New Hardtail - help needed!

Firstly, we don't mind answering your questions, except you kind of kept asking the same one which was answered a few times :)

I started out with a Kraken as I said because, like you, I wasn't sure if I would get into it. I very much got into it and love riding but whilst the Kraken was a great bike for the money, I wanted something built better, lighter and stronger because as we've established entry level bikes = low end components, they don't last and are heavy.

Moving on, and I've mentioned it above, better components often mean, lighter, stronger and better quality so they work better. That's the advantage and that's really all there is to it.

Example:

The more expesive you get, the more of the below you will find.

Brakes - Better stopping power, modulation, lighter, stonger etc

Forks - Stronger, lighter, personal setup (sag etc) travel/damping adjust

Mechs Front/Rear - Lighter, Stronger, Smoother shifting, better adjustment option

It is the same for pretty much every part of a bike. To answer your question as to what advantages there are over certain specs, well that depends on the riding you're doing. Something good for Downhill or freeride might not be good for Cross Country (XC) or Trials.

Good sites? BikeRadar will be good to start with.
 
weescott said:
As previously posted. Bikeradar is a good place to start. But be wary of all the kids saying omgz my Specialized hard rock is amazing...etc..

To have a basic understaning of what is what. Look at the Shimano Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimano

Bike mags frequently do budget bike reviews. Something like MBR would be a good buy.

As vague and unhelpful "all much of a muchness" sounds, it's actually very true. Components at this price level are very basic and you won't notice much gains between one bike and the other in terms of performance. What sounds good on paper might actually ride horribly. Find a review of a bike online that you like the look of, or even better find a good local bike shop and try some bikes out for size. It's not until you start riding that you appreciate what is good and what isn't, then you start disagreeing with half the reviews you have read.

If you stick with the big brands like Trek, Specialized, Giant etc..then you can't go wrong.
Click to expand...

Thanks, and ty Rob.

If that's the case, would it be best to pick a bike with a reasonable/good fork/frame then upgrade it as I progress (if indeed I do)? If so, any ideas which bikes within the budget (£400 wouldn't really be an issue seeing as the Kraken is £350, and a sat/sun shift nets me over £90) would be the best to look at?

Would it be worth looking into Specialized Hardrocks second hand? Or are they likely to have been abused to kingdom come?
 
Last edited:
Yes they are worth a look. XC bikes are much less of a risk second hand than second hand AM/FR/DH bikes. Ask where the owner rode and how much they rode it, make sure the wheels are straight and everything works fine. Ask if it's been serviced recently. A bike located in say Norwich is going to have taken much less of a beating than a bike in Aberdeen.
 
Cookeh said:
Thanks, and ty Rob.

If that's the case, would it be best to pick a bike with a reasonable/good fork/frame then upgrade it as I progress (if indeed I do)? If so, any ideas which bikes within the budget (£400 wouldn't really be an issue seeing as the Kraken is £350, and a sat/sun shift nets me over £90) would be the best to look at?

Would it be worth looking into Specialized Hardrocks second hand? Or are they likely to have been abused to kingdom come?
Click to expand...

Budgets gone up again and now we are talking of upgrading lol!

If you want a bike that you can upgrade you need to stick to the main brands as mentioned by peescott above as a rockrider and carrera aint worth upgrades.

So what is it you actually want a £200-300 budget bike to just get out on some trails or a £400-500 entry level XC bike that can be future upgraded.
 
Cookeh said:
Could you explain the advantages of certain specs over others, regardless of budget so I know what's important and the best features for said parts? Principally so I don't have to trouble you all so much at a later date.
Click to expand...

In short - no.
Sorry, but that question is "how long is a piece of string".

Too many factors: Budget ( fork for example range from £50 to £1800), intended use ( xc/am/fr/dh), which specific part you are referring to (Frame, Fork, shock, Brakes, Handlebar, Stem, Seat and post, rims, hubs, tyres, shifter and mech, cranks, pedals, types of pedals, chaindevices, etc etc,, etc), Brand preference, air vs coil, personal preference, ... im getting tired of writing - but the list goes on.

You seem to be getting annoyed at people's answers in this thread - but you have to appreciate what you are asking.

I'll once again be the one whos blunt, a £200 bike is crap, the parts aren't really worth discussing. The shifters will shift, the fork will go up and down, the wheels will turn and so will the cranks.

In short, get the Specialized hard rock - be it second hand or now.
 
Last edited:
ichabod crane said:
Well rather than point out what we are all doing wrong why not give some advice?
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood... I'm in a similar situation to the OP and might be looking to buy. I know nothing either! :)

The info above is definitely improved, but for someone new to it all, I think it's hard to just take someones word for it when they say stuff like "£300 is just basic and £1000 everything is just better". If it is better, will it make you ride faster/better or with more comfort/precision? I think realistically the answer to that is probably not. A lot of it sounds like bike snobbery to me and more about a number i.e. how much you spent.
I mean if I can ride my old MTB from the 90s faster than my mates with their £1000 bikes, wouldn't you say that was money badly spent? Nobody seems to explain how it translates to the performance of the bike in the real world. So say a £1000 bike is lighter and stronger in most areas. Why is that better if it still lasts the same amount of time as a £300 bike? Or is that the point, you spend extra money for it to last longer and take more abuse only?
 
jaybee said:
I mean if I can ride my old MTB from the 90s faster than my mates with their £1000 bikes, wouldn't you say that was money badly spent? Nobody seems to explain how it translates to the performance of the bike in the real world. So say a £1000 bike is lighter and stronger in most areas. Why is that better if it still lasts the same amount of time as a £300 bike? Or is that the point, you spend extra money for it to last longer and take more abuse only?
Click to expand...

No, that just means that if you were on a £1000 bike, you would beat them that much more. There's no point in measuring your money spent vs someone else's.

The more relevant question is: Would you beat your own time on a 90's rustbucket, than on a modern £1000+ bike, in more comfort?

I spent nearly £6 000 on my DH bike, but the fact remains that there are some kids at my local spot, that would kick my arse in a race on a hardtail purely because they are just that much better than me. That doesn't make me question why I spent that wonga, because I'd have a horrible time riding said HT with zero comfort.

That's an extreme example above - but will give you an idea. That said, those kids can bring their hardtails to France, then my money spent will be leaving them in the dust :p
 
Last edited:
"£300 is just basic and £1000 everything is just better" But this is obvious they are not going to put the same kit on a budget bike as a high end one.

"If it is better, will it make you ride faster/better or with more comfort/precision? I think realistically the answer to that is probably not. A lot of it sounds like bike snobbery to me and more about a number i.e. how much you spent." No it wont make you a better rider but you buy a bike that fits your wallet and the type of riding you do, and like any hobby you may start on a lower budget and as you get more into it you spend more.

"I mean if I can ride my old MTB from the 90s faster than my mates with their £1000 bikes, wouldn't you say that was money badly spent?" Yes :p

"Or is that the point, you spend extra money for it to last longer and take more abuse only?" Again yes but not necessarily because it is lighter or stronger but more the fact the components are of a better quality and manufacture and so will take more wear and tear and will also be more upgradable.
 
Its ridiculous to say if you spend more money on a bike and it will last longer, go faster, make you more attractive to women etc etc. Fitness and riding technique play a major role. You buy a bike to suit the type of riding you want to do first and foremost. Nothing wrong with spending £1000s on a bike if you enjoy riding it and you're riding it whereand how it was meant to be ridden.

Ultimtely are taking the word of strangers on an internet forum, a PC hardware enthusiasts forum at that. We offer advice, which may or may not be correct, because afterall this is just a hobby and most of us I'd wager have never worked with bikes and learnt by reading, visiting bike shops and posting specific biking forums, like BikeRadar, SingleTrack etc.

Quite simply, buy a bike, one you like and that fits your size and budget, see if cycling is for you and go from there. You will learn as you go, you cannot know everything from the off. I know a fraction of all there is to know about bikes, especially compared to some of the guys here.
 
LOL guys that's better info. Basically my mates have Specialized bikes and we ride XC and trails, but mainly as aggressive trails as we can find. I don't think they would be considered down hill though. One of my mates has a Specialized Hardrock, another has a specialized something else, and another has a Specialized Full Sus thing. Sorry not sure of makes.

Personally I prefered the hard tail over the full sus due to power going fully to the pedals. Full sus is nice for landing big jumps (I rode my mates bikes to test) and the backwheel tracking better over rough terrain, but it comes down to that both have pros and cons and either would ne nice. But....hard tail is considerably cheaper for the same money you get a better bike. So for me, I'm looking at getting a hard tail second hand. I notice a LOT of people saying that second hand you can get bargains, my mates always say they should have gone second hand now they spent loads and uprgaded.

I basically want to (if possible) spend as little as possible on an equivalent bike to the one I borrow from my mate, which is an upgraded Specialized hardrock I think. I took the mick on it the other day a bit and still didn't come off. My but took a pounding on the routes we go on, but I still prefer the hard tail over the full sus for handling and feel. Ideally want to spend under £400 second hand.
 
Last edited:
R0B75 said:
most of us I'd wager have never worked with bikes and learnt by reading, visiting bike shops and posting specific biking forums, like BikeRadar, SingleTrack etc.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself.. I believe the majority of the "Bike bike thread" regulars do/have done just that. :)

Jaybee - use paragraphs, your posts make my eyes hurt! :D
 
Last edited:
I want a bike that I can use on road and use for getting into XC trails.

I was told there is nothing semi-reasonable that can be bought for £2-300 hence I have to expand my budget :p

Thanks for the time guys, has certainly cleared some things up :)

Guess I'll be on the lookout for a second-hand (any particular year to try and get?) Hardrock or a new Kraken
 
Don't buy a Kraken second hand, unless you get it for pennies, it just isn't worth it IMO.

Second hand, you want to be looking more into the mid range of bikes - bikes that retailed for £700-£1000 when new and being let go for a quick sale cheaply, like we've said there are bargains to be had. Obviously, like buying a new car you have to make sure its been looked after and is in full working order but it gives you a better platform to build on that buying a low end bike from new.

Example is this which is quite a good deal.

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12780136
 
Hence the word "new" ;):p

So other than the mentioned Hardrock, what others bikes should be attainable at my budget second hand?

Define better platform :D Am I looking for the best frame possible, or the best fork? What sets frames apart from each other at this new higher price?
 
Low end bikes have heavier frames and poor forks. A mid range bike like the one linked to will have a lighter and likely stronger frame and better forks. The components all round will be better aswell and it a decent base for upgrading.

£300 entry level bikes, including the Hardrock are throwaway bikes IMO, no real point upgrading. You can't polish a turd as they say. You buy one, love it, hammer it, and then when its had enough, take out the back yard and blow that mother away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom