Opinions wanted: 2010 Demo 8, 2010 Giant Glory, 2009 Wilson, or 2010 Session 88 ???

William42 · Jan 24, 2011

Doesn't look like you can go wrong with any of them, although I don't know what mixed things you've heard about the session. It has a great shock rate, and very comfortable DH geometry. Its a great bike, I'd love to keep mine, but I don't get to ride DH anymore and so I'm getting a smaller bike. Honestly though, they're all top notch bikes and you can't go wrong with any of them.

The only thing that you should sway yourself towards is that the boxxer race is a very inferior fork to the boxxer team or WC. Unless your planning on getting the avy upgrade, I'd steer clear of it.

crohnsy · Jan 24, 2011

I love my Demo 8 I that I bought last year. Didn't weigh it stock but I had mine sub 38lbs with ex721 wheelset and Elka shock.

It's low.. much lower than the Bullit I previously rode, but you get used to it,

I found its a bike that the faster you ride it the better it feels. I enjoyed riding it at my local hill, but when I went to Mont Ste Anne with it thats when it really came alive for me.
Overall its a great feeling bike, confidence inspiring, will definitely help you out when you get in over your head and all that...

As far as the fork goes have you considered any bike with a 2010 Race and upgrading the damper? Theres so many options out there now it might be worthwhile to get a big boost in fork performance

demo 9 · Jan 24, 2011

My vote is session, but none of them are bad, you will be fine

quickneonrt · Jan 24, 2011

Having ridden owned Demos then switching to a Glory last season, I can highly recommend the Glory. Plus it has a better fork and you can make it slacker with an Angleset. I had the Works -1 on mine and I found it perfect

mtbman1127 · Jan 24, 2011

I would vote for the session. I have one and absolutely love it. As hokey as ABP seems it works amazingly you wil not be disappointed.

Banshee Rider · Jan 24, 2011

I came off a 2010 Session and have been riding a 2011 Glory since September. Both bikes shared the same build, it was simply a frame swap, so the comparison is based soley on frame characterstics. Here are my oversimplified cliff notes.

"Out of the box" I personally felt like the Session was a more stable ride. It cornered well, and was inspiring to ride on fast ugly terrain. From the beginning I always thought it was a pretty firm riding bike though with regards to suspension movement. Absolutely no complaints, Trek did a great job.

The Glory turns equally well. The suspension also floats over terrain well, but is less jarring of a ride. I will confirm speculation that in comparison to the Session, the Glory is too steep out of the box. I tend to prefer a slightly steeper headangle, and have no desire to own a <64* bike, but even I will be installing an Angleset into my Glory this winter. I'm confident that once that change is made, it'll blend the ride of Maestro that I prefer, with the rad handling characteristics of the Session.

Mo(n)arch · Jan 25, 2011

I ride a Session since two years and have to say, that the bike is confidence inspiring. It's light and stable but nimble enough to ride it in an active way. It isn't a plow bike, which makes it a fun bike to ride on any terrain.
It jumps and corners really well and the geo is spot on.

So if you search a bike for any condition, the Session will do the job.

If you search something less "jarring" or stiff, the Glory-with angled headset

should be good.

William42 · Jan 25, 2011

see the link in my sig. if you decide to go with a session, you can have a better condition equally as high end specced session for less.

But really, you're looking at bikes from the big 3, the only one that falls short in any way at all is the glory, which can be easily remedied with a works cup or angleset. So really, you can't go wrong. I recommend not the demo, purely due to spec.

William42 · Jan 25, 2011

no input on the devinci, but the session is pretty far from freeride angles. The listed HA is incorrect, it has always been 64, and my BB measures 14.1. I think you're getting hung up on numbers. Nobody who has ridden my session (or any of the others I know of) has ever felt that it was too high or steep.

norbar · Jan 25, 2011

MetalMayhem said:
Every write-up I've seen on the bike lists it as 65º. I know that the newest model is 64º, but regardless, that's pretty much what I was hoping to hear about the session. I'm looking for a bike that will feel comfortable plowing into rock gardens and on high speed stuff. Sounds like the session should be a decent choice for this

What write up? All the users on RM claim it is slacker than advertised. The only writeups that say its 65 deg didnt measure but got their info from the site.

William42 · Jan 25, 2011

MetalMayhem said:
"65° head angle, 14.3" BB height, 17.3" chainstay length, 47" wheelbase, 32.7" stand over height"

" (size M) TT length (effective): 23.5 in.; ST length: 9.25 in.; head angle: 65 degrees; seat angle (actual): 58 degrees; bottom bracket height: 14.3 in."

Pinkbike Product lists it as 65º as well

Either way, if it is really more like 64º then that's what I'm looking for anyway

I'm aware its listed at 65 everywhere, just when you actually measure it out it comes out at 64-64.5 depending on tires and fork, and certainly the subjective *feel* (I know, not scientific) is low and slack. Trek did their homework. Its a DH bike through and through.

norbar · Jan 25, 2011

MetalMayhem said:
"65° head angle, 14.3" BB height, 17.3" chainstay length, 47" wheelbase, 32.7" stand over height"

" (size M) TT length (effective): 23.5 in.; ST length: 9.25 in.; head angle: 65 degrees; seat angle (actual): 58 degrees; bottom bracket height: 14.3 in."

Pinkbike Product lists it as 65º as well

Either way, if it is really more like 64º then that's what I'm looking for anyway

Pinkbike lists it what trek gave to them. If you want real geo numbers talk to the users. William is one of them but many people on rm claimed its under 65deg.
News sites rarely do measure on their own (dirt mag does but they had some strange trek with 63 deg ha).

William42 · Jan 25, 2011

norbar said:
Pinkbike lists it what trek gave to them. If you want real geo numbers talk to the users. William is one of them but many people on rm claimed its under 65deg.
News sites rarely do measure on their own (dirt mag does but they had some strange trek with 63 deg ha).

63 is pretty slack :think:

I'm skeptical that they got that correct, or that trek sent them a production frame. I measured mine to be 64.5 with a 40 and Specialized clutch tires and the fork as low as clearance would allow, and I haven't bothered to measure with my boxxer team since I know it rides well.

norbar · Jan 25, 2011

William42 said:
63 is pretty slack I'm skeptical that they got that correct, or that trek sent them a production frame. I measured mine to be 64.5 with a 40 and Specialized clutch tires and the fork as low as clearance would allow, and I haven't bothered to measure with my boxxer team since I know it rides well.

Jonsey claimed in the review it was preproduction and trek told them it will be steeper so yeah it could be 63. He would probably noticed if it was 65 as he seems to love slackers.

Wa-Aw · Jan 25, 2011

Session is DH race bike. Don't get hung up on the numbers. That incarnation of the wilson is also out of production so you could say it's a bit out dated. I also heard hearsay of flex issues with it.

But you asked the people here and they say the session is a good bike. I have a few friends with them and they are good bikes. Also don't forget that just because a bike has steeper numbers doesn't mean it rides steeper. That's the glory's problem. It has pretty much the same numbers as the Session but it's suspension system rides higher in it's travel making the bike feel like it's steeper.

tuumbaq · Jan 25, 2011

MetalMayhem said:
Thanks for all of the replies. Seems like the session is a good choice. Any chance someone could compare it to the 2010 demo? This one has a world cup as well so specs seem great. http://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/714844/

My main concern with the Demo ( which IMO is a big one ) is the stock valving on the rear shock.Its got practically no top and hardly any mid stroke support, meaning when you are loading the bike to "hop" over something, it "dives" in its travel , making the front end even slacker and the BB lower.Which in return translate into a lot of pedal smacking and its very hard to put weight on the front wheel to steer.

Like others have said, static numbers on websites dont mean much.The Demo could have the best geo in the world but yet , with poor damping, the geo goes out the window as soon as you step on it.Its a shame for Specialized, the would have a great frame but I think it's not on par with what other manufacturers are already doing with their bikes and they should seriously step up to the plate and valve that rear shock!

That said, its still a great frame, you could have the rear shock "push" and it would be a ton better.

The Session comes stock with a kick ass rear shock, one if not the best currently on the market and the geo is spot on. I'd even go as far as saying its not a fair comparison as the Session is in the different league than the other bikes you've listed. It rides like a single pivot : amazing acceleration, tracks the ground very , very well, RAILS flat corners , its extremely playful but it also brakes like no other bikes Ive own ( including 5 Demo's :thumb:

)

The Demo on the other hand with its very soft valving and FSR suspension, makes for a very good plow bike, stable at high speed but hard to play with when you need to work the bike around...To me, it feels dull overall

buckoW · Jan 26, 2011

Well said! I agree.

Mo(n)arch · Jan 26, 2011

I agree.

This

norbar · Jan 26, 2011

Wow. Finally someone has said that. I agree.

cableguy · Jan 26, 2011

^^ Word

yd35 · Jan 26, 2011

tuumbaq said:
My main concern with the Demo ( which IMO is a big one ) is the stock valving on the rear shock.Its got practically no top and hardly any mid stroke support, meaning when you are loading the bike to "hop" over something, it "dives" in its travel , making the front end even slacker and the BB lower.Which in return translate into a lot of pedal smacking and its very hard to put weight on the front wheel to steer.

Some questions about Tuumbag's comments. Does this relate to the 2010 Demo 8? I'm no suspension expert so I have to ask: Is this lack of top and mid stroke support the reason why, on my 2010 Demo 8 with RC4, I have to run a ton of compression and air pressure to get the bike feeling good? And by "good", I don't mean perfect by any means. I feel like I'm always compromising. Either I set it up stiff so that it feels good on the fast, rough stuff, but it has poor small bump absorption and a lifeless ride quality with very little pop OR I back off the compression settings and air pressure only to feel overwhelmed on the fast stuff but have great small bump sensitivity and a very lively bike that loves to jump. Anyhow, does this mean a revalve on my shock that gave more top and mid support would then enable me to run less pressure/compression and have a more balanced ride quality?

buckoW · Jan 27, 2011

yd35 said:
Some questions about Tuumbag's comments. Does this relate to the 2010 Demo 8? I'm no suspension expert so I have to ask: Is this lack of top and mid stroke support the reason why, on my 2010 Demo 8 with RC4, I have to run a ton of compression and air pressure to get the bike feeling good? And by "good", I don't mean perfect by any means. I feel like I'm always compromising. Either I set it up stiff so that it feels good on the fast, rough stuff, but it has poor small bump absorption and a lifeless ride quality with very little pop OR I back off the compression settings and air pressure only to feel overwhelmed on the fast stuff but have great small bump sensitivity and a very lively bike that loves to jump. Anyhow, does this mean a revalve on my shock that gave more top and mid support would then enable me to run less pressure/compression and have a more balanced ride quality?

Yes, it sounds like a firmer compression tune will help and sometimes a fast setup is not very "comfortable."

quickneonrt · Jan 27, 2011

My experience with the RC4 is it is slightly better then the DHX5 and that's not saying much. For it to feel ok I had to run a soft spring, boost valve with the highest pressure possible and the bottom out almost fully cranked in. Mid stroke was horrible and blew through the end stroke. This was on my 2010 Glory. I really did not like that shock.

Opinions wanted: 2010 Demo 8, 2010 Giant Glory, 2009 Wilson, or 2010 Session 88 ???

Chimp

fork ways

Monkey

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

fork ways

Chimp

fork ways

Chimp

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Chimp

fork ways

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

fork ways

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Monkey

Chimp

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Monkey

Monkey

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey