Revel Ranger - The All New Boss Of Down Country

Is This The Ranger Of Our Dreams? Re-Defining what 120mm  Can Do

The updated Revel Ranger rom Revel Bikes seems to check both the XC bike and short-travel trail bike boxes, which is exactly what makes it interesting. Build it light, and it can sit right around 25 pounds with a proper XC-leaning setup. Add a little more fork, wheel, and tire, and it quickly turns into a 120mm trail bike that feels much more capable than the travel number suggests.

That is not usually an easy balance to pull off. A lot of bikes in this category either feel like an XC bike with a little more forgiveness or a trail bike that gave up too much efficiency. The new Ranger feels like Revel took that middle ground seriously.

This is not just the old Ranger with a few extra millimeters of travel. The new bike gets 120mm of rear travel, a 130mm fork stock, updated CBF suspension, new hardware, a cleaner frame layout, refined geometry, quieter cable routing, and a frame that is claimed to be lighter, stiffer, and more capable than the previous version.

Old Ranger Left, New Ranger Right

I have also had a lot of time on the old Ranger platform. Three different previous Ranger builds, plenty of miles, and enough time to know where that bike was great and where it had room to improve. For the new Ranger, I have been riding it for about a month with roughly 200 miles split between two very different setups: a more downcountry build with a 140mm RockShox Pike and burlier WTB Peacekeeper 60tpi tires, and a lighter XC build with a Fox 34 SL, Float SL shock, sub-1300g wheels, and WTB Peacekeeper/Macro 120tpi tires.

The short version? The new Ranger is a big step forward. It still has the weight and efficiency you want from a fast bike, but the frame feel, geometry, suspension support, and descending confidence are on a completely different level from the old Ranger.

What’s New On The Revel Ranger?

The old Ranger was already a very good short-travel bike. It was efficient, quick, and had that CBF climbing feel that made it easy to pedal all day. But the new Ranger feels like Revel went back through the whole platform and cleaned up the details that matter once you have actually lived with a bike for a while.

Rear travel grows from 115mm to 120mm, and the stock fork travel moves to 130mm. That is the easy headline. The bigger story is the frame, hardware, and suspension feel.

When I built this bike up, I did what I usually do with a personal long-term bike: I stripped the frame down, re-greased everything, and torqued it all properly before putting miles on it. That is where the new Ranger made a strong first impression before I even rode it.

The updated hardware, bearing washers, link shapes, and the way the links now sit into the frame all feel like they came from both a rider/mechanic perspective and Mike Giese’s engineering brain. It is cleaner, easier to appreciate when you are working on it, and a pretty noticeable improvement over previous CBF platforms.

The rear triangle also feels impressively stiff. With the rear axle out, it has the kind of stiffness you normally expect from a much bigger trail or enduro bike. That might sound like a small garage observation, but it absolutely shows up on trail. The new Ranger feels more direct under power, tracks better through rough sections, and holds a line better than the old bike.

Revel Ranger Specs And Details

The new Ranger is built around 120mm of rear travel and a 130mm fork, although I spent some time running it with a 140mm RockShox Pike as well. It is still a 29” bike, still built around Revel’s CBF suspension platform, and still very much aimed at riders who want one fast bike that can handle long climbs, big days, and real descending.

Revel also claims the new frame is about 200g lighter on average across the size range compared to the previous version. That is impressive considering the bike also gets more travel, a stiffer-feeling frame, cleaner routing, more protection, and a more robust hardware layout.

Notable specs and features:

• 120mm rear travel
• 130mm stock fork travel
• 29” wheels
• Refined short-travel CBF suspension
• Updated frame and linkage design
• Hidden lower link design
• Claimed average 200g weight savings across sizes
• Tire clearance up to 29” x 2.6”
• UDH compatibility
• Proportional chainstay lengths by size
• Two bottle mounts inside the front triangle
• Additional mount under the downtube
• Utility mount under the top tube
• Co-molded internal cable guide tubes
• Updated chainstay and downtube protection
• New seat tube debris fender
• Colors: Red Zeppelin and Steezy

Pricing:

• Frame only: $3,699
• SRAM Eagle 90: $5,599
• SRAM XO Eagle Transmission: $6,599
• SRAM XX Eagle Transmission: $10,199

Geometry

The geometry is one of the first things you notice once you actually throw a leg over the new Ranger. The old Ranger was efficient and quick, but the new bike puts you in a much better position, especially on climbs.

The effective seat tube angle is 77° across all sizes, and that steeper seated position feels great on trail. You are more over the front of the bike, which helps on steep and punchy climbs where the old Ranger could feel a little more rearward. The longer reach also helps center you between the wheels, and the bike just feels more modern immediately.

For my size large, the Ranger has a 485mm reach, 437mm chainstays, a 65.7° head tube angle, and a 1234mm wheelbase. Interestingly, the new Ranger actually has a touch longer wheelbase than its bigger sibling, the Rascal. I have a lot of time on the Rascal as well, and that comparison makes sense once you ride the new Ranger. The Ranger is still lighter and more efficient, but the longer wheelbase and chainstays give it a very stable platform for a 120mm bike.

The proportional chainstays are also worth calling out. Small and medium frames use 435mm stays, large moves to 437mm, and XL goes to 439mm. On my large, the 437mm rear end feels like a great balance. It is stable, but it never felt like Revel made the bike boring or hard to move around.

On Trail Performance

I have been riding the new Ranger in two pretty different builds, which honestly shows how wide the range of this frame is.

The first setup was more downcountry/trail focused. I ran a 140mm RockShox Pike, 1450g wheels, and WTB Peacekeeper 60tpi tires that are around 950g. That build came in right around 28 pounds. It still climbed really well, but it gave the bike a little more front-end confidence and a bit more tire under it for riding harder trails.

The second setup is more XC focused and closer to how I plan to keep this bike long term. That build uses a Fox 34 SL 130mm fork, Float SL shock, sub-1300g wheels, and WTB Peacekeeper / Macro 120tpi tires. In that trim, the bike came in just over 25 pounds. That puts it in proper XC weight territory, but with 120mm of CBF suspension and a frame that feels much more capable than a typical XC race bike.

That is what makes the new Ranger interesting. With light parts, it can be a real XC race bike for the right rider. With a slightly burlier fork and tires, it turns into a very fast short-travel trail bike. The frame does not feel like the limiting factor in either direction.

A 120mm/120mm version of the Ranger we built up, the Red Rockshox matches great...

Climbing Performance

The Ranger climbs really, really well.

The steeper seat tube angle is immediately noticeable compared to the previous Ranger. You sit in a better position over the pedals, and the front end is easier to keep planted when the climb gets steep. Combined with the longer reach, the bike feels more centered and more composed than the old one.

The CBF feel is also excellent here. The bike settles into sag and then gives you support from there. There is basically no noticeable bob when climbing off-road, and I have not felt much need to reach for the lockout. It stays smooth, gives you traction, and still feels like it wants to move forward when you put power down.

That is one of the things the Ranger does best. It does not feel harsh or overly firm in the name of efficiency. It has enough sensitivity to keep the rear tire driving on loose or technical climbs, but it does not wallow or feel like it is wasting effort. Between the climbing position, frame stiffness, and suspension support, the bike feels quick in a way that goes beyond just the number on the scale.

Descending Performance

This is where the new Ranger surprised me the most.

The old Ranger was capable, but you still knew you were on a short-travel bike. The new Ranger has a much calmer, more planted feel when the trail opens up. The longer wheelbase, proportional chainstays, stiffer frame, and updated suspension all work together to make the bike feel like it has more travel than it does.

The rear suspension gets into its travel nicely and smooths out small bumps well, but it still has a lot of mid-stroke support. Even with the smaller-volume shocks I have been running, I have not been blowing through travel. The rear end has that bottomless feel people love to talk about. Cliche, yes, but in this case it is true.

The bike is also impressively quiet. There is basically no noise coming from the frame, cables, or chainstay area, and that always makes a bike feel faster and more refined. When a bike is silent underneath you, it is easier to focus on the trail and easier to trust what the bike is doing.

Downhill, there have been plenty of times where I forgot I was on a Ranger and not a Rascal. That is probably the biggest compliment I can give it. It is still a 120mm bike, and you can still find the limit if you push hard enough, but the chassis and suspension feel so composed that the tires often become the limiting factor before the frame does.

With fast XC/downcountry tires, the bike stays quick and keeps itself in check. With something like the stock Maxxis Dissectors, even after just a couple rides, it starts to feel much more like a proper 120mm trail bike.

New Ranger Vs Old Ranger

Having owned three old Ranger builds, the differences are not subtle.

The new Ranger is better almost everywhere. It climbs from a better position, feels stiffer under power, tracks better through rough terrain, descends with more confidence, and has a much cleaner frame and hardware layout.

Old Ranger Left, New Ranger Right (both 120mm forks)

The previous Ranger was efficient and fun, but the new bike feels more complete. It feels like Revel kept the speed and pedaling efficiency, then added the stiffness, stability, support, and polish that the old platform was missing.

The frame hardware is a big improvement from a mechanic’s standpoint. The suspension layout feels more refined on trail. The bike is quieter. The rear triangle feels notably stiffer. The geometry feels more current without going overboard. It all adds up to a bike that feels like a real next generation, not a small revision.

Ranger Vs Yeti ASR

On paper, the new Ranger and something like the Yeti ASR can look pretty close. They are both light, efficient, short-travel 29ers that could be built for XC racing, big trail rides, or fast backcountry days. But on trail, they split pretty heavily.

The ASR has the weight advantage. Depending on the build, it can be roughly 1 to 1.5 pounds lighter. For some riders, especially those focused mostly on racing or pure climbing speed, that will matter.

Yeti ASR Left (Beefy setup, 130mm fork), Ranger Right 130mm Fork

For how I like to ride, I will take the extra weight of the Ranger every time. The Ranger feels much more stable, more confident, and more composed when the trail gets rough. It also has a much stiffer frame feel, which helps when climbing hard, putting down power, cornering, and holding a line through rowdy terrain.

The ASR feels more like a pure fast bike. The Ranger feels like a fast bike that is not scared of real trail riding.

The Goods

• Big improvement over the old Ranger
• Climbs fast with very little bob
• Stiffer, quieter, and more composed on trail
• Feels stable downhill for a 120mm bike
• Can be built light for XC or burlier for trail riding

The Bads

• Tires can become the limit before the frame does
• Not as light as some pure XC bikes
• Still only 120mm of travel when things get really rough
• Build spec matters a lot with this bike

What’s Worldwide’s Takeaway?

The new Revel Ranger is not just a better version of the old Ranger. It feels like a much more complete version of what the Ranger was always supposed to be.

It has the weight and efficiency to work as an XC race bike, especially with a light build, but it has the frame stiffness, geometry, suspension support, and descending confidence to handle normal aggressive trail riding the other 95% of the time. For my riding, that is exactly what makes it so good. I can take it to the start line of a handful of XC races this year, then keep riding it on big four-hour trail days without feeling like I brought the wrong bike.

The old Ranger was fast and efficient. The new Ranger is still fast and efficient, but now it feels more planted, more composed, more refined, and a whole lot more fun when the trail gets rough. For a 120mm bike, it is shockingly capable, and so far, after about 200 miles split between two very different setups, I have only come away impressed.