What is the Honda Civic of mountain bikes?

[[email protected]]

I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?

 

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go
> from asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've
> shopped around and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range
> of options has this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end
> bike that most of the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?

I bought my son a $400 Raleigh that has held up very nicely for about
four years. His is front-suspension only, and if you are a larger
individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
kind of full suspension.

Looking at the Raleigh website, I think the rough equivalent of my
son's bike is the Mojave 5.5. A pretty good looking full suspension
bike is the Phase, viewable at

http://www.raleighusa.com/items.asp?deptid=11&itemid=280

It can be a little tough to find a Raleigh dealer in some areas. The
Raleigh website has a dealer finder, though. I think there is a
consensus that you tend to get more bike for your money, at least at
the low end, with Raleigh than with the "name" dealers.

My daughter's Gary Fisher bike was a little more expensive, and has
also held up well, but the GF website is too brain-damaged for me to
look at on a non-Windows platform, so I can't point you at anything
specific.
--
_+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\ / [email protected]|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[di]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?
>

Honda car dealers sell a mountain bike, it's probably made by Pacific, it
weighs about 35 lbs, very cheap components, but does have a Honda name on
it. Maybe you can convince them to put a Civic decal on it.

Seriously, the price won't help keep you from "getting stuck", but the
better components will definitely keep you on the bike more, The higher the
price normally means better components, you should get years of service from
about any bike bought from a bike shop, maybe months of service from one
purchased from a department store. I have a Cannondale F300 Mountain Bike
that costs about $500 and have ridden it nearly 3000 miles, I also have a
Cannondale Scalpel full suspension bike which costs about $2500. both are
equally reliable.

 

[ridewright]

There is a problem, with the Civic, you buy, drive past the gas pumps,
it's all good.
With a low end bike you buy, you ride,, you explore a bit more than
you had thought you would, you have a blast. You soon can not help but
notice others ridding stuff you would like to try, but you know your
low end bike is too heavy, you start looking for a better bike.
This process takes two months max, so you buy a better bike, having a
little better idea of what this mountain biking is all about. You might
even think "bet I can sell my $300 bike for $275 to offset the cost of
the $900 bike I just bought!" Good luck! The first bike will sit and
gather dust, useless. Doing the math, with a little conjecture thrown
in, this means you now ride a $900 bike, that you paid $1200 for.
So, take your time, look around, and then spend the extra rto get a
bike you can be happy with for at least a year or two.
Happy hunting

 

[JD]

J.D. Baldwin wrote:
> if you are a larger
> individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
> kind of full suspension.


What a crock of ****.

JD @225 lbs

 

[NotaKnob]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?

Specialized is the Civic of mountain bikes. They're ubiquitous on the
trails, most often not the like an S2000 or an NSX, but you'll
sometimes see a riced-out one. I still see FS-Stumpjumpers from 95 out
there and you've probably seen some raggedy-ass ugly purple rigid
stumpjumper/rockhopper from the 80's tied up outside a bar.

Bruce

 

[CowPunk]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?

Forget about the frame or bike manufacturer.

The price ranges have to do with the components.

Shimano in general runs like this
LX/deore = good
XT = better
XTR = best

Not sure about the SRAM hierarchy, but in general, they make some
pretty good stuff.

If you're just looking at most bang for your buck, and really don't
ride enough
yet to care about frame geometry, ride quality, etc....
Then look for the bike with the best group you can afford. Things that
wear
out quickly are going to be brakes/shifters/deraileurs. If you can
find a frame
with XT quality components in your price range, you probably will be
happy
with it, since it will spend less time in the shop. Specialized does a
pretty
good job of spec'ng out their bikes.

 

[J.D. Baldwin]

In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
> > if you are a larger
> > individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
> > kind of full suspension.
>
>
> What a crock of ****.
>
> JD @225 lbs

I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.

I'm about the same weight and, while I don't *hate* riding a hardtail,
I can easily see where a 100kg+ beginner might find the sensation a
little discouraging.
--
_+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\ / [email protected]|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[small change]

"NotaKnob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
>> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
>> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
>> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
>> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
>> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?
>
> Specialized is the Civic of mountain bikes. They're ubiquitous on the
> trails, most often not the like an S2000 or an NSX, but you'll
> sometimes see a riced-out one. I still see FS-Stumpjumpers from 95 out
> there and you've probably seen some raggedy-ass ugly purple rigid
> stumpjumper/rockhopper from the 80's tied up outside a bar.
>
> Bruce
>

LOL, Paladin had a blast on Mr. Adventure's turquoise M2 comp a few weeks
ago... and I did just happen to see one of those raggedy-ass ugly purple
rigid
> stumpjumper/rockhopper from the 80's tied up outside a bar.

Only it was at the super market. ;-)

 

[small change]

"J.D. Baldwin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
>> > if you are a larger
>> > individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
>> > kind of full suspension.
>>
>>
>> What a crock of ****.
>>
>> JD @225 lbs
>
> I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.
>
> I'm about the same weight and, while I don't *hate* riding a hardtail,
> I can easily see where a 100kg+ beginner might find the sensation a
> little discouraging.
> --

A beginner finding the sensation of a HT discouraging? WTF does that mean?
If they are riding stiff, butt glued to the saddle, and hanging on for dear
life, you bet it's going to rattle them but that's all about technique, and
not the bike.

 

[Paladin]

[email protected] wrote:
> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?

Hmm, Honda Civic. Reliable, economical, works when it's spozed to, no
frills, just dependable, economical transportation. Good on dirt.
Decent components right out of the shop. My vote goes for the
Specialized Rockhopper hardtail. Fits the bill on all counts.

CDB

 

[Paladin]

small change wrote:
> "NotaKnob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > Bruce
> >
>
> LOL, Paladin had a blast on Mr. Adventure's turquoise M2 comp a few weeks
> ago... and I did just happen to see one of those raggedy-ass ugly purple
> rigid
> > stumpjumper/rockhopper from the 80's tied up outside a bar.
>
> Only it was at the super market. ;-)

Yep, I had a blast. Riding that older hardtail was like dating a girl
friend from high school without having to explain it to my wife. I
love the stumpjumpers from the early-mid 90's. Poetry in motion.
Nice lines; perfect race geometry, light, nimble, hops like a rabbit,
climbs like a squirrel, "floats like a buttahfly...".

CDB

 

[cc]

Paladin wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>>I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
>>exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
>>asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
>>and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
>>this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
>>the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?
>
>
> Hmm, Honda Civic. Reliable, economical, works when it's spozed to, no
> frills, just dependable, economical transportation. Good on dirt.
> Decent components right out of the shop. My vote goes for the
> Specialized Rockhopper hardtail. Fits the bill on all counts.
>

I second that.

 

[Raptor]

J.D. Baldwin wrote:
> In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
>>> if you are a larger
>>> individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
>>> kind of full suspension.
>>
>> What a crock of ****.
>>
>> JD @225 lbs
>
> I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.
>
> I'm about the same weight and, while I don't *hate* riding a hardtail,
> I can easily see where a 100kg+ beginner might find the sensation a
> little discouraging.

You're right for beginners. But I was a beginner before anyone developed
full suspensions. There were few trails I would challenge. Now, I'm 195
lbs and bought a hard-tail because I was getting too soft.

OP: $300 is enough for a good bike (from a bike shop). It'll last and do
what you want. But spend as much as you can afford. $500 will get you a
hard-tail that'll take you to any trail you ever want to try, or a
full-SX that will need more maintenance if you ride it hard. Look at
$700+ for a good entry-level FSX that you can grow into.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

If FDR fought fascism the way Bush fights terrorism, we'd all be
speaking German now.

 

[cc]

Raptor wrote:
> J.D. Baldwin wrote:
>
>> In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
>>
>>>> if you are a larger
>>>> individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
>>>> kind of full suspension.
>>>
>>>
>>> What a crock of ****.
>>>
>>> JD @225 lbs
>>
>>
>> I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.
>>
>> I'm about the same weight and, while I don't *hate* riding a hardtail,
>> I can easily see where a 100kg+ beginner might find the sensation a
>> little discouraging.
>
>
> You're right for beginners. But I was a beginner before anyone developed
> full suspensions. There were few trails I would challenge. Now, I'm 195
> lbs and bought a hard-tail because I was getting too soft.
>
> OP: $300 is enough for a good bike (from a bike shop). It'll last and do
> what you want. But spend as much as you can afford. $500 will get you a
> hard-tail that'll take you to any trail you ever want to try,


or a
> full-SX that will need more maintenance if you ride it hard. Look at
> $700+ for a good entry-level FSX that you can grow into.

BS. Name one.

 

[Raptor]

cc wrote:
> Raptor wrote:

>> You're right for beginners. But I was a beginner before anyone
>> developed full suspensions. There were few trails I would challenge.

wouldn't

>> Now, I'm 195 lbs and bought a hard-tail because I was getting too soft.
>>
>> OP: $300 is enough for a good bike (from a bike shop). It'll last and
>> do what you want. But spend as much as you can afford. $500 will get
>> you a hard-tail that'll take you to any trail you ever want to try,
>
>
> or a
>> full-SX that will need more maintenance if you ride it hard. Look at
>> $700+ for a good entry-level FSX that you can grow into.
>
> BS. Name one.

Um... Maybe I should've said $1000.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

If FDR fought fascism the way Bush fights terrorism, we'd all be
speaking German now.

 

[MattB]

cc wrote:
> Paladin wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
>>> exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go from
>>> asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've shopped around
>>> and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range of options has
>>> this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end bike that most of
>>> the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmm, Honda Civic. Reliable, economical, works when it's spozed to, no
>> frills, just dependable, economical transportation. Good on dirt.
>> Decent components right out of the shop. My vote goes for the
>> Specialized Rockhopper hardtail. Fits the bill on all counts.
>>
>
> I second that.

I agree too. Or maybe even the Surly 1x1. It's even simpler, but that
may not be such a good thing for some riders.

Matt

 

[Scott Gordo]

J.D. Baldwin wrote:
> In the previous article, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm looking to purchase a Mountain bike. I'm just going to do it for
> > exercise so I don't need anything special - just the ability to go
> > from asphalt to dirt and some mud without getting stuck. I've
> > shopped around and the prices range from $300 to $1500 and the range
> > of options has this novice's head spinning. What is a solid low-end
> > bike that most of the owners tend to be happy with but not ecstatic?
>
> I bought my son a $400 Raleigh that has held up very nicely for about
> four years. His is front-suspension only, and if you are a larger
> individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
> kind of full suspension.
>
> Looking at the Raleigh website, I think the rough equivalent of my
> son's bike is the Mojave 5.5. A pretty good looking full suspension
> bike is the Phase, viewable at
>
> http://www.raleighusa.com/items.asp?deptid=11&itemid=280
>
> It can be a little tough to find a Raleigh dealer in some areas. The
> Raleigh website has a dealer finder, though. I think there is a
> consensus that you tend to get more bike for your money, at least at
> the low end, with Raleigh than with the "name" dealers.
>
> My daughter's Gary Fisher bike was a little more expensive, and has
> also held up well, but the GF website is too brain-damaged for me to
> look at on a non-Windows platform, so I can't point you at anything
> specific.
> --
> _+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
> _|70|___=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
> \ / [email protected]|to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
> ***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------

While I don't share your enthusiasm for budget full-suss for big
people, the link to the Raleigh site was interesting. The total Turner
ripoff of the link isn't a bad looking rig. They've got a lot of nice
stuff in there, rigid steel 29er included.

/s

Rode a Tomac back in the day....

 

[JD]

J.D. Baldwin wrote:
> In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
> > > if you are a larger
> > > individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
> > > kind of full suspension.
> >
> >
> > What a crock of ****.
> >
> > JD @225 lbs
>
> I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.


If your idea of the "typical rider" is one who doesn't know how to ride
a bicycle and get their ass out of the saddle, then yes, I am not the
typical rider. I see so many asswipes who plant that ass in the saddle
on their cush FS bike and will never learn how to ride a bike as
opposed to their riding on a bike. Your "typical rider" is normally
the kind of rider I avoid because I can easily blow their doors off
while riding a fully rigid bike. Normally their saddle is keeping
their head pinned in that ass, so they can't recognize someone wanting
to get by their slow ass.

JD

 

[GeeDubb]

"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> J.D. Baldwin wrote:
>> In the previous article, JD <[email protected]> wrote, quoting me:
>> > > if you are a larger
>> > > individual (say, 180-lbs.-plus) you will probably want at least some
>> > > kind of full suspension.
>> >
>> >
>> > What a crock of ****.
>> >
>> > JD @225 lbs
>>
>> I am under the strong impression that you are not a typical rider.
>
>
> If your idea of the "typical rider" is one who doesn't know how to ride
> a bicycle and get their ass out of the saddle, then yes, I am not the
> typical rider. I see so many asswipes who plant that ass in the saddle
> on their cush FS bike and will never learn how to ride a bike as
> opposed to their riding on a bike. Your "typical rider" is normally
> the kind of rider I avoid because I can easily blow their doors off
> while riding a fully rigid bike. Normally their saddle is keeping
> their head pinned in that ass, so they can't recognize someone wanting
> to get by their slow ass.
>
> JD
>

Hey now, I resemble that rant.......

Gary (doors blown off by JD and his rigid ss while ass planted in
saddle.....)