Bike Review: SC Blur

[Anthony Sloan]

OK, initial review. Keep in mind that I have done all of 2 rides on this bike, so what I say is by
no means a refined opinion.

I need to quit comparing this frame to my old one, which is a 2002 Giant NRS Air. If we picture a
scale that runs from hardtail to full on downhill rig, the NRS would be just over the line from
hardtail. Small bump compliance, and initial travel feel quite harsh on the NRS.

(In reality, it seems that riding the Blur has made me more able to objectively review the
NRS..ah well)

So. Enough about the NRS, that is so 2002.

The Blur rides *quite* nicely. There is just a much more plush feel to the bike. The Blur is not as
efficient as the NRS, but there are two points I would like to make about that.

1) The NRS is about as efficient as it gets.

2) The NRS is pretty much an XC race orineted bike, while the Blur is geared to being a
"Trail Bike".

All of the hype on this bike seems to agree on the fact that the 4.5 inches of rear wheel travel
feel more like 6, and after the riding I have done I would have to agree. It really soaks up the
rough stuff quite well.

Currently I am running an 80mm travel fork, which works suprisingly well, I cannot wait for the
100mm fork to show up. (perhaps today!) I was a bit leery of dropping the front end off of ledges
that were over a foot and a half.

The bike feels quite solid. The rear end doesn't seem to wag at all. and it generally seems to enjoy
being plonked off of about anything.

I really don't have a good feel for climbing yet. I gotta get the NRS out of my head. It doesn't
seem inefficient, or bobby (or cindy, or greg, or marsha) but the increased plushness will take
getting used to.

Overall, I am quite happy with the bike, but look for a more informed review soon.

A

pic o' the day to ye: http://www.anthonysloan.com/monumentsnow2.jpg

 

[Jonathan Bond]

Anthony Sloan wrote:
> OK, initial review. Keep in mind that I have done all of 2 rides on this bike, so what I say is
> by no means a refined opinion.
>
> I need to quit comparing this frame to my old one, which is a 2002 Giant NRS Air. If we picture a
> scale that runs from hardtail to full on downhill rig, the NRS would be just over the line from
> hardtail. Small bump compliance, and initial travel feel quite harsh on the NRS.
>
> (In reality, it seems that riding the Blur has made me more able to objectively review the
> NRS..ah well)
>
> So. Enough about the NRS, that is so 2002.
>
> The Blur rides *quite* nicely. There is just a much more plush feel to the bike. The Blur is not
> as efficient as the NRS, but there are two points I would like to make about that.
>
> 1) The NRS is about as efficient as it gets.
>
> 2) The NRS is pretty much an XC race orineted bike, while the Blur is geared to being a "Trail
> Bike".
>
> All of the hype on this bike seems to agree on the fact that the 4.5 inches of rear wheel travel
> feel more like 6, and after the riding I have done I would have to agree. It really soaks up the
> rough stuff quite well.
>
> Currently I am running an 80mm travel fork, which works suprisingly well, I cannot wait for the
> 100mm fork to show up. (perhaps today!) I was a bit leery of dropping the front end off of ledges
> that were over a foot and a half.
>
> The bike feels quite solid. The rear end doesn't seem to wag at all. and it generally seems to
> enjoy being plonked off of about anything.
>
> I really don't have a good feel for climbing yet. I gotta get the NRS out of my head. It doesn't
> seem inefficient, or bobby (or cindy, or greg, or marsha) but the increased plushness will take
> getting used to.
>
> Overall, I am quite happy with the bike, but look for a more informed review soon.
>
> A
>
> pic o' the day to ye: http://www.anthonysloan.com/monumentsnow2.jpg
>

Good stuff, sounds like you're a happy customer. Just curious about a couple things:

you think you're going to try and put a 5th element air shock on there when they come out?
(Progressive is saying they're coming out sometime in march!)

Do you think that it's a raceable bike, given the fact that racing is secondary to just riding? I
don't need hardtail efficiency, although the closer it gets to it, the better, but overall (on a
rough course), do you think it will make you faster or slower, or not have much effect?

Thanks, nice pic by the way.

Jon Bond

 

[Michael Dart]

"Anthony Sloan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> OK, initial review. Keep in mind that I have done all of 2 rides on this bike, so what I say is
> by no means a refined opinion.
<snip some>
>
> All of the hype on this bike seems to agree on the fact that the 4.5 inches of rear wheel travel
> feel more like 6, and after the riding I have done I would have to agree. It really soaks up the
> rough stuff quite well.
>
> The bike feels quite solid. The rear end doesn't seem to wag at all. and it generally seems to
> enjoy being plonked off of about anything.
>
> I really don't have a good feel for climbing yet. I gotta get the NRS out of my head. It doesn't
> seem inefficient, or bobby (or cindy, or greg, or marsha) but the increased plushness will take
> getting used to.
>
> Overall, I am quite happy with the bike, but look for a more informed review soon.
>

Sounds good but maybe not a major improvement over the FSR type suspension like the Tracer.

Mike

 

[Jonathan Bond]

Michael Dart wrote:
> "Anthony Sloan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>> OK, initial review. Keep in mind that I have done all of 2 rides on this bike, so what I say is
>> by no means a refined opinion.
>
> <snip some>
>
>>All of the hype on this bike seems to agree on the fact that the 4.5 inches of rear wheel travel
>>feel more like 6, and after the riding I have done I would have to agree. It really soaks up the
>>rough stuff quite well.
>>
>>The bike feels quite solid. The rear end doesn't seem to wag at all. and it generally seems to
>>enjoy being plonked off of about anything.
>>
>>I really don't have a good feel for climbing yet. I gotta get the NRS out of my head. It doesn't
>>seem inefficient, or bobby (or cindy, or greg, or marsha) but the increased plushness will take
>>getting used to.
>>
>>Overall, I am quite happy with the bike, but look for a more informed review soon.
>>
>
>
> Sounds good but maybe not a major improvement over the FSR type suspension like the Tracer.
>
> Mike

I'd be really interested in a side-by-side comparison. Hopefully I'll get to do one sometime!

My friend who rides DH and freeride for the most part (but started in
XC) got a chance to ride one at his LBS. He only took it around the parking lot and a bit of grass
and dirt, but he said it felt different than all the FSR type suspension bikes he tried. He
said it felt like it had more travel when he hit something or bonced up and down, but the same
or even less bob while pedalling. By the way, he knows his stuff, and is a damn good rider. He
and his friends have a segment in Chain Reaction 4, including him sticking a 20 foot+ drop...
he's sick.

Jon Bond

 

[Jd]

Anthony Sloan <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> OK, initial review. Keep in mind that I have done all of 2 rides on this bike, so what I say is by
> no means a refined opinion.
>
> I need to quit comparing this frame to my old one, which is a 2002 Giant NRS Air. If we picture a
> scale that runs from hardtail to full on downhill rig, the NRS would be just over the line from
> hardtail. Small bump compliance, and initial travel feel quite harsh on the NRS.
>
> (In reality, it seems that riding the Blur has made me more able to objectively review the
> NRS..ah well)
>
> So. Enough about the NRS, that is so 2002.
>
> The Blur rides *quite* nicely. There is just a much more plush feel to the bike. The Blur is not
> as efficient as the NRS, but there are two points I would like to make about that.
>
> 1) The NRS is about as efficient as it gets.
>
> 2) The NRS is pretty much an XC race orineted bike, while the Blur is geared to being a "Trail
> Bike".
>
> All of the hype on this bike seems to agree on the fact that the 4.5 inches of rear wheel travel
> feel more like 6, and after the riding I have done I would have to agree. It really soaks up the
> rough stuff quite well.
>
> Currently I am running an 80mm travel fork, which works suprisingly well, I cannot wait for the
> 100mm fork to show up. (perhaps today!) I was a bit leery of dropping the front end off of ledges
> that were over a foot and a half.
>
> The bike feels quite solid. The rear end doesn't seem to wag at all. and it generally seems to
> enjoy being plonked off of about anything.
>
> I really don't have a good feel for climbing yet. I gotta get the NRS out of my head. It doesn't
> seem inefficient, or bobby (or cindy, or greg, or marsha) but the increased plushness will take
> getting used to.
>
> Overall, I am quite happy with the bike, but look for a more informed review soon.

Well done Anthony.

JD

 

[Anthony Sloan]

Michael Dart wrote:

>
>
> Sounds good but maybe not a major improvement over the FSR type suspension like the Tracer.
>
> Mike
>
>

I duuno. A friend has a Tracer, so I rode his before deciding on the Blur. The Blur has a plusher
feel, and at the same time, better climbing manners. It is sort of hard to describe. The VPP thing
seems to work.

A

--
My hands are full of thorns but I can't quit groping for the rose.

 

[Anthony Sloan]

Jonathan Bond wrote:
>

> Good stuff, sounds like you're a happy customer. Just curious about a couple things:
>
> you think you're going to try and put a 5th element air shock on there when they come out?
> (Progressive is saying they're coming out sometime in march!)

Any suspension money that I come across will go towards a Fox 100 RLC. Plus I got a call from Surly
today. Karate Monkeys are Stateside!

> Do you think that it's a raceable bike, given the fact that racing is secondary to just riding? I
> don't need hardtail efficiency, although the closer it gets to it, the better, but overall (on a
> rough course), do you think it will make you faster or slower, or not have much effect?

It is raceable, but not as much as my NRS was/is. I think I am going to keep the NRS and
slowly build it back up. For anyone interested in racing AND riding, the NRS is tough to beat
on all counts.

>
> Thanks, nice pic by the way.

Here's another. Heading here this week:

http://www.anthonysloan.com/icicles.jpg

A

--
My hands are full of thorns but I can't quit groping for the rose.

 

[Jimbo]

Anthony Sloan wrote:

> Jonathan Bond wrote:
> >
>
> > Good stuff, sounds like you're a happy customer. Just curious about a couple things:
> >
> > you think you're going to try and put a 5th element air shock on there when they come out?
> > (Progressive is saying they're coming out sometime in march!)
>
> Any suspension money that I come across will go towards a Fox 100 RLC. Plus I got a call from
> Surly today. Karate Monkeys are Stateside!
>
> > Do you think that it's a raceable bike, given the fact that racing is secondary to just riding?
> > I don't need hardtail efficiency, although the closer it gets to it, the better, but overall (on
> > a rough course), do you think it will make you faster or slower, or not have much effect?
>
> It is raceable, but not as much as my NRS was/is. I think I am going to keep the NRS and
> slowly build it back up. For anyone interested in racing AND riding, the NRS is tough to beat
> on all counts.
>
> >
> > Thanks, nice pic by the way.
>
> Here's another. Heading here this week:
>
> http://www.anthonysloan.com/icicles.jpg
>
> A
>
> --
> My hands are full of thorns but I can't quit groping for the rose.

Nice Pic

Jimbo(san)