Hey,

Congrats on your bike ! I kinda wish I had got a full Suspension but I am just starting out in MTB and didn't realize how quickly I would get addicted to it !

Anyway, I love my Brodie but maybe will buy a Full Susp. next year. Thanks for listing off all the benefits though - it will make it easier for me to justify my decision ! :-)

It's weird - I don't see many females on full susp. bikes around here (I am female). Obviously alot of them buy fs bikes but so far, my Brodie Bruzza seems fine for my skill level.

Justen

I love my full suspsnsion klein, had it for about 3 years now, and I will never go back to a hardtail.

With lockouts you can go back anytime. :beer:

I'll disagree here...if you don't know the diff between a lockout and a ht then you never really rode your ht.

I see the point to a dually and in fact may need one someday but a ht has its merrits as well. The debate in fact is pointless in my eyes but hey thats me :) Ride what you like or in my case ride what you think you deserve :)

It's all about power/weight ratio :D

HT RULES!!!!! but that is only my opinion.

I rode an NS (no suspension) bike up until the summer of my 8th grade year in high school ... which I think was 99 or so ... then I got my trek 6000, later it was stolen, I had no bike for a while ... then I got my klein.

Does mean you have really ridden one...I rode a 'lockout' for a few days and within 2 minutes could feel the difference between the two.

While a lockout might aid in xc, it is still nothing compared to a real ht.

Another thing you have to sacrifice with a FS is chainstay length... or rather lack thereof. My old fully rigid 1990 Nishiki Ariel was an excellent climber due to its 16" chainstays... shorter than most MTBs of the day and much shorter than many FS bikes of today. Additionally the short chainstay made for really quick accelerations and the bike seemed a lot nimbler than my current FS XC bike. Sometimes I miss my old Ariel which I stupidly gave away when I got the FS. I'm contemplating getting a hardtail now because in some ways, it's more fun.

If you like short chainstays look at the Kona roast/chute/stuff series. The bikes are made with shorter chainstays to make wheelie drops and more technical turning easier.

1) Wrong (specialized epic**********??)

2) **********? Yea, I am sure when people press on their fork on a full suspension bike, they immediately are sent over the bars.
Hint: Theres a thing called rebound damping also

3) Since when do ALL FS BIKES weigh over 30 pounds????

4) If you have a 20 pound FS bike, and a 18 pound hardtail, are you going to actually call the FS bike heavy**********


So what dual suspension bike is this? I feel a hell of alot more worn out if I ride a hardtail on a trail at the end of the day compared to if I rode a full suspension. Partly because the rear end constantly bucks up over every little tree root and everything.

I dont know about you, but I have sprinted my 38 pound bighit up long steep streets before. Not only have I sprinted up streets, but I have raced friends on hardtails before (one was riding my old P3) and he gave up while I made it all the way to the top, and still wasnt even really out of breath or tired. Maybe everybody should get a specialized FSR, because they sure perform better than any other bike.

You don't seem to understand. Reguardless of HOW your rebound is setup, a dual suspension WILL BUCK! I've experienced it on tons of FS bikes, read it in tons of magazines...maybe you should do a little reseach. Show me a 20 pounds FS bike. Until you get a bike that is as LIGHT as a hardtail it will never be ass efficient. Is that a hard concept to understand? More weight = less efficiency because you have to haul it all down the trail. There's no way in hell you'd out-sprint a guy on a hardtail on your big hit... NO WAY. Does your friend weigh 350 pounds or something? I'd like to see you beat me to the top of the hill on that dog!

Do I have to scan one of the articles in my bike magazine so that some of you might better understand the concept of how a dual suspension bike can have a bucking effect? I really didn't think it was that hard to understand.. simple physics.

Picture this: You are driving in your car and you slam on the brakes. The front end dips, while the rear end rises. It is the SAME concept on a dual suspension bike. Often when you hit a deep rut or drop off a small ledge the front fork will compress, and the rear shock will decompress, causing the rear to rise up and the front to dip. It's NOT that hard to understand, but I suppose I can SCAN this article if you really MUST have a simpler explanation.

Actually MBA had an article last year that talked about the FS/HT issue. Based on research done by bicycle companies, all signs pointed towards FS being more efficient..Especially with the advent of rigs such as the Epic. People still hang with HT because it "feels" more efficient..Even though it's not. Based on the article, I agree that FS is more efficient...However, I think every bike has it's place, and I can't really say more since I haven't ridden a FS on the trail.

Tee hee, I did a search on alltheweb for Full suspension designs vs. Hardtail designs, and my first result was to a bikeforums thread..pretty coolio.


http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?threadid=1835

Not to switch sides but what you are describing is brake jacking and/or brake Squating. You are correct EVERY fs to date has some form in varrying degrees. But it is all dependant on where the pivot is and what gear you are riding in. Some designs have eliminated jack in the middle ring but still suffer greatly from it in the small ring. It also varries between the different four bar systems. One with a horst link has less jack (very little in fact) compared to a 4 bar designed by Kona which use a rocker system. Compare the 4 bar to a single pivot and the brake jack gets signifigantly worse. Compare again to a softtail system (I forget the actual name) and you actually referse the jacking (instead of bucking you off you get slammed into the ground when you brake). To say they all brake jack the same is very wrong. As designs get better the jacking will get better and in fact be reduced to nothing. Different linkages and designs are working on this. Dw at ridemonkey designed a linkage for Ironhorse hollowpoint that makes a great comprimize between braking ability without the jack. Horst linkage with its pivot lower and than the rear dropout reduced it signifigantly (fsr system) to the point where you really don't notice it. Santa Cruz has a v10 system which is also suppost to have reduced it (I believe as well as creating a near vertical travel).

Brake jack / bucking is in fact TOTALLY eliminated by a floating disc brake system found on some very high end dh bikes. this is also a third party adon except on Balfa bikes I believe which come stock with these on higher end models. Of course this isn't appropriate for xc rigs as it adds weight. this is a special feature designed for certain bikes and works extremely well. For example some of the best dh bikes are single pivot however these are renowned at jacking (bucking you up). Add the floating disc brake and whammo you have a single pivot dh machine that has no brake jack at all.

If you are talking about some other form of jacking (haha) I really have no idea what you are refering too because no one complains about being 'bucked' off if the suspension is setup correctly with proper rebound adjust, damping and weight ratio on the spring.

BTW I am staying out of the efficiency debate...this post was strictly about brake jack...

I think you need to differentiate between efficiency and performance. Just because something is more efficient does not mean it will perform better or perform better in all circumstances. Take for instance a jet plane (turbojet or turbofan). It is far less fuel-efficient than a turboprop but has higher performance (max speed, acceleration, time-to-climb, etc...). And in the realm of turbine engines, there are other design features such high vs low bypass... variable vs fixed inlets... Each feature offers trade-offs between efficiency and performance... complexity and added weight vs simplicity and greater thrust-to-weight.

For a more pedestrian comparison, take a Honda Civic vs a Ferrari FX. While the Civic is more fuel efficient, it's certainly not going to beat a 650hp supercar in a race.

Translation:


If your riding a fs bike, you are going to lose to somebody who is riding a hardtail.:D

Yes... but you need to qualify that. The mechanic at the bike shop I go to races a fully rigid singlespeed Jamis MTB in XC. He blasts everyone on the climbs but gets killed when the terrain gets gnarly because he has to pick his lines better while the guys with the FS rigs and any amount of travel can just blast right on through. Also the fact that he's only got one gear means he runs out of them on fast descents. His strategy is to try and put as much time on them as he can during the climbs and when the course is relatively flat. The problem is that if he laps them (and he does quite often), he'll be stuck trying to pick his way through the pack without suspension to shoot straighter lines.

I don't think there will ever be an end to this debate.. Like I said, I think every bike has it's place. Besides that, every rider has a different preference.

It also depends alot on what your trails and riding style are. I tend to pick smoother lines, even on my FS bike. I like my FS bike.. but it just flat wears me out riding it versus the hardtail on most of the trails. It's awesome to descend on.. but I hate to climb on it. I have a sprinting style and that bike doesn't accomodate that well. I'm much more comfortable in the rough stuff, but on the climbs or sprints it just feels like a real dog to me. I find myself riding the hardtail 90% of the time. But for urban assault/downhill I'd deffinitely choose the FS bike.

once you go fs.....you never go back:beer:

i dont think i will ever buy another hardtail?!:p

Thats cause you like to sit :D...

Last weekend I went for a ride with a couple friends with fs. One had a 38 lb Specialized Big Hit set up for freeride, another on an older i-drive set up for xc (about 28 lbs), and me on my 24 lb HT Stumpjumper. We had to stop several times so they could try some nasty jumps:D It was entertaining to watch. When we actually rode, I owned them on the longer climbs and stayed even on the smooth trails. But I ate their dust on the really rocky descents. But there were also plenty of technical sections that were all about the rider that I held my own on. At the end of the 10-mile ride, I was the only one with a sore lower back (i-drive guy was sore all over from a couple face and ass plants). That M2 frame is pretty harsh. The fs guys spent most of the ride trying to convince me to go fs. At the end of the ride I was considering it, but I ultimately decided to stick to my plan of getting a steel HT when my M2 dies. I will not go fs until I am satisfied with my skills as a mountain biker. After all, if you can't handle a certain obstacle on a ht, how will it look if you can't handle it on a fs, either?

yep sittin is cool, most hard tails do beat me up hills thats for sure! but in the tecnical and downhill, folks be gettin smoked! I salute the folks that are riding hardtails to hone skills and waiting till they are worthy of the big bikes! lmao i could get into a tec. rant but im not going to F S IS SO SOFT AND BOUNCY MY BACK IS NEVER SORE! I think people are in fs denial though to be honest, imagine your fav trail on an ibis bowtie!