close
Pinkbike is now part of Outside! As of December 3, 2021, please refer to the Outside Terms of Use and Privacy Policy which govern your use of the Pinkbike website and services.

Review: 2022 Canyon Torque CF8

Feb 28, 2022
by Mike Kazimer  
The new Canyon Torque still falls into the same gravity-oriented category as its predecessor, but it received significant geometry updates for 2022. Along with getting longer and slacker (shocking, I know), there are now three different wheel size configurations – riders can choose from 29”, mixed-wheel, or 27.5” options with either a carbon or aluminum frame.

I've been putting the miles in on the $5,399 Torque CF8, which has 175mm of rear travel delivered by a Fox DHX2 coil shock, and a 170mm Fox 38 Performance Elite fork. Other build kit highlights include a Shimano XT 12-speed drivetrain, XT four-piston brakes, and a Maxxis Assegai / DHR II tire combo mounted to a DT Swiss FR 560 wheelset.
Torque CF8 Details

• Wheel size: 29" front, 27.5" rear
• Carbon frame
• Travel: 175mm / 170mm fork
• 63.5 or 64-degree head angle
• 435mm chainstays
• Sizes: M, L, XL
• Weight: 34.9 lb / 15.8 kg (size L)
• Price: $5,399 USD
canyon.com



bigquotesIt only took a few laps on the Torque to realize how much fun this green machine would be in a bike park setting, somewhere with plenty of high speed trails and big jumps. Mike Kazimer






Frame Details

Canyon designed the new Torque to be ridden hard, so they made sure the frame met the same Grade 5 classification as the Sender downhill bike. Like the Sender, it's dual crown fork compatible, a fact that Thomas Genon illustrated at Red Bull Rampage.

Even with the Grade 5 designation, the frame weight is still reasonable at a claimed 2,652 grams. My test bike weighed in at 34.9 pounds (15.8 kg). That may not seem all that light, but that's with a DoubleDown casing rear tire, and a whole bunch of aluminum parts, including the cranks, handlebar, and rims. It'd be easy to knock a couple of pounds off if someone wanted to spend the money for lighter carbon parts. Personally, I'd be more inclined to save my cash and spend it on lift tickets, but that's just me.

There's also room for a water bottle inside the front triangle, eliminating the need to worry about getting dehydrated during those dusty days in the bike park. Canyon's own water bottle is a little wider than the norm, which allows it to hold 600mL of fluid.

On the carbon frame, there's only a solitary bolt hole on the underside of the top tube that can be used to attach Canyon's own accessory bag. The aluminum frame has two holes, which makes it easier to find a tube or tool holding mount that'll bolt right on – I'm not sure why the carbon frame got the short end of the stick here.

One nice touch that Canyon has implemented in recent years is the use of replaceable threaded inserts to help keep the frame safe from mechanical mishaps. Other details include fully guided internal routing, a threaded bottom bracket, and SRAM's universal derailleur hanger.






Geometry & Sizing

The Torque ships in the low geometry setting, which gives it a 63.5-degree head angle and 77.5-degree seat tube angle. In the high setting, those change to 64-degrees and 78-degrees respectively, with an 8mm increase in the bottom bracket height.

Reach numbers are on the longer side of things, with the size large I tested coming in at 490mm. The seat tube lengths are fairly short across all sizes, and the bikes come with dropper posts where the amount of drop can be easily adjusted, which means riders should be able to go down a size if they'd like without running into any issues.

On the mixed-wheel CF8 the chainstays measure 435mm across all sizes. The Sender DH bike has adjustable chainstays, but that feature didn't trickle down to the Torque.


Suspension Design

The Torque still uses a Horst-link suspension layout (Canyon calls it 'Triple Phase Suspension'), but changes have been made compared to the previous version. The initial leverage ratio has decreased slightly, and the amount of progression has been increased in order to allow the bike to work with both coil and air shocks. The amount of anti-squat has also increased at the sag point in order to improve the pedaling performance, and then it drops off fairly quickly as the bike goes deeper into its travel.


Leverage rate
Anti-squat, previous vs. current Torque.



Specifications
Price $5399
Travel 175mm
Rear Shock FOX DHX2 Factory
Fork FOX 38 Performance Elite Series, 170mm
Cassette Shimano XT, 12-speed (10-51)
Crankarms Shimano XT M8120 32T, 170mm
Chainguide Canyon Chainguide
Bottom Bracket Shimano MT800, Threaded
Rear Derailleur Shimano Deore XT, 12-speed
Chain Shimano M6100
Shifter Pods Shimano Deore XT, 12-speed
Handlebar Canyon G5 Riser Bar
Stem Canyon G5, 40mm
Grips Canyon G5 lock-on
Brakes Shimano Deore XT M8120
Wheelset DT Swiss FR 560 350
Tires Maxxis Assegai 2.5" / DHR II 2.4", EXO+ front, DoubleDown rear
Seat Fizik Gravita Alpaca X5
Seatpost G5 Adjustable Dropper Post













Test Bike Setup

One of the challenges that comes with running a coil spring shock versus an air shock is getting the correct spring rate. Not all riders have a stack of spare springs at their disposal to experiment with, so Canyon thoughtfully includes a lighter and a heavier spring with the CF8. For my 160 pound weight the 400 lb/in spring was the ticket to achieving 25% sag.

There were a couple of moments during my initial shakedown rides where it felt like the shock was getting hung up during repeated impacts – it wasn't getting out of the way as quickly as I wanted. Speeding up the rebound and adding more high speed compression helped solve this, and my final settings ended up being: LSC 12, HSC 6, LSR 11, HSR 4 (all clicks from closed).

I've lost count of how many Fox 38-equipped bikes I've spent time on at this point, which means that the setup has become a quick process. I ran 87 psi in the 170 Fox 38 with two volume spacers.


Me.
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Age: 39
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer

Testing took place in Bellingham, Washington, and on Vancouver's North Shore, with conditions ranging from extra-muddy and wet to unseasonably warm with perfect dirt.




Climbing


Canyon's not kidding with the Torque's 'Low' geometry setting – I measured a bottom bracket height of 335mm, which is positively ground-scraping for a bike with 175mm of travel. I found myself smacking my pedals more often than usual, and that's on climbing trails that don't really have that many obstacles. Switching to the higher geometry setting raises the bottom bracket height by 8mm, and that made a noticeable difference. Yes, it also steepens the head angle by .5-degrees, but for rides with a lot of pedaling that's a tradeoff I'm willing to accept.

The Torque's geometry numbers may look intimidating on paper, but while this isn't going to be the bike to choose for rolling terrain or areas with really tight, technical climbs, it's actually a pretty mild-mannered climber. Long, steep fireroad grinds were as comfortable as they could be aboard a 35-pound machine – the seated climbing position is nice and upright, and I didn't have any trouble settling for the spin to the top. Getting around sharp uphill turns does require advanced planning in order to make sure there's enough room to swing the front end around. The steep seat angle makes does make it possible to remain seated for many of those maneuvers – it's a matter of sliding forward or backwards on the saddle to maintain traction, rather than standing up and performing a more drastic weight shift.

The compression lever on the DHX2 is easy to reach, and I'd flip that switch for longer sections of dirt roads. It's not a full lockout, so the shock is still able to track the ground and take the edge of chunkier sections. Even in the fully-open position the Torque doesn't bob all that much. It's not nearly as snappy as the Propain Sprindrift, a bike I'd put at the top of my list when it comes to pedaling efficiency in this category, but the suspension is noticeably calmer than the previous version during out of the sadddle pedaling efforts.



Descending

It only took a few laps on the Torque to realize how much fun this green machine would be in a bike park setting, somewhere with plenty of high speed trails and big jumps. Ratchet up the miles-per-hour and put a big lip in front of it and the Torque is right at home; it ended up being a much more entertaining ride than I'd expected. It's also very quiet, free of any distracting chainslap or cable rattling noises.

The mixed-wheel setup makes a lot of sense for a bike like the Torque. Canyon does offer a dual 29” wheel option, and there's a 27.5” version too, but during all my time on this mulleted machine I never found myself wishing for something different. For me, it handily ticks the 'freeride' box, a bike that's happiest on extra-gnarly terrain or boosting jumps, rather than trying to find the fastest line possible between the tape. Now, there's no reason you couldn't do some enduro races with the Torque, but it is a lot of bike, and probably overkill for some race courses.

There's a very smooth ramp-up to the Torque's 175mm of travel, and I didn't encounter any harsh bottom outs. It does sit a little deeper in its travel in extended sections of rough terrain, part of the reason it feels more like a freeride bike rather than a race machine – the scales are tipped a little more towards the plush side of things, rather than being super supportive.


Not surprisingly, its weight and length are more noticeable at slower speeds and on flatter bits of trail – on more than one occasion I found myself manualing rather than bunnyhopping through a section, simply because I was feeling a little lazy and wanted to save to some energy. There's also the fact that the chainstay length remains the same on all sizes - it'd be great to see an adjustable chainstay length feature, or chainstay lengths that change with each size. I spent a lot of time on a Commencal Meta TR last year, which happens to have the same reach number and chainstay length as the Torque; that may be why it didn't take long for me to get up to speed. If I had to pick, I'd prefer a slightly shorter reach and longer chainstays, but riders that prefer blowing up berms and letting the back end break free at every opportunity may disagree.

In keeping with the freeride theme I made a trip up to Vancouver's North Shore to see how it handled some old-school rock rolls and chunky, technical trails. The overall length was noticeable on some of the slower speed sections, but this is another instance where I'd say the 27.5” rear wheel and shorter chainstays ended up being a benefit by making it easy to weight the front of the bike, and then pivot the back end to get around a steep, weird turn, or reposition the bike to line up for another section of rocks and roots.


2022 Canyon Torque CF8 review
Canyon Torque CF8
2022 Norco Range C1
Norco Range


How Does It Compare?

When it comes to pricing, Canyon have put together a very attractive proposition. You'll need to shell out at least $1,500 more to get a similarly spec'd bike from a non-consumer direct brand.

How does it compare to the Norco Range, last year's Mountain Bike of the Year? When it comes to geometry, both bikes are plenty slack – the Range's head angle is 63.25-degrees, and the Torque is 63.5-degrees. I'd be willing to be 99% of riders wouldn't be able to detect a .25-degree difference, so they're essentially identical in that regard. Norco does a better job of altering their geometry, including the chainstay length, so I'm going to give them the point when it comes to the overall fit.

However, there's no mullet version of the Range, or an aluminum-framed option for that matter (Norco does make the Shore, but it's not exactly the same). It's also not designed to be run with an air shock, all things that Canyon offers.

The large Range has a reach of 480mm and a chainstay length of 442.5mm, numbers that worked extremely well for me. The Canyon has a less balanced feel, which can be a lot of fun, but it does take a little extra work to remain centered and in the sweet spot.

Neither bike is going to rocket up the climbs, but I prefer the Canyon over the Range due to its slightly lighter weight and quieter pedaling. On the descents, the tables turn a little. If I wanted to go as fast as possible through the roughest terrain around, I'd pick the Range. The Torque can hold its own, it just doesn't erase chunky sections of trail in the same way the Range does. Now, if I wanted a bike to slash berms and get sideways off jumps with, I'd go with the Canyon. The Range has a more stuck-to-the-ground feel, while the Canyon is a little easier to get airborne.


The Fizik Alpaca saddle has stubby nose and a very flat overall profile.
The amount of dropper post travel can easily be adjusted without any special tools.

Technical Report

Tires: The Torque comes with my preferred setup for riding here in the Pacific Northwest - a Maxxis Assegai up front with an EXO+ casing and MaxxGrip rubber, and a DoubleDown casing DHRII with MaxxTerra rubber out back. Some riders may want to swap out the front tire for something with an even thicker casing, but for me this setup worked perfectly, and I didn't suffer any punctures.

G5 dropper post: It's great to see a 200mm post come as the stock option, and if that's too much drop it's easily adjusted without any tools. However, the post did have a rattle out of the box when it was fully extended - the inner cartridge was knocking against the outer tube and making a super annoying racket. Luckily the fix isn't too complicated - it requires removing the cartridge, wrapping a loop of electrical tape around it, and putting it all back together. After that was done everything was quiet and trouble-free.

Contact points After a few rides I ended up swapping the grips and seat out for more comfortable options – the G5 grips aren't particularly soft, and the seat's totally flat profile didn't work well for me. It's a matter of personal preference, and I'm sure some riders swear by them, but I've never got along that well with Fizik's saddles.

Shimano XT brakes I've griped about Shimano's wandering bite point issues plenty of times in the past, but I'm not going to do that this time around. This set of brakes worked perfectly out of the box, with plenty of stopping power and good consistency even during sustained sections of heavy braking.



Pros

+ Excellent spec for the price
+ Reasonable weight considering the amount of travel and build kit
+ Loves back wheel – great cornering and jumping
+ Very quiet (once the rattling dropper post is fixed)

Cons

- Long front center + short back end is fun, but can require extra attention at times
- Low geometry position is really low – may not be all that useable for riders pedaling in rocky terrain


Pinkbike's Take

bigquotesIt's easy to get lost in geometry charts, suspension graphs, and spec sheets when you're shopping for a new bike. Those details are useful, but I'll try to make it easy here: the Torque CF8 is a ton of fun, and offers an excellent value for anyone in the market for a big bike that's more than just a straightline specialist.

Yes, it's long, slack, and stable, and can make short work of gnarly trails, but there's more to it than that – the new Torque is also incredibly adept at ripping through berms and blasting jumps, making it a great choice for riders in the market for a long travel bike that doesn't always require a shuttle truck or chairlift to get to the top. 
Mike Kazimer









119 Comments

  • 119 1
 The closeup shot of the stem looks like a hungry baby dinosaur!
  • 41 0
 surprised that's not in the Pros list
  • 10 0
 I'll never unsee that now haha
  • 9 0
 Makes bar humping a bit dangerous.
  • 9 0
 Can't unsee now. Needs googly eyes and angry eyebrows.
  • 28 0
 @oldfaith: Bar humps shall henceforth be know as "feeding the baby dinosaur".
  • 2 0
 Drugs are bad mmkay
  • 1 0
 and your balls are for dinner!
  • 50 3
 2’22 CNYN TRQ
  • 12 2
 2O22 CNYN TRQ MLLT CF EGHT
  • 13 0
 Can we do that removal of circular characters on the price as well?
  • 32 1
 Can we add a section on how well protected the frame pivot bearings are and how easy/painful they are to swap out at home? Easy home mechanics can make or break a choice of bike or component for me.

EDIT - I think Dan Roberts used to do that, but it's dropped off from PB lately.
  • 2 1
 The threaded insert bit piqued my interest but I doubt it's for bearings. But how cool would it be if bearing inserts were threaded, so that when we needed to replace bearings you could just thread the insert out, and thread a new one in with bearings installed? It's on my wish list for manufacturers, for sure.
  • 5 0
 @rickybobby18: like a threaded bottom bracket, you mean? That's a lot of extra work for very little benefit. Adding room for an extra threaded part and the insert would add significant material to many suspension designs: doesn't take much carbon to wrap around a 24mm bearing bore, but the insert would be much bigger. Not to mention 2 more machining jobs.

Plus so many more questions. Is it a standard, or does every manufacturer do their own shape and size insert? How long until it breeds 3 more "standards" in the name of marginal gains? What is the tool interface to install and remove it? What kind of single-job-specific, maybe proprietary, wrench or socket would replace my universal press and standard 6802/6803 drifts?
  • 8 0
 @justinfoil: alright you convinced me that my idea is in fact a bad idea
  • 3 0
 @rickybobby18: not bad, just unnecessary. Solution in search of a problem.
  • 40 7
 Hope you didn't over-torque the bolts
  • 11 53
flag Kiotae (17 hours ago) (Below Threshold)
 Not likely, Canyon provides detailed torque numbers with each bike and, IIRC, a preset torque allen key.
  • 63 3
 @Kiotae: whoooooooooooooooosh
  • 5 1
 @Kiotae: ^ what he said
  • 4 2
 @EnsBen: they don't come bigger than this
  • 8 10
 @EnsBen: That was the joke, op is German.
  • 5 0
 @Kiotae: what are you torqueing about?
  • 2 0
 @stuggidavid: Now that's a bolt use of the homophone. Well done.
  • 34 1
 How about you do a secret review on Canyon’s warranty, instead?
  • 20 1
 How about including a "warranty"-section on all reviews?
  • 16 1
 That would be an interesting article for PB to do. Some undercover journalism where they rate the customer service of different companies with a hypothetical broken bike. See how quick they are, how helpful, are spare parts readily available, etc. I'd love to see that.
  • 2 0
 @DylanH93: they talked about it in a podcast, it's not that fair/doable as it depends on too many things so they won't do it even if it seems a cool idea
  • 4 1
 Is this a real thing?? I keep seeing the comments about Canyon warranty, but where’s the first hand accounts of this issue and some numbers to back it up. Genuinely interested in this bike, but being cautious due to these kind of comments.
  • 4 0
 @DylanH93:
The crew have talked about that in the pod cast.
The problem seems to be that the experience is so variable. One person has a great experience but the next person gets the warranty guy on a bad day and has a very different experience.
  • 25 0
 My very basic review.

Pro: The bike is capable and fun, not a terrible climber considering that is not its design.

Cons: The chain guide rubs the chain on the lowest gear regardless of adjustment. Canyon we’re no help and sent the same component out again with no dialogue to support. I have installed a one-up guide instead.

The saddle is like sitting on concrete, an ergon saddle has been much better.

The bike arrived from canyon with a blocked brake hose and what looks to be a botched repair by the bike mechanic with silicone sealant around the union. No apology or help from canyon so repaired myself.

Fox 38 fork is fantastic but has been sent away for warranty repair as it is sticking on first 20mm of travel after very few hours of work.

So, the bike is great but canyon quality and service leaves something to be desired. Especially considering spending £4.5k on the bike
  • 1 1
 You can’t really knock canyon for the fork issue. That falls on shitty ass fox. A lot of their “oem factory” suspension has issues. That’s why you don’t see that on the high end bikes. Every entry level bike has bad saddles or issue, you can’t really think for the low price of 3k means your getting great bikes. My buddies 2022 YT capria came with issues out the box. Lines had a lot of air in the brake lines, the dpx2 had no nitro in the reaver can, derailleur was out of alinement and hanger was bent. It’s part of the game.
  • 22 0
 Their rider support makes me think "no way" but the builds keep making me say "maybe..."
  • 13 1
 The Con list read as “we really couldn’t find a con for a bike that was purpose built to go downhill, so….we’re going to try and find a flaws while we use this bike while climbing.”
  • 11 0
 So a 7" long travel bike with a coil that still weighs the same as most 150mm enduro-lite bikes with air shocks. Also priced aggressively, considering the state of the globe right now.

Assuming Canyon carbon bikes don't all break, whats the catch? Whats the downside? Why would i order a Trek Slash when this has more travel and weighs the same despite having a coil?
  • 9 1
 Water bottle
  • 5 1
 Because the Slash is a 160mm, climbs better from what I have read, and is an overall different bike for doing different things. They both look great, but they aren't the same.
  • 7 1
 They all break
  • 3 0
 @jeremy3220: I've never owned a Canyon, so what do I know, but my buddy has the previous carbon version of this built up to 33 pounds and he hits stuff at the OG rampage site on it with no issues. He blew up a zeb and 1st gen X2 air on those hits, but the frame is fine. IDK if thats a good example.

@redrook if both bikes have similar wheels, tires, and an air shock with lockout, I don't know if the Slash really would climb meaningfully better. Or any other bike with 150mm of travel.

@Dogl0rd you got me
  • 11 0
 Freeride bikes with water bottle cages, what a time to be alive.
  • 2 0
 RM Slayer also has the water bottle cage, it's quite nice.
  • 16 11
 Canyon makes their bike longer and slacker but....

Current EWS series champion rides a smaller frame size Canyon as they are too long for racing...

Sam Hill once said.... A medium guy is still a medium guy, oieye dont know why these bikes are all getting saaaw long!

Steve Peat rode his old 26er V10 the same speed as his new 29er one (ignore the last marketing run), but with unserviced suspension and old, narrow bars.
  • 8 1
 I just wish there was a size between medium and small. As a 5'10" guy I find 455mm reach or so to be the sweetspot. Also while we're wishing on a star I wish that the mullet came in the alloy builds.
  • 13 2
 Yeah.... Im not any of those guys. I'll take some extra stability and help. Within reason of course.
  • 5 6
 What bike manufacturers really need to to is figure out how to make frame reach adjustable by +/- 10mm for a given seat tube length. Some folks love, love, love their super long front ends, some not so much.

Bonus points if they can figure out how to do it so you could make the adjustment tool free in a couple minutes. Imagine you’re in a 3 stage enduro. Stage 1 is kinda flat and has awkward twisty corners (short front end better), Stage 2 is wide open with steep chutes and wide berms (long front end better) then Stage 3 is in the middle.

This is probably impossible but we can dream. And if some company figures this out they can take my money.
  • 13 2
 It's almost like the needs of EWS racers are different than us plebs?
  • 7 1
 Jack is also proportionately a freak show
  • 3 1
 @plustiresaintdead: That would be sick! But first they need size small to actually be small
  • 12 0
 Bikes are long because modern riders don't control the bike, the bike controls them.
  • 7 1
 @luckynugget: they make up for their lack of skill with a big bike.
  • 3 0
 @bocomtb: Guerrilla Gravity has an adjustable headset that does exactly that. It does require a tool but only takes a few minutes.
  • 4 0
 @jmesw15: It would be a lot of complexity but having that combined with an angleset like the stumpjumper evo would be awesome.
  • 4 0
 @jmesw15: GG offers two positions that are 10mm apart. It’s a good start for sure but I want to see a total of 20mm of adjustment for a given frame size. So your frame with a 440mm seat tube could have 460, 470 or 480mm reach.

Again, it’s probably not realistic. Just my idea of an ideal world (and yes I know there is more to bike fit than frame reach).
  • 6 0
 Actually Steve Peat did not ride his old bike as fast as his new bike. It was only 7-8 seconds slower which for your average person having fun doesn't matter at all. But that's a very significant difference in a DH race.

You can always find racers who downsized, just like you can find racers who have upsized. Sam Hill, (insert any big name rider with a multi year contract), gets to have a HUGE say on what the production frame size is that the rest of us buy/ride so it would only make sense that he's riding the frame size/geo he thinks he should be on and shouldn't need to upsize...?
  • 2 1
 @Betsie, Preach it John. I have one Marin that has modern Geo, albeit a couple of years old in a Large, Not XL, and being 6,3 I still think it's ridiculously wayyy too long. No idea what they were thinking
  • 3 0
 @nofu: then buy what is comfortable for you, not what the store says? I'm 5'10 and ride an XL (brands reccomend a Medium for me) because that's what works best for me. Do your own research, test ride bikes and figure it out. Don't blame the brands for selling bikes.
  • 2 1
 @stiingya: I said to ignore the last marketing run XXX
  • 1 1
 @nofu: it's so true.
How many people have jumped on my old V10 which was an XL back in the 26er days and said it tiny. Bit it did ok for me for the last 6 years at the races.

It's too easy these days to mix up comfortable (those long ass frames) with slow (those long ass frames) for so many riders.

More time and fun is to be had from tighter corners on a nimble bike than going 28mph rather than 27.99mph down a fire road.

Always better to test something and go by GoPro evidence or freelap if you are lucky enough. Never Strava as it's way too inaccurate.
  • 1 0
 @plustiresaintdead: play with different stem lengths and bar rises?
  • 6 0
 @betsie: Jack Moir was asked about that and said he normally rides a long DH bike but went for the short EWS bike because the courses are so tight. At risk of putting words in his mouth, it was a technical requirement more than a personal preference.
  • 1 0
 @bocomtb: Guerilla Gravity. Or almost any frame with a ZS56 or similar straight headtube.
  • 6 2
 My very basic review.

Pro: The bike is capable and fun, not a terrible climber considering that is not its design.

Cons: The chain guide rubs the chain on the lowest gear regardless of adjustment. Canyon we’re no help and sent the same component out again with no dialogue to support. I have installed a one-up guide instead.

The saddle is like sitting on concrete, an ergon saddle has been much better.

The bike arrived from canyon with a blocked brake hose and what looks to be a botched repair by the bike mechanic with silicone sealant around the union. No apology or help from canyon so repaired myself.

Fox 38 fork is fantastic but has been sent away for warranty repair as it is sticking on first 20mm of travel after very few hours of work.

So, the bike is great but canyon quality and service leaves something to be desired. Especially considering spending £4.5k on the bike
  • 6 2
 I think all bike reviews should have one drive-side shot with the dropper post fully extended at the reviewer's pedaling saddle height so that we can see what the saddle to bar drop is. I would also be nice to have a drive side shot of the reviewer in a fairly-neutral descending position so we can see what body position looks like.
  • 7 3
 Number of posts featuring Canyon bikes seems a bit disproportionate recently?
  • 5 1
 Not if you compare it to the number of posts featuring Specialized products... Compared to that, the amount of Canyon of late is perfectly fine.
  • 3 0
 They have also released more bike model/configurations than any other brand I can think of. So it seems normal to me. Impressive that the Torque and Spectral both come in all wheel configurations, carbon and alloy.
  • 1 0
 I'm leaning towards the AL5 29r version of this bike, do you think the larger wheel would add some grip out back?
I'm on a mullet bike running a Wild Enduro out back and it's drifty as he'll even with 454 chainstays and 505mm reach.
I'm looking for a monster truck on a budget cross shopping the Commencal Meta SX but wanted a dual 29r.
  • 1 0
 I'm going for the same spec this summer. I guess the 29er will be less maneuverable but more stable
  • 1 0
 With the 2022 Torque 29 AL, Canyon actually managed to climb back onto my go-to list. The aluminium version of the Torque is absolutely fantastic value for money AND is capable of DH use. Plus it's available in a raw finish. Nice!
  • 4 0
 Cool pic of Kaz flying through the forest! Can't wait for the trails to open here in SW CO!
  • 3 0
 +1! This article was full of great photos of amazing looking trails and scenery.
  • 11 10
 Hi @mikekazimer :
When 435mm in 27 and 448mm in 29 became "a short back end"?
Spesh enduro is 442mm and wasn't consider as short
Demo 29 is 448 is that short?
Sender CFR 29 is 445mm and 435 in mullet
Your beloved balanced and composed Hugene is 445mm and your very best in test Spesh (again) stump EVO is 438-443 in 29
I don't get it?
Are the 453mm Geometron your Benchmark now?
thanks
  • 17 0
 I too keep a notepad filled with on information on every bike's geometry in my pocket precisely for instances such as these.
  • 22 3
 @rommfly, I'm not entirely sure what your question is. The bike reviewed here has a 490mm reach and 435mm chainstays - that's not exactly the most balanced ratio. So yes, I'd say the back end of this bike is fairly short all things considered.
  • 3 0
 The real question: Should the valve stem be lined up with the Maxxis logo like it is, or should the tire logos be lined up with the rim logos?
  • 2 0
 Wish that crazy color scheme was available in the U.S… freeride seems to be making a comeback with this bike, the range, perhaps even the spire counts?
  • 2 5
 Funny that they said it felt more freeride like and less racy but that the suspension was plush. (Freeride means stiff AF)
  • 3 0
 Appreciate the comparison to the Range! Any thoughts compared to the Spire?
  • 3 3
 Comparison to the Spire? Sounds like the spire pedals a bit better and is less of a free-ride bruiser. You can have an alloy XT spire that will weigh about the same as this Torque, or a carbon one for $600 more that will weigh less.
  • 1 0
 No point having a short st length if you can't take advantage of a straight tube to put a big dropper in. I'd smash the XL if I could've fitted a 240mm one up (or 210) and have the seat right down.
  • 4 2
 "it climbs poorly for a 175mm travel bike".

No way! What a surprise Wink

Honestly, I expected a DC fork on a bike with this much travel.
  • 2 0
 "It climbs poorly" (no surprise)
vs
"It climbs poorly for a 175mm bike" (unfortunate)
  • 3 1
 Is this starting a trend toward 200mm rear travel with rigid fork. 175 rear with 170 fork seem weird. Thought it was always balanced or slightly more front travel?
  • 1 0
 Seems like they are waiting for you to put it in low but over fork to 180 on the front so the BB isn't so low...?
  • 2 1
 My guess is it uses the same frame as the all 27.5" version so they went with 170 to avoid messing the geometry up a ton when they put the 29" wheel on front
  • 1 0
 There are a few DH bikes that do this too, up to 220mm rear travel.
  • 4 0
 Jesus, if I were 20 years younger....
  • 1 0
 How is this not being compared to a Status rather than the Range? Seems a more likely bike a prospective buyer would be cross-shopping. Closer price point, mixed wheels, etc.
  • 2 0
 I love my 2020 torque. The hydration situation was the only change I wanted.
  • 4 1
 Nobody guna click just because beta has a lame doggy story super lame..
  • 1 0
 Is this starting a trend toward 200mm rear travel with rigid fork. 175 rear with 170 fork seem weird. Thought it was always balanced or slightly more front travel?
  • 1 0
 Think about how many dh bikes have more travel in the rear. It's super common with dh frames. It's really the pedal bikes that are weird.
  • 1 0
 So the geo chart has four variations on 'effective seat angle', plus a bullsh*t 'reference seat height' - and they still avoid telling us the actual seat angle...
  • 1 0
 What would be useful is saddle layback at various seat heights. Not this nonsense.
  • 1 0
 People in Europe must just not consume the same amount of water as me. Kinda jealous
  • 2 0
 That seat looks equivalent to sitting on a cement bollard post.
  • 1 0
 It is a great looking bike, at a great price. I'd love to try one out-anyone know west coast canada demo options?
  • 2 0
 Interested how this bike compares to the Transition Spire
  • 1 0
 Why is the standover ~30mm more than comparable bikes? The Clash for example is 730 while the Torque is 770 @ the same reach
  • 1 0
 What's with the shovel handle hanging off of the rear axle?
  • 2 1
 Looks like a capra
  • 2 3
 Can't carry a real water bottle
  • 1 2
 1,283mm wheelbase lol. Like piloting a cruise ship.
  • 1 4
 Shouldn’t the Con list include “Impossible to get replacement from Canyon”???
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2022. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.017004
Mobile Version of Website