Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    14

    Lapierre Zesty or Spicy?

    I just moved to Switzerland and booked a 3 day Valais tour from Nendaz to Zermatt which I am told is mostly downhill. I am new MTB but keen to get into it and trying to decide between a Zesty 214 or Spicy 216 frame which are within my price range. The Zesty is 13.4kg but the Spicy is 14.9kg which I worry is on the heavy side.

    First Q is if the Zesty will do the trick in the Alps? Hear the Spicy is more suited.

    Second Q is if I should stretch my budget at get a Spicy 316 which is GBP450 more? Or if I should stretch it even further and pay GBP700 more for a Spicy 516 (2010 model) I found on sale.

    Third Q is a general Q. The Lapierre size guide tells me I should be a medium frame but if I stand up when off the saddle, there is no clearance between the top bar of the frame and my crotch! Imagine there should be some space between or is that not an issue?

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    20
    Hi, I can't help you much regarding which of the two to get, but I'm in a similar situation as you as I'm also not quite sure which frame size to get (medium or small). How tall are you?

    So far I looked at different 150mm suspension bikes, and I think those bikes are generally quite tall I think. Take a look at this video, if you forward to the very end you can see the reviewer is basically resting his youknowwhat on the top tube, there's no space at all!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    14
    Around 168cm. Size guide shows a small frame is for 150-168cm and a medium frame from 165-175cm.

    Point on the vid though I think the gap is even less for me on a medium frame!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    20
    Hmmm... ok if there's even less gap than in the vid you should probably go with a small. But I'm the wrong person to give advice really. Hopefully you'll get more response. I'm 173cm btw.

    That's the Lapierre size guide you're talking about?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    14

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    20
    You could also measure your inseam and apply the formula given on the Lapierre site:

    Frame Size = inseam (cm) x 0,56

  7. #7
    usually cranky
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,980
    id go for the spicy. overall it will be a bit more capable than the zesty and really not give up anything. a stretch to the 316 is worth it, stretch to the 516 only if the money is burning a hole in your pocket. id get the medium, it would be more comfortable for longer rides.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    31
    I've got spicy 216 2010 model.
    Weight is not an issue for me (and have 2-ply maxxis tires on it, bash + chainguide upgrades), using it as AM machine.

    I'm 172 cm and small is perfect. I've also put 50 mm stem on it. Climbing is not an issue at all. Medium would also probably be fine, especially with 50 mm stem, but I personally like shorter bikes more.

    At 168, I would definitely go small. For 450 price difference, 316 _might_ be worth it, you basically pay for the fork (oh, yeah, 216 2011 model has crappy brakes, 2010 one had formula RX). And fork is open bath float, which you may be able to upgrade to later on for 450 (and selling domain). Plus I like green one. However, with 2011 models, you also get tapered headtube and maxle lite. If getting 2011 model, I would get 316 one, if price is ok (which increased for 10% from 2010 ). You do not _need_ a travel-adjustable fork. For me, it might have been useful for 0.5% of time, which is not worth it.

    I got mine on sale (1500 eur), was also thinking upgrading the fork (if I would, probably lyrik), but I'm happy with domain for now, works great. Stock spring (red) is spot on for me (cca 83 kg riding weight).

    Float R is fine, gives great traction on climbs, opens up on descends. I' using cca 147 psi and use all travel on typical ride. It could be a little more progressive on middle stroke, but not really an issue.

    Wheels hold great. Had to true them after 10 000 vm, but only slightly. Although basic (deore level), everything else works as expected. My typical ride is 15-25 km with 400-800 meters of vertical difference.

    Highly recommended.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    14
    You mention basic level. At the moment I don't think I can tell the difference between Shimano FC / Alivio / Deore / SLX / Deore XT components. As I get more experienced will I want to upgrade? Or are the differences really down to just weight and durability?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    31
    Basically weight. You're not professional, so its not really a big deal. Higher end stuff also works somewhat smother, but as you said, difference is not really that big. Reliability is just fine with deore level, I have them on my other bike for 4 years now and it still works great.

    Rear der. you will rip apart with branch/stone etc., so you can upgrade then. Crank is great, its actually XT level from some years back.

    No worries.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    14
    Cool thanks. Figured as much on the components. Guess the big differences are felt on the shocks.

    Does 20mm make a big difference (140 v 160)?

    Also what is the view on travel adjustable forks (e.g Fox 36 talas allows 100-130-160) and rear shocks that can lock out (e.g. Fox RP2). Atm I doubt I will feel the difference but when I get better, will I want these features? They seem really pricey to upgrade...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve.E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    759
    Travel adjust forks are useful if you have a lot of hills where you ride, being able to lower the travel (to 130, or 100 like the talas) lowers the front end of the bike, putting your weight over the front of the bike, stopping the wheel lifting making you lose control, it can be handy but it's also possilble to adjust your technique and manage OK without it.

    140mm travel is generally seen on trail or cross-country bikes, with 160mm travel being seen on bikes meant for more technical terrain; rocky descents, drops and jumps etc.
    Santa Cruz Blur TRc

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    31
    You do not need travel adjustable fork. As said, it may be useful in some situations, but I ride everything w/o it and its pretty steep (10-30% going on for few miles for example).

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    155
    I bought a lipierre zesty 314.
    I'm 5ft 6 i ride a 42 cm fram feels perfect.
    140mm travel forks the lbs said its fine for technical terrain and jumps its not all about the travel in some ways. it is if you're going to do downhill tracks with jumps higher than 10ft thought.

Posting Permissions

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