29er HT VS. 26" full suspension

[tubbtpt]

Sorry to (re)open this can-o-worms. I'm looking at getting a new bike and the 29er Hardtail looks really appealing. I'm 6'2" and primarily ride Patapsco Avalon. I'm an aggressive rider and want something that will take a beating. I know that fit will matter but I trying to find a bike I can live with for a good many years and can't decide whether the trails around here really call for a full suspension. :bangshead: Thanks for any input you may have.

[Dirt]

Nothing will give you more info than test riding both on the terrain that you ride. See which one you like best. Lots of local shops have demo programs. Start with the MORE sponsors if they're convenient for you.

Around here you're likely to get a can of worms from people then you'll end up test riding and making your own decision anyways.

Good luck.

[DKEG]

Have you thought about a 29 Full Suspension? Most stuff around here can be done with a hardtail. One advantage of the 29er is (as everyone knows) that it rolls over stuff better then a 26er. I personally would not even look at a 26er at all. There are times and places where a Full susp. has an advantage over a hardtail. If you are a more aggressive rider. Then a Full Suspension will suit you better on the high speed technical stuff. Now where it may hurt you is on the low speed technical stuff and climbing.

I know this may open up a debate. But everyone knows the 26er format is dead :) Unless you are 5'2".

Your only real question is Hardtail or Full Suspension 29er. My suggestion is to check out the Full Suspension options.

[CRAIG2]

The obvious choice is a softtail 69er.

[chillindrdude]

how much you looking to spend? if on a budget, a complete hardtail will almost always give you a better frame/parts spec than a complete FS of equal cost. if sky's the limit, i'd go for the 26" full suspension, especially since it sounds like this is gonna be a do-it-all, aggressive XC/AM ride for you.

what brands/models are you looking at?

[Dirt]

I'm an avid 29er guy and I wouldn't say the 26" format is dead. I've been having a blast on a ghetto 69er that I built a few weeks back.

26er suspension forks are much better than 29er suspension forks for bigger guys. I'd love to see Fox make something in their 36 line of forks for 29ers. For people who are 190lbs or lighter, you can probably do pretty well with a 29er suspension fork. To be fair, I haven't ridden the latest Fox 29er forks with the through-axle yet. I rode a new Reba in the parking lot recently and it still has the same flex issues that I didn't like with the first set that I bought. Grab the front brake and watch that front wheel dive backward toward the downtube. Yikes.

My 29er FS will not be built up until I find a fork that I like. That fork might be the Fox F29 with a through axle. It seems to be the best so far.

Edit: Obviously I'm in the minority on my dislike of most 29er suspension forks. Try some. If you're not bothered by them, then by all means go for it!

[jon_baler]

At your height, I would go for the 29er.

Steel HT with big wheels will be cush enough for Patapsco.

For long term durability, there are less things to go wrong on a hardtail.

(For reference: I'm 6'4", 215lbs, and ride Patapsco regularly on a rigid SS 29er.)

[Squirrel_Girl]

I have a 26" FS bike in box from the last trip it went on. I leave it there, expecting a future trip, sometime. Meanwhile, I ride my 29er with the thudbuster. It's great for me. I don't miss the FS at all. And given that you ride more aggressively than I do, I'd think that would make you an even better candidate for the 29er.

Some people have back problems or some reason why they don't like the HT, but it apparently isn't a significant problem for me.

[jabberwocky]

I'll echo Pete and say you should really try them both. 2 years ago, you're "aggressive rider" qualifier would have really pushed me to recommend a 26er, but availability of heavy duty 29er stuff has gotten better and you can probably put something together now (26ers still have a vastly superior selection of heavy duty parts available though).

Disregarding wheel size, for AM type riding I'd much, much rather be on a FS bike than a hardtail. Depends on what you mean by "aggressive", but everyone I know who is into AM/FR type riding doesn't care for 29ers. I have one (along with two 26er FS bikes) and don't have any desire to replace the 26ers.

[jon_baler]

Depends on what you mean by "aggressive"

exactly. Aggresive cross country or all-mountain? If the OP is mainly riding Patapsco, he's probably somewhere between cross country and all mountain.

(26ers still have a vastly superior selection of heavy duty parts available though).


Sure there are more 26er heavy duty parts out there, but there are good enough options out there for most folk's version of a heavy duty bike IMO.

Again, it's a matter of perspective. One rider's heavy duty may differ from another's.

[jabberwocky]

Sure there are more 26er heavy duty parts out there, but there are good enough options out there for most folk's version of a heavy duty bike IMO.

Again, it's a matter of perspective. One rider's heavy duty may differ from another's.Oh, theres stuff available, but you have a much greater selection in 26er land. Forks are the real killer, as nobody makes a 36/Lyrik class fork for 29ers yet (or if they do, I'm not aware of it). You'll have a better choice of tires and rims on a 26er, but there are some reasonably heavy duty options in 29er land (even real DH-class tires now, I hear).

I personally don't think that the whole 26/29 choice really makes that much difference. I'd be looking more at geometry for the intended purpose. To me, a bike for aggressive riding should really be a FS bike though. The main problem with FS 29ers is that compromises have to be made to the geometry to accommodate the large wheel, and the tradeoff just isn't worth it (when it comes to real aggressive riding). It totally depends on what you're looking for though. The best course of action is to try to ride both and see for yourself what works best.

[tsunayoshi]

Last August I went from a 26er FS to a 29er HT (aluminum) and I don't regret the change a single bit for everyday normal riding. One of the 1st rides on it (and my 1st time ever on that trail) was Elizabeth Furnace/Bear Wallow and at no time did I ever think "damn, wish I had a FS bike instead".

Having said that, a way future purchase will be a 3-4" 29er FS bike for XC and enduro racing since my back doesn't like the beating it takes when going all out or for long distance.

[tuba_transport]

If you have a bike now that is in decent condition then it might also be beneficial to show up for a few MORE rides and see what others are riding. You might get some ideas that you hadn't thought of yet. I know that had a lot of influence on my latest singlespeed build. It is also not all that uncommon for some members of the club to loan someone a bike on a ride to try out. A large percentage of us own more than one bike and could bring 2 to a ride so you can try one out. You would just need to hook up with one of the taller riders.

Demo days are good opportunities to try out new stuff on trails. But I think most of those happen in the springtime.

As far as which shops to stop by and look at what is available in different price ranges, again take a look at the MORE sponsors. If you join MORE than most of them offer some kind of discount on bikes and accessories. Yet another plus for joining the club.

I believe we spoke offline and you had expressed interest in the SM100 perhaps next summer. Throw that out there along with your ballpark budget figure and recommendations will begin to get much more specific. Right now people are giving you suggestions ranging from $700-$7000.

You budget will also help decide whether to go custom build or off the shelf. Custom is generally more expensive up front but in the longer term is not really all that much more expensive if you end up upgrading a bunch of parts soon and things fail quickly like a cheap fork or cheap wheelset.

When you do establish a budget and even establish a bike shop they will fit you to the bike. That means picking out the right size frame and stem length needed to fit you properly. As you know if the bike does not fit right then riding it never feels right. You will REALLY notice it on the SM100 over 14,000+ feet of elevation.

If you want to try out an XL sized 29er hardtail I know someone who rides that size who might be willing to loan me his bike for a ride. It might be a singlespeed though.

[RRRJ]

Last August I went from a 26er FS to a 29er HT (aluminum) and I don't regret the change a single bit for everyday normal riding.

Have you done any longer rides (shenandoah/GW forest) or longer races on both? How do they compare at fountainhead or patapsco?

I've got a pair of 29er bikes (niner air9, salsa mariachi) and thinking about building up a really light FS 26" for longer races and 'big' rides next year....

[tuba_transport]

thinking about building up a really light FS 26" for longer races and 'big' rides next year....

IMO a sub 26lbs FS bike would be ideal. Don't have the funds to make it happen right now though.

[mtbmore]

Sorry to (re)open this can-o-worms. I'm looking at getting a new bike and the 29er Hardtail looks really appealing. I'm 6'2" and primarily ride Patapsco Avalon. I'm an aggressive rider and want something that will take a beating. I know that fit will matter but I trying to find a bike I can live with for a good many years and can't decide whether the trails around here really call for a full suspension. :bangshead: Thanks for any input you may have.

I am not a real aggressive rider but not a slouch either. I gave up my custom 26er HT for a 29er FS. I have since gotten a 29er HT rigid to go with the FS. No more 26er rides for me. I AM 6'1" and 195 lbs. What it may lack in agility it more than makes up in rideability over anything. I was passing a bunch of people on a race recently up hill that were on very high end 26ers.

Scud the "Old Guy"

[ChrisJ]

race recently up hill that were on very high end 26ers

Thats because they were "tri" guys. I have alot of respect for what you do scud the offroad tri's are cool. But the guys on the road on aerobars :rolleyes:

[rizetech]

I am small, so I don't feel a "fit" advantage to 29" format - I can make it fit w/o problems, and I love the ride. The 29er hardtail is an excellent format. However, I LOVE suspension. I am in the idea-gathering phase for a long-travel 26er to replace one I've sold, and i am really stoked for this. I am also strongly considering replacing the hardtail frame with a small-travel 29er.

Having done plenty of rides on HT and FS and places in frederick, and plenty of FS rides and one or 2 HT rides at patapsco - I think I would prefer FS. Honestly, you CAN ride anywhere on a SS rigid any wheel size. Period. But, there's no advantage to that!

Why FS? Well - it's more fun! You get a lot more comfort, which results in longer rides, the bike takes more of the beating, you get a bit more confidence on trails that might be over your level, and you get better climbing traction. The various time trial threads provide all kinds of back-forth about overall speed, but i think FS is faster overall, and I think it's WAY more fun.

Why 29? Well, I'm IN LOVE with my 29er HT - except when I'm riding "gnar" spots (for around here) and wishing I had suspension... 29" is the real deal, it rolls fast, it rolls over, it carries momentum, and it's just freakin better. It is.

Exception: long travel 29" is stupid. The frames are not that great, the tire selection is sub par, and the fork selection is laughable. It's a poor investment IMO, I personally feel that bikes like the niner WFO negate the real benefits of 29ers in favor of trying to be 26ers... If you want 5 or 6" of travel, I suggest 26.

However, something like the Lenz Leviathan, or Niner Jet (when the new one comes), or maybe even RIP - I think these are great choices for patapsco, FH, etc. - they provide some cushion and durability, get the faster wheel size / rollability, and moderately light.

Also, going FS avoids in large part the silly "steel is real", "titanium is bling" "aluminum is light" etc. arguments - frame material is super personal, and really really varies between designs - steel isn't always more comfy, etc.

Again, that's all my opinion - but I love riding FH, patapsco and the watershed - and for me, I think you could have the most fun on a 29" FS if you're just interested in the XC offerings, and I also think a good 5" bike is worth it too - mine weighed just 2lbs more than my 29er HT, which I built pretty light... You really can't go wrong, but I would RIDE RIDE RIDE!

[twplunke]

I have been pondering a very similar question...I have a HT 29er and have been thinking about upgrading to FS...mostly due to some lingering back pain and to help with tracking in the fast turns with chop.

A caution about waiting for the demo days:
I was (overly) stoked about the recent Trek/Fisher demo days to try out some of the FS bikes. Two issues I personally had in getting a fair assessment at the demo days (1) they only had the top-of-the line carbon bikes...liked the feel of the $6.5K bike but could not extrapolate down to something in my price range; and (2) they were set up in their showroom form; i.e., the 29 FS was paired with 1.9 semi-slick race tires. After getting off the SuperFly I rode the same loop on my 29er HT with tires better matched for the Patapsco terrain that day and the ride was smoother and more in control than the FS 29er. I am not sure what other company demo day policies are, but borrowing or renting may be a better path to see what suits your needs.

[gman0502]

I started on a FS and the got the 29er HT. I will not ride the FS around here anymore. Climbing is better, it rolls over anything and it is fast. My vote is for a 29er HT. You do need to demo both to make sure you get what works best for you.