[Closed] Struggling to find a 130mm 650b full sus

Could run a Nukeproof Mega TR at 130mm

I really like the look of this though it's a smidge under 130mm

http://www.santacruzbikes.co.uk/bantam/

I think Boardman do a 130mm FS, spec is basic but it retails for about 1k new and the frame/geometry looks great for trail riding...ripe for a choice upgrades too which is always fun!

Man have you seen the Orange Whyte in the flesh? It's great!
Suppose you could try saving a bit more, and buy the boringly coloured SCR version.

Why worry about whether it's 120, 130 or 140? Not trying to be flippant, but how it rides is probably more important than the exact numbers.

My FSR is 140mm, but rides really efficiently - a lot better than a mates Whyte E-120 that has 120mm travel.

How about the new Norco Sight that was on the news pages of STW a week or so ago. Looks lovely & just a whisker over £2k.

Here:
http://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/fresh-goods-friday-223/
but it's 140mm travel.
Would be on my shortlist....

I would say that 10mm isn't going to be what makes the difference.
The [i]purpose[/i] of the bike is going to be what makes one ride different to another.
There are good solid trailbikes that have both 120mm and 140mm and ride similarly.

I see no reason to discount all 120mm bikes from your search. It's only a cm less travel, and there are more prevalent factors which will influence how the bike feels.

EDIT: Beaten to it.

It seems quite specific to be looking at 130mm bikes and ruling out 120mm or 140mm bikes - I would have thought that there are 120mm bikes with more bottomless travel than some 130mm bikes and 140mm bikes which climb/handle better than other 130mm bikes.

Merida's One Twenty 7.800 is 120mm rear and 130mm front travel. Or, given that there are some deals to be had on Pyga this month, a OneTwenty with a 130mm or 140mm fork might work for you - and I'd challenge you anyone to reach the limits of its travel on terrain suited to a 130mm bike.

EDIT - beaten to it multiple times above!

Loving the Whyte T130 was not keen on the colour but it rides well
[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7511/15938908460_d01033455e.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7511/15938908460_d01033455e.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/qht5by ]10153692_10152994270731474_6633101099459015474_n[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/people/22534490@N00/ ]Richard Munro[/url], on Flickr

Maybe the Whyte is the best option for me. My current full sus is a 100mm 2005 FSR with 115mm Rebas. It feels fast but i often wish i had a little more. The Trek EX8 has some great kit for the money and ive heard very good reviews from people who own them. Just not sure if i'll regret sticking to a short travel full sus rather than 130mm.

Has anyone ridden either the Whyte or Trek?

[i]Is it me or is there a lack of 130mm bikes out there? The market seems to have lots of 120mm then jumps to 140/150mm. [/i]

Probably because they all weigh the same, once passed 120mm, and pretty much cost the same. Look at Whyte 130 vs 150.

Transition Scout is 125 rear/140 front?

Transition Scout is 125 rear/140 front?

I didn't think about less on the rear. I'm guessing i can adjust the travel on Pikes if i needed to?

I'm guessing i can adjust the travel on Pikes if i needed to?

Yes and a set of 150mm Pikes may very well be what's going on the front of our Scout demo bike which just arrived today.

Looking at the bike you're coming from I think you'll be impressed at how capable a good modern mid-travel bike (whether it's 120/30/40 front or rear) is.

The Transition Scout looks great. Geometry is perfect and a tapered head tube so one can fit an angleset if you want it a little slacker. I bet it would be fun with 150mm forks as well.

I'm going to have one.

10mm is some bigger, sqisheyer tyres and thicker soled shoes.
As above, suspension design and geometry will make a lot more difference.

Yeah, the 150mm forks would kick the head angle out a little more though - which might be desirable for some. Either way (140 or 150) the bike is going to be fun, as 10mm makes little difference.

Really really want one of those Transition Scouts, lightweight build (1x10, carbon rims, saddle, bars and Next SL cranks) + a big set of 4 pot brakes and a set of custom tuned Manitou Mattocs from Germany with a titanium spring instead of the air spring and SKF seals....I'd be in heaven!

Time to offer myself up for some clinical trials and risk my life for a bicycle and science. 😆

The Transition does look fun. I ride Xc most the time but trips to Trail centers are more frequent now than before. As the Transition, Trek and Whyte are similar prices what would be some genuine reasons not to go for either one?

I'm a big fan of Transition bikes so +1 for the Scout but also take a look at PYGA, I think they have 130mm ish bike.

what would be some genuine reasons not to go for either one?

Bikes that look similar on paper can feel very different when you ride them. eg a few years back when I was demoing bikes, the Trek Fuel EX felt very stable and composed almost a bit boring as it was so composed. While the Transition Bandit felt very fun making me want to pop off any little feature I could use as a kicker. I liked both bikes but the fun nature of the Bandit really appealed to me. but ... might not be everyones cup of tea.

A reason to go for the whyte is the frame bearing warranty that you don't get with most brands.

Geometry, the Transition has the most progressive geo out of the lot, it's slacker and judging purely on the numbers it will give you a more sat in the bike feel - with a long top tube combined with shorter stems to get the same reach. It also has a shorter chainstay meaning it could be easier to manual etc. Basically, I don't think you will have any excuses on the downs with this bike.

The Trek is very steep and kitted out with poorer suspension.

The Whyte is a bit better than the Trek geo wise, but still bleh.

However, like anything, geometry is open to preference and bikes can ride differently than their geo suggests (usually to do with the rear suspension kinematics - ie some bikes have a livelier ride because of the leverage rate and suspension tune) - I prefer having fun on the downs and the Transition is the most gravity oriented bike of the lot. Looking at the reviews it delivers a lot of confidence on the downhills, so I'm going to have to go and swing a leg over one.

In case you can't tell though....I am totally biased. Try riding them.

I wouldn't discount a bike because it's +/- 10mm travel or even 20mm for that matter.

For xc and trail riding, 120mm with the right geo. will feel every bit as quick as a 140mm with less desirable angles.

I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference in travel unless you start pointing it down techy downhill sections of trail, at which point you'd be wanting more than an extra 10mm anyway so don't get hung up on travel.

Have a few more test rides, try the Norco fluid, then the Norco sight. I suggest these two because they have similar geometry, are both designed for trail use, though the later more so than the former, but have 20mm difference in travel.

Oh, and I ride a Norco fluid-120mm travel, which I find is spot on for trail riding and love it, sure if I have a day at Aston Hill I curse it all the way to the bottom and wish for another 80mm travel, but I do it once or twice a year so wouldn't buy a longer travel bike just for that. That said, if I had the chance i would have given the Sight a go as well, would have noticed the difference if not taking components into account, I strongly suspect not,

Thanks for all the info guys. The trickiest thing for me is I a bit out of touch with current tech. I only got back into riding a few years ago. And last year really got back into it. I guess my riding style is Mostly XC but not scared of hitting stuff and getting the wheels off the ground but nothing big. Short chainstays appeal to me because I'm short and struggle to get enough weight back to manual properly.

The scout looks ace and is getting good early reviews. I have a bandit which is SO much fun going down and climbs great too, if the scout is better (as transition claim!) it must be super fun.

I too demoed a trek fuel, it felt like a boring lifeless bus compared to the bandit
(Biased obviously!)

No worries. Understandable that it's tricky to know what you want - TBH it's tricky to keep up with things in the bike industry when it's your full time job, let alone if you've been away from riding for a while.

Best advice I can give you is test ride as many bikes as you can. You'll know what works for you by riding it, far more so that the spec or geometry on a screen can tell you - especially so if it's a new bike.

If you're ever headed towards mid Wales give us a shout and come and try some bikes here - or just swing by for a look around and a brew.

I've ridden both the Whyte T-130s and the Trek Ex8 650b.

The Whyte is a much better bike to ride. The shorter back end invites you to chuck the bike around, alot! I'd been looking at a little drop off on my local loop for a while. I was that comfortable on the bike I hit it on the first loop. The new Rockshox Debonair shock is super smooth, small bumps and big hits are all soaked up perfectly. The geometery is spot on, as you'd expect for Whyte. I was a little apprehensive of the new Sram brakes, but they're great too.

The Trek on the other hand was very dissapointing, the Fox CTD forks weren't great last year and I really can't see the difference this year. The DCRV shock is great at small and big hits, but now the Debonair shock is just as good. So no advantage there.
It felt heavy and clumbersome, much harder work on the climbs. No feedback on the descent did little to inspire you to pin it.

The decider for me was that the Whyte has a Dropper post as standard and as already mentioned above, lifetime warrenty on the bearings.
Once I've sold my FatBike I'll be ordering mine.

just need to find somewhere that can get the Whyte for me to try in North Kent.

10mm is some bigger, sqisheyer tyres and thicker soled shoes.
As above, suspension design and geometry will make a lot more difference.

This. You're nuts to limit your choices to 130mm. Some 150mm bikes with crap leverage rates feel like 130mm.

Geometry, the Transition has the most progressive geo out of the lot,

Indeed but - as is often the case these days - it also has a steep seat angle, so you need to get on with that, which I don't. Not too bad if you can fit a layback post but none of the current droppers have layback yet so... The Whyte is slacker is this respect (SA).

Canyon spectral?.

I've looked at canyon but keep hearing about poor after sales. The Transitions geo may be too aggressive for most my riding so swaying towards the Whyte still but still open to other recommendations.

You're nuts to limit your choices to 130mm. Some 150mm bikes with crap leverage rates feel like 130mm.

Boardman FS Pro has RS Rev fork, Monarch shock, SRAM 2x10 X9 gears, Elixir brakes. £1600.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/intense-spider-pro--review-2015.html

Just to throw something else into the mix. It's rare that I go weak at the knees for a full suss bike bike this does it for me.

mjsmke

A fair point but that sounds like im better off on a good 130 bike than a poorly designed 150.

Or, you're better off on a good 150mm bike than a poorly designed 130mm bike 😀

As many others have said geometry will make a much bigger difference than 10mm of travel. So don't get hung up on millimeters of travel, tt length, cs length, head angle and seat angle will be the biggest factors in how the bike feels.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/intense-spider-pro--review-2015.html

another one with a time trial-esque seat angle.

Not too bad if you can fit a layback post but none of the current droppers have layback yet so...

Specialized Command Post has some layback I think. At least the old models did.

I gather you have seen the reviews on the new Intense Spider Pro - to add to your shopping list

I really like the look of that Intense. Why does the cheapest option have 150mm while the more expensive versions have 130mm?

I've never been keen on the Boardmans. They are great value for money but working for Halfrauds in the past made me aware of how flex those frames were (they might be better now).

Favourites so far:

Whyte T130 - Seems to be a good all rounder
Intense Spider 275 - depends on budget/spec
Commencal Meta Trail - something about keeps making me look at it
Transition Scout - May not be ideal for Mostly XC

Thanks for all the info so far!

Nothing to suggest but I'd have to say the last thing to choose is wheel size, open your options up and get the bike that does what you want.

mjsmke - Member

I really like the look of that Intense. Why does the cheapest option have 150mm while the more expensive versions have 130mm?

[url= http://www.evanscycles.com/products/norco/sight-carbon-74-2015-mountain-bike-ec073041 ]NorcoSight?[/url]

[img] [/img]

http://www.tweekscycles.com/bikes/650b-27-5-mountain-bikes/gt-bicycles-sensor-elite-alloy-27-5-full-suspension-mountain-bike-2015

mjsmke - do a search for ''Whyte G150 or Orange 5'' and ''Whyte T129 or Whyte T130'' - lots of useful info about the T130.

Here is what I wrote today on one of the above: -

I have done a few more rides on my T130 works and it continues to impress. The other day, me and a couple of mates did W2 at Afan (44km, combining The Wall and Whites Level trails). I’ve done both of those trails a few times, but they really do show what the bike is capable of. It climbs well – pedal efficiency is top notch, but the rear end is plush enough to make climbing up technical, rocky sections a breeze. The front end does feel fairly light for a trail bike, so I did find myself leaning forward a fair bit on steeper climbs, but no problem with that.

On the steeper, faster and more demanding descents, it copes well, launching off lips and steps etc. The suspension at both ends is so so good – plush, supportive and stiff. But it also bails you out on occasion when you hit a dodgy line. I use all the travel but it’s sufficient on the whole and it’s rare I am left wishing for more. It definitely feels a bit twitchy at times on the steepest, roughest sections (and it’s compounded slightly by not being able to slam the saddle quite as far as I’d like given the 19” seatpost). Not in an unmanageable way, but I definitely find myself reigning it in slightly. It’s on those sections that my mate on his Orange Alpine 160 tends to let off the brakes and edge ahead. But some of that is down to rider skill!

Where it really excels is when the downward gradient is moderate. It’s planted, lively, poppy, stiff and playful. It absolutely tears round banked corners and can be slalomed between alternating corners with ease. The more moderate, twisty, rocky descents of Afan can be blasted on this bike. Considering that the majority of most standard trails is ‘moderate’, it’s a pretty ideal bike for the majority of riding. I’m yet to take it to Bike Park Wales (blue and red only), but hoping it doesn’t leave me wishing for more length/travel/slackness.

Contrary to a lot of people’s comments, I’ve found the tyres to be superb. Fast rolling and plenty grip enough for most situations. No, they aren’t mud tyres, but then it’s not often I find myself in gloop to be honest.

Gears and brakes both great.

Still torn about cockpit changes. Have just made do with stock so far. At 5’10”, the stock 70mm stem on size Large frame definitely stretches me out slightly too much, but only just, so I have a renthal Apex 50mm to fit, but concerned it may be a bit cramped then. May have to be 60mm. I’m also planning to get some new bars – either 740mm Renthal fatbar lite carbon, or the Renthal 780mm carbons. Again, 780mm may be excessive for a trail bike. Could trim to 760mm. If they have less backsweep than the stock Whyte bars, then perhaps that 50mm stem will be ok in terms of reach.

But yes, great bike.

Indeed but - as is often the case these days - it also has a steep seat angle, so you need to get on with that, which I don't. Not too bad if you can fit a layback post but none of the current droppers have layback yet so... The Whyte is slacker is this respect (SA).

Why don't you get on with steep seat angles? ❓

Isnt the rationale with a steep seat angle to improve seated climbing and balance out the slacker head angle on these bikes?