# 28lb DH bike from Vital MTB....



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)




----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

wow, that is lighter than my XC bike... Id ride it though


----------



## metelhead (Jun 1, 2008)

no way...I want to the see the scale reading!


----------



## Deerhill (Dec 21, 2009)

*28lbs= $28,000?*

mutho!


----------



## Lunchbox362 (Jun 27, 2009)

but is it trail worthy?


----------



## chauzie (Mar 8, 2010)

we know the frame is carbon, but everything else is not.
All the other carbon DH bikes are in the 35 lbs range. How can Trek make their 28 lbs? 7 lbs is a lot of weight to lose and still be DH worthy.


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

chauzie said:


> All the other carbon DH bikes are in the 35 lbs range. How can Trek make their 28 lbs? 7 lbs is a lot of weight to lose and still be DH worthy.


theres plenty of V10c's lower then 35lbs without sacrificing real durability. someone got theirs down to 29lbs with "non-dh" parts...singly ply tires, extra light tubes, tune wheelset

that Session 9.9 actually has a lot of weight that can come off of there too...lighter cranks, wheels, tires, brakes, pedals, seat, grips....


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

metelhead said:


> no way...I want to the see the scale reading!


me too and parts list


----------



## invol2ver (Jul 14, 2009)

no way. my mojo hd with carbon wheels and the same shock is 30lbs


----------



## scaryfast (Apr 23, 2004)

are you sure you didn't mean 38? 28 is light, even for an all mountain set up.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

Yeah - it clearly says 28.13lbs BOOM!


----------



## DurtGurl (Dec 10, 2001)

THat picture had to have been taken at Snowy Creek Condos in Whistler... I look forward to sitting on that stoop again next year!


----------



## killjoyken (Jun 12, 2009)

gticlay said:


> Yeah - it clearly says 28.13lbs BOOM!


So where's a link to this magical bike? I can't seem to find it on Vital.


----------



## ak pura vida (Dec 15, 2008)

if that pic was taken in whistler then we may have seen it on the lift. saw three dudes all with those new 9.9's getting on the lit behind me. nice looking bikes for sure. they all looked pretty much brand new so my guess was they worked for or were connected to trek in some way. never did talk to them, wish i would have now. was just too busy have an epic time myself to do more than just gawk a little before hitting dirt merchant and a-ine again... 

as far as actually being 28 lbs i think it might be possible. my canfield diggle is right at 36.1 lbs with a 40 and a steel spring on a dhx 5.0. so changing those it would be close to 34 lbs (not sure how much light the vivid air would be?) plus i could do cranks, seat, bars, seatpost, etc. and that is on a aluminum frame. although 28 lbs seems to be getting a little ridiculous. but hey, if it can be done, it will be done.

pv


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

killjoyken said:


> So where's a link to this magical bike? I can't seem to find it on Vital.


It's on Facebook.


----------



## RBrady (Jan 20, 2009)

Parts list? I'm calling bs. List parts and weights.


----------



## MTB Pilot (Oct 23, 2010)

My Remedy 9.9 weighs 28 lbs 4 oz and it has all top end light components, so I'm not buying that this Session weighs less than 30! :nono: Trek was advertising it as sub 35 lbs. My buddies brand new Session 88 weighs 39 lbs 3 oz. 

I guess if you put a bunch of XC parts not able to last long in the DH arena you might get it under 30.

MTBP


----------



## Got-Bike!! (Nov 9, 2010)

Who would want a DH bike that light anyway? It would never be stable in the chunky stuff! What about high speed stability? I can see mid 30's but sub 30's can't hold up.


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

MTB Pilot said:


> My Remedy 9.9 weighs 28 lbs 4 oz and it has all top end light components, so I'm not buying that this Session weighs less than 30! :nono: Trek was advertising it as sub 35 lbs. My buddies brand new Session 88 weighs 39 lbs 3 oz.


28lbs is pretty heavy for having "top end" components on it.
theres tons of aluminum sessions that weigh well below 36lbs even with a 32mm Boxxer and CCDB on it.
your buddy's Session seems pretty heavy..


----------



## rzalewski6 (Sep 28, 2008)

Leave it up to some Trek dude to claim his dh bike is 28 lbs. You're telling me this bike is 5 lbs lighter than some of those V10 carbons with the Enve AM wheelsets? Where did they lose those 5 lbs?


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

rzalewski6 said:


> Leave it up to some Trek dude to claim his dh bike is 28 lbs. You're telling me this bike is 5 lbs lighter than some of those V10 carbons with the Enve AM wheelsets? Where did they lose those 5 lbs?


its less then a lb lighter then the V10c with the Enve AM rims


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

I think Bontrager has some new carbon stuff coming out. We'll know after this coming week!


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

Weight of the bike has negligible effect on stability. The bike's weight is already a lot lower to the ground than your body which makes it have even less effect. By that logic if I load up at a buffet before a ride I'm going to be one stable dude! Suspension and geometry makes bikes stable.


----------



## lelebebbel (Jan 31, 2005)

Got-Bike!! said:


> Who would want a DH bike that light anyway? It would never be stable in the chunky stuff! What about high speed stability? I can see mid 30's but sub 30's can't hold up.


5 years ago:



> Who would want a DH bike that light anyway? It would never be stable in the chunky stuff! What about high speed stability? I can see 35's but sub 35 can't hold up.


10 years ago:



> Who would want a DH bike that light anyway? It would never be stable in the chunky stuff! What about high speed stability? I can see mid 40's but sub 40's can't hold up.


and so on.



> Weight of the bike has negligible effect on stability. The bike's weight is already a lot lower to the ground than your body which makes it have even less effect. By that logic if I load up at a buffet before a ride I'm going to be one stable dude! Suspension and geometry makes bikes stable.


'xactly. Or have you ever seen anyone at a race strapping dumbbells to their frame because the track is rough?


----------



## MTB Pilot (Oct 23, 2010)

Quarashi said:


> Weight of the bike has negligible effect on stability. The bike's weight is already a lot lower to the ground than your body which makes it have even less effect. By that logic if I load up at a buffet before a ride I'm going to be one stable dude! Suspension and geometry makes bikes stable.


Why are you quoting my post? I never said anything about stability, so please don't try to give me a lesson on something I'm not talking about. :skep:

MTBP


----------



## kubo (Sep 20, 2009)

With tires?


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

MTB Pilot said:


> Why are you quoting my post? I never said anything about stability, so please don't try to give me a lesson on something I'm not talking about. :skep:
> 
> MTBP


My bad, wrong post. Excuse the late night posting!


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

28 lbs = a lotta money.

I would guess that this bike is not for the masses, that its for the team riders, and those who have the coin to look like they are. My guess is that after one or two rides, the team is just going to junk the bike; I could be wrong though. To be fair, I'm not a fan of carbon on a DH bike, so I might be biased.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

CombatMutt said:


> 28 lbs = a lotta money.
> 
> I would guess that this bike is not for the masses, that its for the team riders, and those who have the coin to look like they are. My guess is that after one or two rides, the team is just going to junk the bike; I could be wrong though. To be fair, I'm not a fan of carbon on a DH bike, so I might be biased.


You must not have broken enough aluminum bars and frames then. Get back to us when you have. I will never, ever run al bars again...


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

gticlay said:


> You must not have broken enough aluminum bars and frames then. Get back to us when you have. I will never, ever run al bars again...


I'm not doing anything "Red Bull Rampage" style, but I ride pretty hard at Winter Park. The thing about carbon is that there is no warning when it snaps. Well, you might hear a loud crack, and then you're eating carbon bits in your hands and crotch. Doesn't sound like a lot of fun. Aluminum bends and its only when you keep riding on it that you get a brake lever through the hand.

I just don't trust carbon; clearly you don't trust aluminum. I don't think we'll be able to change each others' minds. If I start eating my stem, then I may reconsider.


----------



## lelebebbel (Jan 31, 2005)

CombatMutt said:


> The thing about carbon is that there is no warning when it snaps. Well, you might hear a loud crack, and then you're eating carbon bits in your hands and crotch.


Not true, all depends on fiber type and layup. Enve DH bars, as an extreme example have a built in kevlar matrix. That's the opposite of brittle.



> Aluminum bends and its only when you keep riding on it that you get a brake lever through the hand.


Most definitely not true. The alloys that some of the newest lightweight DH bars are made of are some of the most brittle ***** you can imagine. Failure mode like a porcelain plate.

I ride alloy bars, the CF stuff is too expensive for me to make it worthwhile. But I am under no illusion that they will somehow warn me before they snap. They might, or they might not.


----------



## CombatMutt (Jan 3, 2011)

I understand that CF is strong, what I'm trying to say is that I don't think its up to the repeated abuse heaped upon it by downhill riding.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

CombatMutt said:


> I understand that CF is strong, what I'm trying to say is that I don't think its up to the repeated abuse heaped upon it by downhill riding.


Maybe al alloys have revolutionized. (I doubt it) but I've snapped enough not to trust it. On the flipside, carbon has never failed me. I always use the DH "version "...


----------



## Quarashi (Aug 23, 2006)

CombatMutt said:


> I understand that CF is strong, what I'm trying to say is that I don't think its up to the repeated abuse heaped upon it by downhill riding.


Also a misconception. Metal, specifically alu does have a life span, especially the harder more brittle alu in today's bikes. Carbon fiber is less prone to long term stress and vibration but probably more prone to environmental factors (heat, humidity, exposure to direct sunlight). But I'm no carbon-fiber-ologist.

I've been told this and have been convinced with my own eyes. A friend of mine has been riding a 1998 GT (something) carbon fiber "freeride" (5.5"in of travel) bike for the better part of 12 years and right now the aluminum is falling apart. Almost every piece of aluminum, linkage, frame bits has been cracked and "repaired" yet the carbon fiber parts are still all pretty good. If this thing was made from 1998 carbon tech, I have faith in newer carbon bikes.


----------



## hopsalot (Apr 12, 2008)

I keep thowing wieght at my bike in an effort to keep it in one piece. 28 pounds seems counterproductive unless the rider is a 90 teenager dropping off sidewalk curbs.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Al bars do most definitely go el-SNAPPO if you ride into a big enough bump/hole with a rider's weight on them. When the first weight-weenie craze went through mountain bikers in the early 90s, you'd see DH racers using all sorts of bikes and equipment meant at best for XC racing at places like the Mammoth Kamikaze course where speeds were then pushing high 60mph territory on the long gravel/sand fireroad descents. When your wheels hit a pothole left by a 4x4 truck that's five inches deep, on an XC type bike with 3-4" of travel, at SIXTY miles per hour... its quite a peak load to subject your equipment to. Jimi Killen suffered a spectacular crash (ON CAMERA, there was a helicopter tv crew right above him filming him) in the Reebok Eliminator in 1994 when he hit such a pothole and his aluminium bar SNAPPED near the brake lever clamp and he cartwheeled down the road for fifty feet or so. The helicopter camera captured the bar failure on video and if you frame-by-frame the video you can watch the end of his bar bouncing down the road behind him as his bike and body came undone essentially.


----------



## rzalewski6 (Sep 28, 2008)

deadatbirth said:


> its less then a lb lighter then the V10c with the Enve AM rims


Guess I have not seen a 29 lb V10 Carbon yet...


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

CombatMutt said:


> 28 lbs = a lotta money.
> 
> I would guess that this bike is not for the masses, that its for the team riders


it would be a lot of coin to get it that light.

TWR rides on Fox suspension and their bikes are sub-35lbs w/ the hybrid-40 and RC4 w/ Ti sprin


----------



## Morpheous (Mar 28, 2006)

lelebebbel said:


> 5 years ago:
> 
> 10 years ago:
> 
> ...


Word. :thumbsup:


----------



## OneEyedHito (Jun 20, 2009)

28lbs. is the new 36lbs.......Count on it, and looks to me like the Pro's are FLOATING OVER the ROCK GARDENS on 35lb rigs, so at 30lbs., based on the Newtons 9th law they will be able to fly over the rock gardens now instead of float...........

Morpheous had it right with his 'Word'!


----------



## siyross (May 19, 2009)

Everything on it is carbon. Frame, wheels, cranks, stem, bars, seatpost, seat rails, brakes. It has tubeless tyres. It has air forks and rear shock. 
I can see how it gets down to 28lbs


----------



## downhillbiker23 (Sep 17, 2010)

so awesome


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

siyross said:


> Everything on it is carbon. Frame, wheels, cranks, stem, bars, seatpost, seat rails, brakes. It has tubeless tyres. It has air forks and rear shock.
> I can see how it gets down to 28lbs


actually, either you're looking at a different bike I am, or you're mistaken. The wheels are not carbon in any way, and its got 3c (dual ply, full on DH tires. WC riders go to tire of choice). Also, there is no info telling whether or not its tubeless, but the main place you save weight in tubeless setups is by going to UST tires, which weigh a lot less then real 3c DH tires. As those are full DH tires, not little girl tires, they're probably not saving much weight even if they ARE running tubeless. And generally, a super light build with air fork and shock hits 34-35lbs. Not 28 (actually, I think this is basically 29, since its 28 and 14 ounces).


----------



## killjoyken (Jun 12, 2009)

Wait a minute. I didn't even notice that it's got real DH tires on it. Now it just doesn't add up. There's no way that thing is as light as my Mojo HD. 

Yeah, subtract 1 pound for no dropper, 1.5-2 for extra gears and shifter, but add 2 pounds for tires, 1 pound for wheels, 1 pound for the fork, plus the extra weight of the Vivid Air over the Monarch Plus, and the larger rotors. I'm thinking it's more like 30-31 lbs, which is still we-todd-did-ly light for a DH bike, just not what they're claiming.

I could easily post a pic of my HD on a scale reading 20 lbs, or 10 lbs or even 0 with no photoshop. It's not hard, it's just pointless.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

If it's real, I want it for my AM machine. I'd also probably make it to Whistler a lil more next year


----------



## siyross (May 19, 2009)

This is the bike that Aron Gwin rode yes?


----------



## lelebebbel (Jan 31, 2005)

killjoyken said:


> Wait a minute. I didn't even notice that it's got real DH tires on it. Now it just doesn't add up. There's no way that thing is as light as my Mojo HD.


No it doesn't. They are single ply "EXO"s, which are about 900g-950g each. Wouldn't want to DH on them, unless the track is smooth as silk.

Here's the link with a (rough) parts list:
Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB

Other than the tires, I can't see any real "cheater" parts. I don't think the rims would last very long, but I wouldn't have any concerns that the thing would collapse under me. 
Stick a set of real Dual Ply tires on, throw in another 300g for some stronger rims, and you have a 31 pound DH bike that could be raced competitively, anywhere. That is pretty good.


----------



## siyross (May 19, 2009)

lelebebbel said:


> No it doesn't. They are single ply "EXO"s, which are about 900g-950g each. Wouldn't want to DH on them, unless the track is smooth as silk.
> 
> Here's the link with a (rough) parts list:
> Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB
> ...


They are Minion Dh tyres. why wouldn't you use them for DH?

If Trek says it is that light then maybe just maybe trek have made it that light.


----------



## William42 (Oct 29, 2006)

lelebebbel said:


> No it doesn't. They are single ply "EXO"s, which are about 900g-950g each. Wouldn't want to DH on them, unless the track is smooth as silk.
> 
> Here's the link with a (rough) parts list:
> Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Project Flyweight: The 29lb Trek Session 9.9 DH Bike - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB
> ...


the vital bike is different from the bike posted. Not the same bike/part spec, although similar. And also, there are various confirmed scale shots floating around from different sources. The initial bike pictured really is 29lbs (or 28lbs 14 ounces).


----------



## ianjenn (Aug 1, 2004)

gticlay said:


> If it's real, I want it for my AM machine. I'd also probably make it to Whistler a lil more next year


Well it would cost you like $10K so wouldn't you make it to Whistler a little less. And BTW 500GM rims are not DH worthy I am pretty sure those are the super light Bontragers and also didn't they weigh it with Maxxis EVO XC tires??


----------



## lelebebbel (Jan 31, 2005)

siyross said:


> They are Minion Dh tyres. why wouldn't you use them for DH?


Because they are EXO single plys, and you'll pinch flat them, or smash up your rims before the first turn if you are going hard. I've tried it. On smooth courses lighter riders might get away with a single ply front tire, but even then you have to run at least 30-32psi, and you'll still be worried about it the whole way down which will not help your time....

Again, other then the rims and tires I think the bike is downhill worthy.


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

siyross said:


> This is the bike that Aron Gwin rode yes?


no. TWR is sponsored by Fox, so they run the 40 and RC4 as well as Shimano products. Monk said his bike was around 35lbs iirc which is obviously more then light enough


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

ianjenn said:


> Well it would cost you like $10K so wouldn't you make it to Whistler a little less. And BTW 500GM rims are not DH worthy I am pretty sure those are the super light Bontragers and also didn't they weigh it with Maxxis EVO XC tires??


I don't know man, I think I'd feel compelled to go more. It's only a two hour drive away for me. I can't believe everybody is fixating on the wheels. So what if they aren't "all season DH worthy"? They are on there because Trek makes them. Just put wheels you do trust on. King hubs and flow rims would probably work well. So would Enve wheels. Or Mavic Dee's.


----------



## rep_1969 (Mar 25, 2004)

The frame, rear triangle, wheels and fork are filled with Hydrogen!! Come on guys, you should all know this by now.


----------



## deadatbirth (Jul 23, 2007)

rep_1969 said:


> The frame, rear triangle, wheels and fork are filled with Hydrogen!! Come on guys, you should all know this by now.


----------

