Head to Head: Rocky Mountain Altitude vs Santa Cruz Megatower 20

Beyond what the looks would suggest, the new Rocky Mountain Altitude and the current Santa Cruz Megatower have a list of similarities on paper but also come with a few distinct differences. To see if those differences are perceptible on the trail, we logged a heaping helping of laps on both bikes to see how they ride. Are the differences significant enough to separate these two enduro machines as individuals or will they end up as nothing more than twins separated by a border between the U.S. and Canada? Dig on in to find out.

The current generation Santa Cruz Megatower launched in 2022 with a revised kinematic, geometry, and frame construction over the outgoing model. The full 29-inch-wheeled enduro machine is a well-proven platform that lands among the top-tier enduro bikes in terms of performance and reliability. The newly released Rocky Mountain Altitude is a ground-up redesign from the outgoing model and looks to improve upon the winning track record it carried. Frame features pose several improvements over the previous generation bike with the same highly adjustable geometry and an all-new suspension platform. With the change to a lower link-driven LC2R suspension platform, the similarities between the Altitude and VPP-driven Megatower are undeniable. With so much speculation around the similarities of the bikes and coincidentally having access to both bikes, I thought what better way to find out than to compare the two and dive into what separates them from being carbon copies.

Frame Details

Starting with the details of each frame and some of the more obvious similarities, both bikes are centered around a dual-link suspension platform with a lower link-driven shock. Santa Cruz’s tried and true VPP suspension platform mounts the lower link to the front triangle above the bottom bracket. In comparison, the new LC2R from Rocky Mountain uses a concentric lower link that rotates around the bottom bracket shell. Both lower links have flip chips; Santa Cruz provides high and low positions on their link, while Rocky Mountain gives riders the option of mixed or 29-inch wheel settings. As for geometry adjustments on the Altitude, a 4-position geometry flip chip is found in the forward shock mount, and reach-adjustable headset cups are found in the headtube to allow for further adaptability to rider preference and terrain type. Around the lower link, both frames feature small fenders to protect the shock from debris, have downtube protection in critical areas, and utilize ribbed chain stay protection.

The Bikes

It's worth noting that the build kits of both bikes are closely matched, which means there are no significant factors that could give one bike an advantage over the other in terms of on-trail handling, suspension kinematics, and frame stiffness. While there may be some minor differences in certain components, these discrepancies are primarily superficial and do not significantly impact the performance of the bikes in the tested categories.

The Megatower is custom-built but comes in at a nearly identical level of performance for key components like suspension, drivetrain, and brakes when compared to the Altitude. The Altitude's C70 level build kit features RockShox suspension in the form of a 230x65 Super Deluxe Ultimate rear shock and 170mm travel ZEB Select+ out front. The drivetrain is handled by a complete Shimano XT 12-speed kit and XT 4-piston brakes with 200mm rotors front and rear. The wheelset combines Raceface ARC 30 rims laced to a star ratchet DT Swiss 370 rear hub and OE branded front hub wrapped in Maxxis Assegai and Minion DHRII tires in the MaxxGrip compound. The Megatower uses the same 250x65 Super Deluxe Ultimate rear shock but bumps up to a ZEB Ultimate fork, which brings the addition of RockShox ButterCups technology but the same Charger 3 damper and 170mm of travel as the Select+ level fork. Shifting is handled by a full SRAM T-Type GX Drivetrain with Code Ultimate brakes paired to 200 and 220mm rotors to slow things down. The bike rolls on a Reserve 30|HD AL wheelset wrapped in the same Maxxis Assegai and Minion DHRII tire combo, with the same 30mm internal rim width, and laced to a star ratchet DT Swiss 350 hub set.

Setup

Having spent a ton of time on the Megatower over the last two years, it's a bike I've become super familiar with and often refer to as a baseline for sizing. On top of the comfortable fit, the standout trait of the bike is consistency across a wide variety of terrain, and my experience on the bike tested was no different than in the past. My time on the Altitude was limited leading up to this test, I'd spent enough time to get acquainted with the bike but not enough to really feel comfortable. In my short time on the bike, I'd already opted for the shortest reach setting, which helped make things more comfortable but still felt a bit unfamiliar. When the idea to compare the two came up, I matched the Altitude geometry as close to the Megatower as I could by using Rocky Mountain's Ride 4 geometry settings found in the forward shock mount. Switching to the steepest setting matched the headtube angle, seat tube angle, and bb height within half a millimeter of the Santa Cruz, instantly making the bike feel far more familiar.

Geometry

Size XL	Megatower- Hi Setting	Altitude- POS.4 Steep/-5mm headset cup
Reach	495mm	508mm
Stack	656mm	653mm
Head Tube Angle	63.8°	63.8°
Front Center	855mm	869mm
Rear Center	443mm	450mm
Wheelbase	1298mm	1319mm
Effective Top Tube Length	637mm	642mm
Seat Tube Angle	77.8°	77.8°
Bottom Bracket Drop	26.5mm	27mm
Standover Height	722mm	817mm
Head Tube Length	135mm	130m

Suspension
I made a point to setup suspension exactly the same on both bikes by matching sag and damper settings from the Megatower I'd become familiar with. Both bikes were set up with 30% sag at the rear with 268psi in the shock, rebound two clicks from closed, HSC at -1 from the middle, and LSC set at -1 from the middle. I put my usual 106psi in the fork of each bike with one volume reducer, rebound was set to 6 clicks from closed, HSC in the middle, and LSC +2 from the middle. This served as a great starting point for the Altitude and a spot I stayed for the duration of the test as far as air pressure, with the only change being one additional click of HSC added to the rear shock. With both bikes feeling comfy, it was time to start some back-to-back runs. The test period was conducted over three different days: two days of pedaling two laps on each bike and one day of shuttling six laps on each bike. This allowed me to feel a wide spectrum of qualities and reinforce any ideas I'd had from my past experience on each bike.

On Trail

Both bikes provide an adequate level of pedaling performance for an enduro bike; they are nothing ultra light or snappy but certainly not cumbersome when pointed uphill. Body position on the Altitude felt slightly more forward when seated, while the Megatower put me more upright; they both pedaled about the same, with the Megatower having a slight advantage because of its shorter dimensions, allowing for better maneuverability. Power transfer felt more direct on the Santa Cruz from a firmer suspension platform that holds the bike up more, whereas the Rocky Mountain seemed to bob a bit more but provided a smoother ride over small bumps.

Megatower Descending Performance

Overall Handling
Going downhill, the highly maneuverable handling characteristics of the Megatower continued to shine through, making it easy to read and execute lines at a moment's notice. Posture on the bike was upright and weight distribution felt slightly rearward but provided fairly even pressure at the contact patch of both wheels. Because of this somewhat rearward bias, the front wheel had a tendency to feel light at times when cornering or riding steeper terrain and required a steady hand. On the flip side, when riding more familiar terrain, the bike was easy to place exactly where I wanted it and was rewarding with higher levels of rider input. This made shralping turns, hucking to flat, and blasting into whooped-out sections of trail a rewarding experience where the bike truly got better the harder I pushed it.

Suspension Kinematic
The high confidence the Megatower provided when pushing closer to the limit can be attributed to how its suspension provides support throughout the travel. While the feeling off-the-top was less comfortable at lower speeds and did transmit more feedback from the trail through the bike, it created a light feeling that helped the bike ride more like a trail bike on less demanding terrain. Getting the wheels off the ground felt easy as a result, and the natural ramp provided ample support when going too deep by slowing the higher velocity impacts in a calm manner. This is thanks to a slightly lower leverage ratio than the Altitude and a more linear leverage rate that continually builds support throughout the travel rather than at the end. When trail speeds got faster, the Megatower only seemed to get better; the less settled feeling at lower speeds translated into stability at high speed and was more rewarding the harder I pushed.

Frame Construction
Where the firm and supportive suspension helps maintain a more natural geometry throughout wheel travel, Santa Cruz’s frame construction helps maintain the most solid foundation possible throughout all scenarios. As a result, the Megatower is on the stiff side of frame compliance. Looking at lateral flex, there is a small amount of forgiveness, but it is clear that the bike was engineered to be thrown into turns hard and not flinch. Riding near where the bike was developed, the structural integrity of the frame was one of the characteristics that shined through. The bike felt absolutely on rails on trails with more committed features that feed directly into a series of turns. On the opposite end of the spectrum, comfort suffers slightly but is something worth sacrificing for incredibly predictable handling.

Altitude Descending Performance

Overall Handling
After getting the setup as close to the Santa Cruz as possible and feeling more comfortable on the Altitude, I was excited to find out how it compared when pointed downhill. Right off the bat, the longer dimensions of the bike put me more central in the bike and feel a bit calmer in general. I anticipated this with a significantly longer wheelbase, but the longer rear center measurement resulted in an unsettled feeling at the rear wheel that was easily mitigated after a short adjustment period. Because of the longer dimensions, movements felt slower on the Altitude, but not necessarily in a negative way. Tightening up turns is less immediate, but I felt confident leaning into them for longer, leaning back into lips of jumps felt more controlled, and hitting larger undulations at speed felt less sporadic.

Suspension Kinematic
Traction over successive hits was excellent on the Altitude thanks to a soft off-the-top feeling from the rear suspension that is met with ample ramp in the final third of travel. This makes chatter disappear while providing a solid foundation when compressing through longer low-speed compressions. When pushing into the suspension through low-speed compressions, the bike felt a bit stuck to the ground off of small lips, but longer transitions allowed the bike to reach the final third of travel, providing a solid platform to pop off of. While the rear suspension absorbed a lot of chatter and feedback off the top, it had a tendency to reappear later in the shock stroke. Where the shock can move very freely at a high velocity early in its travel, that velocity would often continue throughout the stroke of the shock until hitting a significant level of ramp that would transmit through my feet at a similar speed. This resulted in a less settled feeling and significantly more feedback closer when pushing closer to the limit through heavy compressions.

Frame Construction
Similar to the suspension, the Altitude's frame construction also feels fairly supple on trail with a good amount of ramp in terms of support. The off-the-top flex proved especially beneficial in off-camber sections, where holding a line through choppy undulations and across roots felt effortless. The bike really shined in these scenarios and increased confidence when choosing lines. I anticipated the lateral flex to have an adverse effect that would wind up in turns and spit me out the wrong way under heavy loading, but the frame's torsional flex ramps up heavily to create a solid foundation once loaded. This contributed to the slower movements on trail from a higher level of traction, allowing me to lean for longer into turns and creating a calmer experience through the rough stuff.

Durability

Megatower- With only a few weeks to differentiate these two bikes, it was not necessarily a long enough period to test long-term durability, but it did provide enough time to foresee a few problem areas. On the Megatower, the lower downtube protection is made of hard plastic and has a gap between it and the frame in one portion, which cracked and lost a piece at some point in the time I've had the bike. This also happened on the test bike I received in 2022 when the bike launched. While it's easily replaceable with only two bolts holding it in place, it would be a bit annoying to continually replace them over the lifetime of the bike. A potential solution could be something co-molded with a rubber inner portion. This could not only avoid rattling but also increase the durability of the part. As for pivot hardware, the bike tested has a lot of miles on it, and I haven't had a single concern, surely they are overdue for regreasing, but it is unknown to me in terms of ride quality. 

Altitude- The Altitude posed a more serious concern, with the lower link finding its way loose after my second ride on the bike and causing a fair amount of free play within the linkage. Thankfully, Rocky Mountain provides a tool that uses a 6mm Allen wrench to tighten the interface to the recommended 25Nm. I opted to use low-strength blue Loctite on the threads to prevent any future slipping. Unfortunately, the problem resurfaced after two more rides and seemed to arise in instances where loading the bike heavily side-to-side was more frequent. Upon re-torquing the main pivot, I noticed a discrepancy in the torque specs that could be a root cause: the 35-55Nm torque range of the Shimano threaded bottom bracket cups surpasses the 25Nm of torque of the pivot hardware. Being housed behind the drive-side cup, which uses left-hand threads, the right-hand threaded main pivot ring spins with the bottom bracket shell as it tightens and results in a loss of torque until enough pressure builds between the two to keep it from rotating any further. I tried slightly less torque on the bottom bracket for my second attempt, but the problem persisted and posed a concern when considering bearing life and the cost of ownership. A left-hand threaded sleeve for the main pivot would be a viable solution as an update to solve this, but perhaps there is more than meets the eye as to why it's not an option.

What's the Bottom Line?

These bikes are both great enduro bikes, but I think they serve two different purposes in my mind. As for where I would spend my money on a daily driver to ride terrain I am familiar with, I would go with the Megatower. It's super predictable and more playful, and while it felt less stable in less predictable instances, I can deal with that day-to-day. As for an enduro race bike, the Altitude is the obvious choice. I felt super confident riding less familiar terrain, and the additional comfort would be really beneficial over the course of a couple of days of racing. As for everyday riding, I think I would get tired of the stuck-to-the-ground feeling, but for racing, it's always appreciated. The durability concerns are a factor that would keep me from wanting it as my daily driver, but if it's being used as a race bike, I think taking things apart to clean and retorque is less of an issue and more of a good idea anyway.

View key specs, compare bikes, and rate the newest Rocky Mountain Altitude and Santa Cruz Megatower models in the Vital MTB Product Guide.