1. The most important thing about buying a new bike is to make sure it fits. The only way you'll know if the bike is right for you is to size up the bike and make sure that the bike's geometry matches your body's geometry. Ask questions and do some research.
mtn. biking 101
2. If possible, try to find a shop that will let you demo the bike on real dirt. Five minutes in a parking lot won't cut it. You wouldn't buy a car without a real world test drive, and a bike should be no different.
3. Don't belive the hype. Just because your favorite rider or best friend rides a certain bike, that doesn't mean that's the best one for you. Have an open mind and be realistic about your needs and ability.
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1

    Hello all! New here and have a question.

    I am planning on buying a new bike in the spring and have a minor dilemma. I can't decide if it is better to buy a lower spec bike and upgrade, or just spend the money out of the gate on a higher spec bike. I have been to several of my LBS and ridden Scott, Specialized, Giant, and Norco in various FS models. The best fit for me is the Norco Sight by a landslide. I am trying to decide if I should get the base Sight Carbon 7.2, Sight Carbon « Trail « Mountain « Bikes « Norco Bicycles and upgrade items, like change to XX1, or go for the Sight Carbon 7.1.5 Sight Carbon « Trail « Mountain « Bikes « Norco Bicycles and leave it as is. There isn't much difference between this and the Sight Carbon 7.1 except the drivetrain and seat post that I feel justifies the $1250 price gap. The Sight Carbon LE FS is out of my price range. I am leaning towards the 7.1.5 but am curious what you would do if you were in my position. Would you buy the less expensive bike with lesser specs and upgrade, or buy something middle ground with better specs and just ride, or buy the better spec machine and spend the extra cash? The overall equipment on the $6000 7.1 is pretty nice. Is it possible to beat the "bundle price" with a build up from the bottom, or should I just settle for the middle of the road which seems like the best price/perfomance ratio, and upgrade once I need too? What would you do?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    464
    I have a 2014 Sight Carbon 7.1 and I love it, so do all the magazine reviews. However pretty much any bike in the $6k range is going to be good, its the type of bike for your preferred riding style that really counts [E.G. XC, Trail, AM etc]
    But that's not what you asked.
    Simply put, almost without exception buying a complete bike of excellent spec as original equipment will always be cheaper than up grading a lesser spec bike to the same standard.
    IMO if you can afford to drop the cash on the spec you really want or had planned to upgrade to then do it, it will be better value
    You will also avoid compatibility issues such as which crank set matches what bottom bracket spec etc if you aren't really switched on to various components

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    178
    i have ridden 2-3k mtb then had the opportunity to buy a top of the line carbon fibre merida team 96r fully specced. its is almost unbelievable to ride and i feel blessed every time i get a chance to ride it

  4. #4
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    13,691
    Spend what you can stomach upfront. The bike companies get better deals than you on components. And, better to buy things just once and use them for their whole service lives.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  5. #5
    FBI tested, NSA approved!
    Reputation: Forster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Bennyhaha812 View Post
    I am planning on buying a new bike in the spring and have a minor dilemma. I can't decide if it is better to buy a lower spec bike and upgrade, or just spend the money out of the gate on a higher spec bike. I have been to several of my LBS and ridden Scott, Specialized, Giant, and Norco in various FS models. The best fit for me is the Norco Sight by a landslide. I am trying to decide if I should get the base Sight Carbon 7.2, Sight Carbon « Trail « Mountain « Bikes « Norco Bicycles and upgrade items, like change to XX1, or go for the Sight Carbon 7.1.5 Sight Carbon « Trail « Mountain « Bikes « Norco Bicycles and leave it as is. There isn't much difference between this and the Sight Carbon 7.1 except the drivetrain and seat post that I feel justifies the $1250 price gap. The Sight Carbon LE FS is out of my price range. I am leaning towards the 7.1.5 but am curious what you would do if you were in my position. Would you buy the less expensive bike with lesser specs and upgrade, or buy something middle ground with better specs and just ride, or buy the better spec machine and spend the extra cash? The overall equipment on the $6000 7.1 is pretty nice. Is it possible to beat the "bundle price" with a build up from the bottom, or should I just settle for the middle of the road which seems like the best price/perfomance ratio, and upgrade once I need too? What would you do?
    Not sure this is a question for beginner's corner, but it's a great question none the less. The real question here (in my opinion) is not where you get the best deal. I think buying what you want upfront regardless of the discount the manufacture passes on to the consumer with a whole bike (upgrading means you pay once for the component and once for the upgrade) is always the better deal. The real question is where does expense equate to increased performance? (i.e. is it worth spending extra money on a component because you will receive some apparent benefit?) If I replace my chain every year and don't care about minor weight difference it is not cost effective for me to buy an XTR chain verses an XT chain. In my case, buying super lightweight stuff (like super light wheel sets) may actually be a performance decrease as it may not hold up to my 212 pounds. I would really look at how you are riding and what components best suit your needs rather than what the "best" part is supposed to be. Also, I wouldn't get to wrapped up about things that will wear out rapidly (i.e. cassettes, chains, chain rings, tires) you can always upgrade those as part of your regular maintenance schedule.

  6. #6
    3CN
    3CN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    5
    I find paying more up front generally ends up being cheaper than upgrading, but I feel comfortable spending the extra just because it's fun to work on my bike.

  7. #7
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    13,691

    Re: Hello all! New here and have a question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Forster View Post
    Not sure this is a question for beginner's corner, but it's a great question none the less. The real question here (in my opinion) is not where you get the best deal. I think buying what you want upfront regardless of the discount the manufacture passes on to the consumer with a whole bike (upgrading means you pay once for the component and once for the upgrade) is always the better deal. The real question is where does expense equate to increased performance? (i.e. is it worth spending extra money on a component because you will receive some apparent benefit?) If I replace my chain every year and don't care about minor weight difference it is not cost effective for me to buy an XTR chain verses an XT chain. In my case, buying super lightweight stuff (like super light wheel sets) may actually be a performance decrease as it may not hold up to my 212 pounds. I would really look at how you are riding and what components best suit your needs rather than what the "best" part is supposed to be. Also, I wouldn't get to wrapped up about things that will wear out rapidly (i.e. cassettes, chains, chain rings, tires) you can always upgrade those as part of your regular maintenance schedule.
    Not a bad point, and particularly valid at the lower pricepoints, where spending more may just mean a different crappy derailleur and having less money to spend on wine and women.

    I think most of the time at the OP's pricepoint, one gets better models of some of the big-ticket stuff, like a better fork.

    But, one should always take a critical look at the spec lists.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lotusdriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    506
    I would buy the best bike you can afford.

    I had the same dilemma, in the end l pushed the boat out and bought a Kona on offer for UKŁ1500 down from Ł1900

    The bike is fabulous and l have not felt the need to spend much on it, Shadow+ rear mech and remote lockout, plus some nice pedals.

    At this price everything on the bike is pretty good, and as already pointed out, it is cheaper in the long run as the bike companies get the parts cheaper.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 06:12 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 07:29 AM
  3. Question: Green Lane Upper Blue trail question...
    By Molasses in forum Pennsylvania
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-29-2013, 01:53 PM
  4. Bottom Braket Question, yet another pf30 vs bb30 question.
    By ntm1973 in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-21-2013, 08:30 PM
  5. Forest City Trails Question: Sandusky Question?
    By bycyclist in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-26-2011, 11:43 AM

Posting Permissions

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