[TN]

I dont know $hit about suspension...'cept I am just about the only one with out it. Seeing that I am in the market for a new bike, I have come here to learn more (I am looking at hardtails). Please indulge me with your knowledge.

what about maintenance?

what about being adjusted for my weight & riding style (i weigh a buck 20, & i ride agrresive XC & urban assault)?

how much travel? (i live in west TN so the trails I ride are nothing like the ones out west or up in the NE...but there is alot of rooty & rutty trails here, but I am no stranger to 3 foot drops)

& anything else I should know?

Thanks mokeys!!!
-TN

 

[stringcheese]

Sounds like a short travel trailbike with an air shock would be good for you. FS bikes really aren't too much maintenance, especially if the pivots use sealed cartrige bearings and you have a good quality shock.

 

[Carbon Fetish]

For your weight and riding style, I would suggest a 100mm fork with adjustable travel ('03 Duke w/ u turn, the Black Elite 100mm/80mm, or Marzocchi Aggro XC Series forks) and with coil/oil guts. With a coil/oil fork, you do get a weight penalty and are messy to maintain, but the quality of the ride makes up for the downfalls. I would only recommend air forks for lighter riders or riders who aren't too aggressive with their suspension. I've heard a lot good things about the Fox fork, they only gripe about the forks is that you must rebuild for the fork if you want to adjust the travel.

For dual suspension bikes. Stay away from URT (unified rear triangle) bikes like Trek Y and the Fisher Betty. The suspension design was prime its time but now its old and antiquated. Single pivot bikes (ex: Santa Cruz Heckler) are great for maintenance and tend to be lighter. Depending on the design and placement of the pivot point, the suspension may absorb some of your pedal stroke energy when you are in the granny gear and cause some bobbing while riding too. The horst link and FSR bikes (Turner O2, Trek Fuel, Specialized FSR) are the most efficiant but they have multiple pivot points thus requires more maintance in the long run.

 

[Merwin5_10]

I'm gonna have to disagree with the majority of Carbon Fetish's post. (Not entirely, just the OPINIONS of efficiency.) Check the thread about lockouts. Lots of good information there.

Carbon- I'd love to debate with you over FS rides when I have time. You sound like you know about bikes and it would be fun to mix it up a little. I'll return when I have more time.Lockout Debate

 

[Dropout]

Do a search of the boards with key words like "suspension, Hollowpoint, Schwinn, floating brakes, horst link" to name a view. There are som excellent discussions on suspension in many of the earlier posts about the Iron Horse Hollowpoint on this board, and there were some good discussions about suspension in a thread on the new Schwinn freeride bike vs. the Craftworks bike.

www.titusti.com has a good overview.
www.specialized.com has a very biased, but slightly informative overview.
www.dougal8.com has some info that seems good, and some info that can be argued.

There is a start I guess.

The one big thing to know, that was an important find for me was: a seatstay pivot is different than a chainstay pivot when it comes to four bar linkages.

 

[Carbon Fetish]

Heh... I can see where this is going. I'm more of a hardtail rider so I guess I shouldn't really be talking about FS bikes.

I do agree that some of the "pedal bobbing" and "loss of pedaling energy" does transfer toward downward forces on the rear tire therefore creating more traction while riding. I also agree that there is a too much emphasis on lockouts on shocks and its a what the average consumer that push bikes makers to spec them. That is why Trek has expanded their lockouts on the Fuel bike beyond the Fuel 100 for 2003. I get a lot of customers, who are interested FS, asking if the bikes have a lock outs. I try to tell them it's not necessary but they are sold on lock out equals total efficiency.

On the debate on which design is the most efficient for general riding, there are too many variables to declare a true winner. Some designs tend to better riding characteristics (climbs, descents, etc.) on different terrains but I believe all designs have negative aspects as well. I know a lot of people who are loyal to certain brands or like a certain pro rider so their opinion on the best FS design are biased. Even with CAD run simulations, we will never know who makes the best FS bike because of the infinite variables that happen while riding a bicycle.

BTW, do you disagree with my fork suggestion too?

 

[Merwin5_10]

I agree with your fork suggestion. I feel a rider could find more options by shopping for a variable travel 80mm fork (most are adjustable between 63mm and 80mm) but for Urban riding I think a 100 mil fork would rock.

I actually agree with more of your second post. I am a firm believer that there is not currently, has never been and might not be for awhile, a "fully efficient" FS geometry, regardless of the hype from the makers. For many of the reasons you stated, every company has its niche. I also strongly agree that certain FS rigs do certain things better (ie. Fisher's Sugar is a fantastic climbing machine) and some things not so well (ie. Fisher's Sugar is a tank, and has a tendency to feel "dead.") So, I still state you sound like you know about bikes. It would be fun to banter back and forth and see where it goes. (I wan't planning on flamming you. I just love a good debate with someone who knows what they are talking about. Its becomming less common, you know.)

 

[TN]

THANKS GUYS!


-TN

 

[Big_Papa1080]

Originally posted by stringcheese
FS bikes really aren't too much maintenance, especially if the pivots use sealed cartrige bearings and you have a good quality shock.

unless ur pat873401

 

[NRSracer]

Originally posted by Big_Papa1080
unless ur pat873401

hey, ihaven't broken anything major yet.
just shifter cables busting thru housing as results of a crash