Irish Trails: 26 or 29er?

mikelo303

OK. Now I am stuck with two 29ers.

One carbon fame and good equipment 140mm travel. And second aluminum with high quality components 120mm travel. Both weight almost the same. Any thoughts? Which one would you prefer and why. Any feedback welcome.

http://www.cube.eu/en/full/allmountain/stereo-super-hpc-140-race/

or

http://www.cube.eu/en/full/allmountain/ams-120-slt-29/

Tenzor07

One question..... Why CUBE?

Looking at them it always seems that Cube are behind the likes of Giant, BMC and even LaPierre in terms of suspension design...

Anyhoo to answer your question, a Carbon bike would always get my vote and 140mm is great for trail riding...

The 120mm appears to be more race orientated, though 120mm is still plenty of travel for most types of trails..

mikelo303

Tenzor07 wrote: »

One question..... Why CUBE?

Looking at them it always seems that Cube are behind the likes of Giant, BMC and even LaPierre in terms of suspension design...

Anyhow to answer your question, a Carbon bike would always get my vote and 140mm is great for trail riding...

The 120mm appears to be more race orientated, though 120mm is still plenty of travel for most types of trails..

Well I have a deal with my local shop so I will get it like one grand or more cheaper than usual price. SO instead of paying 3,5K I will get it for 2. I would never buy such expensive bike otherwise. Regarding cube. They have always better value for money. Canyon is always best in terms of design and components but it's hard cash upfront. With cube I have huge discount and I can pay half of it by installments over half year. Regarding carbon one. Thy have special new suspension on the back so it's actually new and supposedly one of the best designs so far. According to test by http://www.twentynineinches-de.com

I am tempted by 140 suss and carbon frame. Not really crazy about equip as I will probably never notice difference between XT and XTR ot cashima. I have So basic crappy bike now that anything better would be a heaven for me.

Still my friend is suggesting 1200 because drop post and cashima and xtr, but he is a racer. I am a technical and fun type of guy.

Tenzor07

Hmm...must have a read of that...though funny how a German website gave a German bike company such a good bike review! :rolleyes:

As for XTR vs. XT, you will notice the difference when it comes to replacing worn components! XTR is for racers only...and sponsored one's at that...
Even the new 2013 SLX groupset is as good at the current XT groupset.

Most novice riders would not notice the difference between Kashima Vs. Non-Kashima suspension anyways...

mikelo303

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Hmm...must have a read of that...though funny how a German website gave a German bike company such a good bike review! :rolleyes:

As for XTR vs. XT, you will notice the difference when it comes to replacing worn components! XTR is for racers only...and sponsored one's at that...
Even the new 2013 SLX groupset is as good at the current XT groupset.

Most novice riders would not notice the difference between Kashima Vs. Non-Kashima suspension anyways...

Yeah. My friend told me that XTR is actually more fragile and you can break it quickly if you are not careful. He says that even SLX is better if you are not weight crazy. Said it's 100% stronger than XTR. Anyways I stick with XT for the beginning.

Regarding Cashima. I read (fecking everything online probably by now) that it really does not matter. Difference is so small that it's not important. People says that new sealing used by Fox form last year are more important and that actually sealing are making biggest difference. They advice not to make decisions based on cashima or not. New line is better anyway than old one and cashima is just cosmetics.

So far 140mm carbon wins then...