Old school Turner 5 Spot Horst Link Against todays bikes.
gezmason
Posts: 4
Has anyone done a test of old school bikes vs current bikes, i have a 2005 HL Turner 5 Spot with modern kit and i still love it, i feel i should upgrade to a newer bike but want something that rides like the turner only maybe a bit lighter? Any suggestions
0
Comments
-
2005 isn't that old!
This week, I'm riding my 14-year old Marin whilst I wait to get my rear shock back from servicing. And I'm liking it.
It's a little heavier, but the main difference is the handling. It's more nervous, and turns in faster, but, oddly, once you're in a turn, it's slower to change directions.0 -
2005 is old school? You make me feel ancient.I don't do smileys.
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
London Calling on Facebook
Parktools0 -
Well when i say old school, in a sport thats evolving with carbon this penny farthing that i'd just like to see how my ol girl would stack up in say "trail bike of the year award", would it be last or not far off what is now regarded as "benchmark"?0
-
They are decent enough frames - probably a little flexier and heavier than some of todays offering, but will do the job for trail riding. Similar to a Boardman frame I'd say.0
-
I ride a 2001 Heckler but with modern forks and rear air can, gears etc I cannot honestly say its worse than any other similar 100mm travel FS.
My mate had a 2005/6 era 5 spot and it was a bomber of a bike - you'd have to spend a fair amount to get better for sure.Closet jockey wheel pimp whore.0 -
Hecklers are very similar to Orange 5s though - and neither has changed dramatically over the last decade. Hecklers were, and still are good bikes, just a bit heavy is all.0
-
If you're happy with the bike and like the way it rides, why would you need to change? Obviously, if you change riding styles/terrain, other bikes might be more suitable. 2005 isn't outside of modern ballpark geometry I don't think.0
-
My downhill bike is a about 9 years old, and my XC bike is 6. I'd say your 2005 turner is still a decent bike! Besides, horst link is still a proven and widely used suspension platform.0
-
ilovedirt wrote:My downhill bike is a about 9 years old, and my XC bike is 6. I'd say your 2005 turner is still a decent bike! Besides, horst link is still a proven and widely used suspension platform.
Agree, suspension design doesn't change that drastically, (how much has FSR actually evolved since conception??) but shock technologies do. You can always upgrade a frame to keep up with modern parts. I think the biggest change over the years is geometry, trail bikes are getting slacker but even that can be 'amended'.0 -
Yeah, most of the change is in geometry and materials used. You can make an older bike ride like a more modern one if you deck it out sensibly with modern kit. That's what I've done, and I've managed to build two bikes on relatively old frames that can still keep up with more modern bikes in terms of weight and performance, and neither of them cost me a fortune (relatively speaking).0
-
-
My 96 Zaskar has slacker angles than many of todays 'trail bikes' when used with a 100mm fork.0
-
The rest of the Zaskar is kind of peculiar compared to modern bikes though, no? Top tube length, seat tube angle, etc?0
-
Not to mention the rider.YeehaaMcgee wrote:The rest of the Zaskar is kind of peculiar compared to modern bikes though, no? Top tube length, seat tube angle, etc?I don't do smileys.
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
London Calling on Facebook
Parktools0 -
cooldad wrote:
Not to mention the rider.YeehaaMcgee wrote:The rest of the Zaskar is kind of peculiar compared to modern bikes though, no? Top tube length, seat tube angle, etc?
Was 3 degs difference, when in a world of 71/73 with 425 was pretty different! They did however measure 'frame size' to mid top tube: so my18" Zaskar is more like a 20.5 in todays terms. Still, the ETT is a good 580mm, 69/72 angles with a 480 fork - rides great!0 -
Ah, must just be the look of the frame size then. Bikes were as big as gates back then, haha!0
