September 17th, 2008 by 
leel
By the numbers; weights, geometry, draft specifications.
Weights below are approximations (all with a RP23 rear shock):
- The RSL (Racing Super Light - ie carbon frame) Altitude 90 and 70 Frame with shock (18”) is 5.7Lbs
- The Altitude Alloy Frame with shock (18”) is 6.6Lbs
- The Altitude 90 RSL, 19” fully built, with pedals is 25.9Lbs. The 18” frame should weigh about 25.5Lbs.
Geometry figures and some stock photos from the Rocky 2009 site are featured below.
Rocky Mountain Altitude 50 (aluminium frame)
Rocky Mountain Altitude 70 (aluminium frame)
Rocky Mountain Altitude 90 (carbon frame)
In the geometry table below, RMB uses a BB drop measurement (distance between BB and rear axle) rather then a BB height measurement.to remove the variability of wheel size. I measured the Altitude’s BB height as äpproximately 13.4″ (340mm) with 2.3″ WTB tires.
Geometry
Please note that specifications are not finalized as of September 15, 2008. Prices are also not yet finalized. Draft specifications are as follows but may be subject to change. Please watch the RMB site for updates on specifications and pricing details as and when they are released:
| Altitude 30
FORK Fox 32Float R |
Altitude LO
FORK Fox 32Float RL 15mm E-Thru |
Altitude 70
FORK Fox 32Float RL 15mm E-Thru |
| Altitude 70 RSL
FORK Fox 32Float RL 15mm E-Thru |
Altitude 90 RSL
FORK Fox 32Float RLC 15mm E-Thru |
September 17th, 2008 at 11:04 am
FYI - I’m in the process of trying to get some approximate pricing for the bikes as built for the North American market and will edit when I have this information. I didn’t know if I could get pricing so thought it best to publish this article and update with pricing for later.
This is pricing from the feedthehabit article linked to in the review. I’m trying to confirm the pricing
2009 Rocky Mountain Altitude Specs
Frame, Trim Levels and MSRP (USD)
Altitude 30 - $2849
Altitude 50 - $3499
Altitude 70 - $3999
Altitude 70RSL Carbon - $4899
Altitude 90RSL Carbon - $6499
Altitude 29er - $1599 (single-speed) or $1999 (geared)
Altitude Ladies 50 - $3499
Here is Canadian pricing from Rocky Mountain
Altitude 30
$2,999.99
Altitude 50
$3,599.99
Altitude LO
$3,599.99
Altitude 70
$3,999.99
Altitude 70 RSL
$4,999.99
Altitude 90 RSL
$6,599.99
September 17th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Yo… cool to see some rider feedback on the new Altitude platform. I’m looking forward to riding one at Interbike next week! The pricing you show (quoted from my article on http://www.feedthehabit.com) was given to me directly from Rocky Mountain, so it should be fairly accurate. Of course, like anything, prices are subject to change.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
The bottom of the downtube looks ridiculous and the tire clearance inadequate. Saving my money for now and hoping they look after these in rev. 2
Pretty sweet to see them develop a nice 4-bar and essentially throw up a middle finger toward the big red “S”!
September 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Thanks, you told us exactly what we wanted to know and that’s one of the best thought out reviews I’ve read in a long time, oh and the pics were very helpful too, it looks a lot nicer in the pics than I thought it would.
September 17th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
ERRATA:
- Prototype frame’s egg-shell white colour is a one-off. The production frame will be the brighter white depicted at the end of the review.
- Production frame to be changed to have more tire clearance so a 2.5″ will definitely fit
September 19th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I like the effort to put the waterbottle inside the main triangle - very important for epic rides to have both camelbak and bottles, and for races like BC bike race it is way faster to use bottles than bladder.
I like low bottom bracket for better handling and more stability. Striking pedals is not a big deal if you have some skill. 1 cm lower makes a big difference for feel, handling and stability, but makes negigible difference as to whether you strike a pedal or not if you are skilled.
I like Rockies forward facing seat tube clamp, since it is easier to drop saddle while riding, and the seatpost can be marked in the keyhole cutout and remain visible (marking seattube above clamp weakens post)
Don’t like bent top tube. Clearance is over rated. I’d rather have long flat surface for long portages. I like the classic look of original Rockies and in the case of Elements I like the ability to have two water bottles.
Really don’t like bent down tube and the possibility of crushing it.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Quality review Lee. Glad to see you took it up on a few epics. For me, the shore-worthiness of a bike like this is a bit of a moot point. I say RMB should focus on the bottle mount(s) and as taprider suggests - stuff like ease to shoulder it etc (I agree standover is overrated in this category). No doubt, this is an improvement over the busy ETS platform. Would be great if RMB would issue a Special Edition with some more traditional paint we’ve long liked from Rocky.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:31 pm
I spent a few hours on the Altitude this past weekend and posted up my thoughts in the Rocky Mountain forum.
http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=4911737&postcount=33
The Altitude is definitely a nice-riding platform.
September 24th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Some other takes on the bike are listed below:
http://cyclingnews.com/tech/2008/shows/interbike08/?id=results/interbike083
http://nsmb.com/page/s/2649/wade-simmons-and-the-girl-scout/
September 25th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Sure is neat, unless I skimmed it, that rear wheel travel is not mentioned. Is it me, or is that something that is important?
Maybe I’ll check out pinkbike. They can tell me I’m sure.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
You know, I can’t believe I forgot to mention the rear travel. D’oh! It’s 5.5″ Thanks for catching that.
October 2nd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Interesting post by Johnny Rockall of RMB about the Straight Up Geometry
http://bb.nsmb.com/showthread.php?p=2031182#post2031182
October 7th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Great review! I’m in the market for a 140mm epic bike and I’m adding this to my short list.
December 24th, 2008 at 6:52 am
I’m a proud owner of the retired ETSX-50. Why? Altitude? Bottom is awfull. Adjustement on the front fork is lost. Makes no sense…
December 28th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Great report! Thank you very much. What frame size was your test-bike? Would you (your size is 5′ 10″, right?) choose 18 oder 19,5 frame?
February 22nd, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Sorry for the late response Rocky Rider. I was on an 18″ bike. I am 5′ 10″