[Closed] What new 'enduro' bike?

Are you sure you know what you're doing? That's a heck of a lot of money just to spend on something that "looks cool"

Nope I have no clue - I just acted on impulse. It's what everyone does really, some people are just better at convincing themselves they've made a logical evidence-based decision.

🙂

5. We rationalize purchases we don’t want

I’m as guilty of this as anyone. How many times have you gotten home after a shopping trip only to be less than satisfied with your purchase decisions and started rationalizing them to yourself? Maybe you didn’t really want it after all, or in hindsight you thought it was too expensive. Or maybe it didn’t do what you hoped, and was actually useless to you.

Regardless, we’re pretty good at convincing ourselves that those flashy, useless, badly thought-out purchases are necessary after all. This is known as post-purchase rationalization or Buyer’s Stockholm Syndrome.

The reason we’re so good at this comes back to psychology of language:

Social psychologists say it stems from the principle of commitment, our psychological desire to stay consistent and avoid a state of cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we get when we’re trying to hold onto two competing ideas or theories. For instance, if we think of ourselves as being nice to strangers, but then we see someone fall over and don’t stop to help them, we would then have conflicting veiws about ourselves: we are nice to strangers, but we weren’t nice to the stranger who fell over. This creates so much discomfort that we have to change our thinking to match our actions—i.e. we start thinking of ourselves as someone who is not nice to strangers, since that’s what our actions proved.

So in the case of our impulse shopping trip, we would need to rationalize the purchases until we truly believe we needed to buy those things, so that our thoughts about ourselves line up with our actions (making the purchases).

The tricky thing in avoiding this mistake is that we generally act before we think (which can be one of the most important element that successful people have as traits!), leaving us to rationalize our actions afterwards.

Being aware of this mistake can help us avoid it by predicting it before taking action—for instance, as we’re considering a purchase, we often know that we will have to rationalize it to ourselves later. If we can recognize this, perhaps we can avoid it. It’s not an easy one to tackle, though!

I've ridden quite a lot of bikes and I enjoyed riding them all in different ways. None of them were shite, some just weren't set up very well for me. If I really hate it I'll sell it but I doubt I will.

Nope I have no clue - I just acted on impulse. It's what everyone does really, some people are just better at convincing themselves they've made a logical evidence-based decision.

😀

Grum - I'm 5ft 8in and the large Capra was the right length for me (but too tall).

I think the small might be a mistake. You can always get a short stem on the medium.

Nope I have no clue - I just acted on impulse. It's what everyone does really, some people are just better at convincing themselves they've made a logical evidence-based decision.

Glad it's not just me then 🙂

I bought my reign because I liked the colour (and it was recommended by someone whose opinion I respect) but mainly the colour.

Yup I've emailed and asked about switching to a medium. I can't see it being a problem as the delivery estimate on the medium isn't until the 9th December.

Get an Orange as that's what you really want. How about this?

http://www.drakescycles.co.uk/m1b114s377p5195/ORANGE_Five_Pro_MK2_Sterling_Silver_2015

Pikes, Reverb, Pro2 etc. 😉

You should also check out the Alpine 5. I went from a 26" 5 to the 29" and really rate it. If you're near Skipton you're welcome to have a go.

Don't care if it's too short,, mmmmm........

[img] [/img]

Funniest post I have read for ages on here

Thanks to Deviant
Some very po faced and serious (boring) cyclists on here.

Get a test ride, if you can't then take a punt....that's the joy of bikes, they all ride differently.
So what if the top tube is slightly short....fit a 5mm longer stem and move the saddle back another 5mm.....there you go, you've just gained 10mm more TT.

Some of the comments....'l only ride horst link'.....'l used CAD to superimpose the geometry over my old bike'.....jesus wept, you guys are missing out....seriously.

There are so many good bikes and so little time (and money) to own them all!.....i currently have a DW/maestro but I've had linkage driven single pivot....I'd like to try Horst....I'd like to try VPP....I'd like to try an Orange-5 etc

This thread has descended into another example of why I don't ride with others and am loathe to call myself a MTBer, as a group we really are a sad sad bunch.

wrecker

How very dare you. Jimjam used to work in CRC. Knows much more than either of those oafs.

Clearly you're still badly butthurt after getting put in your place. Sorry 😉

This thread has descended into another example of why I don't ride with others and am loathe to call myself a MTBer, as a group we really are a sad sad bunch

If you think that this place is representative of yer average MTBer, then you are quite deluded. The vast majority of my riding mates either have no interest, or haven't even heard of it.

Clearly you're still badly butthurt after getting put in your place. Sorry

Oh sorry, you're right, there were other people who put you in your place. As for poisonspider I think it's pretty obvious he's annoyed that I criticised his bike and has spent three pages trying to undermine a simple statement I made about my priorities when choosing a bike, which made a lot more sense than his.

Oh sorry, you're right, there were other people who put you in your place.

he's annoyed that I criticised his bike

I'm not being negative I'm being objective. I don't have a dog in this fight. Not attacking him but it was Glasgowdan (and someone else) who said the bike lacked class or was common. Poisonspider is focusing on disecting my statements because I'm not being subjective I'm being rational. If someone feels the bike is common, what can you say to that? They're a bit of a bike snob (but that's okay it's stw).

I'm sorry if I'm winding you up, if you want we can let it go and not mention hope or shimano brakes ever again.

You're not winding me up jimjam, you are however coming across a bit "internet expert". Is it really surprising some are getting defensive about bikes they have spent £3K on?
You wouldn't go into someones "new bike" thread and say "nah, that's shit, I don't like it" would you?

No, I wouldn't slate someone's new bike and that's not what I'm doing. This thread is someone contemplating a purchase so criticism of a possible contender is relevant. It's not slagging someone else bike choice, although it has turned into slagging someone else's rationale or bike buying process. If nothing else I'd say it's helping the op.

you are however coming across a bit "internet expert"

Nothing I wouldn't say to someone's face, but it's the internet. Honestly, you'd love me if you knew me 😛 (that may not be true).

My 16 inch HT with 140mm forks would be some people's idea of a nightmare (i'm 5' 9" by the way, so probably looks like a circus bear riding a bike)....i love it though, love the ease with which it changes direction, love how easy it is to get in the air, love the confidence inspiring steel girder like construction that allows me to ride like a pillock and get away with it....always fun at places like BMCC, Antur, BPW, FoD etc and trying to chase down the full-on DH bikes....not always successfully i might hasten to add!

Its a laugh and thats what bikes are for me, i have no intention of entering Enduros on it....i occasionally find a local DH race with a HT category and have a competitive outing in that respect.

I have a Trance with 160mm forks for the serious side of this sport where everyone seems to compare themselves and their bikes to each other and pick holes in millimetres of difference in geometry....part of me hates myself for getting suckered into it, i was happy with HTs but i have ridden FS before and i'll concede they are easier/better over truly horrendous terrain....only thing i've done as a two fingered salute to the MTB gods is ditch the Rockshox suspension it came with and go full in with X-Fusion front and rear...always gets some looks that one!...almost like people arent expecting me to get down the hill in one piece with such 'inferior' chassis tech on my bike, haha!

Erm...have you read the posts?

JJ

How many times?? Give me strength.

(CAPS means shouting right?)

I DON'T CARE IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY BIKE!!!

I DON'T CARE IF NO-ONE LIKES MY BIKE, IT'S ALL PERSONAL CHOICE AFTERALL!!!

What is irritating is the nonsense you spout about being able to judge a bike by its static numbers. All that crap about assessing it's dynamics and kinematics. I bet you can't even explain the difference between the two without Googling it. And to then go on to say all magazine reviewers at crap riders who simply write reviews based on fear and bribery. Wtf?

God you're obtuseness is exhausting. You have such an over inflated sense of your own ace-ness that you can't see you talking rubbish. When you have an opportunity to prove yourself you bottle it by saying you not going to dignify it with a response. I suspect deep down you know it's garbage.

OK, put a sock in it you two, or take it outside......

Meanwhile, back in the real world of riding bikes for fun. I have realised that it doesn't take long to get on with a new bike even if its different to your old bike.

I found I adapted pretty quickly. I discovered this when testing a few new bikes for long weekends.

It starts with a quick spin - that just leaves you thinking the new bike is odd / different

Then you stop and adjust the various bits you can tweak, like bar/saddle position, suspension settings etc. and ride it some more.

Then over a day or three you adapt your riding a bit. Small differences can be adapted to. You can even put different tyres on and change the way it feels.

If you stick to just one geometry or one style of riding I think your quite likely to miss out on discovering new things - some may be better, some just different.

Meanwhile, back in the real world of riding bikes for fun.

Trimix - Member
OK, put a sock in it you two, or take it outside......

Whilst I don't recognise an admonishment from you, you're not my Dad!

I'll accept this spat is going nowhere, I think he's an arse and I'm sure the feeling is mutual, that's not likely to change so it is time to move on.

I think you're an arse. Let's move on.

Ah just like the old days! 🙂

Each thinks the other an arsehole. Because of a bicycle. We are funny old creatures aren't we?

So..... much as I've enjoyed this little exchange. I got a reply from YT (pretty good response time) and they basically said if you ride bike parks a lot and want a 'play' bike get the small, but if it's for general riding: 'going on a tour or going really fast', get the medium. Seems reasonable - I'm gonna go with the medium.

Thanks everyone.

I got a reply from YT (pretty good response time) and they basically said if you ride bike parks a lot and want a 'play' bike get the small, but if it's for general riding: 'going on a tour or going really fast', get the medium.

Yeah but wadda they know? 🙄

Now I'll move on 😉

6 pages, a handful of recommendations and evidence that YT can answer emails pretty quick.

Cheers all :S

DaveyBoyWonder - Member
6 pages, a handful of recommendations and evidence that YT can answer emails pretty quick.

Cheers all :S

So what are you buying then?

Evil Insurgent naturally because they're head and shoulders above the rest.

So what are you buying then?

A road bike 😉 Kidding...

Still genuinely no idea. The Orange features highly still - may see come March time whether Orange have any ex-demo/closeout models on their website as the Five/Alpine/Segment all remain on the list.

The Capra is still there and it'd be great if I grab a go on grum's to check how it feels. If it feels as good as the spec looks on paper its hard to ignore.

Just browsing Stif's website too, theres the Bronson C for £2700. Factor in a Reverb and theres change from £3k. Seems like a possible option?

A mate has just bought the Bronson, he rates it having come from a carbon Spesh enduro 26"

It is a bit 'pink' though.

DBW - the Bronson comes with a Sektor fork at that price though, add in a Pike, the Reverb, maybe a different shock and all of a sudden it's about £4k

www.stif.co.uk//bikebuilder/bronson-c-v2/142/0/size-2,colour-264,shock-63,preset_kit-276_326/

Its got one of those front mech things as well I think :S

Heckler?

www.stif.co.uk//bikebuilder/heckler-27-5/58/0/size-2,colour-248,shock-64,fork-300,groupset-276/

Heckler I think is venturing away from long and slack.

That said, I'm sure I read somewhere that angles and stats written down on a website mean sod all and actually riding them is what counts.

That said, I'm sure I read somewhere that angles and stats written down on a website mean sod all and actually riding them is what counts.

Leeeve it!! 😆

Not hugely low or slack (but 66deg is easily slack enough), but still worthy of consideration is the Giant Trance SX.
Here's one reduced to £2K with pikes, monarch plus, XO1, guide R's. Giant dropper and wheels but you could upgrade both and still have change for a riding holiday.
http://www.bicyclechain.co.uk/productdetails.asp?productid=32466&gclid=CjwKEAiA9uaxBRDYr4_hrtC3tW8SJAD6UU8Gy0VHwqpSx7FBeyttuOJYDwig8DHl4ayOY968Hgb89RoC_HPw_wcB
Travel adjust forks, it's a seriously versatile bike and easy to get a demo on.

I don't think the Bronson is overly long DBW, the reach & stack on the L Bronson is about the same as the M Five. But, like you say, they're just numbers and who can tell what they really mean without riding them...... 😈

I know someone who can provide a detailed description of exactly how it will ride without troubling yourself with a test ride. All you need is the geometry numbers and the ability to believe anything you hear?

😡 Damn you Woody2000, I was doing so well moving on.

I'm just shit stirring, ignore me 🙂

😉

I'd still buy a Banshee Spitfire if I was shopping now. Long, slack, low and you can swap your 26 parts over or build it up 27.5 if you prefer. Really good suspension design - pedals like a really efficient 140mm bike but charges through the rough and takes the big hits like it has a lot more travel.

poisonspider - Member

I know someone who can provide a detailed description of exactly how it will ride without troubling yourself with a test ride. All you need is the geometry numbers and the ability to believe anything you hear?

So now you're trolling me? But a while ago my obtuseness was infuriating. That's nothing like what I was saying at all. Do you need a reminder?

Get a room you two ^^^^^^^

The Capra is still there and it'd be great if I grab a go on grum's to check how it feels. If it feels as good as the spec looks on paper its hard to ignore.

Nae bother but I won't have it for at least a month. You can finally show me some of these Halifax trails. 😉

I'll bring my 5 and we can compare and contrast DBW and grum 🙂

I quite fancy this...

[url= http://www.last-bikes.com/products/coal-trail-2016.html ]Last bikes Coal[/url]

So now you're trolling me?

I don't thinks so? A gentle jibe perhaps. In fact the 'joke' was on me really as I fell off the JJ wagon first. 😳

Do you need a reminder?

Get a room you two ^^^^^^^

Ok, I really need to move on now.

jimjam - Member

That's nothing like what I was saying at all. Do you need a reminder?

As i understand it (and i used to work in an understanding shop so i'm pretty much an expert on these types of situations), you said what [b]you[/b] would do when looking for a potential new bike. You ruled out (among others) a Capra based on [b]your[/b] criteria - it has shite geography, poor suspension harmonics and a flight deck only suitable for a T-Rex, [i]and[/i] as a bike is less than the sum of it's parts. Another poster who bought a Capra (but doesn't care about the things you care about when choosing a bike and values 'pro spec' over a frame that's designed for humans) got upset at this and now thinks you are an arsehole.

Well no wonder. Tell him his bike is awesome you arsehole!

Oh yay another internet tough guy/expert has arrived. 🙄

Euro

As i understand it (and i used to work in an understanding shop so i'm pretty much an expert on these types of situations), you said what you would do when looking for a potential new bike. You ruled out (among others) a Capra based on your criteria - it has shite geography, poor suspension harmonics and a flight deck only suitable for a T-Rex, and as a bike is less than the sum of it's parts. Another poster who bought a Capra (but doesn't care about the things you care about when choosing a bike and values 'pro spec' over a frame that's designed for humans) got upset at this and now thinks you are an arsehole.

Well no wonder. Tell him his bike is awesome you arsehole!

Lol. Well thanks for clearing all that up there, I was starting to wonder.

grum - Member

Oh yay another internet tough guy/expert has arrived.

He's joking grum.

Oh yay another internet tough guy/expert has arrived.

I'm no expert on bikes or the internet i'm afraid. My speciality is in the understanding of things. I understand you also have (or will soon have) a Capra. Ah well, you can always sell the frame on i suppose 😛

He's joking grum.

He's right grum. I'm joking
(Takes the fun out of it a bit when you have to say you're joking when you're joking).

This bit is serious though. If you ever post an eye rolling emoji in my direction again i will **** YOU UP!!!

I'm not sure how many times I've said this, a few already.

Deep breath...I don't care if people think my bike is crap, its geography (sic) is incorrect etc. I don't care, I really don't care. I've cared more about things I've never even thought about than I care about that.

My point is (I'm losing the will to live even typing this for umpteenth time);

I have an issue with the premise that someone can judge a bike's handling (any bike, not my bike, any bike, your bike, his bike, your Mum's bike?) by simply taking the static geometry figures and then (wait for it..) calculating (in their head) a series of extremely complex interrelated dynamic and kinematic (definition: [i]kinematics studies the trajectories of points, lines, other geometric objects, and their differential properties such as velocity and acceleration[/i]) equations to determine how a bike will actually ride.

Nobody, of sound mind, can possibly believe this?

It is simply an opportunity to try and sound like some kind of bike genius amongst a sea of people who just like riding bikes for the hell of it. It's an ego trip.

If it isn't and JJ is gifted in this repsect, please enlighten us with a detailed description of the process. Please make reference to the dynamic/kinematic principles being applied. I don't mean vague, 'oh I look at the design and compare it to my bike' guff.

That is the issue. Nothing to do with the Capra. By making it an issue of me throwing my toys out because someone has slighted my pride and joy etc is a smoke screen to hide the fact that he's talking nonsense.

This bit is serious though. If you ever post an eye rolling emoji in my direction again i will **** YOU UP!!!

Give me strength. 🙄

jimjam, what were the geometry figures on the Lapierre you disliked so much, which you said is just like the Capra?

Imagine this movie but instead of horses, it's bicycles. And instead of Robert Redford, it's JimJam.

[img] [/img]

You can be Kirstin Scott Thomas if you like (i've not seen the film so no idea if they shag or not - they probably do, she's always at it).

Not sure about The Horse Whisperer...The Horse[i]shit[/i] Talker perhaps.

I have an issue with the premise that someone can judge a bike's handling (any bike, not my bike, any bike, your bike, his bike, your Mum's bike?) by simply taking the static geometry figures and then (wait for it..) calculating (in their head) a series of extremely complex interrelated dynamic and kinematic (definition: kinematics studies the trajectories of points, lines, other geometric objects, and their differential properties such as velocity and acceleration) to determine how a bike will actually ride.

How in all **** did you get to that from what I wrote. Lets quickly recap. You took umbrage at my suggestion that people buy Capras on spec, then crow about how great they are. You countered

poisonspider
I bought it because it had good reviews and was killer value for money. [b]Isn't that what most people consider when they're buying a new bike?[/b]

to which I replied

Well I can't speak for most people but the first thing I consider is geometry. Second would probably be kinematics/dynamics, how the bike rides. Componentry would be almost irrelevant because I usually throw everything out and put my own bits on. Reviews would be equal last as 95% of them tend to be bullshit these days. I used to put more credence in reviews until I saw some of the reviewers riding and realised they were pretty crap, that and a marketing manager explained to me how they could and would collapse any magazine just by removing their adverts if they didn't get favourable reviews (believe that if you want).

So, just to elaborate on that statement. For you. What I look for when contemplating a purchase. Geometry . Believe it or not, it's important and believe it or not people can interpret geometry charts they are there to be looked at. If they were irrelevant manufacturers wouldn't publish them. After many years it's possible to develop an emperical preference with regards to these seemingly crazy and irrelevant numbers. For example, if I'm looking for an "Enduro" bike and see that the geometry more closely resembles an XC bike I can dismiss that bike out of hand. That's not saying "I know exactly how that bike will ride" it's saying "that's not the geometry I want".

You've tried to laugh this off, sneering and belittling the idea that anything can be gleaned from geometry or ".07 of a degree or 1mm will make the bike feel awful". Of course it won't. But compare current geometry to 1999 and tell me which is better. You don't often hear people buying a new bike and complaining that it doesn't descend like their old 90's hardtail.

So assuming the geometry is suitable, and based on what [b]I know I like[/b], I'll start to consider how the bike will ride. As I said, I like Horst link bikes (many people do, including you) so that's a known quantity to me as I've owned 6. If the bike's suspension design was less familiar to me then I'd have to ensure I would get on with it. I'd try to arrange a test ride if possible. Radical statement, I know. Please mock me for this. [i]If[/i] that's not possible, but I still want to buy the bike, and I'm worried about spending thousands of pounds in error I would have to try and understand how the bike works using all the information available.

At no point did I say I would look at the geometry and produce dyno graphs with my eyeballs. Of course I'd have to use google. Of course I would have to use calculators, graphs....any info I could to try and anticipate any undesirable traits, like the Glory had, or like the old Reign had. I don't have £3000 or £5000 to waste on a bike so I would do everything I to avoid a mistake. Crazy again, I know.

You've also tried to mock the suggestion that magazine reviews were less than bullet proof. Again to recap, I stated that I had seen some journalists from a well known magazine riding. I was not impressed. Furthermore, I myself, had an actual conversation with someone who was in charge of a substantial advertising budget who implied that magazines were heavily dependent on that money, and several would likely collapse if he withdrew it (say for a bad review). I actually had that conversation, in real life. I didn't say it was YT, I was saying to further illustrate why I don't put much importance in magazine reviews.

Any better?

Jimjam, what was the geometry of your old bike that was so bad?

Remind me what was wrong with the cheap specialized again?

Dave, Woody, Grum, I'll bring my 2012 Nukeproof Mega in size Small. I will understand though if you are too embarrassed to let me hang with my hideously unfashionable top tube length.. I'm sure somebody once told me that it wasn't the size that counted, can't remember if that was JJ or PS...

Jas - stop it now, someone is actually going to explode soon 🙂

chiefgrooveguru - Member

Jimjam, what was the geometry of your old bike that was so bad?

I think [url= ]this [/url] is it. It's all completely irrelevant though.

Any better?

Not really.

Why is there no emoticon pulling its hair out an in tears of frustration?

Sigh:

In the fewest words I can manage so there's little for you to misunderstand;

I never said geometry isn't important.

It's nothing to do with the YT.

[i]It's the dynamics/kinematics bit that is nonsense.[/i]

I have to say when people using words like 'kinematics' my BS detector starts twitching. Maybe it's just because I'm ignorant but....

Dave, Woody, Grum, I'll bring my 2012 Nukeproof Mega in size Small. I will understand though if you are too embarrassed to let me hang with my hideously unfashionable top tube length..

How tall are you? 🙂

Give me strength.

I think he was joking!

poisonspider

Sigh:

In the fewest words I can manage so there's little for you to misunderstand;
I never said geometry isn't important.

poisonspider

Static numbers are meaningless

poisonspider

Oh hang on, aren't you concerned it might crack ,
or that the top tube is 0.7mm different to what's 'on trend' at the moment, the handling will be shite!! 🙄 🙄

It's the dynamics/kinematics bit that is nonsense.

[i]"Kinematics"
[kin-uh-mat-iks, kahy-nuh-]
is the branch of classical mechanics which describes the motion of points, bodies (objects), and systems of bodies (groups of objects) without consideration of the causes of motion. Kinematics as a field of study is often referred to as the "geometry of motion".[/i]

[i]"dynamics"
[dahy-nam-iks]
the branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of bodies under the action of forces.[/i]

So, in other words...how the bike rides.

jimjam

would probably be kinematics/dynamics,[b] how the bike rides[/b]

Ideally, that means a test ride. I'm sure I already said that. Sorry for using big words. If a test ride can't be arranged there are alternatives to help with the [url= http://www.bikechecker.com/intro.php ]guess work.[/url]

grum
I have to say when people using words like 'kinematics' my BS detector starts twitching. Maybe it's just because I'm ignorant but....

I used to do 3d animation and the two main types of character animation we used were forward kinematics and inverse kinematics. Forward kinematics involved moving each limb and joint of a character point by point. Inverse kinematics is a hierarchical process where say, if you move a hand, the wrist, elbow, shoulder and torso will follow within parameters you define. So that being said, when I want to describe a series of parts moving together like a bikes' suspension it makes sense to me to use that term.

Anyway, **** this noise. if you need me I'll be on mumsnet.

Crikey this is bad tempered.

It's only bikes chaps. A leisure activitiy to most of us.

My two cents is that I prefer long and low, but my best mate - twice the rider I am - always undersizes because he comes from a street background and likes the flickability.

Horses for courses.

Grum, almost 5' 8" in my Glitterboots..

5-spot

ajt123, that's a good point, most of the fastest riders I know all ride old/unfashionable or downright knackered bikes. On the other hand, the rest of us need all the help we can get 😀

As I said, I like Horst link bikes........try and understand how the bike works using all the information available

If you were doing a good job with the information, you'd know that the general layout doesn't define the suspension kinematics, merely dictates your constraints, ie you could theoretically have a horst link that rides identical to a orange 5 for example, but you don't have the freedom with a single pivot to feel like many, many horst link configurations, though many horst link and single pivot configurations could be designed to behave in the same manner. 😉

Just to be a douche.

PS, switch link, dw link, vpp, maestro are all configurations of horst link, they all ride different because the designer has chosen to optimise in a particular manner, it's the designer dictating, not the general layout.

Brilliant thread. What we're seeing here is a combination of things....some snobbery around the YT brand, someone clinging on to current geometry trends, believing in them hook line and sinker and being dismissive of anything that deviates from that and some very defensive behavior from everyone regarding their overpriced bikes....it's pure gold.

Yep, loving this thread. Keep it coming!

What you need is a Cotic Soul. Ticks all the boxes.. I think.. 😀

I think this is it. It's all completely irrelevant though.

I suspected that was the mistake you were making. You're writing the Capra off for being too short because the ETT is about the same as an old Lapierre - however the seat angle is way steeper so that means the reach, which is the part of the length that matters on a bike like this, is much longer. And the head angle is a degree slacker. And the BB height is lower and BB drop much greater.

So in short the geometry isn't similar at all.

Dean's on the right track regarding the importance of where the pivots are as opposed to simply the layout. But Horst link is a specific type of four bar suspension where the pivot nearest the axle is in front of and below the axle. You can broadly group short-link four bar and long-link four bar into two groups, in terms of how much the virtual pivot point moves as you go through the travel but both configurations can be designed for high, low or middling anti-squat.

Single pivot bikes (simple ones or linkage driven) are more restricted in that they suffer more kickback and brake squat if designed to have high pedalling efficiency (anti-squat), whilst any virtual pivot design can work around that by giving the brake caliper a degree of freedom and by having a virtual pivot point that drops towards or even below the chain line to reduce the kickback. That does require good design though...

Thankfully all this stuff can be accurately modelled before anything gets built, which is why full-sus bikes are way better than they were 15 years ago!

@deanbfm, the horst link definition's very specific- it has to include a chainstay pivot near to and lower than the rear axle, none of those other systems meet that definition. They're 4-bars but not horsts. (it's almost like a major design consideration was avoiding existing patents, eh? 😉 )

chiefgrooveguru

the seat angle is way steeper so that means the reach, is much longer.

So in short the geometry isn't similar at all.

I'm well aware of the importance of reach, iirc the 2 degree difference in seat angle equates to about 20mm difference although it's not stated on LP. And whilst the geometry isn't identical we are comparing a very flawed (imo) 140mm trail bike and a 170mm "Enduro" bike. Similar is an entirely subjective term but for my money there isn't enough daylight between the two.

That was my initial suspicion, which was confirmed when I rode one. It's also obvious when you consider everyone advised the chap who bought one to go up a size. Or that poisonspider had to go up a size. On the one had lambasting me for being a sucker, and buying into modern trends but doing exactly that. Or that it's short in comparison to most current "enduro" bikes. The Capra's geometry was already behind current fashion/trend/design when it came out. Who wants to bet they won't revise it soon?

The Capra's geometry was already behind current fashion/trend/design when it came out.

Oh well I'm gonna cancel my order then. I only bought it because I thought I was on trend. 🙁

Don't worry, if you've bought a size bigger than the manufacturers sizing chart then your reach and ett are almost on trend. Not exactly on the bleeding edge but the new one will be.

@deanbfm, the horst link definition's very specific- it has to include a chainstay pivot near to and lower than the rear axle, none of those other systems meet that definition. They're 4-bars but not horsts. (it's almost like a major design consideration was avoiding existing patents, eh? )

You got me, i was maybe being a bit too liberal with the interchangeability between true 4 bar and horst link, i stand corrected (maybe if they wrote the original horst link patent in a more ambiguous, all encompassing manner, as you typically attempt to do with patents, you wouldn't have all these other legit variations).

O yea, i guess the main point i was trying to make above, it's not a general suspension you may/may may not like (not pointed at anyone in particular), it's what the designer/company has decided to compromise/optimise on, what they've decided is the best balance of compromises, peoples decisions, not a physical layout.