|   24 Hr bike needed: Burner? Blur? Spider? ASR? | sperky
Jan 9, 2004 10:52 AM | | Need some help. I'll be riding the full 24 Hr schedule this season and I am going to get a new bike for it. I am just not sure about which one....keep in mind I will be riding solo and I do a significant portion of my training (7000km/year) on my mountain bike. I weigh about 180lbs and I am fairly hard on my equipment so durability is important.
Any suggestions? (FYI, I ride a 2001 Superlight right now and it needs to be replaced (it has about 15000km on it so not sure it will last much longer).
Thanks for your help!
Steve |
| Forgot to mention Titus RX100 is on the list too! | sperky
Jan 9, 2004 11:14 AM | | |
| Uhhh, I think it's the one you almost forgot to mention, the RX100... | Bikeless Rider
Jan 9, 2004 8:49 PM | | ...(or HH if one of those won't fit you) should not be a mere afterthought. I hear alot of talk about comfort, geometry, weight, etc. when it comes to 24hr bikes. It seems to me what matters most is pedaling efficiency, something that climbs and accelerates so well, it feels like it wants to jump out from under you when your fresh, and doesn't wear you out when you're not. Any bike that's 24hr capable is not going to be as much of a problem with weight, geometry, and comfort, unless the person buying it doesn't have a clue what kind of bikes to look for. The differences in pedaling efficiency are amplified when fatigue sets in though, and most noticable of all. Frame stiffness and efficiency are the strong points of the RX bikes. |
| I would say RX100 or Burner... | Homebrew
Jan 9, 2004 11:54 AM | | because I am biased towards the Horst designs. The Burner is a little less money but I think the Titus is worth the extra cash. But at this level it's all nit picking. There are some geometry differences, so out of the two, I would say whichever looks like it will fit you best.
My buddy's Blur hasn't impressed me at all in terms of ride or durability. Quite frankly, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone much less anyone who is hard on equipment. |
| Go with a Blur, especially for a 24h | Davide
Jan 11, 2004 6:59 PM | | it has the most confortable ride of all the suspension bikes I tried (in 12 years), and it is one of the most efficient ones, it is light and it is the cheapest ... |
| Why are you riding a Turner? | Jaybo
Jan 12, 2004 10:10 AM | | If you are so sold on the Blur? I'm confused. I agree that the Blur would be a fantastic 24 hour bike. Ask Steve Larson who rides a Blur in marathon events.
Jaybo |
| because the Blur is designed for a 3-4" fork | Davide
Jan 12, 2004 4:34 PM | | if Santa-Cruz came out with a 4.75" rear and 5" front I would have bought a Blur a year ago. But sure you could use a 5-spot with an air-shock on a 24 hours, altough it is probably an overkill (travel-wise) for such an event.
(please don't ask me why I do not buy a Spider 5.5, it is because of the disks). |
| re: 24 Hr bike needed: Burner? Blur? Spider? ASR? | Willy Vanilly
Jan 9, 2004 1:35 PM | | If you're big on the pedalling efficiency thing, Ellsworth Truth is a nice bike to consider. Pretty damn light and stiff. If you happen to be interested, I have one for sale. I posted it up in the classifieds but I keep getting flakey buyers.
http://marketplace.consumerreview.com/cgi-bin/classifieds/classifieds.pl?db=MtbReview&website=MtbReview&language=&session_key=&search_and_display_db_button=on&results_format=long&db_id=65100&query=retrieval |
| re: 24 Hr bike needed: Burner? Blur? Spider? ASR? | CDMC
Jan 9, 2004 1:51 PM | | I would vote for the Burner or a Titus Racer-X. Both have great reputations for reliability. I would avoid the Ellsworth since it seems to be designed to bet the absolute lightest possible, even at the potential expense of reliability. Also, have you considered another Superlight with a stable platform shock? |
| I ride a Burner and love it. | Ducky
Jan 9, 2004 1:57 PM | | The burner is a great bike. With the propedal it is quit respondsive. It does have aslacker head angle ay 70 deg. That works better form than the 71. |
| AS-R man. | Axe
Jan 9, 2004 2:03 PM | | That's the best bike on the list. Light and strong - just what the doctor ordered. I'm quite heavier then you, and it holds up perfectly. |
| You probably won't believe me on this one but... | Mikerj
Jan 9, 2004 4:56 PM | | at this past year's 24hrs of Adrenaline at Hardwood Hills in Canada I took 2 bikes. My Blur that was speced very well and my back up Surly SS with 2.3 Conti Verts. We had a 4 man team and as I recall I did 5 laps. I used the SS for 3 laps and the Blur for 2. All laps were faster on the SS! And, I'm only a part time SS rider. Take it for what it's worth. I would have never guessed I would have been slower on the Blur. All my times were very competetive. The trails were super smooth and not many long steep climbs so it was a SS friendly course. My point is not to go SS but rather sometimes we only _think_ we know what we need.
If you've decided you must have a FS to race on that's fine, especially if it is a bumpy course. If you're doing it solo I'm sure you'll stay fresher longer on a FS. The Blur's ride is super and very raceable. BUT... after several races and somewhat aggressive trail riding (no drops > 2 ft) my Blur went belly up. The pivots went bad and the shock link cracked. SC was cool about it but it took several weeks to get the bike back. When SC get's the durability issues worked out to allow the bike to handle tougher trails it will be the bike to have if you're only gonna have one bike to do it all. BTW I'm 180# plus gear.
If I were going to get a dedicated racer and $$$ was no object I'd likely go with the Racer X or the Turner. I've ridden neither but I hear in terms of performance AND durability they are tops. Keep in mind that you weigh 180# and should have little problem hauling around an extra 1/2 to 1# of frame. Especially if the extra weight means a stronger, stiffer frame.
Good luck going solo.
Mike |
| Why not the Spyder? | biker1
Jan 9, 2004 6:30 PM | | I have heard some great things about the Spyder....why are these other bikes better? |
| Why not the Spyder? | Mikerj
Jan 9, 2004 8:18 PM | | I've learned my lesson about being the first one to try out "new technology". Stick with the tried and true, and let others test the new stuff.
Mike |
| Wow. 7000K per year! | KRob
Jan 9, 2004 11:42 PM | | That's like 4000 miles no? That is an impressive total. I can't speak for the other bikes, but the RX/HH100x is durable, stiff, and proven. After 20 months of hard riding (and very little maintenance)and maybe 3500 miles total I can attest to the bombproof nature of the RX/HH frame. All the pivots are as tight and smooth as the day it arrived from Charles. Mine is about 27lbs and I have raced it, but I'm sure you could build it in the 25-26lb range without going stupid on any parts. |
| The bike that fits you the best! | Jaybo
Jan 12, 2004 10:13 AM | | However, I understand trying these boutique bikes can be challenging. I think the Burner might have the most durable pivots, which is important in marathon events. However, I'm sure the others would hold up fine.
Jaybo |
| Or . . | Motivated
Jan 12, 2004 2:16 PM | | a Ventana. Don't want to add to your list, but from what I've read these are extremely reliable. Having said that I (weigh = 185) ride/race a Blur and would consider it an excellent 24hr bike, properly spec'd (do not get a platform shock!). For the ~$3000 you are talking about spending you really need to test ride those bikes. The HH100X would be tough to test ride, but the others should be accessible. Fit is probably the most important thing on a bike and if your Superlight fits you then the Blur will too - and you will find the handling very familiar. The Blur should have the same durability as the SL. Some people consider the Blur experimental, but SC messed with the geometry of a proven winner (Superlight) a lot less with the Blur than Turner did when then created the 5spot. After you consider fit, handling, durability and compatibility with your style (sitter, stander, masher, late braker, etc) I think your next step is components. The front fork you pick is more important than the rear suspension. The type of rear suspension is almost irrelevant as they all do a very good job - that is why there is so much discussion/argument about it. |
| |
