[Closed] Best Bike for Scottish Mountains

Nukeproof Mega

Hmmm. Checklist of requirements for me are :-

Full sus.
Heavier duty forks - I like Lyrik's myself.
Bottle cage - minimum one, preferably two.
Dropper post.
Lightish rims with grippy tyres - Timberwolf's still work well for me.
Not too heavy.
Comfy saddle such as a WTB.
Triple ring or if you must, a double with a granny gear. 1 by whatever just seem like an unecessary compromise that saves a few ounces and loses versatility but each to their own.

There are loads of good bikes to choose from. I'm currently riding a Turner, albeit a cracked one!

When I get a long travel 29er, I'll let you know how I get on in comparison to the Turner. The big wheels appeal for epic rides and all day comfort. If I can get one that rides as well as the Turner on steep, loose and technical trail, I'll be delighted!

I reckon your Giant will see you right. To be honest, the important bit is getting out into the hills and enjoying them. 😀

Cheers

Sanny

Short and to the point 🙂 The first review I found of the mega said it is "aimed squarely at the new breed of gravity based enduro events" and with 150mm of travel would you really want to spend hours riding it up a big hill?

Cheers,

Andy

Any 100 to 160mm bike. Happy to take a 160mm bike to the top of a hill. Depends if you want to enjoy up or down or both. You have to comprise one way or the other. Five heckler nomad blur mojo mega anthem reign nicolai enduro and a few more

Whatever you currently have. (steel HT here with bolt through forks and bigger tyres, only improvement would be to have [s]clown[/s] bigger wheels)

Damn, must work out how to quote here. That reply now looks like it was responding to the wrong post.

Sanny, you are quite right. The Giant will do me fine and the important thing is to get out there. But no harm in a bit if idle daydreaming.

Interesting that you want bottle cages. I've switched to carrying water on my back after seeing the state my bottles got into when I put them on the frame 🙂 I'm with you on the rest though. Triple all the way for me, even if the outer ring is just a jagged bash ring most of the time.

Cheers,

Andy

For the route's I like to do a 20lb bike for the ups and a DH bike for the doon's... other than that almost anything will do. We used to ride the same mountains with rigid bikes, then suspension forks, then full suss, then freeride bikes, then all mountain bikes... no 29er's in my group yet (but one has been ordered)

I was once advised to get a large size frame so I can put some insulation roll on the tubes and carry it on my shoulders by sticking my head through the middle 😐

As above... depends on your route's and if you are you there mostly for the downhills or if your all about big days and big long adventures.

Edit - 160mm travel both ends and about 30-33lbs works for me.

My checklist for Munro/big descent type riding is roughly:

Something that climbs OK but needs to be burly enough to stand up to a lot of abuse, including the inevitable offs. My BLT2 comes in about 30lbs which IMO is a good compromise
At least 140-150mm fork for coming down the steep technical stuff. With your weight on the front end and the brakes on, it can already be 2/3 through its travel even before you hit the next rock or drop
Ideally a slackish head angle - 68deg or less
Full suss - there's a lot of riding across rocky trails that is literally a pain on a hardtail
Double and bash - no need for big gears, and a big ring can catch on a rock
Good brakes so you can one finger brake down whatever you want without arm pump
Tough and widish rims both to prevent getting dinged and to take a good volume tyre

Tread lightly please - fatbike

I live in Scotland and have come to the conclusion that if you're going to have full suspension you may as well have shit loads of it or none at all but that's just me.

My first proper mountain bike was a Trance X which I really liked but ended up selling because I didn't feel it was right for my needs. I was pushing it very hard and it was great on the smaller bumps but couldn't cope with really rough stuff at speed. Thing is I'd built a single speed hardtail which covers most of my riding and I got so into hardtails that I replaced the Trance with a Blue Pig which is slacker and descends even better than the Trance did. The pig feels like the ultimate Scottish Mountains machine to me and I have it 1x10 for weight saving and simplicity.

Make of this what you will but if I ever got a full suss again I'd get something slack with loads of travel to really go crazy with on the downs. The Reign for example is meant to be a good climber but far better then the Trance going down. Consider BB height too.

roverpig - Member
Short and to the point The first review I found of the mega said it is "aimed squarely at the new breed of gravity based enduro events" and with 150mm of travel would you really want to spend hours riding it up a big hill?

i just thought you really wanted to know what bikes people had so thought no point in messing around 😀

Mega pedals & climbs quite well though btw & mine's built up to about 31lbs.

done a fair few scottish hills by bike and spend a lot of time ticking lake district hills off too. depends on where & what you want to ride. i like my descents to start off with a gruelling few hours of hike-a-bike as i know this generally leads to the more technical descents. therefore i think some of the stuff on Sanny's list could easily be sacrificed for this style of riding, e.g:

dropper post - often only 1 up and 1 down so 1 change of seatpost height;
triple chainset - never gonna need the big ring (but defo agree on the granny - 1x10 is silly in the big hills).

Picture time... on top of a mountain.

[img] [/img]

Hammerschmidt for huge ground clearance when manouvering round rocks... and good range of gears. I would not run a big ring.
Nice thick 2.3-2.5" Tyres which won't tear when treated roughly down granit and slammed (accidentally) into water bars.
Slack head angle with wide bars and a short stem = fun on the gnarly downhill bits.
Dropper post. I held off this for a while thinking one up one down and it's not necessary... but they are brilliant.
Powerfull brakes are a must... and smaller rotors to avoid dinging them if you can... I ride the super powerful Formula The-Ones with 180/160 rotors.
I've got the coil shock on for this trip as it's worth it, but just as often run an air shock (which can get a little hot to the touch on 20 min rocky descents like this one).

None of this is really necessary as I've ridden the same route on a hardtail... but on this bike it's much more fun 😈 I've got a mate who takes his Iron Horse Sunday up here...

Consider BB height too

therefore i think some of the stuff on Sanny's list could easily be sacrificed for this style of riding, e.g:

dropper post - often only 1 up and 1 down so 1 change of seatpost height;

Mmm. In theory yes, but in fact it's helpful to be able to drop the seat a little for technical sections where you still need to pedal, or little steep technical bits in the middle of an otherwise easily rideable trail. Haven't invested yet as I wanted the technology to stabilise but it's probably my next buy

i suppose...i do think they're great & like you am waiting for the 'right one' to come along (Fox Doss perhaps?) as unfortunately big mtn riding is not the only riding i do.

i usually find that the seat is either up or down on these types of rides, so dropper isn't a necessity. if it was the only type of riding i did, i'd spend my money elsewhere.

[IMG] [/IMG]

456Ti
Light enough for carrying. Strong enough for pretty much any descent.

Maxle fork, big tyres run tubeless, wide bars and a granny ring for those long days.

Thanks folks. I'm beginning to see the flaw in my own logic. Natural trails are naturally highly variable, so no bike will be ideal for all parts and any general purpose bike will probably do the job. Some interesting suggestions though and I notice that nobody suggested an Orange Five, which is interesting as I though that was supposed to be the definitive "made in Britain for British trails" bike.

Cheers,

Andy

my 2p:
for natural trails, the most important attribute is reliability, a super lightweight part is useless if it is broken.
for me it would probably be a heavy duty steel hardtail, probably about 140-150mm forks, fairly standard shimano kit for gears/brakes,
good solid, reliable bars stem seatpost etc.
and a saddle that i know to be comfy for me. im undecided on the tubeless debate, as i havent tried it, but i would make sure i could fix whatever i had.
you could easily be 30 miles from help, without a mobile phone signal, best to be reliable in those circumstances.

Gratuitous photo opportunity from me as well then of my do-it-all bike. BLT2 with Rev 150, 2x9 double and bash, Hope Tech M4 brakes and Mavic EN521 rims. Pedals really well and comes in around 30lbs

Edit: agree with the above that reliability is more important than weight, but IMO that does not preclude full suss

[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7096/7285339778_68354bb19c_c.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7096/7285339778_68354bb19c_c.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/55229898@N08/7285339778/ ]Rannoch, Ben Nevis and Glen Coe from Carn Gorm[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/55229898@N08/ ]CaptainMainwaring1[/url], on Flickr

[i]you could easily be 30 miles from help, without a mobile phone signal, best to be reliable in those circumstances. [/i]

Agreed, so ensure you've the tools/parts/know-how to get you home. And a HT can be SS'd.

[i]for natural trails, the most important attribute is reliability, a super lightweight part is useless if it is broken.
for me it would probably be a heavy duty steel hardtail, probably about 140-150mm forks, fairly standard shimano kit for gears/brakes,
[/i]

Gotta disagree with your basic premise, using the Bontrager Rule of Strong/Light, just ain't cheap. And shops just don't carry spares over and above components - AlpineBikes (GT and Innerleithen) don't stock levers, just brakes for example.

I use an Orange 5 with Lyriks. Having used bigger things with more travel I find the 5 a lot more fun purely because of the geometry. Nothing appropriate is suitable for shouldering though. I also have an Evil Sovereign with Pikes I use for certain big hills.

In our munro-storming group there is-

Trek Remedy with Fox 36s
Cube Frittzz with 36s
Cube AMS 150 with Revs
Commencal Meta 5.5 with Fox 36s
Lapierre Spicy with Fox 36s
Orange Five with Fox 32s
Orange Five with Fox 36s
Orange Five with Fox 36s
Orange Five with Lyriks
Orange Five with 32s
Evil Sovereign with Pikes
Evil Sovereign with Fox 32s
NS Surge with Sektors

140-160mm with big ole forks is the answer.

agreed, i wouldn't necessarily preclude full suss, i have one.

@ br:
im not sure which part you disagree with?
i wasnt really thinking of cost tbh.

Yea I forgot to mention forks. My Trance came with Recons which I replaced with Pikes which gave me infinitely more confidence and control. The Pikes feel even better on my Pig with the slacker head angle. I wouldn't go back to QR forks as bolt through are so much stiffer.

Thanks again. Respect to anybody who is happy to ride a HT all day over rough ground. That's too much for my old bones I'm afraid.

I see there are a fair few fives amongst the Munro baggers, but I could probably get by with my Trance (maybe with some 140mm forks).

Cheers

Andy

Just to be contrary...

[url= http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3071/2850661094_6812d105a3_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3071/2850661094_6812d105a3_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/druidh2000/2850661094/ ]2008-07-28 16-37-40[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/druidh2000/ ]druidh_dubh[/url], on Flickr

[img] [/img]

HT is all you need, coming down Mnt Keen on Sunday.

Just to be contrary...

That's not like you. 🙂

Personally I reckon if money was no object I would one of those crazy expensive but light 150-160mm travel bikes. This would probably do pretty well in fact for not completely ridiculous money:

http://www.yt-industries.com/shop/index.php?page=product&info=214

B r

Nice pic fella. Is that up above Rannoch Moor?

Cheers

Sanny

HT is all you need, coming down Mnt Keen on Sunday.

avoiding all the rocks 😀 😉

Nah,all the monster travel ain't for me. I was up Glen Einich yesterday after riding around Badaguish on an LT carbon tallboy and burning up to the loch with 105mm at the back and a pike wound out at 120mm for the climb and descent suits me fine. I enjoy it up in the mountains too. Big rocks can be ridden with shorter travel. 160mm on a bike for long days in the saddle with 3000ft of climbing isn't going to be the best option. You would be suffering and taking so much enjoyment out of it all by having to push up some sections that could be ridden on shorter travel.Even with a pike or talas of whatever description still leaves you with a big bike lurking underneath and I really can't see why something with 160mm of travel on a long mountain day ride consisting of 80% climbing is going to be the most pleasurable option. Yes, its great coming down but for me.. I enjoy a bike that suited to the days ride more than a bike that's more suited to the descent.

Take a trip to Torridon for example. You start in Coulags and head to Annat. You climb back over and up to descend down into Coire Lair.. A total of 5 hours+? and you have descended into Annat (totalling 15 mins) then you descend down into Acnashellach (totalling 30-40 mins)To be honest I actually get more enjoyment on mountains on my 4 inch travel full suss. The 140mm on my Zesty is great.. but only for such a small percentage of the ride.

Then again,back in 97 I had even more fun on my Pace rc200 with Judy's coming down Cairngorm.. and that was after carrying it up and around the Fiacaill ridge and directly up to Cairngorm with it on my back. Just ask Sanny if he had more fun carrying his slingshot up mountains in 1995 or pushing his Turner in 2011 ;oD

160mm on a bike for long days in the saddle with 3000ft of climbing isn't going to be the best option. You would be suffering and taking so much enjoyment out of it all by having to push up some sections that could be ridden on shorter travel.

I dunno, on modern bikes with propedal you don't lose much energy to bobbing, and the fancier ones don't weigh much so where's the penalty for the extra travel? I'm not sure why some sections wouldn't be rideable going up on a longer travel bike - I find my Pitch is great on technical climbs and I often get up stuff other people on shorter travel bikes don't manage. The only times I feel the bike dragging me back is on long easy fire road type climbs because of the weight - on some carbon 27lb bike that wouldn't be an issue.

I did Ben Lomond on that bike and it was great IMO - not a long all day ride I admit but a lot of climbing. Mind you I don't mind pushing/carrying especially when it's not really any slower than riding. I guess it depends how you like to ride the descents too - for me it's worth some pain on the way up to have full on speed/skill compensation ( 😉 ) on the way down.

[i]Nice pic fella. Is that up above Rannoch Moor?

[/i]

Good shout, the little top to the right of where the chairlift 'lands'.

Next day I did there through to Fort Bill and back on the WHW - 58 miles, which is probably why I reckon having something light is very important 🙂

I ride a Gary fisher roscoe 3 and my friend a spesh hardrock with 100mm travel. He's done every up and down I've done but just not as comfy!

Good to hear all the repliies, sensible answer is that you might want at least 3 different bikes in the end once you get into mtbs 🙂 all depends what u want to do when u get up the mountain.....For instance a bit XC , an all mountain, a mad downhill....

'3 different bikes'
yes, well maybe, but whatever you are riding make sure its tip top before you set off.

>Good shout, the little top to the right of where the chairlift 'lands'.<

Which is roughly where I thought it must be after my first take: Jesus someones taken a bike up the Buachille 😉

I don't find more travel a problem, it's better for ploughing through stuff in the mountains but it's more the angles when you are trying to get up something that's rocky and steep.It's hard enough as it is on a steeper short travel bike. Even with Talas and steep seat tube angles I'd still find myself swaying towards bikes I rode 15 years ago with hardly any travel to make a better all-day,3000ft climbing per day,scottish mountain bike. I'm not fit or brave enough to be pinning it down a remote mountain on big travel after being out all day anyways!

martynxyz - don't want to keep banging on about my own bike, but one of the great design features of the Mega (and a few others such as the Rocky Mountain Slayer) is the steep seat angle which puts your weight further forward much like a steeper HA would & thus aids climbing. with non-travel adjust 160mm forks up front most climbs that are do-able get done and the ones that don't wouldn't have been nailed on a shorter travel bike.

then you have the benefit of the slack HA and big forks for the way down.

reckon we'll see this geometry creeping into more 'AM' bikes - it really does work!

Never really considered that before but my Pitch has a 73 degree seat angle, which isn't far off the Mega I don't think. I find it climbs pretty well (apart from my fitness letting me down!)

I see that the Orange Five, which appeared so regularly in the list of bikes used by the Munro riders also pairs a 67 degree head angle with a 73 degree seat angle. My Trance on the other hand is 69.5 degree HA and 73.3 degree SA (which I guess would be 69/73 if I went up to a 140mm form).

But, as always, I guess it just depends on what kind of rider you are. I get the feeling that, for many people, mountain biking is pretty much all about the descents. Going up is a means to an end, the thrill is in the descent and the steeper and more technical the better. Then there are folk, like me, for whom the climbing is just as important and enjoyable in its own way as the descending. Actually if I'm honest I find climbing more enjoyable than descending. Going down is mostly about fear and the thrill mainly just comes from getting to the bottom in one piece. I rarely get to the bottom of a run and think that I want to do that again and it is the climbs that keep drawing me back.

I also like to ride on my own, on quiet trails (the quieter the better) so tend to walk down anything that may result in serious injury. Whether that's being sensible or just using that lack of company as an excuse to get out of riding something I don't want to ride anyway is left as an exercise for the reader. But at least there is nobody around to see my shame.

So, one the one hand, I think I'd probably find a long travel bike took some of the fun out of the climbs. But on the other hand I'm such a wuss on the descents that I need all the help I can get.

Cheers,

Andy

Interesting thread this as it shows how different riders requirement can be to do the same thing 😕

I find it much easier to climb the really loose and steep paths round my way with the 160mm of travel available on my big bike than I ever did when riding my XC race hardtail back in the day. Combination of lower gearing, bigger tyres run tubeless at lower pressures, and the supple travel more than make up for the extra weight (to a certain point... I'd still like a lighter bike for the ups).

I like the challange of the ups and riding up as much as I can is an important part of the day out... I'm not into taking the bike for a walk just to get a doonhall (unless it really is the only way).

For the downs I want a bike that I can let loose and enjoy. I don't want to be "mincing" down a rocky mountain path and getting off to walk tricky bits that I know I could ride on a slightly more robust and differently set up bike. Two years ago I took a retro 24lb steel xc hardtail up a local mountain, I managed most of the ride but it was different... I enjoyed it but I'm in no hurry to repeat.

I'm probably what many people would call "overbiked" but if I use that potential once in a ride to make it round a techy corner or launch a drop that I wouldn't on another bike then I'm a happy bunny... and anyway, it's not a race and mostly ride on my own so who cares if it takes a bit longer to take the bigger bike round

I think geometry is more important than suspension. I prefer descending but I got the Blue Pig because it has that steep seat angle of 74.5 and the head angle is really slack at 67.5. The seating position is really comfy for all day rides and going up hills and it descends better than I could have hoped.

Rover- I don't know the angle but 140mm forks slackened out my Trance a fair bit and you'll really notice it. I wouldn't have wanted forks that I couldn't wind in though so I got Pikes. 140 felt too slack for general riding.