First world problems and call me crazy, but my new Diverge 4 has been so good I almost find it boring. The FS, frame geometry, and big tires quiet any and all bumps, and the dropped BB with the “in the bike” feel make it incredibly stable on fast downhills and techy single track.
I sold my beloved Crux for this thing and I kinda miss it… The Crux rode on a knifes edge, it was raw, it made you work on fast downhills, but it climbed like a rocket and handled singletrack pretty well too even. It seemed to have that secret sauce that the Diverge just seems to lack. Every ride on the Crux was harsher and hurt more, even on low psi 48s, and it was not nearly as stable at speed, but still always left me smiling.
The Diverge sometimes feels like it does all the work for me, and while I hate to take that for granted I think that’s why I’m finding it to be kinda… boring.
I feel this way about 150 mm mountain bikes. I’ve bought 2 over the last several years and always end up riding my shorter travel bikes because they’re more fun for me. The bigger bikes only come alive if I’m going all out downhill but my shorter travel bikes feel alive all the time.
I actually just sold my Top Fuel for this very reason. The trails I mostly ride just don’t require anything close to that level of bike and I found myself being less motivated because of it. The Top Fuel kind of flattened everything out, so I found myself less engaged while riding and quite possibly regressing in my skill level/technique. I went back to a hardtail singlespeed and am having enough fun that I’m planning on doing an entire XC season on it next year- something I haven’t done in at least a decade.
I think about it as the intersection of the bike, the trails, and the rider’s skills.
At that intersection there are three possible outcomes:
The perfect match (rare and unlikely): the trails are just challenging enough for your skill level on the bike that you’re completely engaged by the ride - and you never crash.
Under-biking: the trails are a little too challenging for your skills on that bike. You either crash a lot or go slow.
Over-biking: the trails are too easy for your skills. You go fast, but you’re bored. Maybe you crash because you’re not paying attention, but not because anything is too challenging.
Are there any harder trails you could ride with your bike?
Or maybe get a second set of wheels and put narrower slicks on them to make the trails more interesting…
I like boring bikes for racing. Racing has enough drama and danger, I like stability and confidence in a race bike. Smooth and predictable is fast, but often boring. For fun rides, I’m game for anything and enjoy underbiking at times for the added challenge/novelty.
What you describe makes sense. In 2012 I bought an XC fully, which (at the time) was modern, capable and certainly handled better over difficult terrain than the hardtail it replaced. Turns out, I like the roughness of a hardtail. They tend to be lighter and simpler machines. I got a great deal on a used sub-10 kg hardtail and really like it.
Hence, I don’t think you are crazy wishing you had your Crux back. So what are you going to do about it?
I agree with all of this. As others have already mentioned, this is really obvious with MTBs since there is such a huge range of them and the “more capable” bikes are the ones being pushed in development and marketing, but the truth is that most of us don’t need that much bike to have a really good time out on our local trails.
I can see this happening with gravel bikes now given how far that tech is being pushed.
I do see you likely getting used to your Diverge, and at some point, going back to that Crux might make you feel like it’s too twitchy, and rough, but, who knows? Maybe that Crux really is the sweet spot for the type of riding you’re doing. I think that’s likely why it’s been such a popular bike and sort of taken over Specialized’s gravel line up.
The best bike for a rider depends on their priorities. If you want to go fast, there’s a bike for that, but it’s not always more fun. Just like with cars, you need the machine that fit’s your goals. Bigger, faster, lower, more powerful, more expensive isn’t going to be more fun for most of us unless you have the skills and you’re doing 180mph on the right track.
So true. With my old fully there were so many situations where I could just plow through and not worry. In fact, plowing through was probably a faster line on that bike. When I bought the XC fully, I had initially planned on getting a trail bike with 130 mm front and rear. Felt wallowy and way too much. The (cheaper) 110 mm XC version felt better.
If I ever went down to one bike, the Crux — or a bike like it — is going to be at the top of the list. I prefer a nimbler (= twitchy for some) handling and a more aggressive body position.
I hate to play the old man card (I’m not even 45), but when I was a kid, my father’s Mercedes 320 TE (S124) with 220 hp was a fast car. Now it’d be positively slow. Ditto for Porsche Boxters and Caymans. However, once you introduce corners into the mix, they come alive and you can get closer to full potential than with a modern 400+ hp super hatchback that’d outrun a Ferrari from 20 years ago.
Totally! That Cayman is likely going to be way more fun on some tracks and in the real world than a Ferrari. Also, I probably wouldn’t have a ton of fun in a Ferrari on the track it was made for since I don’t have the skills to take it to the limit.
The right tool is determined by the terrain, the skill, and the intent of the pilot.
Yep. The least “boring” car I’ve ever driven was an old big block vette with a 4 speed. It was loud and violent and completely unrefined. Cars like that are still a lot of fun even if they are crazy slow compared to modern cars.
These days, I have an old porsche 993 that is a blast to drive even at low speeds. Not quite as fun as something like a miata, but there is a lot to enjoy with a lightweight car that can handle. Neither are fast, but that’s not the objective when it’s not a race. All these modern cars with crazy HP are a bit silly, they are pretty boring on public roads and few people actually race them on the track.
Folks who choose to ride hardtails are kind of like folks who still prefer standard transmissions in their sports cars. Everyone knows a modern automatic is faster, but a standard transmission can be a lot more fun for recreational driving.
My best friend has a 968 Clubsport and a 986 Boxter S, and he previously owned a current-gen Miata. He took me for a ride in the Boxster and it was fast enough. Taking corners at (for regular cars) ridiculous speeds was fun, and getting the Boxster didn’t break the bank for him. It was about the same as a used Miata, he said. On the other hand, it isn’t as rare as his 968 CS and if something were to happen, he’d be fine.
That’s a good comparison, actually.
PS All that talk reminds me of one of the best comebacks from my wife when I convinced her to let me buy a new road bike. She said “At least you are not into cars.”
My new road bike could be described as “boring”. Modern fast aero bike. Every time I ride with this one local dude and see his custom titanium bike, I get jealous.
But also, this “boring” aero bike is fast. And fast is fun, so I’m not bored at all.
My 170mm MTB was a uncompromising bike when it was launched (albeit in 2018) and it is just amazingly perfect for the riding I do. When I am dropping into a trail that says “Pro Line” on the sign, I don’t want to be second guessing if I’m under biked.
My XC bike would be great for all those people who like to “under bike”, like those that ride Epic Evo’s. But that’s not the riding I am currently into. I love racing XC, but I don’t have fun riding it unless I’m challenging someone else.
I love the 993s, last aircooled ones. I have a 996 turbo x50. While the car is fun to drive at any speed its party trick is really the 2 to 3rd gear pulls that get you well well over the speed limit….. Whats the saying: its more fun to drive a slow car fast, then a fast car slow. Its the same with bikes.
