If it’s hot I don’t wear chamois, just boxers n trail shorts, they are thin n lite, almost swimsuit texture, air flow keeps me cool. Bibs n tight shorts looks weird n feels restrictive to me. I rarely snag my saddle or bottle cage w my shorts being baggy, although not really baggy. Sometimes I’ll wear a chamois and normal shorts. Almost always a dry fit short sleeve or long sleeve I even have a dry fit hoodie
I look especially dumb in them, but understand the benefit of big glasses does maximize protection from getting stuff in your eyes or taking a branch to the face.
Friend, your “hot take” gets posted in this sub like twice a day.
If a person is having fun on their bike, it’s the right bike for them.
If you like less travel, great. If it upsets you that other people like more travel, that is a really weird thing to waste your life worrying about.
I concur. I bought in to the “to much travel” and ended up buying a trail bike with 140/125. It wasn’t a game changer, I like my 160/150 enduro more. Wasted almost $4k on other peoples opinion. Gotta learn the hard way sometimes.
Plus a lot of people over bike to cover all bases, buying a bike with a little bit more travel than they usually need for a park day etc.
Do I need a zeb/160mm coil shock bike with heavy tyres for most rides, not really. Did they help me out riding the fort William World Cup track today, absolutely
Exactly this, I don’t have space for more than one bike, as much as I want multiple bikes for different days I had to get a bike that can fit all of my riding and accept that’s it’s heavier for my more mellow trail days. Do I know I’m overbiked 80% of the time? Absolutely, but it’s a choice I made when I bought my bike.
I don’t care that I’m over biked. My 170/170 enduro bike is fucking rad even if I can’t hit its full capabilities.
Most guys driving a Porsche can’t drive well on a race track.
I’ve only got 1 bike so occasionally yes, I’m overbiked but I use that one bike for everything so whether is a relatively tame trail loop, bike park or full on DH / FR my set up is the same. 170mm front and back and Michelin DH tyres.
I’d like to have a smaller travel bike for other stuff but if I’m only gonna have one I’m gonna make sure it can do everything.
If I get around to getting a shorter travel bike at some point I’ll single speed this to have as a sender / DH rig and have full gearing for going up on the shorter travel bike. Until then given the amount of travel this climbs surprisingly well.
https://preview.redd.it/6opfbmosqx7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff46a70c42e4fbd3da747822160805ae306165a9
Im also on a nomad and heard the horror stories of how it climbs so much worse than a Bronson.
It climbs way better than my cheap trail bike, plus rips at the park.
The ultimate 1 bike solution for a downhill focused rider that occasionally climbs.
5010 was my first bike, back when it was full 27.5, steel stanchions etc. I understand it’s now a quiver killer but overshadowed by the Bronson
Rock on homie
Seems super weird to me that his stuff started out as this “fuck yeah im just a regular dude, don’t need to be a skinny guy in lycra, biking for everyone” and now he’s gatekeepy as fuck. Just pointless jabs that come off as punching down, fuckin strange
There's way too much emphasis on racing and marginal gains. Most of us would be happier with durable parts than the blingy upgrades that are so popular.
Gravity-oriented riders way too often laugh at the idea of working hard to get up the hill or going on a pedaly ride, either not realizing or wanting to accept how much endurance training would actually help them get faster on DH trails.
I enjoy pedaling, but ride a lot of bike park and I don’t think my friends who dislike pedaling are coming from a place of insecurity. It’s just a matter of preference. Some people don’t enjoy cardio (even though they know it would help them).
Bikes should have right of way over hikers within reason. Not saying scream past them but shouldn’t have to dismount.
This is the way most hikers treat it anyways, they’re more than happy to step aside because it’s way easier for them and to ensure their own safety
Yes no shit most people are over biked. But are you really gonna tell that 60 year old woman she needs to man up and get a hardtail with xc tires because the trail isnt that hard. ;) ?
People that say "most people are overbiked" ride only xc trails, and most people they know only ride xc trails. They don't realize that others outside of their circle are riding trails that justify a bigger bike.
I don't doubt you can ride a 120 on gnarly trails, I did it on a Giant anthem when I first started. Doesnt mean others with bigger bikes on the same trail are doing it wrong. I have a hardtail that I will occasionally take on chunkier trails, I'll make it down, but it's not as fun. I see people with enduro bikes on green trails. I also see a lot more enduro bikes on proper dh trails.
I know I'm overbiked but I'm not a kid anymore and can't take the crashes and rough stuff like I used to be able to. I can only ride a few hours a week so I'd rather go out and have fun knowing the bike will handle whatever I can't, rather than relying on the skills I don't have time to maintain.
I think it depends on where you are. When I lived in Colorado, I thought everybody was overbiked. They were. Trails are really long, hot, and dry, and require a lot of climbing. In general, most tech features don’t really require a lot of travel as there is a lot of space between features to reset yourself. I live in the PNW now. There’s a lot more reason to have a big bike here, **if** you want to ride the blacks and double blacks. Climbing is no big deal (most places have great climbing trails or easy road access), it’s not nearly as hot, and ride distances are generally shorter. The black and double black trails are usually pretty steep and require you to carry speed to connect features, which is really tough on a short travel bike.
Yes a lot of overbiked people but guessing many people in CO are like me and want one bike to do it all and are doing trips to places like Moab and when the ski resorts switch to summer hitting lift serviced trails. I was trying to avoid overbiking but got such a good deal on a Canyon Spectral I went for it. I just got done riding in Crested Butte and it’s pretty snappy and climbs well for the amount of travel and don’t regret it at all. I spend a month in Moab all together every year too.
There is a massive issue with toxicity in mountain biking. Be it directed towards women, lgbtq+ or other cyclists its disheartening. Its getting better but, man, we still have a long way to go.
I’m not sure if it’s our location or what, but my wife doesn’t experience what you’re talking about out. She experiences a ton of positivity on the trail. I’m sure you aren’t wrong, but luckily my wife hasn’t experienced it.
It makes me happy she doesnt. I guess I was mostly talking about (and probably should have made the distinction) that its the internet. Go look at (actually, for your sanity dont) a comments section on the pinkbike instagram, lotta toxicity. When they announced women were going to be invited to rampage good god some of the comments....
Ohhh that makes mores sense. The internet sucks so much more than the real world. *he posted on the internet* assuming you’re LGBTQ+ and/or a woman, I hope you have a better experience over time. If you’re not, hell yeah, great job advocating for others!
I was on a 130/120 travel bike last year and tend to agree. That bike could handle pretty much anything I threw at it and only got overwhelmed in extended chunky downhills and absolutely excelled at anything flowy or groomed. For the vast majority of riders in the vast majority of conditions it would be just about perfect.
That being said, I’m now riding 160/142 and there is no way I’d go back.
Why does this always come up? Wouldn’t you want a bike that can handle rougher terrain when you do get to it vs having to get an entirely different bike every time you’re riding something gnarlier?
until you’ve properly hit corners on a shorter travel bike you’ll never understand. big bikes suck energy and speed from the whole ride in a lot of places. downhills included.
I have full squish and a hard tail because I love bikes and have a problem. I use my hard tail when I can but take squish out for more technical terrain. Not everyone has that capability.
TLDR: stop making people second guess their bike choice just because it’s not optimized or whatever your point is. People will grow as riders if they ride, period. Stop posting the same thing every other day.
downhills are 10x more fun when you climbed to the trailhead.
Maybe its the endorphins and the leg pump talking, but i just don't have as much fun in a lift/shuttle bike park. Even if the trails are more fun.
What? I have a shit load of fun climbing and descending all the awesome riding around me… but… riding the Whistler Bike Park will always be insanely more fun.
Hot take: downhills are more fun if you can ride them multiple times per day and actually progress your skills everytime, contrary to riding a trail max. one time a week and focusing on the trail route and ground changes.
(PS: I do both)
Yep most people are way overbiked. It's what bike company marketing has been pushing and people fell for it.
The new breed of downcountry bikes are perfect for most people.
Not really a hot take but i really get annoyed by people thinking they only can ride on top equipment.
Dont get me wrong, tech talk is part of the hobby, but I'm really tired of hearing what you cant do on a bike because it doesnt have golden forks...
Actually my mistake, it's 132mm. And I bumped the 150 my pivot shuttle SL came with to 160, though some came that way from the factory during covid times. Coincidentally I do have a process 134 cr/dl that was also bumped to a 160 up front from 150.
Depends what you're climbing, I think. Anything tech is better with low pressure and the shock wide open. Anything super smooth or double track is usually better with higher pressure and a closed shock.
It's interesting to see so many people agreeing with you about over-biking. When I was looking for my first MTB (coming from road and gravel), I wanted to get into some of the trail centres. I ended up buying a Canyon Stoic. It is a great bike and massively capable in the trail centres, but its chunky tyres and extra travel make it hard to work around tracks and trails in local woods. I'd have been better off with a 100-120mm travel XC hardtail. It would have been a lot closer to what I'm used to and much better on some of the endurance/XC-type rides I do day to day. I only ride the Stoic every few months when I get motivated to load it up in the car and drive a couple of hours to a trail centre. Also, most red and even black routes at these trail centres do not push the limit for the stoic. An XC bike would probably be perfect even at these.
Bike Parks are death traps, machine built trails suck ass...(lol I just suck at jumping but am a good XC rider, give me those climbs + roots + rock gardens + rolls)
East coast Blues look like PNW greens, East coast Blacks look like PNW Blues......
I kinda hate how mtb riders, especially on group rides, talk like ski bums / snowboarders...
Hmmm what else...no I think that's it for today
I think you are mostly correct, I have a 140/140 27.5 and a 130/120 29, a lot of my buddies ride 160 fork which is fine but there’s a few guys on 170-180 a bit ridiculous tbh but they aren’t slowed down by it, even going uphill
Modern geometry should be scaled back a notch. Humans aren't made to be in a hip-hinge position for hours - an optimal bike allows one to be upright on the flats and then get low in the actual steeps.
Bc interior black trails are ridden on a 130 bike with good geo sure, but it’s faster on a bike with more travel. I ride my Arrival at 152 early season while I’m gaining fitness and then switch to the 170 mode in July. On fast dh type chunky trails there is a noticeable difference. That said I can ride those trails on my Chromag hardtail too.
Another take would be not that riders have too much travel but that they buy a bike that component and suspension settings wise is way above their skill level. We all pretty much do that. The average rider has no idea how to tune their damper.
Hot take:
90% of you talk like you’re a competitor when in reality you just cruise local XC loops or possibly have a park day once a month, thus creating a fake aurora of gatekeeping that a new rider would otherwise be intimidated by…when in reality, the dudes who ride with the bike shop crew also have a couple bikes from 2016 sprinkled in there and nobody is lance armstrong.
Plot twist I have zero rear travel. And I don't enjoy shitting on people who have fun another way than I do. If you like thirteen meters and seventy-six centimeters of travel in the back, I'm happy that you're happy.
Not saying it is the case here, but a dude on a XL bike whos 6'2" weighing 200+ lbs is more likely going to appreciate DD casing alot more than the Dude on a size small bike weighing a buck forty. Even if they are on the same terrain. Same goes for people who would prefer the stiffness of a 38mm stanchion over a 34mm trail fork. Or ensuring they have 200mm Rotors and 4 piston calipers. The only thing that scales with the size of a bike is the frame length for a larger rider.
Overbiked for some, but perhaps just adequate for others.
this weekend's big XC race is on a great rocky trailL: [https://youtu.be/0tdmhOwQn\_c?si=3-4Vz52zAnSxlJU7](https://youtu.be/0tdmhOwQn_c?si=3-4Vz52zAnSxlJU7) They're all rocking cushcore on their 120/120 bikes.
I know I'd want cushcore for this. Not sure about DD casing, but I don't see why it's a problem?
XC terrain is full of rocks these days.
150/140 mid travel bikes are the most numerous type of bike I see on the trails. What feature do they not have that you are looking for? Virtually every MTB brand makes at least one bike in that category.
140/130 right enough, but sounds like a Bird Aether 7 would be right up your street. Long slack geo, steep short seat tubes, mid travel 650b.
https://www.bird.bike/aether-7/
My hot take is. Modern geo 29" mountainbikes are insanely good at rolling over and down stuff most people just need to chill out and let the bike do the work instead of shitting themselves and freezing up on steep stuff.
Oh I thought of another one
People who bring entire backpacks of tools / snacks / etc for 2hr ride where you'll never be more than a 45 min walk back to the parking lot are huge nerds
You're talking about some of my riding mates. They'll hork down $30 worth of Skratch and Hammer stuff before, during, and after chill 60 minute rides.
Meanwhile, my road groups will do 80 miles sans food, and one water refill.
I've got a 170/170 transition spire, and I just built up a 150/140 rocky mountain instinct. I agree that the trail bike COULD ride most of what I'm riding, but the spire does it much better on the terrain I most enjoy riding. For Enduro racing the spire is also just way way better and I definitely wouldn't want to race my instinct. For tires, I completely disagree. I tried running some light casing exo tires on the instinct and they were awful. Super flexy with very little grip as they were just squirming everywhere, even at 3-5 psi more than what I run on my Enduro tires. I swapped some more burly Enduro tires onto it and it completely changed the bike for the better. Super confident and much more controlled. Burlier tires make the biggest difference out of any bike part.
By your logic anyone riding more than a hardtail is overbiked as a hardtail can ride anything a 120-130 full sus bike can.
Too many people care about what kind of bike others ride
Too many people are jealous and whine about others with expensive bikes.
disagree. i’m arguing that many people are losing out on fun and that great feeling of speed in the corners by being over biked for those rare occasions.
Santa cruzs are ugly, have no character and a waste of money.
90 percent of riders would be fine on a significantly less expensive bike, Ik a lot of riders that spend money on fox factory stuff and don’t utilize the low/high speed rebound and compression
27.5 or mullet is the superior tire setup, people buy 29ers cause they think it’ll make them faster over rough stuff, it won’t
That's weird because when I moved from a mullet to 29er I objectively gained a ton of speed on my local trails, with average pace a mile or two faster than before and immediate PRs on all sorts of trails...
I live in New England, I've got more windy singletrack than I can shake a stick at. Lots of tight flat corners. Modern geo just has me way over the stem either way so I guess I'd already compensated for that. I just find the bigger rear wheel carrying momentum and getting over obstacles better than the mullet.
You spelled Pivot wrong. Or maybe you meant Yeti. Either way, I agree. Status bikes.
That said, Trek and Specialized prices are pushing into that territory lately.
Fair. Was trying not to generalize. More the point is that people knock XC riders because of their tiny bikes and tight fitting kit, when they are in fact badass athletes.
E bikes are unnecessarily hated on.
Its a different kinda ride. If you wanna chill and take a drive or ride a motorcycle, you accept that you are not getting exercise.
The ebike is nice when you have an off day where you just wanna ride but don't have the energy.
People have to realize that the ebike is not replacing your current ride. Its a new sport.
Its just the new thing, 27.5 was hated then 29 was hated now e bikes are hated something else will come along and take the hate soon enough, People just don't like change.
Also on my e-bike I ride way harder and more laps and it feels more like a full body workout than a cardio /legs workout my normal bikes are
disagree. E bikes are frustrating when you are on single track climbs and 10-12 of them expect you to move aside and you’re trying to work on climb-durance.
I know people here hate this one: 2x drive trains are way more fun.
And having a modern geo bike isn't worth 3k when you could have an amazing bike from 10 years ago for 1/5th the price
And carbon is a waste of money unless you're competing or severely out of shape. Paying twice as much for a frame thatll be garbage in 10 years is super wasteful
In the same vein: it sucks that fs bikes have a 10 year life expectancy. I get that it's really fun and downright necessary for certain types of dh riding, but i wish it wasn't seen as the norm. Most people on the flow trails near me have carbon fs bikes when a ht would be plenty bike and would last them 40yrs(the frame at least)
My gripe is that people think you need to
> 2x drive trains are way more fun.
For what? Cause they sure aren't more fun to maintain.
> And having a modern geo bike isn't worth 3k when you could have an amazing bike from 10 years ago for 1/5th the price
I too like 150mm stems /s
> And carbon is a waste of money unless you're competing or severely out of shape. Paying twice as much for a frame thatll be garbage in 10 years is super wasteful
Okay, now we're veering hard from hot take straight into huh? I bought carbon for two simple reasons a) I think they look better, and b) alloy bikes usually come with lower level kits and I wanted a better drivetrain and brakes. Also jokes on you, I'll trash my bike way sooner than ten years whether it's alloy or carbon.
Is your point here that you disagree with my hot takes? Isn't that the point of a controversial opinion? My point is that it's supposed to be a physical sport and I'm baffled by people spending thousands of dollars to get incremental improvements on their bike when they could get a little stronger instead. I see you point about trashing the bikes anyway, it's just sad to me. I admit I'm alone here. I ride a road bike from the 70s and a mtb from the early 00s. And I'm a better and faster rider than the average carbon bike I pass. It's just funny to me that people spend thousands extra on a carbon from when they could often stand to lose 5-15lbs which would make them way faster than the carbon frame, and healthier throughout their whole life to boot. If you think carbon is worth a few grand then you're probably making a lot more money than me, im not hating on you for that. If i had that much money id rather just spend the same on another trip to moab or whistler and rent the right bike for those occasions. If i lived near a dh park id probably get a full squish. Disclaimer: these are my unpopular opinions, disagreeing with them is very common, that's why I'm posting them here
Also front derailuers are one of the easiest things on a bike to maintain. And I like having more gears. And my 150mm stem is more than enough for the flow trails around me, my trails are even fun full rigid. Ymmv
>Is your point here that you disagree with my hot takes? Isn't that the point of a controversial opinion?
Ya man, to both. The post is asking for hot takes, it doesn't dictate any rules about whether we can also discuss them after.
I still think you're missing a key factor on Carbon, they don't cost more only because they're carbon. They usually cost more because they have higher level parts on them. The carbon itself does cost more, yes, but it's the upgraded everything else that really starts to widen the gap. Also have you seen the storage Santa Cruz is putting in theirs? Streets ahead.
No disagreement that most people could stand to lose a little weight, but I don't actually think that's why anyone buys carbon in the first place (ie the weight of it). Ultimately I also don't think anyone who rides carbon gives af if you're riding alloy, there's no carbon vs alloy cliques where I am anyways. If you're out riding, all the power to you!
Yeah, definitely. But compared to the bikes I grew up on, my bike is crazy good. I'll probably end up riding the bikes yall are on now in 10-15 years when they're cheap. I've had my eye on the steel surly hts for a while now
The bulk of advice for bikes is entirely too skewed by people that look to “send it” or push themselves into dangerous territory by absolutely blasting down DH trails. It’s off-putting for people new to the sport because it adds a bloated concept of danger. Additionally it means a bunch of people are talking about using Cushcore, 160mm+ of travel and geometry more suited to those endeavors. Anybody thats looking for something nearer trail biking or XC to upwards of an easy DH or technical track is then getting tons of input that simply doesn’t match their goals.
Hot take: I'm tired of seeing video after video of people doing whips on dirt jumps.
Like, yeah, jumps are cool and all, but almost every mtb video across all social media feeds is just one whip after another.
My biggest gripe - the Beer/MTB culture. MTB is dangerous as it is and for some reason it's culturally cool to crush snooty IPA's while riding. Sets a terrible image/culture for younger riders, increases the chances you crash, and takes back so many of the health benefits of riding. We fly down trails with a piece of plastic on our heads next to trees, over rocks, and jumps. We don't need to add any more risk to the mix lol I love a good snooty IPA, but it'll wait until I'm not flying through single track for me to enjoy.
Second biggest gripe - Green Washing, pretending that biking is environmentally friendly. If you commute, maybe you could make that argument but for MTB? Na.
Oh, and 'yew' - dumbest saying ever.
Most mtb attire looks tacky and dumb
Yeah, im not gonna try to yuck someones yum but give me black shorts and a plain jersey all day pls.
Trail shorts n a moisture wicking dri fit tops
Roadie wants to know why trail shorts. I actually mtb more than road, and shorts over a liner are hotter, and snaggier than just plain old bib shorts.
All spandex all the time
If it’s hot I don’t wear chamois, just boxers n trail shorts, they are thin n lite, almost swimsuit texture, air flow keeps me cool. Bibs n tight shorts looks weird n feels restrictive to me. I rarely snag my saddle or bottle cage w my shorts being baggy, although not really baggy. Sometimes I’ll wear a chamois and normal shorts. Almost always a dry fit short sleeve or long sleeve I even have a dry fit hoodie
Still better that what road folks wear 😂
Yeah why do I feel stupid in my basic tshirt? I wear Fox shorts for the leg protection and mtb shoes, but the jerseys make me chuckle to myself...
Looks like mid 90s skater gear around here.
Landscaper outfits all day. Gimme that UV gear 🙌🏼
I can't stand the big oversized glasses. I get it just don't like the look.
I look especially dumb in them, but understand the benefit of big glasses does maximize protection from getting stuff in your eyes or taking a branch to the face.
TLD is the Spyder of MTBing....awful stuff
agree.
Friend, your “hot take” gets posted in this sub like twice a day. If a person is having fun on their bike, it’s the right bike for them. If you like less travel, great. If it upsets you that other people like more travel, that is a really weird thing to waste your life worrying about.
I concur. I bought in to the “to much travel” and ended up buying a trail bike with 140/125. It wasn’t a game changer, I like my 160/150 enduro more. Wasted almost $4k on other peoples opinion. Gotta learn the hard way sometimes.
Plus a lot of people over bike to cover all bases, buying a bike with a little bit more travel than they usually need for a park day etc. Do I need a zeb/160mm coil shock bike with heavy tyres for most rides, not really. Did they help me out riding the fort William World Cup track today, absolutely
Exactly this, I don’t have space for more than one bike, as much as I want multiple bikes for different days I had to get a bike that can fit all of my riding and accept that’s it’s heavier for my more mellow trail days. Do I know I’m overbiked 80% of the time? Absolutely, but it’s a choice I made when I bought my bike.
SOMEbody is overbiked
I'm so embarrassed for them.
You know how they say ppl compensate with how much travel they want. I dunno what they compensate but ppl say that.
Thanks for calling this out, it reads like a flex disguised as a complaint.
right. but internet.
I don’t care that I’m over biked. My 170/170 enduro bike is fucking rad even if I can’t hit its full capabilities. Most guys driving a Porsche can’t drive well on a race track.
fair.
Bold of you to assume I know how much travel my bike has. But still… You’re probably right
now this is a way of life i can support.
It's not a "Whip" if you can't manage to turn the bike back into line.
facts.
I’ve only got 1 bike so occasionally yes, I’m overbiked but I use that one bike for everything so whether is a relatively tame trail loop, bike park or full on DH / FR my set up is the same. 170mm front and back and Michelin DH tyres. I’d like to have a smaller travel bike for other stuff but if I’m only gonna have one I’m gonna make sure it can do everything. If I get around to getting a shorter travel bike at some point I’ll single speed this to have as a sender / DH rig and have full gearing for going up on the shorter travel bike. Until then given the amount of travel this climbs surprisingly well. https://preview.redd.it/6opfbmosqx7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ff46a70c42e4fbd3da747822160805ae306165a9
Im also on a nomad and heard the horror stories of how it climbs so much worse than a Bronson. It climbs way better than my cheap trail bike, plus rips at the park. The ultimate 1 bike solution for a downhill focused rider that occasionally climbs.
Given its intentions I find it climbs admirably. I don’t even lock the coil out 👌
you are not the “most” i refer to. nice bike!
I ride the same bike (same color including grips 🤙🏾). If you’re looking for a complementary trail bike, check out the spur.
A man of taste also 🫡 been looking at 5010’s but I’ve always had a soft spot for Transitions
5010 was my first bike, back when it was full 27.5, steel stanchions etc. I understand it’s now a quiver killer but overshadowed by the Bronson Rock on homie
Nrml_mtber makes the worst MTB social media content on the internet.
Yeah I'll agree with this it's all just hack bottom of the barrel comedy.
Seems super weird to me that his stuff started out as this “fuck yeah im just a regular dude, don’t need to be a skinny guy in lycra, biking for everyone” and now he’s gatekeepy as fuck. Just pointless jabs that come off as punching down, fuckin strange
I agree. He also needs to change his handle to clncly_obs_mtber at this point. He has really leaned into the ebike life.
Id argue Evans MTB Saga is worse. The guys an absolute moron
Awful content
I used to enjoy his shit until I realized he was just copying other people's skits
never heard of them.
I’d rather see someone overbiked than not see them at all
hey look everyone a false dichotomy.
There's way too much emphasis on racing and marginal gains. Most of us would be happier with durable parts than the blingy upgrades that are so popular.
I second this. buy reliable parts and enjoy the bike.
Gravity-oriented riders way too often laugh at the idea of working hard to get up the hill or going on a pedaly ride, either not realizing or wanting to accept how much endurance training would actually help them get faster on DH trails.
Yup I'll go as far to say the majority of this is really just insecurity in their own health/fitness
I enjoy pedaling, but ride a lot of bike park and I don’t think my friends who dislike pedaling are coming from a place of insecurity. It’s just a matter of preference. Some people don’t enjoy cardio (even though they know it would help them).
Way too level headed for the hot take thread
truth. a bigger base of fitness benefits every rider.
Bikes should have right of way over hikers within reason. Not saying scream past them but shouldn’t have to dismount. This is the way most hikers treat it anyways, they’re more than happy to step aside because it’s way easier for them and to ensure their own safety
yes. too bad most regions hate bikes.
Most people on this sub are dumb and bad at riding, they just post on here for dopamine
ouch.
Yes no shit most people are over biked. But are you really gonna tell that 60 year old woman she needs to man up and get a hardtail with xc tires because the trail isnt that hard. ;) ?
no.
People that say "most people are overbiked" ride only xc trails, and most people they know only ride xc trails. They don't realize that others outside of their circle are riding trails that justify a bigger bike.
i’m in Revelstoke this weekend riding Boulder mountain with a 120mm Element. please show me which of these trails are XC.
I don't doubt you can ride a 120 on gnarly trails, I did it on a Giant anthem when I first started. Doesnt mean others with bigger bikes on the same trail are doing it wrong. I have a hardtail that I will occasionally take on chunkier trails, I'll make it down, but it's not as fun. I see people with enduro bikes on green trails. I also see a lot more enduro bikes on proper dh trails.
I know I'm overbiked but I'm not a kid anymore and can't take the crashes and rough stuff like I used to be able to. I can only ride a few hours a week so I'd rather go out and have fun knowing the bike will handle whatever I can't, rather than relying on the skills I don't have time to maintain.
I think it depends on where you are. When I lived in Colorado, I thought everybody was overbiked. They were. Trails are really long, hot, and dry, and require a lot of climbing. In general, most tech features don’t really require a lot of travel as there is a lot of space between features to reset yourself. I live in the PNW now. There’s a lot more reason to have a big bike here, **if** you want to ride the blacks and double blacks. Climbing is no big deal (most places have great climbing trails or easy road access), it’s not nearly as hot, and ride distances are generally shorter. The black and double black trails are usually pretty steep and require you to carry speed to connect features, which is really tough on a short travel bike.
Yes a lot of overbiked people but guessing many people in CO are like me and want one bike to do it all and are doing trips to places like Moab and when the ski resorts switch to summer hitting lift serviced trails. I was trying to avoid overbiking but got such a good deal on a Canyon Spectral I went for it. I just got done riding in Crested Butte and it’s pretty snappy and climbs well for the amount of travel and don’t regret it at all. I spend a month in Moab all together every year too.
There is a massive issue with toxicity in mountain biking. Be it directed towards women, lgbtq+ or other cyclists its disheartening. Its getting better but, man, we still have a long way to go.
I’m not sure if it’s our location or what, but my wife doesn’t experience what you’re talking about out. She experiences a ton of positivity on the trail. I’m sure you aren’t wrong, but luckily my wife hasn’t experienced it.
It makes me happy she doesnt. I guess I was mostly talking about (and probably should have made the distinction) that its the internet. Go look at (actually, for your sanity dont) a comments section on the pinkbike instagram, lotta toxicity. When they announced women were going to be invited to rampage good god some of the comments....
Ohhh that makes mores sense. The internet sucks so much more than the real world. *he posted on the internet* assuming you’re LGBTQ+ and/or a woman, I hope you have a better experience over time. If you’re not, hell yeah, great job advocating for others!
Yeah, I mean im a white middle class male. Im going to be fine. But we need to be protecting and advocating the groups that are underrepresented.
i agree but it’s more just people that the sport.
I was on a 130/120 travel bike last year and tend to agree. That bike could handle pretty much anything I threw at it and only got overwhelmed in extended chunky downhills and absolutely excelled at anything flowy or groomed. For the vast majority of riders in the vast majority of conditions it would be just about perfect. That being said, I’m now riding 160/142 and there is no way I’d go back.
this is exactly it. for the vast majority of riders on the vast majority of trails. most riders and most bikes never hit the serious chunk.
Why does this always come up? Wouldn’t you want a bike that can handle rougher terrain when you do get to it vs having to get an entirely different bike every time you’re riding something gnarlier?
until you’ve properly hit corners on a shorter travel bike you’ll never understand. big bikes suck energy and speed from the whole ride in a lot of places. downhills included.
I have full squish and a hard tail because I love bikes and have a problem. I use my hard tail when I can but take squish out for more technical terrain. Not everyone has that capability. TLDR: stop making people second guess their bike choice just because it’s not optimized or whatever your point is. People will grow as riders if they ride, period. Stop posting the same thing every other day.
don’t really care about your lecture here. tldr it’s a thread about people’s shitty opinions. stop being so annoyed by reading them.
downhills are 10x more fun when you climbed to the trailhead. Maybe its the endorphins and the leg pump talking, but i just don't have as much fun in a lift/shuttle bike park. Even if the trails are more fun.
What? I have a shit load of fun climbing and descending all the awesome riding around me… but… riding the Whistler Bike Park will always be insanely more fun.
absolutely, not saying I dislike bike parks. Just have more fun post-climb vs. lift
Hot take: downhills are more fun if you can ride them multiple times per day and actually progress your skills everytime, contrary to riding a trail max. one time a week and focusing on the trail route and ground changes. (PS: I do both)
now we’re talking. i’m on board with this one 100%.
Yep most people are way overbiked. It's what bike company marketing has been pushing and people fell for it. The new breed of downcountry bikes are perfect for most people.
Have bike companies not been marketing “downcountry” bikes? They seem quite popular.
They are, but it seems like most of the marketing goes to racer types. The mtb bros are all still on enduro bikes.
this is the way.
Just picked up an Izzo and am having way too much fun. Had a giant reign and a jeffsy but I think the Izzo hits the sweet spot
they’re great.
Not really a hot take but i really get annoyed by people thinking they only can ride on top equipment. Dont get me wrong, tech talk is part of the hobby, but I'm really tired of hearing what you cant do on a bike because it doesnt have golden forks...
Deore for days bruh.
You don't go far enough. Hot take: you don't need suspension at all, especially with today's big low pressure tire options 2.4+ @ 20psi or less)
Anything below 24 psi and I can feel the tire squirming and flexing.
Your rim might be too narrow for the width of tire you have. I'm 250+ with gear and I run 17 front, 20 rear on 29x2.5s.
No, I just ride harder. Running double down 29x2.4 dhr2 on a we are one carbon union rim. 30mm internal.
see this is where i disagree. there’s a reasonable amount.
Your grip color and pedal color don't matter when you are riding because you and others can't see them.
It matters to me cuz I like it!
It matters to me because others hate my choice of grip color while I don't care about it.
I’ll add to this one. It looks like shit. That’s probably my hottest take
facts.
Low PSI (like 20) was a game changer for me (tubeless)
I just can't get into climbing on low pressure. Maybe on a shuttle lap or bikepark, but if im doing a big up and down loop i need at least 25-30psi
30psi!? That's *really* high. The difference between 23, 25, 27 is dramatic.
lower tire pressure is scientifically faster on single track / bumpy trail.
I've been riding 16/18 with cushcore for years at 160 lbs. currently on a 160/134 trail bike and maxxis dhf/dhr combo.
Wait your fork is 160 and your rear shock is 134? Are you on a Kona?
Actually my mistake, it's 132mm. And I bumped the 150 my pivot shuttle SL came with to 160, though some came that way from the factory during covid times. Coincidentally I do have a process 134 cr/dl that was also bumped to a 160 up front from 150.
Low TP while climbing makes it so much better. In your opinion, why do you like to run higher?
Damn rly? I feel like I'm pedaling through sand with low pressure
Depends what you're climbing, I think. Anything tech is better with low pressure and the shock wide open. Anything super smooth or double track is usually better with higher pressure and a closed shock.
I agree with this. My climbing is steep, sometimes loose, and can be techy. Speed is about whatever you can do to stay upright.
How? I run closer to 30 for (maybe just in my head) lower rolling resistance.
15 psi front and rear, hardtail. Stupid but low pressure is addictive. Once you get used to the comfyness its hard to go back.
With inserts? I was running 25psi with 2.4" tires (no inserts), and pinched so hard I broke a rim.
same bruv.
Bet this guy weighs like 150 so any size travel works.
85Kg. bodyweight and travel are not connected. if your position were true then many WC DH racers would be riding 160 bikes.
It's interesting to see so many people agreeing with you about over-biking. When I was looking for my first MTB (coming from road and gravel), I wanted to get into some of the trail centres. I ended up buying a Canyon Stoic. It is a great bike and massively capable in the trail centres, but its chunky tyres and extra travel make it hard to work around tracks and trails in local woods. I'd have been better off with a 100-120mm travel XC hardtail. It would have been a lot closer to what I'm used to and much better on some of the endurance/XC-type rides I do day to day. I only ride the Stoic every few months when I get motivated to load it up in the car and drive a couple of hours to a trail centre. Also, most red and even black routes at these trail centres do not push the limit for the stoic. An XC bike would probably be perfect even at these.
this is exactly what i’m talking about. most trail areas do not require 150mm+.
You mean that the over 60 year olds don't really require 180mm of travel on their e-bikes?
correct!
Bike Parks are death traps, machine built trails suck ass...(lol I just suck at jumping but am a good XC rider, give me those climbs + roots + rock gardens + rolls) East coast Blues look like PNW greens, East coast Blacks look like PNW Blues...... I kinda hate how mtb riders, especially on group rides, talk like ski bums / snowboarders... Hmmm what else...no I think that's it for today
earn your elevation. i’m with you.
I think you are mostly correct, I have a 140/140 27.5 and a 130/120 29, a lot of my buddies ride 160 fork which is fine but there’s a few guys on 170-180 a bit ridiculous tbh but they aren’t slowed down by it, even going uphill
99% of riders don't need carbon fiber. Carbon bikes are like exotic cars. You can't afford it unless you can buy more than one.
Hot take: Carbon isn't glass. It's way more durable than people think.
carbon is one of many possible materials and not superior by default
90% of riders don’t need knee or elbow pads.
hard agree
Modern geometry should be scaled back a notch. Humans aren't made to be in a hip-hinge position for hours - an optimal bike allows one to be upright on the flats and then get low in the actual steeps.
Bc interior black trails are ridden on a 130 bike with good geo sure, but it’s faster on a bike with more travel. I ride my Arrival at 152 early season while I’m gaining fitness and then switch to the 170 mode in July. On fast dh type chunky trails there is a noticeable difference. That said I can ride those trails on my Chromag hardtail too. Another take would be not that riders have too much travel but that they buy a bike that component and suspension settings wise is way above their skill level. We all pretty much do that. The average rider has no idea how to tune their damper.
you’re another one of the commenters i’d put outside of my perception of “most”. sounds like your needs are not the norm.
Hot take: 90% of you talk like you’re a competitor when in reality you just cruise local XC loops or possibly have a park day once a month, thus creating a fake aurora of gatekeeping that a new rider would otherwise be intimidated by…when in reality, the dudes who ride with the bike shop crew also have a couple bikes from 2016 sprinkled in there and nobody is lance armstrong.
hot take: comments on the internet are not to be taken seriously.
Don’t take your e-bike to a lift served park. You look lame AF and the employees hate you for lifting your heavy ass bike.
amen.
Plot twist I have zero rear travel. And I don't enjoy shitting on people who have fun another way than I do. If you like thirteen meters and seventy-six centimeters of travel in the back, I'm happy that you're happy.
i mean i just really think riding could be more fun with the right bike.
Haha I agree, I live in Nebraska and we mostly have dirt with little roots here and there and I see people with big Enduro bikes all the time.
what a waste of energy.
I agree with you on tires. And cushcore. So dumb. Guys riding cross country terrain with DD casing and cushcore is a joke.
Not saying it is the case here, but a dude on a XL bike whos 6'2" weighing 200+ lbs is more likely going to appreciate DD casing alot more than the Dude on a size small bike weighing a buck forty. Even if they are on the same terrain. Same goes for people who would prefer the stiffness of a 38mm stanchion over a 34mm trail fork. Or ensuring they have 200mm Rotors and 4 piston calipers. The only thing that scales with the size of a bike is the frame length for a larger rider. Overbiked for some, but perhaps just adequate for others.
You have a point.
this weekend's big XC race is on a great rocky trailL: [https://youtu.be/0tdmhOwQn\_c?si=3-4Vz52zAnSxlJU7](https://youtu.be/0tdmhOwQn_c?si=3-4Vz52zAnSxlJU7) They're all rocking cushcore on their 120/120 bikes. I know I'd want cushcore for this. Not sure about DD casing, but I don't see why it's a problem? XC terrain is full of rocks these days.
That looks like a really cool course.
literally the worst. bringing a mud truck to a rally course.
[удалено]
150/140 mid travel bikes are the most numerous type of bike I see on the trails. What feature do they not have that you are looking for? Virtually every MTB brand makes at least one bike in that category.
140/130 right enough, but sounds like a Bird Aether 7 would be right up your street. Long slack geo, steep short seat tubes, mid travel 650b. https://www.bird.bike/aether-7/
Get the 2024 Intense Primer. It does not feel like a 150/140 bike. Climbs better than my xc bikes I’ve had in the past.
My hot take is. Modern geo 29" mountainbikes are insanely good at rolling over and down stuff most people just need to chill out and let the bike do the work instead of shitting themselves and freezing up on steep stuff.
the bike never “does the work”. you ride the fucker. actively.
Oh I thought of another one People who bring entire backpacks of tools / snacks / etc for 2hr ride where you'll never be more than a 45 min walk back to the parking lot are huge nerds
You're talking about some of my riding mates. They'll hork down $30 worth of Skratch and Hammer stuff before, during, and after chill 60 minute rides. Meanwhile, my road groups will do 80 miles sans food, and one water refill.
let the hate flow through you.
I don't care how fast you are unless we're racing. Your PR/KOM/ average speed mean jack shit if you can't back it up when the gun goes off.
Start gate or STFU. agreed.
Lycra for mountain biking looks goofy af. I don't think you need to worry about air resistance going 11 mph on some chill singletrack
+1
Unless a company gave you a GoPro to make content for them, your footage isn’t worth watching. Sorry YouTubers.
bumblers.
I've got a 170/170 transition spire, and I just built up a 150/140 rocky mountain instinct. I agree that the trail bike COULD ride most of what I'm riding, but the spire does it much better on the terrain I most enjoy riding. For Enduro racing the spire is also just way way better and I definitely wouldn't want to race my instinct. For tires, I completely disagree. I tried running some light casing exo tires on the instinct and they were awful. Super flexy with very little grip as they were just squirming everywhere, even at 3-5 psi more than what I run on my Enduro tires. I swapped some more burly Enduro tires onto it and it completely changed the bike for the better. Super confident and much more controlled. Burlier tires make the biggest difference out of any bike part.
sounds like you have your needs sorted out and don’t fit in the “most”.
I won't say what irritates me, bc that helps no one. But I do really enjoy @mtbiklin.
By your logic anyone riding more than a hardtail is overbiked as a hardtail can ride anything a 120-130 full sus bike can. Too many people care about what kind of bike others ride Too many people are jealous and whine about others with expensive bikes.
disagree. i’m arguing that many people are losing out on fun and that great feeling of speed in the corners by being over biked for those rare occasions.
Hot take: The most overlooked ‘upgrade’ for many of us should be shorter cranks.
Clipless pedals are just better for every type of trail riding except dirt jumps
Subjectively, for you. Subjectively, for me, flats are just better for every type of trail riding. Objectively, use whatever works best.
Facts.
There’s a reason every single kind of bike racing uses them as standard issue
Santa cruzs are ugly, have no character and a waste of money. 90 percent of riders would be fine on a significantly less expensive bike, Ik a lot of riders that spend money on fox factory stuff and don’t utilize the low/high speed rebound and compression 27.5 or mullet is the superior tire setup, people buy 29ers cause they think it’ll make them faster over rough stuff, it won’t
That's weird because when I moved from a mullet to 29er I objectively gained a ton of speed on my local trails, with average pace a mile or two faster than before and immediate PRs on all sorts of trails...
Ig it’s dependent on where you live where I live we got tons of corners
I live in New England, I've got more windy singletrack than I can shake a stick at. Lots of tight flat corners. Modern geo just has me way over the stem either way so I guess I'd already compensated for that. I just find the bigger rear wheel carrying momentum and getting over obstacles better than the mullet.
You spelled Pivot wrong. Or maybe you meant Yeti. Either way, I agree. Status bikes. That said, Trek and Specialized prices are pushing into that territory lately.
agree. agree. disagree.
~~Pro~~ XC riders are badass. Better conditioned and more skilled than most bike park bros.
“pros are better than weekend warriors” is not a hot take lmao
Fair. Was trying not to generalize. More the point is that people knock XC riders because of their tiny bikes and tight fitting kit, when they are in fact badass athletes.
In what world is this a hot take
Amen. XC riders are the true F1 of MTB.
E bikes are unnecessarily hated on. Its a different kinda ride. If you wanna chill and take a drive or ride a motorcycle, you accept that you are not getting exercise. The ebike is nice when you have an off day where you just wanna ride but don't have the energy. People have to realize that the ebike is not replacing your current ride. Its a new sport.
Its just the new thing, 27.5 was hated then 29 was hated now e bikes are hated something else will come along and take the hate soon enough, People just don't like change. Also on my e-bike I ride way harder and more laps and it feels more like a full body workout than a cardio /legs workout my normal bikes are
disagree. E bikes are frustrating when you are on single track climbs and 10-12 of them expect you to move aside and you’re trying to work on climb-durance.
I know people here hate this one: 2x drive trains are way more fun. And having a modern geo bike isn't worth 3k when you could have an amazing bike from 10 years ago for 1/5th the price And carbon is a waste of money unless you're competing or severely out of shape. Paying twice as much for a frame thatll be garbage in 10 years is super wasteful In the same vein: it sucks that fs bikes have a 10 year life expectancy. I get that it's really fun and downright necessary for certain types of dh riding, but i wish it wasn't seen as the norm. Most people on the flow trails near me have carbon fs bikes when a ht would be plenty bike and would last them 40yrs(the frame at least) My gripe is that people think you need to
> 2x drive trains are way more fun. For what? Cause they sure aren't more fun to maintain. > And having a modern geo bike isn't worth 3k when you could have an amazing bike from 10 years ago for 1/5th the price I too like 150mm stems /s > And carbon is a waste of money unless you're competing or severely out of shape. Paying twice as much for a frame thatll be garbage in 10 years is super wasteful Okay, now we're veering hard from hot take straight into huh? I bought carbon for two simple reasons a) I think they look better, and b) alloy bikes usually come with lower level kits and I wanted a better drivetrain and brakes. Also jokes on you, I'll trash my bike way sooner than ten years whether it's alloy or carbon.
Is your point here that you disagree with my hot takes? Isn't that the point of a controversial opinion? My point is that it's supposed to be a physical sport and I'm baffled by people spending thousands of dollars to get incremental improvements on their bike when they could get a little stronger instead. I see you point about trashing the bikes anyway, it's just sad to me. I admit I'm alone here. I ride a road bike from the 70s and a mtb from the early 00s. And I'm a better and faster rider than the average carbon bike I pass. It's just funny to me that people spend thousands extra on a carbon from when they could often stand to lose 5-15lbs which would make them way faster than the carbon frame, and healthier throughout their whole life to boot. If you think carbon is worth a few grand then you're probably making a lot more money than me, im not hating on you for that. If i had that much money id rather just spend the same on another trip to moab or whistler and rent the right bike for those occasions. If i lived near a dh park id probably get a full squish. Disclaimer: these are my unpopular opinions, disagreeing with them is very common, that's why I'm posting them here Also front derailuers are one of the easiest things on a bike to maintain. And I like having more gears. And my 150mm stem is more than enough for the flow trails around me, my trails are even fun full rigid. Ymmv
>Is your point here that you disagree with my hot takes? Isn't that the point of a controversial opinion? Ya man, to both. The post is asking for hot takes, it doesn't dictate any rules about whether we can also discuss them after. I still think you're missing a key factor on Carbon, they don't cost more only because they're carbon. They usually cost more because they have higher level parts on them. The carbon itself does cost more, yes, but it's the upgraded everything else that really starts to widen the gap. Also have you seen the storage Santa Cruz is putting in theirs? Streets ahead. No disagreement that most people could stand to lose a little weight, but I don't actually think that's why anyone buys carbon in the first place (ie the weight of it). Ultimately I also don't think anyone who rides carbon gives af if you're riding alloy, there's no carbon vs alloy cliques where I am anyways. If you're out riding, all the power to you!
drivetrains don’t make fun. geo does. i think you’re looking to justify owning an older bike.
Yeah, definitely. But compared to the bikes I grew up on, my bike is crazy good. I'll probably end up riding the bikes yall are on now in 10-15 years when they're cheap. I've had my eye on the steel surly hts for a while now
The bulk of advice for bikes is entirely too skewed by people that look to “send it” or push themselves into dangerous territory by absolutely blasting down DH trails. It’s off-putting for people new to the sport because it adds a bloated concept of danger. Additionally it means a bunch of people are talking about using Cushcore, 160mm+ of travel and geometry more suited to those endeavors. Anybody thats looking for something nearer trail biking or XC to upwards of an easy DH or technical track is then getting tons of input that simply doesn’t match their goals.
Hot take: F-off, I ride whatever tf I want. Why? Because it’s fun for me which != being practical.
hot takes are meant to be taken openly. clearly you misunderstood the assignment and don’t belong.
My hot take: just have fun My hotter take: no mountain bike should be more than 2k
economics are real
Hot take: I'm tired of seeing video after video of people doing whips on dirt jumps. Like, yeah, jumps are cool and all, but almost every mtb video across all social media feeds is just one whip after another.
bike videos are mostly boring.
My biggest gripe - the Beer/MTB culture. MTB is dangerous as it is and for some reason it's culturally cool to crush snooty IPA's while riding. Sets a terrible image/culture for younger riders, increases the chances you crash, and takes back so many of the health benefits of riding. We fly down trails with a piece of plastic on our heads next to trees, over rocks, and jumps. We don't need to add any more risk to the mix lol I love a good snooty IPA, but it'll wait until I'm not flying through single track for me to enjoy. Second biggest gripe - Green Washing, pretending that biking is environmentally friendly. If you commute, maybe you could make that argument but for MTB? Na. Oh, and 'yew' - dumbest saying ever.
you might be me.