# Best climbing 130-140 bike….



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

120 not enough…150 too much..looking for the best (and maybe lightest) climbing 130-140 trail bike that is also a capable descender. One quiver…Goldilocks…whatever it may be called. Terrain is Rocky Mountain west so long climbs followed by big descents.


----------



## prj71 (Dec 29, 2014)

Your fitness level has more to do with it than the suspension travel.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

prj71 said:


> Your fitness level has more to do with it than the suspension travel.


Thank you for your conjecture….but what would you choose in a perfect world (if one exists).


----------



## xjbaylor (Sep 22, 2006)

Based on my experience the Revel Rascal is a perfect quiver killer, if you like the geo. Personally, it works great for me, but the extremely long-legged might disagree.


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

I found my YT Izzo Launch Edition to be a good climbing machine; 130mm rear with 140mm front (came 130mm but I added the 140 air spring). The Uncaged 7 is not equivalent but you might want to look at the Core 4.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

xjbaylor said:


> Based on my experience the Revel Rascal is a perfect quiver killer, if you like the geo. Personally, it works great for me, but the extremely long-legged might disagree.


CBF is an amazing suspension platform. So yea, in that range a Rascal should be on the list.. a Tilt would be as well, but it's AL.. so heavier.


----------



## prj71 (Dec 29, 2014)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Thank you for your conjecture….but what would you choose in a perfect world (if one exists).



Spot Mayhem 130. The leaf spring is the real deal. Not some gimmick.


----------



## Scott2MTB (Feb 2, 2015)

xjbaylor said:


> Based on my experience the Revel Rascal is a perfect quiver killer, if you like the geo. Personally, it works great for me, but the extremely long-legged might disagree.


This (with caveats)IDK about quiver killer but I ride mine everywhere.


----------



## romulin (Apr 23, 2017)

My banshee Prime is a solid climber and a great shredder too. Was looking for the same, do it all bike.
Forbidden druid? Yetis climb very well to i think 

Odoslané z M1 pomocou Tapatalku


----------



## Yootah (Jun 30, 2017)

When I was shopping for bikes recently, the Giant Trance X 29, the Ibis Ripmo, and the Orbea Occam seemed to all be right up there at the top of the list for mid travel trail bikes that climb way better than they should. They don't get mentioned a lot but the Esker Rowl should be on that list too. I ended up on a Trance X 29 because that's the one I found a deal on first, and I'm happy with it. It climbs about as well as my 29+ hardtail, and that's good enough for me.

If you haven't ridden a modern 140-150mm bike, you might be surprised. I was. I'm on the clyde side of clyde and I thought 150/130 was going to be too much for climbing. It isn't. I barely notice it with the shock open, and in climb mode it feels like a hardtail once you get past the initial sag when you sit down.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

prj71 said:


> Your fitness level has more to do with it than the suspension travel.


Truer words were never spoken.


----------



## natas1321 (Nov 4, 2017)

SC 5010 might be an option, I prefer the previous version over the current one. 

Sent from my moto g(7) supra using Tapatalk


----------



## kpicha (Dec 20, 2003)

prj71 said:


> Spot Mayhem 130. The leaf spring is the real deal. Not some gimmick.


I second this. It always shocks me to be going faster uphill than slower.


----------



## Slow&Unsteadh (6 mo ago)

You can get an Izzo to be pretty light. Money no object, Yeti SB130 is the most capable bike I’ve ever ridden(but not light). It climbs in an “urgent” manner, and seemed to accelerate better than the times I’ve ridden an Izzo. But, I’m happy with my Ripmo


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Jayem said:


> Truer words were never spoken.


Such wisdom…I’m very fit…there is a fact though that some bikes climb/pedal better than other….and ‘suspension’ definitely helps going down!!


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

xjbaylor said:


> Based on my experience the Revel Rascal is a perfect quiver killer, if you like the geo. Personally, it works great for me, but the extremely long-legged might disagree.





dysfunction said:


> CBF is an amazing suspension platform. So yea, in that range a Rascal should be on the list.. a Tilt would be as well, but it's AL.. so heavier.


Throwing in another vote for a CBF bike. I love the way my Tilt climbs.

Switch Infinity Yeti is also at the top of the list, but bring your checkbook.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Such wisdom…I’m very fit…there is a fact though that some bikes climb/pedal better than other….and ‘suspension’ definitely helps going down!!


Maximize bump absorption for max fun


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

My Ripley AF climbs really well and is no slouch on the downhill.


----------



## Gman7 (Jul 11, 2008)

I personally like the Pivot switchblade if money is no object but there are better choices bang for the buck. The Revel CBF is great but in my climate I wouldn’t consider it, too many bearings to deal with and wet conditions would require frequent replacement. I like the Ripmo as an all rounder, climbing is nearly as good as Revel, it’s rugged and easy to maintenance and a good value.


----------



## FortOrdMTB (May 29, 2021)

SC Tallboy has a 130 fork & climbs awesome.


----------



## TXNavy (Apr 7, 2004)

My Tallboy 4 with the Cascade Link is 130 F/R. Climbs great and I'd take it anywhere.


----------



## FIF (Oct 5, 2018)

Just a thought of some things you may wish to look for in a bike that I have found really helps them climb:

Carbon wheelset: A descent light weight set and not the ones that are as heavy as aluminum.
Seat Tube Angle: I've found that a 75+ degree seat tube angle really helps to get me forward over the pedals when climbing.
Rear Suspension: Lock out's are incredible for non-technical climbing, but they tend to be more common in the 100-120 travel. Several of the 130+ travel bikes have gone to different anti squat platforms and these really seem to work when climbing.
Tires: Changing out tires to something that's more appropriate for your terrain can really make a difference. Sometimes it might not be worth paying the weight penalty for all that traction if you don't use it.
I'm really in the camp that with the new geometries and technologies that bikes are really good these days. Personally, I'm on a Trek Fuel EX 9.8, but I sold the carbon wheelset it came with and put that money toward a decent wheelset.


----------



## LVLBTY (Jul 15, 2020)

Pivot Trail 429 - Climbs like a goat !!


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

Surprisingly the Trek Fuel EX, doesn't climb as stiff as my Ripley but has a more open high traction feeling and depending how which rear shock and how setup the "firm" switch is great for fireroad climbs and not needed on singletrack. 

Never ridden one if was in the market today Id be looking at the Revel and Canfiled as others suggested also.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

I’ll play, though the entire request is nebulous. All we really know is the OP lives in CO and is very fit.

The Rascal is a great bike. Owned one last year and am currently riding one again. Overall performance and quality of suspension are unreal, particularly when you consider the 130 travel. It is an incredible technical climber, but it is very soft and does not feel urgent on power.

Honestly, the new Stumpjumper (not the Evo) is one of the best-climbing somewhat capable bikes I’ve ridden in the last couple years. Not as capable as the Revel coming back down, but it’s fast and fairly rowdy as long as the terrain isn’t too extreme.


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

I had a great time on a rental Evil Offering in Sedona.


----------



## Swolie74 (11 mo ago)

TXNavy said:


> My Tallboy 4 with the Cascade Link is 130 F/R. Climbs great and I'd take it anywhere.


Really? I specifically avoided that bike because everyone on youtube says it sucks climbing....or maybe it sucked compared to other comparable options


----------



## DaddyFatStax (Dec 10, 2018)

Swolie74 said:


> Really? I specifically avoided that bike because everyone on youtube says it sucks climbing....or maybe it sucked compared to other comparable options


 interested to hear more discussion on this as well. It's on my short list for a next bike. I want to do mostly xc races with the occasional east coast enduro. I know there isn't a bike that can perfectly do both but I'd like to be somewhat competitive with it and can't afford two full suspension bikes. Hell, I can't even really afford one but I don't like to say that out loud.


----------



## Steel-Onions (Sep 3, 2021)

2021/2022 Carbon Stumpy (with the flex stays) all day long


----------



## Salespunk (Sep 15, 2005)

Blatant said:


> I’ll play, though the entire request is nebulous. All we really know is the OP lives in CO and is very fit.
> 
> The Rascal is a great bike. Owned one last year and am currently riding one again. Overall performance and quality of suspension are unreal, particularly when you consider the 130 travel. It is an incredible technical climber, but it is very soft and does not feel urgent on power.
> 
> Honestly, the new Stumpjumper (not the Evo) is one of the best-climbing somewhat capable bikes I’ve ridden in the last couple years. Not as capable as the Revel coming back down, but it’s fast and fairly rowdy as long as the terrain isn’t too extreme.


Agreed on the nebulous part. Climbing on a fire road? Technical singletrack? Something else? Tires will have a bigger impact than suspension design on climbing speed for every 130-140 bike. Shock setup can also have a huge impact depending on how much you want to lock down the low speed rebound (most of the shocks in this segment do not have LSC tuning) and sacrifice small bump compliance.

All of that out of the way, the best climbing bikes are generally SB130, Revel Rascal, etc as been mentioned here. Basically DW Link, CBT or SI bike setups are all more focused on climbing rather than descending. Bikes like the SJ, Tallboy, etc are a more balanced approach on climbing and descending. Then you have bikes like the RAAW Jibb that are more focused on descending over climbing. From there, start looking at geo charts to figure out what bikes have the fit that you like for things like SA, TT length, BB height etc. 

Personally I have the SJ setup 130.150 with a Fox 36 up front to make it an even more capable descender. There is not much that bike won't handle either up or down, but my Epic Evo just walks away from it on climbs in terms of raw speed.


----------



## rdawson808 (Oct 19, 2015)

I have a 2018 Transition Scout 130/150 (r/f) that climbs like a goat, imo.


----------



## Mike Aswell (Sep 1, 2009)

The bike I own, for sure.


----------



## LetsGoOutside (Sep 4, 2005)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Throwing in another vote for a CBF bike. I love the way my Tilt climbs.
> 
> Switch Infinity Yeti is also at the top of the list, but bring your checkbook.



The SB130 starts at like $500 more than your Canfield and is carbon... same with these Rascal comments. Everything costs 6K now, Yeti included. 

The new SJ should be pretty high on this list too with the flex stays.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Swolie74 said:


> Really? I specifically avoided that bike because everyone on youtube says it sucks climbing....or maybe it sucked compared to other comparable options


Owned one last year. I really, really enjoyed the V4 TB and I’d definitely buy another. That said, it’s very much a short-ish travel trail bike and most certainly not an XC bike. It climbs fine, but not great. I’d put it in the Rascal/Following/Optic/Phantom basket, super-fun but not fast climbers.


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

I had a 2019 Giant Trance 29 2 with 130/115 and loved it. But, I bought an Ibis Ripmo AF recently and am blown away at how well it climbs for 160/147. Ripmo kills the Giant in every category. The DW link is so efficient. If you are dead set on trail travel bike look at the Ibis Ripley.

Plus, Ibis has 25% off Ripley and Ripmo AF bikes right now.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

LetsGoOutside said:


> The SB130 starts at like $500 more than your Canfield and is carbon... same with these Rascal comments. Everything costs 6K now, Yeti included.
> 
> The new SJ should be pretty high on this list too with the flex stays.


Rascal frame is $3500, I paid $1700 for a tilt frame.. still the going price.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

FWIW, I just came off my second SB130. I understand why people like it, but the bike definitely does not work well for me personally in Phoenix.

Hard to put a finger on. It FEELS fast, but the numbers tell a different story for me.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

dysfunction said:


> Rascal frame is $3500, I paid $1700 for a tilt frame.. still the going price.


To be fair, that price is without a shock.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Blatant said:


> To be fair, that price is without a shock.


Actually kind of a bonus though, since I get to choose what I want. Not buy, and then sell off etc. But, a fair point.


----------



## prj71 (Dec 29, 2014)

Jayem said:


> Truer words were never spoken.


I have a friend I ride with that is a strong rider...stronger than me. I guarantee I could put him on a 170mm downhill enduro bike and put me a 100mm XC bike and he still would climb a hill faster than me. So then what defines a good climbing bike?

From a different viewpoint I would pick the bike that has the least amount of or no pedal bob when pedaling uphill. Which is why I purchased a Spot Mayhem.


----------



## Dogbrain (Mar 4, 2008)

I played this game last winter and ended up with a Yeti SB130. Between a local who had one and lots of YouTube reviews, it seems like it hits the sweet spot of good climbing and very capable descending. I have had the bike out on several rides this year with +5k of climbing and never felt bogged down. Last weekend we did 40 miles with +7k, and 25 of those miles we on trail, and it felt great the whole time. And I personally have yet to make it feel squirly coming down anything. I mean I have felt squirly but it wasn't the bike's fault 🤣

As for price, I did a lot of comparison because everyone says Yeti is expensive, but it was within $500 of similarly specced bikes. I got the c-series.


----------



## Mike Aswell (Sep 1, 2009)

prj71 said:


> I have a friend I ride with that is a strong rider...stronger than me. I guarantee I could put him on a 170mm downhill enduro bike and put me a 100mm XC bike and he still would climb a hill faster than me. So then what defines a good climbing bike?


What defines a "better" climbing bike is putting him on both and seeing which one he climbs better on. Or putting you on both and seeing.

Pretty much everyone could improve their fitness and therefore climbing on any given bike. But there are bikes that are more geared toward climbing. While the OP is way too broad, it's technically a fair question in some ways.


----------



## cleoent (Mar 22, 2010)

Does MTBR hate the obvious choice? Why only one post out of 40+ recommending the Stumpjumper carbon?

That's crazy. It's the lightest frame to start with for a 140/130 bike. It has a flex stay in the back which only helps its efficiency. And it descends like a champion.

My build is 26 pounds.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Blatant said:


> FWIW, I just came off my second SB130. I understand why people like it, but the bike definitely does not work well for me personally in Phoenix.
> 
> Hard to put a finger on. It FEELS fast, but the numbers tell a different story for me.


Would love to know more about this.

Every time I ride a Yeti, they feel fast however they also feel harsh and have poor rear wheel traction for me. Not certain how that effects the times.


----------



## Bikeventures (Jul 21, 2014)

Have we named every 130 bike yet?


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Im questioning all of the Stumpjumper recommendations here... either Specialized seriously revamped their suspension platform since last time I rode it, or some of you haven't ridden anything but Horst Link bikes. I had 1 Specialized full suspension and it was like torture to climb on. By far the most active suspension I've ever ridden. It was fun downhill, but climbing was a chore on that stupid thing no matter how hard I tried to dial in the suspension.


----------



## cleoent (Mar 22, 2010)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Im questioning all of the Stumpjumper recommendations here... either Specialized seriously revamped their suspension platform since last time I rode it, or some of you haven't ridden anything but Horst Link bikes. I had 1 Specialized full suspension and it was like torture to climb on. By far the most active suspension I've ever ridden. It was fun downhill, but climbing was a chore on that stupid thing no matter how hard I tried to dial in the suspension.


Two things:

There's only been two recommendations (which is insane).

And yes, they revamped their suspension platform in new stumpjumper.


----------



## GKelley (Sep 4, 2018)

I purposely avoided researching suspension designs for the simple fact that it's just way too much data and _opinions_ to sift through. My analysis paralysis wouldn't have been able to handle all that.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Such wisdom…I’m very fit…there is a fact though that some bikes climb/pedal better than other….and ‘suspension’ definitely helps going down!!


Here are the simple facts. How well a bike climbs is a function of antisquat, shock tune, and rider position. More antisquat, the bike will bob less climbing. More low speed compression, the less the suspension moves. Steeper seat angle will keep you better positioned the steeper the climb and also result in less weight transfer. 

Here is the thing, as you add more antisquat and low speed compression, you sacrifice downhill performance. There is no best climbing bike, there is the best match for a rider of design, suspension tuning, and fit. If you value no suspension movement while pedaling uphill, get a bike with high antisquat and a firm lockout. That bike will not climb well on loose and technical stuff. For that you want the opposite, something like a Knolly with antisquat at 60-80% at sag and a low compression tune, which will clamor up all kinds of loose and technical terrain, but bob around like mad if you stand and hammer on it. 

My two cents, first focus on fit and geometry, then look at antisquat, finally use suspension tuning to adjust feel. The first is most important as if the bike doesn't fit you or your riding style, the second two become irrelevant. You ride like you are making youtube videos and pop off every feature and manual like Jeff Kendall Weed, you want one of those short chainstay bikes. Old fart like me that wants to not crash and be able to move around on the bike without the front washing out, long chainstays.


----------



## norcalbike (Dec 17, 2004)

I’d just go with the extra travel and get a Ripmo. Climbs better than most of the 130-140 bikes and rips downhill way above its category. You can probably build one lighter than 30 lbs.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Cary said:


> Here are the simple facts. How well a bike climbs is a function of antisquat, shock tune, and rider position. More antisquat, the bike will bob less climbing. More low speed compression, the less the suspension moves. Steeper seat angle will keep you better positioned the steeper the climb and also result in less weight transfer.
> 
> Here is the thing, as you add more antisquat and low speed compression, you sacrifice downhill performance. There is no best climbing bike, there is the best match for a rider of design, suspension tuning, and fit. If you value no suspension movement while pedaling uphill, get a bike with high antisquat and a firm lockout. That bike will not climb well on loose and technical stuff. For that you want the opposite, something like a Knolly with antisquat at 60-80% at sag and a low compression tune, which will clamor up all kinds of loose and technical terrain, but bob around like mad if you stand and hammer on it.
> 
> My two cents, first focus on fit and geometry, then look at antisquat, finally use suspension tuning to adjust feel. The first is most important as if the bike doesn't fit you or your riding style, the second two become irrelevant. You ride like you are making youtube videos and pop off every feature and manual like Jeff Kendall Weed, you want one of those short chainstay bikes. Old fart like me that wants to not crash and be able to move around on the bike without the front washing out, long chainstays.


The thing about those assumptions regarding high AS, etc. is that it makes an assumption about the terrain being smooth.

Vital MTB just ran some timed climbing tests on what I'd consider smooth single track, and the Exie was faster unlocked then it was locked out. This is because there comes a point where the firm suspension is just lifting up the bike/ rider instead of absorbing the bump.

Just because a bike feels more efficient, doesn't mean it's actually faster on a rough trail.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

Yeah, my upper link, older style VPP feels super efficient on smoother trail, then you hit a square edge that it won't absorb and you get some pedal kickback. Getting hung up can be a problem for high AS bikes. Hit enough of them in a row, and you'd think it doesn't climb so great. Fortunately, it's just a minor niggle for most of my riding, but I do notice it.

This is part of what makes all the CBF suspension reviews so intriguing to me.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> The thing about those assumptions regarding high AS, etc. is that it makes an assumption about the terrain being smooth.
> 
> Vital MTB just ran some timed climbing tests on what I'd consider smooth single track, and the Exie was faster unlocked then it was locked out. This is because there comes a point where the firm suspension is just lifting up the bike/ rider instead of absorbing the bump.
> 
> Just because a bike feels more efficient, doesn't mean it's actually faster on a rough trail.


Absolutely, hence my comment that every rider has to find their own balance and bikes like Knolly have lower AS numbers, move more, but also climb loose and technical better than high AS designs.


----------



## Taroroot (Nov 6, 2013)

Friend likes his Ripmo. I have a Yeti SB140 which i like. Climbs well (much better than SB66 that i had before) and did pretty well in the park, which i dont ride much.


----------



## driven916 (Jul 24, 2009)

Another vote for the Ripmo.


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

I climb faster on my ‘21 Enduro than I did on my Ripmo AF even though the Enduro is both longer and heavier.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Specialized seriously revamped their suspension platform since last time I rode it


It's a sick bike, and yes, it's a great climbing trail bike.








28# as pictured


----------



## C Smasher (Apr 20, 2012)

yzedf said:


> I climb faster on my ‘21 Enduro than I did on my Ripmo AF even though the Enduro is both longer and heavier.


Me too. PRs everywhere compared to my past tricked out trail bikes. Love it.


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

You are in Colorado, have you check out Alchemy. The 135/150 bike is supposed to ride well. They are in Colorado, should be able to get a ride pretty easily.

Well specced for the price and some sizes are currently on sale.

They have a 30 day return period, also.


----------



## DETarch (Feb 26, 2011)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Im questioning all of the Stumpjumper recommendations here... either Specialized seriously revamped their suspension platform since last time I rode it, or some of you haven't ridden anything but Horst Link bikes.


2021 and later Stumpjumpers (standard, non-Evo) aren’t Horst link anymore. Totally different design from previous years, despite the visually similar “strut” asymmetric frame.

Another vote from me for the new Stumpjumper- climbs incredibly well for a 130mm travel bike and can be built pretty damn light. I have a 2022 Stumpy and owned an SB130 previously- for climbing, the Stumpjumper is better IMO.


----------



## TXNavy (Apr 7, 2004)

Swolie74 said:


> Really? I specifically avoided that bike because everyone on youtube says it sucks climbing....or maybe it sucked compared to other comparable options


Read/saw a lot of the same. In a world of hair splitting and stock setups though, sure...one rider may find another 120-130mm bike that "climbs better." Transition Spur comes up a whole lot. I would say stock setup I can see in reviews where something more laser focused on efficiency feels like a "better climber," but after putting the next step higher volume reducer in the Fox DPS, then moving to the RS SDU and Cascade Link, it is probably a lot closer to those other bikes. But I also think we are talking about bikes that are 85-95% climbers and it's a difference between the 87.5% best climber vs 91.3% climber. Even stock, I would never have said the TB sucks at climbing somehow.

"Capable descender" is the other half here. All the bikes mentioned are pretty close, I'd have some preferences but price and availability might rule. The Spur is the one I have most consistently read as "best" in class for what I think the OP is looking for, but I'm also never stuck wishing my TB was a better climber, FWIW. It's also just waaaaaay better downhill than any 120-130mm bike should be.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

romulin said:


> My banshee Prime is a solid climber and a great shredder too. Was looking for the same, do it all bike.
> Forbidden druid? Yetis climb very well to i think
> 
> Odoslané z M1 pomocou Tapatalku


I am on board. Love my Spitfire but 29er makes for a better quiver killer.


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

wrightcs77 said:


> You are in Colorado, have you check out Alchemy. The 135/150 bike is supposed to ride well. They are in Colorado, should be able to get a ride pretty easily.
> 
> Well specced for the price and some sizes are currently on sale.
> 
> They have a 30 day return period, also.


Great recommendation miss my old 140/160 Arktos newer geo version with water bottle look great. The sine suspension is real legit, if has downfall does move through travel quicker on big hits but that could have been me and my tuning climbed smooth and tech very well.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

prj71 said:


> I have a friend I ride with that is a strong rider...stronger than me. I guarantee I could put him on a 170mm downhill enduro bike and put me a 100mm XC bike and he still would climb a hill faster than me. So then what defines a good climbing bike?


Keeps a high bb to reduce pedal strikes in chunk.

2020+ Intense Primer, DW bikes, etc.... but most bikes these days are good climbers. Revels are a bit more active; it all depends on your terrain for which kinematics are best.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> Would love to know more about this.
> 
> Every time I ride a Yeti, they feel fast however they also feel harsh and have poor rear wheel traction for me. Not certain how that effects the times.


Lemme guess, Fox suspension on these?


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

DETarch said:


> 2021 and later Stumpjumpers (standard, non-Evo) aren’t Horst link anymore. Totally different design from previous years, despite the visually similar “strut” asymmetric frame.
> 
> Another vote from me for the new Stumpjumper- climbs incredibly well for a 130mm travel bike and can be built pretty damn light. I have a 2022 Stumpy and owned an SB130 previously- for climbing, the Stumpjumper is better IMO.


Specialized bikes haven’t been a Horst Link for decades. A Horst link has the chainstay pivot below the axle and very low antisquat. All that has changed is they went from a long 4 bar design to a linkage actuated single pivot that relies on flex instead of the extremely small rotation of the chainstay pivot of modern long 4 bar designs.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> Lemme guess, Fox suspension on these?


I think it's much more about the 170% anti-squat in the middle of the cassette than it is the fox suspension.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## smartyiak (Apr 29, 2009)

Bikeventures said:


> Have we named every 130 bike yet?


Nope:

RAZE CARBON RR SL

I'd really like to try one of these though.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> I think it's much more about the 170% anti-squat in the middle of the cassette than it is the fox suspension.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Hmmm. Now I need to ride one.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> I think it's much more about the 170% anti-squat in the middle of the cassette than it is the fox suspension.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Yikes, that is huge. Reminds me of the old Giant NRS, low sag, lots of antisquat so you run the shock topped out under pedaling loads.

At least for me, I find I like bikes with 110-120% AS at sag. If I rode a lot of chunky climbs, I would probably like lower.


----------



## DETarch (Feb 26, 2011)

Cary said:


> Specialized bikes haven’t been a Horst Link for decades. A Horst link has the chainstay pivot below the axle and very low antisquat. All that has changed is they went from a long 4 bar design to a linkage actuated single pivot that relies on flex instead of the extremely small rotation of the chainstay pivot of modern long 4 bar designs.


I think it's clear what I meant- Specialized called their Stumpjumper design (with the chainstay pivot) Horst Link/FSR, and that _designation _ended with the 2021 model year, even if wasn't technically a Horst Link before that based on your definition.

Picking nits doesn't really contribute to the conversation- the point stands that the 2021 and later Stumpjumpers are considerably better pedaling and climbing bikes than their predecessors.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

DETarch said:


> 2021 and later Stumpjumpers (standard, non-Evo) aren’t Horst link anymore. Totally different design from previous years, despite the visually similar “strut” asymmetric frame.
> 
> Another vote from me for the new Stumpjumper- climbs incredibly well for a 130mm travel bike and can be built pretty damn light. I have a 2022 Stumpy and owned an SB130 previously- for climbing, the Stumpjumper is better IMO.


Again, the change from a four bar to flex stay has nothing to do with the change in feel, it is the change in antisquat,progression, geometry and shock tuning that changed how the bike rides.

The Stumpjumper is a good match for you, that is good. It is not a good match for heavy riders or big huckers with its high overall leverage ratio and low progression. Again, the best bike is the one that matches the rider, there is no best as riders vary greatly in skill, riding style, terrain, and size.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Cary said:


> Specialized bikes haven’t been a Horst Link for decades. A Horst link has the chainstay pivot below the axle and very low antisquat. All that has changed is they went from a long 4 bar design to a linkage actuated single pivot that relies on flex instead of the extremely small rotation of the chainstay pivot of modern long 4 bar designs.


They've kind of been all over the map with the AS, some flatter curve bikes, some very high AS, some very low AS, some with very steep falling lines, etc. They are coming around, slowly and not necessarily consistently, but coming around. A lot of the Spec designs were still chainstay pivot below the axle, just that it was only a few mm and more "in front" than "below", but still a little below.


----------



## cacatous (Dec 1, 2013)

Bikeventures said:


> Have we named every 130 bike yet?


Pretty close - Canyon Spectral 125 - killer value and great geometry.


----------



## SleepeRst (Nov 30, 2011)

So did you guys figure it out yet?


----------



## Bassmantweed (Nov 10, 2019)

Cary said:


> Specialized bikes haven’t been a Horst Link for decades. A Horst link has the chainstay pivot below the axle and very low antisquat. All that has changed is they went from a long 4 bar design to a linkage actuated single pivot that relies on flex instead of the extremely small rotation of the chainstay pivot of modern long 4 bar designs.


either I don’t understand this or this isnt true. My 2019 stumpjumper is Horst link. My 2022 not so much.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Bassmantweed said:


> either I don’t understand this or this isnt true. My 2019 stumpjumper is Horst link. My 2022 not so much.
> 
> View attachment 1994638


As Jayem corrected me above, yes they were still slightly below the chainstay, so a horst link, but far modified from the original design which had 0% antisquat and was promoted as independent of pedaling with no chain growth (chain growth controls antisquat to a large extent).

As always, Kinematics tells how the suspension works, all the designs can be tuned to ride like another, so don’t fall into the trap of equating the design (i.e. long 4 bar, short 4 bar, linkage actuated single pivot) for how a bike rides.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

So I'm with Cary on the theory behind picking your bike, BUT, when it's all said and done, if you know how to tune your suspension, there are some bikes that come out ahead for certain uses.

I'm a climber of technical trails, it's what I like to do, the uglier the better, often I ride up what most folks ride down just because I enjoy the challenge.

So if the OP want a bike for technical climbing; not fire roads, I'd lean toward the CBF suspension.

If the OP just wants an efficient climber, it'll be weight, geometry, and gearing that gets my attention.

I ride a Canfield Lithium, previously rode a Canfield Tilt, for a moderate travel bike I'd get the Tilt. If the OP wants a lighter version of CBF and has money to burn, then get a Rascal.


----------



## Bassmantweed (Nov 10, 2019)

Cary said:


> As Jayem corrected me above, yes they were still slightly below the chainstay, so a horst link, but far modified from the original design which had 0% antisquat and was promoted as independent of pedaling with no chain growth (chain growth controls antisquat to a large extent).
> 
> As always, Kinematics tells how the suspension works, all the designs can be tuned to ride like another, so don’t fall into the trap of equating the design (i.e. long 4 bar, short 4 bar, linkage actuated single pivot) for how a bike rides.


Sorry I missed that. 

a few things from a few posts above.

i am a big guy6’5” & 260 lbs at my highest and now around 225 lbs before gear. I ride a 2019 XL stumpjumper expert and even though it has a high ratio I find it works fine for me. I bought a S6 XXL 2022 stumpjumper expert which I’m not really a big fan of. I like the responsiveness of the 2019 better. Don’t know if it is the size or the changes to the rear triangle that make the bigger difference.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Bassmantweed said:


> Sorry I missed that.
> 
> a few things from a few posts above.
> 
> i am a big guy6’5” & 260 lbs at my highest and now around 225 lbs before gear. I ride a 2019 XL stumpjumper expert and even though it has a high ratio I find it works fine for me. I bought a S6 XXL 2022 stumpjumper expert which I’m not really a big fan of. I like the responsiveness of the 2019 better. Don’t know if it is the size or the changes to the rear triangle that make the bigger difference.


If you want to sell the 2022, I know of someone who may be interested. Hard to find bikes that fit people that are actually 6’4”.


----------



## Bassmantweed (Nov 10, 2019)

Cary said:


> If you want to sell the 2022, I know of someone who may be interested. Hard to find bikes that fit people that are actually 6’4”.


i live in ct and was going to post for sale. PM me.


----------



## 50yr+MTB (5 mo ago)

cleoent said:


> Does MTBR hate the obvious choice? Why only one post out of 40+ recommending the Stumpjumper carbon?
> 
> That's crazy. It's the lightest frame to start with for a 140/130 bike. It has a flex stay in the back which only helps its efficiency. And it descends like a champion.
> 
> My build is 26 pounds.


Cleoent - can you pm your stumpjumper build at 26 lbs.


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

50yr+MTB said:


> Cleoent - can you pm your stumpjumper build at 26 lbs.


Heck post for all to see with the specs!


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Damn. you where probably better of just getting it repaired.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Nurse Ben said:


> So I'm with Cary on the theory behind picking your bike, BUT, when it's all said and done, if you know how to tune your suspension, there are some bikes that come out ahead for certain uses.


I think these peripherals are really important. I've changed hub engagement, tire inserts ( for lower pressure safely), crank length (175 to 170) and rear shocks to get a climbing bike I like. After these mods, the bike rides a LOT different. Just picking a frame is but one factor.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

Salsa Horsethief is a DW link bike that everyone who rides it says pedals/climbs extremely well. 

No one thought of that one...did they!!


----------



## danK (Jan 15, 2004)

jonshonda said:


> Salsa Horsethief is a DW link bike that everyone who rides it says pedals/climbs extremely well.
> 
> No one thought of that one...did they!!


Horsethief is Split Pivot, not DW Link. Dave Weagle designed it, yes, but completely different than a DW Link. I own both.


----------



## Lionel_Hutz (Dec 8, 2021)

Had a Stumpjumper carbon comp (current version with the flex stays) and currently have a Rascal. The Stumpy has an edge on climbing efficiency but not as good at climbing through chunk/tech. Stumpy is also not insignificantly lighter. But the Rascal is more capable and comfortable overall.


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

danK said:


> Horsethief is Split Pivot, not DW Link. Dave Weagle designed it, yes, but completely different than a DW Link. I own both.


Ahh, don't know what I thought it was a DW link. Can you elaborate on the differences and maybe the pluses and minuses of them? I am really interested in the Horethief/Spearfish and there is just so little info out there about them.


----------



## mtbfree (Aug 20, 2015)

Unpopular opinion - i trained following training plan and rode intensively for aprox. two months. It made waaaaay more difference in climbing ability than any $$$ change on bike i have ever done


----------



## Kirsa (Jul 5, 2011)

Orbea Occam
My Occam M10 with 150/140 suspension weighs 26,5lbs and climbs very well. I have Oiz as well and it climbs better because it is much lighter but Oiz with 2 big bottles and Occam without bottles and with locked suspensions is very similar on steep climbs. On mellow 1-2% gravel climbs Oiz is much better mainly because of body position and tires and stuff.
But for a trail bike Occam is very good.


----------



## N54tt (Jan 7, 2022)

My only frame of reference is an old Marin hardtail, Rift Zone 3 27.5 and now Mojo 4. Took the Mojo 4 out for its first spin yesterday. It climbs VERY well. Much better than my Rift Zone, although it’s not known to be a great climber lol. I had the shock on full soft too and noticed very little pedal bob. The DW link makes a huge difference in pedaling efficiency compared to the single pivot Marin uses.


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

DW for the win in these type of bike needs and what's best conversations for sure.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I prefer CBF, but it's because of the way that the pedals feel decoupled from the suspension.


----------



## SSsteel4life (Jul 1, 2016)

dysfunction said:


> I prefer CBF, but it's because of the way that the pedals feel decoupled from the suspension.


Completely agree here. It is actually crazy how this feels on the trail. This may end up being the first suspension design I have ridden for all around capability that will check all the boxes for me. Unless you are riding completely groomed trail with no technical climbing, CBF is pretty legit.


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

dysfunction said:


> I prefer CBF, but it's because of the way that the pedals feel decoupled from the suspension.


I'm amazed how well the 165mm travel 27.5 Revel Rail climbs. Not quite like an Ibis Ripley but pretty dang close. CBF is legit and more plush and reactive descending than DW-link. IMO.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

rockman said:


> I'm amazed how well the 165mm travel 27.5 Revel Rail climbs. Not quite like an Ibis Ripley but pretty dang close. CBF is legit and more plush and reactive descending than DW-link. IMO.


Yea, it's a sweet spot. Totally was surprising on my Lithium. It's not as efficient as DW, but man it makes up for it pointed down hill. I really prefer it on technical climbs as well.


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

dysfunction said:


> Yea, it's a sweet spot. Totally was surprising on my Lithium. It's not as efficient as DW, but man it makes up for it pointed down hill. I really prefer it on technical climbs as well.


I've had a number of DW bikes including Turners and Ibis and while super efficient climbing they do hang up on square-edged obstacles. I don't feel that with CBF. If you want a XC rocket ship get a Ripley but for the majority of riding I do CBF really is the sweet spot. So much fun descending. Reactive yet plush whereas DW always just felt firm to me.


----------



## N54tt (Jan 7, 2022)

All this CBF talk. The trails I went to yesterday are about as rowdy as it gets with my local trails….unless I travel over an hr+ away into upstate NY or NJ…..and it handled better than my Marin rift zone. Are there any 27.5 130/140 CBF bikes out there? Don’t tell me I need to get another bike lol.


----------



## HEMIjer (Jul 17, 2008)

Got to admit I have looked for reasons to get a CBF bike (like a Tilt) as part of the stable but nothing I want to thin first.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

N54tt said:


> All this CBF talk. The trails I went to yesterday are about as rowdy as it gets with my local trails….unless I travel over an hr+ away into upstate NY or NJ…..and it handled better than my Marin rift zone. Are there any 27.5 130/140 CBF bikes out there? Don’t tell me I need to get another bike lol.


Short stroke a Tilt to 130 mm and ride it.

A 29er with short chainstays like the Tilt would ride pretty sweet and be plenty agile.

I like DW, but CBF is justa better platform for active pedaling, esp through the rough.

Any bike climbs well on groomer, hell, just get a hardtail for that stuff.

I just got back from Hurricane, we rode Suicidal Tendencies, Guacamole, and Hurricane Rim. My buddies were on an Intense Primer and a hardtail, even though I'm older and they are stronger riders, they had to walk stuff I rode.


----------



## N54tt (Jan 7, 2022)

Sanchofula said:


> Short stroke a Tilt to 130 mm and ride it.
> 
> A 29er with short chainstays like the Tilt would ride pretty sweet and be plenty agile.
> 
> ...


You’re talking about the Canfield Tilt? Unless I’m missing something I don’t see that it comes 27.5.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

N54tt said:


> You’re talking about the Canfield Tilt? Unless I’m missing something I don’t see that it comes 27.5.


Read my reply, the Tilt is a short chainstay 29er, might be a good alternative to a 27.5.


----------



## N54tt (Jan 7, 2022)

Sanchofula said:


> Read my reply, the Tilt is a short chainstay 29er, might be a good alternative to a 27.5.


I did read your reply….short chainstay or not I was looking for 27.5 options not 29. Thanks for your input though, I appreciate it. If/when I go 29 I’ll put the Tilt on the list.


----------



## Knarfis (1 mo ago)

Unbrockenchain said:


> 120 not enough…150 too much..looking for the best (and maybe lightest) climbing 130-140 trail bike that is also a capable descender. One quiver…Goldilocks…whatever it may be called. Terrain is Rocky Mountain west so long climbs followed by big descents.


Hi UnbrokenChain,

You started this post back in July so I have no idea where you are on your bike journey regarding this post and the subject at hand. I wanted to comment with the hopes of helping you and/or someone else that is looking into this subject. I have to admit, the subject of climbing is something that is rarely talked about in today's MTB world. The MTB industry, for some reason, has put so much focus on going down a hill that rarely will the ability to climb will come up in discussions or marketing. Which is quite sad because you have to climb before you go down. Unless riders are always on bike lifts.

Before I go into my wall of text here, let me at least state that I have been riding MTB's since 1994. I currently live in the Phoenix area with the desert chunk and ugly technical climbs. I have also lived in the Lake Tahoe area that has primo MTB trails and are MUCH different then Arizona. I have mainly ridden hardtails with only owning two full sus bikes; a 2003 Cannondale Super V 800 (which climbed like garbage) and my current Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt. I did a great deal of research before purchasing the Rocky Mountain (RM) and I can honestly tell you that I do not know if it is the best climber or not. I will say that climbing was the number one aspect when researching for my full sus bike and there is so little information out there. So, I was (and still am kinda) in the same boat as you. Let me share with you a few things that I have learned.

Hard tails still climb the best. Full stop. Anyone that says otherwise simply does not know what they are talking about. But to be fair, you are asking about a full suspension bike. So, hardtails are off the table.

I am going to say this right out of the gate, most modern day bike (<2018) climb and you would most likely not be able to tell the difference between any and all of them. Yes, there a few that do not climb as good as others, BUT, for the most part, they all are pretty close to each other. With that said, there are subtle differences and it all comes with how the rear suspension is designed. These two links I provide below give a good idea:

Understanding MTB suspension – A comprehensive guide to kinematics, anti-squat and co.

How your bike's suspension design affects its performance on the trail

I found this write up to be quite informative with some basic information provided. But it does not answer your question and neither will anything else. So, let's look at a few things.

Frame geo plays a great deal into how a bike climbs for YOU. That is the key; you AND the bike geo. Geo that may work for you, may not work for me and vise versa. So understanding the geo of a frame that works for you is key on this one. Things like stack, chainstay length (rear center), overall wheel base, seat tube angle all play a roll on how the bike climbs with you.

How you climb, or better said, how you peddle up a hill plays a part. Some people (like my brother) get out of the saddle when climbing most of the time. Where as, I tend to stay in the saddle mostly when I am climbing. Climbing either in or out of the saddle makes a difference when considering suspension platforms both in design and types of shocks used. (lock outs, coil springs, etc.)

Your terrain that you climb plays a roll. If you are doing fire roads, then you do not have to deal with much tech, but you do have to deal with some steep hills. Longer wheel base would benefit you. If you are doing technical rooty or rocky climbs (like here in AZ) a short wheel base and the ease to bring the front tire off the ground (either through peddling or pulling up on the bars) is something that needs to be considered. Notice here that I am pointing more towards geo rather than suspension platform layouts.

Lastly I want to talk about the bike itself. The bike could be a great climber, but it could not be all that great down hill. Case in point, my best friend has an Ibis Ripmo and a Trek Fuel. He reported to me that the Ibis climbs so much better then his Trek without having to use a lockout (which he has to use with is Trek). BUT, the Ibis is quite a bit heavier with all the rear suspension hardware. He also said that the Ibis suspension is so good and so efficient that when going down the bike numbs the trail so much because it just trucks over everything with ease. This is not a slam on Ibis at all. But it does point out that some riders may like that numb feel while others would like a more active feeling bike going down hill. A super good climbing platform may not be all that great on the downhill side of things.

On a personal note: I have a 2021 Ragley Big Al (hardtail) and 2021 Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt. Two very different bikes. Both bikes climb differently. One is more lively (the RM) and one is more planted (the Ragley). One is harder to turn and maneuver (the Ragley) and one is a bit all over the place (the RM). One chews through the tech a bit better (the Ragley because it has 29" wheels and is longer) while one gets hung up a bit on really square edges (the RM with 27.5" wheels). One wants to sprint, play while climbing (the RM) while one feels like I am dragging something behind me (the Ragley). One is like a mountain goat as it truck up tech (the Ragley) while one has to have its line chosen a bit more conscientiously (the RM) As you can see there are all of these pro's and con's to these two platforms and it will be the same for EVERY full sus you look at.

So the bottom line? Take a step back and look for a bike that you want to ride and be seen on, rather than looking for one that will climb the best. Sure, I can say with all of my research that a bike with linkage driven single pivot is the best platform for climbing by all the stats and numbers. But, that does not mean the bikes that come with that platform will be the best for YOU. I can say that my Rocky is the best thing I have ever ridden. I could also say the same thing about my Ragley, yet as you read above, those two bikes have different personalities. So, forget about the suspension an all of the advice you have received here and just go out and ride a few rentals. It does not cost much and is far cheaper then buying a bike that you end up hating after spending thousands of dollars on it, kinda like I did with my old Cannondale Super V. (Who that bike suck climbing!!!)


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Thanks for reply!! I beat you by 10 years with getting my first mtb in 1984 (stumpjumber). Your point all good….just wanted to start a stupid discussion on these dumb boards!!!!


----------



## Gixxer50 (Feb 14, 2021)

Banshee spitfire 27. Beast.


----------



## DrDon (Sep 25, 2004)

Switchblade 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## numbnuts (Apr 20, 2006)

well according to pink bike, the 4000 Norco


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Thanks for reply!! I beat you by 10 years with getting my first mtb in 1984 (stumpjumber). Your point all good….just wanted to start a stupid discussion on these dumb boards!!!!


Okay, best 27.5 FS bike for climbing; I'm conveniently ignoring the weight thing 

I really, really, liked my Guerilla Gravity Shred Dogg, hands down best 27.5 derailleur bike I've owned, proof? I had it for three seasons, which is unheard of for me 

The Shred is not the lightest frame, but weight is only so important.

Now on to my current 27.5 bike and what makes it better than the Shred Dogg ...

I am now riding a Zerode Taniwha Trail Pinion full suspension 27.5, 140/160 travel, and it is truly the nicest riding bike I've owned, and the best climbing bike I've ridden 

Based on frame and drivetrain weight, all components being equal, the Pinion drive adds a 1.5-2# to the total weight of the bike.

Added benefits of a Pinion: Greatly reduced maintenance, equal steps between gears, improved suspension response, improved fore-aft balance, greatly increased longevity, and improved shifting.

I like it so much I'm building a second Pinion FS for bike packing.


----------

