Review: Starling Spur - No Derailleur, No Worries?

Feb 14, 2022
by Seb Stott  

I've heard it said that a review can't break a brand, but it can make one. If that's true of any company, it's Starling Cycles. In 2016, the company consisted of Joe McEwan, a former aerospace composites engineer who was making a few steel bikes in his garden shed. Then a gushing review of the Starling Murmur by Steve Jones in Dirt was like jet fuel on a fire.

Now they have twelve different models, everything from hardtails to downhill bikes, and they make hundreds of frames a year. Most of them are still built in Bristol, just in a much bigger shed.

The Spur shares the steel construction, unique hand-made details and single-pivot suspension with the Murmur, which we've already reviewed (twice) but is deliberately more of a niche product.
Starling Spur Details

• Intended use: "Double-black laps and Alpine seasons"
• Effigear 9-speed gearbox, 440% range
• 170mm travel front & rear
• Mullet or 29" wheels
• Hand-built in Bristol, UK, using Reynolds steel tubes
• 63-degree head angle, 77-degree effective seat angle (approx.)
• Adjustable geometry
• Weight: 18.1 kg / 40 lb (XL, with Cushcore)
• Sizes: M, L, XL (tested)
• Price: £3,330 (frame only, no shock)
starlingcycles.com

Starling describes the Spur as "the bike for big-terrain enduro racing, double-black bike park laps and hassle-free seasons in the mountains." It combines 170 mm of suspension travel with 29" wheels, super stable geometry and the unparalleled reliability of a gearbox, which also shifts weight off the rear wheel so the suspension can (in theory) react faster.

While this test has confirmed what we've learned in the past - that gearboxes aren't for everyone - the Spur's unashamed bias towards descending performance makes it among the best use cases for a derailleur-free drivetrain. It's aimed at those who emphatically prioritise descending over climbing and probably aren't gaining all their altitude under their own steam. But how bad is it really when pointed uphill and is it worth it on the descents? Let's find out.



bigquotesThe bike feels stuck to the floor and never gets hung up or caught out even in the roughest rock sections or rapid-fire braking bumps. It's refreshingly quiet too, which isn't necessarily an indicator of performance, but it certainly contributes to a feeling of composure few bikes rival. Seb Stott




photo

Frame Features

I must point out right at the top that the bike I tested is a prototype. Although the production bike should be much the same to ride, there are a few cosmetic differences to be aware of, including:

• The top tube is positioned lower down the seat tube on production XL bikes. According to Starling, "This gives a better aesthetic but does require a small brace connecting the TT and ST."
• The cable routing has changed. It is now on the top of the down tube.
• The head tube is now thicker. "We've had a couple of them flare," Joe from Starling explains.
• The adjustable front shock mount is "much more refined" with more geometry options.

photo
The production frame has a lower top tube...
photo
...as well as neater cable routing and more shock mount options.

One other piece of housekeeping is to mention that Starling can do custom frames. For example, Joe told me he's working on a custom Spur for a customer in France with 200 mm of travel front and rear. That sounds like an absolute beast!

That gearbox
The gearbox isn't just bolted on like a derailleur; it's the heart of the frame. The Effigear box is cradled by and bolts onto the mainframe at three points, while the swingarm pivot is mounted directly to the machined stubs on either side of the gearbox - it's part of the structure of the frame. This Effigear system differs from the more common Pinion gearbox in that the output sprocket is small, and is located high above (not concentric to) the bottom bracket. The main pivot is concentric with this sprocket, so there's no chain growth (the rear axle is the same distance from the output sprocket throughout the suspension travel). This does away with the need for a separate chain tensioner, like the one pictured below on the right.

photo
Effigear
Zerode Taniwha review test. Photo by James Lissimore.
Pinion
photo
Effigear
Zerode Taniwha review test. Photo by James Lissimore.
Pinion

Effigear's system works with a modified SRAM trigger shifter, which is a huge advantage over Pinion's grip shift. It still needs two cables to change gears in both directions, but the second cable is tensioned by a spring in a cartridge mounted on the downtube. This spring powers the upshifts and tensions both cables just like the spring in a derailleur. Effigear's 9-speeds and 440% range can't match Pinoion's 12-speeds and 600% range, however.

photo
With no derailleur, an eccentric rear dropout is used to tension the chain.
photo
That brace of Starlings is a handcrafted detail you don't get with bigger brands.

Starling's eccentric dropout design tensions the chain and makes it possible to remove and replace the rear wheel without changing the chain tension. The rear dropout fits a 142X12 mm single speed hub, with even spoke tension on both sides making for a stronger wheel.

The Starling motifs in the head tube and swingarm braces add a real touch of class and remind you this is a hand-made piece of craftsmanship.

The frame is built in the UK, using Reynolds 853 heat-treated tubing for the mainframe, with heat-treated Chromoly steel made in Taiwan for the swingarm. Aside from the obvious changes related to the gearbox, most of the tubing is shared with the Murmur, though differences include a straight (not kinked) seat tube and a plain gauge (not butted) downtube - the Spur's downtube has a wall thickness of 1.2 mm along its entire length for improved strength and stiffness.

photo
The production bike will have a thicker head tube.
photo
The highly-adjustable shock mount offers loads of geometry and travel options.

The forward shock mount is adjustable to tweak the geometry or to change the shock length and therefore the travel. The triangular mounting plate has two sets of bolt holes 6 mm apart, and this connects to the downtube via yet more holes - the production bike has even more options than the prototype pictured above.

Each increment changes the BB height by about 7 mm and the frame angles by 0.4-degrees. From one extreme to the other, you could change the geometry radically (I estimate a 50 mm BB height range for the prototype), but the main reason for this wide range of shock positions is to accommodate different length shocks. You could fit a 210 x 55mm shock (instead of the 230 x 65mm), dropping the travel to 150mm. Personally, I really don't see why you would do that. It's like finding out you can run a rally-spec Subaru Impreza in front-wheel-drive mode.




photo

Geometry & Sizing

I measured the geometry of my XL test bike in the second-lowest shock setting (which is how I tested it), with 2.6" tires fitted. The BB height measured 325 mm (45 mm BB drop); the wheelbase at 1,320 mm, the head angle at 62.5-degrees, and the effective seat angle at my pedalling height (830 mm from BB to saddle-top) at 75.8-degrees. These numbers deviate from the chart above, largely due to the position of the shock mount.



photo

Suspension Design

Starling refers to the Spur as a high pivot bike. Thanks to the orientation of the gearbox, the main pivot sits a little higher relative to the BB than it does on most bikes. But it's a very low BB, so the main pivot is actually in a pretty typical place - 415 mm off the ground. With a wheel radius of 370 mm, that means the axle path is rearwards for the first 45 mm (26%) of the travel - that's more rearward than most, but not an atypical figure. I think to count as a high pivot, the axle path should never come forwards of its starting position.

Of course, having the drive pulley concentric with the main pivot does mean zero chain growth and (essentially) zero pedal kickback, which is a benefit shared with idler-equipped bikes. But pedal kickback is usually a non-issue anyway. Because the chain remains well above the pivot point, the anti-squat levels are much lower than most conventional bikes, which means the suspension will bob when pedalling unless restricted by damping.

photo
The leverage ratio is just on the progressive side of linear.
photo
The rear axle path (blue line) is more rearward than most idler-free bikes, but not enough to call it a high-pivot in my book. Notice that with a 170mm fork, the vertical travel at the front is significantly less than at the rear. Remember the horizontal scale on these charts is exaggerated.

photo
As suspected due to the lack of chain growth, anti-squat levels are on the low side - about 37% at sag.
photo
Being single-pivot, anti-rise levels are higher than most. This means there should be a bit less brake dive than with some designs.

As with most single-pivots, the leverage curve is essentially flat. According to an analysis I carried out using Linkage X3 software based on a side-on photograph of the bike, the leverage curve is just on the progressive side of linear - there's about a 2.9% drop in leverage ratio from start to finish. This technique is not totally accurate (that's why Dan Roberts used 3D laser scanning in his Behind The Numbers series), but as it's a single pivot it should be in the right ballpark. Combined with the coil shock and fork, the takeaway is that the suspension is essentially linear front and rear.

Except not really.

The Ohlins TTX coil has a particularly large bottom out bumper, which in this case starts to contact the damper at about 80% travel. That means there is a significant additional build-up of force from this point on. The conical elastomer sits inside a recess, so at bottom-out, it doesn't restrict the available travel too much either. It's low-tech, but the additional mid-stroke support afforded by a coil spring combined with a conical bottom-out bumper in the final 20% works pretty well in my view.

My analysis also estimated the vertical rear-wheel travel at 177 mm with a 65 mm shock. I asked Joe about this and he said that, according to his models, it should have 172mm, but he rounded it down to 170 mm when talking about the bike. The 5 mm difference could be down to the inaccuracy of my analysis, but the shock mount position will change things too. As you can see from the axle path graph above, the vertical travel from a 170 mm fork with a 63-degree head angle is only about 150 mm. This is why many enduro bikes have longer travel forks than frames.

But the discrepancy is bigger in this case. I measured the usable travel of the Ohlins fork by taking the coil out, bottoming it out hard, then refitting the coil and measuring from the seal to the O-ring. My fork was only delivering 160 mm of travel, or 165 mm if the fork was forcibly extended. After talking to Ohlins about this and measuring the axle-to-crown length, it's definitely set to 170 mm travel, but the coil can't extend much past 160 mm travel. That makes the useable vertical travel with this particular fork about 143 mm, so there's at least a 29 mm discrepancy in the vertical travel front to rear, so at bottom out, it will get slacker.



photo

Build Kit

Starling doesn't sell the Spur as a full bike so I won't dwell too much on the components my test bike came with. Starling will supply a shock if you want - the Ohins TTX coil shock is what Starling recommend. The Ohlins RXF36 M2 coil fork wouldn't be my first choice as it doesn't match the rear in terms of suppleness or travel, but there's something to be said for having linear coil-sprung suspension front and rear. My bike came with Michellin WIld Enduro e-bike tires with Cushcore installed, alloy wheels with 25 mm rear rim and 30 mm front, Magura MT7 brakes, BikeYoke 185 mm dropper and Funn cockpit.





Test Bike Setup

In the fork, I used the white coil spring, which is the third stiffest out of seven options with a spring rate of 55 lb/In. The available springs range from 35 lb/In to 65 lb/in, in 5 lb/in increments. I might have preferred a slightly softer ride on some tracks, but while I never bottomed out harshly, I used all the travel on the biggest hits so I didn't want to drop the spring rate by 10% to the next stiffest spring.

For the shock, Starling sent me a 457 lb/in and 502 lb/in spring. With the lighter spring, the bike was too soft at the rear and imbalanced in turns. But with the stiffer spring, I had a good overall setup. Interestingly, the fork felt too stiff with the softer shock spring, but just about right with the stiffer one, proving that balance is key. I used all the travel at the front and rear on the impacts which warranted full travel.

photo
Seb Stott
Location: Tweed Valley, Scotland
Age: 29
Height: 6'3" / 191cm
Inseam: 37" / 93cm
Weight: 189 lbs / 86 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: Unpaid Tunnock's ambassador
Instagram: Seb Stott On Bikes

The 502 lb/in spring gave me 26% sag seated, which is a touch less than I'd normally run with a bike like this. I also ran the compression pretty close to closed on low-speed and toggled between the medium and the firmest of the three High-speed settings. For sure, the bike's lack of progression contributes to this need for a firmer shock setup, but I also think the lack of chain growth plays a role. Remove the chain from a regular bike and you'll notice a slight lack of support in corners. Though great for sensitivity, the Spur's lack of chain growth probably reduces support a little compared to a regular derailleur bike, so the shock needs to be set up a bit firmer to compensate. As for the fork, I ended up with all the damping controls fully off, to get it to move easier and track the ground a bit more like the rear.

I stuck with the shock mount in the second most forward position (the second lowest), preferring to focus on suspension settings, cockpit and tire pressures to fine-tune the ride. I set the handlebars to the highest position but could have used another 10-20 mm of bar height for steeper terrain.

The bike came installed with CushCore inserts and I felt no need to remove them. With 2.6" tires, this allowed me to run as low as 20 psi front, 23 psi rear. I did feel the tires "bottom out" a couple of times, but thanks to the inserts it's more of a thud than a clank. Personally, I find Cushcore only allows you to get away with two or three psi less pressure than usual, not five or ten as some have suggested.

photo

Climbing

First, a word on weight. At 18.1 kg / 40 lbs, I'm actually surprised by how light it is. A pair of Cushcore inserts weigh nearly 600g, so remove those and it would weigh about 17.5 kg. That's only about 700g more than a size-large full-carbon Norco Range, and this is an XL with a two-kilo gearbox, a steel frame and a coil fork.

But I'm not trying to tell you the Spur is a good climber. Not even close.

For starters, gearboxes generally suffer more drag than a derailleur drivetrain. The Spur also has a 15-tooth drive sprocket; compared to a conventional 32-tooth chainring; this smaller sprocket will add a little more drag due to the fact that the chain has to bend around a tighter radius under tension. Also, because the chain line is above the main pivot point, there isn't much anti-squat so the bike bobs quite a lot under power. Fortunately, a lot of this can be attenuated slightly by running the compression damping firm, and since this was how I liked it when descending, I didn't have to bother winding it off at the top. Even so, there is a noticeable amount of pedal-bob no matter what, which will reduce efficiency further. Any one of these factors on their own might not be a huge deal, but when you add them together - the gearbox drag, the small chainring, the pedal bob and the weight - it results in a bike that's noticeably more lethargic than comparable bikes on any climb.

My bike had a 15-tooth chainring with a 25-tooth rear sprocket. Combined with Effigear's lowest gear ratio, that's the equivalent of a 30-tooth chainring with a 52-tooth largest sprocket. Very easy gears, but I used them all. The traction is impressive too, so you can winch up most things so long as sustained speed or acceleration isn't required. On a sustained, steep climb, it will get there but feels noticeably slower than other enduro/freeride bikes.

photo
You have to pick your gear long before steep crux moves like this.

On undulating terrain, the Effigear becomes even more frustrating. Upshifts are dispatched easily but downshifts require you to completely stop pedalling, and even back-pedal slightly to make sure it shifts properly. (The Pinion gearbox is a little easier to downshift as you can often get away with soft-pedalling.) This takes practice, and even once you're acclimatised, it interrupts the pedalling rhythm and robs momentum at every change of gradient. Riding singletrack with friends behind, I had to warn them I was about to shift down so they didn't pile into the back of me.

Sure, you can change multiple gears without pedalling, but I only found it useful on a couple of occasions on the trail. Maintaining momentum is so important when riding off-road that being able to shift while coasting is little consolation for the inability to shift under load.

How much slower uphill is it really?

Experience has thought me that just because a bike feels slow, that doesn't necessarily mean it is. So I did some efficiency testing to put a number on it. Using power meter pedals, I rode it up the same short, steep tarmac hill at a constant power output of 300 W. I did this three times and took an average. I then did the exact same thing on a Privateer 161 to give some comparison to a derailleur-equipped bike.

For what it's worth, the Privateer has a burly build on it and I didn't bother removing the water bottle, tube etc., so the total weight wasn't far off the Spur (17 kg). I also had different tires - Schwalbe Magic Marys: Soft compound rear, Super Soft front. I don't think the Schwalbe tires roll any faster than the Spur's Michelins, and the steep gradient should minimise the effect of rolling resistance anyway.

The results? The average time for the Spur was 73.7 seconds, 9% slower than the Privateer's average time of 67.6 seconds. If you want to more numbers, the Spur's times were 75.0, 74.5 and 71.0 seconds; the Privateer's were 65.2, 69.1 and 68.5 seconds, so the Spur was consistently slower.

This isn't a perfect test, but that 9% difference tallies with what it feels like on the hill. It's not the end of the world, but it is noticeably slower. And remember, we're not comparing it to an XC bike here.

The bottom line is that the Spur will get you to the top of the climb, but it will take measurably longer. Subjectively, when riding on your own on unfamiliar climbs it sometimes feels just fine thanks to the low gears. But when trying to match your usual pace on a familiar climb, or trying to keep up with your usual riding buddies, you'll notice it's a lot more effort, especially when the climb gets technical.

photo

Descending


Despite running a relatively stiff spring rate and firm compression damping, I immediately noticed the rear suspension is super active and supple when dropping into a rough descent. The bike feels stuck to the floor and never gets hung up or caught out even in the roughest rock sections or rapid-fire braking bumps. It's refreshingly quiet too, which isn't necessarily an indicator of performance, but it certainly contributes to a feeling of composure few bikes rival. The rear wheel feels glued to the floor, tracking the ground with real finesse.

How much of that is down to the lack of a derailleur? The gearbox's roughly 2 kg of extra sprung mass no doubt helps to dull vibrations in the chassis due to its own rigid inertia, but it's hard to say by how much. The Cushcore inserts combined with the low pressures they allow undoubtedly plays a role in this too, and I must admit I didn't remove and re-install the inserts to find out, my reasoning being - why would you? The Ohlins TTX coil shock is a proven performer as well, and no doubt contributes to the exceptional small-bump sensitivity.

As for the skinny steel tubes offering more compliance, I'm sceptical there's that much of a benefit here. Pull the handlebar one way and the rear wheel the other, and the twist through the frame doesn't feel radically different to many alloy bikes. I know this is hardly a scientific test, but if I can't feel much difference here I doubt if I can when so much else is happening on the trail. Steel may be real, but it's not magic.

photo

Bottom outs? The heaviest landing on my local hill at Innerleithen DH trails is a drop about 7 feet or 2.2 m high, with a relatively flat, hardpack landing. I'm sure Canadian commenters will tell me that's barely a warm-up, but the shallow gradient makes for a heavy landing on any bike. If a bike doesn't bottom out here it's probably too firm. Yes, the Spur hit the bump stops here every time, but thanks to the big elastomer, it's more of a dull thud than a harsh metallic clunk. And on medium-sized landings, with the shock set to the firmest high-speed setting, the suspension has a nicely damped "pillowy" feel, as the energy is absorbed by the damper throughout the stroke rather than all at the end. For sure, if it's a freeride bike you're after then something more progressive would likely be better, but for UK-style downhill tracks where traction is key and the hucks are modest, the more linear suspension isn't a problem. You could always try a progressive coil or an air shock if you want more ramp, but I didn't need it.

The suspension feels damped, controlled and predictable. It never threw up any surprises and always felt stable and calm on kicky jumps, big steps, catch berms and in the air. It never crashes through the middle of its travel only to be caught by a sudden ramp-up of force at the end; there's always something to push against and the rebound is controlled and predictable too.

Cornering is where the Spur surprised me most. The low BB height and low-down frame weight seem to make it that bit quicker when changing direction from one direction of lean to the other in a series of alternating turns. And that linear suspension means support comes on sooner when you push into a turn, making it feel that bit more responsive especially in short, sharp corners. Despite a lengthy wheelbase, the Spur is surprisingly agile, especially on steep technical turns where it's easy to trust the front end not to truck under.

photo

When the trail gets steep, tight and complicated, especially when riding blind, the lack of a rear derailleur was sometimes a real gift. A couple of times I went off-line and might have snagged a derailleur if there was one, or else had to take evasive action to protect it. Similarly, the lack of a chainring increases the ground clearance a little - despite the low BB height, the bottom of the gearbox measures 290 mm, which is a little higher than the bottom of a chainring on a typical enduro bike. This means you don't have to worry quite as much about sumping out when negotiating tricky ledges at low speed, particularly when riding them cautiously for the first time. It's not that I necessarily would have caught the chainring or derailleur on a regular bike, but it's nice to have one less thing to worry about when the terrain is at its most hectic.

photo

Faults? A longer travel fork would definitely help reach the full potential and improve the balance. Although the suspension travel is balanced on paper (170mm front and rear), the fork delivers nearer 160 mm in the real world, so despite using all the fork's travel on occasion I struggled to get the bike to feel perfectly balanced in high-load berms. I had to run the fork fully open and the shock's compression damping nearer fully closed to stop it from squatting. Set up like this, the suspension worked well enough in the turns, but I would have liked to be able to run the fork a little softer. As I was already getting through all the travel, this wasn't an option. I considered fitting a firmer shock spring, but this seemed like a perverse way of making up for the short-travel fork. The Ohlins fork is not as supple as some forks either; even fully open there's noticeably more feedback through the hands than I got with a RockShox Zeb on the same tracks a few days later, leading to a little more hand pain at the bottom. A 180mm (or longer) fork with a lighter range of damping would be a better pairing to the rear and help extract the maximum potential on the descents. After all, if you've pedalled to the top you've earned every ounce of descending performance you can get. Fortunately, the fork is the only cloud in the sky when pointed downhill.

photo


Reliability

I have no issues to report. Nothing came loose, creaked or rattled. I did think the rear swingarm was misaligned at one point but it turns out I just had the adjustable dropouts set asymmetrically, leading to a slightly squint rear wheel. The shock alignment was bob on too - some bikes need a slight lateral force on the shock to get it to fit into the second mount. The shock's rebound knob fell off somehow, and the shifter clipped the top tube in a crash, causing a scratch. But Starling says the production bike will have a lower top tube so this shouldn't be an issue.

Effigear recommends changing the oil every 6,000 km or every year. Of course, you'll still have to lube the chain and change the cables, but there's no risk of breaking a derailleur.


photo
Starling Spur
16.04.21. Pinkbike Forest of Dean Rider Seb Stott. PIC Andy Lloyd www.andylloyd.photography
Geometron G1

How does it compare?

Recently I reviewed the Geometron G1, another ~170mm travel, coil-sprung 29er. It's hard to be sure because I haven't ridden both bikes on the same terrain, but I came away almost as impressed with the tracking of the G1's suspension as I was with the Spur. One thing which is definitely different is the noise - the Spur is near silent while the G1 I tested had a lot of chain rattle and the shock topped out. This made it feel less refined and it's sometimes hard to separate noise and rattle from how the suspension is working. But in terms of being able to ride over rocky sections full tilt without the suspension throwing up any surprises, I don't think there's too much in it, although the Starling is probably a bit smoother. I'd need to do a back-to-back test to be sure.

The G1 is much more progressive, so it sags more readily and the stiffness builds more steeply through the travel. This means the G1 runs more sag and felt more settled in the travel, but both bikes bottomed out on the bigger hits. Geometry-wise, the XL G1 has a slightly longer front centre, if only by about 20 mm. I found it a little easier to keep the front wheel properly weighted on the Spur, while I can't say I found the Spur lacking stability. When it comes to climbing, however, the G1 is surprisingly good. It's leagues ahead of the Spur.

One thing they have in common is both bikes were more limited by their forks than the rear suspension. A few days after riding the Spur, I took a Privateer 161 out to test some shocks on the same tracks. That bike was fitted with a 190mm travel RockShox Zeb fitted with a Vorsprung Secus. The 161 was a little less planted at the rear with either (air) shock I was testing, but the bigger fork, which could be run softer without bottoming-out, seemed to more than compensate, making it easier to hit the most blown-out sections without flinching and to complete long runs without hand pain. All this is to say that the Spur needs a suppler, longer travel fork to reach its full potential.

There are plenty of bikes with 170 mm at the rear and 170- or 180mm at the front, like the Nukeproof Giga, Specialized Enduro or Norco Range. With suppler forks than this particular test bike, there probably isn't much between them on the descents, but those bikes are better climbers (even the Range) and so probably make more sense for most people. Having said that, a Spur with a suppler, longer-travel fork would be genuinely fantastic for someone who isn't fussed about climbing speed but wants supreme terrain-calming performance and reliability.



photo
Magura MT7 brakes
photo
Michellin E-Wild Front tyres

Technical Report


Magura MT7 brakes: These are seriously powerful, consistent, intuitive, and I like the ergonomics of the broad lever blade too. After a couple of runs, I forgot about them, which is high praise.

Michellin E-Wild Front 2.6" tires: These may seem like an odd choice but, due to supply issues, Starling offered me these or Michelin's ultra-sticky DH22, so I went with these as a faster-rolling option to give me some chance on the climbs. I like the 2.6" size as it gives a bit more cushioning while still playing nicely with normal 30 mm rims. They felt a bit vague in really aggressive hardpack turns but I put that down to the low pressures I was running, and a 25 mm rim at the rear. Braking grip was only so-so with the harder centre compound, and grip really seemed to suffer in freezing temperatures, but cornering bite in soft conditions was impressive and rolling speed seems decent too.




Pros

+ Super supple rear suspension performance
+ Quiet in the rough
+ Stable, predictable and confident when riding fast
+ Surprisingly agile
+ Reliable, derailleur-free drivetrain

Cons

- Climbing is a real drag
- Shifting the Effigear gearbox can be frustrating, especially on undulating terrain
- "170mm" fork measures up short and can't match the rear for sensitivity





Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesPart of the reason we love small-scale manufacturers is that they're not trying to appeal to everyone, and it's clear the Spur fills a pretty narrow niche. It's for those who want something a little more robust and downhill capable than a regular enduro bike, but who still need to pedal so don't want a full-blown downhill bike. The Spur could be the ideal bike for someone who gets most of their riding uplifted but occasionally wants to explore beyond the bike park into the hills beyond. The ideal customer might be an Alpine guide for whom reliability is paramount, who likes to get a bit wild on the descents and who doesn't mind pedalling a bit harder on the way up to the lift.

On the descents, the Spur is stable, predictable and quiet, with smooth and sensitive rear suspension. It's a joy to ride on fast, blown-out trails. It's also surprisingly easy to chuck around in the tighter stuff and the lack of a derailleur gives you one less thing to think about when squeezing through boulders or tree stumps. But realistically, the best long-travel enduro bikes aren't going to be left behind when pointed downhill, yet the Spur is noticeably slower on the way back up. And while the rear suspension sensitivity is superb, I'm not convinced it works that much better than some derailleur-driven bikes with this much travel and a well-tuned coil shock. The promise of bombproof reliability and the bespoke, handmade feel are additional selling points. It's up to you how much those are worth.
Seb Stott





Author Info:
seb-stott avatar

Member since Dec 29, 2014
297 articles

256 Comments
  • 136 2
 looks at charts, understands nothing.... the bike looks cool tho
  • 14 2
 I would never want one, but I'm glad they exist. Really cool bike, that looks like it was made in a shed (pun intended)
  • 4 1
 Straight lines…Neko would approve
  • 11 1
 I really love Sebs analytical reviews. Gives me the illusion of feeling smart, and nowhere to hide for the manufacturer. My favourite bike editor for quality reviews.

Do you do your technical analysis before or after you ride the bike @sebstott ?
  • 1 0
 @tadpoledancer: Good question. Would be ideal if reviewers did that after riding the bikes.
  • 1 0
 no it doesnt
  • 77 1
 Great review - really detailed going into most aspects of this un-usual build. The fork travel issue is something I have seen before too and can be frustrating if you cant increase travel by 10mm to compensate. I am not ready to ditch the derailleur for this kind of gearbox yet - couldnt stand the need to back-pedal to change gear.
  • 5 1
 I agree - great review but those tires or tire-rim pair for the rear (25mm rim with 2.6 tire) reduce the verdict's quality quite a bit. Especially as they were new to him.
With all the effort he put into this review I think he should have put some tires on the rig he is familiar with.
But that's really complaining at a high level, Seb's reviews are always great to read.
  • 6 1
 @moerkster: Swapping tires would be the next step for sure but that's not how standalone reviews tend to be done because it only really pays off when you're comparing it directly to rival bikes. Plus the tyres work fine even on these rims - the true width is 2.5" so they're only about 0.15" wider than the regular Wild Enduros which I am familiar with.

But I'm not trying to make excuses - fitting familiar tyres would be better but it's hard to get hold of tyres right now and I didn't have an appropriate spare pair lying around.
  • 2 1
 I agree the effigear isn't exactly up there yet to be a derailleur alternative. I've ridden both the pinion and effigear (have pinion on my daily mtb) and the pinion is worlds better than the effigear, once you get a couple rides in you figure out the timing of when to shift and its second nature. effigear is cool cause of the trigger shifter but imo not worth it over pinion
  • 74 3
 9 percent slower uphill when riding alone, who cares.
9 percent more power, to just to keep up with your mate? that is a serious loss that could be pushing you into the next heartrate zone, it could be a serious reduction in ride enjoyment or duration.
  • 46 6
 I would care either way. That's a ton slower.
  • 41 4
 Or it might be a good tool for someone who fitter than their mates, but no so good downhill?
  • 2 1
 What about a wider gear range offering providing an extra ~100% in going downhill? Pinion. Has a 636% gearing and I'm sure their highest gearing would put pedal an Eagle 11x30 setup.
  • 15 1
 @SamuraiSlam: all trails are different, but I dont think I have ever been in the position on a downwards pointing off road trail that my speed was limited by my top gear of 32-11.
  • 8 2
 9% on a 72 second climb. Perhaps a bit higher percentage on a 30 minute clime, as in a climb long enough to get to the top of an actual hill?. For comparison, I can probably wrestle a 250 lb opponent for 72 seconds about as well as a 150 lb one. After a bit longer, not so much.
  • 10 0
 That test should have been done with the same tires.
  • 5 4
 After a while youd be 9% stronger than your mate tho(!)

Math pinkers: would that be comparable to climbing on a similar bike as your mate but with a backpack loaded with stones of 9% of your body wheight?
  • 9 0
 @SamuraiSlam: Gearing doesn't give you free power. You'd still be doing 9% more work.
  • 2 0
 @Jolinwood:

9% of body weight + bike weight, but yes.
  • 1 0
 @hllclmbr: cool thanks. Yeah thats a bit much perhaps.
  • 2 1
 @phutphutend: target audience: xc lycra wearer trying to keep up with fellow riders descending on trail bikes
  • 2 0
 @mi-bike: totally
  • 14 10
 This Starling is a pretty much the Jaguar E-Type of the bike world.

It's not trying to be everything, and it's certainly not buying into the same marketing of how every 150mm+ travel bike has to pedal like it has "so much less than the numbers". We all happily know that's marketing bullshit when there's a conventional drivetrain strapped to the bike, but somehow putting a gearbox there makes this sacrifice untenable.

Sometimes owning a bike is about more than just percentage points of power, or whether it is the fastest or lightest. Starling have gone and made something they think is beautiful and people who agree will go and buy it. The rest of you can go on and sour grapes your way into owning something more efficient without a hint of the soul that this bike has and pretend you got a better deal.
  • 18 3
 @Zaff: too many hits from the bong
  • 9 1
 @Zaff: Slight correction: It's the Jag E-Type with a homemade LPG conversion of the bike world.
  • 10 1
 @Zaff: I kinda like the point you're making here, and it harks back to a similar recent debate in these comments about 'emotion vs. logic' in bike buying decisions.

If you're just looking for the objectively best long travel trail/enduro/park bike it's unlikely to start with a handmade £3,300 steel gearbox single pivot frame.

But if you WANT a bike just like this (as I do, for the record) then nothing else will do. And that's enough of a business case for Starling to exist and produce them.
  • 4 5
 @Zaff: YOu have actually seen a Jaguar "E" Type and have some Idea about it's history?

I would probably google robin reliant as a more accurate baseline
  • 5 1
 @thewanderingtramp: I'd go more Land Rover Defender. A hefty but simple bit of machinery that has a cult following even if the more modern alternatives acheive the same thing with modern materials and electronics, for the same or less money. Most owners won't ever come close to the limits of either.
  • 1 0
 @codypup: It was 9% slower given the same power output, so the 9% would apply to any length of effort.
  • 1 2
 @AyJayDoubleyou: I like that!

Really wanted a Defender for the business, seemed to fit the business perfectly!
  • 2 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou: You misspelled CULT
  • 2 0
 @AlexBroach: True, if your energy reserves are infinite.
  • 2 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou: Ignoring the new Defender of course
  • 1 0
 @AyJayDoubleyou: bc its a new bike, more Ineos Grenadier than Landrover Defender imo
  • 55 0
 Be careful when you are ordering your Spur for the BCBR. Double check the brand.
  • 2 2
 Yep, a potential Solo/5010 situation here. Starling may need to Transition to a new name! Funny the two bikes couldn't be more opposite.
  • 1 0
 Spur of the moment replies don’t get any more spurious than this.
  • 39 4
 I know it’s blasphemy to a lot of you out there, but I don’t think the gearbox is going to happen. There are pros just don’t seem to outweigh the cons compared to the pros and cons of the simple derailleur.
  • 10 0
 Cons for gearbox would be weight and efficiency, and I agree with you that gearboxes will likely never reach deraillers capabilities for those points. Hence, for application such as road bikes or XC, I don’t see any possibilities for gearboxes. However, for gravity bikes and ebikes, I can imagine them being popular someday because the cons of gearboxes would not hurt as much, and their pros could benefit a little more.

I could see the market providing options for different drive systems for different applications.
  • 5 1
 I'd love to have a gearbox, but being a father with limited time to train I cannot afford a 9% loss in efficiency uphill and for shuttle or uplift riding i hardly need gears. I've been on a SS DH bike for years now and it's been great for that purpose. For eBikes however they should be a great solution, like for real motorcycles.
  • 6 1
 @t1000: to be fair, i also have a MX background, so some bias there.
  • 6 0
 @Muckal: Indeed for muscular I'm skeptical, but for ebikes I could see gearbox/motor solutions crushing the market soon. Many people don't care about performance and would rather have reliability, something that won't rust or put grease on their pants.
  • 1 1
 I could see it for a touring or bike packing bike but not normal mtb.
  • 9 23
flag DoubleCrownAddict (Feb 14, 2022 at 14:13) (Below Threshold)
 Gearboxes are going to happen, especially because of e bikes. When it finally does happen and is dialed, these kind of derailleur supporting statements are going to seem asinine and offensive in retrospect. As much as I hated front derailleurs, the rear derailleur is worse because of it's location. I ride though alot of raw loam trails that I make quickly and then abandon once the erosion starts and they become hardpack, I'm tired of getting grass and sticks in my rear derailleur. Keep road bike technology on road bikes.
  • 4 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: money talks and that's why the external drivetrain will keep on keeping on long after it should die. Marketing, demand, sales, profit, repeat.
The efficiency bit is kind of moot. Look at big fat tyres. Totally inefficient but everyone uses them for the benefits they offer. Suspension, likewise.
How much efficiency is silence worth?
  • 3 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: Effibike are working on a combined motor gearbox at the minute and I'd be amazed if the big motor manufacturers aren't also looking at them
  • 4 0
 @briain: CVT is where it's at for ebikes if you ask me.
  • 1 0
 @briain: They are and from what someone said they were unsure if Effigear were big enough to finacially survive in that market
  • 2 1
 @thewanderingtramp: the motor unit is made with Valeo. They are big enough.
  • 1 0
 @faul: That was the issue VALEO are fine the gearbox part is not up to the same level of scale or expertise and industry level
  • 1 0
 @jaame: I would wonder about weight and size of a CVT system. But what you could is use a torque sensor to auto shift or a cadence sensor to figure it out the tech will be there just if someone decides to use it. Honestly surprised SRAM haven't added this to AXS yet
  • 1 0
 @thewanderingtramp: I'm sure their where prototype pictures knocking around about a year ago of the system. So they must be close
  • 1 0
 @briain: when you actually look inside a Taiwanese scooter CVT system, there's not a lot to it, and it could be made a lot smaller because motors and legs don't make 8-15hp.
Your idea is also a good one though. Taking control of the gears away from the rider would free up mental I/O for other tasks.
  • 3 0
 @jaame: It's been done and didn't catch on for legpowered bikes. NuVinci it was called.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NuVinci_Continuously_Variable_Transmission. The technology lives on though, mostly for e-bikes under the name of Enviolo. That company just got bought by some big investment firm.
  • 1 0
 @jaame: Just browsed a bit and I see many major brands that equip their commuter e-bikes with Enviolo. Giant, Trek, Cannondale, Cube, to name a few.
  • 30 2
 Every time someone speaks of UK riding it involves mud and slop... yet UK bike builders seem to love drillouts and fancy mud catching machined bits.
  • 25 0
 We even complain about it not being muddy enough come summer time.
  • 25 0
 Yeah but without the drillouts where will we keep our slop?
  • 4 0
 @Peskycoots: Battery compartment init.
  • 2 0
 I thought these holes were there to allow the mud to drain when summer comes around. Or do people actually clean their bikes in between rides?
  • 1 3
 Do you have any other examples to support this contention?
  • 1 0
 @chakaping: No
And I don't care to... because it was a comment made in jest
  • 1 4
 @pourquois-pas: French Canadians whats worse!
  • 24 1
 HEY, this one´s got a chain! it might even work!
  • 20 1
 Honest question — given the climbing ability of this bike, weight, and it’s descent oriented intentions I’m having a hard time seeing a practical benefit over an actual dh bike? It’d probably be easier / faster to simply hike a dh bike to the top rather than lug this around.
  • 9 0
 Or why doesn't it ship with a dual crown and 200mm?
  • 10 0
 theres that guy at vital racing enduro in the usa on a pivot phoenix with a zeb, it looks amazing
  • 1 0
 I think the biggest advantage is lower unsprung weight at the wheel and a lower center of gravity generally.
  • 4 0
 @hamncheez: This. This bike looks definitely made for lift assisted rides, give it a dual crown fork and make it a proper DH bike.

This or make it an e-bike.
  • 17 1
 Obviously the grass on that side of the fence is vibrant, but I don't see any way that gear boxes can live up to the hype for meat powered bikes that pedal up. The watts are too few and the metal to metal interfaces too many. And unfortunately there is no "improved efficiency" waiting in the wings - the design is fundamentally more draggy than a chain by a wide margin.

And for what? Yeah, the derailleur is a risk for unscheduled removal, but it could be reoriented if that's such a big deal. And waxing chains virtually eliminates the contamination issues with exposed chains. Not that this concept addresses that since it still uses a chain.

If durability is so important, tape a spare derailleur and chain to your seatstay for every ride. Or demand companies make a drivetrain storage box for that massive area where the gear box goes. Then if you hit a rock just swap it out. I joke, but this is still much lighter than a gearbox, and Deore is cheap.

Unsprung weight? Maybe. When gear boxes take over DH bikes we can talk again. But if it can't dominate an area that gets all the benefits and none of the drawbacks, what are we even talking about?

Anyway though, I appreciate and commend Starling for making this. I hope the people so excited for gear boxes can get one. I hope it turns out to be everything they ever hoped for even if it's not what I want. Thanks to all the gear box aficionados for trying to make bikes better even if I don't agree with the direction. You guys really love bikes. This is one of the things that makes mountain biking so great compared to many other hobbies - relatively affordable access to crazy ideas well outside the mainstream. And while I don't quite understand the obsession with having a drive train that simulates constantly pedaling in sand, it's great that someone can get one. And maybe I'm totally wrong and in 10 years we'll all be on the things.
  • 4 0
 I'm riding nexus hubs on 4 bikes, and as they are worse than the effigear in term of efficiency, I can confidently tell that the drag issue is non existant for anyone who don't compete.
This bike however has a shitty antisquat, a flat leverage curve and two freewheels, making it way less efficient (and less able to shift properly) than any other bike, gearbox or not.
Take the same bike design, make it 27 or mulet, put the gearbox in a vertical position and it would be much better. Add links somewhere and you can hide the gearbox efficiency loss by having a bike that can actually pedal.
  • 4 0
 Great post. I often think the ardent gearbox fans are armchair riders anyway.

Wonder if Starling have or would make a conventional version of this bike? I'd love to see that go up against the more conventional "super-enduro" bikes.
  • 2 0
 I agree with most of your points- if gearboxes really have an unsprung weight advantage we would see more than that one effigear bike in DHX world cups (which embarrassingly broke during the live feed).

However, I think the efficiency gap could narrow enough to where they might make actual, practical sense for some. This guy did a bunch of efficiency tests with a 2x11 shimano vs Rolloff and a few other gearboxes. The dramatic offset chainline required for the 40 tooth cassette in the lowest gear actually made Rolloff comparably efficient. And this was with a clean chain in a lab. I know waxing helps with dirty chains, but most people don't do it, or if they do they don't keep it up as they should. Now with 12 speed cassettes and boost spaced BBs, the chainline is even worse. I think its possible to eventually have a gearbox thats only 2-3% less efficient in the lower gears than a 12 speed derailleur based drivetrain, and honestly if it rises to 5 or 7% for the higher gears thats tolerable, since youre probably pointed downhill at that point.

With a mature industry, its also probable that the weight could come down to be comparable to Deore and GX drivetrains. Kindernay's 7 speed and Shimano's Affline 11 speed hubs are already very close to Deore (but they have other issues).
  • 3 0
 whoops forgot to post the links:

www.cyclingabout.com/speed-difference-testing-gearbox-systems
www.cyclingabout.com/drivetrain-efficiency-difference-speed-between-1x-2x

Also I misspelled Rohloff literally every single time haha.
  • 2 0
 Products like these aren't for the "just buy Deore" crowd. If everyone bought on pure practicality nobody would buy anything but Toyota RAV4s.

The closest I've ever ridden to one of these was a Shimano Nexus hybrid but it was definitely not like pedaling in sand. It's metal gears in an oil bath, not a torque converter.
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: Oh dear. That rabbit hole is deep. Lot of interesting stuff in there, and it's definitely surprising how well the best gear systems did.

I think it's dangerous to cross reference the two test results as the first link attempts to do. While both tests appear to be internally consistent, they were performed on different equipment in different situations using different protocols. Note that the single speed result from the gearbox test was better than the best result from the geared tests, despite the fact that several of the geared tests were on perfect chainlines.

And the rant I've been wanting to get off my chest for a while... Jason Smith and Ceramic Speed are great and I appreciate their work. But it's so frustrating that the "1X vs 2X" test failed to control for chain losses between the two companies. When comparing the data for perfect chainlines it's obvious that the shimano system has a significant inherent advantage, and Smith even speculates it's because shimano chains are faster. Which is good info, but I'm here to learn about 1X drivetrains!

While I'm talking about that test, I dug into that 1X vs 2X data a while back and came to a few conclusions:
1. Chainline losses in low gears are almost completely offset by reduced friction larger cogs.
2. Shimano chains are faster in a straight line, AND experience less impact from chainline than SRAM. SRAM has the edge on durability based on other testing though.
3. If you run your 1X with a Shimano chain it's very similar to the 2X in low gears but still takes a step back when going fast.
  • 3 0
 @office: There are two major camps of gear box fans: people who think it's cool and would like one, and people who think derailleurs are the dumbest idea ever and anyone who likes them is an idiot technophobe.

The first crowd is cool, and definitely not in the "just buy deore" camp. My last paragraph is directed to them.

The second crowd is more vocal and regularly uses arguments like reliability and replacement cost to justify their opinion about everyone else's riding choices. They are the ones who have to confront the cost of the very good alternatives on the market like Deore.
  • 2 0
 @Blackhat: 1) 'low gears' = 'larger cogs' so not certain what you are trying to say here. If you are trying to say that the 50-52t 1st gear cassette cogs commonly available now allow riders to run a bigger front chainring making the chainline friction negligible due to a larger radius on the front chainring, well I completely disagree. 2) You might be right, however I've never felt so much drag in 1st as I do in 1st gear on my HG+ 1st gear (51t, obviously). The drag is atrocious, related to chainline for sure. Never noticed this before on the SRAM drivetrain I ran on the same bike with the same chainline. The saving grace is the 45t 2nd gear on the HG+ cassette essentially makes 1st gear unneeded anyways.
  • 2 0
 @SunsPSD: Larger cogs have lower friction because the chain doesn't have to pivot as far. But of course to get into that cog it has to go into a chainline that sideloads the chain and increases friction. Based on my reading of the published data, when transitioning from say a 25t with a straight chainline to a 51t with the angled chainline the two effects roughly offset and efficiency is relatively flat.

Not sure what to make of your particular situation. Chain efficiency is so difficult to test and present properly that we only have a few snapshots to extrapolate from. As far as I know nobody has published data from 12 speed drivetrains or the HG+ 51t. I hear about how draggy the big cog feels, but the actual testing data does not hint at such a major effect for chainline and Shimano is generally reported as faster than SRAM. My Shimano feels fine in the 51, but I doubt my ability to detect the difference. The only thing I can think of is maybe the chain binds at the very extreme of chainline and you're going past that, but that's not supported by anything beyond intuition. Or maybe you're running a cheaper chain than the stuff we have data on and it's more sensitive to chainline?
  • 2 0
 @Blackhat: Valid points. Heck maybe it's just all the racket I hear in 1st gear that wasn't there in 2nd gear from the chain being bound. PS. I run new XTR HG+ chains that I clean and wax when new.
  • 1 0
 @Blackhat: Yes, they are two different tests. However, if we tried to adjust them to be comparable, or tested both at the same wattage, the gearboxes would gain ground, as they are found to increase in efficiency at higher watts.

The point is that there is the potential for gearboxes, in the lowest gears, to be close enough in efficiency that tests have to be very controlled and very precise to catch the difference. If weight comes down a bit more, they can possibly compete there too.

All that being said, if the unsprung mass was really that beneficial we would see more than a single solitary gearbox in World Cups over the last 10 years (or maybe 7 speed DH drivetrains are so much lighter than massive 800 gram SX cassettes it doesn't matter?). I still hate the idea that we ride an offroad vehicle with the transmission hanging outside the rear wheel, completely open to the elements.
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez:
I think you are misinterpreting the datas.
The test at 50W and 200W show an increase in efficiency, But you can't extrapolate from that alone. There is proportional losses due to frictions in the "working" gears, fixed losses from the bearings, seals, "non working" gears, and probably "variable" losses due to anything non-linear (deflection, lubing efficiency, ...). There is a huge chance that going from 200 to 250W, the efficiency in % would be really close.
But yes the efficiency of boxes and geared hub is already close enough to not be a real world issue if you aren't counting the watt. There is more difference in two tires than there is between a box and a mech.

And the weight of a rear mech and cassette, isn't only unsprung, it's also away from the CoG of the bike, and if unsprug mass has a debatable effect on suspension action, having weight in the wheel rather than close to the bottom bracket is something detrimental. I don't think WC DH bikes are riding mech and cassette for technical reason only, as we would see more often boxed bikes. Maybe it's because brand want to sell the bike to consumer afterward and gearboxes don't match the price point (or variety of price points). Maybe it's too different for rider to be used to. Maybe designing a frame around a box only for one bike in the range isn't relevant. There is many reason not to use a gearbox that isn't due to technical advantages. (that's also true to many other parameters, as we are still seing changes like wheel size or frame geometry, after years of them being the same, proof that sometimes the best solution isn't considered yet)
  • 1 0
 @SunsPSD: Nice. That's the best all round setup on the market IMO. Still not quite got the wear life of eagle, but those chains are really draggy. Unfortunately there's no friction measurement from Shimano 12S to compare to, but Shimano generally is very fast. I'll be buying an XTR as soon the bank account recovers enough from the new bike purchase to buy spare parts.

What do you use for your quicklink? If Shimano have you tried reusing it, and if not Shimano any effect on shifting? I'm considering just throwing my wipperman 11s link on there and seeing what happens. Any wax related insights into Shimano 12s appreciated.
  • 12 0
 I feel bad for all the trashing that gearboxes get, but at the same time, it might serve as motivation for someone to make a non-derailleur drivetrain that is more efficient than a traditional setup. Cool bike for R&D, but I think it has a long way to go before it finds a big market.
  • 20 6
 I cant see a gearbox with meshed gears every being more efficient than the humble derailleur. Maybe a 'derailleur in a can' could get close though. The future is surely gearbox e-bikes where the extra drag is largely irrelevant.
  • 1 0
 @justanotherusername: Right, which is why I'm saying this probably isn't the move. BUT, it should inspire engineers to make a better system. Pretty much the only viable solution, currently is the same solution we've always had. It's time for something new, but I don't think the gearbox is it.
  • 14 0
 @danielfloyd: The trouble is there is almost nowhere to go in terms of efficiency compared to a derailleur system. They are literally one of the most efficient mechanical systems on the planet when well maintained. Nobody is going to be able to feel the difference between 95% efficient and 97% efficient and it is not realistically possible to get much better than those kind of numbers without using some kind of magic to transmit leg motion directly to the rear wheel.

Gearboxes and hub gears can't compete on efficiency and likely never will be able to but they can offer something different and advantages (such as shifting at a standstill or when not pedalling) that derailleur gears can't do at all or can't do without very clever electronics.
  • 5 1
 @justanotherusername: I'm surprised there isn't a zerode g1 style ebike yet, with a super high pivot and frame mounted gear hub. 170 rear, 200 dc fork, would be an amazing self shuttle dh bike.
  • 13 21
flag justanotherusername (Feb 14, 2022 at 9:38) (Below Threshold)
 @DroppingThreeTwoOne: I’m not sure what kind of motorcycles have ridden but I haven’t been on any I needed to pedal….

Well done for adding some cliche ebike bullshit anyway, very original.
  • 14 4
 @justanotherusername: great point! why would you want to pedal a motorbike?
  • 3 1
 @justanotherusername: pedal an pop.....
  • 5 8
 @naptime: pedal and poop more like.

@thegoodflow: aah go lick an ebike battery ;-)
  • 6 0
 @Patrick9-32: "it is not realistically possible to get much better than those kind of numbers without using some kind of magic to transmit leg motion directly to the rear wheel"

Unicycles. Checkmate.

But in all seriousness, even the "derailleur in a box" isn't going to be as efficient, since you need at least 2 cogs in your "gearbox" and still need two cogs to transmit power back to the rear wheel via chain or belt (or driveshaft)
  • 4 0
 I think whatever company it was that oriented their deraileur so it sat parallel to the chainstay is the winner, solves the problem without reinventing the wheel
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: You already have 4 turns in a derailleur system which matches the simplest derailleur box but the difference would be that instead of making 2 loaded and 2 unloaded bends all 4 would be under load. Then we have to find a way to tension one of the chains.

But if that box completely prevents contamination you might be able to redesign the chain for efficiency and close the gap. Maybe Teflon bushings between the link and pin?
  • 4 0
 @DroppingThreeTwoOne: I figured out a good number of people really want to be on a dirt bike, but they don’t want to admit it.so instead they play the game of getting as close to a dirt bike, while not being a dirt bike.
  • 4 2
 @robertg620: word on the street is you are a bit of a fanny.
  • 1 0
 @Blackhat: The main barrier is no one wants to ride with a dinner-plate sized enclosure inside their frame. Ebikes like the Pivot Shuttle are already mocked for looking like a pregnant cow.
  • 1 0
 @Blackhat: But more seriously, articulation of the chain isn't the primary source of friction, its the interaction with the cog itself. A single speed is more efficient than a derailleur + cassette in an optimal chainline combo because a single speed chain and cogs don't have to allow for bad chainlines and shifting, so they are more optimally shaped. Additionally, any cog interaction almost always means a bearing interaction as well. A traditional drivetrain has two sets of bearings- the bottom bracket and rear hub. This hypothetical derailleur in a box (mbaction.com/hayes-to-market-chain-driven-gearbox-system-oct-5) has at least two more sets of bearings, more if there are tensioners.
  • 2 0
 @hamncheez: the derailleur also has two bearings in the jockeys.

I think you’re mistaken on chain friction. The explanations I’ve read point to the articulation at the pin-plate interface as the primary source of friction. If there was significant friction at the interface between the roller and cog surface the proper optimization would be to reduce surface area of the contact interface, which would tend to be better for the cassette than the single speed.

zerofrictioncycling.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Friction-Producing-Mechanisms.pdf

Side note: that document claims that loaded articulations are what counts.
  • 16 0
 That ‘hand crafted brace’ sure looks laser cut to me…
  • 1 0
 Where does it say "handcrafted brace"?
  • 4 0
 @Lotusoperandi: Photo caption: "That brace of Starlings is a handcrafted detail you don't get with bigger brands"

So no, but kinda yes.
  • 4 1
 @barp: Ah, the photo caption. Didn't read those. Technically there is a hand that hits "print" to make those so.... ..... Wink

It is a nice detail nonetheless.
  • 15 0
 46% anti squat holy hell. I've seen trampolines that bounce around less than that.
  • 7 0
 Username checks out.
  • 4 1
 We tried suspension pivots concentric to the bb (as this effectively is) in the 90’s when the whole sport was trying to be more like MX. They were great for downhill coasting but the moment you started to pedal, they came undone. I get why they’ve tried this design but there’s a good reason why even modern LSP have high anti squat.
  • 1 3
 @Afterschoolsports: Concentric bb pivot has a significantly different wheelpath than this.. much shorter swingarm gives way tighter arc and 100% forward wheelpath (assuming the bike has bb drop, as they do), and both of these differences negatively effect pedaling. Chain angle is also a big factor with pedal-induced suspension movement. This bike’s chain angle is parallel and much closer to the pivot than say, the 30t ring on a concentric bb pivot design.
  • 10 1
 So errr:

- Heavier than a Levo SL e-bike
- Draggy to pedal
- You have to backpedal to change gear
- Not as much travel as advertised
- Linear suspension kinematic from 10 years ago (which on other reviews seems to be a massive negative)
- £3500 frame only

So no thanks. Oh and bolt-on braces suck and always creak.
  • 4 0
 I'm kind of a sucker for somewhat pointless boutique stuff. But this is beyond what I'm prepared to tolerate
  • 5 4
 Which reviews say linear suspension is no good. Nothing but glowing reviews for Starling suspension!
  • 2 1
 @phutphutend: why is linear suspension better?
  • 8 0
 Now i much prefer the sound of the custom 200/200 version of this that is being made. Seems much more suited to a downhill bike than an enduro considering the pedalling and downshifting issues. Also with the adjustable geometry it should make slotting a 27.5 wheel in pretty easy too
  • 2 0
 200/200 with an Ohlins 38DH up front.... Sounds like a pedallable DH bike.
  • 13 2
 This bike is a no go. Who the hell wants a 40lbnon electric bike? Non starter and waste of time.
  • 8 0
 What about 39.5 lbs
  • 1 0
 Location of weight matters. Seems to me that the added weight comes from the gearbox (and the mounts thereof) so that seems like a good position.
  • 5 0
 Wow! What a thorough and thoughtful review. The suspension analysis and efficiency comparison with the Privateer were impressive additions. I know I'm in the minority, but I'd gladly trade some uphill efficiency to a dramatic decrease in drivetrain maintenance and better handling. I'm a big guy (~250lbs) and chew through drivetrain components. I also tend to ride in wet conditions with admittedly poor pedaling technique. I need to do the math, but I suspect over a few years the increased cost of the gearbox would be more than offset by what I spend in new drivetrain parts. I'd like to see the Effigear Mimic on a mid-travel bike with a burly air fork. I'm glad there are builders like Starling that will experiment with new ideas and good on Pinkbike for giving this bike a full review.
  • 5 1
 @Seb-stott your issues with the Ohlins fork are due to your setup. You've tuned yourself into a hole going for a softer setup.
You need to run them with more low speed compression and more preload (and probably faster rebound) to get them to ride higher in the travel. The setup you were running makes you run low in the travel where the spring force is higher and it feels harsh over chattery bumps.
How do I know... I did the same thing initially. It's counter intuitive but it works.
If you did that the front and rear would have balanced much better.
  • 7 1
 And people keep saying that Ohlins makes a superior product. Funny that both my RS 180 forks measure up at… 180.
  • 5 1
 The more you look into suspension the more obvious it is people want to believe there's a magic solution that the big players are too blind to see. Ohlins, Cane Creek, DVO... all fine products I'm sure, but Fox and RS can put 10 to 100 times the engineering hours into a damper or air spring. And by all accounts - like Seb's 10 fork side by side for bike radar - the RS and Fox offerings are quite spectacular when looking at actual performance.

That said, RS recently had to update their air spring because it was sucking into the stroke for some pressure/travel settings. But at least the fork actually could extent to the rated travel...
  • 3 2
 Those forks are amazing. He ran them set up totally wrong.
  • 2 0
 @Blackhat: Chris Porter offers a compelling argument why that air spring was better before the change. If you care to listen, it's in his interview on the NSMB podcast.
  • 1 0
 @JamesR2026: I had one as well and found the same issue. No matter what I did it always felt harsh. I spoke to a couple of UK suspension tuners who both said the damper is good but over damped from the factory. I could have had it retuned, but I really didn't want to throw money at it in case I still didn't like it, so I just changed to a Lyrik Ultimate.
  • 1 0
 @AndrewHornor: I know it's a popular opinion that the previous Debonair spring was better, but I much prefer the higher, more predictable ride feel of the newer one.
  • 3 0
 @Blackhat: I think its more that each brand is trying to find its small niche... Knowledge regarding the suspension is at really high level right now, engineers have really good idea what they are doing and how a particular change might be compensated somewhere else, but in the end there is no magic formula, for example you increase negative chamber volume, you gain some plushness but the fork dives deeper into the travel, now you probably have to compensate that with something in the damper... Its all about the finding the balance. Well smaller brands probably have more control (or just care more) about quality control, I believe two big names get the most hate for the CSU issues... Also its been said before, OEM bikes and components are designed for average riders, this is where smaller brands come in, most obvious is Cascade components who said that they dont make better links but different as they do not have to follow so many restrictions. And finally its probably also a bit personal as it is easier to connect with a rider owned small company compared to the multi billion corporation who just posts net profit at the end of the year but does not really address CSU issues for year...
  • 3 0
 @militantmandy: was that the current 18mm piston version or the old 22mm one?
They changed the damper to the smaller piston to match the DH fork with less damping.
Ohlins also offer a range of different tunes if you need to go lighter.
That's not the problem here. In the same review he is talking about getting pillowy softness from winding on more compression damping in the rear shock and complaining about harshness in the fork while running the fork with no compression damping. The lack of low speed is making the dynamic ride height too low and he's riding small bumps in a harsher part of the spring's travel. The lack of stiction in the coil makes this more of an issue. Ohlins specs a heavier compression tune on the coil version for this reason.
  • 2 0
 @AndrewHornor: I’ve actually looked for the old model spring to try out. It’s stupid that they don’t keep making it as a side grade option. Still, whether or not the “fix” is better overall, it’s an objective failure to meet parameters if a 170mm product doesn’t do 170mm.

Consumers and the industry need to be careful how they respond to such failures though, as complaints about the new spring being less supple illustrate. That’s what happens when you equalize +/- higher in the stroke and reduce negative volume just to hit the top out bumper every time. I would rather see an over stroked air assembly that’s designed for a little extra sag combined with advertising that states a range instead of a single arbitrary round number.
  • 1 0
 Little known fact about the Ohlins coil forks; they have a thicker bump rubber at the bottom of the lowers than the air forks. If you are just pushing down vs smashing into it, you will not compress it enough to get the last bit of travel.
  • 9 6
 I don't understand how a limited edition of a PINK FORK made in Taiwan for Valentine's Day is better welcomed than the original and artisanal proposal of a craftsman who manufactures locally, and want to share something a bit different than usual. Pinkbike has changed.
  • 7 0
 Taiwan isn't that much further from PB headquarters than Bristol, I guess, what is local depends on ... location. Also, this is a review. The pink fork was a press release. I'm glad Seb doesn't say the bike climbs excellent just because it was made in the same town where the company boss lives. Sure, this may be a reason to buy the bike for some. But in a review, I want to know how the bike rides. And this review, like most on this site, does well at telling me that.
  • 1 3
 I know perfectly well what a press release is, what "local" means, and what makes a press review good or not. I'm a product engineer for a small mountain bike brand by the way....I was just talking about the way it was presented which seemed reductive to me at first, regarding all the work behind the products versus the size of the brands involved....

And i was not telling that about the tester also... the review is not as bad as what you're trying to make me say.

(I don't have shares at Starling, Cane Creek or Effigear).
  • 1 0
 To be fair, only some parts are made in Taiwan. The fork is actually made in North Carolina. Same deal as Formula forks being made in Italy. Taiwan is just the best place to get stanchions and some castings made for a not-stupid price. Most of the parts come from the USA, or Italy in the case of Formula, and they're assembled in the USA/Italy. I'm sure the same is true of EXT and BOS.

I agree with the sentiment of your comment though. Just another limited colorway part vs an actually interesting frame that does things differently and has a fun marketing hook. (Gosh that sounds a lot like Brooklyn Machine Works, which would prob get everyone fainting with joy if they came back. Myself included.)
  • 2 0
 @RobinHoodOnBikes: I still don't quite understand what you mean by "better welcomed" .They just dumped the press release on the site, as usual. The review has a lot of work in it and is well done. With the Murmur in the field test and this review Starling is getting a lot attention from Pinkbike lately, IMHO they can't complain. What "seemed reductive" to you? What is the "way it was presented" you speak of?
I didn't try to 'make you say anything' . I just expressed my opinion that the size or location of the company should not be a factor in the technical part of the review. Even though it is given attention in the introduction in this case. A bike with octagonal wheels would be very 'original and artisanal' . But it would ride like sh!t. I want Seb to ride the bike and tell me how that was. And then I will decide for myself whether this version of 'original and artisanal' is what I want. Last time I was shopping for bikes I had a lengthy conversation with a guy that welds custom steel frames in a shed that is biking distance away from me. Prices were similar to what I would have paid for a Starling at the time. Due to career choice and priorities outside of biking, I couldn't afford either so I went with a German consumer direct product. But if small and local was the deciding factor a company from a country that recently chose to give me and my fellow Europeans the finger wouldn't be an option for me.
  • 2 0
 @RobinHoodOnBikes: BTW, Starling doesn't make forks so one could in principle buy a Spur frame and put a pink Helm fork on it. It's a bit short though.
  • 3 0
 £3,330 for the frame and 40lbs complete. Given the travel on this bike and the fact that it's not an ebike both of those facts are ridiculous and literally made me laugh out loud. Is innovation now just making things that nobody really buys (a gear box... really, we are still doing this?) and then making it a price nobody pays because, "tHeRe's a BiKe ShOrTaGe"?
  • 5 1
 Sounds like the perfect candidate for the hydraulic bottom out bumper, climb switch, and custom compression/rebound tuning options of the EXT Storia.
  • 3 0
 seb-stott:
"Remove the chain from a regular bike and you'll notice a slight lack of support in corners".
Can you elaborate a bit? I've never tried, but that doesn't make much sense to me.
  • 7 1
 growing the chain makes the suspension stiffer as it has to extend the derailleur, especially with a clutch.
  • 3 1
 Go to a pump track an ride chainless. You'll notice it immediately
  • 2 2
 @melonhead1145: Fok, I think you’ll find the difference minute as you’re rattling through the forest. Try it, whip your chain off the front ring and push on the seat, if you instantly feel you need more air in your shock or mess with the knobs to get the feel of with a chain I’d be very surprised.
It’s mostly in ya mind mate.
  • 1 0
 Is it the derailleur cage spring and clutch friction that would do that? Didn't expect that. I thought it was the anti-squat. If the the bike has anti-squat, if the suspension compresses it pulls the top end of the chain. For this to happen it either has to spin up the rear wheel or spin the cranks backwards. The cranks won't just do that with your weight on it but increasing kinetic energy doesn't happen too easily either. So that will feel like support. Or well, that's what I though.
  • 1 0
 @vinay: Bit of both I'd say, basically growing the chain requires additional force, through turning the cassette or pulling the cranks, extending the derailleur.
  • 1 1
 I would say none of the above. I once broke my chain on my BMX at a mini ramp sesh. I dropped in without the chain an nearly ate shit straight away. You'd be very surprised how much support on the front foot pedal comes from resistance of just the chain tourque. As mention above, If you think im wrong.. take your chain an try an bunny hop............... you'll instantly notice no support on the front foot/pedal, regaurdless of gears, clutch or suss kick back
  • 2 0
 @naptime: yes, I've felt that before, but that resistance can't affect the suspension on a mtb. It comes from the friction of the whole drivetrain, same as spining the cranks backwards: put the bike in the stand and give it a good push, they spin 2-3 turns; Remove the chain from the front ring and then they do 10+.
And the clutch: I tried compressing with my sram mech locked open and you can feel the movement starts easier (first few mm) without the stiction of the clutch, but again, is nothing to offer support in a corner when a 70kg rider is pushing down half way through the travel
we need answers @seb-stott:
  • 1 0
 @iiman: yeah could be either I guess..
I can also add. I did notice a free'er suss feeling when I went non clutch single speed on the DH bike
  • 3 1
 @seb-stott I have a 161 that I bought because of your review! Love the bike. Thank you. Could you share a little more about the 190 Zeb setup? Are you running an angleset or is the sag low enough to maintain stock HTA? If you're saving these details for a bigger write-up, I can wait.
  • 4 0
 "Maintaining momentum is so important when riding off-road that being able to shift while coasting is little consolation for the inability to shift under load."
Amen.
  • 2 0
 I think this bike is beautiful and I bet it’s a really fun bike to ride. That said ….

I’d get a gearbox bike, but I’d want a motor too, otherwise there’s just too much resistance and subsequent loss of efficiency.

I’m really hard on derailleurs, riding rocky terrain in the western USA, my derailleurs looks like someone took 40 grit sandpaper to them, but other than the occasional hanger alignment they continue to work as designed for many miles.

Hard to fix something that ain’t broke.
  • 5 0
 Is it me or is there an abundance of Starlings lately?
  • 5 1
 I've been hearing murmurations that agree with that.
  • 2 1
 A murmuration even
  • 2 0
 @korev: A murmeration of starling's (bird) is a beautiful thing a murmetration of these would be akin to an episode of scrapyard challenge
  • 1 0
 This bike looks awesome!

however I do not see any benefits of gearboxes without motor, Pedal assist bike with gear box should be ideal solution to the:
- look and feel
- maintenance
- suspension performance
- removing all negatives of gear box
  • 1 0
 Isn't there less suspended weight and mud interference? Not saying it balances out, but I believe there are known advantages.
  • 2 1
 Looks like you could lose a chain pretty easily - I have a steel single speed hardtail and even that can flex enough (usually powering out of a slow uphill turn) to get the chain to come off. That tiny sprocket up front (with nothing retaining the chain) seems iffy.
  • 3 2
 Nope never lost a chain.
  • 1 0
 I think you have a poor setup. This should not happen. Check your chain line?
  • 2 0
 Anyone who wants this for functional reasons needs to look at a Zerode. If it’s the aesthetics that tickle your fancy, well then I’m afraid you’re beyond help. Best of luck to you.
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott
Great review as always and an enjoyable informative, in depth read. Enjoyed your observations about the gearbox also, which is a valuable insight. I note your issues with the Ohlins RXF36 m2 coil feeling harsh despite the sag being ok with the white spring for your weight - just wondered if this may be helped by a lighter compression tune? Reason being the coil damper does come with a particularly firm tune (set up firmer than the air spring option at stock) C50 R40 I think it was.
Speaking from experience, I had similar issues setting mine up on my Spec Enduro. I went to a lower spring rate first, which helped but still knew I wasn't getting the best out the fork. I then went to the lower compression tune (same spring rate) and it then transformed the fork and subsequently the bike, matching the suppleness and incredibly active rear TTX22M.

I have mused that the reasoning behind the too firm compression tune for most riders for the stock coil fork is that Ohlins did their testing on bikes with steeper head angles a few years back, rather than down at the 62/63 range we're seeing now, which may require a lighter spring rate than the recommended chart or lighter tune as there's slightly less force going through the fork due to the slack angle. I have absolutely no numbers or reasoning to back this up though, and haven't spoken to Ohlins, other than just noticing others having similar problems, and an article on NSMB with similar findings running the fork on a Geometron. So take it with a pinch of salt!

Thank you for reading thus far.
  • 2 0
 Maybe not the most important issue but I wonder if long bike trousers didn’t get destroyed in the ankle area with a chain so close…
  • 13 11
 *looks around* Sooo... we're all just going to ignore the fact that this bike has the same name as the most popular short travel 29er in the world?

lol, ok then.
  • 21 0
 I'm pretty sure Starling has had a spur model for longer than Transition has.
  • 1 0
 There is quite a bit of overlap in model naming in the MTB world. Generally doesn't seem to be much of an issue surprisingly.
  • 4 2
 PB comment section is not the same as "world"
  • 1 0
 yeah, if I was dead set on a steel bike w/o a rear mech I would try a rholoff hub... just cuz I generally pass on any rides with steep climbing, The rholoff is bombproof. had one on a DH rig years ago.
  • 5 0
 I hear what you're saying but I think part of the argument for a gearbox is removing the weight from the rear, therefore allowing the rear suspension to what it needs to do easier. The gearbox takes the weight and moves it to the center of the bike offering a more balanced weight distribution.
  • 3 0
 Review would have been far more interesting if after identifying the fork issues, a proper 180mm fork swapped out.
  • 1 1
 The fork works fine. He set it up terribly.
  • 2 2
 So the talk of pedal bob and anti-squat got me thinking... And maybe I'm just not understanding what I'm seeing, but since this bike doesn't have a chain tensioner, doesn't that mean the chain goes slightly slack as the suspension compresses? (since the main pivot isn't concentric with the bottom bracket)
  • 6 0
 Because of the gearbox, the chain isn't driven from the pedal spindle axle - the pivot is concentric to the axle that actually drives the chain. So this is basically the gearbox equivalent of a concentric BB pivot.
  • 1 0
 @bkm303: Ooh, I think I see it now. I thought the big circle a couple inches in front of the chainring was the main pivot, but I guess that's actually a fixed part of the frame that just has a hole through it?
  • 4 0
 @barp: No, the pivot is around the drive cog shaft. So chain is constant length as it goes through the travel.
  • 3 3
 Hear me out: Seb's profile photo has him wearing a Specialized jersey & we all know that Specialized is in cahoots with Outside due to their link at the Investment firm. Outside owns PB so they have to write non-flattering stuff about the other brands. Everyone knows that the Spur climbs great and PB even said so in the field test, yet magically in this review suddenly the Spur bobs slowly up the hill!? I think not Outside!

PS. Seb Stott really does great reviews but this bike is just a dog imo.
  • 1 0
 Excellent conspiracy theory there based on a t-shirt choice from a photo of unknown age!
  • 3 0
 @sebstott "when negotiating tricky, low-speed ledges at low speed, particularly" no hard feelings, just a tad redundant
  • 3 0
 I’m waiting for the Clarice from Starling. It hands down won’t put the lotion in the basket.
  • 1 0
 Fok she was way better than that bike !
  • 1 0
 I'd like to see the shift duties for gearbox bikes split between left and right hand. Right thump up, left thumb down or whatever. Would be easy to run a jumper cable across the bars to close the loop.
  • 1 0
 this has been done for pinion. could use a bit of refinement (esp. for the price), but as proof of concept:

cinq.de/en/shifting-technology/428/shift-r-tour-for-pinion
  • 9 6
 At 40lbs I'm on board with a Mountain Bike having a motor!!! Smile
  • 16 1
 Then it would be 50lbs
  • 7 3
 @justanotherusername: Kenevo SL is 41.2lbs and climbs significantly faster than a regular enduro bike instead of slower like this Spur. Been swapping back and forth between KSL and Enduro and I’m finding that the KSL is consistently a few seconds faster going down, even on tight techy DH. Very narrowly prefer the feel of the Enduro going down and definitely prefer the lack of RC car noise going up, but in the end an extra lap or two in the same amount of time is hard to pass up.
  • 1 1
 @justanotherusername: Ive just seen a planetary with an ebike motor attached to it , did i think it was better than our racing motors??
  • 2 1
 @Compositepro: I’m getting older now and might go ebike full time soon and a gearbox ebike sounds pretty good to me.

Was it better than your racing motors?
  • 2 0
 @Blownoutrides:

"in the end an extra lap or two in the same amount of time is hard to pass up."

They downvoted him because he spoke the truth.
  • 4 3
 Having just spent a week on an EXT setup, I think what you like about the rear suspension design might actually be the shock. that thing is amazing.
  • 2 0
 Yeah but, as stated in the review and seen in the pictures on the test bike, this bike has an ohlins. The pictures with the EXT are from a production frame no doubt taken at Starling headquarters.
  • 2 1
 @Lotusoperandi: who has time to read articles
  • 3 0
 @blackercanyons: So I guess it's picture books from here on out, eh?
  • 2 2
 @blackercanyons: Everyone with time to write comments.
  • 2 0
 @Lotusoperandi: definitely
@Blackhat: not even kind of.
  • 3 0
 Heat tube gusset doesn’t look like it fits properly!?
  • 2 0
 If you can feel the 15T sprocket limiting effiency, you must also complain about the 10T cog everyone has now.
  • 2 0
 You aren't always using the 10T cog and you definitely aren't using it when you're climbing and drivetrain efficiency matters most.
  • 1 0
 Like the gear box, but the only way it will fly is if the weight is similar to conventional derailleur system. 40lbs is heavier than dh bikes.
  • 1 2
 Everyone here is talking efficiency, but I would honestly take a less efficient drivetrain that doesn't require a cassette replacement every couple thousand miles for $200, or have to shell out $400+ for the better X01/XX1 that lasts a reasonable amount of time.
  • 2 0
 Did you manage to find a one minute trail in the borders seb?? You upping your test tracks to 1.30 yet?
  • 2 0
 this is kind of review to literaly help you choose bike for your hard earned money... good job...
  • 2 0
 Accurate name, that bike is full of places for starlings to nest if you left it in a barn.
  • 2 0
 Are people saying Crux Move unironically? I can't tell and I don't know what is real
  • 2 1
 Quite possibly the best bike ive ever seen.
But would probably consider making one very similar rather than face the hefty price tag ; )
  • 3 1
 It's hard to know where to start with this, it really does look like a primary school child designed it.
  • 2 0
 Why call it a SPUR ?

Not that this will ever be mistaken for a Transition Spur.
Might as well have called it a Session.
  • 2 0
 The main photo is so good! Props to small scale frame builder making a splash and a product that gets people talking!
  • 1 0
 betabike really likes these 40lb boutique enduro bikes. like really really likes
  • 2 2
 Looks like a real deal Freeride bike. Can climb, not well, not the point. This bike has a super narrow bandwidth, but should be the perfect tool for that job.
  • 5 4
 High pivot bikes pedal like shit, there’s no way around it ye druid fanbois!
  • 2 9
flag phutphutend (Feb 14, 2022 at 11:29) (Below Threshold)
 They only pedal badly because they have masses of chain growth. They tend to have an idler to reduce, but this has to be optimised for a certain gear, it can't cover full range. This bike has no chain growth, the swingarm is concentric to the output drive shaft. There's a bit of pedal bob due to chainline being offset from pivot centre, but it's minimal.
  • 1 0
 Just for the record, what kind of pivot do you think this particular bike employs?
  • 1 0
 I gotta say, gearboxes are really cool, they look good, balance the weight of drivetrains, but boy are they expensive.
  • 1 0
 cool bike, I love this brand and it's good to see more news about them lately. Wish they had a demo available
  • 1 0
 He likes a tea cake.. but what are his thoughts on the equally delicious snowball?
  • 1 0
 Gearboxes are guff. If they were any good they would be more widely used. And it's hideous. F***ing hideous.
  • 1 0
 "The head tube is now thicker. "We've had a couple of them flare," Joe from Starling explains."

How is this still a thing?
  • 2 0
 Haro x3 reborn !
  • 1 0
 I envy people who can actually use an 18 kg bike.
  • 2 1
 that's a healthy antisquat number
  • 2 0
 Nice review, Seb
  • 6 4
 One fugly bike
  • 3 3
 Why would you build a new bike with a old version box? Thats like building a corvette with a 4 cylinder.......
  • 2 0
 It isn't an old version box!

The 'new' Effigear Mimic is exactly the same internals, just with a mounting and drive output to copy (mimic) the Pinion.

The box used on this bike is still current and will be supported for a good long while.
  • 1 0
 Needs a Brake Therapy floating rear caliper...
  • 1 1
 Still need to make a head tube gusset that actually fits. Please make one that looks right !
  • 1 0
 If you ride with two front tires can you do a fakie landing? @sebstott
  • 1 0
 Yeah,but how does it compare to...you know!?
  • 3 2
 40lbs? LOLZ Hard pass.
  • 2 2
 Ha ha ha .... 3.330 pounds for that ???? xD
  • 1 0
 noice
  • 3 3
 Another beautiful bike by Starling. My Murmur should be arriving soon!
  • 3 3
 In my Pinion, this thing is pretty cool
  • 2 1
 Fugly bottom Bracket
  • 1 0
 WANT
  • 2 2
 very futuristic
  • 2 2
 Yeh this looks sick
  • 2 2
 This is the way.
  • 4 6
 I like this idea but can't see how they will fit a motor in there too?
  • 1 2
 knee crackin top tube m8
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.072334
Mobile Version of Website