Mountain Biking - Itty bitties and FS

How much of a difference, REALLY, would FS make to someone who weighs 115lbs?? 120 the most. I'm being wowed by some FS models, but I'd love to have a reason to shave some of the cost and weight! I can't imagine someone my size puts so much pressure on a bike, but well...ya know being a girl n all...I'm seeing shiney things and I want them :D I want to take some small-ish drops, too. Surely you don't HAVE to have FS for that??? I'm also concerned about weight. I'd like to have as light a bike as possible (without obsessing about how much each component weighs. I'm not THAT concerned. Would just like to have a proportionately weighted bike so I'm not pushing around the same as the 200+ pounders). Right..so go ahead, please tell me I don't need FS and I can take 100ft drops without it :D hehe

Wow, I weighed that little when I was in middle school!

My wife is about the same weight as you, she hovers around 115-120 lbs.(don't tell her I said so!).

She rides a full suspension and loves it. It smoothes out the chatter and takes the bigger hits (logs, ruts, rocks) out of the picture to help her ride faster.

She was less concerned about the weight of the bike vs. the performance and comfort of a full suspension. Plus, she was upgrading from a cheaper hardtail to a "near" top of the line full suspension bike so the total weight between the two was nearly equal.

Plus, all the major manufacturers are all making Women Specific Designs in their lineups. The Trek, Gary Fisher's and Specialized WSD bikes are all very weight conscious.

I will add, she'll never go back to a hardtail!

L8R

Funny how many people still hold the notion that Full Suspension should only be used for Freeriding. After riding a Hardtail for three years before purchasing a Full-susp. XC bike I can definitely say that I will never go back to a HT bike. Also, many people still believe that HT climb much better than F.S. bikes, and this was true in the beginning when there were many horrible designs, but it's not true anymore. Designs have improved to the point where they climb great, in fact I will say better than HT bikes. This is because the rear will can actually follow the terrain and dig in on steep ascents while a HT would lose traction making you lose momentum. Also, the prices for good Full-sup bikes have come down quite a bit over the past few years so now you can find a very good bike for not too much money.

So what I'm trying to say in a very long winded way is, go for a Full-susp. bike. You'll be glad you did.

How much of a difference, REALLY, would FS make to someone who weighs 115lbs??

It will make a huge differance. Fork and shock manufacturers make different strenght springs to adjust the suspension for your weight. If the bike has an air shock or fork you can adjust how soft or hard the suspension is by changing the amount of air you put in them.

Slainte:beer:

Originally posted by Joe Pozer
Designs have improved to the point where they climb great, in fact I will say better than HT bikes. This is because the rear will can actually follow the terrain and dig in on steep ascents while a HT would lose traction making you lose momentum.


Sorry, but that is complete BS. Most of your weight and the bikes weight is shifted to the rear wheel when climbing so following the terrain is not a problem...bobbing up and down is.

Originally posted by palooka



Sorry, but that is complete BS. Most of your weight and the bikes weight is shifted to the rear wheel when climbing so following the terrain is not a problem...bobbing up and down is.

I guess you must ride on completely smooth trails with no loose dirt or rocks...for those who have ridden on REAL trails, you will encounter steeps that are loose and on these occasion the rear suspension will help the rear tire dig into the trail. Also, if the rear tire encounters an obstruction it can compress to go over it as opposed to loosing traction like you would on a HT.

Secondly, if you have ridden a F.S. bike and bobbed all over the place they you really need learn how to pedal properly. With clipless pedals you can spin in smooth circles but unfortunately you must still be a HT holdover who only mashes.

Thirdly, on a F.S. bike you will be able to ride longer and be more "fresh" cause the suspension will keep you from getting too beat up.

For those HT holdovers, spend some quality time on a F.S. bike and you too will be sold.

I disagree with palooka. Yes your weight is transfer to the back of the bike...that is why it is important so have the suspension back there. If you're climbing a hill with a hardtail and you run into a rut or root or anything like that your momentum is disrupted. Now if you hit it with a fullsuspension bike the rear susp. just compresses and absorbs the bumb and alows you to keep going. Also the wheel has more of a chance to loose traction on a hardtail going over bumps while climbing. There are a few riders that ride a hartail smother than some people ride a full suspension bike though..... but a full susp. bike just makes it easier and more fun

I do admit that a fs bike can pogo a bit depending on the design. Most aren't to bad though, and since they alow you to keep your momentum through rough sections it evens out to a point. Just some more to think about. :roflmao:

Originally posted by slcpunk21
I disagree with palooka. Yes your weight is transfer to the back of the bike...that is why it is important so have the suspension back there. If you're climbing a hill with a hardtail and you run into a rut or root or anything like that your momentum is disrupted. Now if you hit it with a fullsuspension bike the rear susp. just compresses and absorbs the bumb and alows you to keep going. Also the wheel has more of a chance to loose traction on a hardtail going over bumps while climbing. There are a few riders that ride a hartail smother than some people ride a full suspension bike though..... but a full susp. bike just makes it easier and more fun

I do admit that a fs bike can pogo a bit depending on the design. Most aren't to bad though, and since they alow you to keep your momentum through rough sections it evens out to a point. Just some more to think about. :roflmao:


Very well said SLC...and you are much more diplomatic than I am

hey joe...kinda funny we said the same thing... i was typing mine still when you posted yours and i then saw both of ours posted and kinda chuckled a bit! ha ha ha

Originally posted by slcpunk21
hey joe...kinda funny we said the same thing... i was typing mine still when you posted yours and i then saw both of ours posted and kinda chuckled a bit! ha ha ha


Yes it is, but yours is definitely written much better. :thumbup:

What irks me is that people will say that FS XC bikes just don't climb as well or are as fast as HT without really spending time on one. I live in the Bay Area were you have no choice but to climb. It's not unusual for me to do anywhere from 5 to 10 miles of climbing on a ride. Heck, I did a ride in the Sierras last year where I had over 8k feet of elevation change and this was done on a F.S. bike. I rode a HT for three years before switching over and I can say from personal experience that I would never switch back.

Yes, in the beginning there were some really bad designs but they have definitely come a long ways.

I have been on an old style full sus. for a long time and was planning on a nice HT but after trying the new designs all I could say is WOW! (that's why I bought one).

My girl just got her first full sus. and loves it especially being a woman she noticed her hands and forarms not hurting from the banging of the rear wheel and notices her climbing skills improved so if you have the bucks go for it!

as for the juliana frames and other designs for women, don't follow religiously unless you are just over the 5 foot mark. If you are experienced just have the bike shop fit a bike to you I know santa cruz already has very short top tubes so they are a wonderfull bike

engoy the ride it's nice seeing enjoying the sport!

a2- I'm tellin'!!!

HS vs HT. That's a tough one. Your weight, if anything, will make it work better. Personally I notice a huge difference when riding a FS uphill. The rougher, the better. If your bike is tuned properly you will be able to climb tenfold better than on a HT. You will get traction when you would spinout otherwise, especially on loose rocky cobbly climbs.

Wow...this is a little more heated than I am used to seeing in this forum.

I think ht vs dually is again opinion. I prefer ht's for xc and light freeriding. I just enjoy it and it feels like when I move the bike is immediately responsive. I have tested many duallies and ALWAYS feel that little bob when I start pedaling. That bugs me because I like immediate and responsive power in that instance. (this is again my opinion)

I will some day need a dually but for what I do but for now a ht will build the skills I need later and does every trail in whistler except the most advanced. If I start riding hard faster and doing bigger drops than a dually is in the picture for sure :)

Whether or not a light person needs a dually. No clue...the last time I was 100pnd was in grade 3...:D

Originally posted by Joe Pozer
[B]

I guess you must ride on completely smooth trails with no loose dirt or rocks...for those who have ridden on REAL trails, you will encounter steeps that are loose and on these occasion the rear suspension will help the rear tire dig into the trail. Also, if the rear tire encounters an obstruction it can compress to go over it as opposed to loosing traction like you would on a HT.



lol. I've never ridden"REAL" trails because I know that a hardtail is a more efficient climber? Last I checked, the East Coast has some pretty real trails. We even have real trees and rocks and...

I've found that gravity and bike handling skills help my rear wheel dig into the trail. Both my Ti and steel hardtails soak up trail noise quit nicely, and "spinning in smooth circles" (you really have to patent that term) get me up hills pretty darn quick.

My aluminum hardtail I've found is my best climber. Good geometry and under 20lbs. Heck of a race bike.




Secondly, if you have ridden a F.S. bike and bobbed all over the place they you really need learn how to pedal properly. With clipless pedals you can spin in smooth circles but unfortunately you must still be a HT holdover who only mashes.



Actually, I'm pretty familiar with "spinning in smooth circles" :rolleyes:




Thirdly, on a F.S. bike you will be able to ride longer and be more "fresh" cause the suspension will keep you from getting too beat up.


So will Ti. So will steel.



For those HT holdovers, spend some quality time on a F.S. bike and you too will be sold.

I already have, and I prefer my hardtails. You're welcome to your opinion, just don't try to pass off BS as knowledge in trying to convince someone to spend their money the same way you spent yours.

Have a good one :)

Ok guys let's take it down a level here, we all have our own opinions of what is good and what we like. Long story short.... HT is good and helps you build certain skills. A FS lets you ride a bit faster on certain things without all those skills. They are both good depending on the person. Test ride em and see what you like. I wont even put in what I think you should buy here, it's up to you. What ever you get you'll enjoy just being out and being able to ride :beer:

palooka i respect your opinion although i do disagree. i've been riding hardtails for the better part of 6 years and recently swiched over to my first full suspension. although i love my hardtails ( my favorite is my 2002 marin eldridge grade steel ) i feel on technical climbs rocks, roots,ruts my full suspension helps my climbing tremendously. my cranking power seems to follow the contour of the terrain i'm riding at the time and i have less spin outs/ loss of momentum. the active rear suspension help put the power to the floor although on a smooth fire road i feel a HT can have an advantage but how often do you ride a fire road without the water ruts and rocks. back to the original post i think the newer designed full suspension bikes do make riding more pleasurable and more comfortable. do you need a full suspension, probably not. would i recommend a full suspension, absolutely.

I'm also a FS convert from a HT. I also ride and race the muddy, rooty Northeast singletrack.

One of the ironies of the FS vs. HT debate is that most people "feel" slower on their new FS bike. I know I did. After two, all-out rides I was disappointed with my new FS bike. It lacked the snap of my HT.

But . . . I was faster. No doubt about it. It took a few more rides to confirm this, but it soon became obvious. I stopped worrying about the lack of crispness in the ride, and started enjoying the comfort and speed.

It takes some time to get used to a FS bike. In the beginning I was constantly clipping rocks with my pedals when the rear suspension compressed (lowers the bottom bracket). I've altered my riding style to allow for this. Also, a FS bike will let you take lines that would ordinarily be bad choices for HT. At a race in late October the course was strewn with lots of pine tree roots. HT guys were dodging the roots to save their arms and butts. I rode over the roots and past the other riders in those sections.

I'm 42 years old and race sport XC. The faster I go, the more FS benefits me as I hit the bumps harder and the suspension works more.

Finally, to keep the FS guys humble, remember that most World Cup and NORBA XC races are won with HTs and v-brakes.

You have to consider the extra weight here, too. When you weigh around 100 pounds, pushing an extra 10 pounds is a big deal. I for one have both a full suspension and a hardtail... and I can honestly say that my hardtail takes WAY LESS energy for me to pedal quickly. I can sprint faster, climb faster... it's just that at the end of the day you feel a little more beat up. But I'm willing to deal with that to get some efficiency. For me pushing an extra 10 pounds (and my Jekyll probably does weigh 10 pounds more than my hardtail) is a big deal. I weigh 135 or so. Not to mention the cost of buying a FS. I built a race ready bike with top-notch components for what I could have bought a low end full suspension bike for. It really comes down to personal preference and the type of trails you ride, and how much you weigh. But honestly.. there's a reason why most of the pros ride hardtails. For me it's just the feel. I feel so much faster on a hardtail, especially when I sprint.. and sprinting and climbing is what I like the most!

Dammit..you guys were supposed to convince me that I don't need FS :D Ah well... Jim311, that was my biggest concern- pushing the extra weight around. And the extra cost (which was significant in the models I was looking at!). But it sounds like it's right up my alley. I just wish I could get my hands on one my size to try out. But that's in another thread... Anyway, I just want to get dirty and have fun. I don't care if I have the best skills. Racing's not in my plans. Maybe later, but not now. But then again, I have a hardtail HYBRID right now, and if I can stand that and feel fine at the end of a ride... frickinfrackinfrickin...grrrrr

Hey Nat (My sister's name BTW),

What models are you interested in specifically?

L8R

Specialized Epics, Stumpjumpers, Gary Fisher Sugar, Giant NRS. Trek Liquid or Fuel 90. Or the hardtail equivilants in those. I don't need WSD. Phew! Not very narrowed down, eh?? I'm really leaning toward Epic.

I'd stay away from the epic's, first year production with new technology and all that! The design and concept seem pretty "spot-on". I haven't spent any real time on one, but the parking lot demo was very promising.

I am a believer in the Horst 4-bar linkage licensed by Specialized. If you're looking at the Epic's, consider just the FSR XC's. I know a lot of people who race these and really like them. Plus, you can build them up (down) to "Stupid Light" ranges. Like 22 lbs +/- an ounce.

I'm definately NOT a lightweight XCer, but if I were. I'd be looking into the Santa Cruz Blur or the Intense Spyder for the VPP design. I rode an Outland VPP a number of years ago and the suspension design was WAY ahead of it's time. It was incredible!

The Trek's and GF Sugar's are very nice. I work in a shop that sells GF's and they are nice bikes.

L8R

all those bikes are really nice! No matter what one you get I think you'd be really happy with it. Only thing with the epic is it does work how it's supposed to...except the thing is funky to bunny hop/get over logs...because the suspension doesn't compress with any rider input...it only reacts to stuff the is hitting it from ground up. If you look at that bike....do this...try and push down on the seat to get the rear end to compress, it wont, then go and pick rear of the bike up and drop it...it compresses. It's a really does work how they say! Just something else to think about! But like I said all those bike are sweet! :beer:

I tried the Epic and it is pretty wierd, it feels just like a HT until you hit a big bump then the suspension is activated.

probably good for a person that likes HT but just needs that little extra.

My girlfriend just got a stumpjumper 2 weeks ago and loves it

As a recent FS convert I can say that I'm MUCH FASTER on the FS than I was on the HT. Nat don't discount the Rockhopper. If you set it up right it's an excellent ride, no bobbing & it climbs like a monkey with it's tail on fire:D

first..thankyou Nat for asking a question i needed to hear answers to. i am also 5'4 117lbs give or take a few ounces..lol
and i have a roadie... been borrowing a friends HT now and then to try out.. the weight got to me.. tho i work out alot and can ride for hours on a roadbike.. with massive hills.. i have to admire
mtn bikers.. its a whole different story. so my deal is.. i am looking also to buy a mtn bike.. and wanted fs primarily to do xc and jumps.. an wanted something light.
I heard the same story about fs being a pain to climb etc... but reviews say differently.. i looked at the k2 disco monkey.. but repair and parts around here for k2 is rare.. the santa cruz or specialized is where i was heading... but norco apeals to me too.
there is a huge bike show here end of feb... this is where i am checking out all my choices.. and hope to buy a deal.
i can only make one choice.. as i live in a very small space and have already given up a dining room to my bike, trainer and misc bike junk :D
its confusing as heck... but you guys have answered some questions for me... thanks again Nat and everyone. Guess i better get a three day pass for the show so i can test out everything :p

What about a Rocky Mountain? I've been dreaming of an ETSX for my first FS mountian bike. Every review of the new suspension system I've read has been glowing.

Rocky Mountain (www.bikes.com)

I have heard that most production mountain bikes are built for the average sized rider, which is 160 lbs. You are much lighter than that.

As far as bike abuse, I don't think you'd have too much to worry about with a hardtail.

However, this heated forum seems to be revolving around comfort and personal preferences.

Although I've test ridden some FS, I am still sticking with the hardtail. I can go on all day on why hardtails are better climbers, but I attribute my stance to the fact that I've learned to effectively ride a hardtail. I depend on the predictability of the rear wheel for traction. I've learned to climb with the unpredictability of front suspension. I'm happy where I'm at.

I've taken smaller jumps with my HT and I've never had problems.

My one question is this? Have you mountain biked before? If you did, and you can't stand the abuse of a hardtail, then I'd get a FS. However, if your comfort level is fine and you just want a bike for small jumps, then it just depends on your definition of small. I think you'd be fine on a hardtail. Don't spoil yourself with a FS.

I'd probably depend more on the opinions of the people who ride the trails that you will be riding.

Thanks all :)

I'm a bit late to the thread, but just wanted to say if you are vertically challenged and looking for FS, don't forget Titus! Titus has been doing small women-friendly (but not "women specific") frames long before the "big boys" jumped into the game. They aren't cheap. More of a "this is going to be my bike for life" type bike.

What ever bike you choose be sure you work with a good shop where they are willing to take the time to set up your suspension properly. Many women don't get the benefit of full-suspension because they are riding bikes set up for "average" (average male that is ) 150lb riders.
Have fun shopping!