With some great wooded trails (mostly old logging roads) nearby, I’ve decided a mountain bike would be a good idea. I’ve ridden just a half-dozen times or so, all on borrowed bikes, and don’t know much about the subject.
Consulting with one distant, reasonably savvy friend has me thinking that I want disk brakes (superior for long descents, especially in wet conditions) and no rear suspension (adds some weight and expense out of proportion to the benefits).
I’d like to hear advice on any relevant point, including:
What should I budget for a sound bike that will give good service?
What brands are recommended? Worth avoiding?
Any must-have or must-avoid features?
Do any internet sources make sense? (Closest decent bike shop to me appears to be about 40 miles).
I can’t disagree with this more. The absolutely only reason to not get rear suspension is if you really can’t afford it. After riding a hard tail (ie, non-suspended) bike for the past ten years, I finally bought a full suspension bike and it’s made a HUGE difference.
It’s not just comfort. Rear suspension makes the bike hug the trail much better than a hard tail. I’ve ridden stuff on this bike that was flat out impossible for me on a hard tail - steep hills, loose sand, trails that go over rocks and roots, etc.
Disk brakes are wonderful too. But if I had to choose, I’d get the suspension over the brakes.
For your first bike, I’d make the 40 mile trek to the bike store and talk to them and try out bikes. Size is very important for bikes, and if you don’t know much about them it’s gonna be hard to get the correct fit over the Internet.
I’m partial to the Specialized brand, but there’s a lot of good ones out there. As long as you’re going to a real bike shop, and not, say, WalMart to buy the bike, you’ll be able to evaluate the various brands.
Pricewise, heck, it’s really up to your budget. But a brand new good bike isn’t cheap. You can spend many thousands of dollars. You might want to look at used bikes if money is an issue. I’d rather have a really good bike that’s a couple years old than a brand new one that might not have suspension/disk brakes/etc.
Mostly I agree with Athena. Personally, on a mountain bike I think disk brakes are a must. When the weather turns bad (which it will) you will be glad you have them.
If you are on trails you probably want the rear suspension. If you are just doing dirt roads you can probably get away without it or get a good suspension seatpost. Do NOT get a cheap suspension seatpost. If there is any rotational play the seatpost it is worthless.
There is a lot of competition among bike manufacturers so comparison in the same price range will get you just about the same quality of equipment. Most of the difference is in frame design or suspension configuration.
Go to a good, reputable bike shop. See what seems to fit you best. Now is a good time of year because they want to move out the 2008 models so you might get a good deal. Just don’t get pressured into buying something you don’t want or doesn’t feel good.
Gary Fisher (owned by the same company as Trek) makes a fine bike. Other name brands like Specialized and Giant will give you a lot for your money. Can you afford $1,000? That amount will get you an excellent machine but you can get good stuff for less.
Some good answers when I posed similar questions here:
I think flats are a fact of life, and preparedness to deal with them is the answer. There are some cool fixaflat items available, though I have not used them.
Do some research HERE there. Lots of good reading.
As for rear suspension, it’s your choice. I wouldn’t recommend it. The only time you really need rear suspension is if your are doing 5’+ drops. For regular trails, your legs work far better as suspension. Not only is there the added weight and expense, but you lose efficiency. Some of the power you put into the pedals will be absorbed by the suspension. Try a long steep climb on a fully suspended bike and on a hardtail and you’ll see what I mean.
But, the best advice has already been given. Go to a real bike shop and test some bikes. Find out what fits you best.
Once again, having put in 300+ miles on the trails since June, I vehemently disagree with this. I can do long, steep climbs on my fully suspended bike much easier than the hardtail I rode at the beginning of the season - the suspension hugs the trails in a way that hardtails simply can’t do. There’s one hill in particular that I’ve never been able to make it up on my hardtail that I ride relatively easily on my suspended bike.
The suspension also comes through hugely on loose sand. I thought I just sucked at biking on sand in June because all the other people I rode with just motored right through stuff that I often had to walk my bike through (we’re talking six+ inches of sand the consistency of sugar). The suspended bike goes through it like it’s hard packed dirt. Amazingly huge difference.
I’d put off buying a suspended bike for a long time for some of the reasons brewha mentions. Once I bought one and started riding it, I found out just how wrong I’d been. I wish I’d bought a fully suspended bike years ago.
OK,Athena I’ll race ya!
If money is not an object, you can get a fully suspended bike to perform as well on the trails. I spent about $500 on my GF Wahoo Disc. I tried some fully suspended bikes as well. The only ones that compared cost about $2500. I could not justify spending 5X the money for the same performance.
Do a search over at MTBR and you’ll find hundreds of posts arguing this same thing. Read those and make your own decision. I’m just telling you my preferences.
Heh. I never said I was FAST. But yeah, come on up, I’ll show ya the good trails.
Everyone’s got their own opinion, but I have yet to know someone who bought a fully suspended bike and didn’t love it to the point of ridiculousness after riding it a few times. Both me and Mr. Athena held out for years for all the reasons you state. But then he succumbed and bought a suspended bike and got all giddy, and two years later I did the same. The difference is startling.
Also, nowadays most shocks have lockouts, so if you want a hard back end you just reach down and flip a lever.
Full sus bikes are a lot of fun - they’re versatile and can take you the most places on the trail. I’ll back up** Athena** saying they’re very most powerful on nasty, technical climbs - this is completely correct, the increased traction makes a significant difference. As far as disc brakes go, I wouldn’t ride a MTB without them the noo. My first bike certainly didn’t have them though.
It will come in large part down to cost, particularly with respect to the rear sus. It used to be the case a few years back that you shouldn’t even look at a full sus costing less than a grand, as they were all garbage beneath this price point.
This situation has changed in recent years. The bike industry has largely worked out how best to design a suspension frame nowadays, and there are no lemons out there from the big suppliers. Any full sus from someone like Giant, Specialized, Trek etc will be decent. It will also be more expensive, so you’ll be choosing between (say) a basic full sus model versus a v nice hardtail.
A good argument for the hardtail, besides the economic one, is that it’ s a tried and tested entry point into the sport. If you would like to become good at mountain biking, technically skilled, you have to learn the ropes on a hardtail. It’s not possible to really understand what suspension does, what it’s there for, if you’ve not ridden without it.
As far as punctures go, I use the tubeless tyres that 50million mentioned on my fast bike. I think I went 2 years at one point without a puncture - riding the trails most weeks. It’s a bit of an involved (and expensive) set-up though, and maybe something to try out once you’ve got a few miles under your belt.
one nice thing about hardtails, and I have both, is you can have a 2nd wheelset with skinny slicks on it and it’s a decent roadbike. Otherwise, unless you are riding smooth dirt you won’t beat me up a local hill on one. A lot of it comes down to what you’re local trails are like, it’s worth spending some time hanging out where you’ll be riding and seeing what others have and trying to engage them in discussion. There is A LOT of difference between the best bike for different areas.
oversimplified: hardtails put all your work to the rear wheel, best for smooth trails.
softails keep you in contact with all of the trail, best for rough trails
Plenty of bikes have suss with lock outs or propedal damping to increase the efficiency, sort of splints the difference, works GREAT.
Regarding tires, I had several flats in a row on my rear tire and bought a Specialized Armadillo - it’s their line of kevlar tires. Seems to be wearing very well and I’ve pulled several hunks of debris (sharp wood chips, hunk of glass, big foxtail) out that probably would have flatted me on the old tire. Costs about twice as much as a regular tire but I think it’s worth it.
I have a decent hardtail and I like it. Much of my riding is around town but I do like to go bomb around trails with some funky/rutted/steep/slippery uphills and downhills. The only place that I consistently have trouble with is a short, steep uphill section with tons of exposed tree roots. The bumpy, long, very steep downhills have never been a problem. Don’t have any full-suspension experience to compare it with but I think riding a hardtail on challenging terrain helped me learn to handle the bike better. That said I bow to the experience of folks who have used both.
On lockouts for the rear suspension, what the guys at the bike shop told me (and they sell plenty of high-end full suspension bikes) is that it’s not really the same as a hardtail. A locked rear shock absorber won’t take the same kind of pounding that a hardtail will; you run the risk of blowing out the seals at some point. I imagine this is more of an issue if you ride that way a lot.
As far as brakes go, I have a relatively bottom of the line set of mechanical disc brakes and I would never go back to caliper brakes again. They are so much easier to maintain, stop like an anchor, work when your rims are wet or covered in mud and they are still functional if you bend the rim out of shape. I have thousands of miles on mine and have had to replace the front pads once (yes, I do check them).
Trying & buying advice - go to a proper bike store. Try models out (they may have demos that you can borrow for the day so you can actually get out into the dirt), ask lots of questions. Pay for their advice by purchasing the bike at their store! You can doubtless find great deals on used bikes on Craigslist or Ebay but it’s like buying a used car - do you know what you are getting, do you have the skills to judge the condition of the bike?
I’m starting to think a full-suspension bike could be worth the money. Based on a visit to a bike shop, it looks like $1000 for a good hardtail and another $500 to add a decent rear suspension - does that seem right?
I ride a Specialized S-works Enduro as my primary bike, around here it would be considered a half decent “trail bike”, with about 130mm of travel in the front and rear. It doesn’t have enough travel to be considered a free ride bike and its way to heavy and not laid out like a serious XC bike. I started riding when suspension started to go mainstream and was met with quite a bit of resistance, anyone remember the Girvin stem suspension? So after watching years of mtb suspension evolution here’s my take/advice.
A full suspension is definitely worth the money. Depending on how serious you are about the sport, one of the major factors that will keep you on or off your bike is comfort. If your a die-hard XC weight weenie who is willing to sacrifice quite a bit of comfort for the sake of shedding some weight and pedaling efficiency in order to win races or impress your friends with your low cadence and heart rate then maybe a hardtail is for you. If your anyone else from a novice to a weekend warrior the comfort and ability you gain on a full suspension far outweighs the drawbacks of reduced pedaling efficiency and added weight.
While climbing a full suspension bike allows your wheels to track better along the bumpy terrain, keeping the wheels in contact with the ground while maintaining traction. The rear wheel of hardtail has more of a tendency to chatter or get bumped around during climbs causing you to lose traction or to rise/hover over your saddle to absorb the bumps in your legs and not directly on your butt while seated. Having a full suspension will help you conquer much ruttier gnarlier terrain on the flats and downhill, anything that reduces the amount of punishment that you take while holding on, helps you maintain your balance and keep the bike stable and upright.
Saying that you only need rear suspension for 5’ drops is like saying you only need suspension on your car for huge potholes and speed bumps. Not only will most people never see a 5’ drop on their bike but many full suspension bikes aren’t designed to take 5’ drops. The Specialized Epic is a full suspension bike that is not in any way meant to be taken off 5’ drops. In fact that bike is pretty much designed to be as efficient and glued to the ground as possible. You seem to be concerned with efficiency yet you say your legs work far better as suspension than a frame? In order for your legs to absorb impact, most of your weight has to be supported by your legs in order to cushion the blow which is very energy inefficient. I prefer to stay seated as much as possible with all of my weight on my seat allowing my legs to focus on pedaling while my suspension soaks up the bumps. Which do you think is easier, just sitting on your seat for an hour, or hovering over your seat for an hour while your legs hold you up. In order for your legs to act as suspension you would have to be doing the latter of the two. Plain and simple, suspension helps you stay seated more which takes extra strain off of your legs.
All that being said, yes you do lose some efficiency in the movement of the suspension, many companies have designs that are supposed to isolate pedaling forces from suspension bob along with shocks that help cancel out pedal induced bob. I use a front and rear lockout and have never had any problems
A locked rear shock isn’t meant to take the same kind of pounding a hardtail is. It’s not supposed to take much of a pounding at all, that is why you have locked out your rear suspension, in order to tackle a section where the impact on your bike will be low and the pedal induced bob needs to be low. The parking post in your car wont take much of a pounding if you keep putting it in park while your moving fast. Use the lockout and the “P” icon on your car when they are meant to be used and they will last a while.
Disc brakes: get hydraulic, Hayes Shimano and Avid are all good brands for a decent price.
I personally don’t like the Giant suspension design, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a top notch bike. My friend just bought a Giant Trance with the maestro linkage and hydraulic disc for about 1700 out the door. It was a year old and on sale. Just to give you an example of what you can get.
Go to your local trail head and talk to the guys on full suspension bikes, ask them what they think, and ask them if they would ever go back to a hardtail.
I test rode a left and loved it. My boss who is a pretty hard core rider did a clinic at a local bike shop and they let him use a new lefty. He bought one that day.
I own two lefty bikes Xema, and have owned an additional one in the past - I like cannondales. I’m not sure I’d recommend it as a fork for someone just getting into the sport. It’s a great fork, obviously, or I wouldn’t be riding it - but it’s the most maintenance intensive bicycle component I have ever seen. I’m a decent bike mechanic on my own stuff, but the Lefty is way too much hassle to work on. It needs to be looked after by a bike shop guy who knows what he is doing - many Cannondale shops lack the skills to work on them effectively. A non CDale dealer won’t even look at it.
The Leftys are worth the maintenance headache because they’re very high performing in the short travel, 100mm, lightweight cross-country bike bracket. They’re ultra stiff, which is v important for a bike like this. This is not he bike the OP is after, so I’d maybe give the Lefty a miss. The longer travel leftys (130mm) for more general trail use are not any better than competitor forks.
You can still get a cannondale with normal forks if you like them, though. A CDale rush is a nice full sus, versatile bike that might suit.
Full suspension and disc brakes on a first bike? I dunno about that. Seems a little like recommending a Porsche to a 16 year old. I think I’d start with a used MTB and see how much use it gets for the rest of the season.
Personal quirk: I never buy bikes new. The savings on a used bike are far too great. Wait till someone buys way too much bike during a period of fleeting interest and scoop it up on Craigslist the following November for pennies on the dollar.
Disk brakes aren’t a performance thing, they’re a safety thing. Mountain bike tires and wheels are heavier than the road bike equivalent. You are also apt to be descending steeper grades and may be under wet or adverse conditions. When you brake they need to work as you expect. In my opinion, the suspension is arguable but I will always recommend disk brakes.
But yeah, come on up, I’ll show ya the good trails.