# So straight up, full suspension or hardtail?



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

I know, individual preference, 29 vs. 27.5 etc.

I want your opinion. I'm getting feedback that buying an aluminum hardtail is an exercise in pain for a bigger dude because the ride is so harsh, and that it beats the body up something fierce, and that the slight downgrade in groupset and such is nowhere near as important as the easier learning curve with a full suspension bike as well as the pain reduction.

so tell me your opinions. If you're a big dude, what would YOU do with your *EDIT - $2000-$2500* full or hardtail?


----------



## justwan naride (Oct 13, 2008)

You make it sound much more painfull than it is...

If you expect to sit on the saddle and cruise through the rough stuff then yes, a ht will be painfull. 
If you stay flexible and use your knees and elbows to absorb impact while letting the bike "dance" under you then you'll be fine.

For rides over 3hrs a fs will be less taxing on the body and will allow more room for errors when fatique starts to eat on your technique.

A ht on the other hand is great fun even on less challenging trails, needs less maintainance, and will teach you a few things if you're willing to learn. At the budget you mention you can get a very good hardtail, with decent wheels and a good fork. For the same money you get a pretty basic fs. 

You're right in that a slightly cheaper rear derralieur won't make any difference, but a better fork or wheels are certainly worth it.

Then it's a matter of terrain. Some places are far more enjoyable on a full susser, others are perfectly rippable on a hardtail.

If you're a big dude you are going to need a strong rear wheel, esp if you go the ht route.


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

You'll get better VFM on a hardtail at that sort of price. Don't listen to the harsh nonsense. A pair of 2.3 tires and suspension forks will see you right. Yes, you have to work the bike a bit more but you'll be a batter rider for it. Then buy a FS as well. You do need one of each.


----------



## Bike Whisperer (Aug 7, 2012)

Most $2k full suspension bikes will be lacking in the Wheel department for Clydes (there may be an exception or two out there). You could instead get a solid hardtail and then invest a little into some hand built Clyde friendly wheels.

Consider a steel frame for a smoother ride (like a Surly KM), you could easily build up a super nice hardtail for $2k with this.


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

Depends on where you ride. I prefer suspension front and rear, when I ride my buddies hardtail I'm amazed how much better it pedals than my Superfly 100 does. But we've got a lot of bigger rocks here and even with only 100f/110r travel I can barge through some sections they can't. 

Test ride each and see stich you prefer. 

I got my Superfly as a leftover for $2000, it was $2700 normally.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

well, as far as upgrade paths are concerned, the biggest thing in full suspension's favor is that I can upgrade the wheels, the suspension forks, the groupset, etc, but once you have a hardtail frame, you're stuck with it.

I ask because, let's say I have *EDIT - $2500*. That gets me a *edit - $2000* hardtail bike plus a really nice wheelset, but then I'm done. If I spend the *EDIT - $2500* on a full suspension, then yes I gotta save up for the wheelset, but in the meantime, i ride that sucker until I taco the wheels or whatever, and then my final upgrade path leaves me with a (potentially) better bike overall. Granted it'll end up being more $$$ spent, but in my case, spending a lot at one time is more of a problem then spending some now, upgrading later, upgrading later, etc.


----------



## Bttocs (Jun 21, 2014)

If you ride rough trails, full suspension for sure. If you ride fire roads and bike paths then hard tail is the way to go. I am 6'4", 245 lbs and ride a hard tail. At first I was getting beaten up pretty bad. It forced me to get in much better shape and now I stay off the seat on any rough sections, which is a lot more effort than pedaling seated. A hardtail is a lot more of a workout on rough trails. For a FS bike your price is pretty low unless you go used. Get a good frame if FS and your strategy to upgrade over time will work out. My 2 cents. I bought my bike based on my limited budget, not based on where I ride mostly now. I still have a good time on my hardtail but look for trails that aren't rock gardens to ride and enjoy.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

The plan is t to ride trails as tough as my skill level allows. Presently that means novice trails. I plan on progressing though and do NOT wish to stay on novice trails if that makes sense


----------



## Bttocs (Jun 21, 2014)

Makes sense. I think you should go FS, but increase your budget or find a way to not by a "entry level" FS bike. I would take a high end "trail" hardtail over a cheap FS any day. I haven't looked too much at FS bikes, except the top of the line models that are reviewed in the online magazines. They sure are nice if you have 5K to spend. I bought an Airborne Seeker hardtail for $900 and I ride intermediate level trails with it. The group I ride with all have FS bikes and are faster than me, no surprise. Airborne makes a FS bike, hobgoblin, that is good quality, that fits your budget. If you look at their lineup, they have a "Trail" Goblin EVO hardtail and a "XC" Hobgoblin FS bike for about the same money. The EVO is set up well for trails, the Hobgoblin will need wider bars, shorter stem, and better tires. I think I would choose the Hobgolin and change the cockpit and tires if I didn't care much about riding on the road. I do ride on the road some, so the hardtail is definitely the better all around bike.


----------



## johnD (Mar 31, 2010)

$2k , HT everyday all day.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

edited as i have negotiated a budget increase with the Minster of Finance (aka 'wife') to $2500 (EDITED earlier posts)

these are presently my top 2 full suspension options (with the understanding that I will drop another $400-$500 on a specially-built "big dude" wheelset) right now:

2014 Giant Trance 27.5 
Kona Precept DL

I also have several other options that will fit within my budget but I won't be able to buy the new wheelset immediately, I'll have to save up for it:

Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt 750 (LBS has 30% off 2014 stock)
Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Comp 29
2013 Trek Fuel EX7


----------



## johnD (Mar 31, 2010)

The Trance and Stumpjumper have very efficient pedaling platforms. I like 29ers myself , but you should ride both. My lbs has sold quite a few of those red trance bikes every one that rides it is sold.


----------



## johnD (Mar 31, 2010)

Your lbs should be able to knock some off the price of this Anthem.

It would be my pick for a $2500 budget.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

JohnFL said:


> The Trance and Stumpjumper have very efficient pedaling platforms. I like 29ers myself , but you should ride both. My lbs has sold quite a few of those red trance bikes every one that rides it is sold.


I'm sorry I'm dense
What do you mean by"efficient pedaling platform"?



JohnFL said:


> Your lbs should be able to knock some off the price of this Anthem.
> 
> It would be my pick for a $2500 budget.


I was told the Anthem was a bit more"twitchy" and that a "slicker headline angle" might suit me better. If you could explain why you like the Anthem to my noob-ish self, I'd sure appreciate it!


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

I recently sold my 29er xc hardtail and i'm down to only riding my 26" FS. I'm in my mid 30's with bad knees so I'm perfectly ok with having the suspension take the beating instead of my body. Next bike I get will also be FS; if I was doing nothing but xc trails then I would have kept the hardtail or perhaps gone to a carbon frame. It just depends what you ride and what you prefer.


----------



## johnD (Mar 31, 2010)

means it's less likely to bob when you pedal hard.

The Anthem is Cross Country/Trail , where the Trance is more All Mountain / Trail.

On longer rides the Anthem will be better.


----------



## clydecrash (Apr 1, 2005)

Are you stuck on new? Are you stuck on the large (clown) wheels? I bet you can pick up an excellent, used 26" FS bike within your budget. Seems many people are selling their 26s just to get the 27.5s. I am seeing complete high end (SC, Ibis, Knolly) bikes either go pretty cheap or just not selling on ebay. You might watch ebay, pinkbike, etc. and be patient for that great deal.

But, if stuck on 27.5, then, as already mentioned, depends mostly on your trails. Mostly smooth with just a bit of rough, then you will likely have more fun on a hard tail. If mostly rocky/rooty, then you will likely have more fun on a FS. A FS in your price range mean you will likely start replacing stuff sooner as compared with a hard tail.

I have both HTs and FSs. I use the FSs more just because I ride the rocks, but the HTs are more fun on the less rocky, shorter rides.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

My problem is that I don't know enough about mountain bikes to feel comfortable buying used.

I'm also not stuck on wheel size. I'm new enough that anything I do is probabl ygoing to be fun and exciting, but longevity of the ride is osmething that I'm concerned about, as well as my injuries and such.

I like wide thick knobby tires, but I don't know about clown shoes. I thought those were the big ole' 4.8" fatbike wheels



clydecrash said:


> Are you stuck on new? Are you stuck on the large (clown) wheels? I bet you can pick up an excellent, used 26" FS bike within your budget. Seems many people are selling their 26s just to get the 27.5s. I am seeing complete high end (SC, Ibis, Knolly) bikes either go pretty cheap or just not selling on ebay. You might watch ebay, pinkbike, etc. and be patient for that great deal.
> 
> But, if stuck on 27.5, then, as already mentioned, depends mostly on your trails. Mostly smooth with just a bit of rough, then you will likely have more fun on a hard tail. If mostly rocky/rooty, then you will likely have more fun on a FS. A FS in your price range mean you will likely start replacing stuff sooner as compared with a hard tail.
> 
> I have both HTs and FSs. I use the FSs more just because I ride the rocks, but the HTs are more fun on the less rocky, shorter rides.


----------



## Kajjal (Dec 14, 2013)

It really depends where you plan to ride, personal preference and if you want to cushion against existing injuries. I started mountain biking in the early 1990's when there was no suspension or disc brakes. We used to ride rough trails on rigid mountain bikes and get literally beaten up by the trail. Once front suspension came along the same trails could be ridden pain free. Now bikes have much better suspension, bigger tyres etc. all of which helps.

If you have trail centres nearby you may be able to hire bikes to see if you prefer a HT or full suspension.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

well, seems that a LBS is having a pretty nice sale on some $2100-$2500 full suspension bikes that are a bit too tempting to pass up

I can get either of these bad boys for $1800:

2014 Rocky Mountain T-Bolt 730, on sale for $1820

2015 Giant Trance 3, $1800 

I'm going to give them both a ride this weekend, and I'm about 99% sure I'll end up liking at least one of them (if not both) enough to drop the $$$.

are there any "clyde-specific" issues about the bikes I need to worry about?

wheelsets (RIM/HUB/SPOKES):

T-Bolt - Wheeltech Inferno 23 by SUNringlé // Shimano Deore, Centerlock, 32H, 12 x 142mm Axle // DT Swiss Champion

Trance - Giant S-XC2, Double wall rims // Giant Tracker Sport Disc, 32h, [R] 135x5mm QR hubs // Stainless Steel, 14g

tires:

T-Bolt: Continental X King Folding 27.5" x 2.2" 
Trance: Schwalbe Nobby Nic, Performance, 27.5x2.25, Wire bead


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

FS :FTW: the greater forces created by us bigger dudes (was 245 myself, now 220) when huckin & shredding will take it's toll on your body. Skill? The more you ride the more skilled (confident) you'll become. An HT will hold you back from going where you fear to tread ^^ This time of year you should be able to find last of 2014 stock at reasonable $$ 
My 2 pesos

Sent from my Kin[G]_Pad ™


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

targnik said:


> This time of year you should be able to find last of 2014 stock at reasonable $$


thank you sir.

right now, $1800 for a Trance 3 or a Rocky Mountain T-Bolt 730 = "reasonable $$"


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

Nothing to add about the rocky mountain. 

The Trance is a fine trail bike. The wheelsets on either are nothing to write home about, but should last a while until you are really riding much harder than what it sounds like you currently are.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

jeffj said:


> Nothing to add about the rocky mountain.
> 
> The Trance is a fine trail bike. The wheelsets on either are nothing to write home about, but should last a while until you are really riding much harder than what it sounds like you currently are.


gotcha. Just wanted to make sure that I wasn't venturing into dangerous waters the first time I take either of them out


----------



## bk_mtb (Oct 26, 2014)

So? Made a decision yet? I was 6'1 260lbs when I bought my bike. In 2010 specialized had a stumpy FSR elite. I am no badass biker but do prefer slightly more technical trails over just flat fire road. Although that is fun too. As a Clyde my main concern would be disc brakes. I know all bikes come with them now pretty much but I am surprised at the number of big people willing to buy bikes with crappy rubber brakes. 

FWIW I never bought any special wheels or whatever for my weight and the bike is fine. I am using all the stock crap. 

If you get a nice FS look for one with a lockout on the rear shock. I can just flip a switch for climbing, lock out the rear then it's like I have a hard tail. I have no idea what the 2014 shock offerings are but if they have that feature it's worth it. 

Also I love my front fork with travel adjustment. I can drop that a bit for climbs. For really bad climbs where I am working to keep the front tire down its totally worth it. 

2014s sitting around bike shops should have decent discounts by now if you can find one that fits. It's worth a trip. 

Also do yourself a favor either way you go and get a dropper post. It's another great investment.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

yep, i'm going full suspension

i'm in the process of putting a leg over the dozen or so options out there with full squish that are in my price range. 

dropper post will be a purchase, but not for this time. I want to get as much bike as I can now and then add the dropper post later.

yes, lockout on both front and back is a must, and I'm thinking that i like the CTD from Fox as well


----------



## bk_mtb (Oct 26, 2014)

Nice dude. Let us know which bike you get.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

Hardtail, specifically a long travel one, like a honzo or on-one 456 for anyone who likes challenging trails and is getting their first 'enthusiast' bike that they will wear out. Doubly so for clydesdales. 

For any rider a long travel hardtail will give them a comfortable body position and handling that rewards getting active and shifting your weight around. They're also simpler and sturdy, so you're less likely to run in to a daunting bit of trailside maintenance. They're not really significantly slower than a FS bike in the 1500-2500$ range, so you can ride in the middle of the pack if you have the skills. The cheaper frame lets you stretch your budget on components, and 2-2.5k is a range where a little better brakes, fork, and wheels make a real difference on the trail, and they're just as fun to ride. 

For a clyde the hardtail is even better. Suspension bikes just don't work right when you're over ~210 or so, and the fancy adjustable bits that can be tweaked to make them better for your weight are expensive and take some experience to extract the most out of. A really aggressive clyde has to worry about breaking parts, and a flexing frame will affect your confidence just the same as a rigid rear end will. (i didn't know how a suspension bike was supposed to feel until i lost the weight and got a seriously stiff frame, and that's despite getting custom tuned shocks and bolt-on hubs and all that jazz). I don't think a clyde can have as good of an experience as a smaller guy has on a mass-produced bike, and if he does he shopped VERY wisely, and probably spent a heap of money.

That all goes out the window if you live somewhere where a good chunk of the trails are just constantly rough. If you can't focus on each obstacle individually then the hardtail is exhausting and not fun. Think the Southwest.


----------



## chugachjed (May 20, 2010)

scottzg said:


> Hardtail, specifically a long travel one, like a honzo or on-one 456 for anyone who likes challenging trails and is getting their first 'enthusiast' bike that they will wear out. Doubly so for clydesdales.
> 
> For any rider a long travel hardtail will give them a comfortable body position and handling that rewards getting active and shifting your weight around. They're also simpler and sturdy, so you're less likely to run in to a daunting bit of trailside maintenance. They're not really significantly slower than a FS bike in the 1500-2500$ range, so you can ride in the middle of the pack if you have the skills. The cheaper frame lets you stretch your budget on components, and 2-2.5k is a range where a little better brakes, fork, and wheels make a real difference on the trail, and they're just as fun to ride.
> 
> ...


This is nonsense. I'm 240-260 depending on the time of year and I ride hard. I'm comfortable riding long technical trails and steep downhills on a rigid bike but right now my only mtb is a Turner Burner. Full suspension bikes with proper setup work great for big guys, with a bad setup they're terrible just like a full suspension bike with a bad setup is terrible for a 140lb guy. You have to decide what kind of trails you ride and your style of riding, that is what will determine the bike you need.

I don't know what you're saying about long travel hardtails working well for "any rider" I've ridden a couple that felt awkward as hell and inefficient.

I'm not trying to be rude just that there's some serious misinformation happening around here.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Agreed ^^

Bigger guys go better on burlier gear. For sure the added mass probably takes a greater toll on parts... better the bike than your body, I say...


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

chugachjed said:


> I'm not trying to be rude just that there's some serious misinformation happening around here.


Hmm... badly written? Mighta been posting and drinking.

Here's a summary-
Hardtail frames are cheaper, so you get better spec at a price point, and FS frames and shocks are designed around 170lb riders. Scottzg has had poor experiences as a jed-sized clyde with FS despite best efforts, much better as a barely-clyde. You can buy a hardtail that has the manners of a trailbike if you're smart about it. Might work better, and that would be my preference. Maybe not if you live in the wrong environment.

Not sure where the misinformation lies.



chugachjed said:


> I don't know what you're saying about long travel hardtails working well for "any rider" I've ridden a couple that felt awkward as hell and inefficient.


So have i. I've ridden awkward inefficient suspension bikes too. Don't buy one of those. :thumbsup:


----------



## JHH (Jul 4, 2013)

Look at XC orientated FS bikes like the SC TallBoy and Giant Anthem. Getting too much suspension isn't great for Clydes especially if your riding XC and Trails not taking big hits or super steep lines. A lot of AM bikes are made for steeper terrain than most really ride. Meaning the bike will feel a bit sluggish most of the time until your at your limit.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

well, rode another several bikes at 2 other LBS. One of the shops was outstanding. They took a good 20+ minutes setting me up on the Stumpjumper, fixing the shocks properly, adjusting the seat and stem and the handlebars, etc. then he took the time to show me how to set the "autosag" on the rear shock and how to properly set the front shock (pretty easy since there's a little graph there). That type of stuff is what sells bikes. Then they did the same thing on the Santa Cruz 5010 and the Cannondale Scalpel 3. That made such a difference. Each bike "fit me perfectly". Everything was set up and I loved all 3 bikes. However, I still liked the extra travel of the Stumpie vs. the Cannondale, and the 5010 was about $1000 more expensive than the Stumpjumper I got, so big advantage there to the Specialized I figured I was going to shun.


The LBS with the Trance and Rocky Mountain bikes had nice dudes working there, but again, not a lot of attention to detail. The Trance's rear suspension felt downright mushy and squishy, both in a good way and in a bad way. I could ride over curbs without an issue, but I felt like pedal bob would bounce me out of my seat. I'm pretty confident that it had as much to do with the lack of proper setup as anything, and that just doesn't inspire confidence in my LBS.


I LOVED LOVED LOVED the Rocky Mountain, almost as much as the Stumpie. If the really good LBS had both, I would've had a serious decision to make. I did like the extra bit of travel on the Stumpjumper and it felt a bit 'softer' over the bumps and pothole-ridden area I rode through while having minimal 'squish' when I stood up and mashed the pedals to accelerate. I liked the Cannondale, it "felt" like a racing bike. i.e. I stomped the pedal and ZOOM!!! I had a pretty nice set of stairs and some rocks to test out the suspensions on, and the Stumpie was butter across the rocks and down the stairs. The Cannondale was a bit more jittery (in other words, *I* was more jittery). I just didn't feel quite as confident. It seemed like perhaps the Rocky Mountain and the Cannondale were maybe a bit more advanced, and the Stump and Trance were more 'easy mode'. Don't mind me, I have no clue what I'm talking about, just yapping out loud (er...in text)


so anyway, the plan is for me to go in tomorrow and put some $$$ down on the Stumpie since they only have a pair of the 2014s at the reduced price point. Really looking forward to getting this sucker on a trail! Thanks a ton, seriously, a TON to you gents for your help. I feel like I just went through Calculus for the first time, but it was a lot more enjoyable. I owe this board a figurative 12-pack.


side note - 2 of the bikes (Trance and the GT Sensor Elite) both felt like, if I turned the handlebars one way or the other, that they wanted to steer themselves, i.e. the handlebars almost felt like they were trying to turn themselves even more than I already did. Weird feeling. Probably my inexperience, but only 2 of the bikes did that oddly enough. One was a 650b, the other a 29er. The Trance had really wide handlebars, but so did the 5010 and it didn't have that weird 'self-steering' feel to it. *shrugs*


----------



## Ray Dockrey (Feb 23, 2006)

I just bought a used 2014 Giant Trance 3 27.5 last week. I got it from local LBS and paid $1266 out the door after tax. I weigh 217 and I get no bob at all. The ride is plush but pedal bob is non existent. It handles like a dream. Took me a while to get used to the wide bars but after a while they feel fine.

The fork was set as recommended by the Rockshox label but to me it was way to harsh. I went from 120 psi down to 90 in increments. 90 psi up front is about perfect. Running 225 psi in the back. The bike was already setup tubeless so for the trails I am on I am running 22 to 23 psi up front and 28 psi on the back. This trail is pretty sandy in spots so the lower pressures help with that.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

Ray Dockrey said:


> I just bought a used 2014 Giant Trance 3 27.5 last week. I got it from local LBS and paid $1266 out the door after tax. I weigh 217 and I get no bob at all. The ride is plush but pedal bob is non existent. It handles like a dream. Took me a while to get used to the wide bars but after a while they feel fine.


yeah, this is what I figured. I had read that the Trance, set up properly, would ride at least as well as the Stumpie, but i wasn't going to give my $$$ to a bike shop that couldn't be bothered to take the time to really make sure it was set up properly. I went to them and said outright, "i'm trying to figure out which bike I'm going to buy", so it's not like I didn't make my intention to spend $2000 well known.


----------



## Surfdog93 (May 30, 2005)

FS over HT, all day, but that's for me going into my 5th year of riding, 5x / wk, 8hrs / wk, all trails with speed from groomed smooth to rocky/rooty.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

I love sitting down so FS gets my vote.


----------



## Phinias (Aug 28, 2014)

Not to hijack the thread, but several posts have claimed that a rider will have more "fun" on a HT than a FS. Now, I just replaced my first bike an Entry level HT with my new Remedy 9 29er and I have had much more fun now that I am not killing my back (4 back surgeries and according to my no common sense either). I am just really curious as to what I may have been missing on my HT, in terms of fun, than I now have on my FS?


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

Phinias said:


> Not to hijack the thread, but several posts have claimed that a rider will have more "fun" on a HT than a FS.


Not really. I've just re-read the thread and I'd say more posters said FS would be more fun.
Your 4 back surgeries mean that several bike aspects do not apply to you. I'd have advised you to get a FS from day 1.
You tend to learn more bike handling and general riding skills on a HT over a FS. You have to move about more and get your body language sorted more the less suspension you have. This may go towards making you a better rider. You also pick your lines better instead of just letting the suspension take the brunt of it.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Livewire88 said:


> I love sitting down so FS gets my vote.


Whether I'm riding a hardtail or FS bike makes no difference in the amount of time on the saddle.


----------



## Ray Dockrey (Feb 23, 2006)

I have just got into mountain biking. About two months ago i got a Talon 3 27.5. I loved it but being almost 50 and having lower back issues I could only ride it once a week. Took me a few days to recover and then I would just ride my road bike. 

Right after I got my Trance 3 i took it out on a Saturday and did my usual route. Unbelievable difference. So on Sunday I went back out again and did it again. Felt fine afterwards and no pain the next morning. So for me going full suspension has made a huge difference and was worth every penny.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

evasive said:


> Whether I'm riding a hardtail or FS bike makes no difference in the amount of time on the saddle.


You must have a hard a$$ because if I ride rough terrain sat down on my HT its like torture, I can sit in the saddle on the FS all day with a smile on my face..


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

Livewire88 said:


> I can sit in the saddle on the FS all day with a smile on my face..


If you stood up more, your riding technique would improve!


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Livewire88 said:


> You must have a hard a$$ because if I ride rough terrain sat down on my HT its like torture, I can sit in the saddle on the FS all day with a smile on my face..


It's the other way around, as TooTallUK pointed out. I don't sit on my FS any more than I do on a hardtail. I sit for sustained climbs or smooth level trail. That's about it.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

TooTallUK said:


> If you stood up more, your riding technique would improve!


Thanks for the tip but I'm happy with my riding style/technique, I am no where near the fastest and don't aim to be so I will continue to sit my ass down.



evasive said:


> It's the other way around, as TooTallUK pointed out. I don't sit on my FS any more than I do on a hardtail. I sit for sustained climbs or smooth level trail. That's about it.


Fair enough, I sit as much as possible because I am a lazy git. So FS is the better option for me on the rough stuff. I have slicks on my HT because it only gets used on pavement.


----------



## fatdudeonti (Nov 19, 2014)

Hi, I'm new to the forum though I've been reading it for years. This is my first post.

I noticed nobody really mentioned the third option, a softtail. I found a 26" Moots YBB frameset on eBay for $800, added a Rockshox Recon Gold Rl (coil for simplicity and ease of maintenence) fork that was new, but a model year old for $300, and cannibalized the parts off my old bike. If you can't do that, you can buy a new gruppo and other parts for around $1000, and focus on a good strong rear wheel. This would come in under the $2500 budget.

I'm 6', 275 lbs, and trails here on the gulf coast don't change much in elevation but there are lots of roots and rocks that make them rough. A lot of people opt for FS around here but i don't think it's really necessary. I would recommend though if you're over 250 lbs and looking at a hard/softtail that it be steel or ti. Aluminum will ride rough and can't be fixed. Most carbon manufacturers won't recommend riders over 220 lbs. I called Moots before I got this one and they said it was good up to and over 300 lbs. Stay away from the YBB superlight though. 

Also, there are other softtails that use an air shock rather than a spring like the YBB. I would avoid them just due to the added complexity and maintenence. I love my bike and it comes in at around 26 lbs, that's with a 4 lb coil fork, discs, clydesdale wheels, lights and battery.

Really i think it comes down to what kind of riding you're doing. For most trails, you can gain a lot in your technique by riding a hard/softtail and floating over the bike on the rough stuff. If you want to huck and do 3+ foot drops, go FS. I hope this is a help and thanks for having me on the forum!


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

Soft-tails were 'a thing' years ago and very few companies even make them any more. A new Moots ST is over $3k for the frame alone, hence why it's not often talked about. With bigger wheels and bigger tires the advantages of a ST have diminished over the years. A nice idea but too niche for most of us fat lads to throw money at.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 19, 2014)

what the heck is a soft-tail?


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

sgtrobo said:


> what the heck is a soft-tail?


It's a full suspension bike where the shock is mounted in-line on the seat stays, as part of the frame. The chainstays either have a pivot mounted on them or the stays themselves are flexy. Suspension travel = the shock stroke.

All the disadvantages of a hardtail with all the disadvantages of a suspension bike, so the saying goes. You still have all the components of a suspension frame without the travel (or linkage to manage its use), and using the shock as a frame member is hard on the shock seals. I think these were popular when suspension was kinda crap, but they've rightfully fallen into a niche market. Fatdude has a nice bike, but good riddance softails. IMO, YMMV, etc.








(check out the pub date)


----------



## sirsam84 (Sep 20, 2006)

Getting a hardtail first will definitely improve your technique, and make riding a FS that much better and more fun when you do get one...

That said, the Norco Range A7.2 is only $2200 and looks like great specs for that price...160mm front and rear.

Or go for a used Kona Process...I have a 2013, and it is epic fun


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

I would quite like a full-sus, so that I can ride on trails that are very tough with a hard-tail, but if I could only have one it would have to be a hard-tail. 

I like the responsive feel and it forces you to ride properly. Going over very rough ground at speed on a hard-tail, if you don't get off the saddle, bend your legs and loosen up you're in trouble. Basically, you learn how to ride better on a hard-tail, and I need that.


----------



## standa11 (Nov 12, 2008)

Owner of $2k full susp here (Trance 29er), so much more comfortable and faster ride (off-road) than my old, higher spec, hardtail (now used as road training bike). X5 or Deore grade components are not that bad function wise in comparison to XT, it's better to spend money on rear suspension and set of custom wheels. But I'm old, fat and unfit so YMMV.


----------



## sir_crackien (Feb 3, 2008)

I'm going to say hardtail on the few different premuses. the first being you will get alot more for your money or you can have alot of money left over for upgrades as you want/need them. Also having a hardtail will make you a better rider as it teaches you to ride lightly on the bike.

That being said I have a full suspension bike and wouldn't give it up for a good hardtail anyday. So its a very hard decision.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

sir_crackien said:


> I'm going to say hardtail on the few different premuses. the first being you will get alot more for your money or you can have alot of money left over for upgrades as you want/need them. Also having a hardtail will make you a better rider as it teaches you to ride lightly on the bike.
> 
> That being said I have a full suspension bike and wouldn't give it up for a good hardtail anyday. So its a very hard decision.


Yeah, it's a shame that 90% of the hardtails out there are fkn lame. Either XC bikes that are no fun at all if you're not a cardio-dork, or built to a budget that precluded the bike working very well on a fun trail. Or both.

I too stand by saying that hardtails are better 1st quality bikes, and doubly so for clydes, but since most hardtails suck it's not surprising that they're unpopular. Most budget FS bikes suck too, but it's not as obvious when they let you feel brave in harder terrain.

I think that's why you see people come back to hardtails after 5 years of riding; it takes that long to identify what really makes a bike work and be fun. It can't be explained, it has to be experienced.


----------



## cpfitness (Nov 19, 2012)

to me this is what ANYONE who is first timer to MTB should be looking atDiamondback Mason Complete Mountain Bike | Backcountry.com

its basically the same geometry as a yelli screamy (i am totally biased, I have a yelli) so it climbs great, descends great. price point is awesome. Ride it to learn technique and when you decide you want a full susser, you can sell this bike and easily recoup half of what you spent on it. It's also priced at a point that it's worthwhile to upgrade components on it over time as well.

I get borderline furious when I walk into LBS and see full sussers selling for $2500 and up with deore level components. I get equally pissed when I see hardtails selling for 1500 with the same low level stuff. The mason certainly isn't high level stuff but it's a helluva lot better than the typical LBS 500 entry level 29er with crap geometry and pogo stick fork.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

cpfitness said:


> to me this is what ANYONE who is first timer to MTB should be looking atDiamondback Mason Complete Mountain Bike | Backcountry.com
> 
> its basically the same geometry as a yelli screamy (i am totally biased, I have a yelli) so it climbs great, descends great. price point is awesome. Ride it to learn technique and when you decide you want a full susser, you can sell this bike and easily recoup half of what you spent on it. It's also priced at a point that it's worthwhile to upgrade components on it over time as well.
> 
> The mason certainly isn't high level stuff but it's a helluva lot better than the typical LBS 500 entry level 29er with crap geometry and pogo stick fork.


Lookit that! A budget hardtail with offroad geometry! I wouldn't wanna own the brakes, and the fork is gonna be weakness once the rider gets comfortable (and it'll need a spring change in the clyde forum) but the rest of it is a solid build for the price. A cheap bike that doesn't make MTB hardtails look like bike path turtles, cool!

...Of course, a bike like this will be outgrown pretty quickly since the owner won't be wasting his time learning to ride around crap geometry...



cpfitness said:


> I get borderline furious when I walk into LBS and see full sussers selling for $2500 and up with deore level components. I get equally pissed when I see hardtails selling for 1500 with the same low level stuff.


Show me a bike with a complete deore gruppo and i'll show you a really good budget build. Deore brakes are as good as anything out there, and the drivetrain is plenty solid for mucking around in the woods without worrying about your bike. It's the sprinkling of mystery parts and born-to-fail wheels (and cheap sram, shh) that irks me.


----------



## matadorCE (Jun 26, 2013)

The Diamondback is a pretty decent bike, also Marin has some hardtails that have true trail geometry compared to the bottom line Trek, Spec, etc. I sold my hardtail and I'm building up a full suspension to replace my older full suspension bike. It's just easier on my body and depending on the suspension design, a FS can still have some of the fun hardtrail traits.


----------



## cpfitness (Nov 19, 2012)

scottzg said:


> Lookit that! A budget hardtail with offroad geometry! I wouldn't wanna own the brakes, and the fork is gonna be weakness once the rider gets comfortable (and it'll need a spring change in the clyde forum) but the rest of it is a solid build for the price. A cheap bike that doesn't make MTB hardtails look like bike path turtles, cool!
> 
> ...Of course, a bike like this will be outgrown pretty quickly since the owner won't be wasting his time learning to ride around crap geometry...
> 
> Show me a bike with a complete deore gruppo and i'll show you a really good budget build. Deore brakes are as good as anything out there, and the drivetrain is plenty solid for mucking around in the woods without worrying about your bike. It's the sprinkling of mystery parts and born-to-fail wheels (and cheap sram, shh) that irks me.


I agree on everything. Brakes can be upgraded up front for $100/to xt level and still be well within budget. Fork is always a clyde issue. I think the manitou tower pro is the only true Clyde friendly fork but those xx springs are hard to come by. Lastly, the new deore stuff is excellent. I do agree, full, current generation deore stuff on a bike would be solid but unfortunately into in shops and I'm still seeing bikes with an alivio crank and 3x8 or 3x9 deore parts priced for 2k.


----------



## Br80 (Sep 10, 2013)

not sure if you have made your purchase yet, but you can get a 1 year old FS dream bike on craigslist for that kind of money. Want full XT? No problem. Especially if, like me you live in an area full of people with more money than skill. I see bikes on CL all day long that are selling for half of retail that the guy bought, rode a time or three and decided he would rather continue swinging his 9 iron. 

I have only been riding seriously for a couple of years, but I started on a hardtail and I will tell you that a full squishy is so, so, so, so, so much more fun if you ride on any kind of texture whatsoever. 

If all you want to do is grind the fire roads, you will probably be better off with a hardtail. But I wouldn't pay full retail for either.


----------



## Terranaut (Jun 9, 2014)

I am going to vote hardtail here. I have 1 of each and if you are newer to riding IMHO the hardtail is much much easier on hills. Your confidence and drive to go farther faster will be higher on a HT. Chances are the spots where you truly need the FS won't be on your ride until you get some more experience and build more muscles. As stated above , buy used and get a friend to help if you are unsure. For the money you are talking about spending...man I would buy a $500 used HT and ride it. If this is your calling by the time you want to get a better bike you will be ready in both strength and skill for the FS. You may ride for 3 months and decide "MEH" not for me. This is why so many bikes are available used. Go cheaper and try it for a while. If you start shopping for a better bike you are ready to spend the amount you are looking to spend.
I hope this all makes sense or cents  = save your cash until you don't need to ask "what to buy".


----------



## some dude (Jan 1, 2014)

Didn't have the best luck riding a Carbon HT 29" on a regular basis. Even with a lot more standing and pumping on my HT my wrists and legs were not happy riding 3-4 times a week. Broke the frame and ended up back on my AM bike full time for 2 months and no more pains. Canfield Yelli would be a good Clyde friendly HT if I were looking for a reliable HT chugger.


----------

