PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
2020 NORCO OPTIC C2
Short on travel, not on capability
Words by Mike Levy, Photography by Trevor LydenPeople have been riding under-gunned, short-travel bikes long before they became capable enough to challenge longer-legged machines. That's a more recent development that came about thanks to evolved geometry, larger diameter wheels, and ever-improving suspension systems, all of which you'll find on the all-new 2020 Norco Optic trail bike.
While it has just 125mm of rear-wheel-travel, other numbers offer a clue as to its abilities; a relatively relaxed 65-degree head angle, a roomy 480mm of reach on our large-sized test bike, and its 140mm Pike up front. Oh, and four-piston brakes across the range.
Yeah, something tells me that this thing ain't your warmed-over cross-country rig that's been over-forked to under-deliver.
Norco Optic C2 DetailsIntended use: Trail
Travel: 125mm
Wheel size: 29''
Frame construction: Carbon fiber, alloy rear
Head angle: 65-degrees (
geometry)
Chainstay length: 435mm
Reach: 480mm (lrg)
Sizes: Sm, med, lrg (tested), xl
Weight: 30.9 lbs / 14.0 kg (as pictured)
Price: $4,500 USD
More info:
www.norco.com Our test rig isn't the no-expenses-spared AXS ($7,500 USD) or XTR-spec'd ($6,600) models, but rather the $4,500 C2 version that sits, a bit confusingly, three down from the top. There's a matching C2 Women's model, and both get the same SRAM X1/GX drivetrain, BT520 four-piston brakes from Shimano, and a Pike Select Plus fork. Every single Optic model, as well as the frame-only option, all come with a RockShox Super Deluxe Ultimate DH shock that, as you might have guessed, is more likely to be seen on a downhill sled.
Since we're talking about suspension, you'll find a compact Horst Link layout on the back of the new Optic that looks a lot like, well, the Horst Link layout on the back of the old Optic. Don't be fooled, though, because the pivot locations and design have changed enough that it's nothing like its predecessor. Compared to the old Optic, the leverage ratio is said to be higher at the start to make it relatively supple for a short-travel bike that’s meant to smash into things. It’s far more progressive, too, and the shock gets a custom high-speed compression tune. When you've only got 125mm of travel, I guess it better be good.
ClimbingWith a 65-degree head angle and relatively long reach and wheelbase, the Optic's geometry numbers are a departure from what you'd traditionally expect to find on a bike in this travel bracket. But while it's not exactly the ideal machine for those awkward, slow speed chess matches that have most of us only dreaming of going dab-less, it does just fine on singletrack that the average rider would still consider enjoyable. It deals with tight, tricky sections in the same way as most modern trail bikes, which is to say that the handling probably won't be the make-it-or-break-it factor for most of us - that'll still come down to skill and desire.
So yes, the Optic doesn't climb like a cross-country bike, 125mm or not. A little extra planning may be required to get through those too tight, 200-degree switchbacks with your feet still clipped in and your dignity still intact, but the steep seat angle helps create a very comfortable climbing position. It was ballsy of Norco to spec a shock without some sort of on-the-fly pedal-assist; doesn't tradition tell us that riders looking for short travel rigs care more about efficiency than anything else, firstborn and that aforementioned dignity included? Sure, but as I've already said a half dozen times, the Optic ain't really for them. Regardless, it doesn't feel like an Ibis Ripley when on the gas, but neither Kazimer nor I ever wished for a lockout on it.
If you're still equating suspension travel with climbing abilities, the new Optic might not be the rapid ascender that you're expecting. But, consider it as a trail bike bent on making you laugh while snatching a few KOMs on the way back down, and the picture that Norco's painted makes much more sense.
Descending Agile. Playful. Nimble. More fun than a barrel of monkeys, and on and on. My plan is to not use any of those tired old adjectives when talking about the Optic's descending abilities, but I can't promise you anything given how often this oddly-green-colored bike had Kaz and I laughing. And aren't those most often the moments when you're getting a bit loose but not so much that you think you're gonna get plastered all over some tree? With its long front-end, 435mm chainstays (on our large), and a 65-degree head angle that all make you feel as if you're down low and between the wheels, there are plenty of those in control but also just a lil' bit out of control times when on the Optic.
But don't mistake that for it being nervous, because that's the last thing the Optic is guilty of being. The Orbea Occam and Intense Primer both have more travel, sure, but it's the Norco that felt less skittish and on-edge during our timed testing. As luck would have it, the Freelap system was powered up just as the skies opened up, making for a tricky afternoon with plenty of close calls, regardless of the bikes we were on.
The Optic wasn't slow in the slippery conditions, despite the relative lack of travel, but that's only because we trusted its impressive, sure-fire handling.
Geometry rules all, and Norco nailed it with the Optic by using numbers that let you ride not just above its (impressive) 125mm of travel, but also like your only goal is to have as much fun as possible out there. After all, that's not a terrible plan.
Something else that rules: the Optic's rear suspension. It's efficient, but that's expected and boring. Less expected is how slippery and active it is for just 125mm of travel, especially at the top of the stroke. There's support, too, and neither Kazimer or I had any end-of-travel, end-of-life incidents when we clanged into the bottom unnecessarily. All of that is expected from a bike with more cushion, but it's not all that common from one with this little.
In case you can't tell, the new Optic impressed everyone who rode it during our two-week-long Field Test session. It's also yet more proof that when your geometry is on-point, short on travel doesn't have to mean short on capabilities.
Gotta get out more mike
Kazimer: Hey @mikelevy, how'd your date you?
Levy: Man, it was going great. We really connected, talked, laughed, decided to go for a ride.
Kazimer: Aw man, that sounds great. But why do you look so down?
Levy: Well, we decided to go for a ride and we were grinding up that fireroad on our second lap, just laughing and having a really good time. So I fell in behind to get a look at - you know - "the propulsion unit." And that's when she did it.
Kazimer: Oh no. You don't mean...
Levy: Yep. She flipped the lock lever. Like it didn't mean anything. Like she was fine just compensating for bad suspension design with an easy and innocuous solution.
Kazimer: I'm so sorry.
Levy: It's ok. I pulled over. Had a little cry. Then a big cry. But thankfully i was able to rehydrate with my 8 frame mounted water bottles and make it home.
Kazimer: It'll be alright buddy. Maybe next time try a woman on an Optic.
Even on a Ripley V4 I use the switch regularly for the middle setting. (never on the "firm" setting though)
(which, afaik simply close the LSC drastically)
Technical climbing: open damping, for grip and comfort.
But I assure you that Cane Creeks DB CS works just as well as regular one in open mode. I would argue the other way around: lack of climb switch on 130+ bikes makes suspension worse because it requires designing more antisquat into kinematics which makes it worse for descending capability of the bike.
Secondly there are many high level shocks witch climb switch including e.g. Storia, Foxes etc. What is more, any shock with compression knob also should be compromised.
Thesis that this bike come with a shock without cs to improve performance is simply ridiculous.
Shock feels identical to the non CS version I had in another bike.
I asked Öhlins mechanic which shock to take before I bought mine and the answer was: CS does virtually nothing to how the whole system performs compared to a regular shock.
So no, no dyno. You can send a quick mail to Vorsprung to have an “independent “ opinion.
Idea that lockouts are - compromise is tempting but saying that climbing with or without one makes no difference is absolutely ridiculous. It’s flat Earth of MTB
My bike came without a lock lever (Deluxe-R) I than found a second hand unused deluxe-RT and installed it, noticed no difference at all without the lock engaged, and in fact there's not big differencies inside the shock. When the lever is on bobbing is near to zero, but main reason to use the switch is to keep BB as high as possible so pedal strikes are less likely to happen even if I hit lots and lots of rocks, I just cann't immagine going uphill with the BB dropped at least 20mm more.
Last but not least climbing out of the saddle, which I do frequently, is waaay much better.
F
So a Cane Creek D(Coil, air, inline, whatever) or a Fox X2 does not perform?
I'm also trying to decide which of these two bikes to purchase.
Because if it doesn't, whats the point?
Believe it or not, sone of us like to climb and want a good climber that also descends well.
It's a 30lb bike I doubt it climbs faster then any of the downcountry bikes.
That said I am not sure I understand the point of that kind of bike. 14kg for short travel and carbon ? Let's add some travel then. If I am ready to be limited by travel but look for grip I think I'd rather add 500gr by mounting trail tires on a lightweight Orbea OIZ TR. Otherwise I'd just forget about climbing speed ride a proper trail bike than that thing that doesn't really do anything well.
I don’t understand short travel bikes with geometries capable of tackling world cup tracks either. Not even for big jump lines in bike parks since as long as everything goes well it works. But things don’t go well for more than 70% of the time, at least not as long as you are pushing it, especially that not bike parks in the world have as great shaping as Whistler. When learning to style things up you will have some awkward leans on the lip when your technique is not dialed and then it is good to have some squish for margins. Then they all run knobby, heavy tyres on those bikes encouraging braking late and coming into corners faster. This rear will have a hard time railing through rough turns at those speeds. Bryn Atkinson is a wizard at cornering and other things, lad can draw shapes - not me. And short travel bike won’t make it much easier to learn that.
DC bikes are excellent as “more capable” XC bikes, but there is no going around the fact that one just can’t take a Enduro racing bike and decrease travel on it, while this is what is effectively happening here. The builds on Optic and Range are near identical.
Regarding the short travel bikes, I think you focus a bit too much on bike parks. Those kinds of bikes are either made to go fast in those specific races or are being use by people who tend to favor rides outside of bike parks. When I was living in Switzerland, 95% or our rides were on local hicking trails really that we could connect from the city by climbing a few mild roads/paths first before connecting to some single tracks that were part of the country's hicking network. So we climbed a lot and enjoyed the descents. While most of them could be done on an hardtail we were also riding rowdier and rowdiers paths, some of which weren't really "official one", following tracks from trial motorbikes. A more capable bike that would still be lightweight enough to be a major PITA when climbing for 2 to 3 hours is nice to have.
Most of people are now switching to e-bikes for that kind of usage but there are still some people who wants the simplicity and lightness of an XC bike.
I don’t understand CS negativity in general, if you don’t want it just don’t use it. People want all the knobs for descending tune but when it comes to climbing, nobody should be able to tweak one lever?
Also, it's not only that you're limited to resin pads by those rotors, it's that the actual surface sucks. The same resin pad on a SLX/XT (machined?) rotor performs amazingly vs this (cast? forged?)
There is definitely a hole in Norco's lineup where the old (2019) sight alloy existed. An alloy150/130mm bike is goldilocks for me.
I guess the 2020 fs1 build of the fluid is ok, but it needs better brakes and hubs. The forekaster rear tire is a weird choice too (usually they'd pair a DHR with the dhf). You could build one up nicely (and people have) but Norco doesn't offer it as a frame only so good luck sourcing one.
I wish Norco would do all their bikes a la carte. Pick your frame, suspension kit and drivetrain then it gets shipped to your closest dealer for assembly.
yeah custom everything would be nice, this is why you get the option to buy frames separately.
While I'm sure the new optic is great, some people don't want to pay a premium for carbon and would rather put that money towards components.
What would be the ultimate kom hunting trail bike?
My trails are nothing like this. As to up or down they are all both. I am pedaling at least 70% of my ride especially if you are going for kom.
Also nothing is really mention about how well a bike carries speed.
Like does it get bogged down rolling thru roots because unoptimized wheel path or wheelbase.
My old recluse was awful at carrying speed constantly had to pedal to keep it going. Didn't do well thru the small roots that litter my trails.
So I need a bike that accelerate fast stays fast thru chatter, rails flat corners and can still handle punchy downs that often times end in full compression and then climb right back up the other side of the gulley.
Keeping in mind gravity isn't doing alot for me 50-70% of the time.
"They are testing these in a bike park right?" They did the downhill timed testing in the park yeah, but did you not see all the stuff they did in Pemberton? I'd also bet they rode all the bikes on the valley trails in Whistler too.
I think though, what I was getting at, is that for any given rider the same bike won't always be the fastest, depending on what time of trails are being ridden. A good rider will be able to get the most out of any bike, but average joes may be faster on a trail on enduro bike (downhill anyway) as they don't have either the skill or the confidence to ride a short travel bike with racier angles fast down anything technical.
Regardless of the rider it's also very trail dependent. A Scott Spark might be the fastest to the top of the hill but if the downhill section is rowdy the Genius will be a 'faster bike'.
that said I still don't get the timing as a comparative base ....a minute of an hour and a half. I base my findings on what makes me happy like easy climbing, a bike that corrects my mistakes, playfulness or descending like a fireman on a rope? Then there's weight. Tire choice... So many variables. Even switching out wheels may make it a bad comparison. Final answer is the one that makes me secure and smile the most.
All that said your tests help us all a lot but we shouldn't take it to the bank. personal bike lust is the final answer.
But well... it’s hard to measure things that way anyways. It is exactly what MTB marketing exploits all the time. Unmeasurable Promises of performance increase.
If I have a complaint it's that the timed section is pretty much all downhill?
There should be more timed stuff over all the terrain they tested on.
This is more a opinion price then anything.
Flame on.
Popping off rocks and bird watching I can do with my gf on a leisurely afternoon on a cheap entry level mtb.
If I'm spending 5k+ I want to know what it can really do.
Basically because of physics all bike handling traits have pros and cons and as you increase or decrease a certain aspect of a bike's travel/geo/suspension tune, you'll improve one ride aspect while degrading another.
Right now my everyday bike is a ragley mmmbop and it handles every trail I take it in in Northern California. But, I wouldn’t mind a little rear squish. Seems like every bike company is coming out with a short travel aggressive design so I’m having trouble deciding which to go with. Probably stick with 27.5 so that will limit my choices. This looks awesome though.
Geometry numbers and travel are not responsible for making a bike "Poppy and Playful".
A rider's ability (a blend of skill and physical strength) and bike weight are the two main factors that make "Playful, etc." possible.
-Some riders play, pop and throw a DH bike around on ANY trail like a short travel bike..
-Some riders can't..they "navigate" their short travel "trail rippers" like aircraft carriers..
-At slower speeds, lighter weight bikes make playing on a bike much easier..
You may be interested in their Genius line up.
This Norco looks a lot like them but with 29" wheels...no thanks!
But ok...if that's how you feel
...Anyway..this is of course just opinion and based on what we perceive as one bike being different from another..I respect and appreciate your responses!
Cheers!
Rental? rappy brakes, crappy dampers, crappy tyres, oh well but geometry is soooo spot on.
If you have never experienced the sine wave that DH bikes allow you to ride through roughest crap you, how differently you read terrain, how much you can focus on looking ahead, planning and reacting, instead of shitty chatter of a DC bike taken to a park, then you have no clue. Mike Levy rode with Gee Atherton who laughed that there is no line choice going on - off course there isn't! There can't be
RANT OVER
@dkidd Another example, just look at the Tallboy, similar type of bike and price/spec and that bike is almost 600g lighter with ALU cranks. And I would not consider that frame fragile. Santa Cruz frames can take a beating.
What are the benefits of bottoming at 125 mm versus having travel left? I seriously want to know.
Thanks!
Does anyone have a recommendation for bashguard to use with the Norco Optic?
“Agile. Playful. Nimble. More fun than a barrel of monkeys, and on and on. My plan is to not use any of those tired old nouns when talking about the Optic's descending abilities”
They’re adjectives, Levy, adjectives
"In a lot of ways the bike climbs very good" "Yeah, I thought the bike pedaled really good.. 125mm it should pedaled good".
Come on PB, write a script and proof it for grammar. It doesn't climb very good, it climbs very well. It should pedal well not pedal good.
"Agile. Playful. Nimble. More fun than a barrel of monkeys, and on and on. My plan is to not use any of those tired old nouns when talking about the Optic's descending abilities"
Those are tired old adjectives not tired old nouns. Yes monkeys is a noun but the expression barrel of monkey's is used incorrectly. It's a sarcastic statement that is supposed to be used when describing something that isn't fun.
Also, it's monkeys with an "s" at the end. No apostrophe.
I've had it for almost 3 years now and was thinking of upgrading to Norco Optic.
Would you say its a worthy upgrade or should I stick to FMB for another season? I really like everything about FMB, but it could be the time to move on.
From the specs, the Optic looks similar (tiny bit more rear travel, slightly slacker HTA, slightly steeper STA, tiny bit longer chainstays in size L). Like others though, I wish it had an AL option.
Has anyone ridden both, and care to comment?
A couple years ago, I switched from resin pads to semi-metallic on my Enduro 29. I could not get any stopping power from them. Even after bedding them in several times. I also did a bleed so that wasn't the problem. If resin-only rotors are a thing then maybe that was the problem.
Thank you
And also whey didn't you test "...", and are you crazy there's no way "..." is faster than "...", and why would you pick that trail for "...", you should have rode them here on trail "..." which is clearly better...
As a second point having recently read reviews of the new Norco sight I wonder how this compares with the optic? They sound very similar except for more travel with the sight. Be interested in which one you would favor if you could only buy one for west coast type riding (not including bike parks). Optic? Sight as 27.5? Sight as 29?
This bike seems quite similar in geometry and intention to the SB130 that was tested in the field test last year - you seem to really like both.
Would you be able to offer up a few thoughts comparing the two?
Does anyone have one or have ridden one around my size? i ask because the UK importer (Evans) only do car park test for 15mins.
Maybe it should have that switch.
He was planning on replacing the rotors anyway, but they were far from end of the world destroyed.
That being said resin rotor only is a really stupid f*cking idea.
Capability count: 3. The scores so far:
Norco: 3; Orbea: 1; Pole: 2; Intense: 0
Sounds like a more refined version of the Transition Smuggler.
But it’s true, we didn’t have many complaints at all about this bike.
you don't have to swap the rotors though
Can’t wait for the Pole then... the secret Geometry ooohhhh
www.vitalmtb.com/videos/main
And click the upload button.
In the description, put "What are pinkbike?"