|   Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Finch Platte
Mar 12, 2002 7:33 AM | | Age-old questions, sorry.
I own 2 Cannondales, a CAAD3 and a Jekyll. The Jekyll has been giving me so many problems, I'm thinking about getting a new HT to replace it (the Jekyll is too heavy, too). But my CAAD3 (w/ the Headshok) beats me up. If I go to another brand of hardtail, w/ a
i real
shock w/ more travel, am I still going to get beaten up by the ride, or does the shock and less stiff rear end make all the difference?
My Maguras were also a pain, so I'm thinking of going back to regular ol' cantis. Mistake? I'm in NorCal, so weather isn't a
i big
factor w/ the brakes, altho I loved the performance when it
i did
rain.
Thanks.
fp |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Jrm
Mar 12, 2002 7:53 AM | | Gary, I'd consider a frameset & fork to replace your famous Jekyll. It may be more cost effective and you can upgrade into a nice frame. Thats why i go the frameset route. Also Formula or avids can be had for about $160. You already have the wheelset/hub sets
No matter how much you improve on a HT ..its still a HT. it still wont be as comforable, track or handle as well as a FS. |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Bob
Mar 12, 2002 7:57 AM | | Hi Fp,
I have both a hardtail (FIsher) and a new NRS-1 full suspension. I wouldn't own a FS without having a hardtail "backup". Mostly due to the increased maintainence and more things that could possibly go wrong with the FS.
Also, I don't feel secure traveling across the country on vacation with a FS with disc brakes and air forks/shocks.
With my trusty hardtail and coil fork, I know I can pick up a brake cable, or pads or most any other parts in any decent bike shop.
Not so much a comfort issue for me, and I actually prefer a hardtail for trials type riding here in the northeast.
Have you considered selling the Jekyll and picking up a softail? Or maybe a simple monopivot FS frame? The Marin designs look nice, although I haven't ridden them. That way you'll have your hardtail for when the trails are smooth and an FS for when you think you might get hammered by the trail. |
| My input | Fiver
Mar 12, 2002 8:12 AM | | I have a Mrazek hardtail and a Rocky Mountain FS, and I'm selling the Rocky. The Mrazek is comfortable enough to make me feel like I don't really need the FS. Sure, it's nice to have FS sometimes, but generally the trails I ride don't really require it.
You've had so many problems with the Jekyll that it just doesn't make sense to keep it. I suggest you pick up a comfortable hardtail (i.e. not Cannondale). Go with a nice steel (or titanium, if you can afford it) frame with a good 4-inch fork. A plush fork alone will make a big difference in the ride quality. Use a titanium or carbon seatpost, or maybe think about a softtail frame. I think you'll be surprised by how comfortable a good hardtail can be. Heck, my Mrazek is aluminum, but it's still comfy enough to take on 5-hour rides and not feel like I'm going to start pissing blood. |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Jekyll
Mar 12, 2002 8:13 AM | | Not sure what is giving all that trouble with the Jekyll.. Not exactly the most complicated FS design - single pivot - the only thing that can go wrong on the frame. Something with 4 bar linkage would have a hell of a lot more there to go wrong than a single pivot design. Also for an FS with real travel the weight is not all that bad, especially if you have an upscale model.
If your components are giving you trouble then that has little to do with the frame they are hanging on (unless of course you have a bunch of CODA crap - then that's a whole different story). HeadShoks can be a little touchy and really need to be worked on by someone who knows what they are doing.
Having had a CAAD3 ('99 F900) with the short travel HeadShok I feel your pain. The short travel HS's blow and tail end on the CAAD3 has absolutely no give. The only good thing about the short travel HS forks is that they are incredibly stiff. Almost anything after a HS will feel squirmy at first.
Personally, I split my time between the Jekyll and my HT Pisgah/Atom Race. Both are great, just in different ways and different conditions. And the LS was one hell of a HT upgrade from the F900 (unfortunately not only in ride but in price too). |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | hedgehog
Mar 12, 2002 8:23 AM | | Hi Finch, I have a steel HT with an older x-vert (supposed to be 100mm but gets about 90mm of travel) on it. It has a pretty comfortable ride but it's not as comfy as my Heckler. I guess it depends on what brand of HT you're gonna get. Although from what my friends say, almost anything will be more comfortable than your c-dale HT.
On your other topic, I still have Arch Rivals on my HT and Heckler. I did put an Avid disk on the front of the Stinky. That's the only disk I have and I love it. I hear Avid is now making a bigger DH type rotor (7" or 8"?). I thought about upgrading to that and maybe puting the 6" rotor on the Heckler. But after giving it some thought, I really have no problems stopping with any of my Avid brakes (I love dis'n the big S when I can). I'll probably wait until I need a new front wheel for the Heckler before changing anything in the brake dept.
Hedgehog
p.s. I've tried my buddy's Hope and Hayes systems and they felt great. I just can't see spending 2 times the money when the brakes aren't twice as good (IMHO) as the Avids. Plus, no new levers, brake lines, bleeding issues etc etc. |
| I think... | ®andyA
Mar 12, 2002 8:30 AM | | ... a lot would depend on your riding tendencies.
I have a Cdale CAAD2 ('99 M500) and a 2k GF Sugar4 and like them both for separate reasons. The Sugar is great for trail rides. Sure 2.5" isn't a lot of travel, but I'm in MI and the terrain I like to ride isn't so rocky that more travel is all that necessary. Of course, if I do start riding those trails I'll consider upgrading. If you're feeling "beaten up" with the Jekyll have you played with the rear shock. I'm not too familiar with the Jekyll specs, but my Sugar has the Cane Creek AD5 rear air shock and last season I lowered the pressure and it helped create a more plush ride. I had been running it higher the season before and wanted to experiment. Also, the Sugar hasn't been too bad maintenance-wise (knock³ on wood). I haven't had many troubles (well, except for the front shifting problems when I first got it - solved with upgraded crank). Here, disks aren't all that necessary either, so I run canti's.
The Cdale, on the other hand, is great for riding paved or smooth trails that I know don't have lots of rocks, roots, etc. I also run a CF seatpost on it to help with vibrations (great for riding road). I originally had an old Coda suspension seatpost on it, but it was crap. I suppose if you wanted to give it a try you could try a good sus. post on your CAAD3 (Thudbuster gets good reviews) and see how it feels.
My $0.02
Randy |
| Material hype | Steve-O
Mar 12, 2002 8:43 AM | | I'm probably asking for flaming on this one but I think the material the frame is made out of doesn't have THAT much an affect on the ride quality of the bike. This is based on having owned a hardtail Ti bike, Aluminum bike, and a steel bike.
If you were to ask me to ride each frame blindfolded I bet I probably could not tell the difference between each frame material and what it's comfort level was. There are always lots of posts about how Aluminum "beats you up" and the wonderful damping qualities of Ti and Steel. To me, its a hardtail - they will all beat you up!
For comfort on a hardtail I think proper setup is SO much more important then frame material. Many riders don't take the time to see if they have the proper seat height, stem length and angle, etc. Proper setup can go a long ways towards easing back pain and tired forearms. Much more so then the latest/greatest frame material.
The thing that affected my comfort level most on a hardtail (surprisingly) was a suspension seatpost. For the price, they are a great addition. There is little or no maintenance and they do help to effectively smooth out the ride. They might not be cool but they work! Try one on your CDale and be happy! |
| Material hype | Yeti_Rider
Mar 12, 2002 9:53 AM | | It's not so much the material, as the design of the tubes and the design of the frame. I am on my second Aluminum HT and I can tell a HUGE difference in how this one rides compared to my other one. My old bike was a Barracuda Comp which was a decent frame in it's day. However, it has a (their attempt to differentiate themselves I guess) teardropped shaped top tube that just made the bike SUPER STIFF. I'd get back from rides and my whole body would be fatigued.
I got a Yeti ARC last fall and can tell a difference in how much better this frame and tubeset absorbes bumps compared to the other one.
As an engineer, I firmly believe that the metallurgists could design any material (steel, aluminum, Titanium, and even carbon fiber) with whatever properties they wanted and they would all mimic one another. Manufacturers just don't go with this approach and simnply purchase whatever "standard" tubing Easton, Reynolds, and others want to sell.
Michael |
| agreed | laffeaux
Mar 12, 2002 3:59 PM | | My Yeti ARC is defintely less harsh than my Bontrager Race Lite steel. Both ride great, but the Yeti, even though it's AL, absorbs more of the bumps. |
| Material hype | laffeaux
Mar 12, 2002 10:33 AM | | I agree about the hype. I ride a steel HT, aluminum HT, and an aluminum FS. The steel is a great ride in tight single track, but the aluminum HT is much smoother over bumps. The AL wheelbase is 1" longer and I think that's the biggest difference. The bikes feel different, but I'm not sure the material has much to do with it.
That said...
You live in NorCal. I live in the bay area. In my opinion a FS not required on trails in our area. It might be nice on long fireroad decents, but in general our trails are pretty smooth. Don't be afraid to buy a HT. |
| no more hardtails | mikeb
Mar 12, 2002 10:57 PM | | my zipcode is in the bay area as well--and i have no intention of going back to a hardtail for regular off road riding after tonight's ride. i love my alibi, no doubt, but after riding my superlight since november and returning to the alibi for this evening's adventure in the headlands, i'll stick to using the ibis as a commuter and a backup bike.
i'm able to rider further, faster and with more confidence on a dualie.
most of the trails here in the bay area are'nt that rough, but even so, the FS still extends your range. i also think if your forty-plus and have any back problems or loose false teeth a dualie is the way to go. |
| Yeah, I have both | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 8:58 AM | | My I-Drive is plush and has not given me any problems (yet) but it is heavy. Guess around 30 lbs. I've gotten into riding my hardtail more because of so many factors. Feel for the trail, light weight, simplicity. The usual suspects. However, I'm in the process of going custom steel.
Sounds like you're ready for a custom steel or Ti bike too. Short of really heavy duty freeriding, however that is defined, a good hardtail seems the better option. I hear people say that you can't really tell the difference between a 30 lbs. bike and a 24 lbs. one. Hogwash! I had a lighter pair of shoes on yesterday and I could tell the difference so I can certainly tell a 6 pound difference. Regardless of what the rider weights, you can feel the difference. Whether you ride better or not with a lighter bike is another question.
A nice light hardtail is just plain "tossable" as in it goes where you want it to and does what you want.
I'm not bailing out of the fs market completely but I will stick by my guns and say if you can afford it and want only one bike, the steel/Ti hardtail is the way to go.
As with everything, it does depend on where you ride, your style, and what you are looking for in a ride. It took me about 20 years to find out............ |
| Speaking of Hogwash. | Matno
Mar 12, 2002 9:26 AM | | What is with people praising the virtues of "feeling the trail?" When I ride a good trail, that's the last thing I want to do is "feel" the trail. I've always thought that a smooth ride was one of the most desirable parts of riding (hence the reason we have suspension at all). I guess not everyone feels the same way. Don't get me wrong, I am definitely what I would call a "finesse rider." I don't throw my bike down the hill without carefully picking the smoothest line, but I still appreciate the added stability, steering control, and comfort that my FS bike gives me (I gave up on HT's last year after way too long of stubbornly hanging on for the sake of "keeping it real"). Now, instead of "feeling the trail" I can "look at the scenery" while I ride, without worrying that a 3 inch pebble is going to sterilize me... |
| We could really go on with this. | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 11:07 AM | | Feeling the trail does not mean getting my butt thrown around. I have always used my legs as extra suspension when the trail gets rough. I have a super plus ride in the I-Drive and after more then a year on FS, I really like the feel of the hardtail better. |
| Speaking of Hogwash. | Clutch
Mar 12, 2002 11:09 AM | | Totally agree. If anything a good FS rig let's flow with the trail not feel (i.e. get tossed by) the trail. I mean if you really want to feel the trail and go old school go full rigid or better carve your bike out of stone. You don't see the the off-road racers like the in the Baja 500/1000 using an old buckboard wagon to keep it real. There are advantages to a hardtail (simplicity, weight, acceleration, etc.) |
| Now you're getting silly | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 11:23 AM | | I say I like a steel hardtail and right away you go into the rigid argument. What part of "I also own an FS" are you missing. I didn't know a custom steel hardtail with hydraulic brakes and an air fork was "old school."
As I'm not planning on racing the Baja 500/1000, what they use has little meaning to me. They also tend to use engines, don't they or is there a bicycle category too?
Why is it so hard for some people to understand that others might really like a hardtail? |
| ohhhh, bubba..... | earthworm
Mar 12, 2002 9:47 AM | | i figured that i really needed a 37# rm7 so that when i hit 50(very shortly) i will be much stronger from pedaling this big squishy bike uphill.Ive even justified all this weight by convincing myself that my muscle tone and strength at 60 will be much better because ive been into resistance training--ummm maybe im on a new angle here for big-hit heavy bikes for the older boomers- really though i think a good bike is a good bike no matter ht/st/fs/rigid.
I really love the tractor like ability of this rm7 climbing over impossible s@$#--YOU JUST PUT HER IN 22/34 AND SPIN-- however it`s slowwwww like me--but just think of all those muscle fibers im building as im pushing weights...... |
| That was my excuse when I turned 50! | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 11:18 AM | | My I-Drive also loves to climb its way over obstacles. However, to really get in shape for 60, I need that hardtail to bomb around smooth trails to get in shape.....
Bet you are not slower then me. Anyone that rides in front of me can vouch for that. |
| Weight | TechniKal
Mar 12, 2002 10:20 AM | | I agree that there's a noticable difference between a 24lb bike and a 30lb bike. However, FS doesn't add 6 lbs. With a lot of the nice XC FS frames around today, you're only adding 1.5 - 2.0 lbs over the weight on a very nice hardtail frame. I think it's quite feasible to build a 25lb FS bike with 'normal' parts. A 25lb FS bike should be just as tossable as a 25lb hardtail, right? |
| Only speaking from my personal experience | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 11:15 AM | | In the case of "my" aluminum hardtail and FS there is a 6 pound difference. I got the impression that the difference in weight of the Jykell and Caad 3 hardtail was also in that area so that was what I was addressing.
I totally agree you can build a lightweight FS.
As for which is more tossable, I don't really know how to answer that one. So much depends on riding style and terrain. Don't paint me as anti-FS. Remember, I said I have one and am not getting rid of it. I just have a personal preference for a steel hardtail.
My take on FS's are that I expect them to be plush and am willing to pay the penalty in weight. I do not want a short travel FS. My legs work quite well and can act as my own short travel fs. That's why my fs weights so much. It definitely absorbs most of the bumps.
Different options for different people. |
| Only speaking from my personal experience | TechniKal
Mar 12, 2002 11:45 AM | | I wasn't trying to paint you as being anti-FS, I was just trying to point out that going FS doesn't have to mean adding 6lbs to your ride. Sorry if it sounded that way. |
| No problem | Rev Bubba
Mar 12, 2002 12:00 PM | | A question though. Since I only have long term experience with my fs (up to 5" front and back) would a shorter travel one be that much smoother then a good hardtail if the rider had the skills to use their legs for suspension. I.E. get out of the seat in the rough. I suppose this would not be practical for miles at a time but where I ride, no matter how rough it gets, you still can sit most of the time.
One of the things that originally kept me away from an fs (this was 5 years ago) was that they still seemed to bounce me around quite a bit. Longer travel rides do absorb the bumps better but you still feel them.
Guess what I'm saying is that for the average rider with decent skills, might a forgiving hardtail be better then a short travel fs? I've ridden the Giant NRS and it felt like it was just as rough as my aluminum hardtail.
Just some food for thought. |
| For me, it's a big difference... | TechniKal
Mar 12, 2002 1:13 PM | | I'm currently on a SC Superlight. 80mm up front, 100mm rear. The bike is substantially more comfortable on rough stuff than the Stumpjumper hardtail I was on before. I still 'hover' the saddle in really rough places, but I can stay seated and pedaling through areas where I would have to have been standing on my old bike.
I don't have a problem with bouncing. Any FS bike is going to have some movement, but then again, so will any suspension fork. The travel of the bike actually helps keep the bike in contact with the ground, as it tends to absorb impacts rather than bouncing off them.
Good hardtails are great. Before moving to this really rocky terrain, I would have never considered FS. However, given the terrain and my riding style, I now prefer it. I'd love to have a really nice hardtail. I'd still keep my XC FS bike, though. But who knows - maybe if I had a really nice steel or ti hardtail, with a plush fork, and big, fat, soft tires, I might be happier on it... I'm still waiting for the new FS I ordered to come in, though, so it'll be a while before I buy a HT to check it out... |
| Ah Hah! | Matno
Mar 12, 2002 10:30 PM | | Here we see the real source of differences of opinion on this subject.
"Before moving to this really rocky terrain" you say... There you have it. Terrain makes all the difference in the world. I have done most of my riding in Utah on very rocky terrain, hence my natural bias towards Full Suspension. Perhaps if I had gotten into off-road biking earlier, like when I was growing up in Houston, I might be perfectly happy on a hardtail. Come to think of it, I used to ride a trail on my way to school on a 10 speed with road tires. Never noticed that the ride was rough at all down there! Of course, you'll notice I said "off-road biking" and not mountain biking. I've yet to see a real mountain that was smooth enough for a hardtail to win my heart over an FS rig. Guess it all depends on where you ride! I'm in the Northeast now, so I'll stick with the suspension...
Oh, one other thing. I've recently realized what a huge difference tire pressure makes. Bigger tires with low pressure could make just about any ride enjoyable. I regularly ride with 25 lbs of pressure in my Ritchey tires (but then, I only weigh 135). Anything over 35 is too bumpy for my taste... |
| my hardtail is heavier than my FS | mikeb
Mar 12, 2002 11:07 PM | | superlight--25.5, give or take allowing for inaccurate scale
alibi, 26 pounds.
both of these bikes are built with roughly the same components. (and i use the word "roughly" VERY liberally) xt hubs don't weight too much more than xtr and so on.
no, i don't really understand why some like a hardtail over today's lighter and stiffer lightweight xc dualies, but to each his own. individual opinions are a good thing--and bike companies willing to accomodate a rider's preferences are a good thing too. |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Steve A
Mar 12, 2002 9:32 AM | | Ok I to own both a Cadd 3 and a Jeykell, my Jeykell weighs in at 24 pounds even and is set up for trail riding not to heavy for a Jeykell ?. The Cadd 3 is just a winter bike used for training it does ride a bit rough but it is what it is ! I think there is a couple of ways you can go. Look at the Scaple very light feels like a hard tail but work like FS, also look into the Cadd 5 hardtail with a lefty, the ride is very good and with the Lefty 100mm of travel it will feel amazing. The bottom line is try and get a test ride if you can before you buy anything. Also take a look at the Marta disc brakes "nice" |
| Oh Boy... | Ryan Prentice
Mar 12, 2002 10:31 AM | | I have owned all kinds of bikes in my persuit of the Ultimate ride, and I finally settled on my Titanium HT and a Santa Cruz Bullit. I too was once beaten up repeatedly by my Cannondale. (We could start a support group like the battered spouse groups!) I scrapped the Cannonwhale for a Landshark steel softail, ( http://www.landsharkbicycles.com/ ) I ended up getting my Ti HT cause I couldn't pass up the deal and I loved it! I sold everything else and bought my Bullit and I've been happy ever since. I know a guy with a Jamis Dakota and for my money, that has to be the best bike you can get! Sweet steel frame, full XT, tubeless sheels (I think) Mars suspension fork, etc. all for $1300!
Go forth, Ride your steel HT and be Happy! |
| No way in hell... | Finch Platte
Mar 12, 2002 6:52 PM | | ...would I buy another Cannondale.
thanks, tho!
fp |
| I think if your.... | 4Me
Mar 12, 2002 7:30 PM | | having problems that you can not fix on your Cannondales you are the type of person who will have problem with any bike you get... |
| No. | Twilight Error®
Mar 13, 2002 6:01 AM | | I rode with Eph Pee last summer, he isn't abusive or makes the bike do anything it wasn't made for. The Jekyll has a number of design problems - the rear shock is a trunion mount (can only use Fox air shocks) (which, quite frankly, blow), the swingarm is seriously underbuilt to the point where it fails under almost any riding condition not on a bike path, the front triangle has been known to fail at the BB/downtube junction... My former LBS used to carry Cannondale, they were one of the largest dealers in New England. Many of the Jekylls bought there were returned several times for warranty replacement of the swingarm and air shock rebuilding.
I suspect any other bike won't be as trouble-prone as his Jekyll has been. |
| How about another brand full suspension? | Metroid
Mar 12, 2002 10:38 AM | | I've been riding full suspension for a couple years now but I'm inbetween frames so I've been riding an old steel hardtail with my Psylo for the past few weeks. I think a hardtail is better with 100mm of travel but it's still a hardtail. My back has been letting me know it too. I've never ridden a Cannondale so I can't directly compare. They tend to do a lot of propietary items so I've shyed away. I've owned a few hardtails, Klein Mantra, SC Superlight, Titus Switchblade and have a Hammerhead 100X (built by Titus) in a UPS truck headed to my house. I'm been very impressed with Titus. The Hammerhead seems to fit nicely with hardtail-like handling but with around 4" front and rear. The Switchblade was just a bit much for what I need and was a tad small. You should definitely check it out...
http://www.hammerheadbikes.com/cycles/100x.htm
I certainly won't be urinating on my bike anytime soon. ;)
On the brakes, I would highly recommend the Avid mechanicals. They are a snap to setup, relatively cheap and work great. |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Ghost Dog
Mar 12, 2002 11:23 AM | | A good hard tail frame,making sure you get the fit right and spend some money and get the best forks you can afford.Remember the front fork is the thing that meets the trail first and soaks up the majority of the rough stuff.Having ownes several fs and hard tail bikes im convinced appart from the arm chair appeal of fs hard tail is the way to go.Very little maintenance,the price factor,no lose of power thru inefficient design and a flexy back end make the hard tail hard to beat
Just my dollars worth
SR |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | AlphaDog
Mar 12, 2002 11:29 AM | | I ride a Steel HT. Love it much better than the FS I rode for 2 seasons. I guess riding style has alot to do with this whole question. Personally I have way more travel on my HT with a 3" fork, bunny hopping ability and standing the rough sections! When the trail is smooth, sit and pedal, when rough, stand and hammer....Simple |
| re: Questions for those who own both an FS and an HT. | Ghost Dog
Mar 12, 2002 11:36 AM | | A good hard tail frame,making sure you get the fit right and spend some money get the best forks you can afford.Remember the front fork is the thing that meets the trail first, soaks up the majority of the rough stuff.Having owned several fs and hard tail bikes,im convinced apart from the arm chair appeal of fs,hard tail is the way to go.Very little maintenance,the price factor,no lose of power thru inefficient design and a flexy back end make the hard tail hard to beat
Just my dollars worth
SR |
| Who let the dogs out?........Woof.......Woof,Woof,Woof. | OldSchool
Mar 12, 2002 12:18 PM | | Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
Hooooooooooooo! |
| Thanks, all! | fp
Mar 12, 2002 12:51 PM | | I appreciate you all taking the time to help out. I'm at work, so I can't answer individual responses.
But, I'll have some good reading tonite!
Thanks again,
fp |
| Why not spend the money...... | tvarden
Mar 12, 2002 2:27 PM | | and lighten up the Jekyll? It is a great bike and I would not trade it for anything out there.. I have a 2000 Jekyll 900sx that is down to under 25lbs (and a few small changes it would be easy to get under 24lbs). I also have a 2001 F600 that is CAAD3 and it never gets rode just got a great deal on it so its my back-up that never gets rode.
Bottom Bracket: Shimano Dura-Ace 173
Brake Levers: Magura Marta
Brakes: Magura Marta 696
Cables: Avid Flak Jaket 147
Chain: Shimano 7701 250
Crankset: CODA Expert EX3 665
Derlr (Front)Shimano FD-M953 XTR 131
Derlr (Rear)Shimano RD-M953-GS XTR 207
Fork: Cannondale Lefty DLR 1610
Frame: 2000 Cannondale Jekyll 900 SX Medium 2493
Freewheel: Shimano CS-M953 XTR 262
Grips: Race Face Good 'N Evil 80
Handlebar: Easton Monkey Lite 175
Headset: CODA Headset 70
Hub (Front) CODA Expert Lefty Disc 134
Hub (Rear) CODA Expert Disc 365
Pedals: Egg Beaters 280
Quick Releases: CODA 50
Rims: CODA Expert Disc 790
Seat Binder: CODA 20
Seat: CODA Comp Mountain Saddle 200
Seatpost: Easton CT2 200
Shifters: Shimano SL-M952 XTR 252
Shock (Rear) Fox Float RC w/Lockout 247
Spokes: DT Competition Stainless 312
Stem: CODA HeadShok 175
Tire (Front) Michelin Wild Gripper Front S 591
Tire (Rear): Michelin Wild Gripper Hot S 646
Tubes: Specialized Turbo MTB 220 |
| FS...now. | fourarm
Mar 12, 2002 5:42 PM | | Think about the summer. I know right now the trails are somewhat soft and forgiving, but think about riding a rocky section of the TRT in 85 degree weather at the end of a 5 hour ride. Do you really want to be on a hardtail at that point? Or any point on the Butcher Ranch trail?
A softtail might be an option, but the good ones are very expensive. I'm waiting for the blowout sale on a Silk-Ti but that might not ever happen.
You need FS. Consider Tracer, Switchblade, Superlight, even a Bullit might be the ticket if you stay away from massive overbuilding. Or, go the whole bike route and get something from Specialized/Giant/Trek. And whatever frame you get, a Marzocchi belongs on the front.
If money is an issue, consider a used frame. I bought a six month old Tracer for $1000, it was barely used. I did this because I know that Intense stands behind their products. There are other companies like this as well.
On the brakes, only once recently did I wish I had some discs, they are nice but for 99% of my riding V's work just fine. Some day though. |
| Never had a problem... | sheebo
Mar 12, 2002 7:30 PM | | riding the Butcher Ranch trail with a hardtail. Just more of a challenge picking the right line. The reason the Butcher Ranch trail is a mess is because it is popular with the throttle twisters and the downhillers who don't want to climb to reach the other trails. The TRT in Tahoe is rocky as well but also very ridable from fully rigid to FS. All depends on what you like or can handle. My 2 cents. |
| i don't want to be on a hardtail anywhere in downieville! | mikeb
Mar 12, 2002 11:14 PM | | |
| Go for a different brand FS. | Twilight Error®
Mar 13, 2002 6:09 AM | | Titus, Kona or Specialized all offer solid, well built 4-5" travel bikes in your price range that use standard components.
I've been looking at the Titus LocoMoto to replace my Breezer when the time comes, maybe thats your best option - you'd get a single-pivot rear end that uses a *more or less* standard rear shock, the ability to run a 5" fork up front and superb customer service.
I'd also stick with Disc brakes, perhaps a move to Avid discs would be best.
Just make sure to thoroughly clean the Crapll before selling it. |
| |
