You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Just reading about the number of electric bikes at Interbike this year and it go me wondering.
This is purely hypothetical so bear with me.
Would it be fun if we could build a bike that didn't take away the physical effort and skill of actually riding, but did increase the speed with which you cover the ground by virtue of having some sort of motor assistance? So for example something that sat in your rear hub and added say a couple of horsepower to your efforts.
If you think about it, this is pretty much what suspension has done for us anyway.
As I can see it, you'd be able to cover more ground, which would be no bad thing, for the same effort/work done. You'd be able to ride up more and it still be challenging, physically and from a skills perspective.
I think it would be awesome.
I think you need a Stannah Stairlift and a lie down.
[img] 
[/img]
Is it not then called a motorbike stricktly speaking?
no.
Always fancied a rocket pack addition.
Rather than getting lazy I just would have tackled the 50 miles commute a bit more often
J.
Really don't see the point, why not just get a motorbike?
Could be useful in some situations. A bit of extra power for getting a heavier bike up a hill for some descents, as not many places have an uplift. Somewhere like Stile Cop, or Leckhampton as examples some might know, where you want to maximise your riding down. Some sort of dynamo for recharging on the descent?
Could be useful in some situations. A bit of extra power for getting a heavier bike up a hill for some descents,
As al said
just get a motorbike, if you must - just kill the engine for the descents for that authentic bicycle feel
Really don't see the point, why not just get a motorbike?
Because a motorbike is a motorbike and that's not what I'm suggsting.
You wouldn't be able to rid it on anything other than road or a green lane.
You wouldn't be remotely responsible for powering it yourself so there's no satisfaction from having propelled yourself or done any exercise.
You'd have to pass your CBT and wear a full face helmet.
It spews CO2.
Do you want me to go on?
I'm talking about a very low level of power that say increased your speed overall by around 15-20% and would still be a bike, just one that had a little extra in the tanks.
Let's say you're time constrained. You want to get out for a quick 2 hour ride but you want to take in all you best bits of trail and that means you really need 3 hours. This would get you round.
Not a couple of HP (that would be like having a tandem, with 2 caverndish's pushing your allong!).
But I'd have one of those seat-tube mounted ones, or even as a development of the nicolai style gearboxes?
Say with 2 settings, a 100w 'fireroad' setting for getting up boring hills quicker, and a boost button that charged via regenerative braking for powering out of corners.
We were discussing the E-bike whilst at Eurobike and they make a lot of sense in countries where the bicycle is commonly used as a form of everyday transport. In the UK where they are predominantly seen as a toy then they don't really work that well.
Personally I would rather push my bike than have a motor on it.
are we talking about some kind of hybrid between a motor bike and a home gym?
No
some sort of rocket thruster maybe?
[img] 
[/img]
A funny thing happened to me and a mate the other day.
Were were on a training run and we noticed a guy up front. We were not gaining on him despite our race bikes and him on a fairly hefty looking bike with normal clothes and wellies cycling with his heals. We go to a fast flat section and started to pass him. He said hello without being out of breath. We stopped further up the road as my mate had inhailed an energy gel and he came past. Hmm had a motorised hub - we were relieevd 🙂
Might have been seen by you all before, but something like this?:
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/ghost-e-ndure-electric-eurobike-2010.html
OP I think you just need to get fit. I'd just do the 2 hour ride.
Seriously though, you don't think something like this will have significant weight, cost and maintenance issues? You'd need say 50W for 2 hours...needing a 12V 8Ah battery
I'm talking about a very low level of power that say increased your speed overall by around 15-20% and would still be a bike, just one that had a little extra in the tanks.
Learn to pedal faster/harder? Most, if not all the fun is in the pedaling. Yes, you'd go further but you wouldn't benefit personally.
No, I wouldn't be interested in one.
I guess the answer will only depend on what you want from your riding in the end.
It spews CO2.
Much like the power station you would need to charge the battery on your electric motor bike, I suppose.
No. I like pedalling, and I like my motorbike. I'd quite like an MX bike, too, if I'm going offroad with an engine I'd like to do it properly!
no
No fun when there is a big hill between you and home when the battery has died and you are on a long ride.
Also that much weight in the hub will make handling challenging too.
You would inevitablt freewheel for the first third of the ride then have to pedal the frikkin lump home 😡
You can imagine it happening though can't you. Not because keen cyclists want it but because people are lazy and don't like pedaling. I wonder how long it will be before mid range mtbs appear with a little helper out back.
How much are these systems? I chatted to a chap on an electric bike a few times on my commute (he thought it was amazing that I kept up with him up a hill) and the machine he was riding cost about £1500. He said it was rather a posh one so, if that's the case, how long until the motor part is a couple of hundred quid or so and can be attached to a £300 mtb.
Just ask Spartacus if an electric assist bike is a good idea, you might get an interesting answer. [/url][url= http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/06/news/cancellara-calls-motorized-bikes-claims-stupid-as-uci-looks-at-scanning-bikes_119452 ]Allegedly[/url]
I presume these bikes would come with a fluorescent jacket that read "I'm a Fat Biffer"?
I saw a chap on an electric Marin FS today (actually, I've seen him a couple of times now) - electric rear hub & battery packs on a seatpost-mounted rack.
Can't see the point, myself; as has been said above, for commuting, it's probably not a bad thing (although I'd have thought it would remove one of the major benefits of commuting by bike, namely getting fit) but for the trails it seems pretty pointless.
It's also heavy (so increased ground pressure & trail damage, especially when they're like sludge) and if you're hooning about with electric boost it may be seen by other BW users as a hazard, and might lead to pressure from horsey/walker groups to reduce MTB access.
Andy
I think some of you are being a little short sighted on this which is strange because MTB is normally a very forward looking technologically advanced sport.
In my opinion what geetee1972 is proposing is very much in keeping which the original ethos of the bike. Which is to improve and extend a persons capability to traverse the landscape.
Also I think people are getting confused with the mention of MX bikes they're not the same as a bike. Not only are there legal barriers to taking them cross country there are also practical barrier ie can one man lift a MX bike over a stile can it fit between the tree etc...
geetee1972 is proposing an electric assited bike you can take pretty much anywhere just like a mtb (if you dont mind riding on footpaths that is).
Also I think people are getting the wrong idea they are thinking of turning on a switch and not pedalling in the case of the current cheap e bikes but once your got a power source on the bike your'll be able to do some very clever things with modern electronics.
Power assist would just be that the bike could be set up to help you maintain a certain speed or help with the initial acceleration and then you take over to maintain the current speed. Or it could be even clever and kick in just when you need it ie making sure you have just enough power to make it out of that bomb hole. All this would either be invisible to the rider or controlled by their pedal strokes.
Some kind of sensor that monitors traction could also be developed and the motor may help to smooth out pedal stroke on loose ground making climbing easier.
Suddenly what was a slightly uphill boring singletrack through the forest would become an exciting technical challenge with a bit more speed.
I think wether this is possible and will come to be is very much dependant on the development and research into battery technology. Im sure powerful and very light motors can be developed as long as people are keen to throw money at them which currently seems to be the case with MTB suspension tech. Its just whether light weight energy dense rechargeable batteries can be developed and as mentioned earlier there is the possibility of recharging the batteries on the downhill.
There will still be a challenge and the best rider will be able to push new advances and will still be the best rider. In the same way not everyone is a downhill god now we can all buy 170mm DH bikes the courses have got harder and the best riders are still much quicker than the average joe.
I dunno, part of the appeal of biking (for me) is that it's good exercise without ever being boring. It might be useful for downhilling where there's no uplift as pushing a heavy bike back up can get annoying, but again it's good exercise.
I dunno, part of the appeal of biking (for me) is that it's good exercise
As geetee states your end up pushing your self just a hard your just go further/quicker.
In the same was as if I decide to go out for a run or a cycle now I'd probably push myself just a hard doing either but I'd cover alot more distance cycling.
No - for MTBing the extra weight of a battery and motor would be enough to spoil the fun.
For touring once I get a bit older - then yes.
No - for MTBing the extra weight of a battery and motor would be enough to spoil the fun.
from a man that lugs another half bike and the missus around behind him 🙄
😆
Ok bit by bit:
[i]"Just reading about the number of electric bikes at Interbike this year and it go me wondering." [/i]
Fair enough.
[i]"This is purely hypothetical so bear with me." [/i]
Slightly suspicious now...
[i]"Would it be fun..."[/i]
If you need to ask then the answer is probably no anyway, but still...
[i]"...if we could build a bike that didn't take away the physical effort and skill of actually riding, but did increase the speed with which you cover the ground by virtue of having some sort of motor assistance?"[/i]
Oh boy. No. No way. Why would you do that?
[i]"...So for example something that sat in your rear hub and added say a couple of horsepower to your efforts." [/i]
I'm pretty sure that certain conspiracy theorists say that pro roadies already have this...
[i]"If you think about it, this is pretty much what suspension has done for us anyway." [/i]
...Has it? I confess I'm no fan of full suspension bikes but that's taking it a bit far! How have you figured that one out?!
[i]"As I can see it, you'd be able to cover more ground, which would be no bad thing, for the same effort/work done. You'd be able to ride up more and it still be challenging, physically and from a skills perspective." [/i]
So you're saying...you want to make something to make it all physically easier, but you still want to be physically challenged? I think you're re-inventing the horse here. Derailleur gears have been around for a while now and I'd suggest that they cover that particular job description pretty well.
[i]"I think it would be awesome."[/i]
Fair enough. If you actually manage to design something like this I'd be interested to see it from a design perspective (not just for mountain biking but the applications for the motor trade etc for the purposes of fuel efficiency), but as for something I'd ever want on any of my bikes...no. No way.
Anyway, nice idea...just a bit...out there for my tastes I'm afraid!
Motor assisted is for the infirm and elderly. 🙄
yeh i need one im too ****ed when i get to the top of a hill to enjoy riding down it 😥
GW - its like having an extra motor - mind you she does only do about ten miles per pint.
Does anyone else think 'sports mixture' are really nice? I think I'm going to finish a whole packet.
scu98rkr
Finally someone with some freakin imagination!
I can't believe how luddite and conservative the rest of you are being. It's like each and every new development to allow you to ride faster, further or harder must be resisted at all and absolute costs as if progress is an assault on your sensibilities. I'm talking about an idea executed at some point way beyond the next five years, not what's currently available.
It's called being visionary. Much like saying a 27lb, 160mm, DH capable carbon nomad is a game changing machine.
Oh and as for the 'get fit' remarks, well when I was single, had no kids, very little mortgage (i.e. I had time), I was a national champion in karate and could ride up Jacobs Ladder with one dab so you can stuff that in your camel back and suck on it like a lemon!
I can't believe how luddite and conservative the rest of you are being. It's like each and every new development to allow you to ride faster, further or harder must be resisted at all and absolute costs as if progress is an assault on your sensibilities
I think the general objection is that folk don't want powered assistance as it removes what separates bikes from powered vehicles. Pretty simple and not really anything to do with your statement above. Folk are quite happy with other developments that assist enjoyment of riding (not all of them are about speed though).
It's called being visionary. Much like saying a 27lb, 160mm, DH capable carbon nomad is a game changing machine.
I'd call that nonsense rather than visionary!
Sorry not sure what part you think is nonsense Cynical?
I would feel like I was cheating if I had a motor on my bike. Part of the fun of a good downhill for me is feeling that I've earned it by riding up to the top entirely under my own steam. I like totting up the miles I've covered on a ride precisely because they're self-powered. A motor would detract from the achievement. So no, I'd not be interested in a motorised MTB.
Having said that, I've only just cracked and bought my first bike with suspension this year (a hardtail), so I'm clearly a bit of a puritan Luddite where bikes are concerned, and therefore not a good indicator.
(Certainly wouldn't fancy lugging a motorised bike over the last few hills with a flat battery, either.)
Whether we like it or not I think it's inevitable.
A lot of the manufacturers are looking at this.
I wont knock it until I've tried it.
If you can get the additional weight to a point where it's not a burden for carrying or when the battery runs out, then I think we'll see them all over the trails.
Legality is another issue - I think we'll see some heated debates and access problems come out of this. For every bike that offers pedal assist there'll be ones which don't require pedalling - meaning more erosion as wheels spin up climbs.
I do get the whole challenge thing and feeling of personal achievement. But here's my point:
At what stage does a mechanical improvement inhibit that feeling of personal achievement?
I guess the answer is different for everyone and on STW I suspect the majority of people are less progressive than say those on the Dirt forum. And I think that's fine; not that anyone needs my approval of course!
What I think is a bit odd is that people would readily accept one mechnical aid but not another. So let me put it like this.
If I could, by virtue of magic, give you an extra 20% on your average speed across terrain, without taking away any sense of your own personal achievement, without inhibiting your sense of connectedness to the bike and trail, without it being illegal or detrimental the environment and without it adding weight to your bike, would that be a good thing?
Sorry not sure what part you think is nonsense Cynical?
That a 27lb carbon Nomad is as DH capable as a proper 35-40lb DH bike.
At what stage does a mechanical improvement inhibit that feeling of personal achievement?I guess the answer is different for everyone and on STW I suspect the majority of people are less progressive than say those on the Dirt forum
"less progressive" for disagreeing with you? 🙄
If I could, by virtue of magic, give you an extra 20% on your average speed across terrain, without taking away any sense of your own personal achievement, without inhibiting your sense of connectedness to the bike and trail, without it being illegal or detrimental the environment and without it adding weight to your bike, would that be a good thing?
You can't though - that's the point.
If I could, by virtue of magic, give you an extra 20% on your average speed across terrain, without taking away any sense of your own personal achievement, without inhibiting your sense of connectedness to the bike and trail, without it being illegal or detrimental the environment and without it adding weight to your bike, would that be a good thing?You can't though - that's the point.
I think this was meant to be a hypothetical question. I guessing GeeTee is going to quite clearly follow this up by saying improvements in the materials, suspension, tyres (tubeless) etc etc have probably all ready made a modern XC bike 20% more efficient off road than a early 1980's machine and no one is complaining about this.
For every bike that offers pedal assist there'll be ones which don't require pedalling - meaning more erosion as wheels spin up climbs.
Alex I pretty much agree with your post but surely once you've powered a bike you will be able to electronically help control the traction much like ABS in cars I dont see why an electric bike would have any more problems with erosion than a normal bike, if a weight issues can be resolved.
I've ridden one of the new pedal assist bikes (Giant) and it was brilliant. No faff.
I'd put one of those motors on my bike in preference to gears - comes to the same thing really - it's a mobility aid, and like gears a great benefit to the old and infirm.
I wouldn't hesitate to use one on a commuter bike.
I guessing GeeTee is going to quite clearly follow this up by saying improvements in the materials, suspension, tyres (tubeless) etc etc have probably all ready made a modern XC bike 20% more efficient off road than a early 1980's machine
Me too...and it's nonsense!
In answer to the OP's question - No, not ever on an mtb. Even knowing I've got a 20% power assist would ruin the point of it for me.
I'm not going to judge other for wanting it though. Seems like it could be a hoot, and plenty good for commuting.
A friend of mine arrived yesterday from Switzerland on a electric bike he designed and his company built and he rode all the way to Scotland. He's threatening to bring it up to my work at lunchtime for a wee lap of Arthur's Seat, I will report back later.
P.S is that you ??
Even knowing I've got a 20% power assist would ruin the point of it for me.
But are you OK with a 20% assist from a bike that is 30% lighter than it was 15 years ago, and 20% more effecient over rough terrain because you've got suspension etc etc?
Which is my main point: at what point does mechanical assistance stop being acceptable and why?
Which is my main point: at what point does mechanical assistance stop being acceptable and why?
what point - when it's a motorbike
why - because I already have purpose built motorbikes
20-30% increases - you are dreaming.
Which is my main point: at what point does mechanical assistance stop being acceptable and why?
Simple (have you been reading?) - when it's powered assistance.
But are you OK with a 20% assist from a bike that is 30% lighter than it was 15 years ago, and 20% more effecient over rough terrain because you've got suspension etc etc?Which is my main point: at what point does mechanical assistance stop being acceptable and why?
There's a big difference between something that makes things easier like suspension, and something that actively adds energy to your ride from external sources.
I think if the only thing that is powering you up a hill is the energy you are putting in, then it is fair game. There's a limit to how much suspension, tyres, drivechain etc. improvements can help you get up a hill, as when it comes down to it, you still have the constant factor of having to put in enough power to lift your body weight from ground level to the top of the hill. So essentially, whilst it is sometimes a bit easier getting up a hill on a different bike, there is still a certain level of achievement in getting up that hill for any rider or bike.
Once you put in a motor, then that limit is gone, so some people will be getting up the hills without putting in any effort, or without putting in enough effort to move their weight to the top of the hill. Which is fine for them, but really you can't in any meaningful way say that they cycled up the hill - at least to some extent they just sat on a motorbike while it cycled up for the hill for them.
Joe
But are you OK with a 20% assist from a bike that is 30% lighter than it was 15 years ago, and 20% more effecient over rough terrain because you've got suspension etc etc?
I agree with al - this is dreamworld.
I doubt bike were much heavier years ago - I know my bike now is heavier than the one I had then ( but a lot stronger)
20% more efficient? No way jose!
You know these days, being depressingly unfit, if I could add something that'd mean I could do a mtbing weekend without being completely knackered after the first day, I'd certainly consider it - that'd make it more fun for me.
Of course, it doesn't have to replace the effort - I'd still always ride my road bike unpowered and probably usually mtb the same but if it increases my enjoyment, then yes, it could be a good option.
Simple (have you been reading?)
All right all right, no need to get ancey! I wasn't trying to wind you up, just engage in a debate.
I have been reading, I think the debate is interesting and i think it's illuminated a very important fact which is we are all, to one degree or another, happy with mechanical forms of aid but the addition of power assist is likely to be a step too far for many people and it's all tied up with a sense of achievement we get from being 'self propelled'.
My enjoyment is almost entirely tied up with the experience of moving fast over rough terrain. But I do get a lot of fulfilment from doing that on a machine that is light and over which I have complete control and where the speed has come in large part from my bike handling skills.
I agree with al - this is dreamworld.
Fortunately people who push boundaries are happy to inhabit dreamworld because that's how you innovate. You take what is impossible and aim to get just short of it.
As for bikes not being light - what are you talking about?
My first bike, bought in 1991, weighed just over 32lbs. The equivalent bike now, for equivalent money, will weigh about 27lbs. Top flight race machines in 1991 were weighting around 27lbs and now weigh under 20lbs.
I think your figures are pessimistic GT, in any event they don't show a 30% weight reduction, and as for 20% greater efficiency, please!
Granted, dreamers may well innovate, but that's not the same as making up ridiculous figures to support your argument.
I said for [b]me[/b] geetee.
However, you're stretching the point somewhat. 15 years ago was the mid 90's and the bikes were, if anything, lighter then.
mid 90s bikes weren't lighter. My bikes weigh about the same now as then but back then they had very little effective suspension, narrow tyres, etc compared to now.
Cynical - you're right, a 5lb saving on a 32lb bike is only a 16% reduction, but a 7lb saving on a 27lb bike is a 35% reduction.
Improvments in the top end of bike performance has outpaced that at the budget end, but, then again, the price of top end bikes has similarly outstripped that of low end bikes.
In 1991, I remember that pretty much the most expensive bike you could buy was around £1500, which in today's money is only £2400. The most expensive bikes these days are getting on for twice that money.
There will be a time when bikes will have 150mm of travel and weigh 20lbs. I don't know when that will be, but I believe it will be some point in the next 50 years. Probably by then they will have other advancements included to which we can't even imagine just yet.
There are loads of trails that I ride that have gentle descents, descents that would be awesome if you didn't have to pedal like an absolute loon to get up to the sorts of speeds where they become a proper challenge.
There are plenty of rides I do where we don't do certain bits because it means 5 miles road ride up the valley and the same back.
Usually faster is better. Actually, always faster is better. For me something like this would come down to handling. I nearly said weight, but then realised my bike weighs almost 40lbs anyway. If I couldn't feel it, then strap as many batteries on as you like!
What's not to like?
indeed, shame this is gash though!
Top flight race machines in 1991 were weighting around 27lbs
Cynical you are rude.
Geetee - Sorry but as Al says, you are talking gash! I got my first decent mountain bike back in 1991, it was a 531 steel raleigh and weighed 25lb and (around a year later I bought a s/h aluminium cannondale that was quite a bit lighter. (pretty sure it cost £2000 new in '91 and it wasn't the highest bike in the canondale range).
Going back to the start - it's already in full swing
[url= http://www.electricmountainbikes.com/ ]Sparky[/url]
I have a friend that spots 'trends' - knowing I'm into bikes he asked me what I thought of electric bikes, and I told him that I just wasn't interested / it's not cycling / it's for oldies etc.
Then he delivered one to my house to play with and I haven't been off the thing since. It looks like a POS but is bloody marvellous to ride on the road. Off road though? I could have done with a motor doing the Beast a couple of weeks ago, but wouldn't have deserved my pint afterwards.
OK let's try to be a little more accurate with the numbers and take a benchmark bike from 1989 (I've been wrong with my dates, which I acknowledge)
Pace RC100, launched in 1989 and weighed 25.4lbs.
Compared to an equivalent race bike from today:
Scott Scale Premium which comes in at a shade under 20lbs.
Think it's a great idea I'd certainly have a go. Thought there were rumours of 'mechanical doping' in the last tdf?
GT72 20% so what? Amounts to say 3% at most of rider+bike weight.
I don't think the power:weight would be there for MTBing, but electric-assist makes sense for 'utility' biking on roads and bike paths.
For example, I ride a Yuba Mundo cargo bike to and from work. It's great even when loaded up with shopping, but it's hard work getting it uphill when loaded up. I can manage (riding a SS has made me strong like an ox), but it probably puts loaded-up riding beyond some people.
Luckily, there are clever people around, so you could buy a [url= http://clevercycles.com/products/stokemonkey/ ]Stokemonkey for your Xtracycle[/url].
I think the following quote from that page sums this up for me:
We don’t believe in replacing human power with electricity; we believe in replacing cars for work that even the strongest cyclists seldom if ever choose to handle without a car.
Thinking about it, and looking at http://www.electricmountainbikes.com/, I have to say I'm now feeling quite antagonistic towards the idea. If I met one of those bikes out on one of my trails, I'd probably be quite pissed off that it was there. Not even sure I can properly articulate why. I think it comes down to the cheating thing again. If I've pedalled my way up hill and down dale I feel like I've earned the right to be out there. If you've been pushed there by battery-power, you haven't.
It's a bit like when I meet MXers on the hills in places they're not meant to be. I'm not just annoyed because they're noisy and polluting and tearing up the countryside and that, it's also because they haven't really worked to get there - they're cheating. Obviously electric-assist bikes aren't anywhere near as "bad" as petrol-powered bikes, but I feel like they're closer to them than to pushbikes. Once you add a motor, you've crossed a line.
(I think this is different to uplift-assisted DH riding, that's just a different discipline, like you get in skiing. This would be like sticking little jet-engines on nordic skis or something...)
I always wondered how I was going to turn into one of those uncomprehending old people who shake their heads at the alarming and disappointing ways of youth. You know, like the way old red-socked bobble-hatted ramblers look at mountain bikers. Electric bikes might actually be a similar thing for me. Now get off my lawn. Damn kids...
It could be a good leveller for people who aren't lucky enough to be able to get as fit as others they wish to ride with, for whatever reason.
It doesn't necessarily mean the rider won't be putting in any effort, as the slowest rider on a group ride is often working a lot harder than the fittest ones in the group. It's all well and good saying get fitter but what if they have a disability, or very limited riding time, etc?
What about a bike that stored the wasted energy from braking and what is soaked up by suspension and tyres and made it available again through some kind of lightweight motor?
The gains would be less than having a battery but it would be in keeping with the ethos of a bike being powered by just yourself. The stumbling block of course is that we don't have the technology at present to make this feasable but who knows what will be possible in the future.
I dont think geetee is necessarily comparing like for like in the same manner as you. He's suggesting the sort of bike someone may have started out on in the past with say their current XC bike.
I would not be surprised if a cheap heavy bike from the early 90 is not at least 10% less efficient that a top of the range XC bike now a days.
That is fair comparison because we are comparing the same rider not the same bike and over the course of say rider mtb as a hobby for 20 years where has the extra speed come from rider or machine ?
I would not be surprised if a cheap heavy bike from the early 90 is not at least 10% less efficient that a top of the range XC bike now a days
here's a real life comparison for you, My allround hardtail (allround for me has to be capable of dirtjumping and DH as well as XC) hasn't really changed spec/performance wise in 15years.
1995 - 16" 4lb Alloy XC hardtail, built for jumping, dual slalom with 100mm Judys with whitebros cart and speedsprings, hope XC/121, XT, 50mm stem, 660mm riser bars, Avid juicys & flat pedals.
2010 - 14" 4.5lb Alloy DJ hardtail, built for jumping, 4X with 95mm Pikes coils, Hope ProII/XC/721(the rim that replaced the 121), Saint, 40mm stem, 660mm bars, XT Vbrakes & flat pedals.
performance wise there's little in it other than the tyres I run now being durable, even the difference in braking performance is
current bike is 30.5lb
1995 bike was 28lb
I currently weigh 14st and in 1995 was 12st so the slight overbuild is simply in line with what the bike has to endure now.
full sus has evolved massively in the last 15 years, XC hardtails, not really that much at all IMO.
1995 - 16" 4lb Alloy XC hardtail, built for jumping, dual slalom with 100mm Judys with whitebros cart and speedsprings, hope XC/121, XT, 50mm stem, 660mm riser bars, Avid juicys & flat pedals.
How is this a cheap bike from the early 90's ?
ah, sorry, so you meant something like a 40lb+ Raleigh activator Vs a 20lb GIANT Anthem X?
At least 10% you say? You might want to re-calibrate your performance measurig instruments? I'd say more like 20-50% over an enduro type event.
I obviously missed your point big time, what was your point BTW? 😉