# 2012 GT Force 3.0 or 2012 Trek Fuel EX 7



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Hey guys!

Before anything, please excuse my english, it is not my birth languaje but i will do my best.

Im from Quito, Ecuador, and i am looking to buy a new bike. I enjoy some mountain bike action with some noob DH rides. Im trying to look for the best Mountain/Trial bike i can get with a 2.5k - 3k budget.

I finally get down with two options:

1) 2012 GT Force 3.0 for $3.000 dollars
2) 2012 Trek Fuel EX 7 for $2.750 dollars

Here are a comparison table of this two models: http://www.vitalmtb.com/product/compare/4664-9080

¿What do you guys think is the best option?

Many thanx, as you know, this is not cheap at all, so i want to choose well!


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Can you ride them? That's the only good way to choose one over the other with any certainty. You can't go wrong because both are good bikes, but they will fit differently and ride differently due to their rear suspension designs. If you aren't able to test ride them, read some reviews and try and match one up with the type of riding you like to do the most.

Good luck!


----------



## cerebroside (Jun 25, 2011)

Those are both more XC focused bikes than downhill, the Trek especially. While the GT Force has 150mm of travel, it has a pretty steep head angle IIRC.

For $3000 you can get quite a lot of bike. I would really recommend buying at a local shop so you can try the bikes out before you buy them. I tried the GT Force 3.0 but found it rather sluggish and ended up changing my mind for something else.

If you want something which can go up and down, try looking in the All Mountain section of the forums for ideas. Again it may depend on what you can find in shops, especially if you are looking for specials.


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Thanx guys!

I cant ride the bikes and here those are the prices. I cant get any lower price on any similar bikes, so thats it.

I like the 150mm travel of the GT, but i really like the front suspension on the Trek beeing a fox, since i didnt heard anything about this Marzocchi brand.

Damn, i really dont know wich one i have to choose and since i cant ride them, i think i will wait for any other member opinion,

Thanx


----------



## okiman (Feb 6, 2010)

I have been through this before between the Treks and GTs. You have to first ride both of them to see which one might be better off the shelf for you and your body, but since you do not have that option, then look at the measurments and try to ride a bike close to those measurements to get a rough feel. 

I ended up with a few GTs since both are very adjustable, but my 2009's had better componets out of the box than the Treks.

Cheers and good luck


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Thanx Okiman. In this situation, which one of this two bikes have the best out of the box components?


----------



## ricky916 (Jun 7, 2011)

Test both, Performance can order a force and if you dont like it return it.
Where are you getting a force 3.0 for $3k? The msrp is $2420?
The ex7 is $2309?
The Trek has better spec depending if you are a die hard fox guy, besides that the only other advantage would be the rear der (deore 10spd vs slx 10spd). The idrive is a very good climber though.


----------



## Crash Test Dumby (May 3, 2011)

ricky916 said:


> Test both, Performance can order a force and if you dont like it return it.
> Where are you getting a force 3.0 for $3k? The msrp is $2420?
> The ex7 is $2309?
> The Trek has better spec depending if you are a die hard fox guy, besides that the only other advantage would be the rear der (deore 10spd vs slx 10spd). The idrive is a very good climber though.


Dude read the original post, he's in Ecuador!


----------



## ricky916 (Jun 7, 2011)

Crash Test Dumby said:


> Dude read the original post, he's in Ecuador!


lol i skimmed it, too much beer, damn this time change too.:drumroll:


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Yes I am in Ecuador hehe, so here those are the prices 

I never heard about this Marzocchi fork, it is any good?


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Yeah, that's a decent fork but why would they spec a 120mm fork on a 150mm frame? That doesn't make any sense to me. I can understand dropping 10mm, but 30? Seems like a strange spec. Have you read reviews? This website is called Mountain Bike Review and there is a whole section with bike reviews that might help you in your decision.


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Yes i did and, in fact, i read some reviews saying some people breaked the GT frames. You can see them right here: GT Force 3.0 All Mountain Full Suspension Reviews

I just dont know, i like the GT most but reading the frames problems and since in Ecuador the warranty works so slow, i might have to go with the Trek.

The fork is indeed a 150mm one, i dont know why in mtb says 120, but is a 150. http://www.gtbicycles.com/2012/bikes/mountain/all-mountain/2012-force-3-0

Thats the only downside i can see in the Trek model, a 120 mm fork is just not enough i think


----------



## cerebroside (Jun 25, 2011)

Yes, the 120mm is definately a mistake. The picture clearly shows a fork which is more than that.

If it is really out of the two I would choose the GT Force as it will be a little more versatile, but remember that it is really just a long travel cross country bike. If you treat it like a downhill bike it will eventually break, despite the amount of travel it has. However it will probably be more tolerant of this than the Trek Fuel, which is a pure XC bike.

I only rode the Force 3.0 for about 15 minutes, but what I mean about it being sluggish is that it almost feels like there is a damper between the pedals and the bike. This is probably due to the suspension design. Depending on what you like in a bike this might not be a problem for you, but I didn't like it. Not really any way to tell how you will feel about it without trying it out.


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Many thanx! I hope anyone else can give me some more feedback


----------



## okiman (Feb 6, 2010)

HotJoint, I would say that they are just about equal. The Trek has the Fox shocks which are nice. The GT does have the larger range and the I-drive which keeps the chain length the same for rough downhills, but does change the position of your crank. 

Other than that they are about the same bike. It will come down to your personal thoughts and it would be best if you could ride them. 

For me I went with a hard tail GT carbon zaskar since it was about $1k less than the Trek version with similar componets. 

Good luck


----------



## HotJoint (Mar 11, 2012)

Thanx dude!  Let's see if someone else have any opinion or tryed any of this models. Thanx all to you for the nice feedback


----------

