How much faster can I expect to be on a modern XC bike

ultrazenith · Dec 15, 2016

I know this is one of those endless debates, but I'm curious to know what others who've extensively ridden both retro and modern have found, concerning how much faster a modern FS 29er would be compared to a decent steel hardtail 26er (retro). I'm guessing 10-15% for a normal XC route, has anyone here studied this?

02gf74 · Dec 15, 2016

Id say it very much depends on the route. On a relatively smooth route, a conservative estimate would be 0%, in fact the suspension espacially at the rear, may even end up slower.

A very bumpy route with 1/2 foot drops then faster as the suspension will make it easier and give you more confidence , dunni what that would equate in percent.

FluffyChicken · Dec 15, 2016

Re:

The real question is; what are you going to do with the extra time you get in the cafe or pub?

cherrybomb · Dec 15, 2016

Re:

For XC, I'd bet the wheel size will make more of a difference than the suspension.

29'ers definitely roll faster than 26" wheels.

Mike Muz · Dec 15, 2016

Re:

Speaking personally, I prefer 26" for most things.

However, you can get away with bad lines more on a 29er.

I find, sorry found, my 29er more cumbersome on climbs, sprinting, even as a tall lad, and harder work through twisty, technical woody sections.

I hear from friends that you can get away without sus on 29ers, but I didn't really get into it enough to find out for myself

Mike

brocklanders023 · Dec 15, 2016

02gf74":39jmm9eg said:
Id say it very much depends on the route. On a relatively smooth route, a conservative estimate would be 0%, in fact the suspension espacially at the rear, may even end up slower.

A very bumpy route with 1/2 foot drops then faster as the suspension will make it easier and give you more confidence , dunni what that would equate in percent.

Nah, a decent 29" fs will not be slower that a 26" retro in any situation.

For the main question how retro are we looking? From experience a 29" fs will be considerably faster than a early 90's bike round any red graded route.

ultrazenith · Dec 15, 2016

I already have a rigid fat bike and it's comfy up to a certain speed, above which it's just a pain, literally. And it's 10% slower uphill than my retro hard tail, maybe 5% faster on the flat and 15% faster on the downhills. On some courses I do it evens out, others it's a bit slower.

ultrazenith · Dec 15, 2016

brocklanders023":1tzc2thw said:
For the main question how retro are we looking? From experience a 29" fs will be considerably faster than a early 90's bike round any red graded route.

What's a red graded route?

makster · Dec 15, 2016

Re:

32.7%

brocklanders023 · Dec 16, 2016

ultrazenith":2h62jj0a said:
brocklanders023":2h62jj0a said:

For the main question how retro are we looking? From experience a 29" fs will be considerably faster than a early 90's bike round any red graded route.

Click to expand...

What's a red graded route?

Standard trail centre routes with plenty of reasonably difficult and technical parts without being downhill ridiculous. Hard enough for a competent rider to enjoy without being unridable. I'd also class most decent natural rides this way.

Fat bikes are fat bikes, they are great in some circumstances but limited in others. A lightish, 100 to 140mm fs 29er will blow away most retro over most routes. That's only half the story though as being fastest isn't always the most fun.

How much faster can I expect to be on a modern XC bike

ultrazenith

Senior Retro Guru

02gf74

Old School Grand Master

FluffyChicken

cherrybomb

Old School Grand Master

Mike Muz

brocklanders023

ultrazenith

Senior Retro Guru

ultrazenith

Senior Retro Guru

makster

brocklanders023

Similar threads

Latest posts