REEB SST Long Term Review

Intro:

I've long been a fan of REEB bikes, since my first Dikyelous hardtail that introduced me to the world of riding singlespeed. Over the years, I've watched them grow and change from a somewhat niche brand into a more household name, all while they retained their in house manufacturing in CO. It's been awesome to watch, but I've always been a little hesitant about FS bikes from smaller brands due to the engineering required, so I held off from earlier Sqweeb iterations.

When I got the email from REEB that they were opening up pre-orders for the SST, I figured it was time to push that concern aside and try something different. I'm really glad I did, because this has been an incredible bike to own, ride, and maintain in the nearly 2 years I had it.

There are more detailed reviews covering the bike, so as usual, I'll stick to the things that stood out to me and avoid too much that has already been said many places.

The Build:

I built mine with a DBCoil IL in the standard size. On the front, I've run a few different forks for experimentations sake: RXF36m.2 coil, Lyrik Ultimate, and a Manitou Mezzer, all set to 150mm. I didn't try the bike with a super lightweight setup or at the more common 140mm fork.

For the rest of the build, I've changed up components a lot: Hayes, Hope, Fox, Shimano, SRAM, I9, BERD, and the list keeps going. The only real consistent component I kept was the rear shock, which I think matches really well with the way the bike rides.

Construction:

The frame is largely made of steel in Colorado, with a few 3d printed components made from stainless and aluminum suspension hardware. At least that's what I gather.

Of particular interest are the flex stays in the rear. Unlike many other bikes, there isn't a rear pivot with bearing and axle hardware, instead there is a flex stay that replaces the normal rotational hardware. I don't admit to knowing the engineering behind this, but it is notable especially considering how unusual this is among steel bikes.

The only points about the construction I'd note are that the previously mentioned flex stays reduce the max rotor size to 180mm. This being a trailbike, I don't think that's a huge deal, but being on the heavier side, I generally prefer 200 rotors in the rear. I have been using more powerful brakes than normal to compensate and it seems to do fine, but that is worth keeping in mind.

The stays will also require you to sortof "preload" the frame when you install the shock, it's again not a big deal, but don't be alarmed if your shock doesn't fit and it is the appropriate eye to eye length. You have to pull up on the rocker to fit the shock and the flex stays will then preload the shock slightly. Who is preloading who here? I'm not sure, but just be aware.

Cable routing is external and fairly straightforward, although the lack of elevation on the hoses can result in some rubbing.

Brake mounting uses a very innovate post mount system, which uses a brass or bronze insert that contains the threads, preventing stripped threads from damaging the frame, something common among smaller brands.

Tire clearance is decent - but may be limiting if you want to run a large 2.5 or 2.6. It has internal routing for a seatpost, of course, and cable guides along the frame, all of which clear large brake hoses fine. Nothing else to really note there.

Finally, there was a lot of groaning and gnashing of teeth about the lack of a BB drain hole on the forums after this bike was released. I tend to agree that this wouldn't be the worst thing to do, but I also don't think it's a huge deal either. My understand is that REEB addressed this and all new frames have this drain hole, but mine does not.

Climbing/Pedaling:

I'll admit that I'm not the XC type. The only other 120mm bike I've been on was a SBG generation Smuggler, which I'm pretty sure I spent more time doing bearing maintenance on than riding. Prior to that, my shortest bike was, well, a 115mm Smuggler. Every other bike I've owned was 140mm or more in the rear. All that to say, I can't really compare this to XC or pedally trailbikes, so keep that in mind.

All that being said, this bike pedals exceptionally well, better than any bike I've owned and definitely better than either of the two "similar" bikes I've had. It's responsive, there is very little bob, and it sprints out of the saddle super well. It reminds me of a suspended hardtail in the way that I can get off the saddle and climb comfortably. That's cliche, I know, but it is true.

Where I think this bike starts to lag a little bit is on traversy, flat rooty sections, the rear end tends to hang up a little more than some other bikes. It's not super obvious, it's not awful, it's just something I noticed on a few short sections. Proper technique, getting out of the saddle prior to these sections, and getting a bit of momentum goes a long way towards this being a non-issue.

Technical climbing performance is great, for the little bit of it that I do. The traction seems to be there and you don't get that sinking feeling in the rear that you do with a lot of other bikes. It, again, does hang up a little bit more than I'm used to from others, but not awful and certainly not unmanageable.

Standing out of the saddle climbing SS style, which I do a lot of, again has little downsides. No feeling of sinking in the rear, no lagging, no noticeable bobbing, just momentum and forward movement.

Now I doubt hardcore XC folks would find this to be the bike for them, but it's hard for me to imagine a bike that is so balanced and stable going downhill while climbing better than the SST does. Despite my weakened state the last year and a half for various reasons, I've found that I can push this bike up the hill with remarkable endurance and speed compared to others I've had with similar component specs.

I do wish the seat tube angle was slightly steeper. It's manageable, but I find myself slamming the saddle forward to keep in the position I want while pedaling. Most others I've seen are in the same position, which leads me to believe a little steeper angle would be helpful.

Descending:

The downhill performance of this bike is shocking. My second or third ride, we did a night ride down a trail I had never ridden before that was narrow, rooty, rough, and had a few small-ish drops on it. The way it tracked through all of this chunky and nastiness was remarkable to me for a 120mm bike. There was no hanging up, no bouncing off line, and no limitation that I could find in the bikes handling of this terrain. It was incredible.

Now, it is a 120 bike and it isn't going to defy that, the difference between the SST and my limited exposure to similar bikes is that the SST handles and performs great through terrain like that, but it transmits the work of enduring it onto the rider. Eventually, I found my arms more fatigued from the constant pumping and movement of the bike, so while it stays on a line incredibly well and tracks superbly, you feel it. It is neither painful nor unmanageable, but it takes a certain amount of strength to keep going and sometimes I find myself on trails where I have to stop to let my shoulders chill out.

Despite this, it remains composed and comfortable, it's more of an exercise than a beatdown, if that makes sense.

Under heavy braking, the bike remains composed and stable, there is no issue with it wanting to fling you forward or have you falling off the back. It's easy to be on the brakes with a lot of power down and remain centered, in control the entire time. I have had bikes in various travel ranges that tend to snag on features under heavy braking and I can't say that's been an issue here. I've put some very powerful brakes on this bike (Radic Kahas) and when I'm grabbing a fistful, as I do, I don't feel any scary or uncontrolled moments when the rear is locked down.

The geometry feels dialed in, it is stable and the bike corners exceptionally well. Like I'll point out in my Steezl review, something about both of these bikes makes switchbacks easier than any other bike I've had. I can't explain it, but they are incredibly stable through tight turns. When it's going downhill and getting steeper, it's easy to stay centered without fighting the tendency to end up too far fore or aft.

Despite trying, I have not been able to bottom this bike out harshly. Admittedly, I am not one to send huge features, but there are a few drops I hit wrong or landed awkwardly, but the bike still remain composed and kept me upright. There was one in particular that formed on a fallen tree that I wasn't expecting, I hit it incredibly awkwardly and was sure I was going to slam the whole rear end together, but it didn't happen (and this is with a coil). I am sure harder riders than me can find bottom on this bike, but riding natural terrain as I do, I have yet to.

Overall, the downhill performance on both smooth and rough terrain has surprised me, particularly the ability for the bike to track over rough terrain more suited to bigger bikes. Again, it's still a 120 bike and it transmits a lot of that to the rider, but it never seems to get harsh or uncontrolled.

Long Term Durability:

I've been on this bike for about 14 months at the time I wrote this. Now in that span, I've had 4 surgeries (fun) which kept me off the bike here and there, so I don't put the usual mileage in, but I've put at least 1000 miles on the bike, mainly in Pisgah. Most bikes at this point tend to start having bearing problems, loose or broken pivot hardware, or other related issues. None of that has been a problem, everything is as tight as the day it arrived and everything is still smooth.

The finish on the frame has remained perfect with no dings, chips, or marks. Nothing is bent, broken, or cracked.

Weight:

Weight is the monkey on the back of the bike industry. Despite 30 years of innovation and performance improvements, some people just can't shake the idea that 1-2 pounds of frame weight is going to have some major emphasis on the bikes performance. I saw this in the comments after the bike was released and I think to emphasize weight on this bike is missing a lot of factors, including the point.

The suspension performance, both up and down, is really dialed in and that includes pedaling performance. I've had 27lb trailbikes with similar builds to the SST and despite my SST being 5lbs heavier, I can outclimb any of those. Weight as a factor alone matters in large increments and in certain narrow disciplines, but generally doesn't matter as much as people think it does (I will admittedly exclude wheels, tires, and rotational weight, which matters in smaller increments).

Unless you are racing ultramarathons or some other XC category I don't participate in, I think emphasizing the 1-1.5lb weight difference between this bike and a lighter carbon one is to miss the point. This bike emphasizes riding up and down across varied terrain, it is not emphasizing a lightweight approach to bike building or trying to appeal to weight weenies.

I also don't think a lot of these trailbikes on the market today are as light as people think they are, the increase in reach numbers and change in manufacturing have made them heavier than they used to be. In my opinion, rolling resistance, suspension performance, and some rotational weight matters way more than material weight from the frame.

All that to be said, mine weighs 32lbs. That's with eeWings, I9 Enduro 315c wheels, inserts, heavier casing tires, XTR cassette, metal bars, a 2kg fork, and heavy flats. You could easily drop 2-3lbs off my built by going with a lighter fork, lighter tires, and "trail" wheels, but that doesn't really suit the way I ride and nor do I feel like the added weight drags me back. This is the fastest climbing bike I've owned outside of my singlespeed. If I wanted it to be faster, I could change to a faster rear tire and sacrifice braking traction, something that remains an option, but one I don't plan on taking advantage of. I could also spend more time in the gym which, let's be honest here, I will get a lot more out of and need to do anyway.

The point here is yes, this is a steel bike, yes it's going to be heavier, but I sincerely doubt that most riders will feel held back by a 1-1.5lb increase in frame weight outside of certain disciplines.

Who would I recommend this to?:

Before I get into this, I do want to emphasize that I think too many mountain bikers focus excessively on travel figures alone as a measure of a bikes purpose and performance. I don't think that's a really good way of evaluating bikes, as there is a lot that goes into the way a bike performs, and this bike is a great example of why this is a poor way of judging bikes. That says, it is still a factor that should be considered. I think people hung up on the travel numbers alone should ride this bike to see just how incredible it is, but people looking to buy with an eye towards faster enduro riding or racing should also keep in mind that eventually, no matter how well engineered it is, you hit the limitations imposed by the travel numbers.

Moving into it, I think it's worth keeping this bikes purpose in mind. Despite the geometry and design, it's not an enduro race bike. A stronger rider will be able to push this bike through rough terrain with greater ease, but it's worth keeping in mind it is still a 120 bike and despite its tracking performance, it's not going to eat rough stuff the way a bigger bike would. It continues to carry speed and not hang up through those features, but it transmits it back to the rider and that requires a certain amount of strength to pull off. My previous notes cover that more, but I think that is worth considering. I also expect riders pushing harder than I am would be able to find bottom easier, but I doubt you would find it in an uncontrolled or harsh manner unless it is setup wrong.

If you want a bike that pedals well, can handle rough terrain, but maybe won't carry the same speed with squishy comfort, then this is a great option. If you like to bump jump, manual, and ride "playfully", then this is again, a great option. The bike is responsive, pedals very well, and tracks well, but it's not going to fully defy the amount of travel in the rear, no bike (despite what you read) will.

I can't speak for the XC folks or how it compares, so I'll leave that out.

Pros:

• REEB is an awesome company to deal with, great support, great folks

• All (or mostly) US made frame

• Coil or air is feasible

• Excellent suspension performance on both climbs and descents, rough and smooth terrain

• Good tire clearance in the rear

• Well balanced geometry

• Beautiful finishes with many custom options available

• Innovative post mount system for the brake that doesn't destroy the frame if something gets stripped or cross threaded

Cons:

• Seated climbing position could be a little more upright for my preference

• Rear rotor size limited to 180

• Early builds don't have a BB drain hole (I'm kidding, don't @ me)