Originally Posted by HDTVKSS
riddle me this....
Mountain bikes are very much classified on HTA, XC race bikes typicly have a HTA of 70 - 72 degrees, whil my cannondale has a HTA of 69 degrees. My hard tail is in the 71 degree range and is noticably twitchier and also more nimble. this may also be atributed to weight and bike length, the cannondale is looonnngggg.
so , why is the given HTA for a " race geometry " so steep? is there any associated climbing benefits to a steep HTA?
MTBs are actually more complicated, because as the suspension forks compress, the HTA increases off the charts, quickening up the steering response. Exactly the opposite of what you want. That's why HTAs go down as travel increases.....71 for 80mm travel.....70 got 100mm.....etc.
To complicate things further, companies measure it differently. I design my bikes as if the rider is sitting on them ( called 'sagged' ) whereas other companies may or may not. The difference can easily be a full degree in both HTA and STA.
Aren't ya glad you don't have to think about this sh¡t all the time?
Is there climbing benefits to a steep HTA? I'm not convinced. I'd design a climing bike a smidge different than a descending one, but that's the problem - what goes up must come down (assuming XC/Trailbiking) so if you design a bike with a full on climbing bias, what happens when you need to come down off the hill?