Any Mtn Bikers on RME?

[UFAB]

ICUP Race

Saturday

Solitude

 

[ozzy702]

Went on my third mnt biking trip in 15 years this week and it really rekindled my love for the sport. Unfortunately my 97' Gary Fisher isn't going to hold up to any more abuse. After running the Wasatch Crest trail down into mill creek I've come to the following conclusions...

1) I want full suspension. I got beat up pretty bad in areas where my buddy blasted right through it. My front fork is leaking pretty bad now too.

2) I want disc brakes, my brakes sucked, probably because the pads are a decade old, but wow, disc brakes sure seem to work well.

3) I love the gearing on my Gary Fisher which seemed lower for the hill climes than my friend's 2 year old Intense bike. Hopefully I can find something similar.

4) Everyone that mountain bikes is in better shape and makes more money than I do! The bikes I saw were amazing.


So, since it's been a LONG time since I've been in the game, what do you guys recommend for brands and models? I'm 5'5" so stepover height is a factor and I'm interested in using this bike for everything from XC hill climbing for fitness to moderate downhill stuff. I don't need crazy suspension but would like enough to take the edge off. Another factor is that I have short fingers so some of the brake levers I've tried in the past have been too long.

Any advice is much appreciated. I probably won't pickup the bike this year but will save for next year and pick a 14' year model up at discount.

 

[sixstringsteve]

welcome to the dark side. WHat size is your inseam?

I'm guessing you're going to want a small or 15-16" frame. I'm 5'6" with a 29" inseam and a 16" is as big as I'd ever go.

I rode my dual suspension tonight for the first time in months and I am SO much faster downhill on it.

 

[ozzy702]

welcome to the dark side. WHat size is your inseam?

I'm guessing you're going to want a small or 15-16" frame. I'm 5'6" with a 29" inseam and a 16" is as big as I'd ever go.

I rode my dual suspension tonight for the first time in months and I am SO much faster downhill on it.

I have short legs for my height so I'd say at best a 29" inseam but probably more like 28". I'll have to have the wife measure me. My current bike is a 15" hard tail and fits me like an oversized bmx bike which is both good and bad. The wheelbase is really short so it's a bit sketchy on downhill sections.

I was really hoping that my Gary Fisher would hold up and honestly, I could probably still use it for a long time if I was able to rebuild the shock internals (2001 Rockshoxs) or buy a new fork and then replace my brake pads. I'm still open to that idea at least for now and am going to look into getting internals for the shock, which I'm not super hopeful to find.

I used to mountain bike a few times a week from the time I started high school until I was about 22. I need to work on my cardio and biking is about the only activity enough to push myself to the point of near passing out. I was pretty close to the top of puke hill before I finally gassed out, which for a guy that never bikes wasn't too bad considering I went further than my buddy and he goes two or more times a week.

 

[sixstringsteve]

Which model is your Gary fisher? For a cheap fork, I really like my x fusion velvet.

 

[ozzy702]

Which model is your Gary fisher? For a cheap fork, I really like my x fusion velvet.

It's a 97' Paragon. For it's day it was a nice bike. I added a rockshox Psylo XC in I think 2001, different neck and bars, other than that it's pretty stock. I think the bearings in my front wheel hub are shot. No clue what it would cost to replace.

So what needs to be done to make it ridable is:

1) Rebuild shock or Replace Shock

2) Replace Hub or entire wheel assembly (assuming I can find one for V brakes)

3) Replace Brake pads


I love the bike and have fond memories of riding it so I'm inclined to do the above if possible and then save my money for a killer Full suspension. Problem is I have absolutely no connections when it comes to mnt bike gear and it may be more expensive than it's worth. Everything else on the bike is in great shape though so who knows.

Ideas from those in the know?

 

[sixstringsteve]

I'd be happy to help with any repairs or work you need.

You can get a lot of bike for the money if you buy used. It's crazy how expensive bikes are new. $5500 bikes are pretty commonplace in bike shops now. I hate to say it, but it's probably not worth dumping much more money into your bike.

 

[ozzy702]

I'd be happy to help with any repairs or work you need.

You can get a lot of bike for the money if you buy used. It's crazy how expensive bikes are new. $5500 bikes are pretty commonplace in bike shops now. I hate to say it, but it's probably not worth dumping much more money into your bike.

A 6k bike purchase would land me in the emergency room with hemorrhaging from my nether regions. My wife would probably support up to a 2k purchase when I go to buy a new bike which I'm guessing doesn't buy much these days.

Yeah, I wouldn't want to dump much into my current it at all but would do so if I could get away with it on the cheap. Brake pads, no prob, cheap and easy. Shock? Who knows. Replace the front rim? No clue how much that would cost since I can't respoke a wheel.

 

[sixstringsteve]

Front wheel $50

Brake pads $30

New shock -$300 to $1200


If you have $2000, I recommend buying a bike that's 3-5 years old instead of a 2014.



Think of it this way. If you had $20k to spend on a car, would you rather buy a 5 year old toyota or a brand new kia?

 

[ozzy702]

Front wheel $50

Brake pads $30

New shock -$300 to $1200


If you have $2000, I recommend buying a bike that's 3-5 years old instead of a 2014.

Think of it this way. If you had $20k to spend on a car, would you rather buy a 5 year old toyota or a brand new kia?

If I can find a used bike that's my size and in good shape I would consider it. With how expensive bike parts are sometimes I wonder how much cheaper it is to buy used.

 

[sixstringsteve]

If I can find a used bike that's my size and in good shape I would consider it. With how expensive bike parts are sometimes I wonder how much cheaper it is to buy used.

you can buy a 2014 stumpjumper for $3700 or you can buy a 2011 stumpjumper for $1800. Obviously the 2014 will have a few more cutting-edge components, but the 2011 will still give you a huge grin on your face while riding. The cost of new bikes is getting out of hand. Just like any other hobby, quite a few people decide they need the latest model and end up selling their 1-2 year old bike for almost half what they paid for it.

 

[Caleb]

If you have $2000, I recommend buying a bike that's 3-5 years old instead of a 2014.

Think of it this way. If you had $20k to spend on a car, would you rather buy a 5 year old toyota or a brand new kia?

If it were me (and it was just a few weeks ago) I'd save a few more pennies and buy a new Toyota

Back to the topic of bikes, I personally would skip buying used...I don't want someone else's problem. I'd rather buy a year or two old that's still sitting on the showroom floor. The bike I got is a nearly $3K bike and I got it right in your budget (it's last year's model...even though this year's hasn't even been released yet). I was in the bike shop again today (wishing I had bought a fully suspended instead of a hard tail, and buying a set of pedals ) and they had a couple really nice fully suspended $4Kish bikes for $2K. Again, they were a year old model. They did have one that was a 2012 model, it was in the $5k range and they were asking something like $2.2K...it was more than half off. When you can buy new, have a full mfg warranty, the other perks the LBS will throw in (Canyon Sports will do the first full tune-up for free for example) and get a great deal I don't think it's worth buying used.

 

[sixstringsteve]

I agree, as long as you buy the right bike for you. Just remember that the biggest discount doesn't make a bike any better for you. I have friends who got great deals on old floor models, but they're not the right bikes (or the right size) for them and they ultimately end up repeating the cycle over and over and being unhappy until they realize it's more important to get the right bike than the biggest deal.

By all means, get the best deal you can. However, pick the right bike for your riding, not the best deal. A $6000 bike for $1800 doesn't make a bike "right" for you. It may be the best deal, but perhaps the 2 year old the $1600 used bike on KSL would fit your riding style much better. That's my advice from working in various bike shops for 5+ years.

 

[Caleb]

I agree, as long as you buy the right bike for you. Just remember that the biggest discount doesn't make a bike any better for you. I have friends who got great deals on old floor models, but they're not the right bikes (or the right size) for them and they ultimately end up repeating the cycle over and over and being unhappy until they realize it's more important to get the right bike than the biggest deal.

By all means, get the best deal you can. However, pick the right bike for your riding, not the best deal. A $6000 bike for $1800 doesn't make a bike "right" for you. It may be the best deal, but perhaps the 2 year old the $1600 used bike on KSL would fit your riding style much better. That's my advice from working in various bike shops for 5+ years.

I agree completely.

 

[sixstringsteve]

I also think it's worth your money to rent or borrow as many different bikes that you can. The more bikes you ride, the more you'll realize what you like and what you don't. Very few people get the right bike the first time. Even if they do, their riding style usually evolves over time. At that point, I believe their bike should evolve to match their style. If you live for the downhill then 2 years later you decide you really prefer the uphill, sell the downhill bike and buy something suited to your new taste.

There's a lot of marketing hype between 26, 27.5, 29" wheels, fat bikes, frame materials, dropper posts, remote lockouts, 1x11, tubeless tires, electronic shifting, and even electronically damped forks and shocks. Then there's the xc, trail, all mountain, enduro, freeride, and downhill classifications. The bike industry is so cluttered with changes in technology that it makes it difficult for newcomers (and even vetrans) to know what's going on. Remember that most bike shops will be telling you how outdated last year's model was and how this year's model has some new technology that you can't live without. Just think back to your ride this week and how much fun you had, even though you don't have the latest tech. Sure, the latest tech can make it even more fun, but tech, year the bike was manufactured, or cost do not equal fun in and of themselves. Riding in comfort and control equals fun. Find a bike that allows you to ride in comfort and control.

 

[Unimog]

I've always bought well cared for used bikes. Learn enough to check it out or have someone who knows check it out, just like buying a car/truck.

 

[ozzy702]

I also think it's worth your money to rent or borrow as many different bikes that you can. The more bikes you ride, the more you'll realize what you like and what you don't. Very few people get the right bike the first time. Even if they do, their riding style usually evolves over time. At that point, I believe their bike should evolve to match their style. If you live for the downhill then 2 years later you decide you really prefer the uphill, sell the downhill bike and buy something suited to your new taste.

There's a lot of marketing hype between 26, 27.5, 29" wheels, fat bikes, frame materials, dropper posts, remote lockouts, 1x11, tubeless tires, electronic shifting, and even electronically damped forks and shocks. Then there's the xc, trail, all mountain, enduro, freeride, and downhill classifications. The bike industry is so cluttered with changes in technology that it makes it difficult for newcomers (and even vetrans) to know what's going on. Remember that most bike shops will be telling you how outdated last year's model was and how this year's model has some new technology that you can't live without. Just think back to your ride this week and how much fun you had, even though you don't have the latest tech. Sure, the latest tech can make it even more fun, but tech, year the bike was manufactured, or cost do not equal fun in and of themselves. Riding in comfort and control equals fun. Find a bike that allows you to ride in comfort and control.

I used to be well versed in all the mountain bike terminology and technology but since I've been out of it for over a decade a lot has changed. Looking at the list above here are the things I'm curious about:

1) 26 vs 27.5 vs 29. Obviously the taller the tire the easier it will roll over stuff. 29's seem to be pretty standard now and it sounds like 27.5" is a newer size for mnt bikes? Thoughts on the three?

2) Tubeless Tires - I've never dealt with them. How well do they seal up? I'm guessing they are lighter since you don't have a tube in there. Thoughts?

3) Xc, trail, all mountain, enduro, freeride, and downhill... of that bunch Trail/All mountain sound the most appealing. I'd be interested in XC except I have a feeling they don't hold up super well to abuse and if I'm going to spend the money I want something fairly stout. Enduro, free ride and downhill from what I can tell would be overkill for my riding style (or lack thereof). I'm just an out of shape dude who is pretty slow everywhere but wants to get back in shape and have some fun while doing it. Am I correct in thinking a trail/all mountain is the right fit?

Past the above, I have really no desire for electronic parts, dropper posts, etc. I want to keep it as simple and reliable as possible.

After speaking to my wife she is on board with me getting back into the sport, mainly because I desperately need to get in shape and while my family history (over 300 years worth) shows zero incidence of cancer, we do suffer from cardiovascular disease. I used the whole "it's for my health" angle and it worked!

 

[sixstringsteve]

1) 26 vs 27.5 vs 29. Obviously the taller the tire the easier it will roll over stuff. 29's seem to be pretty standard now and it sounds like 27.5" is a newer size for mnt bikes? Thoughts on the three?

This is a hot debate right now and will continue to be for quite some time. I'll try to save my opinion and bias for the end. There are exceptions to every rule, but here are the generalities:

Smaller wheels (26") are stronger, slightly lighter, and are generally better for handling and carving turns. However, they don't roll over bumps as well. Larger wheels (29") roll over stuff really well at the expense of a slightly higher center of gravity (only 1.5") and slightly less exciting handling. Granted, the design of the bike has more to do with handling than the tire size, but I've yet to ride a 29er that carves like my 26.

Downhill bikes generally run 26" tires. XC bikes generally run 29" tires. The new trend is for almost everything else to run a 27.5 Shorter guys often have a hard time finding a 29er that fits them well, they often feel to big. 27.5" is supposed to be a compromise between the two. Personally, I think changing wheel size every 3 years is a gimmick from the mtb companies to convince you that your old bike is out of date and you need to get with the program and get the latest wheel size. Currently the rage is 27.5 (also called 650b). There's a guy at my work who's a noob rider, but he swears his 650B is light years better than his old 26 and 29er. He reads a lot of MTB mags, and they tell him it's the best of both worlds with zero compromises.

when 29ers came out, lots of people jumped to that wheel size because 26" was no longer cool. Now, 650Bs are all the rage, and 29ers aren't very cool. You'll have a tough time finding new 26ers and you'll have an easy time finding used 29ers (because they're all dumping their 29ers to get the latest 650b). Ride a few, you'll see what you like, but keep in mind that bike geometry is king before tire size.

My opinion:
I love popping off every rock and root in the trail, and handling is my #1 priority. Plus I'm short and I want a low COG. The 26" wheel fits my riding style best for me and my size. I feel like my COG is way too high on a 29er. A 29er would be awesome for me for a long distance xc ride where you just kind of weave through the hillside with lots of climbs and you don't really attack the downhill and flowy sections.

2) Tubeless Tires - I've never dealt with them. How well do they seal up? I'm guessing they are lighter since you don't have a tube in there. Thoughts?

I'm running tubless on one of my bikes and tubes on the other. They both make me smile when I ride. I haven't decided which is better. Tubeless is not usually lighter than running tubes. I can feel a difference with the contact with the ground, but it's minimal. I'm fine with either on my bikes.

3) Xc, trail, all mountain, enduro, freeride, and downhill... of that bunch Trail/All mountain sound the most appealing. I'd be interested in XC except I have a feeling they don't hold up super well to abuse and if I'm going to spend the money I want something fairly stout. Enduro, free ride and downhill from what I can tell would be overkill for my riding style (or lack thereof). I'm just an out of shape dude who is pretty slow everywhere but wants to get back in shape and have some fun while doing it. Am I correct in thinking a trail/all mountain is the right fit?

yeah, I think trail/all-mountain would be a good fit. That being said, they're just buzzwords. Bikes don't necessarily fit into one neat little category. It's all marketing.

XC will focus on lightweight and ability to travel long distances. They're still strong bikes, but they're designed for 15+ mile rides. On a long ride you'll appreciate the lighter weight. But you're right, when you go lighter, you either give up strength, or you pay through the nose for it. Also, the geometries of a XC bike will be more race-like (in a bad way). The head angle will be steep, more like a road bike than a chopper. This makes steering on the downhill a bit twichy, but very stable for climbs. An XC bike will climb better than any other genre.

Trail/all mountain is the swiss army knife. Not the lightest, but not the heaviest. Can climb ok, can descend ok.

Enduros have a lot of travel (typically 6"), but can still be climbed on relatively easily. This is probably overkill for how most people ride their bikes here in Utah. There aren't many trails around that you'll utilize your full 6" of travel.

Past the above, I have really no desire for electronic parts, dropper posts, etc. I want to keep it as simple and reliable as possible.

Remember, most of these are designed to convince you your current bike isn't good enough and you need to get with the times and sell your old bike and get a new one. They each have their place, and most of them do offer a slight performance increase, but they're not necessary to have fun. The main technology that I can't live without is a dropper post. That's a complete game-changer for me, but they're expensive, incompatible with super old bikes, heavy, an extra cable, and not everyone thinks they're worth it. I will never have a bike without one again.

 

[glockman]

The only important rule of choosing wheel size is, pick one and be a dick about the rest

I echo what has already been said. I bought a year old new giant reign brand new for a sweet discount. I chose the "all mountain" because I like to pedal up and go fast down. This group does that well. I would have been fine on a smaller travel bike but I have yet to want for more bike. When I want for less bike I just remind myself that exercise is good and pedaling a slightly heavier bike is just more exercise.

 

[Unimog]

One thing I'm not big on is exposure - riding next to cliffs. Check out this video on facebook