Getting back in the saddle; what’s new?!

https://enduro-mtb.com/en/cannondale-scalpel-se-vs-specialized-epic-evo-test/

Cannondale scalpel SE? Above article compares it to a more reasonably priced version of the Epic Evo.

A light bike, with light tyres, is still going to be a little more preferable to me than a heavy bike with light tyres.

Until you try …

To you. It’s relevant to me. Because it’s about a bike for me. If I’m after something like a Lotus Exige, why recommend a Ford Fiasco or whatever they’re called these days?

Just because they are ‘race focussed’, as you say, doesn’t mean I can’t just ride them on gentle trails, or in Alpine type areas, or indeed anywhere really. I don’t have to race on one.

That’s because we tried them …
my full carbon HT weighs very little as like Molgrips I was bought into the weight weenie…
It doesn’t climb any “better” just faster … except stuff so steep the long stem shifts my weight forwards.. but it does feel like driving an exige over cobbled streets.

It’s also not much “fun” unless its being pushed fast.
Even though its got fast rolling tyres on and I have a 25 mile cycle each way on mostly bridleway/towpath to my “local” trails and its much lighter and …. I still end up taking my modern steel hard tail that I have no idea what it weighs.

You’d think it would be fine on bridleways/towpath but as it’s shared use I can’t ride it at an acceptable speed and it feels like driving an Exige in 1st. (if that makes any sense – i.e. it feels wrong, jerky, unpleasant, out of its environment)

26 and a half pounds without pedals. various levels of spec for different prices.

I’d also suggest when you go look at bikes again, you take a pair of quality scales with you – nothing is ever as light as advertised etc.

You missed off the bit about the 5010 CC where I said for your budget you could probably get it sub 30lbs.

The lightest model is just a fraction under 30lbs. You could have suggested the Blur, which is a lot lighter.

You missed the context – I said if you couldn’t get over the 29er thing and wanted something 27.5 you may have to move a bit more towards trail than down-country. The Blur is a 29er.

Stop feeding the troll.

https://enduro-mtb.com/en/cannondale-scalpel-se-vs-specialized-epic-evo-test/

Cannondale scalpel SE? Above article compares it to a more reasonably priced version of the Epic Evo.

That’s great, thanks. Seems they found the Cannondale better at climbing, but the Specialized to be the better all round bike. It also shows MTB ‘journalism’ hasn’t changed much in all this time! :D But on the basis of that review, I think I’d probably go for the Specialized (the Epic Evo is currently top of my list so far from what I’ve seen).

You missed the context – I said if you couldn’t get over the 29er thing and wanted something 27.5 you may have to move a bit more towards trail than down-country. The Blur is a 29er

No that’s fair enough; my initial misgivings regarding larger wheels seem to be a bit misguided. The early ones I saw and tried, were dreadful. So I’m more than happy to be enlightened about them. Seems all ‘XC’ type bikes now have ’29er’ wheels.

There’s nothing quite so irritating as someone who thinks they’re still an expert, asks for advice from people who know what the current state of whatever it is is, and then ignores any advice that doesn’t match with their outdated views.

Without wishing to continue this pointless argument any further, I’ll just say that regardless of whatever you or anyone else might think, this is actually about me choosing a new bike, not affirming other people’s egos. So if you think you’ve been ‘ignored’, then whatever. Not really my problem. I was MTBing before this forum existed, and probably way before a lot of people on this forum were even riding bikes. I have, as I’ve stated, ridden other bikes during the meantime as well. So, I’m not a totally ignorant newbie. I do have some idea of what I want, and this thread has so far been mostly very helpful. This is about me getting back into riding off road regularly, getting fitter, having fun, exploring and enjoying. My injuries have led to lengthy spells off any bikes, and mean I’m never going to be as fit or strong as I once was. Hence, I want a nice lightweight bike.

Welcome back to mountain biking. Update us next year when you realise you were wrong. Cheers.

You can bask in the warmth of being ‘right’, and I’ll doubtless be enjoying riding a great bike, and having loads of fun, thanks.

“ I was MTBing before this forum existed, and probably way before a lot of people on this forum were even riding bikes.”

I’d say I’m younger than the average poster on here and I started MTBing in 1988.

“I have, as I’ve stated, ridden other bikes during the meantime as well. So, I’m not a totally ignorant newbie. I do have some idea of what I want…”

That was my point – you think you’re an expert because you know you’re not a newbie.

I didn’t contribute elsewhere to the thread because it looked like my words would be wasted.

Stop feeding the troll.

To be fair if you’d taken a decade or more off …
Bikes no longer climb based on weight … which is almost the complete opposite of what the bike industry was telling us in the past. It takes actually TRYING it to change (I know it did for me)

It takes actually TRYING it to change (I know it did for me)

I totally get that. As I’ve said several times already; it’s not the best time to be trying stuff out right now. I have tried a few other bikes in the intervening years, I really don’t know how many more times I can say this. I just haven’t ridden regularly, or any bikes for any prolonged periods. I won’t pretend to know how every single bike will ride, but I have enough experience to know that a lightweight bike will be a better bike for me, thqn heavier one. It’s simple physics. I’m not going to be doing EWS/Megavalance type stuff, so I don’t need an ‘enduro’ bike. So; something like the Specialized Epic Evo, would be a better fit than say the Stumpjumper.

I started MTBing in 1988.

So did I. I have no idea or interest in whose dad’s the biggest.

“I have enough experience to know that a lightweight bike will be a better bike for me, thqn heavier one. It’s simple physics”

You don’t and it isn’t. All your data points are based on outdated geometry, suspension, tyres, and wheels. Simple physics will show you that variances in bike weights are insignificant unless at the sharp end of competition where fractions of seconds can win races. Complex physics, biomechanics and physiology will show you that other aspects of bikes are more important than weight.

If weight was as important as you think then we’d all still be riding 26″ wheels with skinny tyres.

Ok. I can’t be bothered responding to trols any longer. But to get an idea of what I’m after, have a look at Spekkie’s thread here:

Buying and renovating a rural property on the Spanish side of the Pyrenees

I found this far more helpful and informative, than any of the waffle about how people think I’m ‘wrong’:

Having been here for a while now, I’ve learned what I can do and what I can’t do on my Specialized Epic. It generally copes with everything I want to ride here, including the “easier” Enduro trails. I avoid the descents on the Black routes – the geometery of an XC bike just makes them too tricky – but pretty much everything else is do-able. If I come across a section I can’t do, I’m happy to jump off for a few secs. I’d rather do that and still ride most of a route than not ride the route at all. One day I’ll fit a dropper-post and that will help me along I’m sure. Also, I’m one of those people who enjoys climbing, and the XC bike is great to ride on the climbs

You don’t and it isn’t. All your data points are based on outdated geometry, suspension, tyres, and wheels.

This. Really this. Its what you know from BITD, but you have no basis of comparison for modern stuff as compared. Your metrics are skewed but you dont know it.

Its a bit weird that you asked for advice, presumably because you feel you’re out of touch a bit, and then refute the advice you sought based on 20 year old knowledge.

Still. Its a free world.

I’m kind of with @bridges here. It may be the case that a heavy modern bike is faster in some circumstances. But unless you are racing (in a race that involves those circumstances) how fast it is is irrelevant. What matters is how it feels. And to me, lighter bikes feel better. My Jeffsy was massively improved by removing the stupidly heavy OE tyres and fitting some Nics, so it now weighs a shade over 26lbs which isn’t bad for a bike with 140mm of travel. Even my XTC was improved beyond all recognition by swapping the OE Giant wheels for a ZTR Crest wheelset. It’s a bit ridiculous putting so much effort and generating so much angst telling bridges he’s wrong, he knows what he likes and that’s up to him. Obviously I’m wrong too, but I do wonder why you are all so defensive about your boat anchors.

Obviously I’m wrong too, but I do wonder why you are all so defensive about your boat anchors.

Curious. Many of us have learned that weight isn’t as important as we thought it was, we’ve said so on a thread where advice was specifically sought and you think thats defensive?

Thats some impressive doublethink right there.

For sure weight is important, but it doesn’t sit at the top of the list of priorities like it once did.

I suppose case use is a major player here too, but the capability of modern bikes has even shifted what we used to think was possible on a bike.

If you want to potter along on skin wall Nics with Crests along basic terrain at moderate speeds and it stands up to your type of riding, then thats all well and good, but in that case you could go a lot lighter with a modern gravel bike and big tyres. I’m not sure if its been mentioned in this thread already, but the general feeling is that gravel is now what 90s and early 2000 mtb used to be.

I can tell you from my own experience of those components that if I rode that build I would either have unsatisfactory grip from excessive pressure, or pinch flats on the first ride. In 29er mode the Crests would be too flexible and they’d have flat spots inside of 2 weeks.

Curious. Many of us have learned that weight isn’t as important as we thought it was, we’ve said so on a thread where advice was specifically sought and you think thats defensive?

The OP described what he wanted, and described his expected usage which would be absolutely fine with any of the bikes in that Pinkbike XC/DC group test – most of which are sub-25lbs. Yet most people on this thread continued to insist that a 30+lb bike was what he wanted – because that was what they rode. That’s why I think people are being defensive.

I don’t think anyone has insisted on anything, merely tried to explain that weight is not as big a deal it used to be considered – something that the OP clearly doesn’t want to accept.

People are trying to be helpful.

The question now of course, is if the OP already knows what they want, why did they ask for advice in the first place?

🤔

the bikes in that Pinkbike XC/DC group test – most of which are sub-25lbs

All but 2 were over the OPs budget too, double in some cases. Those that sneaked in budget are right at the top of his weight criteria. The cheaper, but heavier, versions of those would serve equally well.

And they were all 29ers.

IF the OP is a smaller gent, I can understand why he feels that a lighter bike is better for him personally. Makes sense.

The only thing I’ll say about weight is that parts these days are now much much better at actually being parts for a mountain bike, rather than parts that are really for a different sport (road riding) that we were sold as mountain bike parts, because everyone was slightly obsessed by weight, as used to be the case.

They’re mostly better lasting because they have more heaft and strength to them which adds to the overall weight a bit. Plus side is you don’t have to replace endless broken bits of bike, forks don’t feel noodley, bigger wheels roll better, carry more speed etc . Downside (as I think you’re discovering); sub 25lbs bikes are relatively thin on the ground these days.

Hope you find what you’re looking for

I’ve been riding various different versions of the same full suss bike since 2006 and even though the current one is probably 8lbs heavier it is better in every single way. Don’t ask me how as I put it down to witchcraft long ago but my bike is a superb climber, much better than the earlier, lighter bikes and much more comfortable. Used to worry about saving weight, don’t worry now.

Don’t think there’s anything wrong with going ultra light OP, it’s just that you will struggle to get a bike as light as you want with a geometry that will suit your intended use. You talk about lack of fitness and previous injuries but intend to buy a race style bike that is much less forgiving, less comfortable and harder work than something a little bit heavier. You will get tired much quicker on the race style bike and that seems to be the bit you are missing.

Anyway, you seem to know what you want so good luck. One thing you should defo not go down the ‘light at all costs’ route is tyres though. Make sure you do your research and buy ones that suit what you will be riding rather than what the pro XC riders use. Proper tyres, regardless of a few 100g here or there make a huge difference.

On the tyre front it sounds like some kind of exo casing thing might work well. Nothing too aggressive or heavy or draggy, but equally not too puncture prone.

I’d probably look at something like a Forekaster front / rekon rear as an allrounder combo. I tend to ride more aggressive tyres but I’ve been impressed by the Forekaster on the back of my hardtail and the new dissector on the back of my full suss seems to roll pretty well whilst finding surprising grip in mud.

I think the Transition Spur is peak down-country but you’re paying a lot for the transition name. I’d imagine your £6k would get a lot more (and lighter) YT Izzo based on higher spec components.

I’d imagine your £6k would get a lot more (and lighter) YT Izzo based on higher spec components.

Top model is €6500, and 26.4lbs. Second down is €5200, and 26.7lbs. Proper marginal gains.

6k USD Spur is 24.7 lbs

. It may be the case that a heavy modern bike is faster in some circumstances.

THE OP isn’t interested in faster … indeed if he was then we’d be probably be saying the sub 25lb bikes.

The OP described what he wanted, and described his expected usage

Yep they want a F1 car that is comfortable driving round town and offroad.

You talk about lack of fitness and previous injuries but intend to buy a race style bike that is much less forgiving, less comfortable and harder work than something a little bit heavier. You will get tired much quicker on the race style bike and that seems to be the bit you are missing.

Exactly this … he’s looking at a category of bikes that have a single race purpose. Comfort is not a consideration, the only consideration is how fast they climb against a stopwatch with a very fit rider and if they have to pick the bike up and carry it that’s part of the test.

Non race specific bikes on the other hand just get you there slower… but with less fatigue and effort.

but I do wonder why you are all so defensive about your boat anchors

I don’t know when it becomes a boat anchor .. I haven’t weighed the last few bikes anyway as I’m more bothered about how well they climb when not being ridden by an Olympic athlete in a race!

One thing that’s changed over the years is what ‘general trail’ means.

Years ago it meant whatever paths were out there in the countryside. But for some reason, now ‘trail’ means fairly technical stuff that the locals have built in the woods.

The OP seems to want what used to be a ‘trail’ bike which has now been tentatively branded ‘Downcountry’. This means a bike that’s for cross-country but isn’t an XC race bike. So it’s got a bit more travel, and is a bit slacker but a lot more comfortable and better to handle on whatever tech you might find. Probably available for under the ‘magic’ 25lb mark if you have enough money.

https://www.mbr.co.uk/buyers_guide/best-down-country-mountain-bikes-398081
https://www.bikemag.com/gear/mountain-bikes/short-travel-shenanigans/

Of these, the Kona Heihei seems to be spot on:

…nothing is ever as light as advertised…

Going back to the original question in the thread title, I thought @bridges was asking what had changed…? ;)

The OP seems to want what used to be a ‘trail’ bike which has now been tentatively branded ‘Downcountry’. This means a bike that’s for cross-country but isn’t an XC race bike. So it’s got a bit more travel, and is a bit slacker but a lot more comfortable and better to handle on whatever tech you might find. Probably available for under the ‘magic’ 25lb mark if you have enough money.

I think Molgrips pretty much nails it here although I’d be surprised if many of the featured bikes come in under 25lb and under 6k.

The troll returns to his lair.

Bloody hell fellas… he gave you a clue in his user name!

I’d be surprised if many of the featured bikes come in under 25lb and under 6k.

The Heihei CR DL is 26.8lbs according to Pinkbike, and he’s a fool if he dismisses that awesome of a bike for the sake of 1.8lbs.

If you want to potter along on skin wall Nics with Crests along basic terrain at moderate speeds and it stands up to your type of riding, then thats all well and good, but in that case you could go a lot lighter with a modern gravel bike and big tyres. I’m not sure if its been mentioned in this thread already, but the general feeling is that gravel is now what 90s and early 2000 mtb used to be.

Me, 1st page :-)

Obviously I’m wrong too, but I do wonder why you are all so defensive about your boat anchors.

Lol! Some on here would make terrible salespeople, that’s for sure.

THE OP isn’t interested in faster

Oh I most definitely am. Well, faster than a heavy bike, hence why I want a lighter bike. Heavier = more energy required to propel it. It’s simple physics. The aim is to have a bike that’s as light as possible, whilst still being capable. See Spekkie’s description of his Specialized Epic above; that’s exactly the kind of riding I’d be wanting to do, and that bike seems to suit him perfectly for the vast majority of it. So that’s very good to know, that such a bike will be capable. It’s apparently that a sub-20lb bike is out of the question unless I go completely mad, but something around 22/23lbs is more than possible, perhaps even lighter. This is what I’m interested in.

The question now of course, is if the OP already knows what they want, why did they ask for advice in the first place?

I had a rough idea. I now have a much clearer idea. This thread has definitely served its purpose, so I’m grateful to all those who’ve actually bothered to ‘listen’ to me, and understand me. From this thread alone, I’d be much more confident about ordering a Specialized Epic Evo online (if there were any stock anywhere), I’m sure I wouldn’t be disappointed. I will wait and try some though, as I think that’s a much better course of action.

The OP seems to want what used to be a ‘trail’ bike which has now been tentatively branded ‘Downcountry’. This means a bike that’s for cross-country but isn’t an XC race bike. So it’s got a bit more travel, and is a bit slacker but a lot more comfortable and better to handle on whatever tech you might find. Probably available for under the ‘magic’ 25lb mark if you have enough money.

Molgrips seems to understand me very well. Be more like Molgrips. :)

Keep the suggestions coming though. The more the merrier.

Bloody hell fellas… he gave you a clue in his user name!

It’s literally my surname. Whereas your only contribution to this thread has been…?

It’s literally my surname. Whereas your only contribution to this thread has been…?

My contributions would have been similar to the ones where you have then been so dismissive of others’ experience of modern bikes. It didn’t help when you stated something like “Needs to be 25 – 30 lbs” but then somehow expected everyone to understand you, and that you really meant “definitely under 25lbs”.

I recently upgraded from a top-end bike from the late 2000’s… the new bike is heavier, yet climbs better and outperforms the old one in every way.

Unless you plan on going racing, you really can’t lose.

Heavier = more energy required to propel it. It’s simple physics.

Only in the direction opposing the force (weight) – ie, upwards, or more specifically, radially away from the centre of mass of the earth.
Weight makes no difference to the energy required to move a bike along a flat surface at constant velocity. That is simple physics.

You might argue that the grip, and therefore drag, of the tyres is proportional to the force on them; but that, as well as the energy required to overcome gravity on a hill climb will be related to total system weight (including rider, water, tools etc. I remember some hilarious idiots on discusions about backpack vs waterbottles insist that having nothing attached to the bike made it climb faster when that same and more weight was on their back).

The counter arguement would be that additional weight results in a higher optimal tyre pressure, and that when comparing things of different weights, and both using the optimum (but different) tyre pressure, the rolling resistnace will be the same.

Weight makes no difference to the energy required to move a bike along a flat* surface at constant velocity. That is simple physics.

(A surface perpendicular with the earth’s centre of mass)

but yep

the energy required to overcome gravity on a hill climb

“Simple physics” illustrates well why a 15kg fixed gear climbs with less energy than a 15.5kg geared bike ?

Or does it… certainly less PE is gained but that has little do do with how much energy was expended by the rider in the climb.

Molgrips seems to understand me very well. Be more like Molgrips.

Thought he did and thought that’s what you would probably want. Doesn’t change the fact that virtually all the bikes he suggested come in above your weird 25lb mark unless you have very deep pockets. Kinda takes it all full circle and justifies what most have been saying from the start.

Yadda yadda. In other news, I have managed to ride over 100 miles in the last 7 days* since I started this thread. Which is more than I’ve managed,in the same amount of time, in many years. So I’m really happy about that. Might not seem a lot for some folk, and I’ve managed that and more in a day before, but it’s a big milestone for me right now, and a sign that hopefully, those dark years of depressing injuries etc, are behind me. So it’s a big step towards ‘deserving’ a new bike. Gonna spend the next few months getting fitter and stronger, and thinking about some nice trips abroad and that. It’s quite exciting.

*I proudly announced this to my wife yesterday, to which she replied ‘so why are you still here?’ :D

Bit of an update for anyone actually interested: A friend of a friend is a bike nut, and owns countless bikes, and very kindly lent my a few to try out over the last few days (fortunately he’s about the same height as me so the bikes all fit fine). We went out on Saturday, just over to Epping Forest, and he lent me a couple to try on my own for a few days. Tried a YT Capra on Saturday, a Scott Scale on Sunday, and I’ve currently got an old steel hardtail he had ‘lying around’, on a longer term loan/possible purchase. So here are some thoughts on them:

YT Capra: 27.5″ wheels, XT gears, Fox forks and shock. Lots of fun, but Epping Forest isn’t exactly the best place to really test it out, I admit. Like riding a soft sofa. Epping is currently pretty dry, and the ground is hard, lots of bumps and roots everywhere. Hardly felt anything. Such a comfortable ride! But point it vaguely up, and it suddenly felt like, you know when you ride over a patch of grass and it just robs your forward energy? Like that. Felt sluggish when trying to accelerate out of anything. I’d ridden my hybrid over to his beforehand, and it was a blessing to get back on that after riding the Capra on roads on the way home. 2.4″ or so tyres didn’t help mind. Overall, I can easily see how such a bike would be loads of fun if most of your riding was proper chunky mountainous terrain. But as I’d already suspected, the weight was noticeable and it definitely required a lot more energy to pedal up and along. Not sure of the weight, but the owner thinks it’s somewhere north of 30lbs. Oh, and the dropper post, I used once then forgot about! Again, Epping isn’t the ideal proving ground for such a machine.

Scot Scale: Carbon frame, Rock Shox Sid fork, 12 (!) speed SRAM X-something or other, I’m not familiar with SRAM products. FAST. 29er wheels. Some very light tubeless tyres. Really really fast! And surprisingly not as uncomfortable as I thought it might be. Really zipped up any climbs, and rolled really well over the ground. Was a breeze to ride home on the roads. But it felt a bit too ‘big’ on some of the tight twisty woody bits, clipped the (really wide!) bars a few times. The light weight (he thinks 22lbs or thereabouts) was definitely a boon; this thing climbs so well, and you can skip over stuff so easily. Like a gazelle. Such a nice bike. I think I could probably get used to the wide bars and size, over time.

Steel hardtail: 26″ wheel, a mix of older 9-speed XTR and Hope parts, Rock Shox Reba forks. Approx 24lbs, felt only marginally heavier than the Scott. This ended up my favourite, but it’s closer to what I used to ride, so perhaps familiarity played a part there. Such a nimble, well handling bike. Felt much better through the tight bits, I felt more confident in it’s handling in the more demanding situations. I do get the point of larger wheels rolling over stuff more easily, but the 26″ wheels definitely feel like they accelerate a bit quicker, which to me felt like an advantage. I have a possible option to buy this bike, and my friend reckons I’ll get a really good price on it, so a few hundred quid rather than a few thousand. I think I will end up buying it anyway, if the owner agrees. It was his idea anyway, so I’m hoping he won’t change his mind. I am aware the older parts will be harder to replace like for like, though. But it could be a great bike for using this summer; I have it to use now and beyond, hopefully.

So in all, a great few days of riding bikes. Conclusions? The Scott was probably the ‘fastest’, the steel bike the best ‘fit’, and the YT loads of fun but a bit of a barge if I’m honest. I concede the Capra isn’t the kind of bike I’d be looking to buy anyway, but it was good to try it out. I’m extremely grateful to the owner of the bikes to give me the opportunity to try them out. Top bloke. I think on the back of that experience alone, I want to try some ‘XC Race’ type suspension bikes out even more now. Here’s hoping the shops will have more stock in soon, but I’ll start looking around more now. Be good to have some more test rides!

Huh, interesting, I can imagine the YT feeling a bit like a pudding in Epping. I’ve a Spesh Enduro that feels the same when not being used in very gnarly terrain. I’ve recently picked up a Scandal for the flatter stuff I have locally and when you say:

But it felt a bit too ‘big’ on some of the tight twisty woody bits

That’s my experience as well. It’s fast, and accelerates well, and for zipping along; it’s heaps of fun, but get it into tighter stuff and I’m not sure I’m keen on the way it handles. Only had it for a bit though, so perhaps you get used to it?

Well that actually referred to the Scott, but the Capra felt like a barge on those sections anyway. The 29er wheels were definitely noticeable when it got tight and twisty. But it’s all about compromises; the speed of the Scott over mixed terrain, more than made up for it’s deficiencies in certain situations. Overall, the Capra was the most heavily compromised bike; it’s designed for riding down chunky stuff, and is probably excellent at that. It was crap at anything more than a 1% upward slope though! I’m glad I’ve had the opportunity to have that experience, rather than just taking the word of some on here. The owner only takes that bike to trail centres and abroad on holiday to places like Tenerife, Whistler etc (he’s not poor…), he says himself the bike is a ‘pig’ to ride around most places in the UK. Which is why he’s got the Scott (and probably other bikes!).

OP, if you’re happy to pay £6k it sounds like what you want is a Transition Spur X01 – 24.8lbs.

I feel like that goes for pretty much everyone

 It was crap at anything more than a 1% upward slope though!

Horses for courses. I don’t think the “enduro” category of bikes is anywhere near the most sprightly uphill obviously, but the fact that you can pedal a 160-180mm bike up hill at all is pretty cool, especially if you have the sorts of terrain that these bikes are good for. (Not Epping Forest)