[Closed] Short travel hardtails.......

shame it's all in response to an obvious troll really 😉

I see this trend towards super short chainstays and I'm not convinced they're as easy to ride on gnarly trails, especially in the wet -

Perhaps some troll is necessary to defuse the tension.

It is funny how these threads go.

I agree with everything deviant, TINAS and dragon say. Especially about the rear end being the limiting factor. It stands to reason really. I was happy with 140 forks on my last 26er HT and the rear tyre was surviving, on my first 29er hardtail I was running up against the limitations if its 120mm fork, and my current 140mm HT is fine at the front and its pinch puncture galore on the back end. Seems like at the top end that I can get with the fork, I can't quite manage the back well enough.

I believe the 456-summer season could take short forks and still have a slack HA

I've one of those. No idea what the head angle is but having 36 Talas allowed me to play with the fork length 'til i was happy. At 150mm it was good going straight down stuff but it turned funny especially on flatter corners. This was even more pronounced with Revelations that came with it. 32mm stantions and 150mm travel is a recipe for a shite front end ime. A firm 110mm on the Talas (probably about 90 once i'm on board) is just about perfect for everything and makes the bike fell really tight everywhere. There's a couple of trails that get the 130 treatment, but they are special cases 😀

[img] [/img]

I'm not a fan of XC type hardtails either and have fond memories of the ones I ruined early on with longer forks!

My Switchback is designed around 140m forks and is pretty slack - it feels right at this travel and I wouldn't fancy it with longer forks like a few run. It's got short chainstays too (shorter than a 26 inch BFe despite the bigger wheels) which feel pretty good to me even though I liked the length and stability of my Rune.

I often use the full travel on the forks and never notice the bike feeling squiffy although I don't ride mega steep stuff on it. It's a very capable little bike.

The Slackline that I had previously felt much better with 150mm forks than it did with 130mm forks.

I've had loads of full sus bikes but always end up back on a long travel hadtail after a while for some reason. I know that they're a very UK specific thing but they're ace. There seems to a few other options now like the new Last that looks like it'd be fun.

A bike that is on the edge of instability is very easy to move around and have fun on.

I'm with that, but within reason, as a very unstable bike is very tiring over a long time.

Old school XC bikes are ace, but I doubt there are many around. Even a modern Trek 100mm 29er is way more relaxed than a XC bike from before and definitely not a "crouched low over the front" posture.

Mmmmm. It looks like I'm in a small minority who likes longer 150mm forks on my hardtail (A BFe).

I've ridden shorter travel hardtails, but they feel all wrong (to me) when the trail gets very steep or you start hitting larger bumps and drops at higher speeds. I much prefer the wide bars/short stem/140-150mm fork feeling of the BFe. I know I don't look like it, but I feel like I aspire to riding trails like Jinya does on his Chromag HT around Whistler.

Maybe my main problem is that even reading the term 100mm hardtail makes me think of stretched out XC racing machines completely unsuited to the steeper trails I ride. The last time I tried riding those trails on a shorter forked bike, I was constantly getting thrown over the bars on steep hairpins and switchbacks.

So I really don't understand folks who say that such bikes are only for the retarded. A steel frame, 150mm fork and big, fat, grippy 2.4" tyres is a recipe for loads of fun in my book.

It sounds like you need some riser bars. I used to like 50mm ones; still got em, if you're anywhere near Cumbria you're welcome to them. I always used to find big jumps and drops much more difficult with long forks on the hardtail, I think it's because the front end has so far to compress one take off. Same with anything steep and tech.

There does seem to be a trend towards low/flat bars at the moment aswell, no sure what inspired this, downhill racers maybe? I don't even know whether you can get 50mm risers anymore!

So are you a freestyler or a serious racer dude?

I'm a seriously shit racer dude - does that count? 😉

davidtaylforth

There does seem to be a trend towards low/flat bars at the moment aswell, no sure what inspired this, downhill racers maybe? I don't even know whether you can get 50mm risers anymore!

29ers. 30mm risers are common enough, 20mm spacer will get you there.

There does seem to be a trend towards low/flat bars at the moment aswell, no sure what inspired this, downhill racers maybe? I don't even know whether you can get 50mm risers anymore!

Bigger wheels and burlier forks - for a given travel you're looking at most 27.5 forks being 20mm longer A2C than the 26 fork you'd have used a few years ago. And then the 27.5 wheel lifts the axle by another 12.5mm. And I guess with the improved damping on things like Pikes the fork is generally sitting a bit higher in the travel, so the dynamic fork length is longer still.

All these tougher carcass tyres can only be a good thing for gnarly hardtails - dual ply will still make sense for the rockiest trails and hardest riders but Exo, Protection, Apex, Super Gravity, Double Down should keep the trusty hardtail relevant for hard riding.

Bigger wheels and burlier forks - for a given travel you're looking at most 27.5 forks being 20mm longer A2C than the 26 fork you'd have used a few years ago. And then the 27.5 wheel lifts the axle by another 12.5mm. And I guess with the improved damping on things like Pikes the fork is generally sitting a bit higher in the travel, so the dynamic fork length is longer still.

Definitely - I was always in the camp of 50mm risers but my bars have been getting lower and lower - currently running 13mm rider bars with a few spacers as possible. It was the same on the Rune.

Renthal still do 50mm riser I think. The first lower rise bars looked odd at first when I was still on higher rise bars but its now the other way round!

I'd like to try a ltht that's actually designed for long forks just to see what it's like. I've only ever ridden ones designed for short forks which feels way better due to correct bb height, not as divey etc.

@ johnhe - Not dismissing your experience but have you tried the same fork on a frame with geometry genuinely capable of handling 150mm? The BFe IME was not that bike, it was really unstable at 150mm (except on flat terrain) where a Ragley BP with the same fork and components was completely different, much better in all respects apart from quality, weight and looks, not to mention the bone shattering ride BFe frames dish out on rocky descents!

Oh, something else about bar height - if the reach of the bike is shorter then they need to be higher. There's basically two diagonal lines between pedals and grips that determines how you fit the bike. If you increase the reach then you can lower the bars to get the same fit but the head angle needs to be slack enough to put the front tyre well ahead of you so you don't get that falling over the bars feeling.

Shortening the stem helps with this by putting the grips further behind the contact patch (but with the caveat that the bars may need to be higher to fit well). Also, if the BB is lower you can have your bars pretty low before the bike feels too unstable on the steeps.

Wait for the new Orange P7, looks fabulous and by all accounts rides equally well

catvet - Member
Wait for the new Orange P7, looks fabulous and by all accounts rides equally well

I've just had a look; looks like a bit of a brute, probably longer and slacker than some of the downhill bikes from not long ago!

Can't see the point to be honest, it might be quicker downhill than your average hardtail, but if speed is your main convern then just get a full susser. You're missing the point otherwise!

Can't see the point to be honest, it might be quicker downhill than your average hardtail, but if speed is your main convern then just get a full susser. You're missing the point otherwise!

Trolling 101. 😛

Well if you want something like that then there's an awful lot of old steel 26" hardtails that you can stick a 100mm fork on and hit the point - or possibly the ground... 😉

I love hardtails for two reasons:

1. That feedback you get from the unsuspended rear tyre, the way you feel so connected to the trail.
2. Being able to be even lazier with cleaning/maintenance, especially when it's muddy.

I don't really want to ride it differently to my full-sus, or on different trails, or go any slower. The lack of rear suspension inherently makes hardtails more difficult to ride fast and more physically demanding but should save some time uphill and let me fit a bit more descending in. And keep my skills sharper.

At the moment I'm having to squeeze my riding around excessively busy family and work life and it does feel a bit ridiculous commuting (via the trails) on a 160/140mm full-sus!

Have read this thread with interest.

What 29er frames would fit this topic?

Current have some 100mm forks on a Scandal 29er and would like to swap the frame out for something slacker and lower...suggestions?

Have read this thread with interest.

What 29er frames would fit this topic?

Current have some 100mm forks on a Scandal 29er and would like to swap the frame out for something slacker and lower...suggestions?

The new Last frame. Can't remember what it's called but there was a vid on the homepage the other week.

POSTED 3 HOURS AGO #

Parkwood/fireline frame is happy with a set of 100mm forks on. Though I ended up with 120 xfusions: The 100 mm Reba rl just got out of its depth waaaaaay too quickly for my riding style at the golfy.

Yep, My original thought was a Parkwood. But I saw a review somewhere where someone wasn't very impressed and it put me off.

The Last Fast Forward looks great. Full build at around £1250 isn't too bad either

Genesis high latitude: long reach, short stem, midlish head angle*, 100mm forks, top banana.

(*a long reach negates the 'need' for a slack head angle. you get the long wheelbase thing, without the horrible slow-speed handling, imho... )

I'm exclusively ht at present. I don't think slackness = fun. I think as with all things it's a sensible compromise unless you ride uncompromising terrain. A decent bb height (lower) does wonders for how a bike handles. Short travel makes it nimble. As for long wheelbase what do you want you bike to be- do I want stable or fun? For me I just dick about in the woods on some crappy jumps and loads of roots, so I want fun. If I lived in Wales I'd want longer.

I'm exclusively ht at present. I don't think slackness = fun. I think as with all things it's a sensible compromise unless you ride uncompromising terrain. A decent bb height (lower) does wonders for how a bike handles. Short travel makes it nimble. As for long wheelbase what do you want you bike to be- do I want stable or fun? For me I just dick about in the woods on some crappy jumps and loads of roots, so I want fun. If I lived in Wales I'd want longer.

It shows how much of this is personal preference because VH and I ride the same woods and he's taller than me but I ride a bigger slacker bike. I think I prefer a longer slacker more stable bike because it gives me the confidence to push harder and then I have more fun - I'm never going to be the most stylish rider in the world, I suspect the only time I look half decent is when I'm at race pace!

Anyway, I was on the Bird website earlier and noticed their new Zero AM hardtail - it's made for a 150mm fork but I could see from the geometry charts that with an angleset and a shorter fork it would be pretty similar to the frame I was planning to get built. Plugged it into the trust geometry calculator website and I was right! With a -2 deg angleset set and a 130mm Pike the angles are within 1/4 deg, wheelbase/ETT/reach all within millimetres, biggest difference being a 5mm lower BB and 10mm shorter chainstays.

So I've ordered one! 🙂

remind me to have a go when i see you out on it!

out of interest what size is your spitfire? my trance is a large barge and the cracknfail (not living up to teh legend despite me trying hard) is medium (sold the dialled- bb height only slightly lower than eifell tower).

Will do. The Dialled is like my Soul - you can keep pedalling right through corners and over logs! Spitfire is a medium but I think I'd get a large now if I was buying one - though for months it felt huge...

I think I've got too used to the full-sus awesomeness of the Spitfire round here so when I ride gnarlier stuff further afield I don't get the same benefit as when I was used to hardtailing all the time and then got the joy of great rear suspension!

I remember getting into a bit of a slanging match with the OP or maybe GW about it a few years back..

I had a 456 set up with a 100 - 130mm rev fork and used to blat around all over lustleigh cleave (think sweary northerners vids) as happy as a pig in muck.. even managing to keep up with the FS boys on a good day..
I never remembered to wind the fork out from 100mm..

Then I convinced myself that a set of 120/150 dual position revs that I'd seen on ebay were going to revolutionise my riding and I argued long and hard about it on here..

I bought 'em, fitted 'em and fell off on the first techy descent..
Ho hum I thought.. I'm just not used to them, but after a few weeks of riding a divey, unbalanced and frankly dangerous hoof of a bike I took them off again, sold them for a tidy profit and bought a Soul with the proceeds.. (with a 100mm fork on natch)

Soul with the proceeds.. (with a 100mm fork on natch)

That's the spirit!

I've revisited this thread as I need ideas for a new bike.

I'm not sure whether it should be a 650B or a 29er.

Either way, it should be good with forks around the 100/120mm length, 50-70mm stem, lightish, slackish (not daft though), have a short back end.

What's available? I am aware of Cotic, but would prefer something lighter and probably alloy. Not too fussed about a dropper post etc; wanna keep it simple/light/fairly sturdy.

As much as I'd like to, I won't be doing hamsterley table top on it properly. But it'd have to be strong enough to handle smaller jumps and drops like "make or break" at Inners.

Also; cheap to buy. I potentially won't ride this at all and just end up selling it like I did with my last MTB.

Forgot to add; I'm 6'3" so it must be a reasonable size. The large BFe I used to have was a good compromise in size between XC and DH/Jumps. Although I'd probably go for something a bit bigger since DH/Jumps is probably not what I'm gonna end up using it for.

Any ideas?

mboy posted [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/new-ht-christened-today ]this[/url] recently that tickled my fancy in the short travel HT department.

meeeah; can't see the pics at work. But IIRC whyte used to make the sort of thing I was after in a 29er format.

Whilst we're on the subject; WTF have DMR done to the king of hardcore hardtails; the trailstar?!??!?!

[img] [/img]

mboy got a SH Whyte 629 frame and put some nice kit on it. Looks good.

That trailstar on the other hand 😐

That trailstar on the other hand

No chance of clearing hammers table top on that! THe front wheel would've landed before the back had left the take off

At least they kept the original paint job and graphics...