Mountain bikes get even more specialised than road vs. tri bikes, it all depends on what you intend to do with it. XC racing, light trail use, freeride / downhill, all of these demand different things from the bike and so there are different bikes that work best. Not that you can't DH on a hardtail, but I wouldn't want to.

In general, a hardtail is less maintenance than a full suspension, an XC oriented full suspension will be faster and more comfortable over most terrain. A lot depends on your local trail conditions as well as to what is best.

Decent mountain bikes start at well under $1000, and go up from there to whatever you want to pay.

There are a load of good manufacturers out there. Have a look at the Trek / Gary Fisher / Klein, as well as Specialised, Giant, Cannondale. All make decent bikes at good prices. There are a load of companies that specialise in mountain bikes that you shouldn't overlook, like Rocky Mountain, Santa Cruz, Brodie, etc. etc. There aren't too many truly 'bad' bikes out there anymore.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

As someone who just bought a new mtn bike and had to learn about the ltest technology I suggest you first do some reading. Mtn bike technology is much more complex than road/tri bikes. There are trail bikes, cross country bikes, freeride bikes, downhill bikes, north shore bikes, etc. Plus there are many suspension and equipment options. The price ranges are huge and the number of bike companies is much greater than on the road side. I suggest you look at Mountain Bike Action and get a sense of what is out there. This mag is quite tech oriented and will get you up to speed quickly.

I'm looking at the moment for a new one as well, definately more complicated than road bikes. I would move that question across to mtbreview.com, those guys are hardcore.

I'm 6'7" and 205. I've had good luck with my specialized Stumperjumper. I have the 'old' M2 hard tail, I think they're up to M4 now. I owned a full suspension (broke the bottom bracket while climbing) for a while but went back to front only. My theory with full suspension vs. hard-tail is when you reach the limit of the suspension and wreck on a full suspension you are going way faster than you would have been going on a hard tail and that is generally bad. I've proven this to myself many times. To get a good full suspension that doesn't absorb a ton of uphill energy you have to pay $$$. This is my 3rd stumpjumper since they came out in 1981. So either a good quality hard-tail or a light full that you can lock the rear suspension out. Nothing worse than pushing your big heavy full suspension up a hill just for the ride down. $1000-1500 for a really nice hard tail that will take some abuse and is light. Add a 1000 to that for good rear suspension.

Surly Karate Monkey. I mean, who wouldn't want a bike named Karate Monkey? In all seriousness, I think a lot of people vastly overbuy their mountain bikes. Sure those dowhill rigs with 6" of travel in the rear and motorcycle-style forks up front look cool - but unless you're riding the chairlift up for the sole purpose of bombing down at 50mph, it probably isn't the right bike for you.

My advice is to get a solid hardtail with a decent suspension fork on it (or run the rigid if you're into that retro style) and XT components. Save the dual suspension/disc brakes/hummer-style-auto-inflating-tyre bike for a couple of years down the road, when you have a better idea of what you want to be doing.

The Karate Monkey is a damn good frame, and can be built up as a single speed or multi, with conventional brakes of disc, and you can pick your fork to suit. Shimano XT drivetrain & solid 32 spoke wheels to round it out for well under a grand.

---

<If you're gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough>
Get Fitter!
Proud member of the Smartasscrew, MONSTER CLUB
Get your FIX today?

a beefy hardtail could definitely take a beating, but can also require a bit more skill from the rider if tackling some technical terrain. you would become a better rider in more rapid fashion on a hardtail, i would bet. personally, i just bought a kona dawg dee-luxe earlier this year. kona markets its bikes, especially the dawg series, as bikes that can take a beating, while still delivering solid performance. i think the dawg series is very versatile and just a lot of fun. they are full suspension, with 4" of travel in the front and rear. the series covers several price points from about $1200 up to $2800ish.

if you want to get some more info on bikes in general, try mtbreview.com under the discussion forum "what bike to buy". lots of good advice over there.

---

f/k/a mclamb6

Gotta disagree with some here. Unless your sole purpose is XC racing (and even then there are FS options), definitely go for a full suspension bike. They ride better (read gentler on the body), they are easier to handle on technical trails (crash less because the rear wheel isn't bouncing all over the place), and you can just plain have more fun on them than hardtails IMO. The only drawback, and again, unless you are racing who cares, is the extra weight. As people have already said, where you ride and how you ride will narrow your selections immensely.

Just about any name brand bike will be a decent bike these days. You also don't need to spend for the best components. LX and XT are a little heavier, but from my experience they are a lot more durable. Best bet IMO is a FS with a Stable Platform type rear shock.

FWIW I have a Specialized Stumpjumper HT for xterra, Specialized Enduro FS for fun.

Dont think your ironman/half racing experience has anything to do with what kind of mtn bike your buying, but if you live in mountainous area I would get full suspension and disc breaks.....regular pads wear out quick and dont stop as well....

Santa Cruz Blur. Pure fucking butter. If Jesus were alive today he would ride a Blur.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.