Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    130

    Fr & RR suspension travel mismatch on new ENdure 29ers??? WHY??

    Most of the long travel "enduro" bikes have matched the travel between the front fork and rear wheel, or get at least within 5mm from each other.

    How come nearly all of the long travel 29ers are running a bigger gap? The new YETI SB 150 runs a 170mm fork, Transition's Sentinel also runs a 20mm travel gap between the front and rear wheels..

    Why?

    • Is there something in the geometry that makes it desirable? if so, why on a 29 is that true, and not 27.5" wheels?
    • Does the suspension design prevent a longer travel and maintain a short chain-stay? I would bet the horstlink or Yeti's switch infinity could still adapt to that...
    • If the big wheels allow for less travel in the back, why the long travel forks still?
    • Does Bottom bracket height get ungainly high?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    306
    It's just hard to design a compact, long travel rear end with larger wheels. So they sacrifice some rear travel to meet their design criteria. There is nothing magic about matched front and rear travel, so they keep the advantage of the longer travel fork after shortening rear suspension travel.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    93
    I think it has to do with ppl getting less anal about symmetry. Also you benefit more from extra travel up front than in the rear. There are 200mm 29er bikes, so it has nothing to do with not being able to make a bike with enough rear travel. Mismatching front and rear travel have been done for years. both for 29ers and 27,5 bikes.

  4. #4
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,595
    Without getting into too many specifics there are drawbacks associated with increasing travel out back. Also, in terms of traction, there is greater need for more suspension up front. I find a bike feels much more balanced with more travel up front. For example, ever ride rigid? The lack of suspension up front is a massive game changer, compared to riding a HT.

    I personally much prefer my bikes to have more travel up front.

  5. #5
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    12,283
    Quality trumps quantity.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    946
    I think it's to get a bit more capability while keeping it efficient. I don't think there's an inherent benefit to having more travel up front outside of pedaling efficiency. DH bikes tend to have equal or slightly more travel in the rear.

  7. #7
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    29,792
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Quality trumps quantity.
    Yes.
    "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.

  8. #8
    bike rider
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    5,237
    Because people are willing to think of a 145 or 150mm travel 29er as an enduro bike but if it was a 27.5 they'd demand at least 160mm. There's some basis to this since the bigger wheel smooths bumps. It's easier to build a short CS and steep ST that clears a 29" wheel if you give up nearly an inch of travel and it helps pedal feel, so most companies go that route. I wanted a plusher ride so I got a 170/170 Capra 29.
    Keep the Country country.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,324
    The front and rear travel on a hard-tail is pretty imbalanced and their riders seem to cope?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    4,554
    ^^^ yeah. The dynamics of the front and rear suspension are quite different as the cg is behind the front wheel and in front of the rear wheel. Also, front wheel traction is much more important in maintaining balance and steering, so it needs to track the terrain better. If the rear wheel loses some traction over rough surfaces, it's much less of an issue.
    Do the math.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    946
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    The front and rear travel on a hard-tail is pretty imbalanced and their riders seem to cope?
    There's nothing wrong with more front than rear travel but I don't think there's any performance benefits outside of pedaling. In other words, for riding DH I'd rather have a 150mm front & rear bike than a 150mm front/130mm rear bike. I think I'd even rather have 150mm f&r than 160mm front/140mm rear assuming the geo at sag is the same.

Similar Threads

  1. Is this endure to small for me
    By ski1970 in forum Specialized
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-24-2013, 06:20 AM
  2. Will Turbo 1980 saddle endure AM type riding?
    By uzernaem in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-10-2013, 07:40 AM
  3. komodo 2 hanger & derailleur mismatch
    By johnhislop in forum Jamis
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-07-2008, 09:40 PM
  4. GPS & Software data mismatch
    By Papa_Otter in forum GPS, HRM and Bike Computer
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-30-2008, 04:59 PM
  5. Can I mismatch suspension ??
    By rocdog in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-30-2007, 08:11 AM

Members who have read this thread: 119

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.