Another bike advice

I've been out of biking for over 2 years and finally built what I thought would suit my needs, GG Gnarvana S4 with Manitou Mezzer Pro/Mara Pro, Dominion A4 brakes, I9 wheels etc. Everything feels dialed in.
Mostly ride Wasatch, no plans for bike parks.
After riding it a couple times I feel that's too much bike for me. I don't think I'll ride it hard enough even after getting back in shape.
Would Forbidden Druid suit me better? Anyone with the experience on both? https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...7ba6ed2c91.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robik

After riding it a couple times I feel that's too much bike for me. I don't think I'll ride it hard enough even after getting back in shape.
Would Forbidden Druid suit me better? Anyone with the experience on both? https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...7ba6ed2c91.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

---

The difference between 160/160 and 150/130 isn't that great. Get faster and lighter tires than those incredibly slow-ass Hillbillies, flip the GG adjustable-headset-thing to "shorter and steeper", and you'll suddenly feel like you have a new bike.

Rear tire matters a lot more to rolling speed than front tire. Something like a Minion front/Aggressor rear. If you want to stay with Spec tires, try a Butcher front and V2 Purgatory rear (the paddle one). Either combo will be massively faster than the Hillbillies.

The picture was taken when I just built it and tires were part of a used wheelset. Currently running DHF/Dissector Exo, 2.5/2.4. I put it in short mode and while it made the bike fee a bit more manageable, the overall character remained the same. I was even thinking of swapping out the seat stays for Smash and de-stroking the shock.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

Yep, I've got a ton of experience on both bikes (Druid V1). The GG is definitely a lot of bike to handle.

Pedaling and on the climbs, the Druid is a little more manageable since it'll be lighter and smaller/shorter. But they both climb pretty well overall, especially in tech. Assuming you build the Druid up more appropriately for a trail bike, it'll probably be 2-3 lbs lighter, which should help. Also, if you go that direction (V1 only, not applicable to the new frame), make sure you remove the lower chain guide since it helps a ton with chain drag. Otherwise, I didn't really notice much, if any, loss in efficiency due to the idler.

On the descents, the GG is a beast that can handle anything you throw at it. But it's also a big, heavy, long bike, and it takes a lot of effort. The Druid is much shorter and playful, but it can also handle all the chunk with the high-pivot design. FWIW, the V1 Druid I had last year was probably my favorite bike ever. I did big rides in the CO high country on it, but then also rode it on double blacks in BC. There's just something about that high-pivot feel that I really like.

As a person that’s been DDing a Gnarvana most of the summer, it’s not a great trail bike. It’s fine if the climbs are open and smooth, but anything tight and technical it gets to be a handful.

Cheap option would be to convert it to a Smash. Reducing travel on the Mezzer is easy and if you run the same rear shock, you just end up with a longer travel version. The Smash is one of my favorite all-around bikes I’ve ridden. Comfortable climber but nearly as capable as the Gnarvana in all but the rowdiest terrain. If I wasn’t making semi regular trips to the bike park, mine would stay in Smash mode.

Robic, find a demo. Don’t go $5 k in on another bike to find out it isn’t what you thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canada1

Robic, find a demo. Don’t go $5 k in on another bike to find out it isn’t what you thought.

---

It's hard to find a demo of a specific bike in my size at the right time. And I generally go pre-owned frame and build it to my liking. This way I'm at minimal loss with the resale. But I agree, that would be a perfect scenario

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

I’m in the camp that thinks most people are over biked… Yoann Barelli demonstrates pretty well what bikes like the GG are built to do best. If you ride like that - great.

Modern 120-130mm travel 29’ers can ride really really hard and don’t feel like a boat going uphill. Something like a Pivot 429’s for example could ride any trail in Moab pretty darn fast but still pedal well on all day rides and be fun on flowy terrian. I also typically just have more fun when I’m not overbiked. Big bikes on tight singletrack just feel like you’re constantly under steering and trying to muscle the bike through things.

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/st...xoC2NkQAvD_BwE

I think it would be tough to find a better bike, with better specs, with a warranty, for that price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by californiagrown

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/st...xoC2NkQAvD_BwE

I think it would be tough to find a better bike, with better specs, with a warranty, for that price.

---

Not a fan of Spesh, had their first Evo in S3 and it was ok but nothing to be too excited about. I'd be more interested in swapping the frame/fork

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

The fact that you started with a Gnarvana tells me you have a DH bent. The Smash sounds like your bike if you're tied to GG.

I'm a huge fan of that Goldilocks level. The current group of 140-150mm trailbikes truly are the best of both worlds. They do everything very very well.
Other options to try would be the Ripmo, Switchblade, Offering, Hightower, Rail 29, etc. These bikes do it all well.

IMO, there's really very little a shorter travel bike can do better unless you're looking for pure XC.
My Offering is awesome on flats, technical climbs, poppy stuff and I've even raced really chunky Enduro without feeling undergunned.

Here's my opinion, having owned a GG Smash->Gnarvana->Megatrail MX. Previously I had a Sentinel v1, now on a Nomad 6. I generally prefer to overbike as well. That said...
The GG platform has the geometry of a big bike, the weight of a big bike, but doesn't ride super plush. It's got really high levels of anti-squat, anti-rise, and pedal kickback. So if you try and chase a supple, smooth feeling, you're going to have a big heavy bike that's really mushy and vague. If you try to get it feeling efficient, it's going to be a big heavy bike that bounces off everything. That's fine if you're strong, but it's a lot if you're not willing to go full gas all the time.

I agree that around a 150 rear is a really great all-around mountain bike now. You can do just about anything on that. I felt like my v1 Sentinel was a lot more versatile than the GG - the main reason I gave that up was because the v1 wasn't progressive at all. The v2 Sentinel would have been the bike I wanted then. Other great options to look at would be a SJ Evo (preferably full 29, the MX kinematic is a bit compromised), a Sentinel v2, or a Hightower (whatever version they're currently on).

As mentioned above, I've currently got a Nomad 6, which while it's got a ton of travel and actually weighs more than my Smash did, feels a lot more playful and lively, while beating me up less on chunk. The current generation of VPP tuned down the anti-squat and anti-rise to make it soak up repeated hits better, while still pedaling really well. I've also got a '22 Levo ebike, which shares the same kinematic as the SJ Evo. In stock form, it had peppier handling than the Gnarvana or Megatrail, but also is WAY more comfortable through brake bumps / repeated fast hits.

I’ll chime in and semi disagree with andeh. I was on an xl v1 sentinel with cascade link for 5 years and am now on a s4 gnarvana with a zeb and x2. I kept my wao union/hydra wheels so that isn’t a variable. My sentinel was alloy and my gnarvana is noticeably lighter so that is a change.

All that said the biggest difference between the bikes is chainstay length. I bought the gnarvana in part for the longer stays and the bike feels much more balanced. The sentinel with shorter stays could be more playful but you also had to ride it with a super forward position to have the front end hook up. Climbing wise the bikes feel similar and on rolling terrain the gg handles better since there is a bit more weight on the front end. There was an adjustment to the extra length but both bikes are long and it isn’t a huge change.
I do find the suspension on the gg better but it has a nicer shock and a nicer fork and I think the biggest kinematic change between the 2 is more anti rise.

I am going to echo the tires are important chorus and say a big bike with light rubber will feel quicker than a smaller travel bike with heavy rubber.

All that said I also have a hardtail for tame trails and a steady riding diet of steep Pnw tech. If I was riding more high country long rides I would have a 120-130mm bike as my primary built up on the light side, something like a ripley or tall boy.

Yeah, I had a carbon Sentinel and ride size mediums. So its geometry felt much more proportional to me than the massive 450mm CS on a s2 Gnarvana lol. My Sentinel was like ~32-33 lbs, Gnarvana ~33-34 lbs. But more apples to apples, the Smash felt way stiffer than the Sentinel, especially the rear end.

I gifted my Sentinel frame to my brother-in-law, who uses it for his quiver of 1 bike in Pisgah/Dupont. He loves it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smmokan

Yep, I've got a ton of experience on both bikes (Druid V1). The GG is definitely a lot of bike to handle.

Pedaling and on the climbs, the Druid is a little more manageable since it'll be lighter and smaller/shorter. But they both climb pretty well overall, especially in tech. Assuming you build the Druid up more appropriately for a trail bike, it'll probably be 2-3 lbs lighter, which should help. Also, if you go that direction (V1 only, not applicable to the new frame), make sure you remove the lower chain guide since it helps a ton with chain drag. Otherwise, I didn't really notice much, if any, loss in efficiency due to the idler.

On the descents, the GG is a beast that can handle anything you throw at it. But it's also a big, heavy, long bike, and it takes a lot of effort. The Druid is much shorter and playful, but it can also handle all the chunk with the high-pivot design. FWIW, the V1 Druid I had last year was probably my favorite bike ever. I did big rides in the CO high country on it, but then also rode it on double blacks in BC. There's just something about that high-pivot feel that I really like.

---

I recall that you also had Deviate Highlander after Druid. Any comparison here? Both are quite interesting high pivot trail bikes.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

Yep, sure did... but unfortunately, my experience with Deviate was pretty shitty. The QC on their early frames (this was back in 2020) was sub-par, and I ended up getting bikes with out of spec idlers, seals, and more. The paint quality was garbage, and there was chipping all over just from cable rub- especially under the top tube. Even though I was "partnering" with them for demo bikes, they didn't offer much in the way of support, even though I found out later that they knew about all the issues.

Maybe their bikes have gotten better in the last few years- it certainly sounds like it based on recent reviews. But I do know that their support still sucks, which is why I'd never recommend anyone buy one.

I haven't rode a gnarvana more then pedaling around a parking lot, but I'd think it would be worth trying a smash setup if you can track down the stays for a reasonable price. I've had mine for two months now and I think it makes for a pretty good all-around bike. It seems to climb almost as well as my previous 150/135 trance X and is much more competent on rougher descents.

Haven’t ridden the new Druid but am curious. I currently have a Dreadnought for a big bike and really dig it. My trail bike is a V2 carbon Sentinel, if I didn’t love this thing so much I probably my would have already bought a Druid to try.

I would have a hard time only owning the Dreadnought though, which is comparable to your bike. I think the 140-150 range is spot for 1 bike quivers.