i like to ride up for the view at the top and sometimes stop halfway if there is a particularly nice vista in a gap between the trees.
going downhill can be scarey though (thank goodness for 200mm 4-pot disk brakes!) so sometimes walk down instead, the ride takes a bit longer but is no less enjoyable for it.
Bike Forum
[closed]
Is there too much focus on going down hill in bike design/reviews?
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
lifes too short to earn all your descents by riding up!
Yeah, and my days are too short to spend 2 hours pushing up for 5 mins riding!
Posted 2 years ago # -
I really like going downhill as fast as possible and although I am no Steve peat I am quick enough. My point is though that it is quite easy to go downhill quickly. All reviews seems to say that the next bike is even better at going downhill than the last. Well I don't really care anymore as I don't feel any limits going downhill any more, just not got enough balls for big air or high speed!
An XC bike also does not have the correct setup for what I am talking about, technical trails and climbs. You do not see many trials riders on a XC bike. Although I am not doing trials it is a bit similar in that you have to hop up rocks and roots. It would be interesting to see if the Cleland bike made getting up say Jacobs ladder easier.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Martin Brookes rode up Jacob's Ladder in an MBR article on a Felt hardtail.
I still maintain that technical climbs are easiest on an XC bike, I've never felt the need for lockouts/ETA/travel adjusters or whatever, because the front end's at the right height anyway! Surely if longer travel bikes were better for climbing there would be more XC racers on longer travel bikes?
Posted 2 years ago # -
You do not see many trials riders on a XC bike.
Stretching the point a bit there! Trials is a completely separate discipline (although the skills needed to do it cross over well to mountain biking).
Posted 2 years ago # -
My Meta 6 is a great ascender (punchy tech singletrack) and an amazing descender. As a 'mountain' bike it does everything.
My legs, heart, lungs and motivation are the only limiters.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think I have come to this way of thinking as where I live in Sweden it is fairly flat but the trails are pretty technical compared to the Peaks where I used to live. Loads of roots. Short steep climbs and rocky chutes and thin Northshore type bridges (1 foot) for crossing the bogs. To get the most out of the trails I have the mentality of got to do it all.
![](src="http://lh5.ggpht.com/_snJNoQBv3pk/StRMs0EN0FI/AAAAAAAACFw/kO95uM9wlpA/s400/DSC00127.JPG)
And a film which actually is not of the technical as they are too slow and do not look that impressive when filmed.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would ride that on my Epic, and I don't think a longer travel bike would be any easier. How do you need any travel to ride a wooden bridge!?
Perhaps a longer travel bike can continue to plod over bigger rocks/roots etc, whilst a lighter more nimble XC bike is going quicker and just rolls over stuff. That doesn't look particularly difficult though.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yes you may think it looks easy but I would buy you an expensive Swedish beer if you could get up there. Maybe even two!
Posted 2 years ago # -
What tyres do you have on your Prophet and PA GEDA?
Are you climbing steeper than this?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Oooops just seen your pictures
What is the main problem - are you running out of traction?
Your trails sound like my favourite type of climbing!Posted 2 years ago # -
Traction is the main thing. Unless you sit on the seat it spins out. You don't want to know what the tyre is as I already know thats part of the problem. I am going to swap the one that is on the PA and see what difference it makes. But I was not getting the feeling of the back wheel digging in that I get on the Patriot. (And yes the tails are as steep or steeper than that with slightly less grip)
Posted 2 years ago # -
i like climbing more than descending sometimes, esp. if it's a little technical.
everyone can ride down most stuff. more of a skill to ride up ohne dabs.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Well yes it sounds like you should experiment with the tyres first
Other than that perhaps you could try adjusting the shock pressures/rebound. I don't know what difference you could make but it may be possible to affect the level of traction.
I have a friend with a Prophet and he can get up any technical climb that I can on my Remedy. But he also managed to tear the BB out of the shell! (that's another story...)
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think it’s a debate that cuts both ways, mountain biking in general (across all disciplines) can only really grow if there are people taking it up as a leisure activity, selling bikes for leisure use means slacker more DH orientated angles and steering setups playing the numbers game with suspension, quantity as opposed to quality, and playing to the marketing and magazine hype, the products better suited for privateer racers and serious non competitive riders will always exist but differentiating them from kit aimed at the more leisure/fair weather mountain biker is getting trickier…
Personally I think everyone is best out starting out on a 3-4” forked HT with a 71deg+ H/A, medium rise (1”), 620-660mm wide bars and a 70mm stem, pretty neutral all round trail geometry basically, with plenty of gears and decent brakes..
If you are going to get on with MTBs of any sort then you will enjoy riding such a bike for a good long while before you truly find it’s and your limits, it will make you a better rider both up and down as you have to pick your lines and learn how to use gears and brakes properly…Yep I’ll agree HT’s lack the ultimate traction of a good XC bouncer but the lack of “talent compensation” does actually force you to become a better rider for climbs it means you actually learn what to do when traction becomes marginal (which will enevitably happen whatever you ride), when and how to attack or change line, for descents you learn when and where to brake how to carry speed and pump and how to bend your knees, sounds like basic skills but it’s stunning how few people e seem to actually posses them…
It amuses me that whilst bemoaning the “Doddy-isation” (agreed he is a toss bag with undue influence) of modern MTBs into stupid travel comedy machines for plebs, you all seem to see HT’s as somehow having become un-ridable for any serious up or downhill use, dare I say technology has made a fair few people lazy?
15 years ago a 4” travel suspension bike was a DH bike and any “serious” MTB rider wouldn’t entertain such an inefficient sponge soaking up all their energy on the climbs, people dreamt of owning Salsa, Dave Yates and Bontrager steel HT’s, how times change…Posted 2 years ago # -
I've never had a stem shorter than 100mm on an MTB, never really felt the need.
If I'm ever in Sweden I'll look you up GEDA, happily give that a punt. As I said previously I think the difference with an XC bike is that you can put in a really hard couple of pedal strokes and the bike will leap forward, which is often enough to get you over some tough obstacles. A longer travel bike will just bog down when you do that, so you end up with tonnes of traction, but sod all momentum!
Not wanting to wave willies (we've done so well to avoid it!), but I can only think of one climb I've not cleaned which I have seen cleaned by anyone else, and it isn't technical, just very steep, and I'm happy to admit that the person who did clean it is a far better rider than me.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It amuses me that whilst bemoaning the “Doddy-isation” (agreed he is a toss bag with undue influence) of modern MTBs into stupid travel comedy machines for plebs
Why is he a 'toss bag'? You sound like a bit of a snob tbh
you all seem to see HT’s as somehow having become un-ridable for any serious up or downhill use, dare I say technology has made a fair few people lazy?
Er... have you seen the number of hardtails on here? Cotic, On-one etc etc etc
15 years ago a 4” travel suspension bike was a DH bike and any “serious” MTB rider wouldn’t entertain such an inefficient sponge soaking up all their energy on the climbs,
15 years ago a 4" travel suspension bike probably rode like a dog uphill - now you can get 6" bikes that aren't too heavy that you can pedal around just fine.
I do agree that it seems now lots of people think they need a £2000 'all-mountain' full suspension bike as their first mtb, but that doesn't make them shit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
cookeaa.... agree with you completely.
Posted 2 years ago # -
grumm.... re. your second point. i think he means that in the mags they write you need 'X' travel for each given riding style. not here on stw.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The point of riding is to go downhill. Even my race bike I chose because it'd be quicker downhill and in technical sections because that's my strengths and I can still drag myself up hills fine. My big hardtail is just fine at serious downhill, thanks.
Downhills=fun climbs= the challenge to get tehre, but not the main point of the ride.
100mm stem on my race bike, 50mm on my others.
Posted 2 years ago # -
A race is won on the climbs and lost on the descents... or something. Whilst a good descender can get so far in an XC race, fitness is more important. Why have a race bike which you've set up for descending, why not just ride a 'trail' bike (serious question)?
Posted 2 years ago # -
you all seem to see HT’s as somehow having become un-ridable for any serious up or downhill use
Not at all. Riding my FS has a higher free-wheeling and pedal-cruising top speed, esp. cornering, because of the added stability from the rear-sus. But the HT it's a bit sharper climbing, at slow-speed steering and accelerating
Posted 2 years ago # -
What are you looking for in a review then. A technical break down of how well a bike climbs and how much faster it will make you?
Plus how technical are we talking here when you mention this need to have trials like skills to get up some trails?
My hardtail climbs pretty badly but it makes it for it when going down. I demo'd a spec enduro last year and it climbed amazingly when compared to my ht but going downhill the longer stem and steep head angle made it feel much worse.
My favourite ride so far was on a Cove Hustler, climbed nice, felt just like my hardtail going down (though a bit nicer due to rear suss) and was also lighter.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Look at his photo
Posted 2 years ago # -
I have a similar problem with ski mags being too freeride oriented these days. Yes, I board off-piste when the opportunity and lowish-risk level is there, but it's not the mainstay of my boarding so I find the mags boring. Freeride/DH is not the mainstay of my bike riding either.
What are you looking for in a review
Well I think I agree with the OP. It's not specifically about bike reviews. More about the impressions from turning the pages of bike mags.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I have a similar problem with ski mags being too freeride oriented these days.
Isn't it just that freeride is more exciting/interesting than other aspects of skiing (or biking) though? I mean obviously it can get dull, but to me pictures of someone gapping a huge river on a bike or riding some crazy mountain face on a board is a bit more interesting than 'man skis down piste at moderate speed'.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Seen the photo, i'm sure that's do-able on a light/mid weight bike with enough rider skill and fitness (not saying by me though).
Can't really comment too much on magazines as I only really read Dirt and their mainstay is DH/Freeride and a bit of DJ so the ads and reviews work just fine.
Posted 2 years ago # -
geda, i forgot you were in sweden. that makes everything clear! i think you're down in skane? when i've been out wandering about around stockholm (without bike, all the family fishes) i've often thought about the tricky, rooty, rocky nature of a lot of the tracks, esp as i've never seen anyone riding them which in itself might be a clue!
that said i'm used to riding this type of terrain where i am and, most of the time get along with it, usually on my xc ht but these days i'm succumbing to the darkside that is fs. tyres are an issue for sure but not as big as rider style. i ride with what my regular riding partner describes as 'ridiculous pressures' but i ride on the road a lot so low pressures just seems un-natural! he, on the other hand, rides v low pressure and tubeless and while he may be slower on the straight uphill on the technical section he gets to show off just how much better he is in the skills department.
i've always had light xc bikes, never felt the need for anything else as my manly girth is enough weight to carry. what the magazines say? who cares! there's a bike out there for everyone
Posted 2 years ago # -
The contents of magazine is all about selling magazines and hence advertising space, it doesn't necessarily reflect what actually goes on at the grassroots of the sport.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sorry Grumm what I was trying to say was that the tone of this thread suggested the only bike worth owning was a 4" full bouncer, obviously STW as a whole is full of die hard SS, Rigid, HT riders...
As for my Doddy comment, Nope I stand by it, he is a toss bag, I finally stopped reading Future's various comics years ago, about the time he reared his annoying bean shaped head; can't stand the fella, seems his best trick is jumping on whatever cycling bandwagon is going, has very little of use to offer yet another worthless member of the cycling fashionista..
Am I a snob? probably, but like all snobs I like to think it's taste and judgement The term "Over-biked" seems to be chucked about more these days, I see plenty of people on expensive bikes grabbing fistfulls of brake wearing harrased and flushed faces on the simplest of descents, most don't seem to have their mood enhanced by having some goon on a HT worth a quarter of their own bike zip past, the same riders don't look to be enjoying the climbs either, I can't really see the fun in it if they are this misserable when riding...
Posted 2 years ago # -
Isn't it just that freeride is more exciting/interesting than other aspects of skiing (or biking)
Quite possibly. But what they are doing is so far removed from my experience that I lose interest
I should stop reading mags and ride more (except ST obviously)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Njee- I've struck a fine balance between DH and tech capability and lightweight. A trail bike would be too heavy and bobby up hills, you know how it is. Also, it doesn't have that rangy top tube length. However, when I'm racing, I excel on the techy bits so prefer a bike that panders to that.
Still, got the results to back up the fact that I can ride up hills last weekend, when I thought I was undertrained and overweight, so I must be doing something right
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
