Mountain Biking - Poll: Full Suspension or Hard Tail?

This is a poll asking whether or not you like a hardtail or full-suspension bike.

By the way I'm a newbie from Toronto Ontario. I like biking and I have a Kona Blast.

What if you like both?...right now I prefer a ht...but that will probably change :d

i like HT but FS look purrrrdy

My understanding with FS, is when you are doing up hill climbing you lose valuable power with the excess bounce of the bike. They are great on Downhill and depending on how hard you like the rear suspension decent on level ground. For any type of up hill or trail riding where there is more of a chance of up hill the rear suspension defeats some of the momentum of pedaling. Now that's just what I've heard.

i like both, and I just upgraded to fs. As far as climbing, I think i can climb better on the fs as it gets better traction on the rough climbs. Excess bounce? Never!

Hardtail=Pure

Originally posted by lamajo25
My understanding with FS, is when you are doing up hill climbing you lose valuable power with the excess bounce of the bike. They are great on Downhill and depending on how hard you like the rear suspension decent on level ground. For any type of up hill or trail riding where there is more of a chance of up hill the rear suspension defeats some of the momentum of pedaling. Now that's just what I've heard. Applesauce if you get one of the better designs out there (ie: Specialized FSR, Giant NRS) or any of the myriad of "cheaters" out there that rely on a "platform valve" (Giant VT new Intense, even the Specialized Epic) you'll have as good or better climbing with FS than a hardtail. Suspension soaks up the bumps and rocks etc that throw a HT out of contact with the ground. It's pretty hard to be an efficient climber when your drive wheel isn't on the ground

Originally posted by Feltup
Hardtail=Pure Pure? Stinky Applesauce! You want pure go with a full rigid singlespeed with a coaster brake like they did at Repack. Why's it called "Repack"? Because that's what you did when you got to the bottom - repacked your hub with grease to go do it again. Now THAT"S f'in pure!

I have 2 Hts and 2 Fs's, each of them are perfect for their specific kind of riding. There is no "which one is better" its all about intended use.

Now, if you posted a poll that said HT or FS for 4X, then, we could have a debate;)

I know a HT with front suspension, v-brakes and 27 speeds is not the most pure bike experiance one can have, but in todays market it is pure.

I've gotta agree, it depends on the conditions, intended use...etc.

However, I like riding my full squishy much more, and more often than my hardtail!

L8R

out here in San Diego, a full suspension is the way to go. better for climbs and DHs. i never experienced the loss of energy from bouncing except for out on ashpalt, but i rarely go on that stiuff with the mtb. besides, my bike has manual lockout suspension so i can switch anytime i want---you might want to look for the same.

Steel hardtail.

BUt if I ever convince myself to do a MTB century, I'll change my vote.

Hardtail, it is much easier to sprint up hill on a HT. If you do true freeride then a FS, but most people buy a FR rig and ride only XC. As far as technical descents, there is nothing better than passing a bling bling full suspension bike on a stiff aluminum hardtail. Most people who recommend full suspension for XC are the same ones who look at what name is on your bike first thing. I have owned both and after one season traded my FS in on a HT.

HT = Speed.

FS = Comfort and better control on descents.

FS with lockout = best of both worlds.

Poll has too few options to get accurate feedback.

I traded out of a long travel fulll suspension this year to a shorter travel with lockout and I love the options when hammering the local trail. I did take the front fork off the old FS and put it on a hardtail frame. Still due to test ride it.

I prefer ht's.... much more fun.... more challenging and alot less maintenence and stuff to go wrong :D

HT PURE!

I prefer a FS w/ lockout. In socal, its ROUGH. I have a short travel FS and i love it

HT all the way.
Haven't found a FS that climbs quicker than my CAAD4 yet. When that day arrivs I'll consider a FS.
More traction on the climbs??!! I think thats a perception. I seem to get loads of traction with my HT. All depends on posture and positioning and gearing.
In the ring that I do most of my climbing in the suspension bobs (middle ring). This gets ebven worse in the smaller ring.

Only FS i've liked thus far for XC are the Scalpel and Epic.

biggest ring on the middle cog on the cassete will give u plenty of grip.... and as long as ur not balancing over the handlebars it should grip reasonably well....

FS can hide a lot of sins.

I don't think socal is the only place with "rough" trails. The trails get pretty rough here in the south too.

Originally posted by math2p14
HT PURE! FIRE BAD!
:rolleyes:


See earlier post: Singlespeed Rigid THAT"S PURE:rolleyes:

seems to be different ideas of what a hard climb actually is. The climbs around here are steep enough that you would need to be very strong to use middle ring. They also have ruts and rocks to deal with. Most people use their lowest gear (22/32) but I find i use one maybe two up from this.
I want to put my HT back together to use on road climbs as it is more efficient when the terrain is smooth, but in the rough stuff I find the FS better. I do use the middle ring for road climbs. (most common 32/21)

on the steep around my trails back in SA, the middle ring is something you use if you have a 2x9 system, then your fs works well on climbs. Otherwise a lockout of EPIC is the way to go.
Traction is always provided by correct positioning over the bike.