trek slash main pivot

2024 Trek Slash Review | Is this high pivot enduro bike fashionably late, or just late to the party?

The not-so-minor details, 2024 trek slash 9.8 gx axs.

https://www.trekbikes.com

From $6,999 AUD ($10,499 AUD as tested)

- Incredible composure on the rowdiest terrain - Plush & well-controlled suspension - Surprisingly efficient pedalling performance - Mullet setup injects welcome agility - Loads of in-built adjustability

- Extra pulleys add complexity & noise - Tyres too flimsy for the application - Downtube storage is on the small side - Chainstay armour lacks damping - GX derailleur clutch failure

Dan reviews the 2024 Trek Slash

The Trek Slash has undoubtedly been one of the most popular enduro bikes on the market since it was first introduced back in 2011. It was late 2020 when we tested the last version, which impressed us with its buttery-smooth suspension performance and surprising agility for what was a big and burly brawler.

For 2024 however, the Slash has been completely redesigned from the ground-up. Featuring a high pivot suspension design, additional pulley wheels and a mullet setup, it is quite clearly a very different bike to its predecessor.

So how do all the changes play out on the trail? And what about those online reports of chain-dropping issues? We’ll be discussing all of that, and more, in our in-depth review of the new 2024 Trek Slash.

Watch our video review of the 2024 Trek Slash:

It eats up square edge hits for breakfast, while the neutral anti-squat and ABP platform means the back end is unencumbered by drivetrain and braking forces.

An overview of the 2024 Trek Slash

Built for enduro racing and bikepark thrashing, the Trek Slash is designed to compete with the likes of the Merida One-Sixty , Giant Reign and Canyon Strive .

Featuring an all-new frame for 2024, the Slash is now equipped with 170mm of travel front and rear. It comes set up from the factory as a mullet, though by fitting a different shock mount it’s possible to run a 29in rear wheel. The exception is the Small frame size that is purpose-built around 27.5in wheels front and rear.

You’ll still find a four-bar ABP platform, with the most rearward pivot located around the rear axle to help isolate brake forces from the suspension. Trek’s engineers have moved the main pivot almost halfway up the seat tube, which creates a more pronounced rearward axle path. To mitigate chain growth, a large 19T idler wheel routes the chain close to the main pivot. Trek claims this produces around 100% anti-squat all the way through the travel, with the goal being to reduce pedal-bob.

There’s a gazillion other features incorporated into the new Slash, including downtube storage with a second generation hatch design, bolt-on mudguards and frame armour, as well as a flip chip in the lower shock mount that offers linear or progressive suspension settings. While almost every Slash comes equipped with the new RockShox Vivid air shock, the frame is also compatible with coil shocks.

Trek Slash geometry & sizing

Just like the latest Fuel EX , the new Trek Slash incorporates modular headset cups. Complete bikes come from the factory set up in the neutral position with a 63.5° head angle, though by removing the upper headset cup and installing an asymmetric cup you can slacken that out to 62.5° or steepen it to 64.5°. You will have to purchase the asymmetric cup separately for $64 AUD however.

There are some further changes in geometry over the old bike. The seat angle is considerably steeper at around 77-78°, and Trek has also updated the Slash with size-specific rear centre lengths. This is achieved by modifying the location of the BB on the main frame, which varies the rear centre from 429mm on the Small, to 445mm on the XL.

Listed below is the geometry chart below for all five frame sizes. This shows the geometry when matching wheels are fitted (27.5in wheels on the Small, 29in wheels on the M-XL sizes). In the mullet configuration, the angles slacken by 0.2°, the BB drops by 2mm and the rear centre length shortens by nearly 6mm.

Trek Slash price & specs

There are six models in the Trek Slash lineup for 2024. Prices start at $6,999 AUD for the Slash 8, which is the only alloy model in the range. At the other end of the spectrum is the Slash 9.9 XX AXS that sells for a staggering $19,999 AUD. That’s a truly insane amount of money for a bike that doesn’t come with a mid-drive motor.

Thankfully the bike that we’ve been testing is quite a bit more reasonable. It’s the Trek Slash 9.8 GX AXS, which sells for $10,499 AUD. Despite being the second cheapest model it still features a full carbon frame, high performance RockShox suspension and a wireless SRAM GX AXS Transmission, making it an appealing package.

• Frame |  OCLV Mountain Carbon, ABP Suspension Design, 170mm Travel
• Fork |  RockShox Zeb Select+, Charger 3 RC2 Damper, 44mm Offset, 170mm Travel
• Shock |  RockShox Vivid Select+, 230x65mm
• Wheels |  Bontrager Line Elite 30, OCLV Carbon Rims, 29mm Inner Width
• Tyres |  Bontrager SE6 Team Issue 2.5in Front & SE5 Team Issue 2.5in Rear
• Drivetrain |  SRAM GX Eagle AXS Transmission 1×12 w/34T Alloy Crankset & 10-52T Cassette
• Brakes | SRAM Code Bronze w/200mm Centerline Rotors
• Bar |  Bontrager Line Pro, OCLV Carbon, 27.5mm Rise, 820mm Width
• Stem |  Bontrager Line Pro, 35mm Length
• Grips | Bontrager XR Trail Lock-On
• Seatpost |  Bontrager Line Elite, 34.9mm Diameter
• Saddle |  Bontrager Arvada, Austentite Rails
• RRP |  $10,499 AUD

With the Slash however, the smaller rear wheel seems to help counter some that ground-hugging sensation.

Trek Slash weight

Confirmed weight for our Trek Slash test bike is 16kg, without pedals and with the tyres set up tubeless. That’s notably higher than the claimed weight of 15.65kg, and it’s also quite a bit heavier than the previous Slash we tested, which came in at 14.56kg.

Still, it’s in the ballpark for a 170mm travel enduro bike these days, especially one that’s built around a high pivot design.

It’s all pretty burly too, including the Bontrager Line Elite carbon wheelset that weighs a bit over 2kg. These wheels are a great match for the Slash, being quite stiff and also hella durable.

We can’t say the same for the Bontrager tyres however, which at around a kilo each are too lightweight for a proper enduro bike. Unless you want to swap the tyres straight away, we’d recommend at least fitting an insert into the rear wheel to lessen the chance of puncture pain.

Testing the 2024 Trek Slash

We put the Trek Slash into the hands of our enduro tester Dan, who’s aggressive riding styles regularly leaves corners and berms shaking in their boots. Having spent a load of time on the previous version, Dan was perfectly placed to see how this new Slash would compare.

Before putting tyres to dirt however, we had some concerns around the chain-dropping issue that had been reported by reviewers and users online. We spoke with our local Trek dealer, which informed us about a service bulletin that had been issued to address this problem. It turns out that bikes from earlier production runs were being assembled with incorrect spacing for the chainguide, as well as too big of a gap between the chainstay and the lower pulley wheel.

Although our test bike had previously been ridden by another media publication, upon closer inspection we discovered that neither the chainguide spacing or lower pulley wheel were set up correctly. After sourcing the right spacers, a few adjustments with a hex key was all that was required to get everything lined up to spec.

Since making those adjustments we have not once dropped the chain during six weeks of abusive testing. Even still, Trek has informed us that it has developed a replacement upper idler that features taller teeth for more positive engagement with the chain. The replacement idler should be available in early 2024 and will be sent out to Trek dealers to be installed on existing bikes, free of charge.

As such, most customers shouldn’t encounter any chain dropping problems if the bike has been set up properly from the shop. If you are having troubles with your Slash, be sure to check out the service bulletin .

How have you found the fit of the bike Dan?

I’m 183cm tall and the size Large feels spot on. The 488mm reach is almost identical to the previous Slash, but you’re not nearly as stretched out since the seat tube is quite a bit steeper. I still needed to slide the saddle forwards a bit to get a comfortable seated climbing position, but not nearly as much as the old bike.

With that saddle adjustment the Slash fits perfectly. The climbing position is very comfortable, and on the descents you’re nicely centred, giving you a feeling of being ‘in the bike’.

What about the contact points?

The Trek Slash comes standard with 820mm wide bars, which I chopped down to a more sensible 780mm. The Bontrager carbon bars have always looked a bit funny to me, but once I rolled them so that the grips were flat they were fine. They are quite stiff, so you’re likely to notice some feedback at cruising speeds. That said, we’re glad to see a conventional two-piece setup rather than the one-piece carbon cockpit that comes on the higher-end Slash models. Adjustments are easier and it’s obviously a lot cheaper if you want to change out either the stem or bars to suit your preference.

I also swapped the grips straight away, as I can’t get on with the flared alloy lock-rings on the outboard side of the Bontrager grips. I feel like they really dig into the outside of my palms, since I ride with my hands on the very edge of the bars.

Talk us through your suspension setup

Setting up the suspension on the Slash is made relatively easy thanks to Trek’s online calculator . This gives you a great starting point for pressures and rebound settings, all of which are based off your weight. Furthermore, the RockShox Vivid shock has gradients anodised onto its stanchion to help you eyeball sag.

For my 83kg riding weight I needed 209psi to hit the recommended 30% sag for the rear shock. I found Trek’s suggested rebound setting (12/20 clicks) to be too fast for my preference and ended up slowing it down to just five clicks out. I backed the compression adjuster off to its most open position (-2) and ran the Hydraulic Bottom Out dial in the middle of its range.

I set up the Zeb fork as recommended by both Trek and RockShox with 63psi in the DebonAir+ spring. Again I ran a slower rebound setting than suggested, ending up on a 7/18 clicks. I backed off the high-speed compression dial all the way (-2) and added a few clicks from neutral for the low-speed adjuster (+4).

What do you dig about the Trek Slash?

The Trek Slash is an insanely good descending bike. It’s got a great stance on the trail, as you’d expect given the geometry is so close to a full-blown DH bike. However, it’s the top-notch suspension performance that makes it such a beast when gravity takes over.

The RockShox Vivid is very impressive, offering a level of sensitivity that isn’t that far off a coil shock. It’s supple over smaller bumps and chatter, and rear wheel traction is excellent as a result. There’s also great support, and the HBO adjuster allows you to dial in more end-stroke damping if you’re a particularly hard lander.

Trek’s high pivot suspension design has to be commended too. It eats up square edge hits for breakfast, while the neutral anti-squat and ABP platform means the back end is unencumbered by drivetrain and braking forces. This helps the Slash to flow smoothly through chunky rock gardens and high-speed braking bumps, isolating you from the chop while keeping the tyres driving into the ground.

What’s particularly impressive is how the Slash manages to be so plush while maintaining control at higher speeds. It thrives on bombing down steep and technical terrain and it only gets better the harder and faster you push it. With that in mind, I suspect few riders will be likely to find its limits.

Still, I was surprised at how rideable it was outside of full-gas descending. While the suspension is supple, it rides high in its travel and there’s plenty of support for handling bigger hits. This makes the Slash stable and predictable to jump with, and providing you’ve got the inclination, it can be quite playful too.

What does the mullet setup bring to the party?

I think this is a big reason why the Slash doesn’t feel like a total anchor on flowier trails.

In general I like the mullet setup, as it makes the bike more manageable for steep descending. It’s also great through tighter corners, as you’re able to flop the bike over and change direction a bit easier. In these situations a full 29er can stand you up a bit sometimes, especially if you’re on the brakes. Add a high pivot suspension design into the equation and the bike gets harder to manoeuvre due to the way the rear end gets longer as the shock goes into its travel. With the Slash however, the smaller rear wheel seems to help counter some that ground-hugging sensation.

Another factor is the rear centre length, which comes in at just 434mm on the Large frame size. Of course the high pivot design means it does get longer as the suspension goes through its travel. According to Trek, the rear centre grows to 446mm at sag, and ends up at 451mm at full bottom-out.

However, the rear centre length isn’t as dramatic as some other high pivot bikes out there like the Norco Range , and it really helps with agility when slinging through twisty trails. Combined with the smaller rear wheel and supportive suspension, the Slash offers a surprisingly interactive ride quality that encourages you to work the terrain rather than just hang on like a passenger.

We still find it interesting that Trek decided to go for a mullet build out of the box, given this is pitched as an enduro specialist. Of course if you’re serious about racing then you’ll likely want to try the full 29er setup to enhance overall grip and momentum. But we expect there’ll be far more Slash owners that just ride for fun, and for those riders the mullet configuration is the ticket.

What didn’t you like?

No points for guessing that the Trek Slash isn’t the most enthusiastic performer on flatter terrain or at slower speeds.

That’s kind of a given for a 16kg bike with a 63.3° head angle and chunky tyres, and the situation isn’t helped by audible drag from the chain and the two additional pulleys it has to contort around. It’s not as noticeable as other high pivot bikes we’ve tested, which is perhaps due to the 55mm chainline that the SRAM Transmission is optimised around. Keeping the chain clean and well-lubricated is still crucial to minimising noise and banishing the nagging voice in your head when you’re heading up the mountain.

To be fair, I’ve not found the Slash to be a pig on the climbs. The steeper seat tube angle helps a lot, and the rear suspension is for sure more stable under pedalling compared to the old bike. It’s a relatively calm and comfortable affair when you’re winching your way up a steady fireroad climb.

There’s loads of grip for scaling more challenging singletrack ascents, though if the gradient gets especially steep it can be hard to stop the front wheel from wandering around. You’re also more likely to catch rocks and roots with the 27.5in rear wheel, and I found the lengthening rear centre would occasionally disrupt my momentum when getting over bigger ledges. It can still be muscled about, but if you’re looking for all-round performance, setting up the Slash as a full 29er will be worth considering.

Any issues with the chain or the frame?

Thankfully there have been no chain-dropping issues since we got everything set up correctly. It’s also good to know there’s a new upper idler coming that should eliminate the chance of any further problems. The whole saga must have been pretty embarrassing for Trek, but we’re glad to see proactive solutions.

While the chain is managed well, it does end up making contact with the chainstay guard, especially in the higher gears. The rubber protection is more than adequate, though the hard rubber compound results in quite a bit of noise when you’re coasting through bumpy terrain. It’s a fairly dead sound, but I’d still like to see a softer rubber guard to better dampen chain slap.

I also had some popping noises from the headset after a seriously wet and muddy ride, though a quick clean and re-grease was all that was required to silence it. On that note, thank god Trek resisted the trend to route the cables through the headset. The conventional headset and frame-routed cables are so much easier to work on.

The downtube storage is a great concept, and I like the new latch design and the fact that all the plastic components are made from recycled materials. Trek has also updated the hatch with improved sealing, and it all goes together neatly with an almost-flush profile.

However, the opening in the downtube is still a bit small, and that issue is exacerbated by cable guides that sit on either side. It creates an additional snag point that meant I couldn’t actually fit a standard inner tube with the provided storage sleeve. A lightweight inner tube and careful packing will do the trick, but I wouldn’t put any tools inside the sleeve as it makes installation and removal harder.

We also had the same problem with the removable rear axle lever as we did on our Fuel EXe test bike . The lever has never popped out on its own, but the sloppy tolerance means there’s a fair bit of play while riding, leading to an annoying rattle.

These issues of refinement were more noticeable given the finish on the Slash frame is otherwise really good. The included bolt-on mudguards and downtube protection are nice touches, and the fact that Trek gives you a lifetime warranty on the frame provides great peace of mind.

Component highs & lows

As far as the 2024 Trek Slash lineup goes, we reckon the 9.8 GX AXS model tested here is the pick of the bunch. It costs quite a bit less than the higher-end models, but loses out very little in terms of performance.

The suspension is excellent, with the new Vivid being a particular highlight. I had no issues with the Code Bronze brakes, which offer great power, consistency and a nice lever feel.

SRAM’s GX Transmission has worked flawlessly throughout testing, though in typical fashion I discovered a problem right at the end of the review period. For some reason the clutch isn’t returning cleanly anymore, resulting in a lack of tension on the chain in the higher gears. We’re unsure if there’s any damage that might have been caused by an impact, though the derailleur isn’t wearing any scars to suggest this is the case. Either way, SRAM will be replacing the derailleur under warranty and we’ll send this one back to be assessed. It’s the first issue we’ve had of any sort with the latest SRAM Transmissions, and given how hard we’ve flogged the XX and X0 groupsets in our long-term review , it feels like an anomaly.

There were zero doubts about the puncture-prone Bontrager tyres. The rear ended up with a total of seven Dynaplugs scattered across the tread and bead before it finally gave up the ghost after a hefty blowout on the trails of Mt Buller. Unusually for me, I also punctured the front tyre close to the bead. I’ve not had problems in the past with the Bontrager SE6/SE5 tyres on the Rail or old Slash, so who knows, maybe it’s just the new Slash encouraging me to take uglier line choices?

Traction is otherwise dependable in dry and rocky conditions. Bontrager’s rubber compound isn’t the softest going, so grip does suffer on wet roots and rock slabs, and that’s exacerbated by the higher pressures you need to run to avoid punctures. As I mentioned earlier, consider fitting a CushCore insert in the rear wheel at the very least, or swap out the tyres for something with a tougher casing and softer rubber.

Given all the pinch-flats, I’m happy to report that the carbon wheels have been absolutely rock-solid. The rear took a particularly gnarly hit coming off the top of Mt Stirling, but neither wheel is yet to require so much as a spoke key. Even if you do manage to damage one of the carbon rims, it’s good to know that Bontrager offers a 2-year crash replacement scheme.

Flow’s Verdict

We’ll admit that we were somewhat skeptical when we first got wind of the 2024 Trek Slash. We genuinely loved the old version, and there was concern that some of its magic would be lost in Trek’s pursuit of the high pivot trend. Thankfully that hasn’t been the case, with the new Slash being one of the most impressive enduro bikes we’ve ever tested.

Unfortunately for Trek, the Slash ended up having a rough start due to those early reports of chain-dropping. However, we’re glad to report that with the correct setup our test bike has been flawless in this regard. It also turns out that the combination of a high pivot suspension design, Trek’s ABP platform and RockShox’ superb Vivid shock delivers outstanding rock-devouring performance. Along with the sturdy chassis and raked-out geometry, the Slash offers a floaty ride quality that allows you to charge with confidence.

It ain’t a complete freight train though. Yes it needs an aggressive rider who likes to push hard, but for a 170mm travel enduro bike it’s surprisingly well-rounded and has been a great partner on longer days out. We have to give kudos to Trek for committing to the mullet setup, which injects a good deal of pep given this bike’s outrageous grip and stability. Add in all the clever in-built wheelsize, geometry and suspension adjustability, and there’s loads of scope for tweaking the geometry and ride quality to your preference and terrain.

• Submit for Review
• Terms & Conditions

Enjoy reading this?

Get similar articles delivered directly to your inbox

• Pinkbike.com
• Register New User
• First Looks
• Friday Fails
• Community Blogs
• Fantasy League DH
• Places Directory

Field Test Review: 2024 Trek Slash - Rides Like a Session

Cool Features

FIRST LOOK - The All-New High-Pivot Trek Slash 2

Redesigned from the ground up, trek's enduro model now features a high-pivot suspension design with an idler pulley, more travel, and loads of adjustability..

The sixth generation Slash focuses on enduro racers, park riders, and all-mountain rippers who want to ride aggressive terrain with the ability to pedal back to the top. The bike sees many changes from its predecessor, most notably a high-pivot suspension design that increases rear wheel travel up to 170mm. The Slash now rolls on mixed wheels in the stock configuration with full 29-inch compatibility on sizes Medium-XL. Size small frames feature 27.5-inch wheels front and rear only with a curved top tube for lower standover height. All frame sizes have size-specific chainstay lengths and seat tube angles to maintain a consistent fit across all sizes.

• All-new frame with high-pivot suspension
• Updated, slacker geometry with optional angle adjust headset cups
• Increased rear travel from 160mm to 170mm
• Leverage rate adjust chip
• Stock mixed-wheel builds on all sizes except size small (27.5” front and rear)
• Updated frame protection with Integrated Carbon Amor and a noise-reducing chainstay guard
• Room for longer dropper posts
• ISCG 05, 3-bolt tabs
• 2.5-inch maximum tire width
• BSA 73mm, threaded bottom bracket
• 200mm post mount rear, 220mm max rotor size
• MSRP: $4,399 - $11,499 USD

Still centered around Trek's ABP (Active Braking Pivot), the high pivot suspension design includes a large upper idler pulley and a new lower idler pulley. Similar to what would typically be found on a chain guide for chain retention, this lower idler pulley helps mitigate chain growth. Trek claims this prevents the suspension from fighting the derailleur clutch and allows for smoother drivetrain performance by preventing the derailleur cage from being pulled throughout the travel of the rear wheel. 

While aggressive descents are where the Slash is meant to shine, Trek wanted to ensure the bike still pedals well. All frame sizes utilize a 77-degree effective seat tube angle to put riders in a relaxed and upright position. By strategically placing the 19t upper idler pulley, Trek increased anti-squat values exponentially over the previous generation Slash to create the best pedaling platform possible from the new design. 

Regarding frame protection, the chainstay protector has a unique cupped shape to prevent any side-to-side movement and, from a side profile, creates the illusion that the chain is sitting directly on top of the chainstay. Downtube protection is handled by replaceable, dual-density guards that bolt into place. Beneath that, Trek has gone a step further and utilized a layer of thermoplastic beneath the paint to help prevent permanent frame damage from rock strikes to the downtube. All frames feature an integrated rear fender that mimics those on suspension forks, downtube storage with a larger opening for easier access, and an updated latch that is now easier to reach beneath a bottle cage. 

In terms of adjustability, the new Slash incorporates an angle-adjust headset to allow for +/- 1 degree of head tube angle adjustment independent of bottom bracket height. This also means the infamous KnockBlock headset is no longer used and allows full rotation of the steer tube. Bolt-on lower shock mounts allow for either 27.5" or 29" rear wheels to keep geometry in check and feature a flip chip to adjust the progressivity of the leverage ratio, similar to what is found on the Session. Max allowable fork travel is 190mm up front with no dual crown compatibility from Trek officially. 

The Slash is available as an aluminum or carbon frameset and in seven different build kit options for complete bikes. Top-of-the-line kits are spec'd at the 9.9 level with either SRAM XX and X0 T-Type options or full Shimano XTR, all with RockShox Ultimate level suspension. Build kits for 9.8 models are available with a GX AXS T-Type option or Shimano XT and RockShox Select+ level suspension. Aluminum Slash options include the Slash 9 spec'd with SRAM GX AXS (non-T-Type), a RockShox Zeb, and Vivid Select+, and the Slash 8 with Shimano XT drivetrain, a Fox Performance 38 fork, and Float X shock. 

For more information, please visit trekbikes.com

View key specs, compare bikes, and rate the new Trek Slash in the Vital MTB Product Guide.

Stay tuned for our full review and comparison in our upcoming Enduro Bike Test Sessions!

• How does the adjustable headset work?

You can swap out your headset cups to get a full degree of head angle adjustment. The bikes come with neutral/zero-degree cups; consult the service manual to find part numbers to order the angle-adjust headset cups. The upper cup is a drop-in part, but the lower cup needs to be pressed in with a standard shop headset press. The cups have notches and laser-engraved guides to help you install them straight. For more detailed installation instructions, watch the Slash Service Tips video on Trek U.

• That oversized lower idler pulley is sick. Can I use it on the high pivot Session?

Yes! Consult the Slash service manual for part numbers.

• What is the maximum fork axle-to-crown and travel?

Carbon and Alloy: 190mm max travel (all sizes), 587mm A2C (size S), 606mm A2C (size M-XL)

• Is it compatible with dual crown forks?

They will fit, but we haven’t tested them, so we cannot recommend a dual crown fork on Slash at this time. However, you can put a 190mm single-crown fork on there, and that’s pretty close, and has a better turning radius.

• How much dropper post-insertion does the frame have?

Carbon frame max insertion (mm): S (290), M (305), ML (325), L (340), XL (370)

Alloy frame max insertion (mm): S (295), M (305), ML (325), L (340), XL (370) 

• Which aftermarket shocks are compatible?

We know that the following shocks will fit. Other shocks may fit but should be checked for frame clearance at full suspension compression.

• RockShox Super Deluxe coil RockShox Super Deluxe AXS RockShox Next Gen Air (Vivid 2) Fox Live Valve NEO
• Fox X2 (MY21+)  
• What size hardware is needed for aftermarket shocks?

Slash takes a 230mm x 65mm shock with an industry standard 54mm x 10mm upper and 20mm x 8mm lower standard pin mount.

• What is the maximum chainring size? Minimum chainring size?

Min: 28T, Max: 34T round, 32T oval

• What is the chain line?
• Does the new high-pivot layout require a longer chain?

Most sizes require a 126-link chain, which is a standard un-cut chain. XL requires 128 links.

View replies to: FIRST LOOK - The All-New High-Pivot Trek Slash

Most Popular

• off.road.cc
• Dealclincher
• Fantasy Cycling

off-road.cc

All-new trek slash gains high-pivot suspension layout.

It's been a hot minute since we saw the last update of Trek's Slash and, today, the Wisconsin-based brand has completely overhauled its enduro ripper. Not only does it get longer dropper insertion, a revised geometry and a load of frame protection but it's also equipped with a high pivot suspension layout, as well as a bunch of idler pulleys.

• Trail mountain biking - everything you need to know
• Five things that weren't cool - until enduro happened

MTB enduro racing for beginners

The Slash is Trek's big travelled bike that's designed for use between the tape but also to take riders over the gnarliest of trails and is capable of getting them back up to the top. Trek calls its latest iteration, 'the backcountry battle axe'.

For 2023, the Slash gets a host of geometry updates, including a slacker head tube angle at 63.5-degrees which is adjustable by plus or minus a full degree thanks to adjustable headset cups that are available aftermarket. The effective seat tube angle sits at 77-degrees and there's a 488mm reach on a large frame. Other tweaks include size-specific chainstay lengths and seatpost insertion has increased by around 80mm, depending on the size frame you pick.

This year's Slash takes a departure from a full 29-inch wheel setup and, instead, goes for a mixed wheel size with a 29-inch front wheel and a 27.5-inch (650b) wheel at the rear. Trek has chosen this route as it believes that the big front will help roll over obstacles better while the little rear wheel increases clearance over the back of the bike and retains agility.

However, riders can run full 29-inch setups thanks to an interchangeable bolt-on lower shock bracket. The small frame size is 27.5-inch at both ends for easier handling for smaller riders.

However, unlike bikes from other brands, the small frame comes with few compromises as Trek states that it'll fit up to a 170mm dropper post with 290mm insertion, 85mm than before. This size also gets downtube storage and space for a water bottle in the front triangle.

The elephant in the room is that the Slash has gone with a high-pivot suspension layout on this bike, which allows the rear axle to move rearwards with the force of bumps. This means that the rear wheel shouldn't hang up on square hits, resulting in better retention of momentum. 

As a result, the Slash gets not one but two idler pulleys with the upper being oversized and featuring 19 teeth. Trek reckons that this size is more efficient and its placement reduces pedal kickback that's caused by chain growth – a defining factor of Aaron Gwin's famous chainless win.

The lower idler then helps mitigate chain growth from under the chainstay, while keeping the chain from tugging on the derailleur cage.

As expected from a Trek bike, this one gets the brand's Active Braking Pivot tech which has been added to keep the Slash's suspension active when under braking. It's also said that this system has allowed the bike's designers to tune anti-squat and anti-rise independently. And speaking of anti-squat, Trek claims that it sits just above 100% throughout the travel range, which should lead to some mighty efficient pedalling.

Elsewhere on the bike is a host of cool features, including a rear fender that's been designed specifically for this bike but it has to be removed if running a 29-inch rear wheel as there's not enough space. The Slash benefits from dual-density downtube guards that can be replaced if badly damaged.

On top of those guards, there is an impact-resistant film underneath the paint for even more protection.

At the rear, there's a chainstay guard that's been designed to reduce noise and, at the downtube, there's storage as expected of the Slash. However, this time, it's cut with a larger opening and its latch is easier to reach, says the brand. All of the plastic gubbins are made from recycled plastic, too.

The 2023 Trek Slash lineup consists of nine builds with one alloy frame only –the balance is all carbon fibre. Throughout these builds, customers can expect Shimano XT to XTR cable actuated shifting, SRAM GX AXS through to XX AXS T-Type drivetrains. There's also a choice of Fox and RockShox suspension.

There are five sizes available from S up to XL and prices start at £4,250 for the Slash 8 and go up to £11,750 for the range-topping 9.9 XX AXS T-Type.

• www.trekbikes.com

You might also like:

• Are flat pedals worth it?
• Cross-country mountain bikes: understanding their design
• Buyer's guide to hydration packs for mountain biking

Author block

Liam Mercer

Tech Editor here at off.road.cc Liam can also be found photographing bikes as well as revelling in cycling's intricacies. Whether it's gravel, mountain, or e-MTB as long as it's a bike on dirt, he's happy.

Find great off-road deals

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.

HINT! - if you know the bearing reference you need, then type in search box, i.e. '6903' to see all versions of 6903's we offer.

Frame Pivot Bearing Kit | Trek Slash (Alu & Carbon) | 2017-2020

Frame pivot bearing kit | trek slash (alu & carbon) | 2017-2020.

This listing is for a full set of Frame Pivot Bearings only (12 Bearings, 5 different sizes). No other hardware such as nuts, bolts, washers will be supplied. Any pictures indicated in this listing is for reference to the year/design of frame in question. Please click into this product and read the full description for further informaton about the bearings provided.

IMPORTANT: This listing is for a full set of Frame Pivot Bearings only . No other hardware such as nuts, bolts, washers will be supplied.

Any pictures indicated in this listing is for reference to the year/design of frame in question.

Bearing Specification Configuration: MAX Complement (Fully loaded with ball bearings - no cage/retainer present) Material: 100CR6 Chrome Steel for balls and races Grease: Mobil XHP222 or Sinopec HTHS (High Specification Water Resistant Grease) Seal: 2RS ( 2 R ubber S eals, 1 each side) Precision: ABEC-3 

Max Complement (Also known as Full Complement) At Kinetic we only supply Max Complement bearings for frame suspension pivots.  Max type bearings can take a much higher load as they have 40% more balls than standard wheel bearings.  A Frame Pivot Bearing experiences only a minor degree of movement concentrated in a small area, thus strength across the axis of load is of the utmost importance. To achieve this, the races are fully loaded with balls to ensure that the load passes through actual balls and not gaps.

If a supplier selling frame pivot bearings fails to mention they supply MAX complement, it's very probable they are bearings that contain retainers and therefore cannot withstand higher loads often experienced in suspension frames.  These can fail prematurely.  Non-MAX bearings are usually cheaper too.

Note, standard wheel bearings have a metal or nylon retainer with gaps in between, which is perfect for wheels/BB's where full rotation occurs.

Grease & Seals The bearings (Kinetic's own and also Enduro) will be filled with the correct volume of high-performance water resistant marine grease to prolong the life of your bearing.  The seals are usually 2 high quality rubber seals, which is where the 2RS is derived from. 

Precision Rating The precision quality of bearings are rated by the ABEC scale.  The ABEC rating for bearings commences at ABEC 1 which is seen in most bearing applications for bicycles supplied from the factory.  Higher end bearings for bikes are usually ABEC 3.  Kinetic in almost every case supplies ABEC 3 rated bearings.  Suppliers that do not mention the ABEC rating, it could be safe to assume are supplying inferior/cheap/unrated or low rated bearings. 

Quality You can be rest assured that our bearings are of fantastic quality and produced specifically for bicycle application.  We supply 100's of bicycle trade customers directly as our bearings are the same as many bearings fitted to bikes at factory level (Original Equipment).  We buy from suppliers that also produce and supply to many highly regarded premium bicycle brands.

Our Kits – Points to consider The bearings supplied will usually be ALL our own 'Kinetic Bearings', although occasionally contain a mixture of our own and Enduro Bearings.  This is due to some custom bearings used on frames which only Enduro produce. There will ultimately be an option within the listing to purchase a full set of Enduro Bearings.

It costs slightly less to buy a full kit than to purchse the separate bearings.

If you do not need a full set of bearings and know what codes you need as you may only be changing main pivot bearings for instance, then you can order separate bearings as necessary.  Alternatively trade customers can consider stocking our frame pivot bearing workshop boxes which covers main part numbers.

Ordering a bearing kit in advance of working on your frame has it's advantages in that it saves time and/or hassle.  Quite often, you might need to strip the frame down to access the bearings to discover what you need. The bike remains in bits whilst waiting for your fresh new bearings.

Knowing what model year you have It's sometimes difficult selecting the correct year bearing kit.  To help in this regard, we have supplied an image where possible.  If not, you can try a Google image search by Manufacturer, Model and Year of frame. You can then consider if the matches look the same or very similar.

If you still not 100% sure, and you have made an educated guess, please be assured that as long as you return the bearings to us within 14 days in the same new condition supplied to you, then we will exchange or refund as necessary.

NOTE, ROYAL MAIL BASIC POST SERVICES (our free option) CAN BE UNRELIABLE - IF URGENT, PLEASE SELECT TRACKED OR SPECIAL DELIVERY, MANY THANKS

• New Releases
• Announcement

Released September 7

Photo Credit: Trek

Price Range

$4,399–$11,499

27.5″ / 29″, 29″ / 27.5″

Full, 170 / 170mm

Frame Material

Aluminum, Carbon

Trek launched the all-new Slash today, proving that high-pivot enduro bikes are here to rip down gnarly descents and hammer right back to the top, lap after lap. The latest Slash rocks an all-new frame design that gives a nod to Trek's bigger, burlier Session, but with a more pedal-friendly platform that’s built to squash boulders on the downs and grip square edge slabs on the ups. It increases the travel over its predecessor, with 170mm of both front and rear suspension, and comes ready to rip with MX wheels (29˝ front/27.5˝ rear), though it can be run as a true 29er for those who favor unbridled speed over agility on the steeps.

The highs and lows of this model family

Based on build material and quality level of the frame, fork, wheelset, groupset, suspension system, and more.

🐐 Measurements listed in mm and degrees

Sep 13, 2023

The all-new Trek Slash is beefed up in celebration of its sixth iteration. This fresh design features an oversized, 19-tooth idler pulley and a high-pivot rear suspension configuration for the first time in the model’s lineage. Travel has been increased to 170 millimeters, pushing it further into the all-out, winch-and-plummet ethos that so many enduro bikes seem to be gravitating to. Our 9.9 version was spec’d with Bontrager’s RSL integrated handlebar and stem, a SRAM T-Type XO drivetrain, and the all-new RockShox Vivid Ultimate rear shock. The previous Slash was an impressive bike. It was impressively light for an enduro bike and was surprisingly efficient to pedal around all day. The new Slash Gen 6 leans more heavily toward the chairlift and shuttle culture side of the mountain bike world with some extra heft and additional pulleys in the drivetrain. However, with the oversized pulley and lighter casing tires, I found the Slash to climb the most efficiently of any high-pivot bike I’ve reviewed thus far. I attribute this mostly to the large, 19-tooth upper idler.

Read Review

The big story behind the new Slash is its high pivot suspension that allows the rear axle to move backward as the suspension compresses. This means the back wheel moves with the force of impacts, rather than against them, making it easier to barrel over chunky terrain with even more speed. 

High pivot suspension has hit the trail before, but the secret behind Slash’s high-pivot versatility is its anti-squat curve that boosts climbing efficiency. Anti-squat is affected by a few variables, one of the biggest being main pivot position. The size and placement of Slash's upper idler provides another way to tune the anti-squat curve. Between the upper and lower idler layout and size, Slash delivers a super-efficient and super-consistent feeling anti-squat curve that allows it to pedal more like a short travel bike on punchy, technical climbs.

New Slash also gets the longer-slacker enduro treatment, with a super slack 63.5° headtube angle that increases downhill stability. The slack headtube is paired with a steep 77° seat tube angle to help riders put more power into the pedals on the way back to the top. Long reach provides plenty of space to maneuver. On the rear end, size-specific chainstays give riders balanced handling no matter their height or frame size.

For those who like to customize everything, Slash is packed with adjustability features, like adjustable leverage rate, an optional adjustable angle headset cup (sold separately), and MX and 29er wheel compatibility. Slash also offers room for extra-long dropper posts, so riders can increase their clearance for moving around in steeper, rowdier terrain. 

Because Slash is intended for the rowdiest trails, it comes ready to rally with updated shuttle guards that deflect impacts on the frame. A thoughtfully designed chainstay guard that not only protects, but also quiets your ride. Carbon models also receive integrated Carbon Armor that offers an extra layer of downtube protection. Like its previous iteration, all new Slash models come equipped with internal frame storage for carrying ride essentials. 

New Slash is available now in both carbon and alloy for park rats, big mountain riders, and enduro racers alike. Find it in-store at select Trek retailers and online at trekbikes.com around the globe.

Browse all new releases

MOSCOW - RUSSIA

Ibls freight forwarding.

Tolbuchuna Street, 10 Bld 3, 121596 Moscow, Russia

• Phone: +7 8916 656-34-09
• email: [email protected]
• web: www.ibls.ru

Company Profile

• LIST WITH US

To: IBLS FREIGHT FORWARDING

Enter the security code:

+7 8916 656-34-09

Directory of Freight Forwarders, Cargo Agents, Shipping Companies, Air, Ocean, Land, Logistics and Transportation Brokers

Introduction:

“ Moscow – Post-Soviet Developments and Challenges” [1]

John O’Loughlin* and Vladimir Kolossov **

* University of Colorado , Boulder

** Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow

Russia has always been a highly centralized state, with the capital playing an exceptional economic, social, cultural and political role.   Paradoxically, the post-Soviet economic transition not only did not reduce this primacy, but on the contrary, considerably strengthen Moscow ’s hypertrophy.   During the 1990s, political events in the capital (attempted coups d’etat in 1991 and 1993, the struggle between ” reformers” and left-wingers) decided the destiny of all Russia , with most regions only observing with anxiety.   Though its ratio of Russia ’s total population is just less than 6%, the city contains more than half of all banking activity, more than one-fifth of retail trade, and one-third of wholesale trade.   Moscow has, to a large extent, monopolized the functions of a mediator between the country and the world economy and has become by far the most important national node of financial flows.   Even if the August 1998 financial crisis contributed to a certain improvement of the balance between the capital and the provinces, Moscow remains the major “exporter” of Russia ’s primary exports (oil, gas, timber, gold, etc.)    It is being transformed into a true global city (Gritsai 1996, 1997; Taylor 2000).

The average per capita income in Moscow is much higher than in any other of the 88 regions in Russia, and more than twice as high as the second-highest, St. Petersburg.    Moscow provides an example of post-Communist economic restructuring to the whole country and now contains the most sizeable new middle class.   The streetscape of the capital has considerably changed during the last decade.   In its downtown, contemporary offices are mushrooming, and historical buildings look fresh after recent renovation by private investors; at night, Moscow ’s main avenues are brightly illuminated by shining shop windows and advertising by global companies, provoking sharp envy from residents of many other Russian cities, which remain dark and suffer from municipal debts and power shortages.   Is Moscow really the dominant player in the Russian economy, determining the orientation and the rates of national restructuring? How stable is the Moscow ’s “miracle”?   What is the reverse side of the coin, the inequities and polarization that has become apparent in the past decade?   These questions are increasingly at the center of discussions among politicians and academic specialists.

The economic and social costs of Moscow ’s rapid changes since 1991 are already clear.   Moscow has definitely became a demographic “black hole”: mortality has exceeded fertility for a decade, the city’s population is getting older and the decrease is compensated only by labor migration from most of the former Soviet republics, from other Russian regions, and even from some third world countries.   Most migrants live in Moscow illegally.   These processes worsen the qualitative composition of population, create tensions in the labor and housing mark ets, and can potentially lead to ethnic and religious conflicts (see Vendina’s article in this issue).   Though the social territorial differentiation in Moscow has not yet reach ed the scale of U.S. or even West European cities, the growing social polarization has already seen the creation of “gated communities” and can condemn the great majority of Muscovites to live in neglected and forgotten housing ghettos.   Moreover, this polarization process risks perpetuating social contrasts in creating multi-standard systems of education and health care – separately for the richer and the poorer strata of society.        

Moscow city authorities must solve other aggravations.   One of the most serious, requiring huge investments, is the housing problem, specifically the reconstruction of the physically obsolete and dilapidated part of the housing stock, four-story apartment blocs ( Khrushchoby ) built in the 1960s.   Moreover, the city lacks empty spaces for new developments and, thus, it is necessary to demolish old residential and industrial buildings or to shift industrial plants in order to intensify land uses.   Another urgent problem is rapid automobilization, related to the insufficient capacity of the roads’ network and of parking; constant traffic jams already render downtown Moscow inaccessible by car on workdays.   (See the paper in this issue by Bityukova and Argenbright on the pollution effects of the growth in car ownership).   Against this background, slow development of public transportation caused by inadequate investment seems to be especially pressing.   The city government does not possess the financial means to build highways such as the Third Ring and, at the same time, to invest in extending the Metro (subway) and other public transportation.   The city authorities under the leadership of Yuri Luzhkov (mayor since 1992) has pledged to continue to invest in prestigious projects to maintain Moscow ’s image and competitiveness as the Russian capital and a new global city.

Like any major city, Moscow has a complex structure that needs to be considered at different levels.   First, at the global and macro-regional (Central-East European) scale, Moscow ’s relations are dominantly economic as part of a world-city system (Taylor and Hoyler, 2000).   Second, at the national scale, Moscow is both the federal capital and a subject of the Russian Federation – here the emphasis is on its primacy and balancing of the differentiation that is becoming more apparent in the country.   Third, at the regional scale, Moscow ’s agglomeration over-reaches the capital’s city limits and issues about industrial re-location, regional transport, city-suburb relations, and the conversion of agricultural and forest zones to urban uses dominate.   Fourth, at the city scale, the optimal combination that allows the city to assume its functions, to be competitive at the international scene while still meeting the needs of its population is still to be found.   Finally, at the local (neighborhood) scale, Moscow is a relatively vast and heterogenous territorial unit, including 124 municipal districts ( rayoni ) (see Figure 1), which will soon become true local governments possessing not only their elected assemblies, but also their own budgets.   Geographical distributions of housing, jobs, services, green spaces, etc. across these rayoni are likely to become more contentious and prominent.                

To cope with the myriad of problems across a variety of scales, the city authorities need a long-term strategy.   Obviously, the privileged 1990s situation of the capital can change rapidly, as the turmoil that occurred after the financial crisis of August 1998 showed.   The Russian federal government refuses to cover even a small part of Moscow ’s expenses as the national capital. Some large companies (important taxpayers) have already moved their registered headquarters out from the city, and during the last two years city officials complain that the city budget is becoming very tight.    Discussions about Moscow ’s economic future can be summarized as the choice between different models of development that depend in turn on the model followed by Russia as a whole. If Russia remains a dominant exporter of fuel and other raw materials and her manufacturing industry and high-tech industries decline further, there will obviously be much less opportunity for Moscow to realize its potential for innovation and to select a new, more balanced model of development.   Simplifying, one can say that future of Moscow can be based on one of three options – a) traditional manufacturing; b) a service economy - mainly banking and trade, and c) science, information processing and high tech industry.   In other words, Moscow can develop as the capital of an open economy, thus continuing current trends, or as the center of national modernization.   Before the collapse of the Soviet Union , more than one million people in Moscow were engaged   in pure and applied research (one-quarter of all Soviet scholars). Though this unique human capital is now considerably weakened, the Russian capital still ranks second among European cities by the number of citations in academic journals and monographs, thanks mainly to the sciences.   To ensure a sustainable development, the city should promote these scientific innovation activities and extend them into high-tech manufacturing (Pchelintsev, 1999).    

The authors of this special issue offer no solutions for the problems that Moscow is now facing.   Rather, they analyze recent data showing the post-Soviet evolution of economic functions and social-territorial structures of the city from a perspective of its transformation into a global city.   Radical shifts in the economic structure of the capital changed (but did not diminish) its impact on the urban environment.   The theme of the changing sources of Moscow ’s environmental pollution (from stationary to automobiles) is developed in the paper by Viktoria Bityukova and Robert Argenbright .   Olga Vendina devotes her article to social geographical developments among Moscow ’s ethnic minorities and the related issue of growing ghettoization .   Elena Shomina, Vladimir Kolossov and Viktoria Shukhat analyze local community groups (non-governmental organizations) in Moscow as responses to changing neighborhood, especially housing conditions.   In the first paper in this special issue, Vladimir Kolossov , Olga Vendina and John O’Loughlin examine the evidence for Moscow ’s claim to world-city status and the geography of business developments in the city since the end of the Soviet Union .  

Soviet and Post-Soviet Research on Moscow .

Moscow attracted the attention of Soviet geographers who began to study the unique problems of the capital at the end of World War II.   Human geographers were especially interested in studying the interaction between the capital and its region, and its impact on surrounding territories of Central Russia .   They delimited Moscow ’s influence according to different criteria - the radius of daily and weekly cycles of activity, the number of second residences, etc.; the distribution of built-up areas, industry, services and recreational functions by sectors around the city by comparison to their environmental impact.   The fundamental volume on these themes – Moscow’s Capital Region- the Territories, Structures, and Environment - written by a large group from the Institute of Geography of the Soviet (now Russian) Academy of Sciences, include interesting chapters that serve as a bench mark for the post-Soviet developments (Lappo, Goltz and Treivish 1988).   Geographers gave much less attention to Moscow itself.   The social-territorial structure of the city was hardly examined – partly because of the lack of reliable statistical data for micro-districts.   The problems of Moscow ’s development were analyzed mainly by architects and urban planners, especially those serving at the Institute of Moscow ’s General Plan, whose reports are unavailable.

Some general works containing detailed information on urban life are available according to the respective periods. In particular, Yulian G. Saushkin , a patriarch of Soviet human geography and former chair of the Department of Human Geography of the USSR at Moscow State University, produced three books on Moscow (the last one appearing soon after his death with his former graduate student, Vera Glushkova) (Saushkin 1950, 1964, Saushkin and Glushkova 1983).   In the late 1970s–early 1980s, new geographical approaches to the study of the local urban environment, the conditions of life and the functional organization of the municipal economy were developed, in particular, in a laboratory of the Institute of Geography founded by Yuri Medvedkov (now at Ohio State University).   Contemporary quantitative methods (especially factorial ecology) were applied in the estimation of the quality of the urban environment (Barbash and Gutnov 1980; Barbash 1982) Examining patterns of distribution of residential areas and jobs, the number of requests to move into a specific area, its proximity to major transportation lines, the convenience of transport connections, the presence of city-wide services, the variety of employment opportunities, and the ecological situation was used as measures of attractiveness (Barbash 1984, Vasiliev and Privalova 1984).   In the 1990s, a similar approach was used by Sidorov (1992).

In the post-Soviet period, the transition to the mark et economy challenged geographers and other social scientists with new theoretical and policy problems: economic restructuring, the development of the privatized housing mark et, social polarization, unemployment, and old and new social pathologies all came to the forefront of research.   Despite publication of a number of innovative works, it is hardly possible to conclude that Russian human geographers met these challenges.   However, the works of Vera Glushkova should be mentioned.   She published a monograph devoted to the dynamics and the composition of Moscow’s population, the functions of the city and main branches of its economy, land-use and social problems (in particular, its religious geography)   (Glushkova 1997, 1999).   Glushkova also was one of the initiators and main authors of large, well- documented, illustrated volumes on history, geography and urbanism in Moscow (see, for instance, Kuzmin 2000, etc.). The second edition of the Encyclopaedia “ Moscow ” is especially worth of notice (Moskva, 1997).   Relevant geographical information on the development of Moscow is also contained in key historical publications (Vinogradov 1997, Gorinov 1996, 1997).  

            A series of works on urbanism and architecture richly illustrated by detailed maps of   the environment, roads, transportation, planning structure and functional zoning of the city appeared as a result of public discussions, the first steps in the discussion and adoption of the new General Plan of Moscow to 2020 (Arkhitectura... 1999, Moskva... 2000, Moskva..., 2001).   Comprehenisve studies on the history of architecture and urbanism in the capital also appeared during the first post-Soviet decade (Kudriavtsev, 1994).    Geographers participated   during the 1990s in several important works on the environment in Moscow .   In particular, Viktoria Bityukova wrote a thesis, where she studied both the “real” spatial distribution of polluters and their distribution by administrative-territorial units (Moskva... 1995; Bityukova 1996; Kuzmin 2000).   Some environmental maps can be found on the official web-site of the government of Moscow ( www.mos.ru ).

Geographical studies of Moscow were given further impetus by the improvement of official statistics, as well as by the 1995 decision of the capital’s government to introduce a new instructional discipline in the city’s and region’s high schools   – “knowledge of Moscow” ( “moskvovedenie” ).   This educational policy spurred the appearance of a series of textbooks (for example, Alekseev et al ., 1996, 1997 ).   Furthermore, the city government of Moscow initiated the publication of two monthly journals that contain the results of social studies of the city ( Simptom and Puls ).   The Committee on Telecommunications and Mass Media of the Government of Moscow yearly publishes about a dozen small books on current social problems, but unfortunately, only a very limited number of copies are printed and are not available in most libraries.   

Outside of Russia , in his key work, Timothy Colton (1995) analyzed the dynamics of the city’s boundaries, and its demographic, industrial and even political patterns in Moscow in the 20 th century. Many academic journals, including Post-Soviet Geography and Economy, regularly publish papers on the human geography of the Russian capital.   GeoJournal prepared a special issue on Moscow and St. Petersburg ( Gdaniec , 1997; Kolossov, 1997; Vendina, 1997).   In the field of social geography, Mozolin (1994) explained the intra-urban distribution of housing prices in terms of accessibility to the CBD and urban morphology.   Bater (1994) and Daniell and Struyk (1994) analyzed the development of the housing mark et in Moscow and, in particular, the results of privatization of housing, the implementation of municipal housing programs under new conditions, and the construction of new one-family cottages by “new Russians”. Kirsanova (1996) widely used the results of the polls about evaluations and preferences of different parts of Moscow by Muscovites and analyzed their relations with the gender, age, education, and the place of socialization of respondents and with the types of housing.   Vendina (1994, 1995, 1996, 1997), and Vendina and Kolossov (1996) related the transformations of functions and employment in different districts of Moscow in the post-socialist years with the pattern of housing prices on the secondary mark et, while Gritsai (1997) compared the first results of mark et transformations in Moscow, especially the development of business services, with the situation in some largest world metropolises.

Post-Soviet developments in Moscow of demographic and social indicators (natural population change, ethnic composition and the level of education, especially during the 1979-1989 intercensal period in the old administrative districts abolished in 1992), were examined by Rowland (1992). Differences between the inner and the outer zones of the city and the concentration of the educated people in the center and the south-west were also considered in the analysis of the    outcomes of the first democratic elections in the capital (Berezkin et al. , 1990 and Colton, 1995).   Bater, Degtyarev and Amelin (1995) and Kolossov (1996, 1997) showed that the voting behavior of Muscovites differs greatly from most other regions of the country and has stable territorial patterns, while the differences in electoral preferences between the west and south-west parts of the city with the remainder were defined and explained by O’Loughlin, Kolossov and Vendina, 1997.   More recently, Pavlovskaya and Hanson (2001) reported on the effects on family life of changes in the retail structure and privatization of services in a rayon in central Moscow and Argenbright (2000) paints an evocative picture of the changing nature of Moscow ’s public spaces, from controlled Soviet to the contemporary free-for-all.

A visitor to Soviet Moscow would hardly recognize its successor.   The center of Moscow increasingly looks like a Central European city, like Warsaw or Budapest , with expensive stores, gallerias, super mark ets, commercial offices, and a full array of retail services.   Meanwhile, the streetscapes of Moscow ’s outer zones are hardly changed from Soviet times.   As a small segment of the population of “new Russians” prosper in these times of frantic change, the majority of Moscovites struggle to make ends meet.   In a sample of 3,500 Moscovites in April 2000, we found that only 22.8 % agreed with the statement that “things are not so bad, and it is possible to live”, while the majority (55.3%) said that “life is difficult but it’s possible to endure”.   Another 13.3% said that “our condition makes it impossible to endure further.”   And, it is worth re-emphasizing that Moscow is much wealthier than the rest of the country and should not be considered as a typical Russian city or even a harbinger of things to come for other large cities of the former Soviet Union .

            The frenetic pace of commercial life in central Moscow and the associated rush to gentrification and re-development, quick money, criminal activity, banking and financial scandals, and great uncertainties has produced an “city on the make” ( Spector , 1997) .   What is most startling is the contrast of these world-city functions and consequences to the daily lives of most of the population.   The ‘dual city hypothesis” of Mollenkopf and Castells (1991), developed for New York City , seems increasingly apropos for Moscow .   Of course, dramatic polarization is a persistent feature of many major Third World capitals but its appearance in Moscow is undoubtedly the quickest.   Whether the growing gaps in Moscow   - between rich and poor, between the segments of the population who are tied to the incorporation into the global economy and those whose livelihood is connected to state services or to small-scale local enterprise, and between the older generation whose world is still colored by their Soviet-era experiences and the post-Soviet generation – will magnify as they have for the past decade or will be eased is an important research question, not only for Moscovites and Russians, but for all societies undergoing rapid social and economic change in these globalized times.   The papers in this special issue contribute to this research and offer a picture of the city after 10 years of post-Soviet change against which future developments can be compared.

Alekseev, Alexander I., ed. (1996) Moskvovedenie ( Moscow Studies). Moscow.: Ekopros .

Alekseev, Alexander I., Vera G. Glushkova and Galina Y. Lisenkova , eds. Geografia Moskvy i Moskovskoi oblasti (Geography of Moscow and of the Moscow Region). Moscow : Moskovskie Uchebniki , 1997.

Argenbright, Robert “Re making Moscow : New Places, New Selves." Geographical Review 89 (1): 1-22, January, 1999.

Arkhitektura , stroitelstvo , disain (Architecture, Construction Works and Design).   Special Issue on the General Plan of Moscow to 2020, 4  (14), 1999.

Barbash , Natalia B. “Spatial Relations Among Places with Complementary Functions Within the City of Moscow .” Soviet Geography: Review and Translation , 23 , 2: 77-94, February, 1982.

Barbash , Natalia B. “ Privlekatelnost Razlichnykh Chastei Gorodskoi Sredy Dlia Gorozhan (Na Osnove Dannykh Obmena Zhiliem )” (The Attractivity of Different Parts of the Urban Environment for Residents (on the Basis of Data on Residential Exchange)” Izvestia Akademii Nauk SSSR: Seriya Ggeograficheskaya 5: 81-91, 1984.

Barbash , Natalia B. and Aleksei E. Gutnov “Urban Planning Aspects of the Spatial Organization of Moscow : An Application of Factorial Ecology.” Soviet Geography: Review and Translation, 21, 9: 557-574, November, 1980.

Bater , James H. “Housing Developments in Moscow in the 1990s”.   Post-Soviet Geography, 35 , 6 : 309-328, June, 1994.

Bater , James H., Andrei A. Degtyarev , and Vladimir N. Amelin .   “Politics in Moscow : Local Issues, Areas and Governance.”   Political Geography, 14 , 8: 665-687, November, 1995.

Berezkin , Andrei V., Vladimir A. Kolossov, Marianna Pavlovskaya , Nicolai Petrov and Leonid Smirniagin . “The Geography of the 1989 Elections of People's Deputies of the USSR (Preliminary Results).” Soviet Geography , 30 , 8: 607-634, October 1989.        

Bityukova , Viktoria R. Sotsialno-ekologicheskie problemy razvitia gorodskikh territorii ( na primere Moskvy ) (Social-Environmental Problems of Urban Territories’ Development: the Case of Moscow) Doctoral thesis.   Moscow : Department of Geography, Moscow State University , 1996.

Colton, Timothy S.   Moscow : Governing the Socialist Metropolis. Cambridge , MA :   Harvard University Press, 1995.

Daniell , Jennifer and Ray Struyk , Housing Privatization in Moscow : Who Privatizes and Why .   Cambridge , MA : Blackwell Publishers, 1994.

Federov , Dmitri “Telecommunication Computer Networks in Moscow .” Geojournal , 42 ,4: 433-448, August 1997.

Gdaniec , C. “Reconstruction in Moscow ’s Historic Centre: Conservation, Planning and Finance Strategies- the Example of the Ostozhenka District.” Geojournal , 42 , 4: 365-376, August 1997.

Glushkova , Vera G. Moskva . Istoria i Geografia ( Moscow : History and Geography). Moscow : Mir Publishers, 1997.

Glushkova , Vera G. Sotsialnyi Portret Moskvy na Poroge XXI Veka (A Social Portrait of Moscow at the Eve of the XXI Century). Moscow : Mysl Publishers, 1999.   

Gorinov , Mikhail M., ed. Istoria Moskvy (History of Moscow ), vol. 1-4.   Moscow : AOL, 1996, 1997.

Gritsai , Olga “ Postindustrialnye Sdvigi v Moskve : Kontseptsia Mirovykh Gorodov i Perestroika Ekonomicheskoi Struktury ” (The Post-Industrial Shifts in Moscow : the Concept of the World City and Economic Restructuring). Izvestia RAN, Seria Geograficheskaya 5: 90-97, 1996.

Gritsai , Olga “Business Services and Restructuring of Urban Space in Moscow .” Geojournal , 42 , 4:349-363, August 1997.

Gritsai , Olga “ Moscow under Globalization and Transition: Paths of Economic Restructuring.” Urban Geography , 18 , 2: 155-165, 1997.

Kirsanova 1996

Kolossov, Vladimir “Political Polarization at the National and the Intra-Urban Levels:   The Role of Moscow in Russian Politics and Socio-Political Cleavages within the City,” GeoJournal , 42 , 4: 385-401, August, 1997.

Kolossov, Vladimir et Olga Vendina « Moscou, Retour a la Voie Mondiale. » Geographie et Culture, Metropolisation et Politique . Ed. Paul Claval and André-Louis Sanguin. Paris : L’Harmattan, 1997: 137-153

Kolossov, Vladimir, Olga Vendina, Nadezhda Borodulina , Elena Seredina , and Dmitri Fedorov “ Kontseptsia Informationnogo Goroda i Sozdanie Novoi Delovoi sredy v Moskve (The Concept of the Informational City and Formation of a New Business Environment in Moscow ).” Izvestia RAN, Seria Geograficheskaya , 5 : 141-156, 1998.

Kudriavtsev , Mikhail P., ed. Moskva – Tretii Rim: Istoriko-Gradostroitelnoye Issledovanie . ( Moscow – the Third Rome . A Historical-Urban Study). Moscow : SOL, 1994.

Kuzmin , Alexander V., ed. Gradostroitelstvo Moskvy . 90-e Gody XX Veka (Urbanism in Moscow . The 1990s). Moscow : Moskovskie Uchebniki i Kartolitografia , 2000.

Lappo , Georgi M., Golz , Grigori A., and Treivish , Andrei I. , eds. Mosckovskii Stolichnyi Region: Territorialnaya Struktura i Okuzhayushchaya Sreda ( Moscow Capital Region: the Territorial Structure and Environment). Moscow : Institute of Geography of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR , 1988.

Mollenkopf , John and Manuel Castells . Dual City : Urban Restructuring in New York . New York : Russell Sage Foundation, 1991.

Moskva i mockvichi : v kakoi okruzhayushchei srede my zhivem ? ( Moscow and Moscovites : In What Environment Do We Live?) Moscow : Institute of the Moscow General Plan, 1995.

Moskva ( Encyclopaedia of Moscow ). Moscow : Rossiiskaya Entsiklopedia , 1997.

Moskva : Vzgliad v Tretie Tysyacheletie ( Novyi Generalnyi Plan Razvitia i Ego Realizatsia ) ( Moscow : A View into the Third Millenium : the New General Plan of Development and Its Realization). Arkhitektura i stroitelstvo Moskvy (Architecture and Construction Works in Moscow ), special issue, 5-6, 2001.  

Moskva 2000 ( Moskovskii spravochnik ). (Moscow 2000: A Moscow Reference Book). Moscow : Golden Be, 2000.

Mozolin , Mikhail. “The Geography of Housing Values in the Transformation to a Market Economy: A Case Study of Moscow .”   Urban Geography, 15 , 2 : 107-127, March 1994.

O’Loughlin, John, Vladimir Kolossov and Olga Vendina “The Electoral Geographies of a Polarizing City: Moscow , 1993-1995” Post-Soviet Geography and Economics, 38 , 10: 567-600, December 1997.

Pavlovskaya , Marianna and Susan Hanson. “Privatization of the Urban Fabric: Gender and Local Geographies of Transition in Downtown Moscow .” Urban Geography, 22 , 1: 4-28, January 2001.

Pchelintsev , Oleg S . “ Moskva i Strategicheskoe Izmerenie Rossiiskikh Reform” ( Moscow and the Strategic Dimension of Russian Reforms)” Moskva na Fone Rossii i Mira: Problemy i Protivorechia Otnoshenii Stolitsy v Kontekste Rynochnoi Transformatsii (Moscow Against the Background of Russia and the World: Problems and Contradictions of the Capital’s Relations on the Context of Reforms). Leonid Vardomsky and Vladimir Mironov , eds .   Moscow: Institute for International Economic and Political Studies and Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Science,   1999, pp. 13-31.

Rowland, Richard “Selected Urban Population Characteristics of Moscow .”   Post-Soviet Geography, 33 , 2 : 569-590, March 1992.

Saushkin , Yulian G. Moskva ( Moscow ). Moscow : Geografgiz , 1950.

Saushkin , Yulian G. Moskva . Geograficheskaya Kharakteristika ( Moscow : A Geographical Characteristic). Moscow : Geografgiz , 1964.

Saushkin , Yulian G., and Vera G. Glushkova   Moskva Sredi Gorodov Mira ( Moscow among the Cities of the World).   Moscow : Mysl Publishers, 1983.

Sidorov , Dmitri “Variations in Perceived Level of Prestige of Residential Areas in the Former USSR .” Urban Geography , 13 , 4 : 355-373, July-August, 1992.

Stadelbauer , Jörg .   “ Moskau . Post- sozialistische Megastadt im Transformationsprozess .”   Geographische Rundschau , 48, 2: 113-120, February 1996.

Spector , Michael. “ Moscow on the make.” New York Times Magazine , June 1, 1997 .

Taylor, Peter J. “ World Cities and Territorial States under Conditions of Contemporary Globalization.” Political Geography, 19 , 1: 5-32, January 2000.

Taylor, Peter J. and Mark Hoyler . “The Spatial Order of European Cities under Conditions of Contemporary Globalization.” Tidjschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie , 91 , 2: 176-189, May 2000

Vasiliev , Georgi L., and Olga L. Privalova “A Social-Geographical Evaluation of Differences within a City.” Soviet Geography: Review and Translations, 25 , 7:   488-496, September 1984.

Vendina, Olga  « Moscou:   En   Recherche   d'Equilibre   Entre   la Planification et Laisser-Faire » Planification et Stratégies de Développement dans les Capitales Européennes. Christian Vandermotten, ed. Bruxelles: Universite Libre de Bruxelles, 1994, pp. 273-285.

Vendina, Olga « Moscou: les Rôles de la Ville et sa Genèse», Géographie et Cultures ,   14 : 85-103, 1995.

Vendina, Olga “ Sotsialnaya Stratifikatsia v Moskve : Tsena Ekonomicheskikh Reform” (The Social Stratification in Moscow : the Cost of Economic Reform). Izvestia RAN ,   Seria Geograficheskaya , 5 : 98-113, 1996.

Vendina, Olga “Transformation Processes in Moscow and Intra-Urban Stratification of Population.” Geojournal   42 ,4:341 -347, August 1997.

Vendina, Olga and Vladimir Kolossov . “ Sotsialnaya Polarisatsia i Politicheskoe Povedenie Moskvichei ” (The Social Polarization and the Political Behavior of Moscovites ). Sociological Journal , 3 , 4: 164-176, 1996.

Vinogradov , Vladimir, ed. Moskva - 850 let. Istoria Moskvy   ( Moscow - 850 years. History of Moscow ). Moscow : Moskovskie uchebniki (2 vols ), 1996-1997.

* Yablokov , Aleksei V., ed. O Sostoyanii Okruzhayushchei Sredy g. Moskvy v 1992 g. Gosudarstvennyi Doklad (About the State of Environment in Moscow in 1992 - The State Report). Moscow : Government of Moscow , 1993.

Figure   SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 Location of Rayoni in Moscow

[1] Acknowledgements: This special issue benefited from the collaborative work of many individuals.   In Boulder , Tom Dickinson prepared the final versions of all of the maps and Clionadh Raleigh helped with the bibliographic and grammatical elements of the project.   Altinay Kuchukeeva assisted with the research on the papers and Jim Bell, now at the U.S. State Department, was involved in the project in the early stages.   In Moscow , the project was assisted by xxxx , xxxxx , and xxx.   The project was funded by a grant to Professor O’Loughlin by the National Science Foundation and by grants to Professor Kolossov by …….

• Trek Rocker Pivot Bolts M12 - Black

We'll take care of you. Period.

It's our mission to provide you with world-class hospitality every time you visit us online or in-store. We're always here to help you. It's the Trek way.

30 Day Unconditional Guarantee

Ride it and love it, or we'll take it back. If for any reason you're not 100% happy with your trekbikes.com purchase, you can send it back within 30 days for a refund or exchange - no questions asked.

Free shipping on all orders over $49

Simple, free delivery options for however you prefer to shop. Orders over $49 ship to your home for free, and all orders ship free to your local retailer for in-store pickup

More options