Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Mountain Biking
Reload this Page >

Why is full suspension so controversial?

Notices
Mountain Biking Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Check out this forum to discuss the latest tips, tricks, gear and equipment in the world of mountain biking.

Why is full suspension so controversial?

Old 02-06-22, 05:10 PM
  #26  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by Viich
Because suspension was a horrible development direction, and rigid fatbikes are the correction to the poor path of mountain bike development.
You guys crack me up
Kapusta is offline  
Likes For Kapusta:
Old 02-06-22, 05:59 PM
  #27  
Viich
Hack
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,251

Bikes: TrueNorth CX bike, 88 Bianchi Strada (currently Sturmey'd), 90's Giant Innova (now with drop bars), Yess World Cup race BMX, Redline Proline Pro24 race BMX Cruiser

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Liked 181 Times in 127 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta
You guys crack me up
Fatbike I bought this year is first MTB I've bought since 1994.......

I rented a FS once. Terrain I hit accidentally at speed and thought I was going to be injured, wasn't remotely challenging, the bike dealt with it all. I'd kill or maim myself on FS.
Viich is offline  
Old 02-06-22, 07:17 PM
  #28  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by Viich
Fatbike I bought this year is first MTB I've bought since 1994.......

I rented a FS once. Terrain I hit accidentally at speed and thought I was going to be injured, wasn't remotely challenging, the bike dealt with it all. I'd kill or maim myself on FS.
Well it is true that bikes that let you go faster and bigger also get you more hurt when things go wrong.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 02-08-22, 09:49 AM
  #29  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,313 Times in 706 Posts
It could be an interesting discussion point to debate whether FS has led to the development of platforms that are so out priced and technologically advanced from their originally intended purpose that more basic fat bike/plus tire platforms do provide a correction to that trajectory. They (FS) have taken mtb into a meaning that little resembles the original.

FS is great for technical conditions but a some people are buying them for non technical riding like trails because they think that's what they need. Originally, Mtbing was more about fire roads and game trails than bombing artificially constructed obstacles, and in that vein a more basic bike that gets it's suspension from fat tires is a return to reality. That's how many fat bikes are used these days, as the jeeps of the bike world. FS could be equated to the rock crawler. Cool, but not everyone needs a rock crawler for jeep trails.

That's just an observation though, not a controversy.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 02-08-22 at 09:54 AM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Likes For Happy Feet:
Old 02-08-22, 10:34 AM
  #30  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
My two MTBs are a 150mm FS bike and a rigid Fat bike. My take on them: Two entirely different animals. Different strengths and weakness, and virtually no overlap in where they excel. In my experience, the only time a fat bike is the more desirable bike is when conditions make the 2.3"-2.5" tired FS bike a no-go.... which is about 5 months out of the year in upstate NY where I live now (snow, mud, ice, muck). Or when I am riding with some friends who are a bit slower than me and I want some extra challenge to slow me down.

Were it not for the fact that sometimes a Fat bike is the ONLY way to ride, I would see little value in them for me. As far as rigid simplicity for trails that are not covered in snow or mud, a rigid or HT bike with 2.4"-2.8" tires is a much better tool, IMO. Were I to move back to VA where standard sized tires are usable most of the year, I would likely sell the Fat bike. Might buy HT with 2.6"-2.8" tires instead.

I agree that Fat and Plus (more so the latter IMO) in a rigid or HT format do a good job of filling the gap that the evolution of singletrack-oriented MTBs has left open.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 02-08-22, 01:22 PM
  #31  
prj71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,601
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2965 Post(s)
Liked 1,164 Times in 761 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet
FS is great for technical conditions but a some people are buying them for non technical riding like trails because they think that's what they need. Originally, Mtbing was more about fire roads and game trails than bombing artificially constructed obstacles, and in that vein a more basic bike that gets it's suspension from fat tires is a return to reality. That's how many fat bikes are used these days, as the jeeps of the bike world. FS could be equated to the rock crawler. Cool, but not everyone needs a rock crawler for jeep trails.
The thing is, it is a misconception that Fat tires replace suspension. They may add a little cush on fire roads and game trails, but on old school single track (types of trails I usually ride) rigid fat is not a lot of fun. And...Jeeps have suspension.

If were not for winter about 4-5 months out of the year...I would not have a fat bike either. 20 mile ride from 2 weeks ago..


Last edited by prj71; 02-08-22 at 01:25 PM.
prj71 is online now  
Old 02-08-22, 02:39 PM
  #32  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,313 Times in 706 Posts
Anecdotal experience will always vary.

I quite like my fat bike and see it as the logical extension of an old school rigid mtb that can also do sand and snow. A four season rigid mtb. The sweet spot for me would probably be more 3" plus tires but what I have works. This does the trick up until technical terrain.

I don't think people think fat tires replace suspension. Who knows, I can only speak for myself. To me it just add a bit of cushion and float for certain terrain where traditional mtb tires bog down.

If I wanted to downsize my collection of bikes, I would go with a plus tire size and ride all conditions rather than a traditional mtb tire and miss some conditions. For truly technical terrain I would choose a FS.

It all comes down to how many bikes one wants or can afford factored against what conditions one actually rides factored against how much challenge one wants from the platform. People intentionally choose anywhere between SS rigid and CF FS depending.

For maximum comfort a FS e MTB is the ticket! All fun - no work. If that sounds sorta wonky then so does suggesting a certain type of suspension is better because of comfort. I don't seek comfort as a goal when mtbing. Rather, I seek challenge.

If my platform provides challenge then it is a good thing. If it provides so much comfort that I get into riskier situations because of it then maybe I can either dial the terrain or platform back. It is a common observation that FS allows riders to do trails they aren't ready for because the bike protects them from physical feedback.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 02-08-22 at 02:47 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 02-08-22, 05:38 PM
  #33  
Zylar
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cannot justify FS for my casual style of riding and the cost and maintenance is not worth it.
Zylar is offline  
Old 02-09-22, 08:26 AM
  #34  
prj71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,601
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2965 Post(s)
Liked 1,164 Times in 761 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet

I don't think people think fat tires replace suspension. Who knows, I can only speak for myself. To me it just add a bit of cushion and float for certain terrain where traditional mtb tires bog down.
I've seen on bike forums (here and elsewwhere) where people inquire about fat bikes because they say they can't afford a FS bike and they "think" that fat tires will be just as a good as a FS bike. Granted you get let a "cush" on bumpy terrain "if" you lower the tire pressure enough, but fat tires have no rebound or dampening characteristics like FS.
prj71 is online now  
Old 02-09-22, 11:17 AM
  #35  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,313 Times in 706 Posts
Originally Posted by prj71
I've seen on bike forums (here and elsewwhere) where people inquire about fat bikes because they say they can't afford a FS bike and they "think" that fat tires will be just as a good as a FS bike. Granted you get let a "cush" on bumpy terrain "if" you lower the tire pressure enough, but fat tires have no rebound or dampening characteristics like FS.
Well, I would never say that. A good modern FS is so advanced that the rides are not even in the same ball park. I might say for some mild trails, a plus bike or HT fits the bill but once one needs suspension for drops, ledges or big hits those platforms loses their charm.

I see no "controversy" perse. If one removes cost from the equation then the best tool for each job will always be the right choice. That's an easy argument to make. The harder decision comes when there is a cap on overall available funds. There, I think one can look harder at what terrain one actually rides or what challenge one is seeking or can physically accept. Then the challenge is to find a platform that meets the need while recognizing the limits of cost.

Unfortunately, While most modern FS can work on less technical terrain by locking out the suspension when needed, making it a "best case" choice, the cost of a good FS bike is prohibitive for some. If the rider isn’t really doing technical terrain, a fat rigid or mtb hardtail could fit the bill at a lower cost. That's not a knock against FS.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 02-09-22 at 11:20 AM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Likes For Happy Feet:
Old 02-09-22, 12:14 PM
  #36  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet
Well, I would never say that. A good modern FS is so advanced that the rides are not even in the same ball park. I might say for some mild trails, a plus bike or HT fits the bill but once one needs suspension for drops, ledges or big hits those platforms loses their charm.

I see no "controversy" perse. If one removes cost from the equation then the best tool for each job will always be the right choice. That's an easy argument to make. The harder decision comes when there is a cap on overall available funds. There, I think one can look harder at what terrain one actually rides or what challenge one is seeking or can physically accept. Then the challenge is to find a platform that meets the need while recognizing the limits of cost.

Unfortunately, While most modern FS can work on less technical terrain by locking out the suspension when needed, making it a "best case" choice, the cost of a good FS bike is prohibitive for some. If the rider isn’t really doing technical terrain, a fat rigid or mtb hardtail could fit the bill at a lower cost. That's not a knock against FS.

Well said. Different options for different terrain and/or riding style and/or tastes and/or budget. No real "controversy", IMO.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 02-09-22, 12:23 PM
  #37  
veganbikes
Clark W. Griswold
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,278

Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26

Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4252 Post(s)
Liked 3,865 Times in 2,578 Posts
Originally Posted by Zylar
Cannot justify FS for my casual style of riding and the cost and maintenance is not worth it.
I mean maintenance is not super crazy, the occasional pump of the shocks, some cleaning and a service every so often which you could do at or through your local bike shop and you would need to do it on a hardtail as well (just minus one shock). Cost I can see but maintenance is not anything major as long as you keep the correct air in your shocks you are pretty golden. You may have to replace some pivot bearings once and a while and do some service but overall not so ridiculous.

If you are riding very very infrequently I can see a full suspension bike maybe not making as much sense like in my case but if you are still a more casual rider but ride often on trails, I wouldn't put a FS bike out of the running completely. They are a lot of fun and I find a lot easier to ride or at least more comfortable which leads to maybe more confidence.
veganbikes is offline  
Old 02-09-22, 12:34 PM
  #38  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by veganbikes
I mean maintenance is not super crazy, the occasional pump of the shocks, some cleaning and a service every so often which you could do at or through your local bike shop and you would need to do it on a hardtail as well (just minus one shock). Cost I can see but maintenance is not anything major as long as you keep the correct air in your shocks you are pretty golden. You may have to replace some pivot bearings once and a while and do some service but overall not so ridiculous.

If you are riding very very infrequently I can see a full suspension bike maybe not making as much sense like in my case but if you are still a more casual rider but ride often on trails, I wouldn't put a FS bike out of the running completely. They are a lot of fun and I find a lot easier to ride or at least more comfortable which leads to maybe more confidence.
Yeah, I generally find rear suspension to be less maintenance than suspension forks. I say "generally" because I have had a couple frames that ate bearings like candy. But most frames are better than that, and certainly newer ones are.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 02-09-22, 12:48 PM
  #39  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,790

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4831 Post(s)
Liked 7,821 Times in 3,705 Posts
What controversy? Ride the kind of bike that suits the kind of riding you enjoy doing. Period.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is online now  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 02-11-22, 04:25 PM
  #40  
Viich
Hack
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,251

Bikes: TrueNorth CX bike, 88 Bianchi Strada (currently Sturmey'd), 90's Giant Innova (now with drop bars), Yess World Cup race BMX, Redline Proline Pro24 race BMX Cruiser

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Liked 181 Times in 127 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet
Well, I would never say that. A good modern FS is so advanced that the rides are not even in the same ball park. I might say for some mild trails, a plus bike or HT fits the bill but once one needs suspension for drops, ledges or big hits those platforms loses their charm.

I see no "controversy" perse. If one removes cost from the equation then the best tool for each job will always be the right choice. That's an easy argument to make. The harder decision comes when there is a cap on overall available funds. There, I think one can look harder at what terrain one actually rides or what challenge one is seeking or can physically accept. Then the challenge is to find a platform that meets the need while recognizing the limits of cost.

Unfortunately, While most modern FS can work on less technical terrain by locking out the suspension when needed, making it a "best case" choice, the cost of a good FS bike is prohibitive for some. If the rider isn’t really doing technical terrain, a fat rigid or mtb hardtail could fit the bill at a lower cost. That's not a knock against FS.
I'm saying that if I can't do it on a rigid bike I don't need to. If something is harder to do on a rigid bike, then I exercise/develop my skill more than I would on a bike with suspension. Suspension is an expensive way to force yourself into more risk to get the same challenge. I've got no ego forcing me to go on bigger jumps/drops/whatever than I can do on a rigid bike.
Viich is offline  
Old 02-11-22, 05:45 PM
  #41  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by Viich
I'm saying that if I can't do it on a rigid bike I don't need to. If something is harder to do on a rigid bike, then I exercise/develop my skill more than I would on a bike with suspension. Suspension is an expensive way to force yourself into more risk to get the same challenge. I've got no ego forcing me to go on bigger jumps/drops/whatever than I can do on a rigid bike.
Nah. FS is an expensive way to have more FUN for the same challenge.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 02-12-22, 07:05 AM
  #42  
shelbyfv
Expired Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,455
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3637 Post(s)
Liked 5,314 Times in 2,700 Posts
What, no more from the OP? Guess he shared all he had in that first post.
shelbyfv is online now  
Old 02-13-22, 11:17 AM
  #43  
wolfchild
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721

Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times in 1,286 Posts
Suspension isn't controversial...The most controversial thing among in MTBing is people like myself and few others who choose to ride singlespeed with rigid fork. I just don't understand why almost an entire MTBing community looks down on us and hates us so much.
wolfchild is offline  
Old 02-13-22, 11:40 AM
  #44  
Polaris OBark
ignominious poltroon
 
Polaris OBark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,925
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2184 Post(s)
Liked 3,336 Times in 1,741 Posts
It's the lycra.
Polaris OBark is offline  
Old 02-13-22, 12:45 PM
  #45  
Kapusta
Advanced Slacker
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,187

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt

Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked 2,516 Times in 1,422 Posts
Originally Posted by wolfchild
Suspension isn't controversial...The most controversial thing among in MTBing is people like myself and few others who choose to ride singlespeed with rigid fork. I just don't understand why almost an entire MTBing community looks down on us and hates us so much.
They don't hate people who ride rigid singlespeed.

They hate people who won't shut up about riding rigid singlespeed.

Sorta like vegans and crossfit.
Kapusta is offline  
Likes For Kapusta:
Old 02-14-22, 01:09 PM
  #46  
prj71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,601
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2965 Post(s)
Liked 1,164 Times in 761 Posts
Originally Posted by Viich
. Suspension is an expensive way to force yourself into more risk to get the same challenge. I've got no ego forcing me to go on bigger jumps/drops/whatever than I can do on a rigid bike.
Suspension is an expensive way to force yourself into a more comfortable ride. FS isn't just about bigger jumps and drops, it's about smoothing out rough trails with rocks and roots so you aren't beat up after a ride.

How about this...Drop your car off at the mechanic and tell him you want your shocks taken out and replaced with bricks instead. Then maybe it makes sense.
prj71 is online now  
Old 02-14-22, 01:12 PM
  #47  
Polaris OBark
ignominious poltroon
 
Polaris OBark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,925
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2184 Post(s)
Liked 3,336 Times in 1,741 Posts
Why is full suspension so controversial?
For the same reason evolution, climate change and vaccines are so controversial. It serves a disingenuous ideological function to falsely assert this as a premise to discussion.

Polaris OBark is offline  
Old 02-15-22, 04:38 AM
  #48  
Herzlos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Scotland
Posts: 501

Bikes: Way too many

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 825 Post(s)
Liked 584 Times in 345 Posts
I think people tend to try and justify their choices by deciding that theirs is the best and everyone else is somehow wrong.

All bikes have some purpose, and FS take a lot of the bounce out so can make for a smoother ride, can give better performance on rough ground due to increasing contact with the ground and so on. If you're already doing a lot of stuff with a rigid gravel bike then you may as well go all the way to FS for your other bike as a hardtail sits somewhere in the middle.

Personally, I went for a hardtail primarily due to cost. I bought a good HT for about half of what an equivalent FS would be, and as a bonus it's about 2kg lighter too with space for another bottle cage. I don't do anything too technical so I won't really notice a difference. If I suddenly win the lottery I'll get a good FS too.
Herzlos is offline  
Old 02-15-22, 09:51 AM
  #49  
travbikeman
Senior Member
 
travbikeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Martinsburg WV Area
Posts: 1,696

Bikes: State 4130 Custom, Giant Trance 29

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 416 Post(s)
Liked 172 Times in 117 Posts
So....which direction is this winter time discussion about to make? OP seems no longer interested in discussing....

travbikeman is offline  
Old 02-18-22, 05:28 AM
  #50  
Viich
Hack
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,251

Bikes: TrueNorth CX bike, 88 Bianchi Strada (currently Sturmey'd), 90's Giant Innova (now with drop bars), Yess World Cup race BMX, Redline Proline Pro24 race BMX Cruiser

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Liked 181 Times in 127 Posts
Originally Posted by travbikeman
So....which direction is this winter time discussion about to make? OP seems no longer interested in discussing....
I'm perfectly willing to keep listening if people want to try to convince me that I should buy an MTB with suspension instead of a rigid fatbike and cyclocross bike for trail riding, but I'm willing to let it go too.
Viich is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.