Originally Posted by NayBreak
Originally Posted by bounceswoosh
Why would I be in a hurry to sell the DH rig I already have, which has 26" wheels and is already years old and which will sell for far less than its replacement value, in order to have a single bike that doesn't DH as well as it and will also be worse on climbs than my XC bike?
I think that is exactly the assumption you should challenge with your new bike evaluation. If your DH is years old, and your XC is on 26", do you know that a latest and greatest with two bike budget into one bike won't downhill as well (for what you ride) or climb as well as your current XC?
The rides near my house still require lots of climbing. DH tends to tear bikes up, so it's nice to have another bike to ride during the week when the DH rig is in the shop. Or, as happened a few weeks ago, to even ride some DH for the rest of the day.
Makes total sense. Although again, when we ask "what is the difference between a $3K bike and a $6K bike?", part of the answer hopefully should be component durability. So if the answer to the above surprises you re: uphill / downhill (I am making no assertions here, it's just what I would want to know), then perhaps a single bike that can handle the overall demands without repetitive component failure would make more sense than two bikes with lower levels of components and their ongoing maintenance requirements.
I have no need to have one bike that does both self-propelled and DH.
That may have answered your original question
. I had posted this link earlier, and like all reviews it is just that: a review. However, the review hits on light weight, no failures over a long term test, major downhill chops with long climb efficiency, and no feature skimping.http://flowmountainbike.com/tests/long-term-test-giant-trance-advanced-sx/
I am a perfect example of 'dividing the bike budget', because mine goes into kid bikes and all the other stuff and so my piece of the pie is a hardtail. From that perspective, I wouldn't divide my own bike budget into niche bikes that end up each at half when I don't ride that 10% insane uphill nor do I ride that 10% insane downhill. I'd put it all into the 90%, which is where the new 27.5's are sitting.
The divide by half adds weight, it downgrades components, it removes features that add to stability, durability, efficiency, etc. So that's the question: can one bike be better than two if the budget is relatively fixed? The answer might
Hah. I have written, erased, and written a response to your post at least three times now. Here goes.
Thanks for the thoughts and the link to the Giant, NayBreak. All of this hinges on a demo, which -
I realized today, asking the doctor to look at my shoulder while he was taking stitches out of my chin, that I am in no way ready to demo a bike this week. My shoulder hurts too much doing random things. I canceled the Yeti demo. I realized I was pushing myself to do way too much while still pretty jacked up. I am really bummed. There have been some tears. My last week of freedom before going back to work, and I'll be spending it at doctor's offices and such. Realistically won't be riding for a few weeks, possibly months, if my guesses about the shoulder are correct. THIS SUCKS. I was just fine as long as I could pretend nothing had really happened, but now with the shoulder - meh. I am pretty cranky and there may be a pint of something decidedly off-diet in my near future. On the plus side, it removes the (self-imposed) urgency to figure out whether the SB5c is "the" bike for me. Husband would be happier if I waited till the spring to pull the trigger. So there's that.
That Giant is pretty similar to the Yeti I'm looking at, except the Yeti is prettier and has that whole Colorado thing going for it. I thought Yetis were made in Colorado, but now I see they're made in Taiwan, so nevermind that. I still like the idea of supporting a US and especially Colorado company. And did I mention how pretty the bike is?
Your question about whether one of the new generation bikes could be close enough to a one bike quiver is fine in theory, but I don't think it's relevant to me. I'm not planning to sell my bikes to make room in my budget or garage for another bike. I wasn't planning to spend less on a new bike because of the fact that I already own a DH rig. My bikes' components aren't particularly prone to failure; it's simply a fact that when you ride hard, sometimes stuff happens. When you get into very expensive components, they tend to actually be lighter and thus more prone to damage from a rock or whatever. I don't agree with what I think you're saying, that by buying an expensive 140-160mm bike I would somehow be less likely to damage the components than by riding my current DH rig, which was probably a $5k bike when it was built and has had some upgrades over time.
I'm trying to find an analogy. Okay, maybe this. It's like you're telling someone who's really into fashion and already owns a fancy party dress that if she would just get something kind of more in the middle, she could just sell her fancy party dress! Not to get another awesome party dress, but just to pare down her wardrobe. And then maybe she'd give you this look like you are a Martian, because you clearly don't understand that having different dresses for different occasions is something she actively enjoys.