I have a full sus with 120mm travel front and rear but feeling the urge to get something different...
Do bikes with 140mm, 160mm or more travel really give you more confidence when it gets rocky and steep, or do you just feel overbiked 90% of the time? Say something like a Lapierre Spicy, Trek Remedy or even something bigger like a Spec Demo 8.
I'd like to know what all the fuss is about but could it just be a big mistake?
i would suggest that angles and geometry are more important,
a friend of mine has a 6" (127mm) lapierre, but its slack as hell, and feels like a much bigger, more confident bike.
....however geometry slackens as travel goes up generally.
Did similar last year. Swapped my 100/120mm Tazer for a Bullit as I felt I was getting bounced around too much on the rocky stuff, resulting in a 'fun as hell', very 'sit down, shut up and hold on' ride 
. Though, as I'm only small, I found the Bullit a handful on anything else . . . I do like to climb back to the top and I know this sounds a bit cliched, but I felt like a passenger not a rider. Needless to say, I'm now back on another Tazer and loving it.
somebody please slap me and point me back in the direction of this thread when summer comes and I'm after more travel again 
6" is more like 150mm mate!!127mm is about 5" 
I agree that angles make a big difference my five rides different to my mojo, to my mates zesty all 140mm bikes. I noticed the differnce going from my 120mm stumpy to my five on the downs, no massive difference in climbing for me anyway (still a slow chat while going up hill!! )
you'll get a lot of this but test a few or borrow a mates and see on your trails I dont feel over biked on mine TBH riding on the downs to the lakes and trail centre stuff. For me I wouldnt go bigger 1400 is enough for my nerve so far any way!!
That's it, I'm wondering if its my nerve holding me back more than the travel!
Anyone got the 150mm Scott Genius, that looks like a good compromise...or is it too compromised?
my tuppence:
it's not travel that gets you through/down scary/technical stuff, it's geometry.
bikes with loads of travel can be a pain in the ar53 on techy stuff, when you touch the brakes they dive and wobble, when you want to skip the bike around they dive and wobble (this can be very scary).
(you can help reduce the diving and wobbling if you tinker with the low speed compression damping, but only if you've got a knob for it and you know what you're doing).
if I want to go fast and hit big rocks and drops, then more travel is better.
but if I want to pick silky lines through tight twisty steep stuff, i'm much happier on a 5" bike with nice geometry (lowish BB, shortish toptube, slack head angle).
my tuppence:it's not travel that gets you through/down scary/technical stuff, it's geometry.
not the rider, then?
ahwiles is right. It's all about geometry.
Got a Zesty myself and it's got excellent angles. Makes me much more confident than i used to be.
Had a good try of a shorter travel bike recently - the new Yeti 5 alloy. Superficially an XC bike with 120mm travel but it rides like a 'bigger' bike as it is designed a bit slacker than you would expect and allows you to ride it pretty full on. It was actually quicker down well known trails including rocky bits than my Zesty.
bikes with loads of travel can be a pain in the ar53 on techy stuff, when you touch the brakes they dive and wobble, when you want to skip the bike around they dive and wobble (this can be very scary).
eh? I can only speak for 180mm forks but my 66's would only dive if I grabbed a handful as a precursor to a suicide attempt, as for wobble? not at all, they are 20mm bolt through and stiff as the proverbial stiff thing. That said I've ridden bikes with way shorter travel and QR's and I've found the lack of stiffness there to be quite disconcerting.
I agree on the geometry front, my bike has a 67 deg head angle, wide bars, a short stem and its direct and surefooted on the downs, winding the forks down (a long and arduous task on the 66's) makes climbing a lot easier, even the techy stuff (but then I don't like climbing all that much!)
Alpin it wouldn't be the first time my bike got down the hill fine with out the rider on it
In 2008 I changed from my Titus Motolite with 5 inches of travel and steep head angle to a Banshee Rune with has 6 inches of travel and a 67 deg head angle and the difference is amazing. To be honest I didnt want 6 inches of travel, it was the slacker angles I was after, but at the time couldn't find a frame that had 5 inches of travel and a 67 deg head angle.
In short, I would totally agree that geometry is far more important that travel and I personally think that 67 deg HA is the ideal compromise between climbing and descending. However, in oder to get the slacker geometry, you may have to step up in travel as well.
I now use my Banshee for xc and dh duties (including Whistler bike park) and it is amazing. I am now thinking I need to get rid of my Explosif and get a HT with a slacker HA, as I am sold.
I agree with the assertion that it's all about the geometry and not the travel.
I ran an Enduro for five years, which was a great bike but never felt as secure as I wanted on the descents. I bought a 140mm Marin last year with only 10mm more travel at the back (and the same fork - I ran my Spesh with Pikes), but the Marin is a completely different beast on the descents and technical terrain, far more stable and secure.
I'd take a short travel bike with sorted angles over a long travel bike any time.
Bikes can vary a lot I have a 140mm travel front and rear Heckler and once tried a Trex EX 9 for the day, and it felt a lot differnt to my heckler because of the slacker geometry. Perhaps you should try a bike with a slacker geometry but as already mentiond with the same travel as your exsisting bikes. I ride with a couple of guys who have big bikes with 160+ of travel and use them to have more fun on for the more steeper technical rides, however they also have 100-120mm xc lightweight speed machines that do not hold them back and they still fly down a lot of rough stuff, however this also could be down to their riding skills.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
