Final desition
dylancrisp
Posts: 116
I have decided the model I want to buy. it is the specialized hardrock . The problem is that I am not sure if I should get the Hardrock pro disk or get the hardrock sport disk 24 and up-grade the forks and some other bits.
please answer my question
thanks
please answer my question
thanks
0
Comments
-
The 2007 Hardrock Pro has Hayes Sole hydros, so it would depend on the price difference between the two models. Both have awful forks, and would be the first thing that I upgraded on either. There is also the Sport Hyd in the middle. I have to ask, why buy new then upgrade straight away? If you sell the old parts form new, it can work well as you will get some money back, otherwise I would invest in a better bike to start with. At the price of the Hardrock Pro, and a bit more, you could get the Rockhopper Disc, a far far better bike.0
-
My only question is how much do you think the forks will sell for and what else would be worth selling. another thing is do you think the rockopper will be able to handle a little bit of freeride stuff. the rockhopper is also really pushing my budget so do you really think its a better idea to start on that
thanks
ps are there any kona bikes you could recomend0 -
i have also seen a 2006 trek 6500 SLR for 500£ is this a good bike. i need an answer fast because they have only two left in stock and there not re stocking0
-
£30 to £40 pounds for the forks. The Hardrock isnt really a freeride bike at all though, but it does have a slightly burlier frame.
Trek SLR is a good bike, but again, is aimed at the XC/trail market.0 -
so do you think the SLR is a good bye....are there any kona bikes and what else could i sell on the hardrock sport0
-
I'll be honest, I think the Hardrock is poor bike, all of them. Poor forks, basic frames, overly heavy and underspecced, and simply better for the cash. I just wouldn't bother!
SLR is a great frame, and thats a superb price. You need to test them.0 -
ok thanks a lot mate. you have been a real help.
i think ill be getting a bike in october when do 07 bikes start becoming cheaper??0 -
They are starting to be reduced from now, seen a few reductions, but different people release at different times.0
-
are there any other trek, specilized, or kona bikes you can recomend for 500£ max0
-
Kona again tend to be very underspecced at their price points. Trek 6000 2007, Specialized Rockhopper are the only ones that fit the price. GT Avalanche worth a look, as is the Commencal Combi Disc.0
-
ok thanks again...do you think ill be needing any amour0
-
Not for general trails. But if you plan to get more gnarly in your riding, safety is a good option! Start small, get used to the bike and see where you want to go. Get a helmet of course.0
-
ok sure...i was just surfing the web for bike shops in my area and i found out they sell gt's. are there any gt's you could recomend0
-
GT Avalanche 1.0 disc is both tough, light as well as well specced and great value.0
-
ok thanks....I have been looking around this forum for about 5 months and i saw that gt avalanche's were ver popular and i couldnt find a dealer in my area but i found one. i am so happy no.
thanks sooooo much mate you have been a GREAT help0 -
-
supersonic wrote:I'll be honest, I think the Hardrock is poor bike, all of them. Poor forks, basic frames, overly heavy and underspecced, and simply better for the cash. I just wouldn't bother!
I'd agree on that, I'm a bit of a Spesh fan boy at times, my friend bought a Hardrock though. It weighed a ton and he managed to rub a hole right through the frame due to the tire getting knocked off center slightly and rubbing down a hill. It's nothing like the higher models apart from the logo on the downtube (which is where £100 of your money is going).0 -
i am trying to contact the shop but I can only see last years avalanche on it. is this still a good buy.
thanks0 -
Definitely, similar spec fork but from Rock Shox instead of Suntour. The rest of the spec isn't vastly different. Is it the disc model or the V brake one?
If they try and sell you last years though try and get a bit knocked off the price, most places will knock £100 or so off on something like that.0 -
ok thanks....
I think I might be able to get the 2007 version but is it better to buy last years model. I have also been looking at the Trek 6000. Is this a good contender for the avalanche? Is it worth trying them both out....
thanks again0 -
A lot of people seem to like last years for the Rock Shox fork, it's a bigger brand. I personally prefer this years, apart from the design which I didn't really like. This year offers better brakes, I really liked the fork (that's it on the Stumpjumper pics below) and some decent Nevegal tyres.
http://www.whatmtb.com/biketestdetails.asp?id=682 <- there's a review of last years.
A fairly recent MBR had a review of £500 bikes, including the Avalanche 1.0, very short review though as it was in a big grouptest.
Edit: Oh and as they say: "Two things strike you when you climb aboard the Avalanche and start turning the pedals. First, the ride position is relatively compact. Riders used to the old-skool of arse skywards, flat-backed masochism that used to typify cross-country bikes may feel out of place.". I did feel a bit out of place, hence the new frame on there, very good bike that said though.0 -
ok thanks, that was really helpfull
do you think the trek 6000 is a good bike to try to see if i like that one aswell0 -
I've not ridden one but as far as I know it's more of a conventional XC bike, longer top tube than the Avalanche. Similar spec brakes, similar groupset.
If possible I'd try sitting on both, if one is too short or long you should instantly be able to tell.0 -
ok thanks....
whats the difference between the two bikes style wise. arent they both used for the same thing0 -
Yeah pretty much, it's more down to how you ride, shorter bikes are normally easier to move your weight around over for technical bits, longer bikes are more aimed at getting your head downwards and riding fast over easier terrain. I'm 6"6' and found the GT a bit too short personally, my friend has the same bike though and loves it.
With 2 bikes so similar though I'd see if you can sit on them first, there won't be much difference. One will just feel a bit more natural. Both would be fine for pretty much any instance you can imagine.
If they both feel the same pick the one that looks the coolest! It'll sit there begging for you to go on bike rides
0 -
ok....many thanks,
personally i prefer the look of the trek but as you said I think i better try them first. What bike do you have0 -
The two in my signature, click the links for pics!
The Enduro I've had for about 6 years now, it's my playing in the woods bike.
My other one I'm trying to keep light, I use it for longer rides with friends, gentle XC stuff and want to get into racing, next year at the latest. It used to be a 2007 Avalanche 1.0 actually!
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2007-GT-Avalanche-1-0-Frame-Lots-More-XL-21_W0QQitemZ280136219053QQihZ018QQcategoryZ22679QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem <- there's the rest of it :?
Getting a cool looking bike does help a lot, having a worse derailleur or something can always be fixed later. If you don't like the look of your bike you're stuck with it. You can get them resprayed but it'll set you back quite a bit. I did consider getting the Enduro done, I'm sick of the look of it
0 -
lol....what happended to your bike.
would you say the avalanche would be better for upgrades or the trek.0 -
Both fairly similar, I prefer the forks on the Avalanche, the Trek has lighter wheels though. The frames are similar, gearing is similar, brakes are similar.
It's too close to say, go try them, failing that buy the better looking!0 -
what do you think of the trek 6500. any good. i heard something about manitou going out of business. well that affect the garinty. are there any other bikes looking out for at 600£
thanks0
