3 Bikes Under consideration

rockmonkeysc

Rear suspension doesn't make it a lot easier. It's more forgiving and lets you get away with some mistakes.
If he isn't enjoying more technical trails is it really a good idea to spend thousands of pounds hoping that he might enjoy it more? Trying some demo biked first to see if it does the job has to be a good idea. Maybe he will get off the bike grinning ear to ear or maybe he wont.
The Carrera hardtail is reasonably good but a little harsh.

Kowalski675

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Rear suspension doesn't make it a lot easier.

Yes it does. The same trails are far easier on my Boardman than they are on my Kraken.

supersonic

And some are far easier on my Zaskar than my Stumpy FSR ;-). All depends really, and is subjective to an extent.

Kowalski675

supersonic wrote:

And some are far easier on my Zaskar than my Stumpy FSR ;-).

Hence my caveat about smooth trails I defy anyone to ride both my bikes round Gisburn or Stainburn and say (honestly) that it wasn't significantly easier on the more bouncy one.

rockmonkeysc

I used to race downhill on a hardtail. I was convinced rear suspension would make me faster, took me a full season to get happy with it and faster. I still find the hardtail more fun but my back complains too much the next day.
The only trail I find full sus a lot easier and more enjoyable on is Egypt at Gawton.
It does depend a lot on the bike as well. On a tech trail something like a Stanton Slackline will give a lot more confidence and be easier to ride than something like a Specialized Epic.

Kowalski675

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I used to race downhill on a hardtail. I was convinced rear suspension would make me faster, took me a full season to get happy with it and faster. I still find the hardtail more fun but my back complains too much the next day.

Did you miss the bit where I said "full suss will always be easier (maybe no faster, with a decent rider, but certainly easier, and more comfortable)." ?

I'm slow on both my bikes, but certainly faster on the full suss than the hardtail.

supersonic

I ride around Wharncliffe! makes Stainburn and Gisburn seem like pavement ;-)

It is horses for courses though, on longer rides the lighter weight, snap acceleration out of corners, climbing and lack of pedal feedback can have advantages.

Kowalski675

supersonic wrote:

I ride around Wharncliffe! makes Stainburn and Gisburn seem like pavement ;-)

It is horses for courses though, on longer rides the lighter weight, snap acceleration out of corners, climbing and lack of pedal feedback can have advantages.

Or you could equally argue that the more compliant full susser would have an advantage on longer rides by reducing fatigue.

supersonic

Exactly! is never a a shut case really!

Kowalski675

supersonic wrote:

Exactly! is never a a shut case really!

Indeedy. Each have pros and cons, but I'd still maintain that for an average rider on average to rough trails a full suss bike makes things easier and more comfortable, if not necessarily faster.

rockmonkeysc

I still say that depends on the bike and the rider.
Some full sus bikes can be awkward to ride (light, sharp xc bikes) and some hardtails can really give confidence, a more direct feel for the trail and good stability.

Kowalski675

Lol, ok, we'll add another caveat then. For an average rider, on average to rough trails a full suss bike will be easier, given like-for-like type of bike geometry niche...

cooldad

FS is just better.
EOT.

Kowalski675

I thought that after I bought my full suss I's still use my hardtal for local door to door non gnarly rides (well, none of my rides are gnarly, but you know what I mean, lol), but I haven't ridden it since. I kept pulling the full suss down and using that, 'cos it was just far more comfortable.

paul.skibum

I have a hardtail and a full susser - I would generally speaking ride my hardtail in preference to my full susser on most trails - I like riding it, its simple, light and enjoyable. And I have ridden it in a BC bike park, in the Alps, in Wales, Peaks, Dales, etc - you do not need rear suspension to ride and it doesn't make things "easier" unless you aren't doing it right in the first place. For a very long ride with hours in the saddle it might make things more comfortable but I don't have an issue with a steel hardtail and a fat tyre.

For the OP - go and try a few bikes - personally I wouldnt go with the three you shortlisted just because that is what your local shop is trying to get rid of. Go further afield if needed to see some more choices.

chrisrobs

What are the 3 that were recommended?

CitizenLee

chrisrobs wrote:

What are the 3 that were recommended?

None really, I think everyone just wants him to buy a hardtail :roll:

I notice you have a Camber. That would probably be a great bike for the OP.

chrisrobs

3 k budget?

Id buy 2 bikes a hard tail and full susser.

chrisw333

chrisrobs wrote:

3 k budget?

Id buy 2 bikes a hard tail and full susser.

now there is a man who talks sense. 2k ish on a Giant Trance with dropper from Pauls Cycles and the rest on a Boardman HT?

chrisrobs

On ones 456 shimano build for a grand is a better buy, also looks miles better and are bomb proof.

2k left to buy full susser, id go for a 120/140 mm such as a Norco sight they are class bikes and very rare.

rockmonkeysc

chrisrobs wrote:

On ones 456 shimano build for a grand is a better buy, also looks miles better and are bomb proof.

2k left to buy full susser, id go for a 120/140 mm such as a Norco sight they are class bikes and very rare.

I wouldn't. A mate is on his third frame and has to fight with Evans for warranty claims. A 2013 Giant Trance is a safer buy and there are some extremely good deals if you shop around.

chrisrobs

Still a quality bike, everyone knows somebody who has snapped a frame. 3 times is worrying though.

Shame to hear that about Evans, never dealt with them personally.

kesher

I'm really looking at staying around the 2K mark. To go up to 3K the difference would have to be worth it: I'm thinking law of diminishing returns. I really don't want another HT right now. I reckon I need the FS experience for a while, although your suggestions are appreciated.

The Boardman FS I was thinking about does not seem to be geared low enough at (27.5") 42/28 x 36-12t: ratio of 96.25 to 21.38.

My Carrera Centos is (26") 42/30/22 x 32-11t: ratio 99.27 to 17.87 and I often use the lowest gear on very steep uphills, sometimes I'd like it even lower.

Canyon was suggested (nice website): nice bikes; but they are sent from Germany. I'm concerned about service if something goes wrong with the bike. I don't mind buying cheap bikes on the internet, I've had some bargains. However, spending a sizeable wad is a concern. I'm minded to buy fairly local.

chrisrobs

Not even remotely interested in working our gear ratios to that extent. Are you a professional rider?

bennett_346

cooldad wrote:

FS is just better.
EOT.

FS almost made me quit MTB from boredom, and I don't ride easy trails. I built myself a good hardtail up and it livened the trail up immensely. But granted most people aren't as good at riding as I am.

Kowalski675

So modest, too.

bennett_346

Kowalski675 wrote:

So modest, too.

It's partially tongue in cheek

kesher

chrisrobs wrote:

Not even remotely interested in working our gear ratios to that extent. Are you a professional rider?

No I'm not a pro: I became more aware of gear ratios as one of the bikes I ride is a fixie (road), and the one I bought online was geared far too low so I had replace the sprocket. In order to get the correct replacement sprocket, first time, it helps to use the gear ratio formulae.

rockmonkeysc

You soon get used to running taller gearing. I find it faster and easier. Plus if you don't like it the you can alter it easy enough. Ratios aren't as critical as on road.
There have been several Boardman FS frame failures posted on this forum but the frames have changed to suit 27.5 wheels so they may have sorted the problems.

cooldad

bennett_346 wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

So modest, too.

It's partially tongue in cheek

That's not his tongue.