29 Hardtail vs 27.5 full sus

surreyxc

I thought my new purchase would be pretty simple. But welcoming 'constructive advice' on new bike purchase.

Tried a 27.5 hardtail Bird Zero, loved it but my back did not, no fault of the bike, but have suffered a bad back for years. I love the idea of having a more simple rig, a 29er hardtail, I know everyone says they give a smooth back saving ride, do they really, anyone got any experience, do big wheels even come close to a 27.5 100mm + travel in terms of comfort. Or will I still suffer from jarring.

Curiously it is not the big stuff I find which punishes my back, as normally up off the seat but all those micro bumps over long hauls where you are sat in the saddle.

Not interested in ful-sus 29, too big, too much magic carpet feel, nor hardtail 27.5 too harsh.

For the record I don't race, live in Surrey Hills, never found I needed more than 100mm in rear, but happily have 120 -140 upfront. Looking for a playful ride, that covers ground quick yet, can still give a poppy hoppy huckable feel. Mind I am likely to never tackle more than a 3 foot drop off, or get more than a foot of air, so hardly a 'jumper, but ride down steps, hop ups, bunny hops and manuals albeit in a very modest way

So 29er hardtail such as a Trek Stache or like or go 27.5 sus Gaint Anthem SX, Trek Fuel etc.

I know the best advice is to go out and try a few, which is on the list of 'to do's' . But I am sure some lucky souls on here have one of each and so able to offer some pretty good insight.

The Rookie

Get a decent 26 or 27 FS, a 29er is better than a 26 by a margin, but a decent FS is much better.

kajjal

Have a read up on bike fit / setup as some pain even from existing conditions can be down to the way the bike is setup. Older riders tend to go for fs rather than hardtail as it means their bodies take less of a beating. A 29er will be smoother with more trail feedback but you may prefer a fs bike.

njee20

The Rookie wrote:

Get a decent 26 or 27 FS, a 29er is better than a 26 by a margin, but a decent FS is much better.

By what metric? I share the same trails with the OP and I'm faster up and down just about everything on my 29er hardtail than I have been on any bike to precede it. Admittedly I'm a bit more racey than him, but I've found a 29er hardtail more akin to 26" FS than a 26" hardtail, the bigger wheels do a decent job of compensating for a lack of suspension and you have appreciably more grip.

So for me, on the same trails, my order of preference would be:

26" hardtail >> 26" FS >> 29er hardtail

Dunno where 27.5" FS fits into that for me, ideally need to try a few, it's basically personal, nothing is "better" IMO.

rockmonkeysc

Comfort of a full sus bike depends on the quality of the real shock. Most air shocks can be a bit harsh in the first quarter of their travel, they improve once you get up to the higher quality shocks like a Float X, Cane Creek, BOS etc but they are all aimed at bigger bikes.
A good 29er hardtail is probably more plush than most 100-120mm full sus bikes over the smaller high frequency bumps.
If you really want plush comfort a Cane Creek DB coil is like floating on a cloud of titties.

The Rookie

njee20 wrote:

The Rookie wrote:

Get a decent 26 or 27 FS, a 29er is better than a 26 by a margin, but a decent FS is much better.

By what metric?

By the metric of looking after his back, which he stated was the key point.....

njee20

And as he said it's not the big hits that jar his back, and that's more where I notice the difference on my hardtail I'll stand by my comments. Need to try a few at the end of the day and see what you think.

The Rookie

We'll have to agree to disagree, I agree it's not the big hits that jar its the little stuff when pedalling seated, I find the biggest different with full sus is I can pedal seated where I couldn't on the hardtail or a 29er (comparison on a demo day over the same pedally bit) without any jarring at all, in fact it made what was uncomfortable pedalling seated on a 29er (and almost painful on a 26 HT) into what felt almost like a smooth road...I'm talking the roughly 1/2" size of inputs from lumps and bumps on the trail.

Giraffoto

My bad back's been OK on a fully rigid 29er, with the added benefit that it's lighter and the hills are easier to climb

rockmonkeysc

The Rookie wrote:

We'll have to agree to disagree, I agree it's not the big hits that jar its the little stuff when pedalling seated, I find the biggest different with full sus is I can pedal seated where I couldn't on the hardtail or a 29er (comparison on a demo day over the same pedally bit) without any jarring at all, in fact it made what was uncomfortable pedalling seated on a 29er (and almost painful on a 26 HT) into what felt almost like a smooth road...I'm talking the roughly 1/2" size of inputs from lumps and bumps on the trail.

What full sus are you comparing it to? Most short (100mm-130mm) travel bikes are pretty harsh over small bumps. My old Trance, Anthem and Mega TR were all pretty harsh though the Mega is a lot better with a new shock.

The Rookie

I tried a Pivot Mach4 and a Trek 27.5 (not sure of the model as I didn't like it enough to be worth remembering), the Pivot was the better of the two and positively glided over the rough trail where the 29er was uncomfortable (but not enough to leave the saddle)

cycleclinic

This is my own experience. I have riden 26er hardtails and rigids for a while with clincher and tubular tyres and they were fine but I never finished too well in race. Mediocre perfmornace. The biggest grip was climbing one I was never fit enough and 2) the front wheel kept on lifting on a steep climb while sitting.

Got a 29er over summer. It is a Kenesis FF29 as I cannot afford suspension forks at present (well the ones I want anyway) I though I'd give rigid a go. I am running tubular tyres. The first race in september with it withut my fittness being any different I got my best placing so far in MSG (it was round 7). The bike is just quicker on climbs (as the front does not lift), it handles the bumpy bits very well I find I can pedal sitting very quickly . I have yet to race a 650B wheeled bike and I am not inclined too. Now I am a bit fitter round 8 went even better finishing 10th. I know the way 26er feel and there is no way I would have been able to ride my old orange as quickly, the 29er just handles better everywhere, quicker everywhere especially over bumps, than any 26er I have ever riden.

I ride this 29er on local trails too and it quicker on them as well. I have never found a full suser that I like. I prefer rigids and the 29ers are by far the best.

In my view a 29er hardtail that fits you properly will be a good and as comfotable as a 26er full suser. the tyres have a bigger contact patch which helps comfort and traction alot.

rockmonkeysc

The Rookie wrote:

I tried a Pivot Mach4 and a Trek 27.5 (not sure of the model as I didn't like it enough to be worth remembering), the Pivot was the better of the two and positively glided over the rough trail where the 29er was uncomfortable (but not enough to leave the saddle)

The Mach 4 does have a Float X shock which is not exactly a standard quality shock.

njee20

Most short (100mm-130mm) travel bikes are pretty harsh over small bumps. My old Trance, Anthem and Mega TR were all pretty harsh though the Mega is a lot better with a new shock.

This was my feeling, larger hits were soaked up more on the FS, but actually small chattery stuff is more muted on the 29er hardtail much of the time. That combined with the 29er being faster too, and a very comparable weight.

shindig

You can get a hardtail and add a use suspension post. This works well for a back problems.