# Do i need front suspension?



## This is a name (Jan 26, 2021)

Discussion Starter • #1 • 27 m ago

Hi, I am about to buy a single speed converted specialized hardrock with no suspension, for 80 bucks, and was wondering, if I would need suspension, I'm uhh, 16... 5' 2" 115, I would be using it to go down some trails behind my house, there downhill and rocky, would I need suspension?


----------



## paramount3 (Jul 13, 2014)

Rocky downhill trails are easiest on a full suspension downhill bike. But in the early days of MTB, all we had were rigid 26ers like your hardrock, and we made it down some pretty crazy stuff. There is a whole subculture of people who ride rigid these days because that's what they like. For just getting around, the rigid single speed could be practical and fun. However, having said all that, I'd say if your primary aim is to ride steep trails, it's probably worth looking around for something with a suspension fork and gears to get you back up the hill. Possibly not much more expensive.


----------



## This is a name (Jan 26, 2021)

I have a front suspension mountain bike, I ride bmx personally, so I figured, eh big boy bmx, I've made it down on my 20inch fit vh1, it was terrifying, but fun, I definitely want single speed though, and I could always add a front suspension fork right?


----------



## Travolta (Oct 26, 2016)

you could. wether or not that makes sense on an 80 bucks bike is another question.
you are also sending mixed messages here.
you already own a front suspension mtb?

personally, I am fine rigid, but the trails behind my home are not exactly downhill courses either.
for SS you can also gear so low that any uphill is possible. wether or not that makes sense is another question once again.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

You didn't list where you are in your profile so we have no idea how rocky your rocky downhill trails are. If you've ridden them on your bmx, you can ride them on the Hardrock. If it's steep at all, lower your saddle so that you don't hit a big rock and go over the bars. As on the bmx, stay loose and let the bike bounce around under you while you float over the lowered saddle. I'm part of the subculture that rides rigid. I think it helps that you and I are lightweight.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Single speed bikes should be rigid.


----------



## mtbfree (Aug 20, 2015)

This is a name said:


> Discussion Starter • #1 • 27 m ago
> 
> Hi, I am about to buy a single speed converted specialized hardrock with no suspension, for 80 bucks, and was wondering, if I would need suspension, I'm uhh, 16... 5' 2" 115, I would be using it to go down some trails behind my house, there downhill and rocky, would I need suspension?


Nobody can answer if you need front suspension for your trails except you.

You already have front sus bike - rigid will be more shaky in the front over rough terrain. If you are comfortable with that, only you can answer, nobody knows what trails you are riding or how much rigid is too much for your comfort level....


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

You're on an $80 budget? And you're 16? No, you don't need front suspension.
I hate to engage in "when I was your age" -ism, but many 30+ year old men with money started riding in the late 1980's on no suspension steel bikes. You'll be fine.


----------



## 70sSanO (Nov 20, 2013)

This is a name said:


> ...and I could always add a front suspension fork right?


Maybe yes and maybe no.

Depending on the age of the bike, price makes me think 10+ years old, it might be tough to find a decent 1-1/8" steerer fork. And if you did, it would most likely dwarf what you paid for the bike.

And cheap pogo stick forks will be worse than rigid.

John


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

70sSanO said:


> Maybe yes and maybe no.
> 
> Depending on the age of the bike, price makes me think 10+ years old, it might be tough to find a decent 1-1/8" steerer fork. And if you did, it would most likely dwarf what you paid for the bike.
> 
> ...


Given what we know, I'd bet it's a threaded fork, and it'd be possible it's a 1" threaded fork, at that. Either (or both) of those things will make finding a decent suspension fork even harder.

I mean, if OP actually wants a rigid singlespeed, then that's fine. But I wouldn't be buying something like that with the intent to change it substantially from what it is unless I had the parts to do so in hand or knew for sure that I could obtain them.


----------



## SpeedyStein (Aug 2, 2014)

Give it a whirl? $80 isn't a big investment to try something new. As a few other folks said, rigid is probably better than a cheap suspension fork on a bike in this price range. I would probably favor rigid over even what was a nice fork from the 90s, honestly. One thing to note - riding a rigid bike will likely improve your skills faster - it forces you to pick your lines more carefully and attack obstacles with more finesse. If nothing else, it gives you a platform to get started on while you save some cash for a more modern bike. 

Also look at the tires - they are critical on any bike, but especially so on a fully rigid bike. If they are the originals (not likely, but possible) then they should be replaced, regardless of wear. Modern tires are lightyears ahead of what that bike came with originally. Match the tread pattern to the terrain, and if not riding in super muddy conditions, with rigid I would go as wide as possible. Tubeless is a HUGE upgrade, but if your rims aren't tubeless ready, then don't bother. A little Stan's sealant in your tubes will do wonders to help prevent flats. 

As for single speed - if it doesn't suit you, there are a lot of affordable 1x options these days too. Microshift makes a well reviewed 1x8 system that would probably suit a bike of that vintage well. 11-46 or 11-42 cassette options, clutch derailer, and trigger style shifter. I think the necessary parts can be had for less that $150.


----------

