Ideal 'one' bike solution?

[Dermie]

I remember the Girvin flexy stem, elastomer filled shocks & before shocks existed. My first mtn bike was a Kuwahara.
Then I discovered the Manitou FS, in '97 it was a great & light bike in its time.
There have been lots of bikes in between. I now ride a Giant (have to admit it)
But I left my morals out of it & bought a Giant Anthem with a great Sram groupset & have been doin everything on it for two years now with very little maintenence required (always stripping down the Manitou shok & adjusting the xtr brakes).
Sorry but the Anthem is just good solid value for money that you could just not get 10yrs ago & 10 years ago I would not have bought a Giant they were crap then. The Anthem has only one fault, no remote suspension lockout.
Roll on the modern world.

[Slowup]

Originally Posted by James Huang

Hi all,

Ok, I think I need to add an amendment to my original question here. If you could have only one MTB, what would it be? And on what sort of terrain are you usually riding?

Tough question! I have both a 4" x/c dually and a 6" "AM" dually and I have been riding the 6" exclusively for several months now. I find though the 6" bike is slower uphill and on the flats but it makes up for it on the descents and technical terrain, which is the main type of riding available to me, and way more fun & challenging.
In having to choose between the two, it would be hands down the 6"!

[James Huang]

Slowup:

So does that mean if you could only have one that a 5" machine might be the perfect compromise for you?

[Dermie]

By nature only one bike is too hard to contemplate.
I had a longer travel, slightly all mtn bike before my Anthem, in fact a Trance.
It was good too, after two years I am still not sure if I made the correct decision. I also had to get rid of my hard tail just because of the space factor.
I also had to get rid of my old Bianchi (really old) for the same reason. My cycling wife had some influence here also, she cannot work out why one needs (wants) more than one bike for any discipline.
My big problem at the moment is the type of motor bike to buy, a big Harley or small Harley, 883cc or 1200cc.

[Not Riding Enough]

Originally Posted by James Huang

Slowup:

So does that mean if you could only have one that a 5" machine might be the perfect compromise for you?

I reckon, especially for the more mature rider (>30).

Although people should still learn on a hard tail (especially when young) as it makes you a better rider and it is more important to pick the best line. I started on a fully rigid but I think that is going too far as there is much less room for making errors.

[krebs303]

Originally Posted by Dermie

My big problem at the moment is the type of motor bike to buy, a big Harley or small Harley, 883cc or 1200cc.

There is no substitute for cubic inches

[Slowup]

Originally Posted by James Huang

Slowup:

So does that mean if you could only have one that a 5" machine might be the perfect compromise for you?

It would depend on things more important than how much travel a bike has. Head & seat angle, for example, are likely a more deciding factor though it seems that the more travel a bike has, the slacker the angles and for good reason.
So the answer to the question is along the lines of "quite possibly".
An important consideration for me is that it is easier to make a burly bike lighter (though not necessarily cost effective) than it is to make a light bike burlier. In other words, I can ride my AM rig all the places I go with my more x/c bike, but it's not necessarily the other way around.