Beggars Would Ride
Bell Curves and Middlemen
It has become very apparent to me recently that my validity as a bike tester here is a bit questionable. Aside from being low in wattage and short on senditude, I am averse to riding in really shitty weather, and I just don’t burn with that righteous zeal to authoritatively declare what rules and what sucks in the world of mountain biking. And, there’s this little voice in my head that keeps asking; “what even IS mountain biking anymore?”
There is so much variety in what defines a mountain bike these days that I feel like I am perpetually chasing down hypotheses that might really only apply to me, my riding, my idea of mountain biking. I feel, increasingly, like the framework of definition that we all use to parse this sport of ours is continuing to expand, leaving us all scrambling for new ways to categorize, pigeonhole, label, define the bikes we ride in a language that is commonly understandable. And, as we diversify and continue to strive to define, I feel like some of us are losing the plot. Myself first and foremost among the lost.
F’rinstance, there’s this fat bike experiment I’ve been running on myself. An update on that whole shitshow will be coming soon, but the very short version of it is that I just spent a ton of time and money turning a fat bike into a Trek Stache with a really wide Q-factor. Why? Again, very short answer: The Bell Curve.
Basically, the whole fat bike thing came about as I was contemplating what might be the most effective way for me to try and navigate some janky old nightmares in Baja that have been dogging my thinking for decades now. But after the initial obligatory “wow, you can ride over anything with these humungous wheels” sensation gave way to something akin to slow torture, I realized that 27.5 x 4.6” tires are probably best left to churning across the snowbound/frozen tundra landscape they were designed for, and that something a little less massive but still substantially floatier than “normal” would maybe be better suited for the very particular windmills I was trying to tilt at.
So, if a fatbike is no longer quite as fat, but is still substantially more girthy in tire size than a regular bike, what is it called? A huskybike? A bigboned bike? A healthyappetite-no-body-image-traumabike?
This is the story of my bike testing life. Back when I was obsessed with trying to be slightly above average XC pack fodder, I would pare away every “excess” gram of weight from my bike until it became a fragile, sketchy exercise in masochism. Then I would start adding back niceties like tires with tread, ever so slightly wider handlebars, suspension that actually worked, until the bike was once again somewhat tolerable to ride but no longer quite as much of a rocketship when it came to climbing smooth fire roads. Just a couple of years ago, I did that same dance in exactly the opposite direction; taking a perfectly functional Ibis Ripmo and trying to lean it out, thinking I would end up with the king dog trail bike of all time. All I really did was spend a pile of money and end up with a trail bike that seemed too fragile for even my limited huckability, and was still nowhere near as fast as any number of just as fun but entirely differently focused XC-ish bikes. Thankfully that whole humble pie-eating contest is now shuttered behind the paywall of a dead website...
More travel, less travel, more weight, less weight, longer wheelbases, shorter chainstays, slacker head angles, longer top tubes, shorter stems, plus tires, tire inserts, wider rims, different frame materials, air, coil, air, coil, air. At some point or another, I have pushed toward the margins, railed against the status quo, tried to find some revolutionary new key that would demonstrably change my riding experience for the better only to run smack dab into a whole new set of limitations and compromises, and swung back to the center again. Over and over and over.
Enter the bell curve. The humpbacked reality check of life as we know it. Our entire existence easily sectioned up by binomial distribution. Just like everything else in life, the freaks live out at the edges, and most of the rest of us live in that big fat chunk in the middle. The further out toward either asymptote, the weirder shit gets. Naturally, when it comes to marketing and human aspiration, the edges are where we all look to for inspiration; where the biggest risks are taken and the greatest rewards are reaped, a highly specialized and potentially lethal atmosphere that most mortals are not well equipped to breathe, even though so many of us dream of tasting that rarified air.
What works best at one end of the bell curve will almost certainly not be well suited to the other end. But what works at each asymptote will likely have some utility as we move toward the center. At least, on paper.
As you can see, no expense has been spared on this deeply insightful analysis of the global mountain biking population's physio-cultural makeup. Sorry for writing off the edge of the page on the right side there, but it was my last piece of printer paper...
Thus, this handy dandy bell curve that I drew up here. You can see way out to the left, in the frozen trackless wastes of deep Alaska, fat bikes totally rule. Especially if you are the kind of person that lives for the grinding masochism that is “enjoyed” by the adventurers noted. These are not average human beings, but they serve as inspiration to those of us who wish to one day be hewn from some combination of leather and gristle. At the other end you’ve got the 180mm, dual crown, DoubleDown casing, go big or go home set. Again, none of the people out on this razor-thin edge are anything close to “normal”, but by their example the boundaries of what we dream to be possible are redefined, and through their example we collectively evolve. And then, somewhere in the middle, the rest of us.
The edges inform the middle. Our general lot as mountain bikers improves because of what the riders out on the wild fringes are discovering. They expose limitations in our equipment that most of us are not even aware exist. However, they keep pushing those asymptotes further out there, stretching the edges, making the impossible possible. The middle absorbs the lessons learned at the edges, but by and large is nowhere near as dynamic an environment. We may want to think it is as dynamic, because we all aspire to some degree of inner radness, but the reality is that we, the average, are not who defines the evolution of the bikes we ride. We can tweak our rides to feel better for our own ride microcosms, play around with tire inserts and stem length, but we are not really starting any revolutions. That's because we are average. By "we", obviously, I am just referring to myself. But it feels lonely saying that, so I'll keep going with we for now. If you feel that this does not apply to you, that's okay.
We are the meat in the middle. We buy what the bike brands produce. The bike brands produce what they think we need, but also sprinkle in little bits of what they learn from the riders out on the edges. Some of us lean left toward the tundra, some of us gravitate right toward the red rockscape of Virgin, Utah, but, statistically speaking, most of us are most likely somewhere right in the middle of the bulge, and would probably be best suited for almost all our needs riding something like the Kona that Cooper reviewed yesterday.
Or a Trek Stache. I really shoulda picked one of those up when I had the chance.
All of this is to say; the middle is not a bad place to be these days. Once upon a time, up until about 1992, this whole bell curve of bike design looked like a totem pole, and everyone had to ride bikes that were to all intents and purposes identical. Now, we can ride all kinds of bikes that let us chase our aspirational carrots in whatever direction we want.
Meanwhile, I'm going to keep stumbling around trying to make my bikes work better for me. I encourage you to do the same with your bikes. That's a cool thing about bikes. They are incredibly responsive to modification, even if sometimes those modifications are poorly thought through and end up making the bike worse than it was before. I'm going to keep writing about it, too. But I have reached the point, finally, where I am completely comfortable admitting that I do not know what life is like out on the wild frontier. So take anything I say with a grain of salt, because I'm just not that hardcore.
A note about the image at the top of this piece: That is definitively NOT a standard binomial distribution curve. It is, as any astute observer would deduce, a picture of a boa constrictor digesting an elephant. Or maybe it’s a drawing of a hat.
Comments
Morgan Heater
1 year, 2 months ago
These are toys for grown-ups to play in the woods. Trying to bring practicality into the conversation is a little bit disingenuous. I figure, you should ride whatever makes you want to go for a ride, and forget about trying to decide if it makes sense. :-)
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
“The edges inform the middle.”
The edges f*** the middle. That’s why, just looking at your Trek example, you can buy a couple different Session DH race bikes, multiple models of Enduro race-ready Slash rigs (tires not included), a bunch of different Supercaliber and Procaliber XC-podium-chasers, four complete examples of Chris’-family-gettin’-paid fat bikes, and exactly zero models of Stache, even though a low-maintenance/high-fun true-Plus hardtail would suit the majority of us hack riders just fine.
Reply
ZigaK
1 year, 2 months ago
I'm afraid it's just business - the sales weren't happening. It's very similar situation as with internal gear hubs/boxes - a very sensible solution for the middle of the curve, but ... nobody is buying. I personally really want to buy an internally geared mtb, and have been wanting to buy it for a decade, but still haven't, for various reasons :-)
Trek is a major player and if they would come up with improved second generation stache, I'm sure it would work out, but even they couldn't pull that off financially, imo. Same with hammerschmidt and schwalbe procore.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
I understand it’s just business, but marketing happens from the edges as well.
For example, the industry and ‘media’ sold Plus bikes as being for less fast, less radified & less shredly folks.
If you cornered like Jared Graves you wouldn’t be able to find enough traction. If you smashed like Jared Graves tires would have to weigh 3000-grams to be suitably durable. If you hold a line like Jared Graves the tires are too vague. Oh, and if you sprint like Nino, they’re too slow.
But the right Plus rubber in the right width of rim adds an impressive amount of margin descending, comfort all around, and won’t slow you down enough to change your ride order. You just have to admit you’re not Jared or Nino, which was very hard for riders & writers to do.
And yeah, I’m bitter. I’ve heard/read so many people shit on Plus tires who never even rode them and a fair few of those folks, who I know personally, couldn’t beat me down a black trail on their Enduro bike with me riding my rigid single speed - which I’ll note is not me bragging about being fast / it’s me bragging about being very aware of my spot in the amorphous center of the ability curve.
———
This is all an extension of the concept that riding a hardtail is ‘weird’ or ‘hardcore’ and riding a full suspension bike is normal, when actually for a lot of folks level or maintenance, fitness, setup investment, and days on the bike per year, a hardtail is actually the only thing that makes sense.
Reply
fartymarty
1 year, 2 months ago
In my mind hardtailing is a place you get to with age, a certain degree of skill and a decreasing amount of ego (Strava-ist-ism). It's where you care less about the speed you ride or posting the fastest strava times but would rather connect with the trail and have the skill to ride all the same trails albeit slower than you would on a FS rig.
I think for most riders a HT would make sense.
Something like Mike's Bike https://nsmb.com/articles/the-not-so-hard-times-hardtail/ makes so much sense.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
Sure. At some point, for a lot of folks at least, age overcomes marketing.
I don’t think you need any more skill to ride a hardtail on 98% of terrain/features on 98% of rides even here on the North Shore unless you’re racing (friends or the clock). But I recognize that’s the narrative.
Reply
fartymarty
1 year, 2 months ago
I think that is the narrative that's been pushed for riding FS bike - you can ride more, faster, bigger (insert superlatives as required) whereas the reality is not that. You can ride the same stuff just a bit slower on a HT.
taprider
1 year, 2 months ago
Regarding the age thing. I like suspension - not to go faster - but to spare my bones and joints.
Alex D
1 year, 2 months ago
I think it's where you get when you're tired of maintaining linkages and you're riding groomed trails. I'll be on FS forever because traction over bumps and the ability to sit down is worth a two-pound weight penality. The hardtail with 2.3" tires I bought recently disabused me of any nostalgia; on the rooty trails I ride, it was just bad.
Reply
Velocipedestrian
1 year, 2 months ago
"with 2.3" tires" I think you're making Andrew's point.
fartymarty
1 year, 2 months ago
I like my HT with 2.3s. Means I can run heavy casings without silly weights. But saying that I love my HT regardless so would still enjoy it on 50psi gravel tyres.
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 2 months ago
"For example, the industry and ‘media’ sold Plus bikes as being for less fast, less radified & less shredly folks. "
Because bikes in the middle of the bell curve - as far as marketing goes - are Boring. How do you market something that is "its pretty much fine at a lot of things" in an exciting way? You don't.
To look at a different industry, car companies run motorsports programs that look like this:
to sell cars that look like this:
Now the problem in Mountain Bike Land is that consumers can actually just *buy* the version brands are racing, whereas the Toyota Gazoo Racing Yaris is probably $750,000, and not for sale anyway.
No one wants to see Jane and Jim puttering along out there on a Boring Bike on Lost Lake trails, and a day riding Crank It Up - its not going to sell bikes, despite that being the experience a HUGE amount of people have. Would these people be better suited by bigger rubber? Often, probably yes. But how do you sell that? Cause... I don't think this was it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSxqZZ-v0xw&list=PLE9EC2266B5439E50
Reply
Mark
1 year, 2 months ago
I will die on the hill that says a hard tail keeps you far more engaged with the typical type of trail people ride on the Shore and that invariably can make you a better and faster rider than lots of suspension. The caveat is that it takes more effort, both physically and mentally, to do that than to float along on lots of suspension. And it's harder on the body.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
I always go back to this Chris Kovarik DH bike check on Pinkbike from 2021, long after Plus was ‘dead.’
How does shredding a 3” tire work for The Karver but it was it was too vague, and imprecise, for the average rad-dad weekend warrior?
Reply
sverdrup
1 year, 2 months ago
I know that you know this, but it’s because they starting making plus tires with real casings. My first plus experience was on a 6fattie stumpy, and it was blissful for the moments in time I was able to keep air in the tires. I would bet others had similar experiences and moved on from the idea before the tires improved. This, plus all the social stigma/enduro bro marketing stuff mentioned above….
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
The Specialized tires were too light but the rim width was the real issue and that’s still one example in a sea of bikes and mountain bikers are fairly well conditioned to changing tires for their terrain.
27+ vs. 29 - Chris @ Pivot had some good anecdotes about how about 80% of folks in back to back tests actually were faster and more confident on the Plus Switchblades than the 29” version. Very much appreciated him sharing his experiences both the times I had a chance to chat with him about them.
Reply
sverdrup
1 year, 2 months ago
I recall Seb Stott doing timed testing years ago, and think he found plus tires were also generally faster for him.
Personally, I’ve always seen tires as a relatively inexpensive way to mix up the riding experience. Handy tool as a relatively poor grad student for too many years. I didn’t experiment much with rim width though
Currently running the latest gen of Specialized Grid Gravity 2.6s on my hardtail and feel they are a great balance - for me. Nice workout on the way up, all the traction, haven’t used a tire plug yet, and great damping on the way down. Maybe I should throw that old DHR2 2.8 back on the front for fun?
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
I have a few friends down here who are sharp riders and are obsessive about tracking their data, and they have some legit personal race KOMs that were set on plus tires, even though none of them are riding plus tires anymore. Plus hit the market with a whole lot of tire and rim data points undefined, and as such the whole exercise got tainted by the poor performance of the not so great combos. BUT, we probably wouldn't have the bounty of solid performing 2.6 tires and bikes with clearance for them if we hadn't all beta tested the plus concept for the industry in the first place. So at least we've got that going for us.
Personally, I have the same back and forth love/hate relationship with plus tires as I do with fat bikes. I love what they can help me do, but at some point I get tired of dragging around the extra weight. Same with tire inserts. If I lived somewhere super chunky and rough, I'd be running plus or as close to it as I could, as well as inserts, 24/7. Around here, most of the time, the terrain isn't demanding enough to justify the weight.
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
@Mike 2.6” rubber was lazy like 650b. Present something ‘new’ that essentially fits all existing bikes (with super minor tweaks for clearance). ‘They’ even used the same marketing playbook - a halfway point between 26 & 29 / a halfway point between 2.4” & 2.8”.
Most bikes shipping with 2.6” don’t even come with a properly wide rim with brands popping them on i30 hoops.
Alex D
1 year, 2 months ago
My best XC laptimes on my local trails were all on 29x3 Ranger and 29x2.6 XR2. The Ranger in particular has shockingly low rolling resistance. Doesn't turn that well, but I don't rail turns anyway. The XR2 2.6 is only 50g heavier than the 2.35 version. Might be my favorite tire.
Jerry Willows
1 year, 2 months ago
you get a rounder profile with narrower rim and that helps with cornering. That's why lots of pros are on DT 471's.
I also found the wider tires don't corner/bite as well. Went from 2.6 to 2.3 Butchers and won't be going back to 2.6.
lookseasyfromhere
1 year, 2 months ago
A quick eyeballing of my Starling shows plenty of room around my 29x2.6 tires. I might need to see if I can slap in the 27.5x3.0s off my DragonSlayer.
tashi
1 year, 2 months ago
The Bigger tires/ high speed thing is an interesting one to me. I’ve moved from typically running 2.35 Butchers or DHF’s to the 2.6” Butchers and mostly I love em.
Then I got some coaching on my cornering technique, my cornering speeds picked up particularly on buffed and bermed trails and my tires started to feel a bit smooshy. Had to bump up the pressure a little bit, compromising my low speed traction a bit.
Now I’m thinking I might wanna be back on 2.35’s at least in the back.
No idea which is faster, but that’s not all that important because floppy feeling tires make me ride slow cause I can’t trust em to hold on in the corners and riding scared isn’t my idea of a good time.
lookseasyfromhere
1 year, 2 months ago
In case anyone's curious, I tried fitting the 3.0s on my Starling this morning. They made it with 1/4-3/8" clearance. A proper trail test will be more work, though, as it will require some drivetrain juggling.
Reply
steelispossiblyreal
1 year, 2 months ago
Nice one. I've got a pair of Pub 45i carbon all mountain hoops that I'm trying to figure out what to do with. Considering boost hubs for my Murmur for plus bike rippin but I'm not sure.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
1 year, 2 months ago
This is the same conversation that happens with manual gearboxes and wagons. Lots of enthusiasts out there want one (or both) of them, but the weight of wallets in the middle far surpasses the burning desire of those at the edges.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
Is this not the opposite case? The fringes are running the middle and there’s no shortage of low slung manual speed wagons and full-speed off-road trophy trucks but middle ground bikes are all watered down versions of those instead of something purpose built for the every rider - great geo, great brakes, good shifting and suspension (hardtail or FS), and Plus tires.
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
Manual transmissions are basically non-existent in the modern auto market, as a percentage of what is available. And on this continent, wagons are also rapidly going the way of the dinosaur. Pete's comment about the market voting with their wallets is valid - nobody is making those vehicles anymore because most people don't want to buy them anymore. Doesn't really matter if they make more sense for most people, if most people don't want them.
As for bikes, your "watered down" analogy is totally available everywhere, except it doesn't come with plus tires. Much as we could all argue that plus tires would benefit many riders, there are still tangible performance drawbacks to all that added heft that will not play well in the vast parts of this country where the riding terrain is suited just fine for the 2.3" reality. Same deal as with manual transmissions and station wagons. We had the opportunity to buy plus bikes, but not enough of us did. There were a ton of reasons why, but the down the line ramification is that the across the board demand did not prove tangible enough to justify continued production.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
1 year, 2 months ago
the death of the north american wagon comes down to marketing and auto makers getting around emissions regulations.
Not Just Bikes has a pretty good rant on youtube about this
https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 2 months ago
"The fringes are running the middle and there’s no shortage of low slung manual speed wagons "
Unfortunately, this is not true at all. In fact, I'm not actually sure there's any for sale in Canada right now - I can guarantee there isn't any AWD 'fast wagon' in manual for sale. I'm... not sure anyone even makes one globally anymore. I can't think of one.
Sincerely,
Someone Who Misses Their Fast Manual Wagon Very Much.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 2 months ago
I am aware that manual shifting station wagons, the cars, are no longer available.
It was a crappy analogy about bikes not being optimized for the majority of riders.
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 2 months ago
I misinterpreted.
Curveball
1 year, 2 months ago
I don't know that it completely qualifies as a wagon, but the GR Corolla is fast, AWD, and maybe looks a bit like a wagon.
itsky21
1 year, 2 months ago
Mike - love "the edges inform the middle" quote. I do data analysis for a living and it's true in many respects from my experience.
The trek stache is done, but the new trek roscoe is really awesome. I just built up a size small for my kid, and I'm thinking about building one up for myself with wide rims and 2.6s, maybe inserts?
Reply
cxfahrer
1 year, 2 months ago
At least bicycles shipped in boxes always represent the ideal box.
Shame on everyone who does not know The Little Prince!
Reply
Velocipedestrian
1 year, 2 months ago
Thank you! I knew that was familiar.
Reply
Dave Smith
1 year, 2 months ago
Sidebar: A deSE is a literary hero of mine - I read Wind, Sand and Stars once a year just to feel like more of an untravelled wimp.
Reply
Andy Eunson
1 year, 2 months ago
At my advanced stage of decrepitude (read: old age) I have determined that I need to not have a so called enduro type bike all slack and long travel suspension-y. All that would do is allow me to crash at a higher speed. What keeps me from riding big silly lines is my brain and recollection of past injuries. Injuries at age 65 mean I could lose significant chunks of the riding or skiing season. I’m happy that riders are pushing the boundaries of the sport and to a certain extent the design and technology boundary pushing drives. My current stable of bikes is a new Fuel ex and old Chameleon. I could easily see the Fuel as a one bike that rules them all, one bike to find….But other times I think just the hardtail is fine. I ride pretty much the same trails in a similar way. But the two offer different fun. But there are trails or features that I know of that I will never ride because there is too much exposure for my tastes.
As I’m getting comfortable on the new bike though I’m starting to think maybe there is such a thing as too slack and too much reach. I’ve missed a couple uphill switchbacks that I never miss. But I am adapting. I rode a sort of old school series the other day. Dead slow kind of janky trials like stuff with no significant climbs or descending. I rode a couple things like they didn’t exist and other stuff I should have cleaned.
One side of that bell curve (that looks like a side view of Pharrel Williams hat) are the riders that push the riding boundaries and the other end of that curve are the retrogrouches that go on about 20 year old bikes that were so good and had built in excuses to go ass over tea kettle. I guess somewhere in the middle is me. I may "retro" for that 40 year old me that could go harder and crash harder but I’m happy to ride bikes that work better with a bigger safety margin for my middling self to ride on blue trails. The older I get, the better I was.
Reply
Skooks
1 year, 2 months ago
I'm of a similar age and mindset as you Andy. Regarding bikes getting too long/slack, my new bike actually has a shorter reach than my previous one, slightly shorter wheelbase and steeper ST. It feels much more nimble and easier to get around switch backs. I am really enjoying it.
Reply
tashi
1 year, 2 months ago
I’m with ya on that, last time I rode an “enduro” type bike I spooked myself with the speed and risk I was attacking to keep the excitement level up. Give me a downcountry or trail bike instead and I’m happy to keep the risk where I’m comfortable.
Reply
Velocipedestrian
1 year, 2 months ago
This is partly travel, partly geometry. The two are still conjoined on most stock bikes. The Dharco, and related experiments make for bikes with a high excitement level and low(er) risk.
Reply
doodersonmcbroseph
1 year, 2 months ago
I borrowed my friend's Slash and had a similar experience. For him it allows him to be able to ride the same trails and keep up as he is less experienced of a rider. For me that bike gets me into all kinds of trouble, overshooting corners and landings because of the increased speed; if I go slower on it though it's not as fun as my 27.5 remedy. (Both bikes are sized M/L and the remedy is significantly shorter reach)
Reply
TristanC
1 year, 2 months ago
I'm a middle-to-left side of the bell curve person. Between "dangle mug" and not quite all the way to "looks good on camera," because I don't. But I'm working towards that far, far left side, and it's a very weird feeling rolling up to the start line and seeing people like Ben Doom and Jill Martindale and Alexandera Houchin there. I'm just a jackass who likes riding bikes, what am I doing here?
Re: turning fat bikes into Staches, it's a worthwhile path. I have one bike, two wheelsets: 26x4.8" or 5.05" for winter or really sandy stuff in the summer, and 29x2.6" for most trail riding.
Reply
taprider
1 year, 2 months ago
What event were you at with Ben Doom and Jill Martindale and Alexandera Houchin all there?
And good for you, for not going full "dangle mug" (I will choose my own affectations Thank You). Maybe your personal graph can be V shaped
Reply
TristanC
1 year, 2 months ago
Not the same event, but Ben Doom and Jill Martindale were both at Arrowhead 135, and Jill Martindale and Alexandera Houchin were at The Crusher. I'm the overlap in that weird Venn diagram.
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
I guess I should point out here that the "Doom" mentioned in my incredibly well drawn bell curve is actually Steve Fassbinder, not Ben Doom. Not intended to take away from Ben's status as a badass, however.
Reply
TristanC
1 year, 2 months ago
Too many Dooms. We're Doomed!
Reply
Velocipedestrian
1 year, 2 months ago
earle.b
1 year, 2 months ago
Wow Roman Dial, there is a name only the long timers will remember.
Reply
Ryan Walters
1 year, 2 months ago
After so many years spent on so many kinds of bikes, I’m now an N=1 guy. I want 1 mountain bike that does everything I need it to do. Does that mean some compromises? Absolutely. But every single component on my bike is curated to do the best job possible on all the terrain I ride.
Does a 37lb, 170mm travel enduro sled make sense for most mountain bikers around the world? Hell no. But I’m glad it does for me!
Reply
mikesee
1 year, 2 months ago
Stache frames are still available, new, in carbon in alu, in all sizes. Like in stock at Trek, right now, today.
Put your money where your mouf is, boi...
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
I just spent all my money on some wheels, boi...
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
and i gotta say, they are some damn nice wheels!
Reply
mikesee
1 year, 2 months ago
Can't wait to see what you get up to with 'em.
Also put an email in your inbox today that you better not slough off...
Reply
Tremeer023
1 year, 2 months ago
I have a similar obsession with experimenting with bike builds and set-up. I think personal preference comes into it to some extent. Some people like the safety/security of being over-biked and some prefer the thrill/sketchiness of being under-biked.
Is a hardtail with duel crown fork the ultimate balance? ;-)
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
Dual crown hardtail = burn it with fire.
Reply
Perry Schebel
1 year, 2 months ago
aaaahahaha... (i actually raced dh on this abomination; that era, it was something).
Reply
Tremeer023
1 year, 2 months ago
Wow, that's awesome. Mullet too - ahead of its time. The back end looks smaller than my 9 yr old son's current bike.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 2 months ago
26/24 was pretty popular then. I rocked a Specialized P3 26/24 with 3” tires and a 5” Z1.
Had the Tioga saddle that was comically large.
Reply
Tremeer023
1 year, 2 months ago
Yeh, Specialized Big Hits were everywhere when I first got into mtb. Gazza... tyres too!
I had an original 5" Z1. Possibly the best 'back in the day' fork I can remember, although the Shiver and original DJ1 were also very good.
tashi
1 year, 2 months ago
My trailstar ran 3” front and rear, 24” in the back.
Put dual 24” Kujos on the Stinky Primo that followed to maintain the “awesome cornering” afforded by the small diameter wheels. 🤦🏻♂️
4Runner1
1 year, 2 months ago
Ooohh Mag 30’s. I did a lot of day dreaming about those wheels.
Reply
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 2 months ago
They were really the best, at the time.
Reply
Perry Schebel
1 year, 2 months ago
though in 24", on THAT frame: so very harsh. the follies of (relative) youth.
Todd Hellinga
1 year, 2 months ago
for me it was a OG set of 36 hole Mavic 321's, those things were insanely strong
Morgan Heater
1 year, 2 months ago
That's beautiful. Hideous, but also beautiful.
Reply
Jerry Willows
1 year, 2 months ago
how did this get downvoted?
Reply
JT
1 year, 2 months ago
I slapped my Mr T on my Chute while waiting for the 5th Element from my Bullitt to come back from warranty (again) and I gotta say that was the silliest, sheeeiteatingist grin inducing set up. So wrong but oh so right.
Reply
SteveR
1 year, 2 months ago
Confirmed middleman here, and after 40 years plus of mtb- I'm perfectly happy to be putzing along on my more or less modern hardtail. Having said that- after 4 years of HT only I've been thinking about bringing a fully back into the stable- that Kona review pulled my strings quite a bit.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
1 year, 2 months ago
I still have the copy of The Little Prince my uncle bought me when I was very young. I think I’ll read it this evening and plan out tomorrow’s adventure in getting back into riding shape in hopes of doing what ever bike based adventures present them selves this summer.
Reply
Vik Banerjee
1 year, 2 months ago
A search over on that other MTB media site's Buy & Sell page returns ~4 pages of results for Trek Stache if you really do want one.
Reply
taprider
1 year, 2 months ago
"Once upon a time, up until about 1992, this whole bell curve of bike design looked like a totem pole, and everyone had to ride bikes that were to all intents and purposes identical"
Yes
Up to 1992 I raced both the Iditabike and World Cup Downhill on basically the same bike. Kinda still do (Arizona Trail Race to Enduro with the same bike)
Reply
LWK
1 year, 2 months ago
I bought a Stache back when. My wife called it a plump bike and the name stuck...
and FWIW a 2.6 Maxxis Assagai is so close in both tire width and overall resulting wheel diameter to a Bontrager 29x3 XR4 that its close enough for me
Reply
fartymarty
1 year, 2 months ago
Mike - to ask the same question I asked under Cooper article yesterday - what bike would you pick if you could only have one.
(And by one bike I mean one bike including road / gravel etc.)
PS - others please chip in as it is interesting to hear what and why people choose what they choose.
Photos are greatly appreciated / encouraged.
Reply
Kos
1 year, 2 months ago
For me, the current version of the Top Fuel. With a couple of wheelsets, I could race it or take it to Moab, and just plain old ride the crap out of it the rest of the time.
It wouldn't be ideal in either of those applications, but it would be damn good.
There is one in my van at the moment, ready to head to Arkansas tomorrow morning! :-)
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
At the Canyon shindig in Spain last November, one of the journalists referred to the new Neuron that Canyon was unveiling as a Top Fuel. He meant it as a compliment, but also as a slam. He wanted to be excited by the bike, to have something to sink his journalist teeth into and get frothy about, but instead was stuck riding for two days aboard a highly competent bike that you just sort of forget is there. I loved it, for precisely that reason.
Reply
Cr4w
1 year, 2 months ago
As time goes on and bikes get better and more reliable (and way way more expensive) the good stuff lands in the middle. For years I've run the most extreme stuff because that's all that worked for me but now that is changing.
What would I choose? A 150/160 heavy trail bike with a 64' head and angle and 77' seat angle, which places it at the edge of the category Cooper's Kona is in. I don't need a 38mm fork (36 is fine), I don't need a 213mm dropper even at 6'6" (185 is fine). I don't need 2.6 tires (2.4 is fine). I don't need DD or DH tire casings (EXO+ with light inserts is fine).
There's plenty with more travel, slacker head angles, etc. My XL G1 is arguably the longest, slackest most monstrous bikes available and I've come back to settle on something pretty moderate. I used to think it was about travel but once I got the bike to fit with appropriate geometry turns out I don't really need that much travel. But I needed to keep going to the extreme to know that I'd gone too far. If I lived anywhere but Vancouver I'd be on something a few notches down.
Reply
earle.b
1 year, 2 months ago
Same as Cr4w here. One bike and it's going to be a 150/160 modern geo mtb. If it's gotta do everything then I'd compromise the piggyback shock for an inline, I'd dig deep into if a 23 Pike chassis could be bumped up to 160mm with TTX18 damper installed. Wheels I'd go deep on Berd spokes and the lightest rims I could keep from tacoing on a regular basis. 11 speed drivetrain.
Wait, this is kind the bike I am already building, short of the RRT style Pike experiment.
Forced to ride it on some long gravel ride it would get a tire swap and a long stem, suspension pressures cranked way up.
Thankfully I don't live in this one bike world and I can have my ultimate three. E-cargo bike, hardtail, and 160/160 sled.
Reply
JT
1 year, 2 months ago
Soma Wolverine, A Type, if you're talking a one and only one bike for me. Can fit biggish knobs, handle a cx race, a century or mixed surface touring depending on wheels/tires/fork. I've had one for a couple years now and just switch wheels and fork out depending on what's on tap. I haven't touched my cross bike for a couple years beyond a few rides to just keep the sealant from pooling/congealing.
Reply
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 2 months ago
I’ve had one for 7 years and I still love it as much as the day I built it. Right now it’s setup SS with wide (48cm) cowchipper bars and 45c Maxxis Rambler tires, but I mostly run it geared with 1x with 11-42 out back.
It’s my daily commuter, gravel bike, and sometimes XC bike. I added a Ritchey adventure gravel fork a few years back and I really love the weight savings and precise steering compared to the stock fork.
Reply
Hi_Im_Will
1 year, 2 months ago
Here's a weirdo single bike opinion, and it's what I ride 70% of the time:
Nimble geo, crazy grip, pedals somewhere between a xc and trail bike, near bulletproof, and makes makes any trail interesting.
Aggressive-ish geo rigid fat bike
Jumbo jim speedgrip tires (26x4.8)
Tubeless with inserts made from 4" backing rod
Big brakes (MT5 or Dominion)
170mm dropper
Shoer stem.
That bike has done Iceman (really well given the sandy conditions), an Enduro race (less well), normal downhill (surprisingly entertaining but a bit rough), sandy downhill (ridiculous fun, best possible bike for The Trooper at Boyne Highlands), XC races, and hundreds of miles of trail riding in between. Oh and it does snow. Only time I grab my hardtail anymore is for fast flow trails.
Inserts and ultra light tires make it all possible. Fat with low pressure provides the grip, float, and comfort. Supple casing provides the speed, inserts add stability and protect the wheels. Big brakes and dropper add fun.
Reply
steelispossiblyreal
1 year, 2 months ago
I need to see this bike, it sounds so rad. I’m a fellow Michigander and I lean towards wider tires for most applications because of how sandy our trails get, especially up north. Also can you tell me more about these foam backer rod inserts?
Reply
Hi_Im_Will
1 year, 2 months ago
Closed cell backing rod, cut to mimic a Vittoria Airliner. Have a year on them so far, bit of shrinkage but definitely notice when I pull them out. Bike frame is a Borealis Flume, but I think I'd go with a Rocky Mountain Blizzard or something similar if doing it again.
Where in Michigan? I'm Detroit-ish, and it's great for the trails around here and near the top of the mitten, not sure it would do so well in the UP - casing with it hurts, and so do drops bigger than ~5 ft. Rock gardens surprisingly not bad though.
Reply
steelispossiblyreal
1 year, 2 months ago
Nice. Thanks for sharing, I'll consider trying the backer rod. I sold a Surly Pugsley and a Canfield Nimble 9 to get a REEB Donkadonk, really really stoked on that bike.
I'm in Detroit proper. I feel you on it being great around here. That being said I always grab my Murmur for UP trips.
Reply
Hi_Im_Will
1 year, 2 months ago
That Reeb is ridiculous cool. Sliding dropouts and everything. Might just replace a Kruch Tauntaun as dream fatty. Did you already get it built up?
Seriously cool bikes all around, I'm jealous.
steelispossiblyreal
1 year, 2 months ago
Yeah the REEB is a dream. I’ve got 3 wheelsets for it— 26 studded fat for winter, 27.5 midfat, and 29+ single speed (which it’s currently setup with).
Here’s a bike check from earlier this year: https://theradavist.com/readers-rides-peters-reeb-donkadonk-fatbike/
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
For me, it'd be 130 rear travel, probably a 140/150 36 up front, with room for 29x2.6 tires. Room for more would be great, but not a total dealbreaker. 65 degree head angle, 470-ish reach depending on seat angle.
I don't think "one bike for everything including road and gravel" is really possible. For me. I will always differentiate between road and mountain at some point.
Reply
fartymarty
1 year, 2 months ago
Mike - I would take your HT in a heartbeat as it's similar to my Solaris Max.
And separating mtb and road is cheating ;) I guess the question is relevant if you only have space / finances for one bike
Reply
chalcid
1 year, 2 months ago
Banshee Prime + Groad bike
Reply
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 2 months ago
I have two answers, depending on how ambitious I’m feeling about getting older and how long I need to keep said bike.
1) A modern steel or Ti hardtail that I can swap between SS and geared. I bought a Chromag Surface Voyager this year and I’m having an absolute blast running it SS. If I adjust my expectations around the bike… I think this is the smart choice especially if I consider maintenance cost and longevity.
2) Something between a Spur and a Stumpjumper. I would need to test ride a bunch of bikes in this segment because I’m looking for a really specific balance. I’d love to have room for two bottles. The new-ish Rocky Element looks very appealing. Like Mike, I’ve played around with making a longer travel bike lighter… and it didn’t feel right. I prefer to add heavier tires and better brakes to a 120/130 travel bike when needed - I think these bikes are the sweet spot for adaptability. At 5-10 I’d take a 66HA, 76SA, 460 reach, 435-440CS, and 335-340BBH.
Reply
Skooks
1 year, 2 months ago
MTB and road biking are such different paradigms that I would really have to compromise performance to have 1 bike for both. I am always going to have some sort of dedicated road bike / commuter. For a do it all MTB, it would have to be a medium travel full suspension bike, 65ish degree HT / 75ish degree ST. Something like my Knolly Fugitive!
Reply
JT
1 year, 2 months ago
Mike, you're still a considerably more relevant voice than, say, some blogger formerly from Broooklyn. To that end you have me wondering if picking up a lighter set of wheels and tires for my Trance X 29 was the right thing to do (albeit the tires are lighter as they're 2.3s rather than the stock 2.5s). A quest to make the bike a bit more friendly on the days I ride with the not so gravity-oriented crowd.
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
Tires are still the most transformative bang for the buck you can spend on your bike. Super light, fast rolling tires will make your sled feel like a rocket, but you'll wonder where all your cornering skill went. By that same token, big chunky tires can add a whole ton of traction and calm to sketchy XC bikes, but you'll wonder who poured sand in your legs and you still won't have much suspension if you need it. Still, tires more than just about anything else make your bike feel a whole lot different. At a pretty low cost of entry, too.
Reply
JT
1 year, 2 months ago
Heh! Rare is the day I don't start my commute wondering who swapped my gams for sandsacks!
Reply
itsky21
1 year, 2 months ago
Great article and comments here. Probably not the place to ask, but with the conversation in the comments, maybe.
I'm mid-bell curve. I ride all kinds of trails. I race xc for fun sometimes, I do longer races sometimes for fun.
I've only ever ridden 27mm-30mm ID rims and 2.35/2.40 tires. Currently on 27mm ID WAO factions and 2.4 Schwalbes. On my ibis ripley, I'm super interested to try 35mm ID rims and 2.6. At ~200lbs packed up, would do you all think? Would this be an improvement? thanks for the thoughts.
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
1 year, 2 months ago
I like wide rims (and I cannot lie). I may not be jumpy but I am cornery, and I have always noticed tire squirm and flex. Wider rims, for a given tire at a given pressure, seem to support tire sidewalls a little better. Maybe I am feeling a placebo effect, but my experience has been that rim width alone changes tire squirm characteristics enough for it to be noticeable. Wider rims also square off a tire profile a bit more. With some tires, that can be a welcome profile shift. On other tires, that may make them feel weird.
Reply
doodersonmcbroseph
1 year, 2 months ago
I can give you a specific example in my case. I have run DHR II/DHF 27.5" in 2.8, 2.6 and 2.4 (exo casings) on 30mm and 40mm rims.
I am a certified lightweight (sub 150 lbs) hence the EXO casings; but I can definitely notice the difference so I imagine that would be magnified for a heavier rider. All of these tire widths feel good on 40mm rims, only the 2.4's feel good on the 30mm rims. This is mostly North Shore riding but also includes jumps and other reckless riding. Hopefully that helps your decision.
Reply
Peter Appleton
1 year, 2 months ago
Reply
watermonkey
1 year, 2 months ago
That graph made me laugh so hard, I choked on my yerbamate, spit it all over my keyboard, and ruined my days worth of office work. I think I'll go change out the sealant on the 29+ wheelset I recently acquired for my fatbike (my new favorite bike configuration) and take a spin on my half+, mulletted semi-duro.
Reply
mk.ultra
1 year, 2 months ago
I always called plus bikes "mid fat". I had and loved a Salsa Timberjack as my first "real" mountain bike. It is an awesome configuration for hardtails and honestly I don't know why it's lost popularity.
Reply
XXX_er
1 year, 2 months ago
I'm over biked with the bullet but I don't care
Reply
cyclotoine
1 year, 2 months ago
I would like mainstream MTB media to take a trip to a community where people actually have to ride fat bikes in winter and they groom the single track which are proper fast fun single track trails in the summer. You need full fat tires for the traction even on packed snow because it's hardness varies constantly but the trails can be smoking fast and a suspension fork and dialed air pressure are super important. It's not as fun as dirt but it can be super fun and a proper trail bike/modern geo certainly shines just like it does when you point your bike downhill on dirt. I still see mainstream mtb media basically having no understanding that in most of Canada and many areas of the US this is our riding reality for a big part of the year and it's not about touring around in a frozen wasteland. It's ripping up our local trails and it's mountain biking, not some of less gnarly riding than gravel biking. I see it trying to be categorized as something that for a large portion of us. in its day to day guise, it simply isn't. I also have 29x3" wheels and tires for my fat bike which makes it an okay bike in summer. But it still doesn't cut it for maximum trail fun and 3" is just not enough tire for riding on snow most of the time. Even when the snow is hard enough for a 3" tire the cornering traction and support just isn't there. The float of full fat is absolutely necessary to get maximum speed through the corners (which are pretty flat). I invite you to come up North of 60 or any northern mtb town with grooming and experience it for yourself on a proper fat bike with Manitou fork (I have a bluto which is still better than rigid).
Reply
Tjaard Breeuwer
1 year, 2 months ago
We are only at 47 degrees north here in Duluth, MN, USA, and yet that describes us.
I also want wide, grippy tires on my fatbike because:
Reply
Please log in to leave a comment.