Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8

    Lightest all mountain bike

    what is the lightest all mountain bike?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: poppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    994
    Very good question ?

  3. #3
    The guy with 5 kids
    Reputation: Climb-n-Bomb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    113
    Where do you draw the line from Trail to All mountain- 4'' travel or less(trail?) 5" or more(all mountain?)

    A tricked out 575 yeti and Blur can come in around 27 pounds

  4. #4
    thats right living legend
    Reputation: blackagness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,378
    The 07 Turner RFX would prob be the lightest AM bike at "I think" under 7lb's with an air shock, but this is a bike that can supposedly take hucking/jumping. That would be the lightest AM bike I know of, and IMO is pretty incredible if it can take what they say.

  5. #5
    flow where ever you go
    Reputation: noshortcuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,516

    Lightest All Mountain Bike

    That's easy...

    "I must not be crazy because I'm seriously questioning my sanity"

  6. #6
    Don't be a sheep
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by rrt1991
    what is the lightest all mountain bike?
    You can make any bike really light but then it becomes worthless for what the frame was originally intended. Yay, you 24 lb 6" travel Bike path bicycle.....also known as an Ibis carbon mojo.
    "Do not touch the trim"

  7. #7
    I already rode that
    Reputation: SuperNewb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,634
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    You can make any bike really light but then it becomes worthless for what the frame was originally intended. Yay, you 24 lb 6" travel Bike path bicycle.....also known as an Ibis carbon mojo.
    You know you want one.
    Riding F/S since oct 94'

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xxxbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    54
    I know you can build up a 575 under 28lbs, esp if you spec the carbon rear triangle, which makes 2.35s a very tight fit.

    The problem is that real All Mountain bikes are just going to weigh-in in the high 20s, low 30s. IMHO when they get much less, they become too delicate to ride in the manner for which they were intended. As an example, on my 575 I've got 2.5 Maxxis Minions as rolling stock and a Fox 36 up front. That's about 10lbs right there; and I wouldn't trade it. The bike rides better now than ever, and my confidence level is also way up. Fair trade for the extra weight I'd say.

    Heck, even the Scott Ransom Ltd weighs in at 29.9, and it's full carbon. I like to think it's because 6" bikes need to have some meat on them, not like some emaciated XC bike. All Mountain bikes as the Goldilocked perfection between Downhill/Freeride stability with sluggish climbing and the XC lightweight climbing with skittery descending.
    DirtyBike

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tkul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    611
    Why light bikes?

    Build muscles and cardio-vascular resistence - easy to go around... and UP!

  10. #10
    flow where ever you go
    Reputation: noshortcuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,516
    Quote Originally Posted by xxxbike
    I know you can build up a 575 under 28lbs, esp if you spec the carbon rear triangle, which makes 2.35s a very tight fit.

    The problem is that real All Mountain bikes are just going to weigh-in in the high 20s, low 30s. IMHO when they get much less, they become too delicate to ride in the manner for which they were intended. ......
    Nothing delicate on most 24-25 lb. Mojos.

    "I must not be crazy because I'm seriously questioning my sanity"

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skunkty14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by Tkul
    Why light bikes?

    Build muscles and cardio-vascular resistence - easy to go around... and UP!
    Exactly. Nothing like cranking by a guy/girl on a XC race bike on a 30lbs+ 6" rig on the climb. Not to rub in there face, but just to show that the engine matters more than the chassis when it comes to cycling.

    Now if I could only drop that extra 20lbs off my frame to make that actually happen rather than huffing and puffing up climbs...

  12. #12
    fuggansonofahowa
    Reputation: Hawseman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    776
    Quote Originally Posted by skunkty14
    Exactly. Nothing like cranking by a guy/girl on a XC race bike on a 30lbs+ 6" rig on the climb. Not to rub in there face, but just to show that the engine matters more than the chassis when it comes to cycling.

    Now if I could only drop that extra 20lbs off my frame to make that actually happen rather than huffing and puffing up climbs...
    WORD-UP, BRODDA!!! My azz frame is chunkin' some extra, nasty beef...need to grindah down some. Love that cottage cheese, baby...but it's gotta go.

    I gave up on shavin' grams a long time ago. I need the trail tools and parts to ensure my ride home is just that.....a ride.

  13. #13
    Don't be a sheep
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,341
    Quote Originally Posted by noshortcuts
    Nothing delicate on most 24-25 lb. Mojos.
    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.
    "Do not touch the trim"

  14. #14
    I already rode that
    Reputation: SuperNewb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,634
    Just because you lack the finess sp? doesnt mean everyone else does as well. Of course its normal to compare a 24lb bike to a 31lb one.
    Riding F/S since oct 94'

  15. #15
    IPAs make me wanna puke.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,605
    There is such a thing as TOO LIGHT for AM. I personally believe 29 to 31 is the sweet spot. You need some weight for stability through the rough stuff.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chqm8's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    183
    I just bought a Marin Mt Vision which weighs in at 29 lbs. I rode it this morning for the first time and it is sweeet. Heading to Mt Snow next Friday to really give it a beating!!

  17. #17
    Mojo0115
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    You can make any bike really light but then it becomes worthless for what the frame was originally intended. Yay, you 24 lb 6" travel Bike path bicycle.....also known as an Ibis carbon mojo.
    You can see lots of photos and stories of my Ibis mojo on bike paths at: http://www.seanambermoab.blogspot.com/

  18. #18
    Still a child inside...
    Reputation: danyiluska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    844

    .....

    I don't like when my weight is dominant on a light bike. It's scary on downhills.
    IMO the ideal is 15-16 kg.

  19. #19
    Life is Good
    Reputation: Judd97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,499
    My built up 2004 Enduro Pro weighs in at around 28 pounds.
    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live. ~Mark Twain

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    598
    I think around 28-29lb is ideal.

    Lightest? No idea mate.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    788

    definitions

    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?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    771
    As a lightweight myself, I like to keep my bike on the light side as well. Currently about 28.5 pounds for a small Bionicon Edison with Spinergy wheels.
    http://www.bioniconusa.com - Bionicon USA
    http://otbmbc.com - Over the Bars MTB Club
    http://corbamtb.com - CORBA

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    290
    Fisher Hifi Carbon 23.3 lbs for a medium 120/120

  24. #24
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,178
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperNewb
    Just because you lack the finess sp? doesnt mean everyone else does as well. Of course its normal to compare a 24lb bike to a 31lb one.
    If you ride with a lot of finesse you don't need an AM bike anyway. The argument you are making (one that I happen to agree with) is that you don't need an AM bike to ride what most people ride. An AM build indicates it can be ridden hard without a lot of finesse and hold up. In my book, and AM bike/build should be able to hold up to 4 foot drops to flat on a daily basis (edit: and occasionally go a little bigger). The OP was asking about AM bikes. No 24-25 lb 5" dually is going to fit this bill unless you are very light. Throwing xc parts on an AM frame give you a long travel xc bike, not an AM rig.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    109
    The Trek Fuel EX carbon models are very light around 25lbs or less I think. 130mm front and 120mm rear travel.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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