The Top Fuel gets a pretty glowing review. It sounds like a fantastic bike still.
I really don’t like the geo and it looks/sounds like it rides like a very efficient trail bike. Perfect bike for some though and with AXS and that bontrager bar/stem it sure looks sleek!
Cool bike!
Would definitely look hard at this offering versus the Transition Spur, Ripley, Tallboy etc!
But maybe not so much an XC bike on steroids like the Blur TR, Canyon Lux Trail
I wish so badly it could fit two bottles in the triangle.
Love my XT version, although I swapped out the Sid for a 34SC. Came off an older Scalpel and this thing just feels so much more efficient, which I did not expect. I also have another set of wheels to try on it, they’re a little bit lighter so will be interesting to see the effect of those.
Pretty surprised, it sounds like the PB guys didn’t really like this bike. Which is surprising because it costs nearly 10 grand USD!!!
But I think the author nailed it on this one, this sounds like a perfect bike for Marathon XC. One thing to keep in mind is they are riding in a fairly BC style test course, which is definitely not the norm for most XC guys here on the TR forum. I tend to think this would be a perfect Breck epic bike, but a bad BC Bike Race bike (if that makes any sense!).
I think one thing to also bare in mind, Henry Quinney I think is not as XC leaning as he possibly suggests.
He’s beloved by the Pinker’s, and I really value his input on the tech side of things, but he’s more perfectly suited to the trail/Enduro tests (the Top Fuel and the second half of this field test is his wheel house I reckon).
I was highly surprised by the efficiency results with the single pivot/inline set up. Interesting as I thought that set up was mainly for efficiency and the bikes that don’t need lockouts look awesome.
Not sure if we read the same article. I read a glowing review. It has seriously made me rethink going for the Epic Evo!
For me, this would make a great, and I mean simply fantastic all-day marathon bike. It’s comfortable, it’s fast, and its extra travel would provide a safety net for when you’re tired or riding fast on trails that you don’t know particularly well.
The impression from the video wasn’t quite as glowing.
I do think it looks excellent as an XCM bike (actually also as XC bike). Maybe not as efficient as an Epic, but probably more racey overall.
I read and watch every single one of these reviews, and one thing to keep in mind is they are extremely diplomatic in their criticisms, so you kind of need to read between the lines. Example “…it’s a bike that descends well considering that it clearly has its priorities elsewhere…” That is pink bike code for “this bike is not fun to descend on.”
And to be fair, that might not be necessarily a criticism of the bike. It essentially is a very narrow and focused bike, and it sounds like its excellent in that focus. However, these reviews are explicitly a downcountry lens, and implicitly a downcountry, coastal BC terrain, lens. Which means that the best bikes will be more generalist and capable.
IMO, this bike occupies a weird space: not quite light and racy enough to be a true XCO rig, but a little too under gunned to be a true down country BCBR race bike. Sounds like a great bike, but for a very small audience. I think it would be suitable for someone who wants a downcountry bike, but also wants the option to race XCM.
I think there’s a very specific perspective that most PinkBike reviews take - there’s much more of an all-mountain (up to enduro and downhill, and down to trail) performance aspect that they look for. It’s more of a “ride the climbs in order to go down”, rather than “balance BOTH the climbs and descents”.
I think that Mike Levy is the most XC-oriented reviewer at PinkBike, and I’d say he’s such a competent descender that he enjoys downcountry bikes - basically riding all-mountain using a lightweight XC bike. But that’s not the same as cross-country racing or marathon.
While I really enjoy the PB reviews, if you’re looking for XC bike reviews based on XC or XCM riding priorities, I don’t think PB is the best source. I would honestly lead more towards https://flowmountainbike.com/ - they seem to focus on identifying what the bike is for, and then reviewing it against those criteria. I haven’t seen them review the Blur yet though 
I think you’re 100% right. And Levy is the voice from PB to listen to on these bikes. Don’t write off their reviews in the XC/DC area though. They may not go away from Quinney due to the audience love for him, but they have done excellent reviews with Levy and Sarah in the past.
That’s true. Although in the world of bike reviews, I don’t think there are many journalists out there who are as outspoken and willing to bash a bike as Mike Levy.
The niche might be small for some of these bikes. But it’s probably the best race bike type out there for the typical weekend warrior, who does not have the luxury of having a stable of bikes. The rider who does want to do trail riding, XC racing, XC Marathon racing etc. I sincerely doubt that for non-pro riders that the difference in Blur vs Blur Tr, Epic vs. Epic Evo would make an ounce of difference even in XCO racing.
Completely agree. These are the best bikes for those of us who want to race, but also ride trails with their big bike mates sometimes.
I (personally) wish they’d keep the categories more separate instead of drifting upwards and calling trail bikes DC.
I’m curious about perspectives across “categories” vs differences in bike spec - e.g., comparing a trail bike (say the Ibis Ripley) against an XCM bike like the Santa Cruz Blur. I think the generalized comparisons are pretty clear, but what about the specifics? I can envision a lot of XCM races like the NUE series (say, the Shenandoah 100) where the single track and descending is more aggressive than most regular cross-country races…
Thoughts/comments anyone?
If you’re interested in the Santa Cruz Blur TR, watch this video. This edit provides both Harry’s AND Mike Levy’s perspective - and Levy clearly loves the bike. As they say, he is basically the perfect customer - someone who gets excited by riding on the edge of danger.
Levy is the root of all this Downcountry debate, his column named the category and was based around his overforked, overbraked and dropper equipped XC bike. “Did I ruin a perfectly good cross-country bike, or does it actually makes sense?”
Now we have Henry saying that the new Top Fuel isn’t too far off what Nino is racing at an XC, and people are saying every short travel trail bike is “downcountry”.
I thought my non TR Blur was pretty downcountry when I bought it in early 2019 because it was actually a degree slacker HT angle and much longer reach with a shorter stem than the Trek Fuel EX that it replaced. Now I’m over here in the old school XC category with the super steep (69 degree) bike, and only 120mm dropper. Picking up a 34 to slacken it up a bit before deciding if a new bike is in store for '22.
I did? I’m actually not interested in the blur tr but completely agree that it epitomises (to me) what DownCountry is. Race bikes that are happy getting a bit rowdy.
Complete tangent:
Just discovered these cages. Feels like the Otter cage is a perfect match for a BCBR bike 
.
57g isn’t terrible either if it’s as strong as the reviews say. I had to look up the weight of my X-Labs Gorilla (40g), and 17g seems almost worth the novelty. I don’t think it would look quite as good on my Spark as it would on a RM Element or Norco Revolver or something though.
In an XCM the lighter, better pedaling bike is going to win in any situation unless you just aren’t comfortable at all descending and lose significant time crashing. Looking at the SM100 as an example there are still major descents where the fastest times are from Jeremiah Bishop and others from years ago on the old old school XC bikes. With the repeated long descents in that race, you are never quite on the very edge of potential speed like you would be in Pinkbikes 5 minutes up 3 minutes down testing. Once you get seat time and are used to how a 23lb bike with a firm pedaling platform will move around under you much more than a 30lb trail bike you will be within a few seconds with both bikes when you are going at a speed appropriate for a 9-11 hour race. Then on the flipside when you are climbing for hours you’ll start to see the difference the extra 5lbs makes, even if you can almost hide it in a short effort.
I’ve passed a lot of other races on downhills in marathon events but still never come close to winning, climbs are the selection point.
Lighter is better. But a more capable bike in this case does not have to come with a weight penalty. The specialized epic evo for instance can be every bit as light, if not lighter than the Epic Evo XCO bike. Due to the lack of the “brain” in the former.
When looking at the pros, I think the rider is far more important than the bike. Just look at the women’s XCO field. Jolanda is visibly faster over the techy stuff than all the others, despite being on the least capable bike.
The chunkiest XCM race where I live, the Downieville Classic has been won on the Yeti SB100 most recently, which is described as “the downhiller’s XC bike”. The rider of course deserves the credit also here.
I sincerely doubt that the amateur rider is better off with an aggressive XCO bike versus the “TR” version of the same bike.