Mountain biking is a massively broad activity. Back roads and back flips. No bike does it all well.
First of all, some clarification. What do we mean by “underbiked” and “overbiked”? Aside from a few variables I’d say it’s about a judgement of a bike’s suspension travel and its weight.
An audio version of this article is available to logged in users so they can put our goods in their ears.To be “underbiked” is to be on a short travel sub-14kg bike and attempting to navigate significantly rough and/or steep terrain.
To be “overbiked” is to be a long travel over-16kg bike whilst pootling around smooth and/or shallow terrain.
Because this is cycling, everything is tainted with a tincture of sadomasochism. We admire riders who are underbiked. We mock riders who are overbiked. We prefer riders who put restrictions on themselves as opposed to riders who prefer to enable themselves. Cyclists are weird.
Furthermore, the use of the prefixes “under-” and “over-” implies some sort of baseline. Some sort of norm. I guess this is where the fabled “trail bike” is supposed to exist. I know we’re all supposed to love a good do-it-all trail bike but in my opinion, trails bikes are exactly what’s wrong with mountain biking…
The rest of this feature will be in this Friday’s Newsletter. Sign up below.
Free newsletter
Singletrack
Weekly Word
News, reviews and riding from the Singletrack team — no spam, unsubscribe any time.
I know one in my stable is way to much for %99 of my riding and thats due to change . I really dont see the need to drag a 36lb 170mm bike around when my Tallboy can do almost everything just as fast . Obviously I wouldnt hit the blacks at Chatel/ Les Gets on it .. but then again round of Golfie wouldnt be a problem and the fire road wouldnt suck half as much .
I’ve cropped up before saying this, but weights of bikes baffle me.
Everyone’s seen enough of my bikes without me posting more pics, but my alu HT is 32lb/14.5kg and my Stanton (Ti/Carbon/XTR) is 34-34.5lb/15.5kg. On paper the Ragley should be around 30lb and the Stanton 32lb, but they aren’t.
According to the CEN rating of the E-bike, possibly underbiked at times when riding that. Maybe overbiked on the full suss, but that was a warranty replacement and has the same amount of travel as the E-bike.
I prefer overbiked, then I don’t have to talk to warranty departments.
For me, Underbiked is really a feeling rather than a thought, I push my very old and basic bike through some tough obstacles and terrain, and instead of thinking ‘oh my days I could do with a better bike!’ I feel exhilarated and ‘alive’.
I can’t imagine what I’d need to be doing to get that feeling on a long travel FS bike.
I ride a 700cc motorbike, and let’s just say I don’t hang around, I’ve ridden some big performance machines in the past and even been fortunate enough to do short circuit racing on them, so again I’m chasing that feeling of riding on the limit and when you keep raising the limit by riding more capable machines, it starts getting a little silly.
Which leads to a good question.
Are those people riding bigger more capable MTB’s getting the same thrills, or are you riding them just to cruise through obstacles like on a magic carpet ride?
#FYI, My only FS was a 120mm Specialized Camber (26″ wheels), that I loved but felt I was never getting the most out of unless the wheels were off of the ground, it’s gone now, so I truly don’t know what riding a big bike feels like 🙁
My 160/170 FS is underbiked at Caersws, or Dyfi, when most others are on DH bikes. But its probably overbiked at most other places in England. It was bought for big days and to take out the proper mountains but still be pedallable.
I’ve got a 130mm HT and a nice new gravel bike for other duties, so I reckon i’m covered.
First reply from tomhoward said it all though. Depends….
As I alluded to in one of my previous posts, I’ll ride much the same trails on my HT as I do my 180mm ebike – different lines, different speeds maybe, but no less of a thrill
yeah, that’s what I do.
(You haven’t seen me ride…😁)
Probably mostly over biked, but I don’t care. I like the bikes I have and they make me happy.
Full suss is probably about right for the xc/trail I ride. Though I recently was longer at longer travel, mainly as the wife has just bought one and I’m envious of her Stumpjumper 15.Hardtail could probably be more xc, but it does get ridden the same routes as the full suss.
Gravel, probably unnecessarily bling.
Road, probably about right.
Commuter, it does two miles each way….. So probably overkill, but it’s ride and forget spec!
Yeah as above, I don’t care if I’m overbiked, I’m happy,
its interesting with all the mention of ‘enduro’ bikes, where some riders and teams are running shorter travel bikes for the EWS (or whatever its called these days). Is it marketing for the latest rig? A lack of something longer travel? or personal preference where riders prefer to be ‘under biked’ by 10-20mm but then gain by the weight being marginally less, efficiency maybe being higher etc.
The cycling industry is also very clever convincing us that we all need huge travel bikes, as we will be dropping into British Columbia gnar, rampage lines and doing canyon gaps, week in, week out.
Off the top of my head, I can’t think of a brand that won’t sell you a shorter travel bike if you decide you don’t need a longer travel one. But, yeah, more mountain bike marketing based around just getting out in the countryside and riding attainable fun trails please.
Are we over biked? Or underskilled?
Overbiked without a doubt on my 160/160 all mountain bike. I like how it rides, and I’m in the process of getting a lighter wheelset with faster tyres on it for those rides where I just don’t need all the grip. I would love a 100-120mm XC bike but I really don’t have space for one. Same with an ebike – would love one but have no space to store one safely.
So here I am, overbiked most of the time but able to have fun all of the time.
I also have a 150m hardtail on the turbo that I’ll use for riding to work on the occasions I do.
I’m currently on a gravel bike so either appropriately biked or underbiked depending. I’ve just ordered a 130mm Cotic Solaris so very much looking forwards to moving up the scale some when it arrives!
Previously I was on a Whyte G-150 which tbh was probably overbiked for my purposes, I just desperately wanted a full suspension bike and it seemed like a reasonable length of travel to me at the time.
there’s 2 types of rider – those who would prefer to feel a bit underbiked (“it’s more involving") and those who would prefer to feel a bit overbiked (“it’s more capable"). I’m the former because I get bored if 85% of my ride is on a bike that feels soft/slow-handling/etc.
“there’s 2 types of rider – those who would prefer to feel a bit underbiked (“it’s more involving") and those who would prefer to feel a bit overbiked (“it’s more capable")."
Can I be both? 160mm fork and 63 deg static head angle but no rear suspension or gears. Capable front, involving rear!
For 75% of the time probably over biked.
I’ve got a 170/160 29’er Nukeproof Mega – but it’s my only bike (well, until I get round to building my Sonder Camino and Nukeproof Scout HT…..).
TBF it copes with pretty much everything – decent climber and OK to pedal with shock locked out.
Replace capable with Robust.
Never under biked, potentially underskilled
Never under biked, potentially underskilled
I reckon I’m underbiked as I ride either a 2007 Santa Cruz Superlight with a 71 degree head angle or a Sunn hardtail singlespeed from 2000 with 63mm travel forks. Although that is probably underbiked for most places, it’s perfect for Ashton Court in Bristol. I’m getting on a bit and reckon that going more slowly means I’m less likely to injure myself by going too fast. The counter argument is that if I had a more modern bike, I would be less likely to fall off.
yes and no
i live the directness and snappy feeling of my hardtail
but also the plush plough through anything of my 160mm enduro bike
Not necessarily? You can have a bombproof bike that’s ‘underbiked’ / involving to ride. And a capable bike that’s a reliability liability.
It is a daft way to describe bikes though isn’t it.
So flaky. Show some commitment!
: )
Sometimes I feel under and over on the same ride, although mainly its over.
My MTB is 160/150 ebike. Its great for reds/blacks/small,medium jumps and thats about the limit of my ability, maybe not the bikes
But its certainly over biked on what at one time would have been called XC ie riding the moors around Bradford/Hebden etc.
So I am now buying a Gravel bike to make those types of trail ‘come alive’ again 🙂
Definitely under forked currently as I think my Rebas are reaching the end of their service life/bushings are going but pretty much in/around the sweet spot for the rest of the bike.
Started a thread the other week about going up to a 140mm or maybe more bike and still prevaricating after the comments on there and riding the current bike about whether I want or “need" more or do I in fact need a mullet, big forked hardtail 🤔 or a faster XC bike 😏 or a nice 120mm bike with a bigger fork or do I stick to project 130/140. 🫣
So many good options. I could do my usual riding on any of those and they’d all be rewarding and testing me in different ways.