I feel bad but... Which bike? (Sorry)

supermonkey

Hi,

I've been out of this biking lark for a while and looking to get back into it now. I want a decent hard tail that I can mostly use for general cross country stuff but that will also be fine to take on some nastier stuff at some trail centers, Wales, Scotland etc from time to time as well. So I want something reasonably rugged but also light weight (I know those two don't mix too well together but I'm going to try anyway) probably a good description would be a good all rounder?

Anyway, I have £1500 to spend and obviously want a pretty decent bike for that. Options I'm considering at the moment are:


1) Whyte 905 - £1400 - http://www.whytebikes.com/2008/bike.php?ModNo=8W905

Its light weight 25-26lbs, has got a 130mm fork so should suite my purpose well? But I've read a review that said the Recon fork was the main weak point of the bike. Should I be concerned about this? Also, is it a bit expensive for the spec? Can't find many reviews on this bike. Has anyone got one? What do you think? As a side issue, I can also get a deal where the shop will throw in £210 worth of free accessories or upgrades. I need some stuff so this is quite appealing but I could probably get a similar deal on other bikes if I hunted around.

2) Marin Indian Fire Trail - £1500 - http://www.marin.co.uk/2008/bikedetail.php?ModNo=3803

Light weight. Shorter travel but better fork? I like what I've read about this bike but I'm a bit concerned it will be a bit "too racy" for me? Is it suitable for trail center use?

3) Specialized Rockhopper Pro - £900 - http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkMode ... Rockhopper

Much cheaper that the other two but I've read some good reviews and am quite tempted by the low price and weight.

4) Genesis Core 40 - £899 - http://www.genesisbikes.co.uk/index.php ... _bike=TRUE

Got a good review recently, cheap, light.

I've also considered the other Marins - Rocky ridge, too heavy. Eldridge Grade, not too sure, just seems like cheaper, heavier IFT? Also considered and ruled out Orange P7 due to reading about a lot of people having problems with drop outs breaking in one way or another. Also ruled out Boardman Pro, probably because I'm a bike snob but also because I don't really like the look of the thing and if I'm going to spend a grand I want to like how it looks.

Anyone have any opinions on any of the above? Which would you go for if you were me? Or any other options I should consider? (I will do a couple of test rides - Just looking to narrow things down at the moment).

Cheers,

SM

Ciaran500

Any reason you're going for a hardtail? At £1500 you would be getting a very good full sus.

ride_whenever

You could get a good on-one built up for that...

supermonkey

I was considering an FS rig originally, but decided on HT as I've not ridden FS before and as I'm just getting back into things after a long time out of the loop, decided HT would be better to help me regain my skills. Also less maintenance and lower weight are also points I'm considering.

supersonic

Could get a Ti framed Van Nicholas for 1500, or a carbon framed Zaskar or Scott.

supermonkey

I've thought about the GT Zaskar Carbon Expert. Personally think it's a very nice looking bike. Its going a bit over budget but at 24lbs with "just" LX kit presumably it could be upgraded to be super light if desired. Just a bit concerned about it's trail center performance. Same concerns as with the IFT really. Do you think these concerns are uncalled for?

Also can't find any reviews on it. Anyone got one?

supersonic

The Zaskar Carbon is designed to be stiff asd strong like the Zaskars of yore - there are a few reviews that I have seen.

supermonkey

I meant if the geometry of the frame and length of the forks etc was suitable for a good all rounder (All day rides, few jumps, some tame downhill, lot of XC) rather than the actual strength of the frame. Just a bit concerned it (and the Marin) is more of a race frame?

Just found a Carbon Zaskar review and overall they really liked it but one of the draw backs they commented on was poor rear tyre clearance. They said the max width tyre that could be used would be a 2.1 which sort of limits it's appeal. Should I see this as a problem?

supermonkey

ride_whenever wrote:

You could get a good on-one built up for that...

I had a look into that as well. Was looking at the 456 TI. But to be honest I don't think I'd know where to start spec'ing my own bike.

Tall Jon

Phone Brant at On-One and I'm sure he'll give you loads of help and advice

izthewiz

Orange 5 full sus plus cheap hardtail to develop skills. On-One inbred is V good value if you want a new bike.

Chaka Ping

This is what I'd buy if I had £1.5k to spend on a hardtail, the Voodoo D-Jab...

http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stor ... yrn_106182

Or you could have a very nice build on a Cotic Soul or Cove Handjob - both relatively light steel framed XC bikes that can take a longer (130mm) fork. I have a Handjob and find it very good for the riding you describe.

BUT - If I had your budget and wanted one bike to do everything, I'd probably buy a FS instead. You get a lot for £1,500 nowadays.

BlackSpur

I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned this one yet - Rock Lobster build from Merlin?

supermonkey

Cheers guys. I'll be sure to check out the online info for all those options when I get a minute.

So no ones feeling the Whyte? Any reason for that?

Chaka Ping

Rubbish fork for the price and wrong frame material, IMO.

supermonkey

Why wrong frame material?

Chaka Ping

I'm not a fan of aluminium, that's all. For that price I'd rather have top-end steel or mid-range titanium.

I'm sure Whyte make a very nice frame, but I'd want a frame material with a little more inherent comfort for riding all day.

People might say comfort is dictated more by how a frame is built than what it's made from - and there's some truth in that - but we all know steel and ti frames are typically more compliant.

supermonkey

OK fair enough.


Does anyone have any opinions on the Cube Reaction K24?

http://www.cube-bikes.de/xist4c/web/REA ... .htm#anker

Seems like good spec and very low weight. Not really heard much about Cube. Any good?

supermonkey

Anyone?

BlackSpur

Personally I think it would be a bit too XC if your planning on doing some rougher stuff, but otherwise Cube bikes have a good reputation.

Blundell

What about a Trek 8500, pretty good forks up front, it is supposed to be a good aluminium frame.


I suppose that the major factor dictating what you go for is basically the geometry, whether you want xc length forks (100mm) and a fast / twitcher ride, or a mellower geometry based on longer travel forks. You can do trail centres on an xc bike... but you'll need a little more finesse.

supermonkey

BlackSpur wrote:

Personally I think it would be a bit too XC if your planning on doing some rougher stuff, but otherwise Cube bikes have a good reputation.

Even if I crank up the forks to 115mm?

supermonkey

Blundell wrote:

What about a Trek 8500, pretty good forks up front, it is supposed to be a good aluminium frame.

Again, nice looking bike and good spec. Any idea what it weighs and what the rear tire clearance is like?

Blundell wrote:

I suppose that the major factor dictating what you go for is basically the geometry, whether you want xc length forks (100mm) and a fast / twitcher ride, or a mellower geometry based on longer travel forks. You can do trail centres on an xc bike... but you'll need a little more finesse.

That's the question really. And I'm pretty torn between the two:

1) 100mm forks with XC bias
2) 130mm forks with hardcore bias

Just a bit scared of picking one and wishing I'd gone for the other.

Really I want to find something in the middle. I'm annoyed about the Whyte as on paper it seems exactly what I want. It's light enough for XC and (judging by the reviews I've read) a pretty quick bike. But its also got wide bars, short stem, longer fork etc making it a bit more suitable for the trail centre stuff.

Even the blurb from the Whyte site sounds pretty much what I want:

"The UK is a unique place to ride and has a scene all of its own. Where else in the world do riders demand durable, lightweight hardtails built around a long travel fork? In the past, to get such a bike UK riders have had to resort to paying a small fortune for a custom build. This is why we designed the new Whyte 905. A lightweight, yet durable, long travel hardtail that doesn’t cost the earth. Buy one as a second bike to brush up on your handling skills or use it as an opportunity to own a WHYTE for the very first time."

I just can't get over the fork issue. £1400 is a lot of dosh and to get a sub par fork which is arguably the most important part of the bike except for the frame is quite hard to swallow. How bad is the Recon? Are we talking noticeably bad or just not quite as good as it should be? What would be a good 130mm replacement?

keith

Titanium On-One 456!

http://www.on-one-shop.co.uk/?p=644

I am ordering the steel one on Friday, the Titanium one has the same geometry. I have been researching since christmas and the on-one's seem to be the nicest hardtails i can find. British make too

BlackSpur

SuperMonkey wrote:

I just can't get over the fork issue. £1400 is a lot of dosh and to get a sub par fork which is arguably the most important part of the bike except for the frame is quite hard to swallow. How bad is the Recon? Are we talking noticeably bad or just not quite as good as it should be? What would be a good 130mm replacement?

The Recon is by no means a bad fork, it is just possibly not on par with other bikes in the price range because Whyte have put their money elsewhere e.g. frame.

niblue

SuperMonkey wrote:

That's the question really. And I'm pretty torn between the two:

1) 100mm forks with XC bias
2) 130mm forks with hardcore bias

Just a bit scared of picking one and wishing I'd gone for the other.

You can have both if you go for adjustable travel forks. My Cotic Soul usually wears 85-125mm Fox Talas forks (although it's a rigid singlespeed at the moment) and that means it's great for XC stuff and for more agressive trails.

Blundell

Tyre clearance, I haven't got a clue, you'd have to look at one in the flesh.
As for weight I'd estimate about 24lbs or a little bit more maybe.

Larok

have you considered a specialised stumjumper comp?

http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/ebwPNLq ... 155c002909

supermonkey

keith wrote:

Titanium On-One 456!

http://www.on-one-shop.co.uk/?p=644

I am ordering the steel one on Friday, the Titanium one has the same geometry. I have been researching since christmas and the on-one's seem to be the nicest hardtails i can find. British make too

I've looked at On One and I really like the look of the 456 TI but the only forks they offer are 100mm Rebas. Seems silly as (according to Brant) the name means the frame is suitable for 4, 5 and 6" forks. Why only sell them with 4"? I think I may need more than this and I really don't want to get into building my own bike.

supermonkey

BlackSpur wrote:

The Recon is by no means a bad fork, it is just possibly not on par with other bikes in the price range because Whyte have put their money elsewhere e.g. frame.

So taking everything into account, would you say on balance that the Whyte is a good or bad deal value wise?

supermonkey

niblue wrote:

You can have both if you go for adjustable travel forks. My Cotic Soul usually wears 85-125mm Fox Talas forks (although it's a rigid singlespeed at the moment) and that means it's great for XC stuff and for more agressive trails.

If I could find a bike with adjustable forks that fitted what I want to do then I would be up for that. I think Cotic is frame only though isn't it?