Too much travel?

[#mitch]

I was talking to a friend the other day about my upcoming Kenevo delivery and he asked why I want a bike with so much suspension travel. Honestly the question didn't even compute in my brain, like more is better right. So my question here is why would anyone want less travel? (apart from the obvious stuff like bmx dirt jumps etc)

 

[Gary]

BMX and DJs is the black to your white.
In reality it's a massive grey scale and you're erring towards one end.

 

[Gary]

Because of their weight Hardtail Emtbs handle terribly and feel dead. Taking it further (and using your example) an Ebmx would be God awful.
So surely you can work out where and when a bike with less than 200mm travel might feel better. (and what kind of rider might prefer that)

 

[wildsau2]

Because of their weight Hardtail Emtbs handle terribly and feel dead.

lol

 

[George_KSL]

Opinion: The Case For Being 'Over-Biked' - Pinkbike

Strongly debated topic for past 3 years since inception of burly but short travel bikes.
They are very niche, but make even less sense in e-mtb since... nimble-ness and jibby-ness is not how I would describe even my KenevoSL.

Weight is usually much bigger problem than travel. You can always setup travel to be firmer with more compression, progressivness, spring rate/sag point.

 

[#mitch]

Yeah that was my thinking @George_yt basically if you want firm then put more air in the shock or add a more progressive spring.

 

[lightning]

My ebike has 160mm travel front and rear, which is more than my car.

There's no issue with the amount of travel, the bike performs great.

 

[Motohawk75]

I have always thought more is better with ebikes , my Bullit was 170 and rode great but was a little dead on flatter trails and didnt have much pop…. My new 22 Giant trance advanced has 140 rear 150 front and is amazing! I panicked at first going less for some reason but in reality its got plenty and i have bottomed yet or got close but its fast in the turns and definitely pops more !

 

[#mitch]

My ebike has 160mm travel front and rear, which is more than my car.

There's no issue with the amount of travel, the bike performs great.

But if it was 200/200 would it be worse in any way? It would be more flexible Downhill likely

 

[lightning]

l don't know. That's getting into seriously long travel.
l've not ridden a bike with over 160mm. My first mountain bike had 40mm maximum on the fork but as it was using elastomers it barely moved at all in cold weather

 

[JP-NZ]

Really depends on what you are riding IMO. 140-160 is plenty for most All mountain and enduro (even occasional bike park) less if your riding XC style/forest trails.

 

[CjP]

But if it was 200/200 would it be worse in any way? It would be more flexible Downhill likely

I ran 200mm b/f on 29s on my old Kenevo and absolutely loved it. I mainly ride enduro/Dh trails which was were it shined.
It obviously didn’t have the “pop” of a shorter travel bike but you can always tune the suspension firmer to counter that. I went as far as adding more air here and there but it never bothered me having a plush “Laggy” bike on boring xc type trails.
I currently run a 180 f/r air shocked KSL and find that the perfect compromise.
But everyone has a different opinion on what suit’s their riding style/trails.

 

[Bad Mechanic]

Shorter suspension makes for a livelier and more engaging ride. It's the difference between a Baja truck and a WRC rally car.

I know what trails I like, and that's why I bought a bike with 150mm of travel.

 

[Timochka69]

I once had a long term (ca. 2 months) loaner Haibike with IIRC 120 mm f+r. I really never felt like needing more, bottomed out a couple (or few) times, but no biggie. On same trails I've been riding my 160/150 mm f/r and I only bottom out if I screw up badly. The trails I usually ride do not require more travel. Would I have more fun on a 100 mm bike - I doubt. Would I be faster with more - or less - travel, I also doubt that. But, I do know that on gnarlier trails I could use more travel.

 

[Boltdude]

When I upgraded suspension I debated extending the travel, but ultimately decided not to mess with how the engineers designed it (150mm/160mm on my Trek Rail). With firm settings I rarely bottom out even on very chunky drops. I really enjoy technical climbing things on an EMTB that I’d have no business climbing on an acoustic. I think the current configuration is is dialed in really well for that and feared that longer travel would negatively affect climbing ability.

 

[KnollyBro]

When I upgraded suspension I debated extending the travel, but ultimately decided not to mess with how the engineers designed it (150mm/160mm on my Trek Rail). With firm settings I rarely bottom out even on very chunky drops. I really enjoy technical climbing things on an EMTB that I’d have no business climbing on an acoustic. I think the current configuration is is dialed in really well for that and feared that longer travel would negatively affect climbing ability.

Bah!!!! What do engineers know about riding bikes? They design a bike that is marketable to the masses based on what component deals their company can secure at a price point they think they can sell. YOUR kind of thinking would adversely affect the aftermarket component sales industry and the majority of the bitching and whining that goes on in this forum ! Then again, lots of riders adapt to the bike they buy, which hopefully is better than their previous one. I have always thought of mountain bikes as designed to ride downhill but to each their own depending on the type of trails you prefer.

 

[Boltdude]

Bah!!!! What do engineers know about riding bikes? They design a bike that is marketable to the masses based on what component deals their company can secure at a price point they think they can sell. YOUR kind of thinking would adversely affect the aftermarket component sales industry and the majority of the bitching and whining that goes on in this forum ! Then again, lots of riders adapt to the bike they buy, which hopefully is better than their previous one. I have always thought of mountain bikes as designed to ride downhill but to each their own depending on the type of trails you prefer.

Ha, I hear ya. Just more narrowly pointing out that more travel isn’t always better on a bike not designed around it. You might end up with a funky balance as well as more pushing than riding on super steep uphill technical terrain. If you want downhill travel get a DH bike instead of trying to make a current bike something it’s not.

 

[Gary]

Bah!!!! What do engineers know about riding bikes? They design a bike that is marketable to the masses based on what component deals their company can secure at a price point they think they can sell.

Such insight

 

[KnollyBro]

Ha, I hear ya. Just more narrowly pointing out that more travel isn’t always better on a bike not designed around it. You might end up with a funky balance as well as more pushing than riding on super steep uphill technical terrain. If you want downhill travel get a DH bike instead of trying to make a current bike something it’s not.

I can see that you are more interested in technical uphill climbing which has been greatly enhanced by emtbs but what if you want or can only afford one mtb? Around here, dedicated DH rigs are going out of style in favor of all mountain/enduro bikes as they climb and descend well too, even at Whistler Bike Park.

 

[KnollyBro]

Such insight

Correct me if I am wrong (and I expect that you will) but I thought engineers work for bike manufactures who sometimes offer different models with optional upgraded parts which leads one to believe there must be several variables at play, with their designs. At the very least, this forum has countless posts of end users who have made changes to their bikes (anecdotal improvements to suite their specific application?) which would suggest that they think they know more about how to make the bike perform better than the very engineers who designed them in the first place. A paradox?

 

[Gary]

Most bike companies are ultimately just selling you their frame design with lots of relatively standard components fitted. (even Ebikes). But obvioulsy the components are chosen to fit the geometry and purpose of the complete bike rather than the opposite way.
Yes. Engineers and designers colaborate to come up with suitable frame designs which fit with the brands image and market. Some bike industry engineers/designers are infact very capable riders themselves. Some not so much.
Each frame is (obviously) designed to fit a particular use and market and manufactured to a price point for an initial number of units to be produced... none of this a particularly quick process so deals are already in motion with regards to component packages in advance of a frame's (mass) production.... But yes. Final frame designs often do include an aspect of adjustability.

Actually... Y'know what... I'm going to stop there though. Sorry but it's late here and I really can't be bothered to type an entire page of factual info on how a bike company operates just to educate you on your lack of insight in a throw away comment. It just made me laugh mate.

Surely you've been here long enough to realise from the depth of the threads that the vast majority of users of this forum aren't particularly capable riders and many don't even understand how to set-up their suspension properly nevermind understand the intracacies of how suspension design or bike geometry actually works. and there's nothing wrong with that. Changing tyres/wheels, brakes, drivetrain components or adding 10mm of travel here or their isn't exactly rocket science. and plenty folk here seem to think adding anodized headset spacers and lock-on grip collars or a set of mudguards constitutes "modding" their bike FFS. So no. Not really paradoxical at all.
Don't sweat it though. A hell of a lot of bike industry sales employees and journos aren't actually all that much more clued up either.

Nighty night

 

[Boltdude]

I can see that you are more interested in technical uphill climbing which has been greatly enhanced by emtbs but what if you want or can only afford one mtb? Around here, dedicated DH rigs are going out of style in favor of all mountain/enduro bikes as they climb and descend well too, even at Whistler Bike Park.

To be clear, I very much prefer bombing downhill over climbing (I’m not a complete nut). The technical climbing just adds a new element of fun here in rocky SoCal for sections that used to be miserable hike a bike slogs. Even on very gnarly black descents, I’m only occasionally wishing for a little more travel. The 150/160 set-up is the right mix for me in my geography. Would love to ride Whistler (you’re lucky to have that so close) and if that was my stomping ground would likely ride something more towards the Enduro spectrum. I think it’s just overkill for most the riders on here and comes with unnecessary trade-offs.

 

[1oldfart]

You asked the wrong guy.
*** a bike with so much suspension travel *** is just
a very limited tool. Maybe if you spent more time on the saddle
you could appreciate a shorter wheelbase.
Spend 5 years around 130/120 and your question will be answered.
Many choose easy trails but i ride in places your school bus is no fun.
Stay limited, buy the shit others buy, like the pool, the BBQ, the thermo pump.
I just ride daily and see empty trails.
Online they love riding, i guess you might be one of them.
Ask dogs, i see lots of them, they are the regulars.

 

[CjP]

The title says too much travel? Well that’s really a personal thing. If it works for you then no it’s not too much travel. Everyone is different and everyone perceives things in different ways. I love big travel ebikes! I have a dodgy back so the more the better. I also enjoyed navigating dual crowns around tight trails because it’s another level of fun but then I’m sure some people here may call that crazy.
I just wanna have fun on bikes. I don’t race the clock or count how many internet based ribbons I get but then that’s ok too.
One of my mates loves riding his Hardtail analogue with me on a KSL, it’s nice to have choices.

 

[urastus]

But if it was 200/200 would it be worse in any way? It would be more flexible Downhill likely

Doesn't it depend on what tracks you ride? I imagine 200/200 would be awesome in whistler and riding up forestry roads / fire trail or taking chair lift, but not where I ride.