# Full suspension vs hard tail - now days efficiency



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

I like the look of full suspension they are just sexy so I was looking at them until my friend a mechanic told me that in this area a hard tail would be all I need.
I haven talk to him about all the different technologies out there now day that full suspension bike have. Dont know if he is old school.

My main question now are full suspension on part with hard tail when it comes to ride around town, street, pulling the little one in his trailer?
I know you can lock the rear shock but do you still loose energy when pedaling. 
I still cant believe some FS bike weight about the same as a HT with about the same components.
Thanks.


----------



## IoC (May 14, 2009)

cloudbuster said:


> are full suspension on part with hard tail when it comes to ride around town, street, pulling the little one in his trailer?


I'd stick with a hardtail 29r for this.

Over a rough trail and distance, a good FS can be as efficient as a hardtail because it acts to absorb some things (roots, rocks) that'll effectively push a rear wheel backwards. On a street or smooth climb, I'd take a hardtail.

Note that I also said "good FS" - good suspension isn't cheap. For an area that doesn't need it and for the purpose of towing kids, I'd put money into better components all around.


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2013)

IoC said:


> I'd stick with a hardtail 29r for this.
> 
> Over a rough trail and distance, a good FS can be as efficient as a hardtail because it acts to absorb some things (roots, rocks) that'll effectively push a rear wheel backwards. On a street or smooth climb, I'd take a hardtail.
> 
> Note that I also said "good FS" - good suspension isn't cheap. For an area that doesn't need it and for the purpose of towing kids, I'd put money into better components all around.


This..sure you can get a FS that weighs what some HT weighs..gonna pay big time to do it...right tool for the job..if you do not need a FS then I would stick with a HT 29er...less maintenance and you can build one up to be very light if your budget allows it..if I was using my HT 29er for city riding..street..trailer duty and that was its primary duty I may think about a rigid 29er..pretty much budget and real world use I guess would depend on what you want vs what you need...but then again cool thing about bikes...rock what you want.


----------



## jlmuncie (Sep 10, 2010)

cloudbuster said:


> My main question now are full suspension on part with hard tail when it comes to ride around town, street, pulling the little one in his trailer?
> Thanks.


Sounds like you're just cruising around, is maximum efficiency really important?


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

I'd buy a rigid for what your describing :skep:

Please post a link to an FS that weighs "about the same" as a HT with same specs. Not sure what you call "about the same" but a few pounds is not "about the same" in the cycling world.


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

It all depends on what you want and enjoy. If you already have a ht then a fs is a nice addition but so is a road bike. Sure a ht is more efficient than fs on smoother stuff, but if having some fun and getting some exercise is the goal than that doesn't matter.


----------



## deke505 (Jul 29, 2012)

You would have to spend a lot more on a full suspension bike to get the same efficiency of a hardtail. If what you seem to be using it for a good hardtail would be enough. 

If at a later time you find yourself doing more technical stuff then you can sell and get fs.


----------



## moefosho (Apr 30, 2013)

My advice is to buy an inexpensive full rigid that you can use for riding around town and pulling the kids, and then saving for(or just buying) a HT or FS to use when you want to go off road. 

Why compromise if you dont have to?


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

couple of things

I use a hybrid beater for around town stuff. It was $300 used and it's a ton faster than a $1800 mountain bike (new). Also, it's safer to be targeted by bike thieves.

To get a good FS that doesn't weigh a ton and has good suspension front and back, you are looking at 2k new. to get a same level hardtail, more like 1200 (airborne gobline or bikesdirect bike).

you don't any suspension for around town. A $500 rigid will be faster.



> I still cant believe some FS bike weight about the same as a HT with about the same components.


 not true. you take a significant weight penalty for FS. not that it matters in around town riding.


----------



## andywuc (Jul 2, 2013)

It all depends on what you want and enjoy.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

cloudbuster said:


> I like the look of full suspension they are just sexy so I was looking at them until my friend a mechanic told me that in this area a hard tail would be all I need.
> 
> I haven talk to him about all the different technologies out there now day that full suspension bike have. Dont know if he is old school.
> 
> ...


This is tough. 
You don't need Mtb as a commuter. You are just wasting your money as well as extra weight. 
Since you seem to know the different technologies out there, why would you need any lock out. Most FS riders nowadays don't use them, unless they are racers.

Believe it, a 5.5 lbs FS frame weight exactly the same as a 5.5 lbs HT frame, since both have the same components both bike would weight the same.

That said a 5.5 lbs HT frame may only cost $800, but the same 5.5 lbs FS frame can be $2200. That's the main difference. My ibis mojo steel HT frame weight the same as my FS seven duo ti frame at about 4 lbs and change but there's a $3000 price difference. And yes the FS is more efficient than the HT anyway you look at it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

I have that around here. That why I asked since I would like to get a nice bike to do the activities mentioned and ride in the area


----------



## kjlued (Jun 23, 2011)

If those are pictures of the stuff you will be riding, I have no idea why you would even consider a full suspension.


----------



## goodmojo (Sep 12, 2011)

This is a local intermediate trail that I just rode for the first time on a hardtail 29er which was perfect. The first part of the trail is beginner so jump to maybe 29 minutes to get to the intermediate sections


----------



## Mr5150 (Dec 20, 2011)

cloudbuster said:


> I have that around here. That why I asked since I would like to get a nice bike to do the activities mentioned and ride in the area


Based on your pics, which describe where you ride a HT is the best choice. FS is a waste.

I ride much more technical and steep stuff than what your pics show and I am more than happy on my steel HT.

(don't believe the ads and articles in Mtn Bike Action)


----------



## Fuglio (Jul 15, 2011)

cloudbuster said:


> I like the look of full suspension they are just sexy so I was looking at them until my friend a mechanic told me that in this area a hard tail would be all I need.
> I haven talk to him about all the different technologies out there now day that full suspension bike have. Dont know if he is old school.
> 
> My main question now are full suspension on part with hard tail when it comes to ride around town, street, pulling the little one in his trailer?
> ...


Just buy a beat up banger bike. Maybe a single speed rigid 29er for the around town stuff and get a mounrain bike for tje trails... dont buy a mountain bike to ride around town and pull trailers. Thats a touring bike your after


----------



## Fuglio (Jul 15, 2011)

moefosho said:


> My advice is to buy an inexpensive full rigid that you can use for riding around town and pulling the kids, and then saving for(or just buying) a HT or FS to use when you want to go off road.
> 
> Why compromise if you dont have to?


 I think a rigid ss 29er is tje conpromose... his best bet would be a touing bike from surly


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

For around town and the dirt road type terrain in the pics, a hardtail is more than adequate and will cost you less in general.

If a full suss bike caught your eye and would get you more excited to ride, and you don't mine compromising on either price point or overall quality versus a hardtail, then go with it if it's more likely to help inspire you to get out and ride more.


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

Mr5150 said:


> Based on your pics, which describe where you ride a HT is the best choice. FS is a waste.
> 
> I ride much more technical and steep stuff than what your pics show and I am more than happy on my steel HT.
> 
> (don't believe the ads and articles in Mtn Bike Action)


I do have a few issues and the pictures are motivational



slapheadmofo said:


> For around town and the dirt road type terrain in the pics, a hardtail is more than adequate and will cost you less in general.
> 
> If a full suss bike caught your eye and would get you more excited to ride, and you don't mine compromising on either price point or overall quality versus a hardtail, then go with it if it's more likely to help inspire you to get out and ride more.


Yep that why I asked about the full suspension this days but even with all the technology they still not as efficient as the hard tails.
But they do look sexier 
Now time to look for a sexy HT frame

I mostly wanted to know about that if they still lacked in efficiency even with the rear locked in flat terrain.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

cloudbuster said:


> I do have a few issues and the pictures are motivational
> 
> Yep that why I asked about the full suspension this days but even with all the technology they still not as efficient as the hard tails.
> But they do look sexier
> ...


Again, you have the wrong info and conclusion about efficiency as well as how to use a full suspension.

FS are more efficient than HT, the suspension absorb the bumps and keep the rider moving forward, unlike HT where any bumps translate into a vertical movement that kills momentum.

HT may feel solid at every pedaling stroke but that's just the way it is. It's just the feel of connection to the road, not efficiency. If the road is smooth then it's a good thing but if it's rough then it just bounce every time you hit the bump.

If you take the time to transition from HT to FS, you'd feel just as connected with added control and comfort. Both wheels would stay planted on the ground more than HT. there's no need for any pro pedal or lock out the anti-squat would take care off the bobbing issue.

It's a myth that's been argued by people whom never own, ridden or properly transition form HT to FS. Once that happen they'd turned into someone like me arguing for the other side.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

BEST advice you've gotten, I'd seriously listen and take heed, but that's just me :skep: Nice cheap, used rigid from Craigslist or such for town/trailer duty and then save for a nice FS to start going exploring the trails. As to the ones who tell you you don't "need" an FS for those trails, most people are over biked these days anyways, choose what you like for the trails, but don't waste cash to look _cool_ around town pulling your kid on an FS..


moefosho said:


> My advice is to buy an inexpensive full rigid that you can use for riding around town and pulling the kids, and then saving for(or just buying) a HT or FS to use when you want to go off road.
> 
> Why compromise if you dont have to?


----------



## theMeat (Jan 5, 2010)

mimi1885 said:


> Again, you have the wrong info and conclusion about efficiency as well as how to use a full suspension.
> 
> FS are more efficient than HT, the suspension absorb the bumps and keep the rider moving forward, unlike HT where any bumps translate into a vertical movement that kills momentum.
> 
> ...


don't get this. While I can see and agree with loosing momentum going over rough stuff, you are wasting energy and loosing pedal power with suspension when you pedal period. That energy you put into the pedal that makes you go up and down on the suspension is lost on moving forward. Not to mention a rider isn't dead weight so even on a rigid you can lift, pull,whatever to get over rough stuff minimizing your momentum loss.


----------



## moefosho (Apr 30, 2013)

LyNx said:


> BEST advice you've gotten, I'd seriously listen and take heed, but that's just me :skep: Nice cheap, used rigid from Craigslist or such for town/trailer duty and then save for a nice FS to start going exploring the trails. As to the ones who tell you you don't "need" an FS for those trails, most people are over biked these days anyways, choose what you like for the trails, but don't waste cash to look _cool_ around town pulling your kid on an FS..


Thank you, Sir! 
I love my full rigid SS 29er for commuting and getting me in shape.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Efficiency isn't the holy grail for every rider. 
For some of us, fun is more important. I have more fun on my squishy bike on most trails. The only thing I prefer a rigid bike for is BMX or pumptrack type stuff, where they are far superior. Though if I were ever forced to start riding pavement exclusively, I'd probably go rigid. Either that or kill myself.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

theMeat said:


> don't get this. While I can see and agree with loosing momentum going over rough stuff, you are wasting energy and loosing pedal power with suspension when you pedal period. That energy you put into the pedal that makes you go up and down on the suspension is lost on moving forward. Not to mention a rider isn't dead weight so even on a rigid you can lift, pull,whatever to get over rough stuff minimizing your momentum loss.


I know what you are saying. If you stump the pedal so hard that the action would overwhelm the suspension it would compress the shock or fork, it's not the right way to pedal. That's the main reason why mashers have the hardest time cleaning steep technical climb. They'd break the rear traction and loose momentum and control. It's just as bad on the HT as it would on FS. Inefficient riders do not make inefficient designs.

Good example about the weighting and unweighting the front and rear of the bike to get over obstacles, experts and experienced riders can make it look so effortless but it's not. It requires a lot more energy and core strength to execute the move. My goal on the trails is keep the front wheel from bashing into any obstacles, it's much better now, but it was not easy. I still spend a lot of energy even on the descend.

The anti-squat that built into many good FS designs would shoot you forward firmly without any loss of energy while providing active suspension, some people have the habit of looking down at the shock wallow while pedaling. The movement is not necessary power robbing motion. I'd be worried if there's no movement on the suspension that I paid for. Easy test for people who insist on proving, look at the shock action when pedaling forward, then try pedaling backward and see, the shock will become much more active when there's no anti-squat.

If people still insist upon no suspension movement while pedaling, you can always find older designs like sweetspot, or URT the era called for a HT like suspension lock out. 
Then they can properly evolved and appreciate the current offering.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## s0ckeyeus (Jun 20, 2008)

theMeat said:


> don't get this. While I can see and agree with loosing momentum going over rough stuff, you are wasting energy and loosing pedal power with suspension when you pedal period. That energy you put into the pedal that makes you go up and down on the suspension is lost on moving forward. Not to mention a rider isn't dead weight so even on a rigid you can lift, pull,whatever to get over rough stuff minimizing your momentum loss.


People ride like tanks these days.


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

so if you could only have one bike for now what would it be HT or FS.
I just read more into the Mason by DB and it seem like a good middle design.
I could get one for $1.5k
would that be decent for around town and single track.
I dont live in what you would call a modern city pop about 4K south texas. there for I dont think a rigid or road bike would be ideal.

if I get a HT now I may get a FS later in like a year. vice versa 
Thanks


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

Why would you get a middle design for $1500, when you can buy top designs for about the same price. Giant, Trek, Specialized, Cannondale, etc. Not top model but same model different trim still give you the same frame and design may be with different material. You can get a $1400 entry level in Alu, the top Alu model may be $5000 but still using the same frame. You'd still get similar suspension performance, of course the bike would be heavier and does not have the same bells&whistle components.

Frame design is the heart of any FS so pick a good one with not so good components in your price range, you can always upgrade the components as it breaks, but not the other way around.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

you should be considering these bikes
hardtail
Airborne Bicycles. Goblin
reba fork, x7 derailleurs, x7 crank, elixir hydraulic brakes

Airborne Bicycles. Guardian

compare these component lists to other bikes you're looking at. heirarchy here
Is this a good deal for a First Bike?
I think you'll find that there wont' be many other makers who offer the level of components airborne or bikesdirect offers at the same price point.

not sure where op can by a geared rigid bike, but that would be my first choice for that kind of riding.


----------



## s0ckeyeus (Jun 20, 2008)

The Mason seems pretty good for 1.5k, if it's the same Mason on the Diamondback site. It'd be a shame to reduce that bike to a townie though. It's a trail bike. The 1x10 drivetrain is not what you'd be looking for on the road because it's going to be optimized for riding trails. You are not going to need anywhere near 140mm of front suspension. This bike would not fulfill your stated purpose.

I have two older mountain bikes I use for commuting, both rigid. I think they are pretty good bikes to tool around town on. As much as I'd like you to buy a sweet ride, I think you're barking down the wrong tree, unless you are going to get serious about riding trails.


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

Yes same mason as on diamondback main site.
I tough that something like the mason could be used for all around. From the trial to the park not more that 2 miles loop on the road and here it would be used to pull a trailer.

At the moment I can only get a bike.
I did also look at the goblin it does look good but the lines of the mason keep me looking back.

Why you say the mason is middle design because of the brand?

Right now I'm talking about only one bike. Ht or FS


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

Build up your trail handling skills/fitness on the hardtail. In a couple years - get a FS and you'll see why I recommended a HT first....


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

That why I also asked about FS this days with all the technology R&D put on the rear to help with pedal bob etc.

I'm still considering them with the rear lock and then unlock to go wild but it seem they still don't work that great with the feedback so far on here.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

No, FS bikes have come a long way, I have no issue riding them on road, but what everyone is trying to tell you is that they're not close to the same weight for the same $$ spent as a HT or rigid and for what you describe a used HT or Rigid is better suited. Tyres actually play the bigger part in riding as MTB on the road than if it's a HT or FS these days for me at least.

If you really can't afford a Craigs List rigid/HT cheapie and then your trail bike, then yes, for me the DB Mason looks a fun bike, in the same category as the Paradox which I love. As was mentioned a HT or Rigid on the trails will teach you handling and line choice and improve your technique much better and faster than an FS would.



cloudbuster said:


> That why I also asked about FS this days with all the technology R&D put on the rear to help with pedal bob etc.
> 
> I'm still considering them with the rear lock and then unlock to go wild but it seem they still don't work that great with the feedback so far on here.


----------



## fat_tires_are_fun (May 24, 2013)

Get a hardtail. Easier to maintaint, more than sufficient for what you are describing, more for your money, lighter, etc....
If you are really set on a fs...get one...your opinion is the one that counts.
Your viewpoint is interesting as I have always found hardtail bikes to be aesthetically pleasing and have found fs bikes to look clunky with lines that dont quite flow..
Good luck.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

cloudbuster said:


> That why I also asked about FS this days with all the technology R&D put on the rear to help with pedal bob etc.
> 
> I'm still considering them with the rear lock and then unlock to go wild but it seem they still don't work that great with the feedback so far on here.


Lock out works just fine, many posters including myself said why would you need to use it. If you buy a rear suspension why lock it out? You are paying extra for it. If you don't need rear suspension then stick with HT.

I guess something you just have to try it yourself to understand. Good luck.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

LyNx said:


> No, FS bikes have come a long way, I have no issue riding them on road, but what everyone is trying to tell you is that they're not close to the same weight for the same $$ spent as a HT or rigid and for what you describe a used HT or Rigid is better suited. Tyres actually play the bigger part in riding as MTB on the road than if it's a HT or FS these days for me at least.
> 
> If you really can't afford a Craigs List rigid/HT cheapie and then your trail bike, then yes, for me the DB Mason looks a fun bike, in the same category as the Paradox which I love. As was mentioned a HT or Rigid on the trails will teach you handling and line choice and improve your technique much better and faster than an FS would.


Is not that I cant afford a craglist bike, it was that I dint want to have to many bikes not enough space right now that why I was asking for only 1 bike that could do it all.
I dint want to buy a wally mart bike I wanted a high to mid end bike.
I live about 4hours one way to a big city with bike shops.
Where I live we have nothing.



fat_tires_are_fun said:


> Get a hardtail. Easier to maintaint, more than sufficient for what you are describing, more for your money, lighter, etc....
> If you are really set on a fs...get one...your opinion is the one that counts.
> Your viewpoint is interesting as I have always found hardtail bikes to be aesthetically pleasing and have found fs bikes to look clunky with lines that dont quite flow..
> Good luck.


True not all of them are good looking but to me some FS look better than the good looking HT



mimi1885 said:


> Lock out works just fine, many posters including myself said why would you need to use it. If you buy a rear suspension why lock it out? You are paying extra for it. If you don't need rear suspension then stick with HT.
> 
> I guess something you just have to try it yourself to understand. Good luck.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


I probably misunderstood the meaning of the lock out.
What I mean was if the FS design have to much bob etc. then in that case I would use the lock out. What I dint know was even with the lock out on if it would completely eliminate the bob. If the kinetic dont work that great on a specific design.

I guess that would be a good topic to list the best to worse design when it comes to FS.

So to sum it up what I wanted to know was if a FS was better all around or a HT. but then it depend on the trail not much I dont think I be doing many of those at all.
Mostly ride with the family and pull the little one on his trailer or from time to time go on my own around.
But for here the street are not that great that why im specifically asking about FS or HT.
And then that when I saw the DB Mason that it seem like something in between a FS and a HT that why I think I started considering it.
Diamondback Bicycles - Mason


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

Stick to the cheap HT if you want to pull the trailer, and get stronger brake. If you already have the disc brake just up the rotor size. 

Best and worst designs are somewhat subjective because of many things, intended use, price, geometry, etc. Like I mentioned earlier, URT Unified Rear Triangle, got a bad rap for some stupid demand at the time.

At this point you don't know what's bobbing feels like and how it effects your pedaling. All of the reading is theoretical. Stick with the big 4 brands, Diamondback is good as well. Set it up properly, spend sometime to dial in the suspension per your style, you are good to go.

Don't worry we all have been there at one point or another.


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

I don't have a single bike part.
What would be considered a heavy FS bike 28lbs?
And same for a HT?
I though that the rear design was overall and not specific.
The more you read the more you learn.

Just found this article on the topic
Lightweight Full-Suspension Mountain Bikes Taking Over Hardtail Turf - ACTIVE.com
Now it made me lean more towards the FS side. I guess that the dark side the force is feeling strong.


----------



## Mr5150 (Dec 20, 2011)

cloudbuster said:


> I don't have a single bike part.
> What would be considered a heavy FS bike 28lbs?
> And same for a HT?
> I though that the rear design was overall and not specific.
> ...


From the Article: "Originally published in August, 2001".

Hey here's the deal: I built up my 24lbs steel HT for under $2000. Built up my 26.5lbs FS for $3500. My guess it would cost $5000-$6000+ to make a 24lbs FS bike happen these days.

You want a lightweight FS bike? Plan on spending some real money.

Heavy HT, yea 27lbs.

Heavy FS umm... 33-35lbs


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I think if you're going to ride strictly pavement, no need for an fully. Might be nice to have a little travel up front, couple inches would be fine. If you think you might try to take it off road, you can use that as the perfect excuse to by the full suspension it sounds like you'd rather have. 

I ride a 35ish pound bike most of the time; it's fine. It's got a good bit of travel, so I do use the lock-out on fire road grinds or road connections. IMO, unless you're racing, who cares about a few extra pounds if a bike is fun to ride? Pedal a little harder, or ride a little slower...no biggie, long as you're enjoying yourself.

Get the bike that gets you fired up to ride. You can always sell it off and get a different one down the road if it doesn't work out for ya.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

This single ring set up 24lbs is 2 lbs lighter than the third pic with Hammerschmidt about 26lbs but the Hammerschmidt is a lot faster and I clean more tech climb than I have ever before with the heavier set up, it's not about the weight but performance. Same goes with the bigger set up on my trail bike. I just happen to like single ring from time to time when I need to get my a$$ kicked

Some bike designs like my first gen Giant Reign feel and climb lighter than its 32lbs weight.

If you plan to spend less than $2k get used to the idea that it would be 30lbs+, if it's lighter then it's a bonus:thumbsup:


----------



## s0ckeyeus (Jun 20, 2008)

OP, you might be over-thinking this. Go to the bike shop and ride a bunch of bikes and pick out the one that seems like it would work best for you and the stuff you want to ride. Reading stuff on the internet is all well and good, but it's always good to experience different bikes for yourself. Plus, we're going to talk you into buying the $7000 bike you never knew you wanted and probably don't need.


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

Dint notice the release date on that article hard to see on my iPhone.
Ok I guess I will stay HT
I think this are the options
Airborne goblin xo
DB Mason
Fezzari solitude slx
The new motobecane xo or xtr. New frame design
Save Up To 60% Off SRAM XO, 2x10 Speed 29er Titanium Front Suspension Mountain Bikes - MTB - 2014 Motobecane Fly Titanium 29er | SRAM XO hardtail mountain bikes | Save up to 60% off list prices on new bicycles








Pretty light bikes as they come stock.

Alway wanted to try Ti now that they have tapered HT I think is work a closer look.
Titanium anyone for a HT what you guys think

As you see all of them are mail order bikes I live in a small city nearest bike shop would be 8 hours round trip.

Mimi1885 those are some frames I haven't seen before very unique it seem.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

My main ride is aluminum motobecane. I've read a few negative long-term reviews of the Ti frame in the motobecane sub forum. I wouldn't go for it. If you care about looks, don't get it. The frames work great but they are dated looking, even more so in person. Very straight tubing looks old.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

Motobecane "titanium" is nowhere near Litespeed, Lynskey, Seven, or Moots ti....which is true, Aerospace-Grade material and far superior, in fabrication and construction. I've even heard a few say it seems Motobecane uses cheap aluminum alloy, and "anodize" it with a titanium-like finish. 

I've ridden a new Motobecane Fantom Comp ti and it does have a "dead" feel to it. Yes, it is light - but so is 7075AL too...which is what it really feels like, to me.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

> Motobecane "titanium" is nowhere near Litespeed, Lynskey, Seven, or Moots ti....which is true, Aerospace-Grade material and far superior, in fabrication and construction. I've even heard a few say it seems Motobecane uses cheap aluminum alloy, and "anodize" it with a titanium-like finish.


 I've never seen any evidence to support this. Sounds a bit like, "a VALUE brand!. There must be something wrong with it!!"


----------



## cloudbuster (Dec 14, 2011)

bob13bob said:


> My main ride is aluminum motobecane. I've read a few negative long-term reviews of the Ti frame in the motobecane sub forum. I wouldn't go for it. If you care about looks, don't get it. The frames work great but they are dated looking, even more so in person. Very straight tubing looks old.


That the new frame right there
Now they have tapered head and s downtube. So not so outdated


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

I don't think that bd would sell fake Ti HT. However, I've heard a similar story about Aluor steel frame painted to look like Ti and sold as Ti on Craigslist. 

Op, unlike airborne, when bd advertise xo it only has 3 xo components shifters and derialleurs. The rest are just a mix bag of other cheap parts. Just tell me how it compares with a $6000 trek or specialized. When it couldn't even compare with the airborne goblin x7. It has the full line of x7 that were designed to work together. The spec were put together by someone with common sense. 

If you want a cheap Ti then get it, but it's not that cheap really.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

I think the problem with such bikes, such as some Motobecane models, are that they aren't tuned as well as they could be for the "average" American and their riding style. Things such as tubing diameter make a significant difference in how they ride under someone with a 135 lbs 5' 7" body compared to how they ride under someone with a 185 lbs 5' 10" body or someone with a 225 lbs 6' 2" body. The small and light rider, who cruises passively, might consider it stiff, while other aggressive and/or big and heavy riders might notice flex as they push it harder. You can't realistically suit a large variety of riders with one design, lengthening the seat tube, top tube, and head tube lengths to fit people of various heights.

I personally wouldn't recommend a mail order bike until you understand bike design a bit more, else you likely will be compromising "fit" for a "good" price. It's only a good deal if it actually suits you well. The used market is a good place to start, to test things out to find out what you like and what you don't, as you typically can make back much of what you spent, especially if you hunt for the deals. Buy new when you know what exactly you want. If you know what you want, don't balk at the price and consider something less expensive, just save up for it; it will be worth it.

Personally, I found that some brands are consistent in the kind of ride feel they shoot for. One brand might shoot for confident and capability for aggressive riders that love speed, while another brand might shoot for balance, forgiveness, and easy laid-back handling, with many brands offering something in between. Some brands offer many models in the same "segment", such as XC/trail riders, with the differences between the different models being as simple as shock tune, balancing weight distro for women riders, etc. In short, there's a lot going on in bike design that you may not be aware of. It would do you great good to simply be exposed to much of it, in order to gain a better understanding, and make a wiser decision on what would be good enough for you.


----------



## bolandjd (Jul 23, 2008)

cloudbuster said:


> And then that when I saw the DB Mason that it seem like something in between a FS and a HT that why I think I started considering it.


No, not true. The Mason is a long travel, all-mountain hardtail - a very specialized niche bike. It has slack angles and short chainstays to tackle extremely rocky and rough terrain and go up, over, and back down mountains. This is the kind of bike experienced all-mountain riders get when they're bored of FS. I think you'd be better off with a XC-type bike, especially since your trails look very flat and open. Since you seem concerned with efficiency and versatility, in truth you'd be better off with a cyclocross (CX) or touring bike. I ride trails like that on my LHT (steel touring bike) all the time in perfect comfort. In some parts of the country, they call it "gravel grinding" and mostly ride CX bikes or road bikes with fat (28-35mm) tires. Although I'm partial to rigid steel and fat tires, have a look at Diamondback's "dual sport" bikes, if you really think you need a suspension fork. That would be a better fit for the type of riding you want to do and the trails you showed us.


----------



## Mr5150 (Dec 20, 2011)

bolandjd said:


> . The Mason is a long travel, all-mountain hardtail - a very specialized niche bike. It has slack angles and short chainstays to tackle extremely rocky and rough terrain and go up, over, and back down mountains. *This is the kind of bike experienced all-mountain riders get when they're bored of FS*. .


Being bored riding mtn bikes is a foreign concept to me. I enjoy everything from paved bike paths to technical singletrack. Just riding my bicycle. I guess I'm just a kid at heart.

I feel sorry for those who get bored. I've known a few and they are 50, fat and haven't pedaled a bike in 10 years.


----------

