I am in the lucky position of being able to build a decent fs bike. It will join a great ti hardtail. I find myself geting a bit carried away. 95% of the time it’ll be in the Chilterns or doing XC trails at Swinley. I’m near 50 don’t like jumping or great rocky drops. I would like to get to the Alps and Tenerife but not to dj.

A lot of people tell me to get a 140mm fs bike capable of doing the most extreme that I might do, I looked at a 5 spot but just fell in love with a flux which is better locally potentialy capable enough for the rest. The concern I have is that it’s too similar and that a lightweight build of something like a yeti asr5 or liteville 203 willl

Not sure how I screwed that up – anyways I don’t do dh as well as not djing and I was going to say that a 140 liteville could only be about a pound heavier and cover xc and trail pretty comfortably.

140 will be plenty but absolutely go to some shops/demo days and try them, there are different designs and they aren’t all for everyone

I’m running a Liteville 301 with 160mm/140mm travel

If its a medium, then you could get the weight under 27lbs easily

However, for the Chilterns and Swinley – anything more than 120mm is probably overkill

I live in the same area and use my hardtail 85% of the time

I have the same dilemma. For me 120mm would be perfectly adequate for most of what I do, but I feel drawn to the 140/150 AM style bikes to Alp proof the bike (have a couple of trips planned this year) and to have a bit of fun! The longer travel bikes, from what I gather from all the various bike tests in the mag’s, will have a bit more ‘pop’ and will be a bit more fun. If that is the case i’m all for that. I’m not hard core DHer, or a haradcore XC’er, but do like to get the wheels off the ground and to hit the odd Black rock garden when the fancy takes me, and like to get a lick on. So I like the idea of being a bit overbiked for the odd occation when I might benefit from it. Afer all it is all about having fun – adequate is so boring! Aferall, in all other areas of our lives we have kit that is way beyond our requirements – cars: why have a nice car when a cheap, economical, mundane small engined hatchback will be perfectly adequate. Why have a smart phone when a normal handset will be perfectly adequate.

I think the modern crop of longer travel bikes no longer hold the traditional draw-backs they used to – they’re lightweight, they climb well, so do everything as well as a shorter travel bike, but give you options over and above shorter travel bikes.

Yes, we could all up-skill, and that is the right thing to do and to aspire to do, but it’s not a realistic option for alot of us who have limited riding time avaialble to us due to work and family committments, so why not get a burly bike that enables us to take on things we couldn’t ordinarly do?

I’ve got a pet theory, backed up by my own experience that most people would be happiest overall on a bike one step down from the ones that they aspire to when they consider the top end of what they ride.
You want enough bike that you won’t ever have to back off something that you might realistically ride for fear of breaking your bike, but you’ll have the best overall bike for the vast majority of your riding, if the very top end of what you do you are pushing the limits of your bike a bit.
For example, I used to race DH, and every now and again it’d be nice to be able to push it a bit on DH courses, hit some bigger jumps etc. An all around bike picked with that in mind would probably be around 160mm travel. I’ve had a bike like that and it was too much, I’m now riding a 5Spot which is right on the edge of what it will tolerate when used that way but it’s a much, much better bike for me most of the time. It’s about more than just all up weight of the bike.
Another way to look at it I think is to look at what tyres you would happily ride around on all the time and pick a bike on which they are appropriate, i.e if you will normally want to run a Rocket Ron on the back for speed, you want a 120mm bike max, and at the other end, you don’t really want a 160mm bike unless you would realistically consider running a dual ply tyre, as everything that a single ply tyre will cope with, a 140-150mm bike will do.

robinlaidlaw says it well. Don’t be tempted to get too big a bike. It’ll eitherlie unused in the shed or you’ll drag it around wishing you had something lighter and less trail-smoothing.

I’m lucky enough to have a big bike that I wheel out for those occasions when it’s the best option but most of the time I ride similar territory to you and choose my 130mm hardtail or rigid SS – because it makes the riding more fun on that terrain.

Rode the Litevilled this morning and hated it. Hadn’t realised how stiff/taut I like my bikes (probably due to the lack of technical riding). Maybe I could get used to it’s active style but it’s not really me and I’d spend a lot of time dialling out all the movement it’s designed for.

Then rode the Flux – just loved it. Taut, felt bottomless, alive etc etc. It’s ordered!

Good decision. Enjoy your new bike