Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Ripley AF vs Revel Ranger

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
B

Blown Jammer

· Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Looking at these two bikes, as a secondary, light trail/down country thing. Live in Colorado so mainly winch and plummet rides with steep technical climbs and rough rocky downhills. Not much flat terrain here at all.

I'll use this bike for less rough trails, Backcountry epics etc. Think Mt Falcon, Colorado Trail, etc. My main bike is an Enduro bike so looking for something pretty different/complimentary to that.

Seems like the ranger probably has the better suspension design for rough trails and tech climbing, but the Ripley AF has the more progressive geometry that seems more fun. Probably only 2lbs difference between the two with similar builds so not too concerned with weights. The Ripley is about $1000 cheaper, so that's not a deciding factor, but it is a factor!

Anyone rode both that can compare? My gut is saying a ranger with a 130mm fork and -1deg angleset might be the silver bullet.
 
#2 ·
Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.
 
Discussion starter · #3 ·
I think somewhat different feeling is what I'm looking for but I agree the ranger seems outdated now. Spur was on my list but seems like it's not as snappy pedaling as the others?

Why do you say the Ripley AF isn't what I'm looking for though?

Streetdoctor said:
Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.
Click to expand...
 
#4 ·
I think buying an expensive bike with the intent of putting an angleset in it is a bad plan to start with. Find something that meets your desires at the outset.

The Ripley AF is a good option. I have the carbon v4 and it’s the bike I would choose if I could only own one. With the Porkchop bag, you can keep all your bike tool stuff off your body as well, which is really nice. Downside is that the water bottle mount area is cramped and limiting, but once you find something that works, you forget about it.
 
#6 ·
Blown Jammer said:
Looking at these two bikes, as a secondary, light trail/down country thing. Live in Colorado so mainly winch and plummet rides with steep technical climbs and rough rocky downhills. Not much flat terrain here at all.

I'll use this bike for less rough trails, Backcountry epics etc. Think Mt Falcon, Colorado Trail, etc. My main bike is an Enduro bike so looking for something pretty different/complimentary to that.
Click to expand...
Also in CO and I know those exact trails very well. I would suggest looking at some XC/trail bikes. My 2021 Scott Spark has been great on both trails you mentioned. The Spark gives most of the XC qualities you want for climbing while retaining the trail qualities for descending. Plus, the Scott Twinloc is clutch for dual suspension control on the fly during those sudden terrain/gradient changes we have in the rockies.

North Table, Green Mt., CT (out & back Denver thru Leadville), White Ranch, Apex, Buff Creek, Hall & Hale, Magnolia, Winter Park, Breck... The Spark has rocked'em all. The only limitation I've found to that bike is me...
 
#7 ·
Streetdoctor said:
Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.
Click to expand...
my ranger feels far more capable than an epic evo. it’s got a more upright HTA but the BB is sufficiently low and the reach is long. the front turns easier but it is nowhere near as twitchy as early 2000s 29ers. epic evo was much racier and shorter feeling.
 
#8 ·
I have the V4 Ripley and demo'd the Revel (Rascal) which had the best rear suspension design I've ever ridden. I was faster on that than I was on an SB130 or V1 Ripmo. The Ripley, at least my V4 carbon was much faster on the climbs though.
 
#9 ·
Also in CO and had a Ripley V4 for about a year. It was a great pedaler on smoother trails, but I found it a bit harsh on rocky terrain and would tend to get hung up on square edges during climbs. If I was looking at short travel bike I would probably look at the Ranger. CBF looks interesting to me and as far as geo goes, I think too much is made into "old" vs "new". Too steep of a SA and your sitting on top of the bike.
 
#10 ·
Have a Ripley AF and Canfield Lithium. CBF is awesome but a bit more active while pedaling than DW Link. Good for sit and spin tech climbing. Out of the seat I feel like the Ripley is a little better.

The Ripley is impressive on the downs. You feel the lesser suspension but the geo is dialed. I feel confident taking it down almost anything short of trails that require 3-4 ft drops.

Unfortunately I have no experience on the ranger. I bet its probably better on the downs than the geo would suggest. The Lithium isn't the longest or slackest enduro bike but it rips better than anything else I've tried.
 
#11 ·
coachxtaylor said:
my ranger feels far more capable than an epic evo. it’s got a more upright HTA but the BB is sufficiently low and the reach is long. the front turns easier but it is nowhere near as twitchy as early 2000s 29ers. epic evo was much racier and shorter feeling.
Click to expand...
That's what's great about the internet coach- We can disagree. My guess is you're mid 40's and don't ride far enough forward for modern geometry. You also don't ride an enduro bike or are slow on the downhills. The HTA is straight out of 2005 which is a deal breaker if the OP thinks his trails are straight up and then straight down. The STA is also very slack by modern standard. Especially with a 130mm fork.
 
#12 ·
Blown Jammer said:
I think somewhat different feeling is what I'm looking for but I agree the ranger seems outdated now. Spur was on my list but seems like it's not as snappy pedaling as the others?

Why do you say the Ripley AF isn't what I'm looking for though?
Click to expand...
Disregard. I was thinking Ripmo AF. If you're looking at the Ripley AF you have to add the GG Trail Pistol to that list. Their nerdy marketing aside it's an awesome bike. I swap between the Gnarvana and Trail Pistola (130/150). No desire for any other bike. I'm an Enduro guy as well that puts in big days. I live 5 minutes from Mt Falcon.
 
#13 · (Edited)
Streetdoctor said:
That's what's great about the internet coach- We can disagree. My guess is you're mid 40's and don't ride far enough forward for modern geometry. You also don't ride an enduro bike or are slow on the downhills. The HTA is straight out of 2005 which is a deal breaker if the OP thinks his trails are straight up and then straight down. The STA is also very slack by modern standard. Especially with a 130mm fork.
Click to expand...
you’re wrong in every one of those assumptions (well except maybe for the slow part). i ride my ranger in winch and plummet terrain in laguna beach. obviously tire choice plays a big impact on the capability of the bike and i opt for big sticky tires which does steal a bit of this bikes character. just out of curiosity, have you ridden one before? or any of the cbf bikes?

edit: just saw in your history you did own one build up light. fair enough. i’ll still stand by the fact that i think reach measurement and bottom bracket height have just as much to do with downhill stability than HTA.
 
#14 ·
Streetdoctor said:
Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.
Click to expand...
It isn't at all old geo by any stretch of the imagination. It just is a bike meant for efficient pedaling and won't be fantastic at bombing down nasty hills. Revel's owner knows what a good pedaling bike should be, and built one he likely rides often.
 
#15 ·
I don’t know where someone is getting that a Ranger is 2005 geometry.

Head tube is way slacker then 2005 XC geo and not far off of other current bikes with that travel and application.

STA is much steeper than 2005 geo and is only .5 deg slacker than the Ripley, and not very slack considering the travel.

Frame reach is right in line with current trends and massively longer than 2005 geo.

If the geo does work for someone, then it does not work for them. But it is not “old-school” geo.
 
#16 ·
kapusta said:
I don’t know where someone is getting that a Ranger is 2005 geometry.

Head tube is way slacker then 2005 XC geo and not far off of other current bikes with that travel and application.

STA is much steeper than 2005 geo and is only .5 deg slacker than the Ripley, and not very slack considering the travel.

Frame reach is right in line with current trends and massively longer than 2005 geo.

If the geo does work for someone, then it does not work for them. But it is not “old-school” geo.
Click to expand...
Yea, I agree. Unfortunately I remember 2005..
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#17 ·
Regarding shop owners that like the Ranger...

www.worldwidecyclery.com

Revel Ranger Dream Build by Worldwide Cyclery CEO Jeff Cayley

Jeff Cayley is no stranger to building up custom mountain bikes. In years past, he's gone to pretty extreme lengths in order to manifest the bike of his dreams; doing things like cutting the seat tube on a Yeti SB4.5 and hacking the largest cog off a SRAM XX1 Eagle cassette are just a couple of...
www.worldwidecyclery.com www.worldwidecyclery.com
 
#18 ·
Never ridden a Ranger but taking away a couple things:

  • Weight not a big deal for you
  • Cost not a big deal but is a factor
  • You like to hit descents hard and care about time on them
  • Want a slacker HTA

Based on all that Ripley for sure. My recommendation would be custom Ripley or Stock build with some upgraded wheels including high engagement hubs and decently light rims. Fast rolling rear tire, gripper tire up front.

Overall though cant go wrong with the choice you have. Purchase go shred hard and enjoy.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#19 ·
My Ranger- with Roval Control SL wheels in a size large with a pike ultimate and SID ultimate shock weighed 29lb. You can build an Epic EVO that's slacker and descends better to be at least 4lb lighter. One of the main reasons I sold my Ranger aside from the geometry was it was only 3lb lighter than my 170/160mm travel enduro bike and my enduro bike actually climbed better.
 
#20 ·
OP, can’t help you on ripely af vs ranger but FWIW, I do like my ranger a lot. I’ve ridden the ripmo, not the ripley. I have an enduro 170 bike and the ranger is a great compliment to that. I personally like that the geo numbers are a little more conservative-I find the bike more fun on stuff that the enduro geo mutes too much.

I’m sure the ripley is great too…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
About this Discussion
33 Replies
20 Participants
Last post:
xjbaylor
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion