[Closed] 160mm - Master of none?

Decent 160mm bikes, built light but tough, will do just about anything. Marvels of the bike world.

Mega AM with travel-adjust fork 💡

Mega with a two step Lyrik ( that works)

I built a Nukeproof Mega with 170mm Lyrik RC2DH last year to replace a Meta 5 with Pikes.

I'm faster up and down on it that the Meta and haven't touched my DH bikes since I built the Mega. In fact, I'll probably sell it now I'm not racing.

Riding anything from Wharncliffe DH to trail centers to 30+ mile 4500 feet ascending Peak day rides on it, but mostly fast-ish local rides.

Just gone 1x10, it's about 30.5lbs and my go-to bike for almost anything apart from pump track.

I went the other way this year having had a five with 36's which I loved as my all rounder but unfortunately I killed that frame when it was just 6 months old and then lost confidence (bent the swingarm, seat tube and cracked shock mount), then went up to a specialized enduro which was a great bike once I'd had the rear shock tuned but was just that bit too much bike for the xc/trail rides but not quite a dh bike for the dh stuff. I've ended up back with a dh bike (commencal atherton v2 supreme) and a ti slackline with some lowered 36's fitted. Cover a lot more bases with a lot less compromise but as a consequence the hardtail gets used a lot and the dh bike not so much but it's nice to have the right tool when I do uplift days etc (although the hardtail is getting used for this as well sometimes as I'm lovin it).
I know this isn't much help but thought I'd give you a different viewpoint. If you must only have one bike then something like a mega, stumpy evo, enduro, yt ltd etc all look great bikes and I'm sure you wouldn't be disappointed.

I'm not racing DH ATM, If I do in the future I might look at getting a 200mm machine again. I've got a Giant Glory now and a Specialized Stumpjumper elite not evo. I was looking at the Stumpy evo but I think the Enduro Carbon would be slightly better for Bike parks and DH

I "Did it all" for years with Hecklers. It was fine (to a point) I had 2 sets of wheels & 2/3 fork options that I could swap in and out. 2x & 1x setups and 2 shocks (air & coil) the upshot was I had a heavy XC/Trail bike and a out of it's depth DH bike. For the trail based alps stuff it was great (whiteroom holidays & mega race) but for alpine DH trips it was just a bit lacking/getting punished.

I killed a frame doing that so was a bit nicer to the new one. Personally 140mm trail bikes when right can do a lot which still leaves room for a DH bike - why not keep the DH for play days and build the nice 140-160 machine without compromise.

It depends so much on the bike. I love my Hemlock, because it really does do it all well- a classic weekend up north was one day uplifting at fort william on the nevis red and worldcup route, then a day's easy XC on the west highland way and thereabouts, then finishing off with a day doing laps of laggan. Never felt like the wrong bike for any of it. Raced it in the endurance downhill at fort bill, came in about halfway up. Last time I rode it was glentress red, next time is likely to be les arcs, nae fuss.

And the best bit is, there's nothing really special about that at all, loads of bikes can do it these days.

Decent 160mm bikes, built light but tough, will do just about anything.

I'm thinking of doing the same, but the last couple of goes ended up as you said, master of none.

Chumba climbed like a 3 legged dog and the enduro was too much bike, apart from when I took it downhilling (and also climbed like a dog).

Bikes have moved on, so I'm tempted to have another crack at a do-it-all bike, as I cannot be arsed with fixing and maintaining two full suspension bikes anymore.

I think the trick is to have components you can easily swap depending on what you do. I have lighter wheels and an air shock on my mega for pedalling days, and a coil shock and burly wheels for dh. Great.

Jack of all trades, master of none. No getting away from it.

I have a 2013 Commencal Meta AM with a decent tough/light build, but there's still no getting away from the above.

It handles DH tracks fine, but still gets bucked about a fair bit.
It copes fine on XC rides, but you can tell the extra weight/bounce.

It's crap on "proper" jumps (any 160mm trail bike will be).

140mm bike and ride faster. Make sure you select the correct 26in wheel size for more turn in and out. You might have a problem with getting the correct size rims, so chop some out of them wagon wheels, for optimum.

Decent 160mm bikes, built light but tough, will do just about anything.

I'm happy with my 160mm bike (mojo HD) as my only bike.

I do flat'ish trail centres (cannock etc), welsh/scottish trail centres, peaks natural stuff, uplift (antur stiniog etc), bigger mountains (snowdon), and alps uplift and southern spain, and even the odd short road ride.

I'm not the fastest at any of them, but dont really aspire to be. It is fun on all of them though (apart from the road maybe).

YT Industries all mountain thingy, I had a go on it recently and even though it's 170mm travel it was fun at Swinley. The Bos suspension only uses the travel when it needs to and feels firm and sprightly on smoother stuff. The spec is ridiculous for the money.

Im reasonably happy with a sb66 as my dh/uplift as well as my xc/trail bike.

I dont really ever feel held back dhing on it, but do always feel a little wasteful using it for xc bimbles on terrain youd be comfy using a rigid.

Im noticing a theme here ......... carbon seems to be the key, lighter for xc, stiffer for gnarrrrrly stuff

or I could be talking bobbins

im having a dilema at the moment, my 140mm AMbike is great for most things

but I cant help thinking that something in 160mm would be better for gravity enduro- as much as anything my32mm stanchions are definately a bit flexy and certainly for the megavalanche next year

Cube stereo 160 mm - so far does everything though I haven't hit Cwmcarn DH on it yet (will be soon) I am confident it will be up to the task though. The main difference is that its carbon so light enough for XC duties.

It has talas and the CTD function so you can almost lock it out. My main issue re the DH side of things is how the 34's cope with flexing but we will see..hit some reasonable jumps and drops with no issues yet

Im noticing a theme here ......... carbon seems to be the key, lighter for xc, stiffer for gnarrrrrly stuff

Generally I would agree. I normally ride an Enduro S-Works with a few trick bits that's pretty much 26lbs, which I use for everything. It's done 2 EWS's, most of the UKGE, The Mega, MOH & a couple of Maxi's, yet i'll happily throw my leg over it for an after work blast round Swinley on the way home.

Of course it's not as quick as a 20lb carbon 29" HT, but the difference isn't as great as people think & the same goes the other way. I do still race the odd DH event on it & i'm just as quick on most stuff. It can get a bit wild on the rougher stuff, but you just hang on.

Carbon (not just for the frame) does mean you get the weight down, without making it a floppy, wet noodle to ride. That being said, carbon does have it's down sides. My bike is visually wrecked after nearly a season's racing on it. Structually it's fine, it just looks a mess.

A 140 rear 150/160 front may be a better compromise? I have a LTc with 36 Floats and don't want for any more/less bike on most stuff (but then I don't race)
160mm bikes vary greatly in terms of the broad spectrum of "AM". Alpine 160 and Covert being at the bigger end of the scale.
Perhaps something in the middle? Trek remedy, Bronson, stumpy evo or SB66?
As kimbers said, get carbon if you can.

Having had a 160mm spicy and money no object carbon everything s-works enduro, IMHO, yes they are too much for local XC trails, even built light the geometry and suspension just makes for something far less optimal than a XC bike.
Building them up with stronger components and pretending they are DH bikes doesn't cut it either. yes you can ride down Cwmcarn on one, but try riding down Cwmcarn FAST on one and you'll find their limits way before you would on a bigger bike.
The one place they aren't a compromise is places like the Alps for tracks like the Megavalanche.
Yes you can compromise on to riding one bike everywhere, but it ill be exactly that, a compromise.

In a sense a master at none, in that I won't be winning any XC or marathon races on my 160 machine and I won't be winning any downhill races on it either. But the point is I could ride them both on the 160 machine. I've a Nukeproof mega and even on lesser terrain I enjoy riding it because it's just plain good fun. I've even done some big epic all day rides over 60 miles on it.

Duane... - Member

Jack of all trades, master of none. No getting away from it.

Don't really agree tbh, there's not a better tool for a lot of the trails around here.

There is a fairly new type of race for these machines - Gravity Enduro. This is where they are masters, so master of none is not applicable.
Try and use an XC "master" bike for DH and it wont be any good at all. Try and use a DH "master" bike for XC and it wont be any good (in fact it would be a nightmare!).
However, the Enduro bike wont be too bad at either discipline (wont get anywhere near the front either, but thats besides the point) and will excel at Enduro.

32mm stanchions wont cut it, yuo'll need at least 34mm for the stiffness. I'd try and get carbon too if I had the money and some carbon components, you'll appreciated the weight saving with no loss in strength. If my Heckler were 5lb lighter, with the burly components, I'd think it perfect for me. It only gets out of depth on really rooty/rocky/steep DH trails that I try to ride quickly (this is where you will have to accept defeat) - weight may not help me here, but it will help on any XC rides or Enduro races.

Saying that, I will always have a HT for winter and less maintenance reasons.

I'm pretty happy with 160mm front 150mm back on my Voltage, does everything I've needed it to do so far! Bit heavy for pedalling on but it can still be done, would be better if I had a full length dropper and 1x10 really. Mind you I'm the kind of rider who doesn't mind lugging a bit extra up to the top if it makes the descent more fun.

My next bike will almost definitely be 160mm FS. I ride cannock almost exclusively but even round some parts of the dog I'm pushing my xc FS harder than it wants to go.

I'll just be putting some lighter parts on where I can get away with it so it doesn't weigh too much. Won't be able to afford carbon unfortunately.

I'm running a Spesh Enduro 2011 and with the adjustable forks 140 - 160mm it's spot on when riding trail, commute! and xc then keep to 140mm riding any rough stuff up to 160mm 🙂

BUT If I had to stick to one size of fork I'd go for just a 140mm as the 160 gets a bit much for normal trail riding.

Riding 160mm on boards get very interesting 😯

[quote=Northwind ] Duane... - Member
Jack of all trades, master of none. No getting away from it.
Don't really agree tbh, there's not a better tool for a lot of the trails around here.

Yes for the trails but what about the extremes? It's always a comprimise

For the [i]extremes[/i] I switch to a shark cage.

Rosss - Let me assure you that a do it all 160mm bike is the way to go, i changed from 2 bikes to 1 about 3 months ago and havent looked back.

I'm on a 2013 spesh enduro built up at 29lbs with fox 36's.

Raced Gravity enduro last weekend, then a 52 mile chairty cycle trail ride saturday, last night did a 15km loop with 600M of tough climbing and 2 super techy DH descents that would not have been enjoyble on a 5" trail bike(i know from expierince). This weekend I'll be hitting afan for just trail centre stuff.

For uplift days and alp holidays I have a tougher set of wheels with my 2.5 super tacky tyres fitted which give i the grip and stiffnes need to hold difficult lines.

These new 160mm bikes really do it all. Go for it! 🙂

What I've found is that unless the trail is the same all the way, such as a pure DH track or a flat singletrack, then any bike is always a compromise at some point in the ride. What if I want to huck something while on an xc ride? I used to be stuck.

What I now do is ride with 2 'bike porters'™. We take a DH bike, 160mm and 120mm bike out with us and I select the best bike for the next section of trail or feature.

This ensures I always get my best possible time on the next upcoming Strava segment and I'm always the quickest in the group.

160mm is a statement of intent rather than an actual measurement, if you ask me... My "160mm" bike has only 120mm of rear travel but it does the same job as an Alpine or a 170mm Wicked. (I've run it 160mm both ends, didn't like it) Then you get your GT Forces and the like which have 160mm travel and have no idea what to do with it, and end up less capable allround than a 140mm Pitch.

I have one bike that thinks it's three bikes..........

The key to an good all-rounder at 160mm is, unfortunately, to spend a lot of money on it. A high spec carbon 160mm bike (lots to choose from) will be well under 30lbs and capable of doing pretty much anything the rider would choose to do. The biggest compromise imo is simply wheels and tyres, but having a spare "xc" lightweight set and a HD set really helps. Likewise with the suspension, fit an shock/fork with a lot of adjustability (i have a canecreek dbair) and i can turn my 160mm squishy thing into practically a hardtail with a turn of a few knobs and a couple of pumps of the shockpump etc.

Finally, i don't really see how "too much bike" matters? As long as it moves when you pedal, surely it's fine?

This thread is bananas.

I actually can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading, which is impressive, even by STW standards 🙂

New Orange Alpine is all you need. A significant improvement on an already great bike. Mag review a month or so back.

Travel figures mean very little on their own, I mean a 160mm bike would have been considered "DH use only" in the not too distant past...

Is it enough for trundling down an Alp or a Welsh hill side? Yes, of course it is, people still do such things on Hardtails FFS, anything more is a luxury...

Will you be able to pedal it up? Probably, Sub 32lb air sprung, lockout / wind down gubbins means a far smaller dose of MTFU is required to operate a modern ego chariot than those of 8-10 years ago...

Focus more on the geometry, weight and handling. The travel is an almost incidental figure you can go +/-20mm from that 160mm, if the bike is [I]Right[/I] you won't care about spec sheet numbers...

Finally, i don't really see how "too much bike" matters? As long as it moves when you pedal, surely it's fine?

That's exactly what I said to my DH bike porter. You should hear him bitch on the big climbs on all day ride though!

maxtorque - Member

Finally, i don't really see how "too much bike" matters? As long as it moves when you pedal, surely it's fine?

Mmm. Sometimes, trails just get a bit dull the more capable a bike is (not always possible to fix that just by going faster, and in any case, going faster means the ride's over sooner)

And sometimes it's just annoyingly hard work! Especially with big sticky tyres.

Finally, i don't really see how "too much bike" matters? As long as it moves when you pedal, surely it's fine?

When you live in the south (Small hills, rather than mountains) having a bike with lots of travel makes for pretty dull riding IME.

I owned an enduro, which only came to life when I was hammering it a speed. The only place I found it really fun was when I took it to local DH tracks and to Cwmcarn.

My trance x is much more fun for the majority of stuff in the south, but is not much fun on DH tracks with 125mm travel and flexy forks.

Say you have a 160mm bike and it's boring on flat trails. Just put 250psi in both shocks, bingo, you now have a fully rigid bike! 😉

Iv an alpine 160 and i find it near perfect for 99% of what i want it to do, its talas but i dont ever drop the forks, just dosnt feel right.

it is a bit slower up hills but iv yet to have to get off and push on any natural or trail centre climb iv come accross

main thing for me is i can hit pretty much anything i have the balls to on most trails including jumps but more importantly big drop off, when i get a bit older and stop the bigger stuff i will more than likely get a five 140 f&r 😉

I ride at Cannock a lot and have recently just replaced my old SX Trail with a Banshee Rune V2. Ultimately, it's totally OTT for lugging round the Doy and Monkey trails but it still manages to be fun. The idea is that is my main bike that can be used for XC rides, generally mucking about and uplift days.

I don't so enough DH / uplift days to warrant having a full on DH bike and Stile Cop isn't really big enough or steep enough to justify it.

Any such 140-160mm do it all bike will be a compromise and its one that I'm happy to live with, even if deep down I know that I would have been better off with a Banshee Spitfire (didn't get one due to a lack of demo opportunity). My Rune climbs pretty well - I'm not usually the last one up a hill and it decends really well. OK, not like a DH bike but its pretty long and slack so feels confident on the steeper stuff.

I don't bother with lock out etc. Modern bikes in this category are pretty impressive machines but as someone pointed out, they're not all the same. Some a more akin to long travel trail / XC bikes whereas others are more like baby DH bikes. I think you just need to decide which wend of the spectrum you prefer - personally, I'm happy winching up to enjoy the descent whereas others may want a bike that climbs better.

Building them up with stronger components and pretending they are DH bikes doesn't cut it either. yes you can ride down Cwmcarn on one, but try riding down Cwmcarn FAST on one and you'll find their limits way before you would on a bigger bike.

Not really. You will find YOUR limits way faster.

There are countless examples of people rocking up at DH races on AM bikes all over the UK & smoking most of the field.

Not really. You will find YOUR limits way faster.

Absolutely. How many times have you sat in an uplift with a few riders on killer DH machines, only to watch them mince and be overtaken at warp speed by the kid on a 1999 Kona Stinky?

Most UK tracks don't really challenge full on DH bikes and don't need the 10" tanks that people ride (with a couple of exceptions obviously). I include myself in that, I had a Cove Shocker which was utterly amazing, but I genuinely don't think i'd have been much slower on a low slung enduro, my skills just don't let me get full tilt out of a big DH bike.

For me, something with DH geo and around 7", built up well, is great for most UK tracks I've ridden.

when i get a bit older and stop the bigger stuff i will more than likely get a 29er

Stumpy Evo here and it's extremely versatile. It's no dh bike, but as long as you remember to take it steady (to be fair - if you forget, the bike soon reminds you) it's great. Eager to climb and so much fun to squirt about on. Nothing to stop you building a chunky 160 if you really want to use it a a dh bike, that will be still be reasonable to climb on. The problem you will have is deciding which bike to buy. If your fav doesn't have a dropper, budget for one. They really make sense on this type of bike.

Euro.... Funnily enough, I've a lurcher 29er parked beside the alpine, used for pedalling to local trail centres, coast paths etc 😉

Peterfile - totally agree. When I lived in Sheffield, a fair of the Wharncliffe locals chopped in Demo's etc for smaller SX Trails. They weren't much slower either.

I bit more squish does give a bit more confidence for lesser riders, but modern 140 - 160mm bikes are amazingly competent on some pretty big / rough stuff.

My intense tracer 275 is an amazing climber and descender. But it it does kill the enjoyment of easy trails to some extent.

Perfect timing on this post. im considering a 150-160mm bike at the moment.

Ive sat on a nukeproof mega TR (nice), a commencal meta SX2 (OTT), a stumpjumper evo (same a mega) and an enduro comp (nice)

My favourite was the enduro and im probably gonna try it again tommorow. it felt the same as the stumpy but slightly slacker.

The best thing of all is that all bikes except the commencal felt lighter than the Gary Fisher roscoe i have now which climbs well.

interesting thread and cookea has it right imho focus on

geometry....huge variations

quality of the suspension and travel.....had 160mm bikes that have blown through their travel on the slightest bump through and wallopy lumps.......through to sprightly overweight whippets. Try the different designs as all are not equal, so turner dw link did not work for me compered to horst link, orange single pivot vs yeti linkage single pivot (sure their is a better description)

know what to do with your suspension....some of my problems was the lack of understanding on what does what......air shocks are wonders of the bike world still would rather have coil personally

weight ...well had 35 lbs bikes that were better climbers than my xc bike in some situations (Titus Supermoto vs Yeti asr sl) BUT a 36lb bike will wear you down at some point....

Remember every STW will be in love/recommend what they have.... :wink:...I sold my 7 inch Yeti as it was not getting any use, it was a wonderful bike pedalled wonderfully, great angles and suspension with coil riding the same trails on a 120mm/100 29er not much light 3 lbs possibly but really enjoying it.

160mm bikes are wonderful but as said above alps were ridden on 71/73 degree 135mm stem with 560mm flat bars with 80mm front suspension suspension, 1.8 tyres hardtails.