# Ripley AF vs Revel Ranger



## Blown Jammer (3 mo ago)

Looking at these two bikes, as a secondary, light trail/down country thing. Live in Colorado so mainly winch and plummet rides with steep technical climbs and rough rocky downhills. Not much flat terrain here at all.

I'll use this bike for less rough trails, Backcountry epics etc. Think Mt Falcon, Colorado Trail, etc. My main bike is an Enduro bike so looking for something pretty different/complimentary to that.

Seems like the ranger probably has the better suspension design for rough trails and tech climbing, but the Ripley AF has the more progressive geometry that seems more fun. Probably only 2lbs difference between the two with similar builds so not too concerned with weights. The Ripley is about $1000 cheaper, so that's not a deciding factor, but it is a factor!

Anyone rode both that can compare? My gut is saying a ranger with a 130mm fork and -1deg angleset might be the silver bullet.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.


----------



## Blown Jammer (3 mo ago)

I think somewhat different feeling is what I'm looking for but I agree the ranger seems outdated now. Spur was on my list but seems like it's not as snappy pedaling as the others?

Why do you say the Ripley AF isn't what I'm looking for though?



Streetdoctor said:


> Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.


----------



## flgfish (11 mo ago)

I think buying an expensive bike with the intent of putting an angleset in it is a bad plan to start with. Find something that meets your desires at the outset.

The Ripley AF is a good option. I have the carbon v4 and it’s the bike I would choose if I could only own one. With the Porkchop bag, you can keep all your bike tool stuff off your body as well, which is really nice. Downside is that the water bottle mount area is cramped and limiting, but once you find something that works, you forget about it.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

I think that Ranger has an IS headset so maybe angleset not so straight forward? NSMB.com - 9point8 SLACK-R IS-Standard Angleset

I love CBF btw.

I had an AF and thought it was a solid performer, good pedaler for a front ranger. Spur is great, if you can get one.


----------



## bfdnelson (4 mo ago)

Blown Jammer said:


> Looking at these two bikes, as a secondary, light trail/down country thing. Live in Colorado so mainly winch and plummet rides with steep technical climbs and rough rocky downhills. Not much flat terrain here at all.
> 
> I'll use this bike for less rough trails, Backcountry epics etc. Think Mt Falcon, Colorado Trail, etc. My main bike is an Enduro bike so looking for something pretty different/complimentary to that.


Also in CO and I know those exact trails very well. I would suggest looking at some XC/trail bikes. My 2021 Scott Spark has been great on both trails you mentioned. The Spark gives most of the XC qualities you want for climbing while retaining the trail qualities for descending. Plus, the Scott Twinloc is clutch for dual suspension control on the fly during those sudden terrain/gradient changes we have in the rockies. 

North Table, Green Mt., CT (out & back Denver thru Leadville), White Ranch, Apex, Buff Creek, Hall & Hale, Magnolia, Winter Park, Breck... The Spark has rocked'em all. The only limitation I've found to that bike is me...


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

Streetdoctor said:


> Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.


my ranger feels far more capable than an epic evo. it’s got a more upright HTA but the BB is sufficiently low and the reach is long. the front turns easier but it is nowhere near as twitchy as early 2000s 29ers. epic evo was much racier and shorter feeling.


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

I have the V4 Ripley and demo'd the Revel (Rascal) which had the best rear suspension design I've ever ridden. I was faster on that than I was on an SB130 or V1 Ripmo. The Ripley, at least my V4 carbon was much faster on the climbs though.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Also in CO and had a Ripley V4 for about a year. It was a great pedaler on smoother trails, but I found it a bit harsh on rocky terrain and would tend to get hung up on square edges during climbs. If I was looking at short travel bike I would probably look at the Ranger. CBF looks interesting to me and as far as geo goes, I think too much is made into "old" vs "new". Too steep of a SA and your sitting on top of the bike.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Have a Ripley AF and Canfield Lithium. CBF is awesome but a bit more active while pedaling than DW Link. Good for sit and spin tech climbing. Out of the seat I feel like the Ripley is a little better.

The Ripley is impressive on the downs. You feel the lesser suspension but the geo is dialed. I feel confident taking it down almost anything short of trails that require 3-4 ft drops.

Unfortunately I have no experience on the ranger. I bet its probably better on the downs than the geo would suggest. The Lithium isn't the longest or slackest enduro bike but it rips better than anything else I've tried.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

coachxtaylor said:


> my ranger feels far more capable than an epic evo. it’s got a more upright HTA but the BB is sufficiently low and the reach is long. the front turns easier but it is nowhere near as twitchy as early 2000s 29ers. epic evo was much racier and shorter feeling.


That's what's great about the internet coach- We can disagree. My guess is you're mid 40's and don't ride far enough forward for modern geometry. You also don't ride an enduro bike or are slow on the downhills. The HTA is straight out of 2005 which is a deal breaker if the OP thinks his trails are straight up and then straight down. The STA is also very slack by modern standard. Especially with a 130mm fork.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

Blown Jammer said:


> I think somewhat different feeling is what I'm looking for but I agree the ranger seems outdated now. Spur was on my list but seems like it's not as snappy pedaling as the others?
> 
> Why do you say the Ripley AF isn't what I'm looking for though?


Disregard. I was thinking Ripmo AF. If you're looking at the Ripley AF you have to add the GG Trail Pistol to that list. Their nerdy marketing aside it's an awesome bike. I swap between the Gnarvana and Trail Pistola (130/150). No desire for any other bike. I'm an Enduro guy as well that puts in big days. I live 5 minutes from Mt Falcon.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

Streetdoctor said:


> That's what's great about the internet coach- We can disagree. My guess is you're mid 40's and don't ride far enough forward for modern geometry. You also don't ride an enduro bike or are slow on the downhills. The HTA is straight out of 2005 which is a deal breaker if the OP thinks his trails are straight up and then straight down. The STA is also very slack by modern standard. Especially with a 130mm fork.


you’re wrong in every one of those assumptions (well except maybe for the slow part). i ride my ranger in winch and plummet terrain in laguna beach. obviously tire choice plays a big impact on the capability of the bike and i opt for big sticky tires which does steal a bit of this bikes character. just out of curiosity, have you ridden one before? or any of the cbf bikes?

edit: just saw in your history you did own one build up light. fair enough. i’ll still stand by the fact that i think reach measurement and bottom bracket height have just as much to do with downhill stability than HTA.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

Streetdoctor said:


> Ranger is old geometry that will feel very different than your Enduro bike. Think 29'ers from the early 2000's. The Ripley AF is not the bike you're looking for either. I would look at something like the Epic EVO or Transition Spur.


It isn't at all old geo by any stretch of the imagination. It just is a bike meant for efficient pedaling and won't be fantastic at bombing down nasty hills. Revel's owner knows what a good pedaling bike should be, and built one he likely rides often.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I don’t know where someone is getting that a Ranger is 2005 geometry. 

Head tube is way slacker then 2005 XC geo and not far off of other current bikes with that travel and application.

STA is much steeper than 2005 geo and is only .5 deg slacker than the Ripley, and not very slack considering the travel. 

Frame reach is right in line with current trends and massively longer than 2005 geo.

If the geo does work for someone, then it does not work for them. But it is not “old-school” geo.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

kapusta said:


> I don’t know where someone is getting that a Ranger is 2005 geometry.
> 
> Head tube is way slacker then 2005 XC geo and not far off of other current bikes with that travel and application.
> 
> ...


Yea, I agree. Unfortunately I remember 2005..


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Regarding shop owners that like the Ranger...









Of All The Bikes, I Snuggle With This One [Video]


Jeff Cayley is no stranger to building up custom mountain bikes. In years past, he's gone to pretty extreme lengths in order to manifest the bike of his dreams; doing things like cutting the seat tube on a Yeti SB4.5 and hacking the largest cog off a SRAM XX1 Eagle cassette are just a couple of...




www.worldwidecyclery.com


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

Never ridden a Ranger but taking away a couple things:


Weight not a big deal for you
Cost not a big deal but is a factor
You like to hit descents hard and care about time on them
Want a slacker HTA

Based on all that Ripley for sure. My recommendation would be custom Ripley or Stock build with some upgraded wheels including high engagement hubs and decently light rims. Fast rolling rear tire, gripper tire up front.

Overall though cant go wrong with the choice you have. Purchase go shred hard and enjoy.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

My Ranger- with Roval Control SL wheels in a size large with a pike ultimate and SID ultimate shock weighed 29lb. You can build an Epic EVO that's slacker and descends better to be at least 4lb lighter. One of the main reasons I sold my Ranger aside from the geometry was it was only 3lb lighter than my 170/160mm travel enduro bike and my enduro bike actually climbed better.


----------



## ben_1987 (Jul 24, 2016)

OP, can’t help you on ripely af vs ranger but FWIW, I do like my ranger a lot. I’ve ridden the ripmo, not the ripley. I have an enduro 170 bike and the ranger is a great compliment to that. I personally like that the geo numbers are a little more conservative-I find the bike more fun on stuff that the enduro geo mutes too much.

I’m sure the ripley is great too… 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Blown Jammer (3 mo ago)

Well I found a good deal on a used Ripley AF, so that's on the way. Can't say I'm not still questioning the decision, but I'm sure either will feel like a rocket uphill compared to what I usually ride.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

No horse in this race but according to interwebz, Epic Evo is a very light frame at 1659g. Revel Ranger is more middle of road at 2766g. That's (1100gr) 2.4lbs difference. If you have more weight difference, it's in your build. 

I ask myself: if my build is heavier, am I getting some benefit? like a stouter, longer travel fork vs. a shave every gram XC fork. etc.

On the frame, it's a bit more complicated and harder to quantify but I'd be minded of how the frame feels in respect to it's lightness/heaviness and some projection/data about durability. Also - if one suspension approach requires more pivots/bearing etc - does that translate in a beneficial characteristic or not? A few demos helps here.

^^also to note, it may not always be the easiest to compare weights using published numbers - you gotta put some leg work to verify what that weight included (axles, hardware, hs, shock models, etc)


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Streetdoctor said:


> My Ranger- with Roval Control SL wheels in a size large with a pike ultimate and SID ultimate shock weighed 29lb. You can build an Epic EVO that's slacker and descends better to be at least 4lb lighter. One of the main reasons I sold my Ranger aside from the geometry was it was only 3lb lighter than my 170/160mm travel enduro bike and my enduro bike actually climbed better.


An Epic Evo frame is 2.5 lbs lighter than the Ranger frame. It is going to build up 2.5 lbs lighter with the same build. Not 4 lbs.

I find it odd that you dismiss the Ranger as Old School geo, when the Epic Evo has an even slacker STA and shorter frame reach.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

kapusta said:


> An Epic Evo frame is 2.5 lbs lighter than the Ranger frame. It is going to build up 2.5 lbs lighter with the same build. Not 4 lbs.
> 
> I find it odd that you dismiss the Ranger as Old School geo, when the Epic Evo has an even slacker STA and shorter frame reach.


i find it weird that you don't mention the HTA. I don't own either bike anymore so I'm not a fan boy of either... reach is hard to interpret on paper and it's largely based on STA/HTA. I care about STA and HTA. The Ranger with a 130 fork is not the STA you're comparing to the epic. I owned both and rode both extensively. The Ranger felt very old school and pedaled no where near as good as the epic. The epic also descended way better. You can look at my strava times on porcupine rim and make comparisons.


----------



## Streetdoctor (Oct 14, 2011)

Carl Mega said:


> No horse in this race but according to interwebz, Epic Evo is a very light frame at 1659g. Revel Ranger is more middle of road at 2766g. That's (1100gr) 2.4lbs difference. If you have more weight difference, it's in your build.
> 
> I ask myself: if my build is heavier, am I getting some benefit? like a stouter, longer travel fork vs. a shave every gram XC fork. etc.
> 
> ...


like I said my Ranger was 29.xx with a pike. My current GG trail pistol at 130/150 and a Lyrik pedals better at a couple pound penalty. It's also substantially beefier.

I'm not telling anyone they can't like it. I'm telling you my opinion. No need to defend your bike to me 😂


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

Streetdoctor said:


> like I said my Ranger was 29.xx with a pike. My current GG trail pistol at 130/150 and a Lyrik pedals better at a couple pound penalty. It's also substantially beefier.
> 
> I'm not telling anyone they can't like it. I'm telling you my opinion. No need to defend your bike to me 😂


I don't own any of these bikes. Honestly, don't even care about your opinion either - we all have them.

However, you did validate the point of my message with your preference to the GG: a weight penalty might be perfectly justifiable, if you care - consider what your exchange is...in your case, burlier fork, more travel and 'beefier' - sounds like all that matters to you which is great.


----------



## coachxtaylor (Feb 13, 2020)

i think i’d probably be faster on a trail like porcupine rim on the epic as well with apples to apples builds. i love the ranger and riding one is what made me shift my opinion on modern geo. i used to think it all came down to HTA but realized all measurements as a whole make a significantly bigger difference than one in isolation.


----------



## Gman7 (Jul 11, 2008)

Something to consider… the Ranger is a great riding bike but the Ripley for me was the better choice. I know a few folks that own one and bearing maintenance is a frequent due to our wet weather. The Ripley has IGUS bushings, which do well in wet conditions and are easy to service and replace. One of my local shops, the Hub, dropped the Ranger as a rental due to the frequency of maintenance and number of bearings.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

My two cents after looking hard at both. The things that stopped me from the Ranger were the number of people reporting creaking issues in the Ranger thread and the integrated headset. weight should not be a factor in the decision, the new Ripley v4s is about 300 grams heavier than the v4 and within 100 grams or so of the Ranger.


----------

