Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

301 - 315 of 315 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Don't forget the Brunch Ride recipe for the Ranger, 130 fork with 51mm offset. I think I'm going to order frame/SID fork but I've got a 130 fork on my hardtail that I'll probably swap in for comparo. If I Iike the 130 better I'm sure there will be a market for a lightly used SID Ultimate fork.
 

·
mosstrooper
Joined
·
164 Posts
Don't forget the Brunch Ride recipe for the Ranger, 130 fork with 51mm offset. I think I'm going to order frame/SID fork but I've got a 130 fork on my hardtail that I'll probably swap in for comparo. If I Iike the 130 better I'm sure there will be a market for a lightly used SID Ultimate fork.
The "Brunch Ride" is definitely a neat idea, and I'm curious to hear more from folks who have rode the Ranger in that configuration why they went for a burly Ranger rather than a light Rascal. (Maybe Chris Reichal, aka Dirty Biker, who I think is the only Revel employee running the Ranger BR, could shed some light on his thought-process!) Running the Pike up front instead of a Sid or 34SC would detract from the inherent frame-weight differences between the bikes, and then you'd likely want to run a SuperDeluxe out back instead of an inline shock for better damping control and oil cooling... which begs the question of why the Rascal wouldn't be the better bike, since it's tailored to use those suspension components from the factory. Of course, the same suspension at shorter travel will feel more lively and ramp up more energetically, but it's not like the Rascal is some super-enduro point-and-shoot monster sled -- it's plenty lively and energetic.

I also didn't realize the "Brunch Ride" called for a 51mm offset -- isn't the bike designed around 44mm offset with the Sid?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
I believe you are correct on the 44mm offset for the SID/ 120mm fork

From what I've been able to glean not having ridden either one the Rascal would be the clear cut choice if you only have one bike, I may keep my V2 Bronson so that would put me more in the Ranger than a Rascal by that way of thinking. On his instagram Dirty said the Ranger with 130 pike is the best all around mountain bike he's ever had.

I joined the Revel Owners group on FB and there's a guy that works for Fox on there that just built a Rascal and a Ranger for himself. Put a 130 Fox 34 on the Ranger and loves it. Some other guy there works at a shop in Boise that did a pretty sick brunch build, he called it a pissed off XC bike and the Rascal is the party bike!

I emailed Revel about a 130 fork and was told, we don't offer or recommend the 130 but most riders prefer the 51 for that ;)
 

·
mosstrooper
Joined
·
164 Posts
I joined the Revel Owners group on FB and there's a guy that works for Fox on there that just built a Rascal and a Ranger for himself. Put a 130 Fox 34 on the Ranger and loves it. Some other guy there works at a shop in Boise that did a pretty sick brunch build, he called it a pissed off XC bike and the Rascal is the party bike!
Ah, well if a Fox employee is building a Ranger BR I'd assume he dropped in a Grip2 damper on the 34 fork -- that would be the one reason I could see wanting the 34 at 130mm instead of the 34SC at 120mm. Still, the 34SC is a phenomenal fork for the weight and more than suitable for the rowdy intentions of the Ranger. I've especially liked that fork with the DSD RUNT mod -- allows much greater progressivity without compromising small-bump sensitivity. I could almost make a stronger argument for going for a Pike over the Sid, since the Sid has no compression adjustment for the end user, versus the 34 over the 34SC (which at least has a useable compression range as part of the open-mode adjust).

As something of an aside: Some of these reactions that folks have to the Ranger, or any other new-school "downcountry" bike, seem kind of humorous to me -- as though these folks know that a Ranger, Spur, Hei Hei, etc. will fit their needs well, but they're afraid of being associated with a bike that goes fast uphill and allows them to cover more ground. What was wrong with a standard-issue "XC bike" to begin with?! I suppose we can blame the continued bro-ification/enduro-fication of the MTB industry, and the golden age of the long-travel single-crown bike, for portraying XC bikes as all work and no play. I also wonder if a lot of these people just haven't rode a true "XC bike" in 10 or 15 years, and have no idea what advancements have been made in that category. 100mm-travel 29ers nowadays are absolutely phenomenal and a bike like the Ranger shouldn't be ashamed to be associated with that category.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Yeah, he put the Grip2 34 in it.

As someone who has been over-biked on a Bronson for a few years now I agree with your aside commentary. I'm mid 50's and been riding for 30 years so I've had a few bikes, mostly older tech XC bikes. The most modern one was a '08 Trance with a 140 fork until I got the Bronson which of course I had to have because, well Enduro bro. And I don't huck off anything or go to bike parks very often.

Not being able to demo bikes this year has definitely made it more challenging to pick one. I'm pretty sure from all the internetting I've done that a Spur or Ranger are the kind of bike I want. I like the more slack HTA of the Spur and it is a looker of a frame design but I've become convinced CBF is worth trying so that leaves me with Ranger and I've never even ridden a 29r!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,823 Posts
If anybody is looking for a Medium black Ranger, Soul Ride in Prescott has a GX build in stock...shockingly. I’m not up to speed on the Rascal builds but it has the blue SID for and shock and it’s selling for $5199
 

·
mosstrooper
Joined
·
164 Posts
Yeah, he put the Grip2 34 in it.

As someone who has been over-biked on a Bronson for a few years now I agree with your aside commentary. I'm mid 50's and been riding for 30 years so I've had a few bikes, mostly older tech XC bikes. The most modern one was a '08 Trance with a 140 fork until I got the Bronson which of course I had to have because, well Enduro bro. And I don't huck off anything or go to bike parks very often.

Not being able to demo bikes this year has definitely made it more challenging to pick one. I'm pretty sure from all the internetting I've done that a Spur or Ranger are the kind of bike I want. I like the more slack HTA of the Spur and it is a looker of a frame design but I've become convinced CBF is worth trying so that leaves me with Ranger and I've never even ridden a 29r!
That's a big jump in terms of bike genre! I am totally on the "XC bikes [or, I suppose, "downcountry" bikes] for everyone" train, especially when it comes to a daily driver/local trails bike for the majority of us who don't live in, say, Whistler or Bellingham, but I am curious how many folks who are currently buying "downcountry" bikes will end up preferring their longer-travel, smaller-wheels sleds. Certainly, many will be seduced by the uphill speed and quickness -- perhaps you will be -- but others will swing back to longer-travel and 27.5". It is the way of all MTB trends, after all!

I think somebody coming from smaller wheels and more travel will appreciate the deep-feeling suspension of a CBF design and the nimble-ness of the Ranger geometry. Some XC bikes (ahem, Cannondale, ahem) still feel like they're stuck in the early days of 29ers where the geo hadn't quite figured out how to accommodate a much bigger hoop -- not enough BB drop and overly steep HTA means you feel like you're sitting perched on top of the bike, falling into corners rather than carving into turns. The Ranger geo does a nice job of getting you "in" the bike with a longer top tube and solidly low BB.

Honestly, I think the Ranger would be completely fine getting towed around by an enthusiastic enduro-bro at the bike park! The layup is hella burly and some Revel employees have raced it at some local Roaring Fork Valley enduro/DH events, with good results. When you watch that Pinkbike Huck to Flat video with the XC bikes, the Ranger seems way less sketchy than some of the lighter frames.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Nimbleness of Ranger Geo put it over the top vs Spur for me, I live in New England. If I rode in Sun Valley/Ketchum all the time maybe I'd choose differently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
I was going back and forth on the pike Ultimate with the 130 51mm offset or 120 44mm offset decided to go with both Revel and owner of the LBS building my Ranger recommendation of sticking with the 120mm 44mm offset Pike Ultimate. Main reason that sold me on the Pike vs the SID was the adjustability and I’m glad I did! The bike was easy to dial in for my riding style and trails. I’ve only owned the bike since Xmas and managed to set new Strava PRs on climbs and DH sections of my usual trails. I’ve riden the same trails in Sb100/SB130LR, Ripley, Evil Following and Intense Spider C. The combined CBF suspension and Pike Ultimate was well worth the weight penalty to having a “burlier Ranger” that’s capable of most of our SoCal trails. As result I’ve cancelled my Spur that I had on order just incase the Ranger didn’t check all my boxes. I loved my SB130 but also liked the lightness of the SB100 and wanted something right in the middle. The Ranger weighed in at a not so light 27.5lbs but felt just as light as the SB100 when riding long distances with more stability on the descends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Grabbed a new mullet Rail and looking forward to shredding with it! I have an X2 shock and a Jade X. Just wanted to see what people thought of air vs. coil for the rail.
Cheers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
Grabbed a new mullet Rail and looking forward to shredding with it! I have an X2 shock and a Jade X. Just wanted to see what people thought of air vs. coil for the rail.
Cheers!
I have a MRP Hazzard on my rail. Love it! They have a special tune just for the rail (CBF) platform. Pedals great and descends night and day vs the air rockshox that it came with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Love my Ranger but pushed it to the limits in Sedona. Now looking into the Rail or a rascal to add to the stable. View attachment 1918499 View attachment 1918500
really?? i didn’t think anything in sedona warranted any more travel to be honest. maybe shuttling dh laps on mingus or if you’re seeking out the gnarliest free ride lines or something but i felt the ranger is an absolutely perfect bike for sedona.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
really?? i didn’t think anything in sedona warranted any more travel to be honest. maybe shuttling dh laps on mingus or if you’re seeking out the gnarliest free ride lines or something but i felt the ranger is an absolutely perfect bike for sedona.
Don’t get me wrong epic for sure on the Ranger. No complaints but I’m just finding a reason to buy another bike. Lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
really?? i didn’t think anything in sedona warranted any more travel to be honest. maybe shuttling dh laps on mingus or if you’re seeking out the gnarliest free ride lines or something but i felt the ranger is an absolutely perfect bike for sedona.
Actually after 4 days in Sedona I agree with you. The Ranger is more then capable of most of the Sedona trails. Especially found it’s home in Aerie upper and lower trail ways
 

Attachments

301 - 315 of 315 Posts
Top