That's the beautiful thing about DATA. The Data speaks for itself, does not matter if Britney Spears or Einstein reads off the Final Results from the UCI World Cup Results webpage. Both will produce the same info.

It seems like Nino Schurter disagrees with you. But what does he know? He is only the current world champion of XC racing.

We live in an age where we have to design the Race Courses to Fit the Bike... and NOT the other way around.

Marketing and New Sales always drives all Industries, and NOT just biking. The goal is to get people to buy new bikes, and one way to do it is to have Factory Racers ride on certain rigs to get people to buy buy buy.

Whenever I see a "XC Race" that is NOT a loop. I have to highly question how the course was laid out. If you are shortening the course, or putting in rocks and drop offs across the trail to take away the ideal line, or if you are making the course more DH, then to me that is not really a traditional XC Race... because all you are doing is making the race to fit a bike (and not the other way around).

1) Sample Size
In the 2nd Grade I learned about Sample size, and to predict future results, it's best to take as many samples as possible before coming to a conclusion.

2) Making Exceptions the Rules
When I was in the 4th grade, I often made Exceptions the Rule, use to come to a conclusion based on one extreme exception.... but then when I got in the 5th Grade I learned to stop doing that, as it does not predict accurate results throughout the population of samples.. and that it only accurately predicted that one sample.

3) 2016
2016 is here, let's see how well the FS bikes do this year in XC races, let us all analyze these XC races, see how much total climbing there is, as well as net climbing to see how the courses are laid out. From these results, we will make a list, and see if FS is NOW finally faster than Hardtails.

I think when we gauge a whole we should take as much samples as possible.... We should add up all the courses, all the riders.. and from there, count the podiums. When we do this, what does the results show?

Please Discuss...

Julien Absalon also seems to disagree with Eric. Matter of fact, it seems like most of the elite group disagree with Eric's assertion that hardtails are always faster and pick between FS and HT depending on course.

Eric also keeps claiming his argument is based ok hard data, but Eric fails to present said data. And when data doesn't match Eric's theory (I. E. Pros choosing to race a FS for some courses) Eric claims is all a conspiracy to sell bikes.

Again, picking one or 2 races here and there... give me the total count... I read an article awhile back and it seems that the podiums are still about 80% hardtail.

I am just waiting to say "Full Suspension is Faster".... but so far I can't based on 1 or 2 results. I think I should NOT say "Full Suspension is Faster" until about 51% of the total podiums are Full Suspension.

Don't you agree? and please discuss....

It seems you are taking my "always" the wrong way. What if I said... "through the course of the season, over multiple riders, history has shown Hardtails will always be faster"... what if I said it that way, would you be happy then?

Also like I said earlier... it seems we modify "XC courses to fit the bike" and not the other way around. I see these XC courses as kinda rigged now, and they are not traditional XC courses that I have known.... So when you design a course for a bike, don't you think those bikes will have an advantage?

And this, gentlemen is a fine example of the straw man argument. While people have been arguing that full suspension is faster in some conditions, Eric is now claiming that the argument is "full suspension is always faster." That is what we would call "the straw man" that he would then burn.

Incidentally, a vague reference to an unreferenced article does not qualify as "data." Data would be the fact that top racers (Schurter, Absalon, Kulhavy, Fumic...) swap between hardtail and full suspension depending on terrain. And this terrain dependence has a lot more to do with how rough the trail is than how many feet they climb per lap.

If by "traditional XC courses" yout mea the bridle paths and fire roads the Euros sadly made the norm in the early 00's then yes, some of the recent World Cup courses don't meet that.
The courses have gotten more technical because people weren't too enthused about watching skinny dudes on tight clothes riding bikes on bridle paths and fire roads with every rock spray painted so it could be avoided. I think the new courses are closed to what mountainbike races should be: people racing on mountainbike trails. That includes technical sections, singletrack, drops, rock gardens, etc...

PS: when you say that you can design a course for FS bikes you are just agreeing that terrain dictates which one would be faster. But I'm sure you can move the goal posts now that the straw man burnt.

Hey now, Grant is alright and produces some great bikes...I've owned three of them over the years and still have two. What he doesn't make is a modern singletrack shredder because I think what Riv thinks is dirt riding is more about fire trail/wide rolling dirt path than singletrack.

But, from what I've seen, XC courses do seem to be on the smooth side....ideal for a hardtail.

Yo, RJM, I'm happy for you and Imma let you finish, but Petersen's retrogrouch opinion doesn't carry any weight on this discussion

Silly pronouncement. I like FS too, but there are lots of reasons to buy one besides budget. Maybe you want a camping bike that can mount rear luggage. Maybe you seldom ride at enough speed where FS has much value. Maybe you're really wanting to minimize weight. Maybe you don't want the extra maintenance of a rear shock and linkages. Maybe you just want a simpler bike.

- Mark

OK, glad we cleared that up to take down all the straw men... I was not purposely trying to set up a straw man... and if you go back and read my initial posts, I did say "In the big picture, hard tail will always be faster"... so I have been talking about the big picture all along. I am sorry if you did not pick that up, but now that you have it... and moving forward.....

1) I question that the same rider would still NOT win on a FS bike...
2) What has changed for FS to be needed on a XC Race when they were never needed in the first place? Are they putting in more DH and obstacles to build the Race Course to suit the bike?

Please Discusss.....

and yet... even though they build trails to suite the bike, 80% or more of the podium throughout the season is still occupied by hardtails..

I ride mostly on Natural Trails, I have never really thought about designing a trail to fit around a particular XC bike. Of all the Natural trails I have ever encountered across the country, I still say a Pro would be faster on the Hardtail than a FS bike on all these trails. .

I don't see no crime in designing a trail to fit the bike.. I mean if you goal is to make the bike faster on a particular trail, then have at it!

And now Eric is moving the goal posts. Called it!
If you followed racing to the degree you should in order to be able to make the claim that hardtails win most of the races, you would know what has changed. It seems like you don't, so I'll save you the Google time: they now have courses that look like real mountainbike trails.

not moving the goal posts, I said it from the beginning.... just giving you a chance to be on the same page with me, and giving myself a chance to be on the same page with you...

It's not about who is right or who is wrong... go back and read my original posts. It was worded in a way to cover generics.

What? You mean when you said that "hardtails are ALWAYS faster uphill" you weren't claiming that hardtails are always faster uphill? And when you posted five or six times that hardtails win like 80% of the races so hardtails are faster, you weren't claiming that hardtails are faster?

Yes, you've built straw men, you moved the goal post and now you are going to pull either the Chewbacca defense or taking the ball home. While it has been entertaining to see a classic example of logical fallacies this is getting old and certainly not helping the OP. Who by now is probably confused as ****.

So, in order to help the OP who seems like a nice lad I'll try to steer this back into the proper direction (and into this decade, really)
OP: buying a full suspension bike could help you get those Strava KOMs you want, but a) it will cost you a lot of money and b) it may not. Your best option is to improve on your training and technique. If you are going to spend money, I'd start with tyres (as you call then in the UK) and then consider clipless pedals (in my experience they can help a lot) followed by things that may lower your bike weight (handlebar, post, wheels, fork) But mostly, train, train, train.

You need to read more of my posts, I said I was generalizing XC overall with all riders, and over the course of the season... and not nitpicking a couple of racers here and there.

It's up to you if you want to keep this mis-communication going, or if you want to clear it all up. I won't force you either way. I will quote myself because I love quoting myself... I have said all along I was generalizing based on all the rider and all the racers combined.

Here are the choices
1) Take the time to clear up the misunderstanding
2) Keep up the charade that Erich was moving the goal posts.

My posts below clearly states I was generalizing. However, whatever you chose, #1 or #2 , just know that ERICH WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU!


How about when I said this?

Please Discuss...

Wow, I missed the fun....

Poor OP, seeing us old farts argue in circles.

One point that some might argue about, but few have personal experience with, is that the elite full susp XC bikes are a different animal than many other XC bikes. The Yeti ACR (might have gotten the letters wrong) and the higher models of the Spesh Epic can hold close to a hardtail in climbing, and provide to advantages (line choice is more open with suspension).

I have ridden both, many times, on the same trails. I have no doubt, based upon my Garmin watch, that the trail makes a big difference upon which bike I can ride faster. However, I am far from an elite rider. I do believe my 30+ years of mountain biking, though, provides me some reasonable perspective.

is not just being able to pick different lines (and that in itself can be a huge deal) but also being able to clean things you'd otherwise have to walk.

I agree with you, the bike you are talking about matters (a full suspension race bike like what you have or an Scalpel will be a totally different comparison than a Giant Trance X) and terrain matters. If the trails are technical suspension will allow you to ride faster. If it is really twisty but not too rough a hardtail may allow you to accelerate faster out of corners, etc... And what matters the most is the rider. Skill, fitness and what you earlier called testicular fortitude (liked that one) will make more difference than a bike.

I just don't think that giving the OP advice straight from 1099 (FS is for downhill! hardtails are for climbing!) helps him at all.

I myself have been saying since Post 1 is I don't ever plan to ride a hardtail again unless I get back in XC Racing, and I don't see myself ever doing that.

Even a short travel FS where the suspension rides stiffer, the riding experience is just so much funner, bike does not beat me up as much, and I am in more control. For me, FS all the time unless if I am riding on red carpet trails like those in the Bay Area, for that I will ride a rigid bike.

He will be fine. Discussion is healthy.

Do we get to test ride these trails to know what is fast? I guess our local trails, we can... but going to new places we are going into an unknown.. and going into an unknown, Hardtail will always be faster overall. The Race Results shows it.

However, if we are not Racing, we won't really lose much no matter what the course looks like, and FS will always put us more in control with a bigger fun factor.

Circular discussion is not always healthy, especially if you are new to a topic, it can be frustrating and confusing.

Hardtails are not always faster, or they would be ridden by all of the pros. Over recent years some FS bikes have won the championships (Epics) and some Hardtails (GTs).

You can always take two bikes to a new place, or if local take turns. I switch between my bikes, not because of speed, but because I find it very fun, like making the trails new again to me.