# Transition Klunker for beginners?



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

This is for all the Beers who are always commenting on beginner suggestions: What are your thoughts around recommending a Transition Klunker for all the beginners who are only in his for exercise and fun?










32 lbs., solid, won't break, gets them out on the trails for under under $600.


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Resize your picture, my man.

For me, if I could come up with any amount of extra money right now I would already have one in my possession. I wanted to sell things to get the Gary Fisher Klunker, both times they offered it and this is no different. I'd probably get in trouble for skiddin' up the trails though.

For beginners, I would probably recommend something that doesn't have such a tall gear and some proper brakes.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

I'm on an iPad, it's a PITA. I wish MTBR would reduce their max width.

Are there any other good 26 inch SS rigids for less than $600 worth buying?


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

Well the Redline Monocog is around $650 but I'm not sure that riding a rigid single speed is the way to get most people interested in mountain biking. Sure, it's fun but I think it's a small window of people who don't mind suffering on long climbs and getting beat up on downhills. Good as an option, but probably not great for most.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Yeah, I'm with you. The tough part is an entry level front suspension bike isn't all that much better performance and comfort wise. For guys wanting to begin shape, pushing the bike up hills is probably more exercise than granny gearing it up.


----------



## Kiwi_GR_Biker (Nov 17, 2012)

As a relative noob to the sport I just cannot for the life of me see the attraction of a single speed bike. It seems nuts to me. All I can see is lots of pushing the bike up hills too steep for the one gear. No thanks. Surely pedaling in your granny gears is still better than getting off and pushing. Last time I owned a single speed was when I was 10 years old. Then I graduated to a 3 speed Raleigh Chopper that was the bomb at the time. :thumbsup: Since then I've owned various road and mountain bikes all with deraileurs. The great gearing is part of the attraction of modern mountain bikes for me. Why anyone would want to go back to single speed is beyond me???


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

IF your sole purpose is to get out into nature, lose weight and feel like a kid, a big BMX bike is attractive. If you want to get from point a to point b in the most efficient way possible, a lightweight, geared, bike is attractive.

When a lot of people start, even granny gear is too much and they wind up pushing their bike anyway.

So, depends on your motivations, goals and terrain.


----------



## Kiwi_GR_Biker (Nov 17, 2012)

Sure I can see the fun of scooting around a BMX park for an hour or so on a single speed but for trail riding 2-3 hours over sometimes steep terrain I can't see the attraction.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Okay, but for guys like me and Zebra, we like the idea of that.

Most beginners ride trails for an hour and a half once a week or less. I just wanted to get some experienced guy's opinions of whether it would be a good suggestion for beginners instead of the incessant "I've got six hundred bucks" and then they wind up spending another four hundred in Replacements and upgrades during their first year Because they break stuff or are unhappy with the "pogo fork of death."


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Oh, and a beginner on $600 bike belongs on beginner trails - which typically means the ascents aren't all that bad.


----------



## zeppy (May 21, 2011)

Kiwi_GR_Biker said:


> Sure I can see the fun of scooting around a BMX park for an hour or so on a single speed but for trail riding 2-3 hours over sometimes steep terrain I can't see the attraction.


Try it once. :thumbsup: The joy and simplicity can't really be explained.

That bike, while looking like a blast to cruise around on, I can't really picture getting newbs into the sport. I do kind of want one though.


----------



## zebrahum (Jun 29, 2005)

It actually angers me how much I want that bike. I need to get zen quickly.


----------



## Ktse (Jul 12, 2008)

IMO, I don't think that bike is really aimed at beginners. Most beginners would likely be put off with the lack of suspension, gears, and hand operated brakes. In addition, the price of $500 is in the range of most entry level XC bikes.

This is marketed to the guy or gal who already has a stable of bikes and desires something that's low maintenance and simple for thrashing on a day when they want to go back 'to the roots' of MTB.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Yeah, you're right. I was just thinking, If I could only have one bike and had to choose: Giant Revel One, Trek 3700 or a Transition Klunker? I'd take the Klunker all day, every day.


----------



## Kiwi_GR_Biker (Nov 17, 2012)

wmac said:


> Yeah, you're right. I was just thinking, If I could only have one bike and had to choose: Giant Revel One, Trek 3700 or a Transition Klunker? I'd take the Klunker all day, every day.


Would it be safe to assume you also watch a black & white TV, run a Commodore 64 home computer and have a Motorolla cellular phone that's about the size of a brick?


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

As a recent beginner-level rider, I would not consider this bike if it were recommended to me. Coaster brake, tall gear, 800mm bar is just not gonna work for me in my neck of the woods. I could see someone riding it for the novelty alone however. A $500-600 entry level 29er with a lockout fork will be far more versatile for a new MTBer.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Hey Zebra: How awesome would it be to organize a "Spec Clunker Race?"


----------



## Katz (Jan 29, 2012)

wmac said:


> IF your sole purpose is to get out into nature, lose weight and feel like a kid, *a big BMX bike is attractive*...


Ummm, how about an entry-level DJ bike then? Just throw a long seat post on.

I paid about $550 for my Norco Havoc. This particular one is not rigid, but the frame is CrMo and came with mech. disc brakes. Many entry DJ bikes come with rigid forks.

It's kinda too obvious maybe you have some reason(s) against it? (other than you want to borrow the Klunker from your buddy  )


----------



## XJaredX (Apr 17, 2006)

dgw2jr said:


> As a recent beginner-level rider, I would not consider this bike if it were recommended to me. Coaster brake, tall gear, 800mm bar is just not gonna work for me in my neck of the woods. I could see someone riding it for the novelty alone however. A $500-600 entry level 29er with a lockout fork will be far more versatile for a new MTBer.


This.

The Klunker is like a bike when you have other bikes and you want it as a novelty. Coaster brake 26er is not a good bike to start on lol.


----------



## MOJO K (Jan 26, 2007)

Zebra...you're absolutely right... the blue on black is super HOT....


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Katz said:


> Ummm, how about an entry-level DJ bike then? Just throw a long seat post on.
> 
> I paid about $550 for my Norco Havoc. This particular one is not rigid, but the frame is CrMo and came with mech. disc brakes. Many entry DJ bikes come with rigid forks.
> 
> It's kinda too obvious maybe you have some reason(s) against it? (other than you want to borrow the Klunker from your buddy  )


No, I like this idea! I'll state it again: The reason I threw this out there is because, to me, it looked like a simple option for most beginners to ride beginner trails, which beginners should be on. It would keep them off trails that were beyond their and their equipment's capabilities.

But I REALLY like Katz' suggestion!


----------



## Katz (Jan 29, 2012)

And when your friend decides to invest in a nice bike, you'll get to buy a DJ bike for cheap! :thumbsup: 

I'm in agreement with others who said Klunker is more of a novelty bike. The video of Lars Sternberg and friends shredding on Klunkers is akin to Spec Miata racers racing in MGBs and TR4s, just for the sake of getting a little taste of the past, IMHO.

I've ridden my beater bike on beginner/intermediate trails. The bike handles the terrain without much problem (this rider's lack of endurance is always the bigger problem). It should work out OK for your friend and his intended purposes.

Moab Klondike Bluff









Kingman, AZ Cook canyon loop


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

wmac said:


> No, I like this idea! I'll state it again: The reason I threw this out there is because, to me, it looked like a simple option for most beginners to ride beginner trails, which beginners should be on. It would keep them off trails that were beyond their and their equipment's capabilities.
> 
> But I REALLY like Katz' suggestion!


So when they decide they are no longer beginners and are ready to try some intermediate trails, they need to go drop a handful of Benjis on another bike? 

I have seen some first timers ride every level of trail on their first ride. Then there are some who can barely make it up the hill to get to the real singletrack. This bike probably wouldn't help either type of beginner rider gain the confidence required to ride technical trails.

Even though I disagree with you, I do believe your heart is in the right place.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Slack head angle and it comes in "one size fits none." I think it's a bar bike.

If someone let me design an inexpensive starter MTB, it would have the same XC geometry as every other hardtail, a suspension-corrected rigid fork, a 3x9 drivetrain, V brakes, and all the right fittings to go disc. It seems like the places where people get really hosed on a lot of inexpensive retail bikes is that the forks are worse than just doing rigid and the brakes are really crappy. So maybe if I got rid of the crappy fork, I could buy enough chromoly forks to spend less on that part (though I bet economies of scale would screw that up) and I bet I could get functional V-brakes for cheaper than crappy disc brakes, even without a fantasy market that has moved on in reality.

People would get a bike that goes, stops, shifts, and has much less potential to do something weird.

Maybe offer the same thing in singlespeed because, wtf, and also, people who've been riding a while don't always want to throw a lot of money at trying singlespeed.

Some of the smaller manufacturers do try to make their inexpensive bikes more conservative, sometimes, but they don't last very long. I think the market demands bells and whistles.

While it hasn't exactly been economical, I really appreciate that the Hardrock, at least in '07, didn't have weird geometry. The frame has worked for me through getting back into mountain biking on a halfway whim and several seasons of increasing volume and competition.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

I'm with you Switch. That's what I'm exploring here: Is there a better option besides the usual suspects for beginners looking to get outside once a week?

I mean, if you're looking to get in shape in a way more fun than a treadmill, is a suspended, geared, bike the best way to go?


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Here's a question: which is better

Save up to 60% off new Mountain Bikes - MTB - Gravity 29 SS Single Speed 29er Mountain Bikes

Or

Airborne Bicycles. Skyhawk


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

If outside is off-road and cost is no object, I'd default to gears and suspension for every new adult rider. I guess how much suspension is something people can debate to no end. Absent someone having a concept of goals, I'd probably steer him toward a 5" travel FS.

Once mountain bikes enter the picture, though, it's usually more complicated than "fitness and more fun than a treadmill." Going for a run is a lot simpler than getting my crap together to go mountain biking, and even a little simpler than going for a road ride from my house. I still went mountain biking today.

So, one gets into the issue of "why a mountain bike?" I really don't think there has to be a conflict between a bike being a good one to start on and also being good at something long-term. My pet "starter bike" concept is all about a bike that someone could ride as is, but also put in a heavier-duty trail trim or commute trim and be happy with it. Surly tries to address this, they just don't do enough complete lines (and probably don't sell enough frames) to hit the pricepoint.

There are lots of used bikes floating around. Different companies try making inexpensive bikes by getting rid of high-priced features instead of just making everything cheaper. And people still insist on buying cheap new bikes with disc brakes and suspension forks. I think at a certain point, one must accept that the market has spoken. We can always direct individuals who ask to look at some of the other options than retail.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

Yeah, I just keep reading, "That $600 bike is fine, but you'll want to replace the brakes and fork immediately." Or, I've had my $600 bike for six months and I want to replace my brakes and fork ...

It is what it is, I know, if I were starting, had $600, plan to ride alone and just want to feel like a kid again, the complexity, hassle and frustration of an entry level bike just doesn't appeal to me.

I'd do a dirt jump bike like Katz suggested. I'd then do what my 6 year old son does on his BMX bike and man up on the hills or push, knowing that the ride down is going to be fun!


----------



## zeppy (May 21, 2011)

wmac said:


> Yeah, I just keep reading, "That $600 bike is fine, but you'll want to replace the brakes and fork immediately." Or, I've had my $600 bike for six months and I want to replace my brakes and fork ...
> 
> It is what it is, I know, if I were starting, had $600, plan to ride alone and just want to feel like a kid again, the complexity, hassle and frustration of an entry level bike just doesn't appeal to me.
> 
> I'd do a dirt jump bike like Katz suggested. I'd then do what my 6 year old son does on his BMX bike and man up on the hills or push, knowing that the ride down is going to be fun!


Perhaps part of being a newb is learning these things. How does one know a nice suspension fork if they've never ridden with a pogo stick fork?


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

My first MTB ride was in 1989 and the bikes were disasters compared to today's bikes. I still had a lot of fun. The problem I have is a lot of people are happy and fine with what they have until someone tells them they shouldn't be or they get frustrated when stuff starts breaking.


----------



## zeppy (May 21, 2011)

wmac said:


> My first MTB ride was in 1989 and the bikes were disasters compared to today's bikes. I still had a lot of fun. The problem I have is a lot of people are happy and fine with what they have until someone tells them they shouldn't be or they get frustrated when stuff starts breaking.


I'd say posting around here we have a skewed sample size, though. Most of the folks here are the ones that get bit hard enough by the bug that they decide to join an online forum to talk about it. Once signed up, they look at all the posts of some of the uber-high end bikes folks have and realize that their RST fork may be, in fact, junk.


----------



## wmac (Sep 29, 2010)

See, this is what I'm talking about. It's not junk. It performs as it was designed to perform - Recreational Trail Riding for occasional use. RTR is paved/gravel roads and packed single track. That's what a $600 MTB is spec'd for - RTR beginner level trails.

Like Switch wrote, the market has spoken - offering a better, lighter bike designed to handle RTR doesn't sell because people want a bike that has "the same" parts as an expensive race bike. It is junk compared to high end forks, and is junk when used outside the intended design parameters.

The forks aren't all that bad, but they aren't much better than a lighter weight, rigid fork.

I'll concede, the market has spoken. Beginners don't want a rigid single speed. I won't keep looking for an alternative suggestion.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

I joined this forum when I bought my current mountain bike and started getting back into riding.

My very first thread was one I created after figuring out on my own, without any help from the Internet, that my RST fork was a piece of garbage.

I considered rebuilding it, but lack the commitment of some of the people who create the truly epic turd-polishing threads - I ended up EBaying something that I was pretty content with until I killed it about a year and a half ago.

Crappy brakes and crappy forks really do a pretty good job speaking for themselves. 

Before the Internet, people still had friends. I lusted after a Marzocchi for a couple years because the friend who got me into riding said they were awesome. I actually have one now, which is kind of amusing; it's even old enough that I could have had it in college, when I started riding.


----------



## backalleybikes (Jan 25, 2013)

Curiously, the Klunker is probably better suited to advanced riders looking for a new challenge, though a single speed with handbrakes is a great first bike.


----------

