Help me please. Grand Canyon?

anthony.d

Help please. I'm buying a new bike. Originalyy it was going to be a Canyon Nerve 6.0. But friends have been saying do I really need the rear sus. I 'm coming round to admitting not really. The only plus point is I'm no spring chicken and the extra comfort would be nice.
So, I've turned my thoughts to hardtails.I want a recreational alrounder.
1. Grand Canyon AL 6.0. Anyone have any experience with one. I've read the handle bars are low. Is it too race orientated, I don't like going over the handle bars.
2. Cube LTD team.
3. Giant xtc. I've seen an offer in a local shop, thats all. The guy did a good selling job, says its the cat's whiskers.
4. Boardman MTB team. Is it me or are they heavy?
All help appreciated.

nicklouse

First things first rear suspension is not for comfort.

It is there for traction.

So I would be forgetting wht your friends are saying and go with what you want.

Maybe some test rides to clear you mind as to what type of bike you want rather than wht bike just yet.

anthony.d

I had an old Marin FS which was stolen. It was heavy and i thought i'd never get another FS when I had it. I don't do serious downhills, nice downhill trails with the odd fairly steep short drop thrown in.
I borrowed my wife's HT bike and deliberately went over every bump I could. The difference between the FS and the HT did not seem to justify the height/cost factor. I must say that I did not go over any serious rough technical bits at speed.
However I still seem to be turning my eyes to the canyon nerve fs although I know deep down that I probably don't need the FS.

poppit

My wife has a Grand Canyon AL 8.0 and loves it, she uses it as a winter/easier trail bike instead of her FS Santa Cruz. It'll handle quite a lot and isn't too racy at all. Seeing as the Nerve is only £250 more than the AL 6 though it's tricky choice.

nferrar

Whilst the primary design goal of rear suspension might be traction it certainly does add comfort and is a big reason for a lot of people preferring it.
I like HT's but prefer FS for nearly everything I ride (even relatively smooth trails). It might be bad technique but there are times I just want to sit down and blast along trails rather than have to stand up hovering over the saddle etc. With shock lockouts you're not really losing much climbing efficiency either (other than weight) and gain traction on most modern designs.
I would definitely do some long test rides on hardtails on the sort of trails you intend to ride before deciding if they make sense for you. I say long as until you start getting fatigued after a couple of hours being stood up most of the time isn't really an issue.

Shackster

I would also point out that the Nerve XC climbs like a mountain goat; far better than my featherweight mid-90s titanium hardtail. And that is without locking anything out; in fact it's probably better not to, to maintain traction.

anthony.d

Oh Dear! Thanks for the replies.
I had sorted it out in my head that it was G.Canyon al. But you all seem to saying go for the nerve.
The nerve 6 is 3lbs heavier, that's the main factor. I think I can stretch to the extra £250 as I don't intend to change bikes. I only go out for a max of 2 hours approx. What do you think? Still the nerve?

j40aja

I've got a Nerve XC8 on order (3 weeks still to go) after selling my hardtail. I test rode a Trek EX8 on a demo day and FS is the way to go. So much nicer on the down and not much harder work on the way up and that's coming from a sub 21lb carbon HT.
The weight isn't something to worry about too much, if you're like me you'll probably end up changing bits on the new bike and replace with lighter kit.
I've already got carbon bars, ESI grips and new brakes ready to go on. Will probably get a shorter stem depending on feel and better wheels in the near future.

Don't listen to mates who think they know what you should do, go and try some FS bikes on a demo day or hire one at a trail centre for the day and make your own mind up.