Fuji Rakan 1.1 | $4,000

As bike testers, there’s almost no better feeling than when a bike vastly outperforms our predictions. We get on a bike expecting to be underwhelmed and the complete opposite happens. That’s what riding the Fuji Rakan was like. For two out of three of us anyway.

We try to always keep an open mind when testing bikes, but we’re not robots. We know, as you probably also know, that Fuji is not a huge player in the mountain bike world, and as a result, our expectations were probably lower than, say, how we thought the Ibis Ripley would perform on our brutally rocky, category-blurring test course on Mount Lemmon in Tucson. It’s not that we thought the Rakan would be bad, per se. It wouldn't have been included in the test it if we thought that. Bike has indeed ridden and applauded Fuji and Breezer bikes with the same (though configured differently) M-Link suspension design in the past, so we weren’t stepping in completely blind. But it’s fair to say that we had lesser overall expectations for the bike to put massive grins on testers’ faces—which for a couple of us, it absolutely did.

To begin with, the newly redesigned Rakan frame is a looker. It has nice clean lines and an aggressive, ready-to-party stance. Fuji switched from a horizontal shock placement to one that’s vertically mounted, which not only looks great, but creates more room inside the frame for a water bottle or frame bag.

Things didn’t start out very well for the Rakan though, because, well, our test course began with a 15-minute hike-a-bike, and the Rakan is not a svelte, carbon-tastic superbike that you can just toss over your shoulder like you’re Mathieu van der Poel in a cross race. That’s right folks, our ride testing is so comprehensive and rigorous that we include every possible sort of riding in our specifically and carefully designed test loops, including the very absence of riding.  

Lugging a bike up steep hills will quickly tell you how porky that sucker is. Unfortunately, the Rakan did prove more difficult to not ride than other bikes in the test were to not ride. Things did not start looking up for the Rakan until the not riding parts of the course gave way to the riding parts. Fortunately, the Rakan is far better to ride than it is to carry.

Thanks to refined geometry and suspension, it was far better at riding than carrying than we anticipated. I actually had my second quickest times down some of the chunkiest sections of Bug Springs and Prison Camp trails on the Rakan. The bike is suited well for maintaining composure when things get hectic. It’s got a relatively slack 66-degree head angle that, when paired with a short-offset 130 millimeter-travel fork and very roomy 490-millimeter reach on the size large, makes for a mid-travel trail bike that loves to mob. It’s stable, stiff and invites you to release the brakes and let it ride, even when things get dicey. We’d categorize the Rakan on the heavier-hitting, more aggressive end of the trail category—even though it has just 120 millimeters of rear-wheel travel. The M-Link suspension behaved well and didn’t throw any curveballs at the testers. It had nice off-the-top, good mid-stoke and didn’t blow through its travel too quickly. There weren’t any funky pedaling characteristics, either.

M-Link (short for mid-link) is a four-bar suspension linkage that locates the chainstay pivots closer to halfway between the bottom bracket and rear axle, creating a potentially stiffer design than something like Horst-Link, where the pivots are all the way back near the rear axle. On the other hand, suspension designs such as VPP and DW-link have very short links that mate the front and rear ends. Rear-end stiffness is great with those designs because there are no pivots in the rear end at all. The downside however, is that by being so short, the links rotate a lot throughout the bike’s travel, demanding more out of the pivot bearings. For any given travel, the M-Link pivot bearings rotate far less than a shorter dual-link design, supposedly creating a suppler ride and more durable, more maintenance-free system. Large-diameter hardware is used on every pivot as well, which there’s room for because of where the pivots are located. Another benefit of M-Link is there’s less clutter around the bottom bracket area, freeing up room for engineers to shorten the chainstays or make room for bigger tires if desired. The Rakan does indeed have short stays, at 431 millimeters.  

Testers were impressed with the pedaling characteristics of the Rakan, though its weight was felt on steep, extended climbs. It wasn’t the lightest or liveliest bike in the test, but it maintained composure well and would pedal right through technical sections of undulating trail without bob or pedal feedback. It was just on the steeper, punchier gradients that the weight of the bike sucked some speed out of our lap times, despite the fact that it pedals efficiently and has an appropriately steep 75-degree seat angle. But, when compared to the similarly not-light Commencal Meta TR 29, the Fuji rides lighter because it’s a more efficient pedaler.

Being that Fuji is a brand with many of its bikes focused at the lower-priced segment of the market, the $4,000 Rakan 29 1.1 is the the highest-level build available. Mid-level SRAM GX parts make up the shifter, cassette and chain, while a Descendant crank with 32-tooth ring spins on a DUB threaded bottom bracket. Guide R brakes slow the bike down, and the RockShox Deluxe RT3 and Pike RC shock and fork take care of the travel. The DT M1900 Spline 30 wheels are a nice touch, as are the Maxxis Aggressor and DHF tires, though if we’re being picky, we’d probably opt for something wider than the 2.3-inch versions.

It’s a pretty good build, but the Pike fork didn’t quite keep up. The fork was notably less capable than the Rakan’s impressive rear suspension. Therefore, we’d be more likely to actually recommend the lower-priced, $3,500 Rakan 1.3 that comes with a Fox 34 Rhythm fork, which actually has plusher, more controlled feel than the Pike RC does. With that build, you’ll also get a Shimano 11-speed group, including an XT derailleur and SLX shifter and cassette. It’s also a rad color, Fuji calls Ox Blood.

We do think that on its own, the $3,500 Rakan offers a good value. The bike is solid, has good-sized, nice quality pivot hardware, excellent geometry, good kinematics, has bomber parts, and it looks great to boot. It stands up well next to other bike shop bikes. On the other hand, consumer bikes like the YT Jeffsy or Canyon Neuron similar parts specs on carbon fiber frames for the same money. And for $600 more than the Rakan 1.3, and only $100 more than the 1.1, you can get into a full-carbon Ibis Ripley. An Ibis. You won’t get as nice of a build kit, but you’ll have the same frame as your dentist.

But, the Rakan can beat the snot out of the Ripley on rowdy, mind-numbing descents, so there’s that. The Rakan is a whole different beast, so it’s tough to compare the two, value-wise. At the end of the day, two of us came off our test loops feeling so good about its ability to haul-ass, that we forgot all about schlepping it up the hike-a-bikes.

21

Gallery

21 Images

Q & A with Fuji MTB Product Manager Chris Dietrich

Bike: What were the main goals Fuji was trying to achieve with the newly redesigned Rakan?

Chris: The main goal of the new Rakan was to make a do-it-all trail bike more capable than the previous version, and the new Rakan is a far more capable bike. We feel that with the new geometry, redesigned kinematics, and room for a 2.6” tire, the new Rakan now really checks all of the trail bike boxes. If a rider can only pick one bike, this is the one because of its diverse abilities on varied terrain and its efficiency on the climbs.

Not all aluminum alloys are created equal. Where would you say the A6-SL alloy used on the Rakan frame comes in? Is it geared more towards affordability or performance? How competitive is the weight of the Rakan frame?

A6-SL is Fuji’s lightest and strongest aluminum-  it is geared towards performance. Every tube shape and butting profile was considered when designing the new Rakan to have a very lightweight but stiff frame. The weight of the Rakan frame is competitive for this category, weighing 7.1 lbs with hardware ( size M, no rear shock).

The Rakan is definitely a trail bike, but we feel like it’s more on the ‘aggressive trail’ end of the spectrum. If someone wanted to go full party mode and run a coil shock on the Rakan, would the suspension leverage rate be suited to it? By the way, what size shock does the Rakan run?

Yes, the all new Rakan does work well with a coil rear shock.  The Level One Engineering designed M-Link suspension has a linear spring with enough progressivity to allow the use of a coil rear shock, perfect for party mode! (The rear shock size is 210x50mm.)

Our test bike had a Pike fork and the specs on the Fuji site list it as coming with a Revelation RC. Can you please clarify?

We made a spec change to the Revelation Charger from the Pike which wasn’t able to be made in time for the demo bike that was tested by Bike Mag.

Find all the reviews from the Tucson Bible HERE.