Giant Launches Its Lightest Ever Aluminium Hardtail to Bring More Affordability to XC Bikes
Cross country bikes usually conjure up thoughts of featherweight frames and components, constructed from the latest composite materials and brandishing some not so light price tags. Our cross-country Field Test has just commenced, with plenty of evidence of just that. Giant, however, wanted to open up that lightweight XC performance to more people, and so have launched their XTC SLR aluminium XC hardtail.
The XTC SLR is aimed at introducing XC riding and racing to anyone desiring a strong taste of the addictive speed of a full-on race bike without draining their bank account. Behind the scenes of many bikes out there are Giant, they are one of the largest manufacturers and countless brands use them for their expertise and experience. One particular area of expertise is their aluminium construction, which the XTC SLR showcases.
It's a full 29" hardtail with a frame weight of 1,429g for the size small that encroaches into the territory of some carbon fibre composite frames, just without the price tag. Giant claim this to be the lightest aluminium hardtail they have ever produced. The Taiwanese brand manipulate the grain structure of the aluminium, mainly a 6011 alloy, before mechanically shaping and hydroforming the tubes to achieve the desired volumes while having incredibly thin walls and being butted across their length. Put next to their aluminium SL framesets, this SLR frame is almost 20% lighter.
Geometry follows the contemporary XC hardtail route, with a 69.5° head angle for sizes S and M and then a 70° for sizes L and XL. Seat angle is 74° but given that the XTC is a hardtail based around a 100mm travel fork, it will actually steepen under sag and while riding. Dropped seat stays aren't just a fashion copy from the road scene, but hint at a bike with some built in flex in the seat tube to provide comfort along with the 30.9mm diameter seat post. The frame is dropper post compatible too.
Reaches span from 416mm to 477mm and stem lengths grow per size from 60mm for the S up to 90mm for the XL. The bottom bracket gets a drop of 58mm, putting it at around 312mm off the ground, depending on tyres, and the short head tubes for all sizes aid in getting the favourably low bar heights for XC riders. Chainstays are 440mm across all sizes.
All XTC SLRs comes specced with Giant's own Crest 34 fork and there are two build options with the XTC SLR 1 using a mix of Shimano XT, SLX and MT500 with the XTC SLR 2 using a mix of Shimano Deore, MT200 and Praxis components. Both bikes use Maxxis Recon Race tyres and Giant finishing kit for the cockpit and saddle areas with 780mm bars on all bikes, giving the availability to either run a wide setup or trim down to your prefered width.
Giant use Shimano hubs laced to their own rims and deliver the bikes tubeless ready, with only the included milk needed to be added to the tyres.
Full pricing and availability aren’t with us as we write. But the XTC SLR 2 retails at the bargain price of $1,200 and both should be available very soon.
The XTC SLR 1 in Metallic Black.
The XTC SLR 2 in Dusty Blue. It's also available in Black.
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Obviously used is a great way to go, but with the used market the way it is right now, I'm having trouble finding good value there too.
My Wife and Step Daughter a fraction over 5 ft. Both on the smallest model and love them.
When I worked in shops we sold maybe one or two XXL bikes a year compared to dozens of XS and S.
vitusbikes.com/collections/nucleus-26
She already has the bikes she needs (2 used, 1 new).
Well I hope there is as I need a FS 24" for my youngest(really liking the Norco 24" options for 2020) for xmas.
If reach increases linearly with size (S/M/L/XL), then Reach for size L should be 455mm.
Yeti really messed up with their L sizing... they'll be shortening their reach to match the Medium next season
Not possible, wheelbase grows too. Reach on the L must be in the 450-455mm zone
Giant has a history of making very good aluminum hardtails, and it looks like it will continue.
Can I have my 20yo legs (and 62kg) back please?
This is more conservative than contemporary. Some examples of where XC race geometry is likely headed:
Compared to a Norco Revolver, the head-tube angle is 1° - 1.5° steeper, the seat-tube angle is 2° slacker, and the reach is an inch shorter.
Compared to the Orbea Alma, the reach and seat-tube angles are close, but the head-tube angle is 1.5° - 2° steeper.
Seat angle is 74° but given that the XTC is a hardtail based around a 100mm travel fork, it will actually steepen under sag and while riding."
This is intrinsically true for all hardtails. It won't steepen much, though, and it's equally true that the already-steep head-tube angle will also get steeper, albeit not as much as if it had more travel.
Giant: lightest ever alloy xc!
People: how much does it weigh?
Giant: All our bikes are designed for best-in-class weight and ride quality!
People: yeah, but how much
Giant: The most accurate way to determine any bike’s weight is to have your local dealer weigh it for you.
People: is it actually lighter or not?
Giant: Many brands strive to list the lowest possible weight, but in reality weight can vary based on size, finish, hardware and accessories.
there is no industry 'police' to verify weights given out by brands. you want good data for actual weights, buy a scale and start weighing bikes.
It could also be partly because they don't want to outshine their oem customers, a significant part of their business. but thats just speculation.
I just want to know approximately what a complete weighs. Sub 30lb on the cheap one?
What's an example of a brand that straight up lies? My current bike was around what I thought it would be (considering the brand only listed weights for medium completes).
I had a felt F5 in 60cm that had the 74* HTA too, it was the best handling road bike I've owned.
I ended up buying a gravel bike instead because they tend to have longer reach and toptube compared to road bikes. I picked basically the longest top tube and shortest stem I could find in my price range and it's great, less twitchy and more confident in corners and at high speed.
I'm also sure there's a certain handling characteristic riders are looking for that plays well with the aggressive riding positions they have.
Like for a loosely related example even for an xc race bike on the flatter and twistier singletrack courses where I live I find being able to run a marginally longer stem (like say a 60 or 70 instead of a 50 on a more "aggressive" bike with a similar TT length) really helps keeping the front weighted and tracking through turns when trying to maintain seated power.
I frequent two road descents that are each about 5 miles long, one is a 50+mph descent with straightish gentle turns where you tuck and go with no brakes, while the other is a steeper more active descent with tight switchback turns you need to brake hard for. Longer wheelbase bike feels so much more confident and has more grip on both descents compared to twitchy road race bike.
I'm not a roadie, so perhaps I just don't get it, but I do feel like road race geometry was standardized a long time ago in the era of flexy steel frames and caliper brakes that severely limited geometry and many riders just haven't tried something new.
Road bikes have head angles anywhere 68-74 degrees, they don't all have the same handling. If they are set up right race bikes, xcor road, aren't really twitchy. If they are it's probably due to poor fit. If you watch a road race or crit you will see why bikes need to be fast handling, riding in a pack in a race is not the same as riding solo.
The gravel bikes with low bb and long wheelbase had what I felt was the best handling. Just like with long wheelbase mtbs it does take a bit more effort to initiate a turn, but once you're turning you have more control and more traction and they feel great at speed. I've gotten PRs over my old race bike on just about every descent I've tried, so they handle well for me. You should give one a try if you haven't had a chance yet, you just might like it.
i2.wp.com/www.unionpt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/bikefit.png?fit=614%2C536&ssl=1
A large pecentage of road bike riders, just like mountain bikers, have jacked up fits so its not surprising that people think race bikes are twitchy. If you think about how much of a difference just dropping your heels while descending makes a difference in handling, its not surprising that people with bike fit that are off by inches or more have poor handling bikes.
That said there are lots of bikers on the wrong bikes. My next road bike once I get a job and my scapula heals is going to be an "endurance bike". I'm not going to get a full on race bike then complain about it when I really dont need a race bike. There are lots of options out there for road bikes these days, you dont have to buy a race bike.
Geometry is much more math based than anything else, and even engineers in the mountain bike industry will admit a lot of the geometry on mountain bikes is crap, geometry wise:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5R60JHJbxI&t=174s
Lovin' the talk in this thread there's some great points in here
www.pinkbike.com/news/first-look-giant-manufactures-its-own-range-of-suspension-forks.html
A modern 29er frame is also a lot bigger than a classic 26" frame with short reach and short rear triangle, so Giant is using a similar amount of material to make a larger frame
$1200 dollars in 1995 is equivalent to a bit over $2000 in 2020 due to inflation (or looking at it the other way, the $1200 model would have been $709 in 1995)
With big rubber and lower pressures,a great deal of vibration and impacts are filtered and don't reach the frame.