So I bought a mountain bike last year that has full suspension and I can’t even keep up with my wife on a circa 1989 mountain bike that has no suspension. I am a much stronger rider. Now I wish I did not purchase that bike.
Questions: Does a front suspension mountain bike behave exactly like a no-suspension bike when the shock is locked? (in terms of performance) What things can I do to ensure the mountain bike is as fast as possible without taking away the elements of a mountain bike? Is the only solution to sell the full suspension bike and purchase another bike?
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Well, it all depends. I noted you are in Vancouver so I believe you deal with hills and roots, then a full suspension may be preferred. Then again, in the midwest front suspension is preferred as full offers minimal benefits. As for the front lockout, and your “slowness” compared to your wife, your suspension is probably not tuned in very well. It should be such that you do not feel the suspension at all.
What bike do you have. An uprade in shocks may be an option? Fox’s technology is superior.
Pretty much. Most forks even locked out will allow some play.Weight and Tires. FS bikes are typically a little heavier than HT or rigid bikes, so any weight reduction is a positive, especially with the wheels and tires (rotational weight). Tire tread makes a huge difference on rolling resistance. Tires with more aggressive tread patterns do not roll as fast as low-knobbed or semi-slick tires. This is more of a function of where and how you ride, however.No.
I always think of full suspension as a down hill bike , the hard tails jump better ( take off ) . If the bike is sprung for your weight its better , But a big guy on soft bike will rob pedal power in slow climbs . Most of the Better bikes eliminate the bounce with better rear suspension . Yes the lock out fork will ride like a standard fork.
I am old school stick with a hard tail - shock fork . Most of the full suspension Gilts makes up dimensional inadequacies . Its a poor craftsman that blames his tool
Very close. a locked out fork will travel a LITTLE, but not much. The only difference realy would be weight of the locked out fork vs. a rigid one.
Weight. And as someone else said, tire/wheel choice is huge.
No.
The FS vs. HT debate has been going on for a long time. I am a fan f my new bike (Orbea Oiz) as the 85mm of travel really takes the sting off of anything I run over vs. my old HT. The Oiz only weighs about 1.5 lbs more and is so much more forgiving. I haven’t ridden them back to back to see if I am faster or slower on one or the other. If by chance I am slower on the FS I’m sure that difference will be made up on the run in XTERRA from not getting as beat up as I would have been on the HT.
The guy at the bike store said I will notice a huge difference in speed if I change the tires and add a chain ring to the front. While it makes sense the tires are too nobby, I cannot understand how the chain ring will make a difference if I am not spinning out (the RPM’s are still below 90). Thoughts?
Yeah, you have yourself a very nice long-travel freeride/DH bike that probably weighs close to 35 pounds. This bike was made to go downhill and over gnarly terrain very fast. If you want something for xc riding, cruising with the wife or whatever, then it would be cheaper to get yourself a nice HT or soft-tail xc bike. You’d have to spend a lot of money to make this thing faster, and then you’re looking at frankenbike…half FR/DH and half xc.
I dont think I would classify the Haro as a “freeride” or “downhill” bike, probably more of the all mountain variety. When I consider freeride I think more of the crazy north shore stunts and big drops and gaps. The Haro is a strong, relatively inexpensive bike, but its not very fast, its heavy, and it doesnt have a sophisticated rear shock to control pedal movement. From the sounds of it you are not doing the kind of riding where that kind of bike is not needed.
Full suspension or rear suspension depends on where you ride and how long you ride. When I rode in the mid west where we had mainly buffed singletrack with only short rocky sections a hardtail was fine. After moving to Arizona with very rocky riding, mostly ridden at speed, I was converted to full suspension. Yes a full suspension is heavier by a couple of pounds, but the reduced effort on rough terrain more than negates it for me. I also do a lot of endurance races, 50-100 miles and some 12-24 hours and I will take the extra comfort over most trails. I also have a rigid singlespeed, its good for working on my skills, but to ride it for longer distances on rough terrain can take it toll. I did race it in a 100 miler once, but vowed never to do that again…
The downside of full suspension is that it is more expensive than an equivilent hardtail frame. I am fortunate enough to work at a bike shop part time and have some sponsorship, but I would admit the retail price of my Cannondale Scalpel Team would give me pause.
"“I always think of full suspension as a down hill bike”
Are you serious? Have you seen a short travel FS XC bike? I wouldn’t dare downhill my Oiz.
Perhaps I should say long tavel bikes"
Yes, long travel makes me thinkg down hill as well…but that’s because down hill bikes DO have more travel. But, that’s only one type of FS bike.
"“the hard tails jump better ( take off )”
Try loading the suspension, it works wonders. A FS will hop over anything a HT will and with less effort if you use the suspension.
I am jumping a bump /ramp / slope , your absorbing it . "
I’m not absorbing it. I am talking about loading th suspension BEFORE the jump, then using the rebound to help you up. Trust me, jumping a HT over a rock is no easier than a FS.
“Most of the full suspension Gilts makes up dimensional inadequacies”
Huh?
" Your height - your crank size ( not the one on the bike )"
Are you using full sentences or complete thoughts? Or maybe I am missing something. What’s a “Gilt” and what does “your height - your crank size” mean?
