Whyte 2008
Whyte unveils all-new 120mm travel, carbon fibre, sub-24lb E-120, plus a relatively inexpensive hardtail
UK brand Whyte has a history of making bikes that are either ground-breaking or quirkily eccentric, depending on your point of view. Few would deny, though, that the quirky quota has gone down over the years, and the 2008 range (and it's starting to get quite sizable) is packed with bikes clearly designed with function to the fore but at least half a nod to appearance too.
The big news from Whyte for 2008 is the all-new E-120. Don't be fooled into thinking that it's just a metric E-5 - about all the two bikes have in common is the brand name on the side and the Quad-Link rear suspension, and even that is set up differently on the 120. 120mm-travel trail bikes are clearly the current Big Thing, but the E-120 stands apart by combining impressively low weight (the top-of-the-line Team is claimed to come in at 24lb) with a stout feel and great trail manners.
It's the first all-carbon bike from Whyte, and the designers and engineers have spent a huge amount of time with different grades of fibre, weaves, layup patterns and all the rest of it. To give you some idea of the hidden complexity of this bike, the swingarm alone is made up of 157 different pieces of carbon fibre, all of which have to be hand-laid in the right order and correct orientation. It's a time-consuming process, which explains why the E-120 is not by any stretch of the imagination a cheap bike.
Whyte's new 905 hardtail
That said, the E-120 XT (Fox F120RL fork and full Shimano XT group, including the wheels) comes in at £2,899, which is clearly a lot of money but isn't at all bonkers, all things considered. There's also the Trail (RockShox Revelation, SRAM/FSA/Hope bits) at £3,299 and the fully-emblingerised Team, which will cost you £3,999 and packs an XTR drivetrain with Hope wheels and brakes.
We've got an E-120 to test, with first riding impressions being really very good indeed. There's a lot of volume to the carbon frame and that makes itself felt in the accurate ride. The Quad-Link back end is set up similarly to the Mount Vision from sister brand Marin, rather than the E-5's distinctly different arrangement, and delivers a pleasingly linear and well-mannered performance without losing the magic-carpet feel over smaller bumps.
Over in hardtail-land, the 19 Trail and Race platforms are carried over essentially unchanged apart from colours and spec. There's a new "entry level" hardtail, though, in the shape of the 905. This shares the 19 Trail's geometry but dispenses with the funky adjustable dropouts and is built from butted 6061 aluminium rather than the 19's AN6 tubes. With RockShox Recon fork, SRAM X-9 transmission, Juicy 7 brakes, Hope hubs and Easton finishing kit, the 905 comes in at £1,399, making it the cheapest bike in the Whyte range.
The old E5 was a twitchy scarey feeling beast, way too steep on the angles and that SC32 fork likely didn't help, so I'll pass thanks. I'm sure it climbed well though. Interesting they haven't made a 120mm SC32 or something fork for the front of it.
Posted: 31/01/2008 23:01
Do I comment on every bike and component ?? the answer is no, so NO  But I do blag loads of test rides when Demo's are available
Posted: 01/02/2008 00:03
AMG = Hi performance mercedes - "M" series = hi perfomance end BMW ,S So possibly WHYTE = hi performance Marins ??
Posted: 01/02/2008 09:26
Frame warranty is five years. No official crash replacement policy, but I'm told that a reduced-price replacement frame or swingarm would be offered if it happened. In other Whyte-related insights, Jon Whyte is no longer with Marin or Whyte (and he didn't move from one to the other). And the weight limit on the E-5 was due to the shock leverage ratio potentially pushing the shock pressures above those recommended by Fox rather than due to the strength of the frame.
Posted: 04/02/2008 12:54
Design/Looks wise it aint pretty. I have a Scott Strike 30, 2003 model, Carbon main frame, Scanadium back end, XTR gearing, FSA Carbon Chainset, Ritchley Bars/Stem & Fox forks, all up weight about 23 lbs. Brilliant for X- country/long enduros. It's brilliant, I cannot do it justice (spend too much time Road Racing, Vetrans events) and I've seen nothing that approaches it since. Modern design is attempting to make bikes too much of an all rounder and consequently they are too bulky. And it ain't for sale !!! Marco
Posted: 07/02/2008 21:12
Is Jon Whyte not working for the company bearing his name? Sounds most odd. Maybe he's on the board still? If not, I wonder what he's doing? Is he designing suspension platforms and them moving on? Mind, they look distinctive and are good in mud. Should this bike be seens a more modern, lighter version of the 46? Tim
Posted: 14/02/2008 05:56
Is Jon Whyte not working for the company bearing his name? No. Sounds most odd. Maybe he's on the board still? No. If not, I wonder what he's doing? Is he designing suspension platforms and them moving on? No. Mind, they look distinctive and are good in mud. Should this bike be seens a more modern, lighter version of the 46? No
Posted: 14/02/2008 09:23
Is Jon Whyte not working for the company bearing his name? No. So he still works for Whyte then
Posted: 14/02/2008 09:31
ATB Sales owns the various patents and intellectual property, and also the Whyte brand name, so there'll still be Whyte bikes. Unless he's part of this ATB shareholding, this seems a massive oversight on Whyte's part. So any company can, in theory produce whatever crap they like with complete impunity, assuming they pay ATB Sales a fee to trade under the Whyte name in say Taiwan. It's happened lots of times, you pay company X a fee to produce products in country A, then during that 5 year franchise agreement, you churn out sub standard goods, goods that may not even reflect the original heritage, and the parent company has not a leg to stand on. I hope he has clauses in place in case the company, or any company that chooses to buy out ATB Sales for that matter in the future, does decide to use his name on equipment that he'd be mortified to be associated with, thus devaluing the entire Whyte brand and ethos. In this regards I hope you're wrong about him owning nothing that he produced nor even his name as a trade mark in his 11 year tenure. Tim
Posted: 14/02/2008 09:39
Well, it's clearly not in ATB Sales's interests to devalue its brand. No-one licenses the Whyte brand from it. Jon is currently living in British Columbia, doing a lot of running and riding and says he's happier than he's ever been. I'm not sure he's all that concerned about what happens to a brand name that he never owned anyway.
Posted: 14/02/2008 10:08
Yet. I wonder how many countless designers, engineers, painters, photographers, screen writers, architects, manufacturers and so on and on and on have at one time or another taken this myopic view on their life's work? Then lived to regret it? Most every trade has safeguards in place to aim off fo those who had not understood the power of brand association (in this example). 2 very clear examples of late. The Screen Writers in the USA, and the new contracts that have had to be drawn up at the Guardian Newspaper. That's just two high profile example in 2008 that have been won yet again by the artists. Photographers (my trade) are deadset against the selling of negs and files. That's all part of my work and my income stream. Maybe he has no concept of his work and how the rights he should have had in place. Seems astonishingly naive. What if Merida bought out the holding company for a figure they couldn't ignore and they simply transferred the Whyte brand name to their own creations? How better to make an huge impression and launch their bikes into mainstrean UK & Europe! What if Daewoo were to buy out Chrysler Motors and then without a second thought, simply re-branded their Daewoo Matiz and other cars? Oh. They just did! Don't you just want to own a Chrysler now!? Tim
Posted: 14/02/2008 10:26
I didn't particularly want to own a Chrysler before. I don't really see rights issues in the creative industries (with which, as it happens, I agree with you) as analogous in this instance. He was employed by ATB Sales to design bikes. Then he left. He didn't come up with some designs and sell them to a company. Without ATB those bikes would never have got built. The MTBs weren't Jon's life's work anyway. I'm sure he's got plenty of other stuff up his sleeve. And you can argue all you like about naivete, but when it comes down to it Jon's now living a life that many here would happily shed a limb for. What if Merida bought out the holding company for a figure they couldn't ignore and they simply transferred the Whyte brand name to their own creations? Well, first off it wouldn't work. Second it's clearly not Merida's way of doing things otherwise they'd have done it already with a much higher-profile brand than Whyte (but I realise that you're just choosing Merida as an arbitrary large company rather than a specific example). Third, the vast majority of the public don't even realise that there even was a chap called Whyte who ever had anything to do with the bikes, so what happens to that brand has little impact on Jon himself. I'm going to have to watch myself here, though. At some point you're going to posit some notion that I'm in complete agreement with but I'm going to find myself arguing against it anyway. Which will be tricky.
Posted: 14/02/2008 10:55
If I were to lend my name (for example) to a series of designs and a company that traded in my name, I'd want a controlling interest or some form of veto (and we don't know that he doesn't) , it's the same as when I employ freelance staff to operate under my company, which is my own name and one that has a certain kudos, although almost no one here would know this fact. The fact that no one here has purchased my work doesn't lessen it's potential and value in the future. Witness the Einstein’s Estate- he's the 5th highest grossing dead person and Elvis earns more now that when he was alive. Never sell out today for that quick buck and comfortable lifestyle. The fact is that I'd not want anyone trading under my name in the future if I was not completely happy with the product, especially as you say, he's still active and has plans. The Whyte trade mark might be under some licensing agreement that we'd never be privy to.We can but speculate. Either way, they're good in mud and have an ever expanding range = some measure of success at the tills and are (perceived as 100%) British = kudos, and a degree of worldwide élan and prestige. Tim
Posted: 14/02/2008 11:23
Although not that long ago the bike market was very different when Jon joined ATB Sales The company gave him a platform (contacts in off-shore production and world wide retail distribution) to work from, albeit as an employee. ATB Sales would have taken a considerable risk - it was by no means no certain that full suspension bikes would ever be credible. I think owning the name would have been a reasonable request for that risk, at that time. No other company took that risk at that time...
Posted: 18/02/2008 16:58
Meanwhile, back at the bike review...
... I currently run an E5 XT. I've been night riding on it tonight including a previously unridden (by me) gully with significant rocky step downs. The E5 just carried me over all of this and was brilliant. It also got me up one of the technical climbs that defeated all but one other in the group. FWIW, my E5 runs a Rockshox Revelation, which seems to attract better reviews than the SC32. I've also gone for a more solid wheelset with Mavic 819 and UST Nobby Nics in place of the original 717s and Conti Vapors. The latest tweak is a different bar that is a more usual shape than the quirky upswept original on the bike, bringing my weight more central on the bike, incidentally matching the E120 Trail's specification exactly, right down to the Thomson X4 Stem.
In its original form the E5 was impressive on technical singletrack, great on in-the-saddle climbs and only let me down on steep climbs because of the riding position. The tweaked riding position fixes that fault. The shock stays permanently on the lightest propedal setting (RP3) because a) the lever fell off, and b) the chaingrowth geometry provides fantastic acceleration without having to run any platform.
I'm test riding an E120 in a couple of weekends time. I've read the reviews saying that it has more "authority" and all that, but I'm really struggling to see the shortcomings with my current E5 that seem to be doled out liberally alongside the praise for the E120. Most of the details of the reviews are applicable to my existing bike:
"its 'snap' up to speed is outstanding" - tick
"slight stiffening of the suspension under power to create a rock solid feel for an exhilarating velocity" - tick
"It'll just hurl itself out of corners" - tick
"we've dug it out of unsaveable stalls several times" - tick
"We lost count of the 'crikey we're in the big ring' moments we had too" - tick
"it can occasionally spit traction under full power" - tick
"But the dynamic feel responds well to bodyweight shifts making manuals, drops and 'floating' over rough terrain effortless, even for the most flightless riders" - that'll be me they're thinking of...
I'm hoping it will all become clear by riding the damn thing. At the moment, I've got a bike that I ride fast uphill, fast downhill and fast on twisty singletrack. I am perhaps a bit wary of landing too heavily on the rear suspension as it seems to use up the travel quite quickly, but that is about it. I would seriously consider building up an E120 frame and selling on the E5, but the differences will have to be more than the blingy wonder-plastic.
I note that ATB Sales are fitting Fox F120 forks to the E120 Team and XT and Rockshox Revelation 426 to the Trail. I guess the bigwigs at Shimano/ATB sales didn't want SRAM forks on the XT and XTR spec bikes. Can't think of another reason.
Posted: 27/02/2008 01:35
|
|
