Cyclist33
Guest
- Location
- Warrington
What is the difference between trail and xc riding?
Cheers
Stu
Cheers
Stu
No, sorry, I have to disagree.Trail is a marketing term for XC, essentially they are the same.
What i forgot to conclude, was that the current market is tending to merge the two, but the PURIST bikes tend to be purpose specific. Would you want to lug around 14 or 15 kg of trail bouncer on a weekend XC challenge?Can't agree entirely with that.
Trail centres may be rough on a very lightweight XC race bike, but a more robust XC bike will be absolutely fine.
I think the distinction there is XC or XC race.
Go to a trail centre and thrash it, it's asking for it, ands will do anyhting you want within your capability and experience! Then ride some bridleways at weekends. It will do best what you most enjoy riding.Thanks peeps. Cubist's reply seems to explain it better than any other! I ask because my mtb came with wide riser bars and isn't phenomenally light, but it does have a 100mm fork geometry and so I wondered where it is designed to excel. Thus far I have done the kind of canal paths, Trans Pennine Trail and veering off into uncharted woods and riverside meadows riding. My guess is that qualifies as XC though certainly not racing!
Cheers
Stu
Essentially a XC bike is designed for speed over roughish terrain. Nowadays you find more and more sub 10kg XC bikes, out and out racers with a head down-arse up geometry. They will typically have light alloy or carbon frames, and will have short travel usually air sprung suspension forks, 80mm to 120mm, but most typically 100mm.
Trail bikes are designed to hit UK trail centres. Technical singletrack is an absolute joy to ride, but it will quickly kill an XC bike.
I'm describing the purist definition. The OP asked what is the difference, not "what can each type of bike do|?" I acknowledge that a short travel XC bike can handle trail centre style singletrack by riding my 100mm travel Cube Ltd at trail centres. I do not own a full susser, nor will I enter into arguments about martketing ploys.So now 120mm is classed as short travel! Sub 10kg? I always thought my 23lbs Stumpjumper was light! Barely any standard XC bikes are sub 10kg - that's the reserve of weightweenies forum.
That's complete rubbish, known to many, many 'short travel' XC riders, and a myth perpetuated by the marketing man. You realise they run XC races at these UK trail centres? Technical singletrack is even more of a joy to ride on an XC bike as you're using your skills rather than relying on excess suspension travel to sort things out.
I haven't got time to dissect the whole post, but to expand on my original statement, essentially 'Trail' was invented as a term so that riders who thought lycra-wearing xc-whippets were 'uncool' could differentiate themselves by wearing baggy shorts, walking up tough climbs, being over-biked with far too much suspension travel, and generally ride slower. And it worked, the 'trail bike' took off.
Magazines (MBR springs to mind) convey this myth that you need a minimum of 6 inches of travel to ride off a curb. Anyone remember the issue last year they took a 150mm travel Specialized Enduro on a canal towpath ride? It's great for business though as the more you read the more you can justify a £3k bike for riding around the local trail centre on.
What I will say however is that you are arguing your point from a "I have a short travel hardtail XC bike, and have decided to take a "purist standpoint" arguing that a XC bike is great for all that I wish to ride." That's great, but by aggressivley asserting that the two are the same will blow up in your face when someone buys an Orange 5 to ride in XC races.