PINKBIKE FIELD TEST
Canyon Lux Trail
Words by Henry Quinney, photography by Tom RichardsThe new Lux Trail shares a lot with the standard Lux, including the rear triangle and many very similar dimensions, but it is a new bike. Or at least half of one, thanks to a new front triangle that was added for 2022. This new front end increases the frame's reach by 30mm per size. It also is slightly steeper in seat tube angle, as well as being slacker in the head tube angle.
How you feel about the Lux Trail could depend on whether you prefer incremental refinement or page-one-rewrites. The Lux TR, despite seeing the reach grow substantially, seems more about the former than the latter. Before we get to that, though, let’s look at the frame details.
Canyon Lux Trail CF8 Details • Travel: 110mm rear / 120mm front
• Wheel size: 29"
• Head angle: 67.5°
• Seat tube angle: 74.5°
• Size tested: medium
• Reach: 460 mm
• Chainstay length: 435 mm
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL
• Weight: 26lb 10oz (12.1kg)
• Price: $6299
•
canyon.com This bike has 110mm of rear travel, which is delivered via a single pivot design with flex stays, a layout that's quite common in the cross-country world. Even with the
trail moniker bolted onto the model name, I would say the Lux Trail is still very much an XC bike, much like the Santa Cruz Blur TR we also have in this field test. The Canyon has the steepest head angle, as well as the slackest seat tube angle, of all the bikes on test. There are also other dimensions that might catch your eye, including the long effective top tube length - it measures 627mm for a size medium, and a whipping 650mm for a size large.
For that reason went with a size medium for this round of testing. I was able to try the large earlier this year, and found that that bike simply felt too big for me during seating pedaling. To their credit, Canyon's sizing chart does seem to do a good job of recommending the appropriate size in this case - it puts me between a medium and a large (I'm 183cm tall).
North American Canyon customers will be able to purchase the Lux Trail with longer dropper posts, but in Europe this bike will come with the super-light, XC race-oriented, Transfer SL. This post has, at most, 100mm of travel. That does seem to go against the Lux Trail's downcountry intentions, and it's something to keep in mind if you're looking at this bike outside of North America.
Another indication of the Lux TR’s racing heritage would be the dual lockout - it was the only bike in the Field Test to come with one. Suspension duties are handled by a RockShox SID fork and Deluxe shock pairing. In terms of performance, the SID is a fantastic fork and almost rescues an XC bike's descending capabilities. However, much like on the Trek Top Fuel, our fork developed bushing play.
Canyon does gets some details bang on. Firstly, I think their execution of a rotation limiting headset is a better execution than Trek’s Knock Block. Although it sits externally to the headtube and could be argued it doesn’t look as well integrated, it’s simpler and functionally better.
There is also the best-on-test chain device. The svelte number sits within the pivot hardware and works very well. It’s fabulously light, clean looking and really means there is no reason not to run one. The bike can fit two water bottles inside the front triangle, and has a universal derailleur hanger along with internally guided routing. It also features Canyon's two-in-one axle that manages to combine a lever of ample size that slots into the axle itself to leave a clean and tidy look.
ClimbingWhen compared to the similarly-sporty Santa Cruz Blur TR the Lux Trail doesn't offer the same level of grip on seated climbs. In terms of shock performance, and the feeling it delivered, it was pretty middle of the road, which is no bad thing. It managed to be a very reasonable halfway house between XC-responsiveness and providing a platform that will respond well to large accelerations or shifts in where your weight is sitting.
We always conduct our efficiency tests in the seated position with forks and shocks open. In this setting, the Lux Trail was the 4th fastest bike in this test (out of 6), as well as on the timed single track climb. Using the lockout
might have added some efficiency, but that comes at the cost of comfort, and it's not a setting that's particularly useable on actual trails. I understand the appeal of the lockout for cross-country bikes, but I don't think it's necessary on this particular model.
The bike definitely carries its weight where its numbers would suggest. It's not the lightest bike in this category (the Blur TR is nearly two pounds lighter), but it does have a very classic XC feel. Out of the saddle the 460mm reach felt okay - it puts your weight very much on the front axle, which is a benefit when climbing.
Thanks to that shorter top tube of the medium, manipulating your weight and exercising it over the front axle was easier. It wasn't totally different from the Santa Cruz in this regard, however, the Lux Trail is nearly 15mm lower in the frame stack, which does accentuate this sensation. It felt lively and easy to boss around, both while standing and seated, if not particularly precise.
Descending
On the descents, the Luz Trail falls into a similar category as the Santa Cruz - it's closer to cross-country race bike as opposed to a short-travel trail bike. However, there are some big differences between the two. First, the Santa Cruz is far more comfortable. The Lux Trail is prone to harsh bottom outs, which means you have to run quite a high spring rate. The consequence of this is a firmer, less compliant ride, which made for some jarring moments on rougher sections of trail.
The frustrating thing about the Lux is that it didn’t seem to have one area where it really shined. It wasn’t the lightest, fastest, most comfortable, most feature laden or best handing. It does offer a good value when looking solely at the frame and parts spec, but otherwise there's not one particular handling trait that elevates it above the other downcountry bikes.
I think redesigning the front triangle could have yielded such promise, but this revision seems a bit lukewarm. If this bike was a degree slacker in the head tube, and a degree or two steeper in the seat tube I think it would have begun to make sense. The effective top tube would have been brought into check, and the bike would potentially be less skittish on the descents too.
Our bike came with a 125mm drop seatpost. This is ample for the medium that it is, but as we’ve already gone into, it’s not true to size anymore. In America, the good news is that the other models come with a 150mm post, which is more appropriate for a bike like this. However, as was mentioned earlier, the Fox equipped bikes that are sold in Europe come with posts with only 100mm of drop. In addition, the small two-pot brakes and the 160mm rotor in the rear that’s enacted upon by a flat-mount road-style caliper mounting are also more appropriate for an XC bike rather than one with Trail in the name - it's a shame there isn't a version with a slightly beefed up spec.
Where you ride your bike is of course really important, and in recognition of this we deliberately rode trails that were downcountry-appropriate. Even still, the Lux Trail struggled to shine on any part of them, be it climbing or descending. If the Santa Cruz left it red faced by being all that it could have been, bikes like the Rocky Mountain Element or the Trek Top Fuel made it look like it was meant for a different category entirely. Realistically, it's better to look at the Lux Trail as modern cross-country bike rather than trying to pull it into the downcountry pool.
There's no denying that Canyon's prices do present a good value, and for riders who simply want to put in the miles on mellower terrain the Lux Trail might be the ticket. However, if you do want to push hard, there are simply better candidates.
Levy will love the Blur. Henry will love the Trek.
Levy plays to the audience, the populist.
Henry won't spare anyone's feelings and btw what are feelings?
Man, this is great.
Bike couldn't have more than 500 miles on it and another bad SID, wow. Won't even consider one of these for a new bike.
Because he dodges bullets, Avi
as in swings two ways, or wears baggies over shaved legs?
The dimensions are a bit weird, agreed, but maybe I got lucky and it just fits me. (Sized down to M instead of the usual L) The geo is just fine for an xc bike. As is the firm suspension platform.
Having had a Hightower V2 (the blue one) I m not surprised that Santa Cruz did a better job. But you can almost double your spendings if you want one. And for an XC bike I’m absolutely not willing to do that. I was looking for a simple mile muncher with lots of water storage capabilities. Check!
Pemberton BC is atypical terrain for an xc bike. Most will want a bigger bike in that area. I find that more extreme terrain tests the geo of a bike at the extreme ends. Shortcomings will quickly show themselves their. BUT, if you live where I live, (reasonably flat boring landscapes), than the shortcomings of some aspects of a bike’s geo don’t matter that much. So in that regard, why would I have double my spendings if this bike, in my terrain, just plain works and just deserves to be called ‘a good -xc- bike.
XC stands for across the country. And this bike is great for just riding ‘across the country’. But nowadays all mountainbikes need to firmly live up to the extremes of the labels they have been put on. Be it xc (for some mistakenly synonymous for xc racing), downcountry, trail, enduro etc
Only if the geonumbers reach the extremes of a certain category, is it a good bike. And if you live in BC I understand why it matters. But I don’t agree with that trend pinkbike pushes.
+ I'm 6'3"", I don't have to run a 90mm stem any more! It's odd that the geo numbers look weird but the fit is good. It is a stretched out position but that suits me for long XC rides especially if there's wind about.
+ The firm suspension is sooo good for XC, it does get worked in roots and rocks, but the 110mm shock has handled the Quantocks and Welsh hills very well. I brought it for long XC rides and there's no need for any more 90% of the time
+ Dual lockout - ask again if it's necessary after 3 hours of riding in hills at threshold. Well worth it.
- 160mm rotors... Santa Cruz got that right, I'm swapping to 180mm. Also the brakes took a couple of full bleeds to sort out.
- the CF8 is a bit on the heavy side due to AXS, but with thousands of pounds to save Vs the Evo or Blur, there's plenty of opportunity to add some carbon
- the geo makes the front stay planted, so getting airborne and manualling are harder than on the Epic Evo. I've lost most of Pinkbike with that statement.
In summary it's an XC marathon bike, it's very good at that, and if I ever come to Pemberton I'll be finding someone with an Element they can lend because that geo looks nuts for BC chunk.
Love the field tests, keep them coming.
looks neat tho
"Can't Be F*cked"?
"Cheap to keep. Built to last. Fun to run"?
or what do you mean
But if the lesson is don't buy half-bikes - why did the Epic Evo work?
This Canyon's geometry chart reads way worse, even before this review. No good numbers in key areas and an imbalance, being long with steepish HA and slackish SA. I would lever buy a bike with bad geometry or kinematics because it has good parts on it. Hope they redesign it or make a full DC frame.
Now that Henry's there, u can relax with the all too American tendency of starting EVERY negative with a positive.
If something sucks, just say it. If something is faulty, dont preface it with "its great, however...".
You're definitely on the right track, and i know you can't go all out with the negativity, but I think you boys are big enough now that u dont need to cringe in your seat every time you get judgemental
I'll put it that way- if someone girl ever starts saying to you "You're a really good guy, you're really all a girl can ask for...", you'll get the gist of it before she even continues the sentence.
Bike reviews shouldn't sound like a bad date. If rockshox drops the ball, delivering one faulty fork after another, at a time where you waited 6 months for a bike and god knows how long for a replacement - pinkbike needs to nail them.
If more reviewers did it, maybe we wouldn't still be suffering from top tier Grip2 forks creaking like a cheap mattress. I'm saying this a one who reviewers numerous bikes and is probably guilty of the same wishy washy statements
For my kind of riding (long epics, XC-racing, and intervals) a lockout-remote and a lighter dropper is certainly preferable so I'm looking at something like the Orbea Oiz with a 120mm fork or the XC-version of the Blur.
What does this mean?
says my mother in law
It is available in europe, as of 30.Jan.2022, they have M L in stock, XL possible to order
However, that geometry was crap (old klunkers had geometry close to an enduro bike except for slack seat angles-no dropper compromise). 76-78 STA and 75 or so HTA is where it’s at. Even for XC.
I suspect the new Scott Spark is just the first of the proper geometry XC bikes.
If you're riding a 75* HA bike down steep, rocky trails you'll be keeping your dentist smiling all the way to the Yeti store.
Yes, I do realize you intended to write "65 or so HTA".
1. The text and the video give slightly different impression of the bike. You were more negative of the bike in the video imho.
2. You seem to judge the bikes by how well they meet your personal preferences. Which may come across as honest to some, but as closeminded to others. “Pick a drivetrain type and be a dick about it”
The video review contains both Levy's and my own opinions and our own interpretations of them, whereas the text has to contain both from one voice. I think the tone is largely the same, even if it means that I try and reflect the consensus and not just my own thoughts in the writing.
That's fair. I suppose I try and be clear about what I like and just be very transparent with that. I personally prefer that style of review to just comparing it to some hypothetical rider, that may or may not exist. I kind of consider myself just your average Joe, and try and relate it back to that. I'll definitely think about this more though. Thanks for the feedback.