What should i be looking for in a bike

bleasy

Hi guys im looking to take up mountain biking (did abit 15 years ago) I looking to buy a hardtail (i think) I plan on riding the bike at places like gisburn forest, grizedale, whinlatter, lee quarry, on the trails and doing a few jumps but also for normal bike rides and xc. Im not sure what things i should be after in the bike ie Fork Travel, Frame material, gears (as some bikes ive looked at dont seem to have more than 1 cog on the front, but they look like they would be good for trail riding but not normal riding) I would appreciate it if anyone could help me with these matters and maybe suggest some bikes. Im 5ft 9 so problably looking for a 17-18inch frame. Im looking to spend about £1000 on bike and gear but that may rise as it depends on a compension payout and the wife. but would spend much more i dont think.

estampida

so,

at 5 -9" you are looking at a 14" to 16" frame, the smaller the frame the more throw-able in the forest

1 x 10 seems like the modern fad or single speed (better than you would think), but no more than 18 gears (2 x 9)

Fork - the more travel the more applications the bike will have, as 100mm forks (in my book) are XC race forks unless they are DJ (heavy), but 120 - 150mm fork

alloy frame as everything else will break the bank

and have just found thumbies that will run 10 speed.................. I can send the link if ya want, I might be running a full sus soon with thumbies........ long story

Mark909

How about....

http://www.ragleybikes.com/2011-complete-bike-specs/piglet-x7/

bleasy

If you could send me the link that would be great

£1000 but that includes gear like helmet tools etc, ive ben looking at ragley and like the look of them.

cooldad

Size - go sit on one. Sizes between manufacturers, and even models differ a lot.
Travel - 120 is probably more than enough.
£850

£1000

cooldad

Forget thumbies - modern shifters are a million time better.

Anonymous

estampida wrote:

at 5 -9" you are looking at a 14" to 16" frame, the smaller the frame the more throw-able in the forest

Very small frame for 5' 9" I'd say.

14" would be a kiddies bike anyway surely

I'm 5' 7" and at 16", my 456 is this size and only got that because the reach is long on these bikes and 18" has too long a reach.

18" I've usually had otherwise and have on the Nomad (or is it 17", either way it's a medium frame), though a bit short on the reach.


Whatever the case though, ignore these frame sizes. Find out what the geometry specs are and better still try one. The frame sizes only tells you the seat tube size and with mountain bikes that's largely irrelevant.

So much difference between mountain bikes in the geometry. You need to be looking at the top tube length for reach however, and the head angle maybe but that's based on personal preference (slackness of the bike, which depends if you like steep downs or flat stuff, to put it very simply). Distance of pedal to seat position also as you need to be able to pedal properly, not over reaching or sat too far down killing those climbs. Seat tube size may give a hint here, but there's only an inch between the sizes and people have stupidly long or short legs.

As said, try one, or find something similar to try when it comes to sizing. Once you know what fits you can get a good idea from geometry specs of other bikes as to how they'll probably fit.

Torres

deadkenny wrote:

As said, try one, or find something similar to try when it comes to sizing. Once you know what fits you can get a good idea from geometry specs of other bikes as to how they'll probably fit.

Kenny speaks the truth; no better way to find out than swing a leg over a few (or a lot!) and find out what works for YOU.

Plenty on here will tell you that you need 700+mm bars, 150mm travel at both ends, 10 speed with a chain device and a dropper post; because it works for them, you might be different so get of the internets and go ride some bikes.

Rushmore

i'd be tempted to do get something like this...

You won't get more sexy...

http://www.ubyk.co.uk/catalog/product.p ... il%20Bike'

cooldad

Rushmore wrote:

i'd be tempted to do get something like this...

You won't get more sexy...

http://www.ubyk.co.uk/catalog/product.p ... il%20Bike'

Depends if you go for unshaven armpits

tenfoot

deadkenny wrote:

estampida wrote:

at 5 -9" you are looking at a 14" to 16" frame, the smaller the frame the more throw-able in the forest

Very small frame for 5' 9" I'd say.

14" would be a kiddies bike anyway surely

I

+1. My wife is 5ft 2 and on a 15" frame.

bleasy

i love the look of the ragley but its maybe abit to pricey, i like the lapierre but wasnt sure if it was suitable for the riding i plan to do

rockmonkeysc

That Lapierre is pretty poor value, it's just an average, budget hardtail but you pay extra because it's a Lapierre. The Ragley is a lot better & there are plenty of options better than the Ragley. Decathlon & Merlin do some nice bikes at this price.

bleasy

what is there better than the ragley, im not sure about the decathlon and the merlin dont look any better than the ragley they dont ahve the same amount of travel in the forks

rockmonkeysc

Fork travel is less important than geometry & suspension quality. The Decathlon Rockrider & Merlin Malt have extremely good specs for the money. The Ragley is very good though but it is over a grand so getting a better bike for under a grand wont be easy.

bleasy

ok thanks have u any other ideas? i did like the look of revolution triad zero but they dont do it in my size