Pinkbike Poll: Will Your Next Bike Have More or Less Suspension Travel?

Oct 11, 2019
by Mike Levy  
Spend a sunny summer weekend in Whistler and you'll likely see so many enduro and trail bikes that you'll wonder if there's any truth to that rumour of lift-access riding nearby. I think there is a bit of that, of course, but the rise of enduro racing has spurred development to the point where many gravity riders can have more fun - and go more faster - aboard a sturdy mid-travel bike than on a downhill sled. That's a bit of a worn-out trope these days, I know, but only because it's so true. At the same time, modern trail bikes are great tools for not only doing huge, character-building rides but, thanks to smart geometry, they'll also do just fine on some pretty rowdy terrain.

So, if I had to guess, most of us are probably thinking about less suspension-travel on our next bike rather than more.


Specialized S-Works Stumpjumper 29 review test Photo by Trevor Lyden
Kona Operator CR
Relatively short-travel trail bikes like the Stumpjumper (left) can do all the things pretty damn well, but the feeling of invincibility that comes with a long-travel bike and slacker angles (right) is hard to beat.


Or maybe not. According to our opening day survey, downhill bikes still make up the majority of the equipment being used in the Whistler Bike Park, and that doesn't even take into account the hordes of GT Fury rental rigs that surely live the hardest of lives. Further evidence to prove me wrong: World Cup downhill coverage, and especially the results and tech articles, are consistently among the most-read content on the homepage. Given that there's a good argument for them being the most advanced, most capable, and most interesting type of bike, that probably shouldn't be a surprise, though.

And while modern enduro bikes are convincing riders that they don't need 200mm to get the job done, they're also impressing with their climbing abilities to the point where many are trading their under-gunned trail bike for something more capable on the descents and only marginally worse on the way back up, if at all.

So, with that in mind, maybe it makes more sense to consider a bike with more suspension rather than less?



Will your next bike have more or less suspension travel?



Posted In:
Stories Polls



337 Comments

  • 301 3
 I just buy what the industry tells me. I suppose my next bike will be a 170mm 29er
  • 41 1
 I’m saving up to get a bike next year, so it’ll be a 180mm 29er.
  • 36 4
 I approve of this message. My 170mm 29er is the best bike I had, ever.
  • 16 1
 going from an Altitude to a Slayer for sure!
  • 12 1
 I already have a 170mm (front) 161mm (rear) travel 29er.
  • 12 0
 @unrooted:
I already have one. My next bike will be a downhill bike, so it will definitely have to have more travel than my current bike.
  • 16 2
 @unrooted: man oh man are you in for a surprise when trek releases their 31er
  • 24 1
 I can only afford a bike that is a couple years old. So it will have to be a 111mm travel 29er.
  • 7 0
 But this 170/180 29er will need a 38 Fox forks, nothing under ... just saying
  • 1 0
 @adrennan: 32 and dirtysix kind of sort of exist.
  • 7 1
 @acali: I second this, 111mm is all you need.
  • 17 0
 @bobhow:
That's not what she said.
  • 8 0
 1 have a 170 29er and it’s fantastic
  • 4 1
 @unrooted: 180mm 29er VPP Ebike.
  • 2 0
 @BoneDog: boneeeeeeee doggie is back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • 15 1
 Remember when 29ers didn't need as much travel as 27.5? Wasn't that just like last year?
  • 7 3
 I am already running dh wheels and dh tyres on my already upforked 160 bike, why wouldn’t I increase the travel for descents when I am not doing EWS liasons with 10k verts of climbing?

I want RM Slayer...
  • 4 0
 150/60 front, 140 rear, 29er.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Same here.
  • 2 1
 I wouldn't ride any bike without 180mm Fox 38 next season. Overfork for my local trail? FARKOFFFF..
  • 2 0
 @chyu: angry bro?
  • 1 0
 @BoneDog: me too
  • 3 1
 @chyu: the issue is... 38 will surely cost half way between 36 and 40. You can buy a decent 3-4yr old DH bike for that...
  • 4 0
 If you have some expendable income, buy both a DH and an Enduro rig, problem solved! Whoever said money doesn't buy happiness was obviously lying because who doesn't want unlimited bikes and bike parts to play with!
  • 2 2
 @fullsend604: DH bikes are like Ferraris with factory applied Baby pink. They lose 70% of MSRP the moment they are sold. Just buy a used one...
  • 4 0
 The industry is currently trying their best to get us all to buy eBikes, so I'm actively ignoring them. Hopefully, they return soon to the usual "new standard", "more or less gears" and "fatter / thinner" type hype. I'm really hoping rigid singlespeeds come back into style. That was just about the only time the price of a new bicycle actually went down (if only a little).
  • 2 0
 By the time I have enough money saved to buy a new bike, I reckon I'll be buying a 200mm 36er
  • 1 0
 If your friend said you don't need a FOX 38 next year. All they have are negative thoughts.
  • 55 36
 Why would you ever want less? Especially if the suspension is “smarter” and adjustable on the fly? I’ve never heard someone bomb down a descent and declare “Jeez this is way too much travel....”
  • 29 6
 NoNeed to preach. Actually, I wholeheartedly agree.
  • 91 1
 Maybe if you have lots of trail choice and rough descents. However, if your local trails are tame and flattish then too much travel can get boring. I sold my full sus and ride ht only for that reason. Must be nice to live near proper mountains.
  • 7 0
 Well, the only way for me to get more would be to go back in time and get some monster t's
  • 19 0
 I live in a really rooty, steep and rocky area where most run 160-200mm travel but I have a tonne of fun with 140 there. It makes the trails bumpier and harder to ride and makes line choice even more important. I ride a rigid bike every once in a while for the same reason.
  • 12 1
 Have you ever heard anyone on a climb complain they're on a longer travel bike and not some XC type when they get dropped?
  • 23 2
 I’ve never heard someone clear a climb and say “Jeez this is way too little travel...”
  • 34 0
 Riding my enduro race bike on my local xcish trails is way less fun than on my short travel bike. So if I stopped racing and riding parks, I would want my next bike to be less travel.
  • 12 0
 @tremeer023: Same. I hit the same stuff I used to hit on my full sus on my hardtail, cos frankly I wasn't doing anything that big - I was way overgunned. My steel hardtail is more fun and I actually have more confidence on it - I hit the biggest stuff I would hit on my fully on my first ride out in it, it felt so comfortable.
  • 22 0
 Because N+1. I have a long travel "enduro" 29er. Sure it pedals well and is comfy, but its a BIG bike and a tad heavy.
I want something fast and light I can use for longer days and bigger climbs. Something a little more poppy and playful rather than a charger bike.
  • 9 0
 @tremeer023: A shorter travel nimble (but modern) bike can be way more fun. On undulating XC trails sometimes it's the difference between a ride feeling like a chore or having a good time. Some of my PR's on local descents were on my hardtail.
  • 8 1
 Because:

1. If it is "smarter" etc, it is more capav6and therefore you need less of it to get the same results. So you can enjoy the snappier, more playful nature of a shorter travel bike.

2. It's more fun, challenging and rewarding to do things with skill than monster truck through everything because the bike hides all your mistakes.
  • 1 0
 *capable. Phone....
  • 21 1
 Being underbiked and out of control is really fun tho...
  • 4 0
 I have a slack hardtail and a 170mm both 27.5. Hardtail is more fun on flat twisty XC trail with 50% climbing.
  • 8 0
 My only bike is a dh bike. On flowy trails and some tamer bike parks i am having a hard time catching up. And I need a whole bunch of more energy and effort to keep the pqce with 150-170 enduro bikes. And they are pretty capable nowdays. So there are always two siders of the story. But non the less, I am in love whit my DH bike. So I understand the dillema that this question is about.
  • 2 0
 @tempest3070: Yes, repeatedly... but we no longer ride together.
  • 3 0
 @tremeer023: not a proper mountain here. Awkward drop to flat/rock garden/roots we do have. The odd steep slab too. See a lot of 150+ travel bikes here if they aren’t a xc nerd. People bought into the 120 rage when the following came out, but almost everyone went back to more travel....
  • 15 20
flag Lotusoperandi (Oct 11, 2019 at 14:44) (Below Threshold)
 @Bflutz625: Either way I've never heard anyone get to the top of a climb and say "Jeez that was way too much fun, let's walk down and do it again!" Climbing sucks.....or at least it is something we must all get through to do what we came to do, which is to go down. Might as well have a proper bike for the down.
  • 4 0
 @preach: I'm with you. My bikes have had 160mm of travel for almost 10 years now. I do not want less... that is, for where I live. I took my bike back to Indiana last year, and I would not want it there. It was overkill for the terrain and comparatively sluggish around the winding trail.
  • 3 1
 @NoNeed: usernames check out
  • 4 0
 Ive definitely gone down a trail and felt like I had too much travel. Big bikes are harder to muscle around on some types of flow trails. Plus not to mention harder to get around on pedally up and down trails.
I do like a long travel bike though. That's why I have both
170/160 Tranny Patrol, and 130/120 Marin HawkHill
  • 1 0
 What if someone moved to a place with no mountains and needed a bike that was more efficient.
  • 4 6
 @Lotusoperandi: Cue the (Drum Roll)

eMTB

Putting the grin into climbing.

Anyway - my mid travel 29er is a good compromise across all things and no, only I am its motor.
  • 3 0
 Well if you live in Nebraska 170mm of smart travel is still way too much.100-130mm is the sweet spot for this region.
  • 1 0
 I live near tamer trails where I use the short travel Ripley with a Fox 36, when I go up North or travel to bike parks and rowdier trails I bring my Bronson. I couldn't bide by the whole jack of all trades, master of none mantra. Instead I built each bike to be the right bike for whatever I am mainly riding. Bikes these days are incredible but we're still not to the point where a 170mm 29er will climb quite like a Ripley or a Ripley will descend like that long travel 29er. I can't wait until they perfect the modular design, kind of like GG, where you just have extra stays, wheels, shock and forks to setup the bike for whatever you are riding that day.
  • 3 0
 @zarban: idk if modular is the way. It is really nice to just be able to grab a different bike and go vs having a bunch of parts on the shelf that need a rebuild to change configuration. Having flown with my bike 2 times in the last 4 weeks, it is a pretty big headache to have to pull apart a bike and rebuild so often(and that was minimal teardown). So I can only imagine doing so just to change configuration would be even more frustrating.

I could see if being viable if you did something like keep it in short travel mode all winter then go long travel when it is park season. But not for changing on a daily or weekly basis.
  • 2 1
 Isn't the dirty secret in the industry that most riders are overbiked? So it would make sense to go with more reasonable travel for uphill efficiency and overall weight.
  • 2 0
 @tremeer023: same same! Built a 29” HT for shitzandgiggles. 160 on the front mind you. It bombs anything I throw at it. I think my FS has seen dirt 4 tines in two years. Major improvement to riding skills as well. Next build will be a FS, but a good trail build will be plenty capable and sufficient.
  • 16 4
 "What if someone moved to a place with no mountains and needed a bike that was more efficient."

Um.....wait......what? (scratches head)

Why would you move to a place without mountains? (goes to the bathroom)

No seriously, why would you move to a place without mountains?..............I just can't............even..................

............................what?
  • 2 0
 @Austink: I agree. It would definitely be a pain to change it daily. I always think it's going to be quick to just swap my fork out or to do some type of maintenance but then see that it took two hours longer than planned. I love to tinker but it can be a time suck and more time away from actually riding.

I do still wish I could make some smaller changes, like you mentioned, for days at the bike park and flow trails or for days that are going to have really technical climbs and descents.
  • 2 0
 Yep, I did this. Moved from Wellington NZ to Nova Scotia! Hills everywhere to flat trails covered in rocks and roots.
  • 2 0
 "NoNeed to Preach" - I see what you did there ......... Big Grin
  • 1 0
 when i moved to Oregon, that's exactly what i said.
  • 1 1
 @GravityCandy: I also live in Nelson (actually from here) and can confirm more travel is more fun here. Had a trance for a while but it was constant survival mode.
  • 1 0
 @Ktron: have you ridden a modern DH bike?
  • 3 0
 @Giddyhitch: being ‘overbiked’ for me is a question of either having the right bike 80% of the time or 20% of the time. I’m one of those weirdos who can’t bear being undergunned in that 20% so I carry around too much bike 80% of the time. But I understand that a sensible and logical person might choose to have the opposite.
  • 3 1
 @SleepingAwake: so is shagging a dwarf, you just don’t want to do it everyday. Rode a DH track behind a decent rider this year. Me 160 bike, him on DH bike. I was quite proud of myself for hanging on close to him for the most part. Then I borrowed a Antidote Dark Matter DH bike... he stood no chance... people who say climbs like xc bike, descends like DH bike have no bloody clue how much better at climbing XC bike is and how much better a DH bike is at descending. 140-160 bikes strike good middle ground as The One bike. But for someone living in the proper mountains if they say they are into descents and climbs are a necessity then, get a bloody monster.
  • 4 1
 @WAKIdesigns: buying a dh bike is the perfect excuse to never have to ride up a hill, and that’s a good thing in my book. Smile
  • 1 1
 @tobiusmaximum: you can install regular drivetrain on most dh bikes. Seat angle will work with it.
  • 1 0
 @ratedgg13: Sounds like a Remedy is your next bike
  • 1 0
 @yzedf: I think rocky terrain makes a big difference too even if there are no hills. It isn't rocky where I live - the ground is generally soft/rooty and sandy (chalk in places). Used to have 2 bikes (ht and dh) when I had the time to do all day trips regularly but doesn't really happen these days with kids.

Sweet RSD Middlechild by the way. Very similar to my current set up (Pipedream Moxie in teal, ss).
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: i fully agree. Not always and certainly not for racing!
  • 2 0
 The amount of suspension travel is only a tiny part of the story. Geometry is what it is all about. I recently replaced my hardtail with a 130mm travel fork for a hardtail with a 120mm travel fork (same wheelsize). The shorter travel bike is definitely more "capable" on both the climb as well as the descent. I don't see myself replace that hardtail anytime soon but I may replace the fully at some point. Currently 140mm front and back (160mm at the front sometimes). A new fully may have 115mm travel in the rear or it could be 150mm. I don't care that much as long as I can get on well with the geometry.
  • 2 0
 @tremeer023: thanks! Also have kids, but still swinging the dh day trips so far...
  • 2 0
 Wheels and tires are much better now, taking on some of the roughness from the trail. I still love to rip DH on a squish monster, but for most trail rides I prefer the quick poppyness of 120-130 rear travel. Also, Geos have evolved to make "trail" bikes so much more fun and capable then they were 10 years ago. #TryNewSchool.
  • 2 1
 @Chonky13: yeah, it’s just that big bikes also got much more capable... as to tyres, come on, many folks still run good old DH casings on their trail bikes. I have now spent a second season on Double Down and Super Gravity and I’ll be back to DH casings. DD is great for down country, not much for real sht.
  • 1 0
 If you’re a light rider, less -ve travel makes the bike easier to handle IME.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: DD is pretty much useless in my experience
  • 1 0
 @tobiusmaximum: oh man, I clicked on the wrong arrow. I'll blame it on my bike. Sorry.
  • 2 1
 @yzedf: it is heavier than super gravity and it seems worse. I think it’s better to run exo with cushcore/procore than dd with whatever. I punctured dd through procore for fks sake...
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: yup I’ve had better luck with exo. Trying out specialized grid gripton. I can run lower pressures than dd but the grip in the wet sucks.
  • 1 0
 @yzedf: Dd and back diamond are good with lower pressure. I'm running a 5 psi difference between grid and black diamond.
  • 1 0
 @makripper: I’m already running 22/24 in rocky terrain with grid. No inserts. The wet traction issue isn’t the casing, it’s the compound. You can actually feel the tire hit, squish and then slide. I do really like them in the dry though...
  • 1 0
 Double Ds are useless if your motor boating. Just saying @yzedf:
  • 18 0
 Next bike will probably be more travel, something that feels comfortable at the park and on the local trails. I think it goes both ways, sure smaller travel bikes are getting more capable.. but the super fun squish machines are getting easier to pedal up as well.
  • 1 0
 There are bikes out there with 160mm travel and modern geo that climb amazing. I like riding those, as opposed to overbuilding a smaller bike which brings it almost to the same weight anyways... And if I'm pushing my abilities, I want the extra travel to save me when things get squirrelly.
  • 13 1
 I went from 180f/170r to 150/140 and dont miss the travel at all.
The 29ers 130-140mm bikes are crazy capable and easier to move around and have fun.

And the Vienna woods dont require lot of travel at all.

One of the best decisions I made regarding MTBing.
  • 4 0
 Yep I just went from Kona Process 153 to the smaller 134. It is better in everything other than the high speed rough stuff and even there its pretty close.
  • 3 0
 @JockoJones: Oh the 134 is really interesting.
Bet it shreds ;-)

With a good shock 130-140mm will feel like 160mm and ride like it yet you still get the more playful feel.
  • 3 0
 That's true, I tried several of these and they feel better than the old enduro bike I have, then I tried some new enduro 29ers and I found out it's even better.
  • 1 0
 Agreed. My do it all bike is 160/135 Pivot switchblade 29" that climbs well and rips the BC gnar hard. I have a 130mm hardtail for less gnar.
  • 1 0
 "And the Vienna woods dont require a lot of travel..."

And there's the rub! FOR YOU, all you do is the Vienna Woods so why would you need something where more travel might be a good idea. If you don't go to distant places and ride a variety of things, you're fine.

For now, I'm a one bike person. My 170/160 Canfield does it all. Long fire road grinds, XC, and DH. Is it as good as a DH bike for DH? No. Is it as good as an XC bike for XC? No.

That said, EWS proves all day long that an 160-180 AM/Enduro rig is about the perfect choice when you only want one bike and plan to ride places more that a half an hour from your pad.
  • 14 2
 I have to stay in the 160mm travel range, even on a trail bike, just for the extra strength. Most bikes and forks with less than this aren't burly enough for medium-to-heavier guys riding hard (even on trail rides).

A snappier 140mm bike would be super fun, but probably get snapped.
  • 16 0
 Really don't think that last sentence is true. Just my opinion though.
  • 3 0
 I ride a Canfield Riot, it's a 140mm 29er that's overbuilt like a tank. Love the bike to death but for riding fast over rough stuff, more travel would nice. The suspension has to be run pretty stiff to keep you supported going through fast rocky sections or landing even a small drop or jump to flat.
  • 5 1
 So at 245 lbs I should have broken my Norco Optic 29er everytime I rode instead of just once in a year?
  • 3 0
 My 140 bike is built like a tank. So am I.
  • 5 0
 @Chris97a: Breaking a bike once year is acceptable? OK.
  • 6 0
 @JustinVP:
Not really. Just very few bikes make it away from me alive, and that was a 110 travel bike that I over forked up to 140 and rode pretty hard. I thought it did all right for being a little bit beefed up XC bike that I rode like a rough and tumble all mountain bike. They sent new chainstays super quick when I discovered the crack and I was on my way again.
  • 1 0
 I went from a 160 to a 120 bike and love it, lots more pop and still puts up with plenty of abuse- I still hit everything I did on my 160 but just need to be more precise. Pedals loads better and is just more fun (130) on the front, I wouldn’t go any less but I feel it’s just enough
  • 2 0
 How big are you? I rode a Knolly Fugitive LT the other day which had 135mm of travel and felt like it wouldn't snap under King Kong. There are a number of short travel bikes out there that are burlier than other brands' lighter, longer travel options.
  • 1 0
 The GT Sensor is a burly mother of bike. That bike is made for serious abuse.
  • 2 0
 @WaterBear: I tried to buy an XL one from a dude in SLC because the stats were almost identical to my size L GG trail pistol. #FavoriteBikeEver.
  • 1 0
 Agree, I think rider weight is definitely a factor when choosing a bike. I‘m 188cm and 90kg and my „trailbike“ is a XL RM Instinct BC Edition. Feels perfect!
  • 2 0
 @tneuensc: I'm basically your size. I understood your reasoning in the past as longer travel bikes tended to be build for more abuse, but the current crop of bikes seems to change that. The Knolly I mentioned before, the Sensor someone else mentioned, Guerrilla Gravity's short travel bikes, Transition's, Kona's. The new Tallboy's frameweight isn't much different from the Hightowers and the new Ripley's frame is almost the exact same weight as the longer travel Ripmo.

I for one am happy that it's not longer necessary to get a bike with more suspension than I need in order to get one that will hold up to being flogged.
  • 1 0
 buy a short travel NS Bikes, that stuff is overbuilt as heck
  • 1 0
 yup, at 220 lbs geared up I dont trust shorter travel bikes, i do lots of climbing and dont even notice the extra weight; I dont ride the super-gnar but I sure enjoy the longer travel. going downhill. currently riding a 2018 banshee rune, full coil.
  • 1 0
 @badbikekarma:
You should be open to shorter travel bikes as there are tons of them that are built tough.

And good on ya getting a Rune up lots of climbs. I almost bought a Banshee Phantom a few years back but chose not to due to how it felt climbing.
  • 1 0
 @Chris97a: huh? Rune climbs fantastic. I just prefer the feel of longer travel bikes anyway. Not like i can afford a new frame anytime soon!
  • 15 4
 I did a couple demos this summer and across the board the bikes with less travel seemed silly. They climbed a tiny bit better, but were such a liability going DH that I would go bigger every time. I did feel like 90% of this was geometry, if there was a short travel bike that was still slack up front that might change my mind, but having extra travel is never something I worry about.
  • 16 2
 Like, a Stumpy evo?
  • 8 0
 like a Sentinel?
  • 4 0
 What bikes did you demo?
  • 12 0
 ok i'll say it: do you mean something more downcountry?
  • 26 0
 The user that goes by the name "Rigidjunkie" wants more travel? The hypocrisy is strong in this one.
  • 16 0
 3 rhetorical questions, one punsult, and one legitimate question. Pretty good distribution by Pinkbike comment standards.
  • 7 0
 Username checks out. wait...
  • 1 0
 @remoh: I got one...best bike made
  • 1 0
 tallboy?
  • 10 0
 As a die-hard enduro bro, I've recently purchased a gravel bike (canyon grail) as a second bike, and riding that bike is ridiculously fun. Bought it pretty much just for training as I don't have good trails in the pedaling distance from home. Even though I ride mostly on road and a bit of rough gravel on uphills, it is stupidly fun as the bike is sturdier than a classic road bike, the wheels and frame take more punishment, you don't have to watch for every pothole, crack, undulation or whatever on the road so you can focus more on what lies ahead. Around the city I don't think any other kind of bike is more fun. And that kind of bike is cheap. You can just swap wheels for a road versions if decide to do so in future. There is pretty much no maintenance apart from chain service and adding air to tubeless tyres here and there. If anyone is on the fence I say go for it, you won't regret it.
  • 11 1
 This is a hard question to answer for people with multiple bikes.
I will say, my short travel bike (Marin Hawk Hill, 120r 130ft) is crazy capable, Most people really don't need as much travel as they have.
  • 12 0
 I think the best example of this is watching all the random youtube dudes that ride one bike and one bike only. Seeing what Phil got upto on his Evil honestly made my next purchase easier; less is more.
  • 3 1
 @sherbet: Alex Chamberlin made an excellent Video about the Yeti SB130 and why less most often more
  • 3 0
 Depending on where you live/what you ride, 2 bike can be the best choice. I have my 170/160 29er for racing and park days and a 120 29er for local riding. I definitely can’t see one bike doing it all for me. My next bike will likely replace the 120 with something similar in travel but more modern geo.
  • 3 0
 Rode a mate's hardtail through my usual trails last weekend. Wow - just put up in lights for me how much modern geo means so much more than suspension travel.
  • 4 0
 I demo'd a 120mm bike (coming from a 140mm) and thought it was so much fckn fun.

Getting a GG Smash as my next bike so I can swap seatstays and ride both 145mm and 120mm!
  • 1 0
 I'm always amazed at the things I get away with on a DH bike
  • 9 0
 Kind of an irrelevant question. Unless you know how much travel my current bike has, how do know what more, less, or same is? I’ve got a Free Ride bike and an XC bike. Want a trail bike. Is that more than the XC bike or less than the Free Ride bike? In any case N+1 always applies.
  • 2 0
 Maybe ask: if you have 150 rear, would like like +/-? Etc etc.
  • 2 0
 The brands know what they sold recently so want to know if people generally want more or less than that.
  • 12 0
 Where's the hardtail option??
  • 3 0
 Yeh, my only bike is a hardtail. Running 140mm fork but may be inclined to reduce to 130 in the future for more xc/trail focused riding.
  • 7 0
 I have recently become frustrated with the habit I have developed of using the travel to simply plough through tech. For that reason I have gone for a long, low and slack hardtail as my next bike. (I live in the Scottish Highlands with some of the best steep, techy trails around).
  • 19 0
 Have you tried shouting monster truck? It makes it a little more enjoyable
  • 2 0
 Great choice. Modern geo handrails are surprisingly capable and wicked fun.
  • 4 0
 @browner: yell “Grave Digger!” So people know you actually are about that life.
  • 2 0
 Same here, the next planned bike is going to be a hardtail capable of getting rowdy. Something with 140mm and 29" wheels with modern geometry just appeals right now!
  • 8 1
 I wish you guys would stfu with your enduro bikes can do what a dh bike can. They can not, and will not handle what a dh bike can at speed for even close to the same reliability. Talk to anyone who actually rides hard at whistler and you'll see, broken shock bolts, chainstay after rear triangle, fork rebuilds out the wazoo on all the enduro bikes. Yes long travel enduros are awesome and bridge a gap in the market, but they will never be a DH bike ok.
  • 5 0
 I'm currently on a 150f/140r mid-travel 29er, one bike quiver. If cost were no object, I'd be selling it and getting both a shorter travel trail bike—the new Tallboy perhaps—AND a longer travel rig for park and shuttle smashing—the new Spesh Enduro, the Megatower, or maybe the SB165 run mullet.

As it is though, it's hard to say. I mean, if I were to get as a second bike either a shorter travel trail bike, or a long travel party bike, it's almost like either one would be too close to my current bike's parameters to really justify. I guess if I were getting a new bike and had to keep a one-bike quiver situation, I'd probably stick to pretty much the same travel range, and instead be switching it up for geo/kinematics.
  • 11 1
 Guerrilla gravity, best potential for multiple bikes in one
  • 4 0
 @BrambleLee - 100% with you there. I would love to have a new ripley/tallboy type bike and full on enduro sled. I am able to get out on enduro worth trails for a day a week but my more frequent and shorter rides that I can do out the garage would be best on a smaller travel bike - it's simply more appropriate for the trails. Sure an enduro bike is fine on the neighborhood lap but a shorter travel bike is more fun. Unfortunately, having two bikes is hard to sneak by wife...
  • 1 0
 You have to get a downhill bike if you have a trail bike. There's just no replacing that
  • 5 0
 I am fortunate enough to live in an area with several lift access DH parks. I have a DH bike and a trail/enduro bike. Yes, modern enduro bikes are amazing and can be the 'one bike' if that's all one can do. However, I have my DH bike so I don't abuse the hell out of my trail/enduro bike on endless park laps plus the annual Whistler trip.
  • 3 0
 Same. 95% of my riding is on my enduro bike, and I'll update it every year or 18 months. The DH bike doesn't get nearly as much use, but when it does it's for terrain that just thrashes anything smaller. Not that you can't do hot laps on garbanzo with an enduro bike, but your body and the bike are going to be way more beat up afterwards.
  • 6 0
 @CaptainBLT: Agreed, my enduro ride is a very competent bike in the park and will do everything but I prefer riding the DH sled there purely from a fatigue factor. I find that as I'm getting older (hoping the wiser thing will happen soon!) that the DH bike allows me to ride for longer at the park without feeling like I've been beaten up. For the trail riding I do, I'm seriously considering a 120-130mm bike when I next update because I have the DH bike, a Ripley or Hightower could be finding a new home here.
  • 4 0
 Seems like a pointless survey... more or less travel for which discipline? Almost all of the comments revolve around DH or aggressive enduro but what about trail and XC? The poll is too simple to be provide anything meaningful. For example, I'm not as young as I used to be. Sure I would love a 170mm 29er but will I buy one? Probably not. I'm heading for more riding where if I break a bone I don't have a long recovery (so trails with fewer serious consequences). Crappy but that's life. So a 130mm rig is more likely in my future than a 170mm because my riding style will likely change in the coming years. The poll needs to separate it into disciplines (DH, enduro, downcountry, etc).
  • 7 0
 Use a bike for the trails you ride 90% of the time and ignore the hype.
  • 4 0
 Depends on wheels? I was surprised after recent demos just how much I dislike the feel of long travel 29ers. The marketing on these was exactly opposite my own experience.
Longer travel 27.5 for moi.
  • 3 0
 I want an aggressive short travel bike. I have a slack 150mm hardtail that I built for fun as a second bike. Turns out I love it as much as my 150mm Full suspension bike. So I am thinking a shorter travel aggressive full sus will be the best of both worlds.
  • 4 1
 I drank the Kool Aid by getting a long travel enduro bike a while back. Because being a wannabe enduro racer was cool and everyone was doing it. It was fun, but not as fun as a short-mid travel bike or hardtail for general riding. Enduro bikes are so one-sided nowadays that unless your local terrain are enduro stages, they're just not fun. They're heavy, climb terribly, and literally numb the trail to the point of not feeling the sensation of speed any longer. But descending is where the party is at. The only party. One trick pony.

I'm replacing my 150mm 29er with a 130mm 29er. Keep in mind that some local riders ride enduro stages with hardtails, full rigids, and short travel bikes pretty frickin fast. It's not a matter of being under-biked. More like under-skilled. Do long travel bikes make enduro stages easier? Hell yea. But that's what makes it boring.

I just like to ride for fun now. And mid-short travel bikes and hardtails are the funnest bikes out there.
  • 2 0
 I feel like it will be different based on geography too. I live in NC and my combo of a Patrol and a Honzo seems like a good balance. Honzo for local stuff or smoother stuff in the mountains then the Patrol sees mostly bike park and gnarlier Pisgah.
  • 1 0
 I have a Patrol and I'm thinking of adding a hardtail like a carbon Honzo for XC rides/races.
  • 2 0
 Just sold my HTLT framset and building up a Tallboy 4. Just need more of an all day/everyday setup that can still rip the dh. Back in 2012 I had the Transition Bandit 29er which was a short travel 29er and it was really just about the perfect bike for me and my local trails...including downieville, demo, and tahoe. Looking forward to a 130/120 set up again!
  • 2 0
 well.. i´m not sure if i can get in the poll, but i´ve just bought my new bike! old one used to be a trek fuel ex9 26" wheels, 130mm rear travel with a nice pike 160mm in the front. And the new one is a Production Privee with 140mm rear travel and a super nice 36 160mm travel in the front.. so maybe that´s more travel!
  • 2 0
 Surely this is about terrain, terrain and terrain? You wouldn't want huge travel on an xc loop or small travel on a bike park....if you ride stuff in between the two then I think 130 rear is adequate as you just won't be needing or blowing through travel regularly enough to warrant more. If you are, accept its your local terrain and lose out a bit on the xc boys. I ride a Dune and will set it up for park days and my local stuff but will get a Mondraker Podium DC which leans more to xc as my regular rides are more trail/xc. Terrain innit! If I didn't have a Dune I'd just get a sb130 and sure it would be better than me in all areas.
  • 3 0
 If I want aggressive geo again then I'll pretty much have to go more. My Mega TR has 135 and you don't seem to get anything burly with less than 140, so from the looks of it the next bike will be a 150 or 160 front and back.
  • 1 0
 I settled on 160f-140r Devinci Troy and couldn't be happier. I'm not as young these days and the DH riding subsides a bit with the years. Keeps me stoked on long days out and still gives me plenty on the Park weekends.
  • 1 0
 @Dropthedebt: For me the DH riding subsided when I realised that pushing up 45mins for a 2min ride down isn't worth it. DH is for places with chairlifts, trail bikes can ride anything now and you can pedal to the top.
  • 2 0
 I find it more fun to pop off jumps with less travel, especially in the back. Big squishers are fun, but if there is a lot of out of the saddle climbing they can be draining and I only really want them for gnarl, which is not a big part of my trail system. i can get better flow going with less travel, but big travel is obviously better for the rough stuff. Really, you should only have one bike.if you only ride one trail.
  • 2 0
 Currently rolling on a Kona Process 153 with a 160mm fork. Would love to be just a little lighter & more nimble so my next bike might be the 134 carbon version with a 140 or 150mm fork. Not a big deal though, today's bikes are so so good.
  • 2 0
 Bought a DH bike last year to save the abuse my enduro rig takes at the bike park. After 4 years without a DH bike, I forgot how awesome a DH bike is for increasing confidence on both big jumps and steep, gnarly tech. I'm also happy to ride my enduro bike without a million creaks coming from it after a weekend at the park.
  • 3 0
 I'm super happy with my 160/160mm bike. I think that's the magic formula. It can do everything from fun and flowy, to bike park jump lines.
  • 1 0
 Yup. Same here!
Sold my DH 200mm bike a few years ago. Riding 160mm 29er. Best decision ever! With that said, I think I want 170/180mm 29er... :p
  • 2 0
 @flyingpig1998: LOL. That's too much bike for me. Not that versatile... Wink
  • 3 0
 160/160 is the last travel range that still kinda rode like a trail bike to me. 180/170 started to feel more like a park bike. 160 is a good number, that's probably what I'd go for in a next bike.
  • 2 0
 @WaterBear: That's why it's so good. It still rides and handles really well, but can still crush some rad lines!
  • 1 0
 I'm sure that my next bike will have more travel, it will be longer with slacker head angle and steeper seat angle.. duh.

Only if i manage to convince my wife that I absolutely need a dedicated park bike, I will buy a trail bike with same amount of travel (150f /135r).
  • 2 1
 Got carbon 29er hardtail. Coiled up 27.5 fs 150 And a light 160 26er fs.
My modern hartail 29er with a 130 fork is as fast as my 2009 26er 160 going down thanks to the geo . The 27.5 full suss is faster down but slow as shit up (weight) the 26er climbs like a goat and is light but twitchy.
So by my reckoning a light 130 fs 29er would be the holy grail for me . Aka sb130
  • 1 0
 More travel definitly. 100mm at the back, coming from nothing at all, is a huge improovement. But right now, i stiil need more. Also 130 in the front and still wanting to go to 150mm at the front, even with 100 at the back. I like to have room for error in the front of the bike.
  • 1 0
 I ride a 140/160 but since moving to Colorado I feel like I'm often pushing its limits on rocky descents. Now eyeing a 160/170 or so to just not feel like I'm utterly abusing my bike all the time. I think with 5 years of geometry advancement it will at least be a wash in the climbing department.
  • 1 0
 I think the same amount of travel is the way to go.. . . . . . . ... ... . . . . Because I'm on a 200/200 tank and have no plans to ever change... .. . . .. ..... don't want / need "bang for buck" or "just as cappable" or "all you need" or "all rounder". . .. . ....
  • 1 0
 Pretty content with the 145/160 of my Ripmo. It's burly enough for (most of?) the steep stuff in Squamish/Nelson, and efficient enough for everyday trail rides in the Bay Area. I could afford to have a shorter-travel trail bike, but so far don't see the need.
  • 1 0
 I'm on a 27.5 170/160, it's been amazing for travelling to locations with more challenging terrain and it hasn't been bad at all on the flatter terrain at home. If I was looking to replace it right away I'd probably stay the same, maybe go 29er and give up a few mm
  • 1 0
 Its hard...I still like having a big bike for park riding (200mm). In terms of the second bike...its hard not to go for a 160/170mm bike...you want to be able to do it all with one bike if you're on a roadtrip for example...and the little bikes, unless you start going to the 100mm range don't pedal that much better.
  • 1 0
 Less most likely. I'm currently on a 150/150 first gen Bronson. I mostly ride right, rocky, rooty northeast single track. My next bike will likely be one of the new gen we 120-130 29ers with capable geo. So something along the Ripley V4 - Tallboy V4 - Druid continuum.

I would like a dedicated park bike for lift days, though, so if I happened to stumble on a deal on one, it could go more.
  • 1 0
 I feel like most enduro bikes pedal pretty well, and a set of light, fast rolling tires on an enduro bike is going to be a more efficient ride than a "downcountry" bike with enduro tires. Sooo, if you're worried about best of both worlds, it's a lot cheaper to swap tires back and forth than buy a whole new bike
  • 2 0
 This hasn’t been my experience. For my local trails(mostly xc) my 120 bike with minions is way better than throwing ardents on my megatower. Rolling speed is just one part of the equation. A big bike with a coil shock just doesn’t feel as fun as a light weight bike on undulating terrain.
  • 1 0
 I have 3 mtb bikes: Rigid steel motobecame pos (saved for zombie apocalypse and arm numbing shenanigans.) SB130 LR, and Canyon Lux.

B/t the Lux and the SB130 there's a massive difference, but each time I ride either one of them I think, this is my favorite bike ever, I should just sell my other bike(s). But then I ride the other one and I am reminded why I have two(3). I will say both are considered short travel with 100mm and 130mm but I have never needed more when I ride them. Sure the Yeti is way faster down, but the Lux destroys it on the ups! I am confident I will never need more than 140mm of rear travel for my style of riding, and terrain. Plus I like to "earn my turns" so having more would get in the way of 95% of the ride time. I don't know how fast I am, you are probably faster than me, but I do race and push my bikes, and no enduro or xc course has left me wanting/needing a bigger bike.
  • 2 1
 I have serious philosophical issues with ebikes, but I'm finding it hard to argue against buying an e-enduro and using it for general transport and - why not, it would be a waste otherwise - ripping the trails a new one occasionally. Better than a normal bike and a shopping ebike eating space in the mansion. And I'll soon be old AF, my legs are gone, my lungs have seen better days. It's just a question of whether I can bunny hop one. God I hate myself now.
  • 1 0
 This is a tough question to answer because I own three bikes: one is a hardtail with a 100 mm fork. The full sus trail bike has 140 on the front and 130 on the back, and the bike I most often ride on the shore is 160/150. Honestly, I like them all. But, if I were to buy another bike, it would not have more than the 160/150.
  • 1 0
 I'm on the island and now am wishing for more travel. I have a 150/130 29er (sold the 130mm HT) and need some (currently unavailable) volume spacers so I don't keep bottoming out the rear. Enduro bikes climb a lot better than people give them credit. A friend rides a fairly new spesh Enduro 29er, he can clean climbs I can't. Obviously he's a better rider, but the bike isn't holding him back. It's not like he's some xc monster.

Was riding with two guys yesterday. One on a Capra with a coil, the other on a decoy (borrowed bikes from the brother's collection). Capra climbed fine (obviously so did the decoy) but on the downs that extra travel made a difference. Trying to keep up I was bottoming out both ends. Part of that is setup, but with with extra travel that wouldn't be an issue.

I'm thinking a ripmo af as the next bike. I'm kicking myself for not getting the used range carbon from a lbs employee, "I don't need that much bike."
  • 1 0
 I did the less thing this season and opted for the newly Bronson 2019 in ( rat ) grey and for next year besides the new Cascades Linkage I dont think Id change stuff, then I have my HT and if I had money Id get an abused M 16 or M9 with 27.5 wheels
  • 1 0
 Super stoked on my GG megatrail. 135mm -165mm adjust ability with 2 shocks(one air one coil) . 150mm to 180mm Lyrik dps up front and I’ve never been happier with the options. Climbs as good as a Hightower at 135 and depending on where I’m riding I can swap a shock for 165mm. Crazy versatility (my go to) on one bike and I own a bunch!
  • 1 0
 What's everyone's take on downhill bikes selling enduro bikes? All I really watch is DH, it's the main thing I look at photo epics of, drool over the bikes everything.
But, at the end of it all, I buy "Enduro" bikes.
Don't get real excited to watch enduro shit, tho.
Also always notice the kids on trails know all the DH riders names, but ride a trail bike. Probably depends where you live, but I know for where I do a DH rig is a waste of time & space.
  • 1 0
 My next bike will have a little bit more travel. Rocking a Knolly Warden with 155mm and 27.5 wheels. Looking to go up to a 29er with 160+ travel. Evil Wreckoning, Pivot Firebird or Santa Cruz Megatower will be my next bike!!! Drool
  • 1 0
 I tried to have a do-all shorter travel bike, and I didn’t go for bigger hits “in case I didn’t make it”. Also ripping a short travel bike through chunder is hard work. I’d rather just cruise all terrain and send the big stuff and not worry about anything. 160mm is pretty much it for me.
  • 1 0
 Have a 160 / 150 29er. Just bought a 160 / 155 27.5 I’m sure manualing will be a bit easier. For my trails don’t think any more would be beneficial. We’ll see in Whistler bike park next year. Although the 160 29er is a lot of fun in the park????????‍♀️????????????????????‍♀️????❤️????
  • 1 0
 Current rig : 2017 RM Thunderbolt, bike has 120mm rear, and came with 120mm up front, upgraded to a 140mm boost pike rct3 42mm offset fork, and about to upgrade the rear can to debonair. I ride this around the city and into the mountains, I have been riding steep rough trails and maybe the sweet spot is 130mm out back, these Rocky's come with a chip switch that can actually put a bit of a longer stroke so that might be the next upgrade, 140 up front and 130 out back, with 65-66 degree head angle and 420-440mm rear center sounds great for many riders. These numbers give people room for progression.
  • 1 0
 Just went from a wreckoning to a capra 29 ltd. It's a crazy brawler of a bike that definitely pedals better than the wrek'r. But the wreckoning was closer to a do it all rig than the capra. The 170 capra is more at home on gnarly trails and park riding and gets by on some mellower trails. The wreckoning was just shy of that, being pushed hard at the park level and a bit of a tank on the more xc long rides. Both bike definitely only come alive when they are pushed super hard. Moral of the story is buy a bike that suits your strengths. I'm a competent descender and can get by with a little less travel on the gnarly stuff and would handily welcome any edge I can get on long pedals and more mellow terrain just to make it all more fun. Dream bike for me would be a super burly sb130 lunch ride. In addition to the capra.
  • 1 0
 Right now itll have to be a full dh or enduro travel bike. If you asked me on my last bike you dont have a correct answer because yes its more travel but its a hardtail. And yes that hardtail is doing dh duty. Another 10mm up front but nothing in the back all encased around big ole 29ers. The docta rips. My last bike b4 that was a 170/ 160 banshee rune and its slack geo proved to be a consistent climber and capable descender. Also stealing the light from the full dh rig.
  • 1 0
 This year I went from a 160mm hardtail to an old (2006!) 160mm mini-DH bike. The bike boosted my speed and confidence by a mile but now I'm wondering if it has more to do with its slacker head angle and longer reach than the rear squish. I'm interested in regressing to a hardtail, but a newer one, as a budget-friendly way to get into the newer geometry, current wheel sizes etc. But would that have me back to clunking awkwardly through the chunk, trying to stay on the pedals? Seems hard to know.
  • 1 0
 This keeps me up at night...

So the full DH squish went 16 months ago and was not replaced. The mx bike benefitted from time served.

The 140/150mm 27.5 that was stolen 3 seasons ago also never truly replaced instead a 27.5 plus hardtail dropped into my lap for next to nothing. Funny thing happened. I love that bike. The band aid bike has won we over big time.

So here’s where we are with this question.

Def less travel then dh bike, but something geometry more relaxed then previous trail bike (sight carbon).

Obviously more travel then hardtail, although it was remarkable that I didn’t change any riding locations on this bike. I simply didn't give a shit much about it and it keeps a smile on my face. This bike always has a home.

So 29 for sure. It’s either new reign advance pro 1 at 146mm and I put up with over bike for 65% of my riding or New SC Tallboy 120mm with a 140mm fork and I make due for the gravity days as best I can while slaughtering the weekly trail rides.

I’m leaning towards the giant and the $1600 savings for alike builds.

Does that answer your question @mikelevy. ?
  • 1 0
 I’ve been on a hardtail for the last year and can’t justify going back to a full suss for 95% of the riding I do in the UK. Ok, uplift days excluded. Apart from bike park type places which are fast and with braking bumps I’m sticking on the HT. *no I realise I don’t live in the mountains and if I did then yes I’d have a rear shock
  • 1 0
 More or less travel is all dependant on your starting point. It’s a bit like the glass half full or half empty thing. If the glass started out empty, then it is half full. But if it started out full, then it is half empty. Am I waffling?
  • 1 0
 Stupid poll. The answers are totally useless unless you know how much travel you own right know. The answers should be:
I own 170mm and tend to lore travel
I own 170mm and tend to less travel
I own 170mm and am happy with it
I own 150mm....
.
.
.
And so on
  • 1 0
 My next bike will be full rigid, because the nearest trails are too tame for my banshee prime and it makes for a nicer ride on fire roads. On the other hand I don't plan to sell said Banshee so it is not like I won't have any option.
  • 1 0
 Ive got a 170 F/R 29er and I love it downhill on the real steep rough stuff, but to pedal around its a lot of bike after a while, it completely flattens out all but the roughest stuff so finding fun on standard blues and reds for instance is difficult.

Ive also got a 160, 29 Hardtail. A lot of fun on the tamer stuff and a real challenge on the tough stuff, quite fatiguing in its own way. Its like learning how to really ride again, which is great in itself.

So, I would deduce that a....140 F/R 29er would be the sweet point for an all rounder.....perhaps.
  • 1 0
 Just got the Ibis Ripmo AF and just got off the SC Megatower to me when I went down in travel the response from the trail was way better I thought I wanted more travel but the sweet spot for me is 140-150 rear travel bikes with either 150-160 up front
  • 1 0
 I recently got a new bike after a long time thinking about what sort of travel I should get. I finally settled on less travel going from a 160/170 bike to a 130/140 travel bike. Honestly the best decision I could have made in my opinion. I haven't felt 'underbiked' at all yet and the thing rolls so much better. Obviously that's not so important on the steep downhills but considering I have to pedal up to the top, and also along some flat to get to the steeps sections, I feel it was a good choice. It has made the least enjoyable part of my rides more enjoyable and I haven't really noticed a difference on the downs. I think choosing a bike that works for your whole ride (ie from the moment you leave your car to when you get back) is a good way to think about it. If all you do is bike park uplifts then there's no need to get something pedalable, but if pedalling happens to make up the majority of your ride then I would say take a punt on something slightly smaller in travel.
  • 1 0
 My 180mm 27.5 is definitely overkill for the local trails. I get passed on the climbs and I pass them on the DH and I have no problems with that. My next bike might be a 150+ 29er, but I can't see myself riding anything less than that now.
  • 1 0
 Really depends where you live and what/how you ride. Fortunate enough to hit Whistler weekly and surrounding lift accessed resorts in the province. I noticed a major difference in how my body feels riding 5 days straight on an Enduro bike vs a DH rig. Next bike will definitely be a DH because nothing compares if you just want to bomb as fast as possible and not feel like your body is dying after consecutive full 6-8 hour days in the bike parks!
  • 1 0
 On burly trails, there's no drawback to running a longer travel bike. If you don't want to grenade a wheel and run a precise (bigger stanchion) fork, your shorter travel trail bike will weigh around 32 pounds.

And my Slash weighs.......32 pounds. I guess if I was exiled to the Midwest or someplace I'd go back to a hardtail.

Then again, if mountain biking is a passion rather than a website you visit, do what you have to to live where the trails are gnarly enough that an Enduro sled is what you want.
  • 1 0
 I just got my new bike, SB130. That up from a 2012 Fuel EX9 120/120. This bike is perfect for me but I still wish I had maybe given the SB150 a demo ride or two. With every bike I ever get I always feel like I should have gotten something with more travel.
  • 1 0
 More travel, but the caveat being that the low speed compression and rebound controls work *well* in the middle 60% of the travel range and that the adjustments are wide enough to make it perceptible to even intermediate trail riders.
  • 1 0
 My last squishy bike was a 150mm 26", but I've been solely on a Chromag hardtail/160mm fork for a few years now. I'm SO ready to get on a squishy 29er and shopping 140-160mm bikes. I'll probably end up right at 150mm again.
  • 1 0
 162mm/170mm is really where it is this year. Next year I hope to buy a small batch CNC link that promises 167mm and an aftermarket spring conversion to 180mm that keeps me in step with the marketing departments.
  • 1 0
 Definitely more.

Riding a fuel currently with 120mm/120mm and tired of wondering if I am under biked.

Next bike I am going full send with travel- don't care about the Strava uphill times anymore.
  • 1 0
 my bike 180mm, just perfect amount of travel, next bike will be in same range 160-180, you can use less travel in case not needed, however for the short travel bikes you cannot use more travel if needed;
  • 1 0
 Just bought another hard tail frame. 3rd one in a row after a series of full sussers. Like Stevie Wonder said, nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin', so i guess my travel stays the same. Smile
  • 1 0
 I have found that I generally "need" less travel than I think. My 150f/130r is plenty for the riding I do. That being said, I'd love a longer travel bike for shuttle laps or bike parks.
  • 1 0
 I'll be sticking with my current travel....well because of course I would, I'm on an Ibis HD4..... .........pedals like a trail bike, descends like an enduro bike. Enough said.
  • 1 0
 The most reasonable solution is to have more than one bike. 29er enduro incoming to replace my 27.5. Hardtail for rides in locations that are not as chunky or I want a change.
  • 1 0
 I want a legit DH bike, like a YT Tues, Specialized Demo or a Trek Session, that has a wide range cassette slapped on and the ability to lock out my suspension. Best. Trail. Bike. Idea. Ever.
  • 1 0
 Hahaha losing it! ????
  • 1 0
 Doesn't the DH over enduro thing have more to do with suss desighn than travel? I mean you cant really compare a bike designed to pedal to one that isn't an blame travel amount
  • 1 0
 Many people cross the alps with the bike i ride. So, why should i think about less travel then?
It's a 180mm freerider, but it pedals realy good. For me, it is THE “one for all“ bike.
Trail, park, tour, whatever...
  • 2 0
 live in new england, and my Santa Cruz Tallboy is great on 98% of what I ride....I'd probably uptravel slightly for those big mountain days and occasional lift day.
  • 9 6
 Who cares ?
Where's Friday Fails ?
  • 1 13
flag goytay (Oct 11, 2019 at 12:10) (Below Threshold)
 Sadly Jordie Lunn !
  • 5 0
 It seems to have been left out because it's not good to laugh when a good man has died.
  • 3 0
 @stumpymidget: Yep, Jordie will be missed.
  • 4 0
 @stumpymidget: good point, pretty dumb comment on my part
  • 2 0
 @pigman65: I think it was actually up and then they pulled it. Pretty sure I saw it on my YouTube subscription list this morning.
  • 1 1
 @stumpymidget: Depends. A few belly laughs at my funeral (on top of a 14er of course) is a winning scenario for when I go out. Online snark? Yeah F that regardless.
  • 26 0
 Not going to happen today. We've got other shit on our minds, didn't seem right.
  • 2 0
 Riding a stump evo, I'm looking for less travel and downhill wheels. And same geo.
  • 3 0
 Same travel, but eager to try a high pivot, with an idler pulley.
  • 2 0
 No option for both? Come on, y'all know how many dentists stalk this forum!
  • 3 1
 Currently on a hardtail with 100mm fork. I may go big (read with sarcasm) next bike with hardtail and 120mm fork.
  • 3 0
 I just went from 100 to 130 on my HT. And from 69 degree HA to ~65. You can do it man. Live your best life.
  • 1 0
 Just demoed a 2020 Ripley (130/120) and 2019 Evil Offering (140/140) in Sedona. I liked the Offering much better, for that kind of terrain at least.
  • 2 0
 How to trigger those who bought long travel bikes after convincing themselves they "needed" it.
  • 1 0
 That was me last season buying a YT Capra 29. Way too much bike. Downs were fun but I was so exhausted from pedalling the tank it was a chore.
  • 2 0
 I currently have an aggro hardtail so anything has more travel in the rear lol
  • 1 0
 I've got an Enduro bike and there's a new lift access place opening next year about 30 minutes from my house. Gonna get a dh bike for that so more if the travels for me.
  • 2 0
 My next bike is a dirt jumper, I reckon that’s less travel than my downhill bike haha
  • 1 0
 More. With the geo finally being figured out in '19(reach, sa, ha) more makes more sense then less...especially if your riding steeps like Laguna bch.
  • 1 0
 Just went from a Zerode Taniwha (160 f/r 27.5 wheels) to a SC Hightower (140 rear 150 front 29 wheels)

It's much more capable and can do much longer days pedaling!
  • 1 0
 Current gen Nomad right now, considering a Hightower or Megatower for my next bike, not sure which. Either way, probably going with less travel.
  • 2 0
 Dh, enduro, trail, xc????? What a shit marketing pole!!! Buy another bike n feed the empire.
Be specific ffs
  • 1 0
 Definitely stepping it up big time on my next bike. Going from a whopping 130mm/160mm gt sensor to a 135/160 BTR. SHORT TRAVEL RIPPERS FO LIFE SON!
  • 1 0
 My 2017 160mm Scott genius cost me almost £3k I'm not getting a new bike for at least 5 years ???????? you guys have addictions!!
  • 1 2
 Pink bike cracks me up! These "pools" have already almost no statistical relevance, but in addition PB manages to bias the responses of the already non-representative sample with a question such has: "So, with that in mind, maybe it makes more sense to consider a bike with more suspension rather than less?"

Bravi!!!!!!!! and thank you for wasting everybody's time!
  • 1 0
 I have a sprinty long travel (Ripmo) and a capable short travel (Thunderbolt).. We always need a spare bike anyway.. no?

So, why not having the best or both world?
  • 1 0
 It's a personal choice and comes down to the type of trails you ride the most. I own three bikes and would own more if I could afford it.
  • 1 0
 I will be replacing two bikes with one bike with a medium amount of travel. A 170mm bike and a 130/105mm bike for one with 140 travel.
  • 1 0
 Horses for courses, where do you ride? How large are you? Ideally we'd have a rig to outride your skills and an e-cargo bike for hauling groceries.
  • 1 0
 Another question: Will you next bike have more or fewer volts to make it go, shift,drop or stop? (What a horrible thought!) Mine will have zero volts.
  • 1 0
 Current MTB: 100mm XC hardtail.
Next MTB(In progress): home designed and made 130mm trail focused hardtail. Steel. 1x11. So pumped.
  • 1 0
 When I move from my Banshee Paradox V2 onto the V3, I’ll keep the front pogo at 160mm. Since my V2 is over-forked, I bet my HA will only slacken by 1/2 a degree (?)...
  • 1 0
 well, my current bike is a dh (more travel not possible) and a hardtail, as I tend to buy an enduro the only option is having more travel haha
  • 1 0
 150mm rear/160mm front - 2013 Kona process to? Not sure maybe a 140mm 29er next? Like a little extra just in case never mind... 150mm min.... Smile
  • 1 0
 Making sure your suspension is tuned, maintained, and correctly adjusted to your riding is more important that 1/2" more or less of travel.
  • 3 1
 Have literally just gone from 145 to 141... Does that count?
  • 1 0
 I currently ride a hardtail 29er. My next bike will be a fully @ 150 to 160 mm travel. 29er again of course.
  • 1 0
 170 front 155 rear on a Knolly warden fits me just fine. Literally killed my quiver of bikes. If anything I’d go for less.
  • 1 0
 Chances are, I'd be moving to a full suspension bike with rear travel to match my current 160mm up front.
  • 1 0
 Changed my 2017 Slash to 170mm ASAP and never looked back. Perfect for our conditions here in Christchurch.
  • 1 1
 I sometimes wonder how more than 200mm travel would ride. I have an xl size downhill bike so something like 220mm travel would be proportional to the size.
  • 1 0
 This would have been really amazing if first you had to specify how much travel your main bike has.
  • 1 0
 Went from a Cube Stereo to Norco Torrent.. So, I guess all the way less. In the rear at least.
  • 2 0
 Im thinking about replacing the capra with a downhiller and a trailbike
  • 2 0
 Did this and I'm loving it. Got rid of the super big enduro bike and replaced it with a cheap DH bike from the classifieds and a slightly lower-spec new trail bike. Same budget as one superbike but now I can DH better than the big enduro and can pedal better than the big enduro bike. What's not to like?
  • 1 0
 Sticking with my 170 f and 150 out back. The SB 150 ticks all the boxes for me!
  • 3 1
 180-180 singlecrown and 'enduro' drivetrain is perfect
  • 1 0
 Sticking to 180mm but moving away from 26" as hardly anyone stocks decent tires these days.
  • 1 0
 Best bike decision of my life: Buying a DH bike. Now I have a 140/160 29er and a 26" DH bike and I can do everything.
  • 2 0
 Currently on an Enduro but am really keen to try a Stumpy EVO.
  • 1 0
 Not sure. I have four bikes right now, 100mm through 160mm. I used them all.
  • 1 0
 Well considering the frame sitting behind me is a hard tail and my current bike is a remedy... I think less...
  • 1 0
 Next bike will likely be a fat bike so I would suspect same or less suspension than my current 130mm travel trail bike.
  • 1 0
 Well I ride a 8“ DH, but yeah let’s get some monster T‘s on there and go bigger
  • 2 0
 I'm so rigid right now...
  • 1 0
 I’ve got a mid travel trail bike and a downhill bike. Maybe it’s time to get a dirt jumper....
  • 1 0
 Npt sure but it wont be an ebike and if pinkbike says its good,im thinkimg twice about buyimg it. Amd vice versa
  • 2 0
 Gonna sell my meta and smuggler to get a decoy. Ebikes are fun.
  • 1 0
 I went from a 100/80 XC bike to a 160/145 enduro. Definitely going with less travel next time.
  • 1 0
 150/140 27.5 with 64/65 head angle a 76 sta is pretty sweet for all round UK razzing and a lot of fun.
TR scout for the win.
  • 1 0
 The answer depends on what and where the rider will be using their next new bike.
  • 8 7
 Less is only better in prison
  • 5 4
 plenty of circumstances where less travel is better, DH to enduro for example
  • 1 0
 @Lewis-pick: you're on to something tup
  • 3 0
 @haggeredshins
Depends which side you're on... Rolleyes
  • 1 0
 More up front, less on the rear.
  • 1 0
 Same travel bigger wheels...and a hardtail
  • 1 0
 Got a 27.5 FS 170/ 160. Thinking of going 29er 160/145 next time around.
  • 2 0
 fully rigid SS
  • 1 2
 At current mtb bike costs my next bike will have a motor (Gas Powered, preferably 2 stroke) and I'll have funds left over for fuel and gear.
  • 2 0
 Too much travel? What?
  • 1 0
 140mm rear 150mm front. The sweet spot for all around riding.
  • 1 0
 I'd love to swap SB6c for SB165, but... No more livers to trade for.
  • 1 0
 Better Poll: Should this dude get more gold fronts? Y or N. Answer is yes.
  • 1 0
 I probably won't buy any thing but another Sentinel. - Transition fanboi
  • 1 0
 Good troll Mike - Good f'n troll. :thumbsup:
  • 1 0
 Let’s be clear it’s not about the riding
Spend money
  • 1 0
 Tell us what you want to spend money on
  • 1 0
 Do you ride for fun ?
Spend money
  • 1 0
 Don’t fall for this marketing BS
  • 1 0
 My next bike will be the lowest travel I can get with a 36 and an X2
  • 1 0
 The 36 can get down to 100mm.
  • 1 0
 Tell me what you want to but and we will Market the shit out of it!!!
  • 1 0
 160 27.5 to a 140 29 ????????‍♂️
  • 1 0
 As long as it looks like a Session and has a bottle cage, i am all in.
  • 1 0
 I'm just here looking for Friday Fails.
  • 1 0
 More or less, some travel.
  • 1 0
 I have a 180mm 29er trailbike, no need for more or less.
  • 1 0
 Next bike will be changing the HT trail for a susser so.....
  • 1 0
 Mullet 140/160 is the go.
  • 1 0
 Less travel but slacker geometry is the way forward for me
  • 1 0
 Bronson now, Bronson forever!
  • 1 0
 The Sb100 would be perfect for me,
  • 1 0
 Well seeing as I'm on a hardtail now...
  • 1 0
 I just got a new bike and it is indeed more travel. huck life.
  • 1 0
 Where's the option for both?
  • 1 0
 I keep injuring myself. Going smaller.
  • 1 0
 There needs to be an option for “one of each”
  • 1 0
 Proper geometry > more travel
  • 1 0
 Spend money
  • 1 0
 Spend more money
  • 1 0
 Choose life !!!!!
  • 1 1
 more travel if the bike are E-Bike
  • 1 0
 Yoooo 160 is lit
  • 1 0
 180/180 26+ is the shit!
  • 1 0
 epuke next
  • 1 3
 My next ebike will have more travel (HT to Enduro), my next bike will have less travel (Enduro to XC).
  • 11 13
 My next will probably be E mtb Sorry mom.
  • 5 3
 Oh...
That is definitely on my mind... Smile
  • 3 1
 This site has zero e-bike content. the filter is working.
  • 1 1
 Getting rapidly to the age point were some e-bike assist might be considered ...
  • 3 0
 @duzzi: sorry to hear about your loss.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.100861
Mobile Version of Website