Is 5 Inches The New 4 Inch

What about 6 inches? If the technology is giving us 25-26 pound bikes that have that much travel, is there any reason not to take advantage of that? I just wonder if there's a limit? At what point -- assuming that the manufacturers can keep the weight down in that range -- are you getting too much travel for cross country riding? (And I'm assuming that you're a rider like me, who does lots of XC riding, but also enjoys the occasional downhill. So you want to ride an all-around bike.)

You can't be too thin. (Actually, yes you can.)

Can you have too much suspension?

I recently bought a Kona Dawg Primo, it has 5.5" of suspension, and let me tell you, I absolutely love it. I went from a burly hard tail to a full sus, so I don't have a light whippet full suspension bike to compare it to, but the handling and efficiency of such a long travel bike is great. However, I do notice a bit of absorption on the big climbs, where I have to use the pro-pedal platform on the Fox shock (it's in a great place on the Dawg, where you can switch on the fly!). I think anything much more than this, without sinking A LOT of money on a quality shock would be too much, especially for any xc endeavors.

I took the Dawg for a few DH runs, and it performed like a dream. For my skill level, it was perfect, and I didn't bottom out once.

I agree though, that 5" is quickly becoming the new 4"...but where does it stop? There's still nothing like a good old hard tail for those quick rides, and if you're new to the sport, hard tail is the way to go. These long travel bikes being so prevalent may entice new riders, who should be otherwise learning on a hard tail. Everyone is pushing more and more travel, and leaving the basic, simple, efficient and beautiful hard tail sitting up on the bike shops rack...I feel bad for the hard tails.

Brandon

It's going to depend on the kind of race courses people want to race on. Some courses will favor a longer travel bike, some a shorter travel/no travel bike.