|
calpolyclimber
Jul 31, 2003, 4:25 PM
Post #1 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 360
|
I know this isn't about climbing, and I actually don't really know where I should put this topic, but oh well...
I know alot of you guys are also into mountain biking and I would love it if you could reccomend some bikes for me to check out. I'm just getting started, but I am interested in full suspension and hopefully disc brakes (mechanical should be just fine). I'm looking for a cross country bike, and cost is an issue. Thanks alot for any input, I just don't really know where to start looking.
|
|
|
|
|
jorgle
Jul 31, 2003, 4:28 PM
Post #2 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Posts: 236
|
try mtbr.com they have reviews and pricing on tons of bikes.
|
|
|
|
|
calpolyclimber
Jul 31, 2003, 4:31 PM
Post #3 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 360
|
Thanks, I'll check that out.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtbagginit
Jul 31, 2003, 5:07 PM
Post #4 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 34
|
If your just starting out and trying to keep the cost down, I definately wouldnt get a full suspension ride with disc brakes. I used to ride on a raleigh with no suspension for a long time and it served me well, only recently did I give in a buy a full suspension cannondale. If you want a quality bike with full suspension and other features itll most likely cost you over a thousand. However, alot of experienced riders actually prefer not to have a rear suspension. Even though you can stiffen your rear shock on alot of models it will still bob with hard pedaling taking more energy out of the push. Without the rear suspension the cost goes down alot Ive noticed. Also, if you really want the discs, I recommend it only on the front wheel. The rear wheel seizes up pretty fast whatever kind of brake you have and so the disc isnt really necessary on the rear, which will free up alot of weight
|
|
|
|
|
climbingbum
Jul 31, 2003, 5:12 PM
Post #5 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 134
|
Trek Fuel
Santa Cruz Superlight
Should be able to pick up a used Cruz for a decent price...
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 5:35 PM
Post #6 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
I have raced downhill for a while and have also done CX on my leisure. There are two very different types of riding and two different bikes for each. If you are mainly into CX then you should definitely NOT get a full suspension especially with disk brakes. A bike like that is made entirely for serious down hill. Just because you may dabble in some down hill adventure at times doesn’t justify the cost, weight and components put into a downhill bike if you mainly ride CX. A full suspension is heavier, and has a more flexible ride. This isn’t a good idea for CX. In CX you want front suspension at most and a lighter bike. Disk breaks would be ridiculous for CX. You will lag behind with every crank if you have a full suspension. Yes you can tighten your rear suspension for a more ridged ride but then why have it at all. You can still ride downhill stuff with just front shocks.
With that said, I would look into TREK for a beginner bike. That wont cost you an arm and leg. Specialized makes a good beginner bike as well. you can also look at Mongoose, Diamond Back, and a few others for low cost sound bikes.
Later you can get into the high end Kona, Cannondale, Gary Fischer, etc.
Good luck.
p.s. I can't spelll today.. uuuggh
|
|
|
|
|
alpiner
Jul 31, 2003, 5:47 PM
Post #7 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2003
Posts: 210
|
Nonsense, FS with moderate travel is the way to go for CX unless you are a racerhead trying proving your studliness. A decent design is plenty light, climbs well, descends better, and won't beat you up on long rides. Forget long travel unless you ride lifts. Skip the disk brakes unless you ride in mud a lot, too heavy and no real advantage over Vs.
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 5:52 PM
Post #8 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
all the racers that I have known say that when you crank on a hard tail vs. a FS you get more power out of it especially on uphill sections. trust me there are lots of up hills in CX.
your opinion is great though.. never really thought of limited travel suspension for sort of a all around bike.
Alpiner do you think it's all just opinion or what?
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jul 31, 2003, 5:53 PM
Post #9 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: I have raced downhill for a while and have also done CX on my leisure. There are two very different types of riding and two different bikes for each.
Cal, I agree with you, disks & FS make the bike the most fun. I've had a few MTBs, but no longer have an FS bike. Wish I still did. BTW, if you're building it up yourself, a disk on the front only is fine too, and can save both weight & $$.
|
|
|
|
|
urban_rocker
Jul 31, 2003, 5:56 PM
Post #10 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 58
|
I would reccommend a Specialized bike with front suspension and a decent group set. Try a Hard Rock Comp £399.99 (dunno what it will cost in the states), and upgrade with DMR V8's because the pedals supplied with most cheap bikes suck.
If your are lookin to buy a real high end bike there are alot of frames, but parts try Shimano for the groupset (brakes, derailers, shifters, hubs etc.) Their range goes from Deore (cheap) to LX, then XT then XTR (their dura ace group go in there somewhere, fuck knows where?).
Truativ do wicked cranks, for pedals company called DMR their V12's or V8's are the bomb, for a seat post and handle bars go to Easton.
Try Fox or Rockshox for suspension and Halo (or Easton) for rims. If youy really want disk brakes get Shimano or Hope.
Frames by Specialized, Santa Cruz, Gary Fisher, Kona, Cannodale, are all cool, try trek if you need a cheap bike.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
wpy71
Jul 31, 2003, 6:01 PM
Post #11 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 195
|
What's your budget, that will help me give you some ideas on potential bikes.
Go full suspension if you can afford it. It results in a much more comfortable and controlled ride. Any minor penalty you pay in the flats will be more than made up for on downhills and technical climbs.
I would also highly reccomend disc brakes as well. They offer greater stopping power and control than rim brakes.
|
|
|
|
|
mbva
Jul 31, 2003, 6:19 PM
Post #12 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2003
Posts: 5
|
i have to second the notion of hardtail for xc. leave the full suspension for the downhillers. for the additional price you'll pay for full suspension, you could have upgraded components, and in xc you'll see more benefit from better components. also, if you're working on a smaller type (less than $1000) budget, the meat of the bike will be crap and you'll be paying for the novelty of full suspension.
i would recommend a specialized rockhopper comp, trek 6700 or gary fisher hoo koo e koo. all well equiped bikes with a good solid base for getting started. all around $800 new. if you're looking to spend less, but you want to ride hard, go for a used model of one of those.
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 6:23 PM
Post #13 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
XC, CX.... I keep doing that. thanks for pointing it out.
I agree with the fun part.. I have two FS as well. I dont do disk because of how much they cost. Vs is good for me. it's all what you prefer.
still in a race, you will get more power with a hard tail on a "XC" trail.
The cheaper the bike (usually) the more heavy it is… so if this guy is a beginner and wants to get a cheap bike then he can cut cost by not going with the disk just yet and maybe getting a hard tail with a good front shock. That’s my opinion.
Peace
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 6:27 PM
Post #14 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
Mvba you said what I was trying to say only BETTER.
|
|
|
|
|
nobody
Jul 31, 2003, 6:28 PM
Post #15 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 44
|
as an avid mountain biker, I'd have to say that the only decent advice in this thread so far is to go to MTBR.com
Don't take mtb advice from a climbing website! Most of the climbing advice is bad enough.
this thread reads like it was from 1998. Currently, full suspension is the norm for most types of riding. most brands have full suspension bikes at many pricepoints, so one brand vs. another isn't really any way to think about it. Find a few bikes from different manufacturers that are in your price range, then decide between them.
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Jul 31, 2003, 6:30 PM
Post #16 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: still in a race, you will get more power with a hard tail on a "XC" trail.
Actually, I think with the current FS designs you are faster overall than you would be with a hardtail. True, you may lose a little bit of power when you are cranking out of the saddle on a FS bike but with a nice FS bike you can stay seated more and small bumps don't interrupt your pedal stroke. On anything but a smooth XC race course you will see more pro riders on FS bikes than hardtails. And besides it doesn't sound like the original poster is a weight weenie, ex-roadie, XC fanatic. It sounds like they are looking for a decent trailbike. A short travel (3-5 inches) bike is ideal for this type of riding. But I agree you have to spend at least 1000-1200 bucks to get a decent FS bike. If you wanted to spend less I would get a nicer hardtail.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jul 31, 2003, 6:36 PM
Post #17 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: still in a race, you will get more power with a hard tail on a "XC" trail. |
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 6:46 PM
Post #18 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
In reply to: Because this lightweight rider who doesn't take big drops busted his Freeride frame.
that really sucks...
The guy that doesn’t think there was any good advice given on MTB here on this climbing sight, I think was wrong. Reading all of the opinions here and formulating an idea of what you want to do should set anyone in the right direction.
I’ve been on the NORBA circuit for 5 years now. and yes some of the things I have said about hard tial bikes are opinions from XC fanatics.
All in all I think good advice was given. If you can AFFORD a good FS then go for it. if you cannot then get a really good HT and ride on.
Depending on how much this guy weighs he may never need disk brakes unless he gets into some serious downhill. If he only weighs 100lbs V brakes are going to stop him cold.
|
|
|
|
|
alpiner
Jul 31, 2003, 6:55 PM
Post #19 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2003
Posts: 210
|
Don't forget that racers are worse techweenies than climbers and they look for any excuse to blame the machine ;-) My FS is lighter than most hardtails but isn't made for big air. Anything over 2 - 4" of travel is strictly for the gonzo full-face mask crowd who never travel far. Try biking a century (like White Rim in a day) and you'll be happy to have rear suspension by the end.
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jul 31, 2003, 7:21 PM
Post #20 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
Alpiner
so true! you have a good point. dude how much was your bike and how much does it weigh.. I'm just curious.
peace
|
|
|
|
|
couch_climber
Jul 31, 2003, 7:27 PM
Post #21 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 21
|
As an avid XC mtn biker (but not a racing stud), I'd vote FS. Sure, it does take a bit more energy to pedal, but it's fractionally more. When I'm tempted to use this as an excuse I usually tell myself to shut up and pedal harder.
I find the advantages of a FS bike (comfort, control) to outweigh the disadvantages (weight, energy absorption). In my book, comfort + control = fun. The more fun something is the more I do it.
I'd say spend ~ $1200 on a FS. For a prudent shopper this will land a great bike. After riding for a period of time you'll know if you should ebay that one & fork out thousands on a real machine.
Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
|
enitine
Jul 31, 2003, 7:32 PM
Post #22 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2003
Posts: 103
|
Been racing XC for the last 11 years, sponsored locally and almost semi-pro, when I get a chance I'll pm you and set you up with a sweet ride that won't put a dent in your wallet.
Climb ON!
8)
|
|
|
|
|
bostonclimbah
Jul 31, 2003, 7:40 PM
Post #23 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2003
Posts: 220
|
I couldn't agree more about the tech weenies. I ride 2-3 times a week with people that have some serious $$$ in their rigs and I never have trouble keeping up. FS will open up alot more terrain to you and provide a lot more control and comfort on tough rides. AND.... YOU DON"T HAVE TO SPEND A TON OF $$$!
As for speed vs. a hard tail? Take a deep breath, grow some nutz and crank hard. You'll pass just about anyone you want to.
I would recomend looking at bikes from last year or 2 years ago such as a Trek Fuel 80 or 90. You can find one of these for about $700 - 800 (maybe not the 90). There are also plenty of K2's, Gary Fisher's and Specialized (see the Enduros) with similar components that won't croak you from 2001 -2002. Sure, it's not the latest and greatest stuff invented in the last 5 minutes. Fact is, the technology on these bikes is so advanced that most riders will NEVER use it to it's potential.
Check your local shops. They always have brand new bikes that are last year's model, selling for 1/2 the money. If not, test ride some of the bikes above and contact Ace Wheel Works in Belmont MA. If they have it, they'll ship it to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
calpolyclimber
Aug 1, 2003, 7:25 AM
Post #25 of 36
(3396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 360
|
Hey again. Sorry it took me so long to get back to this. I'm staying with my parents this weekend and using a stone age computer.
I'll try to clear a few things up... I think I may have been a little mistaken about the term "cross country". I was interpreting it more as a little of everything. I want to ride some long trails. I want to ride some more technical stuff (as I progress of cource). I may take a lift now and then, but downhill overall is not the direction I want to take my riding. This is why I was thinking of a FS bike. And yes, it will probably be muddy at times (Northern California), so I was opting for discs.
And as far as price range is concerned, I understand I can't get a "cheap" FS bike without getting just that... When I said price is an issue, I just meant that I didn't want to hear your wishlist. Just keep it reasonable. I am looking to spend somewhere between $800 and $1300. I understand about $1200 can get you a pretty good bike.
Thanks for all the input. Keep it coming. I did look at MTBR too, and have found a few from Iron Horse (Sinister DX and Hollowpoint Sport), Ibex, Haro and GT. Whats the deal with Iron Horse? Their bikes are discounted really big online... Are they going under or something? Also, is Ibex a respectable company?
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
