Recreational & Family - pros and cons of front suspension and higher end bikes

Hi all. This is my first post on this forum and thanks in advance for your input.

I am considering a new bike. It's primary use is to help me excercise and I just enjoy biking. I ride in the city and paved bike trails. I will also enjoy some easy, rolling dirt paths.

I have experience with a Trek 820 that I though was too heavy and a Specialized Expedition (wife's bike) that is nice, but not adjusted for me - although we don't ride together too often I need/want my own bike.

I don't know what to call it but I am looking for a mtb riding position, medium-thick smooth tires with knobbs on the side for dirt trails, I'll take them but don't "need" disc brakes, and I don't know if I need front suspension or not.

Is the front suspension that much heavier that regular forks? Is energy absorbed by the suspension making the bike slower? I am guessing that a lightweight bike with adjustable forks is the way to go but need some comments from those in the know.

When in the local shop to get the Specilized tuned up I noticed they carry Marin. Some looked tempting - are they decent bikes (cost was really cheap) Also, for the type of riding I described is there as much value in looking at some of the more expense makes like the Gary Fisher duel-sport, urban, city/path lines. I don't want to overbuy but don't want to spend a dime of junk either.

Thanks for the reply.

Jeff

If your goal is excercise and enjoyment, keep the front suspension; it will make life a bit easier for your wrists and shoulders, and the energy loss just contributes to more excercise. Forget spending any money on disc brakes. A well adjusted set of canti or linear pull brakes work just fine. Do spend a bit extra on a good set of brake pads though. Pay attention to the geometry, and take the bike for a hard test ride if you can (not just around the parking lot). Top tube length is more important to your comfort than the seat post length.

I have a slightly different take from tuolomne.

To me suspension is generally only useful to aggressive trail or downhill riding or those that really need and want comfort as one of their top priorities.

Suspension is heavier and deadens the steering. But if you are not riding aggressively, you will experience little deadening.

Good suspension costs and those cheap bikes probably have a suspension system that is too soft and with little if any adjustability.

If you know you will do longer rides, when you get tired, you will probably curse the suspension. If you are only going to do light trail riding and you generally slow to walking speed for all obstacles, suspension won't add much to your riding.

If you plan on doing long rides on a lot of rough roads, suspension will take more bite out of the jostle than fat tires could.

From what you wrote, it does not sound like you need it. See if you can borrow or rent a bike with suspension for a couple of days and put some miles on it. That will give you a better idea.

Some people think suspension forks aren't worth their weight and inefficiency. I disagree.
I don't know how much weight the front suspension adds to my Specialized Expedition Sport, but it can't be much, since the bike weighs about half as much as the steel road bike it replaces. Since I ride a lot on gravel and broken pavement, the vibration reduction is well worth any added weight. And I don't think there's much of a loss in pedalling efficiency, either, since the suspension allows me to inflate the tires to the max and still delivers a comfortable ride, minus the jackhammer effect on my hands and wrists.
If I rode on smooth pavement all the time, I'd do without the suspension. But I don't, so I won't.

Another vote in favor of the suspension.

I just bought a Schwinn S-25 with suspension F&R. I have to say, it is so much more comfortable to ride than the bike it replaces. It handles unevenness in the pavement with ease, and I can go down 4" curbs without shifting my weight off the seat. Worth the money.

IMHO, cheap hybrid suspension is just heavy and unneccessary on the road and smooth trail. More of a sales gimic than anything. I changed bikes mainly to get rid of it and the buyer switced to a steel fork. My father-in-law (73 YO) went from suspension to solid and is happy.

i have weak wrists and thus rigid bikes pound them and hurt really bad, my trek 4500's fork is stiff enough that it doesn't move when i try to accelerate hard or go up steep hills and lean on it, but it does absorb just about all but the smallest bumps, suprise potholes, rocks, roots bad pavement, unpainted speedbumps, very nice to have on and off road. the front end is noticeably heavier than my rigid cro moly hardrock, but overall the bike is 26lbs so not bad. my wife's bike is a full suspension trek fuel, air suspension front and rear. her bike is terrible to accelerate or climb when in soft full susp. mode. sweet piece of machinery though, if you stiffen up the F&R shocks it accelerates ok, or you can lockout the rear and it will perform just like a hardtail, or you can lockout the F&R and it will behave like a rigid, awesome acceleration and climbing, to top it off its 3 ~ 4 lbs lighter than mine (bit of jealousy here) oh and the hydro disc brakes are nice too. overall its capable of very good road riding, very comfortable upright position, and firm full suspension or hardtail for easy-medium trails, or very plush hardtail or full suspension for very difficult stuff like rock gardens, very rutty stuff, large obstacles or for just a smooth ride, on the plushest setting it even absorbs a lot of road buzz in the front and the rear.

I took the suspension off my rockhopper and put on a rigid fork. The bike was no longer going to be used for hard mountain biking and I didn't like the suspension for road riding even when it was locked out. With the preload set at as high as it would go and on lockout the fork still move about 10-15 mm. Not a big deal, but I did notice it when I hammered down on the pedals to accelerate and when I had to brake hard. With the rigid fork the front is a bit lighter and I did notice a big difference in acceleration and climbing. Simply put, the bike just feels smoother.

I do have some wrist problems and some rough roads to deal with, but it's no big deal. What helped my wrist comfort more than suspension was putting albatross handlebars on the bike. My wrists are in a neutral position and there's not much pressure on them.

My wife had the Trek 7100 with front suspension and rode the bike on pavement. The suspension was unnecessary, especially with the 700 x 35 tires. She's now riding a Trek 7.5FX WSD with no suspension fork and it feels just fine to her. Much faster bike, too.

Since you say you enjoy cycling, I'm willing to bet you are going to have a lot more fun with a new bike so I would try to get something that won't have you wishing six months later for a better bike.

Flat bars are great for slower manuveuring but they don't have extra places for your hands. Regular drop bars allow you to move your hands around in different positions so are more versatile. Albatross bars, commonly found on commuters and cruisers, put your hands and wrists in a more comfortable position. You can add bar ends to flat bars to give you a similar hand position.

The wider the tires, the cushier the ride. Carbon forks, seatposts, handlebars do absorb road vibration but the effect isn't as great as having wider tires. You can get gloves with gel padding in them or wrap your bars in gel tape.

A comfortable saddle is not one that's real mushy and soft. You need one that's wide enough for your sit bones so it will support you. Soft saddles allow you to sink down, bringing pressure to bear on areas that don't appreciate it. If you are riding ten miles or so, this may not matter much but once you start riding longer, it will.

A good pair of cycling shorts is recommended, as is a cycling jersey. Cotton t-shirts hold sweat and heat. A regular pair of shorts and underwear is both hot, sweaty, and can chafe you to death on a decent ride.

Unless you are riding in soft dirt/mud, treads on tires aren't necessary and they will actually give you less traction on pavement and hard trails.

Disk brakes are unnecessary unless you are doing a lot of hard riding in wet, muddy conditions.


Go test ride some bikes and let us know how it goes.

To me suspension is generally only useful to aggressive trail or downhill riding or those that really need and want comfort as one of their top priorities.

Totally agree. Some of us, back in the day, actually rode MTB without suspensions agressively. And guess what? We did just fine. Suspensions are so that you can slam into a log or rock and not do an endo. It makes riding a MTB on a technical trail a little easier. It helps to compensate for lack of skill.

You absolutely do not need a suspension fork for the road or gravel or dirt trails. It will only be annoying as it saps your energy.

You absolutely do not need a suspension fork for the road or gravel or dirt trails. It will only be annoying as it saps your energy.
I'm not arguing with you here (I doubt I'm qualified for that), but I am curious: How does it sap your energy to have a fork that telescopes to ease the shock when you hit a bump?

I visited the local bike shop where I bought my trek 820 some years ago. They carry Trek, Gary Fisher, Specialized and maybe some others.

I discussed what I was looking for and they suggested a Trek FX model. They had the 7.2 disc version in my size so I took it for a test ride. Simply put, it was a dream. Fast, fast, fast. The only think that I didn't like was the skinny tires. I still like to take some short cuts including the occasionally trail. Those at the bike store told me that they could outfit the bike with some small knobbies if I were going camping but said the skinny tires would probably just sink.

I've been looking at the Gary Fisher Cronos at the web site. The LBS didn't have one in stock and probably wouldn't be getting unless someone special ordered one.

I also took a look at a less expensive Marin Pioneer Trail which I thought was a really nice bike. I didn't ride it but it was nice and light and although the front suspension lacks a lock-out, which I think is desirable for me if I get front suspension at all, I am going to revisit the store for a test ride of the Marin Pioneer Trail. Does anyone have one of these or have any comments?

Additionally I am going to check out some of the Trek models, the Gary Fisher Genesis line. Can anyone suggest another make/model. Again, this bike is for pavement and very light trails.

I'm not arguing with you here (I doubt I'm qualified for that), but I am curious: How does it sap your energy to have a fork that telescopes to ease the shock when you hit a bump?

The idea is that if you are pedalling hard enough, or the suspension is soft enough, some of your pedalling energy will go into making the fork boingy rather than to propelling the bike forward. I'm not sure how often that really happens. But the susp does add at least a pound to the weight of the fork, I think, and that is real for everyone.

Simply put, it was a dream. Fast, fast, fast. The only think that I didn't like was the skinny tires. I still like to take some short cuts including the occasionally trail. Those at the bike store told me that they could outfit the bike with some small knobbies if I were going camping but said the skinny tires would probably just sink.

Sounds like you are in a dilemma. If you want fast, fast, fast, you want skinny high pressure tires and an aero position. But you also want light off road capability.

The bike that will do exactly those things would be considered by some to be a cyclocross bike. Cyclocross started out as a way for racers to keep in shape in the off season. They would take an old racing frame, outfit it with durable or at least expendable parts (cheap aluminum pedals that could be bent back into shape were popular). These bike evolved into their own category but are essentially the same as their ancestors. They have heavier brakes (cantilever or V-brake), sturdier rims and frames and components. Think of them as light, high speed mountain bikes. You don't need to buy one, you can outfit one yourself or have a shop do it. I think cyclocross bikes are kind of niche now and are generally more expensive. But I have not kept up with that market so I could be wrong on that. For the Trek you liked, all they should do is what they suggest, and that is put on a fatter, knobbied tire. The next upgrade to think about would be sturdier rims and/or brakes. Mountain bikes are good but maybe not high speed enough for what you want.

Thanks for the replies.

I'll check out the cyclocross bikes. I've seen them online and they look like a blast. I've also been thinking that maybe I just need a road bike or that trek fx model that I liked might be in my future. I'm going to hold off on those and look toward a more traditional mtb setup. After putting more miles on my wife's Specialized expidition I realized that I really like the hybrid idea, I just don't like her bike very much.

In fact, I haven't seen a hybrid that I really liked yet. Certainly nothing wrong with them just haven't clicked with one yet. So, this is what I am thinking. Your comments are appreciated. This bike is going to be for casual fun rides probably less then 15-20 at any given time. Areas will be my city neighborhood, hitting the coffee shop, local state park path and trails and just knocking around. For which I'm looking for a light mtb frame (Gary Fisher Genesis line maybe) and changing the tires for something smooth with maybe knobs on the sides (is there a name for that tire, my wife has them on her Specialized). Add clipless pedals and will probably have some type of suspension front end although I might change it for a rigid fork if the suspension doesn't work out. In addition to the Fisher line that seems very nice my local shops carry Trek, Specialized and Marin. I'm going to check them out this weekend.

If you get a flat handle bar bike, you can put bar ends on it. The ones with a curve provide you with two more hand positions while riding.
The Marin line of bicycles is a good one.
If you have a Giant dealer in your area, try to test ride one of their FCR line of fitness bikes.

The idea is that if you are pedalling hard enough, or the suspension is soft enough, some of your pedalling energy will go into making the fork boingy rather than to propelling the bike forward. I'm not sure how often that really happens. But the susp does add at least a pound to the weight of the fork, I think, and that is real for everyone.
Thanks for the reply, Hardy. I don't think I set such a blistering pace that I'd need to worry. At my level, I think the springy fork is an aid to efficiency. My bike has fat hemispheric tires that work reasonably well in gravel and dirt. Yet they have not-too-bad rolling resistance and a relatively narrow contact patch on pavement IF you keep them rock hard. The suspension fork maintains a tolerable level of comfort while letting the tires work at max efficiency. It's a good setup for me, anyway.

I had a low-end mountain bike that I mostly rode on the road or paved trails, and when I swapped the suspension fork out for a rigid fork, I thought I'd died and gone to Heaven. The bike was suddenly light, fast, responsive. The old fork weighed a ton, and it dribbled and skittered dangerous when taking tight corners.

I vote for rigid unless you're going on very rough terrain.

Thanks for your vote.

One of the bikes that I first thought would suit my needs is the Gary Fisher Cronos (rigid fork). Going to the local dealer hoping to see one, they didn't have one in stock and turned me on to the Trek FX line, also very nice. However, after really considering the skinny tires on the FX line I don't think they are right for me. Although fast, for sure, I am not racing, or riding with a fast group that I want to keep up with.

So, wanting a bike for fun, exercise and trips around town I am back to the Cronos and also considering some less expensive options. So, I guess it's a mountain bike, light frame, most likely a rigid fork and street friendly tires. Thanks to everyone for your insight.

Maybe you will find over time that you really like riding. In which case you might also decide that you want specialty bikes, one for road, one for mountain, one for cruising, etc.

With the research you are doing so far, you will likely not go wrong. Your style and taste may change over time. If in another year or two you decide that you want a different bike you will have the benefit of all your experience.

Good luck on the decision, let us know what you pick and how you like it.

Yes, thank you all for helping me think this through. I will certainly let you know.