Weight of a mtb compared to a Trek hybrid

I just don't get the

Quote:

---

I want a high-quality, lightweight, full-suspension mountain bike for the dirt trails that the Trek just can't maneuver. If mtb's are built to take punishment, it should be fine for bad weather days (snow, etc) that are infrequent here. I would be using it for weekend rides and a few randon in Winter and frequent in Summer weekday rides when I want to do a run after work.

---

um, it's all about the rider, not the bike. Now if you want a more plush ride on the trails, THAT I can understand, but if anything a hardtail is more maneuverable because it is are both lighter and more responsive to body english.

More stable in rain, snow or whatever is going to be about tire choice, not what kind of suspension you have.

Put me in the ranks of the confused on this one. A FS for anything resembling commuting or commuter alternate is overkill. A FS for winter riding, just asking for trouble. Plus, on anything flat, smooth or not technical even the best designed FS will suck away some of your energy transmission through the suspension unless you lock it out so you might as well go HT or rigid anyway.

I have both a Kona and Specialized full suspensions that I love, but only for trail riding. I'm convinced that they would be thieve magnets used around town, especially at a bus stop ( are you mad?:eek:)

my two cents is all. My vote would be for a dedicated trail bike, full suspension for the plushness of the ride, and another bike for weather/bus stop etc.

irulan

I wouldn't be using the mtb for commuting, I would be using the Trek for commuting. I wanted the wider tires of a mtb for trail riding and those rare bad weather days. Yes, I understand that knobby tires give less grip surface compared to a slick tire, but the wider tire width itself would give more road stability. I can't put anything wider on the Trek than a 32 the way it's configured.

As for a mtb slowing me down on the road...when I do use it on the road... I'm already slow. Speed is not my goal. I wouldn't mind a little road mushiness in return for a more stable ride at those times when I need it. Even the Trek with 700X32 tires with very sturdy diagonal tread that I already switched out for the original 700X28 tires, the 32's are still slippy on sandy/leafy areas of the road.

"...a hardtail is more maneuverable because it is are both lighter and more responsive to body english."

I'm sure that is true for someone in their prime with fast reactions and athletic ability. It's less true for my reaction time and abilities. Though they have improved, they've also leveled off and I find, under less than ideal circumstances, that I get in more trouble with a road bike because it IS so responsive and fast.

A decade ago I had a $100 Walmart mountain bike that was very stable under those kind of road conditions. Of course it weighed 4000 lbs and disintegrated into a pile of rust within 6 months even though stored inside and never ridden in the rain. Poor thing was stolen off my car bike rack outside the lab before we had a locked parking lot in a not so great part of town. At least it didn't have to face the fate of the Trek replacement that went up in smoke in the house fire.

I want the full suspension for comfort, plain old comfort.

As for theft potential. Shrug. I'm as careful as I can be now. I refuse to become one of the many "seniors" who locks themselves in their houses, nails the windows shut, who takes their expensive jewelry out to play with inside their house though they'd never wear it outside. They rot in their vacuuous, silent, musty, boring safety behind triple-locked doors. If the bike gets stolen, it gets stolen.

If someone tried to steal Magdalene out from under my eyes, they'd have to come through me first. (I once took on six drunken hunters with a tire iron who were amusing themselves with hanging a hunting dog puppy....and I won. Arlo, the puppy, came home with me). But a bike? An inanimate object? As much as I love my Trek, I wouldn't risk harm defending it. Besides, I live in what some call a fantasy world of believing that people are generally good and wish no harm to me or my property. I believe Anne Frank said much the same thing.

I'd rather be out on the road on a bike that is just right for me and take my chances with what others call the felonious nature of my fellow man.

Thanks, I'll check out the Specialized since you like it so much. It has been suggested by others who also love it very much. And we have local dealer.

Having just made the switch from a hardtail to a full-suspension, I'll say this:

I knew that it was going to be different but I couldn't, in my wildest dreams, have fathomed how different. It's heavier, it's higher, and shock setup is a whole new thing for me. I love my FS, but I find myself somewhat limited by it. It's simply overkill for so many things. As a result, I'm currently shopping for a hardtail or maybe a cross bike- something for fire roads, towpaths, quick trips around town when I don't need the commuter, etc. (Anyone have a 46cm Surly frame that they want to sell me?) If you'd told me that I'd be buying a hardtail 3 months after buying the FS, I'd have laughed. But here I am.

Moral of the story: go ride some FS bikes. The more the merrier- different brands and models use different rear linkages and will feel a little different. Then decide if your needs are better met by FS or a hardtail (front suspension only).

thanks for all the clarifications... only takes three pages of posts to get there :D

May I suggest now that I get what's going, that in a quest for FS you be very mindful of geometry? There's a lot of variation in body position. Based on what you are saying you are after, you might like an all mountain type set up for body position, which is more comfy and stable than a race type position.

An AM or "trail" set up has a more slack head angle ( front fork is at more of an angle) by a few degrees. The handlebar/stem set up also puts you a little more upright. The more classic race type geometry has your butt higher than your handle bars - which is great for speed but not necessarily the best for technical riding and comfort. We are talking "degrees" here but I was reminded of this yseterday when I rode my friend's GF Cake with flat bars and didn't like it at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pardes

If someone tried to steal Magdalene out from under my eyes, they'd have to come through me first. (I once took on six drunken hunters with a tire iron who were amusing themselves with hanging a hunting dog puppy....and I won. Arlo, the puppy, came home with me).

---

http://bestsmileys.com/clapping/2.gif http://bestsmileys.com/clapping/2.gif

Alrighty, now I have an idea where you are headed. I really liked my hardtail because I actually enjoyed the feel of the trail underneath me. It was lighter and easier to handle BUT I didn't get as good of traction on uneven surfaces like I would with the full suspension. Also, my joints told me if I continue to play hard, I need to find a softer ride. Thus I bought the Epic.

Try all of them and see which one fits you best. I have tried Trek and Gary Fisher and Specialized just fits me better.

Yup, Irulan, I want it as upright as possible. The racer position with your rear up in the air was a configuration I couldn't achieve even at 30. It's a thing of beauty to see a racer sailing by at top speed, artistic even' but, I'll just watch it from the sidelines, thank you.

Sundial, yes traction. Lots of traction. I am a firm believer in tractor traction. And suspension.....my joints like to just hear me say the words....Fulllllll Suspension.

There are four bike stores within easy biking distance so I will be trying out their mtb's. Treks, Gary Fisher, Cannondale, Specialized and a few other brands.

Thanks to EVERYONE for your suggestions.

look at the FSR line of specialized.

What about a soft tail? I have no idea of their availability or who's making them (last one I saw was a Moots- big money :eek:), but that may be a good way to save the joints and some weight at the same time?

Anyone know if they're commonly available?

See here for a pic: http://www.cambriabike.com/shopexd.asp?id=52099

funny I just thought "soft tail" was more lingo for full suspension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irulan

funny I just thought "soft tail" was more lingo for full suspension.

---

My understanding is that a "soft-tail" is a pivot-less full suspension with ~1" of travel usually. A true FS has one or two pivots, depending on the rear linkage design.

Like I said, I've only see one in person, but its owner spoke very highly of it and its ride characteristics.

Pardes, any updates on your mtb shopping? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sundial

Pardes, any updates on your mtb shopping? :)

---

Not at the moment. I'm planning on taking a lonnnnng weekend this coming weekend and will have much to report. Hopefully.

Mentally I'm still vacillating which way to go but then I smack myself and tell myself to just put my butt on some bikes and see what feels good. Otherwise I'd be "planning" which bike to buy until the next century.

Mostly I read these boards without posting. But in this case, I've owned most of the bikes being discussed and I'm an "old" - over 50 year old female - mtn biker.

Over the past 10 years my bikes have included: a Trek hard-tail with 26" wheels, a Gary Fisher hard-tail with 29" wheels, a Spec. Epic Marathon (full-suspension), a Seven "soft-tail" with 26" wheels, and a Salsa Dos Niner - a soft-tail with 29" wheels. I also own a Trek road bike.

I ride recreationally on mtn bike trails, rails-to-trails and a bit on the road. I race my mtn bikes cross-country and in endurance races. I don't road race at all. I'm about 5'6" (and shrinking) and 125 lbs.

My first reaction to reading this thread is that "traction" is mostly about tire choice - tire width is a factor, but tread pattern and the composition material is much more important. If I need more traction, my first thought is not to look for a bigger volume tire.

My second reaction to reading this thread is that unless you plan to ride some really rocky, rooty trails, the full suspension bikes being discussed are probably not a good choice.

Full suspension bikes are heavy (unless you pay very big dollars). For relatively small riders, the weight is a significant fraction of body weight, and makes a big difference in how much fun they are to ride. In addition, even good mid-priced bikes have a certain amount of "bob" in the rear suspension - bikes like the top-end Spec Epics have made their selling point be that their shock is "smart" enough to lock out when not needed, but kick in when you hit the bumps. This works pretty well, but it costs alot. Without this "smart" feature, you have to set the shock for your given ride. That's not bad, but my guess is that unless you are riding really bumpy trails you will set it for about 1" of travel. If that's what you do, then you might as well buy a "soft-tail." They weigh less and handle better.

My current "favorite" bike is my Salsa Dos Niner. It has a very small rear shock (soft-tail) that gives me about 1" of travel. Because its a 29'er (29" or 700 wheels - same as a road bike), it rolls over small things on the trail much better than a 26" wheel. Without a full suspension, its weight is quite low - 23lbs. I've raced it all summer and consistently beat my times on my Spec Epic Marathon. The Epic is good when there are lots of rocks, but for a "recreational" ride I will always choose the Dos Niner over the Epic.

A final thought: these bikes have rather different geometries. The Trek/GF bikes have pretty long top tubes, my Seven and Salsa are in between, and the Specialized is fairly short. This makes for rather different riding positions. I needed my Epic to be pretty low in the front to keep my weight forward enough to climb efficiently.

Have fun shopping, Deb