I just wanted to say thank you for such a great review. I recently lost my Highball Carbon due to a fire and was in the market for a new bike. I normally run a hard tail but was open to some different options. After watching this review I knew that The Santa Cruz Blur Trail version was the direction to go. I watched your videos and read your review and you were right, what an amazing bike. Thanks
Thanks for watching and for your feedback Scott! Sorry to hear about losing the Highball, but glad to hear you're getting on with the new Blur TR. Happy trails mate! [ST Wil]
Hi! Thanks for your helpful reviews of Santa Cruz Blur! I ride xc trails most of the time and I like to push hard on my bikes. When I bought Blur with Fox 32 I already knew that I will change the fork for something burlier. So I installed RockShox Pike 140 mm, 130 mm version wasn't available. I planned to install a 120 mm air shaft. But after several months of riding, I decided to stay with 140 mm of travel😊 Just need to install a dropper and I will be absolutely happy with the bike. Cheers! ✌
I think the 68.1 degree head angle might be even a little slacker, axle to crown on the fox 32 SC is 504mm, axle to crown on the 34 SC is 530mm, which should be about 67.8 degree. I actually have a 2017 Scott Spark RC Pro which I just put a 34 SC with 44mm offset on to replace the fox 34 51mm offset fork that I installed on it a few months back but not had a chance to really test it yet since its winter. I went with the 44mm offset because I have noticed the new Scott Spark comes with the 34 SC 44mm and I trust Scott decision to go with 44mm this year. I am noticing most 29ers are now coming with 44mm offset to help bring the front wheel closer which helps in slow speed cornering while adding more stability at speed by increasing trail figure, can't wait for your 44mm vs 51mm offset review!
Yo Jack! Can confirm the 68.1 degree head angle - that's been clarified by Santa Cruz too. Of course there's a chance it gets a touch slacker when you're sitting on the bike at sag, depending on setup for the rear shock. Interesting note you make on the Scott Spark about going with a shorter 44mm fork offset! From what I understand, the 2019 Genius is also going to a 44mm offset, which means that with the exception of the Spark RC, all of Scott's 29er full susers are running the shorter 44mm offset. Let me know how you go with the new fork on the front of your bike! ST Wil.
Awesome review thanks! I'm tyring to decide between the regular Blur or the TR. Sadly I can't find any more 2019 XLs in that sunset fog which I would prefer so I'd be getting a 2020. The TR version is intriguing to me because it comes with dropper and slightly more travel w/o adding too much extra weight. My question is, how much am I compromising on climbing and handling by going with the TR and the slightly slacker HTA at 68.5? Both technical and fire rd climbing in the 1000-3000ft range. I might also need to swap out for a 50mm stem too regardless of the version I get which could make me even more upright? Just trying to ensure I can still fly up the hills like I was able to when I demo'd the non TR version. It's debatable whether I need 110 in travel, but would go for it if it doesn't require compromising in these areas. Thanks in advance!
Fantastic video! I am considering a Blur and I love the idea of a 120mm (also looking at Epic Evo). However, I tried a Blur today and I loved the fact that you can make the bike a while rigid set up by looking both fork and shock. Would that be possible as well with a 34 swap? Thanks!
Thanks Michael! And yes, this bike has been an absolute blast to ride - I'm really happy with how it's setup here. I do have a few parts I'll be testing on here in the coming months, so it'll be interesting to see what else the Blur can do. ST Wil.
Hello Will nice review ! I have a SC Blur and I am planning to do the fork upgrade to a 34. Also I have a Santa Cruz 800mm carbón riser bars with 35mm clamp. What stem would you recommend me to use in order to install that handlebar I have from a Hightower. Looking forward to your response. Tks !
I am 5'9" and I have the Santa Cruz Blur medium frame. On their sizing chart this exact height is said to fit either the large or the medium. I think that's correct. I could see having a bit larger of a frame, but I am happy with the medium at 5'9".
Hey there Tino! With the 100mm fork, the Blur's seat angle sits at 74-degrees, and with the 120mm travel fork, it sits at 73.1-degrees. On a short travel bike like this, I wouldn't say that's too slack, since it is possible to go too steep on the seat angle. If the seat angle is too steep, for pedalling along on flat and undulating terrain it can potentially put the rider's knees too far forward over the pedals, which may cause issues with knee pain. This was actually the problem I first encountered on the Blur tested here. I had the saddle shoved all the way forward on the rails to make the effective seat angle as steep as possible. I didn't have any issues on really steep climbs, but for everywhere else I was suffering from knee pain on long, pedally rides. I had my riding position checked by a mate, and we found my knees were well in front of the pedals. We pulled the saddle backwards about 20mm, and it's been comfortable since. The current fashion may be to go as steep as possible with seat tube angles, but like many geometry trends, it won't suit every rider and every bike out there. ST Wil.
@@singletrack Hey! Thx for your detailed response. Currently I own a trail bike (Fuel EX 18) with a 74.5° seat angle and while I can climb nearly everything with this bike, I wish it had something arround 76° for a more efficient position. The newest generation trailbikes with a forward thinking geo like the Ibis Ripmo and Yeti SB130 are exactly what I'm looking for. That's because both bikes got crazy good reviews when it comes to climbing capabilities. And that's the reason why I questioning the geometry of a fast bike like the Blur, which is tailor made for uphill sections. On the other hand I totally get your point with different anatomics and too extrem angles. But seatposts with setback can fix this problem.
@@tinoschneider6350 - No worries mate! I've not ridden the Ibis Ripmo or Yeti SB130 personally, but from all reports they are meant to be fantastic bikes. Chipps tested the Ripmo and noted that it was an excellent climber, and while he found the steep seat angle weird at first, he got used to it after a couple hours of riding. I think on that slightly longer travel trail bike - like your Fuel EX, or the SB130 and Ripmo - a steeper seat angle can certainly help with climbing and getting your weight forward on really steep climbs. With more suspension travel you get more sag, and on the climbs that means the bike can sink into its travel and slacken out quite a bit - to the point where it feels like you're pedalling from the back wheel. A steep seat angle helps to bring that position forward. The other benefit of a steep seat angle is when it's used on a bike that has a very slack head angle and a long front centre (like the SB130 and Ripmo). With a bike like that, you have to weight the front tyre a lot more to maintain traction. A steep seat angle (at least while you're seated anyway) helps to force more of your bodyweight onto the front tyre. Putting those benefits aside, I still reckon there's a balance to be had here, because not all trails are either step uphills and steep downhills. Well, not for me anyway. I spend a lot of time traversing and pedalling along flattish singletrack, and I want to make sure I've got an efficient but comfortable pedalling position for that riding. I do come from a background of bike fitting though, so I place a lot of importance on getting the right position, so as to minimise any potential aches and pains. Anywho, that was a really long-winded response! I reckon we might have to do a separate feature about the current trend for steep seat tube angles, and chat to a few different bike companies and professional fitters to get some insight into the whole thing. ST Wil.
@@singletrack Great idea! It would be very interesing to gain more knowledge about this topic or progressive geometry in general. Especially when professional bike fitters are involved. Keep up the good work and a happy new year ;) !
Both the complete bikes and the frame only option come standard with the remote lockout. I decided early on that I could do without the remote lockout though, since the Blur pedals so well even when the shock is left fully open, so I converted the rear shock to a standard non-remote setup. Unfortunately it's not a particularly easy or cheap conversion, since you need a whole new upper eyelet for the shock. I like the clean cockpit though, and it's also allowed me to run a proper under-the-bar dropper post lever too. ST Wil.
Certainly do Corey! Santa Cruz has been offering the 'TR' build for a few months, though the Blur TR comes spec'd with a 110mm travel fork, and it still features the dual lockout system that the XC spec comes with. If I was looking at buying a complete Blur though, the TR build is definitely the one I'd go for. [ST Wil]
Singletrack Magazine , I rode one today! Ugh! Very nice! Reminded me of my Yeti ASR-C. Gonna have to get one! The TR build is perfect for me and where I live in Colorado! And of course I’m gonna need the reserve wheels!
Good question Michael! In some ways yes, but the answer is a little more nuanced. In terms of geometry, the Blur with a 120mm travel fork is very similar to the Tallboy, with basically identical head and seat angles. The reach is 10-15mm longer on the Blur though. As for the frame, the Blur is 1x specific, and that's allowed Santa Cruz to make the swingarm stiffer by using an additional vertical upright on the driveside. The Tallboy has a bit more travel - 110mm at the rear. It also has a longer stroke shock, compared to the little 35mm stroke metric shock on the Blur. This will give a bit more flexibility with setup and adjusting volume for changing the shock progression and overall feel for heavier and jumpier riders. I do really like the poppy and efficient suspension on the Blur though. As for the complete bikes, Santa Cruz is spec'ing the Tallboy as a trail bike with Fox 34 forks, a Maxxis Minion DHF front tyre, and a bigger bar and shorter stem. Obviously if you're building up a frame though, you can build either bike up as you like, and it does see the two bikes overlapping quite a bit. Given that overlap, my guess is that Santa Cruz will aim to distinguish the Tallboy further next time it's due for an update. Hope that helps! ST Wil.
@@mc540flip No problemo! Also, I just remembered that the Tallboy is rated for up to a 130mm travel fork. So that would kick the angles back a bit and distinguish it a little further from the Blur. ST Wil.
Great question Ed! Though the Stage 4 and Blur share similar suspension numbers on paper, in the real world they're quite different bikes. I like the Stage 4 because of its simplicity, tough alloy frame, and huge mud clearance. That makes it a terrific short travel trail bike for UK riding in all the weathers, and I'm also a big fan of the fact that it's made in the UK. It's also a wickedly fun and fast descender thanks to some very progressive geometry - you can do very silly things with that bike :-) In comparison, the Blur is a lighter, sharper and punchier XC bike that still likes to go fast downhill, but is more efficient and purposeful to ride elsewhere. Obviously it's quite a bit pricier and made from carbon fibre, and the back end is more complex due to the VPP suspension design. There's a little less clearance in the frame for bigger 29er tyres and mud too. As such, I think these are two bikes that are aimed at two different riders. I know that's a bit of a cop-out to your question though, so if I was absolutely forced to choose between these two bikes, I'd likely go for the Blur, which suits my personal riding requirements a little better. Hope that helps Ed! ST Wil.
Great question Wayne! With the 120mm travel fork, the head and seat angles on the Blur do end up being pretty similar to the Tallboy. That said, the Blur does have a longer reach, and it also features a new-school metric shock. Additionally, it's a 1x specific frame, so it gets a more rigid swingarm. Notice the Blur has two vertical uprights on the back end, whereas the Tallboy only has one upright on the non-drive side? The result of that is that the Blur feels noticeably stiffer through the back end. The frame itself is also lighter, and is actually the lightest full suspension frames that Santa Cruz has ever developed. There is crossover between these two bikes though, and my suspicion is that we'll see Santa Cruz release an updated Tallboy in the future that will differentiate it more from the current Blur. [ST Wil]
Hey there Simon! While I can't speak for other reviewers and publications, in this case the Santa Cruz Blur was sent to us as a frame on its own, which we were able to build up into a complete bike using various test components. It's a longterm test bike, which means the build will evolve and change over time, with different forks, tyres, handlebars, groupsets, and wheels. The review shown here is just one instalment of the review process. Not sure if you caught the whole video, but the reason I built it up like this is because I've already tested the Blur in the full XC mode. I went to the Blur launch in California last year, where I rode one that was setup with a 100mm travel Fox 32 SC fork, Maxxis Aspen tyres, and a narrower/longer cockpit. The Blur rides like a very light and fast XC bike in that setup, but the frame is capable of running a 100-120mm travel fork, and I was curious what it would be like with more travel and a burlier parts spec. Since the original launch, we've had loads of questions from readers and viewers asking the same question, so given I had the opportunity, I decided to find out what the Blur would be like with a 120mm travel fork and a few spec changes to make it more capable. Given this is a longterm test bike, I wanted to explore the outer limits of what this bike can do, so we can provide readers and viewers with that information - particularly for those who are considering buying a Blur themselves. Hopefully that helps explain a little more about what I was talking about in the video, but if you've got any more questions for me, don't hesitate to ask Simon! [ST Wil]
britshell , I used to be one of those 29er naysayers. Then I rode one and rode it right past all my buddies that still had 26 and 27.5 inch wheels! 29ers are legit! Ive had three now, and they only get better each time.
I rode the yeti sb100, and I’m sold on these new aggressive xc bikes. They’re amazing and you can ride some really gnarly trails on them.
I just wanted to say thank you for such a great review. I recently lost my Highball Carbon due to a fire and was in the market for a new bike. I normally run a hard tail but was open to some different options. After watching this review I knew that The Santa Cruz Blur Trail version was the direction to go. I watched your videos and read your review and you were right, what an amazing bike. Thanks
Thanks for watching and for your feedback Scott! Sorry to hear about losing the Highball, but glad to hear you're getting on with the new Blur TR.
Happy trails mate!
[ST Wil]
Hi! Thanks for your helpful reviews of Santa Cruz Blur!
I ride xc trails most of the time and I like to push hard on my bikes. When I bought Blur with Fox 32 I already knew that I will change the fork for something burlier. So I installed RockShox Pike 140 mm, 130 mm version wasn't available. I planned to install a 120 mm air shaft. But after several months of riding, I decided to stay with 140 mm of travel😊
Just need to install a dropper and I will be absolutely happy with the bike. Cheers! ✌
Quality review, much appreciated .
Thanks for watching and for the positive feedback Justin!
ST Wil.
I think the 68.1 degree head angle might be even a little slacker, axle to crown on the fox 32 SC is 504mm, axle to crown on the 34 SC is 530mm, which should be about 67.8 degree. I actually have a 2017 Scott Spark RC Pro which I just put a 34 SC with 44mm offset on to replace the fox 34 51mm offset fork that I installed on it a few months back but not had a chance to really test it yet since its winter. I went with the 44mm offset because I have noticed the new Scott Spark comes with the 34 SC 44mm and I trust Scott decision to go with 44mm this year. I am noticing most 29ers are now coming with 44mm offset to help bring the front wheel closer which helps in slow speed cornering while adding more stability at speed by increasing trail figure, can't wait for your 44mm vs 51mm offset review!
Yo Jack!
Can confirm the 68.1 degree head angle - that's been clarified by Santa Cruz too. Of course there's a chance it gets a touch slacker when you're sitting on the bike at sag, depending on setup for the rear shock.
Interesting note you make on the Scott Spark about going with a shorter 44mm fork offset! From what I understand, the 2019 Genius is also going to a 44mm offset, which means that with the exception of the Spark RC, all of Scott's 29er full susers are running the shorter 44mm offset.
Let me know how you go with the new fork on the front of your bike!
ST Wil.
Awesome review thanks! I'm tyring to decide between the regular Blur or the TR. Sadly I can't find any more 2019 XLs in that sunset fog which I would prefer so I'd be getting a 2020. The TR version is intriguing to me because it comes with dropper and slightly more travel w/o adding too much extra weight. My question is, how much am I compromising on climbing and handling by going with the TR and the slightly slacker HTA at 68.5? Both technical and fire rd climbing in the 1000-3000ft range. I might also need to swap out for a 50mm stem too regardless of the version I get which could make me even more upright? Just trying to ensure I can still fly up the hills like I was able to when I demo'd the non TR version. It's debatable whether I need 110 in travel, but would go for it if it doesn't require compromising in these areas. Thanks in advance!
No mention of that cable routing? What the hell is going on around the water bottle cage?
Fantastic video! I am considering a Blur and I love the idea of a 120mm (also looking at Epic Evo). However, I tried a Blur today and I loved the fact that you can make the bike a while rigid set up by looking both fork and shock. Would that be possible as well with a 34 swap? Thanks!
Thorough review, looks fun!
Thanks Michael! And yes, this bike has been an absolute blast to ride - I'm really happy with how it's setup here. I do have a few parts I'll be testing on here in the coming months, so it'll be interesting to see what else the Blur can do.
ST Wil.
Singletrack Magazine Nice! Looking forward to it
Wow that rear tire clearance is tight. With no fd I'd think they could have added some clearance!
Best Video of the Blur but Not sure witch fully xc bike to buy 🤔
Great review.
Thanks Derek - glad you liked it!
ST Wil.
That’s a huge rise in BB height
I want to see Santa Cruz Blur 29er to use 2019 Shimano xtr m9100 1by 12 speed groupset review.
I've been looking for the xtr version test as well. When do the 2019 colors change?
Love your review. Keep going on.
Thanks mate - we'll have plenty more coming in the near future!
ST Wil.
What length crank arms were you using that you were not getting pedal strikes? 304 mm bb seems really really low!
Hello Will nice review !
I have a SC Blur and I am planning to do the fork upgrade to a 34. Also I have a Santa Cruz 800mm carbón riser bars with 35mm clamp. What stem would you recommend me to use in order to install that handlebar I have from a Hightower.
Looking forward to your response. Tks !
Are these wheels really 29 inches
How do you think this build compares to the new mach4 sl?
Great video!
Thanks Tomi - glad you liked it!
ST Wil.
I was just thinking about putting a 120mm fork on a blur.... sold... maybe
How tall is the presenter? Looks like he's on a medium frame.
Thanks!
I am 5'9" and I have the Santa Cruz Blur medium frame. On their sizing chart this exact height is said to fit either the large or the medium. I think that's correct. I could see having a bit larger of a frame, but I am happy with the medium at 5'9".
Nice bike
hi i have a blur c with xo if i put a 34 120 factory i have to change also shock? i prefer c frame less stiff
I wonder why the seat angle is that slack (even with a 100 mm fork).
Hey there Tino!
With the 100mm fork, the Blur's seat angle sits at 74-degrees, and with the 120mm travel fork, it sits at 73.1-degrees.
On a short travel bike like this, I wouldn't say that's too slack, since it is possible to go too steep on the seat angle. If the seat angle is too steep, for pedalling along on flat and undulating terrain it can potentially put the rider's knees too far forward over the pedals, which may cause issues with knee pain.
This was actually the problem I first encountered on the Blur tested here. I had the saddle shoved all the way forward on the rails to make the effective seat angle as steep as possible. I didn't have any issues on really steep climbs, but for everywhere else I was suffering from knee pain on long, pedally rides. I had my riding position checked by a mate, and we found my knees were well in front of the pedals. We pulled the saddle backwards about 20mm, and it's been comfortable since.
The current fashion may be to go as steep as possible with seat tube angles, but like many geometry trends, it won't suit every rider and every bike out there.
ST Wil.
@@singletrack Hey! Thx for your detailed response. Currently I own a trail bike (Fuel EX 18) with a 74.5° seat angle and while I can climb nearly everything with this bike, I wish it had something arround 76° for a more efficient position. The newest generation trailbikes with a forward thinking geo like the Ibis Ripmo and Yeti SB130 are exactly what I'm looking for. That's because both bikes got crazy good reviews when it comes to climbing capabilities. And that's the reason why I questioning the geometry of a fast bike like the Blur, which is tailor made for uphill sections. On the other hand I totally get your point with different anatomics and too extrem angles. But seatposts with setback can fix this problem.
@@tinoschneider6350 - No worries mate!
I've not ridden the Ibis Ripmo or Yeti SB130 personally, but from all reports they are meant to be fantastic bikes. Chipps tested the Ripmo and noted that it was an excellent climber, and while he found the steep seat angle weird at first, he got used to it after a couple hours of riding.
I think on that slightly longer travel trail bike - like your Fuel EX, or the SB130 and Ripmo - a steeper seat angle can certainly help with climbing and getting your weight forward on really steep climbs. With more suspension travel you get more sag, and on the climbs that means the bike can sink into its travel and slacken out quite a bit - to the point where it feels like you're pedalling from the back wheel. A steep seat angle helps to bring that position forward.
The other benefit of a steep seat angle is when it's used on a bike that has a very slack head angle and a long front centre (like the SB130 and Ripmo). With a bike like that, you have to weight the front tyre a lot more to maintain traction. A steep seat angle (at least while you're seated anyway) helps to force more of your bodyweight onto the front tyre.
Putting those benefits aside, I still reckon there's a balance to be had here, because not all trails are either step uphills and steep downhills. Well, not for me anyway. I spend a lot of time traversing and pedalling along flattish singletrack, and I want to make sure I've got an efficient but comfortable pedalling position for that riding.
I do come from a background of bike fitting though, so I place a lot of importance on getting the right position, so as to minimise any potential aches and pains.
Anywho, that was a really long-winded response! I reckon we might have to do a separate feature about the current trend for steep seat tube angles, and chat to a few different bike companies and professional fitters to get some insight into the whole thing.
ST Wil.
@@singletrack Great idea! It would be very interesing to gain more knowledge about this topic or progressive geometry in general. Especially when professional bike fitters are involved. Keep up the good work and a happy new year ;) !
Singletrack Magazine excellent response & explanation
Does the frame only option come without the remote lockout for rear shock?
Both the complete bikes and the frame only option come standard with the remote lockout.
I decided early on that I could do without the remote lockout though, since the Blur pedals so well even when the shock is left fully open, so I converted the rear shock to a standard non-remote setup. Unfortunately it's not a particularly easy or cheap conversion, since you need a whole new upper eyelet for the shock.
I like the clean cockpit though, and it's also allowed me to run a proper under-the-bar dropper post lever too.
ST Wil.
Don’t they make a Blur trail now?
Certainly do Corey! Santa Cruz has been offering the 'TR' build for a few months, though the Blur TR comes spec'd with a 110mm travel fork, and it still features the dual lockout system that the XC spec comes with.
If I was looking at buying a complete Blur though, the TR build is definitely the one I'd go for.
[ST Wil]
Singletrack Magazine , I rode one today! Ugh! Very nice! Reminded me of my Yeti ASR-C. Gonna have to get one! The TR build is perfect for me and where I live in Colorado!
And of course I’m gonna need the reserve wheels!
Would this basically be a Tallboy?
Good question Michael! In some ways yes, but the answer is a little more nuanced.
In terms of geometry, the Blur with a 120mm travel fork is very similar to the Tallboy, with basically identical head and seat angles. The reach is 10-15mm longer on the Blur though.
As for the frame, the Blur is 1x specific, and that's allowed Santa Cruz to make the swingarm stiffer by using an additional vertical upright on the driveside.
The Tallboy has a bit more travel - 110mm at the rear. It also has a longer stroke shock, compared to the little 35mm stroke metric shock on the Blur. This will give a bit more flexibility with setup and adjusting volume for changing the shock progression and overall feel for heavier and jumpier riders. I do really like the poppy and efficient suspension on the Blur though.
As for the complete bikes, Santa Cruz is spec'ing the Tallboy as a trail bike with Fox 34 forks, a Maxxis Minion DHF front tyre, and a bigger bar and shorter stem. Obviously if you're building up a frame though, you can build either bike up as you like, and it does see the two bikes overlapping quite a bit.
Given that overlap, my guess is that Santa Cruz will aim to distinguish the Tallboy further next time it's due for an update.
Hope that helps!
ST Wil.
Singletrack Magazine Definitely! Again very thorough. Thanks
@@mc540flip No problemo!
Also, I just remembered that the Tallboy is rated for up to a 130mm travel fork. So that would kick the angles back a bit and distinguish it a little further from the Blur.
ST Wil.
Which do prefer, this or an Orange Stage 4?
Great question Ed!
Though the Stage 4 and Blur share similar suspension numbers on paper, in the real world they're quite different bikes.
I like the Stage 4 because of its simplicity, tough alloy frame, and huge mud clearance. That makes it a terrific short travel trail bike for UK riding in all the weathers, and I'm also a big fan of the fact that it's made in the UK. It's also a wickedly fun and fast descender thanks to some very progressive geometry - you can do very silly things with that bike :-)
In comparison, the Blur is a lighter, sharper and punchier XC bike that still likes to go fast downhill, but is more efficient and purposeful to ride elsewhere. Obviously it's quite a bit pricier and made from carbon fibre, and the back end is more complex due to the VPP suspension design. There's a little less clearance in the frame for bigger 29er tyres and mud too.
As such, I think these are two bikes that are aimed at two different riders. I know that's a bit of a cop-out to your question though, so if I was absolutely forced to choose between these two bikes, I'd likely go for the Blur, which suits my personal riding requirements a little better.
Hope that helps Ed!
ST Wil.
So why not buy a Tallboy?
Great question Wayne!
With the 120mm travel fork, the head and seat angles on the Blur do end up being pretty similar to the Tallboy.
That said, the Blur does have a longer reach, and it also features a new-school metric shock. Additionally, it's a 1x specific frame, so it gets a more rigid swingarm. Notice the Blur has two vertical uprights on the back end, whereas the Tallboy only has one upright on the non-drive side? The result of that is that the Blur feels noticeably stiffer through the back end.
The frame itself is also lighter, and is actually the lightest full suspension frames that Santa Cruz has ever developed.
There is crossover between these two bikes though, and my suspicion is that we'll see Santa Cruz release an updated Tallboy in the future that will differentiate it more from the current Blur.
[ST Wil]
Nah. It’s gonna be the Transition spur for me.
Why does any XC bike reviewer out there immediately turn the bike into a trailbike or at least compare it to one?
Hey there Simon!
While I can't speak for other reviewers and publications, in this case the Santa Cruz Blur was sent to us as a frame on its own, which we were able to build up into a complete bike using various test components. It's a longterm test bike, which means the build will evolve and change over time, with different forks, tyres, handlebars, groupsets, and wheels. The review shown here is just one instalment of the review process.
Not sure if you caught the whole video, but the reason I built it up like this is because I've already tested the Blur in the full XC mode. I went to the Blur launch in California last year, where I rode one that was setup with a 100mm travel Fox 32 SC fork, Maxxis Aspen tyres, and a narrower/longer cockpit.
The Blur rides like a very light and fast XC bike in that setup, but the frame is capable of running a 100-120mm travel fork, and I was curious what it would be like with more travel and a burlier parts spec.
Since the original launch, we've had loads of questions from readers and viewers asking the same question, so given I had the opportunity, I decided to find out what the Blur would be like with a 120mm travel fork and a few spec changes to make it more capable. Given this is a longterm test bike, I wanted to explore the outer limits of what this bike can do, so we can provide readers and viewers with that information - particularly for those who are considering buying a Blur themselves.
Hopefully that helps explain a little more about what I was talking about in the video, but if you've got any more questions for me, don't hesitate to ask Simon!
[ST Wil]
SC 120 - 1650g at $1000. Reba 120 - 1650g at $500. Same stiffness, same performance.
Sc 120 bike
REBA 32MM SC 34 MM
34 is stiffer, more sensitive and has a better spring and damper
@@rickykiller90 Stanchion diameter isn't a big factor in stiffness.
THIS BLUR IS AN INSULT TO THE ORIGINAL 26" BLUR!!!
britshell wrong. This bike is so much nicer! Why would you say that?
@@coreymclernon Because they ruined it with those huge 29in wheels.
britshell , I used to be one of those 29er naysayers. Then I rode one and rode it right past all my buddies that still had 26 and 27.5 inch wheels! 29ers are legit! Ive had three now, and they only get better each time.
@@coreymclernon I have demoed many of them including the ones from Stantacruz like the Tallboy and High tower, and I hate them.
britshell, why? I’ve had both, love my TR W/Reserve wheels.