|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
Hello Everyone,
I'm certain this question gets asked ad nauseum, but I'm newly back here. (I see that a certain Mikey V. is still here as well.) Anyway, I want to try trail riding more. My old ride has approx. 1" of front suspension and is a hard tail with V-brakes. I want to get approx. 4' or 5" of front suspension plus disk brakes in a quality package. How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. The Rocket Man ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
mPer Hober:
How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. I've got all 3: FS, hard tail, and rigid. FS is the one I ride the most by a wide margin. Periodically I go on a hard-tail kick knowing that, for some unknown reason, I'm supposed to wean myself away from an FS that I don't, by any stretch of the imagination, need. But I keep coming back to the FS as my favored ride. -- PeteCresswell |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
Thanks, Pete. Having all three 'flavors' at your disposal and chosing
the FS indicates a definite favorite. The weight difference between a FS and hardtail seems to be a few pounds at most. A few less trips to the pizza place for me would seem to take care of that !! "(PeteCresswell)" wrote in : mPer Hober: How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. I've got all 3: FS, hard tail, and rigid. FS is the one I ride the most by a wide margin. Periodically I go on a hard-tail kick knowing that, for some unknown reason, I'm supposed to wean myself away from an FS that I don't, by any stretch of the imagination, need. But I keep coming back to the FS as my favored ride. ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
Per The Rocket Man:
The weight difference between a FS and hardtail seems to be a few pounds at most. A few less trips to the pizza place for me would seem to take care of that !! There's a perceptible diff in responsiveness going up hills: FS:HardTail:FullRigid. But I find myself unaware of it until I ride a different bike. There is also a diff in reliability: there's that much more to go wrong in that rear sus. I've had two "walk home" suspension failures. Both sheared off sus bolts. But I think I provoked both through cruel and unusual treatment. -- PeteCresswell |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
Just to show it's a personal thing, I'll add that my most-ridden bike
these days is a hard tail single speed. But just yesterday I had a great ride on my FS bike, and I like to ride my fixie around town. So yeah, get one (or more) of each! Matt The Rocket Man wrote: Thanks, Pete. Having all three 'flavors' at your disposal and chosing the FS indicates a definite favorite. The weight difference between a FS and hardtail seems to be a few pounds at most. A few less trips to the pizza place for me would seem to take care of that !! "(PeteCresswell)" wrote in : mPer Hober: How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. I've got all 3: FS, hard tail, and rigid. FS is the one I ride the most by a wide margin. Periodically I go on a hard-tail kick knowing that, for some unknown reason, I'm supposed to wean myself away from an FS that I don't, by any stretch of the imagination, need. But I keep coming back to the FS as my favored ride. ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
... mPer Hober: How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. I've got all 3: FS, hard tail, and rigid. FS is the one I ride the most by a wide margin. Periodically I go on a hard-tail kick knowing that, for some unknown reason, I'm supposed to wean myself away from an FS that I don't, by any stretch of the imagination, need. But I keep coming back to the FS as my favored ride. I also have a FS and HT. The FS is an older XC model with 4" travel at each end. I got the FS when I was starting to ride more aggressive trails, although as you say, skill makes the most difference. I also had a chronic bad lower back, and the cushy ride helped me get more time in the saddle. Even with the extra weight, it can spoil you, even make you a somewhat lazier rider. The HT was a good high end ride in it's day. Very light, 80mm fork, V brakes, quite minimalist. With grippy tires I can't believe how easy it is to climb. There is probably 6 lbs difference in the bikes, but sometimes it feels like much more. Both bikes were bought used, and some components swapped out for their intended purpose. The FS is a dedicated trailbike, the HT has been converted to a townie, but doubles for off-road use on more relaxed rides or big climbers. I have a second wheelset with knobbies for this purpose. It doesn't sound like you'd need much suspension from the type of riding you describe. If I were in your shoes and had to select between my bikes (with their associated price tags), I would opt for the HT and a second wheel set. If this doesn't work out for your trail riding needs, you will likely want it for a city bike regardless. The added advantage is that you could buy a pretty decent HT used for a reasonable cost, certainly less than a FS of equal quality. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Hardtail vs. Full-Suspension -- I got the FS...
Thanks to everyone who replied to my question of hardtail vs. full
suspension. Today, I purchased a new Cannondale Rush SL 6Z full suspension bike. So far, so good. However, my charming wife will be the first to ride it. She's going on a ride around Waldo Lake tomorrow. We had the suspension set up for her weight. "Mamba" wrote in : "(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message ... mPer Hober: How important is a full-suspension? The guy at the bike shop said that full-suspension was six of one, and a half-dozen of another. The guy at the bike shop has years and years of experience and used to ride and even race and downhill on bikes with no suspension at all. Let's face it, a pro on a totally non-suspended bike would certainly be a lot better than me on the fanciest bike on the planet. I'll be doing trail riding, some gravel roads, certainly around town, maybe very occasionally take a chair lift ride up and coast down. I don't think I'll be needing 6" or more of front suspension. The idea of a hard tail appeals to me in terms of a little less weight and less mechanical stuff to go wrong. If I had some money and was going to buy a new hard tail today, I'd probably be looking at something like a Felt Q720. Any comments or suggestions? Thank you. I've got all 3: FS, hard tail, and rigid. FS is the one I ride the most by a wide margin. Periodically I go on a hard-tail kick knowing that, for some unknown reason, I'm supposed to wean myself away from an FS that I don't, by any stretch of the imagination, need. But I keep coming back to the FS as my favored ride. I also have a FS and HT. The FS is an older XC model with 4" travel at each end. I got the FS when I was starting to ride more aggressive trails, although as you say, skill makes the most difference. I also had a chronic bad lower back, and the cushy ride helped me get more time in the saddle. Even with the extra weight, it can spoil you, even make you a somewhat lazier rider. The HT was a good high end ride in it's day. Very light, 80mm fork, V brakes, quite minimalist. With grippy tires I can't believe how easy it is to climb. There is probably 6 lbs difference in the bikes, but sometimes it feels like much more. Both bikes were bought used, and some components swapped out for their intended purpose. The FS is a dedicated trailbike, the HT has been converted to a townie, but doubles for off-road use on more relaxed rides or big climbers. I have a second wheelset with knobbies for this purpose. It doesn't sound like you'd need much suspension from the type of riding you describe. If I were in your shoes and had to select between my bikes (with their associated price tags), I would opt for the HT and a second wheel set. If this doesn't work out for your trail riding needs, you will likely want it for a city bike regardless. The added advantage is that you could buy a pretty decent HT used for a reasonable cost, certainly less than a FS of equal quality. ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FA: Shockster add on suspension for hardtail | Dan H[_18_] | Marketplace | 0 | May 10th 07 06:46 AM |
hardtail v full suspension | - = k O e N s = - | Techniques | 26 | July 22nd 06 02:01 AM |
Hardtail vs dual suspension? | Chris Hansen | Off Road | 1 | January 29th 04 03:54 AM |
Full susser or Hardtail | Jimmy Hitler | UK | 4 | December 12th 03 11:48 PM |
Get a new dual suspension frame or go back to hardtail? | rocketman58 | Off Road | 5 | December 3rd 03 07:57 PM |