How much travel is too much?

Chrisofitall

Hi all, first time poster here but I've been lurking for the last year or so. I got back into riding early in 2012 after a decade off. Things have changed a lot, and for the better!

I picked up a Cannondale hardtail on Cyclescheme last year and has been ok to a point, but I'm now doing the sort of riding where I feel I need some bounce at the back in order to progress and enjoy the gnarlier stuff.

I've been looking at various options but am concerned about having too little - or too much - travel. My riding mainly consists of trail centres, general 'off road' exploration, some cross country with plenty of ups as well as downs and some roads between riding spots too. I'm also slowly building more confidence to hit bigger stuff. I have buds with 120-130mm bikes who sometimes say they 'wish they had a little more'.

A couple of bikes I've been looking at are the Ghost AMR Plus 7500, 150mm front and back, and the Cube Stereo Race (160mm and nice and light).

Seeing as I would like to own one 'do all' bike, is 150-160mm travel excessive for the sort of riding I want to do? Any help, or alternative suggestions much appreciated. A guy in Snow and Rock (not sure if they're respected on here or not) told me the Cube would be 'too much' for what I'd use it for...

Cheers

supersonic

Doesn't sound too much if you think the bike suits you. Bikes like this will be heavier and slacker in geometry (usually) so may not be as nippy as s shorter travel 'racier' bike.

jairaj

The amount of travel is quite personal you'll get all kinds of conflicting answers from people. Also the travel of bike is only part of the puzzle the geometry and components can have big effect on how the bike feels. eg a dirt jump bike and xc race bike both have 100mm of travel but are very different in their pros and cons.

Try and see if you can demo a few bikes to see what suits you the best.

For me the geometry has to be right first and I'll just cope as best as I can with any lack of travel I might have. I may be going slower than others on bigger bikes but I'm also probably working a lot harder than them. But at the end of the day we all get to the bottom of the run with a big smile on our faces.

rockmonkeysc

Its more about geometry and suspension design than the amount of travel.
For the riding you describe I would say something like a Giant Trance, Trek Fuel or Specialized Camber would be perfect. Nice and light but tough and respond well to aggressive riding.

Chrisofitall

Some great advice, thanks all. I think you're right, I need to demo a few and see what works.

poah

best bet would to actually try a bike and see what you think.

Kowalski675

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Its more about geometry and suspension design than the amount of travel.
For the riding you describe I would say something like a Giant Trance, Trek Fuel or Specialized Camber would be perfect. Nice and light but tough and respond well to aggressive riding.

I liked the Trek Fuels I tried (EX8 and 9), the DRCV rear shock and linkage makes it feel like it has more than 130mm travel. They seem like a really well built and well developed product too (maybe not at the cutting edge, but often there's a lot to be said for evolution over revolution). Evans are doing the EX7 for £1600 currently (RRP £2000), which still has the DRCV shock.

Thewaylander

I have a 160mm bike fairly slack and to me this is perfect, some think its a chunk i think its stable and planted, i can pedal it all day.

so as for the above try a few see what YOU like, as everyone is totally different.

cr250noob

Having just made the transition from a 100mm front sus to 160mm full I can fully recommend it. So far I've ridden Cannock a few times, done some of the downhill bits there, ridden Llandegla as well as local stuff near me. Flick the rear to pro pedal and it climbs nicely. Might be a little slower on the ups but feels so much faster on the downs. Gives me the confidence to push that little bit more knowing the bike will take it. No lockout on my fork so if I'm out of the saddle can sometimes get a little pedal bob but easily corrected with body language.

YeehaaMcgee

Chrisofitall wrote:

I have buds with 120-130mm bikes who sometimes say they 'wish they had a little more'.

Chances are, your mates don't need more travel, they just need better bikes. Some bikes can have relatively short travel, but ride smoother than long-travel machines.
It's all down to the design, so don't get hung up on how much, just go test ride as many bikes as you can, and choose the one you prefer.

Kowalski675

Quality of suspension internals and damping counts for more than amount of travel in most cases. The best bike is the one that feels best for you, whether it's best on paper or not.

The Northern Monkey

Agree with all the comments above... it just depends what you see yourself riding.

A 150mm FS with air shocks should be light enough to be fine for XC but have enough travel and be burly enough for a bit of light DH.

but... n+1.

YeehaaMcgee

Kowalski675 wrote:

Quality of suspension internals and damping counts for more than amount of travel in most cases.

Not so much. Particularly in rear shocks, since there's really a relatively small selection of shocks, for such a large variety of bikes.
But you know what? There's no point telling you anything like that, is there?

ilovedirt

I ride with 170mm each end, my one bike for riding everything from british trail centres to alpine downhill, and I agree with the others. It's a very personal thing. My bike isn't the lightest, and it's pretty slack and long, but that's how I like it. Not the easiest bike to pedal up hills, but descends a treat. That said, it climbs a helluva lot better than my old devinci hectik (think that was 150mm rear travel), due to the suspension design.
Definitely demo a few bikes and see what works for you. There are plenty of bikes out there that I wouldn't touch with a barge pole, but might work for other people with different priorities and riding style.

YeehaaMcgee

The Reign is 170mm? I di not know that.

Kowalski675

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

Quality of suspension internals and damping counts for more than amount of travel in most cases.

Not so much. Particularly in rear shocks, since there's really a relatively small selection of shocks, for such a large variety of bikes.
But you know what? There's no point telling you anything like that, is there?

Whatever.

ilovedirt

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

The Reign is 170mm? I di not know that.

The Reign X is. The normal reign is 150mm, (or 6 inch, whatever that is)

poah

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

Quality of suspension internals and damping counts for more than amount of travel in most cases.

Not so much. Particularly in rear shocks, since there's really a relatively small selection of shocks, for such a large variety of bikes.
But you know what? There's no point telling you anything like that, is there?

partially agree with Kowalski - frame design has a huge impact on the shock tune (both damping and can volume). fit the wrong shock (particularly with air cans) you can end up ramping through your travel or never getting full use of the stroke.

YeehaaMcgee

Frame design does, yes, but count how many frames are available, and then count how many rear shocks are available. There's a huge discrepancy. Nobody really makes a bad rear shock any more. But there's plenty of effing awful suss frames.

poah

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Frame design does, yes, but count how many frames are available, and then count how many rear shocks are available. There's a huge discrepancy. Nobody really makes a bad rear shock any more. But there's plenty of effing awful suss frames.

my shock (coil) can have various different spring rates and has 3 different compression and 3 different rebound tunes from the factory or you can like me get it push tuned to suit bike and rider. The fox CTD also has 3 different compression and 3 different rebound tunes plus there is the boost valve tuning. wrong tune = poor ride.

there are many frames but only a few specific designs

YeehaaMcgee

Slight variances in frames make a huge difference though, and once you have a frame, you can't really adjust it's kinematics.
So, frames cause a far bigger impact on suspension performance than the shock. You can tweak a good frame with a good shock, but you'll never make a piece of crap ride well, even if you had secret alien technology damping. Or something.