This is a comparison of the below rigs with the focus on solo MONT 24 or big backcountry, it's the search for the most efficient XC bike that has enough suspension to make a long ride comfortable...
On a steady and constant climb, done in the same lap time, the Enduro is costing me an extra 15beats/min over the Rush, or 8% of maxHR, that doesn't sound like much, but at the top end of going hard, 1% is noticeable to me, 10% is massive, if I ever wanted proof that FR is harder, there it is. It has me thinking an FR rig is too hard for solo 24 too. Of these rigs the Rush offers a HR (read: effort :)) saving of 8%, the Trance 7%, the 575 and VT offer the same gain, 5% (over the Enduro).
The most efficient was the Rush, it climbed effortlessly and has a great weight advantage being the lightest bike tested.
Note: I did not do this climb efficiency test on the ASRsl, I suspect it would have faired well, but doubt as well as the Rush or Trance, as in the end the ASRsl was the 2nd slowest tested rig and it pulled the highest heart rate during the test lap in the below lap time comparison.
We tested the Enduro and 575 twice, that's because the Enduro is my baseline rig, so I have tested it at all the test sessions, the 575 was a real disappointment the first time I tested it, the back end was skittish and all over the place and on climb it bobbed like nothing else, so a fortnight later we decided to let the boys at H&C tune it, then we could retest it properly and see what it was really capable of. It did not disappoint, correct suspension setup made it much more responsive, virtually no bob and 15 secs stripped off it's lap time!
The fastest rig by a fair margin in the Trance (note it's also got a fairly low lap average HR compared to other laps, I believe she's got even better lap times available if the meat on top is not too tired to push her harder :)), with the 575 and Rush 10 seconds back, the VT2 is 16 seconds back. The ASR is a full 25 seconds behind the pace, and as for my poor old Enduro, she's nearly a minute behind the Trance, that's almost a 20% speed difference!
The 575 felt quickest down the hill to me, but it wasn't, the Trance beat all the others (Trance 1:25, ASR 1:40, Enduro 1:45, Rush 1:40, 575 1:45). The Enduro should have been fastest on the descent dammit, that has surprised me, I guess it is harder to get up to speed at the start of the downhill. The down hill there is very smooth, if it was rocky it would have been another story, but we are talking MONT here, not rocky technical track.
Notes:
The ASR is a surprise packet, I should retest it, it is amazing that it could be
the slowest of the new rigs tested.
I would but you'll note in the next section, it's not the best choice for big
enduro rides due to it's stiffness and lack of travel.
The VT2 deserves a lower time, the brakes on it were stuffed and I wasn't able
to slow down for a few corners, which would have costs a second or two each
time, I believe it could have gotten down to the 575's time of 4:50 with the
brakes in good working order.
You'll note it also had the lowest HR in the lap, perhaps with some more gusto,
some more seconds would have come off too, I think this low HR was related to
the slow cornering due to poor braking (or maybe I was just tired? ;))
The ASR felt the fastest and best out of the corners for acceleration to me,
but the Trance wasn't far off that responsive feel.
The first run on the 575 was awful, but after a tune at the shop, she ran very
sweet and responsive, some slight brake jack and skip on two corners that the
other bikes had no trouble with, but apart from that, great fun.
The VT had stuffed brakes and was pretty slow to corner as a result, that robbed
the "fun factor" from it :(
The Enduro is just plain hard work at Sparrow when you put the hammer down, and
the Rush felt great, quick to accelerate, no bob and cornered sweetly.
A tough call here, I would put the ASR, 575, Trance and Rush on a very hard to separate level, they were all very very good. The ASRsl was awesome at sparrow, but very stiff and I got the feeling after a few MONT laps, it would be hurting me due my body becoming the missing inches from it's suspension system, so I'll have to discard it from the list based on that, which leaves 3 very nice machines to duke it out for the title of most fun, a call too hard for me to make, I liked them all a lot, all responsive, snappy out of turns, able to attack the uphills and rip down the downhills.
I give the 575, Rush and Trance a tie for most fun.
The Trance was fastest and the Rush most efficient by the numbers, but that's just numbers, the feel is important and I thought the 575, Rush and Trance all had comparable feel, I hooked all the corners and could power out standing up on them all, I could even climb the hill standing the whole way in top gear (which is amazing for me, trust me! :)). So I guess it comes down to these three rigs, any of them would be good...
The $5400 Rush has the crappy XT dual controllers on the 2000 model we tested
and to change them means putting on cheaper SRAM X9 and Avid kit, which concerns
me for resale. It also runs a lefty fork, which is Cannondale proprietary stuff.
The $7500 575 is by far the most expensive, and given it wasn't fastest or most
efficient, it can go off the list.
The $4500 Trance was only 1% harder to ride up the hill than the Rush, but was
8% faster than it, it also comes with proper SRAM controllers, no dual rubbish
too, it's also the cheapest by a long way.
I think I'll go with the 2nd most efficient, cheapest, fastest and tied for
most fun Giant Trance 1.
Overall I think it is the best package for me.