[Closed] XC race bikes - is a FS much better?

All I can say is that I love my Spesh Epic as a race bike! I find the rear travel just takes the harshness out and adds grip, but stays light. And it climbs so well, particularly on the rough stuff!

Like you say it's the ability to sit and spin over rough terrain that's the biggest advantage. There's probably not much difference in speed when the trails point downhill. The lockout on my Scalpel Si makes it completely rigid like a hardtail so the only downside is the additional weight.

I'd say so, just look at the WC, unless it's almost non technical or the climbs are not rooty they're all on bikes with a bit of rear bounce

After Sundays efforts i'd say definitely, i still feel like someone was kicking me in the arse for 6 hours, the riders on FS bikes seemed a bit more comfortable overall.

Tricky one.

It’s very, very course dependent.

Sundays Vittoria Marathon would have been very doable on a HT. On the other hand the Gorrick Breakouts on a super twisty & very bumpy course might be better on a FS.

If I had 2 XC race bikes (I’ve only one - an Intense Sniper) the FS would get used more than the HT. But HT definitely has its place..

It’s very, very course dependent.

That.
.
I've gone from a 21LB full suss,carbon, 4" of travel, to a 20LB titanium HT, and I find the HT suits me better.
Not a direct comparison as I went from 26 to 29 in the process too but there were still courses where my 26 HT was faster than my 26 FS.
However, I do 24hr races and these tend to be less techy than short XC races.

As said earlier - it isn't really the tech descending where it makes a difference. It is the bumpy flat pedally slog bits.

I'd say so.

I don't want to race, but I do a lot of cross country - particularly on Canal Towpaths.

I love my Cotic Soul, but I'm sure a short travel full suss would be much faster(and batter me less).

I'm looking for an Orbea Oiz frame, so I can build up as I like.

Also when reading about it and looking at different bikes - like you said, all racers are on short travel full suss, but apparently, a fair few are switching to 120 over 100.

Well anyone on a new Scott Spark is, not sure about the rest. There's a few like VdP who run a Fox 34SC set at 100mm, basically 'cos he's a huge (for a pro Cyclist) power house, also the new SID have larger stanchions too.

Having done a few races this year it's certainly a course dependent thing but on rough twisty stuff I find I'm sprinting on smooth sections and free wheeling rough stuff when someone on a full suss can sit and pedal smoothly.

I mean the tracks I'm racing aren't technical - but even long lumpy uphill grass drags leads to me being chucked about in the saddle (and so losing rythym).

Unless the solution here is that I just have to stand up and mash through those sections - I realise xc racing is mostly an hour's interval session, but I can't help but feel I'd be a lot more efficient if I could put out a consistent effort. Feels a bit like being on flat pedals!

A sniper looks lovely (I adored my spider), but it's a whole pound heavier than a spark frame only and you can't lock the rear.

Maybe this is just a stealth 'i want a new spark' ad plus some bloke justification.

I guess it may also depend on expectations and results.

E.G if you're finishing 40th out of 50 or 41st on the other bike, does it matter ?

If it's the difference between 5th and 3rd... then maybe it matters more.

Maybe this is just a stealth ‘i want a new spark’

Me too, however even my lbs owner says I can't have one!!!

One of the bike mags covered FS vs HT on one of the 24hr races around 20 years ago.
IIRC, all but one of the laps with 4 riders was faster on the FS. I do recall that most riders thought they were going slower on the FS, but when seeing the times,were faster than HT.

yes and i have one for sale in the bike forum section - trek supercaliber.

@anagallis_arvensis

You know you have a problem when......

my lbs owner says I can’t have n+ one!!!

🤣

Was looking wistfully at Nick Craig's new Spark RC at Monmouth National XC event weekend before last. Very nice...

Is a light modern xc FS any better? Something like a spark RC? Just musing that I could get one and probabaly sell my evil following as well.

Ironically, the bike that changed my riding so much for the better only a few years ago was my V1 Evil Following, and I always said that if it lost a couple of lbs and they steepened the seat angle a few degrees, it would make a very capable XC/Marathon bike... Looking at the geometry charts, and how close the 2022 Spark is to the 2015 Evil Following, it seems like somebody at Scott was listening to me! 😂

FWIW - I recently picked up an Orbea Oiz, albeit the TR 120mm travel version. I'm coming from a rigid Solaris, it's my first FS bike and my first time riding a suspension bike properly in a few years

Couple of surprises - how comfortable it is on rooty or rutted descents, and how much traction there is on some of the slightly techy climbs, particularly as I can just sit and spin. Definitely having more pedal strikes though

One of the bike mags covered FS vs HT on one of the 24hr races around 20 years ago.
IIRC, all but one of the laps with 4 riders was faster on the FS. I do recall that most riders thought they were going slower on the FS, but when seeing the times, were faster than HT.

And lets be honest, the shock technology 20 years ago was shite, so I can certainly imagine there'd be a bigger difference now.

And lets be honest, the shock technology 20 years ago was shite

Au contraire... Shock technology has hardly moved on in 20 years, they all still operate in pretty much exactly the same way that they always have, just with a few refinements.

Our understandings of suspension design, what's important, leverage ratios, anti-squat, and dare I say it, but the geometry of the frame that all of it is attached to, has increased dramatically in 20yrs though, and that has been by far the biggest improvement in full suspension bikes in that time...

Even if shock technology hasn't moved on, the Oiz for example has 3 position setting for the suspension on the bars, from open, medium or locked out. I don't think bikes had that 20 years ago.

I have both, and are both used as much as each other, the main difference being if somethings are rougher and more technical climbing i go for FS, one thing i have noticed on my new FS which is a scott spark RC world cup axs is the forks which are the 35mm sid ultimates at 110mm travel, they are a big step up from normal 32mm sids on decents

35mm sid ultimates at 110mm travel, they are a big step up from normal 32mm sids on decents

Good to hear, if only I could buy some...

If we are talking XC racing then look how much the top riders spend out of the saddle even on their short travel full sus race bikes.

I feel like the full sus benefit is grip in really technical climbs and descents. Not comfort as such or ability to stay seated. Sure you can but it isn't the fastest way to ride a full sus in that terrain either.

If it is flatter and just a bit bumpy then get out the saddle, slightly bigger gear, maybe slightly lower cadence depending. A full sus doesn't magically stop those horrible lumpy sections become a magic carpet- you'll still lose momentum and feel the impacts if you are sat down like a sack of spuds.

I'd say weight and cost is an important factor. My XC bike is rigid and very light. I'm very light too so the weight saving for the bike and myself combined is a significant percentage. OK its not as fast on the rougher stuff, but I'm so much faster on a lighter bike. If I was a heavier rider I'd choose full sus over a few kg wight saving.

I could build a full sus xc bike that's the same weight or maybe even lighter but they are all over 9k. My rigid xc bike was 1.2k.

The most amazing XC performance I've personally seen, is Steve Day, at Mountain Mayhem. Won the Solo, with many more laps than our team.

Complete light weight, rigid single speed. He just picked it up, and ran up the hills.

Complete light weight, rigid single speed. He just picked it up, and ran up the hills.

Interesting. Ive seen a couple of rigid single speeds at the 24/12. Riding 12 solo this year and usually use my Whyte T130. Might try my On One Whippet this year. Pace will be slow due to the duration so think the lighter bike will really help me.

I'd say so provided you are comparing level of bike, not budget. It might be a different story if you are spending £1000 and that is on either a HT or FS. But if you are dangling the same bits off a different frame the FS will be faster. More traction over the bumpy stuff. Easier on the downs. Able to stay seated for more of the course. Let the bike do some of the work in place of the legs.

It might shock younger members that the same question was posed when front suspension started to appear, some(me) didn't adopt immediately, similar things were said, having front shocks didn't 'feel' faster, some even said it was cheating, but obviously times were quicker so resistance was not realistic.
If times matter on gnarly stuff FS has to be, getting beaten to death is draining and that effects times, and grip is more energy efficient, but I'm heartened that a balance has maybe been reached where old XC trails still play a part and hard tails still have a place, take the time out of it and I'd argue they can be more fun even if that is derived from a bit of highly skilled death avoidance.

I used to do the occasional XC race for fun 15 to 20 years ago. This was back when the GravityDropper was new and rim brakes were still normal.

I always found that I was faster overall on a suspension bike (Giant NRS) because I could stay seated and keep pedaling. However, I was never more than a reasonably fit amateur, so younger, fitter riders could probably handle sprinting out of the saddle a lot better than me. It will depend on the trail though - if it's a very smooth fire-road climb with an nice smooth descent, I would be quicker on a hardtail. The rougher the trail, the more benefit you get from suspension, especially pedaling over fast rough sections. Back then, the hardtail or rigid advocates insisted that the suspension sucked the energy out of them and that the one time they tried a suspension bike, it "felt slow". Really, the only way to tell is to get a stopwatch (Strava now, obviously), and systematically compare where different bikes and setups are faster or slower. How a bike feels can be very deceptive. My personal best on the descent on my local training loop did not feel fast, it just felt like I was cruising along not making much effort. That was because the trail was in perfect condition with masses of grip, so going fast didn't feel dramatic. That was on my old NRS, and was about 30 seconds faster than I've ever done that descent on a hardtail (about 6:20 compared with 6:50). That speed comes from braking later and harder over rough sections without the back wheel locking up.

I was also an early convert to ghetto tubeless, wider tyres, and lower pressures. For years, people who had never tried tubeless insisted they didn't see the point and that higher pressures "felt faster" - we're talking about people running 1.95 inch tyres at 40 or 50 psi. They were utterly, flat out wrong about that, but rock hard tyres do feel fast so you can't tell if you don't get a stopwatch out and compare times.

Same with disc brakes - I always found that having brakes that worked consistently was faster, especially when I was tired. To be fair, good rim brakes are fine in the dry, but the supposed disadvantages of disk brakes were nearly entirely imagined. Seems bizarre now, but forums used to full of people insisting that disc brakes were just a marketing fad - kinda like what's happening with roadies now.

Same with dropper posts. As soon as I tried a GravityDropper, I knew I could never go back to a rigid post. To be fair, top XC pro riders might be faster on some courses without a dropper, but I think the majority of riders on any course with some rough sections will benefit from a dropper post.

Ultimately though, the only way to tell is to ride different bikes and compare times. If I could only have one XC race bike without knowing the course, it would be a short travel suspension bike with a 5" travel fork up front. I still have my NRS and a newer 27.5" hardtail. The hardtail is lighter and climbs slightly faster on fire roads, but the NRS is quicker and easier to ride on descents. In a race, I'd still take the suspension bike, despite it being 17 years old now and a bit heavier. (Or more likely, if I was going to race, I'd buy something like an Anthem 29er).

Even if shock technology hasn’t moved on, the Oiz for example has 3 position setting for the suspension on the bars, from open, medium or locked out. I don’t think bikes had that 20 years ago.

My 2005 Trek Fuel EX had this - linked Rockshox Reba and rear shock to a bar mounted remote.

You are all doing nothing for my likely bank balance. Luckily sparks are not available frame only yet (no interest in their builds). What's like a new spark but not a spark? Procalibers are heavy, epics have that stupid brain shock (or no remote lockout), orbeas are still banging out 69.5 Ha's, lux's are 69.5...

What’s like a new spark but not a spark?

That new FS Vitus Rapide looks similar and is a relative bargain.

https://vitusbikes.com/products/vitus-rapide-fs-crx-mountain-bike

^ Vitus Rapide FS?
Cannondale Scalpel or Scalpel SE?
Intense Sniper?
Yeti SB115?

Looks like there is a new Anthem in development too.

Lots of those are meatier trail frames masquerading as xc race frames - no lockout and framesets over 2kg to start.

The rapide looks interesting if I could get it frame only and excise my inherent snobbery.

I’d argue new Anthem, Sniper xc, standard Scalpel and Rapide all fit? That’s 4 out of 5 😃

I’m with you - Rapide frameset would be spot on. Pedals Bike Care we’re doing a similar frame - blue one on their IG.

Are you a large? There's an OIZ frame in the classifieds: https://singletrackworld.com/classifieds/advert/orbea-oiz-large-frame/

If you’re aiming to get a sub 2kg frame weight for a FS frame - be prepared to lighten your wallet. A LOT. At that weight the tech that comes with that ability comes with a price..

^ +1, sub 2kg is going to cost.
In your position, I reckon something like the alu anthem 29er (if you can get one), is a good bet as it is light for an alu frame and is great under pedaling through xc chunder. Then with the savings get a really good wheelset.

Or go all in and get the new blur.

continuity
The rapide looks interesting if I could get it frame only and excise my inherent snobbery.

You mean LIKE THIS 😉 you'll need a shock mind.

Building a light, modern XC FS ain't cheap, or particularly easy due to the fact you can't actually buy anything anyway. Mine is 10.8kg on the and that's a light (sub 2kg) frame that isn't painted, just lacquered, Fox 32 SC, dropper, MT Zoom bars, silly light stem, ESi grips, DT Swiss wheels and full XTR M9100 in a normal size for me at 5'11", it'll drop under 10.5kg when I swap the wheels for the carbon ones I'm waiting to pick up, and even less if I take out the dropper.

I've raced on both the FS and a HT with a very similar spec and while the HT is lighter and quicker on smooth stuff, over any kind of distance the FS is way quicker.

If you're looking at XC racing, why does an XC focussed head angle bother you? You'll be spending more time climbing than descending

Steve_b77 -how are you finding an open mold full suss. I've had an icann hardtail frame for years and its been great... but tempted by a xc open mold full suss

How have the bearings held up etc.. is it stiff enough? I mean for an xc bike...
I have a bigger bike for more silly riding and was tempted by a scott full suspension.. but could not justify the cost for the few races i do a year... but it may be cheaper as a physio may not be required

Sponsored riders have to ride what the sponsor tells them and this thread seems to indicate that it's having the effect that the sponsors are aiming at.