[kinj]

Can or should a 26" (regular sized) trials bike be used off road(as in trails and stuff)? I mean they are mountain bikes and have gears and everything, and I would think being lighter and stiffer would make it better, wouldn't it?. But I see mountain bikes and trials bikes put in separate categories so I am asking.

Edit: BTW, the bike I am talking about in particular is the Brisa B26D Elite... would this bike be able to handle all the abuse of off road riding?

 

[ioscope]

It should.
People overcategorize.

 

[butthead]

As far as durability goes, I'm sure any trials frame can more than handle the rigors of normal mountain biking. Trials frames geometry geared toward a very specific purpose. It would be a very unique handling trail bike if you built it up.

I can think of only a couple of potential problems.

-Some trials frames don't really have a place to mount a front derailleur. I don't know if Brisa's frames would have that problem, but you might want to investigate that if you want to run more than one chainring.

-Trials frames are usually relatively small compared to "normal" mountain bike frames. If you are tall, you might feel cramped.

I kind of agree about the over-categorization of frames. If you think you'll like it, build it up, ride it, and have fun.

 

[MDBullit]

real trials frames from companies like Koxx, Echo, Monty, Coustellier, etc would be terrible for MTB since A: head angle is very steep and B: the seat tube is 4" long and there is no seat. I have seen pics of a guy jumping on a Brisa B26D though.

 

[haromtnbiker]

I dont want to trail ride a bike with no seat, or one that is 4 inches long. Ouch.

 

[Morryjg]

I wouldn't want to go fast on a trials geometry bike. That steep head angle is going to make the bike really twitchy. I bet technical trails would be fun on a trials geometry though. Overall though, I would guess you would be better off getting a XC bike for trails. I sure wouldn't want to take my Zebdi trail riding.

 

[kinj]

Ok thanks for the replies guys.

Now: Small frames don't bother me, I actually prefer it (I'm 5'4''). Seats can be replaced pretty easily I'm thinking. So the only two issues I have found are geometery and brakes. Most trials-sepecific bikes have really grippy brakes with no modulation, which is horrible for MTB or and sort of trail riding, so that kinda made me reconsider.

Specialized P.3

So I was looking through Specialized's site, and I found the P.3 series, so my question is: Is this bike good for xc'ing? Trials? Is it light weight and strong? Is the geometery correct? If not, I'll just go for a one of the rockhoppers or stumpjumpers. Thanks again.

 

[butthead]

So I was looking through Specialized's site, and I found the P.3 series, so my question is: Is this bike good for xc'ing? Trials? Is it light weight and strong? Is the geometery correct? If not, I'll just go for a one of the rockhoppers or stumpjumpers. Thanks again.

Your best bet would be to go ride one and see how it feels for you. The geometry shouldn't be an issue. It's made to be a freeride, urban, 4X hardtail. It doesn't have the super steep head angle of a trials bike, so it should be stable at speed. I've seen people on the trails with them, so xc rides are possible. I'm not sure about the trials question. It is going to be more difficult to hop around like a trials bike due to longer chainstays, but you might have to make that compromise if you want a "do-all" bike.

You might also consider the Giant STP series, Kona's dirt jump bikes, Cannondale Chase series or something along those lines to give you some more variety. If you have the budget for it, a custom build would probably be the best way to meet your needs. A bike with adjustable chainstays like the Evil Imperial, .243 racing, or Planet X Pitbull would be a good option, but would get pricey quick when you start to add components. The Evil would be particularly good for what you've described since you can set the chainstays super short for urban/trials stuff, go with an "average" length for trails or slalom style riding, or set them long for steep downhill riding. It just happens to be expensive.

In regards to the strength/weight question, here is the general rule of thumb:

Strength/Light Weight/Low Cost - You can only have two of the three categories. If it is strong and lightweight, it is expensive. If it is strong and inexpensive, it is heavy. If it's lightweight and inexpensive, it isn't very strong.

 

[kinj]

I have one more question, the P.3 doesn't have a front derailleur... what is this exactly and what does it do(sorry I'm a major noob here)? Is it neccessary for riding trails? I know my current bike has one(it's a ****ty no-name mtb) and from what I can gather it adjusts the force needed to pedal. I haven't ridden a bike without one yet to see what the difference is, so you guys have to help me out, thanks again.

 

[Morryjg]

That means you only have one chainring up front. Multiple chainrings give you more gear range. Whether you need that range is a personal choice, here in Colorado a trail bike without a triple chainring is useless for most people. The 'P' bikes from Specialized were designed to be a heavy duty urban/dirt jump bike where you don't need the gear range of cross country. You are not going to find one bike that is good for everything unfortunately. I would guess that the best solution would be to get a bike for XC and save up some cash and get a bike for trials work. You can pick up used Trials rigs fairly cheap.

 

[skurfer333]

I've been XC riding for a few years and I've recently taken up freeriding. I rode a P3 on some XC trails just to get to the drops and stunts, but it didn't handle bad at all on the trails. It pedals pretty well too. I mean granted, its no lightweight xc bike that you can beast up the steepest hill in the woods, but it can get you up those long, annoying climbs without leaving your legs screaming.

 

[skurfer333]

Oh, and I'm 5'9" and I prefer the smaller frames too, and I thought the P3's geometry felt great.