Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Lightest all mountain bike

12K views 50 replies 39 participants last post by  Hack On Wheels 
#1 ·
what is the lightest all mountain bike?
 
#28 ·
Kinda depends on where you draw the line for AM i guess. Another poster mentioned an RFX, while it is certainly light for what it is capbale of, I'd half to say, that's a bike that is way near the FR end of things.

Some light AM/Trail Bikes that com to mind (keep in mind some are awefully close to XC type bikes). In somewhat order from lighter<------beefier

Trek's EX line, the carbon even lighter
Gary fisher hi-fi
Specy Stumpjumper
Ibis Mojo
Rocky Estx (or what ever it is)
Giant Trance

Most of the above are more "trail" type bikes IMO, infact, I'd race just about all of them. with more of a weight penalty but more beef I've seen the following built pretty light with the right build:

Turer 5spot
Titus Motolite
Intense 5.5
blur LT
 
#29 ·
No one has broken or cracked the 5.7 lb Mojo frame yet. With 5.5 inch travel, easily fitting 2.5 inch tires, it would qualify in the longer half of the travel range of "all mountain" category.

Seems like many Mojo buyers posting on the Ibis forum are new to suspension and still in the weight conscious racer XC mode, so are running about 22.5 - 27 lbs with air suspension depending on component weight. And the Mojo can be set up to compete successfully at the pro XC level, (or pro DS, 4X, and some downhill courses that don't need 7+ inch travel.)

There are a few I know doing big drops crashing hard breaking components but not the frame.

Mine's 30.5 lbs with Vanilla RC coil shock and Nixon elite coil fork. Moderately heavy-duty DT Swiss 5.1D Hope Bulb wheels, and no categorically light components.

I may have the heaviest carbon frame mountain bike in the world! It is certainly appears to be one of the strongest frames in the world.
 
#30 ·
derby said:
No one has broken or cracked the 5.7 lb Mojo frame yet. With 5.5 inch travel, easily fitting 2.5 inch tires, it would qualify in the longer half of the travel range of "all mountain" category.

Seems like many Mojo buyers posting on the Ibis forum are new to suspension and still in the weight conscious racer XC mode, so are running about 22.5 - 27 lbs with air suspension depending on component weight. And the Mojo can be set up to compete successfully at the pro XC level, (or pro DS, 4X, and some downhill courses that don't need 7+ inch travel.)

There are a few I know doing big drops crashing hard breaking components but not the frame.

Mine's 30.5 lbs with Vanilla RC coil shock and Nixon elite coil fork. Moderately heavy-duty DT Swiss 5.1D Hope Bulb wheels, and no categorically light components.

I may have the heaviest carbon frame mountain bike in the world! It is certainly appears to be one of the strongest frames in the world.
Thats cool, derby. Now I dont feel so bad on my 32 lb AM bike, which actually is 7.5 lbs
for the frame and shock. I've thought of trying to lighten it up at some point, but I dont
want to sacrifice too much on the durability of the parts, or the stiffness of the fork,
Pike 454 w/thru axle.
 
#31 ·
derby said:
No one has broken or cracked the 5.7 lb Mojo frame yet. With 5.5 inch travel, easily fitting 2.5 inch tires, it would qualify in the longer half of the travel range of "all mountain" category.

Seems like many Mojo buyers posting on the Ibis forum are new to suspension and still in the weight conscious racer XC mode, so are running about 22.5 - 27 lbs with air suspension depending on component weight. And the Mojo can be set up to compete successfully at the pro XC level, (or pro DS, 4X, and some downhill courses that don't need 7+ inch travel.)

There are a few I know doing big drops crashing hard breaking components but not the frame.

Mine's 30.5 lbs with Vanilla RC coil shock and Nixon elite coil fork. Moderately heavy-duty DT Swiss 5.1D Hope Bulb wheels, and no categorically light components.

I may have the heaviest carbon frame mountain bike in the world! It is certainly appears to be one of the strongest frames in the world.
I am very happy with the Pace fighter pairing to Vanilla RC coil on my Mojo. I think mine is a little heavier than 30.5lbs at the moment because I have a maveric speedball seatpost equipped. (it gets swapped in any out depending on the area I am riding)
 
#32 ·
Rush Carbon <24 lbs

I just started riding a Cannondale Rush Carbon, 4.5" front and rear (though it feels like more with the suspension opened up full), it tips the scales at a shade under 24 lb's, handles everything ive thrown at it so far, lefty carbon fork is surprisingly solid through the tough sections and while the bike does demand more thought be given to the line, the reduces "stability" weight is a welcome trade off for its kickass climbing efficiency.
 
#33 ·
I've got my Ransom LTD frame built up at a tad over 27.5 right now... Nothing really that special on it - or anything particularly heavy. Pike 454, Havoc Wheels, IRC 2.25" with Stans, XT Crank, CB pedals, carbon bar, Thomson, Ti-railed saddle, etc... Not bad for a 6+" travel bike. If I wanted to get all weeny-ish I could get it under 26, but why? I use it as more of an all-conditions trail bike and it doesn't get much air, but I sure like the way it rides. Funny though - I've been riding my rigid 29'er most of the time on the same rides the last 6 months....
 
#34 ·
I love this AM/XC debating shiat. Such a good way to waste an hour on some retorical psycho babble. Ok here I go!

first to stay on topic and be mildly constructive. To the OP, I say a Heckler or turner RFX. I don't think they are "too freeride."

Some say AM should be classified by the terrain and not by the bike which I do agree with when saying, I ride a) AM or b) xc but when it comes to classifying the bike and not the terrain, I think most of these "light" AM bikes are pretty much just slightly longer travel xc bikes. (Derby I would love to see some pics of a big drop on an Ibis mojo if you have some!)

I think what distinguishes an AM bike from a xc bike really is in the toughness of the build. If you have any of the following: xc wheels, less than 2.3 tires, carbon cranks or carbon xc bars, a seat that sacrifices ANY comfort and strength for weight, a road cassette, and dare I say it, v-brakes. In my opinion you have probably built yourself a xc bike and not an AM bike. Now you may love to ride some sweet AM terrain, but be prepared to break 1 or more of those parts as you come tumbling down a rock gardent too steep to break or stop on or when you get the guts to go try that sweet 10 foot rock drop that your friend on his DH bike always makes look so easy.
 
#35 ·
move over nomad

Rivet said:
Maybe, If all you ride are groomed trails, but that much travel usually indicates a bike that's gonna be ridden hard and I guarantee you can't ride a 24lb ibis Mojo like you can a 31lb Nomad, sh*ts gonna break.
Quite the contrary, a Mojo is a waste on anything "groomed" and excels with rough and technical challenges. As far as I can tell, every single person who has been lucky enough to thrash a Mojo on technical climbs and descents agrees with this, whether they are at Downieville CA, Butte CO, Moab UT, or any other wonderfully "all-mountain" place to ride (including those in other countries).
 
#38 ·
the best and lightest all-hill bike would be the Superlight. the best all-hill is the Blur XC. The best and light all-mountain bike would be the Heckler. the best all-mountain bike would be the Nomad. and for freeride/allmountain, the Bullit.2 and SX Trail. and best freeride is the VPFree. best trailbike is the Stumpy. and if you ask about cross country, "you obviously haven't ridden a Specialized S-Works Epic Carbon Disc." ....i read it in MBA :thumbsup:
 
#43 ·
Personally, I would not "trust" anything under 28 lbs or so for what I consider AM riding. I have been there and I about broke everything including myself. I am now on a 32.5 lb Ventana that can take abuse but still climb all day as well. It is easier for me to lose a couple of pounds than take it off the bike and worry.

A side note....wheel weight/build has a lot to do with how light a bike feels. When I used a temporary build for a little while (Mavic 321 on XT hubs) the bike felt sluggish, but when my current set finally came in (DT Swiss EX5.1D on HD Chris Kings - Thanks to Chad @ Red Barn) the bike felt a lot lighter and really came alive. Any rolling weight that you can get rid of without sacrificing stiffness/durability, goes a long way.

For reference - Coil Lyric and CCDB on this frame, so 32.5 isn't bad at all for running coil/coil.
 
#45 ·
why can't we use pounds? or when it gets over 1000gr at least use kg. it's like saying "my frame weighs 99.2oz. just say 6.2 pounds. it's weird. we measure brakes, wheels, shifting components, cranks, bbs, tires, bars, stems, and headsets in grams but we usually weigh forks, frames, shocks, and complete bikes in pounds.

for the record, that prophet = 2700g = 2.7kg = 5.9 pounds.
 
#47 ·
rm_racer said:
why can't we use pounds? or when it gets over 1000gr at least use kg. it's like saying "my frame weighs 99.2oz. just say 6.2 pounds. it's weird. we measure brakes, wheels, shifting components, cranks, bbs, tires, bars, stems, and headsets in grams but we usually weigh forks, frames, shocks, and complete bikes in pounds.

for the record, that prophet = 2700g = 2.7kg = 5.9 pounds.
Well, in continental Europe we use grams and kilograms (kg) and as you point out, a kilo is another way of writing 1000. An abbreviaton that is. We never use pounds.
But this time I didn't care to calculate from Cannondales website how many kg the prophet weights.
 
#50 ·
heavyg said:
I think it's a big span and clearly dependent on what you define as the lower limit of "all-mountain" riding.

I also believe it is highly terrain specific. To grossly over-generalize, I think that Western riders are more prone to want/need fatter, lower pressure tires, bigger brakes, burlier components, and more travel. I think a lot of this is driven by the more wide open, high speed, chunky downhills you guys enjoy. I also think West favors adjustable travel forks much more, as the climbs are often much more lengthy.

Me, an East Coaster, I can't imagine changing protective gear, seatpost height, and suspension setup before heading downhill. Our climbs and downhills, while steep and pretty challenging, are quite short and relatively low speed (generally max out at 22-23mph once or twice a ride for a few seconds.) If I had to change the setup for every climb, I'd be off the bike more than on it.

While I can see the "requirement" for burlier bikes out in the land of the big fast downhills, there are some of us who prefer a shorter travel bike with "wimpy" high pressure tires for difficult terrain. You just have to accept the compromise that you can't "attack" it on the downhill quite like you could with a Nomad (if you expect the bike to hold up).

Also, when your climbs are short and slow and you don't want to change the bike setup, bike weight and pedal bob are a lot more significant "problems" than if you can pump all the way up the mountain on the middle ring. It is much easier to clear an uphill waterbar on a 10% grade at 3 mph with a 26# 4" travel bike than with a 32# 6" travel bike.

As someone who has broken a few frames and has experimented heavily with 4-6" travel bikes on the same trails over the last few years, I can see the compromises with any of the options. Perhaps I have drifted out of the "All-mountain" category by the average opinion here, but I am still riding the same stuff (just a little less aggressively) on a 4", 27# bike (and loving it). I weigh 215, so I think a light "all-mountain" bike becomes even more valid for a 150 pounder.

Call it "heavy XC" or call it "trail", call it anything you want. But don't forget that not everyone has trails or skills that warrant big brakes, big tires and 30-40mph speed on a regular basis. Maybe our east coast version should be called "All-foothill riding" instead?
I ride the bike In my sig on all east coast terrain and I love it. The big travel and tires all come in handy. I even use the adjustable travel a lot. It has saved me on several long water bar climbs. I personally use every inch of travel on the drops and jumps I do. Maybe not during everyday trail riding but I take advantage of what a 6.5 inch 32 pound bike has to offer.
 
#51 ·
moshelove, I have my bike equipped with sub 2.3 tires. The front is a Kenda Bluegroove 2.1 and the rear depends on terrain, but with a 1.9 Larsen TT on my bike most of the time. However, if you were to call my bike XC, I would have to say that you are wrong. For the record, my riding background is on the North Shore, and I love steeps. This bike does require more finesse than my big bike, but I have happily ridden it on the shore, hitting different rock rolls, ladders, and drops. It really is tough to classify these bikes, but unfortunately, tire width (in my case at least) is not an accurate indicator.
 
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top