Video: Pushing Hard on a Downcountry Bike

 Yeah, modern bikes are so rad and capable. More travel is not necessary to do a lot of tech riding, but it is faster.

 So what you're saying is that good riders are good?

 Yeah. I got the same sense. Dude could have been ripping on a touring bike with panniers.

 Exactly.

 62deg head angle with 180mm travel yeah!

 Someone give this man a prize! Nailed it.

 I feel like comments like this are by people that either: A) don’t have terrain that justifies 150mm of travel B) haven’t rode a modern DH or Enduro bike or C) suck as riders and are completely ok with 120 mm of travel. If you think I’m wrong go buy his bike used after 2 seasons of use and ride rowdy terrain.

 @thejake: Wouldn't you agree that the majority of the people on this sport doesn't have easy acess to challenging terrain?

 @melonhead1145: right, that’s why WC’s DH have best enduro rigs! Oh wait! Comparing modern DH to enduro is just stupid.

 More like bikes need capable riders than geo or travel.

 @nozes: majority of people have access to legit trails, do they choose to ride them? I’m not saying a bike like the Spur doesn’t have a place, I would love one. What pisses me off is people saying “see you don’t need your burly bike”. Sure a good rider can ride any bike on any terrain. Is riding a road bike on a DH trail possible? Yes, enjoyable, no.

 @wvanlogg: I was comparing downhill bikes of ~ 10 years ago to today's enduro bikes. A modern downhill bike will be faster than an Enduro, as downhill bike geometry has progressed too, with longer reach, wheelbase and larger wheels

 @thejake: and as an older rider, more cush means I can ride more often without as much joint or nerve damage. I totally respect the rider who can shred the gnar on a rigid single speed, but it's just not practical if you want to have any longevity in this sport.

 Not to mention, it's easier to sell a bike with more travel than a bike with better geo. Travel is an easy number for consumers to latch on to. Geo... not so much.

 @thejake: your point about the shape that bike is going to be like in 2 seasons compared to a proper enduro bike is legit.

 That is why I have never bought a smaller bike, have problems with DH frames cracking after some time, a shor travel bike will fall apart like a clowns car for me on the same trails surely ?

 the new Transitions have lifetime frame warranty

 @mtnflow74: but how long is the lifetime?

 @Roguee: when it breaks

 Couldn’t agree more. Rode a trance 29 last year and while it was incredibly fun I needed suspension rebuilt after only three months and wound up cracking the frame in two spots. Lifetime frame warranties are great but dealing with filing the claim, waiting for replacement and changing parts over is still a PITA, not to mention time off the bike. Switched back to an enduro bike and though it’s not as fun everywhere it shrugs off the repeated hard hits without wincing and bottoming out regularly. That being said if I personally could accorde to have two bikes this genre would be it.

 @mtnflow74: frame warranty covers manufacture defects not riding it into pieces

 @staylo85: transition is no questions asked for warranty in my experience. had a cracked chainstay on my old patrol (from bike abuse) and was back riding in three days. that was pre-covid with the part coming bellingham to vancouver, but still no filling paper work, no e-mail chain etc.

 @morganrobins: cant argue that, but you may have gotten lucky. I’ve paid for a replacement damaged frame, it was fair, but not free. My only point is “warranty” does not mean if you break it they replace it, generally.

 @GBoyd: Why are you bottoming out all the time?

 @f*ckingsteve: I imagine setting up the suspension stiff enough to handle big drops would completely ruin the ride quality, which is a compromise GBoyd might not have taken.

 My wife's Banshee Spitfire has only 140mm travel, but it is built super strong!

 Shorter travel may reduce loads on some parts. For instance my hardtail runs a 120mm travel fork and 63deg head angle with a 150mm headtube. This kind of gives you the same geometry as a 160mm travel fork with a 110mm headtube (if you don't compensate for sag, indeed). The shorter axle to crown introduces smaller loads (or more specifically, a smaller moment) into the headtube yet as the headset bearings are spaced wider apart, the loads they have to take are smaller too. Obviously a hardtail (so near zero rear suspension travel) can be made lighter, cheaper and stronger than something with (more) rear suspension travel. But I can imagine even the middle ground designs with flex pivots may be easier to design light and strong compared to a true four bar linkage design (in whichever guise). Properly introducing the loads into a link through the small amount of material surrounding these cartridge bearings may be more challenging than allowing members to flex over a certain length.

Obviously some parts may need to be stronger (wheels come to mind) yet at the same time I believe that less travel encourages riders to work with their bodies more to absorb the loads and actually be easier on parts.

The article stating this is all new is a bit cringeworthy. People have been riding their simple hardtails hard for years and the same goes for shorter travel full suspension bikes. I recall Dirt magazine has been exploring the limits of the Specialized Epic (XC full suspension) and the Cannondale Rush (marathon full suspension) bikes well over a decade ago. Dismissing those to a different category and then claim they have a new category for their "pioneering" gear is Apple -kinda reasoning.

dirtmountainbike.com/bike-reviews/bike-test-cannondale-rush.html

 Yes that's exactly what the bike industry wants you to think ????. Hahaha like it's normal for a person to drop 50k on a garage full of different bikes ????. I'm like you, 1 bike a custom nukeproof mega mullet with an ext shock and a custom tuned climb circuit. I dont feel I would ever want a 120mm bike that wasn't a slope style rig. I can close the climb switch ride xc hit dirt jumps and shred steep nasty dh all on the same bike why not just have 1 ????

 Same for me. I ride a 2016 Capra with a Vivid Coil in the back. I ride it on my mellow hometrails, the local jumpspot, a few days a year in the bikepark and a few days in the alps.
Of course it ain't perfect for the local tracks, but I can't afford more bikes as a student.
It's expensive enough that I have to buy a new fork because mine is worn out (was serviced regularly)

 I really can't see how one could live with only one bike? What if something fails so you can't ride for a longer period of time? Get yourself a cheap HT and you are fine for the mellow trails also, especially during the 'offseason'.

 @Muckal: Try having children and being the sole supporter of your family, then you will realize 1 bike is fine. Especially if you having two bikes means your children get none. I think I will stick with the latter, me having 1 awesome do it all shred machine.

 @Bikebikebike03: fair enough, however I will stick to my plan of having at least two bikes to cover more or less everything, which is going to be a challenge in itself. Right now I got four, but I will have to reduce them due to space issues once my little one gets a bike.

 Surely it depends where you live and what style of riding you do. If I didn't use it for racing, my Mega would be total overkill for my local trails and I'd probably downsize to something 140mm ish. I think an actual downcountry bike might be a step too far though, I reckon it would knock my confidence on technical stuff, even if it might be faster overall

 @mountainsofsussex: Completely agree.

I ride my Yeti SB5c on everything around here, it is 150/130. For reference, I'm in Phoenix, AZ and we have some chunky DH (Geromino and Holbert at South Mountain).

Bikes are just better these days, you don't need gobs of travel to make up for bad geo/crappy suspension.

I used to ride a Karpiel Apocalypse on these same trails (9/13" of travel!) and I am way faster and more controlled on my Yeti.

 @mountainsofsussex: I ride 135r/150f bike and it's perfect for most of the trails around our city. However, for Alpine riding and in bike parks is often on the edge and it's merely surviving. It's tiresome and not enjoyable as it could be.
For my next bile I will surely go for more travel. Being overbiked on easier trails is much more fun than being underbiked in proper trail centers.
We could still discuss over some 150 mm bike like the Sentinel or new Stumpy Evo and one full enduro monster like Madone, but I'm convinced that this is the way to go for one do it all bike

 Absolutely. And in case you want a downcontry bike you could just pump up your suspension, and close off compression, and put on some lighter better rolling tires.
And the only limits for reducing travel are set by your weigth and the suspension's maximum pressure.
170mm enduro bike really is the way to go for anyone with space and/or money limitations.
As long as you get a bike with more conservative head tube and seat tube angles it's impossible to go wrong, since you can always XC-size your bike.
And of course it's gona be heavy, but that's meaningless compared to the difference in cost and riding characteristics some lighter better rolling tires will make.

 @c-radicallis: couldn't agree more. my wagon wheeler Slayer pedals as well as my old Smuggler, climbs better and is more comfortable in every situation. don't use the travel when you don't need it, but it's always there when you want to. modern bikes are incredible.

not mentioned is the fact that when you get a bit older, that longer travel is also easier on the whole body and you don't feel as beat up at the end of a ride. tired and exhilarated, but not beat up. long travel enduro bikes for all!

 @iamloz No thanks. Been there, done that. All depends on the trails you spend 70% of your time on. With any "one bike" you will compromise somewhere, ideally you want the compromise to be on the trails you spend less time on. So for me, a one bike is 130 - 140mm travel with modern geo. I will feel a little undergunned on some trails, but that is a small % of my riding time. On a 170mm beast I am going to be overgunned most of the time. But that's just me, if I lived in BC I'd probably agree 100% with your comment.

 ya mon ... right tool for the job the DC bike just does not cut it

 Yes people tend to buy bikes that are designed for what they plan on doing with it. There's more to biking than just going fast on trails.

 Agreed

 Yup. This.

 Used to agree, but after seeing a buddy lose half his face in a rock garden while riding a trail bike with an xc lid, I don’t judge anyone’s helmet choice anymore.

 @g123:

My front teeth are fake. I ride with a full face helmet full time, as it is cheaper than getting those worked on again.

With modern lightweight and breathable full face helmets, I don’t see myself going back to a half shell anytime soon. And I’d bet over time we see more and more riders using full face helmets.

Same thing happened with dirt bikes. They slowly transitioned from half shells (1960’s -1970’s) to full face (1980’s to 1990’s). Now you almost never see anyone with a half shell on a dirt bike.

 You right , honestly I don’t understand why pros go without pads, I get you are cool and fast and bla bla bla ... but this is the wrong example for all of us and the new generations!!

 @g123: same here, a buddy shattered his cheekbone riding an easy trail around here. He probably hit a root or a tree, he can't remember due to a concussion and he was riding on his own. Since i mostly ride on my own these says the TLD Stage i my way to go.

 Given the current situation I know a lot of people riding padded up and with Full Faces where they wouldn't normally, if you can avoid breaking your jaw and being in a hospital with a bunch a covid patients that's got to be a good thing surely?

 @ocnlogan: mine are as well thanks too a crash. I still go between a half shell and full face but will probably be going with the full face all of the time.

Just not worth going through all of that again.

 Your logic makes zero sense.

 ah yes, "lets bash this guy for trying to be safe". Are we back in 2008?

 @mariomtblt: Relax gents, just said it looks odd, as in unusual. I didn't say people shouldn't wear protection. In fact, I intimated that maybe Remy should do so. Now go get mad at something else.

 or just work on your skills

 @housem8d: The most important upgrade of all!

 "The difference between MTB and BMX riders is that the former still has cartilage on their joints at age 30."

 @MaplePanda: I dunno, I skateboarded for many years, got an MRI after a running injury and the doc said my cartilage looked good. You're probably right about the pros who go really huge though

 @Dogl0rd: Yea, I guess it does all depend how often you’re out riding/skateboarding, what features you ride, and what your body is like. Those pro skateboarders are riding down drops that would break most people’s ankles if they tried.

 If you go give it an actual 100% effort down a hill, that 50t comes in really handy even on mellow grades on the way back up. Ask any enduro racer

 @ksilvey10: Pushing the bike is not forbidden as far as I know? Nor it´s significantly slower than using 32/50 gear.

 @Mondbiker: pushing is allowed but probably not necessarily. I know I sit and chill in the 50t on liaison stages. It isn’t because I can’t push a bigger gear, but to conserve energy. I also wouldn’t want to run a smaller chainring as I need the top end for the actual race stages.

 50T is great for Enduro when you ride an Enduro bike and want to only be fast for 5min downhill. Personally, if I dropped 6k on a 120mm bike I might, you know, want to ride fast uphill, over technical sections, etc.

 @hatton: which is why it makes sense for this video. Dude is in full face riding it like he's racing an enduro

 So you have a trail bike and an enduro bike.

 @DoubleCrownAddict: yeah but it's a blur with a 120 34 up front and decent sized tires.

With a trail bike I'd hit jumps, little concerned with the blur...

 Yeah sorry, should've made it a bit longer. I'll go for a full minute next time

No but, I uploaded it for Youtube first and have overlay there on the last 30 seconds. Didn't think about removing it for Pinkbike

 I'm over the hardtail days. Suspension is less jarring on the bones.

 Absolutely! @tacklingdummy:

 @tacklingdummy: ...and way better traction.

 150 is the shiz, it's not going to make your climb horrible and then you got that cushion for the pushin' on the down

 Yeah that's me at 52 on a 150 mm 29er, thanking god for the slack head angles I really could have used 25 or 30 years ago...

 120mm is a lot more capable than you think. I’ve taken my 120mm hardtail down Mt. Fromme‘s espresso, Squamish’s Rupert + Pamplemousse...didn’t skip a single feature. You just need enough volume spacers to prevent bottoming out as easily.

 Okay, to be honest, I skipped the big drop on Pamplemousse. Forgot about that one.

 Transition don’t recommend / Warranty voided on anything over 120mm. Fox 36 only available down to 130mm

 @Richt2000: Thats very odd that they wont let your over fork by 10mm. Personally Id love a spur if I could have more supportive suspension on it. Feeling flexy components and easy to blow through shocks is not my favorite. But having too much travel is also something I hate

 @Richt2000: I think you missed the joke there bud

 Triple crown it. Coil shock. 2.6" tyres.

 You know what helps you with feeling the trail more? Rigid bike, it also save a lot of money. You´re welcome.

 What do you ride though your obviously not hitting canadian open or crab apple

 @Mondbiker: BOOOM, damnn

 "Let the tires that you need, dictate your required suspension travel." this is actually pretty good way to decide what you need travel wise, but maybe if one knew he has 40mm less travel he wouldn´t plow through that rock garden at the same speed but more slowly/pick line more carefully, thus not needing heavy tires to cope with it? It´s chicken and egg conundrum I think.

 I run an assegai on my 160 bike as well as my 120 bike. Why? Because the dirt we have here is ultra slippery loose over hard and even the most benign corner can ruin your day if you ride a non aggressive tire. I recently tried a dissector up front and on a fast but very mellow corner lost the front.

Some places just need grippier/more aggressive tires based on their dirt. Maybe tire carcass choice is a better metric. Putting double downs on a 120 bike would seem counterintuitive.

 @Mondbiker: In some situations, going faster is actually smoother because you float over the terrain better. Instead of smashing into each and every rock, you're just skittering over their tops.

 @MaplePanda: That´s theory I like but life has taught me that sometimes you just don´t skitter over the top enough to prevent nice dent in the rim lol. I have heavy casing/ light casing with insert for those moments. I typically still end up rebuilding rear wheel every winter, mostly because I like building wheels but also because I almost always end up with one massive dent on otherwise pristine rim. One that is deep enough to bend inner rim wall and makes it borderline impossible to true the wheel without going crazy with spoke tension.

 Those trails were not highly technical.

 @SunsPSD: You have a point. More flowly than technical, but still impressive riding.

 One of my buddies hit a drop to flat back in the day with one of those during an urban sesh and the plastic top cap let go. The spring came rocketing out and hit him in the eye. Definite trip to the hospital. There's a video on VHS floating around somewhere of the whole event.

 welcome to pinkbike.

 No

 Uploaded it for Youtube first and have overlay there on the last 30 seconds. Didn't think about removing it for Pinkbike

 I don't understand the resistance to "downcountry". Of course I understand people have a natural resistance to change, but its a new category of MTB... we should all welcome that.

To me, "downcountry" says it all... a downhill capable cross-country bike.

 @Baller7756: which is to say; trail bike.