|   intense spider vs rocky mountain element tsc | Dogbreath
Jan 17, 2004 2:02 AM | | Ever since I saw pictures and read reviews of the spider xpv it has been a bike I have lusted after. After some time of thinking it was not worth the expense, I'm now thinking damn the money, go and spoil yourself.
However, being in Australia, picking up an Intense is looking like being an expensive proposition. I may be able to pick up a Rocky Mountain Element TSC at a good price which has given me a great dilemma. Has anyone been able to compare both bikes? There aren't many reviews around on the RM compared to the spider.
I'm after a light FS xc racing bike.
Thanks
DB |
| The Rocky is a proven design, the Intense... | JmZ
Jan 17, 2004 6:52 PM | | Is still working on it. Give it another year or three.
Couple of thoughts.
How is the warranty support for Rocky in Aus? The rocky is a veteran of the suspension wars. I believe the first bikes of that design go back to around the early/mid 90's.
How is the fit of both bikes. If the Rocky does not fit, it is a VERY easy decision, same with the Intense. :)
Neither bike has a 'horst' link, and thus both may have some brake stiffening. I've ridden 'horst' links and seatstay pivots and have not noticed the difference. It just may be my type of riding, or the parts on the bike, I dunno.
The Intense has a better 'High Zoot' factor, but the Rocky is a more proven design. They have been refining it for quite a few years.
Good luck!
JmZ |
| The Intense is a higher quality build.... | Jaybo
Jan 18, 2004 7:23 AM | | I have known many people who have had pivot problems with their Rocky bikes. The Sypder would ride better then the Rocky.
Jaybo |
| depends..... | DGC
Jan 18, 2004 8:39 PM | | I have delt with quite a few bent links and frozen, siezed, blown bearings/pivot shafts on Spyders, some within 2 months. When you consider the Spyder asking price, the Rocky Mountain is worth a long look-of these 2 bikes mentioned. |
| I'd have to agree, for as much time as Intense spent testing the | Bikeless Rider
Jan 19, 2004 11:50 PM | | ...Spyder, you'd think they would have seen that the thin section VPP bearings weren't going to cut it. I suggested needle bearings there when they told me they wanted to use large diameter axles in the middle of the testing phase. The size of the bearing's OD they were stating just didn't add up. I got the feeling they weren't talking high load, full ball compliment type either, as they kept stalling and telling me to call back and talk to Steber, or that he'd call me. I know that may sound like pestering to some, but this kind of info is vital to a consumer's purchase, and they have the right to know what they're getting into. Intense sounded as if they had no problem giving me the details, though they never did. I have no problem with that if it's a very undecided design element, but they led me to believe they were certain the current setup being tested was what they were going with, saying the final tube shape of the Easton frame was the only possible change. The price they spent on the special Easton tube set caused them to cut corners in other areas I think. If Devinci can sell the Banzai frame for about $1900 Canadian, and use full needle bearing pivots with Igus thrust washers and lip seals, not to mention grease injection ports, Intense can at least give you bearings that won't fail in a few months. Devinci does make there own frame tubes though, no doubt one of the main reasons for their good price point. The Devinci site goes into great detail about the load handling comparisons between the needle and cartridge type bearings, as well as the size of cartidge bearing needed to duplicate even a small needle bearing load wise, but this I already knew.
The '04 Rocky frames I've seen have been beefed up in the chainstay yoke and now have nice bearing pivots, very large ones at the seatube/uper link junction. Too bad the axle path is basically that of a single pivot, if they used the Horst Link, I would seriously consider them. |
| and further more | DGC
Jan 20, 2004 1:59 PM | | It always seems best to pester them when you see a clear issue and it should be brought to their attention, weather its Intense or anyone else's name on the bikes. Sometimes that is what it takes to get the product built as good as it can be.
I have no problem telling someone of issues to be aware of, even of a bike that I sell. Because maybe in the end, The consumer will be on a better product and be more happy, then we all win. There is a good bunch of reasons in my mind why I push Turners so hard. I would rather sell Specialized bikes over some garbage so called botique bikes asking $1500-2k for a frame only and very little customer service to back up the purchase, based on what I have seen and delt with.
Just another .02 cents of mine. |
| Advice probably worth what I am charging you | oldfart
Jan 17, 2004 8:53 PM | | The Spider ought be superior IMHO. I have a good amount of time on a Blur, and a tiny bit on a Spider. And I have a lot of time on a bike that is basically equivalent to the Element: a Ventana Habanero. In fact, I have ridden the Element itself a fair amount. I think the Spider will sprint and accelerate better, while at the same time have superior small bump absorption, which will also make you faster. OK, one caveat. I don't know what a "TSC" version of the Element is, but if it uses the same configuration as the older Element, the only way it could compete on a race course is if you had a ProPedal or 5th Element type shock on it. And that won't make it any more immune to bumps. The VPP bikes just nailed this. They almost take the fun outta it they are so smooth. You might also try the Klein Palomino or its Maverick brethren (the Reposado might be real racey, but very expensive too), or based on what I see around here, an Ellsworth or Giant NRS, though none of these overly impress me with their durability.
Issues with the Blur (which might be shared by the Spider): pedal scrape: a ton of it on rocky trails where the bike otherwise rules. Also, there is a funkiness to the pedalling. Definitely efficient feeling when you accelerate or climb, but sometimes there is a feeling when you are "in between" coasting and accelerating where there is some kickback / feedback. But I am not even sure the Spider has these issues. If it does, my thinking is you may bitch about them all the way to the winners circle.
FYI I bought the Maverick ML7 and am consistently 2-5 minutes faster than on the Ventana around a hour long loop we have that has a good mix of conditions. My buddy on a Blur is almost as fast. When we switch bikes I don't think I am any slower on the Blur, and could possibly be even faster with a little practice. One thing, the 2 bikes fit differently, and I like the way the Mav fits better...but that is my body. I think long-torso'ed, long-armed guys will prefer the Mav's fit. |
| re: intense spider vs rocky mountain element tsc | Blimp
Jan 18, 2004 3:20 AM | | The RM Element is tested in the latest MBR (the UK magazine) and didn't do that well. They said it was dated and the latest setup (the one tested) with Propedal did not suit it well. Little small bump sesitivity, etc. |
| re: intense spider vs rocky mountain element tsc | SpiderX927
Jan 18, 2004 5:29 PM | | I don't know about the other bike personally but I have been riding a Spider for about 6 weeks and I like it more with each ride. It really climbs great and handles very well. It is very smooth and firm at the same time. Just a great bike |
| |
