# Full Sus vs Hard Tail



## Jockey (15 May 2008)

Ok, the longest running debate ever I'm sure, but I'm looking for some advice.... I'm riding the Merida Penrith enduro in September and I'm looking at investing in a new bike for the event.. Well you have to have an excuse for new wheels don't you!! At present I ride an Alloy hardtail which I love but am finding it just a little hard on the body these days. I also ride a full sus, which is heavy as hell and not right for a full on XC race.. But... full sus's are getting lighter and lighter, yet Carbon hard tails taking the "hard" out of Hardtails. So my question is...

Should I take a punt on a carbon hard tail, or should I go for a full sus as my next XC bike. Any personal experiences / recomendations would be appreciated - especially if you can recommend a decent bike.

Thanks


----------



## Tim Bennet. (16 May 2008)

Forget about carbon hardtails having any give. Stand beside one and lean on the saddle and see how much give that back end has; NONE! The tyres will give a bit but the rear end of a hard tail is rigid, whatever it's made of.

Carbon and steel can held reduce the 'buzz' that gets through to the saddle, pedals and grips, and this can help to reduce fatigue, but it does nothing for the rough stuff. Tyre pressure (and tyre quality to a degree) has a much bigger effect than anything else on a hardtail.

When I went for a full susser, I too thought I would keep the hardtail (steel and said to be very compliant) for cross country enduros, but the ride on the full suspension was so much better that the longer the ride, the more inclined I was to ride the full suspension and the hardtail remained unused.

In the end I swapped the Whyte PRST2 for a Santa Cruz Superlight and happily use it for everything. If I want to go 'hard core' for things such as the Hell of the North Cotswolds, I just use my cross bike.

Mrs TB has got her race SantaCruz down to less than 25lbs all up, so full suspension doesn't have to be heavy. But you do have to pay lots to get less.


----------



## RedBike (16 May 2008)

Something in-between so to speak, a short travel full sus like the Giant Anthem or a long travel hardtail? 

Its will probably be worth hiring a few different bikes or finding a stop that will let you test ride a few off-road. 

I would say that in general full suspension bikes are getting heavier as more and more suspension travel seems to become the norm.


----------



## barq (16 May 2008)

I sympathise with you about alu hardtails. I moved to steel which was a tad better, but the only bike that makes a significant difference is my full-susser.

My limited experience of carbon is that it damps vibration which is great for road bikes, but doesn't 'give' the way you want for off-road cycling. Aside from making riding more comfortable good suspension should help plant your wheels firmly on the ground as you go over the rough stuff. So I'd be trying out a few different suspension designs from different manufacturers. I like Kona's Kikapu range (now superceded by the Four range), but a very popular choice would be some variety of Specialized Epic.


----------



## mr Mag00 (16 May 2008)

hi, my few pennies worth. i went from a hardtail that was about 15 yrs old, twas v v good in its day actually ridden professionally too. but it became increasingly difficult to maintain and was becoming less cost effective and the stance was all wrong in the 'modern' era. so i blew a wad of cash on a full sus Trek fuel ex 9.5. i looked and rode and tried many a frame spec i was v v undecided as to what to get, but designs had changed and now there are far more genres of riding so i plumped for the enduro geometry which seemed i deal i wanted to attempt those races at some point, god im rambling here, its an excellent bike the ability to lock off the sus when needed is great but i find more and more i leave it on even for the 'flat' stuff and find i can ride it faster. it has taken me some time to get used to riding full sus, im not sure about riser bars and change the riding style has changed.


----------



## User482 (19 May 2008)

I have 2 MTBs - a full rigid and a full sus. I think that full sussers are in danger of becoming a bit too much of a good thing - on anything but the gnarliest terrain, you simply don't have too much involvement. By contrast the full rigid requires lots of concentration at all times, and is more fun as a result. On the other hand, you get beaten up and tired much more quickly. So for an enduro, I would go for a light, short travel full suss - it's what I used for the Bristol Bikefest and it seemed to be the perfect choice of bike.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (10 Jun 2008)

I have a very nice FS (Titus Motolite 2), on which you can lock out the rear suspension if you want - which means it is pretty much all purpose. I have found that despite what people say about FS getting better at lower prices it isn't really that simple - you do have to pay more to get something that is really good. 

In some ways you can't beat the feel offered by a hardtail added to the fact that it simply forces you to take a better line. Hardtails make you a better rider - simple as. And for XC there really isn't any need for FS. If I was buying now, I would buy a steel On-One HT.


----------



## bonj2 (10 Jun 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> I have a very nice FS (Titus Motolite 2), on which you can lock out the rear suspension if you want - which means it is pretty much all purpose. I have found that despite what people say about FS getting better at lower prices it isn't really that simple - you do have to pay more to get something that is really good.
> 
> In some ways you can't beat the feel offered by a hardtail added to the fact that *it simply forces you to take a better line. Hardtails make you a better rider - simple as. *And for XC there really isn't any need for FS. If I was buying now, I would buy a steel On-One HT.



people'll be wheeling that tired old argument out for ever and a day...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Jun 2008)

bonj said:


> people'll be wheeling that tired old argument out for ever and a day...



Uh-huh - what is your argument against it? Seeing as all the genuinely experienced riders and racers I know are of this opinion... 

And remind us how long it is you've been riding seriously again as you do.


----------



## Tim Bennet. (11 Jun 2008)

> Seeing as *all the genuinely experienced riders and racers* I know are of this opinion...


You need to get out more. About everyone I know made the switch to FS about 4 years ago and all said they would keep the hardtail fo racing / enduros / skill training, etc. 

Only one has ever ridden a hard tail since, and he's got some 29'er which he claims..... yardy, yardy, yardy.....

Everyone else can see no downside whatsoever with FS for cross country. But then we all live in the Lakes and not London. Perhaps our definition of cross country is different.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Jun 2008)

Tim Bennet. said:


> You need to get out more. About everyone I know made the switch to FS about 4 years ago and all said they would keep the hardtail fo racing / enduros / skill training, etc.



There's no need for the school yard taunts. I get out a fair amount, thanks.

And you miss the point almost entirely. These are people who rode hardtails when learning, and switched - me too. I am not against FS - I have one, as I said. 

But are you seriously suggesting that you do not develop better technique, better judgement of line and better foresight if you never ride HT (or for that matter rigid)?


----------



## Kirstie (11 Jun 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There's no need for the school yard taunts. I get out a fair amount, thanks.
> 
> And you miss the point almost entirely. These are people who rode hardtails when learning, and switched - me too. I am not against FS - I have one, as I said.
> 
> But are you seriously suggesting that you do not develop better technique, better judgement of line and better foresight if you only never ride HT (or for that matter rigid)?



For the record, I agree with FM here. As a general rule it's always better to start on a hardtail because they give you great handling skills. Move to FS later on. Having said that for general trail duties there's no hard and fast rule as to when you should ride a hardtail, or when you should ride FS. For example all of the guides at one of the alpine centres i know ride tight long travel hardtails on trails that you (TB) might consider to be only rideable on FS judging by what you've posted. There's more to handling than just having a bit of squish at both ends. And plenty of people still ride fully rigid in places like the peaks and lakes. It's more about what suits you personally.

I've ridden stuff like the marin rough ride, many of the classic lakes and peaks routes on my santa cruz hardtail (the WSD one with the short wheelbase so it's really sh1t scary), and it's a lot of fun if you go fast enough. At the end of dusk til dawn, however, I was cursing the effing thing and wanting to sell it for a short travel FS 

Going back to the OP I would recommend a trek fuel EX9 or better. I rode one last year in the arizona desert (FM was there too), and they climb beautifully, handle really well, are nicely built and are nice and light. I would not recommend a carbon hardtail under any circs...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Jun 2008)

Kirstie said:


> Going back to the OP I would recommend a trek fuel EX9 or better. I rode one last year in the arizona desert (FM was there too), and they climb beautifully, handle really well, are nicely built and are nice and light



Totally agree - I was very surprised by how good the Fuel was - I had always had the rather snobbish view of Treks as being the Ford of the bicycle world, and this was actually very, very good indeed and helped a relative MTB idiot like me do some seriously gnarly rocky desert riding.


----------



## Kirstie (11 Jun 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Totally agree - I was very surprised by how good the Fuel was - I had always had the rather snobbish view of Treks as being the Ford of the bicycle world, and this was actually very, very good indeed and helped a relative MTB idiot like me do some seriously gnarly rocky desert riding.



Didn't stop you sitting on that cactus though did it?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Jun 2008)

Kirstie said:


> Didn't stop you sitting on that cactus though did it?



That was a tactical decision...


----------



## bonj2 (11 Jun 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Uh-huh - what is your argument against it? Seeing as all the genuinely experienced riders and racers I know are of this opinion...


Well, don't get me wrong i'm not _strongly_ against it, i can see the point, and I can see the point in hardtails from a 'purist' perspective, but let's just deal with the assertion as it stands: "it simply forces you to take a better line. Hardtails make you a better rider". At the end of the day, that is _technically_ true: however, my reservations are that (a) you can still learn how to take a better line with a FS bike, and ( a FS bike also makes you a better rider.
I know when I've taken a bad line. I don't need to be riding a hardtail to know when I've taken a bad line. The best case scenario for the pro-FS argument is that the FS might be forgiving enough to enable you to recover better to get back on track in time for the next bend/obstacle.
On the other hand, when riding my FS I also get that real good buzz from taking the best line through something. To balance it out, the best case scenario from the pro-HT argument is that that buzz is even better.
HOWEVER, the reason I call it a 'tired old argument' is that it just conjures up a mental image of a hardtail rider weaving deftly through the obstacles and flicking the bike elegantly round, while the FS rider simply blunders down the middle half asleep straight through the middle of all the obstacles without even paying any attention to line, I don't believe for one minute that's the case. 
I used to have a hardtail before I got my FS, and occasionally I have my rear shock locked out. It's not _that_ much different - it's still mountain biking, the same skills largely still apply and the same element of fun is still there and is generated in largely the same way. If anything I would say that the difference i notice is that with a FS you can sort of 'steer with your arse' more.




Flying_Monkey said:


> And remind us how long it is you've been riding seriously again as you do.



not that long, couple or three years. I don't pretend to be some sort of riding god or anything, i'm not that great I dont' make any pretence of being the best rider in the world, but that doesn't mean i don't know anything, and i'm also aware that i'm by no means the worst rider in the world either.


----------



## Steve Austin (11 Jun 2008)

Ti hardtail is what you need. Its what i been riding for the last ten years and its the only serious choice for XC riding.

30 years of off-road can't be wrong


----------



## Flying_Monkey (12 Jun 2008)

Bonj - so basically you agree with me! 

No-one has said you _can't_ be agood rider if you only ever ride FS, nor that it isn't more fun, simply that you will become _a better rider more quickly_, if you learn HT. 

Learning is not just about choices, it is about what you are forced to do through bodily experience - riding HT punishes bad line choice (rigid even more so although perhaps too much!), so unless you are either a masochist, very clumsy or an idiot, you _have_ to learn to take a good line. 

FS doesn't do that. Of course, it still pays to take a good line riding FS, but unless you are have a really good cycling brain, you will not be made to realise this so quickly through the physical feedback you get from your bike.


----------



## Keith Oates (12 Jun 2008)

I'vve never owned a FS so can't really give much comment but I find that the hard tail gets me through most of the stuff I do when out and about. However I don't race it just out having fun or commuting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Tim Bennet. (12 Jun 2008)

This reminds me of the 'you must ride fixed or you will not learn to pedal properly' arguments from club riders in my youth. They claimed only by learning to 'ankle' correctly would one ever be able to ride long distances. You never hear of it these days.

Oh, and there was the 'you can train your body to not need food and drink' and 'pushing big gears is the only way to go fast', etc, etc.

In mountaineering, the old farts used to rail against 'the young whipper-snappers' not serving a proper aprenticeship of fell walking and grovelling around on greasy routes in November in Wales as training for the 'major ranges'. But standards have continued to rise year on year, despite 'established truths' being trashed by each successive generation.

And so with the HT / FS debate: I predict we won't see any drop off in skill level when the next generation of mountainbikers start to blaze a trail without the benefit of a hardtail apprenticeship. Just ride what you enjoy and ride it lots. If you want to buy a FS for cross country enduros (and have the resources to do so) then go for it. People like John Houlihan and Steve Heading seem to be quite quick on them.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (12 Jun 2008)

Analogy is no good as an argument unless the things are actually similar enough - it is about the specifics in each case. We know that pushing a big gear is not a good idea for most people because of the potential for long-term knee damage. And there are certainly both advantages and disadvantages to riding fixed. 

And (sigh) no-one is arguing that you shouldn't do what is fun and you enjoy. And the top cyclists will still be the best, however they learn, because of their natural talent and hard work - arguing by reference to extremes doesn't really help us understand what works for most of us.


----------



## User482 (12 Jun 2008)

My own view is that riding my fully rigid MTB makes me a better rider - I have to choose much better lines (otherwise I fall off) so my anticipation of the trail is improved. That means I can go even faster when I wheel the FS out. Nothing to do with an old fart moaning about newer riders, simply an observation from 15 years' experience of riding and racing.


----------



## Capt. Jon (12 Jun 2008)

User482 said:


> My own view is that riding my fully rigid MTB makes me a better rider - I have to choose much better lines (otherwise I fall off) so my anticipation of the trail is improved. That means I can go even faster when I wheel the FS out. Nothing to do with an old fart moaning about newer riders, simply an observation from 15 years' experience of riding and racing.



Spot on. Riding all sorts of bikes improves the riding of other bikes. My road bike helps me with fitness and pedaling technique (amongst other things), riding my mtb (HT) xc makes me a stronger rider and works my upper body more, jumping helps with strength, dealing with trail obstacles and maneuverability, bmx similarly. My next bike will be a FS as i'm getting older and want to be able to rider bigger/gnarlier stuff (e.g. Alps), but i have no doubt i'd be a weaker rider if i didn't learn on different bikes.


----------



## GaryA (13 Jun 2008)

I have a steel rigid XC MTB and a FS Alu framed one and they both have their charms depending on terrain/mood
in certain types of tight smooth singletrack the rigid does feel more chuckable and precise but on rough descents it feels too front-endy and a bit scary

What would put me off FS is the maintanance and cost of keeping on top of the rear shock and joint wear if its used during the winter or in sandy conditions, as i do


----------

