[tylund]

I love climbing and it took a lot of convincing to go full suspension due to fear I'd lose efficiency. However, got a Gary Fisher Cake 5-6 years ago and I love it. Able to stay on seat more, keep tire on ground more and actually climb faster...

Now I want to go to a 29er because I hear they are faster but I haven't riden one yet. I'm wondering if I should go back to hardtail. Most people have told me to go back to hardtail because the momentum and wider wheel base make the ride smoother and eliminate the need for suspension. Plus the lighter bike is easy to get up the hill

Any advice?...Thanks

 

[ThierryR.]

It all depends what kind of trails you ride. I started off with a 26 HT and recently moved to a santa cry tallboy (full-susp. 29) and immediately a lot faster. But down here in florida the trails are mostly rocky and rooty(lol). so what I lost in climbing which I can't really tell if I did, I gained in the ability to clear the techy sections a lot faster.

 

[k2rider1964]

I have a SC Tallboy and a Niner Air 9 hardtail....for the life of me, I can't understand why anybody would choose to ride a HT over a FS for any reason. I only ride the Niner if the Tallboy is unavailable for some reason. I know not everybody shares my feeling because I don't understand the single-speed lovers either.

 

[muzzanic]

My Jet9 RDO is quicker every were than my Air9,
But it cost alot more 2.

People often come on here & ask questions like this & don't give any info about how much they have to spend, How hard they ride, How much they weigh, etc etc

You will only get out what you put in so if you want some good info it would pay to give people some info to work with.

 

[tylund]

Good point Muzzanic...as for terrain, I ride a lot of trails like the one in your first video.

I live in ID and have a good combination of smooth foothill and technical mountain trails

I ride pretty hard...race some...did my first Xterra Triathlon last year.

I'm 5'11", weigh 190 and am willing to spend $3-4,000

 

[AK47]

Go full sus. The technology is so good these days, and for where and how you ride, it will blow away a HT in comfort, fun, etc. Like the other poster mentioned above, these days the only time I jump on my HT is if my full sus bike is unavailable, or just to mix it up a bit.

 

[FoShizzle]

the point of the sport, as others have noted here and in several others posts, is to make things as easy for yourself by surrounding yourself with as many crutches as possible.

the less skill you need to have to ride given terrain is what its all about so you can feel as good about yourself as possible where on a primitive, say "hardtail" bike, your ego may be impacted accordingly and you may never recover.

per the above, i would personally recommend a KTM 450 SX to make it to the top, or bottom, with even greater ease

 

[TwoTone]

I love climbing and it took a lot of convincing to go full suspension due to fear I'd lose efficiency. However, got a Gary Fisher Cake 5-6 years ago and I love it. Able to stay on seat more, keep tire on ground more and actually climb faster...

Now I want to go to a 29er because I hear they are faster but I haven't riden one yet. I'm wondering if I should go back to hardtail. Most people have told me to go back to hardtail because the momentum and wider wheel base make the ride smoother and eliminate the need for suspension. Plus the lighter bike is easy to get up the hill

Any advice?...Thanks

I keep reading that, so the other day I went on my normal ride with the rear shock locked out. Didn't take long to think to myslef, WTF are those people talking about, they're full of ****. So for me, on these rooty rocky east coast trails, I'll stick with FS.

So anyway, only you will be able to tell for yourself. Best try and test ride a HT before buying.

 

[ThierryR.]

If you have 3-4k to spend I don't see why you would want a hard-tail, for 3-4k you can get a pretty badass full-sus. bike imo. Trust me I drank the hard tail "balls to the wall" mentality for for awhile but in the end riding my tallboy I can stay out on the trails all day and not get as beat up physically as I would on my HT. It's just a more pleasant riding experience but in no way less fun then a HT. But def. get out there and test ride as many bikes as you can from as many different manufactures, suspension designs( single pivot, dual pivot, multilink) as possible. good luck!

 

[TroyS600]

Yeah, i was wrestling with this one too. In fact, i even ordered a HT 29er (haven't received it yet). Then i rode a Santa Cruz Superlight 29er at Sea Otter. It was nice and comfy with that rear suspension. Then, in one section i locked out the shock (and fork), and bam, i was on a hardtail. So what's the point of having a hardtail? Get a shock with a lockout, or at least a stiff platform mode, and you basically have both bikes.

Now I've ordered a Superlight (before my Highball has even arrived) and i'll be selling the highball as soon as the superlight comes in.

 

[Dry Side]

I have both, but if I could only have one it would be FS. I can ride the FS for many more hours without feeling beat up. Over the long course the FS is faster. That being said I love how the HT handles/feels for the shorter rides. 29 inch tires do not make up for lack of suspension. I run tubeless with 24 psi.

 

[tylund]

Thanksfor all of the advice...seems like most think I should stick with the FS. If I do that, my next question is aluminum or carbon frame?

That is where the price jumps so much...but is it worth it? What is the ballpark on the weight difference...I realize that is a vague question but will I really notice it on the trail?

 

[Jimmy the Hoff]

You know - I have been riding for 23 years; started with rigid TREK 950, been on a Yeti 575 since 05 and recently pieced together an EMD Niner for about $1500 through my fav online store (I too was curious); make that $2000 since I just put some Arch EX rims on. Funny how you can come full circle.

I "benched" my Yeti about three months ago - I find riding my 29er more efficient and far more crisp on single track and challenging technical rides - I also race it; old man category of course.

I think there is something very pure about a hard tail - however, FS has its (huge) benefits; like screaming down trails at Crested Butte. But, most riders would say an FS 26er is far more agile than an FS 29er for obvious geometric reasons. MBA has a great article on this (can't remember which issue though)

I like having two distinct bikes; a Niner hard tail for precision and my Yeti 575 for bombing; which I honestly don't do as much anymore (old man category and all).

and... there is far less maintenance with a hardtail and I bet you think your Fisher Cake is freakin' sweet; so you have an FS.

But, don't listen to me/us - go to your fav LBS and test ride a few bikes; only way to know for sure.

 

[Call_me_Tom]

I have 4 HT's & one FS. The FS is faster on flats with bumps & roots. Too many people only think about climbing or bombing downhill but on flats you're able to stay seated & spin. On my HT I have to stand so my legs can absorb the bumps.

 

[charmon2]

Yeah, i was wrestling with this one too. In fact, i even ordered a HT 29er (haven't received it yet). Then i rode a Santa Cruz Superlight 29er at Sea Otter. It was nice and comfy with that rear suspension. Then, in one section i locked out the shock (and fork), and bam, i was on a hardtail. So what's the point of having a hardtail? Get a shock with a lockout, or at least a stiff platform mode, and you basically have both bikes.

Now I've ordered a Superlight (before my Highball has even arrived) and i'll be selling the highball as soon as the superlight comes in.

Is that your first 29'er? I'm thinking of making the move to a 29'er and the Superlight looks like a great value. I haven't seen too many people talking about it yet and my LBS doesn't have any to check out yet. I'm wondering how it compares to others out there.

 

[Jimmy the Hoff]

Forgot to answer the carbon question; I see a butt-ton of carbon bikes at the races I participate and very few of them help their rider out - they just look good.

I think .5 - 1.0 pounds of weight saved is not worth 2-3 times the price for a frame; and carbon does not take hits like aluminum or scandium or titanium or cro-moly.

My friend spent $800 patching up his chain stay from a chain rip on his S-Works carbon MTB.

You need to really ask yourself, "why you are buying the bike", I guess.

 

[GreenLightGo]

the point of the sport, as others have noted here and in several others posts, is to make things as easy for yourself by surrounding yourself with as many crutches as possible.

the less skill you need to have to ride given terrain is what its all about so you can feel as good about yourself as possible where on a primitive, say "hardtail" bike, your ego may be impacted accordingly and you may never recover.

per the above, i would personally recommend a KTM 450 SX to make it to the top, or bottom, with even greater ease

Nice!

 

[Call_me_Tom]

On the Spesh Stumpjumper FSR the difference between a aluminum & carbon frame is 100 grams. They get the overall weight of the bike down by adding lighter components.

 

[mtbmatty]

full suspension all the way; for me comfort is king, and the king is faster

fwiw 3-4k is a good bit of money. if it were me i would spend it on a baller Aluminum frame for 2 reasons.

1) aluminum is super strong, and you will probably get a better component spec. rather than spending the money on the frame for minimal weight savings.

B) piece of mind. as you read B4, a carbon frame can be pricey to repair. if you are riding hard, on rocky terrain; even if you are an expert rider. there is always the possibility of a crash that could be costly.

carbon bikes have their place in this world, just not in my world :thumbsup:

 

[TroyS600]

I've never had a carbon frame, so my opinion isn't worth much. I can't see spending the money for one though, unless it wasn't a lot more than the aluminum. I'd much rather put the money toward better spec components, or toward road trips!

Charmon2: Yes, this will be my first 29er. I went to sea otter a few weeks ago and rode the demo loop on the SL29. The loop probably took 45 minutes, so it was a reasonably long demo... no techy sections though. Much better than a a ride around a parking lot, not as good as an all-day ride with a lot of trail variety.

Anyway, it felt good to me. I had been riding a Turner Sultan (old, FSR version) loaner bike that weekend. By comparison the SL felt more compact/shorter and handled much more responsively. I haven't ridden many other 29ers other than parking-lot demos, which i don't think really provide any usable feedback (to me anyway) so i don't have a lot to compare to.

The reason i'm getting it though is because it's cheap and it's pretty darn good. Your budget isn't very limiting, so (among the Santa Cruz bikes) if i were you, i'd probably go for the Tallboy or the TB LT (aluminum). I think everyone would agree that those are better than the superlight, if you can afford them (I can't).