Trail Bike of the Year!

jonnyashworth

I have to say that as a frame only option the new foxy carbon does look like a good option. I have been struggling to try and find out what the warranty is on the frame but if it follows Mondrakers limited lifetime warranty for carbon frames then I wouldn't worry about it being the company's first real go at a carbon endure bike.
That said I would still buy a Bronson

Angus Young

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

they lost me at Crank Bros wheels... seriously?

What's wrong with Crank Bros wheels? Are they suspect?

benpinnick wrote:

Yes, very.

cooldad wrote:

Crank Bros in the name is the clue.

Shame Mondraker didn't read this forum before speccing their flagship bike. They might have found out something that hundreds of hours of test riding didn't tell them.

benpinnick

I don't think they'll be unaware of crank bros poor rep, ludicrously proprietary and pointllessly over complex set up.

Angus Young

benpinnick wrote:

I don't think they'll be unaware of crank bros poor rep, ludicrously proprietary and pointllessly over complex set up.

So they chose them because...?

Chunkers1980

People think they are cool. Until they fall apart or the try and get some spares

Angus Young

Chunkers1980 wrote:

People think they are cool. Until they fall apart or the try and get some spares

Because that's just what they's want to happen on their flagship bike, right?

benpinnick

Angus Young wrote:

Chunkers1980 wrote:

People think they are cool. Until they fall apart or the try and get some spares

Because that's just what they's want to happen on their flagship bike, right?

No obviously thats not what they wanted, what they wanted was something that looked bling. What they got was something of questionable point that makes you question the whole bike... an own goal for sure.

Chunkers1980

No idea. Don't work for them. But like most bike stuff, all they make is the frame the rest is someone else's fault/problem, they just specced it. Cool means it is sold.

Angus Young

benpinnick wrote:

Angus Young wrote:

Chunkers1980 wrote:

People think they are cool. Until they fall apart or the try and get some spares

Because that's just what they's want to happen on their flagship bike, right?

No obviously thats not what they wanted, what they wanted was something that looked bling. What they got was something of questionable point that makes you question the whole bike... an own goal for sure.

So the company that had the mindset and ability to engineer the bike that beat all comers chose, for their flagship bike, a wheelset that will ride like sh!t and fall to pieces in no time at all simply because they look cool? They put aside the fact that they rode awful and dozens of sets fell apart during their testing because every time they put a new set on to replace the last that fell apart, they looked bling?

It take it then, you've all had plenty of hours on this particular wheel set?

cooldad

The Crank Bros wheels are the modern equivalent of



They do have issues, are a bugger to get parts for (and expensive), are heavy (all that extra engineering on the rims to hold the spokes - most rims actually remove material (ie holes) instead of adding more) and tensioning/adjusting the spokes is confusing.

Dandy Dan 69

I had those mavic sunset rims when they came out.

Picked it up from the bike shop, rode it around town with my mates for about 20mins, then tried bunny hopping onto a pavement and binned the rear on the curb

benpinnick

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

Angus Young wrote:

Chunkers1980 wrote:

People think they are cool. Until they fall apart or the try and get some spares

Because that's just what they's want to happen on their flagship bike, right?

No obviously thats not what they wanted, what they wanted was something that looked bling. What they got was something of questionable point that makes you question the whole bike... an own goal for sure.

So the company that had the mindset and ability to engineer the bike that beat all comers chose, for their flagship bike, a wheelset that will ride like sh!t and fall to pieces in no time at all simply because they look cool? They put aside the fact that they rode awful and dozens of sets fell apart during their testing because every time they put a new set on to replace the last that fell apart, they looked bling?

It take it then, you've all had plenty of hours on this particular wheel set?

Enough hours (about 6 at a guess) to know they offer nothing over a normal set of wheels except they are more expensive/weigh more than their peer's wheels (which ever way you want to look at it). I have also spent many hours laughing at friends who own them who find their wheels out of use for months at a time after the spokes break and the bearings & free hubs die a premature death and they await the right parts.

I didn't say they'd fall apart, I said they were a questionable choice, which leads to me questioning what else they did... I stand by that statement 100%. There is better wheels to be had for much less money, so those wheels must be an aesthetic choice only... Even more questionable is the choice of pointlessly bling Crank Bros wheels on the top two models, before dropping to the very base level DT wheels on the 3rd model down... Mondraker might make nice frames and I love a lot (actually I think this probably is the most desirable frame I have ever seen) about the design of the Carbon Foxy but someone at the spec decision level needs to look at these specs again and find a better middle ground.

Angus Young

benpinnick wrote:

I have also spent many hours laughing at friends who own them who find their wheels out of use for months at a time after the spokes break and the bearings & free hubs die a premature death and they await the right parts.

benpinnick wrote:

I didn't say they'd fall apart

This strange choice by Mondraker must leave us with one of two options. Either they didn't ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike (and don't know what everyone else seems to know) or they did ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike and simply ignored all the failures during the test rides and have not a care in the world that, once tested, the bike that carries the company name will be roundly condemned by all who ride it simply just so they can sell 5 bikes to those poor souls who don't know that their 6K bike will spend most of its time in dry dock. Either of those two options sound likely to you?

cooldad

I think you missed this bit

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

I have also spent many hours laughing at friends who own them who find their wheels out of use for months at a time after the spokes break and the bearings & free hubs die a premature death and they await the right parts.

benpinnick wrote:

I didn't say they'd fall apart

This strange choice by Mondraker must leave us with one of two options. Either they didn't ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike (and don't know what everyone else seems to know) or they did ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike and simply ignored all the failures during the test rides and have not a care in the world that, once tested, the bike that carries the company name will be roundly condemned by all who ride it simply just so they can sell 5 bikes to those poor souls who don't know that their 6K bike will spend most of its time in dry dock. Either of those two options sound likely to you?

Point is they are expensive, heavy, parts are a hassle to get, and expensive. Freehub failures are a known issue though, and they offer nothing over more conventional wheels except bling and potential hassles.
Crank Bros are famous for developing contrived solutions to problems that don't exist.

poah

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

I don't think they'll be unaware of crank bros poor rep, ludicrously proprietary and pointllessly over complex set up.

So they chose them because...?

TBF they use fox


I don't actually have anything against the crank bros wheels. there was an issue a couple of years back with hubs but that's sorted now.

benpinnick

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

I have also spent many hours laughing at friends who own them who find their wheels out of use for months at a time after the spokes break and the bearings & free hubs die a premature death and they await the right parts.

benpinnick wrote:

I didn't say they'd fall apart

This strange choice by Mondraker must leave us with one of two options. Either they didn't ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike (and don't know what everyone else seems to know) or they did ride the wheels they spec'd on their flagship bike and simply ignored all the failures during the test rides and have not a care in the world that, once tested, the bike that carries the company name will be roundly condemned by all who ride it simply just so they can sell 5 bikes to those poor souls who don't know that their 6K bike will spend most of its time in dry dock. Either of those two options sound likely to you?

No, but then who's to say they had a lot of failures during their testing - how do you know they did more than 10/50/100 hours on those wheels? Clearly as they spec Fox pretty much universally they are happy to spec products that perform worse than their cheaper competition (and yes I have got plenty of hours on Fox this last 18 months before you ask) so why would you assume that their wheel choice was any more solid?

Kai in the Borders

kirby700 wrote:

I was really wanting the new Kona process 134 and will be possibly in the market after all the reviews and seeing one in the flesh but I struggle with the spec and the weight of the thing so much so I'm even considering the Boardman Pro.

Do you mean the 134 in particular or both the 134 and DL? I have the 134 DL and the spec is good. Weight could be better, but the traction is amazing so it isn't that much of an issue in the real world. And I live in a pretty hilly area, so there's lots of climbing!

I doubt you can really compare the Process with the Boardman. I am sure it is a good bike, but the Process is a different animal entirely and probably more capable of more technical riding. Mine certainly is!

supersonic

Either of those two options sound likely to you?

Does to me. Most frame testing is done without the final spec you see. And many DO spec parts that are form over function. To me this is a pure marketing choice because they look flash.

benpinnick

supersonic wrote:

Most frame testing is done without the final spec you see. And many DO spec parts that are form over function. To me this is a pure marketing choice because they look flash.

^ This.

benpinnick

Kai in the Borders wrote:

kirby700 wrote:

I was really wanting the new Kona process 134 and will be possibly in the market after all the reviews and seeing one in the flesh but I struggle with the spec and the weight of the thing so much so I'm even considering the Boardman Pro.

Do you mean the 134 in particular or both the 134 and DL? I have the 134 DL and the spec is good. Weight could be better, but the traction is amazing so it isn't that much of an issue in the real world. And I live in a pretty hilly area, so there's lots of climbing!

I doubt you can really compare the Process with the Boardman. I am sure it is a good bike, but the Process is a different animal entirely and probably more capable of more technical riding. Mine certainly is!

And also this... if you're swaying from a process to a boardman you probably need to stop, test ride some bikes, then make up your mind.

Angus Young

supersonic wrote:

Most frame testing is done without the final spec you see.

Of course. How else would you arrive at a spec without working your way through many permutations as substantial part of the process? But are you saying that they rode better wheels and then said, never mind all those superior wheels, let's spec the rubbish ones that look better (which is debatable, anyway) and cost more?

supersonic wrote:

And many DO spec parts that are form over function. To me this is a pure marketing choice because they look flash.

So who are they planning on selling these bikes to when everyone knows they're riding on a terrible set of wheels?

Might it be worth waiting until this bike gets a few rides before dismissing it out of hand...

benpinnick

Angus Young wrote:

So who are they planning on selling these bikes to when everyone knows they're riding on a terrible set of wheels?

Clearly idiots with too much money if they keep the wheels, although in fairness if you can afford the bike you'll probably just swap the wheels out before it leaves the shop... Im willing to say this will be the majority of buyer's choice.

Angus Young wrote:

Might it be worth waiting until this bike gets a few rides before dismissing it out of hand...

Dismiss what out of hand? The wheels or the bike? The wheels have had their chance and blown it. Im sure the frame is a bang up job though.

benpinnick

Angus Young wrote:

But are you saying that they rode better wheels and then said, never mind all those superior wheels, let's spec the rubbish ones that look better (which is debatable, anyway) and cost more?

Oh and yes. That is EXACTLY what we are saying.

supersonic

Angus Young wrote:

supersonic wrote:

Most frame testing is done without the final spec you see.

Of course. How else would you arrive at a spec without working your way through many permutations as substantial part of the process? But are you saying that they rode better wheels and then said, never mind all those superior wheels, let's spec the rubbish ones that look better (which is debatable, anyway) and cost more?

supersonic wrote:

And many DO spec parts that are form over function. To me this is a pure marketing choice because they look flash.

So who are they planning on selling these bikes to when everyone knows they're riding on a terrible set of wheels?

Might it be worth waiting until this bike gets a few rides before dismissing it out of hand...

I'm saying exactly that.

And people who don't know better.

Hob Nob

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

I don't think they'll be unaware of crank bros poor rep, ludicrously proprietary and pointllessly over complex set up.

So they chose them because...?

Because the guy who owns Team Bike in Spain, (Spanish distributor for Crank Bros) also happens to own Mondraker...

Angus Young

Hob Nob wrote:

Angus Young wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

I don't think they'll be unaware of crank bros poor rep, ludicrously proprietary and pointllessly over complex set up.

So they chose them because...?

Because the guy who owns Team Bike in Spain, (Spanish distributor for Crank Bros) also happens to own Mondraker...

That's the first reasonable answer. Thank you.

benpinnick

Which parts of my answers.we're unreasonable prey tell?

Chunkers1980

He won't believe you until there's a conspiracy. Angus, they are not shite wheels in the short term. They are shite when compared to the competition for the same money and how they will last and how easy it is to source parts. That's just the truth. It is for people who know no better and backhanders

Angus Young

Chunkers1980 wrote:

He won't believe you until there's a conspiracy.

Mountain bikers seem very fond of conspiracy.

Chunkers1980

I'm not. But you said that was the first reasonable answer.