Difference between an XC and Trail bike?

j4mesj4mes

Hello,

This may seem like an obvious question but what is the difference between an XC and a Trail bike. I cannot see the difference.

Thank you

idiotdogbrain

XC bikes generally have 100mm of travel (front and/or rear), steeper head tube angle for more resposive steering and are generally aimed at those who may be wanting to race.

Trail bikes generally have 120-140mm of travel, slacker head tube angles for greater stability at speed downhill and are generally aimed at non-race types.

Massive generalisations there but that's the basic difference.

<awaits correction>

rockmonkeysc

xc bikes are good for covering distance fast and riding while wearing lycra.
Trail bikes are for carving through your favorite single track or racing down an awesome descent, finding features to use as kickers and generally having big fun but they are also pretty efficient at climbing to get you to the to of the next mega descent. Lycra is not compulsory on trail bikes though some weirdo's choose to wear it any way.

Mark909

Trail bikes are for people who do xc but are too embaressed to admit they do xc and feel the need to big themselves up by making out they do "semi-agro" trail riding even though what they are doing is xc :?

Anonymous

Oh god, not this again :roll:

Deepunder

Mark909 wrote:

Trail bikes are for people who do xc but are too embaressed to admit they do xc and feel the need to big themselves up by making out they do "semi-agro" trail riding even though what they are doing is xc :?

Semi-agro ! new phrase on me, class I'd like to know, is that one notch up from knarly?

cooldad

Depends whether you do downhill.
Or use Shimano or Sram.
Or wear a helmet.
Or get excited over 29ers

Anybody think of any more cans of worms?

Anonymous

cooldad wrote:

Depends whether you do downhill.
Or use Shimano or Sram.
Or wear a helmet.
Or get excited over 29ers

Anybody think of any more cans of worms?

Yes.
SPD or flats
Full suss or hardtail
Rigid Vs the world
Jeff Jones Vs common decency and an understanding of the worth of things.
Singlespeed or not actually insane.
etc etc etc.

cooldad

Think we've covered all possible future discussions there so probably time to close Bikeradar.
Except for Crudcatcher where intellectual discussions take place.

Except I may need advice on tyres.

PaulBarman

biggest difference to me is that trail bikes are ok to get air time on but to do so on a xc bike feels like you're pushing your luck

stubs

About £10

I ride XC on a trail bike and trails on a XC bike.

Its a bike FFS just ride the bloody thing and stop worrying about terminology.

rockmonkeysc

You can jump any mountain bike as long as you do it right and don't go too big. Your more likely to break a frame bashing through a rock garden or some big roots.

d00m

A trail bike used to be a more comfortable, hardwearing, and less racy (arse up, head down) xc bike, with heavier less exotic components.

But then all mountain used to be called freeride.

njee20

Freeride used to be copyrighted by Cannondale.

It's all bollocks, and it's all riding bikes.

Thewaylander

True, tis all bollx.

But froma label point of veiw from the bike manufacturers i would say the first point somes it up. I ride all types of terrain so like hte slacker bigger bikes. Njee here likes racing so goes with lighter steeper bikes. but both types are more than capable it's a matter of preference to how the bike handles and feels in certain situations.

j4mesj4mes

if trail bikes have bigger suspension than xc then it cant be bollx surely?!?

d00m

j4mesj4mes wrote:

if trail bikes have bigger suspension than xc then it cant be bollx surely?!?

Back in the day people used to ride downhill looking like this...



Anyway, I think the idea of a modern trail bike is that its more comfortable for all day riding, more forgiving, and easier to handle.

Anonymous

d00m wrote:

j4mesj4mes wrote:

if trail bikes have bigger suspension than xc then it cant be bollx surely?!?

Back in the day people used to ride downhill looking like this...

And back in those days, DH was an entirely different sport to what it is these days.

d00m

yeehaamcgee wrote:

And back in those days, DH was an entirely different sport to what it is these days.

True in fairness, but if they rode that on a rigid, then you dont necessarily need 6 inches of travel to do a trail center and a quality xc frame isnt likely to fall apart whilst trail riding either. Not any trail riding within the scope of your average rider anyway...

Anonymous

d00m wrote:

yeehaamcgee wrote:

And back in those days, DH was an entirely different sport to what it is these days.

True in fairness, but if they rode that on a rigid, then you dont necessarily need 6 inches of travel to do a trail center and a quality xc frame isnt likely to fall apart whilst trail riding either. Not any trail riding within the scope of your average rider anyway...

Nobody said you needed 6" to ride a trail centre. There's a lot of us who DID ride everything on rigids, and rode the very first trail centres on rigids, with crap brakes.
And, many of those bikes were heavier, and stronger than today's superlight XC race machines.
So sure, an XC machine will be fine for trail centres, but it's not built to take abuse.
Also, whilst you CAN ride a trail centre on a rigid, it cetainly isn't as fun.
What is apparent, is that a lot of people think theyir riding is sick gnarrcore enough to NEED a 6" travel machine, when in fact it isn't - but that doesn't mean they're not having fun on that bike.

homerjay

i rode xc hardtails in back in 92 (when i was 12), so i ride xc hardtails now.

ive no interest in such trail bikes of full suspension for that matter, they feel slow and cumbersome. (obviously theyre not on the right sections of trail)

i dont race anymore, its just what i was brought up with. so i'll stick with it.

Anonymous

homerjay wrote:

i rode xc hardtails in back in 92 (when i was 12), so i ride xc hardtails now.

Do you still wear nappies and drink from your mother's bosom too? Times change, people change, "I'll do what I've always done" is a pointless argument.
Fine if it works for you, but it means nothing, ultimately.

homerjay

i was talking about what works for me.

note the word 'I' throughout my post.

Anonymous

homerjay wrote:

i was talking about what works for me.

No, you weren't. You were talking that you've never changed what you've done.

cooldad

To be fair I hope he was off the boob and out of nappies by 12.

diy

Some people are definitely fat enough to need 6 inches of travel

Anonymous

diy wrote:

Some people are definitely fat enough to need 6 inches of travel

How do you work that one out?

bennett_346

diy wrote:

Some people are definitely fat enough to need 6 inches of travel

Eh :?

Either way, by making the distinction that you ride trails not xc, all you're doing is affirming to your peers that you definately aren't a lycra clad heart rate obsessive tw*t, which is a positive distinction to make in my eyes.

In terms of the bikes themselves it means nothing.

Anonymous

I'd argue that by saying "I'm THIS particular kind of rider", you're limiting yourself, no matter where along the jeyboy-freeride god scale you think you sit.

bennett_346

yeehaamcgee wrote:

I'd argue that by saying "I'm THIS particular kind of rider", you're limiting yourself, no matter where along the jeyboy-freeride god scale you think you sit.

It's just to recieve social acceptance.

Anonymous

Seems that would only work if you rode with other limited riders.