Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • How much travel is 'long travel' for a hardtail?
  • poppa
    Free Member

    LT hardtails are all the rage at the moment, just wondering where the definition begins.

    IMO 130 is the bare minimum…

    80-100mm = XC Hardtail
    130-160mm = LT Hardtail
    180mm+ = **** stupid

    Bearing in mind that this is all a load of pointless 'about to go home twaddle' and doesn't mean anything in reality. Glad I don't ride 120mmm or else I wouldn't exist.

    EDIT: I've changed my mind.

    80-100mm = XC Hardtail
    120mm-130mm = JRA hardtails
    140mm-160mm = LT hardtails
    130-160mm = LT Hardtail
    180mm+ = **** stupid

    All IMHO of course…

    (I ride 130)

    rs
    Free Member

    these days I would say absolute minimum is 140mm but even that seems quite normal these days for a general use bike so LT must be at least 150-160mm.

    pitduck
    Free Member

    mine`s 125 😕

    The-Swedish-Chef
    Free Member

    JRA ? "Just about right" with a cryptic typo?

    james
    Free Member

    JRA = Just Riding Along

    poppa
    Free Member

    … Just Riding Along… i.e. a bit of everything. Too burly to XC race, too light to DH but more than enough for most of people.

    Eccles
    Free Member

    It's all down to perception: Anything that makes you mutter "dear god almighty" and swear that the next bike will be a full suss after you nose off a drop and suddenly find that the head angle feels like -80 degrees, but which has the handling characteristics commonly associated with livestock when going downhill and those of a unicycle going up is probably a LT hardtail.

    The-Swedish-Chef
    Free Member

    ta,

    120 for just riding along! 😯

    RDL-82
    Free Member

    tend to spend most of my riding at 120 on a 456 ss and never feel its too little

    poppa
    Free Member

    When I say JRA I don't mean mincing, just the kind of riding most of us do…

    Nick_Christy
    Free Member

    what does determine which length of shock can be used with which bike…?

    i was told i shouldnt go for anything larger than 100mm?

    nick

    rs
    Free Member

    Nick, the manufacturer will have designed each frame around a certain for length, 20mm here or there probably isn't a problem but adding a much longer fork will change the handling and put more stress on the frame than it was designed for.

    ahwiles
    Free Member

    i really can't see the point in using longer forks than 100mm onna hartail.

    i honestly think it's gone a bit daft now, people started putting long forks on their bike and found that they liked the slack handling, manufacturers responded by designing bikes around longer forks, and we had to resort to increasingly long forks to get the slack handling that was missing in the first place. it's become a vicious circle.

    i understand that everyone is different and that's a good thing, but right now there's only 1 manufacturer offering a hardtail frame that's nice and slack with short forks. (on-one, in case you din't know)

    i don't understand why my full bounce xc trail bike has a head angle of 68ish degrees, but my hardtail frame's closer to 70degrees.

    it's obviously a conspiracy by fork manufacturers; they're paying off the frame designers to only design bikes with increasingly-stupid-steep head angles so that we're forced to buy increasingly-stupid-long-expensive forks to compensate….

    er,

    i'm sorry, i went off on one a bit there didn't i?

    alpin
    Free Member

    140+mm i'd consider long travel.

    i sometimes run Revs at 130mm on my Sanderson (they say 100mm) if riding steeper technical stuff, but wouldn't consider it long travel.

    nickc
    Full Member

    i really can't see the point in using longer forks than 100mm onna hartail. (sic)

    I remember not that long ago, meeting a chap who was astounded that I could ride a bike with a pair of Manitou X-verts on it. They were 100mm travel, at the time admittedly Pro DH bikes were only at 150mm or so, so to him (in the mid 90's) 100mm seemed ludicrous.

    Using Thors now, 140mm, seems OK, could do with more occasionally

    Northwind
    Full Member

    "i honestly think it's gone a bit daft now, people started putting long forks on their bike and found that they liked the slack handling, manufacturers responded by designing bikes around longer forks, and we had to resort to increasingly long forks to get the slack handling that was missing in the first place. it's become a vicious circle."

    Agree with this, I use 130mm on the soul for the geometry not the travel, I think most of the time i'd be happier with a really well controlled 100mm fork, as long as the geometry was the same as I have now.

    crackhead
    Free Member

    enough to flatter your riding due to a lack of technique and skill,
    then add more for quietening your imagination…take off a bit for pedaling uphill,put some back on for image,bit more off for bob…bit more off to quicken the steering,bit more off for frame warranty issues…add some for the trip abroad,bit more so I can put them on the full sus…

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)

The topic ‘How much travel is 'long travel' for a hardtail?’ is closed to new replies.