You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I've had a xc fs bike before.
Currently have a specialized fuse. So 120reba 67.5 degree head angle. Dropper etc. I use this for riding around the lakes. I have a xc bike I use locally.
I know a fs bike would be more comfortable and I know how you don't have to keep getting out of the saddle all the time.
But I wonder what a trail fs bike would be like compaired to a trail ht (like my fuse)?
Been looking at bikes like the trek ex (130mm travel) or the yt 29er (140)...So similar in travel and head angles to my fuse.
Basically I have a fs itch again
What problem do you have with descending?
Get yourself a demo at wheelbase or cyclewise at whinlatter. Then you would know for real
In general, it will be more stable with better grip over rough stuff if you're comparing a HT and FS with similar geometry and forks. But, as mrmoofo asks, what is limiting you on descents? For me, it's usually fatigue, my legs are tired from the climb and I can cruise along faster on a FS bike because I can stay seated more. What do you mean by "better"? Faster? More fun?
Yeah I guess it's a hard question to answer.
We'll it's definitely skill holding me back.
Did borrowdale bash yesterday and felt right on the limit on all 3 descents.
Wondered if a fs bike would feel more stable for example
Your right though...what is better? Just different eh.
Stable, well that could be geometry/sizing/fork set up.
Personally after last year on a rigid half fat I struggled with my full suss, not used to the forks as it seemed intrusive and at whinlatter felt I could not locate the bike where I wanted to go.
Still like a full suss but tend to ride .rigid or hard tail.
<h1 class="post-title">Would fs make decending easier</h1>
pretty much the whole point of them!
Only easier under certain cirumstances it makes things easier
I have 2 hardtails and one fs. I think im faster on my hardtails on most descents just because they are 29ers not 650b like my fs
Do you feel more in control on your fs bike?
I have 2 hardtails and one fs. I think im faster on my hardtails on most descents just because they are 29ers not 650b like my fs
Aye, all those EWS guys should really be on 29er hardtails 😆
Bash is defo way more fun on a FS bike. IMO the speed you get from FS is pretty much all from getting nice and low through corners, not from wheel size etc.
Depends on terrain, but yes, it will.
It will also allow you to run up against your skills shortage quicker and therefore take you to the edge of your limits quicker and more often. This is the zone where you learn the most the quickest, but its the area where the chance of crashing is also significantly increased...
Depends where you're usually riding, although if you do the Lakes a lot I'd probably just get one end of.
On your local stuff, are there descents you ever swerve because they'll put you on your limit? That's the sort of thing that would sway me towards a FS, where it can make a material difference to what you take on, for stuff you're seeing regularly.
Other side of the coin is how these bikes climb and ride on the rolling stuff, which is a huge majority of most rides. You've got to be a bit wary of Teds on here saying stuff like 'I can't believe how well this nomad climbs, it's not just good for a 160mm bike, it's good full stop'. Obv it sucks balls climbing, but it makes less of a difference if all you do is winch your way up stuff in general.
Obv it sucks balls climbing, but it makes less of a difference if all you do is winch your way up stuff in general.
Depends on the bike, but most FS bikes actually climb better than a HT unless it's smooth.
People think HTs are quicker uphill because of the feeling of immediate power transfer, but forget to consider the number of times it hangs up on sqaure edges, spins out due to traction limitations and hooks up and messes with pedalling cadence.
Just as with cars, the primary aim of suspension is to keep the wheels in contact with the ground to maintain control. This translates into absorbing impacts to a point and depending on setup/components chosen may be tuned to come down on the plush side of comfort or the harsh side of efficiency.
It’s a deceptively hard question to answer and really the answer should be to understand FS bikes are different in most ways from HTs and rigid and further that they are different among themselves too. If you think you might like a FS bike, then ride many until you have worked out what qualities you appreciate and found one that works for you.
The days of necessarily ‘must stay in saddle on climb to prevent bob’ are long gone, unless you’re very small or large then well designed suspension should improve your climbing experience as well as descent although through common sense, you should expect bikes with larger amounts of suspension to be set up to favour descending at the expense of climbing.
Depending where you ride, there’s also the chance that a FS may suck the joy out of your trails. It’s not a simple question...
Definitely.
Forks make a big difference; my Stanton was hugely improved after putting better forks on.
But a FS has more grip so you can go faster uphill and use the brakes going downhill.
Given that all major MTB disciplines are predominately won on FS bikes should give you a clue as to the answer .
For me, the answer is yes.
I have a hardtail that is quite dated - 2004 Kona Caldera / 100mm Z1’s / 26” wheels / 2.4” tyres and Guide R disc brakes - recently started riding it off-road where I built it up for mucking about on pump tracks etc.
Even on fairly easy trails around Bristol I find I get tired much more quickly and my lower back gets sore quicker from a previous back injury.
On my 5 lb heavier fs I don’t get tired on the same trails anywhere near as quickly. And this is an Enduro type bike that is quite hard work on pedally flat trails with lots of slow sharp corners.
Get the fs on a big downhill and it’s so stable and you can take massive liberties with the lines you take over rocks and roots and drops. I’d get down trails on the hardtail but I’d be bashed and broken by the bottom and it would have been much slower.
Not to say I wouldn’t enjoy the hardtail, but I’d enjoy the fs more.
Appreciate there are better hardtails with bigger wheels hat roll over more / have longer forks / longer wheel bases and slacker geometry that would get closer to the fs - but 6” of rear travel makes a difference!
Yes. But....
Been running strava since it was released. My best times on all my usual trails that are predominately gravity orientated were on the full sus bikes. Get close with the hardtails with squish / rigid 29er's but still a good 10-20 seconds off.
But I have so much more fun on the ht's and the rigid bikes... More of a workout, more skill picking lines carefully, feel more connected to the trail etc.
When my back gives up and I get a little older I will absolutely get another full squish but believe everyone needs to ride hardtails for a bit as I think it really helps improve your riding skill.
Saying all this... If I lived in the lakes as opposed to the south east, I am pretty sure I would be riding full sus 🙂 everywhere!
Weĺl I have a xc racing bike I use for local pennine stuff. This would be for exploring the lakes. Not interested in anything too slack or tòo much travel as I like a big day out as opposed to just smashing down decents.So got to be an all rounder...like the sound of a trek ex.
Next question...is carbon work the extra price tag.
Most my other bikes are carbon. But on something so bouncy with less than 20psi I'm sceptical about all the stiffness guff I read. Is saving a pound or two of weight worth and extra grand? Guess it looks nicer.ha
No, it's not really worth the extra. And that's coming from a guy who's only mtb is a carbon FS. 😆
It might be worth going for carbon to get better other bits, depending on the range available. But basically yeah, just a weight thing really.
And to cut through the crap above then yes it'll be faster and give you more control, which it sounds like you're after.
If all other things are more or less equal, then a fs bike is bound to be quicker on almost anything that you could call off road.
whether quicker is actually better, is a whole different discussion.
A HT otoh, may feel more exciting to ride, due to the more direct feedback from the trail.
nobeerinthefridge.
You are missing my point.
IMO A full sus gives very little advantage for a lot of trails but for others they do
On a trail centre for example providing a pro has an acceptible bike he would still wipe the floor with me no matter what bike im riding
Imo people over sell the need for a full sus bike for everyday riding! Its more about skill than the bike
The 1990s called, they want their thread back!
(sorry, that is my only contribution)
Imo people over sell the need for a full sus bike for everyday riding! Its more about skill than the bike
it's about the rider. The trail. What you want from your riding - is easier 'better'? Is faster 'better'? - you can blather on with different qualifications and nuances indefinitely. I'd echo what a few folk have said already, get a test ride or two and see what you think.
And if you want something that's a hardtail but with added traction and a slightly bigger forgiveness envelope, have a look at a b+ bike, something like a Sonder Transmitter Carbon lurks somewhere in the borderlands between hardtail and full suspension particularly on rocky, straightish trails like a lot of Peak and Lakes stuff.
He's currently riding a B+ bike .