# difference between downhill and mountain bikes



## Funkdeal (Apr 27, 2006)

why are downhill bikes so expensive? what can these bikes do that regular mountain bikes can't? any help appreciated. thanks.


----------



## todd_freeride (Aug 9, 2005)

regular mountain bike then a downhill bike ....you tell me the difference. pretty obvious.


----------



## Smiffman (Jan 1, 2005)

Are you a bit thick?


----------



## Smiffman (Jan 1, 2005)

I WANT that giant.... no, not the glory, that beast above it.

"sick..."


----------



## DamoNNomaD (Apr 7, 2006)

I will have to agree with Smiffman.... I have also never been one that thought all questions were good questions.

Your question is a bit thick indeed.


----------



## todd_freeride (Aug 9, 2005)

Smiffman said:


> I WANT that giant.... no, not the glory, that beast above it.
> 
> "sick..."


All your friends would be jealous on the trail rides


----------



## Funkdeal (Apr 27, 2006)

obviously i can look at 2 pictures and tell the difference. i was asking more of what makes the downhill bike so much more capable and expensive.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

Funkdeal said:


> obviously i can look at 2 pictures and tell the difference. i was asking more of what makes the downhill bike so much more capable and expensive.


I can give you a few. 
for one they are made diferntly. lets take the two bikes posted above. the top will be made of a cheep steel or cheep allum.... where has the dh bike will made of high gread alumm... like 2026 or others, 2nd look at how they are put together. the top one has very few welds. and suports. whers as the dh bike dose. why you ask well for one there is alot more stress being placed on the frame.IE: from the shock and the impacts from doing drops and other hardcore riding. and last. look at how they are spec'd. the DH bike has higher end parts, why, because they need to last, wnd handle that the punishment that the rider could dissh out on it.

sorry for the spelling im a bit drunk.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

Smiffman said:


> Are you a bit thick?


It's quite possible that he's new to the sport. Just imagine you were getting into glockenspiels, and you were to ask a question like, "What's the difference between a glockenspiel handcrafted in Munich as opposed to a glockenspiel you would find at Stanroy's Music Center."


----------



## DamoNNomaD (Apr 7, 2006)

Prechrysler said:


> It's quite possible that he's new to the sport. Just imagine you were getting into glockenspiels, and you were to ask a question like, "What's the difference between a glockenspiel handcrafted in Munich as opposed to a glockenspiel you would find at Stanroy's Music Center."


I have to give people more credit than that. I'll just say that he posted the question because he was bored.


----------



## COmtbiker12 (Jan 12, 2004)

Funkdeal said:


> obviously i can look at 2 pictures and tell the difference. i was asking more of what makes the downhill bike so much more capable and expensive.


To give a simple analogy for it, it'd be like comparing a Ferrari to a Civic if you wanted to go race around Laguna Seca or something. Like cars, a downhill bike is designed entirely with an emphasis on the environment that downhilling puts the bike through. The complex suspension designs and travel amounts allow the bike to easily travel through technical features (including things like rock gardens, drops, etc...), the extra large (relatively) hydraulic disc brakes and rotors give a lot of modulation and power to help you stop when you're bombing down the hill. As posted above, frame materials and building styles are drastically different and much more reinforced with the downhill frames. Components in general are much more reliable and stronger in comparison to cheap bottom end mountain bikes. With all these differences cost jumps incredibly, but as with anything else in the world you get what you pay for.

I know a lot of us on here can speak for a great difference in the bikes. When I first started getting into more technical riding I was riding a Trek 820, bottom end $200 commuter-basic-transportation type bike; I quickly discovered that parts were breaking and the bike as a whole began to have a diminished performance in riding at all. Now, my Intense M3, top of the line downhill race bike, the Ferrari of downhill bikes if you will, comes with a much larger price tag; about $5,000. But the components and frame are not only strong enough to do whatever I throw at it, but will perform flawlessly as long as I keep it lubed up and what not.

All in all, if you're going to do downhilling then the best solution is to get a downhill bike (which start quite cheaply actually, not all of them are $5k, lol). And if you want to do commuting type riding with fireroad/paved trails, then there's absolutely no reason to get anything more than a low-end bike that does the job.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Iranian-Mechanic (May 6, 2004)

One word Higher Tech.
And you have to pay for that tech but be sure your money isnt going in to the technology it will fullfill the economical dreams of the company owner . And the enginees will be paid their sallary .
BUt be sure when you pay more for a DH bike you can make more fun out of it.


----------



## ezweave (Jul 9, 2004)

*It's not price, it's the ladies*

It all depends on what you mean by "regular".

Mountain bikes fall into all kinds of categories, DH/FR, XC, All Mountain (Trail/Enduro), hard tails, full suspension...

I disagree with the assertion that it is all about technology. It's true that the DH/FR explosion has led to better trickle down technology, but in terms of quality, cost, and complexity, you can find that in an XC bike as well.

Like everything, you get what you pay for. If you buy a $500 XC bike it will probably not suit you after a few months of really hard riding (XC riding), as well as a $1500 XC bike. As with any bike, the sky is the limit in cost... although it's true that a high end all mountain bike probably won't cost as much as a high end DH bike (unless it's the Scott Ransom LTD, which is like $6k).

DH/FR tech does tend to trickle down: disc brakes that work, long travel forks, frame design, etc. The 'general" differences between the bikes is more subtle than cost: frame weight/design, geometry, etc. What you will notice (as every one else points out) is that they work better in particular scenarios. An All Mountain bike is lighter and enables you to comfortable climb hill and dale, as well as descend in relative comfort. An XC bike (especially a race bike) will climb well, but fast technical descents will become rough and down right scary. A DH or FR bike (and there is alot of variation here too) is pretty much impossible to climb with (some make it an acadmic excercise) but makes descending comfortable and puts you in a good position to flick around the bike... with some caveats.

A DH bike can be built as light as you want... almost. It's one purpose is to be fast, so as long as you are smooth and don't crash, it could be light (not as light as an XC bike), 10lbs lighter than a FR bike... really. However, such a bike would be a bad choice for FR, as you most likely will crash... alot. But FR bikes vary too: BB height, top tube length, etc. Basically a bike you might race may not be the same as a bike you drop off your house.

And then there are slope style bikes and HTs, urban and DJ, 4x and DS... tip of the ice burg.

Put it this way, you roll up on a rock drop that you haven't seen before. It's well over your head and the landing is choice: downhill and smooth. If you're riding a 29lb XC hardtail, your mind starts to think things like: what if my bike breaks and I am impaled on it's remains? I'd rather focus on the drop...

Just my 0.22 pesos.


----------



## fred.r (Sep 8, 2005)

I don't feel like reading all these long posts, but, I wanted to point out by no means are "mountian" bikes less expencive than "down hill" bikes. I think your assumption that mountian bikes are cheeper is because there are a lot more low quaility mtb's out there (target, walmart, ect..) A good mtb can cost as much or WAY more than a DH bike, just depends on what level you're looking at.
Think about one of thoes all carbon MTB's, upwards of 7K.


----------



## RickyD (Jan 28, 2004)

*The real reason*

Well, most these answers are correct, but are not the real reason for the cost.

Basically a downhill bike is a one trick pony. It's designed to do one thing and do it well. It's a niche market, sold to a select group of people and a small group overall, compared to the rest of the biking world.

While at the same time it has to be the most technically advanced and well made. Not to mention the constant R&D. There are also a lot of bike choices considering the size of the market, further reducing market size for each manufacturerer. On top of that, look how often a new model comes out. With a few exceptions you are getting a redesigned bike every couple of years.

You would probably be quite suprised if you knew how many downhill frames some of these manufacturers actually make in a year (think less then 100).

All this adds up to high production costs. Its a market economy, plain and simple.

And to answer your other question. Yes, there is REALLY a differance that you can tell in a downhill bike and an all mountain bike. Sure you can ride a hardtail down most downhill courses and yes you will here stories of guys passing guys on downhill bikes using just their hardtail bike. But thats because having a downhill bike doesn't make you fast. Skill makes you fast, so a rider on a lesser bike can be faster then a lesser rider on a better bike. But all things be equal, put to riders of equal skill on a downhill bike and a all mountain bike and the downhill bike rider will wins hands down. No question.

Anyhow, the good and the bad of all this is, while they are expensive, they also depreciate the most and the fastest. Not to mention a lot of riders change bikes every year. So getting a deal is not that hard. Especially if you get a bike that is 3 or 4 years old. Getting an older bike does not necessarily mean outdated technology either. I mean other than the shock, a 2000 Foes Mono is basically the same as a 2005. Also, contrary to popular belief, unless its been really thrashed, most downhill bikes can go 5 years or more without a problem.


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

Funkdeal said:


> why are downhill bikes so expensive?


because, surgery from having a junk bike break on you is even more expensive....


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

Prechrysler said:


> It's quite possible that he's new to the sport. Just imagine you were getting into glockenspiels, and you were to ask a question like, "What's the difference between a glockenspiel handcrafted in Munich as opposed to a glockenspiel you would find at Stanroy's Music Center."


that's irrelevant, everybody knows glockenspiels are lame......


----------



## Raptordude (Mar 30, 2004)

Smiffman said:


> I WANT that giant.... no, not the glory, that beast above it.
> 
> "sick..."


I'm not joking around...I want that Glory.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2006)

COmtbiker12 said:


> To give a simple analogy for it, it'd be like comparing a Ferrari to a Civic if you wanted to go race around Laguna Seca or something. Like cars, a downhill bike is designed entirely with an emphasis on the environment that downhilling puts the bike through. The complex suspension designs and travel amounts allow the bike to easily travel through technical features (including things like rock gardens, drops, etc...), the extra large (relatively) hydraulic disc brakes and rotors give a lot of modulation and power to help you stop when you're bombing down the hill. As posted above, frame materials and building styles are drastically different and much more reinforced with the downhill frames. Components in general are much more reliable and stronger in comparison to cheap bottom end mountain bikes. With all these differences cost jumps incredibly, but as with anything else in the world you get what you pay for.
> 
> I know a lot of us on here can speak for a great difference in the bikes. When I first started getting into more technical riding I was riding a Trek 820, bottom end $200 commuter-basic-transportation type bike; I quickly discovered that parts were breaking and the bike as a whole began to have a diminished performance in riding at all. Now, my Intense M3, top of the line downhill race bike, the Ferrari of downhill bikes if you will, comes with a much larger price tag; about $5,000. But the components and frame are not only strong enough to do whatever I throw at it, but will perform flawlessly as long as I keep it lubed up and what not.
> 
> ...


My guess is that your mark in english class is over 100%.....
Well said.


----------



## Evel Knievel (Mar 28, 2004)

Funkdeal said:


> why are downhill bikes so expensive? what can these bikes do that regular mountain bikes can't? any help appreciated. thanks.


 The difference is in where you ride it, how well its suspension works , and how long it will take major abusive riding .


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

.WestCoastHucker. said:


> because, surgery from having a junk bike break on you is even more expensive....


true dat


----------



## roaddog (Aug 30, 2004)

alot more xc bikes are sold than downhill. A $5000 xc bike is not hard to build- Specialized Epec carbon is more. It's who is buying them. My downhill bike is a Kona Stab Supreme, and it's made it Tiawan. Over $4000- but not many are made. Return on investment.


----------



## Noonie (Feb 20, 2006)

I want that GLORY!!!


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

.WestCoastHucker. said:


> that's irrelevant, everybody knows glockenspiels are lame......


You're right. Just replace glockenspiel with hammer dulcimer and I think we have a winner.


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

Prechrysler said:


> You're right. Just replace glockenspiel with hammer dulcimer and I think we have a winner.


if i could get one of those with a titanium swerving hyberbolic chamber and a polished muffler bearing, that would be rad....


----------



## Funkdeal (Apr 27, 2006)

thank you to everybody that gave me an answer.


----------



## trueflyer (Jan 26, 2004)

Noonie said:


> I want that GLORY!!!


yeah me too  








oh wait.. it's sitting in my garage already!


----------

