What makes hardtails so much fun?!

Northwind

yeehaamcgee wrote:

just disengage brain, and let rip.

Sounds s**t tbh

lesz42

i have a HT, but sometimes, wish i had a FS, very rough terrain ( or speed over it) getting the odd kick off the pedals, and the comfort.

nickfrog

Cferg wrote:

I only own a HT and it has to be said, its the direct feeling of every hit, that makes picking that right line so much more rewarding - in the knowing that had you taken the line 10cm to the left, you'd have been thrown off.

Why only ?

This is the core reason why people assume that FS is better than HT (which for some terrain or usage it definitely is BTW). FS is often perceived as better because it has MORE suspension. The same way as a 12MP compact camera is perceived as better than a 4MP camera by the average consumer, when all the 12MP do is create more noise with ZERO benefits for a normal size print.

lesz42

FS is better......





for some,

Anonymous

lesz42 wrote:

FS is better......

agreed.

i always wonder if the HT fans have ever tried a fs bike on a trail, i wonder if they are ever going to buy one.

i love nothing more than when a die hard ht fan ends up buying a fs bike after spending years complaining that they are webbo.

i find the real reason lots of people dont like fs bikes is because they cant afford one, this makes perfect sense, they are mentally expensive and we are all suckers for falling for it.

fletch8928

A friend has just put down his deposit on a HT, A big bucks bike, I asked why he didn't get a FS as thats the way he was heading, his answer, "I would have had to pay silly money for a fS with the spec and weight I wanted".
That said he can borrow his missus' bouncy Marin. Guess it makes it easier to buy a HT.

Since this thread has started I have been out on my HT, I have just started to get used to it. Today i noticed that I don't climb as well as on my FS, I can get the power down quicker out of corners, probably due to being out of the saddle, my teeth were rattling and I felt like I had been on a bumpier ride. Still, I am thinking a few tweeks to contact points and fork pressures/rebound, it may turn out to be quite fun.

The lbs owner asked what I was doing on a HT. Told him about this thread and it got me thinking. He said that although a FS is much better overall its sometimes really refreshing to go out on a HT. We mainly do XC. I think. I know I do.
If I didn't mention before, my FS hss 100mm travel front and rear, I didn't want much more, just enough to take the sting away.

Northwind

sheepsteeth wrote:

i always wonder if the HT fans have ever tried a fs bike on a trail, i wonder if they are ever going to buy one.

Not sure which one I actually prefer, they're both ace but if I had to choose just one bike i reckon it'd be a hardtail.

Dick Scruttock

Nothing makes a hardtail fun. Nothing at all.

Cferg

nickfrog wrote:

Cferg wrote:

I only own a HT and it has to be said, its the direct feeling of every hit, that makes picking that right line so much more rewarding - in the knowing that had you taken the line 10cm to the left, you'd have been thrown off.

Why only ?

This is the core reason why people assume that FS is better than HT (which for some terrain or usage it definitely is BTW). FS is often perceived as better because it has MORE suspension. The same way as a 12MP compact camera is perceived as better than a 4MP camera by the average consumer, when all the 12MP do is create more noise with ZERO benefits for a normal size print.

Price for a start, why have two more mediocre/low spec bikes, a FS and HT, rather than a more top end/high specced HT that does the job adequately. At the moment, my HT does what I need it to, and makes it enjoyable, granted if I had the budget when buying my hardtail, I may have gone for a Full sus.

That only covers my personal situation and if I had the money I would 100% have a FS & HT, but I'm not sure I'd want both? One would most likely become preference, as I mainly ride the same stuff. Should trail centres become a more frequent occurance, then absolutely, both would become more 'adoptable' if you like, but one do-it-all high(er) end HT does me fine, and I at the moment see no reason to change. It's like the eternal SPD's/Flats, its down to what you prefer and enjoy/have more fun with.

nickfrog

sheepsteeth wrote:

lesz42 wrote:

FS is better......

agreed.

i always wonder if the HT fans have ever tried a fs bike on a trail, i wonder if they are ever going to buy one.

i love nothing more than when a die hard ht fan ends up buying a fs bike after spending years complaining that they are webbo.

i find the real reason lots of people dont like fs bikes is because they cant afford one, this makes perfect sense, they are mentally expensive and we are all suckers for falling for it.

What a lot of rubbish.

Some hardtails are more expensive than the majority of FS bikes so your argument makes no sense at all. I have seen so many people going back to HT recently, this can't be a coincidence.

I recently rode a new FS Whyte and found the experience quite disappointing. I got (a little) added comfort on very technical sections but to the detriment of feel as the suspension also filters most of the feedback. Bobbing was a serious issue so you have to spin to climb cleanly. The bike was heavy and clearly at a disadvantage when climbing as on dry terrain there is very little traction benefits (and what a pain to carry over gates). The shock leaked oil after 3 hours (demo bike). Going back to my HT was such a relief honestly.

Both have their merits I am sure but for me, FS does not work.

There is only two FS in a group of a dozen hardcore riders I ride with. They are always behind going up and surprisingly never in front going down. Maybe a coincidence ?

Anonymous

nickfrog wrote:

blah blah blah

you're a load of rubbish.

nickfrog

sheepsteeth wrote:

nickfrog wrote:

blah blah blah

you're a load of rubbish.

LOL.

You're clearly one of those struggling at the back. Bless.

I really did not mean to rub it in...

Capital letters are covered in Key Stage 1 literacy BTW. It's never too late.

fletch8928

Just thought about this.
I have not met anyone (met personally) who has gone from a FS to a HT. I have met a fair few who have done HT to FS and just as many who ride both.

I have nearly 2000ft of climbing for startes on tomorrows planned ride. I can safely say that it wont be fun on the HT. It isn't fun on any pushbike. Gets me to where I want to be though. Too lazy to drive there.

bike-a-swan

fletch8928 wrote:

Just thought about this.
I have not met anyone (met personally) who has gone from a FS to a HT. I have met a fair few who have done HT to FS and just as many who ride both.

It's too hard to get the skills back and all FS riders are lazy! I jest, I'm sorry....

I can provide perhaps a more extreme example, someone who went from mountain bike back to cross because he found he didn't need the capabilities of the mountain bike. A bigger jump, d'ya reckon?

fletch8928

bike-a-swan wrote:

fletch8928 wrote:

Just thought about this.
I have not met anyone (met personally) who has gone from a FS to a HT. I have met a fair few who have done HT to FS and just as many who ride both.

It's too hard to get the skills back and all FS riders are lazy! I jest, I'm sorry....

I can provide perhaps a more extreme example, someone who went from mountain bike back to cross because he found he didn't need the capabilities of the mountain bike. A bigger jump, d'ya reckon?

Nooo. I can understand that. I have toyed with a cross bike for some of the tame tracks. It must be fairly simple to eat up the miles and still be off the beaten track. FFS, what am I saying?

Stevo_666

Sod it, I've heard enough: this is the perfect excuse to have one of each and avoid the problem in future

N+1 rules !

bike-a-swan

I was impressed with the stuff he tackled at speed. Admittedly, he couldn't maintain speed in the same way over prolonged rooty sections, but seeing him carry it into off camber rooty corners halfway down a hill was pretty impressive, although it could have been different in the wet. He also proceeded to disappear into the distance the moment we hit anything smooth, and go riding back down climbs to make sure we hadn't lost people. That may have been him (he's a top time triallist) as much as the bike though...

fletch8928

It would be all him. I would still huff and puff my way to the top of any hills. As I said I have thought. You could blast around on fire roads, on the odd occasion take it out with the mtb crowd and have a giggle and not be a roadie

bike-a-swan

Curses, I'd managed to suppress the fact I've rather wanted a cx bike for a while now. It's back with a vengeance. Ah well, give it a year or two now they've legalised discs and I'll think about it.

fletch8928

Obllox to the legit stuff. I would have them. I wouldn't be racing or doing anything competative. May have to have a chat down the lbs.

The diversion to CX hasn't hi-jacked this thread due to them being proper HT.

Anonymous

yoohoo999 wrote:

yeehaamcgee wrote:

pfft, nonsense, here's me riding up a mountian, just to prove it's doable on a full suss, with a fox 36

Notice I said "big bike", not full suss. I've got 36's on my hardtail, i don't get the point you are making

Of course riding up a mountain is doable on a full suss, I don't remember anyone arguing that it wasn't?

Well, it's not a DH bike, but it certainly isnn't an XC featherweight. Quite a big-hitting little monster, actually.


Anyway, we have the conclusion to this thread.
HT riders are just clinically stupid. This has been proven 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt, by having two of them mention they want CX bikes.
If you can ride your local haunts on a CX bike, then I think that's a dead giveaway why you pathetic jessies don't see an advantage for full suss

fletch8928

HT riders are not clinically stupid. Most will see the light. Cassie does me proud. Not over or under equiped for my riding. I knew I didn't want anything big, but something with a bit of rear action.

Speaking of which. Its that time of day

Anonymous

fletch8928 wrote:

HT riders are not clinically stupid. Most will see the light. Cassie does me proud. Not over or under equiped for my riding. I knew I didn't want anything big, but something with a bit of rear action.

Speaking of which. Its that time of day

Well, you're the muppet who stuck a computer on your bars upside down.

fletch8928

One of my proudest moments of total #uc* ups.

cee

Cferg wrote:

Cee, out of interest where abouts is that? Looks reasonably Pentlands-ish?

not the pentlands...a little further north than that....and the hills are a bit bigger! That particular photo was taken near Glen Orchy.

blister pus

this thread is rubbish

i want my money back

cee

sheepsteeth wrote:

agreed.

i always wonder if the HT fans have ever tried a fs bike on a trail, i wonder if they are ever going to buy one.

i love nothing more than when a die hard ht fan ends up buying a fs bike after spending years complaining that they are webbo.

i find the real reason lots of people dont like fs bikes is because they cant afford one, this makes perfect sense, they are mentally expensive and we are all suckers for falling for it.

sorry sheeps...your talking p1sh. too much time in the sun? did someone hit you on the head? tell me who it was...I'll get them for you ;o)

now that a reasonable full susser can be had for a grand...and a decent one for £1500 (2009 or 2010 models now at least..)...that argument goes away....

now...bring in a bit of C2W scheme...and that full susser is acheivable for anyone with £400 to add to the voucher.

Beardface

fletch8928 wrote:

I have not met anyone (met personally) who has gone from a FS to a HT.

*waves*

I made that change, although I appreciate you've not met me personally!

Went from a Marin Mount Vision to a Carbon 456, and love it, the HT feels a lot more responsive, and although I do occasionally miss the added comfort on the back end, I don't miss it anywhere near enough to regret making the switch.. in fact, I'm loving the HT at the moment, and it takes a hell of a beating!

Anonymous

what the hell is all this "comfort" from a full suss malarkey? Do you people ride everywhere siting down?

bails87

cee
I see the point he's trying to make though.

Sure, you could spent £5k on a hardtail or £800 on a FS. But I got a (now extended to) 120mm travel, sub 25lb trail/XC HT with X0 and X9, bits of carbon and Ritchey WCS kit for £750 18 months ago when I got my first 'proper' bike. You simply cannot get an equivalent weight and specced FS for that price, and you couldn't at the time. You can buy a half decent one for £1k, but you can buy an amazing HT for £1k instead. My cousin's just bought a Kraken and it's a bloody good bike for the money, find an equally good FS for £400!

I think that yeehaamcgee has shown that we all ride for different reasons, he wants to give his poor brain a rest (despite HT riders apparently being the stupid ones) when he gets to the top of the hill and starts riding back down. I imagine that's because after dragging his heavy FS all the way up, he's too knackered to concentrate Joke!

But you see what I mean, some people ride to be the fastest, some people just want to enjoy the view in comfort, some want to test themselves technically, others want to ride the downhills fast and don't care about how slowly they get up in the first place. Others just want to spend £400 on something to get them out of the house and away from the other half/job/kids/hassles.

An XC racer could tell us that we are all wrong if we're not riding 80mm carbon fibre HTs with flat bars, then Steve Peat could turn up and tell us we're all wrong if we're not wearing full face helmets and riding huge DH bikes. They'd both have an almost valid point because for what they use their bikes for, they're right. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we use our bikes in the same way.

So to answer the OP, hardtails are fun because you like hardtails.

There's far too much worrying about what other people are riding. In an ideal world I'd have a road bike, a CX bike, an XC HT, a harder hitting HT, an XC FS, a trail FS, an AM FS, a Ti HT with hub gears, a single speed, etc.......
But this isn't an ideal world, so I chose a bike that suits most of my riding. There's nothing that I haven't been able to ride because I'm on a HT, there's stuff that's been difficult because of the relatively steep angles, shorter travel etc, but a slacker harder hitting HT could have dealt with it. And my Boardman did anyway! If anyone says "Well, you obviously haven't been *somewhere rocky* where you'd need an FS". Then, no, I obviously haven't, which is why the HT is still a good choice.

People need to stop dictating what's right or wrong for other riders to do.