Saw this on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APz7mt9jYw4

Neil Donoghue from Global Mountain Bike Network does his best to give a review of Proflex 957 vs a Canyon Lux.  While I appreciate that he was willing to even do the comparison, the video, imo, does a huge disservice to the 957 because it is totally unscientific and suffers from unavoidable bias.  But the video is enlightening in that if look at it in totality, we can see what the bike industry is focused on: going down hill.

1.  Biased from the get go.   Neil compares a bike he's never ridden before with a bike that he owns and rides as his main XC bike.  The geometry of the 957 is different from his bike in head angel.  70 - Canyon, 74 - Proflex.  In addition, while the top tube length of the bikes is identical according to his measurements, the Canyon is 80mm longer in wheel base and has a 80mm stem vs 957 140mm stem.  There's more, like the handle bar length, and the seat angle and the 29" vs 26" wheels, but the point is, Neil is not use to riding the 957 and he's extremely use to riding the Canyon. 

2.  No time comparison.   While Neil does give us some comparative specs, many of the on-line reviews I've watched make an effort to compare time trials.  Neil does not compare climbing times or flat course times or down hill times.

3.  Focus is on going downhill.  At the start of the comparison Neil compliments the 957 and is impressed with it as he rides on a slight uphill.   But by the end, he complains that the 957 feels like it's going to launch him from the seat.  Well, guess what Neil, you have to get off your seat when you down hill on that bike.

In the last two years, I revived my 957 and my 554 and have been riding the 957 a fair bit.  After trying out a few modern bikes, it's pretty clear the industry is highly focused on how the bike does going down hill and not much emphasis is put on climbing.  All-mountain, Enduro, and Trail bike reviews seem to show nothing but down hill footage.   Granted, Neil tells us the Canyon is a XC bike and it only has 100mm travel, but then why does he only focus on how the bike descends?

Recently, I tried a Norco Sight 7.1  (650)  I was admittedly blown away at how that bike soaked up the hits in the parking lot and on broken ground.  I totally get why people prefer modern bikes and I also get the focus on down hill prowess.  But the 957 is a XC racer and it was disappointing for Neil not to focus on things that are important to XC riding.  I'm not going to pretend that the 957 is still cutting edge or even a viable option for real racers, but it would be interesting to see how the bike did in a more quantitative test.

You've pretty much covered all my problems with this comparison. There is no way a bike of this age is going to stay with a modern bike on modern day courses.  Pointless. He did however say at the begining some very positive things. His riding position on the 957 was terrible. I think it showed how good these bikes were and are for managing to stay with the Canyon. Put a few more up hill sections in the test and it would have been even closer.

Chris

Well, I'd love to see someone train on a 957 for a month and then take on a course designed for XC and see what happened.  But the reality is that the focus is on the down hills side of the mountain.  That's where all the sex appeal is.  A bike company is going to sell more bikes by focusing on the bike's descending speed than on its climbing speed.  So to the extent and course puts more emphasis on descending, a 957 is going to have trouble keeping up with the slacker geometries and longer wheel bases. 

The other thing I forgot to question is whether the Noleen shocks on his test bike had been refurbished.  The 957 is nearly 20 years old at this point and I would not expect the Noleen shocks to function the same as when they were brand new.

I liked the video just for seeing a 957 in action. Thanks for posting. My 857 climbed like a goat. Downhill there were some limitations, but mostly were dependent on the riders skill level and of course taking the travel of front and rear into consideration.

And yeah his riding position sucked on the down hill for the geometry of the 957.

What's cool about old bikes, then never look a day older than when you first fell in love with them.   
Hard to fall in love with a new bike that looks like most other new bikes. World Cup Pro~flex is sex on wheels.

Saw this on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APz7mt9jYw4
The geometry of the 957 is different from his bike in head angel.  70 - Canyon, 74 - Proflex.  In addition, while the top tube length of the bikes is identical according to his measurements, the Canyon is 80mm longer in wheel base and has a 80mm stem vs 957 140mm stem.  There's more, like the handle bar length...

3.  Focus is on going downhill.  At the start of the comparison Neil compliments the 957 and is impressed with it as he rides on a slight uphill..

First things first, that bike should have a 71 degree HA. All other year models do and that was the standard back in the 90's. No mtb had a 74 degree HA. It looks like the fork does not have enough steerer tube spacers and because of that the legs angle in. I am guessing they measured the leg angle because it's hard to firt your cell phone in between the linkage and head tube. Hard to see but if you look closely you can see the legs and HA are not parallel. That is going to make the fork feel like it is folding underneath more than it should vs the correct "J" curve. That's a big issue.
Take a look at a properly set up Girvin linkage fork on this bike. You can see it has much slacker fork legs than the bike in the video. http://www.bikepro.com/directions/a97_proflex/957.html

Second, when was the last time the rubber was replaced on this bike (tires, break pads, grips) Is he rolling on 15 or 20 old rubber?  He commented he was sliding all over and that is to be expected when you ride on used shoes for 20 years ago.

Third, when was the last time either Noleen shock was serviced or the pivots/bushings on the fork or rear end serviced? Pretty impressive to be able to smash on a 20 year old full squish like that.

Finally, as pointed out, set the cockpit up to how you like it. WTF? Do you get in a car and not adjust the seat or steering wheel tilt and then complain about the driving position?  I would never think about riding a 140mm stem and bars that narrow even in the 90's and I am 6'4. Cockpit was allways the first thing to get changed on any new bike for me.

Considering the bikes age, the fact fork does not look to be set up correctly, the bikes appears to be running old rubber, who knows when the service on forks and rear shock was cockpit is set up for a roadie, I would say it was pretty impressive he was able to ride as aggressively as he did. He was jamming at a pretty good clip on a bike that does not appear to be safe to ride.

Just watched the video again and I didn't catch it the first time, but the 957 he rode weighed in at +29lbs? Why was that bike an extra 4 or 5 lbs over weight? The 955 came in at 23.5lbs "out of the box" with an aluminum swings arm and aluminum fork legs. The 957 had a carbon swing arm and carbon legs. My 855 is 25.5lb stock.  I'm pretty sure I remember the 957 wieghed in under 25lbs stock even with the heavier Noleen shocks.

The 74 degree head tube angle they quoted, which should be 71 degrees and the extra 5 or so pounds of weight tells me somethings fishy about that bike.

Funny review. Bikepedia speced the bike at 24lbs. I think that was correct. http://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?year=1997&brand=ProFlex&model=957

So when the fork blows up swap it with a Noleen MegaAir fork and you get 4 inches travel and no J-path blues. When the rear shock blows swap it with a Manitou Swinger for another 4 inches travel. Swap out the bar with an Easton Monkeylite XC and the width problems go away. Bingo you have the best of the best for little money.

He did not say what the Canyon cost. Not cheap I bet. Bet it is not a Horst link swingarm either. Proflex 957 was top of the line for a reason.

You can buy a NR-4 shock with compression and rebound damping from Noleen J6. It's 300 bucks but that's a lot less than a new bike.

I eventually got my rebuild kit from Noolen J6, but never got as much as a reply or any indication of when I would get it. I had to open a case with e-bay, and a few days later I got the parts.