Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 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
    985
    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
    6,377
    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
    3,372
    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
    1,633
    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
    764
    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
    858
    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
    3,372
    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
    1,633
    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
    1,603
    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
    1,498
    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
    596
    I think around 28-29lb is ideal.

    Lightest? No idea mate.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    787

    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
    770
    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
    293
    Fisher Hifi Carbon 23.3 lbs for a medium 120/120

  24. #24
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,387
    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.

  26. #26
    Motion activated
    Reputation: Steve71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,133
    Quote Originally Posted by rrt1991
    what is the lightest all mountain bike?
    Depends on which "mountain" you're talking about.
    Happiness is a warm 2 stroke.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    442
    Speshy Enduro SL at 26 pounds... talk to somebody on the Specialized forum.

    I built one in my mind at 24 pounds, but meh.
    Riding and loving it

  28. #28
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,557
    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. #29
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,787
    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. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    768
    Quote Originally Posted by derby
    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. #31
    Mojo0115
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,667
    Quote Originally Posted by derby
    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. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    19

    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. #33
    Birthday Collector
    Reputation: ATBScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,580
    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. #34
    attending to my vices
    Reputation: moshelove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    461
    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.
    OVER THE LINE SMOKEY!

  35. #35
    flow where ever you go
    Reputation: noshortcuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,516

    move over nomad

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    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).

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

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    71
    According to french magazine VTT, some of the lightest 140mm frames include the Ibis Mojo and the Ellsworth Epiphany, both around 2600g (large and medium respectively).

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    6,212
    this thread should be in Mountain Bike Action...

  38. #38
    the goose is loose!
    Reputation: rm_racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,276
    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

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    442
    Holy crap... the older Speshy Enduro frames weighed a meager 5.1 pounds

    http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=302
    Riding and loving it

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,110
    "Claimed" weight, my friend.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    442
    Ah, the pain of realization
    Riding and loving it

  42. #42
    the goose is loose!
    Reputation: rm_racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,276
    yeah, so with linkage bolts, shock, paint, and the hydrogen pumped out of the frame, it's gonna be heavier.

  43. #43
    198
    Reputation: RSutton1223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,804
    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.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    95
    Cannondale Prophet at 27 lbs in medium is a good contender. I think the the frame is 2700 gr with shock.

  45. #45
    the goose is loose!
    Reputation: rm_racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,276
    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.

  46. #46
    I already rode that
    Reputation: SuperNewb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,633
    Grams is XC racing and pounds is AM?
    Riding F/S since oct 94'

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by rm_racer
    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.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socalenduro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    410
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperNewb
    Grams is XC racing and pounds is AM?
    I couldnt agree more.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ikilledkenny2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    223
    The 2008 Specialized Stumpjumper S-Works Carbon. 22.9 pounds
    Trek T1 . MOJO SL 2011 Fox 32 Talas 1X10 FTW

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ikilledkenny2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyg
    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.
    Trek T1 . MOJO SL 2011 Fox 32 Talas 1X10 FTW

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •