Hi – newby here. Riding for 25yrs, red+ trails at centres, but prefer natural Lakes type riding.

Just wanted to relate a couple of anecdotes & whinge at why there’s not a single decent mountain bike that meets my fairly average needs available to buy in the shops yet.

For now, my riding routine is a weekly roll around W2 at Afan, with a couple of evenings playing on Kilvie – typically ~12hrs a week year round.

I used to ride an aluminium marathon full-suspension frame, european manufacturer with the Horst patented design (Specialized four-bar) and was thoroughly unimpressed with the rear air shock. As soon as I picked up the bike, I took it for a week in the Lakes – after just 4 days of winter riding, there was play in the top bushing of the shock mount. Using a plastic sleeve, without any decent seal design is a serious design flaw – I think part of the problem is USA bike designs from a different climate, but then also there’s not much scope for a magazine reviewer to call the flaw out, if there’s no alternative systems available. Specialized used to use plastic bushings on their pivots, but they’ve shifted to sealed bearings and a propriety mount at one end of the shock. For truly durable low-maintenacne designs, plastic cylinders exposed to grit is far from optimal. We need shocks to be mounted on sealed cartridge bearings asap.

So then, this bike had room for a 2.2″ rear tyre – but despite endless attempts to tweak the air pressure on the rear shock (100mm travel), unless I maxed the pressure out to +45psi, hitting rocky trails at momentum would just pinch flat a comedy number of times – 10 pinch flats on the Skiddaw loop descent? The general durability of the rock shox rear shock was poor – after 4 months of riding, the seal blew half way into a 10hr loop and really sketch to complete with a flat shock bottomed out. The reason for posting here is the revelation after I switched to a coil shock – able to run rear tyre down to 25psi and pretty much zero pinch flats.

Another thing is tubeless tyre scam – it’s fairly necessary to reduce pinch flats in a race situation – but after trying Stans system – the flaw of burping with cornering force is dumb – compared with how a tubed system would respond. Using a coil shock with tubed tyres let me run much more suitable tyre pressures.

Air shocks (and a team mechanic) make sense for racing where climbing is the main time saver – but for general trail routes, the performance of a coil shock is in another league all together. But because bike shops want to stock product that look like podium winners, there’s not a single trail bike sold in the UK fitted with a coil rear shock.

After 2yrs of riding, I managed to twist the aluminium marathon frame and there’s a real gap in the market for robust mid-travel bikes. Banshee Phantom looks alright – especially with a linkage that allows a hint of rearward travel path, maybe those Kona’s too.

I might have had a run of bad look, but I’ve owned 2 bikes that Aluminium corrosion was a real concern with – a painted GT that blistered under the paint on the top tube and visible white Aluminium Oxide deposits, then a polished silver Orange Sub5 – again blistering on the top tube (I guess in response to sweat), but also the rear bearing seizing onto the frame with disimilar metal corrosion – seemed to work better after sand blasting and professional re-paint with durable matt black. I lost a set of Mag21s on a ProFlex with the same Aluminium oxidisation problem on the crown too.

From what I can tell, composite materials win out over alloys for mechanical properties, but only in certain conditions – firstly if heat’s involved then metal often wins but composites can be really sensitive to abrasion and can snap fail rather than bend like steel – strikes me than running internal cables, for instance, rubbing away at the hidden inside of carbon tubes is a nightmare waiting to happen. So, for the sake of an aesthetically clean look – most high end carbon trail bikes with internal cables frighten me a bit. Leaves me feeling that there are hardly any durable (+10yrs) UK trail bikes available beyond a steel hardtail.

I’m sort of thinking that built in obsolescence and inadequate design is a strategy on the part of the bike industry to shift more product. There’s really no reason why we can’t have bikes that would run for a lifetime rather than being mostly disposable stuff to replace every few years.

(soz bit jumbled post – just wanted to vent!)

There’s really no reason why we can’t have bikes that would run for a lifetime rather than being mostly disposable stuff to replace every few years.

There is.

less $ for makers obviously…

But, arguably a manufacturer that made kit that lasts with just renewing bits that wear out would sell well too.

Interesting post… some points for good debate. My 2 cents as a bike designer/manufacturer for what its worth:

Specialized used to use plastic bushings on their pivots, but they’ve shifted to sealed bearings and a propriety mount at one end of the shock. For truly durable low-maintenacne designs, plastic cylinders exposed to grit is far from optimal. We need shocks to be mounted on sealed cartridge bearings asap.

Yes and no, there’s actually some pretty good polymer bush technology out there thats very good for the purpose. Most shock positions isolate the bushes away from the main crud and dirt of the daily ride, so there’s not a massive exposure, and if you use the right tech in there, bush life can be measured in years. I think we can all agree that the commonplace DU bushes are pretty rubbish, but Im not convinced that going to a ball bearing is the answer for a couple of reasons. As mentioned the bush solution can be relatively low friction, and have a decent service life. Given the cost and ease of replacement of these parts, this can be a very viable trade off. Also, using a bearing requires a more complex design and some sort of proprietary shock mount (theres no standard for this right now and although you could double up with a ‘static’ bush and bearing, thats not really addressing the issue). I’m currently testing a polymer bush that has a very low COF and offers some elastic properties allowing for impact absorption without damaging the bush – extending life considerably… or at least thats the theory. Bushes and bearings both have the same flaw with a dislike of high impact loads and low rotation, and while ball bearings are not progressing in anyway to reduce this flaw, bushes are so bushes may still prove to be the better ultimate solution.

The general durability of the rock shox rear shock was poor

Yup. They were. Shocks now tend to be more reliable. They (obviously) need a more aggressive cleaning and service regime than coils, but I would say 50% of issues come from the dampers not the air spring, so while coils are more reliable, they are not entirely so.

Another thing is tubeless tyre scam – it’s fairly necessary to reduce pinch flats in a race situation – but after trying Stans system – the flaw of burping with cornering force is dumb – compared with how a tubed system would respond. Using a coil shock with tubed tyres let me run much more suitable tyre pressures.

Thats a valid point, but it does depend on many factors, especially tyre choice and rim choice. For most riders a good combo will provide a better ride, no punctures and burping is not an issue. Many people though (not saying you did) forget that you lose air consistently over time in tubeless – its inherent in the nature of how they work, and so many burping/rolling issues I see are from riders not maintaining their tyre pressures correctly.

Air shocks (and a team mechanic) make sense for racing where climbing is the main time saver – but for general trail routes, the performance of a coil shock is in another league all together. But because bike shops want to stock product that look like podium winners, there’s not a single trail bike sold in the UK fitted with a coil rear shock.

The real rise of the air shock is down to average quality of ride. Put another way on average the customer gets a better ride from an air shock… why you ask? Because an air shock is likely to be better set up for a rider than a coil. It comes down to the spring tuneability and how bikes are assembled. Coils are almost certain to be the wrong weight for any given rider, whereas an air shock only needs a shock pump. Because bikes are generally assembled and packaged long before sale, the option to tune that spring weight would fall to the shop. Given that customers would almost certainly want a correct brand spring (trust me on this), you’d require the shop to carry lots of springs to cover all the possible weights and brands they stock. Lots and lots. Moreover, you’d need the shops to then assess the customer’s weight and riding style to get the right spring, and accept responsibility when they get it wrong – even when thats just bad information from the customer. Thats something most shops would not want to do.

The other major factor is weight – through marketing mainly, we’ve (I say that in the general sense) been convinced that weight is a determining factor in how a bike should be. Adding a coil adds a lb or so of weight. A lb is enough to push a bike from its given ‘desired’ weight bracket, into the ‘too heavy’ bracket. Buyers respond to this more so than they do ultimate ride quality – sorry but its true!

I lost a set of Mag21s on a ProFlex with the same Aluminium oxidisation problem on the crown too.

Consider this a blessing.

I’m sort of thinking that built in obsolescence and inadequate design is a strategy on the part of the bike industry to shift more product. There’s really no reason why we can’t have bikes that would run for a lifetime rather than being mostly disposable stuff to replace every few years.

Sort of correct Im afraid. The market demands that bikes progress at a certain rate, and so investing in making things bombproof is somewhat futile. You will sell more bikes by adding a door in the downtube where you can keep a tube, or some pants, or maybe a sandwich or something than you will by making the bearings last for 10 years. Why? Because buyers want the pants door more than they do a 10 year bike. Bike companies are commercial businesses and so they deploy their engineering resources to where they make the most money, and yes they (on the whole I think) disregard long service life (3+ years), ease of maintenance etc., or at least long service life with minimal money spent, as a necessity. I personally (and we all do here at Bird) disagree with that ethos, and so a good deal of all our design and spec efforts goes into making sure the bikes will last as long as we can make them do so, and offer simple home maintenance, within a sensible budget. Offering a lifetime warranty does somewhat focus the mind on that too!

Finally FWIW I do agree on coil shocks offering the ultimate ride… expect some coil options to appear on Bird full sussers in the near future! You heard it here first folks.

First off, thanks for the interesting post. I’m sure a lot of people will be put off by the length, which is a shame as there are some interesting points in there (and in the responses).

As a user; one of the reasons why I don’t demand longevity in my mountain bikes is the speed with which they are evolving. In contrast to the road, where the basic design was fixed many years ago and where you can legitimately talk about a bike for life, mountain bike designers still seem to be experimenting with the basics (angles, lengths etc). My road bike is 15 years old and other than the desire for new shiny stuff I can’t see any reason to change it. Whatever mountain bike I buy now it’s hard to imagine that I wont be tempted by something new inside 5 years, so longevity doesn’t seem that big a deal.

I must admit that I’ve never tried a coil shock. As a relatively new convert to mountain bikes an air shock seems to make sense. It’s lighter (although I’ll accept that may not actually matter) and I can change the way it behaves with a shock pump (and maybe by adding a token). Pulling it apart and applying some grease every now and then seems to be a small price to pay for that versatility. But maybe I should look more carefully at coil shocks.

Finally, as has been touched on, there are already options for those that want a bike that will last a long time. A steel hardtail (or even rigid) bike will do the job most of the time. You can use tyres of pretty much any size you want to get the desired level of low-maintenance squish. If you really want full-suss then something from Orange’s range with a coil shock should keep trucking for as long as you want it to.

bearings and pivot maintenance are the trade off for riding a FS in the winter in the UK, but to have the bushes wear out after 4 days is pretty bad 😯

OP how much do you weigh? (sorry, should explain, not trying to be rude) but in my experience Big bloke (and I’m guessing you are, given your various experiences) on a 100mm (and therefore a XC) frame = short life.

Thanks for the read, some interesting points made.

Regarding the issue of longevity, I think what you are getting at is the nature of the full sus design i.e. more moving parts subjected to high loads = more chance of things wearing out / going wrong.

I’m watching the emerging plus size / Boost trend with interest because I’m guessing that a plus size 29er hardtail with wide rims and 3″ tyres run at lowish pressures (perhaps even a leaf spring fork) might feel similar to a short travel full sus without the addition of more things to go wrong.

I’ll certainly be looking at something like this when I’m in the market for a new bike.

All I read in that was:
Things were rubbish ages ago
No one makes something that only I want
I cant set up tubeless or air shocks properly
I don’t understand the concept of a business

Interesting read.

I’ve owned bikes which devour a shock bushing in 4months of hard use which is a short life for something, but for a few quid and a few mins to change it’s not the end of the world.

4 days on the other hand is appalling, but I would say not typical for the life of shock bushings in general. So it would be unfair to brand this design approach useless. I do disagree with the need to use a bearing at the shock mount point. I find shock bushings life is significantly shortened if there is any play in the pivots. Just to suggest one possible reason why yours didn’t last long.

I do also find some US bikes make you wonder if they even have mud over there. My Santa Cruz doesn’t have much rear tyre clearance and a nice little shelf for the mud to collect thanks to the pivot design. It’s almost as if they wanted it to clog up with mud really easily!

I’m afraid I disagree about the tubeless tyre scam. When set up properly it’s awesome. Defiantly a solution if you’re getting pinch punctures. If you’re burping when cornering then I’d be looking at your rim and tyre choice as that shouldn’t be happening.

Air shocks are becoming more popular than ever. They’re becoming much more tuneable and offering much higher levels of performance. So much so that they are starting to appear more and more on DH bikes. A place where you would have only ever seen a coil shock up unto a few years ago. So again it’s a shame you’ve had a problem with your one, but I wouldn’t be branding them all as useless anytime soon.

A gap in the market for robust mid travel bikes?? The market is currently saturated with 140-160mm travel ‘enduro bikes’ which can certainly look after you in conditions you would have only taken a DH bike 10 years ago.

I’m sort of thinking that built in obsolescence and inadequate designed to wear out design is a strategy on the part of the bike industry to shift more product.

Who would have thought that the bike industry want to sell more new bikes and replacement parts.

140-160mm is not mid travel. manufacturers want to sell you it as but its not its acutally quite alot of travel!

125-140 is about right for 90% of uk riding and riders i think.

i’ll admit shock tech has progressed a bit so it can sometimes be ok to pedal a 160mm bike. but i’ll still wager a shorter travel bike, setup decently, will be more than adequate for most.

and tubeless is a bit of a scam. i cant decide whether i like it and i live somewhere with loads of hawthorn trees.

How is tubeless a scam? You can these days use ‘normal’ tyres, a lot of rims come tubeless ready, or at worst you have to fit some rim strips or tape & valves, squirt some stans jizz in and away to go, no more thorn punctures, or pinch flats/burping if you match rims/tyres well. Less rolling resistance, less punctures, potentially more grip, similar weight. People who have problems are I think setting them up fundamentally wrong, or using bad combinations of rims 7 tyres.

Needle roller bearings on the shock mounts is the way to go.
18 months trouble free so far. Only maintenance so far has been a precautionary re-grease using Castrol marine grease.

Interesting post. I don’t agree with all of it, but I don’t disagree entirely either. Couple of points.

Bearings aren’t so great when you’re loading them at the same point over and over (i.e in a shock linkage). They’re better when actually spinning. This evens out the wear over at least one of the races. Bushes are also much more compact therefore easier & simpler to design for, also requiring less material (therefore less weight and cost).

Pinch flats and burping definitely suggest you need more air in your tyres. I know it’s a combination of luck, tyre choice, personal riding style and more luck but for many people, tubeless has resulted in a massive number of punctures when riding in normal and rocky terrain.

Ghetto tubeless setup has stopped me pinch flaying and burping. If it’s good enough for Graves it’s good enough for me.

I can sort of see the “tubless is a scam” argument, you have to choose rims, tyres and pressure pretty carefully rather than just going:

“woo, goop and a ghetto set-up that’s me sorted for 10psi..”

my rear used to be at about 30psi with a tube in it, it’s still at about 20-25psi tubless, and I’m a lightweight. Haven’t had a puncture in ooohhh, forever though.

All good points in the past, but technology has come on a fair way. New air shocks with bigger negative springs mean they actually work over small bumps and the ability to add volume reduction spacers to increase ramp up is great and genuinely works. The same applies to forks, you can now change travel and spring curves at home with only a few tools. As a previously firm coil stalwart I’ve changed my opinion after riding 2015 and 2016 air sprung forks and shocks. They’re not perfect and still don’t quite meet coil standards but for me they’re so close it doesn’t matter. Having tuning possibilities that are even easier than coil is a huge factor.

As far as tubeless goes, you just need to run it with nice wide rims and use tyres with decent enough sidewalls. Get the right kit and the kit works well together.

Regarding the original point about no suitable bikes, if you want a low service interval bike that will last and has a coil shock I’m sure Orange bikes would supply you with a Five and a Cane Creek Double Barrel happily. Or try a Turner, the bushings last years if well maintained (well, mine certainly did). Both lovely handmade bikes with sensible angles and sensible travel.

Orange bikes would supply you with a Five and a Cane Creek Double Barrel happily

tru dat…There are def ways of mitigating the servicing

Some interestin observations, and some of the reasons why 14 years ago I bought a Ti hardtail and not a full suss bike.

I still ride it now with minimal maintenance or expenditure. 1 set of shifters, a wheel hub bush, couple of chainrings and cassettes, and two bottom brakets. Not really anything else. The forks are due for a service or replacement, but I’ve stuck some rigid forks on for now.

I built it with a very long term view (ie last me a lifetime). You don’t HAVE to succumb to industry if you don’t want to…

Cheers for responses – I do feel better for having had a grump about the state of it all.

“Bird”
that’s a new name to me. Photos look tidy on the website.

“Orange’s range with a coil shock should keep trucking for as long as you want it to”
Yeah, I hear that from a few folk – that they like their Oranges. I bought a sub5 frame over in NewZealand in…2004 and it didn’t work out very well so I’m a bit put off the brand – part of the problem was probably so far away from customer service – but emails to them directly didn’t get much response. The swing arm just seemed really flexy – so that with pedalling the rear shock ended up being worn either side – I replaced it for a manitou coil but then I had dramas with corrosion on the top tube – I sent Orange photos but they were pretty much just ‘ooh that’s unusual’ and no further help. Then the bearing seized onto the frame – in the end needing to be attacked by the bike shop with unfriendly power tools to remove it. Meanwhile the stantions on the VanR forks marked up within 3 months of riding, the seals stopped holding oil and Fox refused to warranty – ended up having to post the forks away and pay for new stantions but they were just pants compared to how Marzochi kit used to be. All up, I was sort of put off Orange & Fox – but just unlucky experience for me I guess.

“A steel hardtail (or even rigid) bike will do the job most of the time”
yup – sort of loving my Cotic BFe for now – except I have a lower back disc thing on the go and I’m just getting beat up on the trails – hence general moan at no proper mountain bikes for sale in the shops.

“to have the bushes wear out after 4 days is pretty bad “
yeah – I thought so too! I had chats on the phone with the tuning company I got the fox coil replacement from to see if the system on that Sunn Shamann had been unusual and the response was that it’s the same as on every stock bike sold. The week up in the Lakes was fairly enthusiastic – sort of riding all daylight but nothing much gnarlier than Walna Scar / Garburn etc – plus the bike was put in a hostel shed grubby overnight – just made me think most bikes get an easier life or I was really unlucky somehow. Looking at the bush mount – there isn’t much to stop grit getting on the load bearing surfaces and I guess it’s better that wears than part of the bike/shock itself

“how much do you weigh?”
gym machine says 79kg, with 19.5% lard content

“plus size 29er”
sounds like fun! seems like motorsports sticks with big volume tyres if the surface is rocky – I’m guessing once all the fuss about letting go of fairly skinny 26″ wheels, most trail bikes will have fat rubber soon. The way I see it most folk want to have fun out riding – not always so bothered about whether a skinny xc racing snake is faster on a super-lightweight ride. As long as it climbs ok and reliable for a week away then happy days.

“No one makes something that only I want
I cant set up tubeless or air shocks properly”
fair point. I dunno if it’s particularly unusual what I want to do on a bike – I think I’d just like a sturdy ~120mm travel coil full suspension ride that I’d feel ok about taking into the mountains year round. I posted just because the difference in performance between a 2013 monarch and fox van coil was incredible – like I said instead of having to use 45+psi to avoid pinch flats, I could run 25 and hit stuff ok. I did spend a a good while faffing with set-up, with input from shock tuners but coupled with unreliability I was happy enough to switch to coil and until I twisted that frame it was brill. Ha – I managed to pop 8 spokes over time in the rear wheel too – feedback from shop was that black spokes seemed to fail more often – after swapping to DT double butted it was fine. Ok, so maybe all a bit more adventurous a life than the xc marathon bike was expecting but I’m a timid rider and not into jumping/stunts etc – plus this sunn shamann was a ~£2800 new ride or thereabouts so you’d expect it to cope with a few days in the hills.

“some US bikes make you wonder if they even have mud over there”
I hear you – this Sunn was a european version of a US design, but still 2.1″ ADvantage was about as fat a rear as it would take. I read a mag article about US bike designs coming to ride over here and they were shocked about heading out in the mud rather than wait for a sunny day!

“125-140 is about right for 90% of uk riding and riders i think.”
True that. Even a bit less – Banshee Phantom is a burly 105mm 29er and felt like the best out of test rides so far. I don’t want to fuss with locking out shock for climbing – want the bounce for traction and take rocky steeps so I figure a coil shock sub120ish would be ideal. Another thing…as much as I like the OneUp 30>42 1×10 I’m running, it’s too tall a gear for long steeps – it’s a crazy idea to spec most bikes with just single – mostly limits them to be driven to a trail-centre for a short 4hr loop.

“tubeless tyre…When set up properly it’s awesome”
Yeah I’ve read that a few times – but going back to that week in the Lakes, riding between YHAs and longer days in the hills (I stayed in Coniston/Windermere/Keswick and rode between bases with a lamp after days out on the trails) – it’s not that easy to set up with a folding mini pump is it? Might be brill with a CO2 cartridge or track pump and without getting punctures – but if it does fail – like I had a proper nasty tumble cornering when the front tyre burped off the rim, it seems to more faff than positive. I should try another go at it – the feedback here was just that surprisingly running a coil rear shock seemed to take out loads of pinch flat risks that lead to need for tubeless to begin with.

“designed to wear out”
Yeah – for racing and driving the bike to a centre, it’s mostly no dramas at all – but for a bigger day out or a few days away from a shop in the hills, it’s just a bit of a worry sometimes. I think I’d settle for bit heavier/more reliable/more£ than chase latest fashions.

“Less rolling resistance, less punctures, potentially more grip, similar weight.”
No doubt – especially on a hardtail or a light bike I figure tubeless is probably a bit necessary.

“Needle roller bearings on the shock mounts is the way to go.”
Any more info about what sort of bike/set-up? sounds cool

(soz for text wall – was just interesting posts from folk and wanted to chip in again)

“Bushes are also much more compact therefore easier & simpler to design for, also requiring less material (therefore less weight and cost”

fair enough – it’d be cool if there was a way to seal them a bit better to stop grit sneaking in

“Pinch flats and burping definitely suggest you need more air in your tyres”
Ha – that first week of riding heard some creative swearing from me! I was despairing a bit really – even with a ToPeak digi pressure meter if I dropped below 45psi at the rear, riding into rocks would just pop the tube and at that sort of tyre pressure I’d just ping off stuff. Sure, finesse hopping over stuff rider-error etc – but line choice with a bit of momentum on rocky Lakes tracks isn’t alway carefully considered! Part of it a bit I guess is having spent 10yrs up-skilling on the mtb over in NZ so I was used to travelling a little quicker – but on mostly smoother trails. I’ve given up on clip-ins too, opted for dmr vaults & 510 freerides. The burping drama was the front tyre from cornering – my sense was I could run lower pressure in a tubed system without any ouchy tumbles

(for now, running 2.5 High Roller/Minnions – with a maxxis free-ride inner tube on the rear at…22psi is working alright – but kinda heavy and too fat to fit in a lot of bouncy bikes. I’ll maybe try out tubeless set up on next bike. I liked the ADvantages but – again must just be me, the XC rear and regular 2.25 on the front both failed at the sidewalls before the tread wore out – so back to sturdier kit for a bit)

“air shocks with bigger negative springs mean they actually work over small bumps”
cheers – good to hear other folks’ experience. Turner’s look decent too

“14 years ago I bought a Ti hardtail and not a full suss bike”
Good call. I wonder, for a laugh, would any racers consider riding on even a 3yr old enduro frame? On one hand it’s great that we can ride the same kit as talented professionals and in the scheme of things even at, say £1000 a year loss of always riding a fresh bouncy trail bike – it’s a cheap enough hobby. But on the other hand I kinda think we’re being taken for mugs some of the time – it’s crazy that a fancy carbon enduro bike might sell for more than a new HarleyDavidson. I’d be totally set on sticking with this Cotic BFe – I mean the excitement of riding it, sense of speed, peace-of-mind/reliability wins enough for me – but despite being staunch about it I just get a bit beat up after half a day of riding (I have a bit of Sciatica/disc-nerve pressure thing for now) so really just want a reliable, thought-through full-sus ride and felt a bit uninspired about the choices available.

If you like the shorter travel bikes, look at the Transition Scout. It’s a straight up Horst 4-bar though so has plenty of bearings to wear out! It is Canadian though, I hear they have mud there. I bought mine after a test ride and I’m dead pleased. I’m riding faster on it than any other bike I’ve had, which I think is due to the increased confidence the longer front centre brings, but who knows. It’s got 125mm travel and is built solidly. It pedals fine, though not as well as the Turner, and descends superbly.

I’m no engineer, but don’t needle bearings in pivots have a reputation for wearing a groove due to the small repetitive movements rather than full rotation?

“Transition Scout”
looks decent – cheers for tip : )

I didn’t really have a problem with the main pivots on the 4-bar, no grumbles from them even with a couple of years of neglect, it was the shock mount bits that wore out to give a bit of play – I mean it still basically went in a straight line, but it was possible to lift the seat up a tiny bit before the back end would follow if that makes sense and it just seemed a bit naff after less than a week of winter. The mail order co sent me new bushes and we had chats about if there was any other mounting system and confirmed with another shock tuner that it’s just par for the course for now. I had much better life out of the bushes with regular riding – maybe 6 or so changes over a year – but there must be something gnarly about proper grit!

that makes sense about bearings being designed for regular spinning, being a bit uncomfortable with just oscillating a bit instead. In general, I’d bet money too on a lot of the computer analysis mostly modelling the bike in a horizontal orientation with a vertical load – rather than the angle forces hit the rear wheel on a descent – let alone trying to factor in much of a side load from the drive train being unsymmetrical or cornering twisty forces too – the sums just get a bit fiddly – so much of it is prototyping and re-design (hopefully!)

I dunno if it’s particularly unusual what I want to do on a bike – I think I’d just like a sturdy ~120mm travel coil full suspension ride that I’d feel ok about taking into the mountains year round

see, to me that just screams Orange 5… I know you’ve had issues with your old sub5, but that was 9 years ago, and they’ve got a lot better since then. Test ride?

What’s the least travel you can run on a five and not kill the handling?

i read this and thought ‘5’ too, but then i own one, and chose it for minimal faff. i never changed the bearings on my 2009, and a mate has just built it up, and i bought another 5. have helped mates change bearings on multi-pivot bikes and would have to be very convinced of their advantages before i thought of buying one.
if you really want something with minimal maintenance maybe take a look at the stooges with a b+ rear for a bit of cush?
you’ll find plenty of reading about them here….
i quite fancy one myself but 27.2 seatpost puts me off

Good call on the 5 – and I know it’s shallow of me – but I’m unimpressed at them not speccing a 5/segment with a double up-front – almost like they’re aiming more at trail centre commuters. I didn’t have that Shamann long enough to fuss over the multi-pivot bearings as they were working alright for a couple of years – but ordeal of the bearing cold-welding itself to the earlier sub5 frame doesn’t encourage me about general durability of moving parts

*daydreams ideal bike*
I think possibly 29″…bit sturdy but probably around ~120 travel, wonderful if it had a slightly rearward axle path for hitting bumps coming downhill – so nearly like that Banshee Phantom then – except without the dumb idea of different places for the rear wheel – also lots more tyre clearance or even scope for +tyres sometimes. Coil shocks probably front & rear (I know it’s budget but my 150mm sektor for now is a bit sketch – if it’s soft enough to work as suspension then it does epic dives with braking but set up bit harder and the static friction/stiction means it only really moves with thud on the trail rather than working like suspension to take out vibrations – to be blunt my coil 100mm rockshox Judy of 15yrs ago was a better ride)

ha – I just read in MBR letters about a bike suggestion and their pick was a Canyon Strive – so a multi-pivot bike with an extra adjustable office-chair-technology part, extra bushings and another lever – Good Luck for that working in 3yrs time!

Are your sektors coil or air… if they are air you could probably fix the dive!

Honestly, you just seem grumpy and upset.

Why would a Canyon Strive not be working in 3 years time? Seriously, explain why please. If you look after your expensive purchase (like manufacturers tell you to do), it won’t break down half as quick. Bikes are put under a lot of strain, so a few bits breaking is perfectly acceptable over time regardless, just like they did in the olden days when everything was ‘better’ and ‘easier’ like people seem to think.

You just seem like the idea of technology moving on is just wrong, and therefore will never be good enough to meet the seemingly unattainable standards you are looking for.

If a company could make their products last forever, imagine how much it would cost you. £1000 for a mech? £10000 fox forks? I’m sure you would be front of the queue to buy then wouldn’t you. No, you wouldn’t. Nobody would. Which is why we have products that don’t usually last forever; So that the businesses can sell more, we can afford them in the first place, and years down the line we can buy more because the business is still in business. Something they wouldn’t be if they sold one time only products for stupid prices.

like that Banshee Phantom then – except without the dumb idea of different places for the rear wheel – also lots more tyre clearance or even scope for +tyres sometimes

Speaking as a Banshee owner the adjustable geometry is great – really good for tweaking the vibe of the bike to suit your riding (style/terrain/etc). There’s a ton of tyre clearance on all the Banshee frames – you may have been confused by the vertical struts forming the front of the rear triangle, which look very close to the tyre from a side view but are actually miles away.

Also, there’s plenty of space for 27+ tyres with the standard dropouts (you can use the adjustable geometry to raise the BB if you like as they make the bike even lower). And if you put the 27.5 dropouts on (the shorter ones are 26/29) then you can run 29+ tyres (and use the flipchips to being the BB height down).

“sektors coil or air?”
solo air. They’re set up for now with one click of compression and five clicks of rebound (I just checked and that’s 1/4 of the way from the hare towards the tortoise sticker). Running with enough air inside to let me have 130 travel on regular rides – with an extra 20mm I guess for clumsy hitting into something. I’ve tried around a few possibilities and seems like that works ok for me – but they’re not very sensitive to small bumps. It’s hard to compare rides – but my call is that the ancient coil Marzochi Z1s, Judys and Fox VanRs (while they worked) did a much job at dealing with vibration and working like suspension rather than just cushioning against bigger bumps.

“Banshee owner”
That’s really good to hear – I only had a scoot on the Phantom but it felt sorted. I’m a fan of them using tubes at the back with an extra reinforcing bit inside to make a sort of boxy sideways 8 cross-section, that’ll do heaps to stop them twisting so much. I was just nervous thinking that the interface with the adjustable part would be a creaky soundtrack all day and wasn’t sure if the soft aluminium would wear a bit there – but no doubt they’re designed for bigger hits than me gently rolling along. Really felt like a fun snappy ride – keen to test again. Sounds ace being able to run a second set of fat wheels for off-groomed trails too : )

“Why would a Canyon Strive not be working in 3 years time? Seriously, explain why please.”
Ah I don’t mean to worry folk – I’m sure it’s reliable enough. It’s just that with rotating load bearing surfaces, not very well sealed against the elements, with a dollop of grit on top are going to wear out fairly soon – but not in a bad way – just in a having to replace a few bits of it – and it’d just show up as a bit of clunk first rather than something to spoil a ride. That office-chair-technology activating bit to change the geometry adds complexity too that might not last for ever – in addition that bit rotates around heaps more than without so it’ll wear faster. Plus any play that develops is sort of amplified on account of it happening in so many places. But none of it’s going to cause any tumbles and I agree regular maintenance is essential – I bet they’re heaps of fun to ride too!

“you just seem grumpy and upset”
I am a bit – nothing major tho. I’d just about settled for a steel hard tail again and was loving just getting out riding heaps – but it’s not agreeing with my back and it’s different looking back at bouncy bikes again – maybe it is possible to keep the same frame running for 10yrs or whatever (especially if it’s part of a £6k push bike) but I’m more thinking it’ll be stuff to break on the trail and spoil a ride (in-between lots of it being genuinely the best performing mountain bike that has ever existed)

“the idea of technology moving on is just wrong”
I’m just a bit unsure all the technology is moving in an appropriate direction for general trail riders. I’m not being a Luddite about it – I’d love to see hi-tech ideas but applied more towards durability and decent product life – instead of a crazy tide of never-ending ‘industry standards’ so that a fork of a few years ago doesn’t fit a frame of today, or last bikes wheels are a different sized hub to the next new frame etc. It just feels a little bit of a sneaky bid for the most cash from bike makers – rather than a fair swap for decent long life kit at a fair investment. Honestly if there was a bike out there that didn’t use polymer bushes, had decent sealed cartridge bearings, a frame that went in a straight line through rock garden bits, came with coil suspension – but designed for trails not gravity runs I’d throw maybe £5k at owning it – everyone else must be looking for a different sort of ride I guess.

solo air. They’re set up for now with one click of compression and five clicks of rebound (I just checked and that’s 1/4 of the way from the hare towards the tortoise sticker). Running with enough air inside to let me have 130 travel on regular rides – with an extra 20mm I guess for clumsy hitting into something. I’ve tried around a few possibilities and seems like that works ok for me – but they’re not very sensitive to small bumps. It’s hard to compare rides – but my call is that the ancient coil Marzochi Z1s, Judys and Fox VanRs (while they worked) did a much job at dealing with vibration and working like suspension rather than just cushioning against bigger bumps.

My advice?

1. Strip them and rebuild them with oil (float fluid or similar) in the air chamber and fresh oil in the lowers. Might as well do a seal service while you’re at it. You will find that they will open up a whole load if you do that (same applies for all RS forks). Small bump sensitivity will be increased alot.

2. While you’re at it, check under the air cap. If its threaded on the inside get some tokens for it. If not buy a new air cap (it will have tokens as part of the kit). Both options are reasonably priced. Start off by running no tokens, and find a pressure you like the feel in the first half of the stroke, but (presumably) dive through the second half and bottom out too easily. Add a token, pressurise again to the same pressure and test. Repeat adding more tokens until the additional progression they provide gives the support in the stroke you need to get the forks soft off the top, but not blowing through the travel.

3. Think to yourself ‘ok maybe air forks are not so bad after all’ 🙂

Wow! Longest posts ever. As mentioned above this is why I keep on coming back to Turners. They focus on longevity and ride quality and less on weight or fashion.

Good call on the 5 – and I know it’s shallow of me – but I’m unimpressed at them not speccing a 5/segment with a double up-front – almost like they’re aiming more at trail centre commuters

I used to share your view, that 1x was for trail centres and not suited to “big days out in proper mountains”. In fact I still have sympathy with that view, but a few things are starting to change my mind.

First, you can now get pretty low ratios on a 1x setup. With a 28T up front and a 42 (or even 45 if you go for a shimano 11 speed setup with expander) you can get as low as (or lower than) a “standard” 24×36 bottom gear.

Second, I realised that I only use half the cassette with my 2x setup. The smaller sprockets are pretty much unused as I change out of the granny as soon as I can and never need to go beyond the middle with the outer ring off-road. In fact, even on the road (with soft chunky tyres) I don’t pedal beyond about 20mph, which is only around 80 rpm with 28×11 on a 29er, so easy enough.

Finally, there are a few folk on here who do “big days out in proper mountains” and choose to use 1x setups.

everyone else must be looking for a different sort of ride I guess

Not really, it’s just that most folk have realised that bikes are always going to be a compromise

As a recentish reverter back to coil shocks, air just doesn’t do it for hard riding. Swapped out my lyriks and a fox air shock for some marzocchi 55’s and a fox dhx on my old specialized enduro last summer, performance was night and day – small bump and big bumps, off jumps drops rocks etc. Upped the weight to 33lbs but still not a chore by any means to do 50k+ routes in the fod, welsh mountains, and the peak district. Now have an ohlins shock on my new enduro evo longest ride being 52k so far, yea it isn’t going to win any hill climbing awards but is very functional and just gets on with it and then the moment it points towards anything resembling technical riding it is awesome and well worth the weight penalty. All about having the most fun possible at the end of the day rather than worrying how fast up fire road I am going to be.

I struggle to see how air shocks can’t do it for hard riding when pro DH and ENDURO racers are using them? Yes, plenty use coils too but why would any use air shocks if they couldn’t handle that kind of riding?

I do think air forks and shocks are generally harder to tune than coils. And coil shocks and forks will generally have their dampers tuned for harder riding, but that’s a damper not spring issue.

They have skill I don’t!

Imo it’s got to the stage where the new round of dh air shocks are just as good as a coil in performace. The only time when a coil is better is on reaaaally long tracks where you might notice some heat build up in an air shock.

When you’ve got Gwin and Remi amongst others choosing air shocks over coil for dh tracks like Lourdes and Fort Bill you know air shocks have bridged the gap.

robd

As a recentish reverter back to coil shocks, air just doesn’t do it for hard riding.

chiefgrooveguru

I struggle to see how air shocks can’t do it for hard riding when pro DH and ENDURO racers are using them? Y

robd

They have skill I don’t!

And that’s it in a nutshell right there. The first post just reminded me of being in a bike shop and pretty much once a week you were guaranteed to encounter someone with all of the OPs complaints.

Bikes are too expensive, not fit for purpose, too complicated, too weak, air shocks were crap, … etc etc but when you scraped away the surface you find out that the guy you’re talking too was either riding something completely unsuitable and/or they were nowhere near as gnarly as they thought they were and they’d be doing some howlingly awful bike maintenance like power-hosing or spraying WD-40 into the pivots or running 10psi in their tyres and 400 psi in their air can. They’d almost always be some kind of “engineer” too 😉

Current full suspension bikes are sensational. There are some bad ones out there, some design flaws, but on the whole they are sensational. To be able to have an air sprung 160mm bike with comparable or better performance than DH bikes of not so long ago is incredible. With correct maintenance most will go on for many years.