Author Topic: Which MTB for under a grand  (Read 14891 times)

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Which MTB for under a grand
« on: September 08, 2014, 08:27:41 am »
I have been trying to find a thread which discusses the merits of various hardtails....but the search function just throws up web based stuff, which I have already trawled.  I know very little about these bikes, but, having hauled my Roberts Roughstuff up and down a few routes over the last couple of years, including a very wet trawl on some of the trails around Aviemore this weekend, I have become convinced of two things.  Firstly, I love it, even if, like this weekend up here, it is pouring with rain, full of mud and I end up sliding down most of the descents on my bum with the bike sliding down behind me and, secondly, I really would be better off doing this with a bike built for the job.  (I might stand a better chance of staying on the bike on the downhills, anyway. Possibly).  I might be able to scrape together a grand in the next few months and have been looking at the Boardman hardtail which is about 850 quid which has quite good reviews.  Just wondering if anyone on here has any knowledge of this bike and/or any others in that price range which they'd recommend me looking at.

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2014, 09:09:46 am »
Boardman generally have a reputation for good value packages with a higher spec of components than you'd expect at that price point. Which model were you considering?

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2014, 09:13:19 am »
The Pinnacle Ramin range from Evans have been getting good reviews too, and seem to be sensibly specced for the money.

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2014, 09:20:39 am »
Depends on your riding really but if I had  £1000 to spend it would be

On one parkwood

Or

On one fatty (don't tell my wife but this is the next n+1)


Don't let people put you off a 29er either if you're under 6ft. They just want to keep them to themselves. I'm 5'8" and love my 29er
OnOne Pickenflick - Tour De Fer 20 - Pinnacle Arkose cx - Charge Cooker maxi2 fatty - GT Zaskar Carbon Expert

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2014, 09:46:00 am »
Be careful with Evans and Pinnacle.  Young LJ has a Pinnacle jump bike - a sort of "mountin bike" but with the saddle far too low.  When the inevitable happened and he snapped the gear hanger Evans were unable to supply the correct replacement (they did sell him a replacement gear hanger, but not one that would actually fit that bike  ::-) ).  There were none available from any of the on-line sellers/manufacturers of gear hangers, and in the end a very kind forumite made him one.  I was not impressed with Evans' service.

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2014, 12:23:28 pm »
Is what you were doing what you'd like to do with the new bike?
If so my old thread might help (give or take changes in models): https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=46418.msg917128#msg917128  I'm happy with the On-One Inbred I got, for about a grand.

interzen

  • Venture Altruist
  • Agent Orange
    • interzen.homeunix.org
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2014, 12:42:57 pm »
If you can rock a 29er then a Genesis High Latitude.

I used to have the (now discontinued) singlespeed version - awesome bit of kit, but eventually got dumped for a younger model (a Salsa El Mariachi)

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2014, 12:51:08 pm »
The On-One Inbred is often recommended and is inexpensive (I built mine for probably around £500 about 10 years ago but the frame was s/h) but beware that the frame is long. This means that to avoid too long a reach you may need a smaller than usual frame so the handlebars may end up a bit low. It's a decent enough frame though and I ran mine as an everyday bike with rack and 'guards for a while.
Pen Pusher

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2014, 04:23:02 pm »
What do I want it for?  Well, I want to have a go at the Ryvoan Pass this week...I have borrowed an old mtb to do that.  Tried riding through Glen Affric a couple of years ago and spent a lot of time pushing up, which I don't mind too much, but also throwing the bike down too...which I am not so keen on.  Even this old mtb I borrowed seems much better on steeper,rougher bits (An Sluggan, near Aviemore, if anyone  reading knows it) than the Roberts....I always feel I am constantly having to bring the Roberts under control on rough, steep terrain....this old mtb seemed happy for me to let it go without me constantly feeling I was on the edge of losing it

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2014, 04:26:44 pm »

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #10 on: September 08, 2014, 04:55:13 pm »
What height are you?  I have a Trek 4500 WSD that I've been trying to sell:

https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=82253.0

I could fit a better fork and disc brakes for a bit more money, but still much less than a grand.
I could also arrange postage on it.

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #11 on: September 08, 2014, 07:00:19 pm »
Interested, definitely.  16 inch is the same size as the old thing I have borrowed...rode it through the forest and up and down An Slugan today...it felt like a perfect fit.  I would want disc brakes though, having experienced a split rim on the Roberts Roughstuff offroading it through the Peak District (bit of flint stuck in a rear brake pad and then kaboom! on a subsequent descent when it ripped a 7 inch tear in the rear rim....scary).   I know nothing about mtb forks so don't know if I'd prefer a different one...do know that some can be locked out though, so that sounds like a good idea as I don't own a car, so would have to ride it on road for at least part of my off road journeys.

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #12 on: September 08, 2014, 07:35:04 pm »
Boardman Mountain Bike Team HT 650B is the model I was looking at...I think those massive wheels would just render any bike too big for me, no?  The 16 inch I have borrowed feels right but it's only got old style 26 inch wheels.  When did this all get so confusing?

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #13 on: September 08, 2014, 07:46:31 pm »
650b aren't much bigger than 26" wheels. I wouldn't worry about them being too big, but what size wheel is a whole discussion in itself :). Only possible downside is that there's less choice in 650b tyres than for 26" or 29" ones, but that choice is growing.

Fork wise I'd definitely be looking at an air spring rather than coil. Lighter and, in my view, more suitable for what you want to do. Most have a lockout these days although I don't use it that much on mine. I'd agree with you about disc brakes, preferably hydraulic although a good cable brake is better than a bad hydraulic one.

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2014, 08:09:56 pm »
I did take a peek at that on one, king boonen.  Liked the look of it certainly.

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2014, 09:47:19 am »
I did take a peek at that on one, king boonen.  Liked the look of it certainly.

It's the best trail hardtail you'll find for under a grand, they put the price up slightly recently but it still beats the rest.

26" ain't dead, I'll be sticking with it for a good while yet and most the people I ride with will too.

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2014, 10:14:39 am »
Without wishing to make any suppositions I think that 140mm travel may be too much for the OP's intended use?

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2014, 11:38:33 am »
Without wishing to make any suppositions I think that 140mm travel may be too much for the OP's intended use?

She mentions Aviemore which 140's would be perfect for (as long as we are talking proper trail riding, not paths round lochs) and it always better to be a bit over-biked than under biked... I've ridden up there on 120's and will soon be going to 150-160. I think 140 hits the sweet spot on a hardtail that will still ride ok on a gentle meander down a tow-path but will handle black runs at trail centres no problem.

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2014, 05:30:09 pm »
Yes, I think I mean proper trails...Ryvoan Pass I did on the Roberts a couple of years ago...lots of pushing up and throwing down.  And I would like to do some longer routes in Scotland.   I have been told I would find it much better on a bike made for the job.  Today I went out on the borrowed hardtail...not Ryvoan but some bits up hills in woods...track turned into rough path then disappeared altogether!  It seems these tracks on the OS maps which aren't actually dedicated by the estates for offroading, can disappear after a few years, if the estate stops using them.  It was still fun though, even if a machete would have been handy for the last mile or so!
The terms you are using is all the stuff I don't understand...I know 140mm is something to do with the movement in the fork but not quite sure how that relates to the terrain you want to travel.  Thanks everyone so far for all the advice. 
My mate says I maybe shouldn't spend so much yet...I am not good at judging this kind of thing...only ever had second hand or hand me down bikes till I was 45, then just saved up enough to buy a proper made to measure Roberts Roughstuff which was of course about two grand!  From the ridiculous to the sublime, you might say.

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2014, 05:36:13 pm »
Yes, 140mm is the amount that the fork will compress completely. Typical range today is from 100-200mm with more travel being used for more extreme riding.

There's a good introductory article here: http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/mountain-bike-suspension-forks-a-buyers-guide-55/

Quote
Mountain biking is a very diverse sport and there are suspension forks designed for every type of bike: cross-country bikes generally offer 80 to 120mm of suspension travel, trail bikes range from 120 to 140mm, enduro and all-mountain bikes have between 150 to 170mm, and gravity/downhill rigs go from 180 to 210mm.


Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #20 on: September 10, 2014, 09:04:12 am »
I personally find anything above 100mm of suspension on a hardtail to ride very strangely as, when the fork compresses a lot, you are pitched forward, pivoting around the rear axle.
For more than 100mm of travel I prefer a full suspension bike, as the rear compresses in a ratio with the front, eliminating the pitching forward effect.  Much more money, though.
Most stuff can be ridden on a 100mm hardtail with decent tyres, just a bit slower and with more careful line choice than a full suspension bike.

Jane: if you're interested in the Trek then send me a PM.  I'm sure we can sort something out.

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #21 on: September 10, 2014, 09:32:20 am »
Sounds like you're riding the wrong hardtails bikenrrd  ;)

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #22 on: September 10, 2014, 12:03:52 pm »
The terms you are using is all the stuff I don't understand...I know 140mm is something to do with the movement in the fork but not quite sure how that relates to the terrain you want to travel.

As PaulF said, it's the maximum travel you get from the fork. It can all get very complicated with different wheel sizes, different travel forks (some are dual position, some can be internally changed) either air or coil springs, different geometry and so on and so on...


This is very, very generally: bikes sold with forks from 80-120mm travel will be aimed at cross-country riders. They'll have a more forward geometry which will work well going up hill and on the flats but can feel like you are going to go over the bars easier when it gets steep downhill. The geometry of the frame is designed to enhance these characteristics and these are the kind of bikes you would see used in the XC races in the Olympics/Commonwealths etc. They work very well for people who want a bike to commute on as well as ride trails and they'll handle all of the graded trail runs in the UK fine.

Bikes sold with 140-160mm travel forks are usually referred to as trail/all-mountain/enduro bikes. The longer travel means they are more able to soak up big hits if you are dropping off steep stuff, doing some jumps etc. Again, the geometry of the frame usually reflects this and you'll find they have a steeper head angle which makes them feel more confident on steep descents but are harder to pedal up hill (more likely to wheelie). Many 160mm bikes use dual position forks so you get the benefits of both. These bikes can be used to commute but they're not great for it, but they'll hammer round trails like anything and take you off-piste and even down some downhill runs if you fancy it. If you want a mountain bike that'll do anything these are the ones to look at in my opinion.

Bikes sold with 170mm+ travel are almost always full-suss and over 180 is usually a downhill bike. Downhill bikes are designed for just that, hammering downhill. You do not want to pedal one up! You can get some 170mm travel all-mountain bikes and these will climb fine (FS can be designed in a way to make them climb well) but again, they're likely to be full-suss bikes that you wouldn't want to pedal on long, less taxing rides.




For me 140mm travel sits right in the sweet spot between rideable all day and able to point it down hill and feel confident. Of course, the frame matters just as much as the fork, but frames are designed with the travel in mind as I said.

I've actually just ordered a dual position fork for my BFe which runs at 130mm and 160mm. It'll probably spend most of it's time at 130 to be honest.

jane

  • Mad pie-hating female
Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2014, 01:05:40 pm »
http://www.on-one.co.uk/i/q/CBOO456EVO2DEO/on-one-456-evo-2-shimano-deore-mountain-bike


Will handle anything UK trails can throw at it. :)
I have been offered one of these secondhand.  Will check it out this weekend.  Just wondering if I would be able to future a dynamo hub wheel on it...

Re: Which MTB for under a grand
« Reply #24 on: September 19, 2014, 05:10:33 pm »
http://www.on-one.co.uk/i/q/CBOO456EVO2DEO/on-one-456-evo-2-shimano-deore-mountain-bike


Will handle anything UK trails can throw at it. :)
I have been offered one of these secondhand.  Will check it out this weekend.  Just wondering if I would be able to future a dynamo hub wheel on it...

If it has the fork shown in that spec (or any other 15mm through axle), then your options are limited, but it is possible. I use a Shutter Precision hub on a 15mm fork; the other option is a Son28. If it has a QR fork, then the planet's your mollusc.

I'll add my endorsement, here, too. I've had a mk1 456 since 2008, and it has been spot on.  :thumbsup:
Life is too important to be taken seriously.