The Build
The Fury Expert is positioned in the middle of the Fury lineup. The “World Cup” and “Team” builds come in at higher price points ($8,140 and $5,970, respectively), and the “Elite” comes in at the lowest price point ($3,360).
The Expert I rode was a demo from Evolution Sports in Whistler, and wasn’t completely stock. While the wheels and some other minor parts were different, the standard issue Formula T1s brakes, Race Face Chester cranks, and Shimano Zee shifty bits were all present on my test rig. Also present was the stock suspension, a Fox 40R (coil) fork and a Fox Vanilla RC rear shock.
All in all, I’m fairly impressed with the build on this bike, especially for the relatively modest (by DH-bike standards) price tag of $4,340. Everything worked well, and while it certainly isn’t going to appeal to weight watchers, the Fury Expert’s parts spec is a sensible one that can take a beating. I should note, however, that the one part of the stock build that seems somewhat suspect (the generic wheels) wasn’t on my demo bike, which might indicate that the wheels didn’t last long on this demo rig.
Having ridden some of the Fury’s top-of-the-line competition from Trek and Specialized, I found myself lamenting the lack of external adjustments on the fork, and fine tuning on the rear shock. But with the Expert being roughly half the price of those high zoot competitors, I’d say the Vanilla and 40R do a pretty damn good job. I should also note that it had been a little while since I’d spent much time on a coil fork, and I’d forgotten how smooth they feel (although I was less excited by the reminder that 40 coils make a perpetual spring-scraping-tube sound).
The Ride
The Fury is a massive freight train of a bike, but it’s a playful freight train.
When I first got on the bike, there wasn’t any getting around the fact that it felt really big. The reach and top tube length numbers aren’t deceiving—the Fury feels long. But what I was surprised about is that, once I got rolling on it, the bike still felt very manageable. I never felt like it was too big for me, although there were specific bits of trail where I wished the bike was a little shorter.
Whistler has plenty of technical trails, and most of them can be ridden with decent speed, but there were inevitably times when I’d choose a crappy line and end up having to swing tightly around a tree or cut sharply inside to avoid a rock. In those sort of situations, the Fury was a handful. There was one particularly tight corner on Crack Addict that I would get through cleanly on most of the other bikes, but I got repeatedly hung up on the Fury.
Another situation where I noticed the bike’s length was on small rollers or holes in the trail that caught me off guard. If I was prepared for them, lofting the front end of the bike over them wasn’t a problem. But if I was lazy or inattentive, I noticed that the Fury’s long front end was more inclined to jerk me forward as the front wheel dipped into a depression.
While it’s harder to pin it down to a specific situation, I also thought that the front end felt a little vague at times. Some of this I attribute to the fact that the front wheel was way out in front of me, some of it probably had to do with the fork (which would have benefitted from some compression adjustments) and some with to the front tire (a slightly worn Der Keiser that felt a bit drifty from time to time).
The up-side of the Fury’s length is that it is extremely comfortable charging through pretty much everything, as long as it doesn’t get too tight. The bike’s long wheelbase and slack head angle do exactly what you’d expect them to do; it will plow through rough stuff at high speed with impressive ease and composure.
But one of the best things about the Fury is how easy it is to pop off of jumps and features. Given how large (and heavy) the bike is, I wasn’t really expecting it to be very playful, but it most definitely is. The Fury was one of the most playful bikes I rode in Whistler, a close second to the Knolly Podium in terms of the pop it will generate. The Fury was a blast on trails like Whistler’s A-Line and Dirt Merchant. Even though those trails don’t call for a big, long bike, the Fury was still a ton of fun. And somehow, the length and weight of the bike aren’t all that noticeable once the bike gets in the air; I could still throw it around without too much trouble.
On paper, the Fury looks like a purebred plow bike. But when riding it, it’s fastest when you start doubling up bumps on the trail, taking creative little lines that help smooth out technical sections. And the beauty of the Fury is that, when you try to take those playful lines but things don’t go as planned and you end up popping yourself into a pile of rocky, rooty garbage, the bike remains composed.
The only negative attribute that I noticed about the Fury’s rear suspension is that it would occasionally hang up on square edge hits. The bike wasn’t horrible in this respect, not nearly as bad as the Giant Glory, but it was noticeably worse than the Specialized Demo. Some of this may have been due to the shock (maybe with a bit more time dialing it in, I might be able minimize this issue). However, I suspect a little bit of this comes from the new main pivot location on the 2014 Fury. It’s a bit lower than in years past, and that change may have affected how well the bike handles some of the more difficult bumps in the road.
I’m just speculating here, but I suspect the new Fury’s lower pivot location reduced some of the rearward arc at the beginning of the suspension’s compression. That reduced rearward movement might be the reason wheel seems to hang up from time to time. But, to be fair, that change also probably yielded greater pedaling efficiency.
Laying down the power is really where the Fury shined; it was the most efficient pedaling bike of the DH bikes we tested, and I’d even say it pedaled better than some trails bikes I’ve been on. GT’s Independent Drivetrain system works, and it works well; when you pedal, the bike goes, and for the most part, it seemed like the suspension remained fairly active over bumps at the same time.
Under hard braking, the Fury wasn’t quite as composed as the Specialized Demo, but it was by no means bad. It didn’t have that glued to the ground feeling that Ohlins rear shock on the Demo produced, but it also didn’t do anything that I found to be especially concerning.
Bottom Line
The GT Fury is one of the better all-around DH bikes I’ve been on, and the Expert model comes with a solid parts spec at a reasonable price. The only time I found myself wishing I was on another bike was when the trail really got tight—the Fury is a really big bike, and there’s no getting around that. That said, I was still pretty impressed with the Fury Expert; it’s an extremely capable plow bike that is also poppy, playful, and generally a lot of fun.
NEXT PAGE: Geometry & Full Specs List (Stock)
What do you think can you attribute to the amount of pop in each bike – the Fury and the Podium? You mention both pop well, but heading over to Linkagedesign.blogspot.com, shows two very different leverage curves – the Fury being very linear and the Podium being very progressive. Very curious on your thoughts.
As an side, looking at the leverage ratios, It seems like the Podium would be the choice for big hits and the Fury being the choice for all-out DH speed. Did you notice much bottom-out harshness on the Fury when landing with high impact compared to the Podium?
Hey Brian
That’s a great question and something I’ve been trying to wrap my head around. I don’t have any clear answers as to why those bikes seem to pop well, and I suspect that the answer really can be attributed to a few things. Here’s my take:
In a general sense, I usually think of single pivot bikes (like the GT) as having lots of pop. I also usually think of “platform” type linkages (VPP, DW link, etc.) as having a lot less pop. The basic reason for this (I think) is that, like you said, single pivot bikes like the GT tend to have fairly linear leverage curves, whereas the platform type bikes oftentimes have a heavily modified leverage curve to help out with the bike’s pedaling characteristics. And while that platform works well to keep the bike pedaling efficiently, it tends to make it harder to load up the suspension and get a predictable pop off of jumps.
Like you said, the Knolly seems to have a somewhat progressive leverage curve, but it doesn’t have the sort of modified curve that you see on (for example) a Santa Cruz Nomad. So I think that, even though it’s a bit different than the GT, it’s still easily predictable and it doesn’t do anything drastically different throughout the travel. In other words, as you compress into a jump, the suspension gets progressively stiffer on the Knolly whereas the GT gets stiffer in a more linear manner, but both get stiffer in a predictable way that allows you to time your preloading and weight shifts accordingly.
The other thing I’d point to is the rear shock. Both the Knolly and the GT had Fox shocks (RC4 on the Knolly, RC on the GT), and I think those damper units just give a bit more pop than, for example, the Ohlins that was on the S-Works Demo we rode (which was extremely reluctant to leave the ground). I’m speculating here, but I would guess that the compression circuits in the Fox are a bit less dialed in than on the Ohlins, which means that it’s easier to predictably preload the shock into the face of the jump. The Ohlins, which is without a doubt better at smoothing out rough trail, seems to have some more complex damping going on that’s more concerned with sorting out bumps of all sizes, but at the cost of not having that super consistent compression support that helps you get a lot of pop off of jumps.
As to your other question on bottoming out the Fury – yup, I did that. When I first got on the Fury, it had a 350# spring that I was blowing through pretty badly. I switched that out for a 400#, which helped things a fair amount; I’d still bottom it out on hard hits, but it wasn’t nearly as harsh. If I were to own that bike, I’d probably experiment with throwing a 450# spring on it. But more than anything, I’d just like to have a higher end shock on it. The demo that I rode had a Fox RC (which is stock on the expert model), and while that shock got the job done reasonably well, that bike would certainly benefit from the bottom out adjustment that you get on a Vanilla RC2 or RC4 (which comes stock on the Fury Team and World Cup, respectively).
Hey there, I read your comment about the rear suspension complaints on the giant glory. I am actually interested in building up a glory and just wanted to get your thoughts on it. It will be the new 27.5 version, so idk if you have seen or have any experience with the new 2015 version, but just wanted to get your input. I am 5’8″ and look like we have very similar riding styles.
Hey David,
I’m wrapping up my review on the Glory now, so that should be up on the site in not too long. Here’s the executive summary: I rode a 26″ wheeled Glory from the Whistler rental fleet. I disliked it more than pretty much any other modern DH bike that I’ve ridden, but I think a lot of its problems came from a wonky rear shock (which was a Vivid R2C). The rear wheel tended to hang up in holes, the suspension felt super harsh, and I struggled to keep the front end underneath me. But given that lots of fast guys seem to get along just fine with the Glory, I’m reserving final judgment until I ride a different one with different suspension.
Thank you so much for getting back to me, even though is not what I wanted to hear lol. I am hoping they have there new bike a little more figured out. There is also the problem that they have changed the frame sizing for 2015 as well. Let me know if you hear anything about the new version or get a chance to ride one. Trying to decide between the glory and the 27.5 demo aluminum.
Thanks again for your help
I’m hoping to swing a leg over one of the new Glorys at Interbike (in 2 weeks). If that works out, I’ll post my findings.
That would be much appreciated!
Talking again abou the fury!
For 2015 model, there are a lot of changes
I’m 1,78m-5 10″
Some people says that i have to choose s size
But this year the bike has 618 horizontal top tube on M
And 592 on S.
I I choose the S, will the bike be too much short?
Hey Joan,
Sizing on the Fury is a bit tricky. The 2015 shows a shorter effective top tube, but it also has a steeper seat tube angle (73 for the 2015 vs. 70 for the 2014). From talking to the guys at GT, it sounds like they had an issue with the tire hitting the seat at full bottom out, which would explain the steeper seat tube, as well as the slightly shorter travel (210 vs. 220 mm) on the 2015 27.5″ version.
GT doesn’t list reach in their geometry tables, which is a shame since I think, particularly for DH bikes, reach is one of the most useful numbers when it comes to assessing a bike on paper. Top tube length is most apparent when you’re sitting down, and (hopefully) you’re not in the saddle all that much on a DH bike. Reach is more useful since it measures the horizontal distance from the BB to the head tube – basically how stretched out the bike will feel when you’re standing up. At 438 mm, the 2014 had a long reach. Running the calculations on the 2015 shows it being slightly shorter at around 430mm, but that’s still not short by any means.
So, getting to the point, I’m a bit shorter than you (5’9″) and I got along with the medium pretty well. If I was going to buy a Fury, that’s probably the size I’d get. I generally like bikes to be on the longer side of things, which is really just a matter of personal preference. If you like shorter bikes I’d probably size down, but otherwise, I’d stick with the medium.
Hey Noah,
Trying to revive this thread. Any frame size recommendations for someone that is 6′
218 lbs for a 2015 fury?
I typically ride large demo 8s.
Thoughts?
Hey Tyler,
Comparing the Fury’s geometry to the Demo’s depends a little bit on what year Demo it is. It also gets a bit more complicated because the Demos used to be small / medium / large, but on the newer Demos they’re short / medium / long / extra long.
So with that in mind, on the older Demos, sizing on a medium Fury would fall about halfway between the medium and large Demo. On the newer Demos, a medium Fury falls in between a long and extra long. The large Fury is effectively a half size bigger than the largest Demo (old and new).
So, long story short, if you’re coming off a large Demo, I’d say go with a medium Fury if you’re looking for a slightly smaller bike, and go with the large if you’re looking for a slightly larger bike. I’m 5’9″, and I didn’t feel like the medium was too big for me, but it did take a little getting used to having a longer bike. It’s also worth noting that when I was riding the Fury, I was switching back and forth with a medium Demo. The Fury definitely feels bigger, but not enormously so.
Personally, I like a DH bike to be a little bigger, but it also depends on what and where you’re riding; the big bike can feel cumbersome in tight spots and it’s a little less whippy on jumps, but it’s super stable at speed.
Noah,
Thanks for the reply!
Im fairly new to the sport but grew up racing motocross. From my understanding i’m on the verge of a medium or large and end up riding larges.
I have been renting large 2015 650b demos (carbon and Al) at angelfire. So after reading your post, my understanding is that the medium will be actually be slightly bigger than a long but smaller than an extra long demo 8. I think the medium would be a good fit then if that’s the case.
Once again, thank you!