toolonglegs wrote:Edit:maybe I should show my age ...I remember pretty hardcore XC courses
Waterfall, - Gone Bargo, - Gone Megalong Valley - Gone Ourimbah - The current course is hardly technical Oxford Falls - Gone
To that I'll add Arcadia - Gone Yellowmundee - Some of the more technical sections have gone
From talking to people that race them some of the WC courses are a lot tougher than they look.
Shame that!. Yes I think some of the world cup courses do seem a bit tougher these days...seems to be a fair bit of A & B lines on some obstacles anymore giving advantage to the more skilled rider...and I suppose everything is more difficult at speed when you brain hasn't got much 02 .
I have a 2005 Specialised Stumpjumper which is comfortable but it doesn't just GO like a hardtail does, there are a lot of newer FS bikes that have been described like that though.
In any case, i weighed the Merida frame at work (i work at a pool shop and we have a set of scales accurate enough to weigh grains of sand heehee) and it came in at only 1460grams, great starting point for a super light build
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
A couple of weekends ago on a training ride, a riding buddy demonstrated how good those Specialized brain shocks are.
His was a 4"travel XC bike with brain shocks and forks, and the thing climbed like a full rigid. Up out of the saddle occasionally to torque over waterbars... not a skerrick of bob. The "pop" and accelaration he got from pedal inputs was impressive. Might have to sell the Cannondale
The only advantage I can see for a HT over those things is weight... an advantage you promptly give back on the next rough downhill.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
trailgumby wrote: ....The only advantage I can see for a HT over those things is weight... an advantage you promptly give back on the next rough downhill.
Dumb question then for a MTB/XC newb, who do most of the competition XC racers use Hardtails - is a weight more of a factor for the longer/multi-day races ?
trailgumby wrote: ....The only advantage I can see for a HT over those things is weight... an advantage you promptly give back on the next rough downhill.
Dumb question then for a MTB/XC newb, who do most of the competition XC racers use Hardtails - is a weight more of a factor for the longer/multi-day races ?
Bob isn't like rolling resistance, it grows disproportionately based on power, much like air resistance grows disproportionately on speed. Doesn't affect fit casuals, because we don't make enough power to bob a good suspension continously. (Mine breaks out into bob around 35 km/hr on flat tar - which is faster than I can endurance ride an MTB at).
I also think the descending advantages are a little overstated. Ground needs to be somewhat choppy for it to be a big advantage, and MTB descents are rarely straight I've found, which means that having hauled the weight up a big hill, there is always a corner that forces me to dissipate some of the bonus stored potential through the brakes.
DS bikes are often porky if the budget is finite too as component cost has to accomodate suspension cost, so the uphill penalty is bob + 2 - 3% for weight. I imagine the upper end of many fields are still effectively amateurs and budget limited.
trailgumby wrote: ....The only advantage I can see for a HT over those things is weight... an advantage you promptly give back on the next rough downhill.
Dumb question then for a MTB/XC newb, who do most of the competition XC racers use Hardtails - is a weight more of a factor for the longer/multi-day races ?
Comfort is more of a factor the longer the race, but is highly terrain dependant. If mostly fire road or smooth singletrack, a HT will be chosen. The bumpier the ride, the more likely a DS will be chosen.
Also, the closer to the sharp end of the field the rider is, the more likely a HT will be chosen, as they have the higher skill levels and core strength endurance required to ride them smoothly and with flow over the uneven terrain. In contrast, us mere mortals tend to just plough through stuff.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
aeroslavebigbelly wrote:Would a HT be a better option then to hone skills?
A rigid would be the best option to hone skills.
BikeRadar wrote:45 Harden up
We’re big hardtail advocates here at BikeRadar. Resident snapper Seb explains why: “Ride a rigid hardtail through the winter, or at least a hardtail. You’ll go much faster when you get back on a susser.†Super-smooth trail surfer Steve Worland goes one step further and recommends that you own at least one off-road bike without suspension (big tyres excepted) and ride it regularly.
Rigid and SS if you really want to hone your skills.
I rode rigid SS for about 5 years on both a 26er and 29er. I went back to full suspension and now find I am a lot faster downhill than the last time I had a full sus bike.
Giant Reign 1 Merida CX4 Trek Superfly Al Trek Earl
Yes, a HT definitely for skills, and a rigid even more so. Eventually you'll get sick of the pinch-flats and learn to float the bike. I don't think you'd see me on a rigid 26er on my local, but a chromo 29er with big fat rubber, maybe. Definitely not a singlespeeder though - from experience my knees wouldn't stand up to the load. I know a few other SSers who complain about sore knees.
Then, get yourself to a skills course.
And watch this afterwards to see what you pick up. Now that I've learned some of the tricks, I find I appreciate the skills of these guys so much more:
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
trailgumby wrote: I know a few other SSers who complain about sore knees.
I don't know any, and know of many geared riders who complain about sore knees.
One of whom would be me at the moment.
The interesting thing for me was that the two I know of first hand acquired the knee pain after switching to SS, and for one of them it has since resolved after returning to a geared bike.
It's not the lack of gears per se, just the low cadence high force type of work that SS tends to inflict on you if your power output isn't that great.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
trailgumby wrote:The interesting thing for me was that the two I know of first hand acquired the knee pain after switching to SS, and for one of them it has since resolved after returning to a geared bike.
It's not the lack of gears per se, just the low cadence high force type of work that SS tends to inflict on you if your power output isn't that great.
Not surprising. You need to be able to stand up any time the cadence gets below about 80 if you have knee issues. I doubt many could stand up that much on a longer ride, especially after just changing to SS.
...I remember pretty hardcore XC courses
The "pop" and accelaration he got from pedal inputs was impressive. Might have to sell the Cannondale 
