We're no strangers to the Norco Fluid. It was a budget standout at last year's Trail Bike
Field Test, and even won a 2022
Pinkbike Award for Value Bike of the Year. So when Norco made the decision to upgrade the front triangle of the Fluid FS - moving from alloy construction to carbon fiber - our ears perked up.
Conveniently, the bike is otherwise unchanged, offering the same general design, geometry, and ethos as the all-aluminum models. The bike's new tagline sums it up well: "Everything Fluid FS, now in carbon."
Norco Fluid Carbon Details
• Intended use: Trail / All-Mountain
• Carbon front triangle, Alloy rear
• 130mm suspension
• 140mm fork
• 65° head angle
• 420-510mm reach
• 425-440mm chainstay
• Size-specific seat tube angle
• Price: $4,099 - $5,999 USD
• www.norco.com A trail bike through and through, the Carbon Fluid retains the easy handling and adaptable geometry that we liked about the alloy version. With balanced geometry and plenty of size options in the range, there should be a solid option for the majority of riders. It's always great to see a high stack number on bikes as the frame size grows, and it's no surprise to see this from Norco, who have been at the forefront of proportional geometry.
The main takeaway here is a 600 gram (1.3 lbs) reduction in weight, all shaved off that front triangle simply by moving to carbon fiber construction. All of the hardware remains the same, so in theory you could just pop the new front triangle in to achieve the same effect. No word on whether that will be available as an aftermarket option, but food for thought.
There are a few size-specific geometry elements on the Fluid, including the reach, stack, chainstay length, and seat tube angle, as well as the typical standover and seat tube length. Combined with their Ride Aligned setup guide, it should be quite easy to find a comfortable starting point on the bike once you've chosen a size. Compared to the all-aluminum Fluid, Norco aimed to sharpen the handling characteristics with a stiffer chassis, in addition to the reduction in weight.
With three build kits to choose from, as well as a host of colors, the Fluid aims to retain the mass appeal and easy of entry that the first generation really nailed. Pricing is naturally higher than the alloy counterpart, but value is still a strong focus for the series.
Fluid C1 Color & Build Kit; $5,999 USD $7,999 CAD
Fluid C2 Color & Build Kit; $4,999 USD $6,199 CAD
Fluid C3 Color & Build Kit; $4,099 USD $5,199 CAD
And a compelling frame-only option; $2599 USD, $3299 CAD
I have a C1 Fluid Carbon in for a long term test, so we'll see how the new bike holds up, and just how much of an improvement that carbon front triangle proves to be. Stay tuned!
For more photos and graphics, check out the high-res gallery
here.
1. Aurum
2. Factory DH
3. Team DH
If these are the options you are considering maybe your accounting department in their beige suits can help you decide.
Are you new here?
Team DH is a solid name for their DH bike
You damn Americans get is alway one size bigger…
I wouldn't be surprised that aluminum build weighs the same as the carbon one.
Bizarre
And for maybe the slightest weigh savings.
I'll always take the aluminum option with better components than the carbon for more money and lesser components.
The “carbon tax” in Mtb is real.
Fluid A1 short shocked, upgrade the fork and wheels at PoS.
Would be well under 8k and have a much better ride than this carbon version.
That was my plan last summer. Eventually decided to order another Geometron
that's a big difference in context!
The point I would make is this: if you want a lighter bike then there are no big wins - you have to make small weight gains on every area of the bike that add up to a noticeable saving. And there is literally no-where else on the bike where you are going to be able to save 600g by swapping out one part.
If you don't care about weight then fine, stick with an alloy frame, it's all good. But if you do care about weight then this is how you save it.
I agree. I have owned a couple different bikes in their alloy and carbon variations and especially for a simple trail bike (4 bar no through shock) having carbon really wasn't an advantage. I'd even say I preferred the alloy version in one case as the ride quality was more lively. There's a place for carbon for sure but it isn't always a big an advantage as it is made out to be.
@shunji180: I can't find any references anywhere, but I swear I heard a rumour that the Optic and Sight would eventually be following in their big brothers' footsteps and going high pivot. That's just about the only way this move makes sense to me, because otherwise they have a totally redundant bike in the lineup.
No bike above $2,500 should have SX.
XX1-> XTR
XO1-> XT
??-> SLX
GX-> Deore
NX-> A bag of garbage
SX-> A bag of garbage that's been sitting in my hot garage for a week.
On the Fluid A1 you get Bear Pawls hubs on Stans rims. Bear Pawls? lawls.
I mean sure, there is a big price difference, but part of that must be the carbon vs aluminum frame. Why not have the cheaper aluminum frame, with the C1 components?
Crankworx starts tomorrow so we’ll see. Maybe.
50mm shock stroke is curious @ 130mm. very high leverage curve. hope they have a good compression tune in there. float X is pretty light compression compared to the super deluxes (generally) they run on the optic.
But mine ist called „optic“ for some reason…
Could we see some model blending between fluid, optic and sight?
Get one large rainbow frame in USA please????