[Closed] Full suss that climbs well and descends safely

How deep are your pockets? Frame and build it up yourself or off the peg?

I'd look at something shortish travel (~120), fairly slack. Maybe a Yeti ASR5c.

I'd also try and have a go on a good hardtail too, something like the Soul.

If you really want a big bouncer then something like a NP Mega maybe. Though I think you'd probably have more fun and develop better skills on a hardtail or short travel in the long term.

I only own one of the above 🙂

I would say Giant Anthe, climbs incredibly well an defends as well as many much longer travel bikes

I've never owned a specialised, but I'd say a Stumpy fits right in that bracket, and you could get last years model for a good price on t'internet.

If you are happy with Mail Order, then a Canyon Nerve AM would be cracking spec for the money.

My All Mountain bike is a Santa Cruz Heckler, and that would be great for that, as would an Orange 5, or a Yeti 575.

So that's 5, only 1 of which I own/Have owned!!

Specialized Camber - climbs as well as an Anthem X but more relaxed geometry. I've had both and the Camber rides really well, very forgiving without being dull. Worth a tryout for sure.

I wouldn't say that "money's no object" but I don't mind spending on something that will last. My main problem right now is deciding what I'm looking for. I'm currently riding a (26") Trance and have an older Five that I've been playing with to get a feel for what I want from a bike. I've got test rides booked on an Orange Gyro and Trance 29er for later in the month and will post my thoughts on those. But during my ride last night it struck me that I tend to judge a ride by what and how fast I can climb and what (but not how fast) I can come down. So a successful ride is one where I get up or down something I've never managed before or climb something faster than I've managed before.

it may be worth seeing if you can get a test ride on a ellsworth epiphany. Of all the full sus bikes I've owned and ridden, including spesh, treks, giant,orange , felt, sinister,maverick, marin etc... it was the best mix of climbing/pedalling/descending and all round awesome bike. It climbed like a monkey with it bum on fire. Just lush and the only 26er I still wish I owned. Would kill to get my paws on the 29er version.

[url= http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/mountain/product/review-ellsworth-epiphany-10-36001 ]review thingymebobbins[/url]

What'sd wrong with your current bike? I don't mean that facetiously, just wonder what it's lacking?

If you're looking for for confidence to be inspired when you've already had lots of riding time on a trance and five, then quite possibly your skills are the limiting factor.

then quite possibly your skills are the limiting factor.

Nahhh that's what 29ers are for.

Good questions.

There is nothing wrong with the Trance. But, in an ideal world I'd be looking for a bike that would climb faster than the Trance and allow me to get down some of the trickier descents (e.g. bigger steps, drops, rocks etc). Of course, both of those can be achieved by working harder on fitness and skills and I may well conclude (after all the test rides and general naval gazing) that the best course of action is just to stick with the Trance and work on my skills before considering another bike. But, no harm in thinking about whether another bike might suit me better.

Trek fuel ex's are really excellent bikes. A friend has one and it just does everything well with minimal fuss. The 2013 ones have revised geometry and look very interesting indeed. Shouldn't be too difficult to get a demo either.
Actually, if you have a healthy budget; a turner DW 5 spot fits that bill very well.

Blur LT climbs really well, handles a lot on the way back. Bonus points for getting the c.
Life time bearing replacements from SC, great frame, great for climbing very adaptable. Climbed like a shorter bike descended like a bigger one.
(missus owns one)

26" option would be a Whyte 146

29er trek Rumblefish

+1 Fuel Ex8. Run mine with 110/140 talas and 1600g american classic wheelset...nips up and down mountains like a Nepalese goat

Norco sight / sight killer B

Ibis mojo sl or sl-r

light, climbs well, 140mm travel get you down pretty much any natural trail v fast 🙂

my sl kicks ass, 26lbs of all round, all day fun

Anything but a downhill bike.

I'd recommend... ooh, lets see... the first 2 pictured [url= http://singletrackworld.com/ ]here[/url]

SC Tallboy LT? Carbon or alu depending on your pockets?

It climbed like a monkey with it bum on fire.

Sounds like you are demoing the right bikes there Roverpig. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts.

in an ideal world I'd be looking for a bike that would climb faster than the Trance and allow me to get down some of the trickier descents

Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it. The best thing I could suggest is to work on your bike handling skills.

If you want to buy anything, go for some flats and 5 10's.

Once you are more confident offroad, you will have more of an idea of what you actually like in a bike.

Fear not mattbibbings, long and rambling posts are bound to follow any testing 🙂

The number of options seems to be growing at an alarming rate though. I wonder whether it would help to focus on characteristics rather than specific brands/models e.g. what makes one full suss bike a better climber than another?

Let's consider (for a simple example) a fireroad climb. So, we can assume the shock is locked and take that out of the equation. Weight obviously matters but that's total weight of bike plus rider so a few pound here or there on the bike wont make much difference. Let's ignore the wheels as that are easy to change. In fact, I'm really just thinking about frames at this point as I'd almost certainly want to build up my next bike myself. What's left? Stiffness I guess. So, is that what I should be focusing on? Frame stiffness?

Geometry is as/more important than all of the IMHO.

Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it.

Of course. Don't we all 🙂

If you want to buy anything, go for some flats and 5 10's.

Got those already. Very nice they are too, but I don't think they are doing much for my climbing 🙂

Once you are more confident offroad, you will have more of an idea of what you actually like in a bike.

Sound advice and that may well be my conclusion too, but no harm in window shopping.

Frame stiffness is good....

For climbing really for me it's the shock and suspension design. Basically I can live with the lock out doing all the work but it's far from ideal. If the suspension can help to provide some stability too then it's great. For a good climbing bike you need a back end that tracks the ground. Take a bike that you need to run a hard lockout on and that is lost.

I'd say the Trance was a pretty good balance to be honest, most bikes that are light enough to climb faster aren't likely to be demon descenders as well. You could try sticking a faster tyre on the rear for less rolling resistance on the way up and maybe a slightly longer fork up front to give a bit more confidence on the downs and if you want to get really anal, maybe some sort of slacker headset gubbins.

Or you could just go medieval on your wallet and buy a Blur TRC... but really, the proper quick riders I know are proper quick whatever they ride. Personally I'd be looking at a light hardtail with a biggish fork, a Ragley Ti or similar, 456 Ti Evo maybe if you want new, but that's just me.

Geometry is as/more important than all of the IMHO.

For climbing? OK, I understand that you need to keep the front wheel on the ground, but beyond that it seems as though the front end geometry is more about descending than climbing and pretty much every bike these days seems to have something close to a 73 degree seat angle.

I'm not saying that you are wrong. Geometry is obviously crucial in general, but I'm struggling to see which bit of geometry is going to make one MTB climb better than another.

ps: oh, you want some sort of race whippet carbon hardtail that magically metamorphoses into a mini-downhill bike as soon as you hit the crest of the hill. And for that reason, I'm out. 😉

Geometry is obviously crucial in general, but I'm struggling to see which bit of geometry is going to make one MTB climb better than another.

I think (and this'll feed bwarp's 29er frothings) a change to a 29er will help more than anything, from the riding and wants you're describing. Generalising yes (and edited to add 'assuming decent geometry'), but 29" wheels can handle steppy, slo-mo steep rocky sections more confidently and capably than a 26 and climbing is great if you accept that momentum-maintenance is what you need, not stop-start grinding where a heavier wheel will feel slower.
Climbing-wise frame stiffness, sus type etc make some difference but you'll need to ride a lot of bikes for a fairly long time to really figure that out. Some people like SPs, some prefer multi-links, as long as the bike puts you in a good position and suits your pedalling / riding style all's well.

I've been demoing fs bikes since last year on and off and the best going up was the TRc I rode in the lakes, it's was also fantastic going down. The two dw link bikes I've ridden also went up very well.

Pivot Mach 5.7... climbs as well as an Anthem, if not even better, and has more travel for getting down again. I own an Anthem, and the Pivot is the only FS bike I've ridden since I got it that gave me a bad case of the "I wants" after a demo. Much too expensive for me, mind!

I've ridden most suspension designs available, and the Maestro is up there with the best. The things making your trance feel slower ton the climbs will be weight, get a fast tyre on the rear and drop the weight of your components if you want to go faster, and plug a 140mm stiff fork up front with a through axle.

Where in Scotland are you riding, and what type of terrain?

By a country mile the Turner implementation is the best feeling design I've ridden. Well worth seeing if you can try one out for comparison. Its the kind of bike you can build up heavy so it descends very very well, but pedals a hell of a lot lighter.

Sorry but weight is a red herring. I've got a 20lb ish XC hard tail and a 30lb ish full suss AM bike and the AM bike climbs brilliantly, you can't feel the extra weight at all. For the OP coming from road riding I'd say go for a 29er for starters, it will feel more like a road bike in terms of pedaling and climbing efficiency. I would say look to something like a Transition Bandit 29. I've got the Covert which is more DH orientated, but still climbs very well, but the Bandit will be an even better climber.

Make sure you test ride a Stumpjumper - best bike I've owned. I'm not saying its the best bike out there but for me climbs brilliantly and descends with ease.

Stick with the trance.. That is already the answer to what you are looking for... the weakest link is most always the human... only that can top this climbing with bit confidence going down is anthem with 120mm setup... Stumpy fsr are good choices too..

Lapierre

+1 Lapierre

Zesty. More confidence inspiring which is key to the op.

I've found nothing better than my 575 in this respect. However I refuse to test ride a Specialized Epic 29er for this exact reason. I reckon thats the ultimate weapon out there at the moment.

lapierre wouldn't be on my list as sell on price is going to be hit hard by the fact that they wont sell spares to anyone but the original owner!

i got a rocky mountain alititude 50 love it climbs like a goat 140mm travel all round with lockouts! and its done everything i threw at it!, but also on my list was the norco sight 3 it came down to personal pref but the norco won trail bike of the year 2012!

http://www.evanscycles.com/products/norco/sight-3-se-2013-mountain-bike-ec043508
£1800 seems a good deal on that!

http://www.evanscycles.com/products/norco/sight-killer-b-3-2013-650b-mountain-bike-ec041219
£1900 for the 650b model!

those would defo be in my check list an add to that evans will get them in and you can get 0% for 12 or 24months seems a bargin... but i think my next bike with be the sight killer b 🙂 160mm travel all round 🙂

gl in getting a bike

Can't do quotes, but earlier on in this thread there was a mention about the importance of geometry for climbing ability and some views were expressed that it didn't matter. Well I'm no expert on this but have read and know enough to appreciate that for a full suss bike geometry and rear suspension design is absolutely key to haw well the bike climbs. Things like chain growth and pedal kickback are results of suspension and geometry design that will determine if the bike is a good efficient climber or a bike that will fight you on the climbs and sap your energy. Also the degree of pedal bob is a function of geometry and suspension design.

If you're liking 26" wheels and have DEEP pockets try a Nicolsi Heliys CC, they climb very well and descend very well too.

If 29'er is your preference, an Anthem is the way to go IMHO.

Yeti 575's are also very good and both things your after, as is the Ibis Mojo SL.

For something I haven't ridden/owned, hmmm, those Canyons look good VFM

Any bike with wheels and brakes that isn't from Argos or Tesco. Because, believe it or not, a bike is a completely inanimate object and it will only do what you make or inadvertently allow it to do.
If you're looking within a similar price category and with similar components, they will all be more than capable with a capable rider.

For climbing? OK, I understand that you need to keep the front wheel on the ground, but beyond that it seems as though the front end geometry is more about descending than climbing and pretty much every bike these days seems to have something close to a 73 degree seat angle.

Exactly as mike said, go and ride a few with different geometry and you'll understand what I'm saying. There is no panacea, everything is a compromise so you need to end up with something with climbs and descends acceptably. Suspension designs behave very differently, so try as many as you can get your mitts on. I'm a huge VPP fan, but I understand that it's a bit marmite and not for everyone.