why not hardtail?

[Jcgill]

I only mtb occasionally because around here any good single track is a 45 min drive. I am 80% roadie 20% mtb, and gravel does not really appeal to me.

I have had a trek fuel ex8 since 2009 when I bought it at the end of season sale. In the fall of 2016 i got a scott big jon rigid fat bike, i never realized how much energy was lost in the bobbing of my fs trek. The big jon is just so much more fun to ride and provdes much more feedback from the terrain, it causes you to think more about lines and that makes the ride more fun in my opinion.

I actually just ordered a 2018 Scott Scale 950 on Monday. I think that the hardtail 29er with 100mm travel up front will provide the same level of fun as the fat bike, But will be almost 8 pounds lighter and much more nimble.
I am planning to do some xc racing with it as well as some cx in the fall (cx around here is just a taped off course on grassy hills)

I agree with the others and say fs is fun because you can just plow thru anything, but ht is fun because of the thinking involved with picking lines and the bike handling skills it builds.

[Gummee]

Originally Posted by JAGI410

Hardtails and full rigid bikes are still awesome!

I have a steel rigid fatbike that I love, and a carbon FS 29er (or 27.5+) bike that I love. I can ride them both 20 miles on the same trail and have a blast. The big difference is how I feel the next day. I’ll be feeling considerably better after riding my FS.

Rode my rigid Superfly today. Rode the Top Fuel last Sun.

More choices is more better

I'll likely ride the rigid SS mtn bike or the SSCX tomorrow on the social ride.

M

[Gummee]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

g a HT, or rigid bike, or CX bike on trails doesn't do a damn thing to improve your skills - it just forces you to look for smooth lines, which are rarely the fastest line.

Umm that's the skill involved.

Suspension allows you to take better lines with less regard for trail irregularities. So do big tires, to a point. Every time I ride a HT or rigid bike for a few weeks, I have to retrain my brain to ride fast again after I get on the FS.

I would argue that you're 'un-training' your brain to look for the smooth line and riding lazily, letting the bike do the work. Is it faster? Yup. Is it 'better?' One can argue that it isn't 'better' just faster.

Combine the 2 skills: picking a line and letting the bike do the work IS probably better.

Personally, I like the feel of the rigid fork on my Superfly. Lets me know what the front wheel's doing. I'll have to time myself over the loop I rode today on both bikes and see which is faster. The terrain I'm riding is pretty mellow except for in one spot, where it's pretty rocky

M

[Jaybee]

Riding FS doesn't have to mean "lazy lines". Sometimes the best line that allows a clean exit from a series of rock features is over the big rock to set you up for around the tree stump and over the short side of the root. Maybe you can make this with the added traction from rear suspension and you can't regularly do this on a hardtail. Maybe you can do it 50% of the time on a hardtail, but there are 30 or 40 such features over the course of your 15 mile ride.

Both types of bike have their place. Most of the good bike handlers here are riding FS, but would crush me even on a mid 90s 26er.

[peanutgallery]

*All my mtbs are carbon and I have yet to hurt one in the rocks we ride. I did destroy a steel MCR in less than a year with dents

*Pedal bob. You have to set the bike up properly and you don't notice it in the woods. You will notice it on the road or a parking lot. Mine usually has a climbing mode which turns it off

* Line choice, efficiency, learnings etc. A modern trail bike handles somewhat differently, you sit in it instead of on it to take advantage of wheel size and geometry. Nuetral, think dirt bike. Because there's no motor, efficiency is key and flow is always the word of the day. You can use bad lines and get away with it but you still have to provide the power if you lose momentum. Just like any other bike

So why haul a 30 some odd pound bike around the woods for hours? It puts you in a place where you can ride just about everything and have fun doing it. Logs, rocks, climbs etc are conquered and descents are a hoot

Rent or borrow a modern trail bike and go for a ride, speculating gets you nowhere

Side note: as a group we're getting better about MTB. A year ago on a thread like this would have been more about getting a 12 year old FS 26er off of craigslist and calling it good

[merlinmurph]

That. Is. Awesome.

Pic of the Year, right there

Originally Posted by joosttx

When you are young it doesnt matter. The kid killed a 1000ft up and down today. I have to say compared to a gravel bike a modern-day hardtail is so more comfortable.

[Pastashop]

I see a Jones SWB / LWB in my future...

[timto]

When I lived in the Canadian rockies with buddies that like to do ridge rides in Kananaskis country and Canmore - FS was essential. Long days, really rocky, big long descents. I would finish a long day tired but safe, had tons of fun and not sore.

Now that I'm out in Eastern Canada - the terrain is much different ... but i'd still get a full susp if long days in the saddle were the plan.

So really technical, rocky, big descents or long days - I feel is where the full squish shines.

[merlinmurph]

I agree, all those spots are hardtail-worthy. I used to work and live in that area an know those places well. Even won a Sport Beginner race in Needham TF in '94. I think there were 12 guys in my class.

I don't ride my mtb much anymore. It used to be my main ride, but now when I hit the trails, it's on my cross bike. Lots of stuff locally to keep one busy.

When I rode my mtb all the time, Vietnam was the closest. Then, I hit Franklin TF, Wrentham SF, Gilbert, Upton SF. I got older and didn't want to get beat up at 'Nam anymore. Last time I rode there, I ended up getting rotator cuff surgery.....

Originally Posted by sparky33

My regular spots are near home and work because I get out only when the stars align for a moment.

Cutler@Needham is by the office, so I am there ...all...the...time. Needham town forest, Dover: Caryl/Noanet/Hale, all over the spiderweb of trails in Wellesley, Weston and Lincoln. The whole gamut of bikes is in attendance. Haven’t really been further west to some notable spots. What’s your favorite?

Lately I’ve been spending a good deal of time in Martha’s Vineyard, and the trails there are incredible. The road riding is popular, hum-drum and dangerous, the paved bikeways are fine for getting around, but the trails are where it’s at on island and no one seems to know it. Shhhh! A significant portion of the island is held as conservation land, and some dedicated folks are cutting and keeping up the trails. I’ve had some incredible trails rides there recently. Cross country heaven with some sleeper technical spots too. Two of the best flow trails I’ve seen are hiding there.

[sparky33]

Originally Posted by peanutgallery

Side note: as a group we're getting better about MTB. A year ago on a thread like this would have been more about getting a 12 year old FS 26er off of craigslist and calling it good

No kidding. A dedicated mtb forum would surely still chuckle in our general direction. Pretending to be a mtb'er isn't something I do well either.

One recent evening I was working on a project with some local mtb folks, and the pump track in the woods came up. What is a pump track someone asks? My explanation of it was terrible. Then my lifelong-mtb'er buddy jumps in and says...it takes a good deal of patience to listen to a roadie explain what a pump track is, before giving a the good explanation.

[BikeNY]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

Hardtails are fun, no doubt. But they are not as fast (up or down, assuming weight is in a similar ballpark) and you can ride faster, farther, and be less beat up afterwards.

I've done multiple timed runs over XC terrain (rooty, not very rocky, but very fast and lots of cornering - typical SE terrain) and the FS bikes are faster. Interestingly enough, 2.35" tires (or even a little bigger) are faster too, until they get >850g each.

The Kona Hei Hei Trail DL Carbon I ride weighs 23 lbs with pedals, makes no extraneous noises, has beefed-up carbon layups in rock strike-prone areas, has geometry that 3 years ago would have been considered enduro, and is crazy fast. Compared with a HT, it loses maybe a bit on pavement - maybe - but I can lock out the suspension if needed. The FS bikes corner so much better because both ends compress when cornering, vs. the front diving, so geometry stays more consistent, and the traction is amazing.

They feel more "sluggish" because you feel less of the trail. It's like driving a racing kart - 40 MPH feels like 80 because you get so much feedback from the pavement - that's the HT. The FS is more like a modern car - 80 feels like 40 because you are so isolated from road feedback. But the watch doesn't lie.

One last thing we've learned over the years - riding a HT, or rigid bike, or CX bike on trails doesn't do a damn thing to improve your skills - it just forces you to look for smooth lines, which are rarely the fastest line. Suspension allows you to take better lines with less regard for trail irregularities. So do big tires, to a point. Every time I ride a HT or rigid bike for a few weeks, I have to retrain my brain to ride fast again after I get on the FS.

They are all fun, but one is better. There's a reason why all the XCO guys (and many women, though not all) are on FS bikes now, despite their resistance to adding any weight to bikes.

Some of that is true, and some not to much. First of all, you are assuming that everyone wants to go as fast as possible, which is certainly not the case. Over techy terrain, a FS bike is clearly faster, nobody is arguing that. But a lot of people don't ride terrain like that. Flowy singletrack can be ridden just as fast without full suspension, and climbing can be faster without rear suspension, again, depending on terrain.

But for a lot of riders, speed is not the ultimate goal. Many riders just want to go ride in the woods for a few hours, have fun, get a good workout, and challenge themselves. That can be done perfectly well on a rigid bike, a hardtail, a SS, and even a FS bike. Some people also don't want to spend $5000 to get a well spec'ed mountain bike, a hardtail can be had for much less with similar components. Some people also don't want the added expense and time required to maintain a FS bike, which can be substantial. Also, as somebody else mentioned, the slightly lower speeds also mean when you crash, your injuries are likely to be less sever.

I totally disagree with your statement that riding a hardtail/rigid whatever on trails doesn't improve your skills. If you're doing it right, it most certainly does. It teaches you how to ride smoother and 'lighter' on the bike. You don't have to slow way down and go around all the obstacles, you have to learn to use the 'suspension' you were born with, your arms and legs! Once you've learned that, it can be applied to any bike to make you faster, with the added bonus that you equipment takes much less of a beating and last longer.

[redir]

I've never owned a full squishy before but I have ridden them at demos and thought... Meh. I do have a Thudbuster on my C'Dale 29r hard tail though and that really helps take the edge off. I've been thinking a lot about dropper posts lately but then I'd have to give up the Thudbuster and I really like it.

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by Gummee

Umm that's the skill involved.

I would argue that you're 'un-training' your brain to look for the smooth line and riding lazily, letting the bike do the work. Is it faster? Yup. Is it 'better?' One can argue that it isn't 'better' just faster.

Combine the 2 skills: picking a line and letting the bike do the work IS probably better.

Personally, I like the feel of the rigid fork on my Superfly. Lets me know what the front wheel's doing. I'll have to time myself over the loop I rode today on both bikes and see which is faster. The terrain I'm riding is pretty mellow except for in one spot, where it's pretty rocky

M

It would be "improving your skills" in an applicable way if and only if you don't ever plan on taking advantage of tech (suspension, tires) that make better line choices possible. It's not better skills you're building, in other words, just a different skill set - the ability to ride a lesser bike on the same terrain at slower speeds.

If my goal is going faster (yours may be different), then "learning" to steer around things vs. taking the best line is a waste of time.

Again, no argument that rigid or HT is fun to ride. Heck, my CX bike is fun to ride on rough trails. It's just a lot slower.

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by BikeNY

Some of that is true, and some not to much. First of all, you are assuming that everyone wants to go as fast as possible, which is certainly not the case. Over techy terrain, a FS bike is clearly faster, nobody is arguing that. But a lot of people don't ride terrain like that. Flowy singletrack can be ridden just as fast without full suspension, and climbing can be faster without rear suspension, again, depending on terrain.

But for a lot of riders, speed is not the ultimate goal. Many riders just want to go ride in the woods for a few hours, have fun, get a good workout, and challenge themselves. That can be done perfectly well on a rigid bike, a hardtail, a SS, and even a FS bike. Some people also don't want to spend $5000 to get a well spec'ed mountain bike, a hardtail can be had for much less with similar components. Some people also don't want the added expense and time required to maintain a FS bike, which can be substantial. Also, as somebody else mentioned, the slightly lower speeds also mean when you crash, your injuries are likely to be less sever.

I totally disagree with your statement that riding a hardtail/rigid whatever on trails doesn't improve your skills. If you're doing it right, it most certainly does. It teaches you how to ride smoother and 'lighter' on the bike. You don't have to slow way down and go around all the obstacles, you have to learn to use the 'suspension' you were born with, your arms and legs! Once you've learned that, it can be applied to any bike to make you faster, with the added bonus that you equipment takes much less of a beating and last longer.

You can learn to ride "lighter on the bike" on a FS bike as well - the rigid bike just forces the issue. It's like saying you need to train on a heavier bike to make yourself faster, because the weight slows you down. You obviously don't; you could simply ride faster on the lighter bike and do the same amount of work. Or like saying singlespeed makes you climb faster - no, it just keeps you from gearing down and spinning, something you can accomplish on any bike.

FS corners better on even flowy terrain, because traction = speed.

I know a lot of racers that have never owned hardtails yet have far, far better skills than those who have never ridden suspension, and they usually ride lighter on the bike as well.

As I said, fun, simplicity, cost, etc - these are all great reasons to ride HT or rigid (or SS). Speed isn't.

[josephr]

there's a cougar at the top waiting for his lunch!

Originally Posted by joosttx

When you are young it doesnt matter. The kid killed a 1000ft up and down today. I have to say compared to a gravel bike a modern-day hardtail is so more comfortable.