There always seems to be good response here to questions about Xterra and MTB.
I am going to upgrade my full suspension bike to a more race-worthy frame. All the other components are great, the only remaining issue is a frame that’s not designed for racing and the geometry really messes with me on steep technical climbs.
I have 2 used frames available to me and need to choose between them.
They are:
2005 Trek Top Fuel
2003 Santa Cruz SuperLight
Which one would make the better Xterra race bike and why?
I’ve got a Motobecane 5" travel frame designed more for AM riding.
It’s got a very high bottom bracket and I have a high CG when I ride it. On a steep hill the rear squats too much, the front can compress as I lean forward, and with the high center of gravity the front end gets too light and I only succeed on some uphill turns by riding a controlled wheelie.
It’s just not the right frame for XC racing…
The two frames I mentioned are better suited to XC racing anyway (geometry and weight).
if you had issues with the Motobecanes front end lifting off the ground, I would steer you towards the Santa Cruz. Wheel base is slightly shorter in the santa cruz, but a large portion of that is because of the more slack HT angle on the Trek. The change will come in the chain stay length being longer or equil on the santa cruz and the head tube being shorter. As long as you’re running no more than 100mm travel on the front, teh santz cruz seems like it would be a better fit for you. Lower BB height too.
I had issues with trek bikes and the front end lifting too. I switched to a Fisher and it is firmly planted on the ground even in the steepest of climbs.
I’m also looking at a santa cruz superlight/blur. I may even lean towards the Heckler or Blur LT. As long as you’re not running a freeride fork, it sould ride well uphill.
I am a much more experienced MTB racer than triathlete, the main reason I dont post much here. I had an '03 Fuel 98 (aluminum front triangle, carbon stays) that I raced for several years. I raced it in several Xterra’s (Dirty & Dueces Wild) as well as the Breckenridge 100 and many traditional XC races. V-brakes, came in right at 23 pounds. I sold it due to new bike lust.
In the last couple seasons I have been fortunate to race on two bikes: an '06 Epic that weighs 22 and change with race wheels, and an '04 Yeti Hardtail that weighs right at 20 with race wheels. I love both of my current rigs and choose between them based on course, however, if I could only have one bike, I would take my old Fuel back. The Fuel is a proven XC race machine…of everything out there over the years, Trek hasnt changed the design much, and thats for a reason.
The Fuel pedaled well, certainly not as well as my hardtail or Epic, however the little noticable bob gave great traction on technical climbs. The Fuel descended really well, the geometry was spot on. A very well bablanced bike, IMO, the reason that you see many at races. I dont have any real complaints.
My only experience with Santa Cruz is on a full XTR Blur XC (SC’s top of the line XC race bike) that I demoed in Summit County, CO for a day. Granted thats a completely different animal than a Superlight, but I wouldnt consider it a race bike by any means. An awesome trail bike, for sure. Thats personal opinion, but I prefer a quick and nimble race bike. There is something to be said about single pivot designs (such as the Superlight) with newer platform dampening shocks though (Fox RP23, etc.). Simple and efficient.
IMO, the bottom line is you are looking to build a race bike…thats an easy decision. Other than the Epic, its hard to argue that there is a more proven full suspension race winner than the Fuel.
The two bikes are going to have a different ride. The Top Fuel has a lower pivot point, its going to be more active under pedalling efforts. Those bikes do require some platform or damping in the shock to control bob. The flexing seatstays and bushings in the rear suspension do however give it some inbuilt platform. Its going to be a firmer ride, not as much small bump compliance.
The Superlight with a high forward pivot point has built in pedal extension, which means in the middle and granny rings the suspension extends, meaning it will climb well without platform. The downside is more pedal feedback in the granny, you can feel a tug on the pedals if you compress the rear shock suddenly while climbing. You also can lose traction when climbing steep loose slopes compared with a more active bike.
Downhill the Superlight will have a more vertical axle path, I find high forward pivot bikes tend to hang up less on square edged hits than low pivot bikes.
My personal choice between the two would be the Top Fuel given most Xterra courses are fairly non technical, its a race proven design with World Cup and Norba wins to its credit.
The SC Superlight is a nice bike but it’s not a race bike. It’s a nice trail bike and you’ll be pretty much in the same boat as you are now with that choice. The Top Fuel has a great race pedigree, it’s the better choice of the two. For me, for Xterra, I’d choose a nice light 80 or 100 mm travel hardtail. In fact I just did; a Niner EMD9 with a RS REBA fork. I’ve only done one ride and can’t wait to get it on the race course (at Lake Placid)!