Trek Supercaliber Gen 2 Showroom and Brief Review

When Trek presented its then brand-new all-purpose weapon for Cross Country and Marathon in the fall of 2019, there was a murmur through the scene: Such a "Hardfully" had not been seen before.
Four years, an Olympic victory, and many more beautiful individual successes later, it's time for a little model maintenance. Given the current developments in the XC World Cup - increasingly difficult courses, faster sections, more brutal segments - this turns out to be quite extensive.

The most important changes in a nutshell: The rear travel grows from 60 mm to 80 mm. The front of the second-generation Supercaliber adds 10 mm to a standard travel of 110 mm. Both are supposed to have no negative impact on efficiency or weight - on the contrary.
The geometry of the race machine goes the now quite familiar longer-slacker route to offer World Cup pros and training champions more stability in downhills and at high speeds.
The frame is split into two quality classes. While the SL chassis weighs roughly the same as the previous model, the higher-quality SLR frame sheds 200-250 grams.
And the IsoStrut shock will be supplied by RockShox instead of Fox in the future - and of course in a functionally improved version that should also be easier to handle.

Whether by chance or Trek's sophisticated logistics, the top model of the lineup knocked on our editorial door just before the official launch date of the new Supercal.
Unfortunately, the black beauty didn't have enough time for an in-depth practical test. Therefore, we present to you the most important facts about the second generation, coupled with fine pics and detailed specs of the €11,499 SLR 9.9 XX AXS, as well as our riding impressions gained over three weeks.

In a bike designed for the world's most challenging Cross Country courses, efficiency, weight, and speed are more important than ever - while the demands for downhill capabilities are increasing.It's a balancing act that Trek, when applied to the "more affordable" models, encounters with a trick well known from their road bikes: In addition to the high-end SLR frame, which will weigh 200 to 250 grams less than the first generation Supercaliber, the Americans are introducing the weight-wise approximately consistent SL frame (so probably just over 2,000 g). The former features a higher high-modulus and lower FAW (fiber aerial weight) content in the carbon fiber mix and generally fewer layers than the latter. Moreover, the - anyway mostly wireless-specified - Superlight version does without the internal cable routing, which facilitates threading in the SL frame.
Furthermore, the two versions are not different and thus also share the same rear suspension with Floating Brake Mount. However, the SL and SLR available in two or even three different colors are equipped differently:The economy class has to make do with aluminum wheels and cockpit - but still costs €3,999 (9.6 SL with Shimano SLX/Deore, RS Recon Gold RL, and JD Dropper) or €5,499 (9.7 SL with Sram GX AXS-T/Level Bronze, RS Reba RL, and Line Dropper).With the SLR frame, there are a total of five equipment options spread across the 9.8 and 9.9 models, each rolling off the line with carbon wheels and a fancy one-piece cockpit. Their prices range from €6,499 to €11,499, depending on the group (Shimano or Sram), fork (Fox or RockShox), dropper (Bontrager or Fox), etc.In addition, the higher-quality chassis is available as a frame set for €3,999.By the way, the weight-optimized top model, which you can also take a detailed look at here, is the only family member to use 2.2" tires. This is because the installed RS SID SL fork allows a maximum of 2.35". All other bikes are delivered with 2.4" tubeless tires. The tire clearance of the 29" frame with Boost standard, 55 mm chainline, Pressfit-92 bottom bracket, max. 160-mm PM brakes, UDH derailleur hanger, and space for two bottles is right there.

Technical Specifications

The front suspension travel has, as already mentioned, grown from 100 to 110 mm. However, forks with +/- ten millimeters are also possible, to accommodate individual preferences regarding travel and geometry.
The actual USP of the Supercaliber remains the IsoStrut - that half-integrated construct into the extended seat stays and running parallel to the top tube, which is responsible for the suspension and damping of the rear end. Now made by RockShox instead of Fox, it now manages 80 mm of travel instead of the previous 60, has become slightly longer (+ 7 mm to 240 mm) and logically also has more stroke (40 instead of 32.5 mm).
Furthermore, the SIDLuxe IsoStrut should be easier to adjust and maintain than its Fox predecessor. The printed Sag-Range (15-35%) is an initial indication of this, and the ten possible settings of the rebound knob are also visible from the outside. In addition, adjustment via volume spacers is feasible.

The translation ratio has been significantly increased compared to the first Supercaliber. Practically identical across the entire range of suspension travel, the Gen2 kinematics thus features a very linear characteristic curve (see graphic - Gen 1 was degressive). Trek expects this to deliver more performance in challenging downhills.
Uphill, in return, significantly higher anti-squat values (see graphic) are intended to maintain or even improve pedaling efficiency.

Regarding geo-data, it has been modernized for more stability in downhills and at high speeds in a predictable direction: The head angle has been made 1.5° slacker and now measures a constant 67.5°. The seat angle has been steepened by half a degree (71.5°). The reach has grown by 10 mm across all five sizes still available (to, for example, 465 mm for size L), and the chainstay length has increased by 5 mm to a uniform 435 mm.
More ground clearance is provided by the bottom bracket, which has been raised by 7 mm. And in the slightly shortened seat tubes, dropper posts with insertion depths of 215 mm (S) to 330 mm (XL; in between: 225/250/270 mm) are consistently used.

Geometry

How it all feels in practice, we were able to try out within three, far too short weeks; after that, the test model unfortunately had to move on.
Initially, I encountered Trek's new racing flagship with a bit of intimidation. The look and equipment are so trimmed for speed, performance, and power that any sign of a prosperity belly, any post-career paunch, yes, any gram of fat on its tester seemed decidedly too much. But well, we had to go through with it, the Supercal and I.

Speaking of looks and equipment: The colors, seemingly black and definitely silver, but also blue-gray and almost white in certain lights and angles, are one thing. The RockShox SID SL Ultimate fork, the 160mm Sram Level Ultimate brakes, and the Bontrager Kovee RSL wheels are another.
9.7 kg in size M is not an all-time record. But for a fully suspended twenty-niner with a dropper post, it's very nice, especially since the carbon wheels and the only 2.2" thin racing tires mean there's quite a low rotating mass.
Add to that the sinfully beautiful, also lightweight, one-piece RSL cockpit, the Sram XX SL Transmission gears, and the Fox Transfer in the SL version – and you have the high-end package for which Trek proudly asks for 11,499 euros.

But back to the rear suspension. A short ride down some stairs revealed that the shock absorber works very diligently when the trail demands it.
Progressing setup-wise from a firm 15 to a classic 25 to eventually 35% sag, I found the latter setting to make the most sense for my more tour-oriented purposes. In real XC use, I would probably opt for a tad more efficiency, meaning less negative travel.

As potent and balanced as the suspension is (by the way, my initial fear that the 30 mm gap between front and rear suspension travel would be noticeably disturbing was completely unfounded), so agile and willing is the handling. Mind you: without ever appearing nervous.
'Zippy' is an understatement for how quickly and precisely the Supercal responds. At the same time, it exudes a calming security thanks to its stable position and pleasant imperturbability.

Only good things can be reported about the weight-optimized SL-trim Transmission shifting. Even under full load, the rear axle-mounted derailleur shifts buttery smooth, is astonishingly quiet and always precise. Functional and ergonomically successful is the controller, as already mentioned above, convincing is the range.
Of course, this finding depends on the accuracy of the initial setup. It's an unpleasant thought to have to fine-tune the device with sweaty hands and a dripping forehead using a mobile app somewhere in the boonies during a heatwave - three or four or - I've lost count this year - ten times. But well, since we are not dealing with an unkempt everyday bike but hopefully a well-cared-for racing steed, such factors are usually checked at home in peace and not at 35°C in real-world conditions.

The Fox Transfer SL may prove to be a guillotine for the groin for some users due to the speed at which its internal steel spring pushes the saddle up. However, I much prefer a dropper post that operates a bit too quickly for my taste and only has two positions (extended/retracted) to having no telescopic post at all. Not to mention the low weight of this XC and gravel-specific solution.
My time with SRAM's ultimate XC brake went without a hitch, apart from some initial squeaking. Ergonomics, braking power, reliability - all fine for cross-country purposes. Whether heavier riders will find the 160mm rotors sufficient in marathon use, however, remains to be seen.
The completely new Bontrager tires proved to be inconspicuous in the best sense. However, I almost always rode the tires on ideal terrain - on grippy forest soil, over dry rock, friendly gravel. In wet conditions, the excellent rollers might lack grip, according to my purely visually fueled prejudice. And what they don't like on bone-dry, "loose" ground is too high pressure. But which tire doesn't respond to such conditions with lateral spreading and loss of control?