The thing is that most new XC bikes are, many go even further than the SB100. They all take geometry cues from trail bikes: the head angle got progressively slacker, for example. Yeti was just earlier than most.
So if you replaced your Yeti with a new XC bike, it might be “worse”, i. e. it might feel even more like a trail bike. Some race-oriented XC fullys have a simplified rear suspension design (like the Trek Supercaliber), but I wouldn’t count that as a plus, necessarily.
Agreed. It makes sense to offer such a bike as default: it is quite capable on trails, climbs well, not too heavy and is really a quiver killer with knobby tires.
Yup, Yeti pulled the stop-gap option to fudge the SB100 into the SB115 because they misjudged the trends and chose to tweak the 100 into the 115 to try and be on par with other bikes. It is a ‘hack’ that parallels those done by Specialized and Santa Cruz a bit ago when the trends changed faster than their desire to design and make new tooling.
It would be great to see another modern XC bike brought to the market, they really are starting to be the right bike for a ton of people.
I’ve espoused my love for my BMC TwoStroke a lot, and that is the geo I would really like to see on a fully.
The current SB115 is short, taller and steeper than BMC’s full on XC hardtail… That barely strikes me as a modern “trail XC bike” or downcountry or whatever the hell you want to call it.
The spark is really the closest I can find for the geo I like, 67 ha 75 sa on a 100mm travel fork.
Lastly, 2x bottle cages need to be more common on these bikes. There is no reason you have to wear a hydration pack because you plan on riding more than 1.5 hours.
Nice!
I had a Pivot 429 as a rental once, that thing rocked. It ran circles around my then XC fully.
I was thinking of a TwoStroke when I wanted to upgrade from my last mountain bike. Unfortunately, they do not import size L to Japan, at least not for the aluminum models. Ugh.
Doesn’t the geo of the FourStroke mimic the TwoStroke?
I don’t remember the history here with complete alacrity, but wasn’t the SB115 part of an effort to make a burly version of an existing bike? Didn’t they also offer a more trail-focussed version of the SB130 around the same time, too? (They called it a lunch ride bike, which makes no sense to me …)
They are pretty close, the shop could never get them in.
A general question on geo, are full sus geos quoted when unsagged? and how much does it change when at 20% sag?
On to Yetis, every time I see one I have to do a double take, they really are beautiful bikes, but it seems they are stuck on their heritage and not really driving the design world anymore.
Other than being expensive, and at the end of their model lifespan, I don’t think that’s a fair take of the current crop of bikes. Have yet to see a bad review or experience of the SB130, and the SB150 is still a championship winning enduro race bike.
But as someone indicated earlier, it seems new models are soon to come out!
What brands are pushing the envelope according to you? (Just to be clear since nuance and intonation gets lost in written posts: this is an honest question and I am really curious.)
I am looking at this as your average front of the pack Cat 2 XCO rider.
On a sliding scale from not progressive to modern progressive, I would say Trek Super caliber is way old school, Scalpel/OIZ land in the middle the Spark/Epic would be pushing the progression. I am guessing the new 4 stroke is going to be the slackest pure xc bike out there.
The SB115 lands somewhere near the modern geo, but ends up being shorter and taller than something like the newest Anthem. It really is a short travel trail bike. They would be better served by ditching the 115 and finding a way to shed 3 pounds off the 130.
My proposal, build the 130 with a Fox 34 130mm spec’ed with more of an XC rubber, remote lock outs, high volume rear shock without the extra can and now we are looking at a pretty sweet ride. It is more bike than I will ever need for the trails around me, only one race in our series has a descent that had me thankful to be riding my full sus.
Yeti’s history is in the old Norba days of some wild ass bikes that broke the mold, I think they are still that way on the bigger bikes, but for sure not on the XC race side of things.
The people who want that for the SB130 is a small crowd! Could always build it up that way from a frame. But that is not the vision or the intent of the SB130. That bike sits firmly in the jack of all trades trail bike segment. It is the type of bike that you’re surprised how well it can hang on the uphills, and then hang with the enduro bros on the downhill.
Some of us still do that on a 100mm full sus with a high post!
So completely derailing from “Yeti has a new bike, possibly”, and going to Yeti makes killer trail bikes, now lets spec what they could build for the grim donut of XC bikes.
I would want a 66* head tube, 75* seat tube, size medium would be a stack and reach of 600/445 running a 60 mm stem and a short offset fork, a solid pedaling platform with locked and wide open option.
Second edit, I want two bottle cages on my bike too!
I really like the new crop of XC bikes too! really enjoy my Epic EVO, so much so, that the “big bike” the Ripmo AF is seeing less and less use, as the Epic can handle all but the gnarliest of trails.
I too hope Yeti updates the SB115 design, and make a killer XCM bike. I was just pointing out that it will likely not be in the format of the SB130. That bike has a different market segment in mind.
For XC that might be true. Yeti is all about EWS Enduro racing, and e-EWS racing, apparently. I think the market for their SB100/115 as probably someone who might default to riding trail or enduro style, but wants a short travel bike for racing - same with Transition in their Spur.