Bike sizing advice

Nasqueron

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

snip

Out of interest, what level of technical riding are you talking about?

I ride at Cannock Chase on the blue trail, I do not intend to ever be a technical MTB rider doing 30mph through forest trails downhill, not really convinced on drops either as I always fear damaging the frame even if it's not likely! However, doing some of the more basic trails there or possibly Dalby Forest would be of interest and potentially using the bike in winter in snow with the wider tyres (perhaps even studded ones).

My thoughts would be on comfort most of all and then ease of climbing trails (I'm a strong enough rider on the road and on the CX on light trails so could get up most things if there is grip)

So the question is more:

Fat bike
Full suspension
Hard tail with + wheels

I'm guessing 27.5" wheels would be best for my riding as I don't need the speed (29") and not doing downhill stuff (26")

Apologies for thread hijack OP

esuhl

Nasqueron wrote: »

For a commute a full suspension isn't really needed though personally if I get a MTB I'll go that way as I get back ache from riding trails on my CX without any suspension and a hard tail will just mean I get more pain with all bumps going through the saddle.

Unless you have medical problems with your back, my guess would be that backache is much more likely to be caused by a poorly-fitting bike than a lack of rear suspension.

I got terrible backache when I first got my bike. The first thing I did was to get a rack and panniers so I didn't need to carry a bag on my back. It made a huge difference, but didn't fix the problem.

Changing the stem size (the bit that grips the handlebars and attaches to the forks) really helped. I got one a bit shorter (so I didn't feel so "stretched out"), and with a steeper incline (raising the height of the handlebars so I wasn't bending over as far).

And maybe this is imaginary, but I got a new saddle recently, and I'm sure there's a bit more flex in the metal rails.

Oh -- I almost forgot -- the saddle that came with my bike was like sitting on a plate of metal. It was agonising! I threw it out the day I got the bike and used the one off my 15-year old £100 bike. Even that made a huge difference in comfort. The new saddle is quite wide and has thick (but firm) padding.

Don't know if any of this helps...

Nasqueron

esuhl wrote: »

Unless you have medical problems with your back, my guess would be that backache is much more likely to be caused by a poorly-fitting bike than a lack of rear suspension.

I got terrible backache when I first got my bike. The first thing I did was to get a rack and panniers so I didn't need to carry a bag on my back. It made a huge difference, but didn't fix the problem.

Changing the stem size (the bit that grips the handlebars and attaches to the forks) really helped. I got one a bit shorter (so I didn't feel so "stretched out"), and with a steeper incline (raising the height of the handlebars so I wasn't bending over as far).

And maybe this is imaginary, but I got a new saddle recently, and I'm sure there's a bit more flex in the metal rails.

Oh -- I almost forgot -- the saddle that came with my bike was like sitting on a plate of metal. It was agonising! I threw it out the day I got the bike and used the one off my 15-year old £100 bike. Even that made a huge difference in comfort. The new saddle is quite wide and has thick (but firm) padding.

Don't know if any of this helps...

I've had my main road bike fitted properly and the position on the CX and my other road bike are fairly similar (they were fitted by the bike shop at purchase, not a full fit). I do have minor back ache problems on and off regardless so jarring over bike trails doesn't help much

Johnmcl7

Nasqueron wrote: »

Out of interest, what level of technical riding are you talking about?

I ride at Cannock Chase on the blue trail, I do not intend to ever be a technical MTB rider doing 30mph through forest trails downhill, not really convinced on drops either as I always fear damaging the frame even if it's not likely! However, doing some of the more basic trails there or possibly Dalby Forest would be of interest and potentially using the bike in winter in snow with the wider tyres (perhaps even studded ones).

My thoughts would be on comfort most of all and then ease of climbing trails (I'm a strong enough rider on the road and on the CX on light trails so could get up most things if there is grip)

So the question is more:

Fat bike
Full suspension
Hard tail with + wheels

I'm guessing 27.5" wheels would be best for my riding as I don't need the speed (29") and not doing downhill stuff (26")

Apologies for thread hijack OP

I ride a mix of trails both purpose built trail centres and natural trails, predominantly the latter and all year round. Non-purpose built trails are usually a bit tougher as they're more slippery and have more features like tree roots and similar particularly over winter where the tracks get churned up in a way a trail centre does not.

This is where the bigger tyres show their advantage as with big rims you can run the tyres at a low pressure to give more grip and more float over rough surfaces. Over the winter, the massive grip and traction from the fat bike tyres makes it much better at coping with the very slippery trails.

The fat bike isn't much us at trail centres though as they have good surfaces so you don't get the advantage of its float and grip, the plus bike similarly doesn't have as much an advantage either.

Full suspension bikes have come on hugely and it's now possible to get decent all rounders for around £1,000 so you don't pay the weight penalty you previously did. For descents even just blue ones I find the full suspension more comfortable on my legs as the hard tail needs quite a bit of control since they're doing all the work soaking up the movement of the bike. The big plus tyres don't really help in place of suspension.

I wouldn't discount the 29er as just being a speed option as the bigger wheels make it easier to roll over features and I liked the stable feel of them. My full suspension bike is a 29er and while it's not great at jumping, it's superb at feeling well planted and stable over everything.

There's no one answer to it though and a lot of it comes down to preference, it's a small group I ride with weekly and we go out all year round but there's a real mix of bikes although mostly still 'skinny' bikes.

John

Nasqueron

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

I ride a mix of trails both purpose built trail centres and natural trails, predominantly the latter and all year round. Non-purpose built trails are usually a bit tougher as they're more slippery and have more features like tree roots and similar particularly over winter where the tracks get churned up in a way a trail centre does not.

This is where the bigger tyres show their advantage as with big rims you can run the tyres at a low pressure to give more grip and more float over rough surfaces. Over the winter, the massive grip and traction from the fat bike tyres makes it much better at coping with the very slippery trails.

The fat bike isn't much us at trail centres though as they have good surfaces so you don't get the advantage of its float and grip, the plus bike similarly doesn't have as much an advantage either.

Full suspension bikes have come on hugely and it's now possible to get decent all rounders for around £1,000 so you don't pay the weight penalty you previously did. For descents even just blue ones I find the full suspension more comfortable on my legs as the hard tail needs quite a bit of control since they're doing all the work soaking up the movement of the bike. The big plus tyres don't really help in place of suspension.

I wouldn't discount the 29er as just being a speed option as the bigger wheels make it easier to roll over features and I liked the stable feel of them. My full suspension bike is a 29er and while it's not great at jumping, it's superb at feeling well planted and stable over everything.

There's no one answer to it though and a lot of it comes down to preference, it's a small group I ride with weekly and we go out all year round but there's a real mix of bikes although mostly still 'skinny' bikes.

John

I probably ought to try hire bikes, I know you can at Cannock. The fat bike is probably a luxury I don't need as I don't ride on sand and we don't get snow often enough.

The idea of a more flexible MTB that can do say + tyres for snow riding to work but can also do 30-50 for trail riding appeals.

I can afford to spend more than £1000 on a bike, the question is more whether a full suspension is really worth doing for light trails so try before buy!

esuhl

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

I ride a mix of trails both purpose built trail centres and natural trails, predominantly the latter and all year round. Non-purpose built trails are usually a bit tougher as they're more slippery and have more features like tree roots and similar particularly over winter where the tracks get churned up in a way a trail centre does not.

This is where the bigger tyres show their advantage as with big rims you can run the tyres at a low pressure to give more grip and more float over rough surfaces. Over the winter, the massive grip and traction from the fat bike tyres makes it much better at coping with the very slippery trails.

The fat bike isn't much us at trail centres though as they have good surfaces so you don't get the advantage of its float and grip, the plus bike similarly doesn't have as much an advantage either.

Don't know if it helps anyone, but the brand and type of tyre makes a huge difference to grip and feeling "at one" with the surface you're riding on.

My bike came with Michelin Dry tyres, which scared the **** out of me when I went through a puddle, braked gently on tarmac, and the rear wheel jumped a metre to the side in the blink of an eye. They were really twitchy and flipped from gripping perfectly, to total loss of traction. Not much good off-road either.

I got some Kenda Nevegal DTC tyres and they are amazing. If they slide out, they do so gradually and predictably, they grip wet tree roots, tarmac, loose sandy soil/gravel -- everything except thick wet mud. I absolutely love them. :-)

So... even tyres of the same size and type vary a lot in performance.

scd3scd4

I ride 20 miles a shift to work and back all year. I ride a Whyte hybrid 700 x 32


I always lock the front suspension. The ride is a mix of Thames footpaths, shingle and road.


10 miles is no bad, don't be to hard on yourself.

scd3scd4

LiamSmith wrote: »

Do you really think, that driving a bike, is not dangerous,

What's the point? People not exercising more than a couple of hours a month is also dangerous.

Johnmcl7

Nasqueron wrote: »

I probably ought to try hire bikes, I know you can at Cannock. The fat bike is probably a luxury I don't need as I don't ride on sand and we don't get snow often enough.

The idea of a more flexible MTB that can do say + tyres for snow riding to work but can also do 30-50 for trail riding appeals.

I can afford to spend more than £1000 on a bike, the question is more whether a full suspension is really worth doing for light trails so try before buy!

Trying hire bikes is definitely the best way to go even for bikes that appear similar on paper, can be quite different to ride.

It's not so much the fat bike is a luxury more it's quite a bit of drag if it's on surfaces that don't need the traction. I did used to ride the fat bike all year round including CX and endurance racing but it can be a frustrating ride in good conditions and I really only get the benefit by riding regularly through the winter in poor conditions.

I had no idea where to start with a mountain bike so I went with an ex-hire hardtail for £400, it was nothing fancy but the parts were all mostly Shimano Deore which were all good and I rode all year round on that bike.

I was going to say that helped me make my mind up about what bike to go for but several years later, I still haven't settled on what bike I want