# Opinions wanted on Knolly & Canfield



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

I’m looking to replace my full sus and have narrowed it down to the Canfield Lithium probably short strocked to 151/160 and Knolly Fugitive 138 or Chilcotin 151.

After reading all I could find on mtbr and the net about these bikes I’d like some real world feedback from anybody who’s ridden these bikes, specifically about the differences in suspension feel and performance.

More interested in playful/flickable vs plough/fast and I’d rather have traction on tech (especially going up) rather than less squat/ bob when pedalling.
Cheers!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I ride a doennsttoked Lithium as my primary bike, climbs great, fast and stable on the down, not sure I’d apply the term “flickable” to a long travel 29er, but the Lithium is fairly agile for its size.

I’ve never been a fan of Knolly, so can’t help you there, but I have a lot of saddle time on Guerilla Gravity, and I prefer CBF suspension for tech climbing and overall feel.

I would not say the lithium is bobby, plush, forgiving, active, but it’s not bouncing around when climbing.

I’m 6’, riding a medium, fits perfect, 210mm dropper, seat centered, 2.5” riser bar, 50mm stem.

There’s a Canfield forum with plenty of info …


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Thanks! 
I’ve read pretty much every Lithium/Tilt thread on the Canfield forum and the pertinent threads over on the Knolly forum! Lot’s of content but very little direct comparison info and I can’t demo a Canfield in my area. 

Your impressions kind of sum up what I gathered about the Canfield CBF platform: pedals well, stable, not bobby. I’m just wondering if it’s as active as the Knolly system and how they might feel different.


----------



## ttchad (Jun 28, 2007)

Have a Gen2 delerium so very different from the fugitive. Stack height on most Knolly's are pretty low. Both will have a short chainstay. I'm in the same boat but also considering Banshee which will have a longer chainstay.


----------



## So Cal RX (Oct 1, 2005)

I can give a few thoughts on suspension feel/performance:

I‘m currently building up a Canfield Tilt, so can’t give real world feedback on CBF quite yet, but I also rode a Knolly Endorphin.

The Knolly 4x4 suspension is all about traction. Great climbing tech, great on rough downhills. I wouldn’t call it poppy, and to me, it seemed a bit sluggish on long, non-tech climbs, which I used to do a lot of back in Southern California.

I’ve been riding an Ibis Mojo3 for the past 5 years, and the DW link excels at non-tech climbing, and is good all-around. Likely not as good at tech climbing as the 4x4 or the CBF due to anti-squat.

What I’m hoping, and from what I gather, the CBF may be a good middle ground: maybe not as efficient as DW link overall, but better through tech, and also a bit more efficient overall compared to 4x4.

What bike will this be replacing?


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Yes, the stack height is a concern but nothing I can’t sort out with a bigger rise handlebar!

Thanks for info So Cal! I did ride a bit in California and remember having to slog up some long fire road climbs! We don’t have much of that up here in Quebec

Was your Endorphin running a coil or an air shock? I’d most likely stick a poppy air shock on, like a Rockshox.

This will replace a 130/150 2013 Kona Satori😬 nothing is stock on it except the frame itself.

I’ve had (and rented/demoed) bikes with different suspension designs and each design seems to have it’s own flavor, I kind of feel the linkage driven single pivot works well for me even though it’s not super efficient (which bugs me on longer climbs).

I have several bikes and ride hardtail a good bit, I tend to keep the Satori for steeper chunkier rides or if I want that full squish comfort for longer time in the saddle.


----------



## So Cal RX (Oct 1, 2005)

I rode the Endorphin with air shocks. It came stock with a Fox CTD, which I later changed to a Cane Creek (CC DB air). I remember it was a nice improvement, esp. descending.

I feel like 29er trail bike geo has improved since the Satori’s days, in terms of capability and maintaining maneuverability, so you should end up pretty stoked with either of your choices. Let us know how it goes!


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Interested in hearing your thoughts on the Tilt after you’ve had some rides on it! I hope the CBF meets your expectations. My experience with DW is somewhat like yours I believe: felt efficient, supportive, and pretty good all around but not particularly playful or lively.


----------



## jab253 (May 8, 2017)

Never ridden a Canfield, so I can't compare for you. Fugitive LT and Chilcotin owner. It sounds like you already know the basics of Knolly suspension so I won't bore you with more industry boilerplate descriptors. What I would say since you are reading reviews is take the Beta MTB one for the Chili and toss it out...it doesn't do the bike any justice at all.


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Hey Jab thx! You could help me out with Chili vs Fugi! Is your Chilcotin 151 or 167? Do you ride the Fugitive in hi or lo setting? Do you find the BB too low? I’m looking for a trail bike with once in a while DH capabilities, not a full on bruiser…


----------



## jab253 (May 8, 2017)

Chili is 167...curious to try it at 151, but having the Fugi LT at 135, I will probably never do that. I've ridden the Fugi in both settings quite a bit with a 150 fork...High is slightly snappier handling for sure, slack is more stable. 

I like the low BB a lot for stability and cornering. I've also got a Ripley and have ridden Evils in the past...all low BB bikes...I'm a fan. I don't really care too much about pedal strikes...technical climbing isn't my joint...I just try to time my pedal strokes in those places and live with that compromise. That one is like anything...going to depend on your terrain, suspension setup, riding style.

The Fugitive can handle a TON, and the newer version seems to have some geo mods that people respond well to. The Chili a 167 is a bruiser for sure, but it's all relative...the faster you go, the livelier it becomes. It is a bit sluggish climbing and on flatter terrain, but when things turn downhill it's a beast. Wish I could tell you more about it at 151...I suspect there is quite a bit of overlap between the 160/151 Chili and the 150/138 Fugi.


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

Big Knolly fan here, but if I’ve ever ridden a bike with a rear suspension I liked better than Knolly which has great tech climbing traction and is active while descending even while braking, and in the newer iterations pretty good pedaling on flat or smooth climbs, it was Canfield’s CBF (I’ve ridden the Riot, The One, and Revel Rascal). 

Like someone else said, it seems to be a nice blend of Knolly active/plush and Ibis or Pivot’s DW link supportive/more firm plush. 

If I were considering a Chilcotin 151 (which I kinda am), I’d also have the Lithium on my list as well as the new Rail 29 and La Sal Peak. 

Having said that, depending on your ratio of trail to DH/shuttle riding, the mid travel offerings from these three companies (the Rascal, Fugitive, and Tilt and Evil’s Offering) I think will fit the bill better for what you describe. 

Those big 29ers are a lot of bike for the average up and down trail riding. The Fezzari La Sal Peak might give you the best of both worlds. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Great info biker friends, cheers!
I’m down to Knolly and Canfield because I want an alloy frame and short chainstays (before anyone says anything: I have long and medium chainstay bikes and I just prefer short for the fun factor).

So KRob, you’re considering a Chilcotin 151? What’s going to be the deciding factor?

I did consider the Tilt but after punching in the geo numbers the Lithium at 150/160 just made more sense.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Active? You mean like poppy I suppose, so yeah, I'd say the CBF bikes are pretty active.

Some of this comes down to suspension set up, but I wouldn't call CBF damp.

I prefer a poppy bike, so I ride Canfield and it satisfies me.

Have you ever ridden a bike/owned a bike you didn't like?

I rode a couple Santa Cruz demos about five years ago, VPP, didn't like em at all, a High Tower and a Tallboy, no amount of suspension fiddling made them ride well for me.

I owned a Druid high pivot and I sold it because it was so damp and not playful.

GG bikes are pretty poppy, but the suspension ramps up quick so I found them to ride a bit harsh. CBF doesn't ride harsh.

If you come down to ride in the desert, you can swing a leg over mine 

It's tough buying a bike sight unseen. I was able to parking lot test a Tilt before I bought one, but I got a Lithium without a test ride. I like the Lithium best, but the Tilt was pretty durn good with a 160mm fork. I think the reason I like the Lithium better than the Tilt is fit, though that little extra cushion doesn't hurt; I also like red 

A few years back we were all told that the bikes we were riding were to small, now I think the pendulum is swinging the other way. If you find the seat post tube to be too short, then get a longer dropper post, same with the front end, get some riser bars and never look back. I run really short cranks (155mm), so my post and bars are pretty high, 210mm dropper works fine but I could run a 250mm dropper if I wanted. I run a 2" riser bar, Burgtec.

What color Lithium are you getting?


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

By active I meant that the suspension remains active regardless of other forces (so not too much anti rise or ati squat) I prefer my suspension to work under pedalling and braking forces, but of course there’s a sweet spot cause too much pedal bob sucks!

But yeah, I’m also looking for poppy! And as you say Ben that’s also a function of shock setup, but I believe the basic kinematics play a role as well.

Bikes I didn’t like? I can get used to anything but DW and VPP (although very limited experience) come to mind as not being my first choice.

Agreed, I think bikes may be getting just a tad too long, guess it depends on what kind of feel you want, stability at speed ain’t everything

I’d love to ride in the desert, never have, been planning for a while… you guys have some serious rocky chunk out there and beautiful views!

Ben you went from large Tilt to medium Lithium at 6 feet? 
Any info on how the Lithium pedals vs the Tilt? If the difference in negligeable I’ll take more travel.
I have a raw Lithium in the cart over at Canfield😄


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

lookiel said:


> So KRob, you’re considering a Chilcotin 151? What’s going to be the deciding factor?


Mostly if I decide I need a bike that big. Like I said, the Offering handles 95% of the trails I ride most often beautifully. I'd like to ride a 151 with air suspension and see if it feels nearly as responsive as my Fugitive. I wouldn't mind a little extra travel on my "one" bike if it didn't sacrifice too much on more XC type trails and climbing. I get into a fair amount of gnarly/steep terrain on some rides, especially on bike trips and with two bikes you're forever trying to decide which bike to bring.

If I do decide to go with a two bike stable again I'd sell my Offering (and Fugitive) and build up a light shorter travel bike like the Following, Ripley, Trail Pistol, etc, and have a second bike like the Lithium/Chilcotin/La Sal/Rail for the bigger days. But like I said, seems like I'm forever trying to decide which bike to take on trips when I have two.

A light(ish) 150-165 travel all-around "one" bike makes more sense for me. Not sure if the Chili 151 can be made to feel as light and responsive as some the others with lighter frames (Rail/La Sal). The Chili 167 with coil shock and ZEB fork I rode crushed the downs, but did not feel like a great every day, up and down, all-trail bike.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I have a Lithium at 151, it's a light enough 'all around' bike... the only problem I have with it is the over-all length on many local trails... and since I'm having to give up my hardtail, for those trails I'm going with a Tilt... because I really do like CBF that much (and yea, I've had a DW link bike, and think the comparisons in this thread are accurate). At that point, I may end up removing the spacers in the air shock and go to 160 rear.


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

I hear ya KRob, too much choice can be the enemy of happiness!
And yeah, haven’t ridden the Chilcotin but have a hard time believing a plush 167mm bike can be an all rounder.

Dysfunction, are you saying the Lithium is long for twisty trails? The Tilt is to shorten the wheelbase? I’ve run into that problem before and try to keep the riding wb around 1200mm give or take a few.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I'm riding a large, and I'm noticing the 1250ish wb of the lithium compared to the 1220ish of my paradox. So, basically I want a smaller trail bike for much of the trails here in Tucson.


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Out of curiosity how tall are you? Have you tried/considered a Lithium in medium like Nurse Ben?


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

lookiel said:


> Out of curiosity how tall are you? Have you tried/considered a Lithium in medium like Nurse Ben?


I'd smack my knees. ~187cm.. To be honest, I could easily ride the XL. I'm running a 50mm stem as it is on the L.

Ben's on the long end of a medium, I'm on the short end of an XL.. .

edit: btw replacing a hardtail with a long travel 29er.. is kind of.. weird, I'll likely run the tilt at 125


----------



## lookiel (Nov 13, 2012)

Makes sense, was wondering about sizing cause I’m 6ft and a bit.

Yeah, I understand, a hardtail is a different experience, you should keep the Paradox, I wouldn’t want to be without one

On deciding which bike to bring: I find that minimizing the overlap between bikes in the stable helps, that way you’re not torn, you decide what experience you want and go with the appropriate bike.


----------



## KennyWatson (Sep 4, 2017)

KRob said:


> Big Knolly fan here, but if I’ve ever ridden a bike with a rear suspension I liked better than Knolly which has great tech climbing traction and is active while descending even while braking, and in the newer iterations pretty good pedaling on flat or smooth climbs, it was Canfield’s CBF (I’ve ridden the Riot, The One, and Revel Rascal).
> 
> Like someone else said, it seems to be a nice blend of Knolly active/plush and Ibis or Pivot’s DW link supportive/more firm plush.
> 
> ...


This post nails it IMO. As a current Revel Rascal owner and former Ripmo AF and Raaw Jibb owner, I have to say I love CBF. 

The "big" 29ers are more versatile than ever, but I also agree that it's worth taking a hard look at the 130/140mm versions of these bikes. 

I find my rascal handles pretty burly trails at reasonable speeds quite well, yet it never feels overkill in milder terrain and is super fun and zippy. 

I do have a 160 fork on it. I think offering, rascal, sb130, tilt give up very little to the big bikes unless you're really riding continuously at the extreme end of high speed gnar.


----------



## Cerberus75 (Oct 20, 2015)

If Canfield weren't an option I'd ride a Knolly. The suspension feels very similar to being able to peddle through chunk but the Canfield you use less energy.


----------

