





RIPLEY

VS

RIPLEY



The new Ripley LS squares off against its OG brother









WORDS: MIKE LEVY

PHOTOS: JAMES LISSIMORE







The Ripley LS is longer and slacker than the standard Ripley.

The standard Ripley's frame is all-new, but the conservative geometry is the same

As I'm sure some eager beavers will point out, a few things are different in the pictures. This is due to needing to have both built up simultaneously for the photos.

The Numbers

My Numbers



It turns out that I'm never going to be a great basketball player or need to shop at the local Big and Tall. I'm of average proportions all around, which means that I sometimes need to ask someone to get something off the top shelf, but I don't have any trouble when it comes to finding bikes that fit me well. The one caveat to this is that I have a relatively tall-ish inseam that requires an equally tall seat-to-pedal height. Yes, my dancer's legs just don't quit. No, you don't actually want to see me dance.



• Height: 179cm

• Inseam: 87.5cm

• Ape index: +1



The LS Ripley is 42mm longer, all of it ahead of the bottom bracket shell, and a bit over 1.5-degrees slacker.

Climbing

The OG Ripley is happy to take the inside, outside, or middle line through any tight climbing corner. The longer LS Ripley requires more thought.

When it comes to janky, tech climbs, both bikes can hold their own.

Descending

It's easier to go faster aboard the LS Ripley, while the OG bike wants to play 24/7.

The OG Ripley can be picked up off the ground at ease, and it fits into the smallest of pumpers and rollers on the trail.

OG or LS?

About the Reviewer



Mike Levy spent most of the 90s and early 2000s racing downhill bikes and building ill-considered jumps in the woods of British Columbia before realizing that bikes could also be pedaled for hours on end to get to some pretty cool places. These days he spends most of his time doing exactly that, preferring to ride test bikes way out in the local hills rather than any bike park. Over ten years as a professional mechanic before making the move to Pinkbike means that his enthusiasm for two wheels extends beyond simply riding on them, and his appreciation for all things technical is an attribute that meshes nicely with his role of Technical Editor at Pinkbike. Age: 35 • Height: 5'10” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 165lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None • Instagram: killed_by_death

The rear-end of both bikes measures 442mm, but there is a big difference at the other end of the two Ripleys: the OG's top tube is 607mm long whereas the LS' is 619mm. Reach is also quite different, as you'd expect, at 406mm and 428mm, respectively. This means that the LS Ripley is 42mm longer overall compared to the OG bike, and all of it is up front due to the longer reach and slacker head angle.I'm not going to argue that any of these numbers are at the extreme end of what's currently acceptable when it comes to geometry - there are much slacker and longer bikes out there - but that's the exact point of this comparison: trail bikes for everyday riders, but both bikes sport relatively conventional yet very different geometry. You know, the same but different.I was busy failing math class the last time I had to deal with this many numbers, so instead let's get to how the steeper, shorter 120mm-travel OG Ripley compares to the slacker, longer 120mm-travel LS Ripley. Both bikes were ridden on the same trails, singletrack that I test all of my review bikes on and trails that I've been riding for twenty years, which certainly gives some extra perspective.Because most people on trail bikes have them so they can pedal up mountains before coming back down, I thought that I should probably do a bunch of exactly that on both Ripleys. The same technical climb was ridden over and over again in the same conditions over a few months' time, but it didn't take nearly that long for me find out which of the two bikes I prefer.The orange OG is an absolute beast of a bike that can breeze past the tightest, rockiest, rootiest problems on ultra-technical sections with ease. It feels very much like a cross-country race bike that's both more forgiving and has more traction, but it gives nothing away in the efficiency department. On the OG Ripley, a rider can slow to essentially a stop, worm their way around a corner so tight that the bike's rear wheel stays on top of the same few inches of dirt, and then shuffle up a section of trail that has more in common with a spiral staircase than anything a bike should be pointed up.How does the black LS compare? The longer Ripley is an excellent technical climbing machine that makes a lot of other bikes of similar travel look out of their depth, but it ain't the OG. The bike's slow-speed steering actually feels quite similar, surprisingly close, to be honest, which is where its 97mm of trail comes in compared to the OG's steeper head angle and 85mm of trail. Tight switchbacks at slow speeds on the LS aren't ever going to be an issue for this reason - point it where you need to go and turn the pedals over - but it's the bike's extra 42mm of length, all of which is in front of the bottom bracket, that does mean that a rider on the LS Ripley has to do a bit more thinking than if he were on the OG bike.What I'm getting at is that, while the LS and OG are both quick handling bikes that supply the same amount of traction, I did find myself out of place on the longer LS Ripley more often than when on the OG, simply because of the former's extra length.Both bikes are champs on difficult singletrack climbs, but I know that I cleaned more technical trail on the OG than I did while on its longer, newer brother. Don't have those types of ascents? Then there's really nothing between the two bikes when it comes to climbing.Here's where it counts. With 120mm of travel out back and efficient feeling suspension, neither the OG or LS are the kind of bikes that relish fast and rough terrain compared to some of the new-school, short-travel play bikes out there. Neither Ripley is for chubby chasers who happily push around extra heft in exchange for added forgiveness when things get rough, but rather lithe machines that perform at their best when ridden with deliberate exactness instead of pure ballsiness. And, more than anything, you'll find that both are extremely entertaining bikes when this is your approach.If you had the chance to ride both the OG and LS Ripleys back to back, you'd find that the handful of millimeters that separate them also makes all the difference in the world.Trails that invite different interpretations are where the shorter, steeper OG Ripley was clearly ahead, or at least it will be to a rider who looks at singletrack and thinks, ''where can I go that's different than the line the person in front of me chose?'' The orange Ibis fits into places where other bikes, including its longer sibling, would prefer to go straight through rather than into and out of. The OG can be pumped and popped where the LS is plowing and pushing, relatively speaking given the 120mm of travel. While neither approach is right or wrong, a rider more apt to employ the latter could find the OG Ripley to feel a bit nervous. I love a sharp handling bike, though, so I'd say that the OG's steering is more decisive and on-point in a positive way, even if someone with the opposite preference might call it a bit jittery.One thing is for sure; the OG doesn't tend to push to the outer edges of the trail through a corner. Just the opposite, in fact, which might be why I tended to find more fun line variations because Icut in or under the accepted blue groove and choose something different. And the slower the switchback, the more the OG is going to brag about its so-called passé geometry while making you look like you know what you're doing.While the two bikes ride differently, it's only when the trail gets really fast and rough that the LS starts to pull ahead when talking about comfort, and maybe even speed. The bike's longer wheelbase sometimes makes it feel as if the LS is sporting an extra 10mm of travel, and it's obvious that, along with its more relaxed handling, the LS is going to allow a rider to feel more at ease than when he's trying to go the same speed on the OG Ripley. It simply feels more surefooted, especially when the ground is wet or loose, and I had more confidence and felt farther away from the edge of control when on the black bike. But, for where I ride, this makes up a small portion of my saddle time. Given that both bikes share the same suspension, wheels and tires, and cockpit measurements, this is solely down to the difference in geometry between the two - 42mm of length, 12mm of trail, and a bit more than 1.5° up front.Pancakes, of course, and the OG Ripley with its shorter, steeper geometry.Both bikes are equally capable - skill is what matters, after all - but the OG and LS Ripleys also perform differently enough to warrant matching the bike to your terrain and style. The good thing is that we do get to choose these days, and I'm not just talking about these two Ripleys. In many cases, travel no longer defines a bike's intentions and personality, but rather its geometry. You can pick up a short-travel bike that thrives in the bike park, or a long-travel bike that pedals like a demon and turns on a dime and vice versa.I know that it's expected of me to say that I preferred riding the bike that I felt faster on, which is the longer LS Ripley, but I found myself having more fun on the shorter, quicker handling orange bike. For where and how I ride, the OG Ripley is more enjoyable to be on; I was more likely to take creative lines on the shorter bike, and I was also more likely to be hooting and hollering as a result. That makes it pretty clear for me, but the LS might be just the ticket for you if your terrain calls for it or if you chase your riding buddies who are on long-travel bikes. After all, I know that some of you out there do prefer waffles.