ONE BIKE to rule them all...- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Y no grease?ლ(ಠ益ಠლ
    Reputation: greasemeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    770

    ONE BIKE to rule them all...

    Cool ad, hehe. Anyway this isn't really about Pivots but more of a general suspension travel / design question. If you were to own only a single bike, wouldn't you prefer more travel over less, i.e. more travel = more options? I don't see why one would choose a $3,000+, 4.7" trail bike, when you could have 5.5" for the same price? Sure, the 4.7incher is slightly lighter, maybe quicker steering with 1 degree different head angle, but wouldn't you want the extra capability of more travel?

    I suppose it's for people that are surrounded by a network of specific, less-gnarly trails, who never ride anywhere else and therefore the xtra suspension is unnecessary? Or is there some drawback to having another inch of susp. travel I'm not aware of besides weight?

    All I know is, some of the best reviewed trail bikes out there are 5" & up in travel..

  2. #2

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,903
    bikes with more rear travel usually have more front travel too. having a bigass long fork doesnt make for the best climber.

    assuming both bikes have been designed around the same size front fork, id probably want the one with a little more rear travel too.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,607
    For the type of ridding I do 4" is the
    sweet spot. 6" plus travel is over kill
    for me. Plus I really like a light bike.


    Best, John

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hardtails Are Better's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,294
    There are hundreds of threads on the same subject. Try searching. Basically what it boils down to is this: people ride differently over different terrain. This requires different bikes. If you're going to be limited to one, what you want depends on a ton of different factors. There is not, and never will be one bike that is everything to everyone.

    \thread

  5. #5
    Y no grease?ლ(ಠ益ಠლ
    Reputation: greasemeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    770
    Try searching? Wow you just owned me, props broham. How about, 1 person, riding the same way, over the same terrain, shopping for a new bike, picking 4.75 inch travel over 5.5? Same price, roughly sameish weight, seems odd to limit your options but w/e.

    For example I notice Ibis created the Mojo as their personal dreambike, and it is guess what, 5.5 inches.. anyway gj on dismissively missing the point, +1

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D34ThL0rd69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    153
    Who wants to hump a big clumsy boat around all the time?

    I'd rather have the raw, visceral experience of not-quite-enough-bike-for-the-terrain.
    I want to feel the rocks and roots succumb to my power and momentum.
    I want the trail features to decide my line, not my level of boredom.
    If i wanted a smooth ride, why don't i just hop on my road bike?

  7. #7
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,635
    There's a lot of times when I'm riding my Yeti 575 that I'm thinking 'this is too much bike for this trail' and that the 4" bike it replaced would've been a better option. Little lower to the ground, little tighter handling, etc...

    Only one thing to do. Build another bike. I'm thinking 650B hardtail....
    No moss...

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veritechy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    603
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffw-13
    There's a lot of times when I'm riding my Yeti 575 that I'm thinking 'this is too much bike for this trail' and that the 4" bike it replaced would've been a better option. Little lower to the ground, little tighter handling, etc...

    Only one thing to do. Build another bike. I'm thinking 650B hardtail....
    Build another bike +1
    I've built 3 for the same reason...Oh my wallet.
    BTW I end up riding the 5" most of the time.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,673
    Quote Originally Posted by evilhead
    If you were to own only a single bike.
    I refuse to accept your premise.
    Warning: may contain sarcasm and/or crap made up in an attempt to feel important.

  10. #10
    Y no grease?ლ(ಠ益ಠლ
    Reputation: greasemeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    770
    Hehe, yeah, it's tough... got to start somewhere tho. I guess can't go wrong with either.. I can dig deathlord's point, but then again, I wouldn't call a mojo sl or a mach 5 or yeti 575 or snyper 140 etc "big clumsy boats"...

    Maybe get a 4.75" travel one first, then a 6+inch bomber later on?... or fuggit, 5.5" trailbike & call it done... no idea. It's all good though I guess keep an eye on sales/deals will be deciding factor in the end.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veritechy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    603
    BTW there is a big difference in ride between a 4" and a 5" bike...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D34ThL0rd69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    153
    this thread is like a Mountain Bike Action reenactment.

  13. #13
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,876
    Quote Originally Posted by evilhead
    Cool ad, hehe. Anyway this isn't really about Pivots but more of a general suspension travel / design question. If you were to own only a single bike, wouldn't you prefer more travel over less, i.e. more travel = more options? I don't see why one would choose a $3,000+, 4.7" trail bike, when you could have 5.5" for the same price? Sure, the 4.7incher is slightly lighter, maybe quicker steering with 1 degree different head angle, but wouldn't you want the extra capability of more travel?

    I suppose it's for people that are surrounded by a network of specific, less-gnarly trails, who never ride anywhere else and therefore the xtra suspension is unnecessary? Or is there some drawback to having another inch of susp. travel I'm not aware of besides weight?

    All I know is, some of the best reviewed trail bikes out there are 5" & up in travel..
    In my experience, more is not always better. There is a sweet spot, and it will be a little different for everyone, and different terrain. Longer travel does have some drawbacks, IMO. For one thing, you need a higher bb hieght (and thus higher COG) or give of some pedal clearance. More squat on climbs (depending on the suspension design) and more fork dive unless you crank up the compression damping. Also, the slacker head angles that generally come with a longer travel bike is not as agile.

    For me and all around riding, I think around 5" is what works best for east coast riding where is want something pretty agile. When I lived in Tahoe, closer to 6" was pretty nice for the more wide open rocky stuff, but I found it a drag when I would ride the smoother flowing single track in the foothills.

    I think it is the same compromises for everyone, but different people have different priorities, so some choose 6" and others 80mm hardtails for the same trails I ride.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    90
    It depends on what you ride. if you ride fireroads, and curvy singletrack with a few roots here and there, then the extra travel in unneeded and will just make it harder to pedal. If you ride single track that has a few drops and maybe a jump or two, then the extra travel is going to be useful, and and not wasted. Personally I would go with a 5.5" bike, because I do jumps and drops here and there.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    131
    I recently bought a 140mm trail bike which is reasonably light (A 2009 BMC Trailfox 01) as my do it all bike. I still have a 100mm bike, but don't use it much anymore since the TF01 arrived. The key which makes the TF01 and similar bikes so versatile is the light weight and efficient suspension (The TF01 bobs less than my 100mm bike and that without propedal activated). The TALAS fork adds to its versatility in climbing performance, but also in geometry (lowering the fork makes the HA approx 1deg steeper for each step down on the TALAS; going from [email protected] to 70 @100).

    If you never ride terrain for which you'd need 140mm I'd opt for a lightweight 120mm bike with fixed fork. I would only go to 100mm again if I were to race (which I don't), adding a bit of travel just increases the smile factor going down IMHO. If the roughest you ride can be handled by a lightweight 140mm (or 120mm) then I think in these days it is perfectly possible to have an all-in-one bike (if you're not racing that is).

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: screwyouguysimgoinghome's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    108
    Scott Voltage FR

    Muhahaha
    avoid Manitou forks at all costs... they have no souls...

  17. #17
    No good in rock gardens..
    Reputation: Sideknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,273
    Quote Originally Posted by D34ThL0rd69
    this thread is like a Mountain Bike Action reenactment.
    Next issue - bike types categorised by weight.
    Less isn't MOAR

  18. #18
    Double-metric mtb man
    Reputation: Psycho Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    4,482
    Greasemeat, there are a lot of things to consider here. As others have mentioned, where and what you ride will be important factors. East coast tight, twisty trails with roots are a lot different than "AM" riding out in the rockies.

    Comparing a 5.5-6" AM rig with a 4.7" trail machine can be a night and day difference...I know. I am currently riding a 5" bike with XC geometry and it is far different than a 5.5" travel AM machine. One was a bit of a jackhammer and twitchy on rocky, rooty descents, but climbs a heck of a lot better. The other was butter going down, but a bear going up.
    As if four times wasn't enough-> Psycho Mike's 2013 Ride to Conquer Cancer Page

    Moran? Let your opinion be free -> F88me

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    212
    OP, how long and what type of riding do you do?

    In the end there is no 'best' bike for everyone.

  20. #20
    Resident Texican
    Reputation: Texico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    170
    I have a 4" hardtail that can handle just about anything I've ridden so far here in north Georgia. My next bike is going to be the Cannondale RZ 140 4, though. I want something to ride without fighting the trail on the rooty rocky descents and trails. Plus I should be able to take it out west whenever I'm over in that part of the country. I figure 5" is probably the best travel for me, though. I'm just getting a better deal on the 5.5" RZ 140.
    [email protected]%K! Where the hell did that tree come from?!

  21. #21
    Y no grease?ლ(ಠ益ಠლ
    Reputation: greasemeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    770
    Yeah. I guess the problem was that I assumed everyone was like me & wants to be doing road trips, traveling to new areas to bike & explore, taking along their one do-it-all bike, so would want the extra capability for the various trails you'd come across. I live in Central Calif so its not overly crazy here, Downieville is in the neighborhood & although I'm no huge bomber I'd like to be able to cruise down sometimes without having to rent another bike. Love Moab, Sedona, Oregon, Whistler was cool, all of BC is great really... Utah, Colorado.. etc etc so I figured why get less travel & find yourself wishing for more somewhere on your travels. I'd like to be able to be out as an all-day thing, so cross-country / AM type stuff I guess.

    Reminds me of my road trip last summer, we saw a turn off for some dinosaur footprints/fossil beds etc, and went to take the exit but it was soon a pretty rough rutted high-center dirt road & had to turn back. Damn you, Passat sedan! Not that you'd only ever be rock crawling in a Jeep, but if we had one, we wouldn't have missed out.

    Evidently some people plan on never traveling out of their little area, or if they do they'll rent at the destination, or they have multiple bikes so its a nonissue. I was just trying to confirm 5.5 is about the sweet spot at the moment for the one ''do it all" type since I'm looking for a new ride.

    I'm even wondering if more travel would be the way to go. I went to the Pivot shop & the dude there couldn't wait to get his new Trek Remedy which is 6" ish I think ... but on the smooth fast trails I think I'd be annoyed. Depends on how well the bike is made I guess, they are getting tighter & better every year it seems.

    Anyway thanks for the input fellas

  22. #22
    Resident Texican
    Reputation: Texico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    170
    When I say 5" is the best travel for mei I mean for my body type. I'm 5'9" 145, so a bike with a slack HA and 120mm susp. (something like the 456 Summer Season as a full squish) would probably be perfect for me to ride just about any trail in the country. That being said, I've been planning to build up a 5.5" trail bike until I found a great deal on the 2010 RZ 140 (still 5.5"). It will be more than enough bike for any type of trail with my light weight.

    So to repeat, 5"-5.5" is perferct for just about any trail for me.
    [email protected]%K! Where the hell did that tree come from?!

Members who have read this thread: 0

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

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.