# How different would these bikes handle



## megablue (Jul 20, 2020)

I know it's a bit of an arbitrary question, however, given the geometry of these two bikes, how different would you expect them to feel? They have the exact same linkage design, same wheel size, etc. all the components would be the exact same. (Bike 1 on the left, Bike 2 on the right)


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

One has short chainstays, a more neutral HTA, and a shorter wheelbase. This will make it more nimble and quicker handling. 

The other has a longer wheelbase and slacker HTA. This bike will be more stable at speed and hold its line better through rough stuff. 

Get the Kona Process 153 for trail riding. Get the 161 for more gravity oriented riding.


----------



## megablue (Jul 20, 2020)

*OneSpeed* said:


> One has short chainstays, a more neutral HTA, and a shorter wheelbase. This will make it more nimble and quicker handling.
> 
> The other has a longer wheelbase and slacker HTA. This bike will be more stable at speed and hold its line better through rough stuff.
> 
> Get the Kona Process 153 for trail riding. Get the 161 for more gravity oriented riding.


Thanks for your reply. But I was getting at how much different the bikes would handle. I know longer wheel bases, slacker headtube angles, and longer chainstays all make a bike less nimble. However, for example, I've owned a process 153 and my current trail bike has 135mm rear travel but has 450mm chainstays and a 1245mm wheelbase with a 65.5 HTA. However, it doesn't really feel all that different to me than the process.


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

I would go the slacker longer travel beast.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Probably about 3.


----------



## erdawe (Sep 12, 2017)

Bike 1 is a generation back in geometry (size large?) is would feel less confidence inspiring in steeper terrain and would feel much more quite more stretched out in seated pedaling, you'd want to slam the seat on the rails if you climb on it due to quite short chains. It also has a somewhat long seatpost length and take a 150 dropper. It will take more rider input for better or worse to weight the front in turns. However it would manual nice and could be fun for an active and nimble style of riding.

Bike 2 is modern Enduro bike in (size Medium?) and would be faster and more confidence inspiring in the downs. It would feel better for big climbs up and down riding and smaller seated feel pedaling, but allow better weight of the front end for steeper climbs. It probably take a 175 or 200mm dropper with ease. This bike will be more stable and less responsive to rider with weight shifts, compared to the nimbleness of Bike 1.

If you want a confident bigger travel enduro bike get bike 2.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

megablue said:


> Thanks for your reply. But I was getting at how much different the bikes would handle.


Post a vague question, get a generic answer.

What exactly are you asking? Handle what? What are you looking for? What are you trying to avoid? Where do you ride????

These threads are a total waste of time. Put a little effort in or people will just not bother replying, or you'll just get sarcastic answers like what Jayem posted. Which is not at all out of place or out of line.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Ohh, ohh..!!

I love guess the bike games!!

I'm guessing bike 1 is a Kona Process 153.

Great bike by all accounts.

Bike 2 is a little tougher...

Kona Process X!!

If you want an all around do most anything steed, get the Process 153.

If you're into bikeparks and shuttle laps get the Process X.

NB, reveiws on the two whips are available and without having swung a leg over either, I'd say they're fairly accurate.

I use to own a Process 134.

Kona make great handling bikes. Fun is built into their DNA.

Sent from my Asus Rog 3


----------



## megablue (Jul 20, 2020)

*OneSpeed* said:


> Post a vague question, get a generic answer.
> 
> What exactly are you asking? Handle what? What are you looking for? What are you trying to avoid? Where do you ride????
> 
> These threads are a total waste of time. Put a little effort in or people will just not bother replying, or you'll just get sarcastic answers like what Jayem posted. Which is not at all out of place or out of line.


My god man, take a breath. I appreciated your response and tried to narrow it down a bit with my answer. You don't need to be a dick. If you think it's a waste of time, then don't take time out of your day to reply, it's not hard.


----------



## megablue (Jul 20, 2020)

erdawe said:


> Bike 1 is a generation back in geometry (size large?) is would feel less confidence inspiring in steeper terrain and would feel much more quite more stretched out in seated pedaling, you'd want to slam the seat on the rails if you climb on it due to quite short chains. It also has a somewhat long seatpost length and take a 150 dropper. It will take more rider input for better or worse to weight the front in turns. However it would manual nice and could be fun for an active and nimble style of riding.
> 
> Bike 2 is modern Enduro bike in (size Medium?) and would be faster and more confidence inspiring in the downs. It would feel better for big climbs up and down riding and smaller seated feel pedaling, but allow better weight of the front end for steeper climbs. It probably take a 175 or 200mm dropper with ease. This bike will be more stable and less responsive to rider with weight shifts, compared to the nimbleness of Bike 1.
> 
> If you want a confident bigger travel enduro bike get bike 2.


Thank you for a legitimate answer that actually addresses what I was asking. This was exactly what I'm looking for.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

???

I guessed the bikes!!

No props!?

OMG!!

Sent from my Asus Rog 3


----------

