Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Mountainbiking central

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby mitzikatzi » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:06 pm

ozdavo wrote:...snip.... 2009 Marin Quake 7.9 was $6899 NOW $1749!


At $1749 you could make money parting that Marin Quake out. The Fork is worth about half the sale price.
Xplora wrote: Do not get cheap SPDs, your body will hurt you.

trailgumby wrote:29ers are awesome.
User avatar
mitzikatzi
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Perth

by BNA » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:15 pm

BNA
 

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Nobody » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:15 pm

trailgumby wrote:hardtails are without doubt more efficient and faster... you can deal with the comfort factor to some extent by running less pressure in the tyres, say mid-20s ... but you'd need to go tubeless to avoid getting pinchflat punctures..
At his height and therefore likely weight, he is probably light enough not to pinch flat at that pressure. Depends on how big the bag is too. I run 25 on a 2.2 and don't have a problem. I'm about 82Kg.

trailgumby wrote:Interestingly, ran into another bike store owner who is not convinced about 29ers after having tried them... but then he does crazy freeride stuff that I look at ... and decide "I'm walking". :P
Since MTB is so varied these days, I can see why there are so many different opinions. I think it would work for me, but I'm too tight at this stage to make the move. I'll probably just wait until I'm too old to continue rigid, then change.
Nobody
 
Posts: 6488
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:20 pm

mitzikatzi wrote:
ozdavo wrote:...snip.... 2009 Marin Quake 7.9 was $6899 NOW $1749!


At $1749 you could make money parting that Marin Quake out. The Fork is worth about half the sale price.



Hmmm... really, but the fact that this bike is advertised at more then 3 times the sale price make Joe a little questionable.
Someone once said, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is !

Would pick this one up tomorrow but a bit weary as to why oh why, has it not sold ?
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby mitzikatzi » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:28 pm

It's a Downhill bike or at the least a Free Ride bike. It would suck to ride on the flat.
Xplora wrote: Do not get cheap SPDs, your body will hurt you.

trailgumby wrote:29ers are awesome.
User avatar
mitzikatzi
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Perth

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:41 pm

mitzikatzi wrote:It's a Downhill bike or at the least a Free Ride bike. It would suck to ride on the flat.



Yeah that's what I thought, but didn't know that it would suck that bad on flat riding.

Oh well lets just say, I need an enjoyable bike and not a competition one which I won't enjoy :x
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Gordo » Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:35 pm

kunalraiker wrote:but from what I have read,up hill will be easier,


yeah, im thinking it would prob smash it up reasonable consistent gradient but when it comes to the stupid steep steep stuff i like then maybe not so.

cornering less but marginally.


i rode a trek superfly HT carbon. it was good. i liked it. had me sold for a while on 29er. smoothed out stuff pretty well. when i went around some reasonably tight 180 degree corners i tried to do it like my 26 and felt a loss of control. had a couple of 'oh fk' moments on it. the camber 29 would prob corner even less well than the race thing i was on. Still reviews are good, they say it corners better than expected. The flickability of 26ers is still nice i think

i havent ridden 29ers enough to come to a decision on em. i dunno
Gordo
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:18 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby AlMac » Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:56 pm

If you really want people to go WF at you on your bike, buy some old POS, ramp up your stamina and skills and use it to smoke people on the trail.

On the road or on the trail, the thing that people notice most is getting their arses kicked by someone on their old POS.

I watched a big group of roadies cruise by the other day. All sorts of carbon drool, but the only WF moment was the red single speed sitting at the front of the pack - and they were moving.

I see all sorts of joy out on the trail, but it doesn't make me go WF.

The Niners look ok, but they're nothing to me compared with an orange carbon Tall Boy.
AlMac
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:11 am
Location: Perth

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Mugglechops » Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:05 am

Tall boys are nice

Image
User avatar
Mugglechops
 
Posts: 2275
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:51 pm
Location: Shoalhaven

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby sblack » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:22 am

Gordo wrote:
kunalraiker wrote:but from what I have read,up hill will be easier,


yeah, im thinking it would prob smash it up reasonable consistent gradient but when it comes to the stupid steep steep stuff i like then maybe not so

In my experience stupid steep stuff is mostly about the balance between weight over the rear to keep traction and weight over the front to keep it on the ground. My understanding is that a 29er is better in this regard. It's when things get tight and twisty when manoeuvrability matters that 26 has the advantage.

Sent from my MB526 using Tapatalk
Image
User avatar
sblack
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:35 am

sblack wrote:
Gordo wrote:
kunalraiker wrote:but from what I have read,up hill will be easier,


yeah, im thinking it would prob smash it up reasonable consistent gradient but when it comes to the stupid steep steep stuff i like then maybe not so

In my experience stupid steep stuff is mostly about the balance between weight over the rear to keep traction and weight over the front to keep it on the ground. My understanding is that a 29er is better in this regard. It's when things get tight and twisty when manoeuvrability matters that 26 has the advantage.

Sent from my MB526 using Tapatalk


Yup that is what I believe too, but wouldn't know the degree of tightness until I test one.
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby trailgumby » Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:42 am

Gordo wrote:i rode a trek superfly HT carbon. it was good. i liked it. had me sold for a while on 29er. smoothed out stuff pretty well. when i went around some reasonably tight 180 degree corners i tried to do it like my 26 and felt a loss of control. had a couple of 'oh fk' moments on it. the camber 29 would prob corner even less well than the race thing i was on. Still reviews are good, they say it corners better than expected. The flickability of 26ers is still nice i think

i havent ridden 29ers enough to come to a decision on em. i dunno

I experienced that strong sense of instability on the tight stuff, too. Most of it can be resolvd by getting the bars lower, down to the same height off the ground as on yoru 26er. My first ride on the 29er that I reviewed awhile back felt like I was trying to negotiate my way around the track on those tall clown stilts. :x

Flipping the stem was a big improvement, would have liked to have tried a flat bar but it was too much fluffing around getting the foam grips off for a bike that wasn't mine.

A mate of mine has one of those Tallboys and loves it. I might have to talk him into doing a pedal + bike swap for a day (he uses flats) and see how it goes.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 9898
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:10 pm

I drove up to You Yangs today, must say the Stockyards Trail is a steep way up had to adjust my bike rack on the car to prevent them from falling along the way.

Did 3 trails, I should say my wife looked more adventurous then myself at the start, I wasn't too bad until I had my first fall on a steep down hill, not exactly a fall.
Was more like ohhh showtime, this is too steep, which resulted in me slamming my breaks and my rear tyre in front of me :roll: , luckily I wasn't injured and the only thing damaged on the bike was the glove end slightly torn.

But from there it was all fun, I should say I didn't take big risk, just tried to ease myself into it and avoided any steep climbs to exhaust myself early with too much lactic acid around the muscles.

But end in end it was all fun!
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:12 am

Merida and Marin seem like really beautiful bikes that fall in my price bracket, any owners here who would like to word in?
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby mitzikatzi » Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:48 am

Not sure what your budget is.
Both of these are good "entry level" bikes.
Both have Silver Recon's and SLX.
I am a bike nerd if I meet you on the trails I would think you had a "nice" bike if thats important to you.

Scale 60 (2011)
or
GT Zaskar Comp (2011)

Valentine's Day is comming up. Buy the GLW/GF one as well :)

Then go and see Norm and Jess at Forrest for some lessons and great riding.
Xplora wrote: Do not get cheap SPDs, your body will hurt you.

trailgumby wrote:29ers are awesome.
User avatar
mitzikatzi
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Perth

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:45 pm

mitzikatzi wrote:Not sure what your budget is.
Both of these are good "entry level" bikes.
Both have Silver Recon's and SLX.
I am a bike nerd if I meet you on the trails I would think you had a "nice" bike if thats important to you.

Scale 60 (2011)
or
GT Zaskar Comp (2011)

Valentine's Day is comming up. Buy the GLW/GF one as well :)

Then go and see Norm and Jess at Forrest for some lessons and great riding.



Under budget unfortunately... hey where's the rear suspension gone :roll:
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby mitzikatzi » Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:46 pm

Both those bikes have large discounts on them.
kunalraiker wrote:The bike will be predominantly used to ride on a daily basic along the river tracks Maribyrnong River.
Apart from that it will also be used on weekends to ride on medium difficulty tracks at Lysterfield.
Also will be taken on road trips to be used to be riden on walking and bike tracks.


When I see people riding good quality bikes "pootling alone" on bike paths I think it's sad. Like trying to buy performance. Buy whatever you like. I would buy a bike like one of the two I listed then get lessons on how to ride it well. If I had a partner with a nice bike that wanted to ride with me I would be a happy man.

You don't need full suspension MTB for a bike path you don't even need a mountain bike. A bike with 28mm tyres and a rigid fork is plenty comfort and grip IMHO.

A Kona Dew is a great bike for bike paths and rail trails.
Xplora wrote: Do not get cheap SPDs, your body will hurt you.

trailgumby wrote:29ers are awesome.
User avatar
mitzikatzi
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Perth

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:46 pm

mitzikatzi wrote:Both those bikes have large discounts on them.
kunalraiker wrote:The bike will be predominantly used to ride on a daily basic along the river tracks Maribyrnong River.
Apart from that it will also be used on weekends to ride on medium difficulty tracks at Lysterfield.
Also will be taken on road trips to be used to be riden on walking and bike tracks.


When I see people riding good quality bikes "pootling alone" on bike paths I think it's sad. Like trying to buy performance. Buy whatever you like. I would buy a bike like one of the two I listed then get lessons on how to ride it well. If I had a partner with a nice bike that wanted to ride with me I would be a happy man.

You don't need full suspension MTB for a bike path you don't even need a mountain bike. A bike with 28mm tyres and a rigid fork is plenty comfort and grip IMHO.

A Kona Dew is a great bike for bike paths and rail trails.



That's why they say, we all are made different.
Me for once feels every bump on and off the bike path, then on the trails its a different story.

There is no way I would attempt the You Yangs High Difficulty Trails witheout a dually.... :!:
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Gordo » Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:56 pm

get one of these. u and ur missus can have great fun. she can take the handlebars, stop u from crashing out

Image
Gordo
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:18 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby trailgumby » Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:28 pm

Way cool tandem - even has rear suspension! 8) 8)
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 9898
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:56 pm

Gordo wrote:get one of these. u and ur missus can have great fun. she can take the handlebars, stop u from crashing out

Image


Coooooooooooooool!!!!!!!!!!!!! is that what your parents ride ?
:)
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Gordo » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:43 am

best way to find out what you want/need: go test ride. try and get to a specialized, giant or trek demo day. u can look at bikes all u want and figure out which one u think has the most bling bling, but actually getting on them changes things completely.

rode a camber today. initial impressions. too upright for me. not a slow bike but next to the epic, forget it. butt is very back wheel. wide handle bars, upright. very plush though which was nice. cornering urghh.... cant see myself doing what i do on my 26er around corners with that thing. bawked at going up hills. suspension springy, ass on the backwheel, no thanks. Not the kind of ride i expected it. certainly off the wish list. would have to change and fiddle with the setup a lot to get me to like it.

epic: this is fast. just enough suspension to get places i reckon. felt far more balanced over the bike.Bike didnt feel as big and bulky as the camber. 29er wheels, ok, cant say i was blown away. The bike was very fast when i got it onto the tarmac though. Cornering hmmm???? reduced i have to say. 26ers can flick and maneuver just that bit easier which is difference between hitting and missing a tree sometimes. it did handle well all the same. nice bike. very expensive (wrong side of 3000 for me). has the 'brain' which i dont think i really need or want. great bike though. too bad specialized dont sell a more basic stripped down version of it.

stumpy HT. fast. climbs well. maneurvers well . only 80mm travel, can be adjusted to 100mm by adding or removing spacers. its a HT, the fact it was carbon and had 29er wheels dont make it comparable to a 26 dual suspension IMO. very fast on tarmac like the epic. The epic was better.
Gordo
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:18 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:08 pm

Gordo wrote:best way to find out what you want/need: go test ride. try and get to a specialized, giant or trek demo day. u can look at bikes all u want and figure out which one u think has the most bling bling, but actually getting on them changes things completely.

rode a camber today. initial impressions. too upright for me. not a slow bike but next to the epic, forget it. butt is very back wheel. wide handle bars, upright. very plush though which was nice. cornering urghh.... cant see myself doing what i do on my 26er around corners with that thing. bawked at going up hills. suspension springy, ass on the backwheel, no thanks. Not the kind of ride i expected it. certainly off the wish list. would have to change and fiddle with the setup a lot to get me to like it.

epic: this is fast. just enough suspension to get places i reckon. felt far more balanced over the bike.Bike didnt feel as big and bulky as the camber. 29er wheels, ok, cant say i was blown away. The bike was very fast when i got it onto the tarmac though. Cornering hmmm???? reduced i have to say. 26ers can flick and maneuver just that bit easier which is difference between hitting and missing a tree sometimes. it did handle well all the same. nice bike. very expensive (wrong side of 3000 for me). has the 'brain' which i dont think i really need or want. great bike though. too bad specialized dont sell a more basic stripped down version of it.

stumpy HT. fast. climbs well. maneurvers well . only 80mm travel, can be adjusted to 100mm by adding or removing spacers. its a HT, the fact it was carbon and had 29er wheels dont make it comparable to a 26 dual suspension IMO. very fast on tarmac like the epic. The epic was better.


I wonder if they hold the bike demos here in Melbourne ?

But thanks for posting your views on the camber, epic might be a little out of budget but hey camber might fit the bill with me being a short and all!
Merida and Marin's look convincing too, I need to find a dealer here in Maidstone that stocks them.
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Mugglechops » Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:23 pm

The Epic and the Camber are 2 totally different bikes. Not really fair to compare them against each other.

Its like a comparing a Reign to an Anthem with Giants.
User avatar
Mugglechops
 
Posts: 2275
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:51 pm
Location: Shoalhaven

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby Gordo » Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:42 am

Wouldnt that be more like a trance to an anthem? But yeah, the camber was very different than i thought (maybe part to do with the setup). i was expecting to get something slower than an epic but the difference was really big i felt. not what i expected at all. i was a bit dissapointed and was hoping id like the camber due to its price. now it just leaves near 1000k short on the epic which aint going to happen. test rides are great value non-the-less
Gordo
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:18 am

Re: Ideal MTB (See requirements)

Postby kunalraiker » Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:33 am

Gordo wrote:Wouldnt that be more like a trance to an anthem? But yeah, the camber was very different than i thought (maybe part to do with the setup). i was expecting to get something slower than an epic but the difference was really big i felt. not what i expected at all. i was a bit dissapointed and was hoping id like the camber due to its price. now it just leaves near 1000k short on the epic which aint going to happen. test rides are great value non-the-less


Gordo, the problem I face is enquiring for a test ride without any commitment to buy, are the retailers ok with that ?
kunalraiker
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:44 am

PreviousNext

Return to MTB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mick243



Support BNA
Click for online shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Cycling Express Cycling Express
Ebay Ebay AU
ProBikeKit ProBikeKit UK
Evans Cycles Evans Cycles UK
JensonUSA Jenson USA
JensonUSA Competitive Cyclist