Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 129
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249

    Is Giant Trance considered an all mountain bike?

    And if there are some owners feel free to tell me how you like the bike!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    157
    Not by today standards, but the chainstay is very well built and with proper wheels and fork it can take a lot of abuse. Great bike I just wish I had gone with the Large top tube is sort of short and I´m starting to like longer top tube with a very short stem.

  3. #3
    Huffy Rider
    Reputation: motochick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,391
    No, but I built a Reign, which I love.

  4. #4
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,348
    A Trance X? I'd wager to say yes, or at least on the edge, whereas the reign overlaps and edges towards freeride/park/SS/mini DH more.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  5. #5
    Clueless genius
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    275
    2013 and earlier, probably not, but certainly tougher than your average XC bike. However, the 2014's would most certainly be "all mountain"; especially the trance SX.
    1994 Cannondale M400 2017 Felt Surplus 30
    1997 Marin Point Reyes 2013 Pivot Mach 5.7

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Thanks guys!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Why do I hate this f%$#ing question?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    I don't know..

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Why do I hate this f%$#ing question?
    1. Bikes shouldn't be pigeonholed

    2. what exactly is the difference between trail and all-mountain... if you point down for more than 10 seconds at a time, it has to be AM and not trail.. right?


  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Really? Do we have to define every aspect of riding to that level??

    I have a friend that pounds his Trance (not Trance X mind you) harder than most people ride their Nomads/Mojos, and it's holding up completely fine. He just rides with a lot of finesse, rather than blindly ham-fisting/plowing his way through everything. 2+ years later and the bike is still in excellent shape. It's most definitely an AM bike, albeit leaning to the lighter, more climbey side. Is the Trance as capable as a Nomad? No. But is is capable of handling 95% of the trails the average 'AM' rider would ever want to ride? Most definitely. So you decide if that fits the internet's definition of an AM bike or not. I think it does.


    Extra Credit Early Morning And I'm Grumpy Rant:

    Here's the problem with pigeonholing every bike and style of riding into a category: People LOVE to downgrade any bike that's even slightly less burly than their bike. As soon as 6" overtook 5" in popularity, the 5" bike was instantly a feeble, incapable machine. It was downgraded to trail, heavy-duty-xc, or whatever marketing term it is stuck with now. "No, that bike couldn't handle what my new burly bike of radness can handle." Of course bikes do have actual limitations, but most riders don't come close to pushing them. Does artificially limiting a 'lesser' bike's potential prove that they and their bike are so much more hardcore or something? Well if we go along those lines, then guess what peeps? I have a Canfield One, so you're all screwed. It has more travel than your so-called AM bikes, it can handle every terrain feature on earth, and has a sweet metal skull logo on the front. I'm the pimp sauce and you're all WAY less All-Mountain than I am. Don't follow me or your wimpy bikes will all break. Boom.

    It's largely the rider and their technique that determines if a bike can handle certain terrain or not.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  11. #11
    Inspector Gadget
    Reputation: abeckstead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    672
    I don't really think it's an AM bike as currently categorized by manufactures. I think consensus would say it falls into more of a trail bike category. Even that's all subjective anyhow, people do things on bikes that aren't supposedly made for a certain type of terrain all the time. I think the better question you could have asked is: I want to do X,Y,Z will this bike handle it?

    I ride a '11 Trance X and what Rhino said is pretty much spot on. You won't be plowing tech blindly, you will have to finesse your way through bigger stuff. I ride with a few bud's on 6"+ bikes and I just can't plow some of the lines I see them take. I think it's a good climber... I've made some really steep climbs that left bud's saying "how the hell did you make that"... When it's steep and tight, not super techy... is where I think the Trance X shines... it's efficient enough and pretty agile. May be riding style, maybe bike... whatever. I hit some jumps when I see them. I do tend to just roll and pump most of them though. I don't have a super confident feeling once airborne, so I only hit stuff with smooth transitions. Jumps to flat landings are pretty sketchy IMO.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,072
    ^^ nailed it! Very well said, sir.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Many bikes can slide either way. You can build them up with burly parts and big tires or go the other way and make them more lightweight XC bikes. My bike started out at 27 pounds when I bought it and I've got it up to 30 pounds now. It's got a 150mm Rockshox Pike on it, massive 2.35 Schwalbe Hans Dampfs, dropper post, wide bars/short stem, bashguard, etc. I could have gone the next bike up, but why? If you NEED 160-180mm travel for "all mountain" riding, you're doing something wrong. Maybe it's nice to have, but it's not necessary. It's never held me back. That's pretty much bike park and freeride territory and overkill for 95% of trails out there.

    Are there certain tools better for certain jobs? Yes. But that is down to your intended use, which was not specified.

    Though I loathe bike labels and pigeonholing bikes for all the fore-mentioned reasons, I'm more stoked on this "enduro" category of bikes than I ever was on "all mountain bikes" with the endless desire for more travel! more travel! Not because of the label itself, but because the bikes in this new category are truly amazing machines and they really define a "jack of all trades" design philosophy. Bikes that can bomb downhill fast but still climb efficiently...yeah, that sounds more like what we all need. Sounds like a "mountain bike" to me.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,072
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    Though I loathe bike labels and pigeonholing bikes for all the fore-mentioned reasons, I'm more stoked on this "enduro" category of bikes than I ever was on "all mountain bikes" with the endless desire for more travel! more travel! Not because of the label itself, but because the bikes in this new category are truly amazing machines and they really define a "jack of all trades" design philosophy. Bikes that can bomb downhill fast but still climb efficiently...yeah, that sounds more like what we all need. Sounds like a "mountain bike" to me.
    Couldn't agree more. A lot of riders aren't realistic with what they need a bike to be capable of. If you're riding DH or bike parks all the time, then by all means get a bike for that, but riding a DH bike on mellow trails and only going to lift access trails once a year is silly IMO. I ride a 140mm travel bike on the same trails guys are riding 180mm travel bikes (and even some riding 8 inch travel DH bikes) on and I have no issues whatsoever. Some of those guys absolutely shred on those bikes, but I can smoke them on climbs. If anything, I would rather have a bike that I have to finesse a little than being able to blast over everything in sight. It makes riding more fun, to me.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTB Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    402
    2011 Giant Trance X3.....200+ lbs rider. Always handles what I throw at it and I have a blast. I love my bike! I never question my bike on where I'm taking it to, I have full confidence that I will always enjoy my ride and not feel like I don't have enough bike.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Wow thanks a lot guys! The trance is the perfect bike for me!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    1. Bikes shouldn't be pigeonholed

    2. what exactly is the difference between trail and all-mountain... if you point down for more than 10 seconds at a time, it has to be AM and not trail.. right?

    1. It's not pigeonholing. It's establishing recommended boundaries and classifying intended usage.

    2. All-mountain includes stunts and features you may find at a bike park. Trail bikes are not built to withstand that abuse on a consistent basis. It isn't a conspiracy to confuse you, and it isn't rocket science.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by charging_rhinos View Post
    But is is capable of handling 95% of the trails the average 'AM' rider would ever want to ride? Most definitely.

    It's largely the rider and their technique that determines if a bike can handle certain terrain or not.
    If it only handles 95% of what a rider will likely throw at it, then it isn't "all" mountain. There's a major distinction in that 5%. It helps if you're a smooth rider, but gravity is gravity. A 200 pound rider hitting a 10 foot drop will punish his bike whether he's smooth or not. If you do that on a consistent basis, you should get a bike designed to handle it. Just because some pro trials riders ride small cross-country bikes, doesn't mean that they don't run a major risk. I'm sure they replace components and frames on a fairly consistent basis.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    If it only handles 95% of what a rider will likely throw at it, then it isn't "all" mountain. There's a major distinction in that 5%. It helps if you're a smooth rider, but gravity is gravity. A 200 pound rider hitting a 10 foot drop will punish his bike whether he's smooth or not. If you do that on a consistent basis, you should get a bike designed to handle it.
    Gravity is gravity, but not every rider takes the double black / pro level trails that have the 10 foot drops and necessitate a DH or FR bike.

    Intermediate and advanced trails with zero big air jumps / drops are still gravity. Those trails can easily be ridden on bikes with 4-6" travel. Twenty years ago they were ridden with rigid bikes.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    Gravity is gravity, but not every rider takes the double black / pro level trails that have the 10 foot drops and necessitate a DH or FR bike.

    Intermediate and advanced trails with zero big air jumps / drops are still gravity. Those trails can easily be ridden on bikes with 4-6" travel. Twenty years ago they were ridden with rigid bikes.
    Yeah, and those trails without the big air are best ridden on a trail bike like the Trance. All-mountain is meant for bigger things than what people rode with their rigid bikes. People can ride what they want where they want, but there's a reason why bikes are classified, or "pigeonholed". People would be happiest on the proper bike. Why drag around more weight and travel if you don't need it, and why risk destroying your bike by using it in ways it wasn't intended to be? I think I might agree with you on that one...

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lew242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    533
    It's mostly down to tire choice and weight IMO. If you put 2.5 Minions on a Trance it would be more capable and more like an AM bike. But it climbs so well why bother? I used to have a 6 inch travel bike weighing a heft running heavy tubes and thick slow rolling knobblies. Yes better on the downs, but getting destroyed by roadies and guys on XC bikes uphill and on the flat fire-trails and roads who are much less fit than me wore pretty thin after a while. These days I shove a fast XC tire on the back and a 2.35 knobby (not soft compound) on the front of my pretty lightweight 5 inch air sprung rig and can have my cake and eat it. Fast everywhere and some air and gnarl too. If I had lots of money I might plum for a carbon or alu lightweight 6 inch bike, but I really don't want to bother with anything over 30lbs if I'm riding up or on the flat.

    May get a 2nd hand coil sprung Freeride monster for other duties, also maybe not.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    If it only handles 95% of what a rider will likely throw at it, then it isn't "all" mountain. There's a major distinction in that 5%. It helps if you're a smooth rider, but gravity is gravity. A 200 pound rider hitting a 10 foot drop will punish his bike whether he's smooth or not. If you do that on a consistent basis, you should get a bike designed to handle it. Just because some pro trials riders ride small cross-country bikes, doesn't mean that they don't run a major risk. I'm sure they replace components and frames on a fairly consistent basis.
    Haha. A 10 foot drop is not all mountain. That's free ride if you want to get technical, since you're defining bikes and all.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    Haha. A 10 foot drop is not all mountain. That's free ride if you want to get technical, since you're defining bikes and all.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
    I consider a 10 foot drop to a transition all-mountain. A true all-mountain bike should be able to handle that. If it can't, it's a trail bike. Freeride is bigger than that. Often much bigger. Freeride should be able to handle anything you would consider putting your body through, if you want to get technical and all.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    I consider a 10 foot drop to a transition all-mountain. A true all-mountain bike should be able to handle that. If it can't, it's a trail bike. Freeride is bigger than that. Often much bigger. Freeride should be able to handle anything you would consider putting your body through, if you want to get technical and all.
    I don't think you are in sync with the industry definitions.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    I consider a 10 foot drop to a transition all-mountain. A true all-mountain bike should be able to handle that. If it can't, it's a trail bike. Freeride is bigger than that. Often much bigger. Freeride should be able to handle anything you would consider putting your body through, if you want to get technical and all.
    This is exactly the problem I was mentioning earlier. So to further the issue, I consider all mountain to be 20 foot drops to a transition. Since you only do 10 foot drops, you should be on a trail bike. US more hardcore people will stick with our 18" travel am bikes and do true all mountain riding.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Well, if you've ever seen a mountain bike freeride video, you've probably noticed that they are hitting drops and jumps much larger than 10 feet on freeride bikes. I would think that a 6" bike that's designed to be shuttled at times and be ridden on any trail on a mountain, including stunts, should be able to handle a pretty good sized drop. Look at what people like Wade Simmons and Richie Schley were riding back in the day. My point is, a little common sense should tell you what bike you should be riding. Who knows exactly where the lines are, but an intelligent person that is honest about their riding will know which side to err, if need be. As far as not being in tune with industry definitions, I've seen more than a couple of ads for all-mountain bikes with riders 10 feet in the air. Just sayin'.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 802spokestoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    1. It's not pigeonholing. It's establishing recommended boundaries and classifying intended usage.

    2. All-mountain includes stunts and features you may find at a bike park. Trail bikes are not built to withstand that abuse on a consistent basis. It isn't a conspiracy to confuse you, and it isn't rocket science.
    Recomended and classified by whom for whom?

    If bike builders had to put a frame out for each category on this site they'd have 20 different frames. Just frustrated here, because I asked a question in a similar thread, and it got instantly pushed aside for, you guessed it, internet dick swinging. And now I'm being that same guy!! Damnit!

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Recommended and classified by the designers of the bike.

  29. #29
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,348
    This is ridiculous. Those 10 and 20 foot drops require skill and the right conditions. Some of them, if designed correctly, with the correct rider, will not put much stress on a bike. On the other hand, repeatedly dropping to flat concrete over just 5 feet (no transition) can kill a "freeride" bike. You can't judge a bike's "strength" by if you see it doing drops to 10 or 20 feet in a video.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  30. #30
    Flying in High in the Sky
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    272
    Don't fall for "All Mountain" "Freeride" bs. Go test ride all the bikes you can. Rent if you have to. Buy the bike you are most comfortable in. Go out and ride.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    This is ridiculous. Those 10 and 20 foot drops require skill and the right conditions. Some of them, if designed correctly, with the correct rider, will not put much stress on a bike. On the other hand, repeatedly dropping to flat concrete over just 5 feet (no transition) can kill a "freeride" bike. You can't judge a bike's "strength" by if you see it doing drops to 10 or 20 feet in a video.
    No crap. Like I said, common sense goes a long way. By all means, just go out and buy whatever bike comes in the color you want. I'm sure it will fit your riding perfectly, and stand up to whatever abuse you choose to put it through and climb like a 22 pound hardtail. Why pay any attention to the intentions of the engineers who design bikes to excel in particular areas, right? I mean, what do they know. Everybody knows anybody can ride any bike in any situation and by perfectly fine. Heck, a trials champion has a couple of videos riding trials on a road bike. Perhaps we should all ride road bikes. Common sense, people. I know that's asking a lot, here.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    386
    My regular riding buddy has a 2011 Giant Trance. We ride lots of diamond trails. I think if you like the Trance buy it. It won't disappoint. The only time he bottomed out the fork he dropped 4 feet to near flat. The only thing I would worry about is the front fork flexing a bit if you ride the Trance near it's limit.

    BTW.. I love when people on mtbr.com talk about one hit wonders. It reminds of Citta's Friday night.. My buddy telling this girl he's on the Canadian ski team.
    I'm going to rob banks til I retire or get caught. Either way I'm set for life

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTB Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    402
    The OP got a lot more than he bargained for in this thread.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    God 20 foots drop is considered all mountain!? I just want a bike that can take 4 foots drops so if 10 foot is trail the trance dosen't even feel a 4 foot drop..

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by MTB Marco View Post
    The OP got a lot more than he bargained for in this thread.
    Lol people are getting crazzzzy!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    I was just proving a point with that 20' drop post. Everyone likes to feel like a tough guy talking about all the huge drops they can hit, and they like to act as if it ain't no thang. It makes them feel like a good rider.

    The Trance will handle decent drops, provided you have a good landing and aren't ham-fisting everything in sight. If you want a bit more strength/capability, look for a Reign. A bit beefier frame, and an extra inch of travel.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Problem with the Reign is that I am going to have a hard time climbing and like I said I will be riding drops of 4 feets MAX so the trance could take that?
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bigfruits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    861
    yes

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by hardtailrider2013 View Post
    Problem with the Reign is that I am going to have a hard time climbing and like I said I will be riding drops of 4 feets MAX so the trance could take that?
    Yes!!

    The Reign isn't that bad to pedal uphill. Take one for a test ride. It's not a HT 29er but it's a 20 foot huck rig either!
    I'm going to rob banks til I retire or get caught. Either way I'm set for life

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by hardtailrider2013 View Post
    Problem with the Reign is that I am going to have a hard time climbing and like I said I will be riding drops of 4 feets MAX so the trance could take that?
    Yes, for sure. But know that the Reign does not climb badly AT ALL. It's very comparable to the Trance. The Trance is a tiny bit lighter, and that is the only real difference between them in terms of climbing ability. The suspension systems are very equal in terms of climbing
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mizzaboom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    432
    I ride an '11 X1 and love it. But, I keep it to 5-6 foot drops and under (and only to transition on the top end). I'll hit any jump that I am confident that I have the speed to clear the gap and make it to the transition (BMX background). Like others have said, you do need to have some finesse and pick good lines in rough techy DH spots. On smoother stuff like Highland (NH) it rails...that place is like a downhill BMX track in spots and my bike eats it up. It will also hold its own on the "B" lines there on the more difficult trails. With a beefier wheelset (mine is XT), and a 140 fork I'd consider hitting bigger drops but I want my bike in good working order when I am on trail/XC rides.

    All that being said -- is it an all mountain bike? I think so. If I wanted to hit 10 foot drops and not pedal ever then I would buy 7-8inch bike. Seems like there are trade offs either way when trying to define "all mountain".
    All good things in all good time

  42. #42
    gravity fighter
    Reputation: Mikecito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    546
    Which Trance are you looking at? 26,29 or the new 650b?
    I think the new Trance is the most "All Mountain" of the three with the slacker HT.
    I'd still test a Reign if I were you. I own an 09 Trance and a 12 Reign and I climb just as slow on both, but I'm MUCH faster and having more fun on the downs with the Reign.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    God you guys are making my choice even harder now..! :P But since the Trance can take 4 foots drops and is a better climber than the Reign do I realllllly need the extra travel of the Reign? I guess if I fall a couple times and land like a s**t since I'm beginning the Reign would suck it up better.. But I heard that the Reign had a problem with the frame and that it was cracking near the rear suspension is that a specific model/or year? If you guys could help me with that it would be great!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikecito View Post
    Which Trance are you looking at? 26,29 or the new 650b?
    I think the new Trance is the most "All Mountain" of the three with the slacker HT.
    I'd still test a Reign if I were you. I own an 09 Trance and a 12 Reign and I climb just as slow on both, but I'm MUCH faster and having more fun on the downs with the Reign.
    26er
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Oh and I forgot to say I ride singletracks and tight corners does one of the two bikes handles that better? And I'm only 110 lbs if that can help.. :P
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,096
    Trance handles better. If you can do lift service DH, consider the Reign. Otherwise it's a clear win for the Trance.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Nope I need to climb the mountain before..
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    314
    At the 10ft drop comments,

    I must be too old or my measuring tape is wrong, but having just measured 10 foot vertically, it's pretty bloody big for AM riding, unless the transition is very good and rider is very capable.

    I would think that AM bikes for this type of riding would severely sacrifice all the other attributes that make AM riding fun, particularly heavier wheels and parts to sustain this sort of abuse, resulting in a pig of a bike to ride up the hills and even on the flat.

    Trance SX would be an excellent AM bike, albeit one that doesn't favour down over the ups.

  49. #49
    Inspector Gadget
    Reputation: abeckstead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    672

    Is Giant Trance considered an all mountain bike?

    [QUOTE=Uphill=sad;10602047]At the 10ft drop comments,

    I must be too old or my measuring tape is wrong, but having just measured 10 foot vertically, it's pretty bloody big for AM riding, unless the transition is very good and rider is very capable.
    [\QUOTE]

    Well ya know I've been tellin' my wife 4" is a foot for years... The same probably applies to drops
    I hope you have a big trunk... cause I'm gonna put my bike in it!

  50. #50
    Bandit 29 FTW!!!
    Reputation: In-Yo-Grill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,157
    So...Just to add a little fuel to the fire...

    Does a 26" bike have to have 6" of travel to be considered AM? Where is the line for 650b or 29er's since in theory having the bigger wheel is like extra travel on a FS?
    Let's make like a Bike and get the Huck outta here...

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by charging_rhinos View Post
    I was just proving a point with that 20' drop post. Everyone likes to feel like a tough guy talking about all the huge drops they can hit, and they like to act as if it ain't no thang. It makes them feel like a good rider.

    The Trance will handle decent drops, provided you have a good landing and aren't ham-fisting everything in sight. If you want a bit more strength/capability, look for a Reign. A bit beefier frame, and an extra inch of travel.
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to charging_rhinos again."

    Drops are always twice as big on the internetz.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by abeckstead View Post
    Well ya know I've been tellin' my wife 4" is a foot for years... The same probably applies to drops


    there is definitely some ridiculous sht-talking in this thread. fortunately, it appears that the OP has seen through it and is getting what he needs to make a decision.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Just to get the thread back on topic and help with the original question...
    OP, you're 110 pounds, need to climb to get the goods, and are talking about 4 foot drops and under. Get the Trance! Done. You don't need the extra travel of the Reign, and being so light, that's going to be a big bike to pedal uphill. Get the Trance and be happy.

    This more travel obsession has gotten so stupid. When did 140mm (5.5 inches) become short travel? More travel does not equal better. In fact, I prefer mid-travel with a sportier suspension instead of plush, wallowing long travel, but I like my bike to pedal well and float up and over stuff rather than just plow through it. Geometry and how a bike is built is far more of a factor for a bikes intended usage. Look at guys ripping crazy stuff on a bike like the Banshee Spitfire (used to be only 120mm travel, now 140mm travel and Banshee calls it an all mountain bike). Look at the GT Distortion. What about people launching it in the bike parks on the old Transition Bottle Rocket? What about guys on slopestyle bikes hitting massive jumps and drops on hardtails?
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Thanks alot BaeckerX1 my descision is made now! I am going with the Trance!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Uphill=sad View Post
    At the 10ft drop comments,

    I must be too old or my measuring tape is wrong, but having just measured 10 foot vertically, it's pretty bloody big for AM riding, unless the transition is very good and rider is very capable.

    I would think that AM bikes for this type of riding would severely sacrifice all the other attributes that make AM riding fun, particularly heavier wheels and parts to sustain this sort of abuse, resulting in a pig of a bike to ride up the hills and even on the flat.

    Trance SX would be an excellent AM bike, albeit one that doesn't favour down over the ups.
    That's basically my point. Very few people actually need a true "all-mountain" bike with 6" of travel. People have been hitting pretty big gaps and drops on less than that. These bikes can absolutely handle some pretty large drops and jumps with decent transitions. You know, the stuff you find at a bike park. The Trance is a solid trail bike, but it can't handle all the trails on the mountain. At least not on a consistent basis. Four foot drops to tranny, no problem. People get their panties in a bunch because they have this great 6" travel all-mountain bike and never use the travel. Most people don't need an all-mountain bike, but few people are man enough to admit it. Talk about marketing...

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    Just to get the thread back on topic and help with the original question...
    OP, you're 110 pounds, need to climb to get the goods, and are talking about 4 foot drops and under. Get the Trance! Done. You don't need the extra travel of the Reign, and being so light, that's going to be a big bike to pedal uphill. Get the Trance and be happy.

    This more travel obsession has gotten so stupid. When did 140mm (5.5 inches) become short travel? More travel does not equal better. In fact, I prefer mid-travel with a sportier suspension instead of plush, wallowing long travel, but I like my bike to pedal well and float up and over stuff rather than just plow through it. Geometry and how a bike is built is far more of a factor for a bikes intended usage. Look at guys ripping crazy stuff on a bike like the Banshee Spitfire (used to be only 120mm travel, now 140mm travel and Banshee calls it an all mountain bike). Look at the GT Distortion. What about people launching it in the bike parks on the old Transition Bottle Rocket? What about guys on slopestyle bikes hitting massive jumps and drops on hardtails?
    Agreed. All-mountain bikes with 6" of travel are absolutely overkill for 95% of the riders out there, and look at the percentage of the market they have. The OP is making a good decision by going with the Trance for his riding.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by mizzaboom View Post
    All that being said -- is it an all mountain bike? I think so. If I wanted to hit 10 foot drops and not pedal ever then I would buy 7-8inch bike. Seems like there are trade offs either way when trying to define "all mountain".
    There are always trade offs. What if you wanted to hit the occasional 10 foot drop and still pedal the local trails? That's what all-mountain is. If you're riding mostly trails with an occasional 4 foot drop like the OP, you're looking for a trail bike.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post


    there is definitely some ridiculous sht-talking in this thread. fortunately, it appears that the OP has seen through it and is getting what he needs to make a decision.
    What sht-talking are you referring to?

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Oh what have I done with this thread... Lol
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    That's basically my point. Very few people actually need a true "all-mountain" bike with 6" of travel. People were hitting pretty big gaps and drops on less than that 15 years ago. These bikes can absolutely handle some pretty large drops and jumps with decent transitions. You know, the stuff you find at a bike park. The Trance is a solid trail bike, but it can't handle all the trails on the mountain. At least not on a consistent basis. Four foot drops to tranny, no problem. People get their panties in a bunch because they have this great 6" travel all-mountain bike and never use the travel. Most people don't need an all-mountain bike, but few people are man enough to admit it. Talk about marketing...
    While we're on the subject, I don't think bike parks are something that should really be factored into the equation. I have a downhill bike for that. It's really not a good idea to use the same bike for the bike park as well as your daily bike. If you are only doing it rarely and you only have 1 bike then so be it. But if you're building a bike up burly enough to be fit for continuous thrashing at a bike park, then that bike is going to be miserable to pedal around. The bike park is hard on bikes, even downhill bikes. As for what you're going to encounter on the trail? Zero trails (other than some illegal downhill trails) outside of the bike parks in Colorado have 10 foot drops. We've got some intense terrain with crazy elevation loss and gnarly rock gardens, but that? No. So yes my Mach 5.7 will handle 100% of anything I'll encounter on any trail around me. If I want to ride the bike parks, well, I have a Specialized Status with full coil suspension for that, and I sure as hell wouldn't want to pedal it up any big hills. 2-3k feet elevation gain in one climb is pretty common around here.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    While we're on the subject, I don't think bike parks are something that should really be factored into the equation. I have a downhill bike for that. It's really not a good idea to use the same bike for the bike park as well as your daily bike. If you are only doing it rarely and you only have 1 bike then so be it. But if you're building a bike up burly enough to be fit for continuous thrashing at a bike park, then that bike is going to be miserable to pedal around. The bike park is hard on bikes, even downhill bikes. As for what you're going to encounter on the trail? Zero trails (other than some illegal downhill trails) outside of the bike parks in Colorado have 10 foot drops. We've got some intense terrain with crazy elevation loss and gnarly rock gardens, but that? No. So yes my Mach 5.7 will handle 100% of anything I'll encounter on any trail around me. If I want to ride the bike parks, well, I have a Specialized Status with full coil suspension for that, and I sure as hell wouldn't want to pedal it up any big hills.
    So you can afford multiple bikes. What if you can only afford one? That's what an all-mountain bike, or "quiver killer", is for. As far as your trails not having large drops, what's your point? I've ridden some that do. I had to pedal to get there, so I suffered a little bit on the climb. I couldn't ride my hardtail up and trade it for my downhill bike at the top. Just because you ride your Pivot 5.7 on rugged trails doesn't make it an all-mountain bike. It's still a trail bike. All-mountain is made for trail riders that hit regular drops and jumps, like in BC, while still putting in some miles on the trails. Maybe they race an enduro race or two.

    People throw terms around like they are worthless. Definitions can help an informed buyer make the correct purchase. It's more feasible to classify a bike as trail or all-mountain rather than explaining the trails a particular bike was designed to excel on. It's up to the buyer to determine if it's right for their trails or not.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    It's all mountain enough. Since you're the epitome of badassitude...what bike do you ride and what trails do you ride that you think I couldn't ride on my bike?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Is Giant Trance considered an all mountain bike?-img_20130808_070023_051.jpg  

    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    By your logic, the 140mm Knolly Endorphin isn't an all-mountain bike either. And to that I say...

    Knolly Endorphin - Garett Buehler Edit - Pinkbike
    2:54 in
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thrash_273's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    179
    i owned a hardtail, then just last week i was able to pick up a used trance x2. i answer this base on my short experience but very big difference. at the span of 4 months i have been riding my hardtail on the trail, this bike is just crazy good. i have set PR on strava while riding the trail after 4 straight days of rain. plows anything on its way. all mountain? i dnt know what that means. heheheh but trail, yes it is

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    It's all mountain enough. Since you're the epitome of badassitude...what bike do you ride and what trails do you ride that you think I couldn't ride on my bike?
    Why am I the epitome of "badassitude"? Because I don't think your bike is all-mountain? I don't care what you ride. If you're happy with it, then whatever. Why do you care what I have to say? I ride a Santa Cruz Superlight, because I don't hit big drops or jumps, anymore. You could ride any of my trails on your bike. I never claimed to be a "badass" rider.

    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    By your logic, the 140mm Knolly Endorphin isn't an all-mountain bike either. And to that I say...

    Knolly Endorphin - Garett Buehler Edit - Pinkbike
    2:54 in
    Why wouldn't I call the Knolly Endorphin an all-mountain bike? I'm pretty sure that bike is capable of some pretty hefty terrain. It isn't all about travel. It's about the intended purpose of the bike. Why is this so difficult? Why are you so defensive?

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    Why am I the epitome of "badassitude"? Because I don't think your bike is all-mountain? I don't care what you ride. If you're happy with it, then whatever. Why do you care what I have to say? I ride a Santa Cruz Superlight, because I don't hit big drops or jumps, anymore. You could ride any of my trails on your bike. I never claimed to be a "badass" rider.



    Why wouldn't I call the Knolly Endorphin an all-mountain bike? I'm pretty sure that bike is capable of some pretty hefty terrain. It isn't all about travel. It's about the intended purpose of the bike. Why is this so difficult? Why are you so defensive?
    Wait, am I talking to the same guy? The one who claimed he was frequently hitting 10+ foot drops on his trails, that he had to pedal to get to these trails, and that he suffered on the climbs a bit with his big bike to get there? The one who said that "AM" bikes were 6"+ travel?
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    Wait, am I talking to the same guy? The one who claimed he was frequently hitting 10+ foot drops on his trails, that he had to pedal to get to these trails, and that he suffered on the climbs a bit with his big bike to get there? The one who said that "AM" bikes were 6"+ travel?
    You just read or comprehend what you want to, don't you? I never said I regularly hit 10 foot drops. I hit a few back in college, but that was years ago. Reread my posts. Most all-mountain bikes are 6" of travel, and 140mm is pretty darn close. Obviously, slopestyle bikes are often less than that, and many dirt jump bikes are hardtails, but who's going to pedal those on lengthy trail rides? Reading comprehension goes a long ways.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    You just read or comprehend what you want to, don't you? I never said I regularly hit 10 foot drops. I hit a few back in college, but that was years ago. Reread my posts. Most all-mountain bikes are 6" of travel, and 140mm is pretty darn close. Obviously, slopestyle bikes are often less than that, and many dirt jump bikes are hardtails, but who's going to pedal those on lengthy trail rides? Reading comprehension goes a long ways.
    Or just one colossal backpedal, whatever. Too funny.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Anyways, my point is that classifying bikes is helpful to a buyer looking for the best bike for his trails. Yes there's overlap between classes, and apparently people get offended when referring to those classes, but they do provide some insight as to the designers' intentions.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    Or just one colossal backpedal, whatever. Too funny.
    Reading comprehension. Show my packpedal.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    You missed the boat man. Industry terms and marketing buzzwords can be swung whatever direction the manufacturer desires. And many bikes can fill multiple rolls depending on how you build them up. The Knolly Endorphin and Pivot Mach 5.7 are so close on paper and the Mach even has more travel. Yet you say one is "all mountain" and the other isn't. All mountain is a dumb term that was invented to classify a new generation of bikes, but is used interchangeably and in different ways throughout the industry. But nobody other than you claims all mountain bikes should be able to handle 10+ foot drops and anything you'd find in a bike park. As a matter of fact, if you told any of these bike manufacturers that you broke your bike on a 10 foot drop, they'd tell you that voids the warranty. I'm not even sure you realize how big a 10 foot drop really is.

    I could care less what you think, but I'm just pointing out how your perception is flawed and this type of thinking confuses the already muddy waters of mountain bike categories. Since you said that the manufacturer defines what a bike's intended use and design is, and what category it is, I guess you now have to admit that the Mach 5.7 is an all mountain bike.

    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    1. It's not pigeonholing. It's establishing recommended boundaries and classifying intended usage.
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    Anyways, my point is that classifying bikes is helpful to a buyer looking for the best bike for his trails. Yes there's overlap between classes, and apparently people get offended when referring to those classes, but they do provide some insight as to the designers' intentions.
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    Recommended and classified by the designers of the bike.
    Per Pivot...
    "The 5.7 strikes an unrivaled balance of superior pedaling efficiency, fully active travel, incredible chassis stiffness and award winning handling. With an ever growing list of awards to its credit, the Mach 5.7 is the reigning and undisputed all mountain trail bike champion!"

    Personally, I don't worry about what my bike is classified as. I just go out and ride whatever I feel like and so far my bike hasn't held me back.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by BaeckerX1 View Post
    ... the Mach 5.7 is the reigning and undisputed all mountain trail bike champion!".
    Whoa, wait a second!! Using both 'All Mountain' AND 'Trail Bike' phrases in the same sentence?!!!! My head asplode! Can't compute... must categorize... too much... NOTHING IS TRUE!!!

    I agree completely. Just ride the dang bike.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by charging_rhinos View Post
    Whoa, wait a second!! Using both 'All Mountain' AND 'Trail Bike' phrases in the same sentence?!!!! My head asplode! Can't compute... must categorize... too much... NOTHING IS TRUE!!!

    I agree completely. Just ride the dang bike.
    I know right?! What should I do?! Guess I should only take my bike on the bikepath cause it's just too confusing.

    NEED MOAR TRAVELZ!
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    46
    Based on the about suggestion the Trance SX 27.5 with its 140mm rear travel and 160mm front travel is both a Trail and All-mountain bike all in one... or maybe its neither.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,639
    You're all missing the point. Let me break it down for you. Why classify cars as SUV, coupe, sedan, etc.? Why classify paint as latex, oil, water, etc.? Why classify flooring as laminate, wood, bamboo, etc.? Why classify anything? Because it should provide buyers and users with some sort of clarity as to intended usage and design limitations. If you can't interpret definitions of mountain bikes, then you're either completely uninformed or choose to ignore the obvious. Leave it at what it is. If you don't like it, then ignore it, just like I'm going to ignore you from this point on.

  76. #76
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,766
    Jumps are different than drops, and drops are different than downhill.

    A downhill bike is made for repeated impacts, it doesn't care if it thats a 10' drop to flat or a rock garden filled with more square edges than a library.

    One thing I'm worried about with only 140mm is that the FRAME is strong enough to handle rock gardens at as-fast-as-I-can-go speed?

    I think you guys got really caught up in travel when the topic of "intended usage" is more in the build strength of the frame and how the bike is designed to use its travel. I'm sure you could build a "downhill strong" bike that pedaled awesome, but that was as heavy as a boat anchor and horrible suspension feel, and you could make a 200mm travel bike that was 25lbs and pedaled awesome, but would snap like a toothpick at the sight of a rock garden.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    You're all missing the point. Let me break it down for you. Why classify cars as SUV, coupe, sedan, etc.? Why classify paint as latex, oil, water, etc.? Why classify flooring as laminate, wood, bamboo, etc.? Why classify anything? Because it should provide buyers and users with some sort of clarity as to intended usage and design limitations. If you can't interpret definitions of mountain bikes, then you're either completely uninformed or choose to ignore the obvious. Leave it at what it is. If you don't like it, then ignore it, just like I'm going to ignore you from this point on.
    And you're missing the point. The terms don't make sense, you say a bike is a trail bike and not an "all-mountain" bike, when the industry and the bike designers (who you said you define the bikes intended usage) use those 2 terms interchangeably. Also, travel has nothing to do with it. I just proved it. Here's another example. Ignore us if you want, it's what people proven wrong often do. Go stick your head in the sand if you want, but I think I made my point.

    Devinci's New 650B Troy - First Look - Pinkbike
    • Intended use: trail/all-mountain
    • Rear wheel travel: 140mm/5.5''

    Don't even get me started on Enduro bikes (since you previously mentioned Enduro racing), because a lot of bikes great for Enduro are long-travel trail bikes that can be pedaled uphill easily, yet still bomb down, not overbuilt monsters that can handle enormous gap jumps. What about Cannondale's "Over-Mountain"? If you're that caught up in marketing terms, you're missing it. Marketing teams will always invent some new term to convince you that your bike isn't good enough, that it might not be capable enough. That's what they're paid for. To make money for the bike manufacturers. If we as consumers constantly have to classify and pigeon-hole everything, we're just being cogs for the marketing machine. I'm damn sure someone out there can ride some crap on a BMX bike or a cross-country hardtail that some couldn't ride on a full blown downhill rig.

    The appropriate question we should ask as educated consumers should be... Will X bike be good for me if I like to ride X and do X with X terrain... not is my bike "all-mountain", "trail", "enduro", "unicorns and rainbows." Don't you realize if I'm a bike company I can call it whatever the hell I want and put whatever I feel like on the marketing catalog. Or I could just invent a new category, just like Cannondale did. The blunt reality is even if a company labels their bike "all-mountain" that doesn't mean they're going to warranty your frame when you case a 10 foot drop and break it, just because you think the bike should be able to do it.

    All mountain is about what you ride, and how you ride, not what bike you're on.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    Jumps are different than drops, and drops are different than downhill.

    A downhill bike is made for repeated impacts, it doesn't care if it thats a 10' drop to flat or a rock garden filled with more square edges than a library.

    One thing I'm worried about with only 140mm is that the FRAME is strong enough to handle rock gardens at as-fast-as-I-can-go speed?

    I think you guys got really caught up in travel when the topic of "intended usage" is more in the build strength of the frame and how the bike is designed to use its travel. I'm sure you could build a "downhill strong" bike that pedaled awesome, but that was as heavy as a boat anchor and horrible suspension feel, and you could make a 200mm travel bike that was 25lbs and pedaled awesome, but would snap like a toothpick at the sight of a rock garden.
    Have you seen how mountain bikes are being built these days? Lighter, stronger, faster than ever before. You no longer have to have an overbuilt tank to have a bike that can handle blasting through a rock garden at warp speed. Hell, even downhill bikes are freakin' 10 pounds lighter than they were a few years ago. Like you said, travel has nothing to do with it. As long as you're not buying a featherweight XC race bike like the Trek Superfly 100 or something, you'll be fine. You can pretty easily tell what a bike will handle just by looking at it and its construction.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  79. #79
    Noob
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    18
    I think it really depends on the riding you are actually going to be doing. I had a 2011 Trance X3 and thought of it as great for aggressive XC and used it for some intermediate downhill single track but no significant drops or jumps. The new 2014 trance X with 5.5 travel, 15mm front axle, chain guide definitely seems to be all mountain capable. I have since gone to a 2013 giant reign 1 which I can grow into as I become more aggressive on the downhill stuff. I plan to go to Mammoth, CA and Big Mountain, Mt a few times a year, and eventually go to Whistler.

    Bottom line is the new 2014 Trance is all mountain capable, it just depends on your riding style and how aggressive you intend on being to determine if that is the right bike for you.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Ok so since this thread as just gone wild here, let me just reformulate my question so you guys can help me with this.. The real question was more like this: Can a Giant Trance X 26er handle 3-4 feets drops (not always to flat by the way) and climb steep terrain (like that picture) And it's not a 1 min climb, it's about 15 min of climbing and I weight 110 lbs if this can help.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Is Giant Trance considered an all mountain bike?-climbing-mountain-bike.jpg  

    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,840
    This thread has been fantastic!! The forum curmudgeon mountainbiker24 versus everyone... Priceless.

    And yes a trance will do fine on that terrain, especially considering you're a featherweight
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  82. #82
    Inspector Gadget
    Reputation: abeckstead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    672

    Is Giant Trance considered an all mountain bike?

    Quote Originally Posted by hardtailrider2013 View Post
    Ok so since this thread as just gone wild here, let me just reformulate my question so you guys can help me with this.. The real question was more like this: Can a Giant Trance X 26er handle 3-4 feets drops (not always to flat by the way) and climb steep terrain (like that picture) And it's not a 1 min climb, it's about 15 min of climbing and I weight 110 lbs if this can help.
    You can climb all day... I do a couple 5mi long climbs on my Trance with no break in climbing. I've done 5,000ft + vert days... You'd be fine
    I hope you have a big trunk... cause I'm gonna put my bike in it!

  83. #83
    Good, green, Oregon.
    Reputation: Giant Chachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    789
    This thread is.....out there.

    Get the Trance OP, if you haven't already. It will handle all that you are going to do with it and then some.

    Speaking a of a Trance handling anything.....Did you guys see that Kurt Sorge rode a Trance in the Red Bull Joyride last weekend? Gee, is the Joyride all-mountain? Hmmm, maybe it is XC. Or, freeride. Or........well, it's all mountain biking, right?
    *2016 Transition Patrol Carbon (aka: Sweet Pea)

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Chachi View Post
    This thread is.....out there.

    Get the Trance OP, if you haven't already. It will handle all that you are going to do with it and then some.

    Speaking a of a Trance handling anything.....Did you guys see that Kurt Sorge rode a Trance in the Red Bull Joyride last weekend? Gee, is the Joyride all-mountain? Hmmm, maybe it is XC. Or, freeride. Or........well, it's all mountain biking, right?
    Yes I've seen that! Trance looks crazy solid man! Curently trying to find one used..
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    I know this as nothing to do here but a saw this on pinkbike, F$%K this bike is crazy! in Montreal, Quebec, Canada - photo by Life1 - Pinkbike
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    386
    You got a new bike yet or what? Even if you do you should keep this entertainment rolling!!

    My favorite recent comment has to be about the Endorphin. Now I see the need for the Chilcotin. Haha.
    I'm going to rob banks til I retire or get caught. Either way I'm set for life

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by homeless junkie View Post
    You got a new bike yet or what? Even if you do you should keep this entertainment rolling!!

    My favorite recent comment has to be about the Endorphin. Now I see the need for the Chilcotin. Haha.
    Lol no I don't have the bike I am looking for one used!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    *UPDATE* I found a x1 2011 for 1700$ no pedals, good deal? I guess so!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by hardtailrider2013 View Post
    *UPDATE* I found a x1 2011 for 1700$ no pedals, good deal? I guess so!
    a new unsold one? pretty good deal, assuming it's the right size!

    if it's used... not that great of a deal, more average at best.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    It is used, and yes it's my size so how much is a good deal?
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  91. #91
    Come on, dare me!
    Reputation: Jerome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    511
    Based on a quick search on Pinkbike.com, I'd say $1700, if the bike is in mint/excellent shape, is still a deal. Then, a really GOOD deal would be $1500 or less (yours to bargain with your present seller, maybe)... On the other hand, you have some Trance X Advanced (carbon) going for a tad over $2000.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hardtailrider2013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    249
    Yes I asked some photos he said it was in realy great condition!
    Hit it first, then we can see where to put the landing.

  93. #93
    App-a-LATCH-un
    Reputation: Appalachian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    226
    Where is that trail-bike forum?
    I ride my ’11 trance in hilly terrain. Up-down-up-down repeat.
    I ride my covert in the mountains. Of course people ride single speed rigids on the same trails. They just go slower down hill and walk some steep drops.
    Fifty-two, I mean fifty-four bicycles on the wall
    Ready to ride, ready to ride until the last of them falls

  94. #94
    Hard as nails
    Reputation: Dirtman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,008
    All Mountain is riding up and down the mountain PERIOD! Every 4-5 years the definition(s) are stretched to accomodate the newest trend and to make way for another product they wish to sell you. And according to what I am reading, many are drinking the Koolaid. Who cares what the (sales motivated) definition of what a category is. I mean really to go back and forth over this Old Ass topic is ridiculous.

    I have a 2012 trance X and an 06 Dritbag. So I will ride anything from smooth and buffed to rocky and lift assisted. Ride more and type LESS.
    Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth.
    Henry David Thoreau



  95. #95
    El CicloPath!!!!!!!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    247
    To simplify:

    Rigid: Nobody wants, no drops

    Front Suspension: Some people want, skinny people, no drops

    XC Full Suspension: walmart/target special

    trail: fireroad, 12" drop

    all mountain: ride up and down the mountain all day long, more than 12" drops

    freeride: ride totally free, spinning, upside down, loop de loops, no climbing, shuttling, bike parks,lots of video watching, any length of drops

    downhill: fun, no cardio, mount wilson shuttle service, snow summit, only go down, seat too low not pedal efficient, big chainguide, 3" wide rims, tires cost as much as a frame, 50+ pounds, cost more than my car


    The Giant is a good bike. Luckily, Giant makes different models to suit your needs.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    167
    FWIW, a buddy of mine just picked up a barely-used 2011 Trance X1 for $1200 in the Denver/Boulder, CO area on CL; it was listed at $1800 but the seller dropped to $1200 with little prodding. Seems like the prices on the 26er versions should be dropping as everyone seems to be salivating over the new ones.

    I didn't thoroughly read this thread, but it didn't seem like anyone was talking about the major differences between new Trances and older ones. I ride a 2008 Trance X right now (for the moment... upgrading soon...), which has the same geometry as all 26 inch Trance X's through 2013, and I wouldn't really call it an AM bike. The head angle is pretty tall (about 70 degrees) and the 120mm rear suspension isn't really set up for big drops and such. I'd call it a trail bike or a long-travel XC bike, and that's how it behaves - great on climbs and smooth, flowy downhill but not as great over rocky or technical descents.

    The new 2014 Trance, however, has been pretty significantly altered. In addition to the 27.5 wheels, the slacker 67-degree head angle is a huge difference, and along with the increased 140mm rear suspension should make it much more of an all-mountain machine. Probably not quite as good a climber (though maybe very close), but definitely going to be more solid on the downhill.

    Hope that's helpful.

  97. #97
    Huffy Rider
    Reputation: motochick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,391
    I would not ride a bike with a head angle that steep in serious terrain....where I ride, that bike would not be adequate. If you are riding chunky, steep, rocky, terrain with drops get the Reign. I don't weigh much more then you and I ride Reign all day long, just as much climbing as descending. This has nothing to do with travel, but geometry. Just my 2 cents, but then what do I know?

  98. #98
    Good, green, Oregon.
    Reputation: Giant Chachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by Jkon View Post
    The new 2014 Trance, however, has been pretty significantly altered. In addition to the 27.5 wheels, the slacker 67-degree head angle is a huge difference, and along with the increased 140mm rear suspension should make it much more of an all-mountain machine. Probably not quite as good a climber (though maybe very close), but definitely going to be more solid on the downhill.

    Hope that's helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by motochick View Post
    I would not ride a bike with a head angle that steep in serious terrain....where I ride, that bike would not be adequate. If you are riding chunky, steep, rocky, terrain with drops get the Reign. I don't weigh much more then you and I ride Reign all day long, just as much climbing as descending. This has nothing to do with travel, but geometry. Just my 2 cents, but then what do I know?
    motochick, you must be referring to the prior years of the Trance, right? Because I certainly wouldn't consider the 67 HA that the new Trance has as steep. I just wanted to clarify this for the OP, as I was a bit confused by your comment immediately after jkon's comment about the new Trance versus the 2013 and prior year's Trance.

    And to be fair, I ride my 2011 Anthem X 29er with a 71* HA in some steep gnar for sure. Yes, a more slack HA would help, hence the reason I am after the new Trance, but it certainly can be done.
    *2016 Transition Patrol Carbon (aka: Sweet Pea)

  99. #99
    Huffy Rider
    Reputation: motochick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Chachi View Post
    motochick, you must be referring to the prior years of the Trance, right? Because I certainly wouldn't consider the 67 HA that the new Trance has as steep. I just wanted to clarify this for the OP, as I was a bit confused by your comment immediately after jkon's comment about the new Trance versus the 2013 and prior year's Trance.
    The OP was talking about a 2011, so that is what I referenced. I would ride a 2014 Trance where I live, not a 2011.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,242
    Can we just admit some people need their bike to make up for lack of skills? I prefer a certain style and geo of bike for what I ride, but if you NEED a certain type of bike and think another is completely inadequate you probably suck. Some people shred shitty old bikes and are happy for the privilege.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-02-2013, 11:23 PM
  2. Would this be considered all mountain?
    By cm_ls1 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-06-2012, 12:10 PM
  3. Next Bike: Trek Fuel EX 9.9 or Giant Trance SL 0
    By surfstar1 in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-13-2012, 08:05 PM
  4. Giant Trance or Rocky Mountain Altitude
    By DannyHuynh in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 04-03-2012, 09:04 PM
  5. first FS bike -giant trance
    By kikoraa in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-19-2012, 07:05 PM

Members who have read this thread: 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •