Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 391 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
As there is no Alchemy bikes manufacturers thread I figured I'd get something rolling here.

I'm looking around, deciding what my next ride will be and the Arktos 29ST has caught my eye.

https://alchemybicycles.com/product/arktos-29-st_gray/

https://alchemybicycles.com/product/arktos-29st-blue/

The issue so far, as they are still quite new there is not a lot of information about such as ride reports or reviews etc.

Bike Mag just released their 'Mid travel 29er - 2019 Bible of Bikes Tests' and they seemed to like the 29ST (note: the rear travel is actually 120mm and not 130mm, confirmed by Joel @ Alchemy).

https://www.bikemag.com/2019-bible-tucson/alchemy-arktos-29/

So...

- Who's actually got one?
- Who's ridden one and what did you think, how did it compare to other bikes you know?
- Who's seen one up close and personal?
- Who's got some photos and what do the two colour options look like in the flesh?
__________

Edit: I was asked in a PM if I have any connection with Alchemy bikes? No (but if they want to do me a deal :) ) the Arktos just seems like a bike I'd like to ride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Talking with Alchemy:

- The Arktos 29ST is 120mm rear, 140mm front (and not 130mm as the Bike Mag review mentions)
- Frames weigh 6.83lbs
- A complete XO1 build comes in at 28.5lbs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
As an interesting side note i think the “sine” suspension is a variation of the original “switch” suspension Yeti used before moving to “switch infinity”. I believe yeti only had a three year exclusive on the original technology.

Anyone know for sure? David Earle is designer of both suspension systems and if true i am surprised its not more widely discussed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,036 Posts
I am also interested in this bike----I have trouble with really long reaches and this is 454 in a large which could be good. Also the pricing is really good and you get a Factory Fox 36 and DPX2---for a similar non factory build to Pivot and you save about $1000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,036 Posts
Remember I believe this is the same frame as their long travel 29er-----tlook at the specs and you will see this----so the stack if more mountain oriented.

But for those of us with really long legs we tend to need more stack or a higher rise-our seats are way up so with low stack we are leaned over more than I want---part of why I am interested in the bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,092 Posts
I've been looking at the longer travel version too, the long seat tube on the XL and the superboost is a bit of a bummer as I would need to build another wheel but apart from that it looks good.

No XL frames in stock at the minute, still waiting on them getting back to me for an expected delivery date.

Strange how the low end build comes with a 150 dropper and the three higher models come with only a 125.

This bike and the new Hightower are front runners for me (whenever the latter is released)
 

·
aka bOb
Joined
·
8,814 Posts
Remember I believe this is the same frame as their long travel 29er-----tlook at the specs and you will see this----so the stack if more mountain oriented.

But for those of us with really long legs we tend to need more stack or a higher rise-our seats are way up so with low stack we are leaned over more than I want---part of why I am interested in the bike.
Agreed and after looking at it again the stack on their medium is pretty close to my Offering in the same size but their large get's further apart which is good for you longer legged chaps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
Got to take out this weekend on a mixture of terrain, flowy single track, technical rock short downhills, and smooth/rocky uphills. The bike excelled in all areas and couldn't be happier.


I mostly ride park/downhill... my previous trail bike is 2014 Commencal Meta AM v3 (150mm front/rear & 275 wheels).


This was my first 29er. I was surprised how nimble the bike is. I feel it's more playful than the commencals I was on. The bike pedals extremely well, never had to lockout the rear suspension, kept it in open the entire time. Couldn't really feel any bobbing on uphills or flats (27% sag setting), rear track well too. I never rode VPP or DW-Link bikes, so I cannot compare how it performs against them. The 75.5 STA is nice, compared to my previous bike. It couldn't even tell how slack front end was when climbing, compare with my other bike, weighting the front was always problem on steep climbs. The bike defiantly shines going doing hill and wants to be pushed. Rear suspension felt really good.. I need to be careful, because geos let's you attack like you are on a bigger bike w/ more suspension vs 120mm bike. The bike does feel like you are sitting higher when seated, I assuming that is because of the 75.5 STA... I thought had more clearance between the cranks and ground, so I had few pedal strikes climbing and/or coming out of turning when pedaling in rocky sections.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Got to take out this weekend on a mixture of terrain, flowy single track, technical rock short downhills, and smooth/rocky uphills. The bike excelled in all areas and couldn't be happier.

I mostly ride park/downhill... my previous trail bike is 2014 Commencal Meta AM v3 (150mm front/rear & 275 wheels).

This was my first 29er. I was surprise how nimble the bike is. I feel it more playful than the commencals I was on. The bike pedals extremely well, never had to lockout the rear suspension, kept in open the entire time. Couldn't really feel any bobbing on uphills or flats (27% sag setting), rear track well too. I never rode VPP or DW-Link bikes, so I cannot compare how it performs against them. The 75.5 STA is nice, compare to my previous bike. It couldn't even tell how slack front end was when climbing, compare with my other bike, weighting the front was always problem on steep climbs. The bike defiantly shines going doing hill and wants to be push. Rear suspension felt really good.. I need to be care, because geos let's you attack like you are on a bigger bike w/ more suspension vs 120mm bike. The bike does feel like you are sitting higher when seated, I assuming that is because of the 75.5 STA... I thought had more clearance between the cranks and ground, so I had few pedal strikes climbing and/or coming out of turning when pedaling in rocky sections.
Cool! Keep posting updates!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
Got to take out this weekend on a mixture of terrain, flowy single track, technical rock short downhills, and smooth/rocky uphills. The bike excelled in all areas and couldn't be happier.

The bike does feel like you are sitting higher when seated, I assuming that is because of the 75.5 STA... I thought had more clearance between the cranks and ground, so I had few pedal strikes climbing and/or coming out of turning when pedaling in rocky sections.
The BB height is listed at 13.23" - standard fare in today's bikes - I would prefer 13.5" Is there any chance you could switch out to 170 mm cranks and see if you get an improvement?

Bike looks fantastic - enjoy your new ride!
 

·
mtbrer
Joined
·
974 Posts
I’ve been emailing Joe at Arktos to set up a demo on home trails. My schedule and Alchemy’s won’t come together for a month or so. I’m itching to ride one of these!

Here’s a thought. The ST uses the same front and rear triangle as the 140mm Arktos, right? Different shock and, presumably at least one different link... so it I were to buy an ST, which I’m thinking would be the right bike for my home trails, what would I need to convert it to a 160/140 full Arktos for, say, a trip to Moab?

Does the Fox 36 still use spacers for travel adjustment, or would it need an air shaft?

Has anyone looked in to the differences in links/ shock?
Enquiring minds want to know.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
I've been emailing Joe at Arktos to set up a demo on home trails. My schedule and Alchemy's won't come together for a month or so. I'm itching to ride one of these!

Here's a thought. The ST uses the same front and rear triangle as the 140mm Arktos, right? Different shock and, presumably at least one different link... so it I were to buy an ST, which I'm thinking would be the right bike for my home trails, what would I need to convert it to a 160/140 full Arktos for, say, a trip to Moab?

Does the Fox 36 still use spacers for travel adjustment, or would it need an air shaft?

Has anyone looked in to the differences in links/ shock?
Enquiring minds want to know.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I asked the similar questions, but didn't go as deep. Frame and swingarm same, they indicated linkage and shock would need to be changed, because the ST rear shock is tuned for 120mm. I didn't ask about the front fork. Bikeco.com is another good POC, as they have specific custom shock tunes for Arktos and I believe are Cody Kelly sponsor.

IMO, how capable the ST, you probably don't need to upgrade to 160/140.
 
1 - 20 of 391 Posts
Top