1 bike Ton now.
full rigid touring bike, fitted with 50mm tyres and 3 x 9.
perfect for 99% of the time.
but eyeing a new fatbike up at present.
Stopped caring what anyone else thinks a long time ago...
That said, a 150/160mm travel eBike is the right bike for about 90% of my riding these days...
Did feel a little undergunned on a couple of particularly rocky trails today for the first time in a while, but not likely to be riding there again any time soon, so certainly not worth considering a bigger bike for the privilege.
"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."So is the point of this, that everyone should ride a bike that weights between 14.0 & 16.0 Kg?
I ride a 15.5 kg 160/140mm as my trail, enduro bike. It's not terrible for long boring stuff and granted some faster rolling tyres would improve that. But the angles mean it would never compare with the 100mm 10kg steep ha hardtail where that is suited (gravel, tar, xc all-day rides). That bike is good for most stuff ... then i find myself careening down a wet clay log shute wishing I was on the other bike.
I did always have the option of a slack 140mm hardtail and in all honesty that was probably the best all-round option for my local riding. Hmmmm...
Horses bikes for courses, innit?
I didn't realise that my 13kg Tallboy was under biked as it doesn't feel like it on most South Downs rides where a gravel bike is probably fine until you hit Steyning where it isn't and the Tallboy is just right to slightly under biked. Not sure how it will cope with the Alps in September but planning to add 1 more KG worth of tyres (no, not a 3rd tyre) to get it to 14kg.
Actually, it's been interesting watching what bikes all the teenagers Reeksy1 choose.
Mostly they have parents that don't ride. Bigger is better obvs, so they had a tendency to get a full-on 17kg enduro rig. A couple I can think of are great riders but after dragging their Norco Range and Polygon Colossus around realised they weren't going any faster in races than on their old bikes because most of our tracks don't need the extra travel. They both started bringing their old bikes to training and races instead and saving the big rigs for DH races. Now they've upgraded the smaller bikes and are really happy with them.
I was pretty lucky, finding a lightweight EWS standard bike for Reeksy1 at a bargain price - it's got enough travel for enduro but is light and nimble enough for pedalling too. If the seat tube was an inch shorter I'd probably steal it off him!
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....
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?
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
just to cruise through obstacles like on a magic carpet ride?
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.
The cycling industry is also very clever convincing us that we all need huge travel bikes...
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.
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.
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")
Replace capable with Robust.
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
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")
Replace capable with Robust.
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.
"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!
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.
Not necessarily? You can have a bombproof bike that's 'underbiked' / involving to ride. And a capable bike that's a reliability liability
True certainly.
I’ve ridden a road bike on 25c tyres around a pretty tame Red/Blue trail centre, as I was passing and bored of the road.
Asides a few punctures, it was fine. I bet if I did that a few times it’d fail in an amusingly catastrophic way tho.
Clearly that’s the far end of underbiked but you could hammer an Enduro bike around it relentlessly without failure or punctures.
What are the definitions of under and over biked?
What are the definitions of under and over biked?
Isn't that the point, that there aren't any, it's subjective?
My point's that I have a rigid 29er that is both light and involving but also genuinely bombproof and reliable, so I'd say 'robust' is a separate attribute here. 'Capable' is about how an enduro bike can roll down a rough trail in more control than my rigid bike. But .. pedantic semantics.
I ride a 27.5in Giant Anthem with 130mm up from and 110mm on the back, and a 130mm OnOne-Ti-456 so feel a bit overbiked for the general XC riding I do around the W.Berks/Hampshire/Wiltshire borders, although both are comfy enough and not too heavy.
On the road I'm underbiked ridning a 26in singlespeed Kona mtb frame with 1.5in road tyres, rigid carbon forks and Mary Bars. About time I bought or built up a proper singlespeed road bike really.
Doesn’t matter now anyway. It’s all about being over or under Torqed and range anxiety.
not that it ever mattered 👍
I just know that my FlareMAX - 125mm at the rear and a 140mm Manitou Mattoc Pro up front - is lovely to ride in a warm, involving, capable but visceral sort of way. I have two sets of wheels, a heavier trail one with a Forekaster up front and a Rock Razor in the back and a lighter set with a Wolfpack Cross, lighter Rock Razor combo. For my usual riding, mostly Peak District, it feels pretty much perfect, can get overfaced on really big, chunky stuff, but mostly has 'enough' without losing 'zip' and 'thing', remember 'thing'?
My experience of more travel is, for me, less fun / more detachment, but obviously that's subjective. If pushed I'd say I instinctively prefer to be underbiked, possibly because when I started riding bikes back about a million years ago, everyone was always underbiked and the more capable and faster a bike gets, the harder and faster you end up crashing.
Weirdly, the most 'overbiked' I'd ever felt / been was on a Trek Full Stache in the Peak. Huge tyres, big wheels, quite a lot of travel. It was simultaneously incredibly capable on typical Peak rockeries, but oddly ethereal, like floating just above the surface on an invisible carpet of pink candy floss. A bit like looking out of the window of a plane at your local trails, but having absolutely zero contact with them.
Do I care? Only in so far as I'd rather enjoy riding my bike and have enough trail feel to kid myself that I'm actually doing something rather than just being a passenger with some control over the direction of flight. YMMV etc.
