# How much travel after 55



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

Hi guys

I’m 57 and currently riding a KTM Scarp which has 100mm travel front and rear.

However im still looking a longer travel bikes , what are people actually riding as you approach 60? Short travel cross country or would you still consider something with 140mm or higher travel?


----------



## Cuyuna (May 14, 2017)

yeti rider said:


> Hi guys
> 
> I'm 57 and currently riding a KTM Scarp which has 100mm travel front and rear.
> 
> However im still looking a longer travel bikes , what are people actually riding as you approach 60? Short travel cross country or would you still consider something with 140mm or higher travel?


I approached 60 a few years ago. I like the 120mm travel on the Bluto on my EX8 more than I liked the 100mm travel of the Bluto on my Fatboy. Very plush ride.


----------



## GeoDon (Jul 10, 2017)

Good question.

I currently have a 2007 Turner Spot that has 140mm of travel front and back and I am 59 years old.

Looking to get a new bike and it would be hard for me to go with less travel although I will give it a try in a upcoming demo.

I give higher travel suspension higher marks for stability when navigating downhill chunkiness and nowadays guys are rating higher travel bikes as good as bikes with less travel for climbing.

But demo bikes and determine for yourself, it really is a personal decision.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Over 70, still riding rigid singlespeeeds. 

Less faff, less maintenance, keeps you fitter.


----------



## OwenM (Oct 17, 2012)

You know how they say "it's not the years, it's the miles"?
I'm just 46, but have injuries whose ramifications are permanent, and that impacts seriously aggravate. I go from bouncing around like a teenager to crawling around my house because I can't stand up, and have a walker just like my grandmother's.
So I gave in and built up a full suspension bike, even though I much prefer hardtails. The new bike has 140mm travel front and rear. 
First ride, I did 3 laps/14-15 miles of a local trail that's pretty rough, faster and harder over the roots and rocks than I'd ever gone before. I've never done more than 2 full laps of that trail on my SS hardtail, even taking it easy and with smoother line choice, because it beats me up too bad. 
And I felt great. Better than I did before riding, to be honest. 
Next ride was much longer, again over familiar trails, some of which are also very rough. And again, I felt great afterwards, just tired from pushing a heavier bike with unfamiliar gears.
I thought the 140 rear was overkill, though(bought it for the geo, not the travel), and wanted the bike to handle more like my hardtail, just with a little cushion. I immediately began experimenting with spacers and pressure to make the shock more progressive, and quickly got what I thought I wanted. Lively, poppy, "playful". Boom, just like that I'm getting a little air off even 2" roots, humps in my yard, things like that. 
Then I took it back to my local trail, ready to put the hammer down this time with my "optimized" settings. After ~2 miles, I turned around, went back to the car, and started removing spacers. The decision to sacrifice some peppiness for a plusher ride was easy, because my body made it for me in about ten minutes.
Now very happy to have bought a 140mm bike that soaks up bigger hits rather than just "taking the edge off", and is less punishing to ride.
A shorter, or more progressive, travel bike could certainly give me a more enjoyable ride, too, _if I rode it like I do my hardtail_. Turns out bombing down stuff that I normally wind my way through and around is REALLY fun, though, and fun is what I do this for:thumbsup:


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

59 and I used to ride an 03 5 Spot, and then an 11 140mm rear, 160mm front. Next was a 15 Knolly Warden 150/160, and that made me a better rider, and way more confident going down. Now I mainly ride a 16 Knolly Endorphin 130/150 and this seems like the sweet spot. Still rails down hill, and is the best climbing bike I've tried, including hardtails. XC bikes are few and far between here and my Endorphin is pretty representative of an average bike in these parts. Not much penalty for having a little more travel nowadays, but stick with what suits your trails and riding. Next up for me is an AM hardtail for winter and backup.


----------



## leaguerider (Sep 6, 2010)

*The wife and I are riding Tracers with 160 front and rear. 56/54 riding black and do*



yeti rider said:


> Hi guys
> 
> I'm 57 and currently riding a KTM Scarp which has 100mm travel front and rear.
> 
> However im still looking a longer travel bikes , what are people actually riding as you approach 60? Short travel cross country or would you still consider something with 140mm or higher travel?


The wife and I are riding Tracers with 160 front and rear. 56/54 riding black and double black in the big mountains. Its not about the travel its about the skills and fitness. We both took lessons to help with separation from the bike/ visualization farther out on the turns and lots of other stuff. We are keeping the jumps to 3' or so though.

And don't forget about good tires with sharp edges, keep the sticky side down.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

It depends on where and how you ride, not your age.


----------



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

MSU Alum said:


> It depends on where and how you ride, not your age.


I ride in the Peak District in Derbyshire UK, So i've got a mixture of big long climbs and down hills.

I went for a shorter travel for the climbing efficiency as I got older.
However it looks like longer travel could provide a better ride as long as I don't loose any climbing ability and too much weight disadvantage.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

As i got into my mid 60's I went for somewhat longer travel to be able to sit more over rough terrain and for a less jarring ride.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

yeti rider said:


> I ride in the Peak District in Derbyshire UK, So i've got a mixture of big long climbs and down hills.
> 
> I went for a shorter travel for the climbing efficiency as I got older.
> However it looks like longer travel could provide a better ride as long as I don't loose any climbing ability and too much weight disadvantage.


Would it be accurate to characterize this KTM as a cross country race type of bike? In addition to travel, bike design can affect the ride. I'm guessing there are 100mm travel bikes that have much smoother rides. I'm 65 and I'm on a Yeti SB5 with a 160 fork, but I ride in Utah. Again, pick the bike for what and how you ride, regardless of your age.


----------



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

MSU Alum said:


> Would it be accurate to characterize this KTM as a cross country race type of bike? In addition to travel, bike design can affect the ride. I'm guessing there are 100mm travel bikes that have much smoother rides. I'm 65 and I'm on a Yeti SB5 with a 160 fork, but I ride in Utah. Again, pick the bike for what and how you ride, regardless of your age.


Yes the KTM is more of a race XC bike which i thought was the right way to go, great bike to ride on the smooth, not really cut out for our decents and rough tracks. Its what I thought was the right route approaching 60 but I miss the type of plush ride I had with my old Yeti 575 with Fox 36's on.

Need to test ride some, I wonder if 130mm and a better fork will deliver in this bike.
https://www.whyte.bike/t130rs

But looking what you guys are riding I wonder if I should keep the KTM for smooth days and get a 150mm for fun days.
https://www.whyte.bike/s150s

Need to find a plush bike that goes up hills as well as it comes down.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Whyte is doing great things these days.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2017)

MSU Alum said:


> It depends on where and how you ride, not your age.


I live right here mostly. Sure a little more travel would could make a trail smoother but I'm riding smoother stuff now and am largely riding rigid bikes (with thudbusters to protect my back). The real consideration (in my opinion) is to stay away from formulas and formulatic thinking. Anytime someone figures out the perfect solution for some problem, you can rest assured they're wrong.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

yeti rider said:


> Yes the KTM is more of a race XC bike which i thought was the right way to go, great bike to ride on the smooth, not really cut out for our decents and rough tracks. Its what I thought was the right route approaching 60 but I miss the type of plush ride I had with my old Yeti 575 with Fox 36's on.
> 
> Need to test ride some, I wonder if 130mm and a better fork will deliver in this bike.
> https://www.whyte.bike/t130rs
> ...


Like I said. I'm 65. Ride in Utah. All of my local rides start at 6500 feet or so and go to almost 10,000 feet. On these climbs (I only track my climb times), I've hit 9 PR's (in the 50 minute range) this summer on 2.6" tires. Also on this bike, I'm comfortable riding in Moab. The SB5 has 127mm of rear travel.

I don't see how you could go wrong with either strategy.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

MSU Alum said:


> It depends on where and how you ride, not your age.


What came to mind. My wife and I share similar bikes. I'll ride a hard tail more, her fat bike is rigid, and we stick to our own trail/AM/Enduro bikes mostly for suspension setup. They're a Remedy 29 and the new or modern Fuel EX.

The new Fuel EX is so radically different than past Fuels that it's less rear travel than the Remedy is kind of a non issue. Both have 140 forks.

Climbing is not necessarily about travel anymore. Some linkage types are firm when you pedal hard. Trek's "Reaktiv" shock is firm when you want that and plush when you need it. I prefer the latter but love a friend's Hightower too that's the firm when you pedal type.


----------



## russinthecascades (Jun 1, 2013)

Also 65, ride a Santa Cruz 5010 with 130/160 Pike. I use it for everything including some bike parks. The 5010 came with a 130 Fox 32 fork, but wanted something more plush and stiffer. The dual is perfect, easy to change on the fly.

My concession to age is setting both fork and shock a little softer than generally recommended...


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

I wouldn't put an arbitrary number on travel. I'm in Colorado and riding 120 Pike /100mm (custom tune) that works well for me. We have a lot of long climbs out here at altitude so climbing efficiency is important to me as well as being confident on the downs. Tires, tire psi and setting the suspension up correctly make all the difference. 

The best thing you could do is go out and demo some bikes. No matter what the number say on paper, the ride could be completely different than what you are expecting. I know, I've experienced this a number of times as I'm sure others have on this forum.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

I plan to visit Alaska and possibly the archipelago of New Zealand.


----------



## Skymonkey (Mar 12, 2014)

56. XC Race bike is 100/90mm front/rear. Trail bike is 130/120mm w 2.6 tires running at 18psi which adds to the cush factor.

I mostly ride midwest trails. If I rode Pisgah/Dupont more I'd have something in the 160/140mm range.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

60, 100 hardtail


----------



## k2rider1964 (Apr 29, 2010)

I don't know anything about riding across the pond but as a general rule, I would argue that age has NOTHING to do with how much travel your bike has. At 52, I'm the young one in our group with others being 56, 58, 59, 60, 61 & 63. I few of us have multiple bikes with no bikes with less than 140mm of travel and up to 160mm. The guys that only have (1) bike all ride 140mm travel bikes for the most part but our old man rides a 160mm travel Bronson and is by far the rider more likely to push the limits on dangerous terrain the rest of us walk. 

I'm only speaking for myself but I would say unless I was racing XC, I don't have a need for a bike with less than 140mm of travel. That's a bike I can ride as aggressively as I want in almost any terrain w/o limitations.


----------



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

In the end i went for a Whyte T130, OK on the climbs, today i did 15 miles with 2000 feet of climbing, made me realise how much i missed going down hill fast.
Takes a little time to get used to 1/12 gearing.
https://www.whyte.bike/t130s


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

As much as you will use.

My hard tail is 140mm, my full suspension is 150mm. I use all my travel, would take 160mm on my full suspension if they made a fat bike fork that long.

It's not about age, it's about how and what you ride. I ride big hit, tech, jumps, drops, so I need more travel. If you ride flow and don't get a lot of air, then 120mm is probably fine.



yeti rider said:


> Hi guys
> 
> I'm 57 and currently riding a KTM Scarp which has 100mm travel front and rear.
> 
> However im still looking a longer travel bikes , what are people actually riding as you approach 60? Short travel cross country or would you still consider something with 140mm or higher travel?


----------



## mileslong (Aug 20, 2016)

I like to go as fast as I can...it's not very fast but I benefit from pushing my limit....

I recently went from a 110mm travel front and back XC type FS to a 150mm front and back Trails FS...for me the longer travel adds a degree of comfort and forgiveness I didn't have with the shorter travel. 

But it's not just about travel, my 150mm has a much less steep HTA which puts me in a safer, more controlled position...which at 55 and still learning is a good thing.


----------



## Yalerider (Feb 14, 2017)

150 mm front and rear and i guess I use it as the oring goes max


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

Velobike said:


> Over 70, still riding rigid singlespeeeds.
> Less faff, less maintenance, keeps you fitter.


Kudo's 

Almost 59, gave up full suspension last year for a Hard Tail plus bike,
I am very happy to have all that hard tail efficiency back without the hard tail beatings of old.

As above, 'Keeps you fitter'
My legs are my suspension,
My Dropper post unpinned me from my bike,
My Tubeless plus tires let me run mid to low teen pressures for traction, speed, control, and comfort.
My Boost spacing makes my stock so so wheels feel stiff like thousand dollar upgrades,
My 120mm travel fork has a remote lockout and I use it all the time.

'Less faff' ? wutufu izzat ??


----------



## RustyIron (Apr 14, 2008)

yeti rider said:


> I'm 57 and currently riding a KTM Scarp which has 100mm travel front and rear.


I won't be 55 for another two months. For the past five years, I've been running with 120/100, and was perfectly happy. I could shred almost anyone on the uphill, and hold my own on the downhills. But my bike was becoming old and obsolete...

So last spring I took things in a whole new direction, and bought a bike with 160/150. Of course there's a LOT different on the new bike, but the big revelation is that longer travel bikes of today are not the wallowing pigs of years past. Now I'm not among the fastest climbing fireroads, but the ride is less fatiguing when climbing up rough stuff. And downhill, there is no comparison. Now I can see that the old bike was awful on the downhills.

So I've done some trading of some characteristics for others. But overall, the new bike is better, and now the downhill is ridiculously fun--more fun than I thought possible. So don't fall into the trap of believing that longer travel bikes are just for the young punks with body piercings and sideways hats. EVERYONE can benefit from modern technology and equipment.


----------



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

LOL, i now find myself thinking , should I be going down this hill so fast at my age.
I'm learning not to push so hard on the climbs and just enjoy the ride for the ride and enjoy the confidence and fun the longer travel gives you.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

yeti rider said:


> LOL, i now find myself thinking , should I be going down this hill so fast at my age.


Yes you should.


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

RustyIron said:


> but the big revelation is that longer travel bikes of today are not the wallowing pigs of years past. Now I'm not among the fastest climbing fireroads, but the ride is less fatiguing when climbing up rough stuff. And downhill, there is no comparison. Now I can see that the old bike was awful on the downhills.


That right there Is why I know I will wind up back on a full suspension one day,
not yet but one day..


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

yeti rider said:


> LOL, i now find myself thinking , should I be going down this hill so fast at my age.
> I'm learning not to push so hard on the climbs and just enjoy the ride for the ride and enjoy the confidence and fun the longer travel gives you.


Yep, Always ride like you stole It 
The Harder and longer you push the farther back you push the coffin.
A strong heart comes from hard work not mellow loads..


----------



## TenBeers (Apr 17, 2009)

yeti rider said:


> In the end i went for a Whyte T130, OK on the climbs, today i did 15 miles with 2000 feet of climbing, made me realise how much i missed going down hill fast.
> Takes a little time to get used to 1/12 gearing.
> https://www.whyte.bike/t130s


Good choice! I have been swapping out the stable looking for the right combo of bikes for various types of trails. I love the Trek Stache as a fun, playful hardtail with enough tire suspension to not rattle my bones too much. The 120mm Pike up front is awesome. It's great for long rides on trails with moderate gnarl and technical climbs. But once things get too gnarly it is a bit rough for me, it is a hardtail after all. I also have a Fuel EX8 27.5+ with the 140mm fork and 130mm rear travel, which does smooth out the gnarl some but still falls a little short on the big stuff. There's a lot of overlap in those two as to what they are good at. So where I have settled is the Stache for some trails, and a new Remedy 8 with 160/150 F/R travel for the trails with bigger hits. But there's a weight penalty with the Remedy -- it's a decent climber, but not as good as the Stache or Fuel. Point it downhill, though, and it goes (the Stache is fast as well, it's just a different kind of fun and can be a bit harder on your body).

If I was to only have ONE bike, I would keep the Fuel, which falls in line with the Whyte that you chose. The Fuel would give me the most options all around, and like someone mentioned, the newer ones have creeped up on the Remedy as far as travel and trail capability. The only thing I would suggest for you is trying out some 2.6 width tires. If you run them tubeless, you probably won't notice the minimal weight difference on climbs and the traction gain is significant. At our age, losing traction in a turn and eating dirt can put a damper on riding, I'll take the traction advantage over a minor weight penalty any day these days.


----------



## sturge (Feb 22, 2009)

58...6'4" and 210lbs. Went through a XC full susp few frames over the years (GT iDrive, Trek Fuel) until I bought the more 'all mountain' Santa Cruz Heckler in 2012 (26" with XL frame). I quickly fell in love with the 5-6" of travel and it's been bullet proof. Ride New England rocky, rooty, technical singletrack terrain. There's better climbing bikes but I'm usually waiting for guys at the top so the 140 - 160 travel is worth it for the downhills, obstacles and hits. Went tubeless a couple of years ago and that's been great as well (22lbs front/rear is just right for me).

Heckler is getting tired so just ordered my next bike...2017 Kona Process 153 (160 travel w/27.5 rims). Has a longer slacker geo which suits my height well. Really looking forward to it!


----------



## chuckha62 (Jul 11, 2006)

I'll be 56 in Jan. and my main ride continues to be a 26-er Hardtail. I ride rocky, technical stuff most of the time, both up and down. Unless my body fails me, I plan on keeping this bike for the foreseeable future. 

I do have an old URT full suspension with ~3.5" rear travel and 4" front. I have it set up as an SS as well. I admit it's more comfortable on rocky descents, but my favorite suspension system continues to be my legs.


----------



## Skooks (Dec 24, 2008)

Travel has nothing to do with age. Get a bike with modern geometry and enough travel for the trails you ride and your preferred riding style. For me, that is 150/160 mm.


----------



## yeti rider (Dec 11, 2008)

Out of interest how much climbing are you guys doing?
I tend to do about 2000 feet over a 15 mile ride.
These also tend to include 1000 feet over a straight 2 mile climb.


----------



## RustyIron (Apr 14, 2008)

My easy rides will be about 10 miles and 1000 feet. On the high end, about 20+ miles and 4500 feet. The trails can be technical and rugged. Sometimes there's some fireroad, sometimes it's so steep as to be absurd, sometimes so rugged as to be unridable. It's all subjective.


----------



## vegrindst (Nov 29, 2017)

58 and a Cannondale Scalpel along with a F29 hardtail. Mostly eastern and Central NC with a trip to western NC and SC. I think travel is secondary to setup.

You realize that sag, rebound and compression wil offset overall travel and performance of the entire suspension system are all equally important.


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

i will be fifty six in january and am concerned about how my recently dislocated right shoulder will handle my return to mountain biking with the bumps and jolts being transferred from my hands to shoulders.

here's to hoping my new hawk hill with its 2.35 tires and 120mm of suspension does the trick.

any more of you old farts coming off a shoulder dislocation and if so, does the suspension really help?


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

Osco said:


> That right there Is why I know I will wind up back on a full suspension one day,
> not yet but one day..


that's why i got a new bike this past september.

i work hard every day--moving furniture and heavy boxes all day long tends to do that.

i need something comfortable to sit on after eight hours of being Mister Schleppo...


----------



## mactweek (Oct 3, 2011)

I'm 66, retired and ride 3-6 days per week. I ride a fatty in the snow (it is rigid). In the summer I split my time between a hardtail Krampus and my Salsa Horsethief. The horsethief has130mm-120mm of travel, which is plenty for the trails I ride. Modern suspension bikes climb so well there is no real downside other than more maintenence. I have found that once you get to 120 mm of fork travel it starts to get plush. 100mm and less is not really enough to give you supple small bump compliance and still not stiffen up as you get deeper in the travel. Fatter tires do help with smoothing out small bumps but they are NOT suspension.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Velobike said:


> Over 70, still riding rigid singlespeeeds.
> 
> Less faff, less maintenance, keeps you fitter.


 Unless you have rocks everywhere. Full sus makes my back happy.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

Fat-ish (2.4 or more) soft-ish (18/20 psi or less) make my back and hands happy, on rigid steel. I don't have rocks EVERYwhere, happily. But I'm not 55 either. :thumbsup:


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

I love my rigid Fat Bike. I love my 140 front 150 rear travel full squish. Rocks and roots here in New England. Old, hard granite and gnarled roots clinging to life somehow. But then so am I, so how much travel? Whatever it takes. 55 and refusing to yield. ( I almost prefer the raw purity of the fat bike, but almost is not absolute )


----------



## Wlg1952 (Aug 9, 2016)

Just turned 65, I'm riding a Santa Cruz 5010C, really like it. Also I'm building a Canfield Balance bike right now. 160 front and 140+ in rear.


----------

