New posts

Looking for some input.

Dec. 6, 2017, 10:57 a.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

Getting back into mountain biking after a decade+. Lots has changed since then! Looking for a bike that going to be smooth on the body, won't be doing big air or super crazy stuff. I know you can bike with a hardtail, but what the minimal amount of suspension for the Shore, that will prevent jarring the joints? I'm 6' tall,  and I like how the 29" wheels roll over things. I was in one bike shop and he wouldn't recommend any 29er's, he said 27.5 is the best wheel size for the Shore, but they were less than 6' tall. So, for you bikers that are 6' or taller, what are your thoughts on the 29er? What bikes are you riding?

Thanks for helping with the confusion of getting back into the sport!

Dec. 6, 2017, 11:39 a.m.
Posts: 222
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

Sounds like that bike shop was trying to push their 27.5 stock
Long travel 29er is money. They work on the shore just fine.

Dec. 6, 2017, 1:15 p.m.
Posts: 636
Joined: Nov. 18, 2015

I ride a long travel 29r on the Shore. Works perfect. I grind it up the nasty climbs and it destroys on the way down almost as well as my DH bike does. You might find that a smaller front ring is helpful depending upon the stock set up as the rolling diameter of a 29r can lead to tough ratio for steep climbs, and stock set ups don't always consider that.

No shortage of awesome bikes these days. They've come a long way in 10yrs.

Dec. 6, 2017, 5:46 p.m.
Posts: 1368
Joined: July 11, 2014

You probably want at least 140mm of travel front and rear. There isn't much of a downside to 150-160mm as most bikes these days are relatively light and climb well (especially if the suspension has "trail/climb" modes to reduce pedal bob). What is more important is the geometry of the bike. The head tube angle is a key measurement, basically the slacker this is the better the bike will descend steep/rough terrain but you will give up climbing ability. Say a 150mm bike with a 64degree head angle is more descent oriented than a 160mm with 66deg HTA.

I prefer the ride feel of 27.5 wheels but tons of people like 29 on the shore/sea to sky. You should demo some bikes to see what you like and feel the differences between wheel size and geometry for yourself. The good news is there are a ton of good bikes out there and most suspension/drive train/brakes etc. are high quality compared to the old days.

Dec. 6, 2017, 7:56 p.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

I understand that 29er doesn't need as much suspension as 27.5 because of the increased rollover of the 29er wheel, is that correct? If I'm mostly going to be riding with the tires on the ground, is a 140/130mm good? Seems like 160/150mm might be too much for my riding if I'm not doing drops greater than 4ft?

Dec. 6, 2017, 10:31 p.m.
Posts: 69
Joined: March 1, 2017

Posted by: Ouch

Thanks for helping with the confusion of getting back into the sport!

To add to the confusion, people want different things from a bike so there is no 'correct' bike, but on the other hand there aren't too many duff bikes either. I'm 6' tall and have owned a shortish travel 29er full suspension bike and didn't like it for the reasons that other people like them. The bike rolls well over everything and ultimately made the ride a bit uninspiring for me. I am back on a longer travel 27.5 bike that pretty well reminds me of a DH bike but I can ride it back uphill. I can throw it sideways, mess about and have a laugh which to me is what mountain biking is about. I know other people who have made similar decisions. So there isn't really a wrong choice. But if you are favouring speed, efficiency etc then maybe 29 is the way to go.

Dec. 7, 2017, 3:06 p.m.
Posts: 4827
Joined: Nov. 25, 2002

Posted by: Ouch

I understand that 29er doesn't need as much suspension as 27.5 because of the increased rollover of the 29er wheel, is that correct? If I'm mostly going to be riding with the tires on the ground, is a 140/130mm good? Seems like 160/150mm might be too much for my riding if I'm not doing drops greater than 4ft?

i think you're on the right track. short(er) travel modern 29'ers are great on the shore - you can certainly get away with less travel. no reason to push around the extra travel unless you're hitting the big chuck at a rapid pace on a regular basis.

Dec. 7, 2017, 5:13 p.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

Thanks for the feedback so far! It's over whelming with the amount of the options, and with the price of bikes I want to make sure I get the right one.

So 29er's are a good option and if I'm not doing crazy stuff 140/130 is enough suspension. I'm going to test ride the Norco Sight and Norco Range next week. Then I hope to test the RM Instinct and Altitude , Santa Cruz Hightower(kind of out of my price range though). I hope to have a good idea what will work for me.

I would also assume that with more suspension the less abuse on the body going over the rough stuff?

Dec. 7, 2017, 7:28 p.m.
Posts: 69
Joined: March 1, 2017

Yep, the best answer is to jump on some bikes. As for more suspension resulting in less abuse on the body.....ultimately suspension is there to increase control which results in increased speed, which then results in using all the suspension and you still getting a beating! I've ridden everything from a fully rigid bike to a Trek Session 10 with 10 inches of travel and I tended to feel the same at the end of the ride regardless of the bike! Although it's fair to say that climbing and flat rocky terrain will hurt you more on a hardtail because in this scenario you aren't hitting things fast on a full suspension bike. My 2018 Norco Range (27.5) is 5 pounds heavier than my hardtail but on anything other than roads it's a better / more comfortable climber.

Dec. 7, 2017, 9:53 p.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

Which model Range did you get? How do you like it? Climb ok?

Dec. 7, 2017, 11:10 p.m.
Posts: 10844
Joined: June 4, 2008

Buy the one you like the looks of most. 

If you’re spending $4000+, your rationalization of the purchase will trump any of the marginal differences brought forth thus far in the discussion.

No kidding.

Dec. 8, 2017, 7:21 a.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

Posted by: ReductiMat

Buy the one you like the looks of most. 

If you’re spending $4000+, your rationalization of the purchase will trump any of the marginal differences brought forth thus far in the discussion.

No kidding.

Sarcasm? Or you stating there's a marginal different between an "all-mountain" bike vs a "Enduro"? $4000+ is a the cheap end for the price of bikes!!

I think I'll buy the bike I like riding the most, then decide on which model.

Dec. 8, 2017, 9:59 a.m.
Posts: 222
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

Pretty much right now is the best time to buy. Right after xmas when the shops try to sell off the 2017 bikes before the next years stock shows up.
If I was you I would go to multiple shops and see what they are offering. For sure many will knock money off the marked price.

Happy hunting

Dec. 8, 2017, 8:04 p.m.
Posts: 69
Joined: March 1, 2017

Posted by: Ouch

Which model Range did you get? How do you like it? Climb ok?

2018 C3. It certainly climbs well enough for me but it's both designed with a downhill bias, and the parts (and frame) are designed / chosen for strength over scale shots for the internet. I can get up anything that I could on my hardtail and I've set the DVO suspension up so I don't constantly need to be playing with levers on the trail. Firm enough compression for the climbs and braking / berms but still plenty plush for chunder. I'm not a massive knob twiddler :D . The Sight, and similar bikes would by definition be quicker climbers if for no other reason that they'd be lighter. The Range also favours stability over fast steering reaction. 

ReductiMat has a point in that it's hard to buy a crap bike but if you choose the one that's right for you then you'll ultimately have a more fun experience.

Dec. 9, 2017, 8:19 a.m.
Posts: 77
Joined: Dec. 6, 2017

Posted by: trumpstinyhands

Posted by: Ouch

Which model Range did you get? How do you like it? Climb ok?

2018 C3. It certainly climbs well enough for me but it's both designed with a downhill bias, and the parts (and frame) are designed / chosen for strength over scale shots for the internet. I can get up anything that I could on my hardtail and I've set the DVO suspension up so I don't constantly need to be playing with levers on the trail. Firm enough compression for the climbs and braking / berms but still plenty plush for chunder. I'm not a massive knob twiddler :D . The Sight, and similar bikes would by definition be quicker climbers if for no other reason that they'd be lighter. The Range also favours stability over fast steering reaction. 

ReductiMat has a point in that it's hard to buy a crap bike but if you choose the one that's right for you then you'll ultimately have a more fun experience.

I hope it'll be quite obvious which bike will be best for me after the demo!

Everyone that I've talked to that's been MTBing for a long time, seem to be split on the all-mountain vs Enduro. I guess both have there pro's and con's.

Forum jump: