You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
After taking a bit of a battering riding my current 29er HT today (my only MTB) it's sort of occurred to me that I would benefit from replacing it with some flavour of FS bike.
I've got a one in one out policy to stick to, and TBH these days I'm a fair weather MTBer doing Most of my year round riding on road and gravel bikes and only dusting the mountain bike off when it's sunny out.
But the thing is I'm not sure what sort of Bouncer I want now. I sort of feel like for a bit of local cheeky trails and swinley type stuff something around 120mm travel would be more than adequate, but then if I'm buying a bouncer and I will be heading for more testing trails in Wales and other places should I be looking at 140mm+?
It used to be simpler moar travel meant more gnarr, so I had longer travel bouncy bikes and a HT for 'normal riding' but now I need one bike for the all uses and there's a few bikes about that apparently buck that old simple travel based rule of thumb plus there's more to a bike than just travel figures...
I am out of touch with it all I'm liking the look of the Evol, aeris 120, 145 and AM9, I still have a soft spot for the bossnut (mainly because it's so cheap) or I could just go shopping for a used specialized of some kind they're bloody everywhere...
Suggestions?
Canyon Neuron?
I am pretty much you, used to have all sorts, HT, FS, road, fixie....
Rationalized to one bike, SC Bronson. I firmly believe that modern 160 bikes pedal so well they aint just for big techy days any more, the Bronson covers ground brilliantly.
I also only have space for one bike so recently swapped all my parts from a 2018 steel hardtail frame to a 2015 Vitus Escarpe frame. 150mm up front and 135 rear.
Haven't looked back. It has done everything from fire road winter routes to bike park Wales days. If anything I'd like to put a 160mm fork up front but it's a really good all rounder that can pedal a 30 mile Sunday morning.
150/160mm bike for the win! I'd love the Bird AM9 you mentioned though....
I've had everything from a mini down hill bike (antidote) with loads of travel to a titanium HT.
In my opinion you don't need 150 /160 mm travel as no matter what ppl say a bigger travel bike will not pedal as efficient, there heavier and due tend to squish on the climbs especially if you've not got the set up correct. I was in a similar situation to you a few years back and it got me thinking, when does your average rider regularly use 160mm travel on an average ride? Never.
I actually sold my 170mm travel antidote (because it was too much travel that I never used) that I used for everything from xc trail rides to holidays mountain biking in the alps down to a titanium 650b Hard tail with a 140mm fork, then also purchased a kona process 111 29er full suss for the heavy full on rough days. After riding the Kona 111 for a while I realised that no one actually needs a that amount of 150,160 travel. I've used the Kona process 111 for everything from xc rides to down hill days at Dalby forest triple Black run etc. Yes I'm not as fast as someone on a full on dh bike but I was actually faster than some mates on the big enduro bikes. The bikes 120 rear and either 120 or 130mm front depending which year you purchase and with it being a 29er is sgoes over everything!
I can honestly say it's also made me a better rider as your actually riding the bike instead of just relying on the masses of susspension alone to get you out of trouble. Try a kona process 111 as you can pick em up for a good price now as they have stopped production. You won't be disappointed.
Lots of places run demos - I think Leisure lakes does a weekend where you can try a many different bikes as you like over the day.
Why not get yourself on one to see what you do or do not like.
Whilst I do not disagree with the other posts, I would pick a bike for what you mainly ride. Yes longer travel bikes pedal very well but their geometry means that they are less engaging than a shorter travel bike on tamer trails. From what you describe I'd be looking at a 120mm bike - it will still cope fine at tail centres and BPW, you will just be slightly less fast downhill... Most aggro 29ers are 20mm shorter in suspension anyway, so a 120mm 29er will probably be equivalent to a 140mm 27.5er broadly speaking...
Recommendations depends on budget but it appears you are looking on the more value side of the spectrum - I'd consider a Scott Spark, SC 5010, or similar.
Have you read my/any of the FlareMax threads - I’d recommend Roverpigs. So, a Cotic FlareMax... get that.
For me if I had just one mountain bike I’d want an fs with around 120-130mom travel with reasonably modern geometry and something like a Pike on the front. Built with strong ish but not too heavy wheels and decent tyres and brakes.
I’ve got a playful hardtail with 140mm forks and a Bird Aeris 145. I think my 1 bike for everything would be an Aeris 120LT with Pikes, some light 25mm internal diameter DT Swiss trail wheels, Maxxis exo tyres (prob dhf / aggressor) a decent 1x11 sram drivetrain, Codes, 150mm dropper etc. That could handle uplift days but still be fun around the likes of Swinley and big natural loops.
Interesting, much of the same points I'd considered.
@drock085, I'd not considered the process 111 but that's not a bad call, I might look into one.
I think I'm coming to the same conclusion that a frame over 120mm would be a bit of a waste, a slightly longer fork would probably help me more... I just want to take the edge off out back on rougher stuff.
Yesterday was my first go on 'top chief' and while it was rideable on the HT, its clearly a trail where some suspension would be a huge benefit...
I'd agree, over 120mm starts to move away from "(quite) a bit more control and speed" and into the realms of the bike doing the work which starts to get dull on local trails.
There's bits of Swinley that are great on a big bike, but they're few and far in-between. 5" just gives enough controlling and grip over the rougher bits to keep your speed up without feeling like hard work.
If I lived somewhere else I'd think differently, but couldn't motivate myself to drag a slack 150mm travel bike round the SE. They climb well (on fire road s at least) but it's the flatter stuff that kills them.
I'm a few months in on my Norco Fluid FS1. 120 rear and lengthened the Rev from 130 to 140. Upgraded to XT 1x11, Hunt wheels. Great geo, long-ish, 29x2.6. Capable but still Very fun on our SE trails and I'm looking fwd to bigger stuff like Wales etc. Climbs well, no bob or need for lockout, steep ST.
I was in a similar position to you last year. Sold the HT (only bike) and managed to pick up a used Cotic Flare for a great price. I’d highly recommend one. I’d still like a drop bar bike for razzing about on the local canal towpath though. Ooh and a cruiser for family bimbles. One bike is never enough 😀
Yeah all the other bikes are staying as is, I simply can't justify owning 2 MTBs these days...
So a 5" travel 29er seems to be the way I'm drifting...
Seems like there's more choice than I thought...
I think 130mm is the sweet spot for general trail riding. I've got a fuel EX & it's great on long climbs with minimal bounce. feels like more travel on the downs. can't fault it really
I've got an orbea Occam tr which is 120 rear and 130 front suspension. Climbs well and handles rough stuff very well. Had a Stumpjumper for the summer last year which was 150 front and rear and whilst great going downhill was overkill for the trails I do and definitely harder work uphill than the orbea I have now. Loads of bikes out there now in the 120 - 130mm range. Good luck!
https://www.canyon.com/en-gb/mountain-bikes/fat-bikes/dude/ or something similar.
A fat bike? **** that.
Buy a wide rimmed rear 650b wheel and put a 2.8 tyre on it. Cheaper and easy added comfort for your current HT. Then demo a FlareMAX (biased).
Thanks @Kryton57 I wouldn't actually go as far as to say it has to be a FlareMax as I'm sure there are lots of other great bikes out there and some may suit the OP better, but I have been struck by how these modern short but progressive (for want of a better word) full-suss bikes blur the lines between efficient, fun and capable.
Personally I think bigger wheels are part of the equation, but most of my riding is on open tracks on Scottish mountains, so something that can munch the miles is an advantage.
I used to think that I needed something "big n bouncy" for the tougher sections and something like a hardtail for the tamer trails, but it never really worked. Very few of the things I ride really require a big bouncy bike and I'd be frustrated by the inefficiency. The hardtail had the efficiency but I found the constant jarring over rough ground got old very quickly and these days I find my back grumbles for days afterwards too.
With the FlareMax I'm happy to ride all day on tamer trails as it's still efficient and even on tame stuff I find it more fun than the hardtail. I've got hundreds of hours of data now which prove (to my satisfaction at least) that it's no slower overall than my old Solaris hardtail, yet I can ride it all day and still get out of a chair the next morning without groaning. On the other hand the geometry means that it is easily capable of tackling anything I'd ever ride and a whole lot more if I'm honest.
I do still have the rigid fatbaike (a Dude as it happens) but to be honest that's mainly for the odd snow day and so that I have something to ride if the FlareMax does break. I'll sell it to you if you like 🙂
Swarf contour, ST did a write up on the prototype a while back didn't they? and I liked the look of it it back then...
This looks like the one...
Can't afford it but I want it.
That’ll do 🙂
It was on my shortlist when I got the FlareMax. Never ridden one, but the numbers look right and I’ve only heard good things about one. I’m sure someone on here has one. Maybe time for a new, more specific, thread.
The Swarf Contour is the bike I’d have if money wasn’t an issue. The nicest looking full suspension bike I’ve ever seen. Figures all seem great too.
If I can rustle up £2k (not quite sure how) I can reuse half the HT's components, I'd definitely need a new 148mm rear hub though...
Not sure my Deore drivetrain and my shonky old Reba would do it justice as a build, but it would get me rolling... Hmmm...
It's more than I really wanted to spend on a whole bike for just the frame and shock, but I might just have to go and do some sums/flog some stuff/save a bit and play the birthday card...
So you have a hardtail, a gravel bike, and a road bike, and want a full suss?
If you're allowed a gravel bike and a road bike then you should be allowed a hardtail and a full suss.
Therefore, ditch the gravel bike.
Ignore if I've misinterpreted where you say about road and gravel bikes.
I’ve got an AM9 which I love but I’m bloody glad it isn’t my only bike. I don’t like riding mellow trails/XC on it at all. In fact it would be the first to go if I had to get rid of one. I’ve got a late model t-129 which is a pretty good candidate for an only bike. Covers ground, 130fr/120rear, can cope with bike park and DH trails with too, although obviously not as well as the bird.
So you have a hardtail, a gravel bike, and a road bike, and want a full suss?
If you’re allowed a gravel bike and a road bike then you should be allowed a hardtail and a full suss.
Therefore, ditch the gravel bike.
Nope the gravel bike sees far more year round use than the MTB, same with the road bike and the commuter.
Plus it's a self imposed limit I'm "allowed" as many bikes as I want (in theory) but I only really need one MTB...
at my peak of bicycle ownership I had seven bikes and four of them were MTBs, (two were bouncers) but I've never owned a suspension bike with less than 6" of travel so a shorter travel bike is new territory for me...
Maintaining any more bikes just becomes an embuggerance, I'd rather be riding than spannering...
I'm almost certain now that the Swarf (or something very like it) would nicely bridge the gap between a rowdy trail HT and a full fat #enduuurrrooo sled, making two such bikes pretty much redundant... Plus it pretty.
I have a 29er HT (Cotic Solaris) and a T130 full sus, i really don't like using the HT for anything more than easy local stuff as i have a bad hip and knee, which the older i get, the longer it takes to get over a ride on the HT. I agree that 130 is a good one to look at, i also don't think they 'take the fun out' of the local stuff, unless you ride it the same way as on the HT, i find i can get through faster and take riskier lines, so no real reduction when in the FS i can see.