Cheapish full-sus for fat bloke?



Status
Not open for further replies.
"Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<c7WTb.867
> I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.<snip trek
> commercial>

How many years have you been riding it, how often, and on what kind of terrain?

JD
 
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:25:14 +0000, Fred Fragger wrote:

> Thanks for the replies,
>
> Can I be clear, is it the weight that's the problem or the amount of folding stuff I have
> available?

Both. Because of your weight, you have to look for a bike that is engineered to withstand the
rigours of your size. Lighter people can get away with frames and components that haven't
been engineered to the same level, because they're got going to be putting those sorts of
stresses on them.

> i.e., are the shocks and / or frames on the dearer bikes specifically designed for heavier riders
> or are they more adjustable or more robust?
>
> How about this 2003 model at a (in the UK at least) knock-down price? :
> http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=3121

No way. XC whippet bike.

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.j-harris.net/bike/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm
 
"Fred Fragger" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> GT I-drive http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=4124

Overengineered bottom-heavy boat anchor, poor fab and subpar materials.

> Scott G-Zero http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=4196

Don't know it.

> Marin Alpine Trail http://www.chevincycles.com/products.php?plid=1/0/1/1357

Decent design, but it will not last under your weight with regular use. A year maximum would
be my wager.

> Gary Fisher Sugar 4+ http://www.chevincycles.com/products.php?plid=1/0/1/1414

Complete and utter garbage for someone your size. I wouldn't even give it six months. Flexy, crappy
design and subpar materials/manufacturing.

Face the facts. You are big. A cookie cutter bike will only give you pain if you intend to ride
rough terrain and ride a lot. Save your duckets (ackers) and get a reputable custom frame, spec it
with the toughest parts you can buy and get a bike that you will ride over and over instead of
sending frames/parts in for warranty repair/replacement time and time again.

JD
 
"Fred Fragger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thanks for the replies,
>
> Can I be clear, is it the weight that's the problem or the amount of
folding
> stuff I have available?
>
> i.e., are the shocks and / or frames on the dearer bikes specifically designed for heavier riders
> or are they more adjustable or more robust?
>

If you're a shortarse then this could be your answer - spend £500 quid on the frame advertised here:
http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=113565&t=113565

spend the rest of your money on a marzocchi fork and strong wheels and save up for the other bits...

Steve.
 
"spademan o---[) *" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Fred Fragger" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:msTTb.16664$JL4.135798@newsfep4-
> glfd.server.ntli.net...
> > Thanks for the replies,
> >
> > Can I be clear, is it the weight that's the problem or the amount of
> folding
> > stuff I have available?
> >
> > i.e., are the shocks and / or frames on the dearer bikes specifically designed for heavier
> > riders or are they more adjustable or more robust?
> >
>
> If you're a shortarse then this could be your answer - spend £500 quid on the frame advertised
> here: http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=113565&t=113565

That would be the Turner RFX frame BTW.

Steve.
 
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 00:14:45 +0000, Fred Fragger wrote:

> Out of interest, these are also under consideration although, given the US > UK price distortion,
> they're probably fairly "low-end" mounts your side of the pond :) :
>
> GT I-drive http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=4124

I-drives break under people half your weight...

> Scott G-Zero http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=4196

Bad forks, bad wheels and an average rear shock. You could take it, but my guess is that with your
size and weight, you'd probably be sending the rear shock back on a regular basis. And what good is
a bike you can't ride?

> Marin Alpine Trail http://www.chevincycles.com/products.php?plid=1/0/1/1357

A good bike, but again, I don't think the shock would be strong enough for you. But, feel free to
discuss this with the shop.

> Gary Fisher Sugar 4+ http://www.chevincycles.com/products.php?plid=1/0/1/1414

Avoid.

> Looks like I'm going to have to read up on rear shocks and I guess it's about time I found a
> decent LBS.

As far as rear shocks go, you probably want to be looking for a coil-over. It will last longer and
is better suited to heavier riders.

> I guess I could look at second hand as Bomba suggested but I'm not sure that I'm comfortable with
> the risk I'd be taking.

It's an option, provided you know what you're looking for. For example, these came up on STW this
morning. Wrong size, but apart from that, it would be good:
http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=113677&t=113677 Or how about this?
http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/read.php?f=5&i=113633&t=113633

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.j-harris.net/bike/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm
 
"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<c7WTb.867
> > I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.<snip trek
> > commercial>
>
> How many years have you been riding it, how often, and on what kind of
terrain?
>
> JD

Its a new 2004 model...riding it since Christmas. The terrain I have been riding it on is the highly
technical trails in South Florida---because we have only small hills, the trail builders seem
compelled to make sure there are lots of huge mutated palmetto roots where ever possible, and where
its not possible, they like having log piles all along the trails to add more gratuitous technical
difficulty to the trails. Along with the log piles, on several of the trails there are now the plank
bridges which have you sailing off 3 to 5 feet drops onto flat landings.

I could easily turn this into a rant over what's wrong with the S Florida trails, but I'll leave it
at this---we could have more enjoyable, higher speed trails here than we have, and we could just
accept the fact that S. Florida has lame mountain biking. It would still do until you can take a
trip to N Carolina or Georgia. Instead, we have so much **** built in to our trails, that speeds
are often averaging closer to 8 mph, where they ought to be averaging 15 mph or higher, and when
you try to get a new rider in here, its almost ridiculous for them. They end up doing a lot of
walking or crashing.

The Palmetto roots are nothing like the "comfortable" roots you have in N Carolina or out West---
these are clusters that can last for 50 yards on trails like Johnathan Dickinson ( in Jupiter), and
the roots tend to be spaced almost perfectly in many stretches so that your front wheel is having to
clear one 9 inch, straight up flat sided root, the same moment your rear is hitting its twin
brother. With a dual suspension bike, you have to go as fast as you can, you have to "try" to keep
the front end as light as you can, while supplying as much torque as possible to prevent slowing. As
you are doing this, often you will be fitting between trees on either side, and having to make sharp
turns which don't allow any practical perpendicular approach to the roots, and the roots are always
running in all directions anyway, so reading the line ahead is something like skiing moguls.

For a heavy rider ( over 210 pounds), doing this on a hard tail gets really tough, since you have
no choice but to stand the entire time ( even more tiring for a heavy rider) , and its still hard
to keep traction to the rear tire without the assistance of a rear shock--and the bike is still
pitching forward sharply each time the rear end clears a new monster root. The bike has to be
lofted as high as possible, constantly, to smooth the impacts--allowing speed to be maintained,
but you have no ability to torque while you are in the air, so your speed is constantly dropping,
then you are sprinting to get back up to "root clearing pace", then slowed back down, sprinting
up, and so on.

With my Liquid 25, their is still gymnastics involved, but the difficulty level has dropped
enormously from when I would ride my hard tail over this stuff. Now my main concern is keeping
plenty of torque up to the pedals ( speed) , and just keeping the front end light.

The Liquid frame is way beefier than my hard tail, it has a huge rocker arm and overbuilt rear end
for the impacts of the normal rider. Where the hard tail was taking a pounding to frame and front
shock, the Liquid 25 seems to be completely unstressed. The 5 inch travel takes much of the abuse
away that the heavier rider would "attack" a 3 inch travel bike with, and the SPV keeps the bike
from bobbing at all, so there is no apparent downside to the longer travel that I have seen--it just
helps minimize stress on the frame and rider, this certainly good for long term integrity of the
bike. As I suggested earlier, at 220 pounds I can pedal a 30 pound bike with less relative effort
for me, than a 140 pound rider can for a 25 pound bike....My body fat percentage is dropping pretty
fast now, in response to heavy training and strict diet --if I can get my body fat percentage back
down to 10% ( from the 20% its at now) , the weight I will be loosing will be FAR MORE important in
my competitive riding, than the weight of the bike :)

Regards, Dan V
 
"Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Fred, I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.

Agggggh!

Well, I weigh a little more than 90% of what you weigh. (Do your own math!)

The Liquid was as flexy a POS as I have ever ridden. Supposedly, those flexible carbon stays are
only supposed to flex longitudinally (bike oriented) and not laterally. What a joke. The rear end of
that bike was all over the place. This was on a brand new bike, too.

> The Liquid weighs a little bit more than an Intense or a Santa Cruz ( have not weighed it, but it
> could be 30 pounds ??) , but if you weigh over 225 pounds, I think the relative weight of the bike
> should be less of a problem for you, than a 24 pound bike would be to a 140 pound rider.

If weight is an issue, then a hardtail is going to be what this person needs. No way to get high
strength, low weight and cheap price. Pick two...

> The only concern I see for you with this bike, or many others, is the shock limitations. The
> Liquid comes with the Manitou Swinger 3-Way w/SPV ---which is supposed to be set to 75% of your
> body weight ( but not over 175 psi).

I had to set the travel setting at the longest travel, or the BB would scrape on all sorts of
things. And I was blowing through the platform a lot. Shock set-up? Maybe, but all the other SPV-
like shocks that I have ridden (Brain, Romic, 5th Element) have been rock-solid.

I didn't like much about the Liquid, INCLUDING it's POS front fork that was ALSO flexy as hell. I'm
really glad you like your bike, but riding this thing on relatively twisty 1track made me pine for
my old rigid bike with steel everything. It was heavy and slow, but at least it was predictable.

I rode the thing for half a day after the set-up - maybe 12-15 miles. It was plenty plush on
straight drops, but it's twitchy behavior in turns really cranked up the pucker-factor on the tight
stuff. After the pivots get some wear, I don't even want to know what kind of flexy this bike is
going to be.

My apologies in advance for pissing in your cornflakes. I absolutely hated the Liquid, and wouldn't
recommend one to anyone.
--
Jonesy
 
<Originally posted by Jonesy
"Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Fred, I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.

Agggggh!

Well, I weigh a little more than 90% of what you weigh. (Do your own math!)

The Liquid was as flexy a POS as I have ever ridden. Supposedly, those flexible carbon stays are....<snip>

My apologies in advance for pissing in your cornflakes. I absolutely hated the Liquid, and wouldn't
recommend one to anyone.
--
Jonesy >

Although I am sure it has been addressed in other post but I don't see it in this one yet... Do you really need a full suspension bike?
I have a fairly heavy duty Kona bike (Stuff).. Yeah I know cookie cutter... JD would crush it in 3 minutes but I have ridden the bike hard for alomst three years... In all kinds of east coast terrain.
It isn't light... It isn't full suspension , but with some 2.4 tires and 100mm fork in front it is pretty forgiving. It is a jumping bike and the geometery is pretty upright.
The bike cost me well under $1000 USD (half that). The parts are speced on the lower end but for me Deore has served me well enough. (that is another can of worms completely)
I weigh in at 220 lbs...Like someone said light or durable pick one... Why not go for durable and affordable... Take the rest and bank it. In the years that the Hardtail serves you you could save for something more appropriate for you in a fully.



Jimbo(san)
 
Jimbo(san) <[email protected]> had this to say
news:[email protected]

> <Originally posted by Jonesy "Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>>
>> Fred, I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.
>
> Agggggh!
>
> Well, I weigh a little more than 90% of what you weigh. (Do your own math!)
>
> The Liquid was as flexy a POS as I have ever ridden. Supposedly, those flexible carbon stays
> are....<snip>
>
> My apologies in advance for pissing in your cornflakes. I absolutely hated the Liquid, and
> wouldn't recommend one to anyone.
> --
> Jonesy >
>
> Although I am sure it has been addressed in other post but I don't see it in this one yet... Do
> you really need a full suspension bike? I have a fairly heavy duty Kona bike (Stuff).. Yeah I know
> cookie cutter... JD would crush it in 3 minutes but I have ridden the bike hard for alomst three
> years... In all kinds of east coast terrain. It isn't light... It isn't full suspension , but with
> some 2.4 tires and 100mm fork in front it is pretty forgiving. It is a jumping bike and the
> geometery is pretty upright. The bike cost me well under $1000 USD (half that). The parts are
> speced on the lower end but for me Deore has served me well enough. (that is another can of worms
> completely) I weigh in at 220 lbs...Like someone said light or durable pick one... Why not go for
> durable and affordable... Take the rest and bank it. In the years that the Hardtail serves you you
> could save for something more appropriate for you in a fully.
>
>
>
> Jimbo(san)

I too, have had no issues with Deore. And your skills will progress exponentially on a hardtail. I
second Jimbo(san) on this one.

Dave
 
OK, I've digested all that's been written so far (and thanks for the input).

The least ******-on choice so far is the Marin Alpine Trail and that's where I'm at right now. I
like the bike, I like the spec and two work colleagues, who are pretty clued up, have agreed that it
is the best option in my price bracket. I've also spoken to a LBS who are Marin dealers and they've
contacted Marin who have confirmed that they are happy for someone of my weight to ride the bike,
i.e. no issues with warranty etc. (and I can have this in writing). This gives me some confidence as
I guess, if they didn't want the warranty problems, they'd have said "no bloody way". They can't be
that desperate to sell just one bike surely?

I don't ride the really technical stuff (too 'kin frightened and too old) so I'm not (apart from my
weight) going to really hammer the bike. I take the point that as my skills progress (hopefully) I
just may want to do something a bit more adventurous like riding downhill with Peaty :) but I'm
thinking I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I also already have a hardtail that is a
reasonable ride so I'm not really looking for another one.

Decisions, decisions, bloody cash is burning a hole in my pocket!

Later,

Fred
 
"Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Fred Fragger" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:vPWTb.16679$YV1.15227@newsfep4-
> winn.server.ntli.net...
> >
> > >
> > Thanks for the time you spent on your reply Dan.
> >
> > The nearest I can get to your 25 in the Liquid range is the 10
> > http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=3186 which is also on my short-list. Looks like a
> > different (cheaper) rear shock though? (The 25
is
> > 1,600 sterling - 3,000 USD !!!)
>
> Wow. That's twice what I paid for mine!!! Can't you have someone you know, buy one for you here,
> and ship it UPS ( but to you) as if they were going on a trip on your side of the pond ?
>
> The 10 is also "not" SPV, so it will pogo a little, if you use the full travel--which you will
> want to do.
>
> Regards, Dan V
>
>
Mmmm, I do have an uncle somewhere in Texas who is talking about coming back to the old country for
a holiday this year, he'd do it for me for sure. Think I'll have a chat with him over the weekend
and see what the possibilities are. Bit worried about the warranty though so I'd have to
investigate that.

Cheers

Fred
 
On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 20:47:59 +0000, Fred Fragger wrote:

> Mmmm, I do have an uncle somewhere in Texas who is talking about coming back to the old country
> for a holiday this year, he'd do it for me for sure. Think I'll have a chat with him over the
> weekend and see what the possibilities are. Bit worried about the warranty though so I'd have to
> investigate that.

<I will get round to putting this in the FAQ at some point>

I wrote this two weeks ago:

"It eventually works out as a false economy because it's not just shipping costs that have to be
taken in to account. As your stuff is brought in to the country, the delivery note will be inspected
by customs and excise who will levy the appropriate import duties, which for bike parts run at about
30%, I believe. Fail to pay it and they keep your stuff. Pay it and you make minimal savings, if not
actually paying more, with all the added bonuses of problems with returning stuff and a lack of
support from the UK / European distributors of said product."

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.j-harris.net/bike/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm
 
Jimbo(san) <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> <Originally posted by Jonesy "Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > Fred, I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.
>
> Agggggh!
>
> Well, I weigh a little more than 90% of what you weigh. (Do your own math!)
>
> The Liquid was as flexy a POS as I have ever ridden. Supposedly, those flexible carbon stays
> are....<snip>
>
> My apologies in advance for pissing in your cornflakes. I absolutely hated the Liquid, and
> wouldn't recommend one to anyone.
> --
> Jonesy >
>
> Although I am sure it has been addressed in other post but I don't see it in this one yet... Do
> you really need a full suspension bike?

Well, I sort did, in the middle of my foam-at-the-mouth rant:

"If weight is an issue, then a hardtail is going to be what this person needs. No way to get high
strength, low weight and cheap price. Pick two..."

[snip Kona commercial]

JUST KIDDING JIM! LOL.

Ride what you like - it's *your* money.

> Like someone said light or durable pick one... Why not go for durable and affordable... Take the
> rest and bank it. In the years that the Hardtail serves you you could save for something more
> appropriate for you in a fully.

Buying the wrong FS is just a huge waste of money. I know, because my Kona just didn't suit me. King
Kikapu, IIRC (Funny, after you remove the stickers from a bike, you can't remember the damn name any
more. I forget what model of forks I have, because I hauled the stickers off, LOL.)

Anyway...

I was glad to give that bike to my nephew. He loves it, my brother is impressed that I'd just give
his kid such an expensive bike (wasn't really - but he thinks $100 is expensive for a bike) and I
figured out I needed something more simple. I spent the money on that bike foolishly, when it comes
right down to it. Luckily, I had the money to spend and give away. The OP surely doesn't.

BTW, I think it was a Liquid 30 with the 3-position Swinger, and not the SPV - that was the Sugar
that I tried. It wasn't flexy, just didn't fit me.
--
Jonesy
 
"Jonesy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > Fred, I weigh 225 pounds and have been having great results with my new Trek Liquid 25.
>
> Agggggh!
>
> Well, I weigh a little more than 90% of what you weigh. (Do your own math!)
>
> The Liquid was as flexy a POS as I have ever ridden. Supposedly, those flexible carbon stays are
> only supposed to flex longitudinally (bike oriented) and not laterally. What a joke. The rear end
> of that bike was all over the place. This was on a brand new bike, too.

Jonesy,

Man, talk about raining on my parade ;-)

I'm wondering how you felt the lateral flex so much, and how you identified this as the stays,
versus the rear shock---I "think" if you had a Liquid 10 or 30, then you did not have SPV valves,
and instead had adjustible 3 to 5 inch travel---which is a poor solution, compared with the SPV
solution used on the Liquid 55 and 25 ( and does not allow travel length changes). SPV tightens the
whole suspension up, much more like a hard tail, until you take a big hit, and then the hit is
swallowed up beautifully.

Bottom line, the trails I ride here in Florida stink---they are technical, mostly by logs and
monster roots instead of big hills, and the logs and roots are hitting the bike in a
longitudinal axis.

For what I ride each week, I find the Liquid 25 way better than the Trek Fuel 100 ( which I was able
to demo on the trail I ride several days per week--Quiet Waters). I mention the Trek Fuel 100 in
comparison, since you clearly are praising elements the 100 excels at ( more like a hard tail, and
very tight suspension, great in rapid turn, tight songletrack), in contrast to the Liquids. The Fuel
100 is twitchy, requiring extreme finesse on technical sections ( more like a rigid fork bike), and
does not clear big roots or rocks any where near as well as the Liquid does ( with the Liquid 25, if
you have the power, you can ram through anything you can't finesse through:)... The Fuel 100 can go
faster on a flat acceleration on smooth ground, or up a smooth hill. For a top racer who has great
finesse, a bike "like" the 100 could probably go alot faster in all turns, and over small roots as
well. But they'd also be "working" the bike the whole time.

For a person just trying to ride fast and have fun, I think the Liquid 25 or 55 have a better result
in the type of trail we have here in S Florida. Likewise, when I get to ride my favorite trail,
Tsali in N Carolina, the Liquid 25 will let me hit huge speeds on the downhills, and the suspension
will be ideal for this Autoban for mountain biking type trail. I expect for the big sweeping, high
speed S turns on Tsali, the Liquid will also be fun. "More fun to ride" is the key issue here, and I
will agree I would not buy the Liquid 25 to win races .

I don't like ultra tight single track and big rock gardens---you have to ride slower than on autoban
style trails, and I enjoy high speed mountain bike techniques, much more than I do the low speed
technical maneuvers we have to use here in S Florida trails. I used to race in the mid to late 80's,
and after about 12 years of working too much, I am on my way back to race shape, about 25 to 30
pounds from now ( I've dropped 15 in the last 2 months). I carry a lot more muscle than virtually
anyone I will race against, from decades of working out in the gym, and I'm a past velodrome
racer/sprinter as well. I can turn a flexible bike into a spaghetti noodle at will ( make the rear
tire rub from acceleration torque), but have not yet been bothered by flex in the Liquid. At 10%
body fat I won't be able to be competitive in big hills--due to muscle weight, but I still like this
kind of big mountain event best--like a race on a Tsali style trail. I'm hoping you are wrong about
the lateral flex issue, sooner or later I'll be on a trail witht he type of terrain you are riding,
and I'll get back to you on whether I hate the bike for this, or if it handles it OK with the SPV
difference.

Different bikes are going to be better at different types of trails. I still have a hard tail bike
in the garage, with a good suspension fork, and I can use it if I want to ride ultra tight single
track--if I ever feel the lateral flex issue you are talking about:)

Regards, Dan V
 
"Dan Volker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Man, talk about raining on my parade ;-)

Sorry about that, man - just my opinion; don't mean nuthin'...

> I'm wondering how you felt the lateral flex so much, and how you identified this as the stays,
> versus the rear shock---I "think" if you had a Liquid 10 or 30, then you did not have SPV valves,
> and instead had adjustible 3 to 5 inch travel

Yes, that's the one. The SPV thing was on a Sugar, also rode that week (from the same shop -
and a Klein.)

OK, So when I was shopping for FS bikes, I rode a pile of different FS bikes. I rode a Fuel and the
Liquid from the same shop, and they had approx. the same spec for all the stuff other than the frame
and shock. I felt a direct comparison of their flexibility was appropriate. And a comparison to the
Klein Maverick and my HT.

> which is a poor solution, compared with the SPV solution used on the Liquid 55 and 25 ( and does
> not allow travel length changes). SPV tightens the whole suspension up, much more like a hard
> tail, until you take a big hit, and then the hit is swallowed up beautifully.

Marketing BS. The shock itself is a pretty rigid system, and it's quite short. I have never noticed
that a *shock* causes excessive lateral flex. Loose mounts maybe, but not the shock itself.

When you can see the fork flex in a turn, you know the fork has flex. Turn, brake and lean. That
Manitou Minute sucked eggs. And the dial-a-travel feature was just dumb.

> Bottom line, the trails I ride here in Florida stink---they are technical, mostly by logs and
> monster roots instead of big hills, and the logs and roots are hitting the bike in a
> longitudinal axis.

We gots rocks and roots here, too. And they "hit the bike" every which way. When you can feel the
rear end "squirm" on one bike, and not another, then the rear end is flexy. When it wobbles all over
the place in a turn, then something's flexing back there. On the same trails, with the same tires,
at the same pressure?

> For what I ride each week, I find the Liquid 25 way better than the Trek Fuel 100 ( which I was
> able to demo on the trail I ride several days per week--Quiet Waters). I mention the Trek Fuel
> 100 in comparison, since you clearly are praising elements the 100 excels at ( more like a hard
> tail, and very tight suspension, great in rapid turn, tight songletrack), in contrast to the
> Liquids. The Fuel 100 is twitchy, requiring extreme finesse on technical sections ( more like a
> rigid fork bike)

Maybe you are missing that the geometry of the bikes are not the same? Of course the Fuel steers
faster - it's headtube angle is steeper. The Fuel also has some rear lateral flex, compared to my HT
and current ZPP softail. It just wasn't so obvious as the Liquid's.

> and does not clear big roots or rocks any where near as well as the Liquid does ( with the Liquid
> 25, if you have the power, you can ram through anything you can't finesse through:)

I found the Liquid's BB clearance to be WORSE than my HT's, unless I set the travel all the way up.
And then it was a pig to pedal. Considering that my old beater HT and the Liquid weight about the
same, it sure sucked ass pushing that Liquid up hills.

Coming down was great, as long as the route wasn't all twisty. Straight and bumpy was the Liquid's
kind of terrain.

> For a person just trying to ride fast and have fun, I think the Liquid 25 or 55 have a better
> result in the type of trail we have here in S Florida.

Straight and bumpy, I'll bet.

> Likewise, when I get to ride my favorite trail, Tsali in N Carolina, the Liquid 25 will let me hit
> huge speeds on the downhills, and the suspension will be ideal for this Autoban for mountain
> biking type trail. I expect for the big sweeping, high speed S turns on Tsali, the Liquid will
> also be fun. "More fun to ride" is the key issue here, and I will agree I would not buy the Liquid
> 25 to win races .

For twisty technical stuff, the Liquid blows. Big, fat chunks. I'm guessing the name "Liquid"
describes the lateral stiffness of the rear suspension. LOL.

> I don't like ultra tight single track and big rock gardens---you have to ride slower than on
> autoban style trails, and I enjoy high speed mountain bike techniques, much more than I do the low
> speed technical maneuvers we have to use here in S Florida trails.

I am more a fan of the twisty 1track. And with roots and rocks, if I can get it.

> Different bikes are going to be better at different types of trails. I still have a hard tail bike
> in the garage, with a good suspension fork, and I can use it if I want to ride ultra tight single
> track--if I ever feel the lateral flex issue you are talking about:)

Ride the Liquid on some fast, tight 1track. Do it right after you ride the very same sections on
your HT. You'll see exactly what I mean, I promise. A tight, downhill S-bend will pucker you
right on up!

Your idea of "use the right bike for the right purpose" is spot-on. It's unlikely that a rigid SS
would win many DH races. Wheeler might protest, but it's true. At the same time, a DH bike to ride
the trails around here would be completely unacceptable. In addition, the OP was looking for a more
inexpensive ride than the Liquid. I stand by my criticism, and my review, but certainly acknowledge
that for your kind of riding, and your mass, the Liquid might be perfectly suitable.

Regards,
--
Jonesy
 
<Originally posted by Jonesy
Well, I sort did, in the middle of my foam-at-the-mouth rant:

"If weight is an issue, then a hardtail is going to be what this person needs. No way to get high
strength, low weight and cheap price. Pick two..."

[snip Kona commercial]

JUST KIDDING JIM! LOL.>

Hey now... it wasn't a recommendo for a brand I was giving.. I know better than doing that in here... I was more featuring the more upright... Heavy duty type of frame...
The bike was purchased to be my back-up for my Fully.. but ended up becoming my full time ride...
It was purchased with the mindset of cheap and durable...

<Ride what you like - it's *your* money.>

Hey I'd rather ride what I like with *your* money.. but charity isn't contagious these days ;-P



> Like someone said light or durable pick one... Why not go for durable and affordable... Take the
> rest and bank it. In the years that the Hardtail serves you you could save for something more
> appropriate for you in a fully.

Buying the wrong FS is just a huge waste of money. I know, because my Kona just didn't suit me. King
Kikapu, IIRC (Funny, after you remove the stickers from a bike, you can't remember the damn name any
more. I forget what model of forks I have, because I hauled the stickers off, LOL.)>

I bought a Rocky Mountain Instinct and started out loving it, but it just didn't work out. I ended up selling it on Ebay... I called it a divorce and kept the "other" bike :p
Oddly enough I have had the H/T everywhere my friends have had their much needed Fullies and never seemed to suffer.. I guess it's all a matter of comfort... and what you can fund.
One day I will fund a new Full suspension bike, but for now Cheap, heavy and durable work for me.
/commercial

Jimbo.. it's floor wax... no! it's a dessert topping... (san)
 
bomba <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:25:14 +0000, Fred Fragger wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the replies,
> >
> > Can I be clear, is it the weight that's the problem or the amount of folding stuff I have
> > available?
>
> Both. Because of your weight, you have to look for a bike that is engineered to withstand the
> rigours of your size. Lighter people can get away with frames and components that haven't been
> engineered to the same level, because they're got going to be putting those sorts of stresses
> on them.
>
> > i.e., are the shocks and / or frames on the dearer bikes specifically designed for heavier
> > riders or are they more adjustable or more robust?
> >
> > How about this 2003 model at a (in the UK at least) knock-down price? :
> > http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=3121
>
> No way. XC whippet bike.

Right. This is closer:
http://www.specialized.com/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=6743&JServSessionIdroot=buag5qfg8p.j27006
 
bomba <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 20:47:59 +0000, Fred Fragger wrote:
>
> > Mmmm, I do have an uncle somewhere in Texas who is talking about coming back to the old country
> > for a holiday this year, he'd do it for me for sure. Think I'll have a chat with him over the
> > weekend and see what the possibilities are. Bit worried about the warranty though so I'd have to
> > investigate that.
>
> <I will get round to putting this in the FAQ at some point>
>
> I wrote this two weeks ago:
>
> "It eventually works out as a false economy because it's not just shipping costs that have to be
> taken in to account. As your stuff is brought in to the country, the delivery note will be
> inspected by customs and excise who will levy the appropriate import duties, which for bike parts
> run at about 30%, I believe. Fail to pay it and they keep your stuff. Pay it and you make minimal
> savings, if not actually paying more, with all the added bonuses of problems with returning stuff
> and a lack of support from the UK / European distributors of said product."

Does that 30% apply to new or used parts? I've read somewhere that to avoid duties, you should take
it for a good, muddy ride and pack it that way.

/s
 
"Fred Fragger" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> OK, I've digested all that's been written so far (and thanks for the input).
>
> The least ******-on choice so far is the Marin Alpine Trail and that's where I'm at right now. I
> like the bike, I like the spec and two work colleagues, who are pretty clued up, have agreed that
> it is the best option in my price bracket. I've also spoken to a LBS who are Marin dealers and
> they've contacted Marin who have confirmed that they are happy for someone of my weight to ride
> the bike, i.e. no issues with warranty etc. (and I can have this in writing). This gives me some
> confidence as I guess, if they didn't want the warranty problems, they'd have said "no bloody
> way". They can't be that desperate to sell just one bike surely?
>
> I don't ride the really technical stuff (too 'kin frightened and too old) so I'm not (apart from
> my weight) going to really hammer the bike. I take the point that as my skills progress
> (hopefully) I just may want to do something a bit more adventurous like riding downhill with Peaty
> :) but I'm thinking I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I also already have a hardtail that
> is a reasonable ride so I'm not really looking for another one.
>
> Decisions, decisions, bloody cash is burning a hole in my pocket!
>
> Later,
>
> Fred

The Marin is about as good a FS as you will get at that price, especially if they're confident about
the frame warranty. Any weak spots will become apparent.

cheers gaz
 
Status
Not open for further replies.