# Did you overbike your last purchase?



## Drew888 (Mar 22, 2011)

I ordered a 2020 Norco Optic and eager to ride. It's way more bike than I need. Friends all think I should have saved $ on my first purchase in 18 years (with a small resurgence in 2001-2003) and buy something like the Marin Rift Zone 3 or Fezarri Abajo Peak. I haven't ridden much at all in this time but used to ride maybe 2-6k mi/year only, back then. I'm not in shape but desperate to get on the bike again. Until it arrives I'm still riding (starting last year) my 2001 Razorback K2 Team bike every other weekend but being careful of the 76* headtube angle. It's a twitchy 24.5lb ride but still fun. 

I over biked hoping to keep me more stable. I figure if I'm going down it'll be on the downhill. For some reason the new Optic speaks to me.

Did you over bike your last purchase?

Anyone in north orange county-SoCal want a slowish ride partner...let me know.

Drew


----------



## Mikhs (May 18, 2006)

I think that it is hard to quantify whether you are overbiked or not. Depends more on the type of rider you are than on the terrain that you ride on. 

My local trails are mostly non technical and we only have 300 feet of elevation so no big gnarly downhills. However you can find stuff to pop off of if you are so inclined. Log overs, roots, rocks and grade reversals give me opportunities to get the bike in the air. Fun even if it is not huge air. The biggest drop we have at our local trails is about three or four feet which can be hucked or rolled. I like to huck it so my 140/125 bike works great. Not that you couldn't huck it with less or even no travel.

Some of my riding buddies are just as happy to keep the rubber on the ground and their 120/100 bikes work well for them.

In any case enjoy the heck out of the Optic and let us know how you like it.


----------



## sgltrak (Feb 19, 2005)

Drew888 said:


> I ordered a 2020 Norco Optic and eager to ride. It's way more bike than I need. Friends all think I should have saved $ on my first purchase in 18 years (with a small resurgence in 2001-2003) and buy something like the Marin Rift Zone 3 or Fezarri Abajo Peak. I haven't ridden much at all in this time but used to ride maybe 12-16k mi/year only, back then. I'm not in shape but desperate to get on the bike again. Until it arrives I'm still riding (starting last year) my 2001 Razorback K2 Team bike every other weekend but being careful of the 76* headtube angle. It's a twitchy 24.5lb ride but still fun.
> 
> I over biked hoping to keep me more stable. I figure if I'm going down it'll be on the downhill. For some reason the new Optic speaks to me.
> 
> ...


Welcome back to riding. 12,000 - 16,000 miles per year back in the day are some mighty impressive numbers! Given that history, your riding should catch back up to the bike you bought in no time at all.

I usually tend to go the opposite direction toward under-biked, but that is what I like and what I am used to after 35 years of mountain biking. Enjoy what you ride and don't worry about being under or over biked.


----------



## Drew888 (Mar 22, 2011)

Much appreciated!

One of the signs of old age, not proofing before you post! 2-6k/yr! I wish it were more.


----------



## RustyIron (Apr 14, 2008)

Drew, you are perfectly fine. You'll quickly--very quickly--come to appreciate the overbikedness of your new steed. 

If you doubt this, keep your eighteen year old bike. Hop back on it in two months. I'll wager that you'll vow NEVER to swing a leg over that rickety old beast ever again.

Edit:
Sorry, I forgot to answer your question. Yes, I overbiked on my most recent buy. I grew into it. It's still capable of handling more than I can dish out, but that's a bonus when I get over my head.


----------



## tkblazer (Sep 18, 2005)

That’s the perfect bike for Orange County riding. Most of our trails are steep and loose so the geo will suit the trails. Just keep your weight centered


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

That bike looks awesome! I bet you'll love it. May your friends be jealous.


----------



## Outhouse (Jul 26, 2019)

Drew888 said:


> I
> Did you over bike your last purchase?
> 
> Drew


Oh hell no. LOl I rode a little mnt back in the day in my 30's and now I just hand built from the ground up a bike with similar details at 27.5lbs and it makes getting back into it worth it. You have no excuses now, get after it!!!!


----------



## Rev Bubba (Jan 16, 2004)

Yes. It's easy to "justify" what we buy but we really don't need much more than a rigid hardtail to enjoy mountain biking. 

Its been said here and elsewhere that there is a big difference between "need" and "want." Before someone else chimes in and says any mountain bike is more then we need, I will agree, but this is a mountain bike forum so I accept that we need some basic mountain bike.

That also doesn't change the fact that I "want" a new and way too expensive bike but I don't "need" it.

Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## fredcook (Apr 2, 2009)

Drew888 said:


> Did you over bike your last purchase?


No! Never! 

To be honest, I never really bought into the idea of buying something that you will outgrow. I always buy what I intend to grow into. My train of though is why spend the extra cash on making two or three purchases when one will work. But, that's just me and I don't limit this philosophy to mountain bikes. Well, except maybe for clothes...


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

I agree, when my XC turned 120mm Trail hardtail frame broke, I got a 140mm FS to grow into which is perfect for the diverse local terrain. A 170mm would be overbiked since i’d never learn to use it all but a 140mm with shorter travel rear like the Optic is great most anywhere.


----------



## SoDakSooner (Nov 23, 2005)

I thought about this as well. The last mtb I purchased 15 years ago was a 130/125 S/C heckler, which was a fairly long travel bike at time. I had bumped up the fork and shock over the years to 140/140. Built the way I wanted it was and still is a pretty good bike for what it is. I looked at a bunch of longer travel stuff and ended up settling on a 160/140 bike (Pivot mach 5.5) so not much more, but with the new Geo, it is completely different for the same amount of travel. 

It's great for what we ride locally but we rode some stuff this weekend that was all smooth, no tech to think of but a lot of tight twisty stuff. I commented to my buddy that a hardtail or short travel, steep head angle bike would have been perfect for these trails. Definitely felt like I had too much bike for the situation, but I don't feel over biked.

Man I only wish I could get 2 to 6 K per year. Might get close to 2k this year but that includes road miles.


----------



## twodownzero (Dec 27, 2017)

Yes I did, and I grew into it nicely. Man do I love it when I go out of town and I'm on some rowdy new terrain. If I won the lottery maybe I'd buy a 120mm full squish, but since I can only have one expensive bike, having the bigger bike is just so much fun, especially when I'm tired and my line choices get questionable. Enjoy your bike! A tiny amount of pedaling efficiency is a small price to pay.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Like singtrak, I underbiked; bought a rigid SS. Provides its own challenges different than that of an overbike that you hope to grow into. Getting down the trail as fast and smoothly as possible is not everyone's goal (not saying there is anything wrong with that). I still ride a full suspension as well.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I have two bikes, a short travel FS 29er and a mid travel FS 27.5. If anything I'm undergunned on both bikes, so I'm stepping up to a more aggressive geo and increasing from 120-130mm on my 29er and then I'm bumping my 27.5 enduro bike from 140 to 160

I don't know that more travel is always the answer, sometimes a short travel bike with aggressive geo and robust build will do in a pinch.

I don't ride rigid, SS, or hardtails any more. Life is too short and my body is to beat to tolerate that sort of thing, so I focus on ride quality and increased time in the saddle.

If I want to beat on myself I can go back to riding mountain unis.


----------



## sgltrak (Feb 19, 2005)

chazpat said:


> Like singtrak, I underbiked; bought a rigid SS. Provides its own challenges different than that of an overbike that you hope to grow into. Getting down the trail as fast and smoothly as possible is not everyone's goal (not saying there is anything wrong with that). I still ride a full suspension as well.


All I've got are hardtails and rigid bikes. I sold off my last full suspension bike about 3 years ago (just before I turned 50) and I cracked my soft-tail in Moab last spring. I love to ride and demo a bunch of the new bikes every year, but I don't really care much about what bike I'm riding as long as I'm out there on the trail.


----------



## Radium (Jan 11, 2019)

Nobody has any business telling you that you "over-biked".


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

I haven't really overbiked (in frame materials maybe- last purchase was a rigid titanium SS and I've ponied up for some nice custom steel SS in the past).

My FS bike is 2014/15 vintage XC-ish (120mm front and less rear travel). I frequently get to 90% or so way through the travel during the most technical rides and that's ok by me.

Some of my friends continue going bigger on travel (150mm or more), dropper posts, etc. All that will do is get me riding more technical lines (on already rocky terrain) bordering on DH at times which I don't really want to do anymore.


----------



## sturge (Feb 22, 2009)

Only you can answer if you're overbiked...ride the hell out of it for a few months and report back. Long ago I went for FS and as years passed I 'settled' on 150-ish travel.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Don't know yet. Waiting for it to arrive.

Lashed out a whole £50 on it too...









What do you think? Over-biked or not?


----------



## twodownzero (Dec 27, 2017)

Velobike said:


> Don't know yet. Waiting for it to arrive.
> 
> Lashed out a whole £50 on it too...
> 
> ...


That's a pretty sexy old lugged bike.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

twodownzero said:


> That's a pretty sexy old lugged bike.


Dawes Windrush. Been looking for a complete original one for ages. Mid 1950s and built for the British offroad fraternity in the Rough Stuff Fellowship. (It's worth clicking the link and look what our predecessors got up to in the mountains)

Equipped with the luxury of several ratios (4  ) it was designed to take on the worst the mountains could throw at you - these days it would be called a gravel bike or maybe a bike packer.

I know they're a competent bike because I have one already and it's my favourite under-bike which gets taken places where generally only mtbs go, eg spots like this in the Highlands (Loch Einich) and so on





Under-biking is more fun IMO. Modern mtbs are so good it's like riding on a paved trail, so you have to seek out more rigorous terrain for your fun or ride somewhere with specially made trails. Under-biking means any old track is fun and with just a few gears, you get a good workout..


----------



## bikemoto885 (Jul 11, 2016)

Yes, but only temporarily until I get up to speed with a way more capable bike, and take it on suitable terrain. At a seminar recently they said, "buy the bike you aspire to ride". Having done just that, I would have to agree. I'm learning more and faster on a bike with more capability in reserve, and having a blast on tracks that used to be dicey on a lesser bike. The flip side is that I should avoid the easier trails as they are comparatively hard work, and not a lot of fun when the bike just flattens everything.

Being under-biked is fine on easy terrain, although it can range from fun though meh to frankly unpleasant. On rowdy terrain it can be scary or downright risky. 

The best thing for any given trail is the Goldilocks bike: not too hot, not too cold, but juuuuuuuuust right. :-D Or simply the one under your bum right now.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Velobike said:


> Modern mtbs are so good it's like riding on a paved trail, so you have to seek out more rigorous terrain for your fun or ride somewhere with specially made trails.


More rigorous terrain and specially made trails are _really_ fun and rewarding though.


----------



## Catmandoo (Dec 20, 2018)

2nd to last bike was an aluminum HT - Specialized Chisel Comp. I put away the 15 yr. old Stumpjumper FS as I realized the Chisel going to be enough bike for the riding I do, fast and twisty ST, no rocks, lots of roots, short steep hills. If I were riding rock gardens for 2-3 hrs. I might need a carbon FS, but the Chisel deals with what I ride perfectly, so not too much bike for my use. 

Likewise the gravel bike I just purchased, a Cannondale Topstone 105, is about perfect for my dirt road and easy trail riding and with a 2nd set of wheels with 28mm tires is my fast commuter. The 105 group is as cost effective a group as can be found and my 2nd bike running it. I had no need for a carbon gravel bike, didnt like the carbon Topstone in any event.

I like being practical.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Sold my Heckler 150mm of travel, and I don't ride that kind of terrain, so I gave up suspension, and got a Krampus.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Now I feel a little overbiked with an eight speed hub on my rigid steel bike. Apparently Velobike only uses four and it's plenty. Must be clean living.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Nat said:


> More rigorous terrain and specially made trails are _really_ fun and rewarding though.


Even more so when you're under-biked... 

When I was out on that white bike up there a few months ago we came to an "interesting" long descent. Seeing as it was an unknown quantity I bravely sent my mate down it first (he's Australian, so is expendable).

He was to give me a yell when he got to the bottom.

Instead he got chatting to a group of lads on full suspension mtbs who were contemplating whether they should try it, so I got worried that he may have pranged and went down anyway.

Apparently they could hear me coming from a few hundred yards away, something to do with the air turning blue - at that point I was not so enthused about under-biking. 

When I got close to the bottom I saw the group scurrying out of the way to clear the track. My mate (did I mention he's Australian? They're cruel) had laconically remarked to them "Watch out lads, Santa Claus is coming down. Fast, and he has no brakes".

The latter was true enough, 1950s brakes on wet rims aren't a good idea on steep rocky descents. Fast? not so sure, certainly faster than I'd have chosen, but the first part cut to the quick though.

Santa Claus? - just because I have a white beard and was wearing a red jacket. Humbug!

(Trimmed the beard that very night  )

So under-biking is indeed fun, even if it is Grade Z fun sometimes.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Velobike said:


> Even more so when you're under-biked...


Maybe, I guess. It might be fun until your bike becomes your limiting factor. Walking your bike or having to take the B-lines when you know you could ride a section on an appropriate (not under-) bike isn't real awesome.


----------



## atarione (Aug 24, 2018)

I think my 2018 Trance Advance 2 is a pretty solid choice for myself.

The suspension components are robust enough to handle all 265~lbs of me and the XL frame fits my 6'3" size quite nicely...

I like the 27.5 wheels as the bike is nimble and lively... I haven't loved the 29ers so much personally.. When I encounter terrain I want to try I also feel like the bike is up to it, If I am..










I currently have Minion DHF 2.6 and Aggressor 2.5 as well as a 50mm Deity Highside riser handlebars, I have Giant Pinner DH flat pedals and a WTB Volt saddle.

I should probably upgrade the brakes but the 180mm rotors / SLX brakes have been fine .. I don't do a ton of super long / steep downhills.

SLX groupset has held up quite well solid workhorse stuff..

all in all this is a solid fun bike that I'm well pleased with.


----------



## dustyman (Feb 13, 2007)

I also live in Orange County and the 2020 Norco Optic is definitely not over biking it. Unless your riding Chino Hills all the time. The Optic is a very capable short travel 29er. Great choice! Most of the older riders I talk to are buying mid to long travel 29er bikes. They say the reason being that the longer travel bikes are more forgiving which allows them to ride longer with less impact on the back and shoulders. They also save you when things get to technical. I agree, just hate climbing on long travel bikes.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Nat said:


> Maybe, I guess. It might be fun until your bike becomes your limiting factor. Walking your bike or having to take the B-lines when you know you could ride a section on an appropriate (not under-) bike isn't real awesome.


Where I ride is natural trails, I've no idea what a B-line is, and if I'm walking my bike is probably on my shoulder and it's not rideable on any bike.

I don't ride to be awesome, just for fun and to get places where there's no people.

At my age, most of my awesome friends have crippled themselves and stopped riding decades ago.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

In my 25+ years of riding and racing, I think I've overbiked, as it were, once or twice. In my situation, it was once purchasing a high end XC HT (Spec S-Works circa 2002 or so) that demanded of me some yet-to-be established racing skills. The bike was fire as hells.


----------



## ShakyDog (Oct 24, 2019)

Yes, and I am loving it!

2018 Intense Primer purchased in October and got one hell of a deal.

I really do not care if I "overbiked" or not as I am at that point in my life where you can either, take me of leave me.

Steve


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Velobike said:


> Where I ride is natural trails, I've no idea what a B-line is, and if I'm walking my bike is probably on my shoulder and it's not rideable on any bike.
> 
> I don't ride to be awesome, just for fun and to get places where there's no people.
> 
> At my age, most of my awesome friends have crippled themselves and stopped riding decades ago.


Where do you ride? Maybe those trails are rideable (maybe not by you but by someone) on a more robust bike? A B-line is an easier, alternate line for people who can't or don't want to ride the more challenging line.

Awesome = fun. Fun = awesome.

How old are you? People have progressed the sport quite a bit in the past few decades. There are talented people out there who can ride some amazing terrain. I haven't seen anyone do it on old drop bar touring-style bikes though. Mostly people are using more modern equipment.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Velobike said:


> At my age, most of my awesome friends have crippled themselves and stopped riding decades ago.





Nat said:


> Where do you ride?
> 
> How old are you?


Here are your answers, Nat! 

https://forums.mtbr.com/fifty-years-old/youll-never-get-up-there-bike-1118567.html#post14378479


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

chazpat said:


> Here are your answers, Nat!
> 
> https://forums.mtbr.com/fifty-years-old/youll-never-get-up-there-bike-1118567.html#post14378479


A ha. It looks like we're doing two totally different sports.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Nat said:


> A ha. It looks like we're doing two totally different sports.


Well, that looks to have been more of a road ride but Velo has some interesting rides. True cross country, as in grab your bike and head out across the country exploring on ancient trails in Scotland. He's talked about their "freedom to roam" laws in Scotland, where you can ride anywhere. He's done some pretty long races on single speeds. So yeah, he may not be zipping down bermed raceways and hitting big drops and flying through massive rock gardens; that's one thing I love about this sport, so many ways to ride and enjoy it!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Isn’t that aka “randonneuring?” 

Not really my thing but I can see how some people would like it.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

chazpat said:


> ...So yeah, he may not be zipping down bermed raceways and hitting big drops and flying through massive rock gardens...


True, because I ride rigid singlespeeds I take a conservative approach on big drops or rock gardens. I'm usually riding on my own in places where I won't be found for a while. There's an element of probability there. I regard it like smoking, or drug taking - it's usually ok, but at some point it'll go wrong and you're wrecked. If you want to keep riding as long as I have, don't get wrecked.

In races, no problem, there's plenty people going by, and an ambulance handy. 

Also races are usually on artificial courses with those features and so there's always a line unlike on real mountain tracks. For example when I did the World 24 Hour Championships in Ft William a few years back I was surprised at how rideable it was compared to the impression I had been given. I was grumpy at the wooden bits over the boggy stuff though - surely a real mountainbiker should be able to cope with a few sections of deep mud or a water crossing. 

For your entertainment, here is another under-biked ride I did before leaving Australia to come back to Scotland:

I decided to go up the mountain, but the road is mental, so I figured I'd try the old pioneers track. I don't mind a bit of hike-a-bike, but this got ridiculous.







After several hundred feet and a few kilometers at last I came to this nice track.



It was a huge relief because I was a bit knackered, the tropical heat was getting to me. Luckily, according to my map reading I was about to come to a gravel road for the next 6km.

I was really looking forward to that!

But all was not what it seemed on the map, some was good, but too much was







So basically another 5km of hike-a-bike.

Now some would say it's daft taking a bike all that way, but having got there it was 30km on the road to get back, so a bike was necessary. And the bonus was most of it was downhill and tight bends, so I got to monster the cars on the way down.

And that probably illustrates the point I was trying to make. Whatever you're on, it's probably the wrong bike at some point, and any bike is better than no bike..

EDIT: how come some of my pics are sideways? Is because I took them on the other side of the world?


----------



## SADDLE TRAMP (Aug 26, 2010)

It's good to read a little description of your rides again, VB. Have missed the write-ups that you have formally did.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Interesting terrain VB. That is reminiscent of some of the rooty terrain in the Pacific Northwest. Other than the one large deadfall it all looks rideable on a more robust bike. It would be an advanced trail, but I'm sure a lot of people could manage it. It would probably make an awesome ride.

Not my images but here are some examples:


----------



## bikenut316 (Oct 10, 2005)

I ride 99% on Long Island NY and own a 2018 Orbea Ocaam TR10. It came with 130/120 travel and a XCish build. The bike eats up the terrain but for my trails, I felt that the front was a little to jacked up. I purchased a Fox 120 cartridge and reduced the fork travel to 120. I haven't ridden it yet but expect the change to push me a little more in to the xc category. I am also trying to resist swapping the dropper for a carbon rigid. lol


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Nat said:


> Interesting terrain VB. That is reminiscent of some of the rooty terrain in the Pacific Northwest. Other than the one large deadfall it all looks rideable on a more robust bike...
> 
> Not my images but here are some examples...


Aye, but those riders are going downhill.

The track I was on was going up hill, steeply.

Here's a couple of other examples of under-biking  :





(Sorry they're not action shots, but seeing as I was riding on my own I wanted to check that the line I was going to take didn't end up somewhere unpleasant.)

I suppose that's the sort of thing that's a cinch on a dual suspension bike, hardly worth the bother really.

Edit: Apologies Drew888, I've derailed the thread somewhat. I'll shut up now.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Velobike said:


> Aye, but those riders are going downhill.
> 
> The track I was on was going up hill, steeply.


You called it a hike-a-bike, so were you walking or pedaling up those trails? The downhillers were definitely biking. Were you?



Velobike said:


> I suppose that's the sort of thing that's a cinch on a dual suspension bike, hardly worth the bother really.


Yeah, right. Sure.


----------



## drich (Oct 9, 2015)

My progression on bikes correlates with the number of injuries I have had during the last 12+ years: Hardtail---110/110---130/130---150/150. At this rate I'm going to be on an enduro soon! I do a lot of climbing and while my Santa Cruz will never keep up with an XC bike going up, I'm so much happier going downhill with more travel and I don't mind earning the downhills. Just much easier on my back, shoulders, etc. I'm in OC, so send me a PM if you want to ride Drew888.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Nat said:


> You called it a hike-a-bike, so were you walking or pedaling up those trails? The downhillers were definitely biking. Were you?


Bike on shoulder to go up that lot. Never seen anyone try to ride up stuff like that get more than a few metres. I'd love to see it being done for 8-10 miles.

Are you saying those downhillers ride up that stuff? I'm impressed.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Velobike said:


> Bike on shoulder to go up that lot. Never seen anyone try to ride up stuff like that get more than a few metres. I'd love to see it being done for 8-10 miles.
> 
> Are you saying those downhillers ride up that stuff? I'm impressed.


I'm saying that you went for a walk with your bike so it's not really anything to brag about. Why don't you ride _down_ that trail instead of walking up the trail then down the road? How about riding up the road then down the trail?

Drew888, don't let anyone try to convince you you've bought too much bike. While they're walking **** you'll be riding. Enjoy the hell out of that sweet new ride!


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Nat said:


> I'm saying that you went for a walk with your bike so it's not really anything to brag about. Why don't you ride _down_ that trail instead of walking up the trail then down the road? How about riding up the road then down the trail?
> 
> Drew888, don't let anyone try to convince you you've bought too much bike. While they're walking **** you'll be riding. Enjoy the hell out of that sweet new ride!


1. I'm not knocking Drew's choice. Everyone rides what they like. The point I was making is that there's no perfect bike. Generally speaking, the more you optimise a bike for one aspect of riding, the less capable it is for others.

2. I thought I explained why I went up the trail - the road is dangerous for cyclists climbing slowly. It's tight and winding with poor sight lines for motorists with a large speed differential coming up fast to a cyclist. Riding back down the road, there is no speed differential, so it's safer. On the way back I was travelling at the same speed as most of the cars and overtaking some.

3. I wasn't aware it was bragging. I thought it was more pointing out the realities of natural trail riding where the terrain is unknown to you. I was expecting just a short carry of a few km, and then a much longer ride on dirt tracks leading to singletrack and a descent. However the unexpected delay due to the extra h-a-b meant I had to change my plans because I did not have enough daylight for my original intention.

I'm not sure what your point is though, but if you're not prepared to carry the bike or walk it sometimes, how on earth do you get your bike up steep rooty hills, rock faces, over bogs and terrain if there is no track or convenient road?


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Sometimes, on any bike, you're under-biked 






Proper mountainbiking.


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

You are bragging Velobike. You just said that if you walk your bike down some trail it is probably not rideable anyway?

I believe you mentioned you are 74, it that correct? Regardless, do you really think if you cannot ride it, nobody else can? That is hilarious! 

As for being over-biked, yes I am guilty too. My last purchase was a fat bike. Do I need a carbon fat bike that weighs 24.5 lbs with carbon wheels? Of course not. I only race in the summer, so this bike is just for training and fun.

But one thing is clear. Never ever underestimate somebody based on what they ride. People's rides usually reflect on their financial status rather than their skill.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Too many generalizations in this thread, dang!

I don’t think it makes sense to judge others against ourselves and vice versa, it’s just too subjective. Honestly, we can all figure the pros and cons at this point in our lives.

Some folks like the challenge of doing more with less.... speaking of which:

Mountain unicycle is the ultimate minimalist ride. It’s hard to learn, but it’s very rewarding if you put in the time. Best part about riding muni is that it’s quite safe, though I’d highly recommend shin guards and full leather gloves with wrist braces; no need for elbow and knee pads.

When I rode muni I was a total snob/purist, for five years I didn’t even straddle a bike; prior to riding muni I rode SS mtb.

Now I ride FS bikes with lots of suspension 😆


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

What does "overbike" really mean? Does it mean buying a 160 travel bike while living in the Midwest?

I live in the intermountain west--Northern New Mexico in particular. I don't do certain things--like huge 4+ foot drops because bouncing my head off the ground isn't in the cards for me. So I wouldn't buy a 160+ bike here either. But I would definitely get a 140ish bike. We have lots of super technical riding here and longer travel makes it easier to ride long days in the saddle (20+ miles and 5000+ vert). As I have gotten older my endurance has increased but my sprinting ability has declined. I am less interested in XC bikes these days and more interested in really good medium travel trail bikes. But I still want light weight. So that means spending money. But not for one moment do I think I am overspending. I ride hard 4-5 days a week and ride my bikes for about 4-5 years. So I think I am getting my money's worth.

Right now I am considering one of these three: Hightower CC XO1 build, Ripmo with an XT build, Fox Factory stuff, and Ibis carbon wheels with their branded hubs, and possibly a Yeti SB 130 T1 build. I don't care about image whatsoever. I ride my bikes a lot (but take care of them) and am interested in good bikes and how they ride where I ride. All of these bikes would be good choices. All of them are about the same price. All of them are too much, but it is what it is.


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

125/140mm bike isnt overbiked in my opinion. its a low travel trail bike these days.

If you are riding average trails thats the kind of bike you want.


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

Velobike said:


> True, because I ride rigid singlespeeds I take a conservative approach on big drops or rock gardens. I'm usually riding on my own in places where I won't be found for a while. There's an element of probability there. I regard it like smoking, or drug taking - it's usually ok, but at some point it'll go wrong and you're wrecked. If you want to keep riding as long as I have, don't get wrecked.
> 
> In races, no problem, there's plenty people going by, and an ambulance handy.
> 
> ...


Those are some awesome roots. I want to ride them!


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

serious said:


> As for being over-biked, yes I am guilty too. My last purchase was a fat bike. Do I need a carbon fat bike that weighs 24.5 lbs with carbon wheels? Of course not. I only race in the summer, so this bike is just for training and fun.
> 
> But one thing is clear. Never ever underestimate somebody based on what they ride. People's rides usually reflect on their financial status rather than their skill.


I don't think being over-biked is as simple as having a lightweight bike or as light as one can afford. That is a luxury that actually makes sense to me and especially so on a fatty where bikes tend to throw a lot of weight around. Good for you having a carbon version of a fat bike !! :thumbsup:



Nurse Ben said:


> Too many generalizations in this thread, dang!
> 
> I don't think it makes sense to judge others against ourselves and vice versa, it's just too subjective. Honestly, we can all figure the pros and cons at this point in our lives.
> 
> Some folks like the challenge of doing more with less....


Yes, this makes sense to me as well. I afforded myself some introspection and aligned with talent (or lacking), experience, ability or reach for what I thought myself capable of. Others defining such characteristics for us seems unlikely or judgy . I can make exception for calling out the braggarts on a nice bike that can't seem to ride worth a chit yet act or talk up a big game.

I have a very simple h/t of steel with plus tires and it's a great all-rounder in the sense that it does everything I want or expect of it.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

serious said:


> You are bragging Velobike. You just said that if you walk your bike down some trail it is probably not rideable anyway?
> 
> I believe you mentioned you are 74, it that correct? Regardless, do you really think if you cannot ride it, nobody else can?


Do not put words in my mouth.

Did I mention riding down that trail?

I was going up it. You're welcome to prove me wrong by riding up it.

EDIT: just checked with a friend who is a much better rider than me, he can't ride up it either. He's a factory rider in the DH World Champs who has placed as high as 2nd in the WC, so if you could ride up it, maybe there's a new profession awaiting you...


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

Velobike, I don't need to put words in your mouth. You do it all on your own. See your post! Maybe you meant that it is not rideable on any bike by YOU?

And I said absolutely nothing about my riding.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

OK, let's make it clear once again.

I was talking about up a hill.

And the hill I was talking about cannot be ridden up by a man who was second in the DH world championship.

Generally speaking I have no problem riding up hills.

Clear enough?

And the point that has been lost in all this is that no matter what bike you have, if you ride mountains and not artificial trails, at some point any bike is an under-bike.

(Edit: I now know what a B-line is. It's called the chicken line where I live.)


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

I’d rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it, personally. But I have 9 bikes, so ‘horses for courses’ equally applies for me too. 
Ride whatchya like!


----------



## Rusnak_322 (Dec 6, 2009)

I didn't think that I was "under biked" with my used 2016 Specialized Fuse 27.5+ hardtail. until I did a demo of a Pivot Mach 5 140/160mm full squish bike at my local trail. I had ridden the same trails on my bike 3 times the week prior and even though it was sprinkling and lots of fallen slippery leaves the day of the demo, I set lots of personal bests on the $6,500+ bike according to Strava.


----------



## scycllerist (Jul 31, 2017)

A better bike may not make a better rider but it can make riding better. 

Don't forget safety, if a bike has better suspension and the rider doesn't go over the bars and breaks their collar bone, that's worth and extra 2K any day.

If you can afford it and use it a few times a week for a few seasons, go ahead. No one has to explain their bike purchases to anyone but themselves and their significant others. LOL


----------



## Skooks (Dec 24, 2008)

I would definitely rather have too much bike than not enough! That said, my new bike (Knolly Fugitive) has less travel than my previous one (Knolly Warden). I don't think it is going to be much much less capable either.

Enjoy your new Optic, it sounds like a rad bike!


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Seems to me that you can get in deeper by being over biked. At some point the bike won't save you and now you are going to hit hard.


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

the RSF picture archive is amazing..

__
http://instagr.am/p/BzPkGGYFeU5/


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

bsieb said:


> Seems to me that you can get in deeper by being over biked. At some point the bike won't save you and now you are going to hit hard.


Umm, no, that's silly, the bike doesn't get you anywhere you can't get yourself.

However a lack of experience will certainly get you in over your head.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> Umm, no, that's silly, the bike doesn't get you anywhere you can't get yourself.
> 
> However a lack of experience will certainly get you in over your head.


Maybe... time will tell.


----------

