The Pivot Trail 429 is dead. Long live the Pivot Trailcat! Nobody puts “29” in bike names anymore. And this model hasn’t had “4” inches of travel for over a decade. So, because Travis fancies himself quite the cat daddy, he went to Pivot’s hometown to chase some laser-pointers on the Trailcat SL and destroy some furniture on the Trailcat LT.

One of the best parts of reviewing bikes for a living is cosplaying as any kind of cyclist you want. It was fun to meet the REEB Steezl on its level and go huck myself for a month, but more often than not, it’s more bike than I need. I loved chasing down traditional gravel on the YT Szepter, but its preferred terrain is a bit too traditional for my taste. The new Pivot Trailcat, though, is extremely my shit.

The Trailcat SL (above) and Trailcat LT are the updated versions of Pivot’s iconic Trail 429 and Trail 429 Enduro, respectively. The Trailcat LT has 135 mm of rear travel and 150 up front, while the Trailcat SL goes 120 rear, 140 front. The SL has about the same travel as my daily driver, plus similar chainstay length and bottom-bracket height. My own bike’s slack 64.1° headtube angle is a tad aspirational given its short travel. The Trailcat SL’s 65.8° is much more realistic. I felt right at home on the SL, and right next door on the LT.

And that’s a good thing. Being so familiar with the category made it a little easier to notice things that might set the Trailcat apart from its crowded category. On the surface, it doesn’t seem that unique. And if all you’re looking for is the right geometry and right travel, there are much cheaper ways to get them than the Trailcat. But as with all Pivot bikes, there’s more going on than just the numbers. So, let’s dive beneath the surface.

Development and Design

The Trailcat is only the second bike Pivot has released to the public since they started their lugged carbon prototyping program. Traditionally, even carbon-only brands like Pivot will work out the kinks of a new design in good ol’ welded aluminum. But that doesn’t allow them to accurately tune a frame’s stiffness until they’ve produced several costly molds. Control over stiffness is a big reason to go carbon in the first place, and Pivot’s approach to lugged carbon gives them a pretty accurate sense of how a production bike will ride. Although Pivot has since moved on to 3D-printed titanium lugs produced by a specialist third-party, the prototype Trailcat shown here was joined by CNC’d aluminum lugs. Those lugs, as well as the carbon tubes they connect, were all made in-house.

One of those tubes includes modern mountain biking’s favorite update; in-frame storage. Pivot’s “Tool Shed” uses a latch similar to Trek and Ibis. Its opening is not quite as big as Specialized’s, though the Specialized latch is a bit cumbersome. Total volume will vary between frame sizes and not just because downtube lengths change. Pivot tunes frame stiffness differently for each frame size. That means smaller diameter tubes for lighter riders so their bikes don’t feel too stiff. Still, all size downtubes have room for one bag folded hot-dog-style around an inner tube, plus another zippered bag for odds and ends.

Also inside the frame is Pivot’s updated internal cable routing. The cable ports got their own big new doors, making it a little easier to fish cables in and out, or to slide silencing foam over them if you choose. Pivot isn’t doing fully guided internal routing on the Trailcat. They say it adds unnecessary weight and complexity, plus the frustration in markets who run their rear brake on the left.

Optimizing internal cable routing is exactly the kind of task Chris Cocalis, Pivot’s founder, would take very seriously. Over the past four decades, he’s been a catalyst for all sorts of disruptive innovations, large and small. Thankfully, Pivot will not be running the Trailcat’s cables through its headset a practice Cocalis seems as frustrated with as me. In fact, while he was explaining the updated routing to us, he hinted at a mild grudge against internal routing of any sort. But you pick your battles. And anyway, Tool Shed storage allows access to a new internal cable clamp system that keeps a long stretch of each line pinned quietly to the frame’s inner wall. And Pivot cleverly built enough wiggle room into the dropper-cable clamp to allow the housing to slide for post height adjustment or removal. It’s clean, smart, and functional.

Still present is a Pivot mainstay, 157mm “Super Boost” rear hub spacing, one of those disruptive innovations Cocalis was behind. During the presentation where he was outlining some of the Trailcat features I just mentioned, Super Boost didn’t come up until I asked if it would be carried over from the Trail 429. My question was met with a wry smile from Cocalis, and some knowing groans from the rest of the Pivot staff. And I get it. They’ve been defending Super Boost 157 for years.

But I actually happen to be a fan. I wrote a story about chainline where I even got Dylan Howes, one of the minds behind today’s dominant hub spacing standard, “Boost 148,” to admit they should have gone wider. Cocalis points to the limited space behind the chainring as part of his motivation for sticking with Super Boost hub spacing and the accompanying wider chainline. “Everyone wants that space,” he says. The tire, the chainring, and the chainstay. Plus, of course, the internally routed derailleur cable. But there were other, less desirable solutions for that on the menu.

Being an exclusively high-end brand, with access to a soon-to-be-growing number of wireless drivetrains, Pivot might have followed the lead of some Specialized and Santa Cruz models by shedding the burden of the derailleur cable altogether. But thanks to 157 spacing, they don’t have to. They can meet all their design goals while keeping mechanical routing. So, I kinda get why they’re tired of hearing people gripe about 157.

Two Bikes In One (ish)

The “Enduro” version of the outgoing Trail 429 was just the same frame with 10mm of extra front travel and a more capable rear shock. But there’s some particularly clever tech separating the Trailcat LT from the SL. Yes, it’s still got 10 mm of extra front travel and a more capable rear shock. And Pivot even designed the Tool Shed door to be reversible so the bottle can be positioned further forward on the LT model to make room for the piggy-back shock. It’s positioned further rearward on the SL to make room for extra large bottles or maybe a neat little frame bag. But more importantly, Pivot used a modular lower shock mount that can be flipped 180 degrees to fit the longer rear shock that yields the LT’s 135 mm of rear travel. That’s paired with a totally unique upper link.

This allowed them to get exactly the leverage curve they wanted out of each bike. Messing with pivot locations on one version of a bike can easily throw off the suspension feel of the other version, but not here. Pivot even conceived and coded a design program that allowed them to essentially work backwards from a desired leverage curve to learn how they needed to shape and position the links to achieve it. This kept either Trailcat from feeling like a compromise, which means it’s finally time to talk about how they rode.

Pivot Trailcat SL Quick Hits

• 120 mm rear travel, 140 mm front
• 65.8° head tube angle
• 29” front and rear, but mixed-wheel compatible via flip-chip
• Carbon frame only
• Same front and rear triangle as Trailcat LT
• In-frame storage
• Five sizes, XS thru XL
• Available at independent dealers or direct from Pivot
• Prices range from $5,999 to $13,099
• As tested: $11,099

Ride Impressions

Of course, the Trailcat still runs on DW Link suspension. If I had to commit to just one favorite linkage design (which, thank god almighty, I don’t) it would be DW Link. When done right, it offers a smart balance of traction and efficiency. And on a 120 mm bike, that balance gets pretty narrow. If it’s just a little too focused on plushness, you forfeit the benefits of running such moderate rear travel. And if it’s too focused on power, you might as well save the cash and get a bike without a boutique linkage design.

On the Trailcat SL, the balance leans a tad towards the “power” side. It’s the kind of bike that rewards forceful pedaling. Which was fortunate, because I only got a few hours on Pivot’s local trails to gather my impressions. The pace was not leisurely, and neither were those local trails. South Mountain is Phoenix’s ultimate lunch-loop zone. It’s packed with quick, punchy uphills and quicker, punchier downhills. Most of the climbs had my heart rate veering into the anaerobic, occasionally ramping up further during the odd trials move over a rock shelf.

In those scenarios, the Trailcat SL did not forgive lazy efforts. My home mountains’ dirt-road climbs have made me soft, and three weeks off the bike after the LA fires didn’t help either. Every watt I could offer was precious. And there were tangible moments when the bike allowed me to clean a section that I might otherwise have dabbed or given up on entirely.

I set up my sag at the softest edge of Pivot’s suggested range, which is about how I set up my personal bike. Nevertheless, rear suspension stayed juuuust active enough under pedaling load to shave the edge off of the many sharp rocks I was ungracefully mashing through. That left the rest of the travel firm so my efforts would keep me moving as long as I kept the effort coming.

That’s why I understand the relatively conservative 76° seat tube angle. The bike always sat high in its travel, so it didn’t bother me. Also, Pivot measures seat tube angle the right way, up at saddle height. And anyway, the trails around Phoenix aren’t just sustained climbs followed by sustained descents. There’s a lot of rolling terrain that merits a less uphill-only seated position. So, a 76-ish° seat angle suits the Trailcat SL perfectly. On the flipside, though, is its conservative stack height.

Although 10 mm of front travel was added this year, the rate of increase in headtube length across the Trailcat’s size range is identical to that of the previous generation. So, Pivot’s thoughts on the relationship between body height and stack height hasn’t changed. I get the logic. If you put an XS and XL rider in a reasonable seated position, the differences in elevation between their hands and their hineys won’t vary all that much. But get that XS and XL rider out of the saddle, and suddenly it’s the height difference between their hands and their feet that matters. Those elevation differences will vary widely based on body height.

But I think this is the sort of geometry evolution that comes down to preference, not “right” versus “wrong.” I criticize because I’m one of those XL riders, but also because I don’t often ride the undulating trails the Trailcat SL is so adept at. Seated positioning is significantly less important to me than standing positioning. But the Trailcat SL the kind of bike built for long, high-intensity days in the saddle. I’d describe it as a more comfortable version of the Yeti SB120, and a more stiff version of the (previous generation) Ibis Ripley. Spencer’s still riding the new Ripley, but I’ll venture some guesses at that comparison when I get to my Trailcat LT impressions.

Descending with the Trailcat SL reminded me why I love moderate-travel bikes on immoderate trails. Kinda makes you feel alive, especially on the techy puzzles that weave through South Mountain. We weren’t riding during any of the two and a half weeks a year when Phoenix’s dirt gets tacky, so there were a lot of sudden flicks and corrections required to stay on the most optimal (or most fun) lines. That’s what the Trailcat SL seems to be made for. The thing is extremely light on its feet. Lighter than my similar-on-paper Canyon Spectral 125, and about as light as that Yeti SB120. Except, I wasn’t as scared as I was on the SB120.

Feel free to come at me, but I say 140mm should be the minimum front travel for a “trail” bike. Of course, there are variables like topography and body height. But to me, anything less crosses the threshold into XC. I’ve been on a journey lately with increasing stack height, so of course I’d say higher is better. But higher also gives you more motion you can fine-tune. I only once got to the last 15 mm of travel on the Fox 34 specced on my Trailcat, but I liked being a little higher at bottom-out. And if I truly wanted to maximize plushness, I’d have just pulled out a volume spacer or two.

Pivot Trailcat SL Pros

• Rear suspension has its priorities in order
  • Favors high-effort pedaling
  • Just supple enough to take the edge off
• Well chosen geo for mixed terrain and topography
• In-frame storage
• Several thoughtful design choices
• No thoughtless design choices

Pivot Trailcat SL Cons

• Not the category-defying descender that some 120mm bikes are
• Not many significant changes from previous model (aside from those made with LT version in mind)
• High starting price point

The Trailcat SL is right on the edge between an accessible all-rounder and a precision downcountry racer. If you’re tempted by the Transition Spurs and the Santa Cruz Tallboys of the world, but you want to shred a little more comfortably, this is probably the perfect machine. If you want to shred a lot more comfortably, you could have skipped this whole section and just read about the Trailcat LT.

Pivot Trailcat LT Quick Hits

• 135 mm rear travel, 150 mm front
• 65.3° head tube angle
• 29” front and rear, but mixed-wheel compatible via flip-chip
• Carbon frame only
• Same front and rear triangle as Trailcat SL
• In-frame storage
• Five sizes, XS thru XL
• Available at independent dealers or direct from Pivot
• Prices range from $6,199 to $13,299
• As tested: $11,299

Ride Impressions

Hokay, so; 135 mm of rear travel, 150 front, and a 65.3° head angle. A half-degree slacker than the SL. Seems like that’s about what The Bike Industry has decided is a down-the-middle trail bike these days. The 140 mm Evil Offering is right between the Following and the Wreckoning. The 130 mm Revel Rascal is right between the Ranger and the Rail. And, among Pivot’s own 29-inch lineup, they put the Trailcat SL and Mach 4 SL below the Trailcat LT, and they put the Switchblade and Firebird above it. So, yeah. Down the middle.

We rode the Trailcat LT at a trail network east of Phoenix called Hawes, offering some more sustained downs and ups than South Mountain. There’s also less traffic, fewer parking lots, and a more remote feel. Our sprawling loop’s “settle-in-and-pedal-up” vibe suited the Trailcat LT well, but we still had a limited time window. The pace was real that day. I’d liken the Trailcat LT’s pedaling demeanor to that of the Revel Rascal. In fact, the settings I landed on for the Trailcat LT had it feeling a bit more supportive on the climbs than the Rascal, despite having a whopping 5 mm more rear travel. It wasn’t quite as cloudlike as the Rascal, but that’s a high bar. The Rascal offered the most cloudlike climbing experience of any moderate-travel trail bike I’ve ridden. And anyway, sometimes cloudlike isn’t the goal.

I felt the spirit of the Trailcat SL within the LT when I was mashing to keep up with the locals. A less surprising comparison than the Revel Rascal might be the 140 mm Canyon Spectral or SCOR 4060. The Trailcat LT would of course feel quicker than those slightly burlier, slightly longer-travel bikes. But I’d say it’s disproportionately quicker. Granted, this might be confirmation bias. It makes sense that Pivot would use that leverage-curve reverse-engineering program to ensure the Trailcat SL’s big brother stays light on its feet.

And anyway, Pivot already offers the heavier-duty Switchblade with 142mm of rear travel. But rationalization aside, I had some especially rewarding moments while climbing with the Trailcat LT. It encourages sustained high-torque efforts in a way that most “down-the-middle” trail bikes don’t. Maybe if I thrived on out-of-the-saddle mashing, the Trailcat SL would be a better choice than the LT. But I like steady efforts over long distances, and extra travel actually made those situations a bit more agreeable. And of course, that’s also true of the descents.

I don’t have to spend too much time stating the obvious here. Speaking narrowly about just the quantity of extra travel in the LT, it delivers the experience you might expect. But if you can resist the urge to roll your eyes, the quality of that travel is better, especially up front. It goes from 140 to 150, but also from a Fox 34 to a Fox 36. Though the 34 I tested had Fox’s stellar Grip 2 damper, the 36 has a larger-volume air spring and a sturdier chassis. It also has the Grip X damper, but I can’t honestly come up with any anecdotes of when that made a big difference. I just felt more stable when leaning over the front end and trusting the travel to save me from bad lines and inconsistent traction. Putting the Trailcat SL too far outside its comfort zone would occasionally result in a cascading chaos that would force me to reset. But putting the Trailcat LT out of its comfort zone only ever forced me to just back off the speed a tad.

The only point where the LT’s discomfort zone was a bit unsettling was when I put a lot of lateral force into the frame. Here’s where my speculative comparison with the current-generation Ibis Ripley comes into play. The Ripley and Ripmo share a front and rear triangle, just like the Trailcat SL and LT. But I get the feeling that the Ripley was born from the Ripmo, but that the Trailcat LT was born from the Trailcat SL. As if Ibis scaled down, while Pivot scaled up. The Ripmo is every bit as laterally stiff as most bikes in the 150mm-adjacent travel category. But after once flicking the Trailcat LT’s rear tire across a smooth boulder embedded in the trail, the resulting sideways give had me stopping to check if it had lost air. Nope. It was just a bit of flex when the rear end caught traction again. The only other time I managed to replicate this was when I was trying to replicate it. In fact, I think Pivot nailed the stiffness for a bike in this category.

Pivot Trailcat LT Pros

• Feels like its own bike, not another model’s “long-travel version”
• Refreshingly light-under-foot for a travel category that’s often overbuilt
• In-frame storage
• Several thoughtful design choices
• No thoughtless design choices

Pivot Trailcat LT Cons

• Not the brawler some might expect from this travel category
• High starting price point

Again, Pivot has the Switchblade if you want something explicitly designed for rowdy but sub-enduro antics. When I was just keeping speed in rough sections, the Trailcat LT held a line as well as any bike this versatile has any right to. And for being priced well into five-figures territory, it should.

Value and Spec

You already saw in the Quick Hits bullet points how much my review bikes cost. But to be fair, they were specced with parts that even some boutique brands don’t bother offering. In fact, take a look at a few bikes that seem, on paper, to be comparable to the new Trailcats. Pivot’s prices are actually pretty average. The GX AXS Transmission Trailcat SL and LT are $6,800 and $7,000. The corresponding Santa Cruz 5010 is $6,900 and the Yeti SB 140 is $7,200. What’s really interesting is that both Santa Cruz and Yeti use their respective brand’s lower-tier carbon on their lower-tier bikes, and though it’s hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison, Pivots only use the fancy stuff.

At one point during our Pivot headquarters tour, I asked Cocalis what it’d take to get a Pivot down somewhere within the $4K range. He clearly had done the math, and theorized they could probably develop a slightly heavier, less expensive carbon frame, put some Deore and Marzocchi stuff on it, and it’d be possible. But they’d also have to relax a few other standards in the process, and that’s not what they do.

Talking about a Pivot mountain bike’s price is a lot like talking about its Boost 157 spacing. There are plenty of other options out there if you don’t like it, but it’s there for a good reason. As usual, my excessively wordy analysis has already taken too much of your time. So, I’ll save my “Why Are Pivots So Expensive?” analysis for another article. But I saw first-hand what goes into conceiving and creating these bikes. Some of it is for all the normal stuff, like weight and performance and water-bottle clearance. But some of it is for stuff like durability and longevity. Or dealer support. Or customer satisfaction.

See more at Pivot