[BigMike]

As far as rear travel goes, I have always had ~6" on my bike. Is it really worth going to 8? I see it as its not the amount of travel as much as the QUALITY of travel.

Lets take for instance, the new Rocky Mountain Switch vs. the New Rocky Mountain RMX.

for pedaling and weight and the such, the Switch wins hands down. With the new FOX DHX 5.0, travel quality should be pretty good too. So, as far as riding DH with a 6" bike, are there any major disadvantages?

 

[OGRipper]

Just my opinion but personally for pure DH, I like more than 6" because I want a fair amount of sag. I like a dh bike to be active, meaning (to me) that it can extend when riding over a dip, not just reactive (meaning it just compresses to absorb hits). I like to have ample negative travel (as well as positive travel) for sticking to the ground over dips and rises in the trail. If my bike is sagged down 2 inches and I've only got 6 inches total, there's just not enough travel left for compressing to absorb bigger hits. But I'm talking about pure DH, as in get down the hill fastest with no jumping or other fun stuff.

 

[RhinofromWA]

My Rotec has 6 or so inches of travel....I think that there are a lot of other factors to make it a good DH bike. Geometery of the bike makes up for a lot. I would take a 6" DH bike over a 8" steepish FR bike for DHing.

That is how I feal. A good DH bike with 8" of travel "might" be better still. Courses can play into what would be better or needed.

 

[Toshi]

like several have said the numeric value of length of travel doesn't mean much. that said it's usually a pretty good indicator. suspension type/design also makes a huge difference. i've owned a kona-style single pivot at 5" and 6", a horst link 6"er, and a parallel linkage 9" rig, with vanilla r, rc, swinger 6 way, and avy dhs shocks variously, and each frame cannot simply be characterized by the length of its travel.

 

[Frankenschwinn]

My straight Six was very plush and very active and I thought I would not need any more than that. But, I was wrong... My V10 holds its line through rough corners better and takes rough choppy lines so much faster.

Six will work and I was faily competitive on the old schwinn but I think the V10 will win hands down.

 

[MikeD]

Geometry is the first concern, then quality of travel, then quantity. Oversimplified a bit, but true.

I'd rather DH on a HT with a 66 degree HA than a 6" trailbike with a 70 degree HA.

MD

 

[OGRipper]

I have to agree with MikeD and Toshi. Geometry and quality of travel are more important than the quantity of travel. Your question was about quantity of travel but it can't be viewed in a vaccuum. So as you look at the question of whether a particular bike will be better for you, look not just at the quantity of travel but other numbers.

Generally (and we love to generalize here on RM!), the more travel you get the more dh-oriented your bike will be. By that I mean bigger travel bikes will have slacker angles, longer wheelbase, etc. Yes, there are exceptions but it's generally true. Those changes mean more stability at speed and in the steep stuff but come at the price of handling in super tight sections.

Compare the numbers on the Switch and RMX and you'll see what we're talking about.

 

[Tully]

I ride DH with 7" (Yeti AS-X with a 5th Element, hopefully a DHX 5.0 sometime soon). It's enough for hucking and most riding, but I wouldn't mind another inch for really rough technical stuff (although that's just my opinion).

 

[Tully]

What sort of riding do you do, and on what bike?

 

[Curb Hucker]

quality of travel is a much bigger deal than amount. My f1 has a rearward arcing axlepath, and the 9in of travel that the frame makes feels alot smoother and more endless than friend's bikes whith 9in and a forward arcing axle, toshi knows what im talking about