120mm or 150mm travel?

tudj

I've been riding for a few months now on a Giant hardtail. I've decided to buy a full sus and I'm looking at the Canyon bikes. I can't decide which would suit me better, the Nerve AL 8 with 120mm front and rear travel or the Nerve AL 8+ with 150mm front and rear.

I do a mix of riding, mostly XC but will also be doing trail centers soon too.

After asking the opinion of a few people I seem to be getting 2 responses:

1. The higher travel will be much better for trail centres and the rides with big/rough descents and drops etc

2. The lower travel is plenty but might bottom on on the bigger stuff.

I'd be happy with 120mm if that is enough, I just don't want to spend the money to find I wish I'd gone for the higher travel.

Can anyone offer any advice/pointers?

Cheers

felix.london

I'm not a UK-based rider but I'm sure 120mm at both ends is plenty travel for the majority of UK trail centres.

I'm riding a 120mm hardtail in the French Alps and loving it! I'll eat up that travel a fair few times on each ride but at least I'm using it all And I'm riding some pretty gnarly sh1t over here. Every descent is pretty much a full on natural DH track

And if you do come across some more gnarly terrain than your average trail centre - I'm convinced not being able just to steamroller everything makes you a better rider in the long-run. Saying all that, if you've got aspirations of riding some proper DH on the bike (regularly at some stage) then I'd go for the 150mm option

.blitz

1. The higher travel will be much better for trail centres and the rides with big/rough descents and drops etc
2. The lower travel is plenty but might bottom on on the bigger stuff.

That's pretty much it.

120mm feels quite lively compared to 150mm and with longer travel there's a lot going on at both ends when the suspension/geometry changes. By the same token 150mm hoovers up the bigger stuff and is less tiring to ride day-in-day-out.

tudj

Thanks for the comments

I've riden a few things on my 100mm hardtail that some people have been weary of on their full sus. I'm not after a bike that is going to soak everything up and take the fun out of riding, I love wrestling the bike when flying down a descent, one of the great things about starting out on a hardtail is that you can't just thrown it down something and hope for the best, you need to pick lines and give it some thought otherwise you end up on the floor! I just want to try and make sure I'm getting the best for my money. I realise there's no point getting the 150mm travel if I'm never going to utilize it. The 120mm version is also ~1kg lighter.

The more I think about it the 120mm is the one to go for, as much as I'd like the 150mm I think it might be over the top for my riding (I don't do any proper DH at the moment).

passout

I used to ride in the Lakes over rough ground every week. I once went for 150mm an hated it - it was slow on flats and uphill and wallowed. It didn't feel I was as connected to the trail. Even downhill it was slower to react in many situations. Personally would definately go for 120mm for the sort of riding you describe. Maybe 130 up front but no more than 120mm on the back. it's all personal preference of course.

EH_Rob

Whilst I agree with some of the above, a 150mm travel bike will not ride itself, and they don't take the fun out of riding - if they did why would anyone ride them?

I do think that you really have to start riding bigger things to get the best out of this extra travel and the changes in bike design though, so if you think you might do at some point then 150mm could be a good option. If not, and you're more likely to stick to XC with some trail riding then 120mm or thereabouts might be the way for you to go.

I bought my current bike as a do-it-all bike, its a 160mm AM bike. My two closest trail centres are Glentress and Innerleithen. At Glentress it's probably too much bike (especially for most of the marked trails), but its still great fun. For Inners its ideal, but that's not exactly typical trail centre riding for the most part. Trail centres vary massively in what you find at them - so it depends which ones you'd be looking to visit.

Check out the Giant Anthems from Paul's Cycles for good deals, or perhaps the Trance if you fancy something a bit meatier.

.blitz

tudj wrote:

I'm not after a bike that is going to soak everything up and take the fun out of riding

As above 150mm doesn't take the fun out of riding it allows you to ride harder by letting the bike do some of the work

But compared to a 120mm you feel as though you're carrying a whole load of suspension around with you for the times when you need it

tudj wrote:

you can't just thrown it down something and hope for the best, you need to pick lines and give it some thought

You can do the same with a longer travel bike - the suspension allows you to be more inventive with lines and not have to follow everyone else.

I'm lucky enough to have six mountain bikes and they are all different but if I had to keep just one it would be the 150mm FS. The 120 runs it pretty close and I think if I rode less often say once a week round a trail centre I would prefer the 120 but for more frequent riding on a variety of terrain the 150 has the edge

tudj

Regarding trail centres, I'll be doing Coed-y-Brenin and Penmachno in November and Glentress in May, hoping to do Llandegla a few times soon too.

From all of the comments so far (thanks!) it really does look like 120mm is right for me. The last comment sums it up

.blitz wrote:

But compared to a 120mm you feel as though you're carrying a whole load of suspension around with you for the times when you need it

I'm glad it's looking that way, the AL 8 (120mm) is in stock now, the AL+ has a 10 week wait If I order soon, I might even get it in time for the trip to Coed-y-Brenin!

rockmonkeysc

You never need 150mm travel at trail centres, thats way over the top. There is nothing at any trail centre that a 120mm bike won't do.
I have developed a real dislike for trail centres now but when I did ride them regularly my Giant Trance X was spot on, I could ride every jump & drop, blast up the climbs and ride twisty singltrack flat out.
I went to Afan on a Giant Reign (150mm) earlier this year and it was far more bike than I needed.

chez_m356

tudj wrote:

Regarding trail centres, I'll be doing Coed-y-Brenin and Penmachno in November and Glentress in May, hoping to do Llandegla a few times soon too.

From all of the comments so far (thanks!) it really does look like 120mm is right for me. The last comment sums it up

.blitz wrote:

But compared to a 120mm you feel as though you're carrying a whole load of suspension around with you for the times when you need it

I'm glad it's looking that way, the AL 8 (120mm) is in stock now, the AL+ has a 10 week wait If I order soon, I might even get it in time for the trip to Coed-y-Brenin!

i suggest you would be better off asking the people who actually ride canyons at trail centres viewtopic.php?f=10002&t=12789920

grenw

Don't forget the 2kg or so weight difference. The AL+ is a bit more of a sturdier build. It's not just the travel.

PS, My XC9 is perfect for all the xc/trails riding I do. Nothing extreme to be honest but I think it could take far more than I use it for.

supersonic

As has been said many times, fun is subjective. Some like a 'livlier' feel, others like the travel and slacker angles. But this is wrong too:

You never need 150mm travel at trail centres

What works best for the individual varies so much.

EH_Rob

Most bikes are sturdier than people think, they'll put up with all sorts. I've been down a couple of downhill runs on my old 120mm xc hardtail, albeit slowly, and it didn't break, it was just unpleasant.

Obviously on my 160mm bike it would have just been boring and not worth the hassle

poppit

supersonic wrote:

As has been said many times, fun is subjective. Some like a 'livlier' feel, others like the travel and slacker angles. But this is wrong too:

You never need 150mm travel at trail centres

What works best for the individual varies so much.

+1 for this.

I had a 120mm fs which was ok for what I was riding at the time i.e not perfect for anything. I decided to replace it with 2 bikes, a hardtail for winter/smooth trails and a 150mm fs for everything else, this solution has been brilliant for me. Bearing in mind I weigh 100kg, the extra weight of the AM over the XC doesn't really count for much and the AM just seems to be perfect for my riding style. The new AL+ is a bit slacker than the old AM but it shouldn't have too much of a negative affect on the trail handling.

I did 3 days at CyB this year and took the fs, it was overkill on travel but was great on the trails and just soaked up the rocks and stones, the rear suspension just seems to dig in on the climbs, I was passing loads of guys who were struggling for traction on the wet stones.

The Rookie

With SS, it's what suites you, I'm a hardtailer (despite the crotchety knees!) the most travel I could see me having would be 100mm at the back just to take a little off my knees, in fact having ridden a Pivot Mach4 that felt perfect for me (120mm front, 100mm rear) but that was FOR ME, you can do most trail centres on a 100mm HT without issue (many on a rigid), you don't NEED 150mm, but what YOU LIKE may be 150mm!

mcnultycop

I had a similar decision a few months back between the Canyon Nerve AM or XC. I decided that as I was keeping my hardtail the XC with 120mm travel would be too similar to my hardtail, and by getting the Nerve AM with more travel (150/120 forks and 140 travel at the back) I'd have the bike for the rougher stuff. The Nerve AM may be "too much bike" a lot of the time, but I think I made the right decision. If I was flogging my hardtail I'd have gone for the lower travel option with a slightly higher spec.

lawman

It's not so much the travel, but the geometry that the frame has. The Al+ has a slacker headangle, which would sway it for me, as I prefer a slacker front end, it just feels more fun and stable, perhaps less lively, but still requires a fair bit of rider imput.

By the sounds of it for the OP, the 120mm bike would be better.

MDobs

Isn't another question whether people are skilled enough to ride certain trails on a shorter travel bike rather than if it's simply 'possible' to do so. Undoubtedly there are people who could ride every black run in the country on a 100mm hardtail (or even rigid) but if most people tried to do that then they'd end up in a whole lot of trouble.

Anyway, I'm just rationalising going and buying the 150mm travel bike i've been eying up for the last month or so

tarbot18

I ride a 120 mm full suss regularly around llangollen , coed y brenin the beast , the marin trail and penmachno all monthly and ive never needed more travel.
More skill and bravery perhaps but id rather have the lighter bike for the hills and xc.
Some of the guys i ride with use hardtails with 100 mm forks and make it round with no problems.

marz

I have +150mm travel trail bike that I ride everywhere. Yes 80% of the time it is too much bike, but on the 20% of rough trail with drops, rocks and roots it wins hands down. Any bike is going to be some sort of compromise and I don't mind giving up a bit of pedaling efficiency to ensure I can enjoy the fun sections 100%.

I've raced it in XC races, done +50 mile rides on it and ride in groups with others on hardtails and 120mm full sussers.

I do also have a couple of hardtails and short travel bikes for racing, but for pure sh!t's and giggles a +150mm bike is hard to beat.

It is all down to the type of riding you like and ask yourself this, is there a section of trail you look forward to hitting that will suffer on the fun factor scale because a 120mm bike isn't up to the job.

tudj

Thanks to everyone for the input, it's given me a lot to think about.

I've decided to go with the 120mm version. I don't think there will ever be a right or wrong answer to the question I posed, as a few have already said it will be down to factors such as skill etc.

I can always sell and get a higher travel bike in a year or so if I feel the need.

Thanks again for all of the advice!