Fit and Geometry
Like the Bronson, the 5010 got stretched for 2016. Or, more accurately, the front end is longer and slacker, while the rear end is shorter.
Reach on the size Large 5010 I rode was comfortably middle of the road at 445mm (17.52”). Even though the 73.8° seat tube angle isn’t quite as steep as some of the other bikes on the market, the top tube is kept to a reasonable 621mm (24.45”).
I was a bit more stretched out than I would have liked, but at 5’9”, I would usually ride a Medium-sized frame anyway. As bikes have gotten longer, I’ve become more accustomed to riding a more stretched out geometry, but if I were going to buy the 5010, I think I’d still go with a Medium. Santa Cruz’s size chart says the Medium would fit someone 5’5” to 5’10”, and the Large would fit someone 5’10” to 6’1”. Unless you have a preference toward a very long (or short) bike, I’d say those suggestions are about right.
Rounding out the geo numbers for the 5010 are short 426mm (16.77”) chainstays, a low 334mm (13.15”) bottom bracket height, and a relatively slack 67° head angle. None of those measurements are what I would call extreme, but they’re certainly on the short, low, and slack end for this class of bike.
The Ride
I’ll cut to the chase: the 5010 is an easy bike to have fun on. It’s not the burliest bike out there, it doesn’t handle huge hits nearly as well as the Bronson or some other longer travel bikes, and it’s not quite as stable at speed. But considering its relatively short travel and trail-oriented intentions, it handles rough stuff impressively well.
Like many of the VPP bikes, the 5010 is pretty efficient in terms of pedaling. There’s not a ton of bob, and the suspension firms up a bit when you get on the gas.
Moreso than something like the new Bronson, the 5010 also retains pretty good small bump sensitivity. As a bike that, according to the marketing copy, is intended for backcountry adventures, this is a really good thing. It makes for a comfortable bike to ride, and even though my test was relatively short, I’m sure it would help keep my body a bit happier during a long day in the saddle.
The mix of good small bump compliance and solid pedaling efficiency also make it a good bike for techy climbs. It maintains traction pretty well, but at the same time, it doesn’t feel like you’re wasting all of your energy bouncing around on soft suspension.
Through higher speed rock gardens, the 5010 still did very well. It’s not as stable as some of it’s slacker brethren, and the suspension is more likely to get overwhelmed on big hits, but I didn’t find either of those traits to be distractingly bad. On some bikes, when they get overwhelmed, things get sketchy. The 5010 never felt sketchy, it was more of just a quiet acknowledgment that it didn’t really want to, for example, drop five feet to flat.
Comparisons
Compared to the Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt BC Edition, the 5010 is a more lively, supple ride that’s a bit more comfortable tackling rock gardens at speed. The Thunderbolt probably scoots up climbs a bit better, and the rear end is a bit stiffer laterally. But for an all-around trail bike, I’d give the nod to the 5010.
The comparison to the Transition Smuggler is a more interesting one. The 5010 pedals a bit better, and it’s lighter (although it’s also a lot more expensive). Both are very good in terms of small bump sensitivity, and neither bike is super gung-ho about getting recklessly hucked to flat.
The 29” wheels on the Smuggler definitely roll through chunky terrain more efficiently, but they come with the usual downsides: the bigger wheels don’t accelerate as well, they don’t really tuck into corners, and they’re flexy. Ultimately, it would really come down to the specific trail. Cost and weight considerations aside, I’d probably take the 5010 for tighter, more technical situations. I’d probably take the Smuggler for higher speed terrain where I could carry more momentum. On most trail rides, I’d be happy on either one.
Compared to the Cannondale Habit, I prefer the 5010 in every situation that doesn’t involve me getting timed while going uphill. And really, if I’m racing uphill, neither of those bikes are going to be the first choice. For general trail riding, the 5010 is more supple, more stable, a lot less flexy, and just all around more fun than the Habit.
There are a few other bikes that could be compared to the 5010, even though they’re a little outside of the 5010’s class in terms of suspension travel. The Specialized Stumpjumper FSR 650b has a bit more travel, and is maybe a bit more happy when the going gets rowdy. It’s definitely not as efficient when pedaling, though. The Devinci Troy, even though it doesn’t have that much more travel than the 5010, is really more comparable to the Bronson. It’s a bike that likes to be ridden fast and aggressively, and it’s a little less inclined to cruise along at a moderate pace.
Bottom Line
On the whole, I think the 5010 fills the role it was designed for very, very well. It’s intended to be an all-around trail bike that is great for big backcountry adventures, and I think that’s exactly the sort of ride where it’d be most at home.
I also think Santa Cruz deserves credit for staying true to the 5010’s intentions. It’s easy for a company to get distracted and try to make a “long-travel XC race bike” or a “mini-DH bike.” And to be sure, those sort of bikes are a ton of fun for the right person. But that’s not the 5010. It’s not a XC race bike, and it’s not a miniaturized version of a longer travel all mountain / enduro / light-duty freeride / whatever-you-want-to-call-it bike. It’s the bike that lands squarely in the middle, and it occupies that space very competently.
So if you’re looking for a bike that fits that semi-ambiguous, middle-of-the-road criteria, and you’ve settled on 27.5” wheels, the 5010 should be very high on your list of bikes to consider.
Good review. It is especially nice to see you clearly state that the Habit is flexy. So many review resources require strong “reading between the lines” to glean information like that, which is just bunk, so kudos!
Noah – could you please say how it compares to the Yeti SB5?
How about a comparison to Evil The Following?
Or Ibis HD3 even.
Unfortunately I don’t have any time on the HD3, but I’ve got a bunch of time on the Following (there’s a full review, if you haven’t already seen it). Compared to the Following, I’d say the 5010 pedals a bit better, and does a better job of smoothing out small to medium sized bumps in the trail. The Following is probably a bit more stable, and it pops better. The Following really feels like the kind of bike that wants to go as fast as possible, all the time. The 5010 is fine when the pace picks up, but it doesn’t feel as high strung.
The biggest difference is, of course, the wheel size. The 29ers on the Following carry speed through rough stuff better, and the help out in the stability department. But the 27.5’s on the 5010 are (all other things being equal) stiffer, and they’re less of a handful in tight spots. More than anything else, it’s the inherent differences in the wheel size that separate these two bikes.
Bottom line: I’d venture a guess that I’d be faster in most situations on the Following, but I might pick the 5010 for longer rides in the backcountry where better small bump compliance and pedaling efficiency would be appreciated.
…and SB5?
I love the fact that you draw comparisons to other bikes. So many reviews these days are ‘vanilla’, and just show that the reviewer is stoked to ride. I get it though, bikes have come a long way and it’s hard to find a shitty one. And when manufacturers are send you free ones to review, there’s a hidden bias. The real decision factor is navigating between awesome choices, so I applaud you for helping light up this crevasse.
Evil makes a 27.5 bike now, correct? A bit more travel and slacker head angle. Maybe a different category, but would love to hear your perspective.
Great review, first of all. It’s very refreshing, I’ll be sure to check out some of your other MTB reviews.
I’ve decided the 5010 is best for me based on my riding style/terrain/fit/$5K ceiling/ etc.. But I have not decided which kit to pick up/what year. I’m curious to hear your thoughts on going after one more than the other:
A) 2015 SC 5010 CC X01 (new found for $5K, used found for ~$4K)
B) 2016 SC 5010 C S (new $4700)
Question: Is the added travel on the 2016 (albeit 5mm) and geometry changes worth the cash while getting a lower quality component package compared to 2015 XO1 for a similar price point ($5K)? Finally, should I be wary about buying a used 2015 carbon frame without being able to see it in person (pinkbike) and checking for any scratches beyond asking for a lot of pictures? Your advice/suggestions are greatly appreciated Noah!
Hey Adrian,
That’s a tough one! I don’t think you’ll go wrong with either bike, but I’d say it probably boils down to where you’re looking to prioritize performance. If you want a bike that’s a bit better on the climbs, get the 2015 with the nicer build; it’ll be lighter, and the geometry is probably a little more uphill friendly (longer chainstays, steeper head angle, etc.).
If you’re a bit more concerned with descending performance, go with the 2016. The shorter rear end, slacker head angle, and longer front end will all make for a bike that’s probably going to be more fun through fast rough stuff. Also, even though the components aren’t quite as nice, it’s still a great build (and components can always be upgraded).
On other thing to keep in mind that the bike got a lot longer for 2016, so a medium 2016 model is closer to a large 2015 model.
Either way, you’ll end up with a solid bike that’s a ton of fun! Hope that helps.
-Noah
I appreciate your advice, you’ve definitely helped. Thanks again!
Hello Noah Great review…Positive vibesss from Peru.
Just one question if i change the Rockshox Sektor Gold RL 130 fork for the Fox Float 34 of 140mm produce a negative impact at the geometry or the performance of the bike.
Thank very much for your time and good windsss.
Bumping the fork up 10mm will do a couple of things. 1) (obviously) it’ll raise your bars a bit, 2) it’ll slack out your head tube angle probably around 1/2 a degree, and 3) it’ll raise your bottom bracket height a bit – probably around 3-4mm.
None of these will have a massively negative effect on handling, but it really depends on the situation. The taller front end will almost certainly make the front end more inclined to wheelie on steep climbs, and you’ll likely lose a bit of slow speed maneuverability. The higher bottom bracket may also make the bike feel a bit less planted in corners. But the slacker head angle will probably aid with stability, and the taller front end will likely feel better when descending steep stuff. And, of course, you’ll have a bit more travel, so that helps for smashing into things.
Long story short: it won’t be terrible. Whether or not the geometry changes are better or worse will really depend on your personal preferences. But the biggest change will be the fork itself – the Fox 34 is a far more capable fork that then Sektor, and will undoubtedly perform far better in pretty much every situation.
Hi,
Enjoyed to read.
Question – how would you compare the 5010 C to stampjamper 2012 (26″ of course)?
appreciate your answer.
Shay
This bike is the biggest piece of shit I ever rode in my life. I borrowed this bike from a bike shop and it throws you around and is the harshest bike I ever rode. My YT Capra is way better then this Piece of shit. I even had a Santa Cruz Heckler that was better then this bike. Thanks for nothing Steve Peat!!
And I am sure you had the suspension set-up dialed in from the get-go to draw this conclusion.
Awesome high quality review.
Noah,
You are my favorite reviewer by far.
Thanks for the good work!