Which MTB - Boardman HT/FS

cramman

’m not looking to start a HT vs FS debate as I’m sure it’s been done to death but I’m getting mixed opinions from friend and shops.

I’m new to mountain biking, although commute almost daily on a roadie or CX so not new to cycling.

I went out to Hamsterly Forrest last weekend and a loaned MTB and loved it, so I need a MTB.
My CTW scheme is about to begin so I’m thinking I may as well use that, although I am keeping an eye on eBay/classifieds. Therefore I’m limited to Halfords so I’m thinking boardman.

My options are;
http://www.boardmanbikes.com/mtb/fs_team.html - FS Team
http://www.boardmanbikes.com/mtb/ht_pro.html - HT Pro

The bike won’t be used on the road as a rule so not worried about that, mainly used for forest trails/downhill/cross country. I’m guessing not massive jumps etc but you never know.

Obviously the HT has a better spec but I’m guessing the FS will be a more all round bike and there are options to upgrade.

Finally, if the general consensus is the HT, is the pro over kill would I be better looking at one of the lower spec bikes, ie will I notice much difference? For example, http://www.boardmanbikes.com/mtb/ht_team.html

Cheers,

Cramman

foxfur

Hi, having had both hard tail and full suspension, I can say that full suspension wins hands down in my opinion.Go for the maximum that your budget will stretch to.

The Northern Monkey

Both very good bikes!

The Pro HT is about 4lb lighter than the Team FS though and is a very capable bike!

cooldad

FS
Obviously

386ka

The HT should provide you with a fun riding experience too...

robst3

Can't say I have ridden a modern FS but when I was choosing it came down to:

Component Spec (HT > FS)
Racing (FS) or fun (HT)?
Old and achey (FS) or young and supple (HT)?

I went for HT as I figured it would allow me to afford better more durable components and I am not planning on trying to win races any time soon.

The boardmans are nice though I was going to go with one of those two until I missed the deadline for C2W :x

cooldad

robst3 wrote:

Can't say I have ridden a modern FS but when I was choosing it came down to:

Component Spec (HT > FS)
Racing (FS) or fun (HT)?
Old and achey (FS) or young and supple (HT)?

I went for HT as I figured it would allow me to afford better more durable components and I am not planning on trying to win races any time soon.

The boardmans are nice though I was going to go with one of those two until I missed the deadline for C2W :x

Then your opinion is effectively worthless.

cooldad

Which I suppose is par for the internet course.

blablablacksheep

If you have bad back go with FS.

But other than that it purely depends on what you planning to ride, a good HT will do most things a FS will to be honest bar jumps and some hardcore trails.

for that sort of money id go with a decent HT as a lot of reviews point out buying a decent FS for under £1500 is pretty hard now-a-days ,though Boardman are pretty good at it

cooldad

Rubbish, plenty of excellent FS under £1500. Hell plenty under £1000 if you look around.

robst3

Meow.

Whatever, that's the general view I gained while researching the exact same bike choice as the OP.

Most people I asked said you would be faster on a FS but spend more for the same level of components, on a HT your body would suffer more.

I wasn't worried about going fast or breaking my body but I WAS worried about quality/durability of components and maintaining something I hadn't worked on before... I'm not actually convinced the spec on the HT pro is THAT much better than the FS team though, so was having a hard time making up my mind.

The Northern Monkey

cooldad wrote:

Rubbish, plenty of excellent FS under £1500. Hell plenty under £1000 if you look around.

Boardman Team FS being one... at £999

386ka

You will be faster on the uphill and flat with a HT, but the FS will be better on the downhill sections. It depends, if you like a relaxed ride, go for the FS, if you want to pick your lines better and ride technical stuff without big obsticles and big drops, go for the HT.

robst3

The ht has the bb30 chainset which the were reports of problems with. The FS doesn't...

With regards to big drops/obstacles I never came to a conclusion whether the HT with rigid rear but higher specced fork would withstand them more or less than the FS (in terms of breakages).

386ka

robst3 wrote:

The ht has the bb30 chainset which the were reports of problems with. The FS doesn't...

With regards to big drops/obstacles I never came to a conclusion whether the HT with rigid rear but higher specced fork would withstand them more or less than the FS (in terms of breakages).

No, not for breakages, but for general preference for ride quality... Although it is still a personal preference

DodgeT

robst3 wrote:

I wasn't worried about going fast or breaking my body but I WAS worried about quality/durability of components and maintaining something I hadn't worked on before...

So you don't mind going slow and being uncomfy, but you want the components to have a nice time, very thoughtful that

Pudseyp

I have both, and ride my FS the most I personally I get more fun and can push that bit harder, the HT is great for a quick blast or a ride out with the wife. So then both get used but the FS gets used a lot more.

As for not being able to buy a decent FS for less than £1,500 is utter rubbish....as cooldad says look around there will always be sales etc...such as this
http://www.ashcycles.com/site/giant-tra ... a7abe3f29d

and the Canyon is always bloody good value and is a real looker

http://www.canyon.com/_uk/mountainbikes ... tml?b=2556

grim168

I bought a team fs with my latest voucher and love it previously riding an orange crush. It is certainly comfier and not that much harder work uphill (better traction). From my experience I would go for fs as your gonna want one at some point. I got mine and thought I'll try fs and if I don't like it go back to crush and sell the boardman but it looks like the orange is going on flea bay.

mingmong

Yeah, consider your terrain. If you ride over 'fist size and above' I'd personally lean towards the susser.

I've got both. I ride the HT more as I love the thrash-ability and less bob-ness of it. It's also straight out of the garage and go, unlike the FS (need to check the shock sag/pressure etc).

Best o luck and hope you enjoy whichever you pick. LET US KNOW!

rockmonkeysc

Boardman aren't the only good bikes Halfords do. Voodo are also very good and worth lookinng at.

SpikeM

Seeing as my C2W scheme also works only with Halfords, I was contemplating pretty much the same scenario (Boardman FS vs HT), except that I'm 45, 10.5 stone, reasonably fit, and do most of my riding along the South Downs Way. I managed 65 miles from Winchester to Devil's Dyke on my current 'old faithful' '04 Shogun Hydra (with additional suspension seatpost) a month ago, but I ran out of steam (and my ar$e was more sore than a very sore thing indeed!).

In an effort to complete the SDW non-stop next spring, and given the VERY up/down nature of the SDW, which Boardman would you go for to do the job? Thanks for any suggestions (including sarcastic ones!)..

Cheers
Spike

supersonic

The hardtail - I think you'd appreciate the lighter weight and better spec. Can always add a sus seatpost for additional comfort.

cramman

Thanks for all the help, I haven't has time to go through all the replies as I've been busy today.

Will have a looks ASAP and maybe come back with more questions.

Cheers

Cramman

robst3

supersonic wrote:

The hardtail - I think you'd appreciate the lighter weight and better spec. Can always add a sus seatpost for additional comfort.

I know the motion control fork is meant to be much better than the TK on the FS, but are the rest of the components really that much of a step up? i.e. X7 vs X9?

I couldn't get my head around that when I was trying to choose between the two.

supersonic

It all adds up value and weight wise - but the fork is indeed the biggest difference.

Both are good value bikes, you won't go wrong with either.

SpikeM

Thanks Supersonic - your advice appreciated and along the same lines as my thinking - that a quality fork on the front combined with light weight will be better than a full-sus but heavier bike for 'most' cycling, unless the tracks are much more bumpy or I'd be doing more technical downhill. The big problem I found with my old bike was that the fork was so poor that I couldn't go downhill much faster than a fixed fork.

Certainly for anyone in the limbo land of deciding full sus or HT, consider a suspension seatpost on an HT - fitting a USE suspension seatpost to myu old bike was a very cheap and effective way of reducing the constant small vibration from the type of cyclepaths/bridelways/South Downs Way tracks that I ride. It doubled the time until I was uncomfortable when riding..

HTH
Spike

The Northern Monkey

The boarman HT is actually quite a comfortable bike to ride anyways. I've done some epics on mine where everyone else was on a FS and I was fine....

johnsav

alot comes down to technique and skill though. I find my boardman HT quite buzzy and hard going on technical bumpy sections - probably due to my lack of skill!

But on my boardman FS I can fly through most things no problem.

Obviously the HT is lighter than the FS but not by miles. Not really noticed the extra weight in my FS, even on climbs.

guilliano

I would also consider the Voodoo Wanga if you want to be a bit of a hooligan on the descents...... the Revelation fork is a stunner and with a 30 speed XT drivetrain you won't be lacking gears for uphill stints. It is heavier than the Boardman HT but it's a more aggressive riding bike