was having a conversation with a weight weenie friend who wont upgrade to rear suspension because he says it adds extra weight!
Anyway, ignoring the fact that the suspension (upto a point) could actually help him on climbs on rocky terrain, surely if you ride a heavier bike your muscles / fitness just improve to compensate for the weight, so after a about 6 months of regular 2x a week riding you'll be about as quick as you were on the lighter bike?
TBH i have no idea, but do recall pro MTB riders who used to train with weights attached to their bikes (think they were called pork bellys) - theory being it made them a little stronger, but more importantly gave them a psychological boost when they took them off
Don't be silly
Dont be silly. Lighter bikes are faster.
Possibly, but he could also ride slightly faster in trainng to get the same effect.
But then I'm hoeping that if I keep riding my Pitch (35lb and climbing!) eventualy I'll be able to keep up on XC rides and enjoy the downs more.
you can probably go harder for longer on a light bike though, improving stamina.
similar to why road bikes are good for improving your mountain bike fitness.
Yes.
You will be 8.6% faster, fitter and more attractive to the opposite sex.
i use to have this conversation with my biking mate who had a hardtail. eventually i converted him to full sus. at first he wasnt convinced but after a while admitted it was more fun on a full sus. i think it depends on what riding your doing. if your a fitness biker then i would say hardtail if you prefer more fun on the downhill parts with rougher terrain then i would say full suspension. theres definatley more fun to be had with a full suspension.
What have you done to your Pitch TINOS? Mine now has a coil shock and 36 vans. 
MTFU hardtails are more fun.
this isn't about fun tho, it's about speed Vs weight and the answer is very simple
if you prefer more fun on the downhill parts with rougher terrain then i would say full suspension. theres definatley more fun to be had with a full suspension.
WHOOP WHOOP
Marketing man alert!
theres definatley more fun to be had with a full suspension.
Yes, if you're shit on a bike and have absolutely no skill then theres a chance a full sus may be more fun.
im no marketing man & didnt mean to offend any of you just thought i would give my experience. i disagree with david, yes you may not have to pick your lines like you would on a hardtail but i would like you to tell sam hill or steve peat they have no skill or are a shit rider. sillyman. i bet you like pedalling uphill dont ya
What have you done to your Pitch TINOS? Mine now has a coil shock and 36 vans
Stock '11 (29.something lb)
revreb post (0.6lb extra)
sunline grips
SDG bel-air (0.1lb extra)
Burcgtech MK2 pedals (1.5lb)
weels gained about 0.2lb as the originals were crap, then lost it again when my spare disintegrated. The 'fun' wheels with dh tyres are something like 10lb with cassette and disks!
So 32.5 in 'XC' mode, will proably be back under 30 in the summer with some fast rolling tubeless rubber, mk3 burgtechs or those new tioga pedals, and a lighter saddle.
Coil shock and 36's would be mint though! Might be seriosuly tempted by a DBair if it's not extortionate, otherwise I'll probably keep the weight down and get the forks and shock push tuned.
If he races then he has a point. Hardtails are almost always faster uphill on race courses as they tend to be doubletrack and fireroad, and have no rear sus to bob and rob energy. You can also sprint more efectively on a hardtail. A full sus might be quicker downhill but the gains are smaller than going up.
i would like you to tell sam hill or steve peat they have no skill or are a shit rider. sillyman. i bet you like pedalling uphill dont ya
I imagine Sam and Steve definiately have fun riding their hardtails since they're decent riders.
I do quite like pedalling up hill aswell!
Yes, if you're shit on a bike and have absolutely no skill then theres a chance a full sus may be more fun.
Errrrr........ I'm not super quick, but I'm no slouch either, but my Pitch is a lot of fun. Not as technicaly involved, but the extra speed makes you concentrate much more on cornering/jumps because unlike on the heardtail they're approaching much much faster!
So yes, if 2 riders one on a HT and one on a FS do a technical downhill in the same time, the HT rider may well be in some way shape or form the better rider, but he'd be even faster on a FS probably.
'Yes, if you're shit on a bike and have absolutely no skill then theres a chance a full sus may be more fun'
i guess if you like having your arse spanked like a batty then hardtail is for you 
you can probably go harder for longer on a light bike though, improving stamina.
similar to why road bikes are good for improving your mountain bike fitness.
Start out on a light bike for lots of distance, work up to a heavier bike for shorter more intense rides, then taper back down to the light bike again.
Maybe the constant burlyfication/weeniefication we all seem to do is just like doing pyramid sets.
If you want to get real benefit out of your riding you can't beat trying to go everywhere on dual ply 2.5" supertackys at 27psi.
And I imagine if you have the mental age (re sense of humour) of a 12 year old, then a full sus is for you since they definitely have more cool points.
surely if you ride a heavier bike your muscles / fitness just improve to compensate for the weight, so after a about 6 months of regular 2x a week riding you'll be about as quick as you were on the lighter bike?
Without getting all scientific, basically no.
Getting quicker involves (other than the bike, weather, terrain, etc) (1) skill (2) cardiovascular fitness (3) strength (4) mental aptitude.
Which of these is a "marginally" heavier bike going to affect so much that one person is then able to spank another when out in the hills?
The British are pretty obsessed with bike weight - notice people always want to pick your bike up? Meet an Italian and he's more interested in the components and whether you've got the legs to do it justice.
If he races then he has a point.
no he doesnt race, we just ride for fun in a group, so my reckoning was that having a heavier full sus would initially mean you were slower than the rest of the group, but would put in more effort to keep up with them and over say 6 months you'd be keeping up with them again no problem... assuming they didnt suddenly start upping their own pace all the time!
Yes, if you're shit on a bike and have absolutely no skill then theres a chance a full sus may be more fun.
Actualy, using your own argument against you..........
Hardtail riders are all unfit fatties who can't overcome the bob on a FS bike uphill.
I don't believe that, but it does seem to be the logical conclusion to what your saying?
If you want to get real benefit out of your riding you can't beat trying to go everywhere on dual ply 2.5" supertackys at 27psi.
Ha ha... 'kin hiarious!!! 
'And I imagine if you have the mental age (re sense of humour) of a 12 year old, then a full sus is for you since they definitely have more cool points'
rrrrr turn that frown upside down, yes they certainly do have more cool points
Is mix and match bikes to conditions not the answer? Sadly for your pal he may need to procure another bike. The shame of it.
rrrrr turn that frown upside down, yes they certainly do have more cool points
Grrr, I'm only frowning because you're making cheap gay jokes, and I have to ride a hardtail aswell.
lol sorry david im only messing with ya dude
How come so many XC riders do win races on FS then?
Surely they wouldn't ride them if HTs were really that much more efficient as they wouldn't be able to get such good results.
It smacks of the old weight argument which mean people would ride flexy old sids when you would actually go faster with a heavier but stiff Z2.
A racers peddling action should be good enough that they are not going to bob their bike very much anyway.
a full sus bike really doesn't make that much difference to speed down a trail. I'd say on a average dh course it would probably make about 10 seconds (so 5%) difference, based on my pace vs my mates when I ride my full sus bike, verses when I ride my hardtail. Both bikes are set up fairly similarly in terms of angles and front suspension (6" on the ht 7" on the fs), I think these make more of a difference than the amount of give in the back end
a full sus bike really doesn't make that much difference to speed down a trail. I'd say on a average dh course it would probably make about 10 seconds (so 5%) difference
How smooth are your downhill trails? Didn't Dirt have a hardtail issue and get some guys to ride the 1:04 on hardtails? I seem to remember the times being at least 50% slower.
does depend on the trails - that was at FOD which was pretty smooth - not taken both bikes anywhere else - although I did have a 4" full sus playbike and a V10 (after snapping the 4" bike) in the alps one year, even after a few days on the V10, I wasn't a lot quicker (was more comfy though)
How come so many XC riders do win races on FS then?Surely they wouldn't ride them if HTs were really that much more efficient as they wouldn't be able to get such good results.
but on anything other than a smooth trail the rear suspension allows you to keep a smoother stroke going.
Otherwise you have to be so fit that you power-down on any rough bit to float your weight off the saddle and avoid the 'arse-kicking' that an HT provides (which is what pro-racers are...)
I may be wrong though - most of my FS experience is on my dw-link flux, so I am not familiar with this concept of a lossy rear-suspension compared to a HT
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
