- Thread starter
- #91
It’s difficult for me to compare now, as I only owned the Rail for 3 weeks, and have been riding the SL since the end of February.
In the beginning, I felt like the Rail was a better handling bike. It was a bit slacker, and felt very planted with the weight. It was very much a point and shoot bike. If you took a wrong line, it wouldn’t matter as it would just charge over what was in the way!
Since then, I’ve changed near enough every component on the SL, and now have it exactly as I like it. It feels nimble, but stable at the same time. I take it down sections as speeds I’d never have considered on my Stumpjumper as I have confidence in it.
The other consideration is that my Rail was my first jump into eMTB. Prior to that, I’d always been riding analogue bikes.
My initial thought was that the Rail was way too powerful for me.
I ride with my SL on 30/80, and find it more than enough. With that, I’m getting about 25miles / 1200m. On the Rail, I was mainly using eMTB mode, and was getting about 15 miles / 1000m.
I ride a lot of trail riding (fire track / fires paths etc), and also a lot of fast flowing single track descents, and occasional downhill tracks.
Sure, the SL is not as capable as a downhill bike, but it’s still capable of getting me down. It handles the flowy trails better, especially tight turns. It also feels much better to ride on low power or off. There’s a little drag when off, but it feels much more like riding an analogue bike.
I’d say the only way you’re going to find out how the SL / Rail compare in terms of power is to get a demo of an SL. That’s what I did - as even after only 2 weeks (when the SL came out), I was unsure if I could cope with the loss of all the Rail’s power. I think at this point, I hadn’t got used to it enough to feel I’d lost it.
If I’d been riding the Rail for a year, I might have struggled with feeling that the SL had enough power!
Hope that makes sense?!
They do look the part though and super light.
