[Snickryder]

I've been thinking about going full-suspension for a while. Looking at a lot of bikes....Yeti ASR, Trek Fuel, Titus Racer-X, Ellsworth Truth, and so on.

Problem is, I climb a lot. Living on the front range of CO, there are two types of riding: Up and Down. There really aren't any X-country rides around here. Most rides are 1000-2500ft climbs followed by a loop at the top and then a big downhill. Which, by the way is very fun.

I'm currently on a 2000 Litespeed Tsali softtail. It's a nice combo of hardtail for climbing and suspension for XC and DH to help take the edge off. Recently though I've really been going hard and think it might be time to jump to a FS rig, but need one that climbs very well.

Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
Rick

 

[Treeline]

Santa cruz bullit!

The perfect bike for any one.
in my opinion.

 

[RideMonkey]

Hey I moved this thread to Tech talk. I am going to be archiving these discussions in this forum, and I though this was a good one

In the meantime I am formulating a quality response...........

 

[Will_Jekyll]

Any light weight FS with a Fox Float RC will be a good climber becasue it becomes a hard tail with a flck of the switch.

 

[KrusteeButt]

Hey Rick, I thought you tried out the Fuel and liked it?

Also, I thought the riding we do here is considered XC...was I wrong?

Dave

 

[kitchenware]

it's some form of hill conquering with brief rest periods (downhill runs). You don't realize how much climbing there is here until you ride somewhere else. I find Moab to be like a ride through town towards the end of the summer after riding here.

 

[Snickryder]

Originally posted by KrusteeButt
Hey Rick, I thought you tried out the Fuel and liked it?

Also, I thought the riding we do here is considered XC...was I wrong?

Dave

Krustee,

I did try the Fuel, and I did like it. Just wanted to see what others have tried and liked that ride similarly. Besides, the Fuel and Racer-X are the only ones of the bunch I mentioned that I have tried.

XC riding, in my mind anyway, is more rolling hills, where you are always up and down. You might climb 2000ft over the whole rider, but it doesn't come all at once like it does here.

Rick

 

[Rocket]

I have a stage 1 Rocket 88 and love it. I have not had a single problem with it and smack it around pretty good. Not thrilled about the sale of the company but love the bikes (have a homegrown also).

 

[B-Loco]

Snickryder -

If you already have a soft-tail and are looking for something with a bit more travel go Racer-X. Closest thing to a hardtail out of the bikes you listed. Has a bit more travel than your soft-tail but climbs very well and it fairly light. Should be beefy enough for some downhills, although that's not what the bike is made for.

Never ridden the Yeti ASR, the Truth is nice but heavy and also beyond expensive. Truth also has a bit more travel than the Racer-X and is supposed to be good with bio-pacing, meaning it doesn't have much. I still the racer-X would sprint and climb better, but I've never ridden a Truth in the dirt. So the only thing I can comment on are the Racer-x and the Fuel. Maybe even consider the Santa Cruz superlight? It's not fully active suspension but it climbs very well and the suspension is built to sprint and climb like a hardtail.

-B

 

[Merwin5_10]

For XC RIDE/CLIMB EFFECIENCY there is really only two geometry's that clearly provide a tangible advantage on climbs.

Giant NRS XTC series bikes

&

Fisher Sugar series bikes.

Test this. You'll see what I mean. Either of these two bikes will smoke any other "xc" FS bike ON CLIMBS. (Read that again, ON CLIMBS.)

They don't utelize a lock-out shock to create efficiency. That means the rider just rides and the geometry creates a powerfull climbing machine. Anytime a bike relies on a lock-out shock, there will come a time (such as in a race) when you can't get to the lock out mech. and your climbing will suffer.

DISADVANTAGES:

Giants- made in taiwan, many more responsive bikes out there.

Sugar- slow, bontrager spec. ians't that great for the price.

 

[muddywolf]

we got the '02 Sugar 3s today, they look a little better. XT, LX, Manitou Black, but they still have the damned Bontrager crap

 

[HELLTACO]

Maybe not da best but I like Titus Switchblade and Connondale Jekyll
Corse da best kinda bikes are lowriders.

 

[Big hit]

I think that no matter what bike you're thinking of buying, by far one of the most important things is the rear shock. I upgraded my bike this year to a giant XTC AC1 with the rear Rock Shox pro deluxe with compression and rebound damping..the compression damping makes a huge difference climbing as you can almost lock it out, or at least to the point of not being a concern...

In my opinion this is what you should be looking for

 

[HELLTACO]

Originally posted by Will_Jekyll
Any light weight FS with a Fox Float RC will be a good climber becasue it becomes a hard tail with a flck of the switch.

Maybe juss ta be different?, but I climb better wit my F/S dan my hardtail. Da hardtail gets sketchy an' slips around where da F/S digs in an' gos. 'Corse dis cud bes cuza ridin' positions an' stuff too, but if I hadn't had so much fun wit da hardtail in da past I'd chuck it.

 

[thatoneguy]

IT is extremely stiff, and you can ride up the hill without having to lock out the shock. 4 bar link has been proven to work with the least pogo. Another similar bike would be the I-drive, works on the same concept...

 

[Merwin5_10]

Originally posted by thatoneguy
4 bar link has been proven to work with the least pogo.

by whom? I've ridden the Giant XTC NRS Zero head to head against the Sugar Geometry. With the front forks locked out (the two bikes I rode were both Spec'd woth 2001 Sid SL's) the Sugar had less pogo on the climbs. The giant felt faster though.

Another similar bike would be the I-drive, works on the same concept...

Can you say heavy? "Huffy" is known for making heavy rides. The I-Drive does pogo, bit admittedly not nearly as much as the vast majority of FS Xc's out there.

 

[RideMonkey]

I never understood i-drive. How is it similar in function to 4-bar linkage when its a 1-piece rear triangle?

 

[dirtybikechick]

I'm riding a GF Joshua F4 and love the lock out on the rear for the climbs. My only gripe is that the lock out won't disengage after the climb. I have to get off the bike and manually disengage it. I have lost my "Bike God" at the local shop here and the other guys really don't know s***. Any suggestions?

DBC

 

[spookydave]

I gotta throw another plug for the Tracer. They are great climbers. I very seldom use the lock out but it's there if i need it. The bike is so adjustable too. You can adjust wheelbase, rear wheel travel, head angle & bottom bracket height. Also Intense is great with any warrenty issues too. Oh, did I say that the rear is stiff? Not flexy like some other fs bikes I checked out. Ya, it costs more than some others but once you have one you'll understand why.
The guy that thinks the Truths are heavy must be nuts. I'm not a big fan of them but a friend has one that weighs in at 24.25 lbs. To me that is a pretty light fs rig. Oh, he climbs pretty darn good on it too.

 

[dw]

Is pretty nice I have to say. I have owned mine for almost 3 years now. Before I bought it I test rode a lot of other frames, and I really preferred it over the Ellsworth and Specialized high end XC frames. I built mine up as a slalom/freeride bike. It has since developed many cracks and will be retired soon. It climbs hills with ease in the middle ring (I run a 36) and the rear end stays planted. Under heavy pedaling it can tend to break loose a little, but it suits my ability generally. I am super sensitive to this kind of thing, most people who ride my bike really do like it. When it was originally built up for my test ride it weighed in at 22 and change on a shop's scale with a full XTR kit and light wheels and tires. My build is much heavier. The bike is pretty much zero maintenence too, a big plus over some of the multi link bikes IMO.

So uh yeah, it climbs pretty nice.

dw

 

[SK6]

Originally posted by muddywolf
we got the '02 Sugar 3s today, they look a little better. XT, LX, Manitou Black, but they still have the damned Bontrager crap

Which ones? I just upgraded to the superstocks, and so far they hold up pretty good.....

 

[Merwin5_10]

The I-Drive is a pivoting sytem that was designed to elliminate inconsitent distances between the cassette and the chainrings, elliminating inconsistencies in cahin tension. The idea is that as the susoension gives, the circular housing rotates to keep the distance equal. This actually has nothing in common with a four bar linkage since the distance varies. Four bar linkages are designed to control forces that create movement and elliminate movement cuased by pedalling. The I-drive doesn't elliminate rider induced bob too well. What it does do is create a very constistent chain tension which translates into smooth pedalling even with an active rear. Two totally different concepts.

 

[dw]

is based on by design a 4-bar linkage. Draw a free body diagram of the system and you will see what I mean. If you analyze the I-drive system with a kinematic modeling sytem (or on paper) you will see that a lot of the rider's weight is carried as unsprung mass. This is especially true for the DHi. This hurts the suspension's ability to react to small bumps quickly as compared to a bike with less unsprung mass. It does however mute high speed oscillations in the system more than other non URT frames. (not that the I-drive is a URT, but it shares some performance aspects with them.) Dont really know where i'm going with this here post, but the subject matter sure is interesting!

carry on!

dw

 

[Merwin5_10]

Originally posted by obiwan-f1moto
is based on by design a 4-bar linkage. Draw a free body diagram of the system and you will see what I mean. If you analyze the I-drive system with a kinematic modeling sytem (or on paper) you will see that a lot of the rider's weight is carried as unsprung mass. This is especially true for the DHi. This hurts the suspension's ability to react to small bumps quickly as compared to a bike with less unsprung mass. It does however mute high speed oscillations in the system more than other non URT frames. (not that the I-drive is a URT, but it shares some performance aspects with them.) Dont really know where i'm going with this here post, but the subject matter sure is interesting!

carry on!

dw

I see what you're saying. The movement of the I-drive system is similar that of a four bar linkage. OK, that makes sense now.

Forget what I said earlier. IMO, the I-drive doesn't elliminate enough bob. That's just how I feel after having ridden it.

 

[KrusteeButt]

Ok....you guys are startin' to sound like engineers!

Now that I've figured out what URT means, what is "four bar linkage"?

 

[SK6]

Okay, I follow you, accept on one point, why is the rider's weight considered unsprung mass?

 

[Merwin5_10]

In other words, the weight of the rider simply riding the bike doesn't initiate shock compression. Its "unsprung." If a rider's wieght has a lot of impact on compression of the shock you get rider initiated bob and a pogo type ride. This deminishes efficiency dramatically. Four bar linkages, as well as the Sugar geometry, redesign the way the rider's weight loads the shock. More accurately, it loads the FRAME not the shock. The only way to make either design become fully active is to create load from beneath the rear tire, as you would if you struck a root or a rock. This provides greater efficiency in that more power makes it to the rear wheel under load instead of being absorbed by the shock when you pedal, as it does on a less efficient design.

Get on a Cannondale SuperV. Get very close to a wall or other support. Lock out both brakes while steadying yourself with your elbow against the support. Put pressure on the pedal and feel the suspension give dramatically under your weight. Even better, lock out the front shock if a lock out is available. Then you can isolate this effect on the rear shock. Doing this type of demonstartion will show you how much pogo you can expect from a FS design.

Now take this idea and think of how it will effect your riding if every time you put pressure on the pedal, the shock compresses and robs you of a little of that power. In XC riding, that adds up, baby!

The important thing to remember is that different design concepts work better in some riding than others. I'm really hammering fully active FS designs because they are not well suited to XC riding. They are exactly what you want for Freeriding or Downhill, tough.
It all depends on what kind of riding you are doing.

BTW, for the record. I like Cannondales. I think they make great stuff. I just wanted to use their Super V as an example of ann FS design the sucks for XC riding.

 

[shocktower]

Just hit your local wall mart and they will soon have them I like the cannondale jeykl they make a good bike ,Also the scalpule seem`s like a sweet XC ride ,But if you are looking for a more than 4" then a Bullit is what you need , That`s what I bought ,I biult it with a triple up front so I can climb and then haul ass way fast down then i do this to my slow friends ,Go and ride as many bikes as you can, I know that cannondale has a test ride program where you really get to ride the bike in real conditions ( they let you take it home and your favorite trails)

 

[Crash]

I'll throw in my hat for a Sugar 2. I love mine and it climbs like a goat. I ride regularly with a buddy who has a bullit. He loves it going down, but uphill is not its strength. It is nice when you point the wheels down, though.

 

[dw]

Originally posted by Nobody
I knew you couldn't keep a good man quiet!

HEH! yeah, i try to keep us all on the same page. Im going to try to stay away from high level analysis on ridemonkey though. (We'll see how long that lasts!)


dw

 

[gravity]

check out the Marin duallies, they have the same monoshock idea as the Santa Cruz, which is that the single shock pivot is above the bottom bracket (on the downtube) so that when chain tension pulls the back wheel towards the bottom bracket, the only way that the wheel can get closer to the BB is to move downwards, in a way locking out the shock but due to leverage ratios all it does is keep the back wheel on the ground while greatly reducing bobbing. its a simple, low maintenance design which is very effective. And sorry to anyone who owns one, but Giant NRS's (in my personal opinion only) suck as they have to be ridden at a certain shock setting to work properly....meaning that you cant set the rear shock harder or softer than the "ideal" setting for your weight as dictated by the manufacturer without preventing the NRS system from working as it should