All Mountain..?

Pricey117

Can anybody reccommend any good All Mountain bikes, lightweight if possible

Thanx

Andy B

Hardtail/ full suss /price????

Pricey117

I'd prefer a full suss..but im open to suggestion..looking for about £600-£1200..

supersonic

Go for the top end, as they are significantly lighter than 600 quid AM sussers.

Giant Trance X?

Pricey117

A few people have reccommended a Trance X...It tops my budget a little but it seems like a very good bike...Waiting to look at one in the shop...
Any cheaper options...?

Andy B

Cheaper = heavier

Specialized Pitch Comp, GT I Drive 5, Commencal Meta 5.5.3, all worth a look

supersonic

The only 600 quid one I can think off, except the sale ones at some places lioke CRC and Pauls, is the Carrera Banshee and Banshee X, but these are lardy. Mongoose Teocali for 800, but still no lightweight.

Splasher

I don't think a 5" trail centre bike is an All Mountain bike. An all mountain bike is a bike that's big enough for freeride and downhill but light enough for XC whilst being perfect for none. A Nomad with a Lyrik for example is an all mountain bike in my view.

So rather than use a marketing tag, why not say what kind of riding and where you want it for and what budget you've got otherwise you could get everything from a Fuel EX7 to an Intense Socom suggested.

supersonic

All Mountain varies in its definition from manufacturer to manufacturer. GT pitch the 5 inch Idrive and XCR as 'All Mountain'. You arent going to get a light long travel bike for these prices. But I agree that the bike should be bought suitable to conditions, hence why various options have been put forward.

Splasher

supersonic wrote:

All Mountain varies in its definition from manufacturer to manufacturer. GT pitch the 5 inch Idrive and XCR as 'All Mountain'.

That's my point really. The term was first pitched as the "one bike does all" and the industry set about producing the 30lb 6" bike. When they tried and produced 34lb 6" bikes some went back to the drawing board determined to still achieve it and the Ramsom carbon and the Enduro were the results. Proper all mountain bikes but so expensive as a result of the frame in one case, and the 1st priciples suspension design in the other.

The other manufacturers seem to have given up and decided that they can't do 6" 30lb bikes, or at least not ones that the masses can afford and so they're marketing 5" 29lb bikes and 6" 34 lb bikes as the answer. The media are buying it, and now eveything from a 120mm Quad link Marin, to a 170mm Reign X is an AM bike.

supersonic

MBR had quite a good article on this, with their 120mm forked bikes. They came to the conclusion its getting a bit silly, with all these categories 100,110,120,130,140,150 etc.. it seems the next year more is better, then the next year more is better again and then... less is better, and we start all over.

It does seem that generally the more travel there is, the stronger the components that are fitted. Not always though, as they are plenty of tough 4 inch travel BSX type bikes, and light long travel bikes. And of course, as you say, more money gives you the same strength, more performance for less weight. Anyone can make a 6inch travel frame for the same weight as a 4inch one... just alter the shock and linkages (and of course frame angles!). But I doubt it will be tough enough for its intended use. Low weight does seem to be a prerequisite for any XC bike though - you wont see a 300 quid XC bike, but will see a 300 quid trail bike. I think we need to add sus quality into this too. The Marin ramps up at the end, almost like reserve travel.

I would put my Ruckus as an all rounder hardtail (on a budget). Stiff tough frame and fork (130mm), but light enough for all day rides with the saddle up, but great on gnarlier terrain. Is this all mountain? To some maybe!

dhxcme

i'd say go for a ultra skinney hard tail like an orange crush. you can grab one for a grand, not to be confused with grab a gran. If you got the guts you can tackle most stuff on one of them.

http://www.orangebikes.co.uk/2008bikes/crush.php

Or even get a secondhand patriot or five got less than a grand.

Splasher

It depends whether the words used in the label are going to mean anything. All mountain in my book means you'd ride it for all mountain bike disciplines. Now I know that even the Ransom won't DH like a DH bike and won't XC like an XC bike and as such it's the classic jack-of-all master-of-none. But nevertheless, if you're riding just for fun, it is light enough to climb Jacobs Ladder (Neil Arnold cleaned it on one) and robust enough to ride all but the most extreme DH and freeride.

A more sensible set of labels would be IMO:

XC - 100mm and 24 lbs for a HT, 27 for a susser - racing and razzing
Trail - 120-140 QR fork, classic trail centre bike - 27lbs for HT, 29 for a susser - general trail centre malarky and enduros
AM - 150-170, single crown bolt through fork, 29lbs for a HT, 31 for a susser - people who want one bike does all or riding DH enduros like Mega
FR - 160-180mm single crown, 33lbs for HT, 38lbs for susser - Chicksands, Whistler, Alps
DH - 180 - 250mm double crown, 45lbs susser. - Anywhere thers an uplift.

The problem is that too many people see this as a hierarchy and think there's kudos in having as "high" a label as possible. So people ride Glentress with Moto V2 brakes!

supersonic

Looking at that list,everything starts at 1k. If AM is meant to be that light, then there can be none that exist below a certain price point, same for XC. i would say the banshee is an all mountain bike. Ok, it wont do XC as well as a nomad, but 6inch of travel at either end puts it in that category with slacker angles.

dhxcme

Your right with that. All-mountain is about doing a bit of everything. Llandegla is a good test of all mountain. Lots of xc, plenty of rough rocky ground, some DH to test your legs.

I have done it on my orange 223 (DH rig) which was pig to get round due to it really slowing down on the up hill.

I have also done it on my hitman which is set as a bit of an all-rounder (see my sig). It now has 130mm splices with a medium spring and my crank bros mallets. I gotta say it was fast as fook and I got a good rattling off it but it did it al and there was plenty left in the tank to do some more.

Splasher

supersonic wrote:

If AM is meant to be that light, then there can be none that exist below a certain price point, same for XC.

That's correct. But it's only the same as saying that an aeroplane cannot exist below a certain price point because it needs to be strong and light. The whole point of the AM bike was that it was strong and light. And you can't have strong, light and cheap.

I guess what I'm railing against is the industry whetting our appetites to the "one bike does all" when they first started the "All Mountain" bandwagon, then finding out it was a bit more difficult than they thought, down-speccing what it means (30lb 5" bikes or 35lb 6" bikes depending on their agenda) and the media and us just accepting it.

If you use the Giant range as an example close to my heart (but the other manufacturers ranges are just as flawed you have:

Trance X - too spindly for serious Alpine fun
Reign - neither one thing nor the other - 32mm QR fork, XC finishing kit
Reign X - too heavy for a whole day in the Peaks

The Trance X and Reign X have a role in life as competant Trail bikes and Freeride bikes respectively. But the Reign is lost, a bizarre mix of components, a relic of the promise that couldn't be delivered.

supersonic

Interesting point on the Trance: I remember reading in WMB when they stuck a set of Pikes on one at 140mm, said it was great!

Splasher

supersonic wrote:

Interesting point on the Trance: I remember reading in WMB when they stuck a set of Pikes on one at 140mm, said it was great!

Was that on the Trance or Trance X?

Funnily enough, I've done the equivalent and stuck a set of Fox 36s on the Reign and it's great too. I've also built it with AM finishing kit, descent tubeless wheels and tyres and a full 27 speed transmission at 30.2lbs!

supersonic

The old 4 inch one! Cant remember what issue.

My idrive is supposed to be for a 4 inch fork, but at 130m it handles fantastic.

Steve_b77

Now where does the Pitch Comp come into this discussion, it's got upto 5.5" (U-Turn Pikes) on the front and 5.9" rear travel.

Is built well with dual wall rims etc, big ass powerful brakes and a pretty good 27speed (SRAM X7/Deore LX) transmission and is great to ride all day and'll take the hits.

The pro weighs 30.7lb so the comp can't be that much more maybe 33lbs?? and it's £1199

Splasher

Nah, the Pitch is just the same as the Reign, AM back end, trail front end - 140mm 32mm stantions. It's a little better I suppose in that the Pike has a bolt through bottom but that's it. To make it an AM bike by the original intention, it would need a Lyrik and that would stick the weight up.

And the Pitch is an admission by Specialized (who to be fair do have a proper AM bike) that to achieve the AM dream prices a lot of people out of the market.

mudface

Splasher wrote:

It depends whether the words used in the label are going to mean anything. All mountain in my book means you'd ride it for all mountain bike disciplines. Now I know that even the Ransom won't DH like a DH bike and won't XC like an XC bike and as such it's the classic jack-of-all master-of-none. But nevertheless, if you're riding just for fun, it is light enough to climb Jacobs Ladder (Neil Arnold cleaned it on one) and robust enough to ride all but the most extreme DH and freeride.

A more sensible set of labels would be IMO:

XC - 100mm and 24 lbs for a HT, 27 for a susser - racing and razzing
Trail - 120-140 QR fork, classic trail centre bike - 27lbs for HT, 29 for a susser - general trail centre malarky and enduros
AM - 150-170, single crown bolt through fork, 29lbs for a HT, 31 for a susser - people who want one bike does all or riding DH enduros like Mega
FR - 160-180mm single crown, 33lbs for HT, 38lbs for susser - Chicksands, Whistler, Alps
DH - 180 - 250mm double crown, 45lbs susser. - Anywhere thers an uplift.

The problem is that too many people see this as a hierarchy and think there's kudos in having as "high" a label as possible. So people ride Glentress with Moto V2 brakes!

Weird. I've ridden DH courses, Alps and was a regular at Chicky all on a 140mm travel bike.

Guess it depends how good a rider you are as to how much travel you 'need'. 8)

Splasher

mudface wrote:

Weird. I've ridden DH courses, Alps and was a regular at Chicky all on a 140mm travel bike.

Guess it depends how good a rider you are as to how much travel you 'need'. 8)

Touche. Of course I'm talking about labelling bikes for their design purpose to help the buyer make the right choice. The essence of mountain biking is to get out and enjoy and I'm not suggesting the labels should be limiting.

On the contrary, the rant was partly triggered by the amount of people posting asking for an All Mountain bike to ride trail centres when it would be overweight and overbig for the job..

And you're right. Last time I was at Chicky on my newly assembled 6" bike, some 15 year olds asked me about my bike and then proceeded to show me what I should be doing on it on their hardtails (which they were telling me they needed to replace because they'd grown too big for them - a problem I've not had for a few years )

Pricey117

Yes..all good points, some a little confusing but on the whole great ideas

Somebody asked to be more specific on what i want so here goes...

Currently got a hardtail-rather heavy-and i feel im missing the comfort of the rear suspension...I dont use my bike for huge DH tracks but enjoy the adrenaline now and again..its not a downhill bike i want though..coz to be honest im more of an adventure person and would rather buy an XC bike..But i know that an XC bike wouldn't even cope on the smallest of downhill trails..thats why i want an AM bike..My budget is flexible but i dont want to chuck my money at the first thing i see.

Does that help?

Just to catch up....Where is 'Chicky'..?

supersonic

Just out of curiosity, how ganraly are the DH bits, and size of jumps and drops?

Pricey117

Without sounding too much of a shithouse!..
The track isnt very ganraly at all..some might nto even class it as downhill corse..A few 5-6ft drops :oops: and a couple of small doubles

supersonic

Thats not exactly small, I wouldnt be wanting to take my Idrive on that without landing smooth! 6 or 7 inch of travel then really. 6ft drops are well beyond most normal trails!

Pricey117

Well..i only do them with mates..because i'd rather take the fall than have them abuse me for chickening out.. :P Sprained my wrist last time so i doubt i'll be doing it again..
I much prefer trail riding without the downhill type section:)

Splasher

Pricey117 wrote:

Well..i only do them with mates..because i'd rather take the fall than have them abuse me for chickening out.. :P Sprained my wrist last time so i doubt i'll be doing it again..
I much prefer trail riding without the downhill type section:)

This is why it's much better to explain what you do. If you want a bike for 5-6ft drops it would be something like a Reign X. But then if general trail riding is really more your cup of tea then you'd be forever lugging around an extra 6 lbs of bike for no benefit.

Something between 120-140mm sounds like the order of the day to me and there's a shed load. Have a look at (in no particular order):

Marin 120 range http://www.marin.co.uk/2008/bikedetail2.php?ModNo=3823
Orange 5
Giant Trance X and Reign
Trek EX range http://www.trekbikes.com/uk/en/bikes/20 ... uspension/
Cannondale Rush
Specialized Epic and Stumpjumper FSR
Kona Dawg family
Commencal 5.5s
LaPierre 714 and 914
etc. etc.

supersonic

Now GT have an interesting spin on this with the Force and Sanction: they keep the same travel for either, but one is set up steeper with lighter components.

Splasher

I deliberately left GT out of the list because I knew you'd be along soon