Canyon xc9 v Ghost amr ltd edition v Scott spark 35

Roc1

Ok so am looking to delve back into mountain biking after a while out of it so am a bit out of touch with things. Have a specialized rock hopper which is about 10 yrs old now which has lasted well but fancy a change now.

After a light full suss bike for trails and cross country and these 3 have all been recommended and are within budget 2k max (Scott is £1800 in a sale I've seen). Just wanted to see if anyone had thoughts on any of these or own any and could give feedback? The Canyon has had rave reviews so that's a tempting one.

Cheers

cooldad

Links to the bikes you are looking at will get more replies.
Not everyone memorises spec, and price makes a difference.

Roc1

Sorry, new here!

Scott: http://www.westbrookcycles.co.uk/bikes- ... 12-p194397

Ghost: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... tedKingdom

Canyon: http://www.canyon.com/_en/mountainbikes ... tml?b=2560

Thanks!

cooldad

Canyons generally get the nod for value for money, but I would be very tempted by the Scott at that price.

rockmonkeysc

I would go for the Ghost.
I much prefer Shimano to SRAM transmission and Rockshox over Fox forks. Saw a good review of the Ghost recently as well.

chez_m356

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I would go for the Ghost.
I much prefer Shimano to SRAM transmission and Rockshox over Fox forks. Saw a good review of the Ghost recently as well.

are you sure ?

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Only intended to go the basic Scalp but I have a expensive habit of upgrading bikes so I decided it would work out cheaper to buy one which is already kitted out with top spec kit



•Chainset: Truvativ Descendant GXP, 36t, 165mm
•Chainguide: Truvativ X0 ISCG05, 36-40t, Black
•Chain: SRAM PC-1051
•Cassette: SRAM PG-1070, 11-26t, 10-Speed
•Shifter: SRAM X9
•Rear Derailleur: SRAM X0

paul.skibum

cooldad wrote:

Canyons generally get the nod for value for money, but I would be very tempted by the Scott at that price.

+1

Scott looks good spec, definitely compared to the Ghost and is probably the slightly lighter xc oriented bike of the three.

rockmonkeysc

chez_m356 wrote:

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I would go for the Ghost.
I much prefer Shimano to SRAM transmission and Rockshox over Fox forks. Saw a good review of the Ghost recently as well.

are you sure ?

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Only intended to go the basic Scalp but I have a expensive habit of upgrading bikes so I decided it would work out cheaper to buy one which is already kitted out with top spec kit



•Chainset: Truvativ Descendant GXP, 36t, 165mm
•Chainguide: Truvativ X0 ISCG05, 36-40t, Black
•Chain: SRAM PC-1051
•Cassette: SRAM PG-1070, 11-26t, 10-Speed
•Shifter: SRAM X9
•Rear Derailleur: SRAM X0

Not my choice, just what the bike came with, should all be replaced with Shimano Saint by the end of the year.

Briggo

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I would go for the Ghost.
I much prefer Shimano to SRAM transmission and Rockshox over Fox forks. Saw a good review of the Ghost recently as well.

£2100 for a bike with Rebas and X-fusion rear shock? Nought wrong with Rebas but is at that price point.

Roc1

theres these two to add into the mix too:

rocky mountain: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=46920

Ghost: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=55733

cheers

rockmonkeysc

Reba's are excellent. I would take them over the Fox F120RLC I had on my Trance.
X-Fusion aren't bad, nothing at all wrong with some of their new stuff though maybe not as good as a Fox RP23.

Briggo

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Reba's are excellent. I would take them over the Fox F120RLC I had on my Trance.
X-Fusion aren't bad, nothing at all wrong with some of their new stuff though maybe not as good as a Fox RP23.

I never said Rebas are crap, for the money I'd expect SID level or at least a better model of Reba.

rockmonkeysc

This SID is a different type of fork, it's not as stiff as the Reba.
Reba is an all round trail/xc fork. SID is a pure xc race fork.

chez_m356

RockmonkeySC wrote:

chez_m356 wrote:

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I would go for the Ghost.
I much prefer Shimano to SRAM transmission and Rockshox over Fox forks. Saw a good review of the Ghost recently as well.

are you sure ?

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Only intended to go the basic Scalp but I have a expensive habit of upgrading bikes so I decided it would work out cheaper to buy one which is already kitted out with top spec kit



•Chainset: Truvativ Descendant GXP, 36t, 165mm
•Chainguide: Truvativ X0 ISCG05, 36-40t, Black
•Chain: SRAM PC-1051
•Cassette: SRAM PG-1070, 11-26t, 10-Speed
•Shifter: SRAM X9
•Rear Derailleur: SRAM X0

Not my choice, just what the bike came with, should all be replaced with Shimano Saint by the end of the year.

er, yes it was, or didn't you read what you wrote ? :roll:

Briggo

RockmonkeySC wrote:

This SID is a different type of fork, it's not as stiff as the Reba.
Reba is an all round trail/xc fork. SID is a pure xc race fork.

Reeeaaaally? So a SID couldn't handle what that bike is aimed at huh. Which isn't really my point anyway the point is its an entry level Reba on a £2100 bike.

Considering price of said fork is much lower compared to a SID or Fox.

Red.Devil.Ghost

I have a 2011 Ghost AMR 5900. It has an aluminum (Actinum) frame instead of Carbon (Lector), a Fox 32 FIT fork and RP23 rear shock. Other than that, it is pretty similar to the Ghost above. I love it. It looks great, rides well and is much better than I am!

You do generally see the Reba on slightly cheaper bikes, but its the carbon frame costing you the money hence the slightly lesser spec. You can get a better spec than that for your money if you sacrifice the Carbon frame. Check out the Ghost website. The black and red Ghost's this year are great looking bikes.

The only thing I will say is I couldn't find somewhere with the 2011 Ghost in stock when I bought mine last year in the UK, so I got it from Germany instead.

I quite like the look of that Canyon as well. I was looking at a Canyon at the same time (and Lapierre) but I got a bargain so it persuaded me.