Pinkbike Poll: Does the Current Method of Mountain Bike Classification Make Sense?

Jan 19, 2018
by Mike Kazimer  
Bikes lay down whilst riders went searching for cover.


Imagine that you were thinking about giving this whole 'mountain biking' thing a try, and walked into your local bike shop in search of a new bike. An overly-eager, pimple-faced shop employee emerges from a dimly lit corner, wiping the grease from his hands.

“What kind of bike are you looking for? A trail bike? XC bike? All-mountain? Enduro? Freeride? Downhill?”
“Umm... I just want a mountain bike.”
“Yes, but what kind of bike? What do you want to do with it?”
“Ride in the mountains?”

You get the picture – there are so many sub-categories of bikes these days that it can get pretty confusing trying to figure out the differences, especially for a newcomer to the sport.

However, even though all the labels might seem like an exercise in marketing (remember when Cannondale tried to trademark the word Freeride?), they do serve a purpose, similar to the way that taxonomy works in the science world. You may have slept through high school biology, but the terms ' kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species' probably ring a bell.

2018 Specialized Epic - First Ride
Specialized Epic
Yeti SB 4.5C review
Yeti SB 4.5

Here at Pinkbike, there are six main terms that we use to categorize bikes: cross-country, trail, all-mountain, enduro, freeride, and downhill. As a quick refresher, here's a rough breakdown of each category:

Cross-country (XC): This is a bike designed for speed, where light weight and quick handling take priority over downhill prowess. Travel amounts typically vary from hardtails to 120mm. Examples: Specialized Epic, Scott Spark.

Trail: Realistically, almost every mountain bike could be called a trail bike – after all, they're meant for riding on trails, right? That being said, a trail bike is typically an all-rounder, with handling characteristics that make it suited for long days of riding that include a mix of climbing and descending. The geometry is more relaxed than an XC bike, but the travel amounts are a little less than an all-mountain bike, ranging from 120-150mm. Examples: Yeti SB 4.5, Trek Fuel EX.


Rocky Mountain Instinct BC Edition review test Photo by James Lissimore
Rocky Mountain Instinct
Nukeproof Mega 2018
Nukeproof Mega 275


All-mountain: All-mountain is one of those terms that was likely dreamed up in a marketing meeting, but then stuck around and became an actual bike category. All-mountain bikes are still capable of climbing, but the emphasis is more on the descents. If a trail bike has a 50/50 bias between climbing and descending, an all-mountain rig is closer to 40/60 or 30/70. Travel amounts are higher, typically between 140-160mm, or more, and the geometry is slacker. Examples: Santa Cruz Bronson, Rocky Mountain Instinct.

Enduro: This is the newest category, a phrase that was used ad-nauseum when it first entered the North American vernacular, but luckily things have calmed down a bit. The line between all-mountain and enduro is very blurry, but the word does work well to describe a certain type of bike, one that was designed with racing in mind, or at least meant to piloted by rider who plans on riding as fast as possible through rough terrain. Because race courses vary depending on their location, the geometry and travel amounts of an enduro-oriented bike can vary between 140-170mm of rear travel, although the 150-160mm range seems to be the most common. Examples: Trek Slash, Nukeproof Mega.


Canyon
Canyon Torque
Scott Gambler 2017
Scott Gambler


Freeride: The 'Freeride' label seemed to fall out of fashion for a few years (enter the term 'Superenduro'), but we've begun to see more long-travel (170mm or more) bikes with single crown forks that fit into this category. These are bikes that can be pedaled to the top of a mountain without a chairlift, but the focus is still mainly on the descent. Examples: Canyon Torque, Commencal Supreme SX.

Downhill: A dual crown fork, around 200mm of travel, and tiny cassette are all good indicators you've got a DH bike on your hands. There aren't typically any concessions made for climbing – this is a purebred gravity machine, one that requires a shuttle, chairlift, or some pushing to get it to the top of a hill. Examples: Trek Session, Scott Gambler.

Are all these terms truly the best way to go about classifying things? Why not just categorize bikes by how much travel they have? That's not a bad idea, except for the fact that not all bikes with the same amount of travel are created equal. A Scott Genius and a Trek Slash both have 150mm of travel, but the Genius rides more like a long-limbed trail bike, and the Slash is an enduro race machine. Or take a new Transition Smuggler and compare it to a Specialized Camber – they're both 120mm 29ers, but they behave very differently out on the trail.


Is there an even better way to categorize bikes? I'm not convinced that there is, which brings us to this week's poll topic:

Do the following terms make sense for categorizing mountain bikes? Cross-country, trail, all-mountain, enduro, freeride, downhill.




406 Comments

  • + 403
 All Mountains and Enduro are pretty much the same thing
  • + 22
 Agreed... other than that, it's all semantics.
  • + 43
 Yeah, they're trail bikes. Not XC, not DH.
  • + 68
 @stevemokan: disagreed! To me trail and all mountain are the same. All moutains are designed to cross a mountain during several days, enduro are not. To me all moutains are trails with more mm but similar geom.
  • + 37
 Agreed. All-mountain can be split among "trail" and "enduro" to eliminate a relatively unnecessary category. It's really not that hard to learn anyway.
  • + 4
 Ditto. Those two categories should be combined. Everything else makes sense.
  • + 10
 Agreed. I am a big fan of enduro race, but I hate calling the bikes it. Back when enduro type of race were not popular yet, we call these bikes "all mountain". Its only when cheeze people starts calling evrything "enduro", even socks.
  • + 2
 Agreed, I say get rid of the all mountain label there's too much cross over with trail and Enduro bikes. Call the "all mountain" bikes you'd race Enduro on enduro bikes and the rest are just trail bikes
  • - 15
flag slickwilly1 (Jan 19, 2018 at 14:22) (Below Threshold)
 Personally to me an XC bike regardless of travel is one that you pedal on trails.. A DH bike regardless of travel is one you use for shuttling or bike parking because its not as much fun to pedal.. But I like to keep it simple, at one time my 2004 Norco Six was both my pedal bike (XC) and my bike park bike (DH).
  • + 1
 @ugez: Its only when cheeze people starts calling evrything "enduro", even socks

I felt the same way when people started saying "freeride" usually followed by 'man', 'dude', or some other adjective that made me want to puke. I still remember the first time I heard someone say it. The guy was a tool. Maybe that tarnished me a bit. Big Grin
  • + 6
 @Poulsbojohnny: Adduro toduro anyduro worduro is for Funduro! Tongue-eth in the Cheek-eth...duro
  • + 7
 Bro.. Thats like saying Dub and Square taper is the same thing... get with 2018 already!
  • + 23
 @ctwheeler: "You can't triple stamp a double stamp Lloyd! You can't triple stamp a double stamp....."
  • + 30
 Hmmm...no dirt-jump, slopestyle or trials?...c'on pinkbike!
  • + 35
 I think AM should be deleted XC - for going fast as you can on boring terrain. Trail - for having fun, the traditional Mountain bike Enduro - for racing or having fun downhill but having to ride to the top first although you don't really want to. Down hill - you have a shuttle, chair lift or walk up hill.
  • + 7
 I still think that XC is correct, Trail, AM and Enduro are the same thing with amount of travel up to rider's choice and then DH. Freeride could be on long travel trail bikes but also in a category of its own. Trail, AM and Enduro all serve the same purpose. Climb on your own and descend on varying degrees of technical trail but all should be capable of technical descending and the rider can choose the length of travel they feel that they need.
  • + 34
 @loopie:
I would Enduro here and there, I would Enduro anywhere,
Enduro in a box,
Enduro with a fox,
I do so love Enduro, Sam I am
  • + 2
 A bike should be classified as Enduro if it is intended for racing Enduro. If it's not intended for that race format, then it should be classified as something else.
  • + 17
 I only ride PARK!
  • + 10
 Watch this - it's all explained here:

youtu.be/6YZz2-_i6yU

You're welcome Smile
  • + 4
 @fautquecaswing: definitely! enduro bikes are mini-dh. Designed to get down a mountain as fast as possible but still capable of climbing. All mountain is a slightly more gravity oriented trail bike. XC is 70/30 climb/descend, trail is around 50/50, all mountain is 60/40, enduro 80/20, and DH 100/0
  • + 8
 When you buy a car you need to decide if you want a sedan, hatch, SUV etc. If you weren't familiar with cats these terms would be confusing too.
  • + 5
 To me the term enduro differentiates itself because those bikes are designed with a specific race application in mind, while AM bikes are not. AM bikes should theoretically be more geared toward fun, balance and ease of application/use while enduro rigs are race-bred, built to compete in a specific setting.
  • + 4
 Enduro is a term coined from racing. Unless youre racing in an enduro race, youre not riding enduro. Hell even my google chrome has enduro underlined in red!
  • + 1
 Where does over mountain fit in?
  • + 5
 Trail and all mountain are the same..although many sometimes race these bikes in an enduro race event...or even a dh event(sea otter).
  • + 3
 @slickwilly1: I agree. I am either out pedalling (XC) or I am not (DH).... it really bugs people on long travel pedal bikes when you call it XC.

... there are a multitude of sub genres, but I think ... very much like skiing (alpine & XC) at the core it's it's either DH or XC.
  • + 5
 @tbubier: "Where does over mountain fit in?"....28.99mm Potato Cannon
  • + 5
 Disagree. AM bikes are still fun to climb with, Enduro not so much. Enduro bike can smash their way downhill at speed, AMs not so much.
  • - 3
 @cmcrawfo: xc has become the dirt roadie...u really only see these bikes.at races(sub 24lbs).
Majority ride trail bikes.
Get rid of enduro as thats a race format where trail and all mountain bikes are used. Plenty use nomads on 3 hour rides in laguna beach...
  • + 1
 not exactly anymore
  • + 4
 I've raced Enduro on my all mountain bike just fine.
  • + 3
 Or we have XC, Enduro and DH....

XC = light and fast,

DH = shuttle /push only,

Enduro = everything else.
  • + 5
 Rethink / edit...

XC
Trail
DH
DJ
  • + 8
 Freeride= dh light, Enduro= freeride light, all mountain= enduro light, trail= all mountain light, xc= all mountain light, full rigid (and I guess cx)= hardcore mad man bat shit insane way of castration.
  • + 2
 I always assumed that those categories described riding styles or race formats rather than bikes. Sam Hill raced downhill on a bike he can also pedal around the whole mountain.
  • + 1
 But an Enduro likes to play around in parks - sometimes..
  • + 1
 @Slabrung: gold! although I'm sure those adjustable enduro-specific dropouts will be announced next week.
  • + 1
 @cmcrawfo: add ski touring to that, but there's only one name for it, regardless of whether the person is more uphill or downhill oriented. Then again the term freerando is now being used (backcountry freeride essentially), so there you go...

Like @fartymarty says, everything in the middle is trail. But then there are so many parameters: fast or slow, jumps or not, steep or not, on a mountain or a hill or neither... You can't have a name for everything so some kind of common nomenclature for different types of trail riding might be useful if you have to describe it for any reason. The question is, who wants to know? If you ask me I'll say "Je fais du vélo de montagne".
  • + 2
 @jammf: Smile I used to joke about the spare frame part most until one day at a trail center I saw a guy on an enduro bike with a spare frame attached to his backpack. Admittedly he was not on a trail but on an access road to the trail center, but it got me thinking spare frame may actually be a thing.
  • + 2
 For me Enduro bikes always were an "extreme all mountain", on the more downhill orientated side of all mountain bikes.
  • + 5
 When 160" bikes that were pedal efficicient began to appear, AM was coined, at that time smaller travel bikes were not as capable at descending. These days many trail bikes tend to have the DH performance of yesterdays AM rigs, thus trail bikes are basically AM bikes now, or the line is very blurred.
  • + 1
 @ugez: Yes! Thank you for this. Enduro is a race not a type of bike!! Some people do have their All Mountain bikes set up for Enduro Racing. Example: heavier casing tires and DH brakes make sense on a race bike, but may not be desired on a daily rider All Mountain bike.
  • + 6
 trek remedy and trek slash are respectively AM and endure and I prefer the remedy for the type of riding I do. I don't need the extra travel, but I don't like the fuel's twitchy ride. I think trek broke down the categories well and in doing so created a good argument for the line between AM and enduro.
  • + 1
 @fautquecaswing: I would say AM are like enduro with less travel. The rough and ready geo but with the shorter suspension to help with the climb and overall nimbleness.
  • + 15
 We just need a reference value that all bikes can be compared upon.

Shreaddiness (S) = (Travel x Wheelbase)/Headtube Angle.

S = How shred ready the bike is (I guess the units are mm^2/degree :/ )
Travel = Rear Suspension Travel (mm)
Wheelbase = Size Medium, (mm)
Headtube Angle = You guessed it. (Degrees)

For example, Slash comes out with 2973 S, or 2.973 kS.

Remedy = 2.303 kS

This way trails can be rated for a certain ideal kS, and you only have to ask where the customer wants to ride to be able to suggest the ideal bike.
  • + 2
 @StevieJB:
"Enduro - for racing or having fun downhill but having to ride to the top first although you don't really want to."

We've been calling the bike you described 'All Mountain' many years before 'Enduro' came about.
  • + 2
 @L0rdTom: this is actually really good, but add a climbability coeff and then we'll be cooking.
  • + 9
 XC - I pedal a lot and work on my cardio
DH - I’m so fast and tough and skilled because I like Sam Hill
Enduro - I don’t know what I am and everybody laughs at me
Trail - I am awake as fk and I make MTB great again
Slopestyle - I don’t do it but I say it is cool so that people think I have mad skills
4x - I don’t do it but I say they should bring it back with no particular purpose
DJ - I may be poor, but I am so fkng cool I don’t even need to ride in the woods
Ebiking - I’m a fat, part time sociopath, but I like it when my friends upgrade their Enduros to SWorks Enduros and I buy Turbo levo for 2,5k less and I can lap them twice at the trail center
  • + 3
 @L0rdTom: Doesn't quiet work for the trusty hard-tail steed. Maybe travel could be remodeled to:

Travel = (Rear Suspension Travel + Front Suspension Travel)/n

Where n is the number of suspension components on the bike. i.e. either 1 or 2.
  • + 2
 @BenPea: A cost to Shreaddiness indicator could also be useful.
  • + 1
 @Monstertruckermotherfuker: I sure wish I had this problem
  • + 1
 @patrick-marsh: yeah, that worked until some dongbag at mercedes came up with "4door coupe" and now thats a thing
  • + 3
 Enduro is one thing, all mountain is another and trail is another. Trail is 110-130 max. A comfortable xc bike, better at going up than down, all mountain is between that and enduro, equally good up as it is down, fom 130-150. Enduro is from 150-170 it goes up just to go down, better at going down than up. I've always seen it like this and think this categories are clear!
  • + 6
 @fautquecaswing: There seems to be a difference between Europe (sans UK) and the rest of the English speaking countries. Here in Europe (well, at least the German speaking part), Enduro, Trail and All-Mountain means the same categories as you've explained, with All-Mountain bikes being clearly one level below of Enduros in terms of sturdiness and downhill capacities, and they fall more in line with the 50:50 bias, whereas Enduros are mainly used for downhil (maybe 80:20 or 70:30).
This does not seem to be the case for the English speaking countries though. Maybe simply because the term Enduro caught up later there, and they already coined the term "All-Mountain" for the same type of bike.
  • + 2
 @sp00n82: I also think alll mountain was mainstream around 2009 and then with enduro it kind of got bumped out, When these bikes returned they did so with the name of trail for some reason the industry decided. But i've always seen it this way and consider bikes that way when looking to buy and stuff. But yeah second what you said.
  • + 1
 @tbubier: another word for freeride I believe...
  • - 1
 @sp00n82: AM is simply sucking by Germans and Italiana while riding on a holiday in Alps while XC us sucking at home. DH is Brits sucking in Portes Du Soleil or Malaga on bikes with 200mm travel and Enduro is Brits sucking in the same place on 160 bikes. No rider of even slightly above average skills says we ride Enduro on tuesday and dh on sunday. We ride bikes in the woods.
  • + 6
 @WAKIdesigns: I actually have no idea what you are talking about. Oo
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns: yeah, youre not making a lot of sense, a part from the part where almost all of suck at riding bikes.
  • + 6
 Dudes! Where is PLUS?? Game. Changer
  • + 1
 @L0rdTom: But that means my rigid 29 is zero even though it has a reasonable WB.

Maybe you need to throw in a HT / Rigid factor for anyone stupid enough to ride them.
  • + 3
 @WAKIdesigns: don't tell me you wrote it while sober.
  • + 3
 @sp00n82: "If you call what you're doing anything other than 'mountain biking' then you haven't got a clue and are far from proficient on a bicycle" is what he is saying. You must study Wakispeak for a little while before recognizing the patterns. They will help you uncover the meaning. It's a little bit like trying to read the inscriptions on machine gun bullets as they fly past your face.
  • + 3
 @BenPea: whether you are familiar with Family Guy or not... I HAVE SPOKENNNNN!

Anyhoo, during many years of my old prick cycling adventure I saw more than a few folks who said they ride downhill or Enduro or Cross Country. These were either pro riders in a video or absolute Joeys in real life, with the latter being most common. Little in between. I could philosophize on the fact that once you precisely determine what you do with your bike you should be able to live up to it but I leave it alone. I ride downhill, I love downhill - a dude on a trail bike just rode past you mate... It's just my inability to deal with someone asking me if I do downhill and being unable to answer in less than 3 sentences... you can always say "I do trail riding", and you are covered. You set your self low standards and have nothing to live up to, then it sounds like you ride bikes on trails which is true. So trail riding is awake as fk and super cool... at least as long as there is no Trail World Series...
  • + 1
 I always simply say that I ride a bike. When I had bike related injuries I asked the doctors if I can ride a bike. They probably thought about road or commuting so the answer was - why not if you do it carefully. Why of course, I always ride carefully! Problem solved!
Unfortunately after the last season I wrecked my spine so much that I have trouble finding a doctor who would say this even if they don't know it's mtb Frown Please keep fingers crossed for me, as I intend to ride anyway...
  • + 0
 @Slabrung: ouch didn't know it's that bad. Doctors always say that so that we die in front of the TV and see them only during the last months of our miserable life filled with flashbacks of med commercials... and hten you read about pros delaying their surgeries on quite fkd up joints until the season is over. Healing vibes and keeping my fingers crossed.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Unfortunately it's not good at all... I put my faith in my physiotherapist. And yesterday I visited a neurosurgeon who totally looked like Tony Stark from the first Iron Man. So at least some consolation Smile Anyway I try to remain positive although sometimes it's hard. I'm not able to accept the possibility of not riding my bike...
P.S. and as I don't ride now I have more time for Pinkbike... And Pinkbike reminds me that I can't ride... very frustratingFrown
  • + 2
 @patrick-marsh: your throwing cats into the mix is confusing in itself, brah.
  • + 2
 Example : YT Jefsy is a rippin trail bike 29" or 27.5 & YT Capra is able to rip park or trail on the daily , both enduro ready Bikes... BUT.... Capra is like the smell of nepalm in the morning, it smells like Victory!!

s.hswstatic.com/gif/napalm-1.jpg
  • + 1
 @BenPea: f*ck ... Alpine Touring ... how could I forget the enduro of the ski world.

XC-AT-Alpine = XC-enduro-DH
  • + 1
 The difference between all mountain and enduro: all mountain I drink a beer, enduro I drink water
  • + 2
 @warehouse: so you've never heard of #beerduro? Which effectively stands for least 70% of Enduro?
  • + 1
 Honestly though we’re only looking at the tip of the iceberg. The most important differences between the two lie in wheel tread, bar width, and some minor geometry stuff. But, it’s semantics mostly.
  • + 1
 @PaulinhoCascavel: Doesn't make them money of course they wouldn't mention that discipline! I know they can generally be the same bike but don't forget 4X too!
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: This still makes not a lot of sense, why not call it mountain bike then? You ride bikes on mountains which is true!
  • + 1
 yeah works for me Smile
  • + 1
 @stefanfresh: What about the poor sods who live in places like East Anglia? They may own a bike, but they may have never ridden it up a hill, let alone a mountain, into and out of a drainage ditch maybe their lot. The drainage ditch maybe too steep maybe 6" to risk on an XC bike, what are they going to do, I don't think they need a Mountain bike ;-) ?
  • + 2
 @StevieJB: That's sounds perfect, you summed it up perfectly!
But do you remember when "all mountain, Enduro" where Called mid-travel bikes. that was to vaque, I think if bike sales people used your discriptions there would be lots of educated newbies out there.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Forgot to thank you for your good wishes. It's weird how stupid things like reading a few nice words from someone you don't know are important...
  • + 2
 I always thought "Enduro" was the name of racing gnalry trails with trail bikes?
  • + 1
 @almacigatrailrider: maybe they are all trail bikes (we don't have any mountains in SE England either but plenty if trails).

Then you could have XC race trail bikes, DH race trail bikes and just plain old trail bikes.
  • + 3
 @StevieJB: I have found my friend in Berlin to call a tiny hill a mountain... So i Guess depending on where you live your concept of mountain is different haha
  • + 1
 Think you have those figures backwards unless you 100% want to pedal ur DH uphill @JasonALap:
  • + 3
 How about we start the sport of Off Road Unassisted Cycling... ORUC - I vote Sick Bicycles for the Avant Garde of the genre! We can start all over and make new standards that will hold for 100 years to come.

You may also start Shredding and roosting on technical terrain on long slack and playful 26" bikes that are not ebikes, but I'm not joining. SRAROTTOLSAP264lifef*ckebikes
  • + 1
 @LoganKM1982: I think you meant:

I would enduro off a box
I would enduro with a fox
but not without my enduro socks
  • + 1
 @DIYsandvich: heresy! that means you have an enduro bike! *sarcasm

Ya... enduro/all mountain are the same in my mind.
  • + 1
 @ugez: I had reason in opting for Enduro to describe that type of bike, quite right we all know All Mountain was Enduro. However as a phrase All Mountain and Trail could be the same thing to a newbie whereas Enduro has come from racing, is associated with racing - it's notably different and I think those bikes are notably different from trail bikes. I've a Snabb T and a Swoop ones clearly trail, the Snabb only weighs about 0.5kg more than my hardtail and climbs almost as well, the others Enduro (Radon say on the website 'Freeride / Super Enduro - pointless extra un-necessary descriptions) its about 1kg heavier and noticeably harder work to climb than the trail bike.
  • + 1
 @fartymarty: yea mate that makes a lot of sense, i agree 100%
  • + 1
 @GregToth: I was being a little sarcastic but it is like trying to classify music. In the end it is what it is and you either kike it or you don't.
  • + 1
 @Costir: I totally agree!!!
  • + 119
 I was looking for the "shut up and ride your bike" selection. I feel like it would have had the highest rating.
  • + 8
 +1000
  • + 5
 Then why are we reading this article rather than riding? Why don't you shut your mouth and go riding, if you feel that's the best thing to do?
Bref.
  • + 1
 I agree, as a child my parents bought me a bike, and I rode it. There was no, "meeeeerrrrrrrmmmmmmm, but 23 millimeters".
  • + 1
 @Uuno: Please point out what is offensive about my post. Honestly, chill out. Just having fun. Besides, I don't have a winter bike to thrash around with.
  • + 2
 @Uuno: because you can only ride so many hours of the day in our respective northern latitudes, if they aren't snowed in, leaving lots of time to peruse and add to the comments sections as well as ride.
  • + 65
 It isn't too bad. I think easily explained to noobs - Four categories: XC(bias is Up) - Trail/All-Mtn(50/50 Up-Down) - Enduro(bias is Down) - DH(Down only)....... First bike for a noob = Trail/All-Mtn...they can decide which way to go after getting some mileage on that
  • + 5
 Damn, that is succinct and accurate.
  • - 4
flag BenPea (Jan 20, 2018 at 2:51) (Below Threshold)
 Enduro is 50/50 too. You can't descend more than you've climbed, unless it's assisted. Unless enduro means partially assisted. Is e-biking enduro? Is the point at which you're not enduroing anymore the moment you stop hating climbing so much?
Dammit, are your brains not hurting thinking about this?
  • + 3
 @BenPea: If i go in to the montains, I tend to use the gondola up so I can descend more and don't have to climb all day. A normal day of riding can easily be 500m up/7000m down all on enduro bikes 'cause DH bikes are just not suitet for the kind of trails found in the Alps(besides the bikeparks obviously).
  • + 2
 @NickBosshard: But enduro bikes are meant for not using the lifts, so perhaps the classifications also change depending on how fit one is.
  • + 1
 @brodoyouevenbike: I'm not sure you can be called unfit if you can't climb 7000 m in a day!
The problem is that so many people have been using enduro for so long without there being an official definition that it doesn't mean anything anymore, unless you're taking racing. We're all kind of doing the same thing (riding mtbs), but on different terrain. You could ignore the categories and just go by the geometry and travel numbers if you know you're riding style and where you're going to ride. If you have to have categories, many others on this thread have said it better, like @Soulrebel
  • + 2
 @BenPea: Nah, even if you do as much D+ as D-, with an enduro bike the focus is more to go fast on the way down than on the way up.
  • + 0
 Enduro and all mountain are the same thing. The only difference is that gapers were first introduced to all mountain bikes through popular/new enduro races so they call them enduro bikes. Its stupid. There is literally no difference between all mountain and enduro- just the dubba who is using the wrong term.
  • + 1
 @Eneite: true, but if you happen to be am uphill whippet and a DH beast do you slide into the AM category?
  • + 1
 @BenPea: What about the time I took a DH to an enduro race? Does it break the internet?
  • + 3
 @brodoyouevenbike: err... I would say no. Try posting videos of dead people on you tube, that usually works.
  • + 2
 @BenPea: Yes, any bike other than a DH-specific is an up/down 50/50 bike. It's the performance difference that makes....the difference.
  • + 2
 @scott-townes: while I would agree that in many bike brand line-ups AM and Enduro are similar/the same I think Trek have nailed an example of two bikes that fit precisely in each of these two different categories with the Remedy and the Slash. Both have similar travel. Both can ride similar terrain. But it’s commonly accepted that the Slash is much more of a bruiser on the downhill. Not only are wheel sizes different but HA, CS length, BB height, etc are all changed respectively. There’s a clear difference.
  • + 2
 @sledshed: Having a slightly different geometry doesn't make it its own category of bike............
  • + 63
 i mean here on pinkbike i think we all understand what those titles mean. but so many bikes are also being described as difficult to categorize to the point that putting them into discrete classifications is sorta meaningless. DH bikes will always be their own, as will XC race bikes, but everything in between is pretty fuzzy.
  • + 9
 Those bikes are difficult to categorize because of how we have defined the categories.
  • + 8
 We may all understand it, but possibly in a different way. As a european dude that saw enduro growing for more than 10 years now, i clearly see a difference between Enduro (160ish) and All Mountain (140ish) and trail bike even less than that. Now the reality is that it's not just about the mm of travel, but many other parameters: geometry (long low slack or not), pedaling performance, suspension performance... and it's gonna make the bike tip towards another category, until the unicorn quiver killer finally appears to us.
  • + 10
 Climbs like a XC, bombs like a DH.
  • + 8
 all these categories are probably srams fault Big Grin
  • + 4
 Yep. Classification based on travel only is pretty meaningless. Nobody will use a bike with XC geometry and 200mm real travel for DH, but some used an enduro bike with slack angles for DH. You can handle a lot of things with an appropriated geometry that an increase in travel will not allow. Travel for bike classification is purely marketing, it is a one-figure box game like 100mm is XC, 120-140 trail, 140-160 all-mountain. It ask way more education to use wheelbase length, angles, front center, etc... and ultimately suspension kinematic parameters to get a picture of a bike abilities, but the picture will be clearer, for sure.
  • + 12
 Don't quite know where my 'do everything' hardcore hardtail fits in. All I know is it does pretty much anything and I call it a mountain bike. Oh and it's a sh*t load of fun too...
  • + 4
 I think you get a good point, discrete classification is creating limitation. Create a shred index, composed of travel and key geometric factors, allowing a continous scale.
  • + 4
 @TheRaven: yeah what about DJ, rigid, single speed, Ebike, clunker, trials, we got a lot of shit to talk about. Ooooor we got some filler fluff content in the dead of winter crap.
  • + 2
 @mattrix2: Climbs like an All-mountain bombs like Enduro:p
  • + 2
 Well, I was thinking of creating a gravity oriented aggressive xc mid-fat plus HT e-bike thing. But still can't figure out how to classify it. Gonna go back to riding my short travel 27.5 trail/xc fun machine and forget about classifications.
  • + 2
 @bcmrider: aggressive XC - it’s what you do after you learn to bunny hop without clipless pedals but you keep your Vo2 max
  • + 51
 How I see it is there are 2 different types of mountain bikes

Race bikes & The non race bike equivalent

XC race bike / Trail non race bike
Enduro race bike / AM non race bike
DH race bike / Freeride non race bike

With the race versions being more built for purpose & performance oriented compared to the non racers

Not that it matter lol
  • + 1
 Makes sense.
  • + 4
 This is how I usually explain to people my collection and why I don't have just 1 bike...
  • + 5
 What's the opposite of performance oriented? A bike that sucks?
  • + 4
 @BenPea: Comfort oriented
  • + 0
 @BenPea: Fun! I would also accept Beer! really just send Beer.
  • + 44
 Travel means nothing. Geometry means everything.
  • + 201
 *Rides off into sunset on rigid DH bike*
  • - 16
flag vinay (Jan 19, 2018 at 12:36) (Below Threshold)
 @rwjones4: Well yeah, you can have a hardtail downhill bike. For those bike park type DH trails you may be able to get away with a fully rigid (fat) DH hardtail. But geometry is still the main thing. You need high speed stability for a DH bike.
  • + 6
 @rwjones4: dam right. My hardtail had a ha of 64 degrees and rips like a mofo!
  • + 8
 @vinay: You could call it a downhill bike, but that doesnt really make it a downhill bike
  • + 7
 Also Im pretty sure those were dubbed freeride hardtails over a decade ago
  • + 3
 I used to DH a Hardtail with a dual crown fork, 24'' wheel in the back, and a 26 up front... It was a very slack bike, and I actually hit some pretty sick trails with it. So yes I agree.
  • + 1
 That's most of it. Kona Process 111. Polygon Square One / Marin Wolf Ridge. Diamondback Release. Those weird looking bikes with the gap between the headset and everything below (can't remember the name).
  • + 1
 @rwjones4: This made my day
  • + 0
 @me2menow: It's not me. BTR has their Belter DH frame, DMR has had an Exalt DH frame. Call them and share your knowledge.
  • + 24
 Now imagine if SRAM engineers got ahold of this classification list...
  • + 11
 They'd just obsolete ALL the categories so EVERYONE has to buy a new bike.

(somewhere a SRAM marketing guy is reading this going "wait a minute, that's GENIUS!!! HEY GUYS I HAVE AN IDEA!!!!")
  • + 5
 Trail bikes need to be a little more playfull, 27.299" wheels will do it. On the other hand, enduro bikes need more speed and control, what about 28.99" wheels? Don't forget specific gearing for each category and different shock "standards" We all dreamt of such magnificent world, tnx SRAM!
  • - 1
 Best comment ever! Big Grin
  • + 14
 I think there could be a better system, but I have no idea what that better system would look like. But at this point, these existing classifications are pretty well beaten into our heads.
  • + 18
 pinkbike is just preparing us for their new standard the "pinkbike superboost 28.99 classification system"
  • + 8
 Couple suggestions:
-flat, up-n-down, down.
-dude?, dude, dude!

I vote the later.
  • + 6
 @Dally666: i like the transition way of describing things with their up and down hills, over mounds of dirt, or down mountains (and the associated symbols)
  • + 2
 @adrennan: I also like Transition's descriptions. I think that for enthusiastic mountain bikers, we know what we want, so the classifications are of limited use to us. But for a newb, it could be really helpful - and unfortunately, the existing classifications probably aren't a lot of help. Something along the line of Transitions fun classifications are probably actually more helpful.
  • + 3
 I agree that there should be a better system. The description above sees trail, all mountain and enduro bikes over lapping. General mountainbiking up should be called trail. XC should remain XC and DH remain DH. All mountain and Enduro are just more extreme versions of trail bikes and trail riding in my opinion.
  • + 11
 The problem with this system is that it is trying to hit a moving target. There are always companies coming out with bikes that blurr the lines. Evil Calling is a good example. If I look at the travel figures alone I would never buy it. But that bike punches way above its figures. Same with the Transition Scout or the Yeti SB5. That same travel on bikes built 5 to 7 years ago would not have been enough for my "Needs". But now some of these bikes are making me think twice about why I insist on 160mm front and back. If the suspension is good I would be happy with 130/140. But that decrease alone takes you from "Enduro" down into "Trail"
  • + 11
 for me there is XC bikes ideal for going up, Downhill bikes which are great for going down and something in the middle that is fun for both. I like riding something in the middle and don't really care what they call it...
  • + 7
 You're absolutely right, it doesn't matter what it's called, as long as it's fun for both. I also like going down... Wait, are we still talking about mountainbikes?
  • + 3
 @lukabe: are we? does it matter as long as its fun?
  • + 2
 @michibretz: I completely agree.
  • + 9
 Freeride is and always has been a poor term to be used in mountain biking. It implies that you mountain bike like a skier would, exploring the mountain regardless of where the predetermined trails point you. You traverse over to the cliff zone, blast through some trees, carve down a blank face. Not even at Rampage are riders going off trail. The only situations that even comes close to "freeride" on a mountain bike is the kind of stuff James Doerfling is doing up in Williams Lake or the mountains showcased in Where The Trail Ends. And that's all usually done on a DH bike.
  • + 13
 Hey Pinkbike, bring back "Freeride" category on photos!
  • + 3
 cant agree more the PB categories suck !! should include every discipline separately !! @pinkbike
  • + 2
 @RedBurn: Agreed. We need better/more modern photo categories.
  • + 12
 You forgot (I only ride) p p p park
  • + 15
 Oh you ride chainless too? Well I ride brakeless foo.
  • + 10
 I'm so damn pro at every thing that I do: if i did slopestyle i'd probably win that too !
  • + 3
 I don’t ride down shit I jump the whole damn thing
  • + 11
 Did you just assume my bike's category?! It's category-fluid alright?!
  • + 8
 I'd like to propose a new system -

Uphill bike (xc)
Uphill uphill downhill
Uphill downhill
Downhill downhill uphill
Downhill

Simple !!! What do ya reckon?
  • + 4
 With dirt jump being
Downhill uphill downhill uphill downhill uphill?
  • + 3
 I reckon that's double plus good.
  • + 9
 What can you do? Basically everything that out now that isn’t a hard tail would have been considered DH 15 years ago.
  • + 5
 @mikekazimer: these so-called "poll" articles aren't really polls per se, but a way to validate a pre-masticated conclusion. Steering your audience into a conclusion and then presenting a multiple choice to validation it isn't honest. You should do -and know- better.
  • + 2
 I agree. The article is written in such a way that it primes the pump for the poll.

That said, the results of the poll surprise me, given the article and the comments. I think the language in the questions is a little flawed too because I think people are answering the question "do you understand" when the idea was more "should it change".
  • + 8
 Remember that time Specialized tried to trademark, Enduro, and Epic, and Roubaix and...
  • + 3
 Not tried... did. Like 20 years ago or something. Are you even old enough to remember that?
  • + 1
 and session
  • + 4
 Can't you just ride a mountain bike for fun and not have to label yourself? Can't you do a 150km road ride of day, 50km XC the next and then go hit some jump lines or bike park after?

XC, Enduro and Downhill are race formats.
Bikes could be classified within those parameters, but they don't have to be separated by travel.

You can have XC race bike from a rigid ht over to steep angled 80mm FS or slack 130mm FS.

Same as with Enduro race bike - it can be 120mm travel or 180mm travel one.

Travel categories are too rigid and don't make much sense.

We're too focussed on placing labels on things and it's gotten to the ridiculous heights even branding grips, shoes, saddles or apparel as Enduro, Trail etc.
  • + 3
 There’s an elephant in the room. Rider skill. A pro can tear ass down a trail on a “poppy” 120mm bike hitting every feature with style while most of us would benefit from more forgiving amounts of travel to “survive” the same trail at a relatively slower pace. Bike classification never explicitly addresses this.
  • + 3
 It's not the classes themselves that need to change, it's how we put bikes into them that's the problem.

This was discussed in Vernon's recent rant about standards and technological advancement. We've so far been dropping bikes into these categories by their travel. 100mm bike = XC, 120-130mm bike = trail, 140-150mm bike = AM, 160-170mm bike = Enduro, and so on. But we've just experienced the start of a major shift in the rankings of what's important in a bike. It's safe to say that geometry has finally officially surpassed travel as what defines a bike. Thus we now have 130-140mm bikes that are more "Enduro" than some 160mm bikes.

The problem that lies ahead is nailing down a new definition for each class. It seems to me that head angle vs. seat tube angle may be the best way to go but I can see arguments for an entire host of different equations.
  • + 3
 I disagree with the hypothetical discussion at the LBS. Its more like:

Shop employee: "How much are you thinking of spending"?
Customer: "$500"
Shop employee: "Unfortunately, in that price range we only have the old low tech bikes you have to pedal uphill yourself. I have the perfect bike for you over here..."
  • + 3
 Where are the quiver killers categorized? That one bike that does it all, xc race and dh all in the same weekend, freeride on monday, maybe an all mountain tuesday, wednesduro, trail thursdays, and you know its dance party fridays at the local DJs.
  • + 1
 Easy, they're in the unicorn category. Especially if they cause rainbows to magically appear in their wake.
  • + 6
 You forgot jump bikes...

And cx/gravel though I'll accept those not really being mtb
  • + 3
 *in no way shape or form
  • + 1
 @me2menow: I wouldn't go that far. Some trail centres these days are so smooth you could probably ride them on a cx and still be faster than the tourists on their far too shiny full sussers. I have to admit I'm guessing here, I've not gone more retro than rigid mtb.
  • + 1
 @sideshowb: If it's flat yeah
  • + 3
 We should just use the Spinal Tap scale.
1 = road bike,
3 = xc,
5 = trail
6 = all mountain
8 = enduro
9 = freeride
11 = DH
Then you can multiply by the wheelsize coefficient and figure out what is the forumking of bikes. 6*26 vs 9*29? battle on!!!
  • + 7
 I just go Mountain Bike riding.
  • + 2
 Yup, so much yup.
  • + 2
 You think types of mtb are hard to understand... look at road bikes... road, gravel, tri, touring, commuter... at least ours are visually distinguishable without an engineering breakdown... I'll gladly spend time explaining the types of mtb to a novice over that.
  • + 2
 Get rid of All Mountain and Freeride and that's plenty. XC > Trail > Enduro > Downhill. XC is race oriented HTs and 120mm travel oriented for racing and flatter courses. Trail is rowdy hardtails (Trek Stache, Kona Honzo) and 100-140mm with HT angles generally more than 67 deg meant to climb and descend equally. Enduro is 140-180mm full sus, meant to climb and descend but more-so to descend. Downhill is anything dual crown and >180mm travel.

It is too complicated, but easily simplified.
  • + 2
 The bigger problem isn't how they are categorized, but how they are marketed and reviewed. So many companies tout their bike as the 'great at everything' bike that 'climbs like and XC bike and descends like a Downhill bike', which is just a load of crap. I would personally get ride of the 'Enduro' category. I would go with XC, Trail, Downhill. Downhill would include 'Enduro', which is really just a 'reasonably' pedal-able downhill bike. I'm leaving 'Dirt Jumping' out of this because I don't consider these mountain bikes really as they are very niche.

When reviewing bikes, the review should be done against all possible types of riding, even those not necessarily intended for that type of bike. Ratings should be absolute. None of this 'climbs great... for an enduro bikd' or 'descends greate... for an XC race bike'. Ratings should include:

Descending ratings:
- High speed descending
- Cornering
- Chunder/gnar descending
- Slow speed/tight switchback/tech descending
- Jumping
Climbing ratings:
- Steep climbing
- Long/extended climbing
- Rolling/short burst climbs
- Slow speed/tight switchback/tech climbs
- Climbing position (seated/standing)

Rate each category 1-10, with 50 max each for Descending and Climbing and a max total rating of 100. 100 should never be achievable. A total score of 50 should indicate a good solid bike that fits its intended purpose. Anything around 60 would be above average, and anything approaching 70 should be category defining. Anyone throwing around ratings in the 80's and 90's should be held to extreme scrutiny.
  • + 2
 Calling a bike "enduro" is so annoying. If you race enduro, you may have an All Mountain bike set up for enduro racing. It kind of reminds me of 20 years ago when folks were calling free ride bikes "north shore" bikes and they weren't riding anywhere near North Van.
  • + 2
 Interesting your mentioned the Smuggler. For me it's way faster up and down than my 160mm full carbon "Enduro" bike ever was and way more confidence-inspiring (sorry for cliche phrasing). It only has 130/115 travel but it's a freaking sledgehammer through rough trail.
  • + 2
 How many times? Enduro is form of MTB racing, not a bike.

XC will morph into trail bikes in the coming years as manufacturers slowly find the guts to put capable geometry on them. Scott has already got the ball rolling on that. There will just be lighter trail bikes than others.

In the end they'll just be, Trail - 150mm, AM 150mm+ and DH bikes.

Freeride bikes are about as relevant as slope style bikes. There's probably less than 5 in existence.
  • + 8
 XC is a form of mountain bike racing.

Bikes are called XC bikes, so why can you not have Enduro?
  • + 4
 XC, Trail, DH. Lets keep it simple. I think XC will always around as long as there is XC racing. Trail is everything in the middle that can be pedalled. DH is any bike that needs lift access.
  • + 1
 @handynzl: I agree with jclnv - Enduro is a type of riding / racing not a bike. I can race Enduro on my 29HT if I want and that's a trail bike.
  • + 1
 @handynzl: Which is why I said XC bikes will be known as trail bikes in three years.
  • + 3
 DH is a form of racing.

I have to disagree here. I think naming a bike for an intended racing discipline makes sense. For every discipline, there is a compromise for said and and everyone knows what it means, e.g. everyone knows what compromises an xc or DH bike has. If it’s not meant for racing, then it’s just a trail bike, short travel or long travel. There are some killer long travel trail bikes that are super fun, but wouldn’t be the best against a clock.
  • + 1
 @whambat: XC, Enduro and DH. That also makes sense in my mind.
  • + 1
 I think the Enduro category is very justifiable. Look at Trek Slash and Remedy. Perfect example of Enduro and AM. Similar travel, can be ridden on similar trails, very different handling characteristics due to wheel size and geo differences.
  • + 2
 I like having a title for the class. Going off of amount of suspension can be deceiving. The new Rocky Mountain Instinct BC should be an enduro race bike based on the 29" wheels and 160/155mm of travel. However, it rides like a trail bike. It pops off of things and handles extremely well. You don't have to push it hard to enjoy it like a dh bike or "mini-dh" bike enduro sled.
  • + 2
 "Yes, I know what they [categorizing mountain bikes] mean, and they make sense to me"... BUT... "I think there could be a better system"

Maybe a combination or some crazy ratio of rear travel and head angle could be combined and viewed on one scale (two things easily explainable to MTB geeks and newbies alike) Scale could start at Spandex and go all the way up to chairlift.

You could have a hardtail with a super slack HA or a DH bike from the late 90's.... and these bikes could possibly be neighbors on the MTB attribute scale.

Voila: one category called 'Mountain Bikes'
  • + 2
 The labels have to be there to make quick work of segmenting everything out but realistically a rider with a back injury may opt for a squishy all-mountain bike and never leave the green xc trails and an endurbro pinner might pick a five-inch trail bike because he knows his skill level and prefers the shorter travel. Both happen all the time. A good bike salesperson will sit down with you for a minute and ask questions about your experience, skill level, fitness, and aspirations then recommend a bike that best fits your criteria, labelled or otherwise.
"And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules."
  • + 1
 There are a few problems with the classifications as they are. First, the categories deal with intent; meaning, what is the intended use of said bike. The problem is that one manufacturer may think an "enduro" bike needs 200mm of travel, where some other maker might say a bike only needs 140mm if the head angle is 63 degrees.

That leads in to another problem which is that there is so much overlap between the categories, to the point where they are more or less the same. The boundaries of the categories are partly so blurry because they aren't apples-to-apples...some are types of race, others are (for lack of a better word) frames of mind.

I suppose if you look at a given manufacturer's product line, they probably make sense within their offerings. The biggest problem I may come down to marketing - "with our new suspension 135.6mm of travel FEELS like a regular 170mm bike, so THEREFORE it can be used as 'enduro'..."
  • + 1
 I believe that there are no Freeride bikes anymore, just super Enduro. Knolly delirium is probably the closest, but with 11 or 12 speed, a dropper and 650b is still pretty Enduro. Of course you don't have to and make it as Freeride as possible, beast of a bike
  • + 3
 I think the categories should be: XC, Trail, Enduro, DH. Any more than those and things become confusing because the difference between bikes becomes too small.
  • + 1
 This has to be so f*cking confusing to someone that wants to get into mountain bikes. Imagine never riding one and walking into a shop to get bikes for you and your kid? I pretty much just break it down to XC, trail, DH when I’m explaining it to noobs. I can’t imagine what happens to some noobs head when the walk into a shop and get an 18 year old sales guy talking circles.
  • + 1
 I think the labels make sense, but at this point geometry wise I feel like there is XC, Enduro, and Gravity. Trail and all mountain bikes all just feel like lower travel Enduro machines now. It seems like our desire for downhill prowess has shortened our ruler for climbing ability. Longer, lower, slacker is great and all, but on a 120mm doesn't that seem like overkill? I just want a bike that's comfortable on the downhill, but mostly focused on pedaling efficiency. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough, but I don't feel like there's many out there.
  • + 1
 Mountain bikes shouldn't be classified.
Riding skills should be the factor of what kind of bike it is, regardless of the bike's travel, geometry, build.
After all, does it matter if the bike is and "enduro" bike, if the biker only cross country rides it?
A Donkey can have a Hucker bike, but we'd still call it a donkey bike because it's ridden by a Donkey.
  • + 1
 What about?
Dirt jump
Street
Slope style
Park
Aggressive hard tail?
All freeride I’m guessing? Not for me they all require different skills and a different mind set. Like DJ is a relaxed attitude where slope is big air with knarley tricks. More categories than one might think......
  • + 4
 Any mountain bike that isnt a dh bike Or a jump bikeis an xc bike. Simple. You ride across country on them.
  • + 1
 another way to look at this is specificity.....some bikes are made to one thing 100% and nothing else......dh bikes for example.....other bikes are designed to do 3 things at 80% but do nothing 100%...allmtn.......single purpose bikes.....multi-purpose bikes
  • + 1
 They're all trail bikes except that Gambler.
- the epic's just super lightweight and more ideal for a spartan
- the sb45's burly yet agile, a weapon for a marine
- the instinct's a little longer and cushier, a weapon for an army grunt
- the mega 275 takes that length and cush and makes it more flighty, a weapon for an airman
- the torque goes even longer, seeking out the biggest targets to hit, a weapon for a sailor
- the gambler is a weapon for special forces.
They're just tools, specialized for different strategies. Like the different branches, they all make fun of each other with stereotypes, for how they choose to engage in "combat", as if one were more glorious than the other. An AK does the job like a AR would, but you might get looked at funny, especially if everyone surrounding you is used to taking shots at the dudes with AKs.
  • + 1
 I basically break it down to three categories.....1) bikes made for people who like and want to pedal.....2) bikes for people that want to have fun and pedaling is a secondary thought.........3) bikes for people that want both.........

I don't like to go on travel because I have a 5 inch trail bike that's great for pedaling......and I have a 6 inch allmtn/enduro ....only one inch different....but totally different in function.
  • + 2
 There are only two types of bikes. Cross Country bikes and Downhill bikes. One you pedal up hills and then ride down them, the other you take a lift, drive, or walk up hills and then ride down them.
  • + 1
 Bugger I was fine with that nice explanation from Mike, now I’ve read the comments section I’m completely bambozoled - thing I’ll go for a spin on my racer, to clear my head, hang on or was it a gravel bike? Or a tourer....bugger.
  • + 1
 Me: As soon as Santa Cruz adds two more degrees to the seat angle, I may buy a Hightower LT
Salesguy: Oh so you want an Enduro bike.
Me: No, I can't rip a tire of a rim with my teeth and after two hours, all I want is a beer, a shower and a nap.
Salesguy: So then are you going ride it in Xc?
me" No, I;m allergic to lycra and I'm not built like a twig with.ooooooo1% body fat.
Salesguy: So are you going to ride it on the road?
Me: No, the thought of cars passing me at 60 mph and the awful noise a knobby makes gives me the chills.
Salesguy: So what are you going to do the your new Hightower if not Enduro, XC, or road?
Me: I'm going to ride the trails on my mountain bike. Simple.
  • + 1
 I've been using travel to classify bikes for many many years and it's worked out quite well. However recently there have been more and more bikes with very unbalanced amounts of travel (Hightower for example) and short travel bikes with aggressive geometry that have blurred the lines. I find it easier to just let people ride whatever they want.
  • + 1
 i do know what they mean but back in the day there were less categories. we had XC (100-120ish) all mountian (or trail bike) was 130-160 freeride and downhill were kind of grouped as one but certain bikes like the konda stinky were freeride bikes but the stab was a DH bike. but yes today the groups are more specific and it makes it easier to use them
  • + 1
 Sort it out by tire size and casings. We all know what XC runs. Larger volume with minimal weight for Trail. Heavy casing for DH & FR and somewhere in between for AM. Of course Enduro will always be “Enduro Specific”.
  • + 1
 This might be the most stupid article I’ve read on pinkbike. If someone is just getting into mountain biking first that person gets a bike. Once they actually START RIDING they will figure out what type of riding they prefer and go from there. You don’t need to ride the same bike forever
  • + 1
 AM was Enduro before it was Enduro - my first Enduro bike, a 2006 Spesh Enduro was, almost ironically labelled AM.

To me - if the new rider wants a “Mountain Bike” they want a trail bike, after all “trail” was just a term to give a non-specialist bike a name.
  • + 1
 It is an argument that will never end, because we all have a lens of what constitutes "mountain biking"

There's a good case that cyclocross is part of mountain biking too. And remember that fox prototype from 2017 Sea Otter - a short travel fork for a CX bike. I have a steel frame single speed road bike with flat bars, mtb brakes, and slicks. I ripped that thing on a local xc loop as part of a road ride, does that count as mountain biking?

The only place the categories matter are the race track, because different race formats have rules restricting what can be used, but even those are very loose in this sport. Road, Tri, CX, XC, BMX, Enduro, DH. Otherwise, it's purely for fun, and what's fun varies not just between people, but by mood.

I think for people just starting out on mountain bikers, a mid-travel full suspension with reasonable geometry numbers at an affordable price is the best choice. AKA: "Trail". Ride the snot out of it, and then make a more category specific choice when you know what you like.
  • + 4
 Just put the above definitions in a glass frame on the wall of the bike shop and point to it and say: choose your ride
  • + 1
 Categories make sense until you get to trail, all-mountain and enduro. I think it can better be classified as short and long travel trail bikes. You can still race enduro on short travel trail bikes and often times it can be the best weapon and at the same time a lot of long travel trail bikes can pedal as good as a 120mm bike. Maybe aggressive trail bike would also be a better way to term a bike because the amount of travel a bike has doesn't tell the whole story of design.
  • + 1
 I want a bike with XC levels of travel but with trail geometry... Why doesn't anybody make that bike? I know smuggler and process 111 will be brought up, but what I actually want is basically an epic or spark with trail or more aggressive geometry. Does anyone make that bike? Is it because it can't be categorized as a XC or a trail bike?
  • + 2
 tallboy
  • + 4
 Lets not forget weight. It seems like when you go from XC bikes to Trail Bikes, you might as well just go to an Enduro. Somewhere along the lines the industry noticed they could sell us a 120mm bike that weighs 5lbs more than the same XC bike and nobody would complain. Most people shopping for XC bikes think that 25lbs or less is the target weight, unless size XL. Then suddenly when you cross shop trail bikes, 30lbs is acceptable. You'll often find that many 140+ bikes end up right around 30lbs as well. The industry doesn't seem interested in producing lightweight trail bikes anymore, especially in alloy. To me, XC/TR bikes should be roughly the same weight (25lbs without carbon), but with different travel and geometry. Long travel trail bikes (125-145mm) should aim for between 25-30lbs. AM/EN should aim for between 30-35 lbs. Stop telling us that a portly 33lbs 110mm bike is "competitive." The industry has gotten lazy with weights and just decided that 25lbs is reserved for top-end, ultra expensive, carbon wonderbikes.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: Agreed, I want an xc bike with trail geometry... not short travel dh bike. SB4.5 is pretty close to that, just a bit more travel than I would like and a lot more than I wanna spend.
  • + 2
 @PHeller: what full alloy xc bike checks in under 25lbs? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I just can't think of one. The Specialized is 27 lbs for alloy. Treks Top Fuel 8 is 28.5 lbs.

Tack on a fork that isn't a noodle, a dropper post, and tires that can survive a little more, (and possibly some wider rims to go with them) and you're staring down the barrel of 30 lbs. And if they don't offer those things, it'll get torn apart by reviewers who will point to bikes of similar capabilities offering dropper posts, better forks, and better tires.

The SC Tallboy I think is a good suggestion, it's a fast bike that pedals great and can be ridden like a regular trail bike. weight for the alloy model R build? 30.4 lbs per SC.
  • + 1
 I'm sure the Banshee Phantom isn't the only bike like what you're looking for: bansheebikes.com/phantom
  • + 1
 @captainspaulding: Kona, Scott, and even Cannondale are making xc bikes with what would have been trail bike geometry just a couple years ago. I slacked my old C-dale Scalpel into 69 HA, vs 71.5 stock, and it’s super fun again. I planned on making it my gravel grinder type bike until the change as I stoped racing, now it’s a blast to ride again. Now, I’m just out seeing how much abuse it can take before snapping.
  • + 1
 @JaredHarzan: Just a few years ago you could get a Santa Cruz Tallboy LT in Alloy down to 27lbs in 29er mode with a dropper and no carbon.
  • + 2
 Kona Hei Hei looks nice.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: "get a Tallboy down to 27lbs"
Do you mean by swapping parts? Seems very light for a factory build with actual trail worthy tyres
  • + 1
 @PHeller: But it didn't come stock at that weight. I'm sure you could get the current tallboy to around 27 lbs with some changes. That NX drivetrain isn't particularly light, and the DHF definitely isn't a light tire. Swap those and new wheels and a few cockpit changes/different brakes and you're there.

And since the current medium has almost the same reach as the old tallboy lt xl, you can probably downsize if you're worried about the weight of the frame.
  • + 1
 Like the Specialized Camber (as one example)? Basically a 120 Epic. Eats up climbs in my experience, and while it's hardly what you'd call aggressive geo, it also rips downhill.
  • + 1
 Look at the Scott Spark RC, XC 100mm of travel combined with a "trail" 68,5HA and short chainstays.
  • + 3
 Kona Hei Hei.
  • + 1
 Santa Cruz Tallboy
  • + 1
 Ok ok ok guys you're all suggesting CARBON bikes. When I posted about how lightweight bikes need to make a comeback, I was referring to the growing weight of CARBON AND ALLOY. A carbon 100-120mm bike should be able to hit 25lbs EASY, and an alloy bike should be able to hit that goal with some fancy parts. Instead, in order to hit 25lbs with most of these bikes you're pretty much required to run carbon bars, carbon wheels, carbon cranks, etc. 10 years ago you could find many bikes in the 100-120 range that weighed between 25-27lbs and had NO carbon.
  • + 1
 @JaredHarzan: To reply to earlier comments, at this time, only a few alloy XC/TR bikes can hit 25lbs. Litespeed 101, Nicolai Saturn-11, maybe a new Epic SmartWeld. They do exist, but it requires the manufacturer to conscientiously avoid carbon and have a competitively low weight "goal". Many manufacturers today seem to dismiss bike weight as a buying consideration for those who prefer alloy.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: I do see where you're coming from. I currently still own a 2007 Gary Fisher HiFi Deluxe, although it's just waiting for the weather to be good to go on sale locally. It's one of those very light trail bikes you're talking about. Although the geometry is much more inline with a XC bike. 26 in wheels help, as do the carbon chainstays, and the 17.5 in frame is very very small by modern standards. So there's that.

I replaced it with a 2018 trail bike, and the new bike is just a lot stiffer/more capable though rough stuff. The GF feels like riding a wet noodle when the trail gets rough, although admittedly it's a blast going uphill (26" wheels do accelerate so nicely..) and on smooth flow trails.

And as I was referring to earlier, I just think a bike like that would get eaten alive by reviewers comparing it to other bikes in it's class.

I do think it would be nice for people to have the option to choose, but I also think it would be a small market that would opt for a lighter trail bike at the expense of (I'm assuming) durability and capability on the trail. At that point, people are just looking at XC bikes.
  • + 1
 This pill is kind of funny. When I read most posts it feels like most of you think there should be a change to some degree, but the results of the poll don't say that at all. I know what the different segments mean, but I think there should be a change, like get rid of AM or Enduro like many of you said. Pinkbike could have come up with better choices on this poll.
  • + 2
 Wrenches are all the same because they're all wrenches. The 'quiver killer' is a Crescent wrench. Of course we need different names for different bikes...or should I say different tools for the job.
  • + 3
 Some of my wrenches are spanners
  • + 15
 some of my spanners are hammers
  • + 0
 @georgy291: I wanna hammer a spammer
  • + 5
 some of my hammers are bearing presses
  • + 3
 @lindblomxc: soome of my bearing presses are books
  • + 2
 @georgy291: Wera Koloss
  • + 1
 But, what size Crescent wrench?
  • + 2
 @Tmackstab: Some of my 7's are L's
  • + 1
 The terms listed seem to be becoming far to orientated around a sales pitch. Why not use a fixed number, like the anti-squat value at sag (30% travel) and use that to demonstrate how the bike will respond to the terrain? Maybe a second number that uses the frame's geometry to suggest where on a scale of 'twitchy as heck' to 'stable as a railroad'. Then riders can make two judgements - 'how compliant do I want the suspension' and 'how do I want the bike to feel'.
  • + 1
 i think there are bikes being built that dont fit perfectly into these category definitions, and i think thats a good thing. you should take a look at what other experienced riders in your area are using if you can, to get an idea of what works best on the terrain you frequent most. in my hometown almost all our trails are smooth and pedally enough that the fast guys are using shorter travel aggressive trail rigs with slacker geo, i.e. santa cruz, transition, and pole.
  • + 1
 i think the new breed of fast-as-hell short travel slack trail bikes need their own category, if youre living in a place like my hometown, its the only mountain bike you'll ever need for flat out fast and less tech trail systems. a santa cruz 5010 is actually a great enduro race bike for ashland, ask nate riddle Smile
  • + 1
 I think Cross Country (or perhaps Trail) and downhill is enough categories. Cross country for bikes that you can climb on and downhill for bikes that aren't designed for climbing at all.

Realistically everything else is relatively small nuance (+/- 30%) in geometry / suspension / tire width reflecting resulting in relative strengths and weaknesses in climbing / descending and suitability for the topography

Categorization is related to marketing and so I am not surprised that Pinkbike is interested in collecting our thoughts to feed back to manufacturers. The proliferation of categories in "Mountain Biking" might mask a lack of true innovation (as opposed to gradual improvement). It may be that retailers are concerned about category fatigue?
  • + 1
 I really cant get why freeride bike should be something between dh and enduro. Was Bender riding freeride on 180mm travel bikes? No! He was riding a f*cking 300/300mm machine for f*cking 20 m drops and gaps! So please dont make errors like this
  • + 1
 Current classification method makes sense to me. I understand begginers when they seem confused. An entry-level ''general'' type of MTB is a great idea for begginers. Helps them explore and define their style. Also they help them build abilities.
  • + 1
 Technology behind suspension has grown over the years making a 130 travel bike feel like a 150 and so on so now it all comes down to angles and degrees and so many riders these days can ride a trail bike as an Enduro and still say it’s a trail bike so I agree with the upper guy that said XC and DH has their own category and everything in between is fuzzy
  • + 1
 Trail, all-mountain, and enduro have more in common than categories not even on this list. Using that level of sub division, I can find more differences between my 4x bike and dirt jump bike than the categories listed here (longer frame and wheel base, gears, close-range cassette, two brakes, lighter and less overbuilt parts everywhere). Frankly, fatbikes deserve more of a category than having 3 for the same thing.
  • + 2
 I think of it as a 1-10 scale, with 1 being a steep xc racing hardtail, and 10 a DH bike built to last. I can take my own bike and move it up or down the scale by changing tires and other parts.
  • + 1
 I think there needs to be a seperate category for the XC bikes that are hard tail, no dropper post, feather light with a steep head angle, maybe they should be called "Marathon". These are pure endurance riders that tend to stick to fire roads and flat single track.
  • + 1
 Although I understand every category, I think there could be a simpler way to explain it as (Soulrebel) prefaced:

Since most technology trickles down from some form of racing or competition, those bikes are very dedicated to a performance outcome. We should have a Competition (RACE) vs None Competition (None RACE) separation.

XC = race / Trail = not race
Enduro = race / AM = not race
DH = race / Freeride = not race

*Yes, Freeride has become a competition (Rampage) but on DH bikes.

But what about:
BMX & 4x = race / Dirt jump & Street = not race
Slope Style = competition / Park = None competition

**Yes, there is contest in DJ, Street, & Park but mainly using a bike evolved from its racing/competition designed brother

At the end of the day we have all of these categories out of demand and it will continue to have blurred lines but we could definitely use some level of simplification and standardization in this ever evolving industry... Just my thoughts.
  • + 1
 The labeling system is fine.
If a newbie hasn’t done their homework online and doesn’t have a good idea what they are looking for before walking into a bike shop they are just lazy or dumb. Especially when going out to spend $5000-$12000 on something. Do your own research first. Then go discuss the pros and cons with the employee at the shop. Make an informed decision.
When your’re not informed going in, or too lazy to care, you end up with Donald Trump.
  • + 1
 Somehow I doubt there are many newbies looking to spend $5-12k on a bike.
  • + 3
 Yes they made sense after I read what they were. Lol

So what are we calling putting a large cassette and dropper post on a DC forked DH bike? SuperFreeride?
  • + 1
 We can argue the toss all day about what labels the bikes have, at the end of the day should we not just get out on our bikes and ride with our mates and have a good time!? Not rocket science.
  • + 1
 I think some people are misreading the poll by just reading "Do the following terms make sense," to which people would instinctively reply yes, to demonstrate that they understand equipment categorization within their sport.
  • + 3
 I have two mountain bikes - one is blue and the other grey. The blue one is fastest.
  • + 1
 I went into my local shop to buy a pump track bike suitable as a gnarly hard tail too that I could ride around the skate park and dirt jumps. You just screwed me out of my bike!
  • + 3
 100% of bikes could fit into one of two categories:


Looks like a session.

OR

Is a session
  • + 2
 I think that the trail catagories trail and enduro have to be made one. These are to close together to be two different catagories.
  • + 4
 disagree. Trail needs to be lighter, more efficient, able to hang with an XC riders on rough terrain, able to cover ground more quickly than an Enduro bikes on flat stuff. Enduro bikes are fire-road climbers meant for big mountains, weight isn't as important, tires and suspension travel are.
  • + 4
 Lots of mountain bicycles in that pick.
  • + 3
 I thought Freeride was distinctive not because of its travel but because it's designed more for jumping than racing
  • + 1
 XC on one extreme. DH on the other. Everything in the middle is gray or ALL MTN. trail to free ride. If your drop any term it should be EDURO. Enduro is a kind of race that can be quite different.
  • + 2
 geography plays a key role in determining the "genre" of a given bike. Around the comox valley I have a trail bike, the same bike in say ontario would be a park bike
  • + 2
 Trail is to Enduro as pike is to lyrik. The pike and the lyrik are almost the same fork, but if you are going big get a lyrik.
  • + 2
 The reality is that the salesperson is going to use the terminology the customer wants to hear. And then apply it to what's in stock and fits the customer.
  • + 4
 Go ahead and poke the bear Pinkbike.
  • + 2
 Expensive and affordable. Way too many bikes north of $3000 these days. Wages have been stagnant for thirty years. Houston we have a problem....
  • + 1
 It used to be XC→AM→FR→DH, but now it is XC→Trail→Enduro→DH
The bike industry is keen on creating new categories and consequently new but useless standers, forcing us to throw our old bikes.
They are fooling us.
  • + 1
 why does there need to be a 'system' in the first place?
what's wrong with 'here's the bikes we make and their geo/spec', then each rider decides what they want based on where and how they ride.
  • + 2
 XC yes.
DH yes.
Everything in between is a mid travel bike.
#pedalorshuttleridefastorslowwhogivesashitreallyitsacapablebikeok
Smile
  • + 2
 you can merge xc with trail, and call it XC! and merge AM with ENDURO and call it Enduro and have free ride and DH into just DH, and call it a fkn day
  • + 2
 XC: pure pedaling/climbing
Trail: trail bike that's pedaling oriented
AM/Enduro: trail bike that's descending oriented
DH: pure descending
  • + 2
 XC riders still have to go downhill
  • + 2
 @CaptainBLT: yup. And on the World Cup, there’s even gap jumps on xc courses now.
  • + 4
 All mountain and enduro are the same thing imo
  • + 1
 Industry should settle on a gnar scale going from 1 to 10 as an assessment of how hard you can trash the bike. The gnar factor would be relative to its respective discipline: xc, enduro, downhill, 4x,...
  • + 0
 I haven’t read all the comments or any of the article tbh.
I know what it all means.

But the lines have massively blured in the last 2 years to the point it doen’t matter that much.

I mean some 120mm travel trail bike now has a ha of 66 degrees and a 160mm all mountain / enduro bruiser has 65.

You only have to change the fork length by 10mm to affect that by 0.6 degrees.... so they are much of a much.

Its gone from having 50% of being rad and 50% being lame to 80% of bikes being rad. Only difference in how they can be ridden is down to the rider’s strength / technique and skill.
  • + 0
 150% of riders , are using a bike too "big" for their conditions. which is stupid as if they're fine with it, who the f*ck cares. That being said, i enjoy going fast and making things easier, so i can ride harder and longer or shorter and further. Location means everything in my book. Southern Ontario VS BC ... the meaning of bikes are the same but what they do is complettly different. A black diamond in Ontario and a Black diamond in AZ, make no more sense then a Tonald DRump tweet. Bike categories good, understanding user needs with relation to geography, much better.
  • + 0
 A bike has 130mm of travel up front. 16.9 inch chainstays. 68 degree HT angle. That seems like a trail bike to me. But Giant classifies their 2018 Anthem, which they also says descends great, under XC on their website. The Anthem has always been an XC bike, so regardless of how it performs, I guess it stays an XC bike.
  • + 2
 I think it's more that Anthem's history is XC oriented. The new Anthem 29er is an XC machine w/ totally different geo & spec than their 27.5 version.

To me, the 27.5 version is closer to a trail bike than an XC bike.
  • + 1
 Less then 180mm and 64 up front make no sense to me, even on xc / trail bike, geometry means more than travel; unfortunately it is hatrd to find 140mm bike with 64 head angle and proper geometry / specs
  • + 1
 transition smuggler
  • + 1
 Should tie the classification to wheel size:

29" = Cross Country

27.5/650b = Trail

26" = Downhill

The marketing guys can then split hair from those.
  • + 1
 Whenever someone mentions “Enduro”, drink! Whenever someone mentions “SRAM”, drink! Whenever someone mentions “Standard”, drink!
  • + 1
 People are creatures of habit, so i expected to see the results found in this poll. I do think the system could be improved and simplified though.
  • + 2
 I ride a mountain bike, it has 1 gear and no suspension, it's wheels are round and I fucking love it.
  • + 1
 I’ve typically just labelled bikes as XC, dirt jump bikes,trail bikes ,DH bikes

4 drastically different styles of riding using 4 drastically different types of bikes.
  • + 1
 ENVE idea on wheels would be very easy! You just use climb and descent percentage on bike also, but I know.. marketing needs catchy names Wink
  • + 1
 At the shop I have a hard time with telling people about "trail" bikes. People always say yes I want to ride trails and it seems a silly term to people outside the industry.
  • + 1
 The terms have been confusing for the majority of new MTB riders I've encountered. That would seem to lead to less participation.
  • + 1
 They do kind of make scene but I always thought all mountain and free ride were the same thing just depended on the brand or media outlet as to which term was used
  • + 1
 Category system(which would also denotes the amount of abuse the bikes can take)

1 (xc), 2 (trail/am), 3 (enduro/fr), 4 (dj), 5 (dh)
  • + 1
 Yes I understand them and they make sense to me , but it could Be done better. Simplicity is the best complexity Keep it to 3 categories. XC , freeride, downhill.
  • + 3
 Most freeride i've seen is done on double crown DH bike..
  • + 3
 There should be 3 categories;
XC, All Mountain, Downhill
  • + 1
 my bike is pretty straight forward.. enduro for enduro
my 50 pound status is definitely 100% downhill, there is no climbing that beast for anything
  • + 2
 SOMEONE!!!!!!!!!! What is the difference between Trail & All-Mountain Riding ??
  • + 4
 All-mountain is more gnarrrly!
  • + 2
 AM is Enduro. Back in the day, as enduro as a form of racing came to be, people used AM bikes for the purpose. As it evolved, the bikes temselves became enduro bikes, as they were used for that purpose. Now trail bikes...I have no idea what that is? A XC bike with 10mm more travel?
  • + 2
 Back in the day Endura was a 100mm Specialized, Then it became a generic term from the marketing guy. .
  • + 1
 Photos in order:

That's a bunch of people on an XC ride

That's an XC bike

XC bike

XC bike

XC bike

XC bike

DH bike
  • + 2
 Recreational, XC/XCO/XCM, SuperXC/Trail, AllMtn/Enduro, Freeride, Slopestyle, DH.
  • + 1
 They need to combine categories.
Xc
Trail bike(+all mountain)
Enduro
Dh(+freeride)
This sums it all up perfectly without being to overwhelming
  • + 2
 DH and XC are the only Mt. Bike race that matters, everything else are just commercial breaks!
  • + 3
 Trail bikes and downhill bikes, that's it
  • + 1
 It’s all in the tires,and can make a large difference on how the bike feels ,and I’m not talking in pressures cause that is another one
  • + 2
 Honestly it makes way more sense to view it as a spectrum than anything else.
  • + 2
 What's the deal with so called mini DH bikes then just sounds like a glorified freeride bike to me
  • + 2
 I think all mountain could fall under enduro, though it is hard to tell with the ever changing standards.
  • + 18
 it's like having a 30mm crank axle and a 28.99 crank axle...
  • + 1
 I'm surprised to see Enduro is such a new term. It thought the Specialized enduro (well before it was a race category) was basically the mountainbike to ride everywhere (except for the Enduro SX which was more of a dual slalom bike though Anneke Beerten raced it to second place in the Lisbon Urban Downhill and Matt Hunter used it to chase cows in The Collective movie). So basically the (regular) Enduro was what would nowadays be considered all mountain and a modern XC fully (or at least trail bike) is probably as capable. And then the whole SX thing started it's own life (separate from the Enduro model).

Let's just accept that the whole nomenclature is messed up. Just say how good it is for uphill, how poppy, how stable, how well it does on rough terrain and then we'll just decide whether it suits our style, skill and terrain.
  • + 1
 A tiny cassette isn't a good indicator of a DH bike, all of my bikes have tiny cassettes, 11-23 is my favourite.
  • + 1
 It should be categorized by the ones who wear licras and the ones who doesnt.
  • + 1
 Other than DH, the categories listed are all just trail bikes - bikes for riding trails.
  • + 2
 Just call everything "enduro" and watch everyone cream in their jeans.
  • + 1
 head angle/wheel size/ susp travel amount...
this is how i would classify bikes
  • + 2
 XC Bike, Mountain Bike, DH Bike. Job done.
  • + 1
 Could one with a DH bicycle buy and swap out parts so it can climb some hills?
  • + 1
 Who gives a flying Fuk about categories. RIDE YOUR FUKING BIKE!!! (Thank you Rat Boy)
  • + 2
 Downhill
XC
Enduro/all mountain/trail -same thing really?
Dirt jump
  • + 2
 there are no categories. it's a spectrum
  • + 2
 Who gives a stuff! ride yer bike!
  • + 2
 It should be categorized by geometry of the bike combined with travel
  • + 1
 That is nothing....try all the ever growing options within categories Wink wheel sizes,hubs,boost vs non boost so on.........
  • + 1
 just call everything thats not dh or freeride or enduro xc those other guys usually cant ride anyway ????
  • + 1
 I mean if you change a name of something it will clearly need 10 more new standards sooooo
  • + 1
 Maybe it would be better just to break them down but ratio of climb to descend. It worked for the article.
  • + 1
 shame on the consumer if he walks into a bike shop not knowing what he wants
  • + 2
 two categories for me. looks fun. doesnt look fun.
  • + 1
 Awesome!
  • + 1
 Well... I joined yesterday to sell my CX bike, and I don't see a category for that. So, I guess I'd like that haha.
  • + 1
 race cats on the other hand is a different story!
  • + 1
 With all this being said, I just want one of each.
  • + 1
 Dirt jump, downhill, slope, boring xc bikes
  • + 2
 It's just my bike....
  • + 0
 PB is just warming up! Good thing riding non motorized mt.bikes is good for the cardio!
  • + 1
 I think the answer were all looking for is who fucking cares
  • + 1
 E-bike...bicycle or motorcycle?
  • + 1
 Broken bikes, working bikes, that will understand everybody
  • + 2
 Accept them all
  • + 1
 Anyone who thinks 6 categories are needed is a f****n retard.
  • + 0
 IMO:
XC & Trail are the same thing the same way AM & Enduro are the same thing.
  • + 1
 XC , Trail/All mountain, DH.

Enduro ruined everything
  • + 1
 It is what it is. Pick a bike that you like riding then hit the trails
  • + 1
 I like putting All-Mountain forks on Trail frames...
  • + 0
 Just like racing. There is XC, Enduro, and DH. Nothing else is needed for Mountain Bike.
  • + 1
 up,up,down,down,left,right,left,right,B.A. Wait...wrong comment section.
  • + 1
 you only need: XC, Enduro, Downhill, Trail
  • + 0
 In the mindset of Mr. Gwinn it's either DH or cross country.. youd're either covering ground or bombing down simple enough.
  • + 1
 how do you know people that do enduro, they tell you they do enduro
  • + 1
 f*ck Me! I ride a 29 Plus hardtail, what the f*ck am I ????
  • + 1
 Outcast! Haha. Man I had a 29r Carbon hardtail a few years ago wanna talk about getting put through torture! Props to you
  • + 1
 What about the Froride category? Wink
  • + 2
 You forgot eBikes!
  • + 2
 Don’t count as a bike I guess
  • + 1
 Let's just go with Pre-Boost, Boost, and Post-Boost.
  • + 1
 What is this DH category?
  • + 1
 I got two bags of popcorn for this... Big Grin
  • + 1
 AllTrailEndursxcMtn bikes
  • + 1
 XC, Trail, DH, DJ. That's it, that's all
  • + 0
 XC, trail, and downhill. Anything else is marketing hype.
  • + 1
 "Does it have shocks"?
  • + 1
 What about ebikes ?
  • - 1
 Its all good, just as long as an E-Bike is never confused with mountain bike...Ever.
  • + 1
 What about pumptrack?
  • + 0
 Forgot e-bike... (Freudian slip???)
  • + 0
 Tell me again what is Enduro got to do with Mt. Biking?
  • + 2
 @pinkbike Wikipedia: " Enduro is a form of motorcycle sport run on extended cross-country, off-road courses.[1] Enduro consists of many different obstacles and challenges. The main type of enduro event, and the format to which the World Enduro Championship is run, is a time-card enduro, whereby a number of stages are raced in a time trial against the clock."
  • + 1
 no
  • + 0
 We need to get rid of this mountain category
  • + 0
 Enduro is a race platform.
  • + 1
 So is XC...
  • + 4
 ...and so is DH. And they all require bikes. Enduro bikes, XC bikes, and DH bikes, to be exact.
  • + 0
 It’s a Marketing engine! Nothing to do with Mt. Biking, but people ate it up like was their last meal! Now look at all these $10k bikes!
  • + 0
 28.99
  • + 2
 thanks for participating in the debate
  • - 1
 XC, Trail, Aggressive trail (geometry matters here), Enduro and Gravity.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2018. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.181881
Mobile Version of Website