Field Test: 2020 Trek Supercaliber - Short On Travel, Not on Traction

 High praise, thank you! Lots more to come. Pretty sure we filmed 963 XC/DC videos!

 @sarahmoore: you really nail these field test. I can't even imagine the work it represents before during and after but it really is a major leap and my favorite new feature on Pinkbike!!
The latest field test from your sister-website Cycling Tips was awesome too, I don't know how you could do it but crossover and mixed content would be so rad!

 It helps that Mike's rocking the lycra.

 @freebikeur: Mountain Biker reviews a gravel and road race bike... Roadie reviews enduro and xc rig... With neither of them getting to research the product XD

 We're stoked that PB readers are enjoying the cross-country content. There won't be any less enduro stuff, just more of this

 Enduro is dead

 THIS! I rode enduro trail for the last 7-8 years and never even considered an XC bike. Then a couple months ago I bought an XC race bike to try out. A hardtail at that! Its a blast! Much more fun then I thought and a nice change of pace to my 6" enduro bike. This is great content for sure!

 I love reading about all bikes (except e-bikes), would love to give one of these bikes a whirl and see how quick they are, haven't ridden an xc bike since I rode an old xtr, sid equipped zaskar about 20+ years ago

 cons of uphill bike is they dont downhill as good as a downhill bike.

 @mikelevy: this field test may help me for my next bike. But not the 12k version for me so I'd like a non axs components biased version of your feeling about the only part in common I can buy: the frame.

 @sarahmoore: Salut Sarah. Bel article. Tu écris si bien en anglais. Ta vie semble très agréable vu d'ici, loin loin dans l'Est. A plus tard

 @mikelevy: have you still got a guy doing DH bike tests and reviews? another segment of bike ill probably never own again, but it would be really cool to know which world cup rider is actually riding the best bike, or best suited bike for a particular track... so mostly i just want to know if Loic's Demo is as good as a supreme 29, and surely giant is due a new glory imminently?

 @GumptionZA: It's been awhile since we've reviewed DH bikes even semi-regularly, but we're looking into a DH bike Field Test soon.

 @Francois-L: Merci Francois! C'est beaucoup plus facile qu'écrire en français! C'est une vie très agréable dans l'ouest bien sur, tu viendras visiter!

 I think this bike makes so much more sense for bikepacking than a gravel bike (or even a plus). Almost the same efficiency but more comfortable on the long run.

 @nhlevi: This bike, with a hybrid drop/flat handlebar, is exactly what gravel bikes will look like in a couple years.

 I think something like the Lux, with a big front triangle but a standard shock type and that 40-60mm more travel, makes more sense.

 Downside is $$$. If you have enough to throw $10k at a dedicated bikepacking rig, or you're primary bike focus is bikepacking, then sure this bike is probably one of the best for it. I think most people are buying a bikepacking rig as their fourth+ bike and not looking to break the bank, which is why you see a lot of Surley type steel hardtails. They are never going to be the best from a performance standpoint, but the price and durability hit the spot of what most bikepackers are looking for.

 @nhlevi: Yeah but this is 10 grand, whereas a $2k gravel bike would still be quite nice.

I just built up a weird Crockett (cross frame) as a flat bar, 1x gravel bike for that exact reason. I wanted something fast, MTB-esque, and XC capable, while still not breaking the bank.

 @tgent: there are options into the 4,800 range, but yeah it's $$$. But, looking at the bikepacking rigs, lots of titanium and carbon, such as Salsa's line, so clearly people don't mind shelling out good $$$ for a comfortable ride.

 @tgent: Yeah, I haven't bike packed but I kinda want to try it. From just biking on trails that only existed on a map, not in reality, aka carrying my bike across bolder field on the side of a mountain. I can say that having a steel or Al bike that one doesn't mind accidentally dropping it or mashing it on a rock (because you're tired and it's heavy with gear) must be a big plus. Also think about how to attach gear bags/strap things onto to the bike. It's not something most people would want to do on a crazy expensive and light carbon bike. A relatively inexpensive, sturdy metal hardtail with a dropper/suspension seat post would probably be the best option for bike packing.

 I am not so sure that this bike is great for bike packing... for starters, how do you attach bags and panniers to moving parts?

Also, if you are going to weigh down a bike with all the back packing gear, why would you spend so much money on a bike designed to be light as possible?

And finally, Great review of a race bike that is an excellent choice for an XC racer who is tweener with hardtails and full suspension.

 @Saidrick: Apologies, I downvoted by accident and think you make a good point.

Is there enough “range” in the rear suspension to accept an additional 20-30lbs of stuff and still have everything work right?

 @actonca: a frame pack wouldn't effect the suspension at all. The only added weight to the suspension movement would be a saddle bag, which is usually sub 10lbs anyhow. Given the range of rider weight, I can't imagine any of this to be a problem.

 Yeah, take a super light awesome XC race machine and pile a bunch of crap on it to defeat the very purpose of it's existence. Like buying a Porsche with a towing package.

 I agree. The dialogue component was excellent and sometimes that means a great support role with little, but considered input. The Oscar for best actress goes to Sarah. The Oscar for best supporting actor goes to Levy. Well done PB!

 @Saidrick: No a real bikepack racer would have the lightest weight and minimalist everything. Such as no tent, just a bivy bag, and no stove, no dangling coffee mug and minimal repair kit, etc. The fastest bikepack racers usually have less than 15lb of kit.
So ideal for a bikepack racer and maybe not a bikepack tourer.

 @waxman: There is nothing wrong with having a Porsche that CAN tow! All the fun, and utilitarian if you need it to be. I guess this bike could work for bikepacking, but heavy bags would render this impressive bike impotent unless you intend to take the bags off and use the bike like it was intended more often than you bikepack with it.

 @waxman: you need a trailer to tow your race tires, kit and tools to the track

 If I were bikepacking.. Sleeping in tents or hammocks along the way, I wouldn't want an expensive bike sitting outside waiting to be stolen

 I think it would mainly be a solid choice for the bike packing style races where everything is ultralight and you sleep on a pile of rocks under a tarp that fits in your pocket. It would certainly work better with a frame bag than many other suspension designs.

 It’s proprietary but I feel like a ton of bikes now have shocks tuned for that bike. So it’s not that big of a deal to me. I mean my rear shock is “tuned” for that bike so I don’t think I’ll throw a coil shock on so it might as well be proprietary

 LOL. Right?

 my understanding is the rebuild and maintenance is off the shelf fox parts.

 LOL Cannondale's ears must be burning

 @MillerReid: Shocks tuned for bikes does not equal proprietary shock. Generally it's easy to find an aftermarket shock that is the same or similar tune or even buy a generic tune shock and have it professionally tuned is relatively cheap. Try finding a Fox float for a 2012 Specialized Stumpjumper with Brain...

 @tgent: exactly...people are crazy to buy this kind of stuff unless they just swap bikes out. Often its not actually the best tech either and a year later you are wanting something different. Add my 2012 Cannondale Jekyll to the list lol.

 @Svinyard: lol ya, threw out 2012 Stumpjumper because I had one, it was a super popular bike, and when my shock blew itself up in about 2015, I literally could not buy a replacement, 1 with the brain and 2 with the proprietary mount.

 @MillerReid: I think that's not a very good comparison... Yes shocks are tuned for bikes, but you can replace them and re-tune a new one. Easy to remove and service, etc. This looks like a nightmare to service, and difficult to be replaced. You'd need someone experienced in this specific type of shock in order to service it, which is hard to come by considering it's new and most shops probably won't touch it.So you likely won't be able to bring this to your local LBS...

I am sure you can remove the shock somehow but it looks like a nightmare to do that... So even if you wanna send it in for servicing you'll likely have a hard time unless you send your entire bike in.

After dealing with Specialized "brain" shock, i refuse to buy a bike with proprietary shocks ever again...

 @stumphumper92: Here is the service manual trek.scene7.com/is/content/TrekBicycleProducts/Asset%20Library/documents/Manuals/pdf/TK19_2020_Supercaliber_Service_Manual_USEN_WEB.pdf

It services like a fox shock. And if you buy a 10k bike that you can only buy from a brick and mortar store, you'll probably either get it serviced at the LBS or do it yourself.

I understand you've been burned before, but you're making assumptions that aren't born out.

 @ICKYBOD: still not buying anything proprietary. Not worth it and you'll usually end up spending more in the long run.

 @stumphumper92: whatever, I dont care what you buy. just pointing out it doesnt appear shock is that much of a problem to service. no unique tools or special knowledge, etc.

 @ICKYBOD: service=/= replace

 @clink83: going through that manual, if you are replacing the iso struct with a new iso strut, I think my very amateur mechanic ass could handle to page 10 and the carriage wiper and seals because I don't have those tools. But it looks like I could handle standard servicing and volume reducers with tools at hand.

Kind of funny getting downvoted for posting the manual and pointing out it isn't a "nightmare to service". Replacing like for like really doesn't look all that hard either.

The bike is interesting to me, if I cared about XC I think this would be high on my list. The xc races near here seem like they'd be a great match for it. No emotional investment here so I'm done.

 @tgent: just paid for a complete rebuild of my 2012 stumpjumper, the mechanic did not have any problems getting the rebuild parts at all. There were even upgrades on some seals, my bike feels right now better than ever, so i dont know what you guys are talking about.
Now I accept it did cost a little bit more than i wish it would've, but paying that much spared me from getting into the interwebs rabbit hole looking for "obsolete" parts.
If your LBS cannot get the parts you need you are going to the wrong shop.

 @Narro2: "If your LBS..." or you bought something that was made by a manufacturer that does not want it's customers to keep riding the same bike for many years. But that never happens in this industry.

 I hear your breathing man, but at only 60mm travel, I doubt the performance could be changed enough with some new fancy shock to really matter. It’s more for the time you might need to replace a broken shock that proprietary becomes an issue.

 @ICKYBOD: poopoo peepee caca

 Levy rubbing lycra pants in our faces

 We thought the percentages were a better representation of the differences and easier to digest when compared to the other bikes, but if you pause the video at 8:52 you can see the times as well and how this bike compared on each segment.

 @sarahmoore: thank you

 @sarahmoore: Times are a better indicator of speed than percentages. If a bike is 2% faster on the climb, but 5% slower on the descent, then it seems like this would be slower overall. But since we spend more time climbing than descending, it wouldn't be.

The times should not be compared to the fastest bike on the descent and the fastest bike on the climb, unless that was the same bike. Comparisons should either be made against a benchmark bike, or against an average (I'd use the mean considering there would be normal distribution) that comes from the entire set of section times and lap times.

If all the data is available (all bikes, all section times), then someone will crunch the numbers. There's plenty of data analysts and scientists on this site.

 I was expecting to see the power readings, then comparing the power in (from the rider to the cranks) to the actual times. It would allow sorting the efficiency of the different models. Sprinting is also not addressed in this test, which is an area that those bikes attempt to be better at, and drive the cost up. Maybe a very short track test of high power, like at close race to the finish line?

 This describes 80% of the riders on the Front Range.

 The Supercaliber is best suited to Olympic distance cross-country and Short Track races. I think you could do some marathon races on it as well, but a technical marathon stage race like the BCBR where you're blind racing every day for a week is better suited to a bike that's more forgiving when you take the wrong line and that you can recover a bit on the downhills with!

 @sarahmoore: I own a Supercaliber 9.9 and I use it exclusively for Marathon races. I do 6hr, 12hr, 24hr and 50-100 mile races in mine. I will admit it took me several days to come up with exact suspension settings and stem/ handlebar position and width measurements. But, once I did I realized just how fast and efficient this bike is over marathon length races. I was eager to test it at Marathon Nationals (But, COVID and a herniated disc got in the way) to see just how well it worked beyond the FLE Endurance races (6hr, 60 mile, or 12hr).

I figured out how to let the shock bottom out consistently to use the rebound of the seat stays to maximum effect without damaging the longevity of the frame. Once incorporated this bike has become a total long distance rocket ship that’s both comfy and super fast. It’s also (strangely) super stable in the air, like trek designed a part of it to be a BMX too. LOL. Great race bike. Thanks for an awesome article. ????????

 @sarahmoore: I’m curious what your setup was for the Supercaliber. Suspension and fit numbers? (I’m a full time fitter and racing geek)

 Not riding with a dropper post was less of a big deal than I thought it would be on these bikes. Stay tuned for the Canyon Lux review tomorrow!

 Because bike fit matters in XC, and a 72-74sta put you in the proper relationship to the bottom bracket/cranks

 Because a longer travel bike settles into the travel more than a shorter travel bike that runs less sag.

That, and XC bikes are designed to be fast uphill, not chase trends. Believe it or not, an 80 degree STA doesn’t work for every application.

 These super steep STA are only helpful on super steep climbs or when your upper body is more or less horizontal like on TT bikes. For everything else STA of 73-74° are the most efficient. If steeper STA would generally be beneficial for the power output road bikes would have them.

I think this topic got big because former trail and enduro bike designs neglected the fact that the sag slackens the STA during the ride. When you ride uphil, your weight is shifted to the rear end, the sag of the shock increses and the STA slackens. In my opinion this has caused 73°STAs on paper becomming ~71°STAs on the trail. The problem is pronounced at longer travel bikes, thus it makes total sense to have steeper seat angles on those.

 @elmaar: that's really interesting.

My comment wasn't meant to be facetious, I am genuinely interested in getting an XC bike and have found that back pain (at my old age) has gone on a new transition scout (with steep ST angle) after being fairly excruciating on an older scout and other bikes with slacker ST angles.

Even my road bike is less comfortable than the scout and I'm guessing that is because of the slacker ST angle.

 @snax001: The reduced back pain could also be due to a higher front end on the new bike. Higher stacks and raiser bars have lead to more upright (read comfortable) sitting positions wich are also good for descenst. The riding position on xc-bikes is usually more streched and with a lower front end, probably due to aerodynamics.

 @elmaar: The lower front end gives you more front tire grip on climbs. If your body position on flat ground is pointing downwards, it will become flat on climbs. Conversely, having higher bars like those on non-XC bikes makes your body position flatter on the descents.

 Yeah we’ve done a separate video for the efficiency test so we didn’t want to give everything away ahead of that!

 @sarahmoore: Great review, and looks like such a great trail. But comparing times in % so confusing..... So, if the SC was 5% slower over a 20 minute lap, it was a whole minute slower than the fastest bike? That's a huge gap over such a short loop.

 @expatrider: and easier for you to extrapolate into your real world situation.

 It does feel remarkably like a hardtail when you’re standing up and sprinting. But then it’s better overall on the climbs since you have much more traction than a hardtail! Compared to the 100mm bikes, I would say yes - it does feel sportier, more responsive and quicker when you stand up to pedal uphill and sprint!

 @sarahmoore: as much as I want to bad mouth this bike, most XC races can and are still are won on hardtails. This bike may be pure genius...

 Coming off multiple Epics and now on a SC, my feeling is it is laterally more stiff (and I feel stiffer in the cockpit as well). It feels faster on sprints to me. I do miss the extra 40mm on descending though.

 Def better steeze than the other reviewer.

 You're correct that the bike's handling is a combination of things, but compared to the Canyon Lux, the Trek Supercaliber feels very similar handling-wise on the climbs and is actually less twitchy on the descents. The traction on the Supercaliber is what I'm referring to in the video - it's really good for 60mm especially compared to the Lux's 100mm!

 Jolanda doesn't seem to have an issue going faster than any other rider downhill...

 Most of a bike’s handling characteristics come from front end geometry. Certainly a longer wheelbase is a factor too but far less so. I relate this to skis. What is going to be more turny.? A Skicross ski at 185 with a 23 metre turn radius or a 180 gs ski with a 30 metre turn radius? A bike that’s a couple cm shorter really isn’t that much of a difference. If that were the case, only short riders on small bikes could turn quick. But that’s not the case.

 @Someoldfart: Steering and turning are different. Steep head tubes _steer_ more quickly (front wheel changes direction more for a given input), but shorter wheelbases _turn_ more quickly (whole bike changes direction quicker for a given input).

Ski turn radius is closer to wheelbase. To complete the analogy you'd want to compare a "normal" skinny ski to a new-skool fat ski. The fat ski (slack head angle) takes a bit more input to get it up on the edge and initiate that turn through the radius. Skinny ski (steep head angle) takes less input to get on edge. But a fat ski and a skinny ski with the same radius (wheelbase) are both going to turn about the same once they're up on edge.

"If that were the case, only short riders on small bikes could turn quick." Well, yeah, smaller bikes do change direction quicker (hence slalom bikes usually being quite short and many riders downsizing on slalom and slope bikes), but his doesn't mean longer bikes can't "turn quick". For the same rider on a smaller bike, the smaller one will turn quicker given a smaller input.

But, there are so many other factors here... small bikes usually only are only shorter in the front-end, so the relatively long chainstays which place the rear wheel relatively further away from the bike+rider's CG. Which means more input is needed to get the whole system to change direction.

I'm just saying, look at the statements from the article:

* steep head angle made it feel "maneuverable", because the front wheel could be pointed where you want it with less input.
* short wheelbase made it feel "twitchier" on downhills even with a slacker head-tube angle, because the shorter wheelbase lets the whole bike change direction with less input.

 @Someoldfart: "Most of a bike’s handling characteristics come from front end geometry." Just to address that directly: most of the bike's _steering_ characteristics come from front end geo. "Handling" is _much much much_ more than just how much bar input is needed to make the front wheel turn a certain amount

 Added: I see that SID is an option on P1.

 The most notable differences I found with the steeper head tube angles on the Trek and Canyon were how they handled tricky slow speed climbs and performed on steeper descents. We did have traversing on rough sections as another thing that we evaluated since that’s something you’ll encounter in every race course and you can lose more time on that than a faster rolling section.

 @sarahmoore:

 Please ignore my comment, fat fingers

 Is there any chance that you also changed tires when going from 67 to 65? Cause rolling resistance generally comes from the tires.

Suspension also has something to do with it if it’s bumpy, but I don’t think head angle adds rolling resistance in most situations

 @PauRexs I don't know if it's what you are experiencing but when the seasons change and I switch from my winter bike (Gary Fisher Wahoo no suspension) to my summer bike (Rize hardtail with 140 MM which is overforked from 100 MM) it feels like the Rize is just harder to keep the same speed on the same commute. It's almost like it's not the same muscles pushing me forward because of the bike differences. But after a few weeks it's like my legs get used to it, build up and I can get the same speeds. Funny thing is when I switch to the winter bike I just fly. No getting used to it.

 www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/mountain-bikes/trail-mountain-bikes/fuel-ex/fuel-ex-5/p/33073/?colorCode=grey_orangelight

The fuel ex 5 is gonna be damn good as a value bike. This particular bike doesn't make much sense scaled down, but trek is making big strides toward making better value bikes.

 The Whistler Bike Park was closed during testing

 I think they are rolling all this out over the coming days. Looking forward to seeing how 60mm of travel on this Trek copes.

 4:18

 It's in the video.

 @mafflin: yeah I watched the video after I made the comment.

 Trek doesn’t.

 Trek has an extra Medium/Large size in there instead of an XS -- 15.5 (S), 17.5 (M), 18.5 (M/L), 19.5 (L), 21.5 (XL), 23 (XXL)

 Trek sizes based on both frame length (e.g. 18.5") and size (M/L). In this case, they also have a M, which is 17.5", and a L, which is 19.5".

 Where? There's only one pivot. Now BB I could believe since it's PF

 These bikes are so fun to climb that sometimes you turn around at the bottom of a descent and tackle it in the other direction!

 @sarahmoore: love it!

 Yes. This would be perfect for dirt merchant and A-line. It even has the same head tube angle as the Kona shonky! It should be great for those massive jumps. If you wanted I bet you could even do Dwayne Jonson on it! People might look at you weird in the lift line, but know this bike is going to send way better than their chunky bikes.

 @dualcrownscottspark: I think you missed the s/ (sarcasm) thing.

 @HB208: Are you sure it wasn’t you?

 Seriously, but at least it’s a bike without a motor.

 Hmmm

 @mikelevy:think about it while the test is not published yet))

 Yo ilyamasksimov, I'm really happy for you, Imma let you finish but the Epic is one of the best bikes of all time.

 @Counsel: nonono! scalpel is better