2014 Kona's

supersonic

Curious in why these are so good? Geometry? Suspension? Parts? Or just a combination? IO note they still use the basic suspension system, and that rear end looks mega flexy! Would love to try one of course!

DCR00

From what I've read its a geometry thing

supersonic

Interesting, as looks a bit steep if anything.

rockmonkeysc

From what I have been told the geometry is superb, long front and short back end. I have been told they are less flexy than the enduro.
One of my mates has obviously really clicked with his, I cant keep up with him anymore and I was always faster than him.
If the Mega hadn't been so cheap I would have bought one.
I just hope they don't have the same strength issues as the Operator and Entourage.

DCR00

supersonic wrote:

Interesting, as looks a bit steep if anything.

66.5 head angle, so not that slack

But as RMSC says, the combo seems to work

That said, Tracey is around 66 and she feels spot on

chriskimberley

The head angle is spot on slacker than a Bronson or an enduro !

The back end is massively stiff it's one of the reasons it's so great ! there's a huge carbon yolk between the seatstays,
Short chainstays keep the cornering excellent and make it feel very flickable
Long top tube makes it stable but the short stem and wide bars make it very easy to steer
Suspension is very progressive sits in the middle of its travel really well but handles big hits like their not there

All come with a decent dropper post and the Pikes really help they are superb I won't be going back to Fox !

Dick Scruttock

chriskimberley wrote:

The head angle is spot on slacker than a Bronson or an endure !

Not seen any figures for a Bronson with a 160mm fork on it but I'd guess it would be pretty much the same angle.

supersonic

I suppose what I am saying is none of it looks innovative or different, but it obviously works for many - and that is what matters. I'm more open minded about geometry, 'spot on' is personal preference.

rockmonkeysc

Rick Draper wrote:

chriskimberley wrote:

The head angle is spot on slacker than a Bronson or an endure !

Not seen any figures for a Bronson with a 160mm fork on it but I'd guess it would be pretty much the same angle.

Probably close enough but it's designed around a 150mm fork and isn't designed for the same use so it's a bit of a pointless comparison. The Process is more heavy duty than the Bronson or Enduro.

lawman

BikeMag really rate the Process 134 in the latest bible of bike tests and I'd have to agree with what they say about the geometry, the sooner more people start making bikes with longer top tubes, shorter stems and shorter chainstays the better imo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3JjsjA5u8w

Kowalski675

supersonic wrote:

I suppose what I am saying is none of it looks innovative or different

Is that necessarily a bad thing? Does a bike need to be innovative or different for the sake of it? Surely the important thing is how it rides - not how many new acronyms the brochure features?

Kowalski675

lawman wrote:

BikeMag really rate the Process 134 in the latest bible of bike tests and I'd have to agree with what they say about the geometry, the sooner more people start making bikes with longer top tubes, shorter stems and shorter chainstays the better imo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3JjsjA5u8w

That's a glowing review. Can't get my head round a three grand price tag being considered reasonable for a bicycle though... :? Lovely looking bike though - that top shock mount is so slim.

lawman

We get ripped off in the UK, in equivalent terms the 134 DL is a grand cheaper in the US than it is here, wages are similar but the cost of living and luxury items is much lower. I blame Wiggle.

But seriously I think for £3k its over-priced a little, for a pretty much full alu bike I'd expect full XT and a reverb, maybe a 140mm Pike or Fox 34.

I think £2-2.5K here is reasonable here in the UK, but then again that means little from me as my Mojo HD frame set me back just over 2 grand

supersonic

the sooner more people start making bikes with longer top tubes, shorter stems and shorter chainstays the better imo

Loads of bikes been like this for the last decade though!

supersonic

Kowalski675 wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I suppose what I am saying is none of it looks innovative or different

Is that necessarily a bad thing? Does a bike need to be innovative or different for the sake of it? Surely the important thing is how it rides - not how many new acronyms the brochure features?

That's the thing - lots of people are saying is radical, great and all this, and is nothing new at all. Middle of the road geometry, if not a little steep on the 134 for the intended riding, heavy, poor spec. But as before it obviously does the trick for many. I wouldn't even consider it fora new bike. Of course I'd like to try one out of curiosity, but if I had to shortlist a few for a new 3k bike it wouldn't be in the top 20.

Northwind

The 153's geometry is within a few bawhairs of my Hemlock, always nice to see people catching up Does seem like they're struggling to package it up with a long travel 29er though, which is a shame. Agreed the 134 looks to steep on paper, it's almost like it's a GT! But bikes often ride differently to their paper numbers, only MBR journalists think you can review a bike with a protractor.

Hoping to blag some goes on these at some point.

Kowalski675

lawman wrote:

We get ripped off in the UK, in equivalent terms the 134 DL is a grand cheaper in the US than it is here, wages are similar but the cost of living and luxury items is much lower. I blame Wiggle.

Sadly true - welcome to rip off Britain. They were talking about a price tag of $3600, so at today's exchange rate they're paying £2184 for the same bike we'd have to part with £3000 for. For most consumer goods (electronics etc) a rough rule of fun is that the yanks pay about the same number of dollars as we pay pounds. And there's no legitimate reasons for it, it's just profiteering - they charge as much as the market will stand, and they know that stupid Brits will pay a higher price than Americans will put up with. How, for example, can Triumph justify the fact that you can buy a bike in America cheaper than you can buy it where it's made in Hinckley? :roll:

Kowalski675

supersonic wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I suppose what I am saying is none of it looks innovative or different

Is that necessarily a bad thing? Does a bike need to be innovative or different for the sake of it? Surely the important thing is how it rides - not how many new acronyms the brochure features?

That's the thing - lots of people are saying is radical, great and all this, and is nothing new at all.

Ah, I see. I thought you were criticising it for not being innovative, rather than disagreeing with any assertion that it actually is. My mistake, I misunderstood your post.

adamfo

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

We get ripped off in the UK, in equivalent terms the 134 DL is a grand cheaper in the US than it is here, wages are similar but the cost of living and luxury items is much lower. I blame Wiggle.

Sadly true - welcome to rip off Britain. They were talking about a price tag of $3600, so at today's exchange rate they're paying £2184 for the same bike we'd have to part with £3000 for. For most consumer goods (electronics etc) a rough rule of fun is that the yanks pay about the same number of dollars as we pay pounds. And there's no legitimate reasons for it, it's just profiteering - they charge as much as the market will stand, and they know that stupid Brits will pay a higher price than Americans will put up with. How, for example, can Triumph justify the fact that you can buy a bike in America cheaper than you can buy it where it's made in Hinckley? :roll:

Well obviously the UK rrp includes VAT of £ 500.

lawman

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

We get ripped off in the UK, in equivalent terms the 134 DL is a grand cheaper in the US than it is here, wages are similar but the cost of living and luxury items is much lower. I blame Wiggle.

Sadly true - welcome to rip off Britain. They were talking about a price tag of $3600, so at today's exchange rate they're paying £2184 for the same bike we'd have to part with £3000 for. For most consumer goods (electronics etc) a rough rule of fun is that the yanks pay about the same number of dollars as we pay pounds. And there's no legitimate reasons for it, it's just profiteering - they charge as much as the market will stand, and they know that stupid Brits will pay a higher price than Americans will put up with. How, for example, can Triumph justify the fact that you can buy a bike in America cheaper than you can buy it where it's made in Hinckley? :roll:

To be quite honest I'd question why anyone would want to buy anything made ink Hinckley!!

lawman

supersonic wrote:

the sooner more people start making bikes with longer top tubes, shorter stems and shorter chainstays the better imo

Loads of bikes been like this for the last decade though!

But have they really though? A medium process 134 has a 600mm effective top tube, for comparison most medium bikes are around 580-590, the large process is 631mm and most large bikes are around 600-610. I've been looking at a hell of a lot of bikes recently, and 95% of bikes have been too short or have the right but had seat tubes that were too long. The konas have the right tt length, short seat tubes so if you want more room you can safely move up a size and have masses of stand over. Its not just the sizing though it's the spec, fitting short stems, wide bars... How many reviews do you see highlighting a stem that's too long? They're well thought out bikes, expensive yes but some of the details are great.

Dick Scruttock

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Rick Draper wrote:

chriskimberley wrote:

The head angle is spot on slacker than a Bronson or an endure !

Not seen any figures for a Bronson with a 160mm fork on it but I'd guess it would be pretty much the same angle.

Probably close enough but it's designed around a 150mm fork and isn't designed for the same use so it's a bit of a pointless comparison. The Process is more heavy duty than the Bronson or Enduro.

A Bronson is designed around a 150 or 160mm fork.

rockmonkeysc

The Kona top tubes are pretty long. I ride large bikes which are usually 610mm long but the large Process has a 630mm top tube, the same as my extra large Mega TR. That extra 20mm really makes a difference.

lawman

RockmonkeySC wrote:

The Kona top tubes are pretty long. I ride large bikes which are usually 610mm long but the large Process has a 630mm top tube, the same as my extra large Mega TR. That extra 20mm really makes a difference.

Exactly this, yes it is possible to get the extra length by going up a size, but it often compromises standover and the longer seat tube can be a real pain, especially if you use a dropper seat post. The extra length gives you more room to move around on the bike, you can use a shorter stem to keep steering sharp and the extra length in the wheelbase makes the bike even more stable. Add in the increasing number of 1x systems and chainstays can be made shorter to keep handling snappy and playful. It's not rocket science, so why aren't more people doing it? MTB's really need to distance themselves from the road bike geometry they are largely based on and move to longer top tubes and shorter, 30-50mm stems, personally I think Mondraker's forward geometry and 10mm stem is abit far as it compromises bar height among other things.

paul.skibum

adamfo wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

We get ripped off in the UK, in equivalent terms the 134 DL is a grand cheaper in the US than it is here, wages are similar but the cost of living and luxury items is much lower. I blame Wiggle.

Sadly true - welcome to rip off Britain. They were talking about a price tag of $3600, so at today's exchange rate they're paying £2184 for the same bike we'd have to part with £3000 for. For most consumer goods (electronics etc) a rough rule of fun is that the yanks pay about the same number of dollars as we pay pounds. And there's no legitimate reasons for it, it's just profiteering - they charge as much as the market will stand, and they know that stupid Brits will pay a higher price than Americans will put up with. How, for example, can Triumph justify the fact that you can buy a bike in America cheaper than you can buy it where it's made in Hinckley? :roll:

Well obviously the UK rrp includes VAT of £ 500.

And prices in the US and Canada are generally quoted excluding the equivalent of VAT so they get added at the till - a sale price alloy bronson here was going for $3000 Canadian or say 1800 quid - but in reality an additional 7% would be added at the counter - not a lot I know VAT in the UK is very high at present.

Northwind

Besides, you can't just look at one price and declare we're being ripped off- you need to take into account disposable income- wages and cost of living. Also what the tax we pay, pays for- people say we pay too much tax but then we don't need to pay for healthcare when we ride into trees and such, we've already paid for it in our VAT and income tax and that. It's never so simple.

chriskimberley

Re: 2014 Kona's
Postby supersonic » Sat Jan 11, 2014 1:15 am

That's the thing - lots of people are saying is radical, great and all this, and is nothing new at all. Middle of the road geometry, if not a little steep on the 134 for the intended riding, heavy, poor spec. But as before it obviously does the trick for many. I wouldn't even consider it fora new bike. Of course I'd like to try one out of curiosity, but if I had to shortlist a few for a new 3k bike it wouldn't be in the top 20.

The thing is you are talking bobbins! show me any other bike that comes with a similar TT length specced with wide bars and short stem
as I pointed out the spec is very similar at that price point compared to virtually any other 2014 bike (unless you go german mail order which has its own warranty risks)
yeah it could be lighter but it didnt cost much to knock a kg off mine

ultimately until youve ridden one youll never know what youre missing!

Northwind

Hang on... So SS has to find a bike with wide bars and short stem, but you're happy to remove a kilo from the bike? Changing bars and stems is a bit easier...

chriskimberley

loosing a kilo was easy the tyres are heavy as fook, 2.4 dual ply HRIIs, Ill save them for the Alps!
I also ditched the front mech and shifter and rings for a 30t race face narrow wide, that was a bit more involvedI suppose

Northwind

Yep, but my point is that width of bars isn't that big a thing- partly because it's so easy so swap but mostly because there's no such thing as the ideal width. If I got a Process (which I can see happening, a bit down the line) probably the first thing I'd do is cut down or replace the bars with some 720s...