Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19

    2013 Superfly vs 2012 Big Kahuna at good price

    Iím shopping for my first bike in a dozen years, and, obviously, my first 29er. Iíve narrowed my choice down to a 2013 Trek Superfly Elite. I wanted to buy as much bike as I could afford, so a slightly higher spec than my skill level likely deserves.

    However, a different LBS will sell me a 2012 Big Kahuna for about $300 less than the Trek, and Iím debating. From what I can tell, the specs are comparable.

    The Trek is a 17.5 and fits well enough, at least from what I can tell from a parking lot ride.
    The Big Kahuna is an 18, and Iíve ridden a Kona with a similar geometry. But not the exact bike. The 18 seems a marginally better fit, but itís very close.

    Jumping from a 12-year-old bike with v-brakes etc., I have really no comparison to modern 29ers. Either way I go, itís going to be a transition. With no 29er experience, Iím having a tough time making a good choice.

    So, Iím starting to lean toward the Kona based on price, but Iíd sure appreciate any thoughtsóparticularly from anyone with experience with the Kona or, even better, both the Kona and Trek.

    Also, both are good LBS. Iíd be comfortable at either shop.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CYCLEJCE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    631
    At that price level $300 isn't much... I think Trek has a better frame warranty. Also, the Konas were on closeout on Chainlove.com some months ago super cheap! May still be a few on Huckandroll. As far as fit goes, see if they will let you go on an extended lap around the block, 15 minutes if so. Hop some curbs and do a little urban thrashing on them!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,689
    The SLX brakes on the Superfly are an upgrade for many people who bought bikes with Elixirs. If a Scott dealer is in your area I would add a Scott Scale 950 or 940 to your demo list. If the dealer has a 2012 Elite for 1300 on discount that would be a steal. Even worth a little road trip.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19
    The Scotts are great bikes, but the geometry is a little too aggressive for me. The slacker Trek and Kona fit me much better. Which sucks, because I had a great price on a carbon Scale that was used briefly as a rentalóthe same price as the aluminum Trek. Just didn't fit.

    Thank you for pointing out the brakes. Great point.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CYCLEJCE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    631
    is this the scandium King Kahuna?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19
    That's right. Scandium 6069.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19
    Soyy. Big Kahuna, 2012

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    229
    Well, the trek is...uuuhhh... a trek. On the other hand the Kona is a bltchin bike, made by a bltchin company.

  9. #9
    get down!
    Reputation: appleSSeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,138
    Kona has a lifetime warranty on the frame, dunno what that dude earlier was talking about.

    Get the Kona.

    #konafanboy
    Rudy Projects look ridiculous

    visit my blog, BEATS, BIKES & LIFE

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,689
    I think you may have a misconception about the Scott geo. The HT angle is slack at 69.5 The chainstays are 440mm. Not aggressive but close to the carbon RC frame they won this year's XC World Cup with and a couple more out of the last 3 years. I guess you can ride it aggressively.
    Trek has a 69.3 HT angle but longer chainstays at 445mm.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19
    On the Scott, I just felt a little more stretched out than on the Trek, or the Kona for that matter. I'm sure it could be tweaked, but for me it just wasn't as comfortable.

    Not sure why. Maybe the stem angle was just a bit lower, which is an easy fix. All that said, the closest LBS selling the Scott is twice the distance away as the other two LBS. Great bikes, but not the best option for me.

    wasfast, ha ha, that's the same pitch I got from the LBS with the Kona. Cool factor does play into the decision, but I sure would love to hear from someone riding that Kona.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19
    Grrrr, might be a moot point. I just had a check-up, and the Doc informed me what I thought was just some nagging knee pain is actually lost cartilage and the beginning stages of arthritis. He's a huge, huge fan of biking for this problem, and he road bikes. For mountain biking, he suggested full suspension, but admitted he didn't know enough.

    I'm going to start a separate thread. Sucks, but squishy would seem to make sense. Talk about blowing my budget.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,689
    Good luck.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    150
    I would go Kona. THeir geometry always seems to work for me - and I am just not a trek fan.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •