Yeah of course you can’t trust manufacturer weights completely. There are enough reviews of different spec levels with complete build weights though to get a good sense of where the frame sits in the spectrum.
The Evo 8 frameset for $3800 is pretty attractive. Better geo, internal storage, 5mm more travel, good weight. I’d never consider the ZFS-5 against that other than the latter being 35% off. Also wish they offered the Epic frame set in more colors.
The S-Works frame for $6000 is a nonstarter for me, though I know it includes the fork.
experiment with an angleset. The wolftooth one is great. I went from 67.5 to 66.5. It makes a difference, but remember, its a balance, and the bike felt less racey, but was a bit more comfortable descending, slight bit more margin for error and mistakes. We’re talking small differences at 1 degree though.
I’m convinced the better rider you are, the steeper setup you could ride, and therefor faster on climbing and mid speed sections. All depends on the terrain though. I doubt many of us really ride enough though for a steeper setup to be super beneficial, but I bet some pros are giving up some speed on slacker setups.
different layup, likely less material. Spec does the same with the 12m Epic fame vs the 11m, it’s lighter because they say the 12m layup is stronger and therefore they can use more of it.
I have no idea what the layup is on the ZFS-5 but the weight limit doesn’t scare me, I weigh 160 and I’m sure there’s a large safety margin in that.
All said, I’m not trying to claim that the ZFS-5 is the best bike out there or other people’s bikes suck. There’s just been zero discussion of it, and I myself dismissed it completely when it came out. Taking a second look, I was surprised to see it actually reviewed quite well, is light, has good geo and in an era of 12,000 - 15,000 dollar bikes you can get one surprisingly cheap right now.
I mentioned the 2.5K frameset but those mostly look sold out, you can still get a complete bike for 3.4K USD: Cervelo ZFS-5 120 GX – Mike's Bikes
You could do a lot of upgrades in the 11 grand left over.
I was joking with regards to the weight! Of course it is through using a different layup and less material. I weigh less than you, and I would still be a little concerned. If the frame cracks, fine, most likely they’ll honor the warranty and you’ll get a new one. What I would be worried about is a sudden failure of a critical part, say the head tube while sending it, that could end badly.
It is not just the rider weight limit, it is also the rating that these XC bikes have when looking at their owner’s manual. Here’s what Canyon says about the Lux TR for example:
Blockquote The scope for these bikes includes occasional jumps up to a maximum height of 60 cm
To me that is a very low limit, and it seems counter to even today’s standard XCO race tracks!
it’s a great price, the question is why? I think cervelo got a really bad reputation when it first released the hardtail with a somewhat old school geometry, after than a lot of “it’s just a Cervelo Blur”, I ride a Blur TR and it’s a fantastic bike, I really like Santa Cruz in general. But like you said it’s not the lightest bike out there, still I don’t feel the need to get rid of it to buy an Epic 8 or a Yeti at this point. The Cervelo would definitely be in my radar if I was buying a bike right now.
But I’m a bit concerned they might actually not staying in the MTB market given these huge discounts that are not usually seen on bikes released not long ago, it’s like you would be able to buy a S-Works Epic 8 next winter for $9k or a yeti ultimate for $8k5 I don’t think this will happen, so something tells me they are not staying with MTB for long
That’s a fair question. IMO they entered a fairly saturated market and probably over estimated the appeal of the Cervelo brand name to mountain bikers. That could also explain why they’re only discounting the lower tier builds and not the higher end ones, their target demo isn’t buying GX spec bikes. The standout thing for to me for Cervelo though is that they don’t have different frame tiers (for their mountain bikes at least) like pretty much all the other brands. You can buy the lowest spec build and still get the same frame as on their 14K halo spec. That makes the upgrade path a lot more compelling.
That said, I wouldn’t be overly concerned if they stopped making mountain bikes. Cervelo and Pon will both continue to exist and would honor any warranties. The tricky part would just be how would they warranty your frame in a few years if they didn’t have any replacements left? I’m sure there’d be some sort of compensation so I wouldn’t sweat it.
Funny you bring this up. I was just looking at this bike. I’m in the market for buying a MTB for my partner (a triathlete) and I think a trail-varietal XC bike is the way go. She’s not going to be doing any big drops or jumps—I think she’ll enjoy something nimble for riding in New England. I can’t quite figure what the other advantage of a Santa Cruz Tallboy would be over the Blur TR (or Julianna Joplin over the Wilder TR). The ZFS-5 120 at it’s current price is hard to beat for these purposes it seems. The other issue is that she is right on the cusp of S and M frame sizes of all of these bikes at 5’5". She has long legs and a short torso (but arms are more proportional to her legs). For road bikes, S would be the obvious way to go. Does the same logic hold true for an XC bike? Of course if it’s a M, it will fit me.
If that is of any help I’m 5’5" with a 29" inseam, I ride a Medium Blur TR with a 42mm stem and 125mm dropped and I’m really comfortable, riding it! I currently riding 740 bars but honestly thinking I will cut them down to 730 or maybe even 720, after building a gravel bike a few months ago those 740 bars feel awfully wide for me now
Like road bikes, smaller frames are more agile and larger frames are more stable.
If the standover works for her, and she has concerns about her technical skills (I don’t know, I’m just guessing based on the triathlete reference), then the larger frame will help her to gain confidence faster as she rides trails.
It will also put her in a more upright position (just use a shorter stem or a handlebar with more sweepback so she doesn’t have to reach too far), which makes the technical MTB techniques easier to execute, in my opinion.
Tallboy is as advertised… it’s fully a “downhill xc bike.” And man is it fun (and capable) on the downhills. TB is a good peddler for what it is, but the Blur has a steep advantage here. The Blur holds it own on the DH but the TB eats up the trail when sending it and is much more confidence inspiring. Going uphill the Blur is more efficient, easier to maneuver the tech and just feels faster.
A few things to consider… Riding both in medium I “sit-up” more on the Tallboy. Tallboy is also 5 pounds heavier for the same spec. If you are looking for a true “mountain bike” I’d go Tallboy. If you are looking for a race bike you can ride on XC trails I would go Blur.
If I had to pick… Though the tallboy is my favorite bike to ride, I’d go Blur TR for the discounted price. Especially if you are doing mostly trail riding or racing.
Has anyone heard a timeline on when flight attendant will be available aftermarket? I thought it was mentioned earlier in this thread but can’t find it.
RockShox has the part numbers called out on their website for aftermarket, you just can’t buy them yet.
