TREK FUEL EX 9 29
£3,200 The Fuel you need to set the trails alight?
Trek’s trail 29er sports a tiny bit more travel than the rest and it’s a little heavier too. There’s a carbon version for the same price, but we opted for the alloy bike due to the lure of posher parts.
The frame
Trek’s ‘ABP’ (Active Braking Pivot) suspension design puts the rearmost pivot concentric with the wheel axle, rather than on the chainstay. As with the Horst Link bikes, the rear brake calliper is mounted on the seatstay, so braking forces don’t interfere with the suspension as much as on a traditional single-pivot design.
The frame has a straight down tube, which is claimed to boost stiffness but would normally be in the path of the front wheel. Trek’s ‘Knock Block’ system limits how far the bar can turn, to stop the fork crown contacting the frame. This reduced steering lock isn’t usually noticeable when riding – just don’t try any barspins!
The kit
Included in the solid spec is a sensible 760x65mm cockpit, wide Bontrager wheels, SRAM X1 gearing and Guide RS brakes. The Fox shock uses Trek’s Formula One-inspired RE:aktiv damping tune, which is claimed to improve pedalling.
The ride
The Fuel EX needs that clever damping tech. Pedalling stood up with the shock in ‘open’ mode results in a fair amount of bob, though not quite as much as on the Norco. Flipping to ‘medium’ cuts down on this a fair bit, and large bumps are absorbed almost as if the shock had been left fully open. This is because of the RE:aktiv tune, which offers quite firm low-speed compression damping, particularly in the ‘medium’ and ‘firm’ modes, but allows the valves to pop open under harder impacts.
While this is handy for pedally descents and technical climbs, it’s not quite the best of both worlds. When sprinting, the firmest mode still permits a little bob, while in the ‘medium’ setting, the shock feels slightly insensitive. Left ‘open’, the suspension performs pretty well over rough ground and absorbs big hits nicely, though we still felt the Norco was slightly more sensitive over small bumps. The fork’s GRIP damper is less responsive to trail chatter than the more expensive units on the Norco and Canyon too, so when battering over really bumpy ground, the 130mm Trek wasn’t quite as smooth as we’d hoped.
Although the cockpit is relatively well-proportioned, we’d fit a shorter stem to get the most out of the long
reach, as the Fuel EX felt a touch stretched-out on steep descents. The tyres lack bite in corners too. SRAM’s Guide RS brakes were the best on test though, helping to push the Trek’s trail chaos confidence way beyond that of the other bikes here.
We used the ‘low’ geometry setting for most of our testing, which gave a confidence-inspiring ride. With a 67-degree head angle and fairly long front centre, the Trek felt by far the most capable and stable descender here. Add a tough, wide wheelset and stiff frame, and the Fuel EX rewards you for chucking it down rocky chutes and stuffing it into corners.
At 13.9kg it’s the heaviest bike on test by a small margin, and it’s got the stiffest gearing too, making steep, sustained climbs a bit of a chore. More importantly, the ‘low’ setting results in a 74.5-degree effective seat angle. Although this is steeper than that of the Norco or Canyon, we found it a little too laidback for attacking technical climbs, especially when compared to the Specialized. Switching to the ‘high’ setting helps, but this also raises the BB and steepens the head angle, losing the Fuel EX its descending edge.
Although it’s not the fastest climber, it’s no slouch. The fastrolling, high-volume tyres carry speed exceptionally well. With the shock in the firmer settings, it responds well to pumping and pedalling efforts. It bowls along flowing trails effortlessly and really comes alive when pointed downhill.