Riding Rigid is Ridiculous - Opinion
The thing about Iron Crotch Kung Fu that may not be immediately apparent—at least not the first time you see a master invite attackers to kick his testicles—is this: While Iron Crotch is truly impressive, it is also largely pointless.
![banner]()
If given the choice to either:
(A) Have my privates pummeled for years until they no longer hurt; OR
(B) Learn to avoid having my privates pummeled,
I'd always go with option B.
I can't help but suspect that not being kicked in the baby-maker would be smarter, less painful, and would free up my schedule to savor the little things in life, like not bleeding from my eye sockets.
The question of whether or not to subject yourself to unnecessary abuse invariably reminds me of the question of whether or not to ride a fully-rigid mountain bike. Make no mistake, intentionally abstaining from the benefits of bicycle suspension is as pointless as inviting strangers to kick you in the crotch.
Allow me to elaborate on the obvious for a moment....
There is a school of thought, which holds that suspension forks and/or rear suspension are the bane of all things good about mountain biking. True, it's not a school with a hell of a lot of pupils in it—certainly not here on Pinkbike.com—but it does exist and it does have its adherents. Case in point, Eben Weiss (a.k.a "The Bike Snob") recently penned a piece for outsideonline.com titled, Bicycle Suspension is Evil. For the record, the column in question is funny, well written and thoroughly worth reading. And I couldn't disagree with it more.
At its core, The Bike Snob's essential argument boils down to this: Bicycle suspension is unneccessary. Moreover, rigid bikes are actually better.
An angel just died because I typed that.
Alright then, let's get on with this...
![Photo by Alexander Baxevanis]()
BACK IN THE DAY....
I'm familiar with the whole "Suspension in unnecessary" argument...mainly because I used to make it all the time myself. Let's take a step back in time. It's 1990, I'm bald by choice and suspension forks are starting to show up at the local bike shop. I am furious about this development. I'd been riding mountain bikes for half a decade at that point and my friends and I had gotten on just fine without those ugly, heavy, spongy things spearheading our rides and stinking up the joint. Were we not rad? Did we not already shred? In retrospect, the answer was "no", but we thought it was "yes" and the idea of some uninvited motorcycle guys bringing "shocks" to the sport made us see red.
You were just a hack if you couldn't ride rigid. Simple as that. We were sure of it. And even if you weren't actually using a suspension fork as a crutch for your decidedly-shit skills, that fork would just numb the whole ride. You'd lose contact with the very thing you were riding!
![elephant]()
Here's what suspension does for you: It helps you ride faster and with more control on trails that were previously way above your pay grade. Sure, you can clean ugly rock gardens on a rigid bike and, yes, there's a particular gritty satisfaction to be gained by doing so aboard the best technology 1870 had to offer, but you know what's even better? Riding that same rock garden twice as fast, with style, confidence, and a big grin on your face.
Modern suspension makes the simple act of riding a mountain bike a zillion times more fun than humping along, awkwardly, at octogenarian speeds. A zillion, you ask? Yes. A zillion. It's been scientifically proven, so just chill for a second and focus on that other word—Fun. Riding a bike is supposed to be fun. Okay, sure, sometimes riding a bike is actually what happens when your driver's license is revoked or you earn a living by towing a pedicab full of musk-ox dung through the jungles of Laos. If you're reading this, however, it's probably safe to assume you ride a bike because it's fun. You remember the concept of fun? It's that thing that's the polar opposite of sitting in line for three hours at the DMV or filing your taxes or getting a root canal sans novocaine. Who the hell doesn't like fun? Who doesn't like speed? Who doesn't like it when those two things get together, have hot monkey sex and make little fast-and-fun babies?
![Photo by Pawel Bienkowski]()
Sure, you can turn mountain biking into some kind of drawn-out, grim-faced, rolling sadism fest. Go ahead and make it harder, make it rougher, make it a kinetic feat of strength...but arguing that riding slower and jerkier is a better, or somehow purer, form of mountain biking is akin to arguing that using a hammer to pound nails is cheating when you can just as soon drive those same nails through a block of wood with your forehead.
Is suspension necessary to mountain biking? It is not. I concede the point. Plenty of riders, fast and skilled ones included, ride with nary an inch of squish on board. Fair play to them. But arguing that suspension is unnecessary is to miss the point entirely. Suspension makes riding trails more fun and since most of us don't ride bikes out of some bottomless need to suffer, suspension wins out over going fully rigid every single time. Wait, you've bolted on a fork or gone full suspension and suddenly none of your local trails pose any real challenge to you? You can always up the ante with your riding. Ride further. Ride faster. Ride other trails that you previously thought were completely unrideable. There is always room to grow and become a better rider. Suspension can help you do that.
...And for the Record, Technology is Awesome
The second argument The Bike Snob makes for renouncing suspension is that rigid mountain bikes are, at their core, better than their suspended cousins. To quote The Snob, “On all but the most technical terrain, a rigid bike is perfectly serviceable, and indeed in the vast majority of situations a typical cyclist is likely to encounter, it's actually preferable.”
There was a time when I agreed with that sentiment. A time when the world crawled with all manner of misbegotten, web-toed, sway-backed, buck-toothed proto-full-suspension monstrosities. I remember those years well—I made a living of riding and testing the things. The Klein Mantra? The Gary Fisher Joshua? The K2 Proflex Animal? We were awash in heavy, flexy, bobbing piles of crap. And, yeah, during the mid-90s you could certainly argue that a rigid bike at least did what it did consistently without the horrid, bucking, stinkbugging surprises.
But that was then and this is now. Hell, it’s been well more than a decade since we bid adieu to the profoundly shitty full-suspension bikes that The Snob is talking about here.
![Bicycle Suspension is not evil]()
Case in point: As I type these words, I’m looking at a Devinci Spartan. The test bike sitting in the corner of my office proves just how ridiculously capable suspension bikes have become. The Spartan is a model that doesn’t even pretend to be well-rounded. This is a brawny, slack beast of an enduro machine that's tailor made to save your ass on the rowdiest descents imaginable, yet I’d still choose the new-age gravity machine over a rigid bike when it comes to scaling big climbs on anything other than glass-smooth trails.
While all suspension bikes exhibit some degree of suspension squat, a well-designed suspension bike provides the kind of traction and control a rigid bike could only dream of. To that end, I’ve cleaned root-laden climbs aboard the Spartan that have humbled me for years. Try the same thing on a rigid bike and I’d be pushing the bike up the mountain instead.
Creating light, stiff and efficient full-suspension bikes took time. But we got there…years and years ago. To now abstain from technological innovation simply because the first stabs at suspension greatness sorta sucked, is a bit like saying you refuse to visit the hospital when you break your leg today because, a hundred years ago, doctors tried to cure cancer with leeches.
So, can you rip around on a fully rigid bike? Of course you can. Plenty of us spent years doing precisely that. But to paraphrase famed anthropologist, Christopher Julius Rock III, Just because some shit can be done, doesn't mean it is to be done. Yes, you can swear off suspension. You can also learn to gargle hot coals, sleep on a bed of nails and smash your genitalia with bricks...it doesn't mean you should actually do any of the above. That'd just be pointless.
If given the choice to either:
(A) Have my privates pummeled for years until they no longer hurt; OR
(B) Learn to avoid having my privates pummeled,
I'd always go with option B.
I can't help but suspect that not being kicked in the baby-maker would be smarter, less painful, and would free up my schedule to savor the little things in life, like not bleeding from my eye sockets.
The question of whether or not to subject yourself to unnecessary abuse invariably reminds me of the question of whether or not to ride a fully-rigid mountain bike. Make no mistake, intentionally abstaining from the benefits of bicycle suspension is as pointless as inviting strangers to kick you in the crotch.
Allow me to elaborate on the obvious for a moment....
There is a school of thought, which holds that suspension forks and/or rear suspension are the bane of all things good about mountain biking. True, it's not a school with a hell of a lot of pupils in it—certainly not here on Pinkbike.com—but it does exist and it does have its adherents. Case in point, Eben Weiss (a.k.a "The Bike Snob") recently penned a piece for outsideonline.com titled, Bicycle Suspension is Evil. For the record, the column in question is funny, well written and thoroughly worth reading. And I couldn't disagree with it more.
At its core, The Bike Snob's essential argument boils down to this: Bicycle suspension is unneccessary. Moreover, rigid bikes are actually better.
An angel just died because I typed that.
Alright then, let's get on with this...
Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder. Photo by Alexander Baxevanis
BACK IN THE DAY....
I'm familiar with the whole "Suspension in unnecessary" argument...mainly because I used to make it all the time myself. Let's take a step back in time. It's 1990, I'm bald by choice and suspension forks are starting to show up at the local bike shop. I am furious about this development. I'd been riding mountain bikes for half a decade at that point and my friends and I had gotten on just fine without those ugly, heavy, spongy things spearheading our rides and stinking up the joint. Were we not rad? Did we not already shred? In retrospect, the answer was "no", but we thought it was "yes" and the idea of some uninvited motorcycle guys bringing "shocks" to the sport made us see red.
You were just a hack if you couldn't ride rigid. Simple as that. We were sure of it. And even if you weren't actually using a suspension fork as a crutch for your decidedly-shit skills, that fork would just numb the whole ride. You'd lose contact with the very thing you were riding!
I was confident suspension sucked. Mainly because I'd never actually ridden any.
I'd never been a dirt-bike disciple, so the magic of squish had always eluded me. I was a Fausto Coppi-worshipping roadie who'd transitioned to dirt... To me, suspension was just the squeaky whatchamacallits that kept our family station wagon from careening off the highway as my father punished the wood-paneled Country Squire for what it had done to his manhood. A combination of poverty and willful ignorance kept me off the suspension train until 1997, when I became an editor at a mountain bike magazine. Now I had to ride the stuff and...aw, crap...it turned out suspension was actually kind of awesome.
I'd never been a dirt-bike disciple, so the magic of squish had always eluded me. I was a Fausto Coppi-worshipping roadie who'd transitioned to dirt... To me, suspension was just the squeaky whatchamacallits that kept our family station wagon from careening off the highway as my father punished the wood-paneled Country Squire for what it had done to his manhood. A combination of poverty and willful ignorance kept me off the suspension train until 1997, when I became an editor at a mountain bike magazine. Now I had to ride the stuff and...aw, crap...it turned out suspension was actually kind of awesome.
Here's what suspension does for you: It helps you ride faster and with more control on trails that were previously way above your pay grade. Sure, you can clean ugly rock gardens on a rigid bike and, yes, there's a particular gritty satisfaction to be gained by doing so aboard the best technology 1870 had to offer, but you know what's even better? Riding that same rock garden twice as fast, with style, confidence, and a big grin on your face.
Modern suspension makes the simple act of riding a mountain bike a zillion times more fun than humping along, awkwardly, at octogenarian speeds. A zillion, you ask? Yes. A zillion. It's been scientifically proven, so just chill for a second and focus on that other word—Fun. Riding a bike is supposed to be fun. Okay, sure, sometimes riding a bike is actually what happens when your driver's license is revoked or you earn a living by towing a pedicab full of musk-ox dung through the jungles of Laos. If you're reading this, however, it's probably safe to assume you ride a bike because it's fun. You remember the concept of fun? It's that thing that's the polar opposite of sitting in line for three hours at the DMV or filing your taxes or getting a root canal sans novocaine. Who the hell doesn't like fun? Who doesn't like speed? Who doesn't like it when those two things get together, have hot monkey sex and make little fast-and-fun babies?
You can turn mountain biking into one long, slow pain fest. If sadism is your gig, go for it. Swear off the benefits of suspension forever! Some of us, however, ride because it's fun. You know, the polar opposite of sticking something sharp in your eye. Photo by Pawel Bienkowski
Sure, you can turn mountain biking into some kind of drawn-out, grim-faced, rolling sadism fest. Go ahead and make it harder, make it rougher, make it a kinetic feat of strength...but arguing that riding slower and jerkier is a better, or somehow purer, form of mountain biking is akin to arguing that using a hammer to pound nails is cheating when you can just as soon drive those same nails through a block of wood with your forehead.
Is suspension necessary to mountain biking? It is not. I concede the point. Plenty of riders, fast and skilled ones included, ride with nary an inch of squish on board. Fair play to them. But arguing that suspension is unnecessary is to miss the point entirely. Suspension makes riding trails more fun and since most of us don't ride bikes out of some bottomless need to suffer, suspension wins out over going fully rigid every single time. Wait, you've bolted on a fork or gone full suspension and suddenly none of your local trails pose any real challenge to you? You can always up the ante with your riding. Ride further. Ride faster. Ride other trails that you previously thought were completely unrideable. There is always room to grow and become a better rider. Suspension can help you do that.
...And for the Record, Technology is Awesome
The second argument The Bike Snob makes for renouncing suspension is that rigid mountain bikes are, at their core, better than their suspended cousins. To quote The Snob, “On all but the most technical terrain, a rigid bike is perfectly serviceable, and indeed in the vast majority of situations a typical cyclist is likely to encounter, it's actually preferable.”
There was a time when I agreed with that sentiment. A time when the world crawled with all manner of misbegotten, web-toed, sway-backed, buck-toothed proto-full-suspension monstrosities. I remember those years well—I made a living of riding and testing the things. The Klein Mantra? The Gary Fisher Joshua? The K2 Proflex Animal? We were awash in heavy, flexy, bobbing piles of crap. And, yeah, during the mid-90s you could certainly argue that a rigid bike at least did what it did consistently without the horrid, bucking, stinkbugging surprises.
But that was then and this is now. Hell, it’s been well more than a decade since we bid adieu to the profoundly shitty full-suspension bikes that The Snob is talking about here.
Case in point: As I type these words, I’m looking at a Devinci Spartan. The test bike sitting in the corner of my office proves just how ridiculously capable suspension bikes have become. The Spartan is a model that doesn’t even pretend to be well-rounded. This is a brawny, slack beast of an enduro machine that's tailor made to save your ass on the rowdiest descents imaginable, yet I’d still choose the new-age gravity machine over a rigid bike when it comes to scaling big climbs on anything other than glass-smooth trails.
While all suspension bikes exhibit some degree of suspension squat, a well-designed suspension bike provides the kind of traction and control a rigid bike could only dream of. To that end, I’ve cleaned root-laden climbs aboard the Spartan that have humbled me for years. Try the same thing on a rigid bike and I’d be pushing the bike up the mountain instead.
Creating light, stiff and efficient full-suspension bikes took time. But we got there…years and years ago. To now abstain from technological innovation simply because the first stabs at suspension greatness sorta sucked, is a bit like saying you refuse to visit the hospital when you break your leg today because, a hundred years ago, doctors tried to cure cancer with leeches.
So, can you rip around on a fully rigid bike? Of course you can. Plenty of us spent years doing precisely that. But to paraphrase famed anthropologist, Christopher Julius Rock III, Just because some shit can be done, doesn't mean it is to be done. Yes, you can swear off suspension. You can also learn to gargle hot coals, sleep on a bed of nails and smash your genitalia with bricks...it doesn't mean you should actually do any of the above. That'd just be pointless.
Author Info:
Member since Apr 11, 2014
Must Read This Week
The times I've appreciated my FS bike the most are right after I've ridden my old hardtail on the same trails.
Lack of suspension makes you a better rider - it's important to pick a line, use your legs as suspension...
Lack of e-power makes you a "rider".
As much as e-bike proponents want to think electric motors on bikes are a natural evolution, there is a pretty big divide between advancing bike technology around suspension, dropper posts, brakes, etc and making them self-propelled. Self-propelled bikes are a fundamentally different vehicle and it fundamentally changes the activity of bicycling and our mental perception of it.
Yeah, yeah, they are pedal "assist" for now, but I think we all know where e-bikes are headed. Even the new Specialized has a "walking assist throttle". Expect this to become a "low speed climb assist" button next year, and then a "flat trail assist throttle" the year after, before finally becoming the "turbo-brap assist throttle" in 2020.
I'm familiar with the whole "electric assist in unnecessary" argument...mainly because I used to make it all the time myself. Let's take a step back in time. It's 2017 I'm bald by choice and electric assist bikes are starting to show up at the local bike shop. I am furious about this development. I'd been riding mountain bikes for half a decade at that point and my friends and I had gotten on just fine without those ugly, heavy, electric-y things spearheading our rides and stinking up the joint. Were we not rad? Did we not already shred? In retrospect, the answer was "no", but we thought it was "yes" and the idea of some uninvited motorcycle guys bringing "motors" to the sport made us see red. "
Modern electric assist makes the simple act of riding a mountain bike a zillion times more fun than humping along, awkwardly, at octogenarian speeds. A zillion, you ask? Yes. A zillion. It's been scientifically proven, so just chill for a second and focus on that other word—Fun. Riding a bike is supposed to be fun. Okay, sure, sometimes riding a bike is actually what happens when your driver's license is revoked or you earn a living by towing a pedicab full of musk-ox dung through the jungles of Laos. If you're reading this, however, it's probably safe to assume you ride a bike because it's fun. You remember the concept of fun? It's that thing that's the polar opposite of sitting in line for three hours at the DMV or filing your taxes or getting a root canal sans novocaine. Who the hell doesn't like fun? Who doesn't like speed? Who doesn't like it when those two things get together, have hot monkey sex and make little fast-and-fun babies?
You can turn mountain biking into one long, slow pain fest. If sadism is your gig, go for it. Swear off the benefits of electric assist forever! Some of us, however, ride because it's fun. You know, the polar opposite of sticking something sharp in your eye.
Sure, you can turn mountain biking into some kind of drawn-out, grim-faced, rolling sadism fest. Go ahead and make it harder, make it rougher, make it a kinetic feat of strength...but arguing that riding slower and jerkier is a better, or somehow purer, form of mountain biking is akin to arguing that using a hammer to pound nails is cheating when you can just as soon drive those same nails through a block of wood with your forehead.
...OK, I'm done.
"Just get a dirtbike"
No, I don't want a 250lb monstrosity that doesn't fit on my roof rack. I want to mountain bike without having to pedal = ebike. I think ebikes could really change the moto and bike industries. We'll be looking at old school pedal bikes like we now look at roller skates eventually.
Ride one once and your life will be ruined because every time you ride a regular bike uphill afterwards you will wish you had e.
You know what is definitely way more fun to ride up hill than a bike or an ebike? A dirt bike. Go ride one and you will see how lame the concept of an ebike is. If they weren’t banned everywhere, all the ebike proponents would just be riding motos. Hell, so would I. But they are, so we aren’t.
The thirst for speed and power is going to create an arms race for emtbs and they are going to get banned all over the place. Hopefully they don’t take regular mtbs out as collateral damage.
At some point they will probably evolve to be bad ass electric motos. If by some miracle they haven’t been banned everywhere I’ll ride one too. I was motor head long before I was a cyclist.
Stop making MTBing so incestuous.
E-Wheelchair.
And nothing beats the pride you get from (at least) beimg able to keep up with people riding fully.
Actually it’s not a surprise at all, you totally seem like that guy.
Discs are definitely a must. My dropper was off as well last winter but may run it this one.
in fact, my road bike had discs since the day i was able to hack something up, and i dont mind riding it in the dirt.
susp comes second.
dropper comes third.
everything else felt like gimmicks of various value.
I ride almost everyday and with 2 kids, 2 big dogs and a full time job, I am lucky I can get rides in. If I were to use my FS trail bike everyday I would need to do non-stop maintenance on the fork, shock and pivots, plus wear it out faster. Suspension life is short enough so why waste it on non-tech trails? Rigid is more fun on non-tech anyways.
I use an '88 MB1 I picked up for $150 four years ago most days and the trail bike when I head to the higher elevations. MB1 is super comfortable and pretty much all I do to maintain its near daily operation is tire pressure, chain oil and keep it out of the rain. You think any of these modern full suspension super bikes will be operating in 30 years?
Rigid is easy, fun and always ready to go.
I'd take a HT with a dropper over a shitty full sus bike any day though.
If you look at the guy's statement about how most riders on most terrain would be better suited by a rigid or HT bike than whatever FS monster they got from Walmart, then he's either an idiot if you think of "most" in the context of PB, where people participate in what we think of as mountain biking, or he's right on if you think of "most" in the context of people who think of a gravel path as being pretty adventurous. His is the Subaru argument - "most" people don't need anything more off-road capable than a Subie, as they're crawling mall parking lots rather than the Rubicon trail. Yours is the Dana front axle argument, as in your ride is not capable until you've got rock-crawler levels of axle articulation. You're both correct, within your contexts.
So do you and Bike Snob have an agreement? Because his post was well-done clickbait - an inflammatory headline, some choice quotes, all to sell what's a pretty decent think piece. Yours does the same, on the other side of the argument. You guys could probably do great things for your respective outlets' readership metrics this way, and perhaps even get some people to take in some nuance along the way.
What people buy/sell/refurbish secondhand isn't clapped out walmart junk, they buy Bridgestones, Panasonics, Raleighs, Schwinns, etc from decades ago. Were they top-tier bikes back when they were made? No, but they were at least designed to last. Cheap junk is cheap junk, and most people don't understand / aren't interested in repairing it. Full sus has nothing to do with it. Shit, I used to volunteer at our campus bike coop and I'd meet people all the time who would say shit like "the brakes weren't working right so I got rid of it".
But I still look forward to the big weekend drive-to rides and I'm in much better shape when I get there because of the weekday "meh" rides.
Part of me always held to the thought that full suspension was a fix for not landing smooth. The art of the proper nosedive at trails is just that, art. Write off BMX as "kids stuff" until you see some random sponsor less kid DESTROY a 10 pack of trails with 20 ft gaps. When dudes are "sending" it on a kick out contest on bike-squish, I hold my breath thinking someone's going to land smooth. Then, bam, flat sideways "boost" hub killin landings.
Granted most "jumps" for a big bike variety aren't transitioned landings, more like Hell Track 2017, so it's less important land smooth and maintain speed. So, full suspension is the cure.
I'm not expecting everyone to be Chase Hawk, but steering the bike into the landing like you got a pair is cool too, enough that squishy forks aren't key...
So I agree the traditional root/rock ensemble is prolly not BMX no brakes pull up go high bike territory.
Still, I'll continue to preach the power and grace of the beloved nosedive. Get butterflies just thinking about it...
Bikes are neat
In the old vid footage from back then it was all WHITE KNUCKLES and wide eyes, no tricks since clearing the sets was trick enough... The Credence dudes were raised on it...
@BenPea: This spring I went to an old jump site, I saw that some guys made a jump I dared to hit bigger. So I thought, I'll just get more speed than usual. Two harder strokes. Turned out... less speed was needed. I was lucky enough to land both wheels, but my arms didn't hold it. Huck to flat from at least 2,5m. Dust seal in my Reba blew up
Anyways, I must say that gym is a great insurance policy for minimizing damage
Certainly almost anything is ridable on a HT...but the gnarlier the track the sooner the HT is outgunned...
I feel like this is obvious?....
if we're talking flow trail maybe, but if the riders are at the same skill level you'd be hard pressed to find any feature driven trails where HTs shine.
There are of course people who shred on HTs, but skill always outweighs equipment, so that isn't exactly a surprise
Second you claim skill is the difference without acknowledging that hardtails have benifits.
Third how can you not see that floating over obstacles is faster/more efficient than smashing into them?
I have a relatively decent hardtail, but barely use it cos I like speed and don't want to f*ck myself up completely, be it through wear and tear or a big off. If I'd been riding nothing but a HT since I got my first mtb in 1990 up until the present day (rather than flipping over to the soft side in 1997), I'm pretty sure I'd be limping my ass around and in need of some serious osteopathy.
Plus it's not youth it is strength you need to engage with a HT.
Back to biking and hardtails: that man was me:
www.pinkbike.com/photo/1295976
I raced DH for many years. Now due to injuries I spend nearly all my time on XC and road bikes. I happened to have come across a cheap rigid XC bike that weighs nothing and has wide range 1x gears. I pass people on the downs with it all the time during any XC adventure! It has become one of my favorite bikes even tho it's not entirely practical in most cases.
As to injuries, my wrists don't take rigid. Even on pumptrack.
If it's a smooth trail and you're Schurter/Absalon/VDP, and your performance is really affected by the weight of FS, then yeah hardtails can be the best tool for the job. But for us mortals mainly it's just something different/fun to ride. I'm glad I have one, but I'm also glad it's not my only bike... at least for the terrain around me.
I wish I had such a luxury. Most of the trails in my part of East Tennessee are barely rough at best, save for the DH runs which are proper steep and rocky.
The main takeaway here is that contrary to the article, there are definitely still places a rigid can outrun anything else!
In that time I've visited resorts and rented downhill bikes and shredded them to the point I scared myself. I've also grabbed a few FS bikes when I was traveling and didn't want to bring my own bike. Point is, I like suspension, I really do, but every time I consider buying a new-fangled ride I look at the miles I've put on my 14 year old ride and I think about how soon my carbon wonder-machine will be obsolete and the amount of maintenance it will require to keep it going. No thanks. I'll keep my low-carbon foot print. I'll put my money into road trips with friends, bakeries and breweries in small towns, and rental bikes at big mountains. I stopped caring about new parts and gear a decade ago. I spend my money at my LBS for the few repairs I need and I make sure to leave a six-pack for the mechanic because when I was a mechanic that was the coolest gift in the world.
I get it @vernonfelton , you get to ride sweet bikes and you can write click-bait, but nothing about this article makes any sense to me. I'm not abstaining from suspension because of some masochistic need to prove myself, I'm staying away because I found something better to spend my money on.
You probably can't expect to take a rigid bike to your local enduro and still enjoy it, but even tame trails can become a lot more exciting, when you don't have that suspension safety net. I've done a lot of what is essentially CX riding recently and it's amazing what the combo of speed, a high saddle and hard-to-reach brakes does for injecting some exhilaration into the bike tracks
I have two bikes, a 150mm FS 29er (Intense Tracer 29) and a fully rigid 29er. My fully rigid 29er gets more miles on it than the other ride because it's just more fun to ride, not because I like having my testicles abused (and for the record, if that's happening to you, you're doing it wrong). A 150mm FS bike in any wheel size, is complete overkill for the majority of the world's trails. The upper limit of comfort, endurance, capability and fun on the rigid SS is the entry level tech trail required for a 150mm FS bike, and there are very few trails that can't be ridden on a rigid 29er. Also applying bike handling skills you learn from a rigid SS with flat pedals to a 150mm FS with clips will improve your riding 10 fold versus plodding along on tame trails with an enduro bike
Look at all the obsolescence over the last 5-10 years - 26" wheel, 135 / 142mm rear hubs, 20mm x110mm front axles, 15x100mm front axles, threaded BB, press fit BB... which have "forced" people to sell / scrap bikes because they want to have the latest bling.
Are we really having more fun than we used to 5-10 years ago? Probably not.
Maybe there are just too many bike companies out there trying to get their share of a limited pot of money that we spend each year. Therefore they all have to out do themselves to make the latest and greatest bike every year. This means small changes each year along with some of the big changes made over the last few years.
Maybe if we stop buying the weak will fall by the wayside and the strong will survive. The "enjoy your bike and ride it till it's f**ked mentality"
Maybe this is why he had a picture of what is arguable the worlds most versatile bike at the top of the article that still uses "old" standards...
That's my 2 pence worth anyway.
But yeah, back to bikes. Modern full suspension bikes for beginners may compensate for an understandable lack of skill and experience. It makes you ride better, but it doesn't make you a better rider. To learn, you need sufficient feedback from the trail. If that feedback is too harsh or wild, you may want to filter that through stable geometry and abundant suspension. But if the feedback is subtle, you'll need less filter to still be aware of what your tires are doing. Then again as I mentioned elsewhere in this topic, full suspension bikes have their quirks too and one needs to learn to deal with that too. As I learned to ride on a hardtail (with suspension forks) with a powerful front brake and a poor rear brake, I'm used to pinning the front and letting the rear fly about. And that style doesn't play nicely on a full susser.
I now also have a 25m Gibbon Slackline. Again, no risk, just thrills and giggles. I'm waiting for the article where someone says it is better to walk next to the slackline because it is safer, faster hence more fun.
And my personal take is that this: "Making shit harder than it needs to be isn't awesome, it's just...harder.", is one of those. Sorry Vernon, that just doesn't wash.
Sometimes making shit harder than it needs to be is essential to the learning process. In fact, not even sometimes.
Ask anyone who opts to build up their bike(s) from component parts rather than buy "off the shelf".....
Or anyone competing in the single-handed round the world yacht race......
Or if you want unequivocal truth, ask anyone who decided to have kids rather than not......
If stuff wasn't hard, we'd still be in bed, bored.
Give someone a challenge though, and watch them rise to it.
PB should be better than that, and we the users create the environment, so if you'd retract that, it would be a nice gesture.
For the record, I ride a Process 111 most of the time, but I just bought a Kona Unit and it is also a hell of a lot of fun in the right circumstances.
I ride bmx alot, and although its rigid its a hell of a lot of fun. I ride trials. Also rigid. Also fun. What makes riding fun for me personally, is seeing what is possible. I like trying challenging things. Rigid MTB is just another fun way to make the trails fresh and challenge yourself. I've ridden Fixed Gear rigid mtb also.
It's all good. (Except Ebike. f*ck them)
That's what I tell my wife
I live in Florida so the extent of our "mountain" biking isn't nearly to the standard of most of you other guys, but we still have plenty of badass manmade XC parks. Techy stuff with a lot of loose-over-hardpack with no such thing as a long climb and descent, or riding miles of fire roads to get to the trailhead. I spent 2.5 years riding and racing a 100mm travel full suspension Scott Spark, then got introduced to SS by a group of dudes who all had massive flow and style on my local trail.
Long story short, I swapped parts over from my Spark to a Surly KM, (steel is real and rides sooooo good) and in less than 5 rides, I switched back (had a race) to my Spark an noticed my flat cornering and descending was already improving. I've built up that Surly with high volume tires, wide bars, a dropper post and recently switched from clips to flats, and have been riding it for a year now on Florida trails. Don't get me wrong, I can't WAIT to get back on an FS but spending the time on the SS rigid has taught me SO much that I don't think I would've learned as quickly on FS. I've learned to be light on the bike, use my body as suspension, keep off the brakes to hold momentum, all that good stuff. I ride my rigid smoother than I did on my Spark, because before I just let the suspension do most of the work. I'm young though, and I know it's only for the select sadistic few, but I do feel riding rigid has it's place and can be an EXCELLENT training tool if you want it to be, and can only make getting back on suspension that much better.
I ended up breaking up my 26FS bike and selling it as a 29HT is nearly as fast.
Show me a bike with full-squish performance that requires rigid-esque maintenance, and I'll happily purchase a one-way ticket to your FS >>> Rigid land. Should such a bike ever exist, I'll fully commit to a FS-only stable.
p.s. Well done on another thoroughly entertaining piece!
and yet, i keep riding FS. why? because it's TOTALLY worth it to me. god, is it worth it.
i also own a hardtail that gets a lot of use- they are still more fun on pedally, flatter singletrack, but i sold my rigid bike a while ago. most of my crashes happened on the rigid because i wasn't willing to go slow enough to be safe on it
If you don't like fully rigid, don't ride it. And rigid should not be equated to hardtail, which misses the whole point. I ride and enjoy both full suspension and fully rigid, and both have their joys. When I'm on my rigid bike in Bellingham or Squamish, I get a lot of looks. And then, 'Wow, you rip on that!' Or, 'How do you do so little pedaling?' Fully rigid is a pumping machine, and I think too many have drank the sit and spin and monster truck over whatever you feel like kool-aid. Let me spell it out for those who never gave it a fair shake: You lift up your wheels over the bumps -- both of them -- and ram them into the ground on the backsides, accelerating you. If you're smashing into rocks and roots, you're doing it all wrong. Sure, it's more input, but its no lesser form of riding. It's more precise, more bike control, more working with the trail than just squishing over it. I'm saddened to think that so many have never spent the time on a capable rigid bike to appreciate and enjoy this. It is not punishment, my wrists do not get sore, I simply exchange pedaling for some vertical pulling and pushing. A friend said it best: Riding FS is a lot like wearing a rubber. And full disclosure, I was a BMXer before I was a mountain biker. They've called our bikes robot bikes, just so you know. Don't be so proud.
Glad we cleared that up
For my budget, I believe some things are worth saving up for (a good frame/fork/dropper) and other things aren't (xx1 eagle, carbon wheels, etc.). If money were no option, I'll take the best of everything please.
It's amazing the amount of bike you can enjoy for $1200. Take the recent commercial am ht. $1200. Would I rather have a carbon trail bike with the latest bling? For most trails, yes. But that $1200 goes a long way on that hardtail, and dollar for dollar, something like that brings more smiles per dollar.
I know that I would rather gave a $1200 ht and be debt free than to have a $9k pro bike that I'm still making payments on.
I realize this is a totally different argument than what Vernon was trying to make. No doubt the latest tech makes riding even more fun and capable, but there is at least one legitimate reason not to have the latest and greatest: cost.
Hardtails are awsome
Rigid is awsome
There is space for all 3 in my garage
Different bikes for different needs....moods, trails and of course weather!
Any of you lot experienced an English winter...and the toll it takes on your finely tuned, carbotanium enduro wagons.
Admit E bikes are pathetic though ????
It's not an either/or.
N+1.
At least one squisher, one rigid and one singlespeed
- If you only have one bike, I believe you're better off with a nicely spec'ed hardtail than with a full-susp having entry-level everything.
- If you have two mountain bikes, it makes a lot of sense to have a hardtail trailbike as a backup/loaner bike.
- If you're a dentist, just by a bunch of carbon everything full-susp and don't bother with a hardtail.
Yes, you get beat up more on a hardtail, but they are really fun to ride and they are not that much slower than a full-susp. They also obviously require only very little maintenance.
I don't ride it that much, but I love my steel hardtail despite it's obsolete standards and geometry. I constantly think about upgrading it with a Chromag Surface or something else nice and modern.
"For a 160mm enduro beast, it climbed surprisingly well. It's a not a sub 12kg XC machine but I was suprised of how i cleared some techy climbs thanks to the superior grip of metric shocks.
...
Pointed downwards it becomes a trail slaying machine, it is a bike that requires full speed to show its potential. The metric shock is so smooth. "
Same review as RM Slayer, Trek Slash, Transition Patrol...
That being said I love my full squish bike and have no plans to replace it with a HT. Maybe add one for winter riding (less moving parts to care for), but I am still having a blast on my current bike and definitely have plenty of challenges left to conquer.
riding a bike near its limit is one of the best ways to have fun on a bike;
the limit of a 160mm rig is way faster and extreme than the limit of a rigid/ht bike;
getting it wrong, which is more likely at the limit of what the bike can handle, is going to be way worse on the big rig than the ht;
so, would I actually be better off (lots of fun but safer) on a ht than a bigger bike?
This is coming from someone who's about to turn 40 and can´t recover from injuries anywhere near as quickly as before.
Of course the idea of running fully rigid is just freaking crazy!!!!
-Trail type (smooth, chunder, drops, elevation gain/loss, etc.)
-Rider skill, abilities, style, strengths & weaknesses(tech, jumps, fitness etc.)
-Budget
-Maintenance
It doesn't matter what you or I ride, but don't hate on someone else's choice, or make it seem obsolete. We don't all need to buy whatever the industry is trying to shove down our throats.
And then there's this:
"Watching someone riding a full-suspension bike on anything other than rocks is like watching a kid trying to walk in one of those inflatable bounce houses."
Wow... just.... has this guy been to a trail or seen an XC race in the last 15 years?? He must be a real joy to be around. And slow as shit.
THAT SAID, do I take my cross bike on mtb trails from time to time? Absolutely. It's a hoot, and it makes you look at the terrain differently, but then the ride is over and my masochistic curiosity is satisfied, and I go back to the ol' double boinger rig. A CX or rigid bike is great as a commuter, or a 2nd/3rd bike to change things up every once in a while, but I can't fathom any real defense of them being "better" as mountain bikes unless all you do is munch up miles on fire roads.
Vernon, I hope you'll be writing a rebuttal for Outside as well
"it's just that [full suspension] is the physical manifestation into bicycle form of everything that's wrong with our culture, society, and humanity in general....The result? Garbage. Basements, garages, vacant lots, and Craigslist "for sale" sections full of complete garbage. Over the long term, suspension is second only to rust in its power to render bicycles useless. Even those 1970s-era 10-speeds have found new life as fixie conversions or vintage commuters, but that first big mountain bike boom unleashed more unsalvageable crap on the planet than BP, Exxon, and Michael Bay combined. At this rate, the earth will soon be a scorched landscape of plastic shopping bags and dual-suspension department store bikes as far as the eye can see"
Seems pretty obvious that Bike Snob is conflating FS mtbs with destructive consumer culture, even while blind to the fact that roadies, triathletes, and even fixie heads can be equally consumerist and fixated on the latest and greatest. Craigslist is LOADED with sick road/tri bikes with only a year or two of use.
"Watching someone riding a full-suspension bike on anything other than rocks is like watching a kid trying to walk in one of those inflatable bounce houses."
That's kind of the whole point, dude. We're riding them on rocks.
I will say that I'd rather ride my rigid or "regular" hardtail than a crappy FS bike. But I won't go back to cantis. lol.
I'd still like to have an old rigid mountain bike (Bridgestone MB-0 if I ever find one), but it'd be a total novelty.
I take my GT RTS or my Bridgestone to the trails and refresh my perspective of appreciating how far technology has come for bikes and the same time laughing when I can't clean sections that I normally would on my Sanction or Zaskar. I'm a smiles per hour rider so with regard to suspension, it's "different strokes (or lack thereof) for different folks."
However since a friend got the 1991 Kona cindercone I also wanted a steel hardtail and finally treated my self to a Genesis tarn 20 in 2017, it's 27.5 plus with 120 Yari.
The Tarn is for some reason the best and most favourite bike I've ever had I love it.
What is it about a hardtail that makes it special when in every other aspect of our lives we accept and crave technological advances ? I don't know but it's like wanking once you start you're never going to stop.
Now to go and nick the Carbon exotic forks off the wife's bike and put them on one of mine to prove i'm a real man lol. ;-)
I'm loving every second of every ride because of NEW TECHNOLOGY!
I've been along for the ride - introduction of new technology from the beginning, and what a hell of a ride it's been...
New MTB technology = bring it on!
Also let’s face it plenty of dickheads ride “normal” bike so why all the hate?
Chill lovely people and ride what ever u can while you can!
But boy, was that fun to ride. Sometimes it's great to forget about shock pressures, and lockouts, and what gear to spin. Sometimes it's fun to point and go. 29ers are faster, but the 26er felt like a big toy in my hands, I could flick it about. Bliss.
This article though... Strawman much? I know lots of people with a rigid singlespeed as one of their bikes. None of them are zealots cursing new technologies. None of them think that gears and suspensions are a waste. They just think that sometimes, a full rigid singlespeed is a lot of fun.
And they're too busy riding to get into Internet shouting matches about it.
This day to day conversation is shaping what bikes look like, and what people think they need to buy...more than even consumer feedback to the industry. Most of the bike companies feel this "conversation" is a true reflection of the entire mtb community. As a result, the articles and yes, everyone's comments are shaping what bikes will look like in two years, and that is actually a good thing....but it totally ignores a huge percentage of riders. XC, Touring, and Fat Bikers still exist in large numbers.
rigid bikes do not become obsolete, they stay around. sure most may become commuters but they sure are still fun to ride on smoother tracks. this is not the case with outdated expensive FS bikes that you can no longer get replacements for or serviceable parts for the shocks, forks, linkages or bearings
Bike #2: Scott 26" aluminum hard tail. Bought a bare frame 2nd hand cheap, built it up. Rides great on the local trails, but don't think I'd want to ride anything big on it. I'm not at the level myself anyway.
Bike #3: 1970s Freespirit road bike. Still in the works of a rebuild. Want it for doing longer road/bike path trips.
Bike #4: Crappie Walmart FS CCM. Bought second hand just to get the feeling of trail riding. Use it as a winter beater, no matter much if it get screwed up.
Bottom line ride what you want for what you want. Nobody is right or wrong for what they ride, as weird as it may seem to others, as long as it works for them.
So yeah on the rougher climbs and on those wide open rough descends the fully is easier. But the tight and tech stuff, corners, slow speed descends with lots of roots, rocks and holes, riding a hardtail is a breeze where the fully is scary as can be. It may be my bike and my riding style. People told me to sit more instead of stand up all the time. And to also drag the rear brake more instead of hit the front brake hard and short. I tried it and it indeed works a bit, but it is boring. I guess my style doesn't work well with rear suspension.
So yeah a fully works better for your style, use that. But if riding a fully is harder, more scary and more expensive than riding a good hardtail, there isn't really a point riding the fully.
That said, yeah maybe there are other full suspension bikes that suit my riding better. This one is a Cannondale Prophet. I once rode a bike from the Magura demo fleet in the hills around Bad Urach. It was from Focus I think, about 100mm travel front and rear. I didn't bring my own pedals so I got these grip-less Shimano pedals with SPD on one side and a sheet metal cage around it. I was on platform shoes, no SPD. Still I was surprised with what I could get away with, it indeed behaved neutrally. So yeah, maybe it is about the tuning indeed.
I ride a rigid steel 29r SS. On really rocky mountains (New Mexico)
Reasons it's awesome
1. It's super fast, you push on bike, bike pushes back, instantly.
2. Front wheels always goes exactly where you put it, tracks and picks lines like a lazer
3. 300 dollars for a 2011 kona unit. 2700 for beer, pot, nice things for the girl, or even charity. (Yes I just said 3000 dollar bikes are immoral)
4. Single speeding up mountains will get you in great shape and turn you into a monster.
5. I don't need a dropper post because I never sit down.
6. The look on people's faces when they see youre on a hardtail, then the look when they realize it's a rigid.
7. The look on people's faces when I pass them on the ups with one gear.
8. The look on people's faces when I pass them on the downs with a rigid fork.
9. It's hardcore.
Though, I have to admit, that if I could only own one bike, the rigid one would be the last one on the list.
I'll give you one counter point to this opinion that I have discovered - flow trails. Since these are remarkably like extended BMX tracks my son and I have really enjoyed riding 26" BMX bikes on these. The berms, jumps and lack of roots really make that a lot of fun. I would imagine the same situation would be true on a bike park jump line. Again, if the bike fits the conditions we are riding in it's just more fun and less painful.
Now can someone please explain that to the CX riders out there!
Fully rigid is silly on trails with bumps, unless that's all you've got. If you are riding a trail with no bumps, it might as well be paved. Ride whatever, a road bike, cruiser, etc. (I am partial to steel frames in these cases). Riding trails with some bumps and shorter technical sections (both up and down) can be fun on the right HT with 120mm front suspension. But there's a point at which a HT just starts ruining the fun. Even a HT with 160mm front suspension, which to me is as silly as fully rigid. It may increase the fun factor, weird factor, whatever, but big travel on the front and none on the rear? Makes no sense at all, function on that is way wacked out, like riding a crazed donkey. OK, that might be fun for a minute or two.
For me, FS has its place and HT has its place, and I choose trail and bike based on what I think I will have the most fun on at the time. So far I am faster on a local flow trail on my HT than I am on my FS, but that says nothing about fun -- the FS is definitely more fun. But fully rigid is reserved for pavement. There are reasons we invent stuff.
So, my point being, the argument isn't so black and white as technology, suspension; good. Rigid, retro-grouch snobs; bad. Yes, get the bike that will make you faster, push your limits, whatever. If, however, you've got a little cheddar left over and there are trails around you (maybe even closer to access than the ones you need to ride to push your limits) consider building up a tough, low-maintenance rigid or HT, it could offer a new perspective. And, if you haven't ever ridden one, it WILL make you a better rider.
Old folks probably benefit from FS across the board though...
Not everything is rocks and gnarly downhill trails.
bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/10/guilty-pleasures.html
Long story short, I went out to one of my favorite trails (intermediate), went KOM hunting, and absolutely destroyed myself to not set a single PR. I was faster on a 30# burly trail bike. That piece of shit went on craiglist the next day and I haven't missed it since. Built up a closeout Niner Jet9 alloy, got it near 26-27#, and at least when I'm on a trail hammering and hating myself I'm faster than on the hardtail.
#hardtailsnever (OK maybe in shitty weather on smooth trails).
"I thinking about going rigid"
"You should, I made the change a few years ago. It was awesome"
"Yeah, its like the only pure mountain bike experience"
"Totally. You can have my rigid fork if you want to try it out. Its been sitting in my garage since I pulled it off my bike five years ago."
More fun.
www.outsideonline.com/2251536/bicycle-suspension-evil
1. How many commenters seem to not get that 'fully rigid' is not the same as hardtail.
2. How many 'clickbait' comments there are about an article with 'Opinion' in the headline.
This article needs to be linked to the original article.
"Ok bro, we'll be sessioning some stuff you can't ride while we wait for you to clank your way down"
Waki is right, the trail just becomes different on drastically different bikes. On a CX bike I'm looking down right in front of me to make sure I don't get hung up on small stuff. On an enduro bike I'm looking out in front of me to the next turn/feature to come at it with speed. They're different skills.
If you ride sloppy lines and just smash into things on your big bike, then yeah, changing bikes can have a positive impact... but picking my way through chunder on a cross bike never made me feel more prepared to gap over a rock garden at speed.
I just bought a more XC oriented hardtail (KTM Myroon) to ride when my Nomad3 is way more bike than necessary, and to just experience my local trails in a new way. I have only a few rides on it but it is a blast.
Key point, it is a hardtail. The rigid category may well satisfy a similar itch others have, but I wanted at least a suspension fork.
Of course I’ve also got a new alloy DH bike, a cheap alloy rigid fat bike, and a steel is real road bike. Sure, a full sus trail bike is probably my next purchase, but it will also probably be the bike that requires the most maintenance and probably won’t stick around as long as the other bikes will (the roadie i bought new in 1990) and it won’t be bought until shock sizes and fork offsets calm down and settle on something long term.
Do you also use the terms 'front forks', or 'rear shock'?
Hold on, what are we talking about?