vanguardx3

Have you considered a thudbuster? I bought an LT as a "stopgap" as I was shopping for a FS bike. I am absolutely amazed by how well the LT works. It soaks up small and large bumps like a sponge, but you don't lose any pedaling efficiency since you still have a HT.

I've since lost interest in a FS bike; the LT works too well! The financial investment was very modest: $120 after a discount on nashbar.

This seemed like a better value than spending $2K on an entry level FS.

ErichVonCartman

Hardtail will be always faster for one way uphill riding as well as any round trip riding.

JRCurzon

just can't afford a new set of rims atm a three way dropper second hand is a possibility, but im not sure how sensible it would be for me to buy used mtb rims. also my rims are quite light, alex volar 2.1, weighing in at 440g each rim only

Wingsprint

If the terrain has a lot of wet roots and rocks or dry hard pack, I am not sure the mountain kings are the best tire for racing. What are the fastest guys in your area running?

Other than tires, I recommend you get a dropper post first and then look to upgrade the wheels.

FrozenK

Get a Thudbuster, a hardtail will always be faster uphill... I feel like I'm back in 1999.

ErichVonCartman

In 1999 it was no question Hardtails were faster on a XC course, as just about every top 10 finisher from every race in the world only saw hardtails...

However, these days, we do see 1 or 2 FS in the top 10 in some races, even in the Pro Ranks. But they are pretty sick XC-FS machines though! But until I start seeing at least half the top 20 of the XC races win on FS bikes, I will always Generalize and say "Hardtails are Faster"

FrozenK

I think you need to get out more then. Or maybe have a chat with Mr. Schurter who switches between hardtail and suspension depending on the course. If he had stuck to a a hardtail he surely would have won the world championship... oh, wait he did win World's last year!

But hey, let's keep on giving 1999 advice and tell people that full suspension only offers an advantage for downhillers! Hardtails are only good for racers! And maybe next week we can argue lycra vs baggies? No, wait, we have to hash out rim vs disc brakes first!

ErichVonCartman

1) Making Exceptions the Rule
Let's not make exceptions the rule.. and I did say I was "Generalizing" and I will still Generalize based on RESULTS.

2) Erich is NOT a Fortune Teller
I do NOT try to predict the future like all you fortune tellers, and I will say again.... and "until I start seeing at least half the top 20 of the XC races win on FS bikes, I will always Generalize and say 'Hardtails are Faster'"

3) It's all about selling bikes, so we need to make the XC course in a way to give FS bikes a chance!
a couple of races where he won on a FS where he still probably would have won the race on the hardtail. Some World Cup XC courses are shorter and more technical now, with a lot less climbing. Also, the bike manufacturers loves when their racers win a FS bikes! The money is in FS, not Hardtails.

RJM

Most of the local racers around me are riding 100mm dual squish XC bikes...and this year looks like the top choice is the Trek Fuel 9.8 (Niner Jet 9s too), which is only 500 bucks more expensive than the ProCaliber 9.8 hardtail. That doesn't seem like a huge dollar premium for dual suspension to me, especially when the bikes in question are $4-5k.

Also, what bike is faster depends on what the terrain is like, even uphill. There is an advantage to having rear suspension even in climbing, especially if that climb is rooty and/or rocky.

FrozenK

This ^^^^ I remember reading a quote from Ned Overend where he said that if rear suspension only helped on he downhill he would have never adopted it. But it can make a huge difference on rooty, rocky or loose climbs. It isn't just control, it is traction. You can have the stiffest hardtail in the world. It won't help if your wheel is bouncing all over the place.

ErichVonCartman

Unless if I plan on XC Racing again, I don't think I will ever ride a hardtail again (I will race MX or Road Motorcycles before I do bicycle racing). I will always ride FS in one form or another unless if I am riding on really Smooth Trails like those in the San Francisco Bay Area, here, I would prefer a fully rigid bike over a hard tail. Actually, I am turning my Litespeed Hardtail into a fully Rigid Bike very soon. I have the rigid carbon fork on hand and ready.

I am open to change.... I really do want to say "FS are faster".. however, the results have not shown shown it. I have no say in any of this, all I do is observe and take notes.

I have heard the same thing since 1999 as what you said. That "FS could be useful for climbing", this may be true for a difficult section, but overall in a XC race, the RESULTS shows that Hardtails will come out on top (even now in 2016 this is the case).

Race RESULTS speaks for themselves. Even in 2016 (based on 2014 and 2015 results), we can see that hard tails still dominate the podium. Take every World XC podiums the past couple of years, add them all up, and it will be less than 10% wins for the hard tails. Until I start seeing all the podiums in a given year be more than 50% of FS, then I will still generalize and say "hardtails are faster". HOWEVER, that day has not come yet, so for now, I will keep my "Full Suspension bikes are faster" comment stored on my C:/ drive of my personal computer, and save it on there in a special place to possibly be used in the future (If this future ever comes).

As for myself, I don't like hard tails, they are NO fun and beats me up. I ride in very rocky terrain where even the "smoother" parts are very bumpy. I feel faster on my short travel Intense Tracer than my Hardtail, but I on my 10 mile normal loop, my times shows I am actually faster on the hardtail even though I feel faster on the FS. So it is obvious, whatever I lose through the rough, I more than make up for through the rest of the course.

hig4s

I find the constant debate about the advantages of hardtails baffling, seeing as how common lock outs are on shocks.

FrozenK

I say this respectfully, but you have no idea what you are talking about.

vanguardx3

Back in the early 90's as front and fs were being rolled out, I recall that magazine reviews and promo literature were touting the performance advantages for fs. I even recall several magazines publishing comparison tests showing that fs bikes were faster overall despite the weight penalty.

Yet, race results show that ht are in fact faster, a quarter century after the industry and mags claimed the opposite.

It's just another example of the bicycling industry trying to push new technology for the sake of profit, rather than because it's clearly superior technology.

I am still open to the possibility of buying a full sus. However, I'm having so much fun with a HT + thudbuster, quite frankly, there is no need and little desire to do so.

In addition, I'm just not a fan of how the trek xc fs bikes ride. They are tuned very stiffly whenever I demo one. Either that, or the limited travel just doesn't work for me. I suppose I have expectations of a plush ride with any fs bike I ride, and the treks definitely did not meet my expectations in that regard. You would think that big wheels + fs = comfort, but treks seem to defy the odds and ride relatively harshly anyway.

FrozenK

This is getting ridiculous. Race results show that it depends on terrain. Which is why every racer that can switches back and forth from HT to FS depending on terrain. By the way, that is what every person with a functioning brain has been saying all along: it depends on terrain.

To claim that it is all a marketing ploy borders on idiocy, given the prices of high-end racing hardtails -that are cheaper to design and produce than a full suspension bike.

If a Thudbuster makes you happy all the power to you. But a Thudbuster will not help with traction on a corner at 20mph and it also won't keep your rear wheel from bouncing on a rocky climb. It is also really poor advice for the OP. Same with saying that full suspension only helps on downhill and hardtails climb faster. It is simply not true and really poor advice.

vanguardx3

I don't follow mtn bike racing results, but if the bolded is true, it's very telling. Mtn bike racing events are designed as showcases for the industry to highlight the leading edge of technology. It would reflect badly on designers if the most expensive and technologically advanced fs bikes were either "only" on par or actually slower than ht unless the courses were designed specifically to benefit FS designs, which it appears some are.

Grant Petersen has long been a critic of FS and suspension in general, stating that the added weight and complexity aren't worth the benefits. It's likely a minority opinion, but aside from cost, I would not look forward to rebuilding or overhauling suspension on a fs bike, or handing it over to a shop for $$$.

I am sure that on the rockiest, gnarliest, most technical terrain, fs designs are worth it. However, for most riders, on most trails, ht's are probably a fantastic option.

RJM

I do agree. I have one trail locally that is ideal for a light, stiff hardtail...rigid even, and that is why I am actually considering picking one up. Well, that and it would be fun to have a different bike in the stable.

I put some thought into what would be the "fastest" bike for me locally since I plan on racing this year...and the truth is that upgrading my trail bike's wheels and suspension will probably do me better than going to a hardtail. There is just too much rooty, bumpy, rocky climbing and descending here to go to a hardtail race bike. (and this is probably why most of the local racers are on some form of FS.) I prefer trail bikes because I like to blast downhill as fast as I can, but my trail bike can also climb very well, especially since upgrading my fuel's rear shock to a Reactive (or however they spell it) shock. Now, I could have gone with an XC bike to save some weight, but they aren't as fun on the downhills to me and not as fast there either.

Canker

I'd forget the thudbuster. My newest steel 27.5 hardtail that I bought used came with a cannondale save carbon seatpost which are made to flex a bit. Man that thing is smooth and that post is a lot lighter than a thudbuster. There are a few other carbon post out there specifically made to flex some more than others. I have a full squish too and while the save seatpost doesn't make up for a rear shock it does take a lot of the sting out those smaller hits.

https://www.cannondale-parts.de/WebRo...5/DSCN6942.JPG

ErichVonCartman

Let's not confuse a faster rider being faster than the others because of the bike, for all we know, he might have won on any bike.

Why is this discussion "ridiculous"? Because you do not like the data that is presented???

We should let the results speak for themselves. Like I said, I have no say in any of this, and I don't tell the Racers how to finish.

You can say "it depends on the course" all you want, but we should COUNT ALL THE COURSES combined.

Add up all the Podiums in 2015 in a World Cup Cross Country Race over all the different COURSES, tell me how they add up. What I am seeing is Hardtails makes up more than 80% of the podiums. So therefore, I conclude "Hardtails are faster!"

I don't like it either, as I am a big fan of FS and I feel so fast on my Tracer! but it is what is.....

ErichVonCartman

Some of the XC Racers are being designed to be shorter and more technical, and in a shorter race, pedaling efficiency and the extra weight becomes less of an issue because the legs never wear out.

In the end, it all comes down to Rider. Even on a WC DH course, I am thinking Aaron Gwin could still beat me if he was on a hardtail and I was on my 6.5" of travel Plush Santa Cruz Nomad!

To me, Full Suspension is worth every penny. It tracks much nicer, keeps me fresher, and just makes the over all riding experience better.

I don't need much skill to ride my Santa Cruz Nomad, as it just bowls over and through big rocks and big logs with ease.... meanwhile a rider like Gwin will still be faster than me as he will just bunny hop that log.

ColinL

Techically, yes. But let's evaluate the state of modern short- and mid-travel full suspension bikes. All but the cheapest ones are good at pedaling when setup properly.

Speed going uphill is mainly fitness, with a dash of technique. The bike is the least important factor as usual.

XC racers put up with some horrific conditions in the name of going fast. What they ride should have extremely little bearing on what a normal trail rider buys. Hardtails are not better going up a bumpy hill than a full suspension XC race bike. So XC racers only use hardtails when the course is quite smooth, with little to no rough descents.

So why buy a hardtail? Budget. That's the only reason. Otherwise, if you're spending >$1500 you should be getting some kind of full suspension bike.

vanguardx3

Sure, but my question is "why?" Is it to tilt race results in favor of FS bikes? Are course designs influenced by marketing considerations?

FrozenK

Eric should try listening instead of talking. But Eric loves the sound of his own voice. If Eric listened, Eric would understand that pro racers regularly switch from HT to FS to math the course. Then Eric may be able to see that terrain dictates which bike is more efficient. Then Eric would realize how wrong his generalization is.

ErichVonCartman

Maybe you should not listen to people and start listening to the RESULTS.

Erich only looks at the RESULTS... and the results shows Hardtails are Faster.

FrozenK

No, it is because people have been complaining about the ridiculously manicured courses on XC racing for over a decade. It got bad enough that people WON short track races on a road bike -not a cyclocross bike, a road bike with road tires. UCI then responded by banning drop bars for MTB racing but eventually race promoters started designing courses that involved actual mountainbiking again.

As for Grant Petersen, he makes his money by peddling overpriced and often outdated (if not flat out obsolete) stuff to people who care more a out image than performance. I would pay about as much attention to him as I do to Mountainbike Action (that has been heralding the demise of the hardtail for almost two decades now)