2020 Sight- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 52 of 52

Thread: 2020 Sight

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    103

    2020 Sight

    These look pretty sweet! Closer to the Range territory now. Debating whether one of these should be my next bike.

    I have a 18' Range XL that I increased the travel in the fork to 170mm(same as the 19' models).It has a HA of 65, STA 73.2, Reach of 479mm, TT is 669mm, Wheelbase of 1253mm. The 20' Sight has a HA of 64, STA of 78, Reach of 515m, TT 649mm and Wheelbase is 1301mm.

    The biggest differences I see is the STA is 5į steeper and the wheelbase 48mm longer. I haven't ridden a bike with that steep of STA, does it make that big of a difference climbing?
    I ride the North Shore, many of the trails have tight turns, I already find the XL Range challenging in some of the techy, tight and steep corners, cutting it wide as possible to get through. What are these longer wheelbase bikes like in the tight corners?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,098
    Personally excited for this bike to appear in local demo fleet, and at least on paper(all the online launch reviews) - it sounds like the bike im looking for. 2014 Sight was the real "game changer" bike for me. Went to a Spot Rollik 557 in 2017 which took the Sight to that next level. THIS bike sounds like the bike I'm looking for as Im ready to go back to 29er (i rode full suspension 29ers when frankly pre 2014 - they mostly sucked - but i still liked the big wheel).

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: In2falling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by Graveltattoo View Post
    The biggest differences I see is the STA is 5į steeper and the wheelbase 48mm longer. I haven't ridden a bike with that steep of STA, does it make that big of a difference climbing?
    I have ridden a few of the "new geo" bikes with steep STAs, only place I found the steeper STA to be of benefit is when the climbing gets really steep.

    Quote Originally Posted by Graveltattoo View Post
    I ride the North Shore, many of the trails have tight turns, I already find the XL Range challenging in some of the techy, tight and steep corners, cutting it wide as possible to get through. What are these longer wheelbase bikes like in the tight corners?
    You will definitely feel an extra 50mm of wheelbase in slower tight twisty stuff, it's going to turn like a 747 taxiing down LAX.

    All this "new geo" stuff is all a trade off. Longer slacker will make it more capable/stable at speed in flowy rough stuff. Then make it tiring work in slow twisty stuff.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Anyone know what a Stan's Flow D rim is? Nothing on Stan's website by that name. Mk3? EX3? Some kind of OEM?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    Have an A2 or order, should have it in a few days. I think it is supposed to have the Stans D whatever it is...

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    6
    Anyone know if the AL frames have a threaded bb? I can't find it in the specs.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    35
    The Flow D rims are OEM, similar profile to the S1 rim but with some additional bracing within the rim (maybe to account for lower spec alloy???). 634g for the 29, 584g for 27.5 so not light (S1 29 is 584g)
    Threaded BB on the A1, also I weighed the large A1 with tubeless setup and it was 15.5kg

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Anth08 View Post
    The Flow D rims are OEM, similar profile to the S1 rim but with some additional bracing within the rim (maybe to account for lower spec alloy???). 634g for the 29, 584g for 27.5 so not light (S1 29 is 584g)
    Threaded BB on the A1, also I weighed the large A1 with tubeless setup and it was 15.5kg
    Thank you muchly for the info! Threaded BB is good news at least!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    857
    Odd but this bike seems not to be getting any attention on the forum---the Optic seems to not have big interest either.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by pctloper View Post
    Odd but this bike seems not to be getting any attention on the forum---the Optic seems to not have big interest either.
    Maybe because Norco released both a bit late relative to all the other big players? People's interest has moved on a bit?

    I know this is being critical, bit I'm trying to figure out why the sight carbon frame is so much more expensive than the Optic? Only difference is 25mm travel and carbon seatstays. Puts the sight carbon builds out of my price range.

    Day off tomorrow, going to head down to the local shop and fondle both (Optic and Sight).

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Anth08 View Post
    The Flow D rims are OEM, similar profile to the S1 rim but with some additional bracing within the rim (maybe to account for lower spec alloy???). 634g for the 29, 584g for 27.5 so not light (S1 29 is 584g)
    Threaded BB on the A1, also I weighed the large A1 with tubeless setup and it was 15.5kg
    Threaded BB eh, damn, now I might just have to get one....

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by percivilla View Post
    Maybe because Norco released both a bit late relative to all the other big players? People's interest has moved on a bit?

    I know this is being critical, bit I'm trying to figure out why the sight carbon frame is so much more expensive than the Optic? Only difference is 25mm travel and carbon seatstays. Puts the sight carbon builds out of my price range.

    Day off tomorrow, going to head down to the local shop and fondle both (Optic and Sight).
    Having ridden the new Sight... it's phenomenal! I'm incredibly excited to buy one, coming off a very similar bike comparing dimensions and angles (the Transition Sentinel), but on the trail it just does everything better... climbs better, more traction, easier to move around, faster...

    The frame only option also has an X2, which is definitely has an added cost associated.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Wait, I thought the new sight had a PF BB? Youíre saying the aluminum ones have a threaded BB? That was literally the only thing I had ďagainstĒ it (ie, my only preference it didnít have).

    And, Iím confused why this isnít getting more talk as well. The sight seems perfect to me. Slack hta, steep sta, and chain stay lengths adapting to the size of the bike/rider... all with a reduced offset fork, and standard 4 piston brakes on each build kit? Whatís not to like?

    I still need to find one to demo, but assuming that goes well, I may be trying to find my way into one sometime in the future.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    35
    Press fit on the carbon frames, 99% sure the A1 had a threaded BB (external cups with tool interface both sides).

    Iím stuck on the sizing, I rode the large, Iím 174cm so on the limit of what the charts say for Medium. The large felt really long and I think the wheelbase and Reach on the M will more manageable on my local tracks however the short ett has me beaten, itís about 25mm shorter than my current M trance. I guess people just pedal in a more upright position with the steep seat angle.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    Wait, I thought the new sight had a PF BB? Youíre saying the aluminum ones have a threaded BB? That was literally the only thing I had ďagainstĒ it (ie, my only preference it didnít have).

    And, Iím confused why this isnít getting more talk as well. The sight seems perfect to me. Slack hta, steep sta, and chain stay lengths adapting to the size of the bike/rider... all with a reduced offset fork, and standard 4 piston brakes on each build kit? Whatís not to like?

    I still need to find one to demo, but assuming that goes well, I may be trying to find my way into one sometime in the future.
    I've never had an issue with a pressfit BB, last one was on a 2018 Range carbon with Raceface Next R cranks. I made sure to get a Wheels BB because the BB cup is also the bearing race, allowing them to use larger sided ball bearings... not a single squeak.

    As far as the Sight... there's a lot to like! There's a bit of a learning curve with the reduced offset fork and the handling (front end grip and staying centered), if you haven't ridden something similar, but I couldn't say much more than "it's a great bike" and "I want one" after riding it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anth08 View Post
    Press fit on the carbon frames, 99% sure the A1 had a threaded BB (external cups with tool interface both sides).

    Iím stuck on the sizing, I rode the large, Iím 174cm so on the limit of what the charts say for Medium. The large felt really long and I think the wheelbase and Reach on the M will more manageable on my local tracks however the short ett has me beaten, itís about 25mm shorter than my current M trance. I guess people just pedal in a more upright position with the steep seat angle.
    I too rode a large and am 174cm tall, I felt like it would be a good size if I did enduro racing and all out speed. I too felt like it was just a bit long for the tighter trails I rode. I'll likely be getting a medium... but I'm wondering if running a narrower bar than my usual 800mm (same as the demo), as the setup guide's suggested a 760mm, and maybe a 35mm stem would help this out.

    Don't decide on a size based on ETT, your position when standing on the pedals will be more of a factor and likely feel feel right, you will pedal more upright and will likely feel more comfortable doing so.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    New Sight A2

    2020 Sight-20191108_172828.jpg

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyOrange View Post
    I've never had an issue with a pressfit BB, last one was on a 2018 Range carbon with Raceface Next R cranks. I made sure to get a Wheels BB because the BB cup is also the bearing race, allowing them to use larger sided ball bearings... not a single squeak.

    As far as the Sight... there's a lot to like! There's a bit of a learning curve with the reduced offset fork and the handling (front end grip and staying centered), if you haven't ridden something similar, but I couldn't say much more than "it's a great bike" and "I want one" after riding it.

    I too rode a large and am 174cm tall, I felt like it would be a good size if I did enduro racing and all out speed. I too felt like it was just a bit long for the tighter trails I rode. I'll likely be getting a medium... but I'm wondering if running a narrower bar than my usual 800mm (same as the demo), as the setup guide's suggested a 760mm, and maybe a 35mm stem would help this out.

    Don't decide on a size based on ETT, your position when standing on the pedals will be more of a factor and likely feel feel right, you will pedal more upright and will likely feel more comfortable doing so.
    A PF BB isn't a deal breaker to me (my current bike, a Kona Process 153 29'er has them), its just that a I'd prefer a threaded BB. Carbon is out of my price range, so I'm happy to hear that the AL versions have it.

    I demo'd a Transition smuggler in the spring (and a number of other bikes), and the was blown away with how the bike cornered. I felt like the smuggler railed berms much easier, and overall was more confidence inspiring than even the longer travel bikes I demo'd. Compared to the other bikes I rode that day(and my own bike), the biggest difference was the reduced offset fork (3 out of the 4 bikes I rode had the same HTA, and chainstays within ~5-10mm of each other).

    Of course, that's the only bike I've ever ridden with a reduced offset, and it was only for like 45min-1hr. But I'm interested enough in the handling difference to try another.

    I'm also a bit between sizes. I'm 6'1", and I fit into the grey area between the L and XL. But looking at the XL Sight, compared to the L Kona I'm on right now, there is a massive ~90mm difference in wheelbase. That said, I do feel at times that I should have upsized to the XL Kona (again, I was right between sizes). Definitely want to demo both sizes before I commit.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyOrange View Post
    Having ridden the new Sight... it's phenomenal! I'm incredibly excited to buy one, coming off a very similar bike comparing dimensions and angles (the Transition Sentinel), but on the trail it just does everything better... climbs better, more traction, easier to move around, faster...

    The frame only option also has an X2, which is definitely has an added cost associated.
    Yeah, I'm probably just being nitpicky because I can't justify the cost of carbon one 😆. Good point on the X2 as well. When you cross shop against other brands they are still a decent value, the Optic is just a bit better of a deal for the price it would seem.

    I am happy for sure that Norco is doing an Aluminum version of this bike! I'd rather spend the difference on better suspension than frame material. I'll probably end up with the A2, not sure I can stretch to the A1.

    At 6'4" I'm pumped about the geometry! I've always been annoyed trying to climb with my butt hanging out over the rear hub...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    I'm building my sons medium A2 later today. Go a sit on a large, it's just too big for him. Seated he can ride it but the reach and wheelbase are so long it will be too unwieldy in tighter corners. He is 172cm and still growing so I was hoping a large would have been ok, if he keeps growing I'll worry about it then.
    Seat post down the medium is like a large of many other bikes.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    2020 Sight-20191109_141257.jpg2020 Sight-20191109_141205.jpg

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    Oh, and it is HEAVY... I can only imagine how heavy an XL bike would be. Didn't get it on accurate scales but hand held scales it was a bit over 16kg with pedals and bottlecage. Over 35 and a half pounds for seppos.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by Duane. View Post
    Oh, and it is HEAVY... I can only imagine how heavy an XL bike would be. Didn't get it on accurate scales but hand held scales it was a bit over 16kg with pedals and bottlecage. Over 35 and a half pounds for seppos.
    I read a review/first ride of the carbon version, and they said it was something like 33lbs (iirc anyway, and I think that was size large). So I'm not surprised that it is heavy.

    That said... I'm not a weight weeny. My Kona is ~35-36lbs (size Large, AL frame), so I'm expecting the weight to be similar-ish to be honest.

    I may care more... but I'm the lightest person in my riding group (which, unfortunately, is not saying much:P), and I'm always waiting for my buddies on the climbs anyway.

    And, IF I get one, I think I may build up a frame, as I'm not very smitten with the parts on the A3 version. I'd more likely transfer everything I could over from my current Kona. It looks like everything other than the dropper would fit (and of course, a threaded BB). Oh, and I'd need to change my fork to a short offset technically.

    I... just wish the frame only option came with a better color. The light metallic looking blue isn't exactly my style.

    I'm hoping one of these is in pinkbikes field test this year, or maybe the BikeMag big group test. I'm curious to see what reviewers think of it. Then come springtime, I should be able to grab a demo, and maybe make a better decision then.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    I read a review/first ride of the carbon version, and they said it was something like 33lbs (iirc anyway, and I think that was size large). So I'm not surprised that it is heavy.

    That said... I'm not a weight weeny. My Kona is ~35-36lbs (size Large, AL frame), so I'm expecting the weight to be similar-ish to be honest.

    I may care more... but I'm the lightest person in my riding group (which, unfortunately, is not saying much:P), and I'm always waiting for my buddies on the climbs anyway.

    And, IF I get one, I think I may build up a frame, as I'm not very smitten with the parts on the A3 version. I'd more likely transfer everything I could over from my current Kona. It looks like everything other than the dropper would fit (and of course, a threaded BB). Oh, and I'd need to change my fork to a short offset technically.

    I... just wish the frame only option came with a better color. The light metallic looking blue isn't exactly my style.

    I'm hoping one of these is in pinkbikes field test this year, or maybe the BikeMag big group test. I'm curious to see what reviewers think of it. Then come springtime, I should be able to grab a demo, and maybe make a better decision then.
    Coming off a relatively light Sentinel (30.66lbs with pedals) and not knowing the weight of my demo large Sight; I would never have guessed it weighed much more... it certainly doesn't feel like it while pedaling and my climbing times were about my average. It definitely didn't feel slower.

    I would be shocked to not see this and/or the Optic in the bible of bikes 2020 as part of their bikes they can't talk about yet.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    349
    I think I read that it will be in the new Bike Bible tests. I'm looking forward to that as their review of the 2017 Sight led me to buying one. I love it but would like to demo the new one. But frankly my current Sight feels perfect for my riding style.

    Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Might have to see if the shop can do a custom build. Pricepoint wise I'm comfortable around the A2 level but don't really care for the build. Basically the Range A1 build is perfect to me (except with air superdeluxe instead of coil), and should be a similar pricepoint looking at the $100 difference in frames.

    Weight doesn't really seem too far off other bikes in the category?

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    I read a review/first ride of the carbon version, and they said it was something like 33lbs (iirc anyway, and I think that was size large). So I'm not surprised that it is heavy.

    That said... I'm not a weight weeny. My Kona is ~35-36lbs (size Large, AL frame), so I'm expecting the weight to be similar-ish to be honest.

    I may care more... but I'm the lightest person in my riding group (which, unfortunately, is not saying much:P), and I'm always waiting for my buddies on the climbs anyway.

    And, IF I get one, I think I may build up a frame, as I'm not very smitten with the parts on the A3 version. I'd more likely transfer everything I could over from my current Kona. It looks like everything other than the dropper would fit (and of course, a threaded BB). Oh, and I'd need to change my fork to a short offset technically.

    I... just wish the frame only option came with a better color. The light metallic looking blue isn't exactly my style.

    I'm hoping one of these is in pinkbikes field test this year, or maybe the BikeMag big group test. I'm curious to see what reviewers think of it. Then come springtime, I should be able to grab a demo, and maybe make a better decision then.
    Yeah itís a shame the frame only is that blue. It isnít bad, but I wouldnít loved the matte green or a nice black.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    103
    Anyone ride a 18' or 19' Range that has demo'd the 20' Sight? How did is compare? Pro's? Con's? Sexy looking bikes!

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by Graveltattoo View Post
    Anyone ride a 18' or 19' Range that has demo'd the 20' Sight? How did is compare? Pro's? Con's? Sexy looking bikes!
    I rode a heavily upgraded 2018 C3 29er for a summer and demoed a 2020 Sight for a bit. The Sight was probably a little large, they only had a Large to demo and I usually ride a Medium, and I could tell that it was a longer bike on a tight trail. It did require a little more input but it never felt unwieldy and the rear end was easy to pick up and move around.

    The Sight just seemed to do everything better, but I didn't get to ride it in anything chunky. It definitely climbs and pedals better, has more front and rear traction, and was faster over the terrain I rode by a fairly large margin. It also felt a lot more playful, I always felt like the Range wanted to monster truck and go straight over everything...

    I feel like the new Sight is definitely a more complete bike for the entire mountain and is on my new bike wishlist... just have to decide colour, suspension and buildkit, I hear there's at least one more higher end buildkit and waiting to see it.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyOrange View Post
    I rode a heavily upgraded 2018 C3 29er for a summer and demoed a 2020 Sight for a bit. The Sight was probably a little large, they only had a Large to demo and I usually ride a Medium, and I could tell that it was a longer bike on a tight trail. It did require a little more input but it never felt unwieldy and the rear end was easy to pick up and move around.

    The Sight just seemed to do everything better, but I didn't get to ride it in anything chunky. It definitely climbs and pedals better, has more front and rear traction, and was faster over the terrain I rode by a fairly large margin. It also felt a lot more playful, I always felt like the Range wanted to monster truck and go straight over everything...

    I feel like the new Sight is definitely a more complete bike for the entire mountain and is on my new bike wishlist... just have to decide colour, suspension and buildkit, I hear there's at least one more higher end buildkit and waiting to see it.
    Thanks for the feedback! But damn you MikeyOrange!😋I was hoping that you'd say there was a slight difference and not worth it......

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: islander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    826
    I was trying to get my head around the '20 Sights geometry, then I realized it is a reduced offset fork spec on the 27.5 ad 29 models. My understanding is that you can't do a direct comparison between head angle of 2 bikes with different fork offsets. SO, the 64 HA isn't actually as slack as it sounds....right? Surprised nobody has mentioned this geo much so far as it seems like Norco is trying to be pretty progressive here.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    My son has just gone for a short ride, easy xc terrain, but he is saying that the new one rolls so much faster (his old one was 650b so to be expected) but he is saying it climbs better despite the added weight and is more poppy, which surprised me. Nothing but praise so far.
    His old bike is a 2019 Sight A2.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by islander View Post
    I was trying to get my head around the '20 Sights geometry, then I realized it is a reduced offset fork spec on the 27.5 ad 29 models. My understanding is that you can't do a direct comparison between head angle of 2 bikes with different fork offsets. SO, the 64 HA isn't actually as slack as it sounds....right? Surprised nobody has mentioned this geo much so far as it seems like Norco is trying to be pretty progressive here.
    A reduced offset fork reduces the wheelbase some, which reigns in the wheelbase a bit compared to a bike with a longer offset fork.

    However, a reduced offset fork increases the trail, which from what I understand, has a somewhat similar effect as slackening the head angle (and also making it so the bike likes to "stick" to the line its carving in a turn). It also brings the tire farther under the rider, weighting it more. Now, I have no idea how many mm of fork offset equals how many degrees of head tube angle, but from my reading, that's the basic idea behind it.

    My one time on a reduced offset fork, was great, I felt like I could finally corner as well as I usually describe my skills to my friends .

    Also, my current bike has a HTA of 66 degrees, and that doesn't ever feel like "too much" for me. At first glance, and on paper, the HTA of 64 degrees does sound a bit crazy, especially compared to a few years ago. However, I grew up riding dirt bikes. And dirt bike geo has had HTA's in the 62-63 degree range for what seems like forever, and those feel totally natural to me.

    I'm curious how far the "long and slack" trend continues. I'm doubting that the HTA's will go beyond what we see in DH or dirt bikes. But in terms of length? I'm not sure. At least now we're seeing chainstays lengthened on larger sizes. And the bulk of a the "reach" that has historically been in the 80-120mm stems that came on bikes, has now been moved to the frames. Now that steeper seat tube angles are pushing the reach out even longer to keep the effective top tube length the same. But now that that is more or less common, I don't think that the seat tubes can get much steeper, so I'm not sure how long the trend can continue.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: F.N.G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,471
    Does anybody know if the 2020 sight can be run with 170mm for? 37mm offset?

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    170mm is only 10mm overforked. And the 27.5in wheeled model has a 37mm offset fork on it from the factory, right?

    Usually you can overfork a bike by 10-20mm without anything weird happening, so I'd imagine it would be fine. If you wanted to go more, you may play around with an angleset, as that would bring the BB height closer to factory height.

    And, as for a 37mm offset on a 29'er? I mean, it would work fine, but would further increase the trail. That would make it tuck into turns really well, but not how it would ride on non-high speed trails.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: F.N.G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,471
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    170mm is only 10mm overforked. And the 27.5in wheeled model has a 37mm offset fork on it from the factory, right?

    Usually you can overfork a bike by 10-20mm without anything weird happening, so I'd imagine it would be fine. If you wanted to go more, you may play around with an angleset, as that would bring the BB height closer to factory height.

    And, as for a 37mm offset on a 29'er? I mean, it would work fine, but would further increase the trail. That would make it tuck into turns really well, but not how it would ride on non-high speed trails.
    Thx, I mean the 27.5. I have a new Fox 36 grip 2 170 mm 37mm offset and like it. Would like to transfer it over to the Sight without lowering it.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by F.N.G View Post
    Thx, I mean the 27.5. I have a new Fox 36 grip 2 170 mm 37mm offset and like it. Would like to transfer it over to the Sight without lowering it.
    Oh, in that case, the change is only 10mm of travel then. A 170mm fork will further slacken your bike by ~0.5 degrees, which would give it a HTA of ~63.0 degrees.

    Also, you can change the travel on your fork fairly easily. The part itself is just a new air shaft, which usually seems to be in the ~$30-50 range, and it is easily done during a normal service of the lowers.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    35
    Just read the Pinkbike field test for the Optic and they said the shimano rotors are resin only, turns out the Sight C2 also comes with resin only. Pretty poor for the price

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Anth08 View Post
    Just read the Pinkbike field test for the Optic and they said the shimano rotors are resin only, turns out the Sight C2 also comes with resin only. Pretty poor for the price
    Rotors can only handle resin pads? Or brakes come with only resin pads from the factory?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by cachaulo View Post
    Rotors can only handle resin pads? Or brakes come with only resin pads from the factory?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The info I have from Norco is RT54 rotors which are resin only but the bikes in reviews seem to have RT64 rotors which handle metal pads, also Shimano donít list the RT54 in 203mm so hopefully my info is wrong

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Got to check out an A2. Seems like a good spec for the money. Think I'd prefer rockshox but I'm sure the Rhythm 36 is decent. No riding impressions but the sales guy mentioned that he's getting one and so are several others at the store.

    It's not a lightweight that's for sure, the XL A2 is pushing 35lbs, but the guy I was talking to had ridden one quite a bit and said it feels awesome on the trail and climbs better than it had any right to.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: F.N.G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,471
    Quote Originally Posted by percivilla View Post
    Got to check out an A2. Seems like a good spec for the money. Think I'd prefer rockshox but I'm sure the Rhythm 36 is decent. No riding impressions but the sales guy mentioned that he's getting one and so are several others at the store.

    It's not a lightweight that's for sure, the XL A2 is pushing 35lbs, but the guy I was talking to had ridden one quite a bit and said it feels awesome on the trail and climbs better than it had any right to.
    Are the frames heavy? Or are the builds making them heavy?

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by F.N.G View Post
    Are the frames heavy? Or are the builds making them heavy?
    Bit of both I'd say. The builds all favour toughness over weight with DH focused parts. The A2 has a beefy wheelset and suspension, and an OEM cockpit. Going tubeless will save some weight. Norco is marketing it as a bike for "sending" whatever you want so they're smart not to put any weedy parts on it.

    I'm aiming to be doing a fair bit of shuttling and bike park on it so it doesn't concern me at all. If I was doing mostly trail riding I'd be looking at the Optic.

    I should clarify that "pushing 35lbs" was an educated guess by me and the guy at the shop. We didn't hang it on the scale. Higher end carbon builds should shave a few pounds.

    The Large Carbon that Pinkbike tested was 32lbs so not unlikely that the A2 with lower spec parts and tubes would be a couple pounds heavier.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    My sons A2 with pedals and bottle cage is 36 pounds! It's no lightweight but I need to slow him down so I can keep up somehow.
    As parts need replacing I will upspec it. The wheelset is quite heavy.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    167
    These days, a 35-36# Aluminum almost enduro bike with an NX cassette sounds pretty normal to me.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Yeah, the weight seems normal to me. Usually an AL frame is somewhere around ~2lbs heavier for most bikes/brands. So I'd say ~35lbs is probably pretty accurate, depending on the rest of the spec. Smaller frame sizes may be a touch lighter.

    That said... I'm not worried about weight, especially for a bike like this. I'd rather it be more durable, which from the weight, it likely will be.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,098
    anyone have some rides on this bad boy? Possibly even a Sight vs Optic comparo?

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    Yeah, the weight seems normal to me. Usually an AL frame is somewhere around ~2lbs heavier for most bikes/brands. So I'd say ~35lbs is probably pretty accurate, depending on the rest of the spec. Smaller frame sizes may be a touch lighter.

    That said... I'm not worried about weight, especially for a bike like this. I'd rather it be more durable, which from the weight, it likely will be.
    Agreed. Every price point looks to be a bike you can charge anything on.

    I'm honestly a bit confused why Norco didn't put it in their Enduro category. Every aspect of the spec/build is Enduro. I guess they're suggesting that it climbs better than most Enduros by calling it all mountain?

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eh steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by percivilla View Post
    Agreed. Every price point looks to be a bike you can charge anything on.

    I'm honestly a bit confused why Norco didn't put it in their Enduro category. Every aspect of the spec/build is Enduro. I guess they're suggesting that it climbs better than most Enduros by calling it all mountain?
    I'd bet it's because they actively list prior years on their site. So putting the new Sight in enduro would mean either putting the old one in there too (which it's not) or having it split between two categories.

    I have to wonder if a site update is coming. Listing all builds and 3 years of models is busy AF. Plenty confusing without splitting a model between categories.

    Most manf just list their current model for each bike. No clue why Norco decided to list their lineup the way they did.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by eh steve View Post
    I'd bet it's because they actively list prior years on their site. So putting the new Sight in enduro would mean either putting the old one in there too (which it's not) or having it split between two categories.

    I have to wonder if a site update is coming. Listing all builds and 3 years of models is busy AF. Plenty confusing without splitting a model between categories.

    Most manf just list their current model for each bike. No clue why Norco decided to list their lineup the way they did.
    It is a busy site for sure. It's kind of annoying how when you click on a model, you then have to scroll waaay down past all the other models to see the specs. I know, first world problems. I also wish companies would photograph their bikes outside, in natural light, not in a white room.

    Commencal has a nice site design. Easy to navigate. I like how they also show the whole bike from a few different angles.

    Anyway, topic drift...

    Out of curiosity, has anyone tried a Rhythm 36? Can't find much out there on them. Apparently it's an earlier version of the grip 2 damper with less adjustability and a slightly heavier lower?

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by percivilla View Post
    Agreed. Every price point looks to be a bike you can charge anything on.

    I'm honestly a bit confused why Norco didn't put it in their Enduro category. Every aspect of the spec/build is Enduro. I guess they're suggesting that it climbs better than most Enduros by calling it all mountain?
    The term Enduro to me is really just a race version of all mountain riding. To me they are totally the same style of bikes. I think itís just them saying this isnít their ďraceĒ bike, but rather their long travel trail bike for the whole mountain.

    Which leads us to...

    Iím betting the range will be updated sometime in the next year or so, and will be something we may currently call a ďsuper enduroĒ style bike. Aka, 170-180mm of travel bike intended for people racing enduros. And I bet that bike will get the enduro moniker in their lineup.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by ocnLogan View Post
    The term Enduro to me is really just a race version of all mountain riding. To me they are totally the same style of bikes. I think itís just them saying this isnít their ďraceĒ bike, but rather their long travel trail bike for the whole mountain.

    Which leads us to...

    Iím betting the range will be updated sometime in the next year or so, and will be something we may currently call a ďsuper enduroĒ style bike. Aka, 170-180mm of travel bike intended for people racing enduros. And I bet that bike will get the enduro moniker in their lineup.
    Yup. Different guy I was talking to a previous time at the shop was saying that the 2021 Range will be a 170ish bike to compete with the RM Slayer. Basically a park/pro line style bike. I'd bet it'll be HSP like the Aurum.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    33
    Agree, I'm expecting a slightly reduced travel HSP with a single crown and eagle cassette.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 3 Days Ago, 09:31 AM
  2. 2020 Orbea Rallon vs 2020 Santa Cruz Hightower
    By kzlucas in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 4 Weeks Ago, 07:31 AM
  3. 2020 Hightower 2 vs 2020 Tallboy 4
    By Doug in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 09-25-2019, 06:51 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-05-2016, 08:49 AM
  5. Sight/Sight KillerB BB height
    By skidad in forum Norco
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-02-2012, 03:38 PM

Members who have read this thread: 103

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.