Loam Wolf been making 🔥🔥🔥 videos the past few months. Excited for 2022. Happy holidays boys and thanks for all the content this year. Watch more MTB on UA-cam than I'd wanna admit, but kept gravitating to your channel this year 👌💯
Here's an off topic question. Drew, if you were to purchase a canyon torque would you get a medium and throw a 50mm stem on it for a 475mm reach /1252mm wheel base or would you get the large at 490mm reach / 1280mm wheelbase?
Tough call but I'd likely go medium and 50mm stem... Course it depends on if that's my only bike, would i also be riding bike park, just be a trail bike etc...
@@TheLoamWolf wanting it for shuttles, park and trail riding. I'm in East Kootenays BC. Fernie, Panorama and Kicking Horse are all with in an hour or three.
@loamwolf If you could get the 29er Sender now or wait till June for the Mullet version (in a sz L) with the 436-446 chainstays which way would you go? Baring in mind I’ve got a park capable bike already. So I’m not absolutely in need of something like this before the lifts start running.
Tough call... We're hoping to get a mullet version this summer. I'd say it depends on if you're racing the clock, want the fastest/smoothest ride possible or if you are shorter, want more clearance, a slightly more playful feel or have tighter trails/obstacles where a shorter rear end would be more beneficial.
I would love to see a comparison of the Sender with a V10. I haven't ridden the Sender personally, but I find the V10 to be the best dh bike I have ridden so far.
@@arminkasum8465 Scott has very good bikes. I ride Scott Ransom 2020 and it's faster than any other bike (Santa Cruz, YT, etc). Gambler's geometry is very similar to Ransom so I would say it's also very fast bike.
@@kenvischi1047 if u look at all commencal pro riders they usually have somebody super injured and none of their riders are smoove causing them to be hella sketchy
@@kenai_the_asian8106 thanks for the response! In your personal experience as a normal local racer ( i guess) did it give you issues? I believe for their racers it is mainly due to riding style more than the bike itself, Amaury Pierron rides like he is spirited hahah
I’d take the Canyon Sender 10 out of 10 times. I’ve tried to like track so many times, but I just can’t get myself to do it. Every time I see one of their bikes in person or feel it or sit on it just doesn’t feel right there fit and finishes and create, the paint seems to chip a lot. The paint seems to be overly flashy and complex which I don’t love and they seem to have a lot of issues. Everybody always talks about how great they are but every time I sit on one I just don’t feel it. The main thing I do like is that Trek is from Wisconsin which is where I live, but thats about it.
I would get the Aluminum Trek over the carbon Canyon any day. Carbon is a bad material for all bikes, but especially for downhill mountain bikes. The worst places to use carbon on a bike are the cranks, bashguard, pedals, and front triangle.
@@spuddo123 Poor durability, bad for the environment, prone to sudden catastrophic failure with zero warning, high cost of manufacturing. There is no advantage to carbon parts over traditional metal equivalent.
well this thing don't need to be argue. just using common sense but you're absolutely wrong about carbon being bad material for bikes cause in fact carbon is better and its the no.1 choice for ultra performance bikes and all types of bicycle manufacturing do have negative effect on the environment in fact from production of aluminum to making a whole bike has more negative effect to the environment and don't forget they can produce more alu alloy frames than a cf composite that's why think twice Bro. another FACT poor durability will depend on the brand I've seen alloy components and frames broke more than carbon and that's why it depends on the brand. for trek they got the best of both and for me i'll choose carbon session any day than its alloy counterparts and carbon dh from other brands cause trek's oclv is industry leading reality check.
@@jaysealenduro5618 >well this thing don't need to be argue. just using common sense but you're absolutely wrong about carbon being bad material for bikes cause in fact carbon is better Why on earth do you think carbon is better? >and its the no.1 choice for ultra performance bikes According to who? >and all types of bicycle manufacturing do have negative effect on the environment in fact from production of aluminum to making a whole bike has more negative effect to the environment and don't forget they can produce more alu alloy frames than a cf composite that's why think twice Bro. Carbon cannot be recycled, and is much less durable. Aluminum can be recycled easily. I would encourage you to think at least once. >another FACT poor durability will depend on the brand I've seen alloy components and frames broke more than carbon and that's why it depends on the brand. Not really, the aluminum bikes from every manufacturer are more durable than the carbon equivalents. The reason you might see more broken alloy frames is because of the sheer volume of alloy frames produced. Carbon frames break more often but there aren't as many carbon frames out there. >for trek they got the best of both and for me i'll choose carbon session any day than, its alloy counterparts and carbon dh from other brands cause trek's oclv is industry leading reality check. You would be much better off with an aluminum frame. You want unsprung weight to be low and sprung weight to be high (eg an heavy aluminum frame with lightweight wheels is better than a lightweight carbon frame with lightweight or heavy wheels). Nothing about Trek frames is "industry leading". All major brands are made overseas in the same factories.
Loam Wolf been making 🔥🔥🔥 videos the past few months. Excited for 2022. Happy holidays boys and thanks for all the content this year. Watch more MTB on UA-cam than I'd wanna admit, but kept gravitating to your channel this year 👌💯
Awesome to hear it and thank you very much for the kind words. We're stoked to have you! Happy Holidays to you and your crew as well
Awesome comparison. Please review norco range vs dh bike & rocky mountain altitude.
Thats actually a respectable feat, to run a 200mm travel fork through its whole travel within just a single frame. :clap:
The extra $1000 is just down to the brand and the fact that Trek are not direct sales.
I’m sold I want a canyon! Send more to the UK
I’m sure Canyon can let you have the bike after such a good set of reviews
Wait till you ride the Canyon Torque! Its so sick! Please do a review! Be prepared to keep it!
We've got one and are riding it now!
Here's an off topic question. Drew, if you were to purchase a canyon torque would you get a medium and throw a 50mm stem on it for a 475mm reach /1252mm wheel base or would you get the large at 490mm reach / 1280mm wheelbase?
Tough call but I'd likely go medium and 50mm stem... Course it depends on if that's my only bike, would i also be riding bike park, just be a trail bike etc...
@@TheLoamWolf wanting it for shuttles, park and trail riding. I'm in East Kootenays BC. Fernie, Panorama and Kicking Horse are all with in an hour or three.
@@TheLoamWolf after nerding out on numbers, a 50mm stem would give it almost similar numbers to a large santa cruz nomad but with 29er wheels.
@loamwolf If you could get the 29er Sender now or wait till June for the Mullet version (in a sz L) with the 436-446 chainstays which way would you go? Baring in mind I’ve got a park capable bike already. So I’m not absolutely in need of something like this before the lifts start running.
Tough call... We're hoping to get a mullet version this summer. I'd say it depends on if you're racing the clock, want the fastest/smoothest ride possible or if you are shorter, want more clearance, a slightly more playful feel or have tighter trails/obstacles where a shorter rear end would be more beneficial.
I would love to see a comparison of the Sender with a V10. I haven't ridden the Sender personally, but I find the V10 to be the best dh bike I have ridden so far.
stick with the v10, canyon service sucks
canyons frame quality is shit, santa cruz v10 or propain rage is the best low pivot dh bikes
It’s ok
You guys are really high on the sender CFR!! Can you say how it compares to the Sender 6/al version without the mx link??
Make some video with the new Scott Gambler.
Good bike for i think 2010
@@arminkasum8465 Scott has very good bikes. I ride Scott Ransom 2020 and it's faster than any other bike (Santa Cruz, YT, etc). Gambler's geometry is very similar to Ransom so I would say it's also very fast bike.
@@jaworq 🤡
My second ac was the 2nd like
How does the session feel with a mullet
which one has better customer service and is less likely to break? trek
Damn two monsters of bikes
Yes they really are!
Compare whatever you want, nobody will never say "looks like a sender"
I want that Session so bad...
If you believe Canyon is better than Trek,that ink has reached your brain
Alloy all damn day. Metal gives no F's.
Though if I get alloy, it'll be a Commencal Supreme 💪
Thanks for sharing.
the supreme is easily the fastest bike but you can get so hurt easily, still love it tho
@@kenai_the_asian8106 hey old comment but could you elaborate on that please as i am considering one, thanks!
@@kenvischi1047 if u look at all commencal pro riders they usually have somebody super injured and none of their riders are smoove causing them to be hella sketchy
@@kenai_the_asian8106 thanks for the response! In your personal experience as a normal local racer ( i guess) did it give you issues? I believe for their racers it is mainly due to riding style more than the bike itself, Amaury Pierron rides like he is spirited hahah
What a HEAVY slam to start a vid 😬
Sourpatch didn't eat enough gummy worms that day...
I’d take the Canyon Sender 10 out of 10 times. I’ve tried to like track so many times, but I just can’t get myself to do it. Every time I see one of their bikes in person or feel it or sit on it just doesn’t feel right there fit and finishes and create, the paint seems to chip a lot. The paint seems to be overly flashy and complex which I don’t love and they seem to have a lot of issues. Everybody always talks about how great they are but every time I sit on one I just don’t feel it. The main thing I do like is that Trek is from Wisconsin which is where I live, but thats about it.
what pedals were you guys using on these bikes?
We were running clipless pedals, one had Saints and the other had XTs
Theres 3 bikes on my radar the v10, demo and sender that would be a good video
Most enduro bikes have bigger rotors than that Trek. Step up your game Trek.
It needs 223mm front and rear!
I would get the Aluminum Trek over the carbon Canyon any day. Carbon is a bad material for all bikes, but especially for downhill mountain bikes. The worst places to use carbon on a bike are the cranks, bashguard, pedals, and front triangle.
Why's it a bad material for MTB?
@@spuddo123 Poor durability, bad for the environment, prone to sudden catastrophic failure with zero warning, high cost of manufacturing. There is no advantage to carbon parts over traditional metal equivalent.
well this thing don't need to be argue. just using common sense but you're absolutely wrong about carbon being bad material for bikes cause in fact carbon is better and its the no.1 choice for ultra performance bikes and all types of bicycle manufacturing do have negative effect on the environment in fact from production of aluminum to making a whole bike has more negative effect to the environment and don't forget they can produce more alu alloy frames than a cf composite that's why think twice Bro. another FACT poor durability will depend on the brand I've seen alloy components and frames broke more than carbon and that's why it depends on the brand. for trek they got the best of both and for me i'll choose carbon session any day than its alloy counterparts and carbon dh from other brands cause trek's oclv is industry leading reality check.
@@jaysealenduro5618 >well this thing don't need to be argue. just using common sense but you're absolutely wrong about carbon being bad material for bikes cause in fact carbon is better
Why on earth do you think carbon is better?
>and its the no.1 choice for ultra performance bikes
According to who?
>and all types of bicycle manufacturing do have negative effect on the environment in fact from production of aluminum to making a whole bike has more negative effect to the environment and don't forget they can produce more alu alloy frames than a cf composite that's why think twice Bro.
Carbon cannot be recycled, and is much less durable. Aluminum
can be recycled easily. I would encourage you to think at least once.
>another FACT poor durability will depend on the brand I've seen alloy components and frames broke more than carbon and that's why it depends on the brand.
Not really, the aluminum bikes from every manufacturer are more durable than the carbon equivalents. The reason you might see more broken alloy frames is because of the sheer volume of alloy frames produced. Carbon frames break more often but there aren't as many carbon frames out there.
>for trek they got the best of both and for me i'll choose carbon session any day than, its alloy counterparts and carbon dh from other brands cause trek's oclv is industry leading reality check.
You would be much better off with an aluminum frame. You want unsprung weight to be low and sprung weight to be high (eg an heavy aluminum frame with lightweight wheels is better than a lightweight carbon frame with lightweight or heavy wheels).
Nothing about Trek frames is "industry leading". All major brands are made overseas in the same factories.
The same line of arguments were brought forward against aluminum when steel was king. We all know how that went.