Best £1000 HT MTB Questions

Davy Sunlund
Davy Sunlund Posts: 5
edited May 2008 in MTB buying advice
Thanks for the replies to my previous question. Any ideas about the following:

Low end carbon versus high end alluminium versus steel, I can't help being sucked in to the lightest?

Has anyone any comments on the 29er, I've never tried one?

And finally, I find I currently run out of gears when going hell for leather down an average decline on the road, has anyone tried a 46T outer chainring and does it make much difference?

Comments

  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    Some alloy frames weigh less than cheaper carbons ones.

    As for gearing, what cadence are you doing when in the 46/11 combo? Any upped gears need to be compared to what will happen offroad. Alo many front mechs wont handle the jump from 32 to 46 teeth very well.
  • lost-time
    lost-time Posts: 549
    I used to have a 52 outer ring on my MTB (34? inner). This was in the day of bright lycra, cosmic trail toptube pads....

    Helped get me above 50mph on numerous occaisions.... (the 52 ring, not the old school stuff).

    Didin't hampen the shifting but by todays standards you'd find ground clearance affected!
  • z000m
    z000m Posts: 544
    wasnt 1st april over a week ago?
  • BlackSpur
    BlackSpur Posts: 4,228
    z000m wrote:
    wasnt 1st april over a week ago?

    What?
    "Melancholy is incompatible with bicycling." ~James E. Starrs
  • Matteeboy
    Matteeboy Posts: 996
    The trouble with carbon is that it's not much good with impacts - wallop the frame on a rock and you'll need to repair it. An ally frame will probably just scratch or dent very slightly.

    Carbon is great - light, stiff and of course it looks cool, but I'm still not convinced it's the best thing for most MTBs.
    Two Stumpjumpers, a Rockhopper Disk and an old British Eagle.

    http://www.cornwallmtb.kk5.org
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    You also get the awkward connections between carbon and alloy on most frames in a few places, usually held together with glue. Saying that, I've seen a few 10 year old carbon frames still happily biking around, Trek Y frames and things.

    The weight saving is only a couple of hundred grams most of the time, even on top end frames, if that.

    They do look very sexy though usually :)
  • fizik
    fizik Posts: 247
    But very lightweight xc frames can be very fragile too with very thin walled tubes especially if you crash and the tubes come into contact with a rock etc. I wouldnt fancy dropping my focus raven, would be more than a scratch and a small dent.
  • I've looked at the weights of a number of the 'cheaper' carbon mtb frames, don't think you actualy save that much (if any) weight?

    Spent some time on my dads 29" Genesis Dual Track(?), its a slow steering barge that weighs a ton
    *Rock Lobster Team Tig SL (22lb 14oz)
    *C. Late 1950's Fixed Gear
    *1940 Raleigh Dawn Tourist with rod brakes
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    Of the top of my head: for medium sized frames:

    Scott Scale LTD = 2.1lbs
    GT Zaskar Carbon = 2.64lbs
    Giant XTC carbon = 3.0lbs
    Claude Butler Cape Wrath = 3.5lbs

    Some Alloy frames:

    Merlin MALT 4 = 3.25lbs
    GT Zaskar = 3.6lbs
    Kona Cindercone ~ 4lbs
    Guess XC01 = 2.7bs
    Dave Hind Olympic = 2.3lbs
    OnOne Scandal = 3.5lbs

    Steel:

    OnOne inbred standard = 4.7lbs
    Orange P7 = 5.2lbs
    Cotic soul = 4.25lbs
    OnOne 456 ~ 5.5lbs
    Pipedream Sirius = 4.7lbs
    Rock Lobster 853 = 4.3lbs
  • The Claude Butler is probably most representative as a 'cheaper' carbon frame (as might be expected on a sub £1500 bike). The others I guess are £2 / 3k+ bikes.
    *Rock Lobster Team Tig SL (22lb 14oz)
    *C. Late 1950's Fixed Gear
    *1940 Raleigh Dawn Tourist with rod brakes
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    supersonic wrote:
    Of the top of my head

    :shock:

    3.3lbs for a Stumpy HT frame, not sure how the new ones differ, this is an old M4 jobby. Very impressed with that new carbon Zaskar frame going by those numbers :O
  • aphex2k
    aphex2k Posts: 3,229
    supersonic wrote:
    Of the top of my head: for medium sized frames:

    Scott Scale LTD = 2.1lbs
    GT Zaskar Carbon = 2.64lbs
    Giant XTC carbon = 3.0lbs
    Claude Butler Cape Wrath = 3.5lbs

    Some Alloy frames:

    Merlin MALT 4 = 3.25lbs
    GT Zaskar = 3.6lbs
    Kona Cindercone ~ 4lbs
    Guess XC01 = 2.7bs
    Dave Hind Olympic = 2.3lbs
    OnOne Scandal = 3.5lbs

    Steel:

    OnOne inbred standard = 4.7lbs
    Orange P7 = 5.2lbs
    Cotic soul = 4.25lbs
    OnOne 456 ~ 5.5lbs
    Pipedream Sirius = 4.7lbs
    Rock Lobster 853 = 4.3lbs

    The 631 Pipedream Sirius is 3.9lbs...
    Mark :)
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    Ah, twas the standard I listed. Is the 631 really that light?
  • Surf-Matt
    Surf-Matt Posts: 5,952
    Supersonic - "Off the top of your head?!!"

    You are obviously to MTBs what I am to cars - factoid geek boy!

    Got a 2007 Stumpy HT in aluminium - whatever it weighs, it feels light, I wouldn't want it any lighter to be honest - knock the tubes (with knuckles) and they feel pretty thin.
  • i personally can recommend a boardman pro.£1000 fully loaded with juicy kit,great frame.an absolute bargain by anyones standards.just tried one at bike demo days when they came to dalby forest.there is also a carbon fibre hardtail called the titan,this also has a good spec and comes in at £1000.not a massive fan of halfords but i can recognise a bargian when i see one.