Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Since both of these bikes are comparable to each other (VPP, 5", All Mountain), what makes one more desirable that the other? I'm sure each one has its own riding characteristics but is there one thing that jumps out to anyone that's ridden both?

From a quality standpoint I would assume that both bikes are top notch since Intense and Santa Cruz are premier bike companies.

Any feed back would be appreciated, gracias!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
Nothing really stand out one apart from the other.
From my experiance, the 5.5 feels more like an XC bike , while the BLT feels more like a trail bike. Again - this is nitpicking , not something that really stands out.
On the BLT you could run a longer fork, I think the 5.5 is limited to 135mm (unless they have changed that for 2006).
 

·
Jus' Ridin' Along
Joined
·
269 Posts
Pretty Simple...

swtballer said:
Since both of these bikes are comparable to each other (VPP, 5", All Mountain), what makes one more desirable that the other? I'm sure each one has its own riding characteristics but is there one thing that jumps out to anyone that's ridden both?

From a quality standpoint I would assume that both bikes are top notch since Intense and Santa Cruz are premier bike companies.

Any feed back would be appreciated, gracias!
Go on both sites and look at the frame geometry. It's pretty easy to compare as the Intense #'s are in a pop up window you can hold whilst going to SC and looking at the LT #'s
I went with the LT due to slacker angles (slightly) and slightly longer wheelbase. A more comfortable AM style of ride.
But I think the iNtense is a better design (rear triangle).
Bottom line: SC is an all day sucker with a 140 mm fork and the Intense is a race-able 5"er
at least IMHO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Hello,

Like you, I was hesitating between the 2 frames.
I have made my choice on the quality...

I think that intense is far away from the quality of SC !!!
One example, I would not pay for a 2000$ frame which stickers are not varnished.

And anodized frames are so perfect. Thanks SC!

Nicolas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
Any feedback on which is the better climber? I've had my Classic Blur for over 3 years now and am starting to think about an LT or a 5.5. I do a lot of steep climbing and love how the Blur motors up the hill even though I do have to work to keep the front wheel planted. I'm 6'2" and worry that the headtube on the 5.5 is actually too short (0.5" shorter than the LT/Classic). And the head angle is 2 degrees slacker on the LT when comparing against the Classic but only half a degree slacker than the 5.5.

I already think my Classic is all-day comfy, having done many a 6+ hour ride on it. But the itch to start looking at something new is growing. I have an '04 Stumpy Elite (the backup bike) that I never quite fell in love with that is probably going to be let go to fund the new ride. I'm no hucker, but do like to do the occasional 12"-18" launch when the trail provides good runout.

Given my bias for climbing and my height, would the 5.5 be a better choice? I've been very happy with the Blur as it still provides ear-to-ear grins on just about every ride. I'd buy the LT in a heartbeat if that little voice in my head would stop saying, "Yeah, but how does it handle the steep uphills?"

Anyone out there ridden both on steep climbs?

MTBmoose
Spokane, WA

P.S. - Sizes in table are XL for LT/Classic and L for 5.5
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Hello from Portugal

Well I just coming back from a little ride before work, on my Blur LT. I just can say it climbs much better than my previous bike, a Chameleon. But for very step climbs I think the important is the fork height, and I just trade last week my old 2005 Fox Float (it was in bad shape) for the 2006 Fox Float because the 2007 is 10mm taller and I don't need 140mm, 130mm is fine and the BLT climbs very steep hills much better than shorter XC bikes.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,220 Posts
Longer chainstays are becoming more and more common again. Initially I thought this was just going to produce stability at the expense of sharp cornering and climbing quality. Wrong. SC has done its homework to balance head angle, wheelbase, and other geometry issues to make one of the best handling packages for all types of riding. Even seeing the numbers, I still don't know quite how they do it, but they do.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top