Bike Test: Santa Cruz Blur LTc

Words: Lou Mazzante
Photos: Morgan Meredith

TWO POUNDS. TWO FREAKING POUNDS. THAT’S HOW much lighter a complete Santa Cruz Blur LT carbon is than last year’s aluminum version—with a very similar spec. That might not sound like a lot, but as the clock ticks deeper into a multi-hour ride, those two pounds will loom a lot larger than they did in the showroom. But there’s more to this bike than just its reduced weight—quality of ride is just as important. After riding both the aluminum version and this new carbon frame, those two pounds turned out to be the difference between a good bike and a truly exceptional one.

Photo: Morgan Meredith

Last year, Santa Cruz used the Blur LT to roll out a significant revision to its VPP suspension design. The newer model was plusher than its predecessor, offered more travel, was slightly stiffer and saw a host of cool features— a carbon upper link, angular contact bearings and grease ports, just to name a few. When built with respectably rugged components, the bike weighed about 29 pounds. It was a fine bike.

But bike shops are swimming in fine bikes. So Santa Cruz put the Blur LT through the carbon wringer. The bike emerged stronger, stiffer, leaner and curvier. The new frame weighs a full pound less than the aluminum version. Its oversized tubes, including a tapered headtube, are constructed in a one-piece carbon mold. And according to Santa Cruz engineer Joe Graney, the Blur LTc is stronger than the company’s 7.5-pound Jackal hardtail dirt jump frame, and stiffer than its V-10 downhill frame.

The test bike shown here weighs 27.1 pounds with XTR pedals and a Crank Brothers Joplin adjustable seatpost. It’s conceivable to build this frame into a sub-24-pound race bike, but that would sacrifi ce some versatility—and versatility is what makes this bike so special.

The Blur LTc has decent small-bump effi ciency, but it truly shines on medium and large-size hits. Ruts, roots and ledge-filled rocky trails dissolve beneath the wheels. And while Santa Cruz’s VPP suspension is not the most active design on climbs, the occasional lack of traction is more than made up for with efficiency and responsiveness.

The frame’s stiffness is immediately noticeable while muscling up steep hills, or stabbing the bike into corners. It holds a tight line, whips through turns and doesn’t allow even an inkling of flex. The only negative is that flex in other components—the handlebars and wheels, for example—becomes slightly more perceptible.

Overall, this is a bike with few faults. Some riders will question the toughness of carbon; others may demand more traction while climbing. Someone will surely grumble about the direct-mount front derailleur. But even those riders would be hard pressed to find a bike that is as light and stiff, and excels across such a diverse range of terrain.

Our test bike costs $5,700, but complete bikes start at $3,500 and the frame goes for $2,400. It’s not cheap, but it is a high-value, high-performance product that comes as close to perfect as any trail bike on the market.

MORE INFO:
831-459-7560
santacruzbicycles.com

Reader Comments

Posted Wed Sep 2, 2009, 1:40 PM — By Eric

Thank you for making sure I read the second paragraph twice. Also, technically the third paragraph.

Posted Wed Sep 2, 2009, 2:31 PM — By Mazzman

D'oh. Thanks for pointing that out, Eric, it's been fixed.

Posted Sat Sep 5, 2009, 7:52 AM — By Jose

In the trail bike category (5-6" travel) which bike is best at climbing in your opinion and best overall? vs. Yeti 575 vs. Turner 5 Spot vs. new Marin Quad Trail. I currently ride a Marin Mount Vision XC bike that I've had for 4 years but looking for a little more travel and not wanting to sacrifice any climbing efficiency. Thanks!

Posted Mon Sep 7, 2009, 11:51 AM — By Tom

I find it hard to believe that a Jackal frame weighs 7.5 lbs. My Giant STP frame is 4.5 lbs., and most chromoly urban frames are 5.5 lbs. Also, what does "very similar spec" mean? The frame is only one pound lighter, but with a "very similar spec" the entire bike is two pounds lighter. A spec that is 450 grams lighter than another spec is not "very similar" in my opinion, because I know how much money it takes to remove 450 grams. Help me out here, Mazzman....

Posted Fri Sep11, 2009, 4:31 AM — By Dave

One thing I wish that more articles would talk about with santacruz is their unmatched ability to tune the bike to exactly what your specifications are. Although many local bike shops may not know it, Santa Cruz has shock techs and suspension techs that can quite literally get the frame tuned exactly to your weight, height and riding style before you even touch it.

Posted Wed Sep16, 2009, 2:54 PM — By Mazzman

Tom, sorry for just getting back to you now, but i was out of the office all last week. When i wrote this review, i didn't weigh each part separately; i only weighed the two complete bikes. But going back now and looking at the spec differences, there's some key ones that help explain the weight difference. While most of the parts are the same (wheels, tires, drivetrain, seatpost...) there were a few differences: namely the fork, bars/stem and saddle. The weight difference between those parts on the aluminum version and the carbon bike reviewed is just shy of 300 grams. It's not quite a full pound but if you take into account year-year weight decreases between some like parts (the aluminum test bike was a 2008; this carbon is a 2009) a few other minor component differences, and the few grams lost when we used rounded numbers ("the frame is a pound lighter," "the complete bike weighs 2 pounds less") you come pretty damn close to 450 grams. Hope that helps, and makes sense. L

Posted Thu Sep24, 2009, 10:28 AM — By Mike

So, what bike has the best climbing small bumb performance ? Yeti ASR 5 C, Turner 5 Spot, Ibis Mojo, etc ??? I get from your comments that this bike swallows up medium to large hits but could be better on the smaller stuff - correct ?

Posted Sun Sep27, 2009, 5:21 PM — By mark

sweet santa crus bike heckler for sale cant ride no more my back is wasted 949 433-3384

Posted Sat Dec12, 2009, 3:54 PM — By Barry

Did you ever get an answer to your question, which is better for climbing and small bumps, Mike? I've got the same delimna as I compare the Yeti ASR5C, the 575C and the Blur LTC. Where I live it's pretty flat, but we do build things and I have a bmx background.