of my former ďnewĒ bike was pedal strikes. Every ďnew geoĒ bike I rode in the 2017/2018 versions handled, turned and descended way better with longer slacker deal but every one seemed to get pedal strikes on my single track root trails. The fix was over airing the suspension or change your technique. I tried that for a year but didnít enjoy either of those. Most of my trails are constant pedaling and with my older bikes pedal strikes happened but mostly from rider error and they were rare.

    I demo Ripley V4 on my favorite trail (Large and Iím definitely XL) and no pedal strikes on the 3.5 mile lap. Not even one, I even tried to pedal more, nothing stupid just to push the issue. Surprised the $hit out of me as I thought every new geo bike was susceptible to this. Cranks were 175, suspension Fox Factory, tires were Maxxis 2.6. Also felt the ďpoppyĒ description that I read in other reviews. My trails lack elevation that can provide speed for big air so you gotta work the terrain for lift. Bike is pretty easy to launch off small features for me and Iím no expert jumper.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,638
    Quote Originally Posted by 12snap View Post
    I finally got a chance to measure the BB height on my Ripley. I get 13.5 inches with a Pike 140, Minion DHR 2.4 front and Specialized Ground Control 2.35 in back. The stock 2.6 tires that come on the Ripley would add a bit of height as well.
    That's interesting because I demo'd a Ripmo that was "supposed" to have a very similar BB height to the SB130 yet the latter was a good half inch lower (same size) so... I'm thinking Ibis is fudging their BB height numbers to make them look lower than actual (more in line with the industry trend). That's great for those looking for rock clearance but I'm not and far prefer the lower BB height which gives a more "in the bike" feel. Ibis bikes are definitely not for me.

    Have FUN!

    G
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

Similar Threads

  1. 2019 Ibis Ripley V4
    By alexbn921 in forum Ibis
    Replies: 2225
    Last Post: 3 Hours Ago, 05:32 AM
  2. Ibis Ripley V4 Setup / Tuning Thread
    By matt.s67 in forum Ibis
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 1 Week Ago, 12:25 PM
  3. Revel Rascal
    By Gratefulone in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 3 Weeks Ago, 09:37 PM
  4. Ripley V4 vs Tallboy V4.....
    By Unbrockenchain in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-07-2019, 12:23 PM
  5. Pivot 429 Trail vs Ibis Ripley v4
    By Alias530 in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-01-2019, 07:15 PM

Members who have read this thread: 286

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.