# 1996 Naked carbon Trek Y22 - Bad idea as a first mountain bike?



## tim808 (Nov 14, 2011)

Edited to add: 
Thanks for all the helpful advice!! I'm following your advice and will look for a more "fresher" bike!!!

I'm considering buying an old FS carbon bike locally as my first mb to take off road. It's listed for $300 but will try to see if he will let it go for $250.

I'm also inquiring on a $250 2001 fs Giant AC1 (but it's a large frame, located on the other side of the island and the owner hasn't emailed me back....may already be sold) and a $225 2010 Giant Revel 2 hardtail

Background info: 
I'm 46, 195 lbs (about 40 lb overweight) and one of my shoulder sockets is starting to act up. My weight and bad shoulder is a big part of the reason for interest in a lightweight fs bike. 

I'm basically looking for a comfortable bike to ride off road. It's mainly for exercise. Plan to do xc and occasionally very very lite dh. 

I know that I should wait till I've had more experience before I buy a fs but I'm debating pulling the trigger now due to the decent price (checked ebay) for a carbon fs, it can be inspected/tested (unlike ebay) and I may never see another one available in my locale.

(I have to admit I have something for old bikes...........or I'm just super cheap)

I figure that if it doesn't work out, I could resell it or part it out without taking too much of a loss. 

Current equipment:
I currently own 2 old rigid frame bikes, a 1994 Bridgestone MB6 (my backup, free from my friend and what got me interested in biking) and a 1998 (?) GT Palomar (my favorite, $40 and came with a good foot pump). I use them to commute 2 blocks from a parking lot to work, riding around the neighorhood and also on a paved bike path.

Thanks in advance for your help/advice!!!


----------



## jlmuncie (Sep 10, 2010)

I wouldn't buy an FS bike that old, especially not a carbon one. Technology has changed a lot since 1996 and who knows whats happened to the frame, not to mention a modern aluminum frame might be as light or even lighter.


----------



## NicoleB (Jul 21, 2011)

i just asked the guy next to me...(hes been "in" bikes forever, so i trust him).
his response? "no, it will probably break". i guess things have much improved since then!


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

The Trek "Y" series of bikes are generally considered a poor full suspension design. They weren't particularly good when new, and 15 years later they're no better. I'd look elsewhere.

If your price range is $350(ish) I'd look at hard tails only. While you might find an incredible deal on a full suspension bike, chances are at that price you're buying a pogo stick.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

One of the guys on a local board was on the design team for those bikes and has said they weren't really ever released in a version with the components (shock especially) that made them work as designed. Hence, they never really enjoyed a great reputation. 

Even if they had, I would be suspect of 15 year old carbon frame technology and wear/tear.


----------



## TropicalCanuck (Mar 5, 2016)

jeffj said:


> One of the guys on a local board was on the design team for those bikes and has said they weren't really ever released in a version with the components (shock especially) that made them work as designed. Hence, they never really enjoyed a great reputation.
> 
> Even if they had, I would be suspect of 15 year old carbon frame technology and wear/tear.


I'd love to know what the proper components are. I've been riding my Y for over 20 years...


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

Tens years on and I still don't know what components he feels would have been better. As long as you're enjoying it, that's what matters most.


----------



## Thustlewhumber (Nov 25, 2011)

i dont know which is funnier - the necro thread or that you actually replied


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

@tim808 If you want a decent bike for basic exercise stay away from any old MTB that's not what was a time proven model for it's vintage. If off road really means unpaved pathways vs single track with rocks, roots, drops and water an older good hybrid bike might be best.

The whole industry has availability problems but try a modern bike before you spend money because you'll know instantly if that's a difference where you really want to spend money. My area has a used shop that fixes up good older hybrid bikes and that gets people on pretty good stuff if the aim is not true MTB riding.


----------



## TropicalCanuck (Mar 5, 2016)

@jeffj I closed the deal on another frame for $250 and it should be here Tuesdayish.

I can't wait to get all my M-950 stuff on it and get to ripping. Party on! Excellent!


----------



## TropicalCanuck (Mar 5, 2016)

*1996 Y-22 frame


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

If you want something light, and are doing XC with the occasional DH, why would you get a FS and not a hardtail? Also, carbon doesn't save as much weight as you'd think, and a modem aluminum frame is probably lighter than an older carbon. Nowadays they use a lot of carbon material, so the weight savings is hardly noticable.

If it was me I'd bump up my budget a bit and get a used hardtail. $600 is a reasonable price to get a solid bike. FS you're carrying a rear shock which is gonna add weight. At $350, you're not gonna get anything that benefits you cause it's old and outdated. Hardtail would be a much better option given your fitness goals and trails you'll be riding.

Good luck!


----------



## BushwackerinPA (Aug 10, 2006)

Unless your budget is really that low, bikes like this in this day are jsut dated and pointless.

a 1000-1200 modern trail hardtail will be better at everything, and may save you from some medical bills and upgrade cost to a very old, dated and quite frankly poor performing bike.


----------



## Eric F (May 25, 2021)

2021Mach6 said:


> If you want something light, and are doing XC with the occasional DH, why would you get a FS and not a hardtail? Also, carbon doesn't save as much weight as you'd think, and a modem aluminum frame is probably lighter than an older carbon. Nowadays they use a lot of carbon material, so the weight savings is hardly noticable.
> 
> If it was me I'd bump up my budget a bit and get a used hardtail. $600 is a reasonable price to get a solid bike. FS you're carrying a rear shock which is gonna add weight. At $350, you're not gonna get anything that benefits you cause it's old and outdated. Hardtail would be a much better option given your fitness goals and trails you'll be riding.
> 
> Good luck!


I hope the OP has made his decision already. His post was from 10 years ago.


----------



## 2021Mach6 (Jan 19, 2021)

Eric F said:


> I hope the OP has made his decision already. His post was from 10 years ago.


LOL didn't catch that ... Makes sense now, was wondering why anyone would buy a bike from 96!!


----------



## Eric F (May 25, 2021)

2021Mach6 said:


> LOL didn't catch that ... Makes sense now, was wondering why anyone would buy a bike from 96!!


My one and only MTB is a Trek OCLV from 99. I bought new in 99, though. After collecting dust for almost 20 years, I recently resurrected it as a singlespeed, and I'm loving it.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

TropicalCanuck said:


> @jeffj I closed the deal on another frame for $250 and it should be here Tuesdayish.
> 
> I can't wait to get all my M-950 stuff on it and get to ripping. Party on! Excellent!


Looking forward to the pics. Still love the vintage stuff.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Thustlewhumber said:


> i dont know which is funnier - the necro thread or that you actually replied


Classic.


----------

