[Closed] One bike to rule them all?

Mojo?

Impossible, unless [i]all[/i] has an incredibly narrow definition.

Have nearly got there. Got a cove g spot which is light enough to pedal a lot and strong enough to really go nuts with it. However for xc stuff a big full sus its going to suck

One bike to rule them all? - Something like a stupjumper evo carbon.

that'll do it...

(no, i don't have one)

druidh - Member

Impossible, unless all has an incredibly narrow definition.

true, the stumpjumper is probably a bit slow on tarmac/sand.

Depends on the rider - in the right hands I'd imagine there are plenty of pretty mediocre bikes that could be faster [b]and[/b] tackle tougher stuff than most of us could dream of on any bike we chose to name.

Ahwiles, I know that bike can do it all, I've ridden one and it is mindblowing. I can't help but think it'll be a chore for longer xc spins and it'll render some less technical trails pretty dull

I think you are looking for bike so beset with compromises that it's greatest strength is it being average at everything.

I tried and it could do everything, but was never brilliant at any one thing. Two bikes are where its at for maximum fun.

Rorschach

I think you are looking for bike so beset with compromises that it's greatest strength is it being average at everything.

That's an interesting way of putting it.

kudos100 - Member
I tried and it could do everything, but was never brilliant at any one thing. Two bikes are where its at for maximum fun.

[i]Two[/i] bikes???? That's never enough!!!

Buy an Orange 5.

I'm hoping the new Tallboy LTc will be the one - i love my TB and 10,000kms of riding have only resulted in me moaning that it needs another 30mm of travel. Behold the new LT.

Nomad carbon.

A Carbon Stumpjumper EVO is gonna make a whole lot of trail riding VERY boring for you. Even if it does only weigh 26lb cos it's covered in SRAM XX or full XTR.

The problem isn't so much the weight as it is the suspension travel and the geometry.

If you only ever ride at trail centres like Afan, then maybe a 150mm lightweight full sus bike would make more sense as an only bike. For me, my 5" travel full sus bike makes too light work of a lot of natural riding I do, so I ride my hardtail a lot more these days too.

I think with a 120mm full sus bike and a DH bike currently, you've got a reasonable spectrum covered. If you're pondering the need of the full sus bike, cos you don't use it at all, then sell it, and buy a hardtail! Then when it comes time to upgrade the 120mm full sus bike, maybe think about a 140-150mm allrounder in addition, but I'd bet you rode the hardtail more...

If you can afford a DH bike and a trail bike stick with that combo.

One type of bike to do it all is ALWAYS a compromise. I'd rather have a cheaper trail bike and a cheaper DH bike than one stupidly expensive carbon superbike.

muddyfunster - Member

But, I had a lingering doubt that even a 140mm bike might render a lot of terrain quite dull?

I used to think that but I've never found it the case, not with a good 140mm bike anyway. For a while I had a rigid bike, a long-ish travel hardtail and my big bike and I was riding them all pretty equally, on similiar stuff- your red and black trailcentres and xc routes- and they all made it fun. In different ways, sure.

But "do it all" depends entirely on your definition of "all". Like, I don't do massive distance, so my Hemlock makes a great do it all bike. If I didn't do the enduro/downhill stuff I do on it, but I did 24 hour races, then it wouldn't- but an Anthem X or something would. Few riders genuinely "do it all".

Seriously keep the big bike. There is nothing like going to a downhill track or the Alps and just having the grip to go at silly speeds. Point and shoot kind of riding where you are less worried about what you are hitting and more concentrated on just going flat out.

The most fun I ever had was on an Ancilotti tomaso out in the Alps, it felt so on rails, confidence inspiring and outright fast compared to anything else I had ridden then that I whenever I was riding it I had a massive insane grin on my face.

It was my first proper run on a full DH bike and the memory will be burned in my head forever. The bike just clicked right away, when I can afford it I'm going to get another big **** off bouncy bike again.

mboy

If you're pondering the need of the full sus bike, cos you don't use it at all, then sell it, and buy a hardtail! Then when it comes time to upgrade the 120mm full sus bike, maybe think about a 140-150mm allrounder in addition, but I'd bet you rode the hardtail more...

No, almost the opposite. I am using the trail bike so much I feel like putting some bigger forks on it.....falling into the old trap of making it into something it's not..

I can't see me going back to a hardtail in a hurry.

The most uncomfortable conclusion I've reached for a one bike solution is that a long travel hardtail does most of the things I want/need, most of the time.

I found my 140mm Wolf Ridge to be an absolute hoot along Welsh/Scottish steep trails, but it feels numb on flatter terrain despite the fact that it's easy to boost off roots and rocks. My 130mm Enduro is a better all day proposition and is almost race bike light but the pedal induced squat and total confidence on the techy stuff round my way leaves me feeling a little uninvolved. However, on unfamiliar terrain, it's my first choice.

So I bought a steel hardtail commuter frame (an Orange Pure 7)...and it's the bike I most enjoy riding. There's no suspension at the back t sap energy, it pings off the terrain like a pinball and is compliant enough not to beat me to a pulp.

It makes perfect sense then that my next bike is none of the above.

a long travel hardtail will probably do everything but nothing particuarly well id go fuel ex..

Santa cruz trc looks like it could fit the bill.

What about a Scott Genius?
6 inches front and back but both are reducible and can lockout.
Potentially you could go from an all rigid bike to a 6 inch full bouncer on the same ride.

The very phrase I used to describe my [url= http://www.basquemtb.com/cove-g-spot-review/ ]Cove Gspot (review here)[/url]. I ride everything on that, big loops in the mountains, xc-style riding and shuttling the local DH courses. For all the types of riding I do it's good. The idea of a bigger bike making the terrain dull isn't a problem. If you read what Cy wrote about the rocket a few days ago then that's what I like most about the GSpot. It's poppy rather than magic carpet, meaning it's fun on all the trails I ride.

The great thing about having one bike to do it all is that you are always on it, no matter what bit of trail is coming up next. You're never wishing you "just had the big bike for this bit". I can head out and do 30miles on the cycle path but just swing past the DH tracks on my way home.

FWIW, I think you always need 2 bikes, just incase one breaks, but my other bike is a Zesty which I never use.

Not sure a evocarbonjumpstumper would be my choice, as 'Do it all' entails an element of dirt jumping. Some sort of lightish, beefy HT with a DH slant would probably be the best compromise for the type of riding and terrain I play/ride on. Not great at anything but not totally out of it's depth anywhere. Fun or fast?

I tried and it could do everything, but was never brilliant at any one thing. Two bikes are where its at for maximum fun.

Really, neither brilliant at "any one thing"? You must be very, very good or have a very extreme definition of do-it-all. I would guess the issue is not bikes at either end of the scale struggling with the bits they do well, it's the grey area inbetween. I think the answer to the OPs question lies in his definition of do it all and the type of riding he enjoys, not the collective which by default will be more complex.

I have a pretty high end 140mm trail bike and for me it's a do it all bike. I've flirted with a second HT but frankly can't imagine any time when I would want to ride anything other than my full suss (although wet night rides might be the exception), this is because I don't ever enjoy flat XC and if I do a more mediocre ride I still spend all my time looking for lines where I can use my bike for what it is designed for. Standing staring at a line of bikes wondering which one is most suited for the trail you're heading for??? No thanks, I'll have a bike that suits my riding not where I'm riding (Extreme DH and competitive XC not included).

I think what the OP needs is a light ish 140mm trail bike with lockout rear suspension to liven up dull flat trails. I have a Five but I think Scott do some very nice trail bikes with lockout suspension.

The answer is of course a Bionicon 🙂

I'm in a similar position at the moment. I currently have a stumpy and it is light enough to do all dayers on but for 80% of my riding it just flattens it right down and does take some fun out of it.

I'm considering a hardtail 29er for that type of riding but I'm trying to decide if I really want to run two bikes.

I do it all on a 140mm full-sus. It was a long forked hardtail for about 10 years, but then I got old and injured.

I have a commuter as well tho, as i don't think my MTB would last too long locked up outside the station.

Does that count as "one" bike?

inevitably when owning multiple bikes, there comes a time when they ALL need fixing at once, and its pain in the @rse.

Is it as straight forwards as XXXmm of suspension travel/XXlbs on the scales = and "allrounder" though?

Not all 120/140/160mm travel bikes are the same, as already stated there has to be a compromise somewhere, the bike has to have a bias towards one type of riding or another, I'd expect that as the travel gets longer that in most cases the geometry and suspension setup gets marginally slacker and more DHey but that isn't neccessarily the case though is it?

"doug_basqueMTB.com" Kind of has it though, perhaps focus less on travel numbers and weights and think about it in more qualitative terms, do you really want to be totally insulated from the trail? or would you prefer a bit of feel and have the bounce there to just take the edge off of roots and rough stuff? in which case do you need 160mm to do that or can a well setup 120mm bike manage this and be easier to pedal up a hill or two?

I also can't help thinking that twiddly dials to lengthen/shorten/lock out/firm up/soften the suspension as required are going ot help you get a bike that is closer to an "allrounder" perhaps?
I mean I know most people seem to just want to set a shock up and leave it which is fine in most instances, but having suspension which is geared more towards descending won't help on the climbs, nor will the oposite firm setup help heading down, and a "somewhere in the middle" setup will just be that uncomfortable compromise that does nothing quite as well as it could, magic dials could actually be more use than extra millimeters for a true all purpose MTB... Till they break of course, then you'll just wish you'd opted for a nice simple HT...

i use my bottlerock everywhere. no problem climbing or descending in the alps or riding big drops etc at herts or commuting to coaching . love it 🙂

Yep, one bike won't do it all.

I have a 160mm (spec pitch/da bomb cherry bomb) bike as my only bike for a while, it did do everything, 6+hrs in the peaks, trail centres, lots of DHing, freeriding and the alps.

It started to make the peaks and trails centres a bit rubbish.

I just got a 100mm hardtail (charge blender) to go with the 160mm bike, the speed/acceleration i can generate coupled with the nimble handling has now turned dull bits into lots of fun.

I'd say a DH bike is too limiting, you can only use it DHing, there are situations where you want a good amount of squish bit it's also big hills day, so you have to pedal it. TBH aswell, there isn't much DH in the UK where you need a DH bike unless you're DH racing, i really haven't got out of my depth in the UK on a 160mm bike. I've only been riding about 1.5 years (though 10+ years BMXing) and haven't been held back by the bike at any point.

I'd say a gravity oriented bouncer 140-160mm that can pedal and a short travel but sorted geo hardtail.

I reckon you can get closer now than ever before.

My Nomad C is down to ~27lbs, yet still plenty DH capable, with a bit of time I could probably ride it within a few % of the sorts of speed I ride my DH bike.

With the amount you can adjust suspension now as well, I can near enough lock the front & back out if needs be.

As ever though, the limiting factor is generally the person on top of the bike, rather than the bike itself.

Orange 5. Talas 140mm "FIT".

I'd say a gravity oriented bouncer 140-160mm that can pedal and a short travel but sorted geo hardtail.

This is where I've ended up after trying most of the above. Currently on an El Guapo built mostly with bits off my DH bike (was a socom) and a 100mm 29er hardtail, built pretty spanky. Coming from a trance+socom (prior to that, prophet+socom - too similar, prior to that, prophet+remec, prior norco 5" + remec - even more similar, prior norco do-it-all).

I thought about 1 bike to do it all, e.g. get the titus really light. But then even as it is, on some XC rides on it, it's just a bit dull/safe? Or you end up going so fast on terrain you're not helmeted/armoured up for that you'd just end yourself if you got it wrong.

Orange Five (inc. Maxle), 36 Floats, 1x9 (or 10) gearing, 2 sets of wheels (one burly, one featherweight). Sorted.

Personally I still slightly hanker after a Yeti 4x built up more for use as a bit of an all round trail machine, a Slacker angled pretty Short travel burly frame made for rough and tumble, with a 120/130mm fork but I'm sure the reality of actually living with such a bike would just disapoint me... never meet your heros - isn't that what they say?

Maybe the compromise to go for is one bike with 2 possible setups perhaps? How about the "Standard" choice of a 5 with an good lightish air sprung, 2x10 "Trail" build, but invest in a second coil shock (doesn't have to be a CCDB, could just be a 2nd hand Vanilla off fleabay, possibly a set of offset shock mounts too?) and maybe some slightly tougher wheels with 2.5" minions on for uplifts or those days where you're just feeling a bit more DH than trail?

It would take you 5 minutes to change that setup and you are switching the 2 things that most people seem to find have the biggest impact on a bike; wheels/tyres and shock...
That's sort of 2 bikes in one but without the pain of actually having to maintain 2 complete bikes...

Edit:

Just read above post, Great minds etc...

The best do it all bike I've tried so far has been my Trailstar. Fine (if a bit short) for xc rides, great downhill and awesome for dirt jumps. OK in the skatepark as well if you have the appropriate tyres on it. The only thing I think would make it better is a longer TT, hence why I'm still considering a Surge..

Bullit is also fairly good for a bit of everything but suffers on the jumps due to the full-sussness of it. For me a do-it-all has to be a hardtail, because full sus bikes are crap for jumping on.

My Evil sovereign is probably as close as I have got to a do everything bike. I've been on long xc rides, ridden 30ft jumps on it and taken it on decent downhill tracks and it can do it all.

My full suspension attempts at a do-it-all bike, have all had too much travel and thus take out some of the fun from xc rides.

The blur 4x was my dream do-it-all frame. Short travel so it is still fun for jumps and xc, while also being very strong, so it can take a beating downhill. Too bad they didn't make an extra large.

Too bad they didn't make an extra large.

This is the problem I note with many possible "do it all" bikes. Nothing out there in the short travel, slack angles, tough line of things that comes in "man size".

salsa horsethief?

just sold the dh bike and the hustler and got this to do 'eveything' on:

[IMG] [/IMG]

Can get up any of the climbs round here, do all day 30-40 mile rides and is more than enough for the dh tracks; in fact it is more fun to ride on the dh runs as it dosnt flatten eveything.

This is the problem I note with many possible "do it all" bikes. Nothing out there in the short travel, slack angles, tough line of things that comes in "man size".

Yup. I searched high and low and could find nothing larger than a 17.5 which had the right angles, frame strength and suspension travel.

If a company could come up with something than has 100-115mm travel, good angles, strong enough to ride DH, but could be built up to around 30 lbs and in proper sizes, they would be onto a winner.

Well good to see I'm not alone, I knew this was something plenty of people think about but it's always good to canvas opinion and see there are like minded people.

I'm well aware that there is more to defining a bike than travel and weight. I'm a bit of a geometry obsessive, but it's the easiest way of categorising for the sake of easy conversation. I think it would be slightly hateful and flumoxing to start a thread saying "I've got one bike with a 69 degree ha, 73 and one with 64 ha and 70. Would I be better with a bike with 67 / 75 perhaps? Painful to read, and write. Also, wheels and rubber play a huge part in feel and attitude of a bike.

I find myself agreeing more with the people saying two bikes, and strongly disagreeing with the people who say Bionicon, Scott Genius etc, as those bikes turn me right off. Also, the fact i've never met a Scott genius owner who hadn't had serious reliability issues speaks volumes.

Other than grimly plugging through the winter mud, at night, or going to work, I can't see a hardtail in my future. For me a short travel full sus does everything a hardtail does ( even a long travel hardtail ) way better.

I think what I need to do is just tweak my existing setup. Stiffer wheels, maybe some slightly bigger rubber on the trail bike, so it's not so skittish on the downs, and maybe just view the dh bike as an occasional treat, and not feel guilty about not using it all the time. Kind of like a supercar in a suburban garage. Bring it out for a play once a month.

Oh and no offence to the people recommending an Orange Five, but that dog won't hunt. I'd rather eat fire while getting a petrol enema than ride a 5.

If a company could come up with something than has 100-115mm travel, good angles, strong enough to ride DH, but could be built up to around 30 lbs and in proper sizes, they would be onto a winner.

i thought i was the only person who thought this! cool.

I bought an 3 x 10 XT shod ASR-5 with F120 for "everything" I do from here in the South East, where singletrack is aplenty and Trail centres happen 4/5 times a year. Weighs in at 26.25lbs

Fits my brief perfectly, I've raced it, ridden it in Trailcentres and use it locally.

However, I recently got a Ti 100mm HT for my birthday. Weighing at 22lbs, I'll use that for events 50k or less (although I am considering it for the Beds 100k Sportive in May).

One bike is never enough....

kudos100

If a company could come up with something than has 100-115mm travel, good angles, strong enough to ride DH, but could be built up to around 30 lbs and in proper sizes, they would be onto a winner.

No, I think it would be awful for anything but playing around on very groomed trails. DH angles giving you confidence, but 100-115mm of travel would either be blowing through all your travel or pinballing about. Point it down something steep and again, your blowing through all your travel before you hit a root or rock. I think it would be pretty pointless.

However, with anglesets and offset shoch bushings and some creative spec you could make a pretty decent effort and prove me wrong.

I agree with Northwind on stressing that one bike is a very subjective concept. I have been trying to find it for a few months and expected it to be a trail bike of some sort eg, stumpy, fuel ex etc. But when testing a load of bikes on the same terrain I was very surprised to find that it was 29er XC machines that came closest to doing it all for me (obviously not mega DH) but steep stuff (surprisingly good), twisty stuff (ditto), lakes (ditto), Surrey Hills (ditto) XC events/trail quest etc (ditto). Have no plans to go to the Alps but I think I have found my do-it-all...anthem or epic XC 29ers.

[perhaps it was just the wheels!!!!! But mid/low travel FS bikes with 29 tyres do seem to kill a lot of birds with one stone]

No, I think it would be awful for anything but playing around on very groomed trails. DH angles giving you confidence, but 100-115mm of travel would either be blowing through all your travel or pinballing about. Point it down something steep and again, your blowing through all your travel before you hit a root or rock. I think it would be pretty pointless.

However, with anglesets and offset shoch bushings and some creative spec you could make a pretty decent effort and prove me wrong.

I don't know where to begin........

kudos100

I don't know where to begin........

Begin wherever you want. A bike with a 64? ha and 72? seat angle and a 45 inch wheelbase steers like a barge. Where would you plan on using this bike? On dh trails it would be pointless with no small grip compliance or grip, or as I've said it would be bottoming out constantly and feel like scat.

On singletrack it would corner slowly and ponderously and be an unwieldy p.o.s. It would be pretty piss poor for messing around and sessioning dirt jumps too.

EDIT: I just re, read your post and you said "good angles, strong enough for dh" which I read as "good dh angles". So my mistake, except of course if by good, you actually did mean dh angles.

I do 'everything' on my Patriot... commute (spare wheelset with slicks), XC/AM (same thing...), and DH.

It's 150mm each end, around 32lb (it *could* be with lighter components - wallet is the limiting factor).

So yes, quite easily can one bike 'rule them all' lol

No, I think it would be awful for anything but playing around on very groomed trails. DH angles giving you confidence, but 100-115mm of travel would either be blowing through all your travel or pinballing about. Point it down something steep and again, your blowing through all your travel before you hit a root or rock. I think it would be pretty pointless.

I don't agree, I think you'd find yourself riding such a bike a bit more like a HT with slightly wider margin for error perhaps, of course its not going to be a DH bike but I think alot more of a bikes cabability is in its angles and layout than the headline travel figures...

I mentioned the Yeti 4x earlier and that along with the old Blur 4X are prime examples of short travel bikes that can take their knocks, it's a different style of riding though, more like a forgiving HT than a DH sofa nimble, confident handling with a bit of 'give' for when it's really needed... Easier to lug about on the trails as it's not wallowing about with 3 inches of travel that are seldom used, direction changes are quicker, Easier to jump, it's just that plowing through roots or rock gardens isn't really their strog suit, but that's all part of the compromise...

There are two problems with the DH angled short travel option idea that I can see, one is finding a suitably stiff fork to take that kind of riding, and two is that a decently set up 160mm travel rear end is no hinderance.

So... you would need a 160mm fork like a Fox 36 but pegged back internally to 120mm and a similar travel out back, it's not going to be much lighter and probably won't ride as well on the doonhalls as a full 160mm of travel so why bother? While dicking about with my Nicolai Helius AM I spent a while with the rear end on short travel (127mm) in an effort to tame a crap shock. While it made the shock much better to the point where it actually felt good, on the 160mm setting with a better shock the bike is better-er-er... I don't understand why people would want a mismatched travel option as if I'm lugging the Helius about it's because I'm planning to enjoy the doonhalls I've earned. Shortening the rear end and running an air shock had no benefits on the climbs and flatter stuff but made the bike not as good on the really enjoyable stuff.
I still have an air shock and air fork which I can throw on it to drop the weight by about 2-3lbs, and if I throw on my other wheels with lighter tyres and go 1x9 instead of HammerSchmidt I can get it to sub 30lbs... but then I can't climb the super techy climbs I love riding as I'm overgeared, and I can't bomb the doonhalls in the way I love to do as I'm under tyred (the coil shocks make the bike feel better but the air options are good enough).

Maybe change your DH bike for modern AM bike can which do the DH stuff but can be pushed into more than just uplift days?

I'm in the "no one bike" will work for me camp. I love my AM bike but it is a bit big for some xc stuff, where I like a headtail anyway. I tried a light XC/trail hardtail but I broke it, so I built a heavier duty one, which lead me to riding it where I take the big bike, and it scared me, so I over built it some more... and now it's ace but I have no XC type bike again. Oh FFS... bikes are ace... build, ride, repeat.

So I have the two bikes, but I've made it so that as much as possible all the wheels and forks etc can swap from my hardtail to my AM bike... which is brilliant in concept but something I have yet to bother my bottom to actually do. If I want the big bike I take it and if I want the hardtail I take that... but I could build some funky hybrids of the two... if I feel the need... as I said above... bikes are ace... build, ride, repeat.

No, I think it would be awful for anything but playing around on very groomed trails.

If you think a blur 4x would only be good for very groomed trails you are seriously misguided.

DH angles giving you confidence, but 100-115mm of travel would either be blowing through all your travel or pinballing about.

Bike handling skills and technique give you confidence. Try riding a short travel hardtail dh. 110mm travel feels loads after this.

Point it down something steep and again, your blowing through all your travel before you hit a root or rock. I think it would be pretty pointless.

You are not going to run the shock at the same pressure for a DH run as you would for doing a tame xc ride.

However, with anglesets and offset shoch bushings and some creative spec you could make a pretty decent effort and prove me wrong.

Creating a do-it-all bike is all about compromise. Compromise with head angle, suspension travel, chainstays, frame weight, and on and on.....

No need for a super slack bike with loads of travel for it to be fun on DH. If you are building a do-it-all bike the chances are you are not going to be riding gnarly DH tracks everyday, so you would compromise this more than say trail riding and general messing about.

Someone who is a decent rider will almost always prefer to have 'less bike' rather than 'more bike' as it is more fun to ride. At the end of the day, what is most fun to ride differs according to how much skill you have on a bike.

Just to clarify, I did mis-read your post. I assumed you literally meant dh angles on a short travel bike, which would be dung. When what I presume you actually meant was a strong short travel bike with somewhat relaxed angles. Having said that I will come back to you

kudos100

If you think a blur 4x would only be good for very groomed trails you are seriously misguided.

I think the Blur 4x is the most over rated bike of all time, bar none. Unless you are an elite level rider it's quite a handful on very rough trails at dh race speeds. It's a fun trail bike with the right setup though, shame most people set them up like a pile of ****

Bike handling skills and technique give you confidence. Try riding a short travel hardtail dh. 110mm travel feels loads after this.

I agree. But no amount of confidence is going to make 110mm of travel feel good when you are hitting successive wheel sized compressions at 30mph. Trust me, I've tried.

Someone who is a decent rider will almost always prefer to have 'less bike' rather than 'more bike' as it is more fun to ride. At the end of the day, what is most fun to ride differs according to how much skill you have on a bike.

I think you've tried to add a barb there and imply that I am some sort of overbiked noob. I assure I am not, as evidenced by the fact that I can and often do ride my 120mm bike on dh trails with people on spicys, enduros, mini dh bikes etc and blow them into the weeds. XC lid and all.

If you're bemoaning the fact that there isn't a dh friendly short travel bike out there, and citing the blur 4x as an example, then it's pretty achievable to create something like a blur 4x. Compromised or not.

My own thinking on this theoretical "short travel ripper"...

Shorten the travel and you can easily shorten the chainstay and drop the BB a tad meaning that barge like cornering you describe due to a long wheelbase can be addressed while keeping a sensible front end layout...

As for a slack HA it is advantageous on the steeps to combat the whole 'tucking under' sensation that people often describe, and makes for a more stable feeling on more open faster sections...

The whole thing is about compromises of course, 4" of travel obviously can't be used in the same way as 6-8" but the trade off is a more nimble lighter on its feet type bike with less material to lug up hills, its a set of compromises I would at least consider...

it's pretty achievable to create something like a blur 4x. Compromised or not.

Please enlighten me. I have looked, but cannot find anything big enough.

Alpine 160 ?

big enough

As in you want blur 4x geo, but a substantially larger bike than a large blur 4x?

5 spot ?

orange 5

my take on do it all bike:

140 - 160mm travel
HA 66 - 67
carbon
11 - 12kg

Zesty - Spicy, either really light enough for all day

Pawsy_Bear

Zesty - Spicy, either really light enough for all day

I've spent enough time on the 2012 spicy 916 to know it would make 70% of my riding dull. Geo didn't suit me for proper dh ragging either. Climber brilliantly for such a bike though.

As in you want blur 4x geo, but a substantially larger bike than a large blur 4x?

Yup, 19" minimum.

Travel isn't the limiting factor in DH, it's the size of your balls.....

(i.e. confidence, not an actual reference to the size of ones testicles.)

I want to race XC, but also want to go to the Alps and have fun on the DH courses/lift assisted stuff.

My five would be rubbish for xc racing, my whippet would be rubbish for the Alps. If I could find one bike to do it all, I'd sell up all of them (including road bikes, I only train on my MTB now) and buy it today....Ok maybe not today as I'm busy, but definitely tomorrow...no hang on, can't do tomorrow....Erm Friday. Yes, Friday....

Travel isn't the limiting factor in DH, it's the size of your balls.....

Disagree.

Seems as if everyone has different ideas. It's almost as if we ride different trails or something....

Would say my ibis mojo

but my old marin serves me well too!

I've spent enough time on the 2012 spicy 916 to know it would make 70% of my riding dull. Geo didn't suit me for proper dh ragging either. Climber brilliantly for such a bike though.

Mudyfunster can you tell me why you found the 916 "dull" everything I can find/read about this bike says its a very sorted bike.

Going to look at one tomorrow, but proberbly won't get to try, so any comments would be great.

Also you mentioned the climbing ability, have you rode a carbon Zesy too ? How does the 916 compare ?

Cheers.

Sorry, missed your post. Just to elaborate on my statement that a 916 would makes things dull, well I was refering to less technical stuff. The bike steam rollers most trail obstacles and soaks up smaller jumps and drops in its stride. It's a very capable machine. Also, with 160mm of travel it insulates you from whats going on a lot of the time. Throw it into a bermed corner and you don't feel very much other than plush suspension at work.

I've ridden the carbon zestys too, to answer your question. For my money I'd rather have it than the spicy, whilst the spicy climbs really well, pedals really well, and as I've said, is a pretty good bike, I just think unless you live near something like several DH tracks and will regularly be pedalling up before shredding down, it'd be surplus to most requirements. Also, with wheels and especially tires capable of taking a serious dh hammering, the bike would be severely hampered for trail riding. So your into the faff of changing wheels and or tyres depending on what your doing.

With the zesty, it's climbs even better than the spicy, but doesn't flatter you or wrap you in cotton wool on the more technical stuff. It's still capable of rough stuff but is just a bit more involving. Also, I'd be more inclined not to mess around with wheels and tyres...just run higher pressures and finesse the bike on technical descents. Accepting it for what it is. I hope that makes sense.

Having said all that, I'm still not a massive fan of Lapierre.

There'll always be some compromise with the one bike to do it all approach. But some of us haven't got the money or space for more than one bike.

I've got an Intense Tracer 2 with 160mm Fox Floats. It's used regularly at Aston Hill, on Cwmcarns downhill run and at other trail centres.

I can't really fault it. Climbing is fine (okay it's not xc race bike having owner a Litespeed Ocoee) but heck it's a lot of fun going downhill. Sure it numbs less technical trails but then I want it to take care of downhill duties too.

My purchase was based on the long term review by this very magazine and a play on a mates Slopestyle 2.

One bike will always mean compromise, but it has advantages too. As Doug said,
you never wish you were riding your other bike,
your bike isn't wasting away in the shed
there is no adjustment time between rides

I'm currently on an alpine 160 which suits most of my riding,but I don't do long flat xc rides. On uplift days I put on DH wheels/tyres, the rest of the time I have a dropper post. My recent trip to Wales confirmed it was a bit of a slog on big climbs, so I now have an air shock (thanks Hobnob) which I will use except for big DH days. I'm considering have the coil tuned specifically for DH and may add some off set bushes too.

To be honest the biggest issue is my fitness not the bike, but I'm working on that, maybe some faster rolling tyres too.If you have the time to ride all the time a selection of bikes is ideal, but if like me riding time is limited it is a waste of money and I find it sad to see a once spangly bike gathering dust and getting dated.

You're all right!!! Great thread. I love the fact that some people have found a "do it all bike". G Spots, Patriots etc built up at 30-32 lbs sound fantastic.

It's also obvious that any suspension is too much for some people. If someone feels like they need a 100mm, steep headangled hardtail to enjoy their trails, then a 160mm bike is going to be meaningless to them.

I've ridden a 115mm Blur and a 150mm Enduro in the Alps, and I was shocked at the positive improvement caused by the extra travel and stiffness of the Enduro. Until I bought the Enduro the thought of a Fox 36 fork didn't enter my mind. However I now feel that an "all mountain, do it all bike" would be meaningless on DH-lite trails with a 32mm fork.

Johnhe - completely agree.

This is an interesting thread and kind of the way the things seem to be going. Gravity Enduro racing is going to become ever more popular.

An all mountain bike enables you to head to Snowdonia, spend a day at Coed y Brenin then hit the soon to open Antur Stiniog on a bike that can handle both. Then next year you'll do w2 at Afan, go to Gethin bike park for some downhill and before heading back home via Cwmcarn to hit the XC and a few runs on the downhill.

schbeemb - Member

An all mountain bike enables you to head to Snowdonia, spend a day at Coed y Brenin then hit the soon to open Antur Stiniog on a bike that can handle both.

Bingo... We had a lovely weekend up at Fort William on the big bikes. Day one, uplift on the red route and world cup downhill. Day two, oldfashioned XC around fort william, largely on the west highland way. Day three, laggan til our legs dropped off. You can't say one bike's perfect for them all but one good bike can take it all in its stride. (on that occasion, a Hemlock a Heckler and a Mojo but there's any number of bikes that would be just as good)

Santa Cruz TRC gets my vote. I previously had a Scott Genius which whilst it had a little more travel - it just doesn't climb like the TRC. Yet to test the TRC on a full on downhill but the video below shows a TRC on A-line at Whistler - seems to cope well.....

Northwind - sounds similar to our trip last year. Scotland has some top riding huh? The guy in the bike shop at Laggan was talking about a bike park proposal for the Cairngorms ... given the height of that range - it could be great but there are environmentalists causing problems (most of them people who had purchased second homes there whilst the locals could see the benefits).

Carlos - that's a dream location for. That and Queenstown. Must go soon. Whilster Bike Park has a new Alpine trail this year.. Looks great.

If I was to start over again and only have one bike I'd go for a mojo hd or intense carbine. I would like to try a 5 to see what all the fuss is about though...

Agree with a lot of whats been said. It makes for interesting reading

Am currently on a 150/155mm FS (with 32mm/maxle fork .. ), 100 or 120mm XC Hardtail with longTT/slack angles (+100mm 'play' hardtail)

My brother has a 120/120mm FS and a 180/170mm single ring coil/coil FS

I keep pondering whether to rebuild by old 120mm FS frame with bits from my XC hardtail. Likely a bit too squishy for XC, wouldnt be Singlspeeding it like I have the hardtail before now

Ooh and a 180mm+ coil FS appeals. A single ring heavy/slack bike would limit it to pusing up/uplifts/flattish 'commute' to DH/FR trails so would limit its use for me
Opting for double/bash, the slack/heavy is still going to limit uphill on anything reeeeally steep or technical where my 6" FS does quite well (with lots of effort and Uturn) and likely overlap the 6" FS to the point I wouldnt use it, taking the 180mm bike out instead just for that bit more for that one bit of a ride where I think I 'need' it. Plus end up spending ££££ on it and still not clean the difficlt climbs I can just about make myslef do now