Choice of two bikes, advice appreciated

EH_Rob

Next week I'm off to look at two bikes, and I'd like some advice and opinions on them, specifically the suspension systems and what would be best for the type of riding I do - which is mainly Scottish Trail Centres, with some natural stuff, and the odd bit of FR/DH. I've included some extra details of both. They are second hand, and come in at similar prices. Both drivetrains specced to a similar level, with differences below. Both bikes will be fitted with my 2012 XT brakes.

The first is an SC Heckler, 2011 model, with an RP23 shock and 150mm Revs. Ex-demo bike, stock 3x9 setup.

The second is a 2009 Trek Remedy 7 as here: http://www.trekbikes.com/int/en/bikes/2009/archive/remedy7, with an RP2 XV shock and 2009 Marzzochi 55 ATA Micro fork (125-165mm). It also comes with a Reverb, a single ring setup, chain guide and bash.

I don't have more detail on the SC at this time, but some advice on the pros and cons of each suspension system would be really helpful, as well as which bike you'd go for assuming condition is good in both cases. I've never ridden the Marzocchi fork on the Trek - anyone have any thoughts? What about the rear suspension systems? Why do you prefer one over the other? Any other views you have also useful.

Thanks in advance.

The Rookie

Nice choice to have to make!

Personally I'd look at the SC, RP23 and Revs I'd take over RP2 and Mazza (nopth that they are bad!), although the Reverb would be nice.....plus Demo bikes are usually well looked after!

EH_Rob

Funny that, I was thinking the opposite!

As I understand it, RP2 and RP23 have the same internals, but the RP23 has a 3-position pro pedal, as opposed to just on or off. You could argue that a well designed suspension system (in this example the Trek) eliminates the need for this additional feature, which is why the Remedy has an RP2. Such a system may be of benefit on a bike such as the Heckler, which has a less elaborate rear suspension system, and will be more prone to pedal bob.

With regard to the forks, I agree here that a Rev has a better track record when it comes to reliability. However, if judged purely in performance and tuneability, I would expect the Marzocchi to at least match it. On paper it looks like a quality fork, and having a little bit of adjustability on the travel is no bad thing (not particularly with respect to climbing, that's not why I want these bikes, but 165mm of travel isn't necessary for most singletrack I'll ride).

I definitely hear you in terms of the demo bike thing. The Remedy has been recently serviced (including fork and air can), but I know it has been ridden hard (although if it has been taken care of this isn't necessarily a problem). The Heckler I expect to be more or less mint.

Looking at respective geos, the Trek appears to be the slacker of the two bikes, which is kind of what I'm after. The Heckler has quite an upright geometry for a bike of this travel. Whether this is a good or bad thing I'm not sure, it will hopefully be a bit clearer once I've ridden them.

I'm also factoring in the fact that the Remedy comes with all the stuff I may look to add to the Heckler in time (double chainring at front, bash, chainguide and a bonus reverb), which would bump the price of the Heckler up quite significantly in the end. The Remedy basically comes ready to go, with the exact setup I'd be looking for.

Leaning towards the Remedy at the moment, but we'll see. Looking at it this evening, with the Heckler tomorrow.

supersonic

Re suspension: The Heckler is a classic single pivot - the Remedy has the main pivot lower and further back. The former will have more anti squat and bob less under power, but more pedal kickback as the suspension moves. The Trek more the opposite ie more bob, less pedal kickback. They will also feel a little different under braking, the Trek system not stiffening up as much, but the downside being that, if fork dive is not sorted, it might feel as if it is pitching forward.

EH_Rob

That's interesting, thanks for that.

rockmonkeysc

For the DH/FR riding the Santa Cruz is far better than the Remedy. The Heckler's rear suspension just works much better and the bike feels a lot more stable.

supersonic

RockmonkeySC wrote:

For the DH/FR riding the Santa Cruz is far better than the Remedy. The Heckler's rear suspension just works much better and the bike feels a lot more stable.

For what reasons? You do get a bit of pedal kickback, the Remedy is more neutral here.

EH_Rob

As I already knew, this is a massive grey area of pros and cons, and it looks like it'll come down to personal preference. Without the luxury of a thorough testing of both bikes on trails I think it may be a case of trying to use judgement as best I can, giving consideration to how well the bikes fit me for size, whilst also paying attention to the condition of both bikes, and factoring in the spec/extras included with each. More opinions welcome though - thanks for your input so far.

The Rookie

If either person is serious about selling and their bikes they would know somewhere local you can at least get a taste of how they ride from....the Demo track at the NEC was hardly challenging but certainly in my eyes was enough to rule out 50% of the bikes I tried without any real risk of damage, just be honest with both sellers and explain exactly what your doing, offer a deposit against dropping it to show you are serious and have some cash!

EH_Rob

So I looked at both bikes this week.

The Trek I probably would have bought. It was a good fit, and came with a hatful of extras, with the bike set up how I'd like it. Sadly someone else had seen it just before me so they had first refusal and took it. That said, my total lack of knowledge about the Marzocchi fork did leave me a bit unsure how much of a bad thing this actually was.

The Heckler was in great nick, but just didn't feel right. Very upright, and possibly a little bit big. Although this might not represent its capabilities, the fact it didn't feel right was enough for me to rule it out straight away.

I was a bit unsure last night about what to do, almost talking myself into believing that because Canyon's are such good value I could somehow justify a Strive for £2500, despite it being almost double my budget. Then I stumbled upon a Santa Cruz Nomad, 2009, going again for a similar price to the two bikes above. Not ridden for a year, new bearings last month, fork/shock service in June. All coil, which combined with the burly nature of the bike means that I reckon it will tip 30lbs. But never mind, having read a few reviews of this bike they sound like good fun. And to be fair I'm coming from an XC bike, and do want something completely different, so hopefully this might be it.

Anyone any experience of a Nomad?