Trail Bike of the Year!

jonnyashworth

I'm sure that plenty of us have had chance to browse the latest 2014 WMB Trail Bike of the year issue (if not grab a copy its pretty good). Reading the reviews got me to thinking ..... ( :shock: I know it doesn't happen often :shock: ) .....what difference to your choice of bike the coveted award (and reviews of the runners up) makes to people.
So with that in mind if you could have any of the bikes that appeared in the 2014 WMB Trail Bike of the Year that cost below £3200 which one would you have?? You would have to keep it standard spec with no mods other than tyres and a dropper post!

poah

probably the canyon

Kai in the Borders

The Kona Process 134 DL ... in fact I already have it.

Awesome bike, wouldn't swap it for anything just now.

Kowalski675

POAH wrote:

probably the canyon

I think it would probably be the Canyon for me too.

BigAl

None of them, not really my kind of bike. I also think many (not all) of them are poor vfm

I'm really quite staggered that a ~£3k bike comes with a 'crap' fork.

Kowalski675

BigAl wrote:

I'm really quite staggered that a ~£3k bike comes with a 'crap' fork.

Aye, I find that a monumental p**s take too.

rockmonkeysc

It would be a Kona Process 134DL for me.
I stopped reading magazines after they all started printing the same article every month about why 29ers were the greatest things in the world. They're probably reprinting the same articles with 6650b replacing 29er.

benpinnick

I must admit I got confused by the top ten bikes often having scores below that of the 11>25 bikes... or was that just me?

jackk1992

I have the 2013 Mondraker Foxy XR MS and simply can't fault it. I bought it as in impulse buy (looking on the website to find new handlebars, next minute i was driving to the shop and putting a deposit down) so I literally knew nothing about the bike, apart from that it looked pretty...(not the best thing to do when spending that much cash) but i'm amazed with it. Had it about 4 weeks now and every ride it just shocks me more and more at how well it pedals and climbs, but is also a hoot on the downhills.

I can only imagine that the new 2014 model is better still. So i totally agree that WMB has probably made the right decision!

in 5 years time i think we will be looking back at laughing at the days we didnt ride forward geometry bikes....
"Stems...what the hell are they?!" says the kid of 2020

poah

BigAl wrote:

None of them, not really my kind of bike. I also think many (not all) of them are poor vfm

I'm really quite staggered that a ~£3k bike comes with a 'crap' fork.

that's fox for you lol

rockmonkeysc

I remember when Fox were good. Now they're badly made, unreliable and loaded with pointless gimmicks like CTD and kashima.

BigAl

POAH wrote:

BigAl wrote:

None of them, not really my kind of bike. I also think many (not all) of them are poor vfm

I'm really quite staggered that a ~£3k bike comes with a 'crap' fork.

that's fox for you lol

Indeed!

I just think it's unforgivable on a bike that costs almost £3k, especially when some manufacturers can offer a more balanced spec. (e.g Whyte G150 with a Pike and Reverb for £2.5k)

rockmonkeysc

Sometimes to get the high end Rockshox components at a good price it means having the full SRAM kit right down to Avid brakes so it's not all positive. It's a shame more new bikes don't come with Marzocchi or X Fusion forks.

lawman

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I remember when Fox were good. Now they're badly made, unreliable and loaded with pointless gimmicks like CTD and kashima.

Perhaps a little unkind. Mine have been faultlessly reliable and the Kashima coating has lasted just as well as any other I've had. CTD wasn't hugely adjustable but should be better for 2015.

I think what the Mondraker winning proves is that geometry and quality of the frame are the most important aspects of a bike. Sure it might not have the best kit and it's a little expensive, but if it rides better than bikes with a slightly better fork or drivetrain does that really matter? A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

lawman

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Sometimes to get the high end Rockshox components at a good price it means having the full SRAM kit right down to Avid brakes so it's not all positive. It's a shame more new bikes don't come with Marzocchi or X Fusion forks.

X-Fusion seem to be getting great reviews atm. The new 350 NCR looks good as well but I've yet to see them available in shops, like last year they initially launched them and only the pro's had them and now they're launching another new one with another new stanchion coating? Sure they might be great but outside of Fox and RS, brands like Marzocchi, X-Fusion and Manitou seem a little hit and miss.

jackk1992

A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

Well said!

Kowalski675

lawman wrote:

I think what the Mondraker winning proves is that geometry and quality of the frame are the most important aspects of a bike. Sure it might not have the best kit and it's a little expensive, but if it rides better than bikes with a slightly better fork or drivetrain does that really matter? A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

But why does it have such a poor spec for such a high price? Do they really expect us to believe that their "forward geometry" frames cost so much more to make that we should accept a piss-poor component spec for a premium price? Like I said before, I can only assume that extra two inches of frame tube is made from really f*****g expensive aluminium compared to the rest...

lawman

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

I think what the Mondraker winning proves is that geometry and quality of the frame are the most important aspects of a bike. Sure it might not have the best kit and it's a little expensive, but if it rides better than bikes with a slightly better fork or drivetrain does that really matter? A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

But why does it have such a poor spec for such a high price? Do they really expect us to believe that their "forward geometry" frames cost so much more to make that we should accept a piss-poor component spec for a premium price? Like I said before, I can only assume that extra two inches of frame tube is made from really f*****g expensive aluminium compared to the rest...

It's worth remembering Mondraker aren't a huge company, they simply don't have the resources to offer a competitive spec compared to some of the larger companies, like Cube for example. They also don't do direct sales either so that's another aspect where they lose on value. Money is not always in the frames, Specialized will get far better deals on components through the sheer number they order and a brand like Mondraker simply cannot do that. Commencal are similar in this regard, perhaps lacking a little in value compared to larger brands. At the end of the day the price is what it is, whether you want to go for a poorer riding bike but with better spec for similar money is up to you. As I say you can have the a bike coming with the best components in the world at Canyon prices but if the frame it's attached to is a flexy, wallowly, steep piece of sh!t then all the bling components and good value are worthless. I'm not saying that the Mondraker is a deserved winner, but there's certainly much, much more to many bikes than simply reading a spec list and seeing what appears on paper to be best value. I'd much rather have the best frame ever made with average components than a sh!t frame design swathed in carbon bling

rockmonkeysc

I have been saying for years that it's not just about the components but if you say anything negative about a Canyon you get 20 people all bite your head off. The top spec Torque is the worst downhill bike I have ridden but apparently it's brilliant because it comes with deemax wheels and cane creek shock and Fox 40's. Never seen one at a race though.

Kowalski675

lawman wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

I think what the Mondraker winning proves is that geometry and quality of the frame are the most important aspects of a bike. Sure it might not have the best kit and it's a little expensive, but if it rides better than bikes with a slightly better fork or drivetrain does that really matter? A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

But why does it have such a poor spec for such a high price? Do they really expect us to believe that their "forward geometry" frames cost so much more to make that we should accept a piss-poor component spec for a premium price? Like I said before, I can only assume that extra two inches of frame tube is made from really f*****g expensive aluminium compared to the rest...

It's worth remembering Mondraker aren't a huge company, they simply don't have the resources to offer a competitive spec compared to some of the larger companies, like Cube for example. They also don't do direct sales either so that's another aspect where they lose on value.

Both points I already acknowledged, but whichever way you cut it, it's royally taking the piss to be charging £2800 for a bike with a "crap" fork. Tbh, it's taking the piss to be charging £2800 for a bicycle, full stop, but that's another discussion...

lbalony

I had problems with my 2013 fox shock and fork that came on my bike. Was really peed off as always been happy with Fox. I contacted Mojo and they advised me to send them in. They put 2014 cartridges in and spacer kits, tuned them to my weight. Set them up. I put them on and wasn't expecting much, but they are now excellent and cannot fault Fox ir Mojo. Granted i should have not needed to do all this but it happened and it was resolved. One very happy customer.

I wouldn't worry about spec but more how fun and good it is to ride. I had a Canyon which was loaded with spec but was mega crap!

Kowalski675

lbalony wrote:

II put them on and wasn't expecting much, but they are now excellent and cannot fault Fox or Mojo.

Well, you can't fault Mojo for sorting them, but you can certainly fault Fox for making them crap in the first place, especially when they charger premium prices for crap product.

BigAl

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

Kowalski675 wrote:

lawman wrote:

I think what the Mondraker winning proves is that geometry and quality of the frame are the most important aspects of a bike. Sure it might not have the best kit and it's a little expensive, but if it rides better than bikes with a slightly better fork or drivetrain does that really matter? A bike can have the best spec and be great value but if it rides like a piece of sh!t what good is it...

But why does it have such a poor spec for such a high price? Do they really expect us to believe that their "forward geometry" frames cost so much more to make that we should accept a piss-poor component spec for a premium price? Like I said before, I can only assume that extra two inches of frame tube is made from really f*****g expensive aluminium compared to the rest...

It's worth remembering Mondraker aren't a huge company, they simply don't have the resources to offer a competitive spec compared to some of the larger companies, like Cube for example. They also don't do direct sales either so that's another aspect where they lose on value.

Both points I already acknowledged, but whichever way you cut it, it's royally taking the wee-wee to be charging £2800 for a bike with a "crap" fork. Tbh, it's taking the wee-wee to be charging £2800 for a bicycle, full stop, but that's another discussion...

Kowalski's right here.

I've no reason to argue with WMB's selection of the Mondraker. If it rides as well as they say, then great.

But just how much better would it be with a Revelation (or Pike)?

And would it really cost that much more than the crappy Fox they've chosen?

Or maybe we're all on the wrong track. Maybe a bike with Fox just sells better than a bike with RS, regardless of actual performance. In which case, who can blame them for sticking with Fox.

With £3k to spend I'd always go with a custome build. For that money, I want what works for me

Kowalski675

BigAl wrote:

But just how much better would it be with a Revelation (or Pike)?

And would it really cost that much more than the crappy Fox they've chosen?

Nail. Head. Bosh.

Who in their right mind wouldn't rather have a Revelation than the Fox Evolution (even without those sexy black stanchions)? Or even a Sektor (which, by WMB's admission "performed better than any of the Fox forks in this test"...

lawman

Kowalski675 wrote:

BigAl wrote:

But just how much better would it be with a Revelation (or Pike)?

And would it really cost that much more than the crappy Fox they've chosen?

Nail. Head. Bosh.

Who in their right mind wouldn't rather have a Revelation than the Fox Evolution (even without those sexy black stanchions)? Or even a Sektor (which, by WMB's admission "performed better than any of the Fox forks in this test"...

But as Al says, if Mondrakers market research says Fox is more desirable to the consumer then it's on their interest to fit them, and that's before we get on to OE deals with Fox they may have in place. Yes the fork might not be great but for a lot of consumers on paper it probably looks better value than other bikes with an RS fork. few top-end bikes come with RS forks these days, they usually appear on the entry level models of a frame, like the GT sensor for example. The higher models come with Fox. There's a whole world of questions as to why they've fitted a Fox 32 that we simply can't answer as we don't know all the details.

It's also not entirely clear what they mean by "crap" either. Is it te damper? The flex? Sure a Revelation might have a better damper (personally think there's little difference between the Evo fox forks and a rev rl) but while a pike would certainly answer te flex issues as I explained before it would probably bump the price up considerably and possibly tread on the toes of the Dune range, so they're trying to think of it's relative market position as well.

At the end of the day, if it still rides great inspite of an average spec then does it really matter? What's classed as expensive is also very subjective, there's certainly no set definition that's for sure! I wouldn't baulk at spending as much on a frame only as some of the complete bikes tested and many wouldn't either.

jackk1992

Its all down to personal preference, if it works for you then how is it a crap component? I'm made up with the forks on my foxy, and im made up with the bike I bought. If you don't like it, don't spend your money on it, plenty of other bikes out there and there are plenty of other people that will be happy with there £2k spent on the mondraker.

poah

putting a pike on in place of a fox 32 probably wouldn't cost that much and probably cheaper than a 34.

I'd rather spend a bit more money and get a decent fork than have to try and sell a shit one and buy new.

rockmonkeysc

It's possible that Fox forks are cheaper to bike manufacturers than Rockshox. That would explain why they are so much more common on new bikes.

supersonic

There is little in it. The reason is that Fox are seen as higher end by the majority of consumers.

Kowalski675

lawman wrote:

But as Al says, if Mondrakers market research says Fox is more desirable to the consumer then it's on their interest to fit them

Then they need to do some more up to date market research, because it seems you could count on the fingers of one of Abu Hamza's hands the number of people who have a good word to say about Fox products (either in the press, or consumers) since they introduced CTD, particularly the Evolution spec units, which seem to earn universal derision in all tests.

lawman wrote:

At the end of the day, if it still rides great inspite of an average spec then does it really matter?

Depends whether you object to being ripped off and taken for a c**t or not, I guess...

Kowalski675

jackk1992 wrote:

there are plenty of other people that will be happy with there £2k spent on the mondraker.

It's £2799.

And "their".