Mountain Bikes

65535

65535

Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
3,736
Lately I have been riding my dad's old hand-me-down street bike (Univega from the 70's I think). It's on its last leg, and I'd like to get into more offroad riding aswell. Anyways I was doing some browsing and came across the Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Comp. If anyone has experience with this bike, or comparable bikes (price range around $1,500-$2,000) your experience would be appreciated.

SJ_FSR_Comp_GL_Blk.jpg
 
What type of mountain biking are you planning to do? If it's just typical trail riding with maybe some jumps then that bike is a bit of overkill. The more suspension and stuff you put on, the heavier the bike gets. For that type of riding, a hardtail (no suspension in the back) is more than adequate. Bikes of type:

Specialized Rockhopper or Stumpjumper HT (Hard Tail)
Bianchi Doss or Mutt
Cannondale CO2 or Caffeine
(there's many others)

Now, if you're just doing trail riding w/o jumps, you can make do without a mountain bike! You can check out cyclocross bikes (looks like a road bike, but you can fit wider nobbier tires on it, and has lower gearing - heck of a lot faster and lighter than MTBs):

Bianchi Volpe (I have one of these) or Axis
Kona Jake the Snake

Heck, that Univega could probably make a nice cyclocross. What size is it? Maybe I'll take it off your hands - it may have more life in it than you think - PM me if you want to get rid of it or want some info on restoring it....
 
Do some research. Like most inventions, mountain bikes have gone from rather simple, generalized machines to bikes designed for very specific conditions.
Quick steering for tight, "technical" woods trails, slower steering for high-speed hardpack, full suspension and disc brakes for "free riding" down ski-resort trails...

If, like many riders, you'll only spend a small percentage of time off-road, and most of that on "improved" trails, you don't need a lot of complexity.
 
Thanks for the help, for me it is definitely nice to be able to get recommendations on bikes that cost half as much, and will probably (I'm not an avid biker but I am picking it up as fast as I can) ride better for what I do. Right now I have only been on road, but I know there are a few really nice wide dirst access roads up in the hills around me that are popular bike paths that require at least Mountain Tires. I really like the look of the RockHopper Pro Disc, and I'm curious would someone like me who's starting to get into biking appreciate the hydraulic brakes which I have heard such great things about, and the features that the $1200 bike would have over their $600 or so bike?
 
I wholeheartedly agree with wintermute: F/S frames are for downhill or extreme XC riding. Unless you have a F/S with a drop-out, climbing on a F/S is a lot more difficult than a hardtail. Don't get sucked into the hype based upon what folks who buy their bikes at Wal-mart ride (since buying a "top end" Wal-mart bike is what a large number of people do)! :barf: I recommend a hard tail as well.

If a F/S is a must, be prepared to spend a lot up front and more for parts maintenance since there are more moving parts to maintain. Also expect a heavy bike. Also, how a F/S has suspension designed into the frame will determine how much float and pedal-bob you might experience when riding. While I'd love to own one, they just aren't practical for most of the riding I currently do.

Check out Mtbr.com which has a Reviews section on bikes as well as forums.

You cannot go wrong with major brands like Specialized, Trek, Gary Fisher, Cannon, or Kona. Keep in mind that the most expensive part of the bike is the frame, followed by the tires. Everything else makes up the components, which other than the frame can be swapped out/upgraded at any time. I'd recommend disc brakes if possible.

Easiest solution - pick a few models that look good on paper and then ride them to see which one best suits you.
 
Disc brakes are increasingly standard on even mid-level bikes. They really shine in mud-goo conditions, where rims and such get all gorpy. Also, on those Western "free-ride" downhill trails they can prevent rim overheating and tire failure.
For most purposes, good 'ol V-Brakes work just fine, and they are simple and cheap to maintain.
 
If you are going to be trail riding as well a street riding I suggest a hard tail with a good to better front shock. Street riding on a full suspension is like a road biker bombing down a hill...you just don't do it. There are also less parts that will break and maintain. A full suspension bike costs a lot to repair and maintain over a hardtail. I have both a HT and a FS. I prefer to ride my HT. I may sell my FS due to its lack of use and get another top shelf HT. I would also look into mechanical disc brakes. Hydro discs have a tendency to blow out at just the wrong moment and cannot be fixed by the user easily on the trail. Mechs are very easy to fix.
 
Check out a Marin Nail Trail II - may be exactly what you are looking for.
 
What kind of offroad riding are you thinking about? On my hardtail I ride a lot of dirt paths and a few rocky trails through the forests and the front suspension is more than adequate. That said, even road bikes with thin tires can go "offroad" as I have ridden in grass and on hard packed dirt with mine.

By the way, being able to spend $1-2k on a bike is nice, but it's a lot easier to shell out half that and you will still get a pretty awesome MTB.

wintermute, do you ride in Suffolk? I'm looking for interesting places to ride.
 
The FSR is a good bike and gets high marks from owners. If you want a FS it's a good place to start.

You've had a lot of people tell you that you don't need FS. I would both agree and disagree. I started riding MTBs in 1983 when there was no suspension of any kind. When the first Rock Shox came out I jumped on it. I stuck to hardtails for a long time and yes they do the job. Around 2000 I bought a FS bike and have barely touched the hardtails since.

Both types have their pros and cons. A HT is lighter than a FS and comparatively spec'd out will cost less. I think the maintenance issue isn't nearly as big a deal as a lot of people make it out to be...there are more parts on a FS bike but those parts don't need repaired/replaced often enough to make a difference. I feel that I climb better on FS than a HT, the FS forces the tire into the ground more and I get better traction.

If you're going to ride mostly on the road then the HT is probably better. However, there's no reason you can't ride FS on the road. Ideally you would have both a MTB and a road bike.

In the end the best thing you can do is some research and then hit the bike shops. Ride anything that grabs your interest, both HT and FS. You'll get a better idea of what works for you that way.
 
Carrot - I used to ride all around the north shore of Suffolk when I was a kid, but I live in Nassau so I don't get out there much - mainly for the Bike-Boat-Bike Tour every year. To be honest with you, I haven't had much ride time this year, but I mostly ride the bike path down to Jones Beach, the bike path to Bethpage State Park and the Nassau Greenbelt trail (note: hiking trail ridden on a cyclocross bike).

65535 - what you're going to find alot of in the $600 - $1200 price range is that the main difference between the highs and lows in the range is a difference in components (cranks, derrailleurs, brakes, shifters, etc.). If the components are made by Shimano, try to keep them Deore level or above (although you get much diminished returns as you go up in the Shimano heirarchy).
 
65535 said:
Lately I have been riding my dad's old hand-me-down street bike (Univega from the 70's I think). It's on its last leg, and I'd like to get into more offroad riding aswell. Anyways I was doing some browsing and came across the Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Comp. If anyone has experience with this bike, or comparable bikes (price range around $1,500-$2,000) your experience would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

I've had two Specialized bikes, and they've been great. I currently ride an '05 Enduro Comp, which is a longer travel bike than the Stumpjumpers. The Stumpies are great bikes, but more oriented towards cross-country riding and racing.

Depending on your weight and what you plan to do, I'd highly recommend looking into an all-mountain bike. They've got lots of travel, have disc brakes, and aren't so wallowy and heavy (like downhill bikes) that you can only ride them on steep descents.

I'm 6'-3" and weigh ~ 225 lbs., so I need a big bike that can take abuse. Specialized, Santa Cruz, Titus, and a bunch of others make wonderful all-mountain bikes that I would strongly urge you to test ride.

By the way -- since you've been riding 20 year old technology, when you swing your leg over one of these modern bikes you're in for a wonderful surprise. They are absolutely a blast!

Think I'll go for a ride tonight.......

Edit: Just saw some other posts, and have to strongly disagree with a few.

First of all, a full-suspension mountain bike is thing of wonder, and makes every ride more fun. You can beat yourself up on a hardtail and save a few pounds, but you won't have nearly as much fun.

Buy as much bike as you can afford. Yes, there is a HUGE difference between that $600 and $1,200 dollar bike, and in 6 months you will be wishing desperately you'd spent the extra. I've ridden cheap bikes, and I've ridden bikes that cost close to $4,000 -- and there's a huge difference. The better the bike, the better rider you are, and the more you can push yourself and have fun.

Brakes: rim brakes get hot and fade, get wet and fade, get gritty and eat your rim, get out of adjustment, and require regular wheel truing. Proper disc brakes are a thing of wonder -- one finger braking that will haul you down in any condition. That's a lot of peace of mind.

We have modern technology for a reason -- it works! If you go off road on anything more than a gravel road, get a good full suspension bike with disc brakes, and you'll have a new addiction.
 
Last edited:
I knew I forgot to add info, I'm 6'0" about 180lbs. The last mountain bike I owned was a Trek FS $300 bike I got at a local bike shop. I've always liked FS, but don't mind a hardtail.
 
Mountainman38( or anyone else) could you tell me what knife that is in your sigpic?
Sorry to get off topic, but I like that knife!Patrick
 
Spinnerblade said:
Mountainman38( or anyone else) could you tell me what knife that is in your sigpic?
Sorry to get off topic, but I like that knife!Patrick
Click to expand...

Patrick,

That's an Ontario Knives RAT-7 D2. I didn't like the grey coating that came on it, so I used some paint remover and fine grit sand paper to take it off.

I recently bought a RAT-3 D2 and did the same thing, which made it a much better knife. That thick grey coating makes sharpening the knife a pain, and cuts down on slicing performance.

I really like my RAT knives, but they both took many hours of work to get to where I could use them. The factory edge on both knives was very obtuse, and not particularly sharp, so I had to spent quite a bit of time with a diamond stone to bring the grind angles up. Once that was done, I could actually put a good edge on them. D2 isn't hard to sharpen, once you get the angles where you want them, but it takes a long time to wear away.

Tim
 
No problem, it's always nice to find out what knife it is you have been eyeing.

Anyways, I think tomorrow I'll hit a couple of local bike shops and see what they have, I will probably be inclined to limit actual buying choice to what is local, unless in an extreme case I would doubt buying online.
 
Ken C. said:
If you are going to be trail riding as well a street riding I suggest a hard tail with a good to better front shock. Street riding on a full suspension is like a road biker bombing down a hill...you just don't do it. There are also less parts that will break and maintain. A full suspension bike costs a lot to repair and maintain over a hardtail. I have both a HT and a FS. I prefer to ride my HT. I may sell my FS due to its lack of use and get another top shelf HT. I would also look into mechanical disc brakes. Hydro discs have a tendency to blow out at just the wrong moment and cannot be fixed by the user easily on the trail. Mechs are very easy to fix.
Click to expand...


I have to disagree with Ken here. Many full suspensions have the option to lock out the rear shock when riding on flat terrain or trying to pump up a hill. Some even have a cable guided to the handlebar so you can lock the shock out on the fly! Even without the lockout, most full-suspensions nowadays have almost no pedal bobbing. Pedal bobbing is when everytime you pump your leg to pedal, the back end bobs up and down. The way most bike frames are shaped, and the way the swingarm/pivot system linkage is designed, there is little to none of the old dreaded pedal bobbing. I also disagree with the statement that it cost alot to maintain a full suspension. Sure it costs more, but if you can afford a nice specialized f/s bike, then you can probably afford the once every year or two maintenance needed for a rear shock. aside from that, the only other maintenance needed for a full-suspension is to clean and lube the pivot areas. All that entails is removing the bolts, wiping the bushings down, lubing, and re-installing the bolts. If your pivots are sealed cartridge bearings, then I would bet that MAYBE every 5 years to replace/clean them. Maintaining a shock/fork is alot easier than most think. There are quite a few usefull books out there on mountain bike maintenance, and a few dedicated to shock building/maintaining. I do agree with Ken about the mechanical disc brakes. Hydrualic brakes can be a pain in the neck. Especially in the wintertime. Mechanical brakes are super easy to adjust and fix. Chances are, that all you will ever need to do is to remove the pad, wipe with rubbing alchohol, and put back in. And replace them when needed.

I suggest the Specialized XC full suspension. I got mine in september of 2004 when the newer 05' models came out. These were the ones that use a dedicated shock (not the previous years' coil-over), and new geometry. The XC is identical in frame geometry to the stumpjumper, but is slightly heavier (only talking about 200 grams, big whoop), and less-pretty welds. Other than that, it is basically a stumpjumper that is way more affordable, with comparable components.
 
after posting my response, I must again emphasize my recomendation for the XC model. Indeed the stumpjumper is damn-near the perfect cross country ride with damn-near cream of the crop parts and components. I don't think that it is necessary to get the stumpjumper model when the xc is basically the same thing. Also, the xc comes in the different "trim" packages. I think that the highest end version xc comes with shimano xt components. My bottom end XC came with lx components, and have not failed me after some serious use for 3 years.

BTW: XC stands for "cross country"
 
If you can afford it get a full suspension there are so many types out there, some with rearshock lock out, pedaling platforms (meaning you can control the compression valving to match the type of terrain) Theres also types with linkages that help pedaling (VPP which is on Santa Cruz bikes) ("DW Link "Iron Horse bikes)
when your looking at forks, you want something that has adjustable travel so you can crank down travel and keep the head angle steep( makes it easier to climb) then when you get ready to descend you can put the travel back to full, for the downhill.
The full suspension thing has nothing to do with Jumps, It has to do with handling and comfort. It helps you stay in the saddle and keep pedaling and also keep the rear wheel on ground. Look at all of the pro dirt jumpers and bmxers they all ride rigid rear (meaning no suspension).

And as far as weight goes I ride a Turner Sixpack(RFX) 6 inches of travel front & back . it weighs in at 30lbs.

Some good bang for buck brands are Giant,Iron Horse, Kona, Transition. Most of these come specd pretty well with OEM parts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top