Maybe sometimes too exciting. I recently changed bikes to a Santa Cruz Blur. It has mm of travel and it is over 10 pounds lighter than my old Santa Cruz. Locally, we have a riding area know as Left Hand that has "secret" downhill trails. These trails are steep, extremely steep. This is where I go to get a regular dose of high-speed, high-consequence riding. I rode the Blur here with trepidation, but I survived. I had to remain extremely focused, pick my lines intelligently, and be very physical with the bike on the way down.
There were lots of sketchy moments and a few near misses. It's definitely a very exciting way to ride, and I'd say it's a bit of an acquired taste. Sometimes it's quite scary, but that could be a good thing. I believe if I keep riding the Blur on this sort of terrain I can get used to the intensity and become a much faster rider as a result. I asked a couple of our shop's most experienced riders what they thought about being overbiked or underbiked.
Seth H. It had a dropper and I did just fine. I really thought it was I would ever need. Then I went to Moab.
I rode a borrowed enduro bike on The Whole Enchilada and it kind of opened my eyes. I bought a bigger bike not long after and started riding all my regular trails again. It changed how I rode. I can blast straight through things I used to have to pick my way around. I ride alone a lot so I go my own pace. But I'm also decently fit and I can keep up with everyone I ride with on my bigger bike an Ibis Ripmo.
Chad H. Being underbiked keeps the skills sharp and makes the trail an exciting challenge. I feel that being overbiked takes the challenge and excitement out of trails. It leads to laziness and dulls your skill as a rider.
I stopped riding one because it limited my trail choices too much and it was too hard on my back. But I feel my big and burly enduro rig is too much for mellow trails. Every little bump and undulation that feels fun on a shorter travel or more nimble bike is just flattened. For me personally, I think my enduro rig is suited best to very technical, steep and rocky terrain, and the bike park. I would add a dropper seatpost and Fox Step-Cast 34 mm fork just to give it a tiny bit more capability.
It's what people are calling 'downcountry' now, even though I hate the term. That'll be perfect for me. No matter what, the best bike is a fun bike. It's possible to have fun riding while overbiked or underbiked. Having the perfect bike isn't everything. Keep in mind too that the rider is always going to make a far bigger difference than the bike. A skilled rider on an imperfect bike will almost always outride an unskilled rider on the perfect bike. Good descenders have dropped me on gnarly downhills riding XC hardtails, and fit climbers have dropped me on long and steep uphills riding heavy enduro machines.
Good riders can take what they have, and make it work. That being said, you can always play to your strengths or weaknesses. Having a bike that enhances the parts of riding that you care about the most will make mountain biking more fun and less stressful.
Bikes are supposed to be fun, and a good bike should make you happy. It's easy to pedal, and it keeps my old trails fresh and exciting.
I'm usually overbiked while riding this bike, but it might be good to boost my confidence. If you're interested in finding a mountain bike with your desired amount of suspension travel, check out our huge selection in our Mountain Bike Collection. Are you overbiked or underbiked? Do you prefer one to the other for your trails? Do you have a bike that sits perfectly in the middle? Hopefully that helps you. I agree, more travel up front is better.
I came to that conclusion in a very unscientific manner. I thought we HT has no suspension in rear and they have as much as mm to 0mm. But nobody has ever built a bike with a ridgid fork and travel in the rear. Like I said anecdotal and unscientific. Just my musings is all. The poll confirms that the majority of riders are locked into their own paradigm of perceived travel presets. Marketing teams have done their jobs well. PhillipJ Dec 15, at So are you some insightful genius who can see through all the marketing when all the rest of us are sucked in?
Or is it possible that your insights are obvious and we are using 5" trail bikes now for the same reasons we were using 4" freeride bikes years ago? Brightside Dec 15, at I considered to chose those numbers for today's common suspension designs. When future brings us tires that don't need suspension or XC-bikes with mm travel I'm open to that.
As long as it rides great everything's fine for me. PhillipJ : not much insight required. I have a few bikes, comparing my roughly rear with a 7. This is on trails that are technical with roots, rocks, steeps, etc.
New England riding. When I get really gassed I can hulk smash everything on the NS. I just dent the shit out of the rims on the This is simply me. Alot of our Enduro races are multi-stage DH events. I have podiumed most of the time and worked in shops for years and ridden since 92 so I'm not a total hack.
People do laugh at my travel occasionally as if they had a higher level of understanding. I have simply ridden alot of different bikes and settled in what worked for me, regardless of marketing categories.
I don't like to throw out the race results thing but I am getting old, salty and tired of these MTB Joey's with matching TLD shit coming in with steadfast opinions of what shreds that is purely based on marketing BS they swallow whole. I don't think about suspension travel--it's more about geometry and components. NotNamed Dec 15, at This "how much travel is the best" is missleading.
Overall I think less is more- you can compensate a lot with your riding skills. Boardlife69 Dec 16, at Riding skills? You mean smash through everything like a hack? Thats my riding skill. Does that Polygon feel like a soggy mess when you're NOT pedalling on short-travel terrain?
If I try to pump the backside of a roller does it actually do anything or does the under-damped suspension just collapse? SeanBikes Dec 15, at Pfft i just duct tape my feet to my bottom bracket.
Is it just me, or the votes fall precisely where manufacturers tell us what amount of travel defines a bike's category? No surprises here. Snowytrail Dec 15, at Let me know next time Gwin wins a WC race on mm I was thinking pretty much the same thing. Apparently everyone thinks bikes are done evolving. I expect that in a few years these will seem 20mm too short, in every category. Rasterman Dec 16, at It's not the length, it's how well you use it.
But a properly sorted 7" at or below 30lbs. Thanks to a mega-efficient linkage and geometry adjustment, that bike is actually better with more travel. The problem is the rest of the kit. Long-travel forks weigh more and dive more under power.
Rims, tires, and brakes that'll stand up to enduro terrain are heavier. Conventional frame designs with fixed geometry still have to compromise between stability and agility. There's always going to be a place, I think, for more focused XC and downhill designs, even as trail bikes become more adept at moonlighting in either role. We already know the amount of suspension travel doesn't make sense if you isolate it from geometry, wheel size etc, don't we? My next frame BTR Ranger has a slacker head angle than most hardtails with mm travel.
Pretty sure it will keep up just fine. No ideal travel for a road bike. Flawed poll. Fake News! The answer is mm. Cross country, Trail, Enduro, Downhill, Park- My bike can do it all.
SingleTackKiller Dec 15, at SingleTackKiller : same thing here on Transition Covert 26". Works for me! I just built a 21" carbon hardtail with dropper, 26" wheels, eThirteen cassette, XTR controls, and mm fork. Light, flickable, accelerates like a scalded cat. So what class would this fall into?
You'd probably find it listed under Classy. This would fall under the, "bikes with no resale value" category. Uuno Dec 16, at Is there any hardcore carbon hardtail in 26" out there? That will fit ? Or did you take a mm 29" frame? Geochemistry Dec 16, at Uuno : ICAN I had a couple of options to consider. With a longer fork you can expect about a degree of slackening for each additional 18 mm of travel, which was perfect for the target angles. Here's my build: docs. MJT59 Dec 16, at This pole is asking all the wrong questions in exactly the wrong way!
This pole divides riding styles up, then restricts the choices to a narrow band within the author's own pre-conceived ideas.
Are you nuts? What matters is that a bike performs, and in general it has to be accepted that longer travel bikes are either more comfortable for old gits like me or go faster over rougher terrain for the young invincibles. From that then we need suspemsion that performs, allowing me and the young to both be happy and for the peddalers to get up hill efficiently. So stop poling us about what you think we want and stop sopping to every suspension manufacturer's wonder-claim and start pushing them to accept that we all weigh different amounts, travel at different speeds, and therefore aside from geometry start offereingsensibly wide suspension adjustment, and stop hiding behind short travel.
Oh and please stop fobbing us off with telescopic forks just because you believe the buying public is so thick we cant tolerate innovation. And dont even start me on Boost! My arse! And Derrailler systems with ever wider ratios? Get a life! Happy Christmas everyone!!!
The ideal amount of travel is as much as possible as long as it remains reasonable to go uphill. Kinematics and Geometry matter. Lashidalgo Dec 15, at I don't care what anyone says You invalidated the whole poll by outright giving readers "the answer" before offering the poll.
I go ride bicycle. I am happy. Vulhelm Dec 16, at The only thing this poll demonstrates is how brainwashed everyone has been by the bike industry. Mega-Man Dec 16, at The same examples you used before the polls. The real question: Do pinkbikers believe that the industry has discovered the ideal travel for these classes of bikes?
And the answer is clearly yes. Most of pinkbike believes that suspension travel increases are the history of mountain biking, not the future of mountain biking. Same for the other categories. For meeeeeeee, larger wheels allowed for 10mm less travel without feeling harsh. And now larger tyres are doing something similar again. I'm proud to say I've been riding mountain bikes my entire life. Even before the invention of suspension.
I have always been on a single crown for everything. Nothing more Ever Needed than a totem. Park downhill Freeride whatever. I was totally on the bigger is better bandwagon until I threw a leg over a Chromag hardtail. It's like asking what's your ideal shoe size Bomadics Dec 15, at Rigidjunkie Dec 15, at There is never enough travel as long as the geometry and suspension work correctly.
As a trail rider, I'd take basically as much travel as I can get as long as it climbs well and is short and steep enough to get around switchbacks. HARv Dec 15, at It's funny how particular mountain bikers seem to be with suspension travel. Gimme one that I can do everything with.
All depends on wheel size. Generally 10mm less if talking 29 wheel. Pole should be setup based on wheel size. Normally trail bikes have up to mm of travel. They straddle the line between harder DH-orientated riding and cross-country style riding which means that they have more travel than a full-on XC bike, but less than more hardcore-specific rides. Generally all-mountain bikes have between and mm of travel.
All-mountain bikes are designed for riding every sort of terrain on the mountain — from DH runs to flowy and smooth singletrack and everything in between.
All-mountain bikes have enough suspension to tackle hardcore riding, but are often light and without too much travel for all day epics and some longer pedalling missions. Enduro bikes have between and mm, or even mm, of travel in the most extreme cases. They are designed to tackle the toughest tracks and bike park laps while still being light enough to pedal to the top of the hills. The balance of those factors will dictate what discipline or riding style the bike is best suited.
Generally speaking, longer travel bikes will be heavier or more expensive and have a stronger construction to help deal with more extreme levels of terrain. The bikes need to be stiffer and less prone to breaking, and current trends are for these bikes to have longer wheelbases, slacker head angles and longer reach figures. A top-of-the-line mm travel trail bike should normally cost a similar amount as a mm travel enduro bike. The more travel a fork has, the bigger, heavier and stiffer the fork will be, so the chassis will be designed to reflect these demands too.
Generally speaking, the differences in components between a trail, all-mountain and enduro bike will be relatively subtle and there is a small amount of componentry overlap.
Trail bikes will generally be specced with lighter components compared to all-mountain or enduro bikes. For example, if all three types of bike had Maxxis Minion tyres fitted, the trail bike would most likely get the lightest casing tyre, the all-mountain bike would probably be specced with a mid-weight casing tyre while the enduro bike should have a heavy weight casing model of the same tyre.
The enduro bike will more likely be fitted with a heavier and longer travel Lyrik or Fox 36 fork though.
0コメント