# All Mountain vs Trail Bikes



## MaddSkillz (Jun 10, 2007)

What's the difference? I'm looking at the Giant line of bikes and I like both the Trance and the Reign. One however is rated for "all mountain" while the other is a "trail" bike... What's the diff? Both have full suspension. Is the Reign as good at riding "trails" as the Trance?

Help!


----------



## irishpitbull (Sep 29, 2011)

From what I have read, AM has bit more travel than Trail. Trail a smidge lighter. I consider my FSR Expert an AM even tho Specialized call it trail bike.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Think of AM as inbetween XC and DH. More travel and burlier than XC, but not as much as DH.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Jun 10, 2007)

Ahh, I see. So maybe a more robust style frame and components to absorb a little more "abuse?" 

I kinda like the Reign over the Trance in the looks department but maybe that's a dumb way to be shopping for these things... haha I'm headed to the shop I race for (roadie) after work. Interested to hear what they have to say.


----------



## iamspartacus (May 21, 2012)

Tagging on to the original question then, where does XC fall into place in regards to Am or Trail status?


----------



## irishpitbull (Sep 29, 2011)

Lightest to Heavy duty

XC
Trail
AM
DH


----------



## velveteer (Feb 28, 2012)

MaddSkillz said:


> Ahh, I see. So maybe a more robust style frame and components to absorb a little more "abuse?"
> 
> I kinda like the Reign over the Trance in the looks department but maybe that's a dumb way to be shopping for these things... haha I'm headed to the shop I race for (roadie) after work. Interested to hear what they have to say.


You gotta like what you ride...


----------



## ARCHAIC (Jun 4, 2011)

Where and what type of riding do you plan on doing? I've demoed both and loved the reign but if you aren't gonna be doing good size drops/ pretty damn aggressive trails then it may be a bit overkill. The trance will climb better and the reign will be a better descender. Both are awesome rides. FYI, for the reign price you should check out an ibis mojo.... Just as capable but lighter and the DW link is pretty sweet. Any way you go you will not be disappointed!


----------



## MaddSkillz (Jun 10, 2007)

I'm a Cat 3 road racer looking to have some fun in the off season during the fall and winter months up in the trails. I'm in Oklahoma and I'm right near Turkey mountain. I've never ridden it before. I'm going this weekend. So I'll know more about the terrain after that. 

I'll be sticking with Giant as the shop I race for sells them and Felt bikes and I get good deals since they're my team sponsor. That Reign is just badass looking.


----------



## pfox90 (Aug 8, 2010)

For AM the head angle will be slacker, the travel will be more, and the top tube will be shorter (usually). All of this is geared towards the decent. With a good AM bike it should be capable of climbing fairly well, the Maestro suspension is a good design and the Reign is a really good bike. You just need to decide if you need that much travel for your area/ride style.

What model Reign and Trance were you looking at?


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

MaddSkillz said:


> What's the difference? I'm looking at the Giant line of bikes and I like both the Trance and the Reign. One however is rated for "all mountain" while the other is a "trail" bike... What's the diff? Both have full suspension. Is the Reign as good at riding "trails" as the Trance?
> 
> Help!


6 inches of Travel slacker HA vs. 5 inches of travel steeper head angle


----------



## MaddSkillz (Jun 10, 2007)

pfox90 said:


> For AM the head angle will be slacker, the travel will be more, and the top tube will be shorter (usually). All of this is geared towards the decent. With a good AM bike it should be capable of climbing fairly well, the Maestro suspension is a good design and the Reign is a really good bike. You just need to decide if you need that much travel for your area/ride style.
> 
> What model Reign and Trance were you looking at?


I spoke to my shop last night and they said that the Reign would be too much for the riding around here. So that's cool. But then they said that the Anthem would be even better than the Trance as there's less give but still enough. I'm really interested in speed so would the Anthem be the better choice over the Trance with more travel?

The two bikes I was initially comparing was the Reign 2 and the Trance X3. Now I need to consider the Anthem X3... I'm just not digging the colors of it though... I may go with the Trance X3 after all.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

If you're interested in going fast, take a look at the XtC too.

Of the FS bikes I've demoed, the Anthem sucked the least. But when I can update my MTB, I'd like to stick with hardtail unless something major changes. If you got curious about racing XC, both the Anthem and the Trance would do the job okay, but the Anthem would probably be a bit better. It'll likely demand a little more finesse on descents.

I see AM as being flowline bikes you can still pedal up to the top of a hill. Not every manufacturer believes in all of the distinctions or makes them the same way, of course. Manufacturers are trying hard to make the Trail category a new default, at least for people who are well-funded enough to enter the sport at that pricepoint.


----------



## iamspartacus (May 21, 2012)

AndrwSwitch, can you give anymore insight on the benefits of HT over FS? I know a lot has to do with personal riding style and local environment, but for a noob on the cusp of making a major purchase, I just want a lot of information as to the adequate nature of one over the other. Personally, I am ready to go with a 26" FS I found at a remarkable price, or build a 29er from a frame I can get at a remarkable price. Thanks you for any and all input.


----------



## Shark (Feb 4, 2006)

I loved my trance X2 when I had it. great do-it-all type bike, can be built up light & climbs well, but still handle the odd drop or two.

The reign is overkill unless you're in places like Colorado, Utah, etc etc....& ride very aggressive.

The Anthem is a race bike, quicker steering/geometry etc.

Ride both and see what you like.


----------



## Magsrgod (Jun 21, 2006)

MaddSkillz said:


> I spoke to my shop last night and they said that the Reign would be too much for the riding around here. So that's cool. But then they said that the Anthem would be even better than the Trance as there's less give but still enough. I'm really interested in speed so would the Anthem be the better choice over the Trance with more travel?
> 
> The two bikes I was initially comparing was the Reign 2 and the Trance X3. Now I need to consider the Anthem X3... I'm just not digging the colors of it though... I may go with the Trance X3 after all.


In Oklahoma I would agree that a 160mm bike would be pretty darn big. One thing to ask yourself is what do you want to do on the bike? If you want to rip around dirt trails when your not on the road bike then a HT or a 4" FS bike would probably be ideal and more like what your used to now. If you want to do drops, hit some jumps, ride chunky harder lines then the trail/ AM bike would probably be better off.

As bad ass looking and very good of a bike the Reign is, you would end up having less fun lugging that around just basic XC trails if thats what you end up riding.


----------



## pfox90 (Aug 8, 2010)

Going "fast" doesn't always equate to riding a short travel suspension bike, I ride way faster with a trail bike because the suspension soaks up quite and bit and the geometry allows me to get better cornering and better descents. Technically no one really needs suspension at all so that is somewhat the shops personal preference referring to the Anthem. If you would going to look into riding more aggressive, big hit, jumps, drops, quicker descents than a trail bike will allow you to grow into that if you should like.

But as it has been said before this is my outlook and you should really get on both of them and see which one is better for you. The X3 is a nice bike.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

iamspartacus said:


> AndrwSwitch, can you give anymore insight on the benefits of HT over FS? I know a lot has to do with personal riding style and local environment, but for a noob on the cusp of making a major purchase, I just want a lot of information as to the adequate nature of one over the other. Personally, I am ready to go with a 26" FS I found at a remarkable price, or build a 29er from a frame I can get at a remarkable price. Thanks you for any and all input.


The jobs of suspension are to soak up energy and to allow the frame and the wheels some movement relative to one another.

Whether this is good or bad depends a lot on your perspective.

When you're at the top of a long descent, your elevation means you've got a ton of potential energy stored up, more than you can control by the bottom. So, brakes. And it's no great loss if in helping your wheels follow the terrain better, your suspension bleeds off some energy.

When you're at the bottom of a long climb, on the other hand, you're going to be spending the next several minutes putting out power. If the suspension moves, it absorbs some of that. Every watt lost is a little longer that it'll take to complete the climb. I also didn't realize how often I get out of the saddle until I rode a FS bike. With the exception of the Anthem, everything I've demoed has gotten pretty discombobulated by that pedaling style.

I weigh a lot more than my bike does, so if I make the whole bike follow the terrain, I don't need as much help from my suspension. If I give up a rear shock, I can get a lighter, cheaper bike even if everything else is comparable.

For me, front suspension is a great compromise. I've got strong legs and a healthy back, so if I make my platform and try to relax, the rear wheel has enough movement. But I've ridden rigid mountain bikes and get some trail time on my 'cross bike (rigid, of course) and root beds and rock gardens become a real beating.

I do notice a little bob when I get out of the saddle with my current, relatively old-school fork. Still a lot less than most FS platforms. I didn't with the previous, newer, fancier one. In the saddle, the bike is well behaved.

The reason I disliked the Anthem the least was that it didn't sink as much when I got out of the saddle. But it wasn't as smooth as some of the other FS bikes I've tried when I was descending. I know there's some room for better suspension setup here, those demo bikes were all just set up for my weight according to a chart or something. But I figure if they can't ballpark the bike to being reasonably good, I probably can't dial it in to where I really like it.

I still want to try a Specialized Epic. And of course, this is a matter of emphasis. I like to get to the tops of things fast and I race XC. If it costs me a few seconds on the way down to save a minute on the way up, well, it's an easy decision for me to stick with hardtails. (Unless the Epic impresses me, anyway. I've got a little time before my next bike so I don't have to decide yet.) A lot of people live with having to climb so that they can descend. They grind their way up fire roads at a conversational pace and then suit up and party all the way down the singletrack. Maybe they even pass me climbing it. 

On flat to rolling trails, it's really still power transfer vs. terrain following.

Both platforms certainly have their place, including in top-level XC. FS bikes are obviously dominant in DH, have been for a while. I think Super-D is still a grab-bag of everything.


----------



## iamspartacus (May 21, 2012)

AndrwSwitch, thank you for the wonderfully detailed and concise explanation. It is these kind of posts that truly help the noob. Again, thank you for your insight.


----------



## bigfruits (Mar 21, 2011)

i like FS for really rooty and rocky trails but i have more fun on my 140mm front travel steel hardtail on most of my local trails (northern va). 

if youre looking to have a bit more fun and not are not racing, here are some "trail" bikes to look at:
FS - transition bandit, santacruz blur trc
HT - evil sovereign, on one 456 carbon & evo, transition trans am, ragley blue pig

out of those above ive only test ridden the bandit down a city street (wasnt my size but i liked it) and i own the sovereign. about 200mi on it and i love it.

edit - sorry, you are buying giant. ive heard good things about both of those bikes. for where i live and for my style of riding, id get the best trance i could afford.


----------



## MaddSkillz (Jun 10, 2007)

Wow, lots of info to absorb. My desire to get a FS might very much be driven by the novelty of it all and I'm cool with that... But, I'm not sure where exactly this mountain biking thing is going to take me. I want to keep my legs moving during the off-season and explore a different kind of riding and certainly different trails. We'll see. It does sound like the Trance model is the best middle ground option as its plenty capable of the rad stuff, yet not overly so like the Reign would be.

So yeah, I'm riding the trails on Turkey Mountain this Sunday. It's known to be very technical and I've actually been told not to go there as my first mountain bike outing... But what can I say... I'm attracted to danger. I'll be riding a Trance so I should get an idea if I like it or not, however, I understand I have nothing to compare it to but I believe they have other bikes I can rent... So possibly an Anthem or hard tail of some sort should be ridden as well.

I'll keep you all posted.


----------



## MotoDC (Jan 3, 2012)

This is in no way a recommendation of this site for purchases, but this page does give a nice brief summary of each of the bike types (XC, Trail, AM, FR/DH):

...ok I don't have enough posts here to give a link, but if you google "giant reign" it's the first result that pops up. The relevant webpage is "artscyclery dot com"

Just mouseover the "Intended Use" buttons on the right side of the age, under the bike pic.


----------



## TwoTone (Jul 5, 2011)

You really need to ride some bikes no matter what people tell you on here.

I bought my current SJ FSR comp, but after riding it a while and demoing a Santa Cruz Tallboy LT, I decided I definitely like the VPP suspension better than the FSR on the SJ. 

I also realized I just didn't need 5 inches of travel so I went with the Tallboy with a 120mm front fork. I think that combo makes a nice trail bike. 

I've played around with locking out my rear shock, there is nothing that is going to convince me that the little I may lose climbing is worth the beating I'd take on a HT.


AndrwSwitch is a good example, he doesn't like FS bikes, that may be due to his climbing technique. He is used to standing and grinding out a hill, generally on a FS bike you'd do better to sit and spin, not stand.

Again all of this is subjective, you need to ride them and decide.


----------



## Magsrgod (Jun 21, 2006)

MaddSkillz said:


> I'll be riding a Trance so I should get an idea if I like it or not, however, I understand I have nothing to compare it to but I believe they have other bikes I can rent... So possibly an Anthem or hard tail of some sort should be ridden as well.
> 
> I'll keep you all posted.


The best thing to do is ride as many different bikes as possible and get the one that feels the best to you. Now having said that, a team discount goes along ways into swaying a decision especially when its significant.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Actually on a long climb I tend to settle in and spin. At least, as long as I don't run out of gears.  It's more that I pump the bike on rolling trails.


----------



## Sickmak90 (May 27, 2012)

I have ridden my Rush FS twice now and I can tell you I stay in the saddle more and I don't feel like the seat is trying to sodomize me anymore. 

I really don't feel any lose in climbing power or any more effort. If anything I feel like I gain traction in the nasty stuff. I'm sure a HT is better on a nice smooth hill, but we don't have many of those around.


----------

