Help a Roadie understand MTB things

[Robbie Stewart]

I ride 120mm front and back. I have not come across a trail that I felt I need more.

Yes, I'll be the first to admit that no-one rides Status Quo on such little suspension travel, but I'm not a lunatic either.

If you are doing 90% of your riding on flat gravel, then you'll find the comfort a trail bike gives much more appealing than riding a very uncomfortable XC bike by comparison. You will also not regret buying trail oriented if you end up doing W2W, Sani etc.

The LBS oke telling you you'll be overgunned on a trail bike should be given some sympathy. Obviously he's not ventured anywhere beyond the dust bowls he rides daily.

[Mamil]

Have bike oriented threads become more contentious since current affairs got binned?

 

[MudLark]

There is a reason this thing has only 60 mm travel in the back and 100 mm in the front. And it's fast, very fast. But it is certainly not a trail bike.

https://www.trekbikes.com/za/en_ZA/supercaliber/

 

[Jase619]

51 minutes ago, Mountain Bru said:

In my opinion, a stumpjumper is the wrong bike for the kind of riding you've described. From what you've described (flat and not technical), it almost sounds like a hardtail is sufficient. 

Flat and non technical would be the most weekends kind of vibe, however, if you read further the goal would be to get a bike that if we were to take them away with us, say to a place that is not flat and technical, and we decided to do a race, be it Sani2C, or W2W or whatever the case may be, that we would be correctly kitted out for such an occasion. The decision to ride these races is basically made, just needing the bikes, hence making a decision with that in mind.

I am picking up on a few things here, but I am guessing that a hardtail would not be sufficient in such a case? 

[TNT1]

3 minutes ago, MudLark said:

There is a reason this thing has only 60 mm travel in the back and 100 mm in the front. And it's fast, very fast. But it is certainly not a trail bike.

https://www.trekbikes.com/za/en_ZA/supercaliber/

 

And also, it's just about the best looking mtb out there these days.

[Jase619]

4 minutes ago, Mamil said:

Have bike oriented threads become more contentious since current affairs got binned?

 

To be fair I knowingly opened a can of worms here, but i asked with the idea that i can't seem to find a common opinion anywhere.

And the discussion has been way off the worst threads I have seen on here, so i am actually quite happy with how this is turning out

[TNT1]

9 minutes ago, Mamil said:

Have bike oriented threads become more contentious since current affairs got binned?

 

Nah, it's just that every one of these kind of threads is looking for a "one bike to do everything" kind of bike, which simply doesn't exist.

[MTBeer]

12 minutes ago, MudLark said:

There is a reason this thing has only 60 mm travel in the back and 100 mm in the front. And it's fast, very fast. But it is certainly not a trail bike.

https://www.trekbikes.com/za/en_ZA/supercaliber/

 

never quite understood what a 'fast bike' is? The reason that bike is 'fast' is because it is being ridden by a superfit professional athlete.

[Jase619]

7 minutes ago, TNT1 said:

Nah, it's just that every one of these kind of threads is looking for a "one bike to do everything" kind of bike, which simply doesn't exist.

Luckily I am not looking for that then. . . .

[100Tours]

4 hours ago, Jewbacca said:

Get a 'trail' bike. Seriously. Bumbling around on an XC race bike is not as cool as people make it out to be

This is good advice. stability and confidence is key

[MudLark]

5 minutes ago, MTBeer said:

never quite understood what a 'fast bike' is? The reason that bike is 'fast' is because it is being ridden by a superfit professional athlete.

You probably won't know the difference unless you have ridden both a slow bike and a fast bike. The geometry and design makes a very big difference to how hard you have to work to make it move along quickly. Tyres and components also make a significant difference.

[MudLark]

19 minutes ago, Jase619 said:

I am picking up on a few things here, but I am guessing that a hardtail would not be sufficient in such a case? 

I have a buddy who has always done these things exclusively on an old GT hardtail. It is really up to you. A dual suspension bike is less tiring and will cross some types of terrain a little bit more quickly perhaps. But a capable rider on a hard tail will manage pretty well as well.

[MORNE]

Nee man, just put some offroad tires on your road bike. DH weapon. All this cape epic talk is nonsense. 

 

 

[Jewbacca]

14 minutes ago, Jase619 said:

Flat and non technical would be the most weekends kind of vibe, however, if you read further the goal would be to get a bike that if we were to take them away with us, say to a place that is not flat and technical, and we decided to do a race, be it Sani2C, or W2W or whatever the case may be, that we would be correctly kitted out for such an occasion. The decision to ride these races is basically made, just needing the bikes, hence making a decision with that in mind.

I am picking up on a few things here, but I am guessing that a hardtail would not be sufficient in such a case? 

Well here in lies the question. It IS sufficient. BUT it isn't the best tool for the job. People will say 'I ride a hardtail and do just fine' etc but the truth is, if the budget allows, there are far better bikes out there which allow for efficiency, comfort and awe inspiring confidence in comparison.

So the answer is yes and no.

I do firmly believe that if you want to have fun and be efficient, a trail bike is the answer. Not an enduro bike. 

It offers the greatest balance, a good stable entry point and is less limiting if you really take to the sport and progress to loving the fun side of single rack without having to feel under gunned, like you've been beaten up or left with not enough confidence in the bike to clear the gaps.

ALL bikes can clear the gaps, but the right bike will allow you to trust it enough to try to clear them.

[RobertWhitehead]

Ok, so here's my opinion (again, those of you who've seen me around knows that I always start a statement like this). This is my view and it may not be the same as what the next guy had in mind but then, that is his / her view and not mine ????.

 

Anything more than 100 - 120mm travel for you will not hold too much benefits. In fact I would go so far as to say that it would actually be a negative / annoyance for you.

I mean because you come from a road riding back ground your riding style will undoubtedly be that of a high-ish cadence and getting into a rhythm quickly, more travel won't eliminate that, all I am trying to say is that with a 130-170mm travel you will constantly fight to overcome the "slog" you'll be feeling.

See, more travel means a slacker head angle which in turn means a (marginally) longer wheel base. This in turn means that the front wheel is pushed forward and this will make the climbs noticeably slower. It will feel like someone opened a parachute every time you start going up.  In my circles we refer to it as a "slap noodle" - very comfy to sit on for hours but you're going to need the comfort because you will be slower.

Edited July 26, 2021 by RobertWhitehead
Added some more context

[Headshot]

1 hour ago, TNT1 said:

In my, admittedly very far from mainstream, opinion, it would serve you far better to invest in proper skills before trying to buy your way out of a technical challenge.

Being anti dropper post is very mainstream SA, investing in skills, i.e paying for coaching is not. Dropper posts are a legit way to buy skills and make things easier, just like 29er wheels and light weight carbon bikes.