XC or AM??

kinggareth

Hey, i'm just getting back into mountain biking after an op at Christmas (all better now - hopefully), and have just sold my current crop of bikes to help fund a new one.
But I need some advice on whether i go for an XC or AM full susser?

The goalposts for XC seem to have shifted since I was last looking at bikes, they appear to be built to survive knocks and bangs and bigger hits than they used to be - more along the lines of what i would have called an All Mountain bike before. All mountains are now riding on 140-150mm suspension, which for most situations (for me) seems a bit of overkill.

The sort of riding i plan to do is Swinley/Tunnel Hill/Surrey Hills, plus trips out to trail centres around the UK.
i'm erring towards AM because I want to be comfortable that nothing is going to be too much for it, but then XC seems to be a little cheaper and i could get more for my money?

What do you guys reckon?

james-m-h

well i ride a giant anthem x for everything from racing to downhill tracks even took it to morzine an did some downhill runs i just cranked up the PSI in the forks and thats only 100 mm travel so in my opinion 120 mm travel with decent forks and rear shok couldcope with lots of adjustment or take a look at the lapiere the cheap 1 1700 and has 140 mm travel and they get raving reviews

steve_muzzy

I feel for most of what I do 5 inch of travel is perfect and I am doing stuff from natural local trails to the Orange at Fort William (although admit more would have been nice there..)

Plus you can get a 5 inch travel bike to easily weigh in under 30lbs so it will allow you to climb as well as descend

multiples to look at from Giant. specialized, orange, Lapierre, comencal etc..

1mancity2

I would go for a bike with 140mm travel so your covered for whatever you end up doing.

Anonymous

Depends where YOU want to compromise.
Do you want a lightweight bike that could be taken over stupid terrain with a little care, or do you want a bike that's built for abuse, that will be a little slower over more gentle terrain?

We can;t answer that for you.

kinggareth

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Depends where YOU want to compromise.
Do you want a lightweight bike that could be taken over stupid terrain with a little care, or do you want a bike that's built for abuse, that will be a little slower over more gentle terrain?

We can;t answer that for you.

Kind of what i was getting at though is advice on what the compromises are, and if they're really that big for the level i'll be riding at.

For instance, AM bikes don't seem massively heavy anymore and most come with pro pedal, will i really notice the difference in climbing compared to an XC. But then if i do nothing more technical than trail centres will there really be anything big enough to necessitate more than a modern XC can cope with?

I am inclined to agree that I'll never NEED more than 120mm until I'm a much better cyclist than i am now, and i grow a bigger set of cajones.

1mancity2

I had a giant Trance 120mm travel and it coped with everthing I threw at it, xc, am, dh so at 120mm you should be fine for the type of riding your expecting to do.

The Rookie

As many people cope just fine on a 100mm hardtail, logic suggests a 120mm FS should cope even easier? Of course you have to factor in likely length of riding (the longer you ride per session, the more a double bumper scores for comfort over conveniance of the lighter weight) and whether you prefer to sit and let the bike do the absorbing, or stand and use the rear suspension god/nature/darwin (delete dependant on belief) gave you. A Mate happily chases down full sussers on his rigid GT (Pace carbon forks/GT Zaskar team) over the roughest parts of Cannock....

Simon

Thewaylander

Ride a 160mm Mondraker here.

And will say that the biggest lsot is efficency to pedal, though it isnt huge. The biggest gain is not the travel but the way the bike is set up, the bigger bikes are normally slacker and more aggressive to ride.

I swapped from my Spec stumpy 2007 (120mm) and its big issues were flex, and the head angle being to steep on really steep terain, made the fork feel like its tucking under you.

So you really need to figure out what you will be riding, any trail center and i would say an XC biek will get you up and down fast for the most part, but get a bit steep then the AM bieks quickly eat the XC bikes on the downs


*Please not i use the terms XC/AM to describe marketing names of bikes, not an actual type of riding which is all MTBing

rockmonkeysc

I ride a Giant Trance X and it's pretty good for most riding though when pushed hard it does get twitchy. I can send it off jumps & drops with no worries but big rock gardens & steep rocky or rooty trails can be a bit hairy.
If you never do anything more hairy than a black run at a trail centre then a Giant Trance X would do you, although it only has 120mm of suspension travel it rides like most 140mm bikes. If you plan on doing a bit of alpine riding & maybe the occasional downhill track then take a look at something like the Giant Reign or any other light weight AM bike.
Geometry counts for a lot more than suspension travel.

xand_xand

Seriously though we are spoilt for choice now, a few years ago trails and mountains were tackled with basic Mtb's and rigid forks for gods sake!
120mm seems to be the happy medium these days...

I asked myself same questions and was trying to convince myself I needed AM Mtb when really I just didn't due the xc trails i regularly hit.

supersonic

Depends on your budget too.

kinggareth

xand_xand wrote:

Seriously though we are spoilt for choice now, a few years ago trails and mountains were tackled with basic Mtb's and rigid forks for gods sake!
120mm seems to be the happy medium these days...

I asked myself same questions and was trying to convince myself I needed AM Mtb when really I just didn't due the xc trails i regularly hit.

I reckon I'm exactly the same. I'm trying to convince myself I need AM for all the gnarly downhill and big hits I'm gonna make, when really I'm a skill-less cissy that'll wimp out of anything remotely close to exceeding an XC bikes abilities.

I think the huge choice is making choosing the right bike more difficult rather than easier, but the majority of riding I'll probably end up doing is singletrack and trail centres where a 120mm XC bike will be more than sufficient.

kinggareth

supersonic wrote:

Depends on your budget too.

I was looking at a max of £2k, but ideally less so that I can buy a cheap commuter as well.

The Specialized Camber Pro was near the top of my list, but I've recently been looking at the Canyon Nerve XC or AM - which looks amazing for the money.

Anonymous

kinggareth wrote:

I'm trying to convince myself I need AM for all the gnarly downhill and big hits I'm gonna make, when really I'm a skill-less cissy that'll wimp out of anything remotely close to exceeding an XC bikes abilities.

Well you've just answered your own question - an XC bike. No point lugging around extra "beef" if you're never going to put it to use.