There is no better XC race bike than the Epic. People may suggest differently, but they are wrong.

1 x 11 is far better for almost ALL use-cases for trail riding, especially if there's minimal climbing. You should ride them both.

Both good choices IMO. I just bought a Scott Spark 27.5+ that has a 1x12 Eagle XX1 setup on it. Definitely go 1x if you have the option. Its awesome.

2nd this

Looks like I am going in a different direction.

Back to a hardtail, a Procaliber 9.7.

https://www.diamondback.com/mountain-bikes/trail/recoil-29#


What about this one? Full suspension for $499.

Probably weighs a ton with crappy suspension and mediocre components at best. I have mechanical discs on my mtb and am not a fan. Also, low tier components on a road bike are one thing, easy to maintain and they'll work fine. On a mtb, once you get some dirt and mud in there it's not going to be a fun day. If that's all you want to spend, buy a used hardtail

If you're doing marathon racing I think you'll regret getting a hard tail by about hour 2-3.

The single marathon race I take part in (6 hour race). Is on smooth single track, with the odd root. No rocks. Almost all of my riding is fast non-technical fireroad type riding.

I raced MTB on the same trails with a hardtail for 10 years. I have been riding a Full Susp. for the past years, and really miss the hardtails, but was nervous about the fatigue as you note. I wonder if the procaliber with the iso frame is a good intermediate step.


Another thing is components. I really like the idea of 2x11. I currently ride 1 42 chain ring with rear cassette of 11-34. I only use my middle 34 chain ring on 1 climb. a 36 with an 11 speed road cassette of 11-32 would give me perfect gearing for 99% of my riding, and then I would still have a bailout gear for that one or two climbs which need it.

So I am going to buy a bike from KONA or GIANT.

Staying under $800...which hardtail would you get and why?

Giant.

Why? I raced giant bikes for about 4 seasons, all hardtail 26' bikes. All aluminum, and very good handling bikes. In that price range you will be getting an aluminum frame and Giant has the best frame technology in that material, and will likely give you better component spec. as well.

Just keep in mind that the Procaliber's "suspension" only works if you're seated. If you're out of the saddle, it's no different than any other hardtail.

I saw that. I am trying to pick a bike for my riding style, I have never really been one to stand very often, climbing on road or MTB. I may stand to accelerate out of a corner, but for most of my riding I am sitting.

For more info, I am currently ridding on a 26' Giant Anthem 1 from 2006. I set the bike up with the highest allowable amount of air pressure in the rear shock. I ride tubeless and keep air pressure kind of high (30-35lbs) or the rear end just feel to soft for my liking.

Kona makes some fantastic bikes.
I demoed a few recently, and they were FANTASTIC.

This may be true. But I have never owned or raced a Kona. They also have very little local support so I know only one person who has significant experience on one. This is why I would go with a Giant, not because it is better, but because I know they are good bikes with good to very good value.

That said a Kona could be better.

Cannondale Scalpels are wicked fast. Need lots of maintenance, but FAST. Find yourself a Yeti ASR, it's a FS that pedals really well.

I HATE proprietary parts. So I shy away from most Specialized, Cannondales and the like.

What is your price point?

Local LBS, good friend and they help me out a ton, only carry Specialized and Trek.

Don't have one exactly. I will ride the bike in the spring about 10 times, and in the fall about 20 times. So I do not want to spend big bucks. I am willing to spend more for the Procaliber 9.7, but for a top fuel I would end up at the 8 (aluminum) or the as Epic Comp (aluminum).

Why will I go up for the procaliber but not the Full Susp. bikes. I value the wheels and better fork and Xt 2x11 shifting that comes with the procaliber 9.7 over the 9.6, and I really do not like the idea of 1x11. I hate big jumps between gears. The mid end Full suspension bikes are 1x11 or 12. The Trek top Fuel 8 has components and price I could live with. The Spec. Epic looks awesome, but the maintenance of the Brain fork would be a deal breaker if not improved with the new rockshox.

Emotionally, I really want a super fast light hardtail again. I once raced on a Schwinn Homegrown XTR bike. It was stupid light, point and shoot geometry, and I flew over all the local XC race courses. I want that again.

The jumps between gears really aren't that noticeable. I went from a triple, to 1x10 11-36, to 1x11 11-42, and haven't noticed the gaps at all. If the terrain is varies, the gaps are even less evident. The 1x is a great system, it really does clean things up.

If its between Specialized and Trek, go with the Trek.
Shimano > Sram Brakes.
Gearing you want.
DT wheels are good stuff.
No proprietary fork.

Thanks for the tips.

I wonder if the jump from the procaliber 9.6 to 9.7 is worth it at 1400cdn.

Wheel upgrade: Bontrager elite vs DT Swiss m1900
Fork upgrade: Ruby vs recon (375grams of weight in this fork alone)
Component upgrade: SLX vs XT (I have never raced on anything less then XT, so SLX makes me nervous)
Frame is the same. The 9.7 is about 10% lighter.

The only thing you would notice is the Fork.
SLX is pretty dang close to XT. I have both.

For 1400, you could get a carbon wheelset and an upgraded fork aftermarket (if you find good deals)

I agree that the jumps between gears really aren't that noticeable.

I went from a 2X11 11-40 on my old mountain bike to a 1X11 11-46 on my new one. I rarely ever used the small ring on the old bike, the only time would be to make a quick jump down when coming to a quick change in grade.

The 1X on the new bike is so simple and the speeds on the mountain bike change so much that fine tuning of my cadence isn't necessary.

I would say the XT cassette and chainrings are worlds above the SLX or lower tier variants. derailleurs and crank are effectively on parity (with SLX actually winning out, IMO, in the optics department). The higher spec shifter will always win out.

I bought a Trek ProCal this spring and love it. 1x11. Races it at Lutsen and Leadville. Great bike all the way around. I had been riding a Top Fuel. I do Xterra's now. My motto is always ride the lightest bike possible. But at certain races I'm sure I'd be a bit fresher on some courses with a full suspension.

That's very much a matter of opinion. Personally I'm not a fan of the way Shimano brakes feel, and would take (the newer - yup, Sram brakes of 5 years ago were crap) Sram brakes any time. I wouldn't say they're better, or worse, I just much prefer the way they feel. I find them easier to bleed too but, again, I'm sure that's just personal preference. I think the takeaway is "Sram and Shimano brakes feel different - try them both and go with the one you prefer".

It is a matter of opinion.
The Guides have gotten high marks for modulation and power, but they have issues with seizing. With the history of Avid/Sram brakes being what it is, the burden is on them to prove that they have changed. The Guides are a big step in the right direction.
I like my brakes to be there when I need them and disappear when I don't. Shimano's do that. Easy to work on, pads are cheap and available.
I am perfectly comfortable with my original statement