Question for Tallboy or Tallboy LT owners
I am planning on purchasing either a Tallboy or Tallboy LT in the near future and I am not sure which one is "best" for the trails I will be riding or if it doesn't really matter, either one would be fine. I live in Tewksbury and work in Burlington so Harold Parker and the Landlocked Forest are close buy. Also Russell Mill, Great Book Farm and Lowell/Dracut. So most of my riding would be in those areas.
I bought a rigid Univega Alpina Uno mtb in 1987, never got a chance to ride it before I got married. Just started riding again this summer. I have only had a chance to ride HP so far (stayed on the easy trails), so I am not sure what the other places are like. I am 5'10" and weigh 150 lbs wearing my gear. I would not be looking at riding any man made jumps, but an occasional drop in the trail would be fine. Serious steep descents that offer good crash and burn potential I would try to avoid, or at least go slow. No plans on racing.
I am planning on buying the "D" build in aluminum, since I am on a budget. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!
I'm not much help since I don't have either (though I've test ridden each for a total of like 10 minutes), but if I was making this choice I would go with the LT. I ride a RIP9 here in Mass and am happy with it and certainly wouldn't want any less travel than the 120 that bike has.
I ride a Tallboy carbon, never tried the LT so I can't compare, but I've ridden HP plenty of times and it's plenty of bike for the roughest areas. I also race so weight and XC handling is a factor for me. If you're into light hucking I'd prolly go with the LT.
SantaCruz Tallboy C
SantaCruz Solo C
Trek Madone 8
Kestrel RT 700
I have a TBc with a 120 fork. I live in Burlington, so I ride the same stuff as you. Great Brook, LLF, Mill Pond in Burlington and it's plenty of bike.
Santa Cruz Tallboy
Thanks all. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
Hi RDB - I don't own either, but work in a shop that carries them and have ridden them both a good amount. In an ideal world I'd probably want an LT aluminum for bombing on the trails and a carbon TB (non LT) for racing...
The extra plushness of the LT makes for a nice ride and the more slacker headtube angle makes steep descents fly by like a breeze. I rode the LT at the Wicked Ride at Harold Parker this past weekend and went out at the end of the day when the trails were pretty nasty and the LT ate up the trails, stuck to the wet and slick rocks and just felt really nice, sturdy and stable the whole time. I could feel that I was doing a little more work climbing than when I've taken the non-LT out for a spin, but with the conditions as they were yesterday, it's a little difficult to make an apples to apples comparison.
Both bikes are quite capable of handling difficult terrain at high speeds. The LT is certainly a shade better on the descents and the non LT a shade better on the climbs. The plushness of the LT by sitting a little deeper into the SAG make it a little more fun and forgiving to ride while the snappiness of the non LT makes it a little easier handling and more fun to ride. I intentionally said that they are both more fun to rider than the other because they both are a lot of fun to ride...
Thanks for the input. I ended up getting a good deal on a 2012 Superlight 29er and bought it last week. I was at the Wicked Ride on Sunday, where I rode it for the first time. Bike performed well, and I had a great time. I would have liked to purchase a Tallboy, probably an LT, but felt it was better to buy something now and just go ride it, and the Superlight 29er seemed like a logical choice.
Originally Posted by danhasdrums