Upgrade or Replace

gcwebbyuk

I have a 2008 StumpJumper HT which is now running 1x SLX.

It still has the original wheels and fork - which I am considering replacing.

Would I be better off investing in a new bike, rather than upgrading an old frame, with old geometry and 26" wheels?

I find the bike fine for climbing and general riding, but have had a couple OTTBs on descents. Would something with a slightly slacker head angle and 29" wheels (Trek Procaliber, Spec Chisel) be more stable?

It will be used for riding the South Downs Way.

02gf74

Without knowing what caused the ottb, it is impossible to say whether slacker geo will fix it.

All I can say that back in the day the top skilful and brave riders on hardtails and rigid forks would rider over terrain that the majority of struggle on full suspension bikes and annoyingly make it look easy.

billycool

I've got a 2006 Stumpjumper HT (bought it new) and went down the upgrade route about 2/3 years ago.

The only thing still original is the frame and forks. The forks got serviced by Mojo in 2015 for the first time.

New bits

3x9 XT front and rear (only replaced the original rear derailluer this year)
SLX brakes (infinately better than the stock Avid Juicy 5's)
Monkey bars
Superstar Components Fuel hubs on Mavic 419's (26") on sale with 20% off cost about £130. Bargain. Went tubeless and run Panaracer Fire XC Pro's 2.1
And probably a few small additions I can't remember, new saddle, seatpost etc.

I still love the bike as it is great for local paths/trails etc and is my winter ride when most of the local trails are washed out and I spend more time on tarmac. I don't need 3x9 and it's really 2x9 as I like having the higher gears for the road riding. It can still blitz local trail parks as well but only really in an XC capacity.

I bought my first FS bike last year and it is great fun. Let's me ride stuff harder and quicker that the HT struggled with. The HT though still works on different terrain and I love it. Like you say, climbs well but a bit sketchy on DH stuff.

Now to answer your question.

My HT has been down BPW twice, Cwmcarn, Afan and the Peaks. I've never gone OTB. I have been close on several occasions but getting my *rse over the rear wheel has prevented it. I think it could be partly technique but geometry does come into it.

The geometry is a bit older and I do feel the bike is more `upright` and I'm further forward on descents than I want to be. I'm 5`10" and the bike is a M (old school 18"). On XC it is great but anything more DH and it feels a bit cramped. My FS is a L (19") but is also slacker and hub to hub is about 3" longer. The fact that it has a soft back end means it absorbs more back end energy and is less inclined to buck me off like the HT.

Having ridden BPW on both bikes, I've had very similar OTB close shaves on both. That was down to rider error and getting too `upright` (lazy and/or not paying attention), hitting a kicker and getting launched forwards on the bike. Had I not corrected it, I would have been OTT, on either bike. With my HT, I really struggle if I try jumping stuff (I'm talking 6 inches off drop offs, nothing more). I always feel like I'm over-rotating forwards and/or nose heavy, no matter what I do. I do think that is partly down to the smaller c*ckpit. My FS doesn't have that issue due to slacker forks, longer wheelbase and it's 140mm travel (HT is 90mm).

Having said that - I do believe that a slacker bike would give a bit more poise/balance, call it what you will. My L FS bike feels `longer` and my riding position is different and I feel far less likely to end up with my weight over the front wheel.

I love my HT and it has been a wonderful bike. Now I know what I know about my HT's limitations and the fact that a longer/slacker/bigger bike removes most of those challenges, if I could do it again I'd probably get another longer/slacker bike. MTB has changed, my Stumpy suited what I did in 2006, but now it's sort of changed. It still loves the XC stuff I do so that hasn't changed, I just ride other stuff that my FS copes with so much better. It's always almost unfair to compare a 140mm FS to 90mm HT with older geometry.

I do wonder what it would be like to ride a longer/slacker HT over the stuff I usually ride. I do think it would help, but I don't know to what extent. I still believe a lot of it is down to rider input. I see some lazy FS riders who just want the bike to do it all for them. I'm a big believer in learning your trade on a HT and then you really appreciate a FS bike and can get more out of it (I actually enjoy my HT more now that I've got a FS).

Is there any way you can borrow some bikes to see what you think? I'd like to say that the bike shouldn't make you go OTB, but I know from experience that DH at speed soon makes you feel quite out of control.

Nothing wrong with 26" wheels by the way! Mine still go round and I'm quicker than other folk with bigger wheels. My FS is also 26" and I dropped off some new WTB rims and Hope hubs yesterday, to be made into my new first choice wheels (my current e13 are quite TLC intensive).

So - you have choices but if getting another bike is an option, I'd be tempted to do that. Just don't forget that a HT likes to throw you off and you still need to tame it!

PS - I used to ride full rigids and I do bang on about people relying too much on bikes to do all of the work. Half the fun IS doing all the work.

gcwebbyuk

Thanks for the info

I’ve always felt the stumpy to be a bit cramped - maybe I got the wrong size but back in 2008 the bike shop sized me up ok.

I tried it with wider bars and a shorter stem but have switched back to 90mm stem and the original width bars.

The cost of some new wheels and forks is gonna be a big chunk of the cost of a new bike which is what is making me consider a new bike (and who doesn’t like a new bike?)

I agree the OTTB was prob down to skill. I probably got a bit carried away chasing mates down a hill...

How slack a head angle can a bike have to still make it climb nice? The stumpy is 71.5 I believe the newer bikes seem to be a good degree slacker - but is a lot of that because they have wagon wheels too?

joebristol

If you have the money then get a new bike I’d say. Keep the stumpy for xc stuff but get something anbit more modern for general trail riding upwards.

27.5” or 29” are both fine, it’s the bike geometry hat matters most. If a new hardtail the 29” probably rolls over stuff better but if fs I wouldn’t get too bothered which wheel size you go for.

A trail bike with around 67 a 68 degree head angles will still climb fine - but don’t focus on that one statistic. Chainstays length / reach / Seat tube angles all matter.

Try test riding some things to see what you like.

gcwebbyuk

I've done a bit of reading reviews and watching review vids on YouTube, and am now thinking something like a Trek Roscoe 9 is the way to go...

A bit of a trail/xc mix. I'm not entering any races so an XC race bike like the Pro Caliber / Chisel may still be a bit steep head angle and twitchy to get a big benefit over the Stumpy. Will mean a bit more effort on the climbs, but that's no bad thing for my fitness!