# What Bike Components Should a New Mountain Biker Consider for 1st Bike



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

There is a lot of controversy about what constitutes a 'real' mountain bike, what is an entry-level bike, how much should someone pay for their 1st mountain bike, etc.

Before I give my two cents on this issue, and as a beginner myself, I think I'm qualified to speak in the Beginner's Forum, let's get a couple of points out of the way first:

1. Beginners cannot buy a $4000 bike and instantly become a good mountain biker. They can't just buy an expensive bike and all of a sudden 'know' how to go downhill, go down fast & rutted switchbacks, deal with very rocky trails, etc. They need to learn first how to do all of those things, and learning them too quickly by going as fast as the more experienced bikers will result in a lot of crashes and frustration whether they have a $400 bike or a $4000 bike. 

2. Some experts on here will recommend a $4000 bike to a beginner because they themselves have one and like it. They look down on all cheaper bikes as something not even worth commenting on, because it doesn't meet their own personal standards for biking. But that mindset doesn't apply to beginners, because a beginner may not even know what kind of biking they will like or not like, they have to get out there with whatever bike they can get and try out multiple different roads and trails to get a feel for what they want. And after that period, which could be weeks, months, or years, THEN they will find out what kind of more expensive bike fits their style and where they want to bike, as in what terrain and what level of incline/decline, etc. 


Hopefully most people will agree with those two points (the perfectionists will never agree, and that's OK). Having said that, what I think a lot of beginners need is a guide for what bike components make a decent mountain bike that can handle the average trail. Not a 25% decline rocky trail going 20+ mph, or a trail with wood jumps and 4 feet of air. Those are more extreme trails. I mean an average trail that has some rocks and the incline/decline is say less than 12%. 

When I bought my first mountain bike in 2010, I didn't even know how good or bad it was. It did the job fine on pavement, and OK on level trails. It had some good components (Shimano click shifters and a 3x8 cassette), and it had some not so good components (50 lbs total steel frame, rear V-brake, cheap full suspension that didn't really do much). When the bike rusted out and the rear hub failed, I threw it in the trash bin. The next bike had good reviews on Amazon.com but was a complete POS, and started falling apart three weeks after I took it on trails. None of the components were good: cheap dual V-brakes, 6x3 freewheel, crappy twist shifters (that both broke off from their mountings), steel frame, etc.). I didn't know that the first bike I had was better than this one until I learned the hard way. I bought two more cheap bikes and actually had a lot of fun with them but they both suffered more or less fatal breaks in the derailleur and rear axle respectively; one lasted 5 months and the other 7 months. Again, I emphasize that I had a TON of fun on these bikes (Kent RCT and Merax Finiss) and for my budget I'd gladly do it again. I also learned what I wanted in the next bike: 3x8 cassette, aluminum frame, 27.5 inch tires, and (hopefully) hydraulic brakes. I learned what I wanted in a bike the hard way, through experience and through taking the cheaper bikes on tougher trails and steeper roads, as I slowly learned how to ride. A beginner will learn to ride through experience, but they don't have to spend $2000+ to get the right bike for what their current level of experience is (which is close to zero). And they can always keep the cheaper bike as a backup and for crappy muddy rainy weather, see below.


Below is a guide for beginners on what to avoid for bike components, what they can probably live with in an entry-level bike, and what they should try to get if they can afford it; remember these are just opinions:

FRAME
Steel - avoid except as a backup bike or a bad weather rain/mud bike (I admit I may buy a $159 Merax Finiss steel frame bike for exactly the reasons above).
Aluminum - recommended; I don't think carbon fiber is under $600 in any bike out there, even the Chinese imports. Aluminum in the the entry-level class is the standard, period.


SHOCKS:
60 mm - avoid
80 mm - can live with, NO JUMPS
100 mm - preferred, I still don't do jumps with it, that's a whole different level of bike for jumps


WHEEL SIZE:
This opens up a huge can of worms, but my personal opinion is that a 26" is fine for a starter bike if the rider is under 5'10". A 27.5" bike is preferable but cost may be a factor for someone's budget. A 29" is great for a taller rider but again this opens up a lot of more complicated discussions that are beyond the scope of this current topic.


TIRES:
If they are not knobby they will need to be replaced for sure or you will crash even more than you should. That is for sure the first upgrade you do on a cheap bike: the front tire. Kenda or Maxxis are fine for this level of bike.


SHIFTERS:
Friction Twist-Shifters - avoid
SRAM Micro-Shifters - I don't know much about them so no opinion either way
Shimano Click Shifters - the standard, just like an aluminum frame for this level of bike


DRIVETRAIN:
6x3 freewheel or less (do they even exist now?) - avoid
7x3 freewheel - can live with it
8x3 cassette - preferred; more advanced cassettes are often not available for a bike under $600


BRAKES:
V-brakes (rubber pads) - avoid, although some work well if they are properly set
Mechanical discs - the standard for this level of bike and you can live with it
Hydraulic-actuated disks - get them if you can! They are great and will really help a beginner avoid potentially serious injuries


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

A few random comments, but more or less in order:

1. Some people swear by the ride of steel frames.
2. I've seen a lot of questionable recommendations here, but I haven't seen anyone recommend a $4K bike to a beginner (yet).
3. 100mm may work for XC, but for aggressive trails, even a beginner may find that lacking.
4. 29ers are not just for taller riders. That is incorrect.
5. While there is nothing wrong with 26" wheels, buying a new 26" bike will probably depreciate more as people simply aren't looking for them. I would avoid these days, especially if buying new.

One thing you may wish to elaborate on is hardtail vs full suspension. I continually see the misconception that a hardtail is "more" or "better", so that's something we should call out.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

a lot of this information is outdated or incomplete.

virtually no one makes 26" mountain bikes any more and rider height has very little to do with wheel size, if at all.

suspension forks have nothing to do with jumping. why did you stop at 100mm?

8 speed?

there are many mechanical disc brakes that are better than some hydraulic brakes. that's not a wise generalization.

I have owned seven different frames over the years, and all of them were steel. I chose them because they are steel. why should I have avoided them?


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

TMI, and sort of scattered info in my opinion. Also being a new rider, I think when you start, you buy what you can afford to test the waters. After that, you know where you like to ride, how you like to ride, learn what works and doesn't work, and apply that to your first real purchase. 

It can get really overwhelming when all these options are out there, instead of just riding a bike, and progressing from there with your riding skills and a better bike. I'm still working on the skills part.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

My advice to new riders:

Buy the best bike you can afford that fits your body and your riding style.

There's definitely a lot packed in there, but it basically amounts to the fact that not all beginners are the same. Know thyself is key. A good salesperson will ask the right questions to figure that out, and show you bikes that come the closest. Some bikes for certain styles of riding have a higher cost of entry (think legit downhill bikes, for example) than bikes for toodling around on easy packed dirt paths with the kids.

When it comes to some of the specific recommendations made in the OP, they're all over the place. I'm not sure you can find a beginner mtb with 60mm of suspension travel anymore. Lauf forks do, though, and they're pretty chi-chi. Focused on racing, though.

I still think a decent rim brake with smooth cables is better than a cheap POS disc brake of any flavor.

My road/touring/commuter/gravel bike is steel, and would probably go for something around $2500-$3,000 new. It's a great bike. Nothing wrong with a good quality steel bike.

Beginners DO NOT "need" to start on a cheap POS bike so they can learn skills. If budget dictates, then you do what you've gotta do. But if you can afford it, it's worthwhile to buy a good quality bike. Biggest reasons are durability and reliability. There's no set rule on this aside from the fact that the price where you get a good hardtail is lower than the price at which you get a comparably good full suspension. Some "beginners" move to mtb from something else where many skills are able to transfer. Someone who's confident and especially fit is going to be at a different starting point than someone who's been a couch potato for the past 40 years. Someone who used to ride dirt bikes or bmx is going to be at a different starting point than a swimmer who is only just taking up a mtb so they can start doing adventure races. But anyone can benefit from a bike with excellent handling characteristics for the terrain they want to ride. Putting a beginner downhiller on a $200 "mountain bike-looking object" is a recipe for disaster.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

A lot of beginners will get confused on steel bikes. Cheapy big box store steel bikes are indeed something to avoid, crappy steel and heavy. Really nice steel bikes (I have 5) are expensive and very nice. There are in-between steel bikes from the big manufacturers that are good (Marin Pine Mountain comes to mind) that are inexpensive, though probably a bit more money than the OP is thinking. So I would say aluminum is the best to go with if you can't afford something like the Pine Mountain.

I agree with Harold, I think V-brakes or mechanical disk are going to be more reliable than really cheap hydraulics disks. And you can always cheaply replace V brakes with better Vs for very little money.

I would recommend a beginner try to spend at least $500 on their first bike to avoid the disposable bike route the OP has gone. But as the OP has shown, any bike is better than no bike, but a bike that doesn't last even a year…

btw, all my steel bikes are 11-15 years old and still going strong.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

richj8990 said:


> Before I give my two cents on this issue, and as a beginner myself, I think I'm qualified to speak in the Beginner's Forum, let's get a couple of points out of the way first:


ok, 2 cents, but you're not the best qualified on this subject. I'm not trying to be dick, but i don't want other beginners steered the wrong way. There's a lot of stuff wrong with your post, that i'm not going to put the effort in to correct EG non disc bike is completely out of the question unless there is no chance you'll ever ride intermediate or singletrack. I encourage you and other beginners on the fence to read my post history, start below. I don't need to rehash over and over. I don't recommend $2k cost bikes, nor do i look down on lower tier bikes, quite the opposite of that. I got buddies who've wridden then XCT level hard as their main for years and raced on it. I also have a an XCT bike as my backup.

here's my writeup advce on it and the divisive debate I had with people afterwards.
http://forums.mtbr.com/recycle-bin/...ople-looking-buy-bikes-get-sport-1032563.html


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

bob13bob said:


> ok, 2 cents, but you're not the best qualified on this subject. I'm not trying to be dick, but i don't want other beginners steered the wrong way. There's a lot of stuff wrong with your post, that i'm not going to put the effort in to correct EG non disc bike is completely out of the question unless there is no chance you'll ever ride intermediate or singletrack. I encourage you and other beginners on the fence to read my post history, start below. I don't need to rehash over and over. I don't recommend $2k cost bikes, nor do i look down on lower tier bikes, quite the opposite of that. I got buddies who've wridden then XCT level hard as their main for years and raced on it. I also have a an XCT bike as my backup.
> 
> here's my writeup advce on it and the divisive debate I had with people afterwards.
> http://forums.mtbr.com/recycle-bin/...ople-looking-buy-bikes-get-sport-1032563.html


Your link doesn't go anywhere. (see edit below!)

Look, disk brakes are great but a lot of us rode those same trails with V-brakes and even cantilever brakes. I still have Vs on my single speed and ride it on advanced trails singletrack. I ride my CX on singletrack, it had cantis and now has mini-Vees. I do wish it had disc brakes but it doesn't stop me from riding, it's more of a problem braking with drop bars than the brakes themselves.

But I will ask, do any of the major bike manufactures still make V-brake bikes?

EDIT: hmm, your link is working now.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

the reason v-brakes is bad has nothing to do with performance. It's because of huge hassle caused by inevitable future replacement parts and upgrades. You will destory a wheel eventually, and then sourcing a deal on quality wheelset for rim brakes is near impossible. Also, eventually you may blow up a fork, now you're going to upgrade to rim brake fork (also cost a lot more than good quality disc forks). So now you're looking at replacing your wheelset, and your fork, and your brakes if either of the first two go bad. Just don't do it. 

for minimal dollar amount, dont' buy used, but an XCT bike that's on clearance ($300 deals I've posted). when the fork goes, u can replace the fork easily. same thing wheelset/brakes etc. compatibility.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

bob13bob said:


> the reason v-brakes is bad has nothing to do with performance. ...


There is a legit performance piece to it. Wet/mud performance is poorer on v-brakes. Hand force required is higher on v-brakes.

They've worked great for years - and I used them myself - but discs are better in a lot of use cases.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

bob13bob said:


> here's my writeup advce on it and the divisive debate I had with people afterwards.
> http://forums.mtbr.com/recycle-bin/...ople-looking-buy-bikes-get-sport-1032563.html


Aw geez, not this crappy post again! Correcting bad info with more bad info isn't going to help anyone. :madman:

To all the new folks reading this, just go re-read what Harold & phlegm wrote above and then try to purge the rest of this nonsense from your mind if that's possible.


----------



## gr7070 (Apr 21, 2015)

> My advice to new riders:
> 
> Buy the best bike you can afford that fits your body and your riding style.


**Without knowing how much one can afford** that's horrific advice.

[Much of the rest of that post is solid.]

New riders should get a slight idea of how much "bike" $150 can (not) buy, how much value a $500 bike can provide, just how good a $1000-$1500 bike is, and how much the returns diminish for a, say, $2376.38 or above bike.

It's very difficult to set a budget without, at least, just a little bit of knowledge on how much $X, $Y, and $Z can get one.

Then one needs to take their own financial situation into account; apply their own personal values with respect to money, hobbies, financial needs and goals, etc.; assess roughly how good a bike one really wants; consider how committed to this hobby they may be; and ultimately determine what a reasonable budget range is for their first bike (and needed accessories).

Buying the most one can afford is horrible advice. It was horrible advice for homes and it's bad advice for bikes. 
Heck it's bad advice for heart surgeons - just get the best, regardless of what you can afford. ; )

Buy a quality* bike well within your financial capabilities.

* That probably starts somewhere north of $300+/- if buying new at an LBS. And if you can't afford that give it a try on whatever you can.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

noapathy said:


> Aw geez, not this crappy post again! Correcting bad info with more bad info isn't going to help anyone. :madman:
> 
> To all the new folks reading this, just go re-read what Harold & phlegm wrote above and then try to purge the rest of this nonsense from your mind if that's possible.


This! 100%


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

gr7070 said:


> **Without knowing how much one can afford** that's horrific advice.


If someone can't figure out how much they can afford to spend on their hobby while balancing other priorities, then maybe. Worse advice: what you just pooped all over the page. Geez, go sleep it off. :skep:


----------



## Tinymountain (Oct 26, 2016)

Don't we have enough "Help, I'm new, what bike should I get" threads with quality suggestions that invalidate threads like this one? Every thread I have read suggests looking used and ask here or a mtb friend to see if it's a good deal. A few hours of research on bikes and components can help anyone get a good idea on what they need for a first bike.


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

Buy a bike. Ride hard in the woods until it blows up. Buy a better bike.

Unless you've got a good LBS or good group of knowledgeable friends, a beginner is going to have to learn a lot on their own. That's part of the sport.


I was probably had as much fun, and was faster on my 26" fully rigid steel SS with V brakes, than I am now on my plastic wonder bike.


----------



## DethWshBkr (Nov 25, 2010)

My first bike was a rigid Giant Iguana. 
Rode it and loved it. Steel frame, TRUE Shimano components, and I loved that bike. I did outgrow it quickly however, then went to a Cannondale Super V. Cantilever brakes, a whopping 50mm front travel. 
Lasted me 2 years before I upgraded again, to a Trek Y33 with a mind blowing 80mm of travel, and true Shimano V Brakes. (What you see now ARE NOT V-BRAKES)
True Shimano V Brakes had a 2 point linkage system known as "Parallel Push" and WORKED PHENOMENALLY. Not this stupid junk linear pull brakes. They have NOTHING on true Shimano V brakes. Sure, all rim brakes hurt when wet. BUT, if it's not wet out, a V brake (Or linear pull brake) will stop you JUST FINE. 

A beginner can ride ANYTHING THEY WANT with ANY BIKE. Suspension makes it easier to go faster, but there is NOTHING wrong with 80mm forks. That used to be the cream of the crop for expert riders.


Get a good bike. Don't do a WalMart bike. They will be disappointing. GO to a bike shop. Spend 300, 500, 1000, whatever you can and want to spend on a bike. 
Simple as that. Components will be better, frame and overall quality will be better. 

Also, NOTHING WRONG with twist shifters. Again though, walmart twisters will be junk by comparison. Up until I had a SRAM 1x system, I sold off all of my Shimano deraileurs, and shifters and got SRAM mechanisms and GripShift. It works great. I HATE Shimano triggers. Sram triggers, I can live with. Shimano Di2, no problem. Shimano triggers, nope. Hate them.

Quality is what matters, not the suspension travel/frame type/geometry/brake style /shifter style a beginner.


----------



## Ride1424 (Oct 16, 2016)

richj8990 said:


> There is a lot of controversy about what constitutes a 'real' mountain bike, what is an entry-level bike, how much should someone pay for their 1st mountain bike, etc.
> 
> Before I give my two cents on this issue, and as a beginner myself, I think I'm qualified to speak in the Beginner's Forum, let's get a couple of points out of the way first:
> 
> ...


This is why you should take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt. This guy could be writing it. Oh the pain!!!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Ride1424 said:


> This is why you should take everything you read on the Internet with a grain of salt. This guy could be writing it. Oh the pain!!!


That's a bit harsh, given he's doing his best to be helpful. However, when you post something so definitive, you are certainly opening yourself up to criticism.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

noapathy said:


> Aw geez, not this crappy post again! Correcting bad info with more bad info isn't going to help anyone. :madman:
> 
> To all the new folks reading this, just go re-read what Harold & phlegm wrote above and then try to purge the rest of this nonsense from your mind if that's possible.


translation: i don't agree with something. but instead of actually provide evidence or counter someone's else's arguments, i'll just label it as bad. Much easier that way.

I wish that thread wasn't locked because that was the place to hash it out.

You guys don't even define what makes a nice bike.


----------



## gr7070 (Apr 21, 2015)

noapathy said:


> If someone can't figure out how much they can afford to spend on their hobby while balancing other priorities, then maybe. Worse advice: what you just pooped all over the page. Geez, go sleep it off. :skep:


You misunderstand. The guy giving the advice doesn't know how much "the most a guy can afford" is. So he shouldn't be suggesting it. He's telling some newbs to buy a $10,000 bike. That's just dumb.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Usually people post a budget, and when they don't, we ask. In my own experience, I ended up starting on a BD ($300) bike by advice given on this forum, no one ever told me to go buy a $5k bike. I have seen it once or twice, but that's not the norm. I feel the more experienced riders always tell you "just ride what you can afford". 

Now, if the budget is $100 it gets tough to suggest a decent bike BUT the usual suggestion is to get a oldie/rigid from CL vs. a Walmart POS.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

bob13bob said:


> translation: i don't agree with something. but instead of actually provide evidence or counter someone's else's arguments, i'll just label it as bad. Much easier that way.
> 
> I wish that thread wasn't locked because that was the place to hash it out.
> 
> You guys don't even define what makes a nice bike.


That thread was a waste of time. People "hashing it out", as you call it was basically others trying to correct a TON of misinformation. Exactly like this thread.



gr7070 said:


> You misunderstand. The guy giving the advice doesn't know how much "the most a guy can afford" is. So he shouldn't be suggesting it. He's telling some newbs to buy a $10,000 bike. That's just dumb.


I didn't misunderstand anything. He used simple English and there's no set number implied. He suggested people buy the nicest bike that would fit in their budget, however *they *may define that. For a few, that may well be $10K (dentists?). Mostly, for new folks it seems to float around $500-1500 because that's what they can reasonably afford. And as jcd46 stated, we don't presume to know what that number is. That's all you.


----------



## ndwgolf (Apr 23, 2017)

Seems like you've got a hard on for $4000 bikes......let go man, move on    


richj8990 said:


> There is a lot of controversy about what constitutes a 'real' mountain bike, what is an entry-level bike, how much should someone pay for their 1st mountain bike, etc.
> 
> Before I give my two cents on this issue, and as a beginner myself, I think I'm qualified to speak in the Beginner's Forum, let's get a couple of points out of the way first:
> 
> ...


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

I keep checking the post date to make sure a thread from 2012 wasnt resurrected. 26"? 7x3? V Brakes? 80mm? Its going to be difficult finding new bikes with these specs.

I would never recommend anyone serious about riding to buy a new $400 bike. For the love of god buy used, you can get a great used bike for $400. If they are reading this then they are plenty savvy enough to use the internet for help in deciding if the bike they are looking at is any good or not. There is no logical reason for people to be fine with buying used cars but think buying something as simple as a bike is too risky.


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

idividebyzero said:


> There is no logical reason for people to be fine with buying used cars but think buying something as simple as a bike is too risky.


Arguably one of the best statements I've ever read on this board,,


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Wow, you guys are really funny. You remind me of Marie Antoinette. "My queen, the peasants have no more bread to eat." "OK then, let them eat cake". The cake in this case is the 'good advice' $2000-4000 mountain bike to buy. The 'bad advice' is for someone on a budget to buy a $150-600 bike BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR BUDGET, dummy. Maybe they don't want to go on Craigslist and buy a used bike from some stranger, maybe they want a new bike for their budget.

A lot of people on here with a budget (I've read it several times here and in other forum subgroups) have a $400-600 budget and are looking at the lower-end Treks, Diamondbacks, Giants, Cannondales, etc. What I've noticed is that some of those brands still have 3x7 freewheels on the drivetrain instead of 3x8 cassettes, and they often sell in the $400's for the bike. What my 'bad advice' was for them to, if they have the extra $75-150, try to get a 3x8 cassette and hydraulic brakes for around $500-600. Is that REALLY bad advice? And for the really cheap guys with a limited budget of $300 or less, then there are bikes out there that do have an aluminum frame, dual mechanical disk brakes, Shimano shifters, 80 mm shocks (can be upgraded later), and a 3x7 freewheel, that they can live with for dirt roads and normal trails. It's their budget, THEY HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT, get that concept??? So instead of buying complete crap that can at least get the basics for a bike that won't fall apart after 100 miles. 

The mountain bike world is not all that different from the rest of the world: the majority of people follow the latest trend, feel the need to impress everyone else, feel the need to conform to whatever someone else who is an 'authority figure' tells them is best, are scared of original thoughts, think in a linear fashion, and get mired in details instead of concepts. For those people, they will never understand my writings and I don't expect them ever to understand them. After all, as Nietschze said, the masses are asses. They cannot think conceptually and intuitively, so I don't expect anything less but ridicule and criticism from their insecure and conformist personalities.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Oh boy cant wait for the results on this thread ...😀😀😀


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Buy $4000 bikes, used. Keep a few hundred for maintenance items. 

...or ride rigid singlespeeds.

/Thread


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

Saw previous posts from richj on this topic, looked up history, and seems he's trying to make this topic his expertise. Problem is, he's spouting the same nonsense.

Actually, a $4000 bike can make a beginner really good in a matter of a few rides, as long as they're in shape and have ridden bike-like objects recently (Road, BMX, MX, Motorcycle/Moped, etc.) or experience in a discipline with similar form (ex. skiing). Aaron Gwin is one such example. People don't know how to justify spending this much on a bike, and it's more beneficial *in the short term* to their finances so they often justify against it.

A rider will adjust to shitty parts limiting themselves to adapt to suspension that has no support (fear of losing control from diving and being bucked), tires made from plasticy rubber that are pumped up rock hard to prevent flats and hopefully reduce rolling resistance, and brakes that are truly on-off, locking up tires and throwing you over the bars. If you are afraid of hitting rocks at a fast pace on a crap bike, and practice avoiding it or slowing down for it, do you really believe you would eventually stand up to the challenge to go against that habit once you're better equipped later on? Habit is extremely hard to break. Trauma is difficult to overcome--you may acquire a fear of washing out in a turn, after experiencing it due to crappy tires and brakes. I have my doubts that without professional help, that you can overcome that trauma. Are you advocating throwing money at these problems after the fact? That's what people seem to do...

They don't call some options "cheater bikes" for no reason. It really does put you ahead of the steep learning curve. I don't see any sense being a noobie, which is distinct from a newb in the sense that they are as skilled as a typical newb, but have been riding for 6+ months, hence no longer new. Even worse, years of riding, giving the same excuse for not trying something challenging (ex. maybe I'll try it if I had a better bike, better fitness, or more practice) and not truly progressing.

Prejudging things based on their numbers, material, or "classification" alone is irrational. Just because you see everyone else doing on this site, doesn't mean it's right. Any argument based on this is easily refutable.

You need some skill to ride a rigid bike, but there's not much chance for challenging something new while on one. It's like playing a game to the second level a couple times on normal difficulty, then trying to reach the 2nd level again on a harder difficulty level. What do you do after accomplishing that? Just do it faster? What about the 3rd and all the levels after that? Why not play through the levels on easy mode (on a $4k cheater bike) and experience more, such as all the various locations like Moab, Fruita, BC, NZ, etc., maybe including the final level (competing on an international level), rather than grinding XP on the noob levels, fighting off stat decay. Re-doing all you've experienced on a cheater bike again on a rigid bike, you'd be *much* more likely to reach higher level. It's like being pay-to-win is seriously OP, skipping out on the silly grind.

The tough truth/reality is that the money you spend on a bike really does reflect on its quality without serious diminishing returns up to a really high point. At what point is debatable, but I believe that, going off of MSRPs, that every dollar up to $1500 for a HT and $2500 for a FS is money well spent. I'd put the money mostly in the frame ($400 or $1200 FS min budget), fork ($350), wheels ($350/pair), tires ($70/pair), and brakes ($70/pair). The drivetrain, cockpit, and everything else can be bargain bin. With recent trendy upgrades like dropper posts and wide wheels, that are seemingly must-have, perhaps these figures are a bit conservative. Beyond this, you're mainly getting convenience/luxury over true performance. The numbers are just a rough guide; if you happened to find something for $800 that has everything you were exactly looking for, then you have good reason not to spend any more.

TL;DR, the more money you spend the higher quality you get. It's not about which is better, steel or aluminum, is 80mm or 100mm, v-brake or disc, etc. it's about the quality you get that improves you ride experience. As a true beginner, you don't know just how shitty the bike you're riding is until you ride something higher quality. Arguing the points of low end parts is like trying to decide between the differences between a $500 Pinto and a $800 Civic without working AC and leaking coolant, and arguing that because Hondas are reliable, that the Civic is the way to go, especially considering that you're risking your life in a Pinto. Why not just save up?


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

> And for the really cheap guys with a limited budget of $300 or less, then there are bikes out there that do have an aluminum frame, dual mechanical disk brakes, Shimano shifters, 80 mm shocks (can be upgraded later), and a 3x7 freewheel, that they can live with for dirt roads and normal trails. It's their budget, THEY HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT, get that concept??? So instead of buying complete crap that can at least get the basics for a bike that won't fall apart after 100 miles.


NOBODY should be buying a new mountain bike for $300. Thats horrible advice. Those are not mountain bikes, they are street cruisers that look like mountain bikes. Anyone with a budget of $300 and wants a real mountain bike NEEDS to buy used. Period.

If someone's budget was $4000 for a car who in their right mind would buy a new one? The choice is buy a new golf cart that kind of looks like a car or buy a used Honda Civic. One is a car, one is not a car. Buy the car. Thats how mountain bikes work, buy the mountain bike you can afford, not the thing that just looks like a mountain bike.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Unfortunately mountain biking has become a thing of disposable income...a luxury item...and unfortunately something around $500 is not going to buy you much of a new "mountain bike". A basic dropper post will run you around 250 to 300.


----------



## brent701 (Sep 17, 2012)

I personally think you need to define the word beginner. It can mean a lot of different things to different people. Is said beg. 100% new to MTB? is it something they want to try and see if it is something they want to keep doing? is it someone that knows how to ride but is truly a beginner at riding on the MTB compared to say a Road bike? What is the end goal is the person wanting a bike? Ride Mountain mostly or do some rides to work or canal riding? 

I have some very beginner Trek bikes my son's have ridden. The components worked for the life of the bike but not the fork. 
Most important aspect to me is a good solid fork. A very low model one won't hold up to some good trail riding for long where a little higher up on the model level may. I am not saying like bike park trails or huge jumps. Here in AZ we have some rough trails. It destroys forks at a fast rate. Now we talking about Gravel rode rides with some trails ( easy trails) added in? the lower model bikes more than likey will work just fine.. 


Frame materials at a beginner level shouldn't really be a factory till said riders has some feel on the current bike he/she is riding and is at least able to demo a different frame. I have carbon and Ti frames. LOVE them. 

It's a bigger picture than just what should my bike come with I feel


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

New riders should start out on a $500-$700 Hard tail, why you ask ?

Because If you really want to learn to ride and work at It your gonna beat your first bike to death..
You don't even know how to ride light yet. much less do bunny hops and drops correctly.

So why beat up a good bike, IMO buy entry level, torture it working on your skill set.
and when you know what your doing and have decided to stick with it buy better.

Or go ahead and tomahawk that $4,000 sled down the mountain, It's your money.

The guy next door bought a $3000 full squish, rode it three times, said it was too hard. The bike Is just expensive garage wall art. not worth crap, seals all dried out and worse.

He got fat,
liked to stay inside in the AC,
He was just a wuss,


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Osco said:


> New riders should start out on a $500-$700 Hard tail, why you ask ?
> 
> Because If you really want to learn to ride and work at It your gonna beat your first bike to death..
> You don't even know how to ride light yet. much less do bunny hops and drops correctly.
> ...


Is the last part a Haiku? I forget the syllable rules.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Osco said:


> New riders should start out on a $500-$700 Hard tail, why you ask ?
> 
> Because If you really want to learn to ride and work at It your gonna beat your first bike to death..
> You don't even know how to ride light yet. much less do bunny hops and drops correctly.
> ...


You can bet that if I was a beginner and have the ability to buy that 10k bike...you can bet that I'll buy that bike. I'll crash that **** and be happy. If I want to hang it on the wall...then that's my prerogative.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

I bet a kid with a 3k bike would ride the heck out of it and when they tomahawk it, it'd be from riding it for real and they'd be like, "is the bike alright?" They'll want to learn to maintain it, as opposed to leaving it to disrepair and disposing of it, as one would likely do with a sh!t bike, esp considering repair costs will be a huge % of the total bike cost.


----------



## Calvin27 (Mar 25, 2014)

My 2c, people focus too much on gears in MTB and not enough on suspension and, most of all brakes. Roadies are especially guilty of wanting better and better groupsets. An XTR and alivio clagged in mud is equally crap. Having hydraulics on an entry level is minimum for me. Next upgrade would be air sprung fork and then gears when they wear.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

noapathy said:


> That thread was a waste of time. People "hashing it out", as you call it was basically others trying to correct a TON of misinformation. Exactly like this thread.
> 
> I didn't misunderstand anything. He used simple English and there's no set number implied. He suggested people buy the nicest bike that would fit in their budget, however *they *may define that. For a few, that may well be $10K (dentists?). Mostly, for new folks it seems to float around $500-1500 because that's what they can reasonably afford. And as jcd46 stated, we don't presume to know what that number is. That's all you.


no, they attempted to discredit my claims, but i countered all of hteir arguments. I was the minority opinion, but not the only one. Also i had the majority of evidence backing me up. Unfortuantely, thread as locked before they could respond to my counters.

If there was any "correcting" done, it was mostly me correcting other people.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

bob13bob said:


> no, they attempted to discredit my claims, but i countered all of hteir arguments. I was the minority opinion, but not the only one. Also i had the majority of evidence backing me up. Unfortuantely, thread as locked before they could respond to my counters.
> 
> If there was any "correcting" done, it was mostly me correcting other people.


I think the issue is that you feel your word is gospel, and is Your way or the highway.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

idividebyzero said:


> I keep checking the post date to make sure a thread from 2012 wasnt resurrected. 26"? 7x3? V Brakes? 80mm? Its going to be difficult finding new bikes with these specs.
> 
> I would never recommend anyone serious about riding to buy a new $400 bike. For the love of god buy used, you can get a great used bike for $400. If they are reading this then they are plenty savvy enough to use the internet for help in deciding if the bike they are looking at is any good or not. There is no logical reason for people to be fine with buying used cars but think buying something as simple as a bike is too risky.


there's a HUGE difference between used car market and used bike market.

I would never buy a used bike under current conditins, i would aso never buy a new car.

I can buy a $23k (new) car for $8k used.

I can buy a brand new clearanced bike for $800, or I can pay $900 to buy a similiar equippped bike 4 years used. No one has yet countered and offered sale on a reba and other components similarily specced used bike for less then the brand new Diamondback deal I highlighted. Prove me wrong and i'll take that evidence to update my viewpoint.

I'll never be able to buy that 23k car new for 7k brand new.

Used items have headaches new doesn't have, both cars and bike. but why pay more to get something used vs being patience and waiting on a clearance deal on the same thing new. dealing with them is work, saving $10k+ on a car worth it. Even if you could save used, dealing with this iessue for a 10% saving is questionable.

used bike market is just way too high compared to rapidly more competitive new bike market.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

richj8990 said:


> Is that REALLY bad advice? And for the really cheap guys with a limited budget of $300 or less, then there are bikes out there that do have an aluminum frame, dual mechanical disk brakes, Shimano shifters, 80 mm shocks (can be upgraded later), and a 3x7 freewheel, that they can live with for dirt roads and normal trails. It's their budget, THEY HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT, get that concept??? So instead of buying complete crap that can at least get the basics for a bike that won't fall apart after 100 miles. .


 a recent deal on a brand new bike was GT aggressor XCT fork, 3x8 bike, disc brake bike for $300, free shipping. Obviously this is better than the used bikes you are talking about.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

jcd46 said:


> Oh boy cant wait for the results on this thread ...


It needs to happen. I think there was a bit too much groupthink going on in this sub. It's always good for "accepted" knowledge to be challenged. In this case I'm one of he few who strongly disagrees with the majority opinion and is bothering to post about it. That's why we're in a forums, this isn't an advertisement page.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

brent701 said:


> I have some very beginner Trek bikes my son's have ridden. The components worked for the life of the bike but not the fork.
> Most important aspect to me is a good solid fork. A very low model one won't hold up to some good trail riding for long where a little higher up on the model level may. I am not saying like bike park trails or huge jumps. Here in AZ we have some rough trails. It destroys forks at a fast rate. Now we talking about Gravel rode rides with some trails ( easy trails) added in? the lower model bikes more than likey will work just fine..


This has been my experience as well. XCTS will work, but they weren't work great and tend to get clunkier with time with more flex and play, but they work. I'll gladly change my nice rig for and XCT bike if it double the amount of quality trails in my area.

my advice is buy the best new bike you can with the best fork for your budget. That is always objectively being patience and sniping a clearance deal. At thist tier, fork + components >>>> frame brand.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

phlegm said:


> There is a legit performance piece to it. Wet/mud performance is poorer on v-brakes. Hand force required is higher on v-brakes.
> 
> They've worked great for years - and I used them myself - but discs are better in a lot of use cases.


I agree, discs perform better. I think the jump to shimano hydraulics is very worth it. I meant that, in this context, the biggest reason is for parts compatibility issues. It causes a HUGE problem with things start to break, it will cost you way more $$ than a disc bike.


----------



## gr7070 (Apr 21, 2015)

bob13bob said:


> used bike market is just way too high compared to rapidly more competitive new bike market.


While I wouldn't hesitate to buy the right used model for the right price, i do agree in general with above. At least for the low to mid-range bikes.

This has also been my experience for other hobbies. People value their own things too highly. Whether it be bikes, guitars, guns, fantasy football players, or opinions. ; )

There are definitely Craigslist gems out there, but haven't stumbled upon any myself.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

Calvin27 said:


> My 2c, people focus too much on gears in MTB and not enough on suspension and, most of all brakes. Roadies are especially guilty of wanting better and better groupsets. An XTR and alivio clagged in mud is equally crap. Having hydraulics on an entry level is minimum for me. Next upgrade would be air sprung fork and then gears when they wear.


I mostly agree. I think #1 problem is people focus too much on frame brand for bikes under $1200. I get it, frame brands and color are easy to see and distinguish. But the components matter a whole lot more in this price range.

Alivio's are underrated and work great, but the need tuning just like any other drivetrain. 
http://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-shifters-derailleurs-cranks/alivio-replacement-841065.html
For me, the best value SPENDING upgrade is air fork and tires (if you have junk tires, rare these days as stock tires are alot better than before). then it's hydraulic shimano brakes (the ones with 2012 redesign).

The biggest problem I fix with beginners and upgrade is adjusting the bike correctly to fit and shift. without fail, 95% of bikes for beginners need this. their shifting cables have streched, brakes needs to be adjusted and tune, reach, lever angel, saddle angle, etc etc. Spend the time to adjust your bike to fit. The LBS wont' do it unless you pay for Pro fitting fee. youtube it.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

Osco said:


> New riders should start out on a $500-$700 Hard tail, why you ask ?
> ,


A rider should either spend $300ish or $900ish as the value sweetspots for a hardtail.
with online dealhunting, these prices will vary a bit.

the $300ish bike will have and XCT coil fork, mechanical disc brakes. going for slighly higher forks like XCM coil or XCR coil is meh and not worth it. You can always by an epixon for $180 shipping and replace it.

The $900ish bike will have reba air fork, hydraulic disc brakes, better wheelset, better cranks, and rest being a lot less important, drivetrain

I walked in to a shop last weekend. Holy hell, a raidon fork specialized is $1600 retail.(lower tier than $180 epixon, MUCH less espensive than a reba) it was on sale for $1300, but that's ridiculous.


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

gr7070 said:


> This has also been my experience for other hobbies. People value their own things too highly. Whether it be bikes, guitars, guns, fantasy football players, or opinions. ; )


The crazy part, is bikes are actually easy. we're all riding the same bikes, only our frames differ. There aren't a lot of bike part manufacturers. Sine we're all riding the same components Shimano or sram, suntour or fox or rockshox, it's very easy to know which components are higher or lower end. We have a relatively strong consensus on component tier levels.

I advocate buying the best components you can in a bike package. These differences are way more important than frame differences.

even top line manufacturers completely screw up their own rides and frame. Here's $9k specialized rig that rides completely wrong. Read the comments about peopel fixing it. You have to tweak your frame fit and ride anyway, dont' give people a false sense of security that they do not. Your big brand LBS is not a magic bullet.





so, a 47 year old sponsorless women got 2nd place in an xco race with a generic korean frame brand (that has no retail sales or experience building bikes). word on the street, major brands don't want to sponsor her because she's too old. Absolute disgrace; remember next time you decide to support them.
http://forums.mtbr.com/xc-racing-training/xcm-xco-world-cup-equipment-1007329-4.html#post13182673
her bike
https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/05/2...type-mountain-bike-plus-indergands-focus-o1e/


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

No its not, BOB.

New buyers have no idea the difference between components because the names are too difficult and require a massive amount of research to follow. It takes a year to possibly understand the order of componentry.

Alivio deore , SLX, XT,, Zee Saint XTR

Oh weight, there are speeds? 

So XT is 11 speed because its the better?

No and you can get SLX in 11 too.

So whats the difference? 

Weight,

But the bike I am looking at only has 9 gears? 

Yes.

Why?

Older slx.

What? I thought you said it was 11?

Yes but it comes in all different numbers depending on the year, same with XT and XTR

Oh should I go new SLX or old XT so I can get a slightly older better setup?

Depends, but get at least a 10 speed so you have a clutch Mech.

Wait, bikes have clutches now?


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

> No its not, BOB.
> 
> New buyers have no idea the difference between components because the names are too difficult and require a massive amount of research to follow. It takes a year to possibly understand the order of componentry.


 Understanding WHY the component levels are different takes experience and knowledge. But anyone can look up ORDER very easily, 2017 deore vs 2017 xt and see which is higher end by just looking at retail price.

And this is still MUCH easier than comparisons like guitars or cars. There is less standardized companies for pickups, neck and fret manufactuers, etc etc. EG. We can't instantly look at two different guitars and know which one has "better" pickups. they are subjectively different.


----------



## Battery (May 7, 2016)

I never realized how difficult it is to ride a bike these days.


----------



## brent701 (Sep 17, 2012)

How much the beginner can spend is a good factor also. 
Hell my procal is upwards of 10k. 
If someone can afford a 1000-3000 bike at the start that's their option. Some can't some can. Some know what they are getting into and how much the value of the bikes drop and others don't. 





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

bob13bob said:


> no, they attempted to discredit my claims, but i countered all of hteir arguments. I was the minority opinion, but not the only one. Also i had the majority of evidence backing me up. Unfortuantely, thread as locked before they could respond to my counters.
> 
> If there was any "correcting" done, it was mostly me correcting other people.


The real problem wasn't that everything you said was wrong. When something's about half right mixed with opinion it's about as useful as mudguards on a tortoise, especially when your target audience is supposed to be new folks. smdh


----------



## AKHappy (Aug 28, 2015)

*First Bike*

I think this would make someone a good first bike https://www.amazon.com/Sundeal-M7SL-Mountain-Hydro-Shimano/dp/B01MR7ZQSU/ref=pd_sbs_200_5?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B01MR7ZQSU&pd_rd_r=ZW7Q49P39WC3NJBQN6P8&pd_rd_w=97tJq&pd_rd_wg=sNYfi&psc=1&refRID=ZW7Q49P39WC3NJBQN6P8 especially if you can get it for $370


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

XT components,, good stuff, said to be the 'work horse' gear, tuff, reliable, not too expensive.

XTR components, much much better stuff, a little lighter,, very little,
not quite as durable as XT, (Because Its lighter) often cost twice as much.

An XT Crank set cost half what an XTR Crank set costs. 
weighs a little less and yes this is good.
XTR can be little easier to damage and may have a shorter life span even with good maintenance habits.
A newer rider willh not be able to feel the diff unless he spends a few seasons on lesser gear first.
Newer riders don't yet know where to spend the money for better gear, for the best bang for the buck~~

I found my XT drive train, (M8000) to shift IMO perfectly smooth, fast, and quiet.
Want better where Is makes the most diff ? get an XTR shifter for even better indexing with your XT derailleur.

Or we could all talk about how the other guy Is on a power trip and try and belittle him and his views or critisize how he expresses himself


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

I think your first bike should suck, It should be hard to ride, make ya sweat.
Tuffin' yer azz up.

Then you will appreciate your next, second better bike even more.

When I was a kid I had to walk to school, UP HILL BOTH WAYS,
In the rain.


----------



## ndwgolf (Apr 23, 2017)

FJSnoozer said:


> No its not, BOB.
> 
> New buyers have no idea the difference between components ?


Excuse me
I've never had a proper mountain bike before and I just bought a Santa Cruz Highball CC with XT gears after talking with a few buddies and from some help from MR GOOGLE and on here.....took me like 2 days max


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Osco said:


> Want better where Is makes the most diff ? get an XTR shifter for even better indexing with your XT derailleur.


I also like pairing a better shifter with a slightly lower end rear derailleur, which is exactly the opposite of how most bike brands do it. Most of the shifting action comes from the shifter and it's a bigger factor in shift quality than the derailleur (but good cables and well-routed housing are the biggest). Bike brands slap on a fancy rear derailleur and a cheap shifter for two reasons - first is that the shifter is the more expensive part and helps them meet a desired price point by cheaping out there. Second is that the rear derailleur is a "flashy" component and is something easy to point out to indicate a "better" bike.



ndwgolf said:


> Excuse me
> I've never had a proper mountain bike before and I just bought a Santa Cruz Highball CC with XT gears after talking with a few buddies and from some help from MR GOOGLE and on here.....took me like 2 days max


If you've got the budget for it, there's nothing wrong with this way of doing it. Saves you the trouble of fighting with cheap garbage that won't hold an adjustment and is going to hold up to some tough riding. Just gotta learn to keep it well maintained, which isn't that big of a deal.

With that said, sometimes it is a good idea for a beginner to start on a much less expensive bike. I learned a valuable lesson with mine, which would have been a really expensive one if I had started on a better bike. It was with high pressure sprays of water. I cleaned my bike that way FREQUENTLY and trashed all the bearings in pretty short order. Every last one of them. I was a poor college student at the time, so I couldn't handle the repair/maintenance costs of a much nicer bike than I had. I certainly didn't have the money to pay a shop to do it, and I didn't have the knowledge at the time, either. An inexpensive hardtail was pretty cheap to maintain in the grand scheme and that made sense for me at the time. Plus there was the extra risk of being on a college campus, where theft risk is pretty huge. It's a good bit tougher to keep a really nice bike in a situation like that.

Every beginner's situation is different and they've gotta figure out the best way to approach things for themselves. You can't have a formulaic approach to it. The worst thing a beginner can do is get paralyzed by trying to analyze everything to every little detail to the extent that they never buy any bike.


----------



## ndwgolf (Apr 23, 2017)

Harold said:


> Every beginner's situation is different and they've gotta figure out the best way to approach things for themselves. You can't have a formulaic approach to it. The worst thing a beginner can do is get paralyzed by trying to analyze everything to every little detail to the extent that they never buy any bike.


Thanks for that mate.
My plan is to just wash off the bulk of the crap with a none pressure hose at the house, then have the bike serviced once a week. Theres a bike shop right beside where I live and beside that is a Starbucks so good place to chill and at the same time get the bike ***** and span


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

ndwgolf said:


> Thanks for that mate.
> My plan is to just wash off the bulk of the crap with a none pressure hose at the house, then have the bike serviced once a week. Theres a bike shop right beside where I live and beside that is a Starbucks so good place to chill and at the same time get the bike ***** and span


My dry weather strategy is just a dry rag and fresh chain lube anymore.

During wet weather, I put a little more effort in because I need to. I never use a hose, either. Pressure or not. At most a bucket of soapy water and a brush/sponge as needed.

I prefer to let any mud dry first so I can knock it off easy with a rag. The less water needed the better.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Harold said:


> I also like pairing a better shifter with a slightly lower end rear derailleur, which is exactly the opposite of how most bike brands do it. Most of the shifting action comes from the shifter and it's a bigger factor in shift quality than the derailleur (but good cables and well-routed housing are the biggest). Bike brands slap on a fancy rear derailleur and a cheap shifter for two reasons - first is that the shifter is the more expensive part and helps them meet a desired price point by cheaping out there. Second is that the rear derailleur is a "flashy" component and is something easy to point out to indicate a "better" bike.
> 
> If you've got the budget for it, there's nothing wrong with this way of doing it. Saves you the trouble of fighting with cheap garbage that won't hold an adjustment and is going to hold up to some tough riding. Just gotta learn to keep it well maintained, which isn't that big of a deal.
> 
> ...


No, you must spend thousands of dollars to start with.

JK, as usual, Harold's got it correct, especially that last paragraph. I was trying to find a thread Adrwswitch had started about long time riders first bike but I couldn't find it. Almost everyone who posted had started on a less expensive bike, some walmart bikes (that didn't last too long) and some lower end LBS bikes (myself included). Pretty much everyone said if they had it to do over, they would do the same due to the experience and knowledge they gained from that first bike.


----------



## Battery (May 7, 2016)

Does anyone have a recommended wax to make my frame shine and increase my ride speed down the trails? 

I also recommend that riders wash the dirt off their bikes after each ride because it adds to the weight


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Battery said:


> Does anyone have a recommended wax to make my frame shine and increase my ride speed down the trails?
> 
> I also recommend that riders wash the dirt off their bikes after each ride because it adds to the weight


Nah, those non-smooth surfaces make you faster kinda like the dimples on a golf ball. They don't call it "turtle" wax for nothin'. :lol:


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Update: A $500 27.5" bike with the hydraulic brakes, 100mm fork, 3x8 11-30t drivetrain is way faster downhill than a $270 26" with mechanical disks, cheap 80mm fork, 3x7 14-28t drivetrain. You are probably thinking "No kidding". The question is (at the bottom), how much faster a $4000 FS bike would be than the $500 27.5".

I can't do an .html upload from Google Maps so here's the link if it helps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sy...4d-116.9915692

The "downhill" course is 1.75 miles total from the highest hilltop (recent starting hilltop maybe 0.25 miles south after the typical starting junction on the map that is the T at the top, that I didn't get to before turning around last time, so typical course is 2.00 miles total but from now on will be 1.75 miles), and an 4.4% degree elevation decline on average (406 feet of elevation drop in 1.75 miles). The 27.5" did 1.75 miles in 16 minutes, averaging 6.5 mph on an extremely rocky downhill combination of dirt road and trails that split off 5 times and back to the road. I think a pro with a $5000 bike could do it at 8.0 mph, maybe? If they can do it at 12-13 mph, WOW...

I will time the 26" again later, to make sure, but starting at the 1.75 mile 'mark', with no stops for water, pictures, etc., it would according to a past ViewRanger plot be 22 minutes to the bottom. That's only 4.8 mph DOWNHILL. No wonder my dentist was telling me my fillings are cracking more than normal, it's the bumps on this trail!!! The 26" was more than 25% slower than the 27.5", which has all the modern bells and whistles.

If and when I upgrade the 26" with a 100mm fork, 11-30t freewheel, and hydraulic brakes, I'll retime it and post the results. I have a feeling after the upgrades it will finish at around 18 minutes, catching up 66% on time to the 27.5", and the 2-minute difference being the smaller tires compared to the 27.5".

Now...what would the time be on this trail for a $4000 bike compared to the 16 minute time from a $500 27.5"? I'm guessing 12 minutes, or 8.75 mph avg. which would be around 35% faster. Or maybe not, maybe it would only be 10-20% faster. I'd like to see the difference. That would resolve a lot of the controversy about just how much better (or not) the expensive bikes really are on timed runs down very rocky trails compared to bargain bikes. Remember these two cheaper bikes above are both hardtails, so if a $4000 FS bike did not do more than 8-9 mph on average down this hilltop section, it would help my point that expensive bikes don't always translate into vastly better performance. A $4000 FS 29" should better damn well be faster than the 6.5 mph from a $500 2.75" hardtail, but how much faster is the $4000 question...


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

richj8990 said:


> Now...what would the time be on this trail for a $4000 bike compared to the 16 minute time from a $500 27.5"?


FWIW, your link was truncated and it doesn't go anywhere useful. Why not use Garmin Connect or Strava or something? Easy to link there.

As for your question, it doesn't work that way. It's the wrong question. Yeah, the FS will probably be a little faster than the HT if nothing else changes. But your skills are going to wind up being the biggest limiting factor.


----------



## Guest (May 28, 2017)

gr7070 said:


> **Without knowing how much one can afford** that's horrific advice.
> .


 You mean horrible advice? Either way you're wrong. If you can afford a decent bike (in the $1K range) you're better off than you would be going to Walmart and getting the $159 special. If you can afford (not finance, but pay cash for without changing your diet or lifestyle) a $2K bike better yet. Good bikes are better than cheap bikes. Consider this post as also potentially "creating horror" or just being horrible. Either way, I'm good with it.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

Someone I rode with today came off of an old Schwinn hardtail with disc brakes, to a Spec Enduro 29. Was managing to keep up on all the descents, trails which pro bikers had a hand in building, only limited by leg power on the climbs. Only lasted 10 miles, 1.5 hours, though. Even they were surprised how they were managing technical features like jumps, berms, rock gardens, big rock features, at such speed. Really only need 1 tip, regarding how to use the front brakes.


----------



## SpartyinWI (Jun 24, 2016)

Only thing with buying the best you can afford as your first bike is if you can afford high end bike, where do you go next? I bought a Salsa Timberjack but I could have afforded much more. Thing is I know I want to buy another one if the future (because it is so much fun) and want to upgrade. My TJ is so much fun because its better than the first MTB I have ever owned, an $850 Scott Aspect.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

SpartyinWI said:


> Only thing with buying the best you can afford as your first bike is if you can afford high end bike, where do you go next? I bought a Salsa Timberjack but I could have afforded much more. Thing is I know I want to buy another one if the future (because it is so much fun) and want to upgrade. My TJ is so much fun because its better than the first MTB I have ever owned, an $850 Scott Aspect.


I can answer that. You either race, you find more suitable trails to ride, and/or you "downgrade" to something simpler and less capable. Either way, you need something to keep things challenging. As a novice, starting with the simple and less capable bike would stunt your growth/progress, mostly with mental blocks*, compared to if you started with the best you can afford.

* Mental blocks include:
- trauma from crashes that cause you to avoid certain things
- using gear an excuse for not attempting something or not doing as well as others may have expected
- preconceptions regarding what you're are/aren't capable of due to experience, training, fitness, strength, equipment (ex protective gear)
- poor confidence levels

Generally, handling technical trail features becomes easier when you ride them faster, with less needless braking. You'll crash less and high quality parts stand up to abuse and neglect better.

Any time you take a long break from riding, you could use all the help you can get to help you get your confidence and motor skills back. After you got that and become a badass, and feel like you can settle down to riding casually, then you can be a badass on a "crappy" bike (ex. rigid singlespeed). I am genuinely worried for a novice's health, who's told to start out on such a crappy bike (for no real reason other than budget), and shows up trying to ride the same trails that I'm riding with my expensive bike & experience.


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

Battery said:


> Does anyone have a recommended wax to make my frame shine and increase my ride speed down the trails?
> 
> I also recommend that riders wash the dirt off their bikes after each ride because it adds to the weight


I waxed my new bike soon after getting it. It's not even a gloss paint but I've been protecting paint finish for over 35 years with wax. It hides blems, remove's scuffs, and dirt or muck slides off those surfaces with ease. I use liguid wax mostly except if work or fixing is needed, then a polish, cleaner or compound. Some comes as paste.

I even got some 3M tape in a very close color to the frame to wrap areas like the chainstay and cable routing or bike pack areas to keep the paint from wearing thin. Read of that idea somewhere and it was a good rainy day project.

Seriously geeky though.


----------



## SpartyinWI (Jun 24, 2016)

zooey said:


> I can answer that. You either race, you find more suitable trails to ride, and/or you "downgrade" to something simpler and less capable. Either way, you need something to keep things challenging. As a novice, starting with the simple and less capable bike would stunt your growth/progress, mostly with mental blocks*, compared to if you started with the best you can afford.
> 
> * Mental blocks include:
> - trauma from crashes that cause you to avoid certain things
> ...


Thats fair. I am so much more confident with the TJ than I was with the Scott Aspect, in part because the trails I ride fit the TJ well. But I am giddy about buying another bike in 3 years or so, with say minimum SLX brakes.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

If it was me helping out a newbie mate that was even slightly serious about riding more than to the pub. I would say starting components would be no lower than Alívio or X5, and try and steer them into Deore or X7, basic air fork.


----------



## gr7070 (Apr 21, 2015)

Forster said:


> You mean horrible advice? Either way you're wrong. If you can afford a decent bike (in the $1K range) you're better off than you would be going to Walmart and getting the $159 special. If you can afford (not finance, but pay cash for without changing your diet or lifestyle) a $2K bike better yet. Good bikes are better than cheap bikes. Consider this post as also potentially "creating horror" or just being horrible. Either way, I'm good with it.


I meant horrific.

I can afford a $10k bike; more actually. That's not braggadocio-some of us are just old.

Spending $10k on a bike for me would be frighteningly stupid. That's today after I've been riding somewhat seriously for a few years now-that's ignoring the eight years of commuting.

To spend $10k on my first mountain bike would have been truly horrific advice.


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

Oh cool this horrific thread is back....again


----------



## gr7070 (Apr 21, 2015)

White7 said:


> Oh cool this horrific thread is back....again


Alright, that's quite funny. ; )


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

gr7070 said:


> I meant horrific.
> 
> I can afford a $10k bike; more actually. That's not braggadocio-some of us are just old.
> 
> ...


You made a decision for yourself. That's great! That's all I'm suggesting people do. Everybody's budget for a bike is different. Just because you can afford to pay for it doesn't mean you should or you have to. You can absolutely get a reliable bike for far less than $10k. You can see I never put a specific dollar amount in my advice, and that was very intentional. You incorrectly jumped to conclusions about it, assuming there was no ceiling. My entire point is that everyone has a different ceiling. You do reach a point on every bike where there are diminishing returns for spending more. Every buyer has to decide for themselves whether spending more is worth it for them. Spending $10k might make sense for someone looking to buy a mtb. Some people with a lot of money on their hands just want the best no matter what. I've talked to a few people like this. One of them was invited to do his first mtb ride with George W. Bush on his ranch and he wanted to "fit in". If some people want to spend it, they're gonna spend it, and they'd be pretty offended by your comments. What I'm saying also applies to the new rider who wants to spend less than $1,000, and probably even moreso. Buy the best you can.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Not to dramatize what is happening with my bikes (since I created a Trump-like firestorm of controversy on here, and I hate how he does that just for attention), but I've decided that I don't like mechanical disk brakes anymore. When I first got them on a previous bike last year, I thought they were more consistent than V-brakes, and easier to work on, although with my wife's bike if it's a good V-brake they will stop the bike well, it's just a pain to adjust them and take the front tire off compared with mechanical disks. Now that I have (Tektro Auriga) hydraulic brakes on my "good" bike, I don't know how I ever went down a hill without them. Zero problems so far, some squeaks here and there, once in a while I need to separate the pads with a flathead screwdriver, big deal. I'm going to put $60 Shimano Deore's on the back of the mechanical disk bike and see what happens. I'll probably convert the front as well. Even cheap hydraulic brakes are so much nicer down a hill than cheap mechanical disc brakes. More confidence down the hill, more speed, less worry about the mechanical brakes failing or not stopping fast enough, no worry about the back tire suddenly locking up, etc. 

I've read other posts about people usually upgrade a cheap OEM fork to 100mm on cheaper bikes, and that's fine, that will feel a lot smoother on a hardtail compared to the 80 or 60 mm forks on those bikes, but for safety and confidence, if you are going to upgrade one thing, I would say for sure upgrade the brakes to hydraulic for any downhill rocky trail applications. You are missing out on a fun confident ride down the trail without them.

So..to 'rephrase' my earlier post about the minimum mountain bike parts requirements, maybe it should instead read: "For relatively flat/level dirt roads and light trails without a lot of rocks, mechanical disk brakes are fine. For steeper and rockier trails, ANY type of hydraulic brake setup, all the way from the $45 SRAM Avids up, is recommended". How is that for an amendment?


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

Pedantic.


----------



## Jays19832 (Jun 1, 2017)

bob13bob said:


> Understanding WHY the component levels are different takes experience and knowledge. But anyone can look up ORDER very easily, 2017 deore vs 2017 xt and see which is higher end by just looking at retail price.
> 
> And this is still MUCH easier than comparisons like guitars or cars. There is less standardized companies for pickups, neck and fret manufactuers, etc etc. EG. We can't instantly look at two different guitars and know which one has "better" pickups. they are subjectively different.


Yup. Been playing and tinkering with guitars for ten years and wouldn't be able to tell the difference etween a 10k$ Stratocaster or a 150$ squire bullet.


----------



## Jays19832 (Jun 1, 2017)

I have to admit, though, that reading through this entire thread revealed many different opinions, ideas, and mostly options. With a little logic and a few grains of salt, the whole experience was actually enlightening.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Taken from the recycle bin, quoted by One Pivot, title of thread was "Actually good advice for people looking to buy bikes and get in to this sport." 

"Heres the end all advice for buying your first bike!... just go buy whatever from where ever. It'll be the wrong bike, but you either wont care and you'll keep happily riding it (in which case you made the right choice!), or you'll be gearhead and you'll be bike shopping soon again anyway, in which case you still made the right choice! Winner!"

I love both the thread title and the response quote, the thread title because it's so presumptuous and the response because it's 100% true. Now that I have a $500 bike I don't like riding a $250 bike. When I had a $250 bike I didn't like riding a $150 bike. If and when I get a $1000+ bike I may not like riding the $500 bike. But when you are riding a certain level of bike you don't know any better, and ignorance is bliss. It's like being in high school and driving a first clunker car, but it's the most fun you could have.


----------



## J_Ghost (Sep 10, 2016)

The whole point of buying a less expensive (not $2000) bike is to experience the hobby without feeling obligated to fully immerse yourself right off the bat. I don't want bikes to be my life, just a secondary fun add-on. Frankly I don't want a massive knowledgebase of gear ratios and stuff, I just want to have fun. If I like it, I can learn as I go. I have been eyeing the Salsa Timberjack as my first mountain bike. Not sure if I would like the + tires or not, but it seems like a good buy. TIMBERJACK | Salsa Cycles

The Diamondback Overdrive Comp seems like a great value too.

https://www.diamondback.com/mountain-bikes/overdrive-comp-29

I would probably be fine with a Trek Marlin, but a step-up would be nice.

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/mountain-bikes/cross-country-mountain-bikes/marlin/c/B321/

Used is also an option, but then you need to find it in your size and make sure it is working fine. I would rather just get something new to begin with.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

richj's post in 3 words: "ignorance is bliss"

Looking at it the other way, it could be interpreted as, "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

I really appreciate you bringing all of your personal hatred and condescension into a forum entitled "Beginner's Corner". It takes a real man to look down on beginners in a certain sport, and do it through the safety and remoteness of a computer.

When a new person comes in here, and I don't mean myself, they often say they either have a cheaper bike or are on a budget. I see their postings about this several times a week, so it's common. The veterans on here should really nurture their newfound love of biking, whether they have a "good" bike or not. If the beginner has a steel bike with V-brakes and friction twist-shifters, you could say "Hey that's great that you are out riding. By the way, have you tried an aluminum frame bike, or a bike with disc brakes?" Or you could say something like "What is the max. you can afford and then we'll see what kind of bike that gets you for what you want to do". Not the usual "Your bike sucks and it doesn't even deserve to ride on a trail that I ride; my bike is the bomb and I just spent another $1000 upgrading it." That's pretty Junior High of someone to do. Grow up and be the biker that beginners need for guidance in a positive way, not a negative way.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

richj8990 said:


> I love both the thread title and the response quote, the thread title because it's so presumptuous and the response because it's 100% true. Now that I have a $500 bike I don't like riding a $250 bike. When I had a $250 bike I didn't like riding a $150 bike. If and when I get a $1000+ bike I may not like riding the $500 bike. But when you are riding a certain level of bike you don't know any better, and ignorance is bliss. It's like being in high school and driving a first clunker car, but it's the most fun you could have.


I'm probably not typical, but after spending many years riding 4-5-6000 dollar bikes, I've gone back to cheaper sub~$2000 bikes. I simply don't find there's a lot of return on investment above that (unless you're in need of a very specialized machine like a DH race bike, etc.) Too many people today seem to mistakenly conflate endless shopping and bling-chasing with actual mountain biking; they are actually NOT intrinsically linked activities at all. Spending money does not a mountain biker make.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> I'm probably not typical, but after spending many years riding 4-5-6000 dollar bikes, I've gone back to cheaper sub~$2000 bikes.


Agreed, there certainly is a point of diminishing returns. Exactly where that point lies may just vary person to person


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

MozFat said:


> Agreed, there certainly is a point of diminishing returns. Exactly where that point lies may just vary person to person


Somewhat true. I'm sure there's an extremely small subset of bikers that operate at such a high level that those last few grams or iota of performance that come at a huge premium in the upper equipment levels actually make a difference. The vast majority of buyers of very high end stuff are primarily gear whores though, IME.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

Regarding the point in diminishing returns, it varies person to person based on how much is being demanded of them by their situation. A pro racer aiming for the podium needs every advantage they can get, and their chances slip if their equipment is sub-par compared to the rest of the participants, where a $10k bike might be worth every penny to at least level the playing field. Someone basically riding flat dirt roads, with no real destination nor goals (just letting the flow of the situation carry them), has much lower demands, where even a $1k bike would be overkill.

For instance, take a beginner who has little riding skill, but is in good athletic shape (ex. from basketball), and take a long time rider who's familiar with the trails they both will be riding, but has taken a lengthy break from any sporty activity. If the beginner doesn't know the trail and needs to be guided along, and winds up tagging along with the long time rider, the beginner will face FAR greater demand trying to keep up. What kind of handicap would you give these two in terms of equipment choice, to allow them to ride at a similar level?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

zooey said:


> For instance, take a beginner who has little riding skill, but is in good athletic shape (ex. from basketball), and take a long time rider who's familiar with the trails they both will be riding, but has taken a lengthy break from any sporty activity. If the beginner doesn't know the trail and needs to be guided along, and winds up tagging along with the long time rider, the beginner will face FAR greater demand trying to keep up. What kind of handicap would you give these two in terms of equipment choice, to allow them to ride at a similar level?


I wouldn't (beyond having a bike that actually works). 
I don't really give equipment the kind of credit most seem to. Some, sure, and particularly at very high levels of competition, but maybe 5% of what the marketing department would like you to think in most cases. Had my ass kicked too many times by dudes (and chicks) with way less experience and far 'inferior' equipment. Still happens to me on an all-too-regular basis actually. 

The main thing that will even out the riding level (at an 'enthusiast level anyway) is saddle time. I very frequently ride with beginners, and have made a point of getting people into riding for decades. Upgrading equipment is something that's barely discussed for the first number of months, beyond how things function in a general sense of course. The best way to improve a beginner's "game" as quickly as possible is to be patient and make a point of riding at a level that allows them suck your wheel as much as possible, tossing out tips and attaboys constantly along the way.

It's not about how you shop, it's about how you ride. :thumbsup:


----------



## emjayel (Apr 21, 2007)

Assuming totally new to cycling I'd set my budget at $1k out the door. I'd try like heck to wrangle some version of a pro fit included to keep the inevitable aches and pains to a minimum. For many, I bet, this would decrease the chances that they'd abandon the sport before they had a chance to get past the inevitable, and sometimes frustrating, initial learning curve.

That price puts you in the solid performing HT market, IMO. If steel frames can still be found, then I'd go that route since, to my posterior, they are far superior in vibration damping which translates to less pain and therefor more likely to be ridden more often (and not give up the sport). The one component, in hindsight, that I overlooked as a beginner was the saddle. That's where the pro fit (I would hope) would be really valuable. Yeah, there's always going to be initial discomfort, but it can be minimized with saddle fitment and adjustment.

I do have to agree with others that the OPs statements about steel being something to be avoided is silly unless he's thinking about Walmart level bikes. Ive never understood the benefits of an aluminum HT over steel at this price point given the drop in rider comfort.

From there a beginner will find out if they really enjoy the sport, what sub-discipline they enjoy for their next purchase, go a very long way toward honing fundamental bike handling skills, have serious smiles per mile, always have a good backup bike they can loan to a friend, and not cry too much if they discover they simply hate the sport and never throw a leg over the steed after the first month.


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> I wouldn't (beyond having a bike that actually works).
> I don't really give equipment the kind of credit most seem to. Some, sure, and particularly at very high levels of competition, but maybe 5% of what the marketing department would like you to think in most cases. Had my ass kicked too many times by dudes (and chicks) with way less experience and far 'inferior' equipment. Still happens to me on an all-too-regular basis actually.
> 
> The main thing that will even out the riding level (at an 'enthusiast level anyway) is saddle time. I very frequently ride with beginners, and have made a point of getting people into riding for decades. Upgrading equipment is something that's barely discussed for the first number of months, beyond how things function in a general sense of course. The best way to improve a beginner's "game" as quickly as possible is to be patient and make a point of riding at a level that allows them suck your wheel as much as possible, tossing out tips and attaboys constantly along the way.
> ...


So you straight out say you think differently than the majority, regarding the value of equipment. Your first point implies that you're old and not skilled--someone's that's been racing for 10 years still is far less experienced, compared to your decades of experience, and can beat you on a $350 bike. Your second point, saying that beginners catch up to your level with riding time, and perhaps a bit of active coaching from you, doesn't even satisfy the question.

The question was how to make a complete novice keep up with a rider who's experienced and familiar with the trails, through equipment handicaps.

*shrug* not sure why I bothered replying. At least I know that the scenario isn't totally impossible, if we used someone like slapheadmofo as the experienced rider. Don't think I'd even need to put slapheadmofo on an unicycle to even things up, based on his response.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

zooey said:


> So you straight out say you think differently than the majority, regarding the value of equipment. Your first point implies that you're old and not skilled--someone's that's been racing for 10 years still is far less experienced, compared to your decades of experience, and can beat you on a $350 bike. Your second point, saying that beginners catch up to your level with riding time, and perhaps a bit of active coaching from you, doesn't even satisfy the question.
> 
> The question was how to make a complete novice keep up with a rider who's experienced and familiar with the trails, through equipment handicaps.
> 
> *shrug* not sure why I bothered replying. At least I know that the scenario isn't totally impossible, if we used someone like slapheadmofo as the experienced rider. Don't think I'd even need to put slapheadmofo on an unicycle to even things up, based on his response.


I'm really flattered by your interest man, but I'm married and hetero, and you've got that whole personality issue to work through, so sadly we were never meant to be.

I'm sure there's someone out there for you somewhere though.
Chin up little buckaroo!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

zooey said:


> So you straight out say you think differently than the majority, regarding the value of equipment. Your first point implies that you're old and not skilled--someone's that's been racing for 10 years still is far less experienced, compared to your decades of experience, and can beat you on a $350 bike. Your second point, saying that beginners catch up to your level with riding time, and perhaps a bit of active coaching from you, doesn't even satisfy the question.
> 
> The question was how to make a complete novice keep up with a rider who's experienced and familiar with the trails, through equipment handicaps.
> 
> *shrug* not sure why I bothered replying. At least I know that the scenario isn't totally impossible, if we used someone like slapheadmofo as the experienced rider. Don't think I'd even need to put slapheadmofo on an unicycle to even things up, based on his response.


From reading Slap's previous reply, he was just being casual, and positive, and giving his opinion. Even self-effacing.

What triggered you to reply like this? Geez.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Obvioulsy it's that personality thing; got stuck with a shitty one and he's bitter about it. :skep:


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

phlegm said:


> From reading Slap's previous reply, he was just being casual, and positive, and giving his opinion. Even self-effacing.
> 
> What triggered you to reply like this? Geez.


Shall I talk about myself in 2-3 paragraphs, using questionable logic, and not answer your question, similar to how slapheadmofo replied?

Others I talk to, can get triggered to reply in a peculiar way when I mention something in general, talking about a group of people and not them specifically, showing how they're sensitive to specific topics. For example, if I bring up the topic of how things can be done more intelligently, they might interrupt me and try to justify why they do things the way they chose to and declare that I'm not welcome to speak of it. They jumped the gun, presuming I was going to talk about them, when I was intending to just speak in general terms about a widespread issue. This sours the bond between us; what's to blame? Ironically, when they gossip about specific individuals, getting giggles at the expense of someone else's reputation getting **** upon, they strengthen their bonds.

If I bring up an innocent question like, whose face is on the US quarter, someone may think it's a trick question, or that my motive is to shame them. They'd refuse the answer the question, and then might argue how it's useless to have such knowledge and that me asking the question proves nothing. "Ain't no one became a billionaire cuz they knew who da fuqs on the quarter. Git yo shiznit outta here." It could just be me surveying to see just how many know. Friendly trivia just for giggles?

I like use to satire when I notice choices that could be improved with a bit of wisdom. People react to it differently--some feel happy that they're not the only one who's noticed, while others will spite me for pointing it out, defending their freedom to act how they please.

====

So that didn't answer your question really, and said a bit about myself and my experiences. It also shows my social failures.

You seem like you're experienced at judging a person's character. What's your serious opinion? Don't worry, I won't I presume that your reply is a confession of sexual attraction, nor would I make fun of you for having a different personality.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

My judgement FWIW, is that you were being unnecessarily harsh to someone who merely replied to a thread. Perhaps they didn't directly answer your question (or answer it at all), but that's the nature of the Interwebs. The gist was that one needn't focus on upgrades, especially early on, which is entirely relevant to the OP.

How about we all take a breather, and try to cobble together something of value for future readers of this thread? The overall topic is a good one, and comes up frequently.


----------



## Toot3344556 (Apr 25, 2016)

There's some intriguing comments here. Some good some bad...
Bikes and components are like women and ice cream... you gotta try a lot of different ones until you find the flavor you like. 

That being said, I'd start with an entry level bike on the lower end of the price scale so that in the case you don't like it then you're not too vested. 

Also, this allows you go get basic maintainence skills down. If you F something up chances are the part wasn't too expensive to begin with. 

Some thing ls too look for: 
1.). Air fork- doesn't have to be anything special but air forks work soo much better than spring forks (regardless of brand) and provides a way more comfortable riding experience 

2.). Tubeless rims ( or tubeless convertible) 
Upgrading to tubeless is the #1 upgrade you can do to your bike. Some rims are some rims arent. Do research before you buy. 

3.). Disc brakes
Could be mechanic or hydraulic. ( both have pros and cons) Either will provide a significant upgrade over v brakes

4.) tires 
Make sure your bike comes with tires that fit the terrain you ride. Don't buy a bike with magic marys when you ride flat cross country trails

5.). Bike fit
This is probably number 1 on the list in front of tubeless setup
Youtube Search bike fit and figure out what size you need. Also, dont trust the bike shop dude... he's just trying to sell you a bike. He might tell you a large is perfectly fine for a 5'6" person just to get it off the floor. 
No price deduction is worth buying a bike that doesn't fit properly. 
Ive been riding for 5+ years and just realized a month ago that i was all ****ed up and mis aligned

6.) standards 
Bike shops want to get rid of last years models and will sell you them for full price if you don't know any better 
Know your standards:
Boost 148
1x11 
2x11
Tappered head tube
Pf30
Sram vs shimano freehub 
Also, know you part hiarchys
For shimano it goes slx, xt, xtr 

Also, another reason Not to buy an expensive bike is because you don't know the value what you're buying yet so you're most likely getting ripped off until you do. 


Hope this was helpful, cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

zooey said:


> Shall I talk about myself in 2-3 paragraphs, using questionable logic, and not answer your question, similar to how slapheadmofo replied?


More to the point, if you did answer like that, what kind of person would be so put out that the question they seem to feel they 'assigned' wasn't answered to their standards they would feel the need to post some sort of passive/aggressive 'analysis' of that person based on goofy assumptions they've made? Why do you feel anyone whould be required to cater their responses to your standards? Arrogance? Maybe you're on the spectrum a little bit and socially awkward like that? Are you some sort of teacher/professor in real life and feel everyone should treat you as such? Or maybe one of those guys that dresses up their car to look as much like a police cruiser as they can? 
You seem to feel you deserve to be treated as an authority. News flash: not.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Just finished putting the Shimano Deore Hydraulic Brake on the rear of the cheap $270 bike. Turned out the rear brake purchase was $68, but I think it will be well worth it. It's not just the better stopping power, the brake feel and consistency is way better than mechanical disks. A few issues. First it took 90 min to install, about 45 more minutes than I wanted, oh well. Second, the original right brake lever is integrated into the shifter, so now I have two brake levers and had to put the new one on the inside of the shifter, and it sticks up a bit more than I'd like but can still pull on it directly from the handlebar grip. Third, the adapter had to be put on the inside of the frame close to the disk, when it was originally on the outside of the frame, and the front bolt could take no spacers while the rear bolt took about a centimeter's worth. That's a bit dicey because I worried about stripping one or the other bolts since the caliper is at a slight diagonal angle to the adapter. But it worked. The rear brake by itself can now stop the bike on a moderate hill with no problem, no rear tire lockup. That was on asphalt, we'll see on dirt. Very happy so far with the cheap hydraulic Deore, now to see how it holds up on the trail...


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

richj8990 said:


> Taken from the recycle bin, quoted by One Pivot, title of thread was "Actually good advice for people looking to buy bikes and get in to this sport."
> 
> "Heres the end all advice for buying your first bike!... just go buy whatever from where ever. It'll be the wrong bike, but you either wont care and you'll keep happily riding it (in which case you made the right choice!), or you'll be gearhead and you'll be bike shopping soon again anyway, in which case you still made the right choice! Winner!"
> 
> I love both the thread title and the response quote, the thread title because it's so presumptuous and the response because it's 100% true. Now that I have a $500 bike I don't like riding a $250 bike. When I had a $250 bike I didn't like riding a $150 bike. If and when I get a $1000+ bike I may not like riding the $500 bike. But when you are riding a certain level of bike you don't know any better, and ignorance is bliss. It's like being in high school and driving a first clunker car, but it's the most fun you could have.


Agree and I think good research pays off. If you don't know someone, you've probably read a few posts by those that got a new bike, something really fancy and expensive and for whatever, reason don't like it, are not impressed or it doesn't fit them right. Most of us can be thankful we are not such victims.

I also believe you can experience enough of any sport, recreation or hobby and later realize you may not need or even enjoy the top tier features of the higher end. I've learned enough about myself that I'm doubtful I'll ever need or demand enough of a bike or be frequently on trails I need or want full sus or anything elaborate or esoteric.

I realize it's all rather subjective (costs, high-end, what's expensive or elaborate) but in my case, a $1200 to $1400 hard tail is what I finally decided on as my newer bike. I prefer the simplicity of it much the same way I've simplified my sound system-home theater, mostly because it fits my needs and I value User-friendly, user-serviceable and less fussing to mean more enjoyment. 
Again very subjective. We can't easily define it for others.


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

*What Bike Components Should a New Mountain Biker Consider for 1st Bike*

I think outlining what's available as you have listed is good place to start the conversation, especially if the person knows enough about bikes to ask or has been shopping some to hear the terms and likely confused.

Fact is, they need to know what those terms and components mean and more importantly, getting to know what they want or expect out of biking is critical.
A question like; "What do you want to accomplish? or 
"What is your interest in biking centered on?"

That can lead to how serious they are ($$) , timing, what they are willing to budget or what type of bike to start looking at. Any one of those points starts to narrow things down some and with such a substantial menu of bikes and features or price categories these days, the more they know about themselves should play a big part in solving the mystery.

Fitness, getting in recreation and time with other family members, getting more involved in the community and 'groups' or social networking etc.... 
In other words, don't let the bike define the person.

I'm considering a fat bike for my wife. I know she'll appreciate the ride and stability and although I'd like to get a very nice one, the simple answer is something that isn't 53 # and she'll probably like a grip-shift feature in lieu of standard shifters and lots more gears. This could easily translate to something just beyond a big box store bike as I've seen a few in the sub $500 range that are respectable weight. It's going to be on paths and paved greenway areas and not climbing hills and techy terrain or trails. 
I guess if she likes the e-bike option some offer, I'll be spending more than a few hundred dollars but at least we can figure it out before I end up with 2, a fat bike likes and a fat bike she loves.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

A beginner, should go to an LBS & say they have 'X' amount of dollars to spend on a MTB & let those that know what they're doing - do...

The rest of us, buy a cheap piece of s*#t & soon figure out, it's a cheap piece of s*#t...

We/they then buy a slightly better piece of s*#t & muck around on it for a while & eventually figure out - you get what you pay for.

Stick a narb on a good bike & you've still got a good bike ^^

Looking back, I could've saved myself several grand - if someone had rolled up & said buy 'this' bike & you'll be set...

If only!?

The journey is the important thing =)

Sent from my kltedv using Tapatalk


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

targnik said:


> A beginner, should go to an LBS & say they have 'X' amount of dollars to spend on a MTB & let those that know what they're doing - do...
> 
> The rest of us, buy a cheap piece of s*#t & soon figure out, it's a cheap piece of s*#t...
> 
> ...


Def a better chance of working with professionals but not everyone trusts sales people and some LBS can turn out to be more like BS. Word of mouth referral is a good thing though. Taking along a knowledgeable friend might help discipher things too.

If they can avoid some of the bike forums, they avoid the risks of; _gotta be a carbon frame_, or _got to have 1x11_ or _full suspension, single speed_ or what have you. 
Too many well-meaning helpers out there with no knowledge or background of the person who is shopping.

I pick up a bike mag every now and then and it's rare that I don't see an issue devoted somewhat to the buyers guide, bike ratings in all types and price points and How to go shopping or buy the right bike. Much of that solid advice is echoed here within some of the posts by many that have read it, lived it or understand it.


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

Toot3344556 said:


> Some thing ls too look for:
> 1.). Air fork- doesn't have to be anything special but air forks work soo much better than spring forks (regardless of brand) and provides a way more comfortable riding experience


Oh good more wrong info,,,the only thing this threads been lacking:thumbsup:


----------



## Toot3344556 (Apr 25, 2016)

White7 said:


> Oh good more wrong info,,,the only thing this threads been lacking:thumbsup:


You're saying that spring forks are better than air forks ? 
There's a milion+ people on this forumn that would disagree with you...


----------



## Frits (May 21, 2017)

I've been working my old rigid hard at the local bike park. The only component that on it I've found to be inferior so far is the freehub. 230 pounds is apparently too much on drops for it. I suppose I changed out the brake pads on the cantis for cool stops. I've got money but I don't understand how people spend so much on their bikes.


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

Toot3344556 said:


> You're saying that spring forks are better than air forks ?
> There's a milion+ people on this forumn that would disagree with you...


I didn't say that,you said "air forks work soo much better than spring forks (regardless of brand)" And that couldn't be further from the truth

By that statement your saying a Zoom air fork is better than say A Marz 350r,or a Lyric,Fox van etc ? Not all coil forks are pogo sticks like a suntour

I ride nothing but coil suspension,For me nothing compares to the plushness of coil although at a slight weight penalty which i don't care about

BUT don't want to start the dreaded "Air vs Coil" thats been beat to death a bajillion times:thumbsup:


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Toot3344556 said:


> You're saying that spring forks are better than air forks ?
> There's a milion+ people on this forumn that would disagree with you...


There are also a million plus gravity influenced riders that would tell you a properly set up coil fork is better than air. It's all perspective. Otherwise, why would there be coil conversion kits for top of the line air forks?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

What this thread "needs" is to just die.


----------



## Toot3344556 (Apr 25, 2016)

tuckerjt07 said:


> There are also a million plus gravity influenced riders that would tell you a properly set up coil fork is better than air. It's all perspective. Otherwise, why would there be coil conversion kits for top of the line air forks?
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


If a beginner new all that stuff then they wouldn't be beginners...

You should elaborate more instead of creating confusion. In at least 75% of the cases air forks air superior.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

Toot3344556 said:


> If a beginner new all that stuff then they wouldn't be beginners...
> 
> You should elaborate more instead of creating confusion. In at least 75% of the cases air forks air superior.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What more should I elaborate on? That was my first post in this thread.

Also, 47.36525% of random fabricated statistics are just that, random fabricated statistics.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

noapathy said:


> What this thread "needs" is to just die.


Has the Awesome Strap been recommended yet?


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Cornfield said:


> Has the Awesome Strap been recommended yet?


No discussion on accessories so far. Just components 😀

I prefer saddle bags. 👍👍


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Cornfield said:


> Has the Awesome Strap been recommended yet?


Good point. Something every beginner should be aware of. :thumbsup: :cornut:


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

Toot3344556 said:


> If a beginner new all that stuff then they wouldn't be beginners...
> 
> You should elaborate more instead of creating confusion. In at least 75% of the cases air forks air superior.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My records show 76% of the time coil is superior

Not sure where your getting your stats from


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

Cornfield said:


> Has the Awesome Strap been recommended yet?


I find that 78% of the time the awesome strap is superior to the not-quite-so-awesome strap


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

jcd46 said:


> No discussion on accessories so far. Just components 
> 
> I prefer saddle bags. 


Have you even tried an Awesome Strap? You can't just go around saying something is better because you prefer it. :nono:



noapathy said:


> Good point. Something every beginner should be aware of. :thumbsup: :cornut:


Somewhere in the unwritten rules of mtbr it states that no thread shall be be done with 'till the Awesome Strap has been mentioned.



White7 said:


> I find that 78% of the time the awesome strap is superior to the not-quite-so-awesome strap


As far as I know there is no substitute for the Awesome Strap. If there was what would it be called? The Decent Strap?


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Cornfield said:


> Have you even tried an Awesome Strap? You can't just go around saying something is better because you prefer it. :nono:
> 
> Somewhere in the unwritten rules of mtbr it states that no thread shall be be done with 'till the Awesome Strap has been mentioned.
> 
> As far as I know there is no substitute for the Awesome Strap. If there was what would it be called? The Decent Strap?


Lol

Are you saying I'm not a mountain biker?


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

White7 said:


> I find that 78% of the time the awesome strap is superior to the not-quite-so-awesome strap


Pretty sure that number is closer to 76%. Nice try.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

phlegm said:


> Pretty sure that number is closer to 76%. Nice try.


He was probably grouping it together with the so so strap, not to be confused with its predecessor, the crappy strap.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

jcd46 said:


> Lol
> 
> Are you saying I'm not a mountain biker?


Nah, you ride, therefore you are...


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Cornfield said:


> Nah, you ride, therefore you are...


I hope you know I was joking...referring to that other thread. 👍


----------



## Shotgun Jeremy (Mar 14, 2017)

Damn. After reading some of the comments on here, I feel like I'm the only one who got the cheapest bike the bike shop offered (still better than an expensive one at a box store!) and haven't had any problems with it. 

I look at it like this: 15 years ago, I was in my teens on a Magna, and I was tearing up trails on that cheap POS. It was getting me to work, I was doing a ton of off road goofing off, and typical street riding - jumping a LOT of driveway curbs just to catch some easy air and land on the street. All I ever messed up was my grip shifters - those POS's kept cracking in half! Then, my brakes were messed up cause I've always had a hard time getting V brakes to adjust right how I need them. 

So a few years ago, I decide to get back on a bike and hit some basic local trails. I got a Cannondale Catalyst - nice cheap beginners bike. I want to do a tire upgrade, and I'm thinking about tubeless, but for now self sealing tubes and tube guards are working just fine. I've got mechanical disc brakes that I've just about figured out. I've got a quality frame. He'll, even my shifters seem to work fine. For my level of weekend riding, I can't justify a $2000 bike. I don't see what a $2000 bike can do for my riding style that mine won't with a part change here or there. 

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

I don't know what an Awesome Strap is but if it replace's shoelaces for bikepack rigging, it might be better.

White7 has the right spirit , case by case on those fork types and in general, just some weight penalty. Choose your own equip or tactic and gth out on the trails !


----------



## Daman4469 (Jun 12, 2017)

As a beginner, I can't say what is best to look for, but I can tell you what I did, and it was an enjoyable experience and I ended up with a decent low-end beginner bike (Specialized Rockhopper Sport).
I researched. Mostly forums and magazines, but I read read read. Luckily for me, I knew I wanted to ride about 75% smooth trails and 25% easy/intermediate single track. The trails around here aren't too brutal. I knew I'd be riding only a few hours per week, if I'm lucky.
I learned terminology and what the current standards and trends are. 
I talked to my lbs and learned what I needed (hard tail was recommended) and found where my needs fell in the price range, then determined whether it was feasible. For me it was, so I didn't go the used route.
I placed a lot of trust in them (lbs) but had some knowledge so as to be able to understand what I was being told. I shopped around. Test rode. Saw what all the hype translates to in real life. Ended up feeling more engaged at one particular shop. Chewed on it for a while, researched particular components that the bikes I test rode had, and made a nice little chart of advantages and disadvantages. For instance, my suntour xct fork doesn't exactly get a lot of love, but for my needs and skill level, they will suffice. I made sure what the lbs told me was backed up on online reviews and forums (it was...trust but verify) and that helped me realize they were pretty accurate, so that shop got my business. My 'shopping' took months but I feel my $$ were well spent.
Beginner here, maybe I did it all wrong, time will tell. But that's how I tackled this. There's a lot of info out there and a lot of people willing to help, I have found, and even though you might not hear what you want to hear, it's still worth considering. Trust me, my eyes really got opened as to price points. No way two months ago I would have said 700 dollars will get you a lower end decent mountain bike. But that's what I learned, and the truth doesn't change. Hope your searches go well. Looking forward to finding out I did this the right way, lol!

Rob


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Daman4469 said:


> As a beginner, I can't say what is best to look for, but I can tell you what I did, and it was an enjoyable experience and I ended up with a decent low-end beginner bike (Specialized Rockhopper Sport).
> I researched. Mostly forums and magazines, but I read read read. Luckily for me, I knew I wanted to ride about 75% smooth trails and 25% easy/intermediate single track. The trails around here aren't too brutal. I knew I'd be riding only a few hours per week, if I'm lucky.
> I learned terminology and what the current standards and trends are.
> I talked to my lbs and learned what I needed (hard tail was recommended) and found where my needs fell in the price range, then determined whether it was feasible. For me it was, so I didn't go the used route.
> ...


As long as you found a bike you like, and are happy with your purchase, you did it right. 👍

Edit: And ride it!


----------



## demonlarry (Jun 20, 2011)

The heaviest, slowest and weakest thing on my bike is me.

But, I'm hoping to change that, (and not by putting a 200 pound weight on the bars)

Then, If I out grow my bike, I'll find another, and will hopefully make the right choice.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Rode the bike last Saturday 12 miles, it did fine, the back hydraulic brakes did not stop as well as I wanted but that was in loose dirt down a hill, otherwise they are fine. The 26" bike now is almost as enjoyable riding as my "better" bike now that I've fixed the brakes. Front mechanical brake is an aftermarket $20 Shimano and works good enough if tuned right. Here is what I wrote on Amazon.com about what size the fork is (someone else replied the bike was garbage):

80mm. It's fine for dirt roads and light trails. It is not going to be fine for tough downhill trails, jumps, etc. The bike is not garbage at all for normal Cross-Country riding, it's a great buy for the money. It is "garbage" if you are doing All-Mountain and Downhill on a $270 bike. Have some common sense people... Amazon has a 26" 100mm Suntour Fork for $70 on here. Although I love that 100mm size on my other bike, to me it's not really worth the upgrade on this particular bike but it may be for you, you will for sure notice a difference in smoothness overall if you upgrade. After 100mm, the prices start jumping up way too much in the $400-600 range for 120-130mm to justify putting it on a $270 bike. Personally, I chose instead to put a $68 Shimano Deore hydraulic brake system on the rear brake, and a $20 Shimano mechanical caliper on the front, and that $90 brake combination works well and really should be done instead of the fork upgrade for roughly the same $$$


----------



## bob13bob (Jun 22, 2009)

so, a 47 year old sponsorless woman rider got 2nd place in an xco race with a generic korean frame brand (that has no retail sales or experience building bikes). word on the street, major brands don't want to sponsor her because she's too old. Absolute disgrace; something to remember next time you decide to support them.
http://forums.mtbr.com/xc-racing-training/xcm-xco-world-cup-equipment-1007329-4.html#post13182673
her bike
https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/05/2...type-mountain-bike-plus-indergands-focus-o1e/


----------



## Toot3344556 (Apr 25, 2016)

bob13bob said:


> so, a 47 year old sponsorless woman rider got 2nd place in an xco race with a generic korean frame brand (that has no retail sales or experience building bikes). word on the street, major brands don't want to sponsor her because she's too old. Absolute disgrace; something to remember next time you decide to support them.
> http://forums.mtbr.com/xc-racing-training/xcm-xco-world-cup-equipment-1007329-4.html#post13182673
> her bike
> https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/05/2...type-mountain-bike-plus-indergands-focus-o1e/


Your point is BS.

A frame is a frame is a frame.

Components are key. I spotted a fox fork, high end hydraulic brakes a shiny hope or chris king hub on the rear and an xtr rear derailleur.

Its not like she was riding an entry level mtb by any means.

Most likely that's a carbon frame as well.

Key takeaway... buy a cheap frame and deck it out with awesome components

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Toot3344556 said:


> Your point is BS.
> 
> A frame is a frame is a frame.
> 
> ...


Your point is BS.

Parts is parts is parts.

Shiny hubs don't make you fast.


----------



## Toot3344556 (Apr 25, 2016)

slapheadmofo said:


> Your point is BS.
> 
> Parts is parts is parts.
> 
> Shiny hubs don't make you fast.


She also has carbon rims, carbon crank and Ti egg beaters.

Go ride your novatec hubs bro and pretend they're kings or Hopes because cuz you're obviously butt hurt about not having some LoL

Article and post were misleading. 
That's a custom built bike with very high end personalized components (whether shiny or not).

Bike probably cost between 4-5k$ to put together. 
Not a cheap korean import by any means...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

NOT TI EGGBEATERS!
Well that's obviously the key. My bad.


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> NOT TI EGGBEATERS!
> Well that's obviously the key. My bad.


I think the whole point is bob basically said the bike was a generic, no experience building bikes POS.....Which is the exact opposite of what her bike is


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

White7 said:


> I think the whole point is bob basically said the bike was a generic, no experience building bikes POS.....Which is the exact opposite of what her bike is


And tootsie said frames don't matter, which is the exact opposite of fact.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

Absolute disgrace; something to remember next time you decide to support them.



slapheadmofo said:


> And tootsie said frames don't matter, which is the exact opposite of fact.


None of which has anything to do with this increasingly random thead. 
$4k beginner bikes, coil sprung DH fork for beginners. Now we're advised not to buy from major OEMs cos some random aging WC racer has a deal with some newb carbon manufacturer from the ROK.....


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

By now, any newbie reading this thread, has moved to road riding. 😁😁


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

jcd46 said:


> By now, any newbie reading this thread, has moved to road riding. 


Awesome Strap works on road bikes too! So hopefully that tidbit was not lost in all the tl;dr posts.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Cornfield said:


> Awesome Strap works on road bikes too! So hopefully that tidbit was not lost in all the tl;dr posts.


Lol good point!


----------



## Guest (Jun 21, 2017)

I'm older than she is and likely slower, but I've was racing before she turned 10, only have eggbeater 3s and I'm more likely to buy beer after a ride than most people. Yet, no beer company will sponsor me. Think about that the next time you're wondering about irrelevancy.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

Forster said:


> I'm older than she is and likely slower, but I've was racing before she turned 10, only have eggbeater 3s and I'm more likely to buy beer after a ride than most people. Yet, no beer company will sponsor me. Think about that the next time you're wondering about irrelevancy.


Don't worry about that, my post ride beers keep a brewery in business


----------



## White7 (Feb 9, 2015)

slapheadmofo said:


> And tootsie said frames don't matter, which is the exact opposite of fact.


Missed that part,you are absolute correct


Forster said:


> Yet, no beer company will sponsor me. Think about that the next time you're wondering about irrelevancy.


This is completely unacceptable,,And to take a stand in your behalf I'm boycotting beer until 3:30 today


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Rode the cheap 26" bike today on the usual road/trail loop just to try it out vs. the 27.5". Two downhill trails on the 6-mile loop. First one is short and sweet, smooth hardpacked dirt, bike and brakes did fine. Preferred the 26" on this trail to the 27.5", felt more in-tune with the trail on the smaller bike. Then came the 2nd trail. This is where the 27.5" shines and the 26" sucks. Rocks all over the 2nd trail, including hundreds of embedded ones. The 26" struggled; even with the Deore rear hydraulic brake it didn't stop that well and locked up the rear tire a couple of times. That just doesn't happen on the 27.5" with the dual Tektro hydraulic setup. With the bigger bike you just point and shoot, and brake when needed, it's easy. It's not easy with a 26" that has 1.95 inch tires and a front mechanical brake with uneven pad wear.

I could plunk down $100 or so and get front Shimano XT's, but this 26" cheap bike has become a real experiment: can someone upgrade a cheap bike with mechanical disks to cheap hydraulic brakes and end up with something significantly more enjoyable (or less sucky) to ride. If $70 for rear and $100 for front brake, then the bike plus upgrades is $440 (not counting the front tire upgrade which all cheap bikes desperately need). I want to deliberately keep the bike + upgrades under $400 to see if this is all doable and more enjoyable or not. Will buy the Hayes Dyno Comp ($40) for the front and see if that solves some of the 26" bike's problems on downhill rocky trails; the other solution is to get something around 26 x 2.5 inch tires for $50 instead of the current 26 x 1.95 inch. Again I'm not counting that as an upgrade because tires are so damn important on every trail bike, cheap or not. 

Notice how I'm not even mentioning upgrading the 80 mm fork. The mechanical brakes have become so annoying compared to hydraulics that the relatively small fork doesn't even matter, IMO it's not a big deal either way to upgrade for XC stuff. Bumps are bumps, but when you can't stop as fast as you'd like on a downhill trail that's way more important to fix first.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

FWIW - you can find SLX brake sets well under $150 for front and rear.
Great option IME.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

slapheadmofo said:


> FWIW - you can find SLX brake sets well under $150 for front and rear.
> Great option IME.


Yep, I bought these for my 29er, this is a pretty good deal:

https://www.merlincycles.com/shimano-slx-m675-disc-brakes-front-rear-set-58528.html


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

OP is well intentioned but post is too long and I stoped reading immediately after the first paragraph.

I don't know what your 2'points are but there is a reference to $4k bikes.

An air fork with real functioning dampening is the single most important component if a new rider is looking for such. you can get entry level bikes with a feasible air fork for far less than $4k. sometimes with sales you can get them for well under $1k.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

jcd46 said:


> Yep, I bought these for my 29er, this is a pretty good deal:
> 
> https://www.merlincycles.com/shimano-slx-m675-disc-brakes-front-rear-set-58528.html


Great deal. no doubt. However, besides the "Sorry - Out of stock" part currently from Merlin, it's good for those interested in new brakes to know that there are a few caveats to getting new SLX brakes for your bike for $120.

1) The brakes are 'pre-bled', but come with really long hoses (1000 mm front, and 1700 mm rear) that will almost certainly need to be shortened unless you want the area just in front of your handlebar to resemble a raptor snare. I ride XL and XXL bikes and typically need to remove at least 8" or more from each hose. Shortening the hose can involve needing to bleed the system (not always, but not unusual). No biggie if you have the know how, tools, and a little extra brake fluid already (if the brakes come in the factory packaging/box, it should have a spare olive and barb which you'll need if shortening the hose), but this can add a significant cost if you have to have a shop perform the installation.

2) You might need new rotors, and this too can add a significant cost to what you initially figured would be a 'cheap-n-easy' brake upgrade.

3) You might need adapters to mount the new calipers to your fork/frame, and these can run an additional $10 to $15 each.

If you ordered the spares from Merlin, it would run you around $35 for new 160/180 rotors in the RT-66 flavor (RT-56 are only used for organic pads, so I would not recommend them). More if you want Ice-Tech (personally, I like RT-66 better, but YMMV).

Add another $25+/- if you need adapters. That has us up to $60 minimum if you need those spares. Add the cost of installation/bleeding, and you can see it all adding up.

Depending on the shop you go to, this could easily add well over $100 to $150 to the cost if you need all of the above.

Just thought it would be good for newbs to know the actual cost going in before getting a WTF from their CFO. . . LOL


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

cjsb said:


> OP is well intentioned but post is too long and I stoped reading immediately after the first paragraph.
> 
> I don't know what your 2'points are but there is a reference to $4k bikes.
> 
> ...


Well said. Similarly, I kinda thought this was going to be a discussion about budget air forks and the merits or other wise of entry level components/ groupsets (Alívio, Acera, X5, X3), reasonable non group parts like crankset and hydro brakes.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

jeffj said:


> Great deal. no doubt. However, besides the "Sorry - Out of stock" part currently from Merlin, it's good for those interested in new brakes to know that there are a few caveats to getting new SLX brakes for your bike for $120.
> 
> 1) The brakes are 'pre-bled', but come with really long hoses (1000 mm front, and 1700 mm rear) that will almost certainly need to be shortened unless you want the area just in front of your handlebar to resemble a raptor snare. I ride XL and XXL bikes and typically need to remove at least 8" or more from each hose. Shortening the hose can involve needing to bleed the system (not always, but not unusual). No biggie if you have the know how, tools, and a little extra brake fluid already (if the brakes come in the factory packaging/box, it should have a spare olive and barb which you'll need if shortening the hose), but this can add a significant cost if you have to have a shop perform the installation.
> 
> ...


OK, my bad! I didn't look at the big picture because at the time, I was buying parts for a build so I was just thinking "SLX brakes"  double whammy on the Out of Stock. 

Thanks for expanding on that.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Of course, if you need new rotors, you need new rotors regardless of what brakes you end up buying, so that point is pretty much an aside. Same goes for adapters, bleed kit, etc etc. The fact that SLX brakes may require the exact same things that every other brake also requires doesn't detract from them being a really good deal in terms of performance.

FWIW, SLX are also super easy to set up, adjust hose length, bleed, etc.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Wow this is getting more views than Trump's tweets (not sure if that's a good thing). Who on here said that bike frame doesn't matter? Unless someone is doing special stuff like downhill or freestyle, etc., why would you want a heavier bike when a lighter one is available for around the same price range? I've had 3 bikes that weighed 42-50 lbs (two steel and one big aluminum frame), and they were OK, they were not horrible for pushing up a hill, but why not have a nice aluminum one at 30-35 lbs total? It's not like aluminum bikes are all $1000 plus or something, you can get a decent aluminum frame for under $300. Tire size choice first, aluminum frame strongly recommended, as well as posts for disk brakes. Cassette or freewheel is not a huge dealbreaker choice for cheap bikes. Once you choose the tire size for the bike you want, and make sure it's an aluminum frame and has brake discs, then you can upgrade the tires, brakes, and if you want, the fork. That's what I'm doing now to the $270 26" bike. $40 Hayes Dyno Comp front hydraulics came in, will install today. Waiting on $18 Shimano stand-alone shifters so the handlebars are not so cluttered by new brake handles and integrated original shifter/levers. My current conclusion on forks: if the cheap bike has a 60mm fork, upgrade for sure to a 100mm fork. If it starts with an 80mm fork, try to live with it. The 100mm fork is nice but it's not a huge difference from 80mm; it is a huge difference from 60mm.

Remember I'm talking about XC stuff here not all-mountain parts like the elite on here are touting for their $5000 bikes. Apples and oranges. I find it very curious that there is no "XC" forum webpage on this site, just XC racing. I guess XC for actually riding dirt roads and "normal" trails just gets lumped into the beginner webpage here. Or maybe non-racing XC discussions should be in the Passion section. It's very interesting to speculate why there is no real XC webpage on here by itself. There are three different 29 inch bike webpages and zero non-racing XC webpages. Like XC riding for the sake of riding (and not racing) doesn't even deserve mention as a real mountain biking style. That's part of the problem in trying to discuss starter bikes on here. If a post is in the beginner section, it's assumed to be wrong and "needs" to be corrected by people that don't even ride starter bikes (or may not ever have ridden them). That's called armchair quarterback critiquing. It's like that one representative saying "No American has ever died because they didn't have health insurance". People like that are so out of touch with the reality of others. The elitist bikers are out of touch with the needs and aspirations of the casual XC riders, plain and simple.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

I wish this thread will end!

Where are you getting the elitist from? Each beginner's post, will be different.

Different buget, different size, different locations to ride. Some newbies come with a 5k budget btw, rare but I have seen it. I have yet to see anyone saying "your budget is $800? Buy a 5k bike".

Its best to buy the best bike one can afford, period!

That is why the begginers forum exists, so ppl can get options/opinions and make their own grown up decision.

As far as XC, isn't that what most of the ppl here ride?


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Hello JCD. The problem is that it's not all beginners posting in here. It's veterans that are monitoring the beginner posts and "correcting them", sometimes politely, much of the time rudely. They (not all of them, maybe 1/3 of them) come in here and troll anyone who dares to have a different opinion than theirs. Take a look at some of the responses on here, do they look like beginner responses? This isn't really a beginner's posting forum it's a mix of beginners and veteran "monitors". That can be helpful but it can also be conformist because the veteran is the authority figure that knows all, and we have to bow down to their beliefs, like mountain biking should be a cult or something.

Yes I would assume most people ride XC in here but then you look at other posts in other forums on this site defining XC and one of the main definitions is that the bikes should weigh 20-25 lbs. In other words carbon fiber or titanium. If you have a 30-45 lb aluminum or steel frame, and don't have a 130mm+ front fork, then by definition you are not even doing XC (or all-mountain or downhill), and therefore you are not doing real mountain biking. This is not by coincidence. This is all designed TO MAKE MONEY. 

You can't get a 20-25 lb new bike for cheap. You can't get a bike with an aluminum frame with a 130mm front fork for cheap. Therefore, to be a "real" mountain biker, you have to pony up $1000 plus for a "real" mountain bike. Anything else is not even considered a mountain bike, read the definitions of the weight and fork sizes on multiple different mountain bike websites, they are all essentially the same. There is no definition for a 30-45 lb bike with a fork size under 130mm. That is basically sub-mountain or pseudo mountain. This is all designed for beginners to spend more money on a bike, whether they really need that level of bike or not. If you did biking on normal trails out there you will soon find out what you need in a bike, and it's not 200mm forks and 18 lbs of weight. That may be nice, but it's not needed.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

richj8990 said:


> Hello JCD. The problem is that it's not all beginners posting in here.


Kinda thought that was the point - a place where beginners can go to ask questions and learn basics from more experienced riders (who should be trying to give good advice).


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

richj8990 said:


> Hello JCD. The problem is that it's not all beginners posting in here. It's veterans that are monitoring the beginner posts and "correcting them", sometimes politely, much of the time rudely. They (not all of them, maybe 1/3 of them) come in here and troll anyone who dares to have a different opinion than theirs. Take a look at some of the responses on here, do they look like beginner responses? This isn't really a beginner's posting forum it's a mix of beginners and veteran "monitors". That can be helpful but it can also be conformist because the veteran is the authority figure that knows all, and we have to bow down to their beliefs, like mountain biking should be a cult or something.
> 
> Yes I would assume most people ride XC in here but then you look at other posts in other forums on this site defining XC and one of the main definitions is that the bikes should weigh 20-25 lbs. In other words carbon fiber or titanium. If you have a 30-45 lb aluminum or steel frame, and don't have a 130mm+ front fork, then by definition you are not even doing XC (or all-mountain or downhill), and therefore you are not doing real mountain biking. This is not by coincidence. This is all designed TO MAKE MONEY.
> 
> You can't get a 20-25 lb new bike for cheap. You can't get a bike with an aluminum frame with a 130mm front fork for cheap. Therefore, to be a "real" mountain biker, you have to pony up $1000 plus for a "real" mountain bike. Anything else is not even considered a mountain bike, read the definitions of the weight and fork sizes on multiple different mountain bike websites, they are all essentially the same. There is no definition for a 30-45 lb bike with a fork size under 130mm. That is basically sub-mountain or pseudo mountain. This is all designed for beginners to spend more money on a bike, whether they really need that level of bike or not. If you did biking on normal trails out there you will soon find out what you need in a bike, and it's not 200mm forks and 18 lbs of weight. That may be nice, but it's not needed.


Hey richj - I think there are a couple of things to consider. Marketing is not going anywhere, you have a business, you have to market that business. The ultimate choice is up to us, the consumer. Almost like smokers that sue Marlboro :madman: We own our own decisions. Only the poster knows their budget, and their needs, all you can get in a forum is advice, and you take it and apply it however you think it fits.

Sadly, funny people, clowns, condescending people are found everywhere, but if one gets easily offended, maybe a public forum is not a good spot for your search, or become an active member. I think in most cases, people are very helpful. Man, the other day someone asked a question about a ROLEX watch?? sure enough, two quick replies and the answer was there. LOL

There are some threads in the beginner's corner that get over looked when newbies are searching. "post your entry level bike" and there is one w/post your under $400.00? bike. Those threads with actual pictures, can give you great ideas of what you can afford, and still enjoy the ride (which is why I think some people suggest a "better" bike than what has been posted)

In my case, started with Bikesdirect, and I can tell you that going from the Motobecane, to a Cannondale Trail was a huge difference. I spent $1000.00+ when it was all said and done, when I could have probably spent $700.00 if I knew better at the time. It is also not only about the ride, but safety, the wrong equipment could be bad news. I must have fallen 40x on the Moto, the fork just won't hold up even in beginner trails. I still fall btw, that will never go away.

In any event, my original point on my previous post, is that is hard to have a thread that helps "all" beginners, as this is very much depending on tons of factors. As you can see, instead of becoming a valuable thread, is a confusing, and argumentative thread. Life on the web  - I still think this forums provides a plethora of knowledge, and experience, not to mention the passion.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

slapheadmofo said:


> Kinda thought that was the point - a place where beginners can go to ask questions and learn basics from more experienced riders (who should be trying to give good advice).


Lol man, that is the short answer..I went on a rant. 😁


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

https://www.singletracks.com/blog/mtb-gear/buyers-guide-budget-hardtail-mountain-bikes/

I don't see any specific rules against pasting a link from another mountain bike website, so here it is.

Giant Revel $330, 26", V-brakes. They didn't mention what the drivetrain is, so, after Googling: 3x7 freewheel drivetrain, 60 mm fork. It's unacceptable to skimp on the brakes, even for this price. You can get better for cheaper.

Gravity 29 SS $350 rigid singlespeed. No comment.

Motobecane 529 HT $400 Tektro Hydraulic Brakes, 29". WOW, nice price point for that. What about the rest. 100 mm Suntour XCT fork, SRAM 24-speed. If you like twist shifters this looks like a great buy.

Giant ATX 27.5 $415. They don't say anything meaningful about the bike. Mechanical disks, 100mm fork, 3x7 freewheel drivetrain. The Motobecane looks way better.

Trek Marlin $439. 2 wheel sizes, 3x7 cassette (not freewheel). 27.5" or 29". Mechanical disks, 100mm fork. Drivetrain better than the Giant ATX.

Specialized Rockhopper $525 29", mechanical disk brakes, 3x8 drivetrain, 80 mm XCT fork. Eh. Not bad, probably should have hydraulics for that price.

Diamondback Hook $650 27.5" 120mm XCM coil spring, SRAM 1x8 drivetrain, mechanical disk brakes. The beginning of a 'real' mountain bike?

Commencal Meta HT Trail $700 27.5" (says 120mm fork standard but it looks like 100mm), SRAM 3x9 drivetrain, hydraulic brakes. $180 extra gets you a 120 mm air fork. This bike looks really good but compare it to mine: $517 SE bikes 1.0 Big Mountain 27.5", hydraulic brakes, 100mm fork, 3x8 drivetrain. Apart from the shifting and 3 more gears, hardly any difference on paper besides the price. And I'll take the click shifters, thank you...

Cannondale Trail (5) $820 27.5" or 29", 100mm coil fork, 3x9 CLICK drivetrain, hydraulic brakes. Again, nice hardtail, I would not mind it at all. Let's see the lowest cog's teeth: 34t. Is it wrong to be disappointed? That seems pretty linear. Shimano has an 8-speed cassette that also has 34t. Just doesn't seem like 9 is much better than 8. Otherwise a great bike, too bad it doesn't have an air fork, but you can't ask for everything under $1000 I guess.

Framed Marquette Alloy 27.5" $850 relatively fat 3" tire, 120mm air fork, SRAM 1x9 drivetrain, hydraulic brakes. The fork, drivetrain, and tires are sure to attract a lot of bikers.

Airborne Seeker $930 29" 100mm air fork? Hmmm. SRAM 2x10 drivetrain, hydraulic brakes.

Cannondale Cujo $980 27.5"x3" kinda sorta fat tire, 120 mm Suntour XCR air fork (I'm going to try this as an upgrade fork, not a lot known about it), Shimano 2x9 drivetrain, hydraulic brakes. I would get this bike for sure if I didn't already have a 27.5". Seems like 2x9 is easier on the chain than 3x9, but you peak (again) at 34t on this one, 36t may be an upgrade but not a huge difference.

Commencial Meta AT $999 140mm air fork (is this the best deal in a bike for that size?),
SRAM 2x9 drivetrain, 27.5", hydraulic brakes.

Salsa Timberjack $999 29", 120 mm air fork, hydraulic brakes, SRAM 1x11 drivetrain. The last two bikes are starting to scrape the all-mountain designation. Frame is still aluminum. $200 more can get you carbon.

I'm sure you will appreciate my continuing monologue on cheap bikes.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

Surely you have a detailed commentary on SPAM v. Treet, that you can share?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## guitarguy (Jul 26, 2017)

I went with a Trek Marlin 5, MY2018, for $449. It has:

- hydro disc brakes
- double walled rims
- 3x7 cassette
- RST Gila seemingly not so great coil fork

Whatever.

The shifters are a little noisy but seem to work fine. 

I haven't broken anything yet. 

The grips more around and twist when I ride, I may replace those.

I'll probably get a set of better flat pedals. 

Again, whatever. I'm enjoying riding the bike. Maybe I'll upgrade the fork if I destroy the stock one. 

I bought from LBS and did not consider used because I had no idea how to size my bike or set it up properly. I hadn't owned a bike in 15+ years.

I feel like I did OK.


----------



## Mike's MTB (Jun 12, 2017)

guitarguy said:


> The grips more around and twist when I ride, I may replace those.


Get a pair of lock on grips. Just don't over tighten the bolt. Due to how small it is it can strip out very easily.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

Mike's MTB said:


> Get a pair of lock on grips. Just don't over tighten the bolt. Due to how small it is it can strip out very easily.


Or just mount the ones you have properly!!!


----------



## guitarguy (Jul 26, 2017)

MozFat said:


> Or just mount the ones you have properly!!!


The bike is brand new...has been on 2 trail rides in the last 2.5 weeks I've owned it.

Is it likely they weren't mounted properly from the factory?


----------



## Mike's MTB (Jun 12, 2017)

guitarguy said:


> The bike is brand new...has been on 2 trail rides in the last 2.5 weeks I've owned it.
> 
> Is it likely they weren't mounted properly from the factory?


I've never liked slip on grips. Didn't matter which method I used to mount them, they would always have a tendency to slip. The fact that yours are ergonomic makes it all that much easier to rotate them.


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

guitarguy said:


> The bike is brand new...has been on 2 trail rides in the last 2.5 weeks I've owned it.
> O
> Is it likely they weren't mounted properly from the factory?


Very likely, if you search bit, people use all sorts of stuff to make them stay put. Alcohol, hairspray etc that will still let you get them off eventually. Or ask the LBS to fix them up for you.


----------



## guitarguy (Jul 26, 2017)

Mike's MTB said:


> I've never liked slip on grips. Didn't matter which method I used to mount them, they would always have a tendency to slip. The fact that yours are ergonomic makes it all that much easier to rotate them.


Ah the ergonomic shape...I'm not sure how much I like the asymmetry of them anyway...but yeah it certainly makes them that much easier to rotate.

I may change them out.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

.

.

.

I got here late. Did anyone mention Awesome Starp yet ?

.

.

.

Truth be told I use Awesome Starps to hold my battery pack
to my stem for night rides...


.
.
.

Just checkin.....awesome starps don't be fooled by imitators


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2017)

127.0.0.1 said:


> .
> 
> .
> 
> ...


 Straps or Tarps, no starps.


----------



## Cornfield (Apr 15, 2012)

Yes! I can claim that one: Post #113

Jcd did nail me on a technicality, tho; apparently an Awesome Strap is an accessory, not a component.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

Forster said:


> Straps or Tarps, no starps.


my damn Kringlish keybrd///


----------



## MarshallMTB (Apr 26, 2017)

Excellent


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Nevermind, old thread.


----------

