Levy missed what this bike was designed for, long distance, multistage, multi-day races. Those races throw throw everything (climbing, endless climbing, tech descents, high speed descents, rock gardens, etc) at you , and the bike has to be burly enough to hold together for 6 days (Breck) of hard core hammering. I suspect that Geoff Kabush had a hand in this bike, he has been crushing the field on the SB100 and probably had one built up with a little more suspension and it caught on. Seeing as how this is the SB100 frame with a different linkage, shock and switch infinity mounting, it basically cost nothing for Yeti to put it on the market. I have been riding the SB100 with a longer travel fork up front for a while, the bike is long distance trail destroyer. I can't wait for a conversion kit and get a little more rear travel.
“Way back in 2018” get real guys, the bike is still relatively new and modern. Sick of all this “it’s one year old so it’s outdated” attitude! That attitude is everything wrong with modern day cycling and consumerism.
@@blazerman61 your right, it’s consumerism, and in my view is wrong.. car reviewers are the worst for it, cycling comes a close second.. but I guess fashion does top it off.
I think we're seeing bikes diverge into "East Coast" and "West Coast" bikes. Truth be told, the geometry of the SB115 is perfect for tight, twisty, East Coast trails.
Interesting point. After so many reviews watched, I’m starting to think there’s enough breadth and difference to categorize bikes by geographic location
@@julianrime8544 yes bike parks exist. And this is a trail bike that seems to suit the characteristics of most east coast trails (tight, rocky, technical). Hope that clears your confusion.
I agree. Just took my Vitus Sentier out to my local hand-cut trail in Georgia and it’s miserable in slow, tight, techy trails with the wide bars and 66 degree HT angle. I take my Rockhopper out there or my old 2011 Epic with a dropper and they feel great. It seems alot of these modern bikes are made for manicured bike parks or speedy west-coast trails.
I think LR indicates a lot more than 15mm difference between front and rear travel. The one that I demo"d was 127/160. The Pivot Mach 429 Trail from a few years ago, (not to be confused with the newer Trail 429,) was 115 rear and designed for a 120 or 130 fork. That wasn't considered wild or overforked back then.
I’ve ridden the Ripley, 115, and spur; the slight geo differences were hardly noticeable. I had to go to the sb130 or Ripmo to notice a significant advantage / disadvantage in geometry. Suspension platform was primarily the most differential factor between brands. That being said, I do not understand why we’re bringing back single pivot flex stay suspensions to trail bikes.
totally, it seems like the shock bottoms out before the gold linear rails break static friction and start moving. look at how much bounce that rear wheel has in the middle of the clip at 2:15! it's almost off the ground again, and definitely has less force on the contact patch at that moment than the rider's static weight would deliver.
Why compare a 130mm trail bike against a bunch of 120mm XC bikes and complain it's heavier? Obviously the Fox 34 130mm it going to add a ton of weight compared to a noodly Rock Shox Sid
heh, 34 step cast is damn light, but what's even lighter is the new sid... which has larger stanchions and isn't exactely what I'd call noodly. In fact, it is the all round better option for downcountry.
Anyone who is confused between 100 or 115.. SB100 Downcountryman's XC bike.. SB115 Upcountryman's Trail Bike! Or be like me.. Just split the difference by throwing the 130 Fox34 Grip2 on the SB100 ~I am the #UpDownCountryMan 👨🏻🚀🚲🍇
Running a 2.5 in the front and a 2.3 in the back creating an almost in-between mullet situation that is awesome. I was surprised how much adding 0.2" to width changed the diameter of the entire wheel as well, making a noticeable difference in the geo. I'm doing the same on my trail bike right now
So I bought one of these for some marathon races. Trail riding is where this thing shines. I think mike explains how it rides really well and I was a little reserved given the comments on size and geo. Probably overstated here. I also have several other bikes and a banshee in the same class (typically pretty long bikes) sure there’s a little difference but felt the sizing is about the same as others once you’re riding - seat angle probably comes in to play there. Great bike. But shoots way over its 115 and can get well out of shape when you pass its limits - nowhere near as forgiving as the banshee phantom that way.
Its kind of funny seeing so many comments complaining that the SB115 is worse than the SB100, that its softer and longer, when so many people were also complaining the SB100 was too short and stiff compared to the SB4.5 (114mm travel) it replaced. You'd be better served considering this the new SB4.5 (that many people missed) instead of the new SB100. That said, definitely agree the geo let's it down. The reach on the size XL is smaller than their other size L models (even their HT has a noticeably longer reach).
Reminds me of a joke... “it’s still too heavy”, LOL! My enduro Scott is about the same weight as this thing and has 160/160 travel. It’s in the middle of what exactly??? That’s my point. To push a product into the queue for Yeti lovers is about the reality of this bike. If you want a capable bike that does it all, look to a Scott Genius or a Trek EX9 for the better overall adjustment with minimal to no weight impacts. This bike is for a single option, Yeti fans... BTW, who else ya got PinkBike?
Too heavy for the $ compared to other options. Yes YETI is a great brand and eye candy but 5 pounds is a lot against competition (going by weight chart).
Wait?! Slacker and longer doesn't mean better? Isn't this exactly the narrative that's been forced down our throats for the past couple of years? Good review as always though!
People buy right into the marketing too don't they? I think the folks like myself who ride XC largely agree that the Yeti SB100 and 115 are right in a sweet spot in regards to head tube, reach and seat tube angle. Any more and an XC bike simply becomes an undersquished and undertired trail bike.
Because the screwed up by dumping the 4.5 and everyone bitched about it ...so instead of bringing it back and owning up yhey put this out to save face!
The bike is solid and my Ebike conversion went great. ru-vid.comUgkxHL1v1R3NE5x4KiYfyt8dnQmyNYz7qi5L Very smooth ride at 30mph with no problems (135 miles ridden so far). The picture is a bit deceiving - there is WAY less space in the center of the frame than it shows. The suspension connection takes up the entire thing. So I needed to attach my battery on the bottom of the frame and my controller on the top. Instructions for assembly were lacking but honestly it wasn't too hard to figure out even though I have very little bike knowledge. Watched some youtube videos on adjusting the disk brakes but that was it. Still, I am loving it and very happy with the purchase.
The video was great team really made me think 🤔 The sb100 is awesome but the sb115 not so much, which leeds me to consider all these bike comparisons are flawed! Are these bikes just the sum of there parts? Not engineered by the frame manufactures though carefully chosen to fit a price point. Now we’re using control tyres, should we start using control everything other than the Bike Frame and shock? This way we can determine what is the best frame. Rather than a bike that the sum of all its parts. The consumer could then determine which linkage designs and geometries are superior for them. I’m sick of reading that a bikes great but let down by the $300 brakes or the low engagement hub that the brand has fitted to keep it to a price point. Does anybody else agree?
Wouldn't a better comparison for this category be the SB100? The SB115 has similar Geo and travel to something like the Hightower, so in essence this is more of a short travel trail bike rather than 'downcountry.' Thoughts?
This has practically the same angles, travel, and tyres as my (mildly customised) Kona Process 111! Although mine is probably a kilo heavier... This Yeti sounds fun, too bad I'll never afford a Yeti!
I know it's difficult obtaining test bikes during these times, but it would be nice to see all the bikes at about the same price point. Does it make sense to compare the Transition Spur SE at $6000 to the Epic Evo at $11,500? No.
For a 100/120mm bike the SB100 has dialled geo, for a 115/130mm the SB115 numbers are a little conservative. The rotated switch infinity link is genuinely flawed in its design, and as an SB100 owner I'm actually quite disappointed in how Yeti has approached the issue. Still love my bike though, albeit a bitter sweet relationship at times purely because of the SI link.
comparing to my Cube Stereo 120 HPC TM, I think this bike plays somewhat in the same league as the SB115. yeticycles.com/bikes/sb115 www.cube.eu/2021/bikes/mountainbike/fullsuspension/stereo-120/cube-stereo-120-hpc-tm-29-flashgreynorange/ Would like to hear your opinion from you guys what the differences are and which would be more conservative in terms of geo. I'm still a bit blindfolded when it comes to identifying rad vs. cons. geometry. :) All I know is, the cube has a slacker HTA, a tad more reach and wheelbase. Happy to hear your opinion on both bikes. :)
@@beardsleymcbearderton6492 do you know in what way? the original hardware was beefy but squeaky. V2 & 3 were never stiff enough. I could see maybe threading the stantion holes so you could use a lock nut rather than leaving the hole free to rotate. (I would say I really miss the way my SB100 rode when new if you ignore the squeaks...)
I think they answered this on one of the other videos... they just picked a bunch of newish bikes and drew the line at 120mm rear travel. Izzo has 130mm so is more trail than DC. They would've had to then include bikes like Trek Fuel EX (130mm rear travel) which are definitely not "DC".
