Which Giant?

bone-shaker

I need a little advice. I know there is a sticky on this subject but I want to check out a couple of specifics.

I was a keen cyclist many years ago and now want to get back into it. I particularly enjoy trails and would eventually like to try a little downhill. But first things first. I have a 10 year old Raleigh 21" mountain bike and think I need to get something new. This is what I am thinking so could you all give me your thoughts and the following;

1. I think I need something that is lighter than I have to make it easier to ride
2. I think I need disc brakes for stopping in the wet
3. I will need front suspension to soak up the terrain and save my bones
4. I figured that a full suspension bike would be ideal but it is out of my budget and cheap ones are not worth the money.
5. Is a good front suspension bike better than a cheaper full suspension one?

I think I have worked out for myself what I need but I would like the thoughts of some more experienced riders.

I want to get an entry level bike for trails from a proper bike shop, not a dept store. As a result it seems to me that Giant offer good bikes for the money. So as long as I have got the above right, I am down to three models, again can you let me know what your thoughts are;

1. Giant Boulder Trail at 275
2. Giant Yukon at 300
3. Giant Rincon Trail at 325 (Top of budget)


What are the pros and cons of each? I tried a 23" Yukon and it felt like it 'fitted' well (I'm 6'2"). Obviously I will try them all but the gears, brakes and seat posts all seem only slightly different, is there really a lot in it? The Rincon and Yukon have lock outs on the suspension and I guess this is good if on-road. Please give me your comments on these, especially the frames.

Thanks very much,

Bone-shaker

Splasher

A couple of things, I think the bikes you mention are 2007 models and you really should be getting a big discount on 2007 models at this tiume of year. For example http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/products.p ... Suspension

Also, at 6'2" I'd be amazed if 23" was the right size for you. 21" should be a much more comfortable fit. Don't be worried about a good bit of seatpost showing, that's how mountain bikes are designed now.

bone-shaker

Hi Splasher

I know, I thought 21 would be enough but I went into the shop and the guy said try the 23 it will be too big but he changed his mind when I got on it. I have really long legs! The bike felt very comfortable and I wasn't stretching at all. I will check out the link, thanks for your time replying.

bone-shaker

Splasher

Don't worry about having long legs, that's more reason to go for the 21" - sounds daft but let me explain.

If you're 6'2" and you've got long legs than average for your height, you must have a shorter body than average. The 23" frame will be longer than the 21" and whereas you can always adjust the seat height to accomodate your legs, there's not a great deal you can do if the bikes too long, or at least nothing that doesn't cost money.

Now I don't know your bike shop and I'm sure they're straight up, but a less reputable one would prefer to sell a 23" bike because the 21" are easier to shift. So try both and buy the one that feels right to you. If they both feel OK, buy the 21". It'll be lighter, easier to handle on the trails and easier to flog if you get the bug and want to upgrade.

bone-shaker

Good advice. I will try both side by side.

I checked the model year and the models I have referred to are all the 2007/8 models shown on the Giant site as current. The Yukon for example has the blue / white paint job, not the brown. I am trying to buy from the local shop as I am sick of the half**ds / Tes*o bods trying to take over everything! Plus I get good advice and servicing.

dav1

I have an 07 Yukon and I love it!

Its a lot of bike for your £300 and you can always upgrade it later to improve it as you get better and things wear out.
I am 5'10 and ride the L (21") frame.

I cant really see what you are getting for your extra £25 in the rincon trail, is the trail frame supposed to be lighter or something?

bone-shaker

I don't know about the frame being lighter or stronger etc. Anyone? What you can see though is that the fram dips lower where it meets the seat post, meaning that if you fall off you dont drop directly onto the frame in a way that brings tears to your eyes!

Does anyone else know whether it is worth the extra £25 going from the Yukon to the Rincon Trail?

Thanks

bone-shaker

RussAlf

My yukon, its a great first bike and you do get alot of bike for your money. However if you plan on seriously getting into this then i suggest you wait that bit longer and save that bit more cash and buy a better specd bike or be prepared to spend a bit of cash upgrading it when you get better. I never thought i would get this seriously into mtb being it my second hobby but i have and i now wish i spent a bit more. The main weaknesses on the bike is the Shock, mechanical disc, pedals and the chain. It all depends on how hardcore you plan on being with this bike, if you plan on doing a bit of downhill and serious trails you will in the future need to upgrade those parts i listed.

So far ive upgraded my yukon a fair bit, ive got spds pedals, a stronger sram chain, hayes hfx 9 discs, xt shifters, new grips and ive got a rock shox recon sitting at home waiting to be fitted. From reviews ive read the yukon comes with a strong aluminium frame which is worth upgrading. I do wish i had bought a better bike but as i already had it i just upgraded it, once i get the shock on there it will be a much more capable bike (untill i break something).

Frame size wise, im about 5'11" ish and i went for the M 19inch frame to give me a bit of room to move. In my eyes the Trail frames are not worth the extra money, i didnt even look at them.

dav1

I am in the same boat with my yukon, got it for commuting and a bit of off road. Now i'm off road with a bit of commuting.

You could wait and save up, and get something better if you are prepared to wait that long. I wasn't and only had £300 to spend so I went for it anyway.

The upgrade thing is very true though, Now I am getting better and I can see what better parts do I have a wish list building up. Took me 9 months to go for my 1st major upgrade. That said the advise is always spend as much as you can when buying a bike to avoid upgrading the hell out of it and spending an unholy amount bringing it up to a level you could have bought cheaper in the first place.
I think everyone likes to upgrade regardless of what they have though Had a nice chat with people in my MTB club about how much fun it is when new bits arrive and some of them have bikes with forks costing more then my whole bike even with upgrades accounted for.

I put some toras on mine last week along with a cane creek C2 headset as my forks filled with water and i was given credit for the upgrade under warranty (i think it could happen to any forks on any bike at this price as suntors/RSTs/Darts aren't great forks. You do need to spend loads more to start getting the nicer stuff though). I also got a WTB speed V seat after I bent the rails crashing a few weeks ago (100% caused by my error when trying a few jumps).

I still maintain its a fantastic starter bike, if I went back knowing what I do now id have still bought it as there would have been no way to stretch my budget any further at that time being in my last year of uni.

As far as frame size goes I wish I got the 19". The 19 and 21 fitted but I went for a 21 thinking commute would be very important. Now I cant lower the bars further and need a new stem to get that 'race' position I desire. Id advise you to see what feels most comfortable for moving the bike about and which will give you the bar height/reach you want for your type of riding.



The MBUK website had this a while back where the yukon was highly rated http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/t ... ether-7820
it nicely explains the limitations of the forks and such that I briefly mentiond in my post.

Thanks to the move I think you will need to read the individual reviews for the bikes tested in the bikes and gear section of the site as the links seem to have been lost from the article

Hope this has helped.

The Spiderman

Good bikes,but if you can stretch to it see if you can find an XTC 4.5,for not much more.Everything is a bit better out of the box,and the frame is a better basis for upgrading if the mtb bug ,bites.

bone-shaker

Please keep the comments coming in - I am getting the idea that the Yukon is a good starter - the Rincon Trail is not worth the extra 25 and to go for the XTC if possible. All good advice, thanks to all those who took time to post.

bone-shaker

bone-shaker

Oh dear. Didn't see that coming! I asked for advice on a 'starter' bike, looking at the Yukon or Rincon Trail but now find myself looking a little further along the line. Now I need a bit more advice - I was happy with the look and feel of the Yukon but now understand that hydraulic discs are much better and easier to maintain, and that I would probably end up upgrading them from mechanicals. This lifts the game and puts me in the Terragon area or even, as was said earlier, into XTC territory.

So the big question is, is it worth holding out until I can afford the XTC 4.5 2008 at 500? Is it a much better frame, seat, crank, fork, wheels package than the others? I know the components are all a little better but should I go for a lower level starter bike and upgrade at a happy pace or is the XTC better than the sum of its parts spending 500 on an XTC is better than a Yukon plus £200 of upgrades.

I am answering my own question I think... but comments please, I want to get this right.

Underscore

bone-shaker wrote:

...
This lifts the game and puts me in the Terragon area or even, as was said earlier, into XTC territory.

So the big question is, is it worth holding out until I can afford the XTC 4.5 2008 at 500? Is it a much better frame, seat, crank, fork, wheels package than the others?
...

First off, if you're planning to upgrade, you will almost certainly be better off buying a bike which already has those upgrades on.

I, like you, have recently got back into MTBing, and my wife has got into it too. I've got the 2008 XTC4.5 and she has the Terrago. I've not riden the Terrago hard but I'd say that many of the differences are quite subtle. However, the 2008 XTC has better brakes that the Terrago - which still has the MPH3s. If you don't intend to go the SPD route, it comes with toe clips and I feel that the seat is much better suited to off-road riding. The tyres on the XTC are better off-road, but a much higher rolling resistance on-road, and I've had 2 punctures compared to my wife's zero - so it's probably horses for courses on that one.

I went for the XTC because my serious MTB friends pointed out that the frame (better for 2008) is a better starting point should I want to upgrade in the future. While I still don't know whether I will succumb to temptation and start upgrading, I would go for the XTC again. However, the Terrago is still a nice bike and I suspect that you would be more than happy with either.

On the price, remember that the list price is only a starting point. I got 10% off the Giants from a LBS (though I was buying two bikes) and I got the same percentage discount from a different LBS when I bought my commuter 4-5 years back. If you don't ask, you don't get...

HTH,

_

bone-shaker

Thanks Underscore (nice name!)

I think I would be happy with either. In fact I know I would be happy with anything that is a 'proper' bike but I am just trying to make sure that if I went for a cheaper bike that I am not saying in six months time 'I wish I had gone for the other one because I know now that the frame / cranks / gears / whatever is better' I know you can upgrade the components but I don't have £100 for this and £85 for that so I am trying to get the most complete package I can now but I can only justify going up to the XTC if it is much better.

I must admit the XTC does seem to have everything I have on my checklist. Which is typical.

Is your XTC light and easy to move around but good enough for a full days riding?

Thanks for taking the time to reply,

bone-shaker

Underscore

bone-shaker wrote:

Is your XTC light and easy to move around but good enough for a full days riding?

When it's not pulling my daughter around on her tag-along, yes it is nice and light. On the black route at Thetford, it was really nice and chuckable through the twisty single track. I would also be happy to ride all day on it - I've done upto about 25 miles in a day with no real issues - though the slightly more agressive riding position can cause a small amount of back and neck ache after longer rides spent prodominantly in the saddle (which is probably down to my aging bones!). I really wouldn't want to spend to long on the road with the stock tyres, though, so if you are planning on a significant amount of road work, either going for the Terrago or getting your dealer to swap the tyres for something more suitable would be a good idea.

What I did was to try one out. I was visiting friends that live near Cannock Chase and I hired an XTC from a bike shop there (Mammoth?) and went for a ride on the Chase. I liked it and decided to buy one. If you are thinking of stretching your budget, it might be a good idea to invest a few quid in trying one out first, to see whether it is worth the stretch. If you decide that it is, the pain of the extra outlay will quickly pass leaving you to carry on enjoying the bike out on the trails...

_