If another brand was to support Kurt and Neil, they would've won on that brand's bike's.
Extremely likely.

I know, short travel. The Spearfish is as short as it gets. If you choose FS why not go with some other pedal efficient bike with 100-120 mm.
BMC, Yeti, Kona, Specialized, Stoll, Bold, Mondraker, Trek - they all felt just as pedal friendly with much more travel. Once you don't need the travel, you just lock it - no difference here.

Or you ride the shock a bit hard (much air) and with a volume reducer.
But you still have a more capable and more fun bike.

GregMay wrote: Size large can get quite a bit of kit in the frame

Except for maybe the Stoll and surely the Yeti, all above mentioned bikes have likely the same amount of space (Specialised Stumpy) or significantly more (the rest) than the saucy Spearfish.

I know, geometry is a very personal thing, but the skittish (in a negative way) feel of the front hardly is confidence inspiring, next to the lack of grip on both wheels.

Jay91 enjoyed a Specialized Enduro ... and is looking at a 140 mm Canyon, likely the Spectral... something we should consider if we want to help him.

On my second Orbea Occam Trail 29. 130 f and 120 r.
Really like the look of the new Orbea Oiz Trail too. 120 front and rear and room for two water bottles in the triangle so lots of room for a frambag but even lighter than my occam.

Also Option for custom colours for no extra cost (just an extra wait time).

Just back from a weekend bikepacking in the Cairngorms. Full sus and dropper post makes a lot of sense if you like technical riding but it’s also very efficient off-road!

Price wise they are more than the direct sale brands but very favourable compared to many other brands.

When did 130-140 start getting labelled as short travel?

Scott L wrote:On my second Orbea Occam Trail 29. 130 f and 120 r.
Really like the look of the new Orbea Oiz Trail too. 120 front and rear and room for two water bottles in the triangle so lots of room for a frambag but even lighter than my occam.

Also Option for custom colours for no extra cost (just an extra wait time).

Just back from a weekend bikepacking in the Cairngorms. Full sus and dropper post makes a lot of sense if you like technical riding but it’s also very efficient off-road!

Price wise they are more than the direct sale brands but very favourable compared to many other brands.

Looks nice multi coloured one

PaulB2 wrote:When did 130-140 start getting labelled as short travel?

Models that have both 29/27 have two travel options

Alpinum wrote:If another brand was to support Kurt and Neil, they would've won on that brand's bike's.
Extremely likely.

I know, short travel. The Spearfish is as short as it gets. If you choose FS why not go with some other pedal efficient bike with 100-120 mm.
BMC, Yeti, Kona, Specialized, Stoll, Bold, Mondraker, Trek - they all felt just as pedal friendly with much more travel. Once you don't need the travel, you just lock it - no difference here.

Or you ride the shock a bit hard (much air) and with a volume reducer.
But you still have a more capable and more fun bike.

GregMay wrote: Size large can get quite a bit of kit in the frame

Except for maybe the Stoll and surely the Yeti, all above mentioned bikes have likely the same amount of space (Specialised Stumpy) or significantly more (the rest) than the saucy Spearfish.

I know, geometry is a very personal thing, but the skittish (in a negative way) feel of the front hardly is confidence inspiring, next to the lack of grip on both wheels.

Jay91 enjoyed a Specialized Enduro ... and is looking at a 140 mm Canyon, likely the Spectral... something we should consider if we want to help him.

I enjoyed the 140mm but thinking of 120mm 29r

What's up with the Spearfish?

There's nothing particularly special about the spearfish, but it is an efficient short travel bike with relatively few moving bits. 80mm travel gives you more clearance for a small seatpack than 100mm, or 130mm.

I think Pete's anthem looked great - shock layout leaves more room for a frame bag. A top fuel, epic, oiz, bmc etc. would also do a similar job I'm sure.

I love long travel bikes but would not want to be lugging one around for 500+ miles of mixed terrain!

jay91 wrote:
I enjoyed the 140mm but thinking of 120mm 29r

That narrows things down and should make the decision easier.

ianpv wrote: There's nothing particularly special about the spearfish, but it is an efficient short travel bike with relatively few moving bits.

Same amount of moving bits and bearings as most 4-bar bikes, including faux bar, vpp etc. although more moving parts than a Scott Spark and Kona HeiHei DL.

ianpv wrote:80mm travel gives you more clearance for a small seatpack than 100mm, or 130mm.

Good point.

OT

ianpv wrote:I love long travel bikes but would not want to be lugging one around for 500+ miles of mixed terrain!

If the terrain is difficult enough... I've had a few trips on my long legged 29er where I was happy for every mm of travel. There's a proper place for every bike and bikepacking has an huge spectrum. Problem is, terrain in which you can profit properly from a long travel bike - in my experience - is technically so challenging, I'm wasted after the 2nd day. Longest was 6 days in a row or so and I was too sore to ride on. 5 d on the HT550 seemed like a pootle.

Alpinum wrote:What's up with the Spearfish?

It's just another short travel bike. Stupidly steep head angle and very little room for a frame bag, so little suspension it's almost obsolete. Oh, it won a race, well great, they gave the bike to the right rider.

There are quite a few bikes out there that are just as efficient and comfy, but are lighter (frame), better balanced (rigidity/compliance), cheaper and have more room for a frame bag (easier accessible/packable).

Are you folks all falling for the marketing (being probably the only bike to be advertised as bikepacking bike)?

Why the downer with Salsa? Why does it bother you they have identified their brand with 'adventure cycling' (or whatever you want to call it) before the other brands sussed out that might be a profitable market? I suspect they have sold a few bikes on the back of success in many bikepacking races, and other bikes may be as capable, but why would you not buy the one with a track record, from a brand invested in our niche hobby?

I have not owned enough FS bikes to make bold statements on its comparative merits, but this has become my go-to ride from a number of bikes, because it just feels good, and hasn't let me down (yet). I don't ride in particularly demanding terrain, so the geometry hasn't been problematic. As for frame bag capacity, it is very limited, but that's a common problem for most FS bikes, and many are even worse with the shock placement ruling out any frame bag.

If there is something that rides better, is significantly lighter (my DW, alloy 'fish is just under 11kg, with a normal seat post) and cheaper I would genuinely love to know what that is!

If I had the talent and opportunity to do mainly hard-core riding in the alps, I would almost certainly want something else, but I expect that's not a dream most boners are living.

Same amount of moving bits and bearings as most 4-bar bikes, including faux bar, vpp etc. although more moving parts than a Scott Spark and Kona HeiHei DL.

Well, the old ones didn't have a pivot by the rear axle, they had flexy chainstays, but I take your point re: the new ones (mine were old ones, I had one, sold it, missed it, bought another)

If the terrain is difficult enough... I've had a few trips on my long legged 29er where I was happy for every mm of travel

Absolutely agree - that's why I specified mixed terrain - I really would not want to ride my bird AM9 on the miles of estate tracks/bits of tarmac on the HT550, even if it would've been fantastic in torridon, where I certainly had to back off on the spearfish in comparison to trips I've had there on bigger bikes (patriot, old bullit). I really don't mind lugging big bikes around if the payoff is worth it, but for many bikepacking routes, especially in the UK, I'm not convinced it is. If I lived in the alps I may be more inclined to go bigger, but I don't unfortunately!

Not sure what I'd take on, say, the CTR - people have gone quick on relatively big bikes there...

ZeroDarkBivi wrote:Why the downer with Salsa? Why does it bother you they have identified their brand with 'adventure cycling' (or whatever you want to call it) before the other brands sussed out that might be a profitable market? I suspect they have sold a few bikes on the back of success in many bikepacking races, and other bikes may be as capable,

I must have read too many jokes on here about companies trying to use bikepacking for marketing purposes to take for granted, just how many (BBers) actually go for exactly this. So here I am, surprised to see the amount of Spearfish riders.
There's absolutely nothing on this bike, that makes it more long distance capable than others.

ZeroDarkBivi wrote:but why would you not buy the one with a track record, from a brand invested in our niche hobby?

I rather go test the bikes.

ZeroDarkBivi wrote:I have not owned enough FS bikes to make bold statements on its comparative merits, but this has become my go-to ride from a number of bikes, because it just feels good, and hasn't let me down (yet). I don't ride in particularly demanding terrain, so the geometry hasn't been problematic. As for frame bag capacity, it is very limited, but that's a common problem for most FS bikes, and many are even worse with the shock placement ruling out any frame bag.

I used to ride a bike, which for itself was quite okay. It may have fallen apart, cracked, but that was because I used it for stuff it wasn't really meant. Then I started to test ride a bunch of other bikes and was amazed how much more fun many other bikes were. Almost everything felt better. More balanced, more natural. Now, this testing didn't change the old bikes' characteristics, but my perception and the way I ride. Not riding style, but the way I can translate my riding into the terrain through the bike.
In comparison to many others, that former bike of mine was a sub standard bike. I still rode it much, also took it to UK 3x and rode the Highland Trail twice on it and depending on what you like to ride, I would (maybe…) recommend it to some. But now I know better, I'd not touch it again myself.
Jay will be getting his first FS. I don't see any reason for him to pick a not so fun bike.
Again, bag capacity is very limited and with quite a few decent FS bikes much better.

ZeroDarkBivi wrote:If there is something that rides better, is significantly lighter (my DW, alloy 'fish is just under 11kg, with a normal seat post) and cheaper I would genuinely love to know what that is!

Pick one or a few from those I mentioned prior. There are many more that have the right numbers and more frame space – but I've not ridden them enough to feel able to recommend them (or not).

ZeroDarkBivi wrote:If I had the talent and opportunity to do mainly hard-core riding in the alps, I would almost certainly want something else, but I expect that's not a dream most boners are living.

I'd ride exactly the same short travel bike if I were at home in the UK.

ianpv wrote:Absolutely agree - that's why I specified mixed terrain - I really would not want to ride my bird AM9 on the miles of estate tracks/bits of tarmac on the HT550, even if it would've been fantastic in torridon, where I certainly had to back off on the spearfish in comparison to trips I've had there on bigger bikes (patriot, old bullit). I really don't mind lugging big bikes around if the payoff is worth it, but for many bikepacking routes, especially in the UK, I'm not convinced it is. If I lived in the alps I may be more inclined to go bigger, but I don't unfortunately!

USA, everything is bigger there…
I'd very likely take the same as for the HT550. 100-120 mm FS. Yet, before the first HT I was thinking about taking my Scott Genius LT, just because it was the most long-distance capable bike I had back then (others only DH & fatbike) and I think I would've survived.
That Bird AM9 must be quite the machine and ideal for hammering about in the Alps. Most of us here don't have DH/FR bikes anymore. Our big bikes now are 150-160 mm 29" and some 27.5". Bikes have gotten better and better and closed the gap somewhat to DH bikes. But also in DH there's likely a small jump going to happen soon...