Whyte 901, Genesis Core 50, Genesis Core 26.5

MudPig

Hi, been procrastinating for a while now, finding it difficult to pull the trigger on one of these and need some help. Would be nice to get some advice about which has the best spec overall and also which one you'd go for, which I know aren't necessarily the same thing. Bike will be used for XC and trail centers. I'm over 15 stone so want something sturdy but light. Have tried a 905 (Similar to 901) and a lower spec Genesis Core and both fitted me well.

Whyte 901

Good: Best frame? Nicest looking. Full length cable housing.

Bad: Slightly lower spec. Recon fork. Only 15mm axle. 2 x 10 rather that 3 x 10.

£1149 (But I'm sure I could get a better deal if I shopped around)

http://www.whytebikes.com/2012/bike_pag ... W-1-013-12

Genesis Core 26.5

Good: Best fork? But are the the 2012 Rebas as good as previous models? 2012 SLX brakes. 3 x 10 rather than 2 x 10.

Bad: Only 15mm axle fork. Slightly lower spec spec than the 50.

Can get for around £1070

http://www.genesisbikes.co.uk/bikes/mou ... /core-26-5

Genesis Core 50

Good: Cheapest. 20mm axle. Best overall spec? 3 x 10.

Bad: Coil fork. Not overly nice looking brown graphics. To get best price would have to buy from Winstanleys who I've heard leave quite a lot to be desired.

Can get for £910

http://www.winstanleysbikes.co.uk/produ ... _Bike_2011

The Rookie

20mm axle is mostly going out in favour of 15mm, I would say having 15mm is better than 20mm in terms of future compatability, little in the way of rigidity difference and 15mm is lighter.

Personally of the three I'd take the whyte, nowt wrong with 2x10, I see very few MTB's being used as such with triples up front anymore.

P.S. bigger numbers do not mena better!

Simon

MudPig

Thanks for the quick reply.

Why the 901?

When I tried out the 905 (2011) it was fitted with 2 x 10. It felt like I was missing some of the harder gears, particularly in fast downhill sections. I just didn't feel like I had a hard enough gear to use. Not sure if this was psychological? It didn't feel like it at the time though.

15mm axle vs 20mm axle... After reading the glowing reviews of the Core 50 it seemed to me that the main reason the bike was liked so much was because of the stiff front end. I read up on the different standards and a lot of people seem to be saying that 20mm is quite a bit more rigid than 15mm with hardly any weight penalty at all. Which is why (considering my weight) I'm debating whether to go with the more rigid fork. But then it's coil rather than air. Oh I don't know. :?

MudPig

So the Whyte gets 100% of the votes (1 vote).

Anyone else?

Pudseyp

Yep I would have the Whyte by a country mile.

angry_bird

Tricky, I'd be very hard torn between the Whyte and the Core 26.5.

Whyte has good reviews, but then the Core has the better fork... I'd always want to take a reba over a TK recon... is it possible to try them out?

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/ ... 1-12-45614

baxboy

Personally i have just bought a 901 on the advice from a friends son(honest advice and highly experienced in all things mtb) .Im 14 stone and will be using the bike for xc and trails.No marketing blurb here,out of all the bikes around £1000 the whyte 901 ticked all the right boxes and was ideal for my needs.It looks the mutts and goes really well,and is built for the uk.Your choice bud.

supersonic

The Whyte has a low spec for that money, the 26.5 is far better value. The Whyte is barely better than a Carrera Fury.

MudPig

supersonic wrote:

The Whyte has a low spec for that money, the 26.5 is far better value. The Whyte is barely better than a Carrera Fury.

That's what I thought but in the review on this site it says the Whyte is "an absolute bargain". Am I not seeing something spec wise?

supersonic

It scores well as they have shaved weight off and the handling was liked by the testers. But personally I feel the fork is a let down for the money (but you can upgrade to motion control) and some of the parts are low or badly chosen. (for example the money saved by fitting an X5 rear mech could have gone into a better fork).

Nevertheless it rides well... but so does the Fury, and the Genesis bikes we have tested have always done very well.

MudPig

supersonic wrote:

It scores well as they have shaved weight off

How exactly have they done that? Looking at the spec it looks the same (but slightly lower) than last years? Also looking at Whyte's site is says the weight is 11.4kg that's only 0.1kg heavier than the Whyte 19 which costs £2000. Can that be right?

supersonic wrote:

but you can upgrade to motion control

How do you do that then? Expensive?

supersonic

Most likely in the frame and finishing kit - we weighed it at 11.85kg (website quoted weights are always under), and though last years was quoted at 26.1lbs it is likely to be a pound heavier. Also 2x10 saves a bit of weight, and the 2012 fork is lighter.

The damper unit can be upgraded for about £70 - see Fisher Outdoor or call TF Tuned.

hainman

didnt the genesis core 50 get voted best value at the price hardtail not to long ago on mbuk??

topmoxy

got a brand new core 50 from devon cycle co. a fortnight ago. (ebay store for a shop) ex display but in perfect condition . absolute bargain , look around for a good deal , excellent bike. v happy.

diy

The 901 is a fantastic bike, interesting that its gone 2x10 for 2012 and a lower spec on components. I have a 2011 version and it is 3x10 and X7 controls and Elixir 5 brakes:
http://www.whytebikes.com/2011/bike_pag ... W-1-013-11

MudPig

70% for the 901 then.

Strange considering it's probably got the lowest spec.

People just not liking the look of the Cores?

MudPig

OK so the Core 50's making a come back. I really thought people would have gone for the 26.5 because of the Reba fork.

Is there a reason for that?