Posted by: D_C_
Posted by: Kenny
On fast flow trails there's no real difference. On slow tech trails there's also not much difference. On fast trails with chunk or lots of small drops like John deer or severed, the chromag is a handful and the Bronson makes mincemeat out of them. At least at my skill level. Obviously John deer is a simple trail and you could ride anything down it, but I can pretty much let go of the brakes and smash it on the Bronson. On the chromag I am just doing what I can to stay on the pedals. I feel little need to bring the Bronson to fromme, chromag is great, but I simply don't have the skill or risk tolerance to smash something like ladies at high speed so maybe that's why.
I have a Range 29 and Rootdown BA.
My experience on the hardtail is similar to yours. The hardtail is at home on smooth pumpy trails and steep tech, but suffers a bit on fast trails with high-frequency bumps. It just doesn't track the ground well on trails like John Deer or stuff on Galbraith, which would be considered fast flow on my Range.
On fast trails that are really rough like Ned's, the key is to ride the hardtail fast enough that it starts skipping over the top of bumps. This takes a bit of commitment, and it's either a really slow and cautious pace, or fast and aggressive. But riding rough trails at a middle speed is quite jarring. That threshold needs to be crossed.
Similar to others, I find I ride the hardtail more in the winter. I also like riding it on solo rides, since it keeps me out of trouble. The Range just craves the fastest, roughest, steepest trails, and I don't want to have a big stack by myself in the woods. The Chromag makes me pick windier, lower-consequence trails and makes them challenging and rewarding in situations where the Range would be a bit dull. In the summer, when I'm riding 4 times a week, having the hardtail lets me mix up the experience on the same old Shore trails.
My impressions of the Rootdown: I am running it with a 2016 Pike at 150 with 29er wheels. Prior to the Rootdown, I had a Kona Taro (budget aluminum bike with same geometry as the Honzo) with a 120 mm fork. I really love how the Chromag rides, but there are a couple things I would change:
The biggest thing is that the Chromag frame is about 3 whole pounds heavier than the Kona frame (it's close to 7 lbs), and I notice it. The Kona had a sense of urgency and was easy to throw around. The Chromag plods along a bit more. I'm not convinced an overbuilt steel frame is much more compliant than an alloy frame, so I don't think an alloy bike is worth ruling out. But next time, I'd check out a lighter, more compliant steel frame that's closer to 5 lbs, if such a thing exists.
I also think I prefer a shorter fork on a hardtail. With the 120 fork, there wasn't as drastic a steepening of geometry as the bike moved through its travel. The 150 fork makes the bike a bit harder to set up. I have to run my bars a bit higher than I'd like at static ride height to not feel like I'm being pitched over the bars when the fork gets moving. I also run the air spring firmer than I would on a full-suspension. Given that the Rootdown is designed around a 160 fork, 150 is as short as I'd go to avoid a near-vertical seat tube angle. But I think my next hardtail will be one designed around a 120 or 130 mm fork.
This is a really solid review of what a well built aggressive hardtail does/does not do well. For me (and sounds like D_C_) Fork travel length is a huge factor in determining rider position and the rider position for my 160mm rootdown is quite different than my 160mm fs bike, with identical front forks, and only 1deg diff in HTA. Which means I need to think about some stuff before charging ahead... which, again as D_C_ mentioned, means that I need to address the threshold issue, either on the gas or off.