If we all had enough money and garage space i’m sure we’l have many bikes to suit a wide variety of terrains and conditions and select the right weapon for the job in the same way a golfist selects the right bat for a shot (in JC terminology). Unfortunately I cannot afford the cash or garage space for my ideal bike garage and i’m in the market for a soft tail. A medium travel bike – either 26er or 29er, is probably more suited to the majority of riding I do (maybe 70%), but I certainly forsee occasions where longer travel would be useful, or having the longer travel might coax me into expanding my riding to other area’s more often – and I’m finding myself hunting out jumps more often now. So my question is: do these new long travel all-mountain bikes have any significant drawbacks that would make them complete dogs on less demanding trails? For long travel bikes a Cotic Rocket is the bike I want, but the costs are significant when compared with something like the Canyon Strive (an amazing bike for the money). I’m after a bike with good downhill capability, but also some cross-country abilty, that I can pedal up hills – I don’t believe in pushing bikes uphill.

I don’t believe in pushing bikes uphill.

i’ve seen it happen. its real.

I bought a Pitch, and it’s brilliant at what it does best. Unfortunately, that means it’s rubbish at XC. It’ll pedal round in loops all day, but it’s just not fun. It really only works under 2 conditions:

1) You’re fit enough to pedal it uphill. Just because it’l swallow up steps for breakfast, you still need the power:weight ratio to pedal it up them. If anything it needs more fitness than my XC bike as it’ll ride up more hills.
2) Going downhill, as long as there’s enough of a gradient it’s utterly f**** fantastic!

All bikes aren’t the same, the Rocket sounds very similar (6″, progressive rate, slack HA), the Five is very different to ride, feel like it uses a lot more travel over middling bumps,I didn’t like it. But despite using more travel you see a lot more on XC trails, not sure if that’s down to it’s popularity (there’s just more of them), they’re built lighter (Pitches work best with psudo-DH builds IMO) or if it just works better on XC trails.

I’d probably not want either as my only bike unless I lived in the Lakes, Peaks, Scotland or somwhere else that suited it. I’d rather have an XC bike that was outof it’s depth 10% of the time than an AM bike that was a slog 90% of the time.

I have a pitch use it for long days including the welsh cost to coast in 3, built up with revs, hope wheels etc and comes in at 33lb. Don’t really notice it being a drag to ride uphill even with the baron’s on. It’s my only bike and you just get use to it and I find it very confident going down. Just get what you like the look and feel of and you will enjoy it.

Some long travel bikes can rob the trails of fun. And others can make everything that isn’t a challenging section feel like a total drag.

But the good ones can be used for anything. 20 mile road climb up a french mountain, check. Go to Fort William and spend one day on the uplifts and the next knocking out a big chunk of west highland way? Check. Downhill races? Lap of glentress blue with noobs? Pentlands mud slogs? All knocked off with style.

Now I’m glad I can afford multiple bikes, as having the choice is better than not.. But if I only had my Hemlock and a choice of tyres, I’d be good.

120mm 29er FS seems to be my “quiver killer” at the moment. I’m not saying they do everything well but if I literally could only have one bike, I reckon that’s what would do it for me.

Two years ago I’d have said 140mm 26er FS…

The Rocket certainly fits the bill. Any custom bike is more costly as you don’t have the bulk buying power of Canyon etc. If you can stretch the budget get the Rocket as it’s clearly the bike you want.

The current crop of good long (ie 150-160 ish) travel AM bikes are very capable all rounders, frame design plus shock lockout/pro pedal features make that so. I have had a “go” on quite a few (Five with longer forks, Spesh Enduro, etc)

I have the HT/FS combo and ride mainly the Cotic HT but the Transition Covert is very happy on XC trails, pedals/climbs very well. The Cotic BFe with 150/120 adjustable forks is very versatile and far more jump capable than am I, I got the Covert to be my Alps+ orientated bike.

I’d possibly see the Rocket (and Five) as closer to a Bandit but you could add a Bandit or a Covert to the wish list.

Depends what kind of rider and what you want out of the terrain you’re riding.

From my experience, 6″ bikes are genrally fine if you sit and spin up and along, then only really work the bike on the way down (or sit back and let the bike do the work). if you’re this kind of rider, a mid travel bike will work for you, just slow you down a bit on the ups.

If you’re the type of rider who takes every opportunity up, along and down to mess about, manuals, bunny hops, making up gaps and pump lines along the way, a 6″ bike is generally too much and kills the fun and flow unless you’re riding certainly more gnar core tracks.

Though, you could set up the 6″ bike in such a way, that you run 20% sag, accept that you shouldn’t be using all 6″ of travel on tame trails, but should be using all travel when you’re riding proper DH tracks or doing bigger gaps and drops. The bike will be more lively on the tamer stuff, but have reserves for the big stuff. This is the option i go for. Though i am still pretty desperate for a 100mm slack hardtail for southern and trail centre duties, just cant afford it.

On the jumping side aswell, a bigger travel bike is only going to help you out if you’re doing it wrong and require more margin for error. A smaller travel bike is easier to understand what is going on and develop the jumping technique.

Its not so much the “travel”, its the angles. Get one thats too slack and you wont want to pedal it even on the flat.

Get something that works uphill as well. Set the suspension up firm, with little sag and it will fly but still bail you out when you land badly.

I have a Transition Covert frame you can buy if you like.

If you go for one bike for all types of riding then you will always be making a compromise. This is what I’ve done and for me it’s worked out OK. I think the key is be honest about the type of riding you do most of the time and build your compromise around that. So, if most of your riding is xc but you want to be able to play at jumps and drops with some steeper stuff thrown in now and again then a decent 140/150 trail bike would be better than going for something 160/170mm imo. You can get longer travel bikes which are really light but then that’s usually linked directly to the cost of the build. You should also consider your weight and how hard you are on component etc. If you’re a heavy, clumsy rider then you may better with a burlier build and put up with some extra weight on the climbs and so on. As said above if you do go for something with more travel then something with angles aren’t too slack Will really help on the ups. My last two bikes have had the same travel but climb and descend very differently.

My one bike is a fairly heavy duty 160 bike but I’m a fairly heavy bloke and my riding is mainly in Scotland, so for me the extra effort on the climbs and longer distance rides is worth it for the extra travel and durability the rest of the time. If I was lighter or riding elsewhere then I’d probably get sick of the extra weight.

You can probably shape most 140-160mm bikes into the mold you want. In my case I have a 160mm fsr frame. With an air rear shock with a swichable platform I can enjoy all day rides or DH fun.

At the weekend I did Kirroughtree with it where I would usually ride my 100mm travel fs bike. It was absolutely ace on the big bike as it is good compromise and adaptable for many types of riding.

Make sure you buy something you lust after and it will seem half the weight 😆

Trimix – Member

Get one thats too slack and you wont want to pedal it even on the flat.

Not so much. Head angle by itself doesn’t make any difference to pedalling, especially on the flat. Geometry’s a complete package, and some slack bikes climb well, some don’t. My Ragley’s slack but climbs out of the saddle better than my Soda.

Buy the bike you like = ride the @ss out of it = get fitter = ride faster = have more fun?

My Ellsworth Epiphany (150mm rear, 140mm front) is totally awesome at everything – best bike I’ve ever owned. I use it for xc and duathlon racing, trail riding and looning. Adjustable travel makes it easy to alter on the fly, depending on what I’m doing. I have a 2nd mountain bike which I never ride anymore as the Epiphany is in my opinion a true ‘do it all’ bike.

I bought a Pitch, and it’s brilliant at what it does best. Unfortunately, that means it’s rubbish at XC.

that is a scary thought as i regularly ride xc with folks who are on pitchs… and they dont seem remotely slower.

maybe i’m less fit than i had hoped!

i had a pitch. it was good at xc. especially with some light wheels and sensible (~2.3) tyres on it. i thought it pedalled really well even without the propedal on.

then I bought a new enduro. that was a little less good at xc. then I put 2.5 USTs on it and that really slowed it down.

2 set of wheels is what you need.
and an uplift for when the bike is in heavy mode.

that is a scary thought as i regularly ride xc with folks who are on pitchs… and they dont seem remotely slower.

maybe i’m less fit than i had hoped!

I didn’t say slower, I said rubbish. It’s just less fun, I’ve ridden 50mile loops on it and kept up on climbs and been faster on decents, but overall I’d say XC bikes are faster if it were a race but the Pitch is fine on group rides.

Maybe I came accros overly harsh of it. It is a brilliant bike.

But if it were for a ride at Swinely or Cannock I’d really have a lot more fun on something less “DH bike with pro-pedal”. I’d be the same speed, but the Pitch is just far more capable than those trails, so you never get that ‘on the limit’ fun from it, whereas it’s brilliant in the peaks or at GT with a big hill to play on.

Thanks all for your advice. I’m not hard core cross countryer or a hard core downhiller, but like to mix it with both and I guess the theory I’m looking to confirm is that if long travel AM bikes don’t compromise the cross country capability too much, if at all, then you may as well have the travel than not as it at least gives you options. I’ve already got a 29er XC hard tail, which is a keeper, and does very well round trail centres and so far has dealt well with the more knarly terrain of the woods round where I live and the Peaks. But it feels a bit straight laced and sensible and I’m looking for something a bit more fun and that I can explore different skills on without compromising XC capability. Sounds like a lot of the options mentioned above will fit the bill. I’ll enjoy the process of shopping round! Cheers.

2004 enduro, all he bike you’ll ever need.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/horas-new-frame-my-word-its-nice

This should be up for sale soon and will probably be described as the “best all mountain bike ever” 😉

I have a Transition Covert frame you can buy if you like.

Sent you a message about this mate for details.

Cheers