# Walmart Carbon Fiber bicycle



## 04 F2000SL (Jun 17, 2008)

Well it's here it's queer and I'm not used to it. A carbon hardtail at your local wal ie world!


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

No, Thank you!


----------



## lucky13don (Apr 14, 2018)

it's a intresting bike. i wouldn't pay $400.00 for it. I'm riding a $129.00 wallyworld 29" and I'm looking to upgrade. this wont be the upgrade


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

lucky13don said:


> it's a intresting bike. i wouldn't pay $400.00 for it. I'm riding a $129.00 wallyworld 29" and I'm looking to upgrade. this wont be the upgrade



I'm by no means a brand boy, but how safe could that bike be?

Can't wait for the videos of people bombing down a trail on it to test it.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Interesting. I see this as good thing. Bike prices are getting ridiculous. Downward market forces may benefit us all.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Maybe it's _solid_ carbon fiber?


----------



## 04 F2000SL (Jun 17, 2008)

No my Walmart actually has one in stock and I inspected it. It's hollow and seems fairly thin in areas like the top tube as a normal bike would. The internal routing is pretty neat on it as are other features. If they make a 29 that's the 5'10" to 6'2" in Walmart sizing I'll buy it. These are for teenagers



Mr Pig said:


> Maybe it's _solid_ carbon fiber?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

04 F2000SL said:


> These are for teenagers


Teenagers that you don't like very much.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Seems odd they'd go to the trouble of making a carbon fiber bike but then make it a 26er.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

04 F2000SL said:


> No my Walmart actually has one in stock and I inspected it. It's hollow and seems fairly thin in areas like the top tube as a normal bike would. The internal routing is pretty neat on it as are other features. If they make a 29 that's the 5'10" to 6'2" in Walmart sizing I'll buy it. These are for teenagers


I'm not sure I'd put a 100 pound 5 footer on that frame. Someone who is 6'2" tall and proportionally heavy would, I think, put himself in danger riding that bike.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

I am impressed with the guy's detail in the review and that he has apparently reviewed many Walmart bikes. He has around 11k subscribers.

The thing that jumps out to me is why 26"? Was that the key to hit the price point?

Also wonder if these frames are of similar quality to those buy-direct/low-cost carbon frames from China that are the subject of the voluminous MTBR thread?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

jcd46 said:


> I'm by no means a brand boy, but how safe could that bike be?


I don't think it would be any less safe than any other Malwart bike, I'm sure the frame is overbuilt and probably the least likely part on that bike that would kill you.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Snafu? Like the bmx parts brand? Not surprised at Mcgoo.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't think it would be any less safe than any other Malwart bike.


That's like saying 'This shite sandwich won't taste any worse than any other shite sandwich'.

This bike is nothing to get even remotely exited about. It's just another junk bike with junk parts that won't perform well or last long. Who knows how they made a carbon frame at the price but who cares. This is not a high-end carbon frame, it's a clunky and cheap frame that happens to be made out of something that can vaguely qualify as carbon fiber. It's just another tag-line bike designed to fool the gullible into thinking they are getting a high quality bike for the price of a Chinese takeaway.


----------



## HerrKaLeu (Aug 18, 2017)

KevCentral tested one (he tests a lot of BSO)

weighs 31# due to bad components. If they made a good Al bike, rigid CF fork it would be a much better bike....


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

cjsb said:


> I am impressed with the guy's detail in the review and that he has apparently reviewed many Walmart bikes.  He has around 11k subscribers.
> 
> The thing that jumps out to me is why 26"? Was that the key to hit the price point?
> 
> ...


They made it 26" because they are considered "toys" and not bikes. None of these are intended to be ridden off road. Most have warning stickers on them that indicate that they are meant for the paved paths.

And people buying these death machines at Walmart don't know what bikes are, so they buy based on price.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Mr Pig said:


> That's like saying 'This shite sandwich won't taste any worse than any other shite sandwich'.


Sort of, but more like saying that if you use this for actual mountain biking the carbon frame will be the least of your worries.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

WHALENARD said:


> Interesting. I see this as good thing. Bike prices are getting ridiculous. Downward market forces may benefit us all.


This is the run of the mill 3x7 freewheel-based drivetrain so many $400 bikes have. Amazon has an $850 26" carbon-fiber bike that actually has 'real' Shimano Deore components, 3x10 drivetrain, air fork, I guess the equivalent of a decent bike 10 years ago. But that's not really the issue if you ask me. You can take a bike frame and put all the components you want on it later, but the Amazon one above is 27 lbs. There are 27-28 lb aluminum hardtails, so to me the weight is the real issue; is the carbon fiber frame worth it if the whole bike is not any lighter? I don't care about the frame absorbing bumps so personally no it's not worth it compared to aluminum. Unless it's 24 lbs or less then I'm not sure what the point is about going all goo goo ga ga about carbon fiber.

But yes I totally agree that cheaper bikes drive competition. There are 1x drivetrain bikes now under $1000. And some of these bikes are not quite as bad as you may think. I use the analogy of a guy that just bought a $25,000 Subaru WRX going into a Porsche forum and asking "What do you think of my new car?" The Porsche guys will all say it's crap. But the Subaru can put up similar numbers on the street, just not on the track. Same with cheaper bikes. Most of them are going to do just fine for normal trail riding. Most of them over $500 have the same components 'good' bikes did 20 years ago. They just can't go downhill 40 mph and take 6 foot jumps. Some of us don't want to do that even if we could. The cheaper bikes are slower and heavier, they shift coarser, but they can do a normal trail. Some guys gawk at my bikes on the trail, but I'm on the same trail as them, and the bike didn't fall apart, much to their amazement and probably confusion.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

chazpat said:


> Seems odd they'd go to the trouble of making a carbon fiber bike but then make it a 26er.


A lot of Chinese bikes are still 26". 26" is not dead, it's just Chinese lol. I was looking at a $1700 27.5 Chinese carbon fiber bike on Amazon, 2x11, air fork, etc. 24 lbs. It seems like a good deal but I'm not sure about the warranty. It's kinda hard to ship it back to China if there was a major problem. They have a 26" version for $1050. On paper that seems like a pretty good deal but I admit it's a really unknown quantity for holding up long-term.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

richj8990 said:


> Some guys gawk at my bikes on the trail, but I'm on the same trail as them, and the bike didn't fall apart..


Yet.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Sort of, but more like saying that if you use this for actual mountain biking the carbon frame will be the least of your worries.


I don't mean this sarcastically at all, but what is your exact definition of mountain biking? This bike is a heavy version of an XC bike but can it not do XC trails at all? I would not buy it but I'm just asking what the minimum threshold for a real mountain bike trail is, as in how rocky, how steep, jumps or not, etc. A lot of people say "This will not work" but they don't explain in detail.


----------



## HerrKaLeu (Aug 18, 2017)

richj8990 said:


> I don't mean this sarcastically at all, but what is your exact definition of mountain biking? This bike is a heavy version of an XC bike but can it not do XC trails at all? I would not buy it but I'm just asking what the minimum threshold for a real mountain bike trail is, as in how rocky, how steep, jumps or not, etc. A lot of people say "This will not work" but they don't explain in detail.


I think the threshold would be where the manufacturer does not adhere a sticker to the fork and frame saying "not for off-road or trail use" like all BSO have nowadays.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

mtnbikej said:


> They made it 26" because they are considered "toys" and not bikes. None of these are intended to be ridden off road. Most have warning stickers on them that indicate that they are meant for the paved paths.
> 
> And people buying these death machines at Walmart don't know what bikes are, so they buy based on price.


Thanks! That is a critical piece of information that the reviewer did not include. Maybe he views it as a standard given that is understood when reviewing Walmart bikes?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

I don't have a problem with cheap bikes in principal. People buy them, they kinda work and no one is forcing me to ride one. If they did not exist there would be thousands of people who would not be riding a bike at all.

I'm not keen on this bike though because it is cynical marketing over substance. If they had used an alloy frame and better components they could have made a better bike for the same money but they don't care about making the best bike. They only care about fooling their customers into _thinking_ it's the best bike for the money and I can't respect that.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

richj8990 said:


> I don't mean this sarcastically at all, but what is your exact definition of mountain biking? This bike is a heavy version of an XC bike but can it not do XC trails at all?


It's an xc bike shaped object. I could limp that thing gingerly around any of the trails I ride without any problems but I like to push myself and there's no way I would give it full gas on a 25mph downhill run on a pos like that. My life is worth more than $399, to me anyway.

So I could ride it without breaking it but I just wouldn't have much fun.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Mr Pig said:


> I'm not keen on this bike though because it is cynical marketing over substance. If they had used an alloy frame and better components they could have made a better bike for the same money but they don't care about making the best bike. They only care about fooling their customers into _thinking_ it's the best bike for the money and I can't respect that.


Big box stores have always specialized in selling bicycle shaped objects, designers concentrate on making them appear the same as a "Specialized" or whatever to the untrained eye from 10 feet away.

I agree this one is a particularly bad value because they just slapped extra cheap parts on what is undoubtedly a horrible frame that happens to be carbon fiber, presumably anyway. All the potential buyer will see is "carbon fiber" and think "oh yeah!"


----------



## hogfly (Mar 6, 2018)

You all are missing the boat here. The Walton boys are principal investors in Allied Cycleworks, makers of some of the finest carbon fiber road bike frames in the United States. Clearly this is a partnership between Allied and Wal-Mart. The "Hyper" brand is just a decoy. Scoop these things up while you can. They're a steal.


----------



## 786737 (Mar 13, 2015)

I wonder who will be brave enough to take that steaming pile down a DH run at a bike park for YouTube glory?


----------



## twodownzero (Dec 27, 2017)

This is certainly a gateway drug to better bicycle prices. Wal-Mart is really good at taking virtually any consumer product and driving the price down.

Think about it this way: imagine if that frame had geometry that you really liked. Can you honestly say the frame isn't worth $400? Even if all that remained was the frame, headset, and stem, $400 is a steal. If it didn't have 26" wheels, questionable sizing/geometry, a straight steerer, etc., a $400 carbon fiber bike would be a total game changer for the entire bicycle market. A 3x7 bike is never going to take the market by storm drivetrain wise, but a $400 bike that was a groupset, handlebar, brake, and wheelset away from competing with a $4000+ bike would be a big deal, to me.

I would not buy or ride this bike, because if there's one thing Wal-Mart gets dead wrong on bicycles, it's frame sizing. Everyone who complains to me about how expensive bicycles are doesn't seem to get it: a bike that doesn't fit isn't worth anything, no matter how cheap or high quality. I explain to them that if they walk into a bike shop, even the lowest priced bicycles will come in a size that is bound to fit them. For most people, the idea that $600 has to come from their pocket to leave with a bike is cost prohibitive, so they don't bother. People who know little about bikes don't seem to make the distinction between wheel size and frame size, either, which has really complicated the true entry-level bikes, which are cheap BSOs that people buy to see if they're into it at all.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> It's an xc bike shaped object. I could limp that thing gingerly around any of the trails I ride without any problems but I like to push myself and there's no way I would give it full gas on a 25mph downhill run on a pos like that. My life is worth more than $399, to me anyway.
> 
> So I could ride it without breaking it but I just wouldn't have much fun.


OK that answer was exactly what I was looking for. 25 mph downhill. I try not to take bikes like these downhill more than 15 mph.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Mr Pig said:


> Teenagers that you don't like very much.


Actually there is a pretty sad story about this, all jokes aside. Some 8 year old kid in the USA got a Walmart bike for X-Mas, took it down a hill, crashed, and the steel handlebar ripped through his jeans and pierced his leg. He seemed fine after getting back from the hospital, but died a few days later from flesh-eating bacteria that were in the dirt that the steel handlebar bounced off. No handlebar covers on the side grips killed him, go figure.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

twodownzero said:


> This is certainly a gateway drug to better bicycle prices. Wal-Mart is really good at taking virtually any consumer product and driving the price down.


Never with bikes, good bikes have only gotten more expensive. Department store bikes are better than they used to be but thats only because the cheapest available parts are better then they used to be. Bicycle shaped objects.

Also just because a frame is made of carbon fiber does not mean it's any good, I couldn't imagine paying $400 for that.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

twodownzero said:


> This is certainly a gateway drug to better bicycle prices. Wal-Mart is really good at taking virtually any consumer product and driving the price down.
> 
> Think about it this way: imagine if that frame had geometry that you really liked. Can you honestly say the frame isn't worth $400? Even if all that remained was the frame, headset, and stem, $400 is a steal. If it didn't have 26" wheels, questionable sizing/geometry, a straight steerer, etc., a $400 carbon fiber bike would be a total game changer for the entire bicycle market. A 3x7 bike is never going to take the market by storm drivetrain wise, but a $400 bike that was a groupset, handlebar, brake, and wheelset away from competing with a $4000+ bike would be a big deal, to me.
> 
> I would not buy or ride this bike, because if there's one thing Wal-Mart gets dead wrong on bicycles, it's frame sizing. Everyone who complains to me about how expensive bicycles are doesn't seem to get it: a bike that doesn't fit isn't worth anything, no matter how cheap or high quality. I explain to them that if they walk into a bike shop, even the lowest priced bicycles will come in a size that is bound to fit them. For most people, the idea that $600 has to come from their pocket to leave with a bike is cost prohibitive, so they don't bother. People who know little about bikes don't seem to make the distinction between wheel size and frame size, either, which has really complicated the true entry-level bikes, which are cheap BSOs that people buy to see if they're into it at all.


Wow you said a mouthful, a lot of different concepts to digest.

I totally agree that you start with the frame and then decide if it's worth buying. You can take a cheap bike, add an air fork, hydraulic brakes, better tires for $450 and voila, you actually have a bike that can ride trails. Will it be the fastest bike? No. Will be be the most nimble bike? No. Can you go downhill 30 mph and take 6-foot jumps? No. But you can still have a blast on the bike doing normal stuff out there. If the frame is good enough, knock yourself out and spend $2K in upgrades, why not, it's your bike. People here fix up old bikes all the time and spend a highly variable amount of cash doing it.

I know what you mean about frame sizing. I had a $150 Walmart 27.5" bike that had a 20-inch frame. I'm 5'8" and it felt more like riding a small horse than a bike. I had to literally mount and dismount it like a horse. But I still had a blast on it for 6 months before the frame cracked.

As far as wheel size is concerned, didn't Trek start matching wheel and frame sizes?

For tire size (which is of course a product of wheel size) I was smitten with the idea of buying a 27.5+ bike. BTW they have $200-300 27.5+ bikes out there now, but as you can imagine, most of them have heavy steel frames and/or rim brakes, so no point in upgrading them IMO. But then I learned about 26+ tires. And I started to think hey wait a minute, I'm 5'8" 145 lbs, my 27.5 standard tire rolls over stuff just fine, why am I wanting a taller and taller tire? I don't need a monster truck bike out there. 26 x 2.8 is on paper 27.4 inches tall, that's plenty of rollover for me. Plenty of traction, and not too tall to hurt handling too much either. A really nice compromise between rollover, traction, handling. The 26" may be dead (it's really not, see Chinese 26" bike post above), but 26+ tires on a 27.5" frame seem really cool for a more casual biker with my height and weight. If you were wondering my current 27.5 has a 17 inch frame and seems to fit me perfectly. I think 26+ tires on it would be very interesting; waiting on the wheelset to come in...


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Never with bikes, good bikes have only gotten more expensive. Department store bikes are better than they used to be but thats only because the cheapest available parts are better then they used to be. Bicycle shaped objects.
> 
> Also just because a frame is made of carbon fiber does not mean it's any good, I couldn't imagine paying $400 for that.


Um...please correct me if I'm wrong but good bikes have only gotten more expensive because of all the new tech that you now suddenly 'need', like 1x12 instead of 1x11, 200mm travel instead of 180mm, carbon wheelsets, hydraulic brakes that are 2 ounces lighter than their 'inferior' counterparts which are much less money, etc.

$2000 in more expensive parts lightens the bike 3-5 lbs. That's great but what's considered good has shifted due to the latest and lightest parts in the last 10 years. What was a good bike 10 years ago for $5000 can be had with the same components for $1000-1500 now. I was in the 26" forum several months ago, and some guy said he bought a certain 26" bike brand-new in 2007 for $5500. I looked at the components and I'm thinking, WTF you can buy an equivalent bike now for close to $1000. But that bike 
is 'outdated' now because those components, like 3x10, and the frame's geometry, are out of style now. It doesn't mean that those components suddenly because horrible just because 2x10 came out later. It means that the trendy stuff sells for more than the tried and true established stuff. A $1000 'crap' bike in 2018 would have been a 'good' bike in 1998. JB I don't know if you rode 20 years ago, but if you rode with 'those' same cheap components back then, that Walmart uses now, does that mean your 1990's bike was a BSO by definition?


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

I'm 'unna get me some Snafu tires for me bike. Those look rad.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

I wonder if those tires help get you into a snafu or out of a snafu. That seems a really important delineation. Going to have to email Wallmart and ask.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

We shouldn't slam this bike but realize who the intended user is. I could easily see a middle aged man with a tank top and backwards hat. Cigarette stuck between his missing teeth and riding the bike path, happier than a pig in... If he spends some of his beer money on this and goes riding with his woman's kids then I think that is great.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

richj8990 said:


> JB I don't know if you rode 20 years ago, but if you rode with 'those' same cheap components back then, that Walmart uses now, does that mean your 1990's bike was a BSO by definition?


No. My first mountain bike was a 1984 Trek and though the technology was archaic the quality was there. Department store "mountain" bikes still often come with freewheel hubs that would not survive 1 ride for me. Also disposable bottom brackets, suspension fork shaped objects that hold the front wheel, etc, etc.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

rlee said:


> We shouldn't slam this bike but realize who the intended user is. I could easily see a middle aged man with a tank top and backwards hat. Cigarette stuck between his missing teeth and riding the bike path, happier than a pig in... If he spends some of his beer money on this and goes riding with his woman's kids then I think that is great.


^no doubt!


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

J.B. Weld said:


> Never with bikes, .


I'm not so sure on that. I know a highish end shop that makes the lion share of his margins and sales on kids and bmx bikes. I'd guess a lot of these bikes roll out of the same or similar factories as Wallmart pot metal. I'm far from an economist but that must regulate the cost at some scale. If carbon fiber labor force, skill, and know how ramps up substantially I think it reasonable prices would come down.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

richj8990 said:


> JB I don't know if you rode 20 years ago, but if you rode with 'those' same cheap components back then, that Walmart uses now, does that mean your 1990's bike was a BSO by definition?


My 1997 VooDoo has much better components than anything bolted onto a Walmart bike. It actually has a functional fork and brakes.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

WHALENARD said:


> I wonder if those tires help get you into a snafu or out of a snafu. That seems a really important delineation. Going to have to email Wallmart and ask.


Maybe both?


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

WHALENARD said:


> I'm not so sure on that. I know a highish end shop that makes the lion share of his margins and sales on kids and bmx bikes. I'd guess a lot of these bikes roll out of the same or similar factories as Wallmart pot metal. I'm far from an economist but that must regulate the cost at some scale. If carbon fiber labor force, skill, and know how ramps up substantially I think it reasonable prices would come down.


It will only lower the bar and cause a proliferation of crappy carbon frames, that's the Malwart effect. Quality products will still cost the same or more.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Off topic but I was just in my LBS and I was looking at a new SC Blur. It had a tag on it that said "optional $19.95 convenience package includes kickstand, waterbottle cage and waterbottle". I asked a worker if they had the correct tag on the bike. He said they'd run out of the right tags and ended up just putting those on everything that still needing tagged.


----------



## rlee (Aug 22, 2015)

My lbs said that Giant will have carbon down to $700cnd within 2 years. That is around $500usd. We talk about how carbon is labour intensive but you can train a child to lay fiber in a mould way easier than to weld aluminum.
Aluminum frames are also labour intensive. And if heat treated are expensive to make. I really think we are paying a unjustified huge margin for carbon.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

rlee said:


> I really think we are paying a unjustified huge margin for carbon.


It's justified as long as they can get it, but I largely agree.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Carbon fiber has been "overpriced" for a while. But its the whole thing of people will pay for the benefits of a good CF design and pay a premium for it. Just like sram 12 speed. Add a cog, make it 4t bigger and gold color. Add a CF cage that costs A few cents more than the alloy cage and boom. $1000 drive train thats insanely finicky. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

RAKC Ind said:


> Carbon fiber has been "overpriced" for a while. But its the whole thing of people will pay for the benefits of a good CF design and pay a premium for it. Just like sram 12 speed. Add a cog, make it 4t bigger and gold color. Add a CF cage that costs A few cents more than the alloy cage and boom. $1000 drive train thats insanely finicky.


What is your personal experience with SRAM Eagle?


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Multiple demos, people I ride with have it, more than enough to convince me there is no way its worth the price tag. When your at almost every major event of 2 different states worth of XC race series, get a lot.of exposure to it. 11s does just fine, 10s works but 11s better for wide range. You gain "bling", 4 teeth on at least a rather light weight drivetrain. Far from worth the price tag IMHO.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

RAKC Ind said:


> Multiple demos, people I ride with have it, more than enough to convince me there is no way its worth the price tag. When your at almost every major event of 2 different states worth of XC race series, get a lot.of exposure to it. 11s does just fine, 10s works but 11s better for wide range. You gain "bling", 4 teeth on at least a rather light weight drivetrain. Far from worth the price tag IMHO.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


During those demos, what caused you to determine that SRAM Eagle is "insanely finicky"?


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Very finite adjustment tolerances. 3 out of the 4 bikes I rode I had to adjust slightly early in the ride and much more touchy to adjustments. Even the specialized guys said that was their only complaint is its very touchy adjustments and initial set up has to be dead perfect and maintained there. Basically requires more attention.

And what to gain, 4t and bling. At literally 4x the cost of 11-46t 11 speed shimano.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

So how did a thread about a Walmart carbon fiber bike drift into the value of sram eagle?


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

RAKC Ind said:


> Very finite adjustment tolerances. 3 out of the 4 bikes I rode I had to adjust slightly early in the ride and much more touchy to adjustments. Even the specialized guys said that was their only complaint is its very touchy adjustments and initial set up has to be dead perfect and maintained there. Basically requires more attention.
> 
> And what to gain, 4t and bling. At literally 4x the cost of 11-46t 11 speed shimano.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Actually, riders gain more than 4t, the range is wider - you seem to not understand that Eagle also has a 10t cog. Claiming Eagle is "bling" is funny.

My experience with Eagle over the past year on tasty chunk in CA/NV/UT is that it hasn't been finicky at all, let alone "extremely finicky" as you claim based on some demos (adjust slightly = extremely finicky?).

Compared to the Shimano and SRAM MTB drivetrains that I've owned over the years (3x7, 3x8, 3x9, 2x9, 2x10), Eagle has been set-and-forget, hassle-free and requires less attention than all of my other drive trains did, while offering the same range as the 2x10 that it replaced.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Sram 11s has a 10t as well. Sram 11s uses XD driver and same RD design. Pretty much same RDs.

So you gain 4 teeth.

And gold cogs

Even the RD is just a blingy 11s RD with a possibly a slight tweak to the cage geo if anything.

To each their own, but having talked with guys that have to deal with it for a living and all the very finite adjustments (hell you have to buy a special tool to set up correctly), I personally dont see the point. To each their own, but getting upset over someone pointing out the truth accomplishes nothing. Truth is you paid an insane amount to gain 4t on the big cog and have the latest and "greatest" drivetrain. Its what you enjoy doing and can afford it, cool, but lets be real. Its not life changing overall. 

Truly 1x systems are a downgrade anyway. 1x has been around since bikes have had chains. But tech has evolved where the simplicity of 1x but at the range of old 3x or more modern 2x at less weight can be done now. Eagle 12s is just what it took to get a version of 1x that works for you. A premium that had to be paid to get what was desired.


And I just realized this is the walmart carbon fiber thread, you literally came here to create a debate and pull off topic (which then I followed not realizing what thread this was)

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

RAKC Ind said:


> Sram 11s has a 10t as well. Sram 11s uses XD driver and same RD design. Pretty much same RDs.
> 
> So you gain 4 teeth.
> 
> ...


Its very odd that you imagine that I am getting upset, when I'm merely chuckling while pointing out how silly your unsupportable "insanely finicky" claim is.

More chuckling:

- a special tool is not needed to set up an Eagle system - that's funny. It's easy to adjust the B gap just like any other derailleur. Been there, done that.

- my Eagle cogs arent gold, although you keep mentioning the color disparagingly - do titanium nitride coatings bother you for some reason?

- who has claimed that a drivetrain choice is life changing? I must have missed their post.

- the additional 4 teeth allow folks to run larger chain rings (higher top end) while maintaining a very low climbing/bailout gear. Eagle has a wider range silly. That's the point that you seem to have missed.

p.s. claiming that folks riding Eagle paid "an insane amount" disregards the fact that disposable income levels vary greatly among riders. What seems like "an insane amount" to some folks, you in this case, is negligible to others. That's the actual truth.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Hey, you want to believe that more power to you, I dont judge. You worked for your money and spent it on what you wanted, kind of the point isnt it?

Simple matter is CF is overpriced unless high end brands. But at least there is real engineering to it. Nothing into 12s over 11s. Now back when 11s came out, I would have totally agreed with you.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Walmart is so big that they often negotiate lower manufacturing standards from their suppliers to decrease prices, even withing the same brand. They will do this with bikes.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

RAKC Ind said:


> Sram 11s has a 10t as well. Sram 11s uses XD driver and same RD design. Pretty much same RDs.
> 
> So you gain 4 teeth.
> 
> ...


I like the SRAM Eagle a lot. The gear range is fantastic and I can creep up incredibly steep pitches in the low gear and still have some speed at the high end. And it has shifted flawlessly even in the very muddy last couple of months.

Since mountain biking is a hobby, I don't mind spending money on it. Alimony, taxes, fees...these are things I am forced to pay. I never get bent out of shape having to spend money for a new piece of gear because, while the main focus should be riding, new components and technology are part of the fun. If I can't afford it I just tool along happily with what I can.

People are so friggin' grim about the bicycle industry. It's a luxury industry making and selling advanced toys that we don't actually need. They aren't ripping us off because, in the end, we aren't forced to buy anything.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

It is kind of sad that we spend so much on our bikes for fun whereas I sometimes see people on bikes as their only form of transportation to get to their job and they are on the really crappy, poor performing mart bikes.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Big box stores have always specialized in selling bicycle shaped objects, designers concentrate on making them appear the same as a "Specialized" or whatever to the untrained eye from 10 feet away.
> 
> I agree this one is a particularly bad value because they just slapped extra cheap parts on what is undoubtedly a horrible frame that happens to be carbon fiber, presumably anyway. All the potential buyer will see is "carbon fiber" and think "oh yeah!"





mtnbikej said:


> They made it 26" because they are considered "toys" and not bikes. None of these are intended to be ridden off road. Most have warning stickers on them that indicate that they are meant for the paved paths.
> 
> And people buying these death machines at Walmart don't know what bikes are, so they buy based on price.


I was actually going to start a separate Wal-Mart bike thread, but I figured I couldn't derail this one...

I stopped to get print cartridges (that's a separate, more banal story). Of course, I must circle through the bike dept. on my way to the register, just because.

I stalled a bit to eavesdrop on a potential sale.

The Wal-Mart employee was talking up the 4 bikes on display on the end cap of the aisle pretty well (doing his job), but the customer's sole focus was how much air was in the tires.
"See, this one's no good." (squeezing tire) "I don't want that one."
She continued checking tires on the various copies of the same model bike until she was satisfied.

If the employee was on the ball, he could've sold a floor pump, I imagine. ...and maybe a tire gauge.

But if that's the bar you need to get over to sell a bike at Wally World (tires that hold air), I have to think that the bottom is really way down there.

-F

disclaimer: I am, in fact, a periodic consumer of cheap bikes and BSO's. The reality is that they should not be used the same as a "real" bike.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Fleas said:


> I stalled a bit to eavesdrop on a potential sale.
> 
> The Wal-Mart employee was talking up the 4 bikes on display on the end cap of the aisle pretty well (doing his job), but the customer's sole focus was how much air was in the tires.
> "See, this one's no good." (squeezing tire) "I don't want that one."
> She continued checking tires on the various copies of the same model bike until she was satisfied.


Wow. Just wow. My faith in humanity has just reached an all-time low. People can be really, really dense.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

It's nice to hear Hank Hill narrating the clip. I was once a fan of King of the Hill...


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

chazpat said:


> It is kind of sad that we spend so much on our bikes for fun whereas I sometimes see people on bikes as their only form of transportation to get to their job and they are on the really crappy, poor performing mart bikes.


I know! My area at night is full of commuters, from restaurants and such, most of them are on Magnas or Huffys and they never have lights, so they use the sidewalk often.

They sure don't seem to complaint much or care, for them is really a tool.


----------



## Vespasianus (Apr 9, 2008)

jcd46 said:


> I'm by no means a brand boy, but how safe could that bike be?
> 
> Can't wait for the videos of people bombing down a trail on it to test it.


If that thing snapped easily and hurt people, Walmart would get sued to oblivion. More than anything, I would expect it to be overly built.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Vespasianus said:


> If that thing snapped easily and hurt people, Walmart would get sued to oblivion. More than anything, I would expect it to be overly built.


Maybe not if you take it to a real trail. Don't they have a sticker about that?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

mack_turtle said:


> Wow. Just wow. My faith in humanity has just reached an all-time low. People can be really, really dense.


Reminds me of an old guy I know who cycles a few miles every day to keep fit. Anything goes wrong with his bike, anything at all, and he takes it to our local Halfords. They tell him it can't be fixed and sell him a new bike! I've been in his garage, it's astonishing. He has a pile of bikes with slight faults.


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

its too bad they ruined it with unupgradeable crap, would have been nice buying one on Craigslist for $100 and then putting real components on it to make a commuter


----------



## baddest grandpa (Oct 16, 2016)

Just wait for the 29er with a tapered headtube, it's inevitable.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> No. My first mountain bike was a 1984 Trek and though the technology was archaic the quality was there. Department store "mountain" bikes still often come with freewheel hubs that would not survive 1 ride for me. Also disposable bottom brackets, suspension fork shaped objects that hold the front wheel, etc, etc.


It's true. I don't even understand why they try to put suspension on these cheap bikes, rigid and a 2.4 to 2.5 front tire would be better and save a lot of weight.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Curveball said:


> My 1997 VooDoo has much better components than anything bolted onto a Walmart bike. It actually has a functional fork and brakes.


The brakes are the worst. I see in the beginner's corner people trying to fix up their $300 bike, and some veterans are saying get an air fork, convert to 1x, etc.

Whoa, hold up gentlemen. What about brakes and tire upgrades for a beginner? Did they forget those??? Don't call Walmart bikes a death machine and then not mention they need a brake and tire upgrade for someone already riding one. That's assisted suicide. The only time I ever went over the bars bad was 100% due to horrible stock tires. After you buy better tires and get some sort of hydraulic brake setup, the bike is actually rideable. Not for what YOU guys are doing, it's rideable for more casual stuff like 12 mph downhill, tiny jumps, etc. It's at least entry level and won't kill someone doing normal beginner stuff. Tires and brakes first before anything else.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

jcd46 said:


> Maybe not if you take it to a real trail. Don't they have a sticker about that?


I don't blame Walmart, and lower-end Suntour stuff, and other companies for putting disclaimers on their parts for liability and to avoid being sued when a biker is hurt riding.

And it's not about taking it to a real trail or not, it's about how fast you ride down the trail and if you intend on taking jumps; that's what's going to destroy the cheap bike, not just taking it down a real trail slowly and carefully, like at 6 mph. That sounds boring to someone that has a good bike but it's happening right now with cheap bikes on thousands of trails out there. And yes there are stickers saying don't off road this part, even if it's on a "Mountain Bike". Some people have common sense on the trail and some don't. The ones that don't and buy a cheap bike, well, I feel bad if they get hurt, but they made a dumb decision going fast down a hill on a cheap bike with terrible brakes and tires. Just like how a teenager gets the keys to a car and promptly crashes the car. No experience, no proper judgement.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Quote Originally Posted by Fleas View Post
I stalled a bit to eavesdrop on a potential sale.

The Wal-Mart employee was talking up the 4 bikes on display on the end cap of the aisle pretty well (doing his job), but the customer's sole focus was how much air was in the tires.
"See, this one's no good." (squeezing tire) "I don't want that one."
She continued checking tires on the various copies of the same model bike until she was satisfied.



mack_turtle said:


> Wow. Just wow. My faith in humanity has just reached an all-time low. People can be really, really dense.


LOL. Don't worry about this. Worry about that same lady leaving Walmart, getting in to her huge SUV, and texting all the way home in traffic. That's the humanity you need to worry about. You'll never see her on the trail, you'll just see her plow into your car (or your road bike) while she was texting.

I've also eavesdropped on a dude buying one of two bikes at Walmart. One was better than the other but neither he or the salesman knew that. I briefly tried to explain why one bike was better (relatively speaking) and they just looked at me the way a cow looks when it's trying to sleep standing up. No response at all. They looked like I just tried to explain quantum physics to them. I walked away, hey, I tried.


----------



## chuckha62 (Jul 11, 2006)

I understand why so many of you are concerned (and rightfully so) about the component specs, but honestly, even with "good" components, I wouldn't trust it on a trail.

All carbon manufacturing is not equal. Having no idea of the processes employed laying up and forming that frame, there is no way in hell I would trust it. I've seen manufactured items from China with voids under the surface finish that passed QA inspection because they "looked" okay. The concept of fitness for intended use was never considered. It was all about the fact that it looked like it was supposed to.

I had a cast iron item that was painted. I scraped the paint off in one area in order to be able to attach an effective ground to it. As I scraped the paint off, a white powder started to come out. There had been a sizable casting void that was filled with gypsum, smoothed and painted. It was known to be flawed, so in order to pass QA, the production line diverted the cast piece to a repair area. Once it was "fixed", it was painted, inspected and shipped to unsuspecting users around the world.

The point is, manufacturing concepts in China still lag behind most areas of the world. It all has to do with the communist takeover and purge that happened 70 years ago. They will get there (led mostly by US manufacturing), but I wouldn't trust a non name brand item, just yet.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Box store bikes miss a real opportunity for a reasonable quality bike with no frills that can reliably get you from A to B.

A. Give it reasonable quality control and mfg standards so it can be durable/reliable (like a frame that might be able to hold up to basic xc riding)
B. Mfg it to at least some halfway recent standards - regular BSA BB shell, minimum 135/100 QR/bolt on hub spacing, straight 44mm dia head tube, suspension-corrected geo for possible upgrades
C. Give it a couple frame sizes at least. S, M, L or maybe even S and L
D. Give it dead simple parts - fairly low singlespeed gearing for beginners (but a derailleur hanger for possible upgrades), coaster brake (but brake mounts for possible upgrades)

Can offer different price points for some slight upgrades on the same platform. Maybe a hi-ten steel for the $100 price point, alu or cromoly for upgrade options, 1x7 or 3x7 shifty bits, suspension, whatever. I justify SS for this kind of bike because most people who buy these things don't actually shift while riding. They put it in one gear and ride it that way until it doesn't work anymore. they don't care when the suspension seizes up. I have seen so many where the brake pads are flat gone, or don't even touch the rim. think simple.

The key to bringing the cost down is selling lots of them. If there were as many bicycles in each household as there were cars (or more, really, when you count kids and others who can't/don't drive, and enthusiasts who own multiple bikes), then we'd be talking about ways to drive mfg costs down.

**** like this CF trash heap doesn't help anyone except the companies that make BSO's turn a short-term profit.

But no, we get cynical, deceptive marketing on BSO's because people let themselves be fooled by it.


----------



## Tribble Me (Aug 27, 2012)

You guys forget that most of these bikes are only going to be used about 4 times, if my neighborhood is a place to judge from. The kids in my area never get outside. Too busy with the x-box. 

Although I did see a ~4 year old, with a full face helmet on, the other day on a stretch of smooth double track yelling "you want to race?" as I went the other way.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Harold said:


> Box store bikes miss a real opportunity for a reasonable quality bike with no frills that can reliably get you from A to B.
> 
> A. Give it reasonable quality control and mfg standards so it can be durable/reliable (like a frame that might be able to hold up to basic xc riding)
> B. Mfg it to at least some halfway recent standards - regular BSA BB shell, minimum 135/100 QR/bolt on hub spacing, straight 44mm dia head tube, suspension-corrected geo for possible upgrades
> ...


Agreed, when these discussions come up I always think "why can't they just make a basic single speed for cheap?" That's all a lot of people need for basic transportation and the crappy derailleurs and heavy, wasteful suspension does nothing really but drive the price up and the lifespan and ride-ability down. But marketing has to have their "features" to sell.

And I think they do sell more bikes annually in the US than they do cars, if you include bsos. I'm sure many of us help those figures as well.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Tribble Me said:


> You guys forget that most of these bikes are only going to be used about 4 times, if my neighborhood is a place to judge from. The kids in my area never get outside. Too busy with the x-box.
> 
> Although I did see a ~4 year old, with a full face helmet on, the other day on a stretch of smooth double track yelling "you want to race?" as I went the other way.


Yay, kid!

One of my favorite stories was of a coworkers son who one day finally got his training wheels off. He went down the sidewalk, turned around and rode back and told his dad, "I want a ramp".


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Tribble Me said:


> You guys forget that most of these bikes are only going to be used about 4 times,


Department store bikes are designed with this in mind. People buy them and after 2 or 3 rides something breaks, both tires go flat and they decide that it really isn't that much fun after all. The bike then spends the rest of it's life taking up space in the corner of a garage.



chazpat said:


> Agreed, when these discussions come up I always think "why can't they just make a basic single speed for cheap?"


It wouldn't sell, people buy them because it looks basically like a $2000 Trek to their eyes. The bicycle shaped object model works!


----------



## Zowie (Aug 3, 2013)

Tribble Me said:


> You guys forget that most of these bikes are only going to be used about 4 times, if my neighborhood is a place to judge from. The kids in my area never get outside. Too busy with the x-box.
> 
> Although I did see a ~4 year old, with a full face helmet on, the other day on a stretch of smooth double track yelling "you want to race?" as I went the other way.


So did you want to race, or what?


----------



## chuckha62 (Jul 11, 2006)

J.B. Weld said:


> Department store bikes are designed with this in mind. People buy them and after 2 or 3 rides something breaks, both tires go flat and they decide that it really isn't that much fun after all. The bike then spends the rest of it's life taking up space in the corner of a garage.
> 
> It wouldn't sell, people buy them because it looks basically like a $2000 Trek to their eyes. The bicycle shaped object model works!


Nailed it!


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

J.B. Weld said:


> Department store bikes are designed with this in mind. People buy them and after 2 or 3 rides something breaks, both tires go flat and they decide that it really isn't that much fun after all. The bike then spends the rest of it's life taking up space in the corner of a garage.
> 
> It wouldn't sell, people buy them because it looks basically like a $2000 Trek to their eyes. The bicycle shaped object model works!


That's what's horrible about the whole scenario.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

chazpat said:


> It is kind of sad that we spend so much on our bikes for fun whereas I sometimes see people on bikes as their only form of transportation to get to their job and they are on the really crappy, poor performing mart bikes.


Why is it sad? I really like bicycles. It's a hobby as well as a sport. I don't look down at anybody on any bike...except that i hate seeing bikes chained to rack out in the snow where they remain for the whole winter.


----------



## JackWare (Aug 8, 2016)

But what would happen if Walmart did start selling better quaity bikes at low prices?

I imagine that a lot of smaller LBS would disappear and others would only survive selling to the high end of the market. Would bike companies then be forced to limit development or only offer cheaper low end bikes to compete with these megastores?

A similar trend has happened in the UK with electrical white goods and electronics - smaller independant retailers closing while out of town stores selling cheaper but possibly lower quality but well marketed products flourish.

But I'm no economist so happy to be corrected


----------



## JackWare (Aug 8, 2016)

Ailuropoda said:


> Why is it sad? I really like bicycles. It's a hobby as well as a sport. I don't look down at anybody on any bike...except that i hate seeing bikes chained to rack out in the snow where they remain for the whole winter.


Best you keep away from the Sad Bikes thread to avoid spoiling your day


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

Ailuropoda said:


> Why is it sad? I really like bicycles. It's a hobby as well as a sport. I don't look down at anybody on any bike...except that i hate seeing bikes chained to rack out in the snow where they remain for the whole winter.


It's sad because someone who has an actual need for a bicycle ends up with the worst bike. I'm not saying they need a high end bike, just something built for basic function rather than marketing.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

chazpat said:


> It's sad because someone who has an actual need for a bicycle ends up with the worst bike.


The kind of people whop buy these bikes will find them no matter where they are. Some people are just hard to help. You know, stupid people? I.Q. of potato salad?

I know people like that. you try and give them advice, help them buy good stuff, but they'll go away and come up with some kind of retarded reasoning which compels them to buy shite. They drive you bonkers! And they'll do it time and time again.

Yes, these bikes are rubbish and yes, it would be nice if people demanded better options but nothing can be done. Walmart know their audience and they know how thick they are. I dislike the fact that they simply exploit them rather than trying to educate them but you can't fix everyone anyway.


----------



## 04 F2000SL (Jun 17, 2008)

I think most Walmart bike sales are to children. You do see service workers using a steel full suspension to get to work but for the most part they are for kids and teenagers. I was lucky enough to get bike shop bikes after about age 12. I did buy my 6 year old a 300 dollar trek, he’s big strong and fit for 6 but he’s really rough on the thing!


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Harold said:


> Box store bikes miss a real opportunity for a reasonable quality bike with no frills that can reliably get you from A to B.
> 
> A. Give it reasonable quality control and mfg standards so it can be durable/reliable (like a frame that might be able to hold up to basic xc riding)
> B. Mfg it to at least some halfway recent standards - regular BSA BB shell, minimum 135/100 QR/bolt on hub spacing, straight 44mm dia head tube, suspension-corrected geo for possible upgrades
> ...


Right concept, wrong details. You know 100 times more than me about mountain biking, but you are not actually purchasing these bikes. It's like Marie Antoinette specifying what type of cake the poor masses should eat. And while I find this thread humorous, you guys act like these bikes are for 8 year-olds with a 10 minute attention span. I've been riding them for years, and while I personally may have the mentality of an 8-year old, adults actually ride these bikes on trails. Not just sidewalks, not just fireroads, actual trails. Yes, you can throw up out of disgust, now that you have learned the truth. Some of these bikes suck really bad, some are not as bad as you think.

I know what I would like out of a sub-$1000 bike. It's not a singlespeed. It's funny how the more experienced riders skip the basics about what a cheap bike should have (see below). The only thing above that I agree with is suspension; instead of singlespeed they could have either a rigid fork or a cheap 80-100mm coil fork. They could also put on a wider front tire, like a 2.35, 2.40, or 2.50 if it's rigid to provide some cushion. And it's not that much more $$$ to have a 3x8 cassette-based drivetrain than a 3x7 freewheel. The replacement fixed hub wheel I got was $52; the 11-32t freewheel was $33. $85 total. An Alex 23mm disk-comp and sealed bearing 8-10 speed rear wheel is only $75. 8-speed cassette $17. Total $92. SEVEN DOLLARS MORE for a cassette-based system. Last but not least, hydraulic brakes start at $50-70 for a complete pre-bled set front/rear.

Preferred entry-level BSO:
aluminum frame; whole bike cannot weigh more than 35 lbs total with pedals $variable
tire size (height) doesn't really matter at this level $60-100
tire width should be at least 2.1 inches
hardtail; fork can either be rigid or cheap coil 80-100mm $40-70
3x8 cassette-based drivetrain (let's not get too cute at this bike level) $variable
Wheelset around $125-155 or in-home one for cheaper
Shimano M-355 Hydraulic Brake system $70
last but not least, $35 for a separate 3x8 speed shifter system, since the original one has shifters/brakes integrated and you have to separate that for the hydraulic brake shifters

Now let's see what price range that's in: $400-700. It's as low a price range as the carbon fiber bike that is in this thread. Weight is around the same as the OP's bike. Drivetrain is better due to cassette system. Fork probably the same (air fork plus LBS labor can be as low as a $200 upgrade). Tires and brakes better. The preferred BSO above CAN BE DONE and it is being done, by many manufacturers, including SE, Giant, Motobecane, Diamondback, and Raleigh.

My $517 Amazon bike has around 1200 miles on it now, a few flat tires, chain broke twice, that's it. Besides the chain, NOTHING BROKE ON THE BIKE in 1200 miles of trail riding (let's say 900 miles of fire road/double track and 300 miles of actual singletrack). Now, this is key: I'm not doing 6-foot jumps and going downhill 30 mph with this bike. But I'm doing the same trails all of you are doing, at least the ones off a paid course, in the suburbs or wilderness. Out of the 40 or so trails I've done so far, exactly 5 have been too difficult, the other 35 or so are all doable with a bike of this level at a moderate speed.

Bottom line, if you define 'real' mountain biking as bombing down hills 25+ mph and taking jumps over 4 feet high, then no a $400-700 bike is not a mountain bike. I liken this to a sports car / race car track driver saying "This car A will survive this track, this car B will fall apart on this track, etc.". They are right, they know which cars will survive a 150 mph track and which will fall apart. But all of the tested cars will do just fine on the street, and the street in this case is mountain biking under 15 mph downhill and jumps less than 2 feet high. If that's not mountain biking to you, fine, that's your definition. I'm fine with that. Call moderate downhill at 8-15 mph 'hill' biking or recreational biking or whatever term you want to use. But don't say the bike above cannot do a real trail; it can and does, and does not fall apart. It just cannot do it maniacally like the $3000+ bikes can. Two levels of downhill, slower and faster. I prefer slower no matter how much is in my wallet and what budget I have for a bike. So I'm good with a BSO, much to the disappointment of many on here...


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

richj8990 said:


> But I'm doing the same trails all of you are doing, at least the ones off a paid course, in the suburbs or wilderness.


No, if your claims above are to be believed, you're not doing the same trails.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

4 to 7 hundred for an entry level BSO? Just buy used.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

richj8990 said:


> Right concept, wrong details.


Maybe I need to reiterate this point. You missed the ENTIRE point I made. I have no problems with what you describe for the budget you describe. But box store BSO's start below $100, and that's the target I was trying to hit with my spec list. Make the frame the same basic platform as your $400-$700 trail-worthy BSO and you hit some nice economies of scale, your $100 BSO could also be trail-worthy.

Fact is, most people DO treat bikes in this price range as toys, and a $400-$700 bike is even out of a lot of people's league. Even if you're talking about something they're going to use as basic transportation and not recreation (I see WAY MORE BSO's being used this way than on singletrack. Honestly, I've only seen a handful of BSO's on actual mtb trails in my nearly 2 decades of riding mtb. lots of them on paved greenway paths and neighborhood streets, but not on dirt).


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Harold said:


> Fact is, most people DO treat bikes in this price range as toys.... I've only seen a handful of BSO's on actual mtb trails... lots of them on paved greenway paths and neighborhood streets, but not on dirt).


I agree, you do not see these bikes on trails. The most common plain vanilla trail bike is an entry-level Trek, those are really popular for some reason. Kids might be on those, mum's on an old quill rigid while dad has an enduro that's worth more than the car but no, you rarely see boat anchors on trails.

They usually get ridden...nowhere. The life of a typical box bike goes something like this.

Fred wants a bike to see if he likes cycling/get out with the kids/lose the belly (delete as appropriate) but he doesn't want to spend too much in case it doesn't work out. Enter, box bike, stage left.

Fred goes out on the bike, probably not put together properly, seat too low, jeans on. Isn't as much fun as he imagined. Tries it again the next week, belly is still there. Just as he's thinking 'this is not working' the bike gets a puncture/chain falls off/cat pees on it. This cycling malarkey is shite! So the bike gathers dust at the back of the garage, beside the cheap golf clubs and exercise machine, while Fred watches TV and drinks cheap beer in blissful ignorance of the heart attack he's going to have next week.

And so ends the pathetic life of the box bike.

And Fred...


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

I've never seen any of these bikes on my local trails, which are not that advanced, maybe in the bike path around the lake. I do see a lot vintage mountain bikes, and some entry level bikes, plenty of 26'' etc, but not wally world bikes.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

jcd46 said:


> I've never seen any of these bikes on my local trails, which are not that advanced, maybe in the bike path around the lake. I do see a lot vintage mountain bikes, and some entry level bikes, plenty of 26'' etc, but not wally world bikes.


yup. lots of vintage rigid treks and whatnot. BSO's are exceedingly rare.

When I lived in TX, I rode occasionally with a guy who had one. He'd picked up some entry level components to install on it over the years, which helped some. but invariably, there was some mechanical failure on every ride he did that had him carrying a pretty substantial tool kit. he stopped riding the trails, I assume because the frequent trailside maintenance frustrated him. He mostly rode to work, and with his kids on it. He got more use out of a box bike than I've seen anyone else get, honestly.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

There are TONS of full sus Wallfart bikes around Portland, Eugene etc. 99 times out of 100 the person riding it looks like they had a rough go.

While certainly not pc it would be interesting to see a demographic study of who fills Wal-Mart's coffers. My old man shops there. He's a staunch Republican, hates Chinese goods, hates welfare, etc., yet primarily shops at Wal-Mart because it's cheap. I'm going to step out on a limb and wager he's a fairly typical patron except for he's fit.


----------



## fillaroida (Oct 2, 2017)

WHALENARD said:


> While certainly not pc it would be interesting to see a demographic study of who fills Wal-Mart's coffers.


People Of Walmart - Funny Pictures of People Shopping at Walmart : People Of Walmart

*note,
not a scientific study


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Mr Pig said:


> I agree, you do not see these bikes on trails...





jcd46 said:


> I've never seen any of these bikes on my local trails...


I've seen a couple on the trails around here. They were discarded along the side where they lay broken until the trail crew dragged them to the dumpster.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I had a friend who wanted to get into mountain biking with his grandson. i politely explained the two bike industries thing. He bought them both *mart bikes. A little while later, he told me I was right and he went and bought LBS bikes.


----------



## RonSonic (Jan 8, 2005)

chazpat said:


> It's sad because someone who has an actual need for a bicycle ends up with the worst bike. I'm not saying they need a high end bike, just something built for basic function rather than marketing.


Not around here. I see some pretty serious commuters. Everything from purpose built commuter bikes, a lot of classy old ten speeds, usually a size or two large to get the bars up and plenty of retro mountain bikes.


----------



## 04 F2000SL (Jun 17, 2008)

My store still has the same carbon bike in stock, not exactly flying off the shelves... maybe when summer is in full swing.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

That makes me wonder, people buying bikes at Walmart, are they really looking for carbon fiber frames?


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

chazpat said:


> I had a friend who wanted to get into mountain biking with his grandson. i politely explained the two bike industries thing. He bought them both *mart bikes. A little while later, he told me I was right and he went and bought LBS bikes.


Yeah, the Wally bikes are meant to be utilitarian and serve a purpose, but can't withstand too much of a hammering.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

jcd46 said:


> That makes me wonder, people buying bikes at Walmart, are they really looking for carbon fiber frames?


They are, department stores have always shaped their bikes to resemble Treks or Specialized that cost 10x more.



Crankout said:


> Yeah, the Wally bikes are meant to be utilitarian and serve a purpose, but can't withstand too much of a hammering.


Serve a purpose, yes but utilitarian? Not IME, they are all lipstick.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

04 F2000SL said:


> My store still has the same carbon bike in stock, not exactly flying off the shelves... maybe when summer is in full swing.


$400 isn't cheap for a BSO.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

chazpat said:


> $400 isn't cheap for a BSO.


Especially when the ER bill comes.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

richj8990 said:


> Preferred entry-level BSO:
> aluminum frame; whole bike cannot weigh more than 35 lbs total with pedals $variable
> tire size (height) doesn't really matter at this level $60-100
> tire width should be at least 2.1 inches
> ...


You just described bikes you can find at my LBS. Of course, assembled by actual cyclists, with warranty, support, etc.


----------



## 04 F2000SL (Jun 17, 2008)

What's BSO stand for? Box store something?

You can get entry level Rockhopper for 450 that can do it all and has great geometry! Walmartians aren't looking for that they are the people that put monster stickers on everything...



chazpat said:


> $400 isn't cheap for a BSO.


----------



## chuckha62 (Jul 11, 2006)

BSO = Bicycle Shaped Object


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

chazpat said:


> $400 isn't cheap for a BSO.


What is your definition of where a BSO turns into a real entry-level bike?

My definition (all hardtails):
Grade F: $150-450, rim or cheap mechanical disk brakes, heavy steel or aluminum frame, no QR skewers, 3x6 or 3x7 freewheel system, 60-80mm heavy, crappy steel coil fork. BSO.

Grade E: $250-450, at least mechanical disk brakes (some have low-end hydraulics), aluminum frame (total bike weight 35 lbs or less), 3x8 cassette system, 80-100 mm aluminum coil fork. Still BSO but fork and brake upgrade can bring it up to entry-level.

Grade D: $400-700, all lower-end hydraulic brakes, aluminum frame (usually 30-32 lbs total), 3x8 or 3x9 drivetrain, 100mm coil fork. Entry level especially after air fork upgrade.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Check out this carbon-fiber BSO:

https://smile.amazon.com/BEIOU-Moun...942593&sr=1-3&keywords=beiou+27.5"&th=1&psc=1

$1289 is pretty expensive for a BSO, eh? 24 lbs with pedals. A big gamble of course, buying from China with no verifiable warranty. Add better brakes, wider tires, and take off the 3rd chainring and this BSO doesn't look too bad. It just might be my next bike. 24 lbs is just too good to pass up.

Model: BO-CB020 
Finish: 3K Matte Coloful
Material: Toray T800 Carbon Fiber 
Frame Size: 17"/19" 
Wheel Size: 27.5"/29" 
Frame: Beiou Carbon Fiber Unibody Frame 
Flat Handlebar: BEIOU Carbon Fiber integrated body /600mm/31.8mm 
Seat Post: BEIOU Carbon Fiber integrated body/350mm/31.6mm 
Speed Control System: SHIMANO DEORE M610 3x10S
Derailleur lever: SHIMANO DEORE M610 FD-M611 
Front derailleur: SHIMANO DEORE M610 RD-M610
Rear derailleur: SHIMANO DEORE M610 SL-M610 
Braking System: SHIMANO M315/M335 dual hydraulic disc braking
Brake Type: Hidden Disc Brake 
Fork: UDING DH32 27.5" Air Suspension Fork / UDING 29" Air Suspension Fork 
Cable Routing: Internal Cable Routing 
Crankset: Prowheel integrated crankset 
Cassette Sprockets: SUNRACE MTB cassette 10S 
Cycle Chain: YBN 10S 
Wheelset: RT 27.5 / 29 professional MTB wheelset with CARBON HUBS 
Tire: MAXXIS 27.5*2.10 65psi / CHAOYANG FALCON 29*2.10 60TPI 
Saddle: BEIOU Black-Red Mountain Trial Saddle
Bike Weight: 10.7kg/ 11.8kg (not include the pedals)


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

richj8990 said:


> $1289 is pretty expensive for a BSO, eh?


Well there's a sucker born every minute 

jk, but don't do it! You can do much better. 600mm bars?

No way does that weigh 24 lbs.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

J.B. Weld said:


> Well there's a sucker born every minute
> 
> jk, but don't do it! You can do much better. 600mm bars?
> 
> No way does that weigh 24 lbs.


Yes, I know, play it safe, get something like the Diamondback Mason 27.5+, 28 lbs for $1400. You know what, and I swear this is true: if someone bought me a nicer bike in the $1-2K level, or I won a raffle, or got a gift certificate to a bike store, etc., I'd keep the new bike in the garage and continue on with my cheap bikes until they either broke or I finished learning how to ride them. Seriously. I'm not ready for a real bike yet. Osco said in the beginner form that a $500 bike can do more than most beginners will ever know. I think he's 110% correct. So that's the goal for now: find out exactly what a $500 bike can and cannot do before getting something nicer. I'm having a blast learning, don't worry.


----------



## Kevin Van Deventer (Jan 31, 2015)

I have had three different Chinese carbon frames none have failed.

If you go read all the manufacturer forums then go read the Chinese forum you will find a higher failure rate on the brand name frames.

The Chinese tend to over build their frames and use more t700 carbon which is stronger weighs more and is less stiff and flexes more.


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

Kevin Van Deventer said:


> I have had three different Chinese carbon frames none have failed.
> 
> If you go read all the manufacturer forums then go read the Chinese forum you will find a higher failure rate on the brand name frames.
> 
> The Chinese tend to over build their frames and use more t700 carbon which is stronger weighs more and is less stiff and flexes more.


It would be a really interesting experiment to buy this $400 bike and upgrade it, but I prefer 27.5 so I'll do it that way for my next bike. BEIOU has $369-550 carbon frames in all sizes; Savadeck has a 27.5 frame for only $340, I will most likely roll the dice with that one. And if the frame cracks I'll let everyone know. I doubt it will with XC riding, it will probably do just fine for years.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

fillaroida said:


> No, if your claims above are to be believed, you're not doing the same trails.


Nishiki Colorado Comp 27.5 plus, $400 at Dick's a couple months ago... I think the guy who made the video is riding trails far more difficult that you are complaining about others on box store bikes.






As to the Hyper Carbon, if you watched the followup videos (there's five total including the original video) from KevCentral, you'll see its actually a 27.5 frame and they simply used a 26er wheelset as a cost saving, it is real carbon, and Hyper has said Walmart requested a carbon bike at a specific price point and that drove the component selection. But its a 135mm QR skewer frame with a 44mm cup headtube and BSA thread BB shell that weighs 2 Ibs 11 1/2 oz with the headset cups and seatpost clamp/QR and its definitely upgradeable. The first video briefly passes over a sticker on the frame which gives the max rider weight as 275 pounds (its at the 9 min mark).


----------



## Tom Howard (Jan 8, 2019)

No chance that BSO is 24lbs. my rigid, full carbon frame, fork. bars, cranks with xo1 1x11 and XT brakes is 24lbs 

its a 29er though, i see the 29er there is 27lbs. 3 POUNDS more than 27.5?


----------



## Kevin Van Deventer (Jan 31, 2015)

richj8990 said:


> It would be a really interesting experiment to buy this $400 bike and upgrade it, but I prefer 27.5 so I'll do it that way for my next bike. BEIOU has $369-550 carbon frames in all sizes; Savadeck has a 27.5 frame for only $340, I will most likely roll the dice with that one. And if the frame cracks I'll let everyone know. I doubt it will with XC riding, it will probably do just fine for years.


The basic frames on eBay are down to 275$ range now.


----------



## GuitsBoy (Sep 24, 2013)

I have also had multiple chinese carbon frames without any structural issues at all. Even at my weight. I've sheared a pivot bolt and cracked a cartridge bearing in half, but never had a problem with the carbon layup.

Considering that there are plenty of similar chinese carbon frames on ebay and aliexpress in the 225-250 range, its not too hard to imagine walmart might be able to get similar frames in the sub 200 range thanks to the economies of scale. The components seem to be on par with $150 big box bikes.

If the walmart carbon frames are even half as strong as the chinese carbon from the likes of xm-carbonspeed, velocycle, Ican, or anything else youll find at chinertown, then I'd be far more worried about the cheap components failing on you well before the frame does.


----------



## KingOfOrd (Feb 19, 2005)

I'd ride it, think they'll be releasing an e-bike version soon?


----------



## TheDwayyo (Dec 2, 2014)

richj8990 said:


> JB I don't know if you rode 20 years ago, but if you rode with 'those' same cheap components back then, that Walmart uses now, does that mean your 1990's bike was a BSO by definition?


Wal-Mart bikes use the _style_ of parts (26", rim brake, straight steerer, etc.) that were used back then, but not the quality. They're stamped steel junk that bends out of shape from regular use.

Did you miss the response to your question about what constitutes a mountain bike that pointed out Wal-Mart 'mountain bikes' have a sticker on them that says not for off road use? That's there because they know they are low quality and likely to fail, potentially causing injury. Rather than fix that, they put a little CYA sticker on there so they can't get sued and laugh all the way to the bank.

That does a huge disservice to our sport and there's no way in hell I'd support it.


----------



## Tom Howard (Jan 8, 2019)

never mind


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

I wouldn't buy this one in the current post, but there is a 27 lb 3x10 out there for $800, that you could easily convert to 1x or 2x, it's another 26" one if that even matters at this price:

https://smile.amazon.com/BEIOU-Moun...8-7&keywords=beiou+carbon+fiber+mountain+bike

The Shimano drivetrain version is $50-100 more. The cheapest carbon-fiber 27.5" one I've seen starts at under $1100:

https://smile.amazon.com/SAVADECK-D...&keywords=savadeck+carbon+fiber+mountain+bike

I have that 27.5 frame sitting in my garage now, waiting to save up for components and then will assemble it later (much later lol). The USPS guy when he delivered it said the box was so light he thought it was empty at first. Here is the frame only, $339, around 2.5 lbs (I do have to warn you that it's a rear dropout frame, but this company does make a 2x11 bike so somewhere on the net they have a 12mm thru-axle frame). Also, the head tube is tapered, so it's new/old spacing front/back. This is turning out to be more common than I thought, I've seen several bikes recently like this, not sure why they are doing this. Maybe they just think the front is important and the back can stay QR.

https://smile.amazon.com/SAVADECK-C...7&sr=8-5&keywords=savadeck+carbon+fiber+frame


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

RAKC Ind said:


> Carbon fiber has been "overpriced" for a while. But its the whole thing of people will pay for the benefits of a good CF design and pay a premium for it. Just like sram 12 speed. Add a cog, make it 4t bigger and gold color. Add a CF cage that costs A few cents more than the alloy cage and boom. $1000 drive train thats insanely finicky.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


SRAM Eagle is not finicky. I have two. They run perfectly. You have to set the chain gap with the B screw a little more carefully than with 1x11 but that's it.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Finally opened this thread and watched the Youtube. Great review on a piece of crap bike. Can’t wait to hear his thoughts once he tears it down and checks out the frame on its own. I’m too lazy to check all these replies but please tell me their are not those with thoughts on purchasing one?


----------



## AKRIDERK9 (Mar 4, 2018)

Well, I tend to give Walmart a bit more credit than they deserve, but Walmart carbon is absolutely terrifying and stupid..... my friend and I used to spend hours in the backyard on our Walmart bmx bikes absolutely sending it, we at least knew to get the better Walmart ones, not the cheap and infamous “chaos”..... heck, I cleared a 30’ gap a few times on mine, dropped off my buddies 6’ tall deck, and got 5’ of air once, I never had an issue and I was a big 12 year old (5’10” and 140 pounds). Would I recommend anybody do this? Absolutely not! The fact that we didn’t die is amazing, we both knew we were on borrowed time, but did it anyways..... that said, a bmx bike is different, it’s just a ridged steel frame, single speed, and just one rear brake..... not much to go wrong but they still cost me $175-$200..... so the fact that these mountain bikes have all of these extras like suspension and stuff for LESS scares me. I’m 17 now and endurance cycling is my thing. I’ve worked at a bike shop for 4 years now and own a bike that is valued at upwards of 6k, but I fully credit all of the skills I have on the trail to my summers in my youth on cheap Walmart bikes trying to outdo my friends. I still pick on Walmart bikes and they have never made even a passable mountain bike, but I still feel like they have their place in cycling as a gateway bike. I just wish people would quit trying to make them more than that.

As for the whole eagle shifting awful and being finicky thing.....

•you don’t need a special tool to set it up, it comes with a guide gauge that I promptly threw in the trash.....

•it’s funny you say that 11 speed shifts fine, but 12 speed is awful, the first 11 gears are spaced EXACTLY the same distance apart and have the exact same amount of teeth on each ring..... it’s literally just an 11 speed cassette with an extra 50 tooth ring added..... try it some time, take an 11 speed cassette and use it with a 12 speed system, it shifts perfect..... I even did a race like this! 

•please try to keep threads on topic, or at the very least, be sure you have a full understanding before you go bashing something you don’t care for simply for the sake of argument.....


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Train Wreck said:


> I'd ride it, think they'll be releasing an e-bike version soon?


Of course they are. It will pair nicely with the electric cart-driving customer base.


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/walmart-launches-high-end-viathon-bike-brand.html


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

net wurker said:


> https://www.pinkbike.com/news/walmart-launches-high-end-viathon-bike-brand.html


I saw this last week and thought that was what this thread is about.

It's a lot more interesting than the OP.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk


----------



## KingOfOrd (Feb 19, 2005)

Yeah, seems like the owners of walmart are interested in getting in the biking business, but will these bikes be sold at walmart? Might be direct to consumer type of thing.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

At least they can afford to lose metric tons of money in the bike biz.


----------



## jcd46 (Jul 25, 2012)

Train Wreck said:


> Yeah, seems like the owners of walmart are interested in getting in the biking business, but will these bikes be sold at walmart? Might be direct to consumer type of thing.


From what I read, was going to be on line only, so yep.


----------



## Kevin Van Deventer (Jan 31, 2015)

What's up with the name? Viathon?
Got Walmart bucks and that's the best they could come up with?


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

upgraded. discuss:


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

Train Wreck said:


> Yeah, seems like the owners of walmart are interested in getting in the biking business, but will these bikes be sold at walmart? Might be direct to consumer type of thing.


It sounds like they are into cycling, too.

Just my uninformed opinion, but there are a lot of higher priced products that Wal-Mart doesn't distribute.

May not be interested in$1-6k bikes taking up floor space unless they move quickly.

Seems like a better approach to invest in a brand, get a solid designer, and try buy direct.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk


----------



## KingOfOrd (Feb 19, 2005)

cjsb said:


> It sounds like they are into cycling, too.
> 
> May not be interested in$1-6k bikes taking up floor space unless they move quickly.
> 
> Seems like a better approach to invest in a brand, get a solid designer, and try buy direct.


I'm all for it, those boys have a lot of money and it would be great to see them not only join the market, as well as sponsor a pro team not just for mtb but it would be cool to see an American pro tour team racing Le Tour. These are the guys that Trek and Spec, might have to worry about.

I'd look into the bikes they offer and at least take it into consideration possibly buying one.

Interested to see how this develops.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

Here is a link to the Viathon site. For mountain bikes, it's carbon HT for now, but at least they offer Frame Only.

I don't closely follow carbon HT market, so no how their prices compare.

https://www.viathonbicycles.com/products/m1-frameset

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MozFat (Dec 16, 2016)

Think they might have been better off pitched a bit lower in the market. Trying to go head to head with the big players with discerning riders might be a stretch. 
A $2000 frame when a Canyon Exceed 6.0 is $2200?
Entry level at $16-1800 might have caught a bit more attention.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

The bike could reach a bigger segment of the market if they selected more current trail oriented geo and tire clearances. Matching wide rim width. Take non RC Spark and match the geo and 2.6 clearances with a 120mm fork.


----------



## shekky (Oct 21, 2011)

MozFat said:


> Think they might have been better off pitched a bit lower in the market. Trying to go head to head with the big players with discerning riders might be a stretch.
> A $2000 frame when a Canyon Exceed 6.0 is $2200?
> Entry level at $16-1800 might have caught a bit more attention.


^^^this^^^


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

BTW the price for a different 27.5 Chinese carbon bike (Amazon, NOT Walmart) went from $1100 to $900, crappy Suntour XCT fork (can of course upgrade later), 3x10 drivetrain, claims 27 lbs but I think it's closer to 29-30 lbs:

https://www.amazon.com/SAVADECK-DEC...W37N7N&refRID=NCC5AQZPDT5SW0W37N7N&th=1&psc=1

Air fork upgrade will drop the weight 1.5 to 2.5 lbs back to 27-28 lbs claimed weight.

ICAN sells a 30mm carbon wheelset for only $500, that will probably drop it another 1.5 to 2.0 lbs down to a total of 25-26 lbs.

1x conversion drops roughly 1 lb off, down to 24-25 lbs. NOW we are talking...

If you were wondering, the frame is $340, 2.6 lbs. I have it in my garage, sitting all by its lonesome. Violins please.


----------



## johnnyrmxd (Nov 23, 2014)

Mr Pig said:


> Maybe it's _solid_ carbon fiber?


Hahahahahaha
Or its filled with glass-fiber
That would explained the flex of the frame

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## johnnyrmxd (Nov 23, 2014)

chazpat said:


> Seems odd they'd go to the trouble of making a carbon fiber bike but then make it a 26er.


Its those cheap-ass 26" components to blame

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lned (Oct 17, 2021)

04 F2000SL said:


> Well it's here it's queer and I'm not used to it. A carbon hardtail at your local wal ie world!


Well, After watching Kev central on the CarbonX series I jumped in and bought a 27.5 wally world carbon bike , I junked all but the frame and after 3 years of hard use this thing has never missed a beat. I have about 600 miles of hard trail use and after a complete tune up and inspection from my bike shop this thing is ready for another year of abuse. I sold all the take offs and after replacing them with decent parts my total investment is about $700 - $800 I paid $300 for the bike on clearance. Absolutely no regrets


----------



## lned (Oct 17, 2021)

johnnyrmxd said:


> Its those cheap-ass 26" components to blame
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Its a 27.5 frame with 26" parts to cut the costs


----------



## 006_007 (Jan 12, 2004)

And here I though Covid killed this thread.


----------

