- 160mm – Master of none?
Not really. You will find YOUR limits way faster.
Absolutely. How many times have you sat in an uplift with a few riders on killer DH machines, only to watch them mince and be overtaken at warp speed by the kid on a 1999 Kona Stinky?
Most UK tracks don’t really challenge full on DH bikes and don’t need the 10″ tanks that people ride (with a couple of exceptions obviously). I include myself in that, I had a Cove Shocker which was utterly amazing, but I genuinely don’t think i’d have been much slower on a low slung enduro, my skills just don’t let me get full tilt out of a big DH bike.
For me, something with DH geo and around 7″, built up well, is great for most UK tracks I’ve ridden.Posted 4 years agoEuroMember
when i get a bit older and stop the bigger stuff i will more than likely get a 29er
Stumpy Evo here and it’s extremely versatile. It’s no dh bike, but as long as you remember to take it steady (to be fair – if you forget, the bike soon reminds you) it’s great. Eager to climb and so much fun to squirt about on. Nothing to stop you building a chunky 160 if you really want to use it a a dh bike, that will be still be reasonable to climb on. The problem you will have is deciding which bike to buy. If your fav doesn’t have a dropper, budget for one. They really make sense on this type of bike.Posted 4 years agomindmap3Member
Peterfile – totally agree. When I lived in Sheffield, a fair of the Wharncliffe locals chopped in Demo’s etc for smaller SX Trails. They weren’t much slower either.
I bit more squish does give a bit more confidence for lesser riders, but modern 140 – 160mm bikes are amazingly competent on some pretty big / rough stuff.Posted 4 years agodanjthomasMember
Perfect timing on this post. im considering a 150-160mm bike at the moment.
Ive sat on a nukeproof mega TR (nice), a commencal meta SX2 (OTT), a stumpjumper evo (same a mega) and an enduro comp (nice)
My favourite was the enduro and im probably gonna try it again tommorow. it felt the same as the stumpy but slightly slacker.
The best thing of all is that all bikes except the commencal felt lighter than the Gary Fisher roscoe i have now which climbs well.Posted 4 years agovondallySubscriber
interesting thread and cookea has it right imho focus on
quality of the suspension and travel…..had 160mm bikes that have blown through their travel on the slightest bump through and wallopy lumps…….through to sprightly overweight whippets. Try the different designs as all are not equal, so turner dw link did not work for me compered to horst link, orange single pivot vs yeti linkage single pivot (sure their is a better description)
know what to do with your suspension….some of my problems was the lack of understanding on what does what……air shocks are wonders of the bike world still would rather have coil personally
weight …well had 35 lbs bikes that were better climbers than my xc bike in some situations (Titus Supermoto vs Yeti asr sl) BUT a 36lb bike will wear you down at some point….
Remember every STW will be in love/recommend what they have…. :wink:…I sold my 7 inch Yeti as it was not getting any use, it was a wonderful bike pedalled wonderfully, great angles and suspension with coil riding the same trails on a 120mm/100 29er not much light 3 lbs possibly but really enjoying it.
160mm bikes are wonderful but as said above alps were ridden on 71/73 degree 135mm stem with 560mm flat bars with 80mm front suspension suspension, 1.8 tyres hardtails.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘160mm – Master of none?’ is closed to new replies.