# The big question returns!!! Giant Anthem or Trance.



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

Hello, everyone! I'm very excited to join this forum. A lot of knowledgable people here! 

So, first off...I ride trails, and love to rip trails. However, I also use my bike as a form of transportation, and love to ride around the city, side roads, etc. I go on long rides, and plan on doing a century this fall. I'd say right now it's probably 60/40. 60% trail riding, 40% riding on the pavement/around the city. 

The bikes I'm looking at are:

2016 Giant Anthem Advanced 27.5 2
2016 Giant Trance Advanced 27.5 2

Out of those two bikes which would be best for me, and my riding style? I don't have any bike shops close that carry both, so I can't demo them. I know it's not possible, bit I'm looking for a jack of all trades kind of bike. Out of those two, which bike would be a more "do it all" bike? 

Also, does Giant used the same carbon frame for all of their advanced models? For instance, is the frame the same on the Anthem Advanced 2, 1, 0 and even the frame set itself? From everything I read it seems to be the same. The reason I ask is that I just thought it was weird that the Anthem Advanced frame is $2,700, but for $400 more you can buy a complete bike on the same frame. What do you all think about Giants carbon frames?

Thanks in advance to everyone who reads this! I appreciate your time! 

~ Z


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

Same frame.
Review.




27.5 is not my choice except Plus for anything XC or shorter travel. And 27.5 is not a first choice for transport either.


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

Good to know it's the same frame! I can get the Advanced 2 and upgrade the components. What is it about 650b that makes it not your first choice? I love 650b, because I feel that it splits the gap perfectly.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

A 29 with good geo is quick handling and rolls over things better. 
29s with Boost 148/110 are good with 27.5+ as an option for good tire tuning choices.
Giant doesn't have anything yet.


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

I gotcha. Well, out of the two I mentioned which do you think would be best for my riding style? 60% trails, 40% pavement. 

I originally wanted an Anthem, but now I'm leaning towards a Trance. I just don't know what to get!! 

Next year I'll probably end up building a new bike. So, if I get a trail bike now, I'll build an XC bike later. Vice versa. 

Would you say the Anthem, or the Trance would be better for a "do it all" type of thing? I know there is not a such thing as a "do it all", but I figured one of those two bikes should be close to it..

Thanks!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Neither of them is ideal for riding asphalt, but it kinda doesn't matter. If you're riding to the coffee shop, etc., then as long as the bike's pedaling efficiency and riding position aren't actively getting in your way, it's fine. Marginal changes in efficiency don't really matter. And if you want to go on fast group rides with roadies, they're both going to be pretty bad. Though suspension lockouts are nice to have on the road.

So for me, it would be more about which one I thought I'd have more fun with on trails. That depends a lot on your trails. Do you have friends who ride? Do you know what people in your area are riding? I love my XC bike but for me, those bikes are more and more about racing. The big manufacturers have rear suspension pretty well figured out so if they want it to pedal well and climb well, it does. That means if I'm not trying to beat someone up a hill, there's not a lot of reason for me to ride a short-travel bike and not my 140 mm bike. That would suggest the Trance.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

Plus bikes are coming on strong. For your dual use I'd ride a Trek Stache 7. Or one of the new 27.5+ carbon hardtails coming out soon.
I'd use a second wheelset for the commute.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

When you say you also use your bike as transportation - is there a reason this new bike would need to fill in that role?


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Keep the one you currently have for the neighborhood and use the new Giant you like best for the trails  

Man, Giants are popular I saw so many this morning like 1 out of 3 and it was a busy morning in the trails.


----------



## faceplant72 (Oct 25, 2009)

Im an anthem 29r owner and 90% of the time its all the bike I need but there are some times I feel the anthem is just to lightly built. The anthem broken frame thread is aproaching 100 pages. On a do over I probably would have went with the Trance for my riding style. But for your needs I would suggest 2 bikes. A $500 road bike is going to outperform any mountainbike in a century. It you go aluminum you can have a Trance and a road bike and not really loss much in mountainbiking and gain massively on the road

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## rcoe (Apr 9, 2014)

While neither of those bike are a good commuting bike I would say the Anthem would be the better of the two. With the Trance you are getting into a little more of an aggressive enduro type bike. The Anthem will be a much better pedaler.


----------



## DiRt DeViL (Dec 24, 2003)

The Trance is a trail bike fun to ride, should be terrible for commuting.

The Anthem is more of a cross country racer than trail bike but can handle both duties well, with the suspension locked shouldn't be that bad for commuting.

As others have said, keep the current ride for commuting and get the one the fits better and you like the most for trail riding.


----------



## Davidfs (Feb 18, 2016)

With that much pavement riding I would recommend getting a trail bike and a commuter rather than a trail bike and an xc bike. 

Is there a reason you are limiting yourself to just these two if you cannot test ride then anyway?


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Aluminum Trance and a cheap road/commuter bike would be my suggestion as well - you'll save money and each will do the job it's intended better than trying to make one bike do both.

The Felt Q720 you list in your profile would be better than either of the bikes you're asking about for road/gravel. Give it some road tires and it'd be great for all but the longer road stuff. That's where a decent road bike comes in. Buy it with all the money you're not throwing at a carbon frame that won't make much difference on a longer travel bike anyway. 

Side note: I chose the Trance over the Anthem for you based on the phrase you used "rip trails" and your profile preference of downhill. I have no idea what that really means for you, so the Anthem could honestly be just fine. They're both great bikes.


----------



## ajcjr (Jan 5, 2011)

I have an anthem 27.5 sx model (alum), bike climbs, rails, and is alot of fun. Ride em both


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

Sorry I disappeared for a few days! Been incredibly busy, and not by my computer. The current bike I own (Felt Q720) I'm selling to my friend who wants a decent hardtail, and loves riding 26". 

I actually ended up buying a bike already. After talking with my LBS, and fellow riders, I opted to go for a XC platform, but something different than the Anthem. I went with a 2016 Trek Top Fuel 9.8 SL. I found one on sale, and couldn't pass it up. I will be picking her up on Tuesday, can't wait!!! 

I was a little skeptical about 29ers, but after riding my friends 29er, and once again, consulting with my LBS, I decided it was the best bike to go with for the area I live in. 

As time goes on I will build a trail bike, but as of this exact moment, I don't think that's what I really need....plus the Top Fuel can do trails....maybe not as good as the Trance, but it'll still work. 

I see a lot of talk about these 27.5+ wheels, I also know they are very close to a standard 29er. With that being said, could I put some 27.5+ wheels on the Top Fuel? If I can't, that is perfectly fine...just wondering.

Thanks again, guys! You all were helpful!


----------



## Davidfs (Feb 18, 2016)

Fitting 27.5+ wheels will depend primarily on the width clearance of your frame and fork, I believe there is a thread over in the "+size" subforum all about fitting 27.5+ wheels onto 29er frames


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

Very cool. Thanks!!


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

AndrwSwitch said:


> When you say you also use your bike as transportation - is there a reason this new bike would need to fill in that role?


The main reason it has to be my main form of transportation is I currently do not have a vehicle, and I enjoy riding everywhere on a bike....if possible. I know a mountain bike is not ideal for riding on pavement, or commuting...but I have used nothing but mountain bikes in the past, so I suppose I'm used to it. I've rode 80 miles in a day on my Felt Q720, with little to no issues.

I decided to go with a Trek Top Fuel 9.8. It is more expensive than both of the Giants, but I think it will fit the nitch a little better for what I'm looking for. I'll build a trail bike in the future, and probably even a road bike for riding pavement specifically.

Thanks for all your advice, and input. I really appreciate it!!!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I'd have a hard time leaving that much bike locked outside. But I don't know what your frame of reference is.

People's concern about whether or not they can ride their XC bikes on trails always strikes me as odd. What do they think XC is? I think you're going to find this is a really capable bike, and it will be better at pretty much everything off-road than your Q720.


----------



## Z13 (Apr 21, 2016)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I'd have a hard time leaving that much bike locked outside. But I don't know what your frame of reference is.
> 
> People's concern about whether or not they can ride their XC bikes on trails always strikes me as odd. What do they think XC is? I think you're going to find this is a really capable bike, and it will be better at pretty much everything off-road than your Q720.


Right, I'd even have a hard time locking it up, so I see what you're saying. I live almost 1 mile away from all the stores, and restaurants I would go to...so I usually walk. If I do have to lock up the bike I always make sure it's in plain sight, and not too far from me. Also, I usually ride with a friend, or two. So, if I need to go into a store the friend stays outside with the bikes, and vice versa. With all that being said, I cannot deny that you're 100% right. I shouldn't be riding this bike anywhere that it needs to be locked up. Since Im selling the Q720 to my friend, I should probably invest in a cheap bike, maybe even a Wally World bike. Something that I will only bring out when I know I'm going to a place that requires my bike to be locked up for a couple hours.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I accepted a Huffy from a friend a while ago, on there principal that they can't be that bad if I just want to get around town.

They are that bad.

Just buy a used alloy road bike for somewhere under $1000. Unless you're in a high theft area, anyway. I found that the bikes I could get for $300 and less had too many mechanical problems to be that good as transportation. Besides, if you get a non-crappy utility bike, it's got great crossover for riding your Century.


----------



## Davidfs (Feb 18, 2016)

Yeah I would agree that getting a used road bike, even an old ten speed, would be more reliable and ride better than a Wal-Mart bike...


----------



## hdparrish (Jan 24, 2008)

All good advice, except a sub-$1K road bike is still pawn shop candy to any meth head with a truck cruising for targets of opportunity.

For unattended parking, I'd suggest the cheapest, crappiest bike you can find. It might ride and look like ****, but that's exactly why no one would want it. And it'll still get you to where you wanna be faster than walking ... but maybe only just.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I thought that way for a while, but everyone around me was riding a bit more money. Maybe not $5000, but more than $95. So when, after a series of more minor but annoying failures, I broke the chainstay on that bike I decided to get something a little nicer.

I think it's important to know one's area. When I was still living in Manhattan and leaving my bike outside overnight, I'd have gone with another $100 bike. But where I was living when I could last commute by bike, people lost bikes they didn't secure well. So I felt fairly comfortable riding something nicer and being disciplined about locking it well and not leaving a bunch of stealable things on it.


----------



## hdparrish (Jan 24, 2008)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I thought that way for a while, but everyone around me was riding a bit more money. Maybe not $5000, but more than $95. So when, after a series of more minor but annoying failures, I broke the chainstay on that bike I decided to get something a little nicer.


That's weird. My first two years mountain biking (strictly light XC back then) were on a $110 department store bike--my 24-speed "ShopKo Special."

It was a piece of crap, weighed a ton, and had single-walled rims that would taco if you looked at them funny. But the frame itself was bulletproof (as it should've been--it had an aircraft's worth of aluminum in it).

Rode it as a commuter for a while when I got my first "real" mountain bike and then passed it on to someone else a few years back after putting many thousands of miles on it.

The problem with cheap bikes is they won't hold up to the pounding of genuine trail/street riding. But simple commuting? They should be fine, provided you take care of them and don't ask too much of them.

But you don't have to take my word for it. Take this guy's:


----------



## hdparrish (Jan 24, 2008)

And a continuation of the previous video:


----------



## hdparrish (Jan 24, 2008)

This one should've gone second:






I'm not advocating these bikes for trail use. I think the videos (and my own experience) conclusively prove that they are money sinks in that regard and won't hold up to the abuse.

But they'll get you from point A to point B and, should someone steal yours, you're out $150 instead of much, much more.


----------



## Davidfs (Feb 18, 2016)

I'd rather spend that $150 on a used road bike though, depending on your local market I suppose, but I could pick up a decent 80s/ early 90's road bike and put new cables and brake pads on it for that price...


----------



## hdparrish (Jan 24, 2008)

Agreed--better, faster ride for pavement and more longevity. Those old steel-tubed roadies last forever ... as long as you don't let 'em rust out.

I've been looking for a deal like that for years, but they don't seem to come up very often here. Just not enough population where I live, I guess.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

After that last one I broke, in a steel part of the frame, actually, pre-1992 is another thing I'm done with.

I don't know if there's something different about how I commuted. But it always chewed those bikes more than recreational road riding. So something new enough to have 130 mm spacing and at least an 8-speed cassette is part of what I was looking for with my most recent one. Which I ended up stuffing a 135 mm hub in.  It's surprising how many standards have shifted enough to be incredibly irritating.


----------

