Review: Atherton 130.X - The Lugged Carbon Cruiser
At this point Atherton Bikes needs little introduction – the brand is closing in on its 5th anniversary, and the lineup now includes four different models, with either 130, 150, 170, or 200mm of rear travel. All of the bikes are manufactured in North Wales, where carbon tubes are bonded to titanium lugs that are produced using additive manufacturing.
The 130.X that I've been spending time on is billed as a 'trail bike with attitude', a stout, shorter travel rig that has the same build kit as its longer travel sibling. A whopping total of 22 sizes are available, which breaks down to 11 different reach numbers with a 'regular' or 'tall' version that determines the seat tube and head tube length.
The 130.X that I've been spending time on is billed as a 'trail bike with attitude', a stout, shorter travel rig that has the same build kit as its longer travel sibling. A whopping total of 22 sizes are available, which breaks down to 11 different reach numbers with a 'regular' or 'tall' version that determines the seat tube and head tube length.
Atherton 130.X Details
• Wheel size: 29"
• Carbon frame, titanium lugs
• Travel: 130mm / 150mm fork
• 65º head angle
• 78.5º seat tube angle
• 436mm chainstays
• 11 sizes with 2 seat tube length options per size
• Weight: 33 lb / 15 kg (size L)
• Price: $7,239 USD
• athertonbikes.com
• Wheel size: 29"
• Carbon frame, titanium lugs
• Travel: 130mm / 150mm fork
• 65º head angle
• 78.5º seat tube angle
• 436mm chainstays
• 11 sizes with 2 seat tube length options per size
• Weight: 33 lb / 15 kg (size L)
• Price: $7,239 USD
• athertonbikes.com
Atherton also offers customers the ability to customize the build kit, swapping out things like dropper posts, brakes, and suspension.
 | It's the kind of bike you can hop on, pedal off into the woods, and whatever trail you end up on it'll probably deliver a good time. |
Frame Details
The 130.X's frame has what I'd call a futuristic handbuilt look, and I'm here for it. The lugged carbon frame looks great in person – the round tubes have narrower dimensions than some of the e-bike-esque proportions that some modern carbon frames are starting to adopt, giving the 130.X a very clean profile. Even without oversized tubes, the 130.X meets the EFBE class 5 certification, which means it's approved for bike park and DH usage, not something you see every day on a 130mm trail bike.
The frame design does preclude any in-frame storage, and there aren't any accessory bolts on the underside of the top tube either. There is plenty of room for holding a water bottle inside the front triangle, though.
Lately we've seen all sorts of shapes used for chainslap protection, but the 130.X simple uses a sheet of mastic tape wrapped around the chainstay. It might not be as fancy as some of the other options, but it does the trick - the 130.X was nice and quiet.
The 130.X's DW6 suspension layout does require more bearings than a simpler configuration - there are a total of 18 bearings to keep tabs on, and in addition, there are lots of little crannies where dirt can accumulate around the two short links near the bottom bracket.
![Atherton 130 review]()
![Atherton 130 review]()
The 130.X's frame has what I'd call a futuristic handbuilt look, and I'm here for it. The lugged carbon frame looks great in person – the round tubes have narrower dimensions than some of the e-bike-esque proportions that some modern carbon frames are starting to adopt, giving the 130.X a very clean profile. Even without oversized tubes, the 130.X meets the EFBE class 5 certification, which means it's approved for bike park and DH usage, not something you see every day on a 130mm trail bike.
The frame design does preclude any in-frame storage, and there aren't any accessory bolts on the underside of the top tube either. There is plenty of room for holding a water bottle inside the front triangle, though.
Lately we've seen all sorts of shapes used for chainslap protection, but the 130.X simple uses a sheet of mastic tape wrapped around the chainstay. It might not be as fancy as some of the other options, but it does the trick - the 130.X was nice and quiet.
The 130.X's DW6 suspension layout does require more bearings than a simpler configuration - there are a total of 18 bearings to keep tabs on, and in addition, there are lots of little crannies where dirt can accumulate around the two short links near the bottom bracket.
Geometry
The 130.X's numbers fall right in line with what we've come to expect for a modern trail bike. With a 150mm fork it has a 65-degree head angle, a 78.5-degree seat angle, and 436mm chainstays. Even though the size I was on is called the 490, the reach is 484mm, due to the longer fork compared to the standard AM.130.
The seat tube does have a kink in it part way down, potentially limiting the maximum dropper post length for some riders. That said, I was able to run a 210mm OneUp dropper post without any trouble – the bend in the tube happens far enough down that it didn't pose a problem. That may not be the case on the smaller sizes, though, so it's something to keep in mind.
I was on the 'regular' version, but given the amount of fixed seat post that ended up exposed due to the 400mm seat tube height, I would have gone with the 'tall' version, mainly due to aesthetics rather than anything performance related – it looks kind of strange to have so much seatpost sticking out.
Suspension Design
All of the bikes in the Atherton lineup use a version of Dave Weagle's DW6 suspension design. As the name implies, it's a 6-bar layout, with two short links connecting the chainstay to the front triangle, and a rocker link between the seat stays and the shock. The goal with the design is to be able to have more control over the amount of anti-squat, tuning it to the bike's specific purpose.
All of the bikes in the Atherton lineup use a version of Dave Weagle's DW6 suspension design. As the name implies, it's a 6-bar layout, with two short links connecting the chainstay to the front triangle, and a rocker link between the seat stays and the shock. The goal with the design is to be able to have more control over the amount of anti-squat, tuning it to the bike's specific purpose.
| Specifications | ||
| Price | $7239 | |
| Travel | 130 | |
| Rear Shock | Fox Float X2 | |
| Fork | Fox 36 Float Factory 150mm | |
| Cassette | SRAM GX | |
| Crankarms | SRAM GX | |
| Rear Derailleur | SRAM GX 12-speed | |
| Chain | SRAM GX | |
| Shifter Pods | SRAM GX | |
| Handlebar | Renthal | |
| Stem | Renthal | |
| Grips | ODI Elite Flow | |
| Brakes | SRAM G2 RSC | |
| Wheelset | Stan's Flow MK4 | |
| Tires | Continental Kryptotal Enduro F + R | |
| Seat | WTB | |
| Seatpost | Fox Transfer Factory 150mm | |
Test Bike Setup
After my initial shakedown ride on the 130.X, I swapped out the 150mm Fox Transfer post for a 210mm OneUp post - the 150 was much too short, and I ended up with a ridiculous amount of the post exposed in order to achieve my ideal saddle height. Later on in the test period I installed a pair of SRAM Code RSC brakes and HS2 rotors in order to confirm my suspicions that that setup would be vastly superior to the G2 brakes...and it was.
As for suspension settings, I ran 83 psi in the 36 with two volume spacers. 200 psi in the X2 shock put me at 28% sag, and my settings were as follows (all clicks from closed): HSC:7, LSC: 14, LSR: 11, HSR: 3.
After my initial shakedown ride on the 130.X, I swapped out the 150mm Fox Transfer post for a 210mm OneUp post - the 150 was much too short, and I ended up with a ridiculous amount of the post exposed in order to achieve my ideal saddle height. Later on in the test period I installed a pair of SRAM Code RSC brakes and HS2 rotors in order to confirm my suspicions that that setup would be vastly superior to the G2 brakes...and it was.
As for suspension settings, I ran 83 psi in the 36 with two volume spacers. 200 psi in the X2 shock put me at 28% sag, and my settings were as follows (all clicks from closed): HSC:7, LSC: 14, LSR: 11, HSR: 3.
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Climbing
Bike weights seem to be all across the board these days, and there's no clearly defined average weight for a trail bike, especially when it comes to a genre-blurring option like the 130.X. That said, it's not exactly a lightweight, at least when compared to other carbon bikes with similar amounts of travel. I wouldn't say it feels sluggish, and I didn't have to think twice about taking it out for multi-hour rides with a lot of vert, but it also doesn't feel as spritely as a Specialized Stumpjumper, for example.
The DW6 suspension layout has many of the hallmarks of the more common DW-link design – it stays calm while pedaling, yet also has a good amount of grip, which I took full advantage of during the wet and greasy rides I took it on. There is some suspension movement during out of the saddle efforts, but not enough that I ever felt the need to use the climb switch. That's one of the 130.X's strong suits – it's the kind of bike you can hop on, pedal off into the woods, and whatever trail you end up on it'll probably deliver a good time.
The overall handling on technical climbs is pleasantly neutral - I never felt like I had to fight with the bike to get it around corners or up and over slippery roots, and as I mentioned, the amount of traction was impressive. The 130.X strikes a great balance of being active and efficient, a blend of traits that can be hard to achieve.
![Atherton 130 review]()
Bike weights seem to be all across the board these days, and there's no clearly defined average weight for a trail bike, especially when it comes to a genre-blurring option like the 130.X. That said, it's not exactly a lightweight, at least when compared to other carbon bikes with similar amounts of travel. I wouldn't say it feels sluggish, and I didn't have to think twice about taking it out for multi-hour rides with a lot of vert, but it also doesn't feel as spritely as a Specialized Stumpjumper, for example.
The DW6 suspension layout has many of the hallmarks of the more common DW-link design – it stays calm while pedaling, yet also has a good amount of grip, which I took full advantage of during the wet and greasy rides I took it on. There is some suspension movement during out of the saddle efforts, but not enough that I ever felt the need to use the climb switch. That's one of the 130.X's strong suits – it's the kind of bike you can hop on, pedal off into the woods, and whatever trail you end up on it'll probably deliver a good time.
The overall handling on technical climbs is pleasantly neutral - I never felt like I had to fight with the bike to get it around corners or up and over slippery roots, and as I mentioned, the amount of traction was impressive. The 130.X strikes a great balance of being active and efficient, a blend of traits that can be hard to achieve.
Descending
The 130.X has a very muted feel, likely a combination of the frame construction and the use of that Float X2 shock for its 130mm of travel. Even without any volume spacers in the shock there was plenty of end-stroke ramp-up, and I didn't have any harsh bottom outs.
It's an interesting mix of plush and supportive – in some ways it does feel like a longer travel bike, but in rougher terrain it doesn't erase impacts the same way a bike with 20 or 30 millimeters of additional rear travel would. I love goofing off on shorter travel bikes, and I don't usually subscribe to the concept that "more travel is always better." However, the 130.X feels so much like a longer travel bike that more than once I found myself wondering if I'd actually choose this bike over the 150.
It also seems like a better candidate for a Float X shock rather than an X2 – along with being lighter, with the right tune I think the Float X would have created a slightly peppier ride.
With its well-damped suspension feel and fairly neutral geometry, the 130.X remains composed on a wide variety of terrain. On the mellower, more rolling trails it's supportive enough to generate speed by pumping through rollers, and on the steeper, chunkier stuff it feels surefooted, at least as long as you're not running those G2 brakes. The head angle, reach, and chainstay length all feel appropriate for the bike's intentions - it's not so slack that it feels dull or sluggish on flatter sections of trail, but it's also long enough to feel stable and controlled at higher speeds.
Atherton 130.X
Scor 2030
How does it compare?
The Scor 2030 that I reviewed earlier this year falls into a similar category as the 130.X, even though it has a little less travel in its stock configuration. Both bikes pedal very well, but the Scor's handling is snappier overall; there's more pep in its step compared to the 130.X. The Scor feels like it wants to slap corners, manual, and drift at every opportunity, while the 130.X has a calmer overall presence, and doesn't feel as snappy. That's likely due to a combination of factors, including the Float X2 shock, and the longer chainstay and reach measurement.
The ideal candidate for both bikes is similar – someone that prefers the feel of a shorter travel bike, but doesn't want to feel limited when it comes time to descend. For riders with a livelier riding style the 2030 would be the one I'd choose, and the 130.X is for riders looking for that bigger bike feel in a shorter travel package.
When it comes to price, the Atherton's UK-made pedigree does put it on the higher end of the scale. It's not outlandish, but it's not going to be the place to look for the absolute lowest price. Still, the frame-only price is less expensive than a Yeti SB120, so that's something.
Which Model is the Best Value?
The other two models in the 130 lineup are a bit more trail oriented, with 140mm forks and either a RockShox SuperDeluxe or Deluxe shock. Even the base model 130.1 is priced at $6,545, so this isn't really the place to look for a screaming deal. Of course, I wouldn't expect a bargain basement price from a small company producing titanium lugged carbon frames in the UK, and the sheer number of sizes does mean it's about as close to custom sizing as you can get.
The built kit itself is reasonable, especially since Atherton offer the option to upgrade the brakes and dropper, although considering how many deep discounts on parts and accessories are currently being offered, going the frame-only route might be the best way to maximize the bang for your buck.
![Atherton 130 review]()
![Atherton 130 review]()
The other two models in the 130 lineup are a bit more trail oriented, with 140mm forks and either a RockShox SuperDeluxe or Deluxe shock. Even the base model 130.1 is priced at $6,545, so this isn't really the place to look for a screaming deal. Of course, I wouldn't expect a bargain basement price from a small company producing titanium lugged carbon frames in the UK, and the sheer number of sizes does mean it's about as close to custom sizing as you can get.
The built kit itself is reasonable, especially since Atherton offer the option to upgrade the brakes and dropper, although considering how many deep discounts on parts and accessories are currently being offered, going the frame-only route might be the best way to maximize the bang for your buck.
Technical Report
SRAM G2 brakes: I've hear rumors that SRAM's G2 brakes are going to be retired soon, and I'm really hoping that's true. They're underpowered for most bikes, with much less power than Codes at nearly the same weight. The 130.X deserves better brakes than these, and it'd be one of the first things I would swap out if I bought a complete bike.
Fox Transfer dropper post: I swear, I'm not trying to sound like a broken record, but bikes keep showing up with droppers posts that don't have enough drop. This time, it was a 150mm Fox Transfer post that caused me to shake my head. I was able to swap it out for a 210mm OneUp post and was much happier with the extra room on the descents (that's something a customer would be able to do at the time of purchase for a $40 charge).
The 130.X does have a kink in the seat tube that could limit how long of a post some riders can run – I have long legs, and had plenty of room, but some measuring and calculating could be required depending on the frame size and rider height. The new 170mm Atherton bike has a straight seat tube, a design that would make sense to implement across the whole range.
Continental Kryptotal Enduro casing tires: Most of my time on Continental's new tire lineup has been on the DH-casing versions with the stickiest rubber compound. There's still no enduro casing tire with that supersoft rubber, although that's supposed to change in the future. For now, the enduro casing tires and their soft rubber compound do a good job in most conditions, that is, once the very greasy, very slippery coating wears off. That waxy coating is likely the release agent used during manufacturing to get the tires out of the mold, but it's worth mentioning because it can make the tires feel downright sketchy until it goes away. After that, there was good, predictable traction, even on wet roots and slimy rocks.
![Atherton 130 review]()
SRAM G2 brakes: I've hear rumors that SRAM's G2 brakes are going to be retired soon, and I'm really hoping that's true. They're underpowered for most bikes, with much less power than Codes at nearly the same weight. The 130.X deserves better brakes than these, and it'd be one of the first things I would swap out if I bought a complete bike.
Fox Transfer dropper post: I swear, I'm not trying to sound like a broken record, but bikes keep showing up with droppers posts that don't have enough drop. This time, it was a 150mm Fox Transfer post that caused me to shake my head. I was able to swap it out for a 210mm OneUp post and was much happier with the extra room on the descents (that's something a customer would be able to do at the time of purchase for a $40 charge).
The 130.X does have a kink in the seat tube that could limit how long of a post some riders can run – I have long legs, and had plenty of room, but some measuring and calculating could be required depending on the frame size and rider height. The new 170mm Atherton bike has a straight seat tube, a design that would make sense to implement across the whole range.
Continental Kryptotal Enduro casing tires: Most of my time on Continental's new tire lineup has been on the DH-casing versions with the stickiest rubber compound. There's still no enduro casing tire with that supersoft rubber, although that's supposed to change in the future. For now, the enduro casing tires and their soft rubber compound do a good job in most conditions, that is, once the very greasy, very slippery coating wears off. That waxy coating is likely the release agent used during manufacturing to get the tires out of the mold, but it's worth mentioning because it can make the tires feel downright sketchy until it goes away. After that, there was good, predictable traction, even on wet roots and slimy rocks.
Pros
+ Very calm and composed while climbing and descending
+ Large range of sizes, plus a full custom option
+ The looks - lugged carbon stands out from the crowd
Cons
- There's not much separating it from the AM150, other than travel.
- Underpowered brakes, short dropper post on complete bike
- There are lighter, livelier options in this travel bracket
Pinkbike's Take
| The 130.X is one of those bikes that really doesn't mind which way the trail goes. It delivers a calm, composed ride no matter the terrain, although it's not the bike to choose if you're looking for something extra light and lively. It may be splitting hairs, but in this configuration I'd slot it into the all-mountain category rather than calling it a trail bike. When it's viewed through that lens it makes a lot of sense, a solid, shorter travel option for riders looking for something a little different, a reliable adventure mobile that can handle just about anything. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
At 6'1 (185cm) I am permanently stuck between an L that's a bit short on reach and an XL which is too long in both reach and seat tube.
11 sizes means I can buy right in the middle. That's cool.
I know it happens to tons of other riders of other heights too, so not taking things away from them. But quite literally 6'1" is "usually" the "fuzzy edge" of the sizing guide where they recommend both an L or XL.
Surprisingly, the frame only prices for Athertons (especially given the sizing stuff), is pretty reasonable. For perspective, its cheaper than Yeti the SB140 frame ($4400).
There is no excuse for that price point to not have GX AXS. Or, a superior mechanical shift set, like X01 bare minimum.
I’m 6’1.5” / 186cm and in exactly the same boat as you. I’ve found bikes of 480mm reach too small (most large) and 515-520mm reach too big (well I can ride them but they aren’t as fun)
Very few bikes are 500mm reach, but the ones I have found have been spot on….
Its the main reason I’m drewling over an AM170
And an Arrival 170 in XL will hit that reach number (although your preferred effective reach might be a more useful bike compare number).
happy bike hunting.
I don't think a shoe size would be an accurate fit
Drewling - Drooling+Dwelling
Thanks for the correction, Dad.
Personally I like the geo more on the atherton,
Larger stack and slightly shorter chainstays.
I’d have an arrival 152 though happily!
There is a giant red rectangular button on the screen labelled ""STEP 3 : FRAME SIZE"
Funnily enough it brings up the fit calculator...
Randomly changing something like chain stay length has much wider implications than just rider fit. It effects the wheel path / wheel clearance and sometimes shock leverage ratio etc.
HA you have you have other options to adjust that without getting a custom made frame.
m.pinkbike.com/news/robot-bike-co-r160-custom-review-2016.html
But in general I agree 440mm is on the shorter side for my liking on an XL unless the axle path is substantially rearward.
I also thought I always needed longer chainstays on an XL bike, but some of the ones I've tested I really didn't like the handling. For sure they plowed straight, but also lacked something in handling precision and also playfulness.
I think just depends on the bike and overall geometry and suspension design though
I have two bikes around the 500 reach.
One has 440mm chainstays, the other had 445mm. I much prefer the 440 - its noticable better at cornering and no more stable at high speed…
but for me longer stays (note this is tested with a bike that can run 445-460 stays) remove weight from the rear and place it on the front, resulting in more front grip, and a slightly less forward neutral body position, and IMO improved cornering when pushing the limits of front grip in longer corners done at the absolute limits of traction, whereas the short stays are a bit better for intentional schralp type flicking, which is usually not done at your absolute limits.....
Then also difficult to do a comparison review unless you take into account the sizing benefits against the other bikes with less sizing options.
Obviously the Atherton bikes are of greater value to people who are between sizes or have unusual body geometry and can get a full custom sizing.
Or, to put that differently, there's no shortage of bikes that seem to work well for lean dudes around 5'11" with moderately longish legs for their size. For those folks, Atherton's near custom sizing offers less extra value than for everyone whose a bit further from what seems too be the default size.
Ouch, this hits close to home. Bought a frame 2 months ago and it was shipped without the custom bits that attach to the frame. Nukeproof said "sorry, but we can't give you parts, talk to a dealer"
Your riding the spring.
Rockshox ZEB has plenty of marketing. They aren't trying to price as a boutique product. It works very well, it's easy to setup, and suits a wide range of riders without needing customizations. Thus you get reliable product at a reasonable price (comparatively).
www.pinkbike.com/news/review-2023-rockshox-zeb-vs-fox-38-fork-mtb.html
Sure, you may be riding the spring on ALL suspension products. That is inherently obvious. The thing about it, is if there was NO compression damping as you claim, there would be NO control through the travel. Which is an inherently flawed technical take just by looking at a graph... I can, and maybe because I am an aggressive 150lb rider, can most certainly tell a difference when I crank down the High and Low speed compression. It firms up right quick. I highly doubt whatever dyno graph you are looking at has each individual click of HC/LC to show the difference.
A grip 2 non vvc can generate massive damping, and the curve is kinda wack, an rc2 is a beauty with an extra face shim, and the vvc can't be stiffened enough even with a huge pile of shims, blows right through.... youtu.be/lS-VzI2JbrI?si=COfxjHtPfvH1iF_Q
Many fast dudes are on the previous non vvc base valve.
more stack = bigger bike.
Steering axis and Bottom bracket
You can never change the relationship between these two without modifying other parts of the bike.
By this guys logic you can slacken your seat angle to 65 degrees, bingo, you have a massive ETT that will fit a 7FT man.
Humans are adaptable creatures and most of us will adjust for 5mm here or 5mm there when talking reach, stack, stem length, etc.
Either way, all of those sizes (and even custom geo if you'd like) is a raging bargain for a CF/ Ti frame!
Would like to see them incorporate the EightPins dropper into the Atherton.
But I'm not looking for a 130 trail bike - the am.150 has been absolutely fantastic both as a trail/epic bike and hitting everything including the park. I was on a 170 bike (Ransom) the last few years and was pretty concerned about stepping down in travel but the am.150 has handled everything including a solid week of pure downhilling in the Alps.
Sizing is killer, geo is solid, but why would I buy this over a Norco Fluid or even the new YT Jeffsy?
While it's cool that this bike is rated for DH use, it's a trail bike. I just don't see an advantage of buying this bike over a longer travel rig. It sounds like the suspension was built for stability and compromises on the snappy feeling that a 130 bike can provide.
The Stumpy is under 30lbs, but it has flex stays. I prefer links, for my suspension. The Stumpy is still the standard, but I feel like Specialized was cheating to hit that weight.
This Atherton bike is for somebody that can only afford one bike and never a wants to worry about having the wrong bike… this is a one-bike and not a trail bike, in my opinion. Your mileage may vary, but I see that categorization as having a different set of parameters than a trail bike or an XC-ish bike like your Epic Evo. I rode a super light “downcountry” bike once ( Revel Ranger), it was like trying to control a squirrel on the dh’s.
It seems like 130/140 or 130/150 sits squarely in the trail category but it’s all relative. I’m sure this atherton rips and if I had a chance to try one out I’d be super excited.
Yeah, you’re right, XC bikes, like the Element( 120mm travel/100mm) bikes can still get under 30lbs, but not much else can these days. Where as, my old 150mm/160mm HD3, was under 30 lbs.
My new Mojo 4 was a struggle to get under 30lbs with 130mm/140mm, full XT and carbon everything…
I have a Spire, pedals great, absolute weapon going down, and is so capable, I have to be going warp speed to achieve the sensation of being on the edge.
I also have a ST Fugitive, which isnt as capable as the Spire, and weighs nearly the same, but I get that sensation of speed, and riding on the edge at a much slower speed, or on more mellow trails.
So I can go on rides with my wife, or coach, or explore areas that I might not otherwise on a bike that is still very capable, but is still a tonne of fun on trails that arent quite up for the Spire.
Any of that make sense?
This would be a great bike for what i'm looking for from a short travel bike
I really enjoy the feeling of a light, agile bike. I love the atheron line up and would’ve been really excited to see something lightweight from them but that doesn’t mean this bike won’t be a great ride for a whole bunch of people.
Now, If Nino started a bike brand, or Pidcock, different story.
This is an ultra-expensive waste of fancy materials, and it results in a frame that is heavier then an aluminum one!
Is there some sort of uber material that you can think of in the last 30 years that would facilitate a durable, mid travel bike that can safely be ridden by multiple riders, on multiple types of terrain?
Steel, Aluminium, Titanium, Carbon, those are the choices, and the development of them is really just incremental. We've had these materials, and the processes of them for decades.
Rather than "says something of the state of the industry" maybe it says "this is what these materials are capable of, and these are the current methods of manufacture"
I've been riding mountain bike since the late 90's, and the terrain that I ride has gotten ever increasing, and the bike I ride is much more durable than ever. I value that over 5-6 lbs of weight savings, and I dont think I'm the only one
Its also available in a frame only, so you can attempt to build it as youd like?
the 130X, designed as a short travel, durable bike, for those that want the short travel platform, but more capable due to the more robust parts.
I'm not sure whats got you so fired up about this, theres bikes available if you want a lighter bike, and ones available if you want a more robust bike, that seems like a great compromise to me....And bitching about PB gravity focused content, on that platform seems a little strange to me, but you do you bruv
To me the “bigger is better” is not Pinkbike per se. It is more a result of the industry trying to have less warranty claims, and less viral stories on the internet about that one “frame that broke.”
It also helps newer riders to ride the gnarlyier dh’s. But at the end of the day it creates a longer and heavier bike, on average.
Although, ironically, my first mountain bike weighed 30lbs, with an original rock show fork, 90’s Univega.
I do love my mojo 4 though…
I'm not sure I can get my ST trail bike below 34lbs, and still feel confident on it to chuck it down the tings I enjoy, for any length of time.
I'd say the bulk of weight comes from my alu frame, and wheel setup, both are fairly difficult/cost prohibitive to swap out to get any real weight savings.
My enduro bike, around the 33/34 mark, its already carbon, so short of again swapping wheels and fork out, it is what it is.
and while we can in fact get closer to 30, it is always going to come with a set of compromises, some of which arent acceptable to some.
The idea that the travel number is what is adding the weight is kinda silly, its just the robust parts that make up that difference
Its exactly why this bike is available in more than guise, and why there are lots of different options available. So if you want a 28lb "trail" bike, go buy one, if you want a 34lb "trail" bike, you can have that too
It sure as hell doesn’t look as cool, though. Those Athertons are sweet looking bikes.
Why couldn't you get that "right tune" on an X2? It's got more external adjustments, should actually be easier to get the "right tune" than on a shock with less knobs.
The carbon tubes in a traditional frame design surely softened the ride, especially with straight blade forks of the day! Retail at $1749 I think in 89. I added a rite height on the carbon fiber seatpost - an early version of dropper post.
This Atherton is a nice bike!
Not everyone is generic in their body shape though! If your arms and/or legs are significantly out of proportion with your torso size you can rarely get a good fit on generic sized bikes.
It also comes off as a bit of a fan boy review, so hard to take away any feedback from it.
Atherton bikes are lookin good. Clearly the DH bike works really well!
Protip to anyone reading; make sure you're pressurizing your line from the caliper up. It genuinely does effect how well these brakes work.
Thing is - it should never be needed to have a science degree or a workshop to get bicycle brakes working proper. They should just work from the get go. Mine certainly did not. New, and rather expensive bike. Coming from 2-pot SLX on a few bikes the G2s were a big setback IMO.
My G2s are stronger and more consistent than any SLX I've tried.
This means that the marketing guy wanted to feel useful that particular day
So, yeah, basically "eXtreme!"
XOXO
//Gossip Girl
USA import tax officially 11% but as Preston mentioned it doesnt seem to be consistently applied - some people are chatged 11, some like Preston nothing and others have reported 5.5% - its all very anecdotal so up to you to decide!
Curious why you chose the 130 over the 150, given the very small weight penalty, and reported stellar pedaling of the 150?
As for the 130 vs 150. I'm a two bike guy, a short travel bike for Ontario riding and a bigger travel bike for traveling with. I went from a Tallboy 3 to a SB115 to the AM.130, the AM.150 would have just been too much bike for general Ontario riding. We don't have the sustained downhills to take advantage of the 150 travel even if the weight penalty isn't that much. The weight, geo, and travel of the 130 is just better suited for the type of riding I do on a daily basis.
Because you don't just get more power for free. If the brakes move more fluid to drive bigger pistons to provide more force at the rotor for equal force at the lever, there will be a trade-off with needing more lever throw (to move the master piston more, or less modulation (from linkages designed to equalize lever throw against more piston throw).
"Cons - There's not much separating it from the AM150, other than travel."
Is that a con for this or for the AM150? If this is a good bike at this travel, why is it "bad" that it's similar to a bike with more travel? Especially since you specifically reminded us that this bike more closely fits your opinions on amount of travel than the AM150.
Note: you get the same feeling by keeping actual sag in mm the same as the short option, as opposed to percent of travel.
And of course needlessly stuffing it with items you don't need isn't really the fault of the compartment lol.
Works well for both of my pumps now which do quickly take up precious real estate in my hip pack. Not a deal breaker but it could sway me toward one bike over another.
It's not inherently "bogus marketing hype". Just because you aren't into it.
I'm surprised it took this long to get it.
For the weight, this is supposedly a state of the art carbon frame that actually weights MORE than my Turner 5-spot Aluminum did 25 years ago. And that was with a COIL shock. Bravi! well done. And no wonder: lugged construction is not "futuristic", it is an engineering no-no. It is ok for prototyping, but otherwise is not a great use of carbon fiber.
As for customization, sure you can shorten and lengthen those main tubes, but you cannot even get a mullet option, not to mention a full 27.5. So yes, you can spend upward to $5000 for a "custom" frame, achieving what a simple swap in stem length or handlebar does for any other!
Imagine calling someone who created a community for mount bikers of all types from anywhere a gatekeeper.
If you're still this upset maybe go seek help and talk to someone. I'm not defending anyone here my main point is shut the f*cking hell up.
And don't anyone even think about mentioning the f*cking advent calendar.
For the record, neither Kaz nor I said "you're not a real biker unless you're a racer". With neither of us being racers ourselves that would be quite a strange thing to say, after all.
If it bothered you the day it was on the podcast, why no comment then? Because I listened to it the day it was released and read the comments, and no one said shit about it. I find it odd everyone is now up in arms three months removed from the episode.
Srsly tho, not sure I want to google pearl clutches monthly. I'm going to, but I'm not sure I want to.
@brighterlights: if you want to drop pinkbike because of their elitest attitude I respect that. But when your still here commenting about how your leaving, weeks after it happened, it looks a lot like virtue signaling.