Forum menu
Would anyone consider one? Run it 120 both ends in the UK then a swap of linkage and shock and an air shaft on the forks and you could be looking at a 160 front and rear super sled for the big mountain holiday.
Or, would you rather have a 130 rear, 140 front bike for everything?
25 years ago, I had a mountain bike (before there were sub genres) with two sets of wheels but found I very rarely switched them over.
By the way, all three bikes would weight the same other than the difference in rear shock.
Erm, yes 😔
That bike in longer travel mode doesn't really have any disadvantages than in short travel mode. If you want firmer suspension just increase the pressure
My favourite bike of all the ones I've ever owned was a Turner 6-Pack back in 2005. The only real downside other that being left behind by standards was that it felt like it flattened everything. I just thought any new bike should be shorter travel to feel more engaging.
But you're right, other than a bit of extra fork and shock weight, there's nothing in it.
"Just add more pressure" could possibly be a viable answer. Especially after watching the Vorsprung tech Tuesday videos about how much travel do you need.
SCOR make one like that. But then you’d either need 2x sets of forks and shock, or faff around changing air shafts.
It'd be compromised in one or other of the settings, at 120mm I'd probably want different wheels/tyres as well. Changing all of that isn't an insignificant job so no I'd rather have one bike that did one thing well or one in-between that is only slightly suboptimal in any given situation. I went for an Inbetweeners (Forbidden Druid) and I'd stick with that choice again.
If you simply increase the travel from 120 to something like 160, there will be a few disadvantages for certain riding.
Higher BB
Higher standover
Too much travel for more XC based rides.
They seem to get around this with the change of shock and linkage. The geometry numbers look right for each of the 4 travel versions they sell but all use the same main frame and swing arm.
I've got one: Bird Aeris 9.
Swap the linkage (and spring as it's a coil shock) to switch between 160mm and 180mm rear.
I also have two suitable forks, so I can ride it 160/160, 160/180 or 180/180.
I also have three pairs of wheels, which I switch between my MTBs all the time anyway.
They seem to get around this with the change of shock and linkage.
one thing to check is the reach. They may have sorted all the other geo but can’t get around the size of the front triangle which will rotate forward as you go down in travel.
For me, on the big travel tarvo, the second biggest frame would be about right with 485 reach. Change that same frame to a celos and it has a whopping 509 reach
That's a fair point actually. It's also interesting that the recommended rider height for the two shorter travel frames changes when they become the two longer travel frames.
I mulled this over the other day when someone asked about my new (to me) Escarpe CR (140/150mm) compared to a Mythique (120mm?). But TBH, and compared to bikes a decade ago, pedal like a big bike anyway. A shorter travel bike might be even better but it's well under the threshold of happily riding it all day and standing up to climb.
It's also quite progressive so I've not got into the last 20% of the travel yet so it doesn't feel like it's sanitizing every bit of the fun either.
Thinking back to my Pitch which was the last similar bike I had, by the time I'd got it setup for fun descending it was an absolute dog on the climbs. I was permanently knackered on long climbs, and trying to power through anything technical just caused it to wallow, that bike really needed it's lockout.
Moot as I've now no intention of getting anything else for a long while, but I'd get the 'right' travel for 75% of the time, and accept that there'll be a few Alpine rock gardens you have to comfort brake before you hit, and a few road sections you might have to cruise on all day rides.
I think the question of what it's like to climb is going to be the key. The ones I'm looking at, there's no real weight penalty to longer travel, it's just a question of when it becomes a hindrance on the climb. Then again, that the compromise everyone considers on every bike...
I’d probably get a decent in between bike that’s designed to be good rather than an adjustable bike. Or I’d just get the longer travel bike and use it for everything.