Apollo bike from Halfords

blister pus

It was never about weight at this price point though, it was about better quality components that last longer, feel better, for your money. Carrera Vulcan would have offered that but it's irrelevant now I guess.

Why do you think you need smaller wheels, btw?

llamafarmer

I wouldn't bother spending money on upgrades tbh mate. Save your money, ride it like you stole it and then in a while upgrade the whole thing.

robrymond

They are chunky wheels, wondered if this has an impact that's all. As for the components, there is not really an issue with the brakes/gears as it stands, it all seems fairly solid. The shimano gears and stuff I had on my old bike anyway which had no suspension at all!

petejuk

I wouldn't bother spending money on upgrades tbh mate. Save your money, ride it like you stole it and then in a while upgrade the whole thing.

this is very good advice. You could spend loads of money making this bike ride marginally better. Ride it regularly, ride it hard and get very fit. find the biggest hill you can and blast down it now and again. The weight of the bike will propell you to crazy speeds.

seriously though, save the money and upgrade when you are able. you won't regret it.

ShaggyRS6

johnnyrotten wrote:

Hey, the important thing is, it's a BIKE. If you get bitten by the bug, you'll WANT to buy something better. Sell a kidney or something!

Golden rules of mountain bike buying?
1- Research!
2- Never buy a cheap full suss, buy a hardtail and get better value for money.
3- Research
4- You get what you pay for.....

Above all, enjoy!

Something I would like to add, from a COMPLETE newbie point of view. Only buy second hand unless you know what your doing. If your a newbie to the sport like me, then don't do it. I nearly made that mistake and would have wasted a lot of money.

I had weeks of research behind me in the end, culminating in posting here asking for second advice and new. My advice would be to go to your local bike shop and seek their advice as well.

In the end, after looking for a bike that would cost me no more than £600, I spent £2000. I really know I done the right thing.

GHill

robrymond wrote:

They are chunky wheels, wondered if this has an impact that's all.

Wheels and tyres are different things, I'll assume you mean tyres, apologies if not. What size tyres does it have on at the moment? You should be able to read it off the sidewall of the tyre, something like 26 X 1.95.

Thinner tyres with less tread and harder compounds will mean that you go faster, but of course you'll be sacrificing grip. Note a good set of tyres are generally pretty expensive compared to the price you paid for the full bike.

robrymond

Sorry tyres yes, I'll find out tomorrow, they are fairly chunky and wide with a lot of grip on them. My old bike tyres look thin in comparision.

Banned!

dont upgrade this bike. you will have to spend more than the cost of a much better bike to get it even nearly usable.

i was out the other day on one of my new favourite loops and i met a few riders on cheap apollo/saracen bikes. they were having a lot of fun, but they were also having a lot of problems. one had a loose crank are, another had a seized rear mech and a brake that would reset itself every time it was pulled. the forks on these bikes were horrific too. they would either fully compress then rebound like pogo sticks or remain rigid then dive at the worst possible moment.

they were interested in my machine so I let them have a go at a rocky section on it and they couldnt believe the difference. one of the bikes was a saracen Raw susser ( i think), retailing at around £500-£600 and it was one of the very worst bikes I have ever seen in my life. the other guy had an apollo thing and there wasnt a single component on it that was suitable for use on anything other than a canal tow path. these shouldnt be marketed as MTB's because theyre not. not even close.

Im not a snob, far from it, but these bikes should come with warning stickers all over them, advising the user that riding them off road will result in injury , breakages and frustration.

robrymond

Well I was on a basic trail, I won't to be honest be doing anything offroad on rocky paths, unless there's the odd bridleway or something.

Furbes

supersonic wrote:

Have to be wary of the Halfords false inflated RRP too - £420??!!!

I think there should be a law on the misrepresnetation of the true value.

Who would actually pay ridiculous prices like that when in the same Shop , you have GT's , Giants (& in a couple of Branches over here , they're even selling Kona) - much better quality Bikes for the same Price :?:

Pennywise

robrymond wrote:

Well I was on a basic trail, I won't to be honest be doing anything offroad on rocky paths, unless there's the odd bridleway or something.

In that case yo would be better off buting something which doesn't even pretend to be amountain bike. Like a hybrid or tourer ore something.

Banned!

robrymond wrote:

Well I was on a basic trail, I won't to be honest be doing anything offroad on rocky paths, unless there's the odd bridleway or something.

I think we must have a different definition of rocky path. Im talking about 2 miles of boulder strewn death, falling at a rate of around 5-1. unless your bridleways have changed dramatically over the last few weeks of course.

llamafarmer

To be brutally honest mate, you've got the wrong tool for the job in the first place. It's designed to look like a serious mountain bike, so it's a long way from being the weapon of choice for commuting and bridlepaths. You could put some narrower, semi slick tyres on it and it would give you a little less rolling resistance, but imo you really would be better off putting the money towards a hybrid, which is purpose built for that sort of riding.

daverey

Just to throw in my two-penneth.

I bought an Apollo FS26 full-suspension bike last September - it's the "basic" version of the one you have, and cost a full £80 at the time. Given that I hadn't been on a bike for 15 years I didn't fancy shelling out a lot just to find out I wouldn't take to it.

I know the bikes are supposed to be cr@p - and for £80 you can't really expect much else - but I must say it hasn't actually been that bad.

I live near the peak district/Lyme Park and got the bike for pootling about in the foothills and on paths (such as the Middlewood Way, for anyone that knows it). So far I must have been out on it about 20 times, for up to 3 hours at a time, and have probably covered the best part of 200 miles in total. This is over a mixture of road, tarmac paths, grass, mud & rocky paths. In this time I have barely lifted a finger to look after it - it's been cleaned once or twice, is permanently caked in mud and gets thrown around a fair bit when I'm out. It's now started to rust in some areas, but overall it's holding up quite well.

Initially the seat wasn't screwed on tightly enough (so spun round on my first ride home) and the brakes and gears all needed sorting out - but these were done adequately as part of the free 6 week service. I must have had 4 or 5 punctures by now (probably due to cheap tyres?), the chain-guard near the peddles has snapped (after I wiped out and hit a tree in the mud), and the back whell has recently developed a strange clunking noise when free-wheeling, but other than that I have had no major problems.

In summary, I think it's fair to say that the bike is cr@p, but then it did only cost £80 - and in my opinion it's more than value for money for anyone who wants an introduction to the sport and doesn't intend doing anything "too" extreme. Most people on here seem to be serious bikers, so of course they would sneer at a cheapo Halfords bike, but for your average punter I don't think you shoudl discount them out of hand...

shin0r

Daverey I couldn't agree more. I bought a £70 full susser from ASDA four years ago. It lives outside, unlocked and with no cover on, and the only maintenance it has seen is the occasional squirt of wd40 when it has seized up. It's absolutely fine for the odd occasion it gets ridden around the park and the canal. I wouldn't take it to Cwmcarn, but it's absolutely the perfect tool for the job, and the whole thing cost less than the seatpost on my "proper" bike.

CycloRos

I think the OP summed it up in his first sentence

...think I've made a bit of a boo boo...

I can think of million better things to spend £170 quid on!!!

Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with picking up something on the cheap and ragging it around (by cheap i.e. less than a tonne) but don't expect it to be anything other than a cheap.

oh, and for god sake don't go upgrading it, that would be even more foolish than buying the thing in the first place and posting on here

2tired2ride

I agree with the guy who said ride it like you stole it, then when it breaks, buy a Boardman.

rwms

I had my old Apollo Outrage (had it since 2001) stolen a month ago, and replaced it with an FS.26 SE when they had the 1/3 off weekend. It cost me £125 and for that price I'm not complaining at all. I had read that it wasn't a good bike on here, but as a student and for that price I went for it.

It was poorly set up when I got it, so it took me a bit of time to adjust the gears so they shifted properly and not by themselves, and the discs so that they didn't scrape the calipers.

I've done about 100 miles on it, about 10 of those in serious mud, 25 on good bridleways, and the rest on tarmac. It's been ok, and I've been cleaning and lubing it etc. especially after dirty rides.

I noticed when I bought it that it was heavy, especially the rear. I don't have my old bike to compare, but it hasn't been a problem for me. I don't have any method of weighing it so if anyone has one and can do (and someone else to weigh a "proper" MTB), it would be interesting to see.
ETA the ladies FS.26 17" is 16.7kg according to the Halfords website so this is probably about the same.

I haven't given it much abuse except for a near-accident when I went down about 15 concrete steps (hidden around a corner which I could see was clear) at 15mph.

I wasn't really into off-road riding before I had this bike, I guess a new bike sparked my interest a bit. This Apollo hasn't put me off, but I'll see if my interest lasts.

Banned!

its good that the bike has opened a new way of riding up for you, but if want to get into the sport then you will need a much better bike or you will never be able to understand what all the fuss is about.

Pennywise

daverey wrote:

Just to throw in my two-penneth.

I bought an Apollo FS26 full-suspension bike last September - it's the "basic" version of the one you have, and cost a full £80 at the time. Given that I hadn't been on a bike for 15 years I didn't fancy shelling out a lot just to find out I wouldn't take to it.

I know the bikes are supposed to be cr@p - and for £80 you can't really expect much else - but I must say it hasn't actually been that bad.

I live near the peak district/Lyme Park and got the bike for pootling about in the foothills and on paths (such as the Middlewood Way, for anyone that knows it). So far I must have been out on it about 20 times, for up to 3 hours at a time, and have probably covered the best part of 200 miles in total. This is over a mixture of road, tarmac paths, grass, mud & rocky paths. In this time I have barely lifted a finger to look after it - it's been cleaned once or twice, is permanently caked in mud and gets thrown around a fair bit when I'm out. It's now started to rust in some areas, but overall it's holding up quite well.

Initially the seat wasn't screwed on tightly enough (so spun round on my first ride home) and the brakes and gears all needed sorting out - but these were done adequately as part of the free 6 week service. I must have had 4 or 5 punctures by now (probably due to cheap tyres?), the chain-guard near the peddles has snapped (after I wiped out and hit a tree in the mud), and the back whell has recently developed a strange clunking noise when free-wheeling, but other than that I have had no major problems.

In summary, I think it's fair to say that the bike is cr@p, but then it did only cost £80 - and in my opinion it's more than value for money for anyone who wants an introduction to the sport and doesn't intend doing anything "too" extreme. Most people on here seem to be serious bikers, so of course they would sneer at a cheapo Halfords bike, but for your average punter I don't think you shoudl discount them out of hand...

Perhaps if you'd bought a better bike you might manage more than just over 3 miles an hour on the paths and in the foothills.

Soggz

erm...we bought a little apollo full sus(?) bike from halfords 3 weeks ago for our 7 year olds birthday present.I took him 'mountain biking' all around the woods of longleat,Shearwater and center parcs, near Frome, where we live. In all ,he did 6,yes 6 miles all off road and absolutly loved it...!
Its not what your riding, its the spirit of it,and the company you keep! Kids dont lie.Ride your cheapy Apollo with pride, and if you wear it out, buy a better bike.If it sits in the shed 'cos you dont think it looks the part, or other people have more expensive looking bikes...take up knitting!

daverey

Pennywise wrote:

Perhaps if you'd bought a better bike you might manage more than just over 3 miles an hour on the paths and in the foothills.

Erm, pardon me?
I think you're missing the whole point of my post. Yes, the bike is cr@p. Yes the bike is so heavy it feels like it's made out of cast iron. Yes it's beginning to fall apart now.

BUT, it was £80 - that's only £80 English pounds my friend. As some people have pointed out, a lot less than one single component on some of the "better" bikes people talk about.

For my £80 I have not had to worry once about securing it, cleaning it or maintaining it in any way shape or form. I also didn't have to re-mortgage my house or sell my car to be able to afford it. However, what I did get was an opportunity to enjoy some of the fantastic countryside I am fortunate enough to live by, with a couple of good mates, and get some exercise at the same time.

More improtantly, it was an inexpensive way of finding out whether I am likely to be keen on mountain biking or not. The good news is that yes I am - even at only the 3mph you claim I go.

Will I buy a replacement Apollo when this one falls apart? - probably not, and I'm sure I'll reap the rewards for spending a little more money on something better. However, what I have avoided is spending 3 or 4 times as much and potentially finding out I don't like mountain biking, and leaving £300 of kit rusting in the shed.

My whole point was that there is a perfectly good place for Apollo bikes in this world. An awful lot of people cannot afford expensive bikes and Apollo's are their only solution. You definitely get what you pay (or don't) pay for, but as long as you go into it with your eyes open then I don't think it's fair that all the posters immediately dismiss them
out of hand.

Dave

llamafarmer

I think the point most people are making though daverey is that these bikes are mis-sold. The suspension is a weighty gimmick that takes away from the value and quality of the bike. People come here looking for advice on bikes every day and I think the point to take is that if you're on a very small budget for a bike, the best thing to do is keep it very simple - hardtail, or even better, fully rigid.

It's great you guys enjoy your bikes and I hope you get into mountain biking more and more, because it's a great sport. However, I think these bikes are likely to put more people off cycling than they convert to regular riders. If more people bought light, simple, cheap rigids I believe they'd be more likely to enjoy cycling and want to take it further.

These are not criticisms of all cheap bikes, but cheap gimmicky bikes. They are a false economy.

tuxpoo

IM sure somewhere on this forum said...

"people buy a bike for 50 quid because the are not sure if they are going to use it. However buying a bike for 50 quid almost garentees it will never get used"

Tux

Banned!

My whole point was that there is a perfectly good place for Apollo bikes in this world. An awful lot of people cannot afford expensive bikes and Apollo's are their only solution. You definitely get what you pay (or don't) pay for, but as long as you go into it with your eyes open then I don't think it's fair that all the posters immediately dismiss them
out of hand.

we dont dismiss them out of hand, but you have to remember that this is a forum populated for the main part by rather serious mountain bikers, not casual cyclists who have just dipped thier toe in at the shallow end.

this might sound like snobbery or elitism, but 99% of us have minor components on our rides that cost more than those Apollo bikes, but thats because we need them in order to fully enjoy our riding experience. you cannot go mountain biking on an apollo, you might be able to ride it on a forest trail, but try taking it on a real trail and it will suddenly become a big heavy clunking tractor that tries to kill you then falls to pieces.

if you enjoy riding your bike then well done, youve already won, but apollo dont make mountain bikes. they make 26" wheeled bikes that are unsuitable for anything but light use.

we are not laughing at you or your bike, but they really are the very worst example of form over function. they might look the part (from a distance) but they are not fit for the purpose advertised, and, if you try to ride them outwith thier limits (not yours) they will break. they are dangerous and they probably cause more riders to become disillusioned with the sport than they encourage.

geordiefreerider

Very true, take my step brother for example having not ridden for about 10 years, he wanted to come out and try riding with me as his local gym hires bikes out to members for free, when he told me of this i was dubious thinking they would be something like a apollo or a reebok "mountain beast annihalator" or something as equally misleadingly named. However they were specialized hardrocks so I deemed this an acceptable bike for him to come out with me on and he enjoyed it, if it had been a low end bike I doubt he would of enjoyed himself as the extra weight and general crapness would of killed the ride or his legs. He is now wanting to buy a kona caldera 2006 in mint condition for £200 I found through a friend of mine, roughly the same price you would pay for a "top spec" apollo, so there you have it, if your first experience is on a decent branded mountain bike then you may well be encouraged to take up the sport, however if the bike your on weighs a ton, has crappy components and doesnt let you explore off road like you thought it might then you might just decide that mountain biking isnt your cup of tea. Now im fully aware a lot of people starting off may not know the difference between a santa cruz and a apollo my step brother for example has no idea and is trusting me to find him a suitable first bike (scott ransom ltd,marin quake??? ha ha!!) but my advice to anyone thinking about there first bike is do not bother with this type of machine, you are far better off buying a second hand bike than any of this rubbish I disagree that they have there place, they dont, they are poorly manufactured and have no right to be sold as mountain bikes - and im not a snob im just being honest as aa mountain biker who would like to see more people out there riding and enjoying it.

ExeterSimon

Very rarely do I agree with Jesus_Christ...but this time you are spot on.

daniel_owen_uk

Buy something second hand, £170 is never going to get you a great deal.

But a higher spec £170 bike will most likely be better quality than a new Apollo £170 bike.

My current bike only cost £250 (Spec Hardrock)

Put a £150 fork (second hand £80).

Some £300 wheels (second hand £100).

New tyres, rear brake, chain, chainrings, pedals, cassette; lots of things, all over a period of time, and it's becoming a great bike, next thing to go is probably going to be frame as it's a bit heavy, but from that first purchase I have bike that was very rideable and upgradable.

blister pus

Same here, I paid £195 new for a Giant Boulder Trail with the following spec:

Frame - ALUXX aluminium
Fork - Suntour XCT 100mm travel
Handlebar - Steel riser
Stem - Aluminium ahead
Seat Post - Aluminium
Saddle - GIANT
Pedals - Wellgo platform
Shifters - Shimano EZ Fire 24 speed
Front Mech - Shimano C50
Rear Mech - Shimano Acera
Brakes - Hayes MX4 Mechanical Disc
Brake Lever - Shimano
Cassette - Shimano HG30 11-32
Chain - KMC Z7
Rings & Cranks - Shimano TX70 24/34/42 / Truvativ
Bottom Bracket - RPM cartridge
Rims - Aluminium
Hubs - Formula disc
Spokes - Steel
Tyres Kenda - 26x2.1''

Like that it's too heavy and can feel a bit dead sometimes (the wheels are the downer on this bike, easily remedied though), but it can take some serious punishment on trails, the fork is surprisingly well behaved with rebound adjustment and works great, the only thing I can't do on it is downhill, but I bought it knowing it's limits, it's an XC trail bike.

All the bits are upgradeable though and I've already put some dirt cheap replacement deore / alivio parts on it already, shifters / brake levers / front mech, and with a bit of careful bargain hunting I can get it into a 'lean mean, take some stick machine' - ideal for my first proper hardtail. I've already started looking at a more serious custom build that will fit my needs as I develop riding skills and get a proper feel for the kind of riding I enjoy most.

Bottom line, I'd take this Giant Boulder Trail over an equivalent priced Apollo, infinitely more scope.

Pennywise

daverey wrote:

Pennywise wrote:

More improtantly, it was an inexpensive way of finding out whether I am likely to be keen on mountain biking or not. The good news is that yes I am - even at only the 3mph you claim I go.



Dave

It was you who said you go out for up to 3 hours, 20 times and have done 200 miles. I din't make the claim, i just did the math.