The Surly Mountain Biking Thread

[sasquatch69 627]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, an interesting experience today.  A youngish relative (34) moved back to Dallas after years in Colorado Springs.  And bought an intro-level mountain bike.  So he was itching to ride.  He was kind of active in Colorado Springs with fishing and other outdoor activities, but not exercising per se.

So, with Big Cedar, Boulder, and Windmill Hill being the only trails open today, I decided I would take him to Boulder.  I don't know how it compares for "climbiness" or other features to the two others, which I have never ridden, so I figured devll you know.

Boulder is kinda climby and has a fairly monstrous climb out.  There are also a few places to turn around and head back to the trailhead to cut the ride real short and avoid the climb out.  I don't consider myself to be in proper shape for Boulder, having not ridden since April, and the heat.  I figure the 20 year age difference and coming from the altitude of Colorado Springs set us on pretty even footing.

Wrong.  He catastrophically bonked a mile and a half into the trail.  I didn't think I'd have to call 911, although he was kind of whining about it.  To my surprise, I was pretty fresh and strong even despite the heat.  After about  30-45 minutes of kvetching and lying in the shade, we managed to walk/ride back out, wrong direction, and cut probably a half mile off the route so we did maybe 2.5 miles at the outside with the last half walked.

So, I am actually in better shape than some people!  And maybe ok shape for my age.

 

Honestly, it's likely the heat.  CS rarely/never gets the combo of temps/humidity we have right now.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

3 hours ago, Braff Zacklin said:

Also, mountain biking--and cycling in general--is so leg intensive that you can be in excellent cardio shape and still blow up quickly if you're not used to it.

I guess all those big muscles and all the blood vessels really take it out of you, cardio-wise.

Oh, and I discovered something really annoying.

Last year, after getting my new car, I got a hitch and hitch rack.  I picked the Kuat Transfer and got the version 1.  It's an excellent rack.  Solid, sturdy, and really easy to use.  I got the one-bike version because wife doesn't ride, yet and I could buy an "add-on" for a second bike for about the same cost as the two-bike.

Well, I decided it was time to pick up the add-on.  

Shortly after I bought my version 1, they intro'ed the version 2, and its add-on.  And now you can't find the version 1 add-on and the version 2 is not compatible.

Rage.

[Braff Zacklin 13676]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I guess all those big muscles and all the blood vessels really take it out of you, cardio-wise.

Oh, and I discovered something really annoying.

Last year, after getting my new car, I got a hitch and hitch rack.  I picked the Kuat Transfer and got the version 1.  It's an excellent rack.  Solid, sturdy, and really easy to use.  I got the one-bike version because wife doesn't ride, yet and I could buy an "add-on" for a second bike for about the same cost as the two-bike.

Well, I decided it was time to pick up the add-on.  

Shortly after I bought my version 1, they intro'ed the version 2, and its add-on.  And now you can't find the version 1 add-on and the version 2 is not compatible.

Rage.

Obvious solution:

1) Send me your v1 (I bought a beater SUV last month for camping/fishing trips in the back country; it already has a rear hitch installed)

2) Buy a shiny new v2 for yourself.

3) ?

4) Profit**

 

 

**For me, at least.

[Stinkpalm 697]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, @sasquatch69 or any of the other DFW riders @TexPx ever ridden WIndmill Hill down in Duncanville/Desoto?

It's a little further south than Boulder off 67.  I don't recall having seen it "dried out" early, like it apparently is, but I know almost no one that's ridden it.  It's short and all green but seems to have quite a bit of climbing with grades >>10% and similarly steep descents.  

Never ridden that one, as it’s on the wrong side of Dallas from me. I hear good things though. 
 

Not sure where you’re located, but all the FWMBA trails went green today as well. Gateway and the new Fossil Creek trail (NRH area) might be good for your relative that’s just getting into it. Both appear to be pretty beginner friendly... not too long or technical. Thinking I might run down to gateway tomorrow to finally check it out since a lot of the trails I normally ride are still closed (outside of big cedar). I’ve always written it off as too easy/probably boring, but apparently they’ve added a couple fun looking jump lines that I’ve been wanting to check out. 

[sasquatch69 627]

17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, @sasquatch69 or any of the other DFW riders @TexPx ever ridden WIndmill Hill down in Duncanville/Desoto?

It's a little further south than Boulder off 67.  I don't recall having seen it "dried out" early, like it apparently is, but I know almost no one that's ridden it.  It's short and all green but seems to have quite a bit of climbing with grades >>10% and similarly steep descents.  

Never ridden it, but have been curious to try it. 

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

I was a very strong road cyclist when I started mountain biking, and was almost dismayed by how thoroughly it kicked my ass when I started.  Extremely humbling.

It's a different can of worms altogether.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

8 hours ago, Stinkpalm said:

Never ridden that one, as it’s on the wrong side of Dallas from me. I hear good things though. 
 

Not sure where you’re located, but all the FWMBA trails went green today as well. Gateway and the new Fossil Creek trail (NRH area) might be good for your relative that’s just getting into it. Both appear to be pretty beginner friendly... not too long or technical. Thinking I might run down to gateway tomorrow to finally check it out since a lot of the trails I normally ride are still closed (outside of big cedar). I’ve always written it off as too easy/probably boring, but apparently they’ve added a couple fun looking jump lines that I’ve been wanting to check out. 

I'm affirmatively frightened of Sansom Park, but I have a buddy from another hobby that rides it single-speed multiple times a week weather permitting.

Never been to Gateway, either.  Easy is fine by me, really.  I go to River Legacy with some frequency and Gateway isn't that much further.

Central/Nawf Dallas here.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

13 hours ago, sasquatch69 said:

Honestly, it's likely the heat.  CS rarely/never gets the combo of temps/humidity we have right now.

No doubt. The heat kills me, too, until I kind of acclimate to it.  And, because highs were 75 when the trails were last dry, I am not acclimated to it.  I did acquit myself fairly well, though.  This was my hottest ride of 2021, and on a semi-challenging trail.  When he bonked, I felt like I could do all of loop A no problem and maybe even give the climbout a good go.

One thing I did practically discover when my bike went down in August and started hiking instead of riding:  walking up a hill requires the same amount of work as riding up it. Riding is faster and may take more energy/power to accomplish, but in the final analysis, you're doing the same amount of work (physics work).  Somewhat obvious, but worth noting.  Walking out up a hill is no picnic either.

Edited June 15, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[midtown 3357]

I was a very strong road cyclist when I started mountain biking, and was almost dismayed by how thoroughly it kicked my ass when I started.  Extremely humbling.
It's a different can of worms altogether.

True. I do both. I go back and forth. Road one day. Mtn next etc.

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

36 minutes ago, midtown said:

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I was a very strong road cyclist when I started mountain biking, and was almost dismayed by how thoroughly it kicked my ass when I started.  Extremely humbling.
It's a different can of worms altogether.

True. I do both. I go back and forth. Road one day. Mtn next etc.

I still road ride a lot too, and haven't lost anything there.  It just really shocked me how I could grind up any hill that was paved with relative ease, but was unable to pedal so quickly on dirt.

[midtown 3357]

It's definitely a different skill set.  Mtn bike is more all over workout esp if you are dealing with obstacles; constantly pulling on the bars and turning etc.  Mentally of course its also totally different.  Other than the constantly threat of being run over on a road bike you can space out a lot.   With mtn bikes you are focused the the whole time.  Lots of positive affirmation during the ride every time you navigate an obstacle. 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Also lots of cursing.  Some beer.  Few .22 automatics on your person.

I think MTB may be the most curse-laden sport going.  Maybe golf.

I can't quite figure out why biking on the street dissatisfies me so.  But, I think you hit on it with a fair amount of mental engagement while riding trails.

Edited June 15, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[AUinHsv 584]

I always compared mountain and road to my running career. Road was like training for 10K, mountain was like training for 1 mile race

[Stinkpalm 697]

16 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm affirmatively frightened of Sansom Park, but I have a buddy from another hobby that rides it single-speed multiple times a week weather permitting.

Never been to Gateway, either.  Easy is fine by me, really.  I go to River Legacy with some frequency and Gateway isn't that much further.

Central/Nawf Dallas here.

Oh, don’t get me wrong... I’m good with easy these days as well and RL is in the regular rotation since it’s right down the road. Just not a fan of dirt trails that may as well be an un-paved hike and bike trail. I may be wrong, but I think that’s pretty much how gateway started out... or at least that was the way it was referenced back in the day, which always stuck with me and kept me away. 
 

That said, finally gave it a visit today and it’s actually a pretty decent trail. Definitely on the flatter side, with a lot of twists and turns through trees (much like River Legacy), but they’ve put in a lot of wood and dirt features that allow you to get a little wild but can also be avoided if you so choose. Outside of the heat, I thoroughly enjoyed it and will be back. I admittedly suck at hitting bigger jumps, and they have built some big ones there that I won’t be happy until I can comfortably hit them. 
 

And yeah, Sansom is a beast. I’ve ridden it several times and left zonked every time. It physically and mentally fries me, so nothing but respect to your buddy that does it on a SS. 

[Stinkpalm 697]

Forgot to add... be prepared to stop, turn around, and re-ride segments of the trail at Gateway because it is terribly marked. Compounding all of that is the fact that a disc golf course runs through it so it’s very easy to make wrong turns the first time you ride it. My next trip over there should go much smoother now that I feel like I’ve got a pretty good feel for the layout of the trail, but it was definitely a little frustrating on the first go-round.

[Ron Swanson 182]

Anyone on here have any experience or info on the German brand Ghost bikes?  I'm looking to get a decent entry level hardtail.  Been focused on the Vitus Nucleus for a while but recently saw the specs for the Ghost Nirvana, which seemed promising as well.

I'm 6'-3", 195lbs, and my RAD (as measured per guidance on Joy of Bike) is 34.5" (about 876 mm), so I'm looking at the XL in both models.  The Ghost Nirvana is a bit larger than the Vitus Nucleus which is why it caught my eye.

Any first hand experience, thoughts, opinions, hearsay, etc.?

[TwiceHorn 32121]

13 hours ago, Ron Swanson said:

Anyone on here have any experience or info on the German brand Ghost bikes?  I'm looking to get a decent entry level hardtail.  Been focused on the Vitus Nucleus for a while but recently saw the specs for the Ghost Nirvana, which seemed promising as well.

I'm 6'-3", 195lbs, and my RAD (as measured per guidance on Joy of Bike) is 34.5" (about 876 mm), so I'm looking at the XL in both models.  The Ghost Nirvana is a bit larger than the Vitus Nucleus which is why it caught my eye.

Any first hand experience, thoughts, opinions, hearsay, etc.?

Yeah, you definitely sound like an XL.  Possibly even an XXL, but that isn't an option with most bike brands.

I have vaguely heard of Ghost, good things.  Bottom line is, if it's an aluminum frame, it probably came from one of a half dozen or so frame mfrs in Asia, so you're good there.  The rest is geometry and fit and the component package for the money.

Assuming you're looking at the Tour SF Base, that's a decent component package.  12 spd is kind of a bonus at that level.  SX is useful trash (meaning it works, and pretty well, but has a lot of plastic and will probably be due for replacement in a year or so).  It's a very upgradeable spec, with boost and a tapered headtube etc.  My only question is whether the fork is an air spring or coil spring.  Air is superior.  Suntour has used the XCR designation for both types.  I am guessing from the photo (blue knob on right stanchion), that it is an air fork.

I'd say that is a pretty good cost/quality/utility compromise at about $850.  The $500-600 bikes haven't changed hardly at all in 6-7 years in terms of spec, just crept up in price a bit.  You're getting a lot more bike for a little bit more money.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, you definitely sound like an XL.  Possibly even an XXL, but that isn't an option with most bike brands.

I have vaguely heard of Ghost, good things.  Bottom line is, if it's an aluminum frame, it probably came from one of a half dozen or so frame mfrs in Asia, so you're good there.  The rest is geometry and fit and the component package for the money.

Assuming you're looking at the Tour SF Base, that's a decent component package.  12 spd is kind of a bonus at that level.  SX is useful trash (meaning it works, and pretty well, but has a lot of plastic and will probably be due for replacement in a year or so).  It's a very upgradeable spec, with boost and a tapered headtube etc.  My only question is whether the fork is an air spring or coil spring.  Air is superior.  Suntour has used the XCR designation for both types.  I am guessing from the photo (blue knob on right stanchion), that it is an air fork.

I'd say that is a pretty good cost/quality/utility compromise at about $850.  The $500-600 bikes haven't changed hardly at all in 6-7 years in terms of spec, just crept up in price a bit.  You're getting a lot more bike for a little bit more money.

Let me back up a little as this kind of assumes some knowledge.

When I say "upgradeable," I mean with that bike you would have little trouble buying and installing better/lighter wheels, or another, better fork.  A lot of entry level bikes use older or non-MTB specific standards for things that make it all but impossible to improve the major components of the bike.

By "SX," I mean SRAM's lowest or entry-level MTB derailleur series.  Their hierarchy goes SX, NX, GX, X01, and XX1 in roughly ascending order of cost/quality/functionality.  SX is a pretty standard spec for entry level bikes.  It's fine.  Shimano's range of derailleurs dips pretty low into dogshit (Tourney), but other than that, Shimano/SRAM is a Ford/Chevy thing.

On the fork, there are two basic things that make a fork "go," the spring and the damper system.  The spring may be an air spring or a coil spring.  There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a coil spring, but it isn't "adjustable" to go with your weight, while an air spring can have its spring rate adjusted by adding or removing air.  At reasonable cost levels, air is a better option (you can buy high end coil forks and specify a certain spring rate that fits with your weight, but those forks cost more than that bike).  The damping system is much more complex and subjective than the type of spring, and adds a lot of cost to forks.  High end forks sell because of their damping systems.  The problem with cheap coil forks is that they have almost no damping system. 

Suntour used to make almost exclusively crappy coil forks for low/entry level bikes and has a general rep as kind of a crap company.  That is no longer true.  They have seriously upped their game and are competing with Fox and RockShox and probably make a better entry level air sprung fork than either of them. Probably also worth noting that Suntour is a contract manufacturer for some high-end "boutique" forks like DVO.  They have probably learned from/stolen some of DVOs IP and make a very solid and cost-effective fork these days.  Don't let anyone tell you Suntour is crap.  That may once have been true but is no longer.

In any event, that bike seems to be a very solid choice.  You could go cheaper and not be getting nearly as good a bike.  And, obviously, spend a lot more money without getting  much of value to a newb rider.

Edited June 17, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Pescado_Rojo 19593]

A neighbor of mine I've been riding with lately recently bought one of those direct to consumer Polygon hardtails. It's spec'd like Twice describes. SRAM SX drivetrain and brakes, Sun Tour spring fork, etc. He was pretty unhappy with the fork, so he bought one of the new Sun Tour air forks for it and he raves about it. Said it made a huge difference in the ride, and it's very simple to adjust. 

[TexPx 2338]

Also, [mention=1927]sasquatch69[/mention] or any of the other DFW riders [mention=5512]TexPx[/mention] ever ridden WIndmill Hill down in Duncanville/Desoto?
It's a little further south than Boulder off 67.  I don't recall having seen it "dried out" early, like it apparently is, but I know almost no one that's ridden it.  It's short and all green but seems to have quite a bit of climbing with grades >>10% and similarly steep descents.  

Haven’t been there since the dedicated the Stevie Ray Vaughn Bridge.
It’s fun with short steep climbs/descents. I wouldn’t consider it a destination trail but more of a fun neighborhood trail.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TexPx 2338]

I always compared mountain and road to my running career. Road was like training for 10K, mountain was like training for 1 mile race

MTB can often be more like doing a series of 40yd sprints.
When I was serious about it and racing, I would mix in long gravel road rides on one day and then shorter rides with WFO intervals on the next.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ron Swanson 182]

14 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Let me back up a little as this kind of assumes some knowledge.

When I say "upgradeable," I mean with that bike you would have little trouble buying and installing better/lighter wheels, or another, better fork.  A lot of entry level bikes use older or non-MTB specific standards for things that make it all but impossible to improve the major components of the bike.

By "SX," I mean SRAM's lowest or entry-level MTB derailleur series.  Their hierarchy goes SX, NX, GX, X01, and XX1 in roughly ascending order of cost/quality/functionality.  SX is a pretty standard spec for entry level bikes.  It's fine.  Shimano's range of derailleurs dips pretty low into dogshit (Tourney), but other than that, Shimano/SRAM is a Ford/Chevy thing.

On the fork, there are two basic things that make a fork "go," the spring and the damper system.  The spring may be an air spring or a coil spring.  There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a coil spring, but it isn't "adjustable" to go with your weight, while an air spring can have its spring rate adjusted by adding or removing air.  At reasonable cost levels, air is a better option (you can buy high end coil forks and specify a certain spring rate that fits with your weight, but those forks cost more than that bike).  The damping system is much more complex and subjective than the type of spring, and adds a lot of cost to forks.  High end forks sell because of their damping systems.  The problem with cheap coil forks is that they have almost no damping system. 

Suntour used to make almost exclusively crappy coil forks for low/entry level bikes and has a general rep as kind of a crap company.  That is no longer true.  They have seriously upped their game and are competing with Fox and RockShox and probably make a better entry level air sprung fork than either of them. Probably also worth noting that Suntour is a contract manufacturer for some high-end "boutique" forks like DVO.  They have probably learned from/stolen some of DVOs IP and make a very solid and cost-effective fork these days.  Don't let anyone tell you Suntour is crap.  That may once have been true but is no longer.

In any event, that bike seems to be a very solid choice.  You could go cheaper and not be getting nearly as good a bike.  And, obviously, spend a lot more money without getting  much of value to a newb rider.

Thanks for all the info.  I'll keep doing some homework while i wait for these bikes to get back in stock.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

14 minutes ago, Ron Swanson said:

Thanks for all the info.  I'll keep doing some homework while i wait for these bikes to get back in stock.

There are really kind of two approaches to entry MTB.  Go cheap, a Trek Marlin is an example at around $600.  It has none of the advantages of the Ghost discussed above and some of the Vitus and I think Nukeproof hardtails, at around $850.

Or you can find some bigger-brand hardtails at around $1100 or so that aren't meaningfully better than the $850 ones.  Sometimes score a deal on last-year's model or NOS, but those days are over for a while.

Or just go whole hog.

It's perfectly understandable not to want to commit a bunch to something you may not get into.  The counterargument is that you'll enjoy it more with a better bike.  But honestly, it has more to do with whether you enjoy riding and being in the woods.  If it sticks because of that, you can take your time upgrading.

Like a lot of dude hobbies, it has a tendency to become an arms race.

Edited June 18, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[midtown 3357]

Get on YouTube. Search. Lots of great reviews. That's how I found out about Vitus

I ended up with a Vitus for $1800. SX sucks. Broke the rear derailleur within 6 mths. Upgraded to GX. I'll keep upgrading as things wear out.

Buy the best frame you can get. You can always upgrade components.

Bottom line. Get out and enjoy.

[dillbirt 12]

It also has a lot to do with the style of riding you imagine doing. If you think you are going to get some air and ride hard and fast, look for a hardtail with a geometry that fits that style like the Nukeproof Scout/ Marin San Quentin / Santa Cruz Chameleon. If you are going to ride more climbs and keep it pretty low key, get an XC geometry like the Trek Marlin/Xcaliber, one of the Giant hardtails like the Fathom, Santa Cruz HiBall, or look into a bike from Scott. 

A good air fork and 12 spd groupset will go along way. SRAM SX eagle will get you started, but NX/GX eagle will be more dependable over the long run. 

Keep in mind, the best bike is the bike you have, so make the most of it!

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

On 6/17/2021 at 9:03 AM, TexPx said:

MTB can often be more like doing a series of 40yd sprints.
When I was serious about it and racing, I would mix in long gravel road rides on one day and then shorter rides with WFO intervals on the next.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is exactly how it feels to me.  Where I usually ride, the climbs are really steep, often encompass 250-300' of gain from start-to-finish, and basically require you be out of the saddle just to move the bike.  I can't sustain effort for more than a few minutes in that state.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

23 minutes ago, dillbirt said:

It also has a lot to do with the style of riding you imagine doing. If you think you are going to get some air and ride hard and fast, look for a hardtail with a geometry that fits that style like the Nukeproof Scout/ Marin San Quentin / Santa Cruz Chameleon. If you are going to ride more climbs and keep it pretty low key, get an XC geometry like the Trek Marlin/Xcaliber, one of the Giant hardtails like the Fathom, Santa Cruz HiBall, or look into a bike from Scott. 

A good air fork and 12 spd groupset will go along way. SRAM SX eagle will get you started, but NX/GX eagle will be more dependable over the long run. 

Keep in mind, the best bike is the bike you have, so make the most of it!

I suspect most people in Ravishing's "shoes" have yet to figure out what type of riding they want to do or what's on the local trails to ride.

If you are an adult BMX/dirtjumper/parkbike kind of guy, it might be worthwhile to go ahead and spend the money on a big bike.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

24 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This is exactly how it feels to me.  Where I usually ride, the climbs are really steep, often encompass 250-300' of gain from start-to-finish, and basically require you be out of the saddle just to move the bike.  I can't sustain effort for more than a few minutes in that state.

The other crazy thing to me is how you can do a descent or something else kind of challenging, followed by even a moderate climb, and the adrenaline kind of makes you incapable of doing what you could do under normal circumstances, or makes you totally winded when you do do it.

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The other crazy thing to me is how you can do a descent or something else kind of challenging, followed by even a moderate climb, and the adrenaline kind of makes you incapable of doing what you could do under normal circumstances, or makes you totally winded when you do do it.

This effect lessens for me when I'm familiar with the trail, I've found.

[Pescado_Rojo 19593]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This effect lessens for me when I'm familiar with the trail, I've found.

yea, I know exactly how to modulate my efforts on trails I know well. Riding new trails always get me winded just because I don't know how or where to push and when I can relax. 

[dillbirt 12]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I suspect most people in Ravishing's "shoes" have yet to figure out what type of riding they want to do or what's on the local trails to ride.

If you are an adult BMX/dirtjumper/parkbike kind of guy, it might be worthwhile to go ahead and spend the money on a big bike.

I get that, you are probably right.

I rode BMX in the 80's but last year when it came to buy an MTB I wanted a hardtail, but figured I would ride more aggressively as I got my legs under me, so I got a slacked out bike with a bigger fork. My two boys race XC and both have hardtails that work just fine, and will for what most riders are doing around here.

I've yet to ride anything here in central Texas that requires anything more advanced, other than personal comfort! That could change if I decide to do some enduro races...or that new line and drops at RPR.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

17 hours ago, midtown said:

Buy the best frame you can get. You can always upgrade components.

I'm going to elaborate on this a little.  I don't think frame quality varies much among good brands, in terms of materials, welds, etc.  Of course there's carbon fiber and aluminum and I don't think most newbs are going to want to spring for carbon fiber, nor should they.

But what you are looking for are things that are "built in" to the frame:  the geometry, the dropouts (wheel mounts) being Boost and through-axle, and the headtube being tapered.

On geometry, other than "fit" things, probably the primary thing these days is the head tube angle.  They vary between 70 something and about 65 degrees.  The bigger the number, the less "slack" the bike.  Slack means longer wheelbase for the frame size and puts the front wheel/axle more forward of the head tube and handlebars. These are advantages pointing downhill and on rougher terrain.  They sacrifice steering precision and "quickness"  Angles of 70+ are known as "cross-country" or XC and more resemble a road bike with more precise road bike handling, but they also pitch you forward heading downhill.  They are mild terrain race bikes as a general rule.  For a long time, the cheaper bikes stuck with XC-type geometry, but that has started to change.

Very generally speaking, a bike's "size" (S, M. L, XL) is determined by the seat tube length, so that's the dimension you sometimes see associated with frame size, e.g. 18.5, 20, etc.  But, seat tube angle can vary, also.  On the first "slack" bikes, they were angled further to the rear to keep weight back.  But that hurts pedaling efficiency and can hurt your knees. so they have gotten steeper lately, the idea being that with dropper posts, you won't have your weight on the seat heading downhill, anyway.

Other non-fit-related frame dimensions tend to follow the head tube angle, and the seat tube angle.  But this is where there can be a lot of variation among manufacturers before you even get into full-suspension and those frame kinematics.

You can broadly figure the type of bike, from XC (69-73) to more "radical" bikes (65-68.5), by the head tube angle.  Most of the rest of it can only be sorted by test riding.  You can generally trust a manufacturer's height to size correlations if you are buying online.  But it might pay to read some rider reviews to see if there are any geo idiosyncrasies that will cause you issues.

Edited June 18, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

Great ride at the Ingawanis Trails down by Waterloo. One of my favorite spots to ride. Starting to feel that summer strength coming on. It didn’t hurt that it’s 67 in the shade this morning. Coolest temps we’ve had in a few weeks.

[Born to Run 6601]

I'm going to elaborate on this a little.  I don't think frame quality varies much among good brands, in terms of materials, welds, etc.  Of course there's carbon fiber and aluminum and I don't think most newbs are going to want to spring for carbon fiber, nor should they.
But what you are looking for are things that are "built in" to the frame:  the geometry, the dropouts (wheel mounts) being Boost and through-axle, and the headtube being tapered.
On geometry, other than "fit" things, probably the primary thing these days is the head tube angle.  They vary between 70 something and about 65 degrees.  The bigger the number, the less "slack" the bike.  Slack means longer wheelbase for the frame size and puts the front wheel/axle more forward of the head tube and handlebars. These are advantages pointing downhill and on rougher terrain.  They sacrifice steering precision and "quickness"  Angles of 70+ are known as "cross-country" or XC and more resemble a road bike with more precise road bike handling, but they also pitch you forward heading downhill.  They are mild terrain race bikes as a general rule.  For a long time, the cheaper bikes stuck with XC-type geometry, but that has started to change.
Very generally speaking, a bike's "size" (S, M. L, XL) is determined by the seat tube length, so that's the dimension you sometimes see associated with frame size, e.g. 18.5, 20, etc.  But, seat tube angle can vary, also.  On the first "slack" bikes, they were angled further to the rear to keep weight back.  But that hurts pedaling efficiency and can hurt your knees. so they have gotten steeper lately, the idea being that with dropper posts, you won't have your weight on the seat heading downhill, anyway.
Other non-fit-related frame dimensions tend to follow the head tube angle, and the seat tube angle.  But this is where there can be a lot of variation among manufacturers before you even get into full-suspension and those frame kinematics.
You can broadly figure the type of bike, from XC (69-73) to more "radical" bikes (65-68.5), by the head tube angle.  Most of the rest of it can only be sorted by test riding.  You can generally trust a manufacturer's height to size correlations if you are buying online.  But it might pay to read some rider reviews to see if there are any geo idiosyncrasies that will cause you issues.

Wow this is spot on and great advice. It took me hours of research two years ago to gather roughly this when choosing a bike.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

7 hours ago, Born to Run said:

On 6/18/2021 at 2:34 PM, TwiceHorn said:

I'm going to elaborate on this a little.  I don't think frame quality varies much among good brands, in terms of materials, welds, etc.  Of course there's carbon fiber and aluminum and I don't think most newbs are going to want to spring for carbon fiber, nor should they.
But what you are looking for are things that are "built in" to the frame:  the geometry, the dropouts (wheel mounts) being Boost and through-axle, and the headtube being tapered.
On geometry, other than "fit" things, probably the primary thing these days is the head tube angle.  They vary between 70 something and about 65 degrees.  The bigger the number, the less "slack" the bike.  Slack means longer wheelbase for the frame size and puts the front wheel/axle more forward of the head tube and handlebars. These are advantages pointing downhill and on rougher terrain.  They sacrifice steering precision and "quickness"  Angles of 70+ are known as "cross-country" or XC and more resemble a road bike with more precise road bike handling, but they also pitch you forward heading downhill.  They are mild terrain race bikes as a general rule.  For a long time, the cheaper bikes stuck with XC-type geometry, but that has started to change.
Very generally speaking, a bike's "size" (S, M. L, XL) is determined by the seat tube length, so that's the dimension you sometimes see associated with frame size, e.g. 18.5, 20, etc.  But, seat tube angle can vary, also.  On the first "slack" bikes, they were angled further to the rear to keep weight back.  But that hurts pedaling efficiency and can hurt your knees. so they have gotten steeper lately, the idea being that with dropper posts, you won't have your weight on the seat heading downhill, anyway.
Other non-fit-related frame dimensions tend to follow the head tube angle, and the seat tube angle.  But this is where there can be a lot of variation among manufacturers before you even get into full-suspension and those frame kinematics.
You can broadly figure the type of bike, from XC (69-73) to more "radical" bikes (65-68.5), by the head tube angle.  Most of the rest of it can only be sorted by test riding.  You can generally trust a manufacturer's height to size correlations if you are buying online.  But it might pay to read some rider reviews to see if there are any geo idiosyncrasies that will cause you issues.

Wow this is spot on and great advice. It took me hours of research two years ago to gather roughly this when choosing a bike.

Glad it was helpful.  

I've been eyeballing bikes for 7-8 years now and kind of watching the trends with fascination.  I have helped a couple of people try to decide what bike to get to start off with.  It seems that most have stuck with the lower-end versions just to get their feet wet and see if they stick with the hobby.  A couple that have taken the higher-end splurge have not stuck with the hobby with much regularity, while the others kind of have.

The lower-end bikes will get you out on the trail, and I think help to appreciate bigger bikes later on.  The initial investment in the lower end bike may be "lost,"  but it's probably better than dumping a couple of grand into a bike that you don't ride for whatever reason.

Probably worth adding a couple of other things.   The two fit dimensions that seem most significant to people for comfort and feel are the "reach" and probably the "stack height" https://bikeinsights.com/cyclopedia/stack-and-reach 

If either are too long, they can make a shorter person on a bigger bike feel stretched out, or if too small, a taller person cramped.  And, those are a decent comparison point between bikes as the dimensions aren't completely dependent on other things that aren't fit related.

So if a reach of say 480mm (my bike, L) and stack height of 612mm (same) feels good to you on a bike you can actually sit, then that will translate fairly well to another bike with a different frame.  Also, pretty small changes in these dimensions, even 1/4," can sometimes make a big difference in feel.

Edited June 20, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Also, took the out of shape relative to River Legacy Saturday to make up for subjecting him to Boulder on a hot day for his first ride. And we basically did all the shortcuts to keep the loop down to 2-3 miles.  He's pretty pathetically out of shape.  I went around again, without most of the shortcuts and did what took us 45 minutes in about 20.

And, he went out and bought a jersey, which alerted me to the fact that he's fat as shit.  But, I give him credit as he's doing some road/path riding to try to get into reasonable shape.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Ooof.  Got a ride in at Katie Jackson.  Everything says the RH is around 50% but lord have mercy it was still and muggy in the woods.  And the dirt was a notch or two below hero dirty but not "moist and sticky."  And out in the sun, hot af and dry-ass kitty litter.

Urgh.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

To my great surprise, Katie Jackson, among others, open today.

We have continued to have sporadic, but heavy rain.  So I was quite surprised to find a nearby trail open.

Alright ride.  It was hot and sticky because I didn't think to check DORBA until 1030 or 11.

After a bit less than five miles, doing the whole trail except black, I forced myself to do another loop and was kind of wobbly/disengaged.  Wound up banging my hand on a tree.  Not even a tree gate.  And I still didn't push the ride to an hour.

I wasn't bonked or exhausted, just kind of tired, hot, and sweaty.  I often don't make myself go more for exactly this reason:  I don't trust myself to ride safely.  Anyway, no harm and it did feel good to wear myself out a little.  Bike is shifting like shit, though.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Scampered out to Rowlett Creek today, again later in the morning, toward noon.  Pretty hot and humid, so good training I suppose.

@Knoxtnhorn, loop 1A is closed, but there's kind of a detour that they call Loop 8, which really uses about half of 1A to connect to 8.  I enjoy loop 1A, so that was nice.  I usually go fast and far on RCP, but not this time.  About the same distance as Katie Jackson the day before.   

Rowlett Creek has just enough sunny field sections to beat me down on days like this.  Not a bad ride, though.  I was beat when I got home.

[Bigpoppapump 535]

I'm hoping to ride today, looks like the 3 pm shower is moving away.  I feel like slaughter creek trail loop is all I've been able to ride in the past few weeks.

[sasquatch69 627]

On 7/5/2021 at 2:23 PM, TwiceHorn said:

To my great surprise, Katie Jackson, among others, open today.

We have continued to have sporadic, but heavy rain.  So I was quite surprised to find a nearby trail open.

Alright ride.  It was hot and sticky because I didn't think to check DORBA until 1030 or 11.

After a bit less than five miles, doing the whole trail except black, I forced myself to do another loop and was kind of wobbly/disengaged.  Wound up banging my hand on a tree.  Not even a tree gate.  And I still didn't push the ride to an hour.

I wasn't bonked or exhausted, just kind of tired, hot, and sweaty.  I often don't make myself go more for exactly this reason:  I don't trust myself to ride safely.  Anyway, no harm and it did feel good to wear myself out a little.  Bike is shifting like shit, though.

I did KJ Tuesday morning after we got back in town - similar experience.  Five days of vacationing and poor (but delicious) meal choices - even with a lot of physical activity, since we were in the mountains - led to a rough ride.  Warmed up with blue, then red, then blue again and then yellow with a couple drops.  Kicked my butt.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

7 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

I did KJ Tuesday morning after we got back in town - similar experience.  Five days of vacationing and poor (but delicious) meal choices - even with a lot of physical activity, since we were in the mountains - led to a rough ride.  Warmed up with blue, then red, then blue again and then yellow with a couple drops.  Kicked my butt.

That back side of yellow is deceptively strenuous.  Which drops do you do?

[sasquatch69 627]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

That back side of yellow is deceptively strenuous.  Which drops do you do?

Usually just Ranger and Maverick. I'm too chicken-s to try the others.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

5 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

Usually just Ranger and Maverick. I'm too chicken-s to try the others.

At one time or another, I have done them all.  You may not have been participating, but I somehow ate it hard on Ranger and broke my finger and collarbone.  

It's now been so long that I don't remember what the runouts are like, because I was about to go back into the woods where I wiped out.  And I am just generally skittish about them.  My recollection is that the further down you go, although the drops may be steeper, the runouts are basically flatter.

[sasquatch69 627]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

At one time or another, I have done them all.  You may not have been participating, but I somehow ate it hard on Ranger and broke my finger and collarbone.  

It's now been so long that I don't remember what the runouts are like, because I was about to go back into the woods where I wiped out.  And I am just generally skittish about them.  My recollection is that the further down you go, although the drops may be steeper, the runouts are basically flatter.

I remember you mentioned that happening at KJ earlier in the thread, but I thought it was on a skinny. Happening on a drop makes more sense (although I still skip the uber-skinny at the end of Red).

The runout on Ranger is fun and twisty, although right now it's pretty overgrown.

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

Killer 2+ hour ride in La Crosse, WI (about an hour NE of me) this AM. They’ve always had a good system here, but increased their trails by about 50% during COVID. These trails are all pro built and just incredible. Tons of flow, well placed features for those inclined, and some great views of the Mississippi valley and Driftless region in general.

I think next year I’m gonna take 3-4 days and do a singletrack staycation. There are 4-5 excellent trail systems within 3 hours of home.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Third straight ride at Rowlett Creek because it's open.  It's also a really good trail to recover your fitness.  A lot of shady, mostly flat to just lay down miles and a few spots of up and down to get yourself re-acclimated to that.

I went out loop 12 this time, which was risky because it can be muddy as hell, but it leads onto 11 and 10, which have some short steep climbs and descents.  To my amazement, especially not having ridden those loops in months, I navigated all of them without dabbing or seizing up.

Starting to feel good about my conditioning again.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

16 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Third straight ride at Rowlett Creek because it's open.  It's also a really good trail to recover your fitness.  A lot of shady, mostly flat to just lay down miles and a few spots of up and down to get yourself re-acclimated to that.

I went out loop 12 this time, which was risky because it can be muddy as hell, but it leads onto 11 and 10, which have some short steep climbs and descents.  To my amazement, especially not having ridden those loops in months, I navigated all of them without dabbing or seizing up.

Starting to feel good about my conditioning again.

Sidenote on the above.  Because I feel like I am out of shape, I am spinning a little more than usual.  Meaning I'm a gear or two lower than usual, which I think helped quite a bit cresting those short steepies.  So I need to keep that in mind for regular riding.

It also seems like strength doesn't diminish as fast as cardio when you have a long layoff.

Anyone have any opinions on spinning vs. mashing for conditioning?  I'm pretty sure you have to mash some to build strength and, of course, a mashing climb is a lungbuster, but so can a spinning climb.

[Al_4_ISU 12673]

https://www.kimt.com/content/news/Human-remains-found-in-Mitchell-County-authorities-asking-for-assistance-574848971.html?fbclid=IwAR0ptmiQ2e3U86_pAMdxeg4KlkM70l8x-AYJJXMnIxmX_4UsbUZI8G5yzCk

This is a trail I occasionally ride.  So that's fun.

[Austinvines 318]

Sidenote on the above.  Because I feel like I am out of shape, I am spinning a little more than usual.  Meaning I'm a gear or two lower than usual, which I think helped quite a bit cresting those short steepies.  So I need to keep that in mind for regular riding.
It also seems like strength doesn't diminish as fast as cardio when you have a long layoff.
Anyone have any opinions on spinning vs. mashing for conditioning?  I'm pretty sure you have to mash some to build strength and, of course, a mashing climb is a lungbuster, but so can a spinning climb.

I try and mix it up but am usually spinning tempo. With the wet, I had to ride my hardtail on the street for several rides and would make a concerted effort to remember and shift up until I could really feel it in my quads.

I may be off the bike for a few days to many weeks. Ran into a buddy on the trail at the start of my ride today who had just gotten a new Santa Cruz Bronson. It’s a beefy bike with a mullet 27.5 on the rear and a 29 up front. He was gassed and headed home so he let me take it for a short spin. I thought it was ok but not what I am looking for in a full squish bike.

It has gigantic bars. So big that on a rocky but usually easy downhill rock garden, I clipped a tree that wasn’t ever a thought on my rides on this trail I’ve been on 100+ times. As I am heading OTB I have the distinct thought “here comes another broken bone.” I was able to press myself in a weird reverse push-up and keep my head from hitting the rocks. Hands are scraped and my left forearm is currently oozing through the bandaids my wife put on, but the real kick in the ass is my right though.

As I tumbled over, the bike came with me and I was caught between some jagged rocks and the frame. I’ve got a deep thigh bruise that I’ve wrapped and am icing about every hour. I can walk but am stove up real good.

My buddy was surprisingly unbothered by my wrecking his bike before he could. Thankfully the carbon didn’t get scratched up and I since the WTB seat failed under warranty, he will get that replaced for free.

Hopefully this bruise won’t linger and I’ll be moving ok in a week or so. Being 51 has kinda sucked. I gained 7 pounds on vacation and haven’t dropped them from just returning to my usual diet and now I’m injured with something that could take months to fully heal.