You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
As part of a new head-to-head debate series, Hannah and Chipps agree to disagree on what constitutes ‘mountain biking’ and, by extension, on what should appear in this magazine. We’ve given them a couple of pages to set out their stall.
...
By stwhannah
Get the full story here:
https://singletrackmag.com/2024/06/debate-is-it-even-mountain-biking/
To describe whether something is mountainbiking, I like Didnthurt's proposal, but propose an addition third rule:
1: Your tyres must touch dirt/mud at some point during the ride.
2: You must have fun during the ride (type 1) or after reminiscing (type 2)
3: You must at some point while on dirt/mud, stand up for the purpose of improved handling of your bike.
Still suitable to be able to "do mountainbiking" on your hybrid/gravel/shopping bike, and not gatekeeping on equipment or local terrain. And conversely, if I were to go for a quick local trip to a friends house (on my mountain bike) it would not be mountainbiking.
I’m 100% with Chipps on this. I don’t think the magazine is or should be an outdoor lifestyle magazine with some bike shaped objects in it. For me, riding over a bit of dirt or pootling on a canal path isn’t mtb.
Let’s face it, a lot of what, traditionally was called XC mountain biking is in fact gravel biking and is better served by using a gravel bike because they’re quicker and more fun.
My preferred use of a hardtail is now rebranded as "gravel" and I seem to be expected to use damaging narrow tyres. Sometimes on a hack, I will use Spooky Wood and the blue so I guess I just qualify.
TL:DR there are -1/12 angels on the pin.
I don't think MTB actually exist it's a marketing ploy from the 90s.
I just ride bikes some times it's off road sometimes it's not.
We used to go to nice places and ride most weekends but this has gradually declined as we are more concerned about the environment and our impact. Now most of our "MTB" riding is for holidays and if we go somewhere for some other reasons and can fit in an off road ride.
Age affects what I will ride now as at 70 I don't bounce like I used to and have no desire to be taken of a hill by Mountain Rescue.
What might be a more useful discusion is around car speeds and driver behaviour as I often feel unsafe on the road. It's quite hard to do any bike ride completely off road unless you go to a bike park or trail centre and driver behaviour and attitudes to cycling can be appauling.
The other thing that most often gets ignored is the environmental impact of offroad riding and may become a issue. (See the Coed y Brenin discussion)
Let’s face it, a lot of what, traditionally was called XC mountain biking is in fact gravel biking and is better served by using a gravel bike because they’re quicker and more fun.
does that not just mean gravel has become a subclassification of mtb? we don't have to shun it or claim its totally different because the handlebars are weird.
If you time travelled back to 1995 and gave the bike designers of the day access to modern materials/construction/components, but showed them nothing about the last 30 years of bike racing, or trail centres etc; I reckon they would come up with something pretty much like a modern gravel bike.
I don't and won't buy a magazine or click open a link that showcases or reviews MTBs with motors.
Zero interest.
I do, however, have an electric cargo bike, but that's a utility and not a play bike.
Kramer
Let’s face it, a lot of what, traditionally was called XC mountain biking is in fact gravel biking and is better served by using a gravel bike because they’re quicker and more fun.
I fail to see how a pumped up racer could ever be "more fun" than an MTB on any surface but each to their own.
If it's done on a mountain bike it's mountain biking. Curly barred wotsits are not mountainbikes, they're cries for help.
We used to go to nice places and ride most weekends but this has gradually declined as we are more concerned about the environment and our impact.
Go enjoy yourself. Nothing you do will make a shred of difference to the environment (even if you were flying a private jet to go riding every weekend)
Let’s face it, a lot of what, traditionally was called XC mountain biking is in fact gravel biking and is better served by using a gravel bike because they’re quicker and more fun.
does that not just mean that popular MTB's are now not that well suited to traditional XC MTB and are slow and less fun over it?
personally, I think that is probably about right. our corner of MTB has shifted, with the help of technology, lighter bikes, lighter longer travel bikes especially, so the gnarly trail stuff that 20 years ago was only really tackled by a few folk on their 150mm forked cove stiffee's or freeride bikes that were somewhat out of place on club rides (but always welcomed I may add). Lighter, longer travel bikes were the gateway to the shift I think, to the shift of focus to the fun parts, the descending.
of course now that the gateway has opened, bikes are becoming heavier again as normal riders push the boundaries of what they ask of components.
what was XC, is either gravel-plus, or stuck in a niche along with bull moose bar singlespeeding.. 😉
however, back to the subject, it's all mountainbiking, or rather 'off road' biking, and as long as it's enjoyable and relatable than great.The debate about whether gravel is in that category, I think not. for those of us around in the late 80's early 90's, It's ATB, not MTB. However, would I object to it being in a mag as a feature, similar to other niches around a central theme? No, the 'essence of why' is still there.
I don’t think MTB actually exist it’s a marketing ploy from the 90s.
The French got it right with VTT. If we'd not let ourselves be influenced by the Americans we'd not be having this discussion.
In the UK, mountain land is defined as that over 610m. Therefore, you're not mountain biking if you are cycling below that altitude.
FWIW, as a runner, we call thin, sinuous paths singletrack too. It's an explanation of path type, not a definition of what type of bicycle you can use on it.
Kramer
Let’s face it, a lot of what, traditionally was called XC mountain biking is in fact gravel biking and is better served by using a gravel bike because they’re quicker and more fun.
Depends what you used to ride and call XC? I know somebody who said similar so I took him for a local (what I call XC ride) and he nearly cried. Rutted bridleways, rooty forest paths, dried horse hoof prints and the odd drop or jump when we can find it.
Look at the world cup XC courses, would you ride those on a gravel bike?
The problem is that as bikes are getting more capable people are looking for for more technical terrain, this means that taking a inexperienced rider on even a blue route can be a steep learning curve.
Just ride your bike, have fun and don't trash the environment.
"Nothing you do will make a shred of difference to the environment (even if you were flying a private jet to go riding every weekend)"
A very American or Chinese approach then.
Let's get some Lignite burning power stations built to charge those eMTBs
does that not just mean that popular MTB’s are now not that well suited to traditional XC MTB and are slow and less fun over it?
Trail bikes and above, almost certainly.
Look at the world cup XC courses, would you ride those on a gravel bike?
I think that the key word in my statement was traditionally. XC has moved on, and rightly so IMO. It could still do with being even more technical, until professional road racers can't just dip in and win.
I fail to see how a pumped up racer could ever be “more fun” than an MTB on any surface
Fair enough, and as soon as you're on singletrack I agree with you. But on gravel roads, which is a lot of what we used to ride before things got more technical, gravel bikes work better. They're faster and easier to pedal up hill.
I ride a modern "gravel" bike with flat bars and 2" xc tyres with mates on 170mm ebikes..who cares what you call it, its just fun, and even more fun over 15mph 😉
If you time travelled back to 1995 and gave the bike designers of the day access to modern materials/construction/components, but showed them nothing about the last 30 years of bike racing, or trail centres etc; I reckon they would come up with something pretty much like a modern gravel bike.
I'm not sure if they would. In 1995 MTBs were were growing in popularity but still new and exciting, with new ideas still being tried and forms of riding/racing being fleshed out.
Fast forward to ~2015 MTBs had become a mainstay of the cycling world, and had diversified into various sub-niches with specialist types of 'MTB' for each market, there's more money and marketing behind MTBs but arguably very few truly 'new' concepts were being dreamed up just tweaking some angles and adding the odd cog and pissing people about with new "standards".
Then along comes "Gravel bikes" which were really just a reimagining of CX bikes with a bit more tyre girth and better (MTB derived brakes and gears (a bit like like in the earlier days of MTB in many ways), plus there were fewer definitions over what "gravel riding" is/was or indeed what (if any) rules applied to the kit to be used. Another decade beyond that there's still grumpy sods for whom MTBs are the pinnacle of cycling and Gravel bikes are nonsense (Who I'm sure would love comparisons to the miserable gits on old touring bikes in the 80s rubbishing those new fangled MTBs), and the "Gravel bike" is in the throws of being defined, divided into Sub-niches and marketed back to the sweaty masses.
It's all been done before. Gravel is in the ascendancy today as much because the MTB has sort of run through that 30 years of niche creation and marketing hype and a backlash with some alternative attitudes was due. The zeitgist has already changed for gravel too; people seem to simultaneously love and hate "competitive" gravel or sneer at/embrace crusty bike packers on their laden Surleys in equal measure.
If you gave 2024 bicycle technologies to the 1995 bike industry, they'd still creep along the same trajectory of incremental changes to the MTB, it was the part of cycling with a buzz around it at the time. Curly barred bikes just weren't in the place to be meddled with back then.
"Is it even MTBing?"
I suppose you at least need a simple definition of what MTBing actually is to answer that question, In my head it's still simply riding a bike off-road. So I guess Gravel bikes count too, but I'm sure there's now people who would consider themselves Gravel bikers not MTBers, who are less enamoured with what seem like expensive complex toys to the uninitiated.
Personally I still have a grumpy attitude to E-bikes, but E-MTBs do still 'count' IMO.
Perhaps the more pertinent question is does it really matter?
The mag is Called 'Singletrack' which simply implies "off-road cycling" to me, so I don't see why the whole gate-keepy debate over the legitimacy of what you might ride on whatever trails is needed.
The terrain/destinations/adventures/events should speak for themselves, if people get hung up on the tools used they've already missed the point really.
My Spanish friend referred to my mighty steed my "Countryside Bicycle".
She was right.
I think that the key word in my statement was traditionally. XC has moved on, and rightly so IMO. It could still do with being even more technical, until professional road racers can’t just dip in and win.
There's literally only 2 on the mens (can't think of any women currently) side who do this with any success and they just happen to have grown up racing offroad and never stopped either. Granted MVDP has only really done CX for the last couple of years mainly due to so many of the big road racing suiting him (Worlds 23 and Olympics 24). Pidcock has done less CX and more MTB.
If anything those 2 coming in make it more exciting as it can turn the racing on it's head.
I fail to see how a pumped up racer could ever be “more fun” than an MTB
You either live right next to some epic trails or are a bimbler 😜
On the easy off-road trails where I live it is a hoot riding on the limit on an sub 9kg bike with skinny tyres, whilst riding on the limit of grip and fitness. We averaged 35km/h on a section on last night's weekly gravel ride, on a relatively flat woodsy trail. Bliss.
I do like a ride at the Golfie too, but thinking about trying it on my gravel bike makes me break out in a cold sweat, no thanks.
I thought we'd agreed to call it "wild cycling"?
I fail to see how a pumped up racer could ever be “more fun” than an MTB on any surface but each to their own.
I suspect you haven't actually tried a gravel bike?
Most people who have seem to agree that they're more engaging up to a certain (quote low) level of technicality.
Please explain John Tomac.
Can I suggest that we introduce "Tomac's Law", a bit like Godwin's Law, to measure the time it takes for someone to bring JT up in any discussion relating to gravel/drop bars off road?
If you think what you're doing is mountain biking, it's mountain biking. You don't have to let anyone else set a criteria.
You can then pick a media outlet that matches your taste and definition of enjoyable biking, which may or may not be Singletrack.
What does the abbreviation MTB stand for? Is it meant to be Multi-terrain bike, a derivation All-terrain bike, or the French VTT? Or do people just randomly think it abbreviates mountain bike?
Multi or all-terrain seems a bit more inclusive, regardless of what you're riding.
For me, a mountain bike ride is when the ride involves a mountain bike* and some single-track.
*its evolved over the years, but like the definition of species, it might be a bit loose and ill-defined, but every knows one when they see it.
The French got it right with VTT.
and
Can we not just go back to ATB?
I don't read the magazine but I would have thought a mag about mountain biking would cover all aspects of off road cycling. Mountain biking is just a term used for riding a bike off road, some times this involves mountains and other times it's just on rough ground, there must be countries in the world that don't actually have mountains but people still ride mountain bikes there.
It's the jorno's job to make it interesting for the reader!
If we're talking about racing i.e. DH, Enduro and XC defining MTB, are 4x and dirt jumping classed as mountain biking?
As Bula hatted child of the golden days of early mtb - while a contemporary lens may see the way we rode as ATB, we still rode massive mountains and proper sketch terrain with a nonchalant disregard to the sanctity of our bones. This type of bike is still my favourite type of bike, the sort of bike that is good to ride anywhere and everywhere. In my mind the Atb is closer to the heart of Mtb - if the picture of a modern Mtb has a motor on it, then I'm not an Mtb'er anymore.
Mountain biking is clearly defined by being the pastime of people who at most opportunities will dismiss gravel and or electric bikes.
I would suggest that by modern definitions tomac is racing a gravel bike on a fire road.
I ride a modern “gravel” bike with flat bars and 2″ xc tyres
No, you ride a hybrid, or maybe a 90's style MTB. Gravel bikes have drop bars.
Anyway, I think Mountain Biking covers such a broad church, from downhill at Fort William to bimbling along a fire road.
Gravel I see as closer to road than MTB, but I accept that's just a personal view. If I was going mountain biking I wouldn't have drop bars (even if Tomac did).
Forest Biking ?
“Nothing you do will make a shred of difference to the environment (even if you were flying a private jet to go riding every weekend)”
A very American or Chinese approach then.
Let’s get some Lignite burning power stations built to charge those eMTBs
Its exactly that approach that means you shouldn't sacrifice driving somewhere to ride your bike on the weekend
I would suggest that by modern definitions tomac is racing a gravel bike on a fire road.
If such a race existed today - 10-15 min of loose fireroad descending, maybe some off camber ski piste crossings - what would the winning bike look like?
Anyway, I think Mountain Biking covers such a broad church, from downhill at Fort William to bimbling along a fire road.
But not riding along old railway tracks or towpaths. That's for the Cycling UK bunch wobbling along in their hi-viz. Obviously you can use these routes to access proper trails but you don't go for a MTB ride along the canal. 😀
No, you ride a hybrid, or maybe a 90’s style MTB. Gravel bikes have drop bars.
No, ragley trig is marketed as a gravel bike, drop bars are a bit tricky to manual or pull off a decent bunnyhop with so flats with cowhorns fitted inside brakes for moar aero, it has room for chunky tyres and gets ridden regularly on chunky trails. So yep hybrid .. 🤔
This type of bike is still my favourite type of bike, the sort of bike that is good to ride anywhere and everywhere.
Hmmm. I disagree. Generally they were rubbish pretty much anywhere and everywhere, which is why they evolved into something completely different
I'll warrant there are more miles done by MTBs along canal towpaths than all the MTB centres in the UK combined.
From a commercial point of view I guess it depends what STW as a business want to target. Stay a niche or adapt to the trending market?
Picking one thing to define it is hard.
I reckon if you're riding stuff on a mountain bike where knee pads would be a good idea, it's mountain biking. Through a gnarly trail in the woods, down something jaggy in the Lakes - or maybe Torridon loop - for example, or doing an uplift at Inners.
Riding off-road, alongside a river or canal for example, could be riding off-road on a mountain bike, but I wouldn't call it mountain biking.
That said, I don't actually wear knee pads very often at all - but know I should.
Who cares?
I think this is valid, who actually does care? Granted people buying a mountainbike magazine could legitimately be a bit miffed if it was cover to cover with people riding gravel bikes along double width farm tracks, but what if it was someone riding a gravel bike along proper old school singletrack (like every other one of my gravel rides and probably all of didnthurt's 😂).
Or if it was somebody riding a 100km route of predominantly double-track on their gravel bike, but in some wild and remote mountain scenery?
Seems a bit of a myopic outlook for the magazine certainly if it has to be 100% gnarly singletrack ridden on 100% flat barred bikes.
I’ll warrant there are more miles done by MTBs along canal towpaths than all the MTB centres in the UK combined.
Possibly true, but miles is a useless definition of MTB effort.... hohenmeter or metres is much better definition
What do I read STW for....tricky one.
I guess I read for the journey - be that a single day or multi day. And the journey needs to be off road. The niche of bike it's been done on is part of the story, the subtlety if you will, but it does not make the story.
If I think about the extreme range of off road and where I believe STW fits.....
- A canal path or sustrans day or multi day adventure - this is for Cycling UK (CTC)'s mag
- A day in a bike park, or the write up of doing a downhill competition - basically stuff where a full face is mandatory - this is for Dirt magazine
Everything in between is for Singletrackworld/Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine.
Could I respectfully suggest STW has been getting a little bit Cycling UK mag vanilla/worthy over that 20 odd editions. It's got a little bit lowest common denominator or sensible. Accessible even. Bring back the daft and the aspirational.
I reckon if you’re riding stuff on a mountain bike where knee pads would be a good idea, it’s mountain biking. Through a gnarly trail in the woods, down something jaggy in the Lakes – or maybe Torridon loop – for example, or doing an uplift at Inners.
I think we place kneepads in a different spot on the spectrum.
Personally I'd say [no kneepads : kneepads] sits on the [downcountry : trail] cut off.
But wear what you like, there are no rules, only attempts to categorise things so we can discuss them online and buy things.
I’ll warrant there are more miles done by MTBs along canal towpaths than all the MTB centres in the UK combined.
Oh definitely. That doesn't make it MTBing though. Just like riding your MTB down the promenade to buy an ice-cream isn't a MTB ride.
Stay a niche or adapt to the trending market?
Or to put it another way, start writing articles which don't look out of place in Cycling UK's mag. I don't buy a MTB mag to read about people taking their family for a coffee along a Sustrans route. Fair enough if other people have different views, I can always not buy the mag, but that's a shame because I've bought it since the first issue and there's never been a problem working out what MTBing is before.
scotroutesFull Member
I don’t even own knee pads and if I’ve not been mountain biking in the past 30 years, that comes as a surprise.
Posted 12 minutes ago
Yeah, I get that, I'm 49 and I bought my first pair this year. Worn them twice so far, both for uplift days.
Plenty places I've ridden home and abroad where I knew they were probably a good idea for what I was riding.
In the UK, mountain land is defined as that over 610m. Therefore, you’re not mountain biking if you are cycling below that altitude.
@Scotroutes whilst my natural inclination is to point out that riding round a typical trail centre is not riding on a mountain and most people don't actually go mountain biking - you might have taken the definition too far!
Is it not really a Mountain Rescue if they save your ass at 500m? what you fell from 610m to 590m!
If you go mountaineering from sea level to a summit of 700m, is the whole expedition (which in winter might involve ice axes, crampons, ropes, proper climbing) mountaineering or just the last 90m.
610m is an arbitrary UK definition based on a handy round number of feet. A 2000' hill in a wild part of Scotland with no discernable track in winter is undeniably "mountainous", one in the middle of England on a pleasant summers day, accessed from a road that makes the total climb much less, and with a huge path up the side might be pushing the description.
I don’t and won’t buy a magazine or click open a link that showcases or reviews MTBs with motors.
Zero interest.
I do, however, have an electric cargo bike, but that’s a utility and not a play bike.
@alpin - interesting distinction. Can you imagine a time when your own fitness might make an ebike the difference between ride and not? My sister-in-law's dad is almost 80 and just bought an eMTB so he can keep riding. What if the article was about helping different demographics or abilities ride bikes in more interesting places, and then show cased the best bikes for the job? What if that magazine ran an article on the best uplift facilities in Europe? If that's ALL a magazine was about, or maybe even if thats what it was about every month I could see the gumble.
To be honest, I don't care what the definition of 'mountain biking' is.
There's not a right answer and it can be on whatever bike you like - have you seen the guys riding gnarly Northshore stuff on Boris bikes? Point proven. Similarly - what about the street racing stuff? Tyres aren't on dirt, but that's definitely mountain biking.
If the real question is what should Singletrack Magazine write about then my answer is mountain bikes and NOT GRAVEL. I've ridden gravel bikes, I'd done gravel rides, I don't want to read about it in Singletrack magazine. I want to read about mountain bikes and trail rides.
It's definitely gone a bit too Cycling UK recently, and I get trying to appeal to the masses, but trying to please everyone is a fool's game.
you might have taken the definition too far!
I suspect you already know that comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek 😀
See, I think that bimbling around on fire roads and rail-trails is mountain biking
im with chips here. Bumbling along fire roads or old railways is at best leisure cycling. It certainly isn’t what I consider mountain biking. To mets single track trails whether they are in woods, mountains or open land. Fire roads are no more than a means of getting to the trails. They are the cycling equivalent of driving on the motorway. Quick efficient ways to cover distance with no enjoyment
Whatever you do, if you aren’t doing it exactly like me, you’re doing it wrong.
When you bimble along an unfamiliar logging road, you never know what you may find. Often singletrack appears or an interesting spark gap to the next road. Often you go out with little idea what if any technicalities you may meet.
Sorry, what was the question again?
Having fun with your mates, could be 50 yards to nearest house, could be 50 miles.
Some of you know the sort of riding I do. I know my limitations.
I have adopted some upgrades from when first got into MTBs, hell my first paid upgrade was a pair of M-959s as written about by Shaun. Probably down to the bikes, but I reckon I'm a likely more adept rider than I was say 25 years ago.
Bring back the Armchair Column.
@poly..... if and when I get to that stage in life then I'll start looking at magazines and opening links that talk about them. Until then I'm not interested.
I've a gravel bike and a mountain bike, the types of terrain they're happy on definitely overlap.
Unfortunately for this debate, what I call my ride on my logging platform of choice is down to the bike I rode rather than any other factor such as mud depth or fun index. I have ridden the same route on both bikes, one got called gravel, the other MTB. Amusingly enough, my clothing was pretty much the same for both.
From a wider perspective a true mountain bike ride should probably venture off tarmac and gravel at some point and take the rider a little further away from civilisation. The 'mountain' part conjours up visions of wilderness, peace, technical terrain, hills, escapism .... that sort of stuff, so maybe that's where we need to look in order to work out what mountain biking is?
I ride a gravel bike on gravel roads in Colorado infrequently these days. But when I was riding more, one of my riding buddies decided to switch from 29" with 45mm tires to 27.5 with 2.1-ish tires because the quality of the roads was so poor. I was finding the limit of my 32mm tires on almost every corner. The roads had loose, chunky stones all over them. The dirt became sand anywhere there wasn't rock. And there were often random deep ruts. I found it difficult to maintain speed through corners because of the lack of grip and control.
I use my hardtail for gravel roads and my gravel bike for the local trails. The trails have a more consistent surface, making them ok for my gravel bike. So, mountain biking is riding something that a gravel bike is less suitable or less enjoyable for. Making my gravel bike into what is almost my hardtail, but with drops and rigid forks, isn't what I want it for. And my hardtail can go anywhere, comfortably enough for me to cover almost any terrain in the mountains.
I don’t think people using uplifts to career down purpose made trails jumping in the air is mountain biking.
It’s fun, I’ll give you that, but it’s a different pastime to setting out to use bikes to travel over terrain because it’s there.
MTB for me means suspension, chunky tyres, no curly bars, riding across uneven terrain off road, wheels leaving the ground occasionally and sometimes falling off. Gravel bikes are just road bikes ridden off-road for people who secretly prefer road riding and like to be uncomfortable. EBikes are for commuting and carrying shit. I bought one for this purpose a few weeks ago. Anyone who claims you get the same workout with an eBike is just lying to themselves or us (when they claim to not use the battery when going up hill).
I with Chipps.
i would expect the magazine to focus mainly on “normal” mountain bikes with periodic glances at other sports, like EBikes, Gravel bikes etc.
but I accept that if people ride on singletrack, then that’s probably classified mountain biking as we know it Jim. Riding on double track, fire roads, tarmac - those things are only a means of getting from A to B for me. They don’t float my boat. And I’d rather read about what really appeals to me.
Admittedly, I’m most attracted to singletrack on mountains. But any trail on a real mountain has a bit of a by-ball. As does any singletrack, even if not on a mountain. So, by this self definition, tarmac on mountains doesn’t qualify. And non-singletrack on the flat doesn’t really qualify either.
Riding on double track, fire roads, tarmac – those things are only a means of getting from A to B for me
So this isn't mountain biking?
I do think that if you exclude e-biking from your remit, for any business then you're onto a loser.
OK - that was just chosen at random to illustrate my point. Need I go and link something very similar 😉
(Or edit my post to the past tense?)
I do accept that there are more interesting double tracks. But honestly ( I didn’t watch the video), riding wide, double jeep tracks doesn’t often float my boat. Maybe one time in 20.
edit: so I flicked through the video. And most of the trails in that video would not personally appeal to me. I don’t really see the attraction. However, I don’t think you’d ride that on a road bike. So I accept that, while it’s not to my taste, it totally qualifies as “mountain biking”, and would be highly appealing to many mountain bikers, singletrack or not. But, honestly, I wouldn’t wake up at night dreaming about it, in the way I do dream about singletrack.
I wouldn’t wake up at night dreaming about it, in the way I do dream about singletrack.
I wonder if this is part of the definition and how we are drawn to the same thing, but not really.
The joy for me of riding an ATB (increasing feel this should be the catch all term for bikes ridden off road) is often an 'eyes up' experience as much as it is and 'eye down' one. By that I mean the vista and the environment I am passing through is every bit as important to me as what is beneath my tyres. Some people would be more than happy to 'session' a grim bit of quarry if the lines were gnarly and adrenaline inducing. I'm thinking the sort of thing the Atherton's built in their back yard (big back yard) for training. But that's not me. Yes, I enjoy the challenge and adrenaline of a bit of swoopy singletrack and a bit of time with wheels in the air - and it's definitely part of the experience but its, to me, far from the whole experience.
As I said in my post earlier I see the STW mag as a celebration of journeyers not sessioners. But just maybe not journeyers on canal paths!
I reckon if people want to identify themselves as mountain bikers that’s their inalienable right and we shouldn’t show prejudice against them or try to suppress their deeply held feelings and personal beliefs no matter what our own ingrained opinions might be.
Please explain John Tomac.
he was training to race on the road. To keep a similar position and to develop the same muscles on his mountain bike as he would on his road bike he fitted drop bars to his mountain bike.
I like ATBs. A to B on my ATB. Singletrack, lanes and natural trails along the way. Riding fat tyres off road is fun and I don't mind riding them on tarmac either.
That's about it really... I don't really care what is or isn't mountain biking now. It's a broad church isn't it, far broader than it was in the late 80s and you can't really define something subjective like this. It's just, like, your opinion man.
Both Hannah and Chipps are saying things I agree with.
I suppose one bit about MTB that loses me is when it's suggested it has to be 'extreme' in some way to count. It can be, but that doesn't define it.
That video up there reminds me of why I like double track too.. multiple line choices. Room to play about a bit, it's fun.
If I think about things that differentiates mtb from other kids of biking, I have to think what it’s not.
It’s notmotorcycles, so apparently it must be light enough to move about, and move only when propelled by gravity or your legs. (E-bikes are definitely a grey area here.
It is also not gravel or road cycling, so it must have some technical challenge, and some kinestetic joy: swooping around alternating left right berms, floating a jump, seeing if you can make it up or down something, or whether you can make it up or down that tech bit at faster speeds.
Obviously this is all nebulous, so that’s where I have to give it to Chipps. As long as the majority of the mag covers “trail riding” or whatever you want to call it, absolutely add in articles about things slightly further off that “center line”.
I reckon if people want to identify themselves as mountain bikers that’s their inalienable right and we shouldn’t show prejudice against them or try to suppress their deeply held feelings and personal beliefs no matter what our own ingrained opinions might be.
But where's the foetus gonna gestate? Or something.
Whenever I lead a group gravel ride I always make sure there is some tech singletrack included just to prove to everyone that hardtails are better than gravel bikes.
Whenever I lead a group gravel ride I always make sure there is some tech singletrack included just to prove to everyone that hardtails are better than gravel bikes.
All depends how you define better. I am now riding an old rigid MTB and enjoying it more than gravel type bikes (CX bike with bigger tyres) I have had in the past. It also feels like riding in the 90's which again I enjoyed. So to me that is better.
Looking at loop times on Strava the MTB is slower so you could argue the gravel type bike was better using that as a measure.
I ride an old MTB off road on single track, double track and anything else I come across so to me I am mountain biking.
Obviously you can use these routes to access proper trails but you don’t go for a MTB ride along the canal. 😀
I definitely remember MBR running an article about exploring your local area, trails near you etc and picking up on canal towpaths as being ideal for MTBing.
They naturally decided that to do such cycling, you had to be on a bike (ideally Specialized or Orange...) with 6" of adjustable suspension at each end.
Gnarr core.
All depends how you define better.
Specifically being able to easily ride up or down singletrack tech without looking like you're trying to pass a camel through your urethra.