Guerrilla Gravity Debuts "Smash" 29er
Roughly four years after Specialized trotted out their Enduro 29er, long-travel 29ers seem to be the hot young things of the moment. While Guerrilla Gravity’s new 140-millimeter travel Smash model is at least 10 millimeters shy of what’s quickly becoming the new normal these days (for "long-travel 29ers" anyway), the company argues that they’re focusing on quality of travel over sheer quantity.
The Smash, Guerrilla Gravity contends, lives up to its name—a bike designed to smash into and over anything in its path. To wit, the company is billing the Smash as the 29er version of their Megatrail model, with a leverage curve that is a bit softer off the top, yet supportive deeper in the travel for those high-speed, big-hit moments. Here’s the basic breakdown on the new bike, something we’ve cobbled together from the press release, since the new bike has yet to roll through our office doors.
They Decided Not to Go Longer
While the Smash will play nice with forks boasting as much as 160mm of travel, the Smash frame offers up 140 millimeters of squish. Not 160 or 150 millimeters. 140. Yes, Guerilla Gravity could have gone longer. Many riders are expecting more rear travel these days, but the company says that they were purposefully trying to avoid what they see as ills of the long-travel 29 breed: long chainstays, excessively tall bottom brackets and slack actual seat angles.
Those are all laudable goals, though its worth noting that the Slash 29, Enduro 29er and Wreckoning (to name just a few models) aren’t exactly dogs when measured by that same yardstick. Nevertheless, the Guerrilla guys argue that quality of suspension trumps an extra 10 millimeters of squish.
“By really analyzing how the bikes use their travel and making fine tune adjustments to the leverage curve,” reads the press release, “it’s possible to have a slightly shorter travel bike that rides like a longer travel bike downhill, but is going to have a noticeable pedalling advantage uphill…. The Smash will be the ideal bike for riders that have relentlessly rocky and high speed terrain.”
Steep Seat Tube Angles are a Big Deal with These Guys
Once upon a time, every seat angle listed on a geometry chart was an actual seat angle. This was back in the double-diamond frame days when a straight tube spanned the distance between your bottom bracket and saddle. Full-suspension designs, however, soon made straight, uninterrupted seat tubes something of a rarity, which is why geometry charts often list both actual and effective seat-tube angles. To determine the effective seat tube angle, you’re measuring the angle created by an imaginary straight line that runs from the center of the bottom bracket through the center of the saddle. Your seat tube could be bent or s-shaped or angled way the hell back, but the constant is this: We’re measuring what is effectively the seat tube angle, as defined by the saddle’s location in relation to your bottom bracket. Got it? Nope? Someone on Reddit probably explained it better than me and even included a drawing with smiley faces. Moving on...
Some people, Guerrilla Gravity included, are not particularly keen on this concept and argue, for a variety of reasons, that the actual seat tube angle is still vitally important to a bike’s performance. In a nutshell, if your bike has a particularly slack actual seat tube angle, the effective seat tube angle and cockpit length differ significantly when the saddle is either slammed for descending or at max height for climbing.
Guerilla Gravity puts it this way: “The problem with effective numbers is that they are measured at the height of the top of the head tube and are only valid for one point in space. That point is usually closer to the saddle height used during descending than climbing, and hence, by itself, does not tell the full story. Typically, the steep effective angles use a slack actual angle with significant offset in front of the BB. This can mean even with a steep effective seat tube angle, when the saddle is at climbing height, it is still too far behind the BB. Then, on rolling terrain, lowering the saddle an inch or two makes for a noticeable change in cockpit length.”
For that reason, the new Smash is designed around a 73.5-degree actual (75.8-degree effective) seat tube angle, which the company claims allows for an upright, efficient climbing position at any saddle height.
Guerilla Gravity puts it this way: “The problem with effective numbers is that they are measured at the height of the top of the head tube and are only valid for one point in space. That point is usually closer to the saddle height used during descending than climbing, and hence, by itself, does not tell the full story. Typically, the steep effective angles use a slack actual angle with significant offset in front of the BB. This can mean even with a steep effective seat tube angle, when the saddle is at climbing height, it is still too far behind the BB. Then, on rolling terrain, lowering the saddle an inch or two makes for a noticeable change in cockpit length.”
For that reason, the new Smash is designed around a 73.5-degree actual (75.8-degree effective) seat tube angle, which the company claims allows for an upright, efficient climbing position at any saddle height.
Two Different Suspension Modes: Crush and Plush
As with other Guerrilla Gravity bikes, the Smash can be run in either “Crush Mode” or “Plush Mode.” The goal here is to allow riders to dial in the suspension platform that’s ideal for their local terrain. Per their press release: “Crush Mode has a more supportive mid-stroke for flow trails and all day trail rides, while Plush Mode is softest off the top, making it the go-to for plowing into rocks at mach-chicken.”
Riders can also choose between an air shock and coil shock. Guerilla Gravity says that designing a platform that works well with a coil shock was a priority given the bike’s “smash” vibe. As a general guideline, GG recommends running an air shock for a lighter weight trail setup and for those that don’t have exceptionally rocky or loose terrain, while a coil shock is ideal for those that prioritize small bump compliance and traction over weight.
Plenty of room for a 29x2.5" tire.
Nope, Carbon is Not Happening Here
Guerrilla Gravity is one of the few outfits designing and building bikes in the United States of America. Labor costs in the US of A being what they are, don’t expect anyone to offer a complete carbon fiber full-suspension frame made in Detroit or Des Moines at a price that any of us could dream of affording. The Smash, in short, is an aluminum affair, made in Guerrilla Gravity’s Denver facility.
Pricing:
• Frameset: $2095
• Ride 2 build: $3295
• Ride 1 build: $4295
• Race build: $5295
For specifics on build kits, go to RideGG.com/TheSmash-Build-Kits
• Frameset: $2095
• Ride 2 build: $3295
• Ride 1 build: $4295
• Race build: $5295
For specifics on build kits, go to RideGG.com/TheSmash-Build-Kits
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
I would say that is does not matter where the frame is welded, but rather if it is welded by the same company which sells it. A good company will take responsibility for their products. For a mass company this will be only a "bad batch".
You do realize that limits you to only Giant and a handful of small boutique builders (like GG here)?
To the best of my knowledge, Giant is the only bike brand that has their own large scale factory. Yet small-ish companies like Pivot and larger companies like SantaCruz (or huge like Trek or Specialized) manage to make high quality alloy welded frames without welding them themselves.
Ownership or sub-contracting has little to do with quality. I can pay $ to have crappy frames made for me, I can pay $$$ to have near-perfect frames made for me. Its all in the specifications, contracts, and QA/supervision. On the other hand, I could own a factory and make total crap bikes if that was my objective.
I suggest you read the Pinkbike "we want to Taiwan to start a bike company" article to shed more light on this.
I work an IT for a company which does exactly what those factories in far east do for telecomunications industry. If you pay a lot of money, you can change your mind almost at any time, engineers will work with you closely and the final product is very good (although those engineers work in great stress and it takes a manager with godly skills). But if you do not have skilled employees which can specify things well (and control how it is executed), you will end with piece of sh*t. And surprise, some western telco companies are expanding their IT departments again, because the approach of hiring a company which in turn hires 1000 programmers from India does not always give best results. Google for devops approach, which is currently replacing complex layered organisations for software development.
I did not say that a mass produced frame cannot be good. I simply appreciate people with expertise working closely together, as a one team, in the same building. And I want to support them with my money. If they are dedicated, you do not need super-complex quality process.
I am sure I could find some grumpy shops out there, but not my experience so far.
Nearly every brand is now 25-35% margin in the nice FS bike category.
Unless you meant 50% markup.
I literally laughed out loud when I saw that man, wow. Maybe in Canadia shops are getting 50%, no way that's happening here in the states. Not even if you get top tier pricing and hit all your preseason sales dates are you getting 50%.
GG is onto something with their inclusion of the LBS without them having to 'buy in' to becoming a stocking dealer. If you give the LBS a chance to make money from selling your product while giving your customer a local channel for support and service, it's a win-win. I look forward to watching this company grow!
What Mike Said.
Margins for shop on hi-end bikes are 32-38%, no more...maaaybe into the low 40's for sub 1k bikes from some big brands. 50% is low end accessories.
I believe is supporting the LBS- but have no problem with educated buyers buying direct; or customers who buy direct and don't act entitled when they go to shops, and tip some beers if the service is good.
I also believe in what GG is doing here, gives the bike shops an easy answer to "can I get MUSA??"
Nice to see GG attacking the critical problems head-on and spreading some important propaganda.
It's good to see this SA question brought up, it's frustrating to hear "just slam your saddle forward" when asking for steep actual seat angles... It's not the same.
The other issue is long legs + steep STA = very high saddle/CG which does not feel awesome either.
I'm with you on the short CS. I ride a large frame [typically] and I don't want a bike with CS longer than 17".
Since I'm writing this comment I may as well make the unrelated remark: If you know the effective top tube, the reach, the actual seat tube angle, and the stack, you can calculate your *exact* position relative to both the BB and the head tube for any given seat height.
Some people argue that the listed measurements for a bicycle should be something other than the ETT, R, etc., but those numbers are sufficient to calculate any other relevant measure one cares to name.
I agree with you, especially about chainstay length.
I have done isolated test on my bike with chainstays ranging from 415-435-455 and the 455 by far is the most stable, best cornering (fast or slow) and best climbing option. As someone who Haskell developed skills hopping wheeling and manualing it is not difficult to do dispite the longer stays, actually easier in some regards. I have a 422 reach and 64-67 degree head angle (talas)
Clumsy and cheesy to the max.
Well, ok, it made me feel old and stupid. How can I possibly feel "punk" when I buy a very expensive (although not the most expensive) toy? How can I feel free when I just fell in the oldest marketing trap? Can screaming that you are different make you really different, or you're just a pathetic wannabe?
Ethical and philosophical turmoil aside, I really like this mountain bike.
At least Norco is one of the few companies who don't consiously lie about effective seat tube angles. They actually show the ESTA getting slacker as sizes go up, whereas most companies don't compensate for this in the frame and just lie on the geo charts.
Short Chainstay lengths (430) are for newbies and short front centers , not for going fast
Seat angle right
BUT then.....
Seat tube length way too long - 495 on a Large....533 on XL !!!
Stacks also 20/30mm too high on L/XL to be in sensibly in mid range so riders can go flat or a big riser bar.
Chainstay length they bottled it and went short rather than going variable length CS, OR for a sensible mid range length to suit all frame sizes (435-440).
FWIW-Nicolai has an upcharge for the larger sizes as well. That was my plan B before ordering my Trail Pistol.
BTW, I think this is the best geo I've seen on a bike in a long time. Just silly to pay more for bigger sizes.
Coming down is Holy Shit fast coming from my 27.5 Turner Burner. Lots of this is the DHF/DHR2 WT tires and 29 hoops I'm sure. But the slack front end and long spacious front center really allowed for a deceptive level of speed to build up. I know there is more as I backed off to save my poor dog from exhaustion trying to keep up.
I dig it.
BTW- I wondered how the long ETT would feel (it is like 60mm longer than my previous XL Turner. It felt unreal natural and did not feel stretched out even with a longer 65mm stem. I have never felt this comfortable on any bike....30 years and multiple custom frames built just for my monkey ass dimensions. Nothing is close.
True, but it costs extra. Sad in 2017.
I hope one day we can get to 3-5 year transferable warranties. Boggles my mind that every time I sell a $5k bike I've ridden for 8 months that it has zero warranty.
Brand new HD3 is in my bike stand! First 50 mile rip was stellar, no complaints climbing 8000ft with the stock 2.6" Nobby Nics.
Im not convinced that is an overly bad thing, does generic somewhat mean predictable? If so predictable also meams easy to setup and fine tune and thats never a bad thing.
BTW all you guys talking about angles etc. being just off what you want they can do anything custom for extra $$$. So you want to make some tweaks give them a call and they can get you pricing for the changes.
Wonder if they'll ever be available in NZ?
I bought a Megatrail off GG a year or so ago. It doesn't work out cheap (import tax killed me! Should have known better...), but it's a killer bike. The team at GG are amazing to deal with too!!
But well, I like that Guerilla Bike, not a bad choice at all. Good price and I'm a sucker for raw alu
Let this serve as a cordial invite to come by and ride in the PNW sometime. The guys at Transition are good folks, even if you don't like their marketing angle. Need a linkage bolt for a bike from 4 years ago? Hold on while one of the dudes runs home to pull it out of a spare frame in his garage. That's keeping it real in my book.
I have a feeling that if they didn't have customers asking for carbon bikes, they never would have made them. The transition boys seem to ride that line between doing what they want, and doing enough to keep their customers happy. If they are cool dudes and make bikes that rip, that's enough for me.
Ok they have dipped their toe in the forward geometry pool which is good but they could have gone a bit further and become one of the drivers of the geometry revolution (which will happen - like it or not).
The reason I like GG is they are still making bikes in the US which means they can change things quickly if needed and improve if things don't work. They're Aluminium (I have a healthy dislike for most carbon bikes) and they're a little different to the rest. I see them as a sort of American Nicolai - a bit industrial and raw but beautiful nonetheless.
At the end of the day they all want to sell us a product in exchange for our money, even locally made builders. So this keeping it real thing is nonsense--the brand of bike I ride isn't a way for me to get some strange 'trail cred', or prove that I am in other words "special" or "cool". I ride what works for me, and what I personally like--and I like dudes running a company because they love to ride mountain bikes. GG gets a thumbs up, Transition gets a thumbs up!
Chris Porter (Mojo) has been playing with fork offsets for years. It's nothing new, they're just jumping on the bandwagon.
I would far rather give my hard earned ca$h to Transition rather than one of the biggies for sure however would go GG over Transition if I had the choice and lived in the US. Given I like on the other side of the pond it will be a local who gets my £££. Think global act local and all that.
It's a few years old but the science is there. They may not be as playful but will be faster.
And I agree with you man, I'm not trying to bash GG in any way here. I'm happy to see them getting coverage, and the couple people I know that ride them love their bikes. I guess to clear up the point I was making, yes, we're on the same page in that a person should vote with their money. I just don't believe I'm getting anything in the way of 'cool cred', regardless of the bike I'm buying. Call me jaded from years of working in shops I guess.
@WAKIdesigns At a shop level, I wanted to stock good bikes from companies that treated us well, and threated the people who bought their bikes well. Those are the brands I wanted to support. Transition and Kona stand out as awesome bikes for the PNW, and great people to deal with. Santa Cruz? Not so much anymore.
Have you ever looked at the brand contracts for Spesh, Trek, or Scott? It's nuts what they require of you in order of the 'privilege' of stocking their product. So is Jason C fun to ride with? Probably, but his company still sucks. Transition doesn't require that a shop stock X dollars worth of house brand handlebars or have Y number of bikes on the floor at any given time. At a rider level, I personally wouldn't want a Spesh, but that doesn't make their bikes sh*t and doesn't mean I think less of you if YOU want to ride one... again, because I don't base my opinion of people on the things they own. We're all just trying to get down the hill and have some fun at the end of the day, that's the only "keeping it real" I care about
Also, in the first pic what's holding the bike up? Was a stand just photoshopped out?
And, in the second pic it looks like a guy was just photoshopped into a rock garden. Maybe its the way the photo was taken but dang.
Second pic: that's me, and I hiked up the hill and hit that drop about 5 or 6 times in 95ºF heat for that shot
What trail is the second pic from? The new section of dakota ridge?
I've never even ridden a 27.5 or 29. still trying to demo a GG.
Depends what sort of park riding you like, but if it's jumping, the MegaTrail will likely be more fun. And have more suspension. I've had a shorter travel 29er, and while they really do plow over stuff surprisingly well, there's no substitute for a healthy amount of good quality suspension when you're lapping the park. At least in my opinion.
The 130mm Pistola configuration is being discontinued due to what you mentioned: 120, 130, 140 rear travel 29 options is a bit much.
Spot is modifiying their actual STAs in order to keep the same effective STAs across frame sizes. They also provide two additional tables to accout for changes in STA and ETT given the saddele position or an offset in seatpost. Very nice cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1430/1526/files/Geo_Chart_Mayhem_29_R.0.jpg?v=1490112824
Rear center (chainstays) are also longer in size XL.
I have always found the geometry numbers companies use (effective STA, TT, etc) to be effective abstractions of the important geometry of a bicycle. I have never ridden a bike with 25" eTT that fit me, for example, no matter the seat height, but I have yet to ride one with a 23.5-24" eTT that didn't.
- 25 mm longer in reach,
- 2 degree slacker HA,
- 20mm more travel,
- 2" shorter seat tube.