# difference between XC and All Mountain?



## jay19 (Feb 21, 2011)

might be a stupid question but i've never reallly thought of it till now but what exactly is the difference between all mountain riding and cross country riding...to me, mountain biking is mountain biking and I think a most trails probably have some of all the different types of terrain possible

i mean is all mountain considered rock gardens or terrain like that the entire trail and cross country considered just flat single track or am I totally off. I guess when I say I am going riding I just dont really care what type of terrain I hit I just know I'm going to hit all types of it.


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

It seems to be based on suspension travel. 80-100 mm suspension = XC. 100 -120 = AM. Over 120 = DH or so the industry hoopla has led me to believe.


----------



## Kevin_Federline (Nov 19, 2008)

I don't consider it am until 150mm or uberslackness..

All mountain is a more laid back geometry, plush, and you can take off big hits. 

But yes, who cares just go ride your bike, and find what fits for YOU.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

I think as far as marketing jargon goes, XC implies a more racing direction thus geometry will be more suited to fast riding (longer top tubes, steeper head and seat angles), with lighter components and less accommodations for more technical riding (light wheels, skinny tires, narrower handlebars).

All mountain implies that there is more of a fun component to riding so geometry will be more suited to riding more aggressive trails (Shorter top tubes, higher bottom brackets, slacker head and seat tube angles), components will be speced with strength not light weight in mind (wider rims, big tires, longer travel forks and shocks) and bike will be heavier and more relaxed.

Of course this is all marketing really, if your trails are of the fast paced low technical component type then an XC style bike would be best suited for your All mountain riding (mountain biking) where as if your trails are only steep technical and rocky an All Mountain bike might be too little bike for your location and you might want to look into the next category of freeride or whatever the marketers are calling that now.


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

rockcrusher said:


> I think as far as marketing jargon goes, XC implies a more racing direction thus geometry will be more suited to fast riding (longer top tubes, steeper head and seat angles), with lighter components and less accommodations for more technical riding (light wheels, skinny tires, narrower handlebars).
> 
> All mountain implies that there is more of a fun component to riding so geometry will be more suited to riding more aggressive trails (Shorter top tubes, higher bottom brackets, slacker head and seat tube angles), components will be speced with strength not light weight in mind (wider rims, big tires, longer travel forks and shocks) and bike will be heavier and more relaxed.


The above is how I pretty much see it, and the distinction is reasonable when you think in those terms. My friend who likes to race and to climb hills benefits from a different bike than I use to bomb the downhills and try and get air off of roots and other kickers on the trail.

Some people insert the term "Trail Bike" as a mid-point, because All Mountain sometimes carries a connotation quite a ways further towards freeriding than many are comfortable with.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

JonathanGennick said:


> The above is how I pretty much see it, and the distinction is reasonable when you think in those terms. My friend who likes to race and to climb hills benefits from a different bike than I use to bomb the downhills and try and get air off of roots and other kickers on the trail.
> 
> Some people insert the term "Trail Bike" as a mid-point, because All Mountain sometimes carries a connotation quite a ways further towards freeriding than many are comfortable with.


I always forget about trail bike, of course I also ride a rigid single speed so I really have no experience in all the new marketing genres.


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

rockcrusher said:


> ...of course I also ride a rigid single speed ...


I have one of those too. It was an impulse buy that has turned into one of my most-ridden bikes. Since I don't race, and since I can't do a drop to flat to save my life, I guess i have to call mine a "rigid single speed _trail _bike".


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

My burly rigid singlespeed bike is my trail bike that I use to ride over All Hills in my area. Many ride the same trails using "XC" bikes. Some go for 6" FS bikes on some of their rides (or how much travel does an Intense Uzzi have?). A couple of highly skilled guys have done most of the trails in the area on Cyclocross bikes but they don't make a habit out of that....


----------



## nikojan (Jun 18, 2011)

The way I see it, lower the seat on a XC bike and increase the travel on the fork and you have yourself an AM bike. I'm sure there's something wrong with that logic but I've yet to be called on it.


----------



## bigfruits (Mar 21, 2011)

AM is just a bike with more travel that is built heavier to take more abuse and usually have a head angle that isnt as steep for the downs. its an easy way to describe a type of bike/riding. it makes it easy to classify a bike because a XC and an AM bike are two totally different beasts. 

i think these are typical setups :
XC - can be sub 20lbs, rigid fork or 80mm-120mm
trail - maybe 27ish lbs, 120mm-140mm
AM - typically in the low 30's, 130mm-160mm


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

jay19 said:


> might be a stupid question but i've never reallly thought of it till now but what exactly is the difference between all mountain riding and cross country riding...to me, mountain biking is mountain biking and I think a most trails probably have some of all the different types of terrain possible
> 
> i mean is all mountain considered rock gardens or terrain like that the entire trail and cross country considered just flat single track or am I totally off. I guess when I say I am going riding I just dont really care what type of terrain I hit I just know I'm going to hit all types of it.


It would be very difficult to find a good all mountain ride without a mountain....

It would be very easy to find a good XC ride without a mountain....

It would be very easy to find a good XC ride on a mountain...

I guess one has to make an allowance for canyons etc...the can provide some excellent all mountain riding.


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

nikojan said:


> The way I see it, lower the seat on a XC bike and increase the travel on the fork and you have yourself an AM bike. I'm sure there's something wrong with that logic but I've yet to be called on it.


Make the frame burlier to withstand more stress. Possibly slacken the head angle while keeping the seat angle the same.

Ditto the bar & and stem. I have some weight-weenie handlebars that I'd never trust on rough trails.

Make the bar wider.

Make the stem shorter.

Maybe add a bash guard.

Raise the bottom-bracket.

Add an adjustable seatpost.

Put on wider rims, and stronger ones too.

Run some thick, meaty rubber.

Etc.


----------



## screaminz2002 (Aug 5, 2011)

Nothing in mountain biking confuses me more then this very subject. Without knowing anything I just get on a single trail and ride. Some rocky downhill drops, some river bank gravel, some dirt packed uphill, some smooth paved trails, and some bmx looking courses. I try to do a bit of everything to the best of my ability while having fun. Jump some roots, ride a rocky riverbed, bust my rear.. I guess when you classify you are talking about racing and specializing in one or the other? I realize I don't hold a candle to anyone but what would I be classified in? When I go to buy a new bike next month what do I tell them I am looking for? Will it be years before I need a high dollar bike? Right now I have been really trying to study the frame first and then the fork without classifying anything. I am so confused the more I read about all this.. I was guessing that if I got the first two correct I could replace anything else easily. This is a hard hobby to get into for sure.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

To me the main difference is Geometry.  Like RC said XC think racing. There are some short travel trail bikes out there at or around 100mm travel with slack geometry and beefy build. 4x bikes are like that. There are also a 5.75" travel bike I consider XC bike the Yeti 575. Of course it can go both ways on the Yeti that's the beauty of it.

Geometry I think separate the category most of the time more so than just travel. Older Klein Mantra has 6" rear travel but it's decidedly XC bike especially when it's designed for 80mm fork in the front 

I'm not a big fan of converting one to another because you are spending more money to do conversion and it's at best somewhere in between. Tweaking for personal fit is one thing but conversion does not really work it also void the warranty as well. I've tried on a few bikes but it didn't work.

It's best to stick with "right tool for the right job" mentality. Of course if you've got skillz like some of the poster here you can rock them on a full rigid and have yourself a blast.


----------



## Tim-H (Mar 20, 2010)

The gap is getting wider every year. Since A/M and trail are becoming more widely viewed as their own class of bike there can be less overlap. The xc bikes are slimming down more and more to save weight since they don't have to stand up to the abuse of the average "trail" rider. The A/M bikes are getting slacker and beefier because the trail category is there to accommodate the weight concious group that likes to ride more abusive terrain than the xc bikes are designed for.

I see a lot for people complain about so many different classes of bike but I think it's awesome. You can pick what suits your riding style best.

Run on sentances.

XC doesn't mean just flat singletrack either. There's a lot of different types of XC trails. From flat singletrack to super rooty uphill switchback hell paths.


----------



## James_spec (Jul 28, 2011)

I say if you can ride your bike to the top of a mountain, then it's a AM. If it falls apart before getting to the top, then maybe it's not...


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

James_spec said:


> I say if you can ride your bike to the top of a mountain, then it's a AM. If it falls apart before getting to the top, then maybe it's not...


???


----------



## nikojan (Jun 18, 2011)

JonathanGennick said:


> Make the frame burlier to withstand more stress. Possibly slacken the head angle while keeping the seat angle the same.
> 
> Ditto the bar & and stem. I have some weight-weenie handlebars that I'd never trust on rough trails.
> 
> ...


wait..what? Half of the AM bikes i've ridden don't have half of those characteristics. Make the bar wider? Why would you want a long bar when you're ridding singletracks? and my XC has a bashguard...


----------



## zephxiii (Aug 12, 2011)

I'm starting out with picking a bike and this has been sort of an "obstacle" in my way because when i search around often i have to select one of these categories and when they list them with 2 letters I think ummmmm... I think I am starting to get an rough image of what is what though lol.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

In the nutshell XC is faster on the climb, offer quick handling, and corner like it on rail on smoother trail of course. AM can handle a bit more rough stuffs and descends with more comfort than XC. If you are recreational rider going with AM bike is not a bad idea it's more forgiving bike. You can climb most Am bike with relative ease but descend with bigger smile than XC bike. 

That said, a little extra travel is good too much for your need you just lugging more weight for nothing.


----------



## jay19 (Feb 21, 2011)

I guessive never really thought of it along the lines of type of bike over type of riding...I. guess to me mountain biking riding u encounter just about all the different types of terrain on a ride so why have a bunch of diferent bikes..you can't switch out bikes all the time on the trailso shouldn't a bike beable to withstand any terrain..


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

*Not this thread again*



I'd say almost any natural terrain falls within what a XC rider should be able to do, if he's any good at it. Rock gardens? Yeah. Small drops and ledges? Yeah. Big climbs and big descents? Yeah. Switchbacks, both up and down? Yeah. Creek crossings? Yeah. Some people have been using XC to mean "non-technical." I don't think XC means non-technical, and I don't think someone is a good XC rider if he can't handle a little tech. Even if that someone is me.

I think All-Mountain is something that has come about more-or-less concurrently with trails having a lot of added features. So to me, it's the riding style that emphasizes the ability to do the skills necessary to negotiate that stuff. I sometimes work on wheelies and wheelie drops, but honestly I'm not that motivated - it almost never comes up on a typical XC trail where I live. But if someone decides to set up a skinny with a drop onto a transition that's a couple feet below, and they don't let the rider carry speed onto the skinny, then it's time for a wheelie drop. And that sort of thing is pretty common on added features where I am. Flowlines are another relatively common thing to find on a trail in my area. They don't need a ton of vert. and might be in the middle of a park without a ton of vert., so they're hardly DH or even freeride.

Using berms and ruts to turn is something a XC rider ought to be able to do. Wall rides, whether constructed or by routing a trail onto a natural feature, are more of an AM thing, to me. They're also way too much fun to skip, no matter which bike I'm on. 

IME, most people who ride uphill singletrack choose XC or trail bikes. Most people who ride up fire roads and down singletrack choose something bigger. A lot of AM bikes are advertised as being ready for shuttle days and lift-served DH. Freeride and downhill bikes are purpose-built for that, and people may choose to push them to the top of a run if no shuttle is available rather than riding.

I'd say people are happiest with their bikes when the bike's aptitudes match what the person loves about riding. I love getting to the tops of things, bombing around on rolling singletrack, racing, riding with friends with the same tastes. I love descending too, and question the mountain biker nature of someone who doesn't,  but it's just one part of a rich and varied meal for me. I ride a short-travel XC hardtail, and while I'm open to the possibility that there's another bike that I'll like better, that bike will most likely also be in the XC or possibly trail category.

Other people live for the descents and plan their routes to get the climbing over with as quickly as possible before descending again. I don't think they'd be any happier with my bike than I would be with theirs.

What part do you love?


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

jay19 said:


> I guessive never really thought of it along the lines of type of bike over type of riding...I. guess to me mountain biking riding u encounter just about all the different types of terrain on a ride so why have a bunch of diferent bikes..you can't switch out bikes all the time on the trailso shouldn't a bike beable to withstand any terrain..


The reason to have different bikes is the ability to choose the optimal bike for the trail one plans to ride. I rode a rooty trail tonight, so I grabbed my four-inch travel full-suspension bike. When I was in Grayling last year riding sandy trails without roots and rocks, I grabbed my rigid bike. When I go to the skatepark to hit the tabletop jump and play around on the ramps, I don't grab my lightweight, hardtail race bike, because jumping that bike would bend the wheels and probably crack the frame. Instead I take my park bike with its reinforced-for-jumping frame, steep head-angle, very low standover, and rigid thru-axle fork.

Sure, a good rider can ride just about any bike anywhere, but that doesn't mean it's not fun to have some choices.


----------



## mimi1885 (Aug 12, 2006)

jay19 said:


> I guessive never really thought of it along the lines of type of bike over type of riding...I. guess to me mountain biking riding u encounter just about all the different types of terrain on a ride so why have a bunch of diferent bikes..you can't switch out bikes all the time on the trailso shouldn't a bike beable to withstand any terrain..


You can rock the XC bike on the same trail many or even yourself ride there AM/trail bikes. It's just a different kind of ride that yield different enjoyment. You just can't go around and do some jumps and drops you'd break your xc bike soon enough.

I ride my SS soft tail on the same trail and take almost the same line as my trail bikes, I just stay lighter on my pedal thru rough stuffs or risk getting ejecting off my bike. It's fun but different fun. Most of the time I just do what JG is doing pick the right tool for the right job.


----------



## C.M.S (Aug 28, 2009)

All I know is that me and my bike are like one,having a blast everywhere and anywhere!


----------



## JonathanGennick (Sep 15, 2006)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I'd say people are happiest with their bikes when the bike's aptitudes match what the person loves about riding.


Wow. Why can't I nail it so well? I really like the above thought.

My friend and I are good examples. He likes climbing and racing, and smooth trail. I tolerate climbing because it leads to what I really like: the descending. I'm also happy to have a few roots in the trail. He and I ride together a lot, but we have quite different tastes in bikes. This year I'm riding a Salsa Big Mama (heavy and solid frame that can land a jump well) with wide, meaty tires having big knobs mounted onto some Salsa Gordo rims. He's been rocking a Superfly 100 with lightweight, Maxis Ikon tires having a low-knob pattern. He never even attempts a jump. I run 680mm bars. He runs 660mm bars. I rock a short stem. His is longer to stretch him out over the bike. He runs 1x9 with a 32-tooth ring and a chain guide. I run 22/36/bash. We both ride the same trails, and often together, but we each emphasize and draw enjoyment from different aspects of our riding.


----------



## BrentP (Jul 6, 2007)

James_spec said:


> I say if you can ride your bike to the top of a mountain, then it's a AM. If it falls apart before getting to the top, then maybe it's not...


I say if you can ride your bike to the top of a mountain, then it's a AM. If you're finishing your second sandwich by the time your buddies catch up, then it's an XC.


----------

