Orbea Rise EMTB - 16.2KG Superlight

[Pdoz]

Why is the ltd price / weight / marketing getting people so upset? We have a whole thread on spec levo weights with scary $ being spent on bling , lots of different compromises made and I don't see people ranting because someone went for carbon cranks or wheels?

Orbea has done us a huge favour - the other manufacturers now have a new weight / performance target to chase . Don't forget, Orbea has offered 4 basic levels with the options to change spec within each of those levels - including the option to spec DOWN components to reduce cost. They're giving us a choice at the time of purchase , which seems a lot less hassle that what so many buyers do - buy a bike and immediately upgrade components / sell the stock bits at a loss , and tell their significant others that $10 k bike only cost $6. She knows...and if it means she doesn't need to listen, she doesn't care.

IMHO, When you factor in the current market, the cheaper M20 starts looking like great value - it's cheaper than a focus jam 2 9.9 was going to be , ( Exclusive review: FOCUS JAM² 9.9 DRIFTER 2021 – Brand new Shimano EP8 motor and a modular battery system | E-MOUNTAINBIKE Magazine ) , it's lighter , and has the option to order the fox 36 factory forks . It's still scary expensive compared to what many of us we buying 2 years ago, but if I compare my 23.8 kg giant full e pro with a 19 kg orbea m20 , the giant looks like a fugly joke. Yet I love that fugly joke....so a sexy orbea is looking pretty good to me...and the M10 would probably make me look like that fat bald dentist with a trophy wife....so imagine being able to feel like a rockstar for just the price of an orbea ltd! No divorce, no expensive gifts, and until the unobtanium Mk 7 is released life is good. Bikes are cheap.

 

[Pdoz]

Hell it was only 2 years ago that every other 22kg EMTB had 34's specced on it out the box.

Their marketing speil is a load of gumpf though.

They were 25 kg emtb's because those were e spec 34's....

 

[apac]

The M10 looks 'ok' for the price with standard spec. How much does this one weigh?

 

[paquo]

at much better pricing than an sl the rise team, on paper at least, seems like a winner. I like all the shimano components but otoh i like carbon frames , i'm glad i don't have to decide

 

[carlbiker]

I didnt get one yet, but heres the details!

Please send me the demo bike once you have absolutely no requirement for it.......?

 

[maynard]

I've had the best times of my life on mine!!! ?

Yeah I should get one. But I'm too scared ill kill myself.

 

[Zimmerframe]

Yeah I should get one. But I'm too scared ill kill myself.

I'd certainly had death defying moments on motorcycles. But in the end, I sold it because where I was living the driving style is very "relaxed" .. or completely unaware of anything outside of the vehicle people are in. Car's are normally either in the middle of the road or the wrong side. They'd invariably be going considerably faster than the speed limits and considerably faster than what would be even remotely safe based on what you could see and react to - even if you did happen to be paying attention. The fun factor was no longer balanced out by the risk factor outside of your own control. Mountain biking is much safer ...

 

[RickBullotta]

Yes and no... and do understand what you mean.

The law of diminishing returns obviously plays a big part. It only cost a little to improve and transform a bad racing car into a good one. It costs millions of dollars to improve an exceptionally fast racing car into one that is only fractionally faster in order to win at the top end of the field. This cost comes from thousands of hours of R&D and innovative re-thinking, plus what usually involves true bespoke manufacturing.

The same thing can be applied when it comes to weight/strength.

But then there's market value, and by that I mean the price that people are willing to (or have been accustomed to) pay for any given item. Branding and marketing comes into play here, where validation-by-association is deliberately seeded into the user culture. This is true for any commodity, be it sunglasses, food, or rare comic books. If you can increase the desirability (inherently or artificially) you can increase the retail value - regardless of how cheap it is to manufacture, or acquire. No manufacturer is going to disclose how cheap it is to manufacture a bicycle part in large quantities by CNC automation, especially if nobody questions its market value no matter how exorbitant. An equivalent replacement part in the motorcycle industry has no bearing on this.

agreed. and it appears that there is ample demand for bicycles at all price points.

 

[Jimbo Vills]

Yeah I should get one. But I'm too scared ill kill myself.

lol. We all gotta go sometime ?

I very rarely ride on the road anymore though in all seriousness. Although I toured a lot over Europe for quite a few years with pals and was honestly the best times I’ve had.

then went racing and it took over my life and finances ??

Mainly just track these days. Least if you crash it’s likely just a dented ego and wallet. ??‍

And occasionally some bones....

my current weapon of choice ??

 

[ian6354]

Does this bike make the SL even more special. I mean spec the SL with the Orbea’s components and then do a weight comparison. And then there’s the range, I’m guessing the Orbea would struggle to achieve 20 miles.

It’s where you realise what goes into Specialized R&D. They developed a small lightweight motor and then built the bike. Orbea have added an off the shelf motor, detuned it and then fitted questionable components to bring it in under the weight of the SL.

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

Does this bike make the SL even more special. I mean spec the SL with the Orbea’s components and then do a weight comparison. And then there’s the range, I’m guessing the Orbea would struggle to achieve 20 miles.

It’s where you realise what goes into Specialized R&D. They developed a small lightweight motor and then built the bike. Orbea have added an off the shelf motor, detuned it and then fitted questionable components to bring it in under the weight of the SL.

Specialized told us on the launch of the SL they had built some SL’s as light as a 14.95 KG when testing them. But it had thin tyres, 180mm rotors and a couple more lightweight components as part of the build. They wanted them trail ready out of the box so ended up at 16.9 KG.

I wonder how much Nm they could achieve from that Mahle motor. Biggest issue could be nylon gears inside...

 

[KeithR]

Does this bike make the SL even more special. I mean spec the SL with the Orbea’s components and then do a weight comparison. And then there’s the range, I’m guessing the Orbea would struggle to achieve 20 miles.

It’s where you realise what goes into Specialized R&D. They developed a small lightweight motor and then built the bike. Orbea have added an off the shelf motor, detuned it and then fitted questionable components to bring it in under the weight of the SL.

I was thinking much the same thing.

Bunging a detuned standard motor into a decent but rather "by-the-numbers" frame is pretty much the dictionary definition of half-arsed bandwagon jumping: imagine what the Orbea would be like with the Mahle motor, or a properly researched and developed equivalent.

It seems like a nice enough bike, but groundbreaking it ain't.

 

[RickBullotta]

I was thinking much the same thing.

Bunging a detuned standard motor into a decent but rather "by-the-numbers" frame is pretty much the dictionary definition of half-arsed bandwagon jumping: imagine what the Orbea would be like with the Mahle motor, or a properly researched and developed equivalent.

It seems like a nice enough bike, but groundbreaking it ain't.

Why the hate? I don't see a "half-arsed" approach - I see a "70% more-arsed" approach. Significantly more power than the SL. I also see a "30% cheaper" approach than the equivalent SL (LTD vs S Works). I see a design more accommodating of bigger rubber too (at least spec limits, I suspect both bikes can go bigger than the stated max).

I'd have to say the Orbea is pretty impressive and hits a real sweet spot. I ended up spec'ing mine with a DPX2 and 36 and 4 pot brakes, well, because. I'll report back actual weight. Not that I care. I know that it will be 10-12 lbs lighter than my Pivot Shuttle, and a MASSIVE improvement over my older KTM Kapoho Macina.

I like both the SL and the Rise quite a bit - and I was ready to buy an SL. I just decided that I wanted to try this new "power point" between 35nm and 85nm and see how it goes, and save 30% in the process.

 

[KeithR]

Why the hate?

No hate whatsoever - just completely underwhelmed.

You don't have to be so defensive about it, Rick - It's OK for you to be impressed, and me less so.

Significantly more power than the SL

Which is completely irrelevant. We buy the SL for what it is, not for what it isn't. If I'd wanted more power, I wouldn't have bought mine.

It's Orbea's approach that's half-arsed - taking what is in reality a bog-standard eMTB, detuning its motor, and then trying to claim they've invented a new paradigm, really is just "phoning it in".

 

[Stray cat]

At full power,could we compare this engine to Bosch Gen 4 in Tour mode or a bit more?

 

[F4Flyer]

I was looking at the Levo SL but I think I will get this one instead, sometime next year after I see a few reviews. I have been mountain biking for 20+ years and I do like to pedal. I also much prefer lighter bikes over heavier bikes. I like this a lot!! Hopefully, even more manufacturers start to do this.

 

[Norcalsl]

At 0:42 of in the above video they weigh the Rise M Team - one step below the LTD and priced at nearly $10,000 U.S. Unlike the LTD, it is not a cross-county style bike - more like Levo SL spec (150 travel front and rear, 36 Fox Fork). It weighs 40 lbs with pedals. So at similar spec it's actually heavier than the S-Works Levo SL and similar to the lower level SL models. Plus the Levo SLs all have beefier tires.

 

[RickBullotta]

At 0:42 of in the above video they weigh the Rise M Team - one step below the LTD and priced at nearly $10,000 U.S. Unlike the LTD, it is not a cross-county style bike - more like Levo SL spec (150 travel front and rear, 36 Fox Fork). It weighs 40 lbs with pedals. So at similar spec it's actually heavier than the S-Works Levo SL and similar to the lower level SL models. Plus the Levo SLs all have beefier tires.

Though the SL has smaller tires both F and R. And 42% less power. For some specifics, the 36/150mm fork only adds 7 ounces. And the DPX2 is better spec than the DPS on the SL, but adds 5 more ounces.

The Rise delivers more power, and on its LTD trim will be lighter than an S Works SL, even with a Fox 36/150 and the DPX2.

 

[apac]

It's going to be gas guzzler with tiny tank

 

[flash]

It's going to be gas guzzler with tiny tank

I think that's what the narrow cadence band is supposed to help with. Between 70 and 90 RPM will maximise your power with the bike maximum assist to extend battery life. This is what the original Fazua firmware did. Limited the range where assist was maxxed and range was huge for a small battery. With Fazua 2.0 it's possible to either have the same or max power and crush the battery life.

There'll be some improvements due to the new motor, lower power and lower drag (compared to the E8000) of the new motor as well.

With the extender range could be enormous. And you can carry more than one if you really need to.

Gordon

 

[Gary]

the older E8000 and E7000 motors both have a fairly narrow range as regards optimum cadence for max motor assistance % anyway.

 

[mark.ai]

More interesting charts, but who knows how accurate they could be ...

Although I'd forget the extra 54Wh from the rider, and just say it's similar to a 500Wh standard system (instead of 540).

 

[Cricket23]

Sorry Dobby, I was kidding. BTW, GMBN have a vid up of this thing in the wild.

Here's the link.

 

[urastus]

I like it. I have only used boost once on my bike for fun. I'm usually on the 2nd lowest setting (eco on medium). I'd order it with bigger rotors (as big as they offer), and bigger, burlier tyres.

Although I do like aluminium for an easy life, and mullet. Still not my ideal bike, but close.

 

[b45her]

What I don't understand is if it's just a normal ep8 motor but with software restricting the torque to 60nm, why don't they give you an option to run it in full fat 85nm mode, they could include warnings in the manual about the battery running down v fast etc, but it would give you, the customer, the option to have a levo sl style lite ebike bike or a full fat style bike with the same range as a regular full fat bike if using the range extender battery, then it would be the absolute best of both worlds.

There must be a reason why they haven't done that, but can't think why. The only thing that springs to mind is that maybe the small battery can't supply a large enough electrical current to give 85nm torque.

Any ideas?

Current has nothing to do with the battery capacity, if you don't know why the motor isnt 85 Nm i'd suggest you look into why you aint going to see any 85nm EP8's until at least February. It's hard locked to 60nm your not gonna be able to flash it.

 

[b45her]

The Rotty does seems pretty sorted but I'm not entirely convinced a 63.5deg head angle is "bang on" for the sort of rider you're likely to see riding one of these in the Surrey Hills or at Glentress.

HaHA , from what i've seen and been told about the surrey "hills" i think i'd be more inclined to take a gravel bike .

 

[Mteam]

Current has nothing to do with the battery capacity, if you don't know why the motor isnt 85 Nm i'd suggest you look into why you aint going to see any 85nm EP8's until at least February. It's hard locked to 60nm your not gonna be able to flash it.

I know that current is not directly linked to battery capacity (well it sort of is really but anyway) , but current is directly related to the number of cells in a battery and how those cells are connected together (series or parallel) . And the number of cells in a battery directly drives the weight and size/shape of the battery, so it is possible that orbea decided to configure (note I'm not talking about the capacity) the battery in such a way as to hit a weight target or a particular size/shape and were happy to have a compromise on the torque that could be delivered by the motor as a result.

I dont think these bikes are going to be delivered to the general public until next year, which is when the normal ep8 will start to be delivered, so I dont think orbea are limiting the torque because of the well known issues with the ep8 at present.

The 60nm could be nothing to do with battery spec, it could just be set like that because of the target market. I was only speculating whether the battery design could be why orbea set the torque low . It just seems crazy to me to not give people the option of a full fat ebike experience if the system can do it - therefore I conclude the system cant do it, and seeing as orbea say the motor is identical to a normal ep8, the battery is the only thing that is different to a full fat ep8 bike, hence my musing about whether the battery is the constraint.

 

[b45her]

I do because I have three eBikes that span a 5 1/2 kilo weight difference. I just think that a 140/140 bike specced with cross country parts to keep the weight down for marketing isn't entirely honest when 99% of buyers won't buy it that way. 16.2kg is a lost leader. You can't even replace some of those consumable parts, like for like at you LBS. They had the chainring and tyres specially made for them (or bought exclusivity. Orbea use that to suck you in and then sell you something a bit different. Especially when they could have gotten the same result with the 17.5kg spec.

I know everybody does it. It just rubs me the wrong way.

Gordon

m10 is 18.22 kg without pedals with proper tyres, sealant fox 36's and a dpx2 just weighed one on a park tool scale

 

[Doomanic]

Photo would be awesome!

 

[Zimmerframe]

Photo would be awesome!

There ya go ...