Coming back from our recent field test in Pemberton, I had a fresh feeling of clarity. Not just because of a near-fatal dose of hypothermia as I literally woke up on the train tracks, and the concurrent heightened appreciation for one's own mortality that comes after you genuinely think you might die, but I’d also ridden
bikes from the future, as well as bikes from the past.
The downcountry bikes were an interesting proposition. In fact, even the longer travel trail bikes were a very mixed bag. The latter category spanned to the space age from, if you were to cruelly go off aesthetics alone, one might say from the age of steam. There was something distinctly Brunellian about the steel-framed bike on that test and, I have to say, I really quite liked it. Slightly gangly, perhaps. It almost had a case of the Stephen Merchants. But alas, maybe it’s something in the Bristol water.
 | I think, with bike design, a better bike doesn’t always make you go faster, but what it does is open up the window of executability. |
What made the downcountry bikes so interesting was the ideological iron curtain that existed within the group. There were some bikes that were
longerer and
slackerer than one could ever dream of. There were also bikes with more conservative geometry.
There were some things that many of those bikes got wrong though. I suppose I would suggest that a bike's spec might only be as strong as its weakest link. It was odd to see some of these bikes, steeped with amazing suspension parts on frames that, if anything, could be defined as too radical, came with things such as organic pads or small rotors. The whole point of these bikes was that they opened up so much terrain - it seemed bizarre to try and peg that capability back at the first attempt.
It was like having a modern supercar with drum brakes. It all seemed a little strange. Then, of course, there was the element of short dropper seat posts.
 | So, with that in mind, let’s set some things straight and compensate for things I’ve said in the past - cable routing should be external, dual lockouts and steerer-limiters aren't a silly USP to hook in novices, flip chips aren’t crap, cranks should be long, seat tubes shouldn’t be shorter, nobody should think outside of the current crop of standards… e-bikes are the answer! |
Want and
need is a different thing. However, when you bolt
trail or
downcountry on a bike’s model name then concessions have to be made. It’s no longer an XC bike, it’s inherently, by its very definition, a compromised beast - which is good! Compromise makes bikes interesting. As horizons narrow, design is driven and innovations are more likely.
Now, ever the bearer of bad news, here’s something of a bitter pill to swallow: downcountry, which I know is a silly name, is a real thing. Yes, I know you’re probably thinking I’m a pillock, and quite frankly who can blame you, but I would say that there was a real difference in that test between 120mm trail bikes and the downcountry bikes. I’m sorry. I'm just so sorry. What have I become?
I don’t know if I view it as a category though, but maybe a very adept description. Some 120mm bikes have a trail feel, some 120mm bikes feel more downcountry and some feel like long-legged XC bikes. The latter are as convincing, in terms of descending ability, as one child standing on another's shoulders beneath a trench coat. The chasm of difference is both obvious and immediately apparent.
I think, with bike design, a better bike doesn’t always make you go faster, but what it does is open up the window of executability. I’ve often thought that you can boil down descending to three main parts - roughness, steepness and speed. A good downhill bike can do all three with ease. A good enduro bike can do two with aplomb. A shorter travel bike can normally just do one at a time.
Of course, you can ride anything on anything, I don’t think the possibility is removed, but rather the likelihood of you not having a dirt nap diminishes.
Well, all of this was all very well and good until I realised last weekend that everything I know about bike design is wrong. Everything I waffle on about is redundant and, quite frankly, I’m embarrassed. Discount everything I’ve ever said. View these op-eds with even more justified skepticism than you perhaps already do. Bleep out any of my excerpts that may appear in the podcast. I’m absolutely and unequivocally wrong. About everything.
So, with that in mind, let’s set some things straight and compensate for things I’ve said in the past - cable routing should be external, dual lockouts and steerer-limiters aren't a silly USP to hook in novices, flip chips aren’t crap, cranks should be long, seat tubes shouldn’t be shorter, nobody should think outside of the current crop of standards… e-bikes are the answer!
And what was the slip that started this avalanche of this new realisation? What light first broke through on the dawn of my epiphany? Well, I'll try and keep it relatively succinct.
In a bid to make friends in a new town, I’ve really been trying to branch out from just riding on my own. Recently, when asked what I’d been up to I responded “listening to grunge and riding cross-country”. Quite simply, something had to give. I remember also telling that person that I’m not the c-bomb I often come across as on the podcast. Note to self, this isn’t how you make friends. Nope, a new approach was needed.
I abandoned my Temple of the Dog Spotify radio station, put my flannel shirts into storage and tore my Eddie Vedder posters off the wall. It was time to get social.
And make friends I did. I even had a social soiree on Saturday and the only thing on the menu was BC-made humble pie. Needless to say, many slices were served.
I’m not somebody that likes to put fear into people. I always find it quite reductive when people say “oh f*ck, this is so gnarly - you don’t stand a chance!”. That said, I would never want anyone to get themselves into a pickle on account of finding themselves on a trail that isn’t quite suitable.
 | A man is never more truthful than when he acknowledges himself a liar. |
Our riding group arrived and to my surprise, downcountry bikes were out. I’d said I’d show the riders some of my favourite trails. Now, the riders in question are far better in every avenue of bike riding than myself. There isn’t one facet to their riding that I could hold a candle to. However, the sight of shallow XC tires on their bikes, and knowing what we had in store to ride, did leave me a little worried for them.
I just mentioned, in what I hoped was a relaxed manner, that maybe, just maybe, they wouldn’t have the best time on the trails we would be riding. I suppose I’ve been so wrapped up in distinguishing the difference between the good and the very good that I completely forgot that talent is the great leveler of all design foibles.
So, we rode a trail that I would describe as pretty-bloody-keen. I was amazed. I was so genuinely impressed. I remarked at one point that that should be the advert for Ikons. However, little did I know what was in store down the road.
There we were, enjoying a trail-side chat, when this squadron of lycra-clad riders came past, all with their seat posts seemingly bypassing their backsides entirely and going straight up to their eyeballs. They were absolutely shredding. Honestly, I thought it was the sickest thing I’d seen in a long time. There I was, on my big ol’ enduro bike. I felt somewhat embarrassed.
It’s not that the trail was easy to ride, but rather it was amazing to see how easy a large dollop of skill and talent can make things look. I looked back to that field test, and how to some it will look like I’m splitting hairs under a microscope with a Stanley blade. It’s not that those bikes weren’t different, or that they didn’t feel drastically different, in both good and bad aspects. It’s also not as if the other testers didn’t draw similar conclusions, but rather sometimes I do get wrapped up in my own world. Truth be told, and I can only speak for myself, but I believe a bike's shortcoming can become more apparent due to your own technical inadequacies, rather than your proficiency.
I think humble pie and imposter syndrome are useful things to be exposed to and hopefully stop you from becoming a complete arsehole. A thought I often come back to, both in my professional and personal life, is a Mark Twain quote. He once said "A man is never more truthful than when he acknowledges himself a liar" and I think it's a very useful thing to remind yourself of. The acknowledgment that we're all these walking contradictions who deposit both insight, as well as falsehoods and fallacy, be it about ourselves or other people, and in my case the particular intricacies of cable routing, knowingly or otherwise. The mistake is not in trying to resist it but rather in failing to acknowledge it.
So, in short, if you’re good enough, buy yourself a 2013 Giant Trance and just be done with it. Leave it to us mortals to sweat the small stuff.
From Medical News Today "Cognitive dissonance causes feelings of unease and tension, and people attempt to relieve this discomfort in different ways. Examples include “explaining things away” or rejecting new information that conflicts with their existing beliefs."
As a result, they may:
- try to hide their actions or beliefs from others
- rationalize their actions or choices continuously
- shy away from conversations or debates about specific topics
- avoid learning new information that goes against their existing beliefs
- ignore research, newspaper articles, or doctor’s advice that causes dissonance
Avoiding factual information can allow people to continue maintaining behaviors with which they do not fully agree."
Likely caused by consuming years and years of mtn bike media and marketing telling us you can't ride gnarly trails without a gnarly bike, and that lycra-clad xc'ers are wankers that can't ride real trails.
Yes, he’s modest and witty. Two of the best human characteristics imo
Conclusion: Skill, fitness & talent > geo, components & travel.
Also a lot of this article is inside baseball from the podcast… so if you don’t listen to the podcast you probably won’t understand what he’s on about.
- I thought I was going to show up riding partners on trails when they showed up on XC rigs
- turned out they are better riders than I am and my bike capability can’t trump their skil on a trail I perceived as hard
-The End
So, in short, if you know how to ride, buy yourself a bike and just be done with it.
Leave it to us, wannabes to sweat the small stuff.
What ever that means!
Since the end of wheel (27 5/29) debate, and geo (long slacker low) debate, mtb just seems to plateaux!
Jzzzzz, just check out that crankshit
I once had a boss, when nearing the end of a large presentation and after losing his cool a few times during the meeting, stood up and in all seriousness said, "Words have meaning," and then walked out.
Same kind of theme. I am sure it sounded cool to say (or type) but kind of a no-brainer when you think about it for just a split second.
If this article didn’t make sense to you…
That was funny.
Though I do caveat - I am familiar with his style and use of metaphors, similies, analogies and incredibly intelligent wit, and I for one hope that any editor doesn't force a dumbing down to a level of intellect and literary comprehension that might meet some stereo-typical prejudice about national characteristics (e.g. French are arrogant, Germans humourless, British Pompous, Americans Dumb).
For those that don't,understand the article: Henry is saying that despite years of accumulated 'wisdom' and perception on what might be summarised by the industry as 'the right bike/kit for the job' and how this industry view may have led to the emergence of ever more new sub-genre's like 'Down Country', actually his recent rides to make new contacts in a new town have turned everything he thought was true, upside down (though I don't believe him re e-bikes!) - so those he rode with that he thought were 'under biked' for the trails they were about to ride, actually were able to smash it due to their high level riding ability, and this experience has more clearly impressed on him that it is more rider ability, above bike type, that is a key, despite his years of bike testing and journalism and seeking out the small differences between bikes and bike catagories - e.g. it doesn't matter to much if your dropper has 125mm or 175mm drop, if you have the riding ability.
So, for example, Sam Hill could beat ALL of you down an EWS route on an XC or down country bike while you rode the very latest, 'best' full-on race enduro rig.
1) your skill or lack thereof matters more than the “type” of bike you’re on
2) Locals on XC bikes in the PNW can ride really rowdy shit and can put an out of towner on a sled to shame
3) new bikes are super good on paper and feeling but don’t make up for point #1
I thought that was one of the best pieces I've read on PB. I really dig the author's writing style.
Enough! It's a short travel bike that's good for a bit of everything. Settle down you marketing flogs.
A talented rider has a good understanding of the limits of their bike as well as their talent.
A less talented rider does not. A less talented rider on a big travel gnarly bike will survive less than ideal riding choices due to the capabilities of the bike.
That being said, a very talented rider on the bike most suited to the terrain will always be king/queen.
1. Use long words so people complain
2. Be controversial to incite debate
3. Be vague to solicit clarifying questions
Pick two and you’re guaranteed to generate enough to confusion, polemic and queries to count as “amazing community engagement”!
"In summary (I think? In no particular order)
1) your skill or lack thereof matters more than the “type” of bike you’re on
2) Locals on XC bikes in the PNW can ride really rowdy shit and can put an out of towner on a sled to shame
3) new bikes are super good on paper and feeling but don’t make up for point #1"
Way better read in way fewer words!
I see pedaling only as a means to an end, but I also didn't want to get something that was a total pig. Ended up getting a V3 Bronson last year not only because 150/160 travel seemed reasonable for a bike I would pedal at least half of the time, but I also wanted something that wasn't SO long and slack that it would actually force me to learn how to ride properly if I wanted to ride more difficult terrain. As someone who was looking to move from an intermediate to advanced level of riding this ended up being a fantastic decision and I think also forced me to improve my body positioning.
To me it seems like longer, less maneuverable surfboards are analogous to heaver, longer travel bikes, and short boards are analogous to bikes with less travel and more "nimbility".
As a result, I'm always confused when I see people recommending shorter travel bikes to beginners. I think beginners are more likely to come up against a short travel bike's limitations, and less likely to take advantage of a bike that is "poppy" and "playful".
If I had a friend who was getting into mountain biking, I wouldn't say, "you can ride any bike down any trail, so get yourself a downcountry bike, let's hit some black diamond tech and practice our manuals".
The advice that I would give is that it's gonna take a while to get into shape no matter what, so don't worry about weight. Get a "low end" bike with plenty of travel and good brakes, start with green and blue trails and work your way up to the heaver stuff. Once you're comfortable enough to ride a variety of trails and start to understand what you like, then you can decide what you want to prioritize with your next bike. Whether that's light weight and "nimbility", or a bike that can plow through the rough stuff.
After a few years though it started feeling really slow and hard to manuever, especially trying to get around corners. Now I wanted a new 29er race bike and sized down to a medium Spire and again it's the perfect bike!
As for the surfboard analogy, not sure how well it translates to bikes. See, what you want as a rider is find that buzz and still have a way make it right when things go wrong. A less stable/forgiving bike will get you that buzz at lower speeds and less challenging terrain but it will also be easier to correct if you're slightly off. So you're getting the fun you're looking for and also get a chance to make it when things go wrong. If you're getting a more forgiving you need a higher speed at rougher terrain to catch that same buzz you're looking for. But by the time you realize things go wrong, you've had little prior experience to stand a chance of correcting the bike.
"Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades" - Abraham Einstein, 1769
Henry, great article! I have a similar story from several years ago about a guy from the local Tuesday/Thursday night ride group. On his trusty titanium Moots hardtail with a whopping 100mm fork, he could routinely smoke us both up the mountain AND down. And this is in an area where the topsoil is thin and rocks are abundant, to say the least. I've never once recommended someone to get a hardtail to "get started" riding here.
A few of us along with Mr. Moots headed up to Downieville one weekend for some shuttle runs, and I was flat out amazed and embarrassed during that ride. Here I was on a Santa Cruz Blur LT with a 150mm coil fork up front, on some seriously rowdy downhill trails, and still getting literally left in the dust by this dude on a hardtail. And it wasn't just me, but the whole group of experienced and fit riders. Sometimes the truth hurts, and truth is that fitness and skill on a bike combined with natural talent can trump all. Geometry and suspension be damned.
....or maybe I just know the handshake to get me into the club.
And all this to say talented XC riders can outride a novice on the best sled...yeah i think we all know that?
I like that
Makes me think of a Top Gear episode "baddies in a black corvette at the mall"
Have no idea if this is related to the article, but this is what I wrote after reading it.
Obviously a fresh feeling of clarity. Such an intersting réflexion.! You are couragous to dive inside like this and to admitt to yourself and to others that what you previously think, was all wrong. You were able to try another perspective and see things from a different angle.! Good…
Thank you one of the best edit I read.
The fact of the matter is that most people don't ride lots of bikes. To most people, a good bike is a significant investment that should last them a long time. Those people don't get the chance to compare bikes back-to-back as much and having someone else do that riding and try their hardest to explain the distinctions between the bikes is a very valuable thing, even if the differences come down to very small things.
Your job is to help us buy the bikes that will work(hopefully best) for us. Keep that in mind and do your best. You don't have to be the best rider, you have to be able to relate to us the differences.
"The acknowledgment that we're all these walking contradictions who deposit both insight, as well as falsehoods and fallacy, be it about ourselves or other people, and in my case the particular intricacies of cable routing, knowingly or otherwise. The mistake is not in trying to resist it but rather in failing to acknowledge it.
So, in short, if you’re good enough, buy yourself a 2013 Giant Trance and just be done with it. Leave it to us mortals to sweat the small stuff."
This is easier to do when older too, especially when we spent many hours learning our MTB craft on solid frame bikes.
When some riders complain, or make fun of other riders for being “overbiked” for a trail, they are probably just a much more skilled rider, and they are viewing the world through their lens (the lens with skills).
For many riders the first stepping stone to shredding on a short and steep bike, is “managing” or “surviving things on a more capable bike.
And that’s ok.
In 2013, the Trance was only available as a 26" or a 29" but the 27.5" bike that came out the next year was a solid step forward, and not far off the geometry of the 2021 Trance 27.5.
It’s beneficial for newbie riders to start with smaller travel because it makes a bike easier to control at slow speed, no wallowing around.
Depending on the terrain, starting on a downcountry bike or even 130ish makes the most sense to me. An xc bike will immediately hold back some people as they’re designed more for suffering than enjoyment.
I have an Olympian who rides in my area. Like, elite. He's fast everywhere, but on our super rocky trails, there's just a limit to speed on XC tires. You can't mach straight, chunky, steep trails made entirely of pointy rocks and not end up fixing a flat. And his speed on those trails reflects that. Slower than the regular locals running 160mm bikes and double down tires. By a lot.
On tamer trails, sure, a lot of us bring bazookas to knife fights. But there are also trails where things like burly tires truly matter.
1) PB's consistent message over the last 2 years until recently: "there's only one type of bike really worth talking about, and it has between 160-180mm of travel!"
2) PB's consistent message over last few weeks: "I like my enduro bike but downcountry is what is really fun."
I own an SJ Evo and a Fuse and I like both of them for different reasons, so I think I get it. But it's a little weird how all at once, the editors have been talking about how much they like their downcountry bikes all of a sudden.
And ride your damn bike
If you didn't get the article, you don't know Henry very well. (Not saying I do, but just that you have to kinda know him and his GMBN background etc to understand where he's coming from).
My takeaway: the best bike is the one you ride, because an ounce of skill and practice are worth a pound of "latest and greatest tech". (Or maybe a pound of weight savings from upgrading to the latest tech.
Not really…..you still need to pedal them…..oh wait….Aaron Gwin…..*facepalm*
One footing it.
Riding switch.
On a swallowtail.
(*ex of the FWT...)
Some people just like the sound of their own voice I guess.
"I don’t know if I view it as a category though, but maybe a very adept description. Some 120mm bikes have a trail feel, some 120mm bikes feel more downcountry and some feel like long-legged XC bikes."
Henry - That night in the woods has really effected you! I'm now more confused by this, is downcountry a catagory? or can we just bin it off and continue with XC, Trail, Enduro...... or just ride our bikes and be happy? Please?
When is the funeral for Pinkbike?
Pretty funny that he advocates for longer cranks, Knock Block, and suspension lock outs.
Nobody wants that ^ shite!
all things come to an end.
(In a nice way)
Thanks Mr Quinney
♂️
Don’t bother Henry just write in plain English
Us mere mortals can then understand and enjoy your
Article instead of thinking wtf
PB comments: "Hey! I don't get this!"
I swear to god, you people grow more stupid by the day.
If this article was in print form I'd use it to wipe my arse, or line my birdcage. Either way, you should get the point.
It takes real genius and talent to throw paint around like that and come up with something surprisingly impressive
Not me, it’s hardly worth reading now, add a Paywall and I’m outta here.