Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 171
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837

    GT Avalanche 2.0 questions

    I just ordered a new 2008 Avalanche 2.0 with Tektro Aguila Comp Hydraulic Disc brakes and was wondering if the disc were screwed onto the hub or held on by rivets? I put a Iron Horse Warrior 5.0 togeather for a friend and noted the Shimano Hydraulic brakes were not the greatest and the disc were rivited to the hubs? Also I ordred a size small as he's 5'4" and as near as I could tell the small was about a 16" frame. Looks like a very nice setup for the money and Performance Bikes have 10% off till tomorrow. Would be great to here from all who own one and how well you like the bike. My sons 15 so he'll be pretty surprise come birthday time in April.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    62
    There are 2 common methods of holding rotors to the hubs the Shimano "centerlock" system where the disks fit onto the hubs with the centerlock (very nice system!) or the more traditional system were the hub has 6 bolts and torx screws are holding the rotor to the hub. This really breaks down to 2 methods of putting the disk rotors onto the hubs. Both can be replaced when the rotors wear but these systems are not interchangeable. Check out shimano's site on Deore here http://bike.shimano.com/publish/cont...ain/deore.html both systems have advantages and disadvantages the bolt onto the hub system runs the risk of the disks getting loose if the bolts loosen.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    Wow you bought the bike for your son 4 months in advance! I have a 2008 1.0 and it's been great so far. Firm, strong, sturdy ride. The saddle seems more comfy than my older 3.0 but I haven't gotten much ride time yet due to the weather/season. One minor (very minor) issue I have with the bike is that the water bottle cage mount (2 holes) is off center. It's just a little annoying to look down and see more of the right side of the bottle versus the left.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    The bike will be sitting at my office until April. Guess I'll be taking my bike stand in t assemble. Hated to buy something without seeing it but based on what I've read I feel pretty comfortable.Anyhow Performance has a 100% Satisfaction Guarantee.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    Yeah, performance has a good guarantee. If you don't fit well in the bike, they'll replace it with a larger one

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    Whats the word on the Kenda Nevegals on the bike? Are they standard set or a less expensive heavier OEM tire?? Not sure if they do such a thing but I noticed there were not many marking on the tires in the photo's?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    Still not sure if they are of the same quality or a lessor expensive version the OEM are putting on? I have a pair of Negegal DTC on my F/S and these on the GT seem to be a lower budget and my guess is heavier version. In the auto world they put a cheaper version of the tires on. Wasn't sure if they did the same think in the bike world??

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    Hmm, this is the first I've heard about having two versions of the same tire with 1 version being a lower quality in both auto/biking world. I believe that would be illegal. They have to at least change the name of the tire or version. I haven't quite broken in my tires in yet, but so far so good. Very predictable, traction seems good so far on light sand and dirt.

    One issue with the bikes that I've bought from my performance bike is that they didn't tune the rear derailleur very well. Both bikes were ghost shifting back there and needed minor adjustments. I'm not sure if you knew but the bikes you buy from them comes with lifetime adjustments if you have any issues. My performance bike was kind of far so I made my own.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    Well let me rephrase the tire issue. OEM auto tires come with less tread life than your off the shelf tires you purchase from a retailer. One way they cut cost in the auto industry. I know Kenda has several different models of the Nevegal so I'm assuming this is the cheaper heavier version? I run the DCT model and love them.

    As for the shifting issues I assumed I'd have some problems. I'm some distance to any of the stores so I'll be making all the adjustments. By the way were the hydraulic brakes already bled down and in order??

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    Brakes working perfectly, pads need to be worn in a little bit (obviously). I'm not too sure which version of the tires they are, I'm sure the manufacturer opted for the cheaper version though (at least that's what i would do if i was the manufacturer).

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    Bike arrives Wednesday so we'll get a good look at it. I wish I had spent the extra $100 and went with the 1.0 now. Just thinking down the road (a little late for that).

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    Does anyone know what the deal is with the two Avalanche 2.0's at Performance. I noticed they have the 2.0 with mechanical disc and one with hydraulic disc for the same price ($499). Did they cut back somewhere on the hydraulic version. The only thing I really noticed was the hydraulic version comes with a different crankset the M311 versus the M341 on the 2.0 with mecanical discs. Best I can tell is the M311 has riveted chainrings while the M341 comes with a crank with replaceable chainrings.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    I think you still did better with the 2.0. The difference in price is more like $150 (I think the 1.0 is going for $649 versus $499 for the 2.0 at Performance). With the $150 you saved you can easily upgrade the front and rear deraillueur and the shifters. The only other real difference is the front shock, and I'm not sure if the Suntour X-100 is really that much better than the Suntour XCR-Lo. Does anyone have experience with these two entry level front forks.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    The 1.0 was $599.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    You also get 27 gears vs 24 if that matters though.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    Was the $599 a pre-christmas sale price. Today when I checkedit was $649. Guess I should wait for the price to come down. I've been keeping my eye on the 1.0 and 2.0. BTW, what was the lowest folks have seen the 2.0 on sale for. Today it was $499.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    Does anyone know what the deal is with the two Avalanche 2.0's at Performance. I noticed they have the 2.0 with mechanical disc and one with hydraulic disc for the same price ($499). Did they cut back somewhere on the hydraulic version. The only thing I really noticed was the hydraulic version comes with a different crankset the M311 versus the M341 on the 2.0 with mecanical discs. Best I can tell is the M311 has riveted chainrings while the M341 comes with a crank with replaceable chainrings.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    When I placed the order for the 2.0 the 1.0 was at $599.00. I noted a few days ago they raised the price to $649.00 As for the two different versions of the 2.0 I went through the same thing. Spent the better part of a couple hours comparing parts and googling component's to see what the better value was. I decided the Hydraulic brakes made the better sense between the two. I also spent time on ebay on the derailleurs and found for about $40.00 I could upgrade the front and rear with XT's. I figured I'd have my son ride it for a while and we'll see if there's any issues and make the upgrades from there. To be honest I think I have just as much fun riding as I do tuning and upgrading. Allin all it seems like a very good value.

    Our other choice was the Iron Horse Warrior 5.0 at rscyles at $599 (now their offering 25% off that price). The downfall with that setup was the brakes and the fact the Tora fork only had rebound adjustment and no lockout. I think for the most part these lower end forks all do about the same think. Which means you get what you pay for. That said I will say I'm amazed at what you can buy now days for $500., Heck just a few years ago the same bike would cost a $1,000.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    Tailwaters, did you do much research on the front forks that come on the 1.0 and 2.0. I noticed the 1.0 comes with the Suntour X-100 and the 2.0 comes with Suntour XCR-LO. Not sure if its worth paying the extra $100 for the X-100. Might be better pocketing the cash and buying a "good" front fork when the stock fork needs replacement.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    It doesn't really look like they cut back on the hydraulic version. Seems like hydraulics would be the way to go? I was reading the discussion about AM bikes vs XC bikes. Which type of bikes do our GTs fit into?

    Oh one other difference, the 1.0 has clipless pedals as well.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    The Avalanche is XC

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by tailwaters
    When I placed the order for the 2.0 the 1.0 was at $599.00. I noted a few days ago they raised the price to $649.00 As for the two different versions of the 2.0 I went through the same thing. Spent the better part of a couple hours comparing parts and googling component's to see what the better value was. I decided the Hydraulic brakes made the better sense between the two. I also spent time on ebay on the derailleurs and found for about $40.00 I could upgrade the front and rear with XT's. I figured I'd have my son ride it for a while and we'll see if there's any issues and make the upgrades from there. To be honest I think I have just as much fun riding as I do tuning and upgrading. Allin all it seems like a very good value.

    Our other choice was the Iron Horse Warrior 5.0 at rscyles at $599 (now their offering 25% off that price). The downfall with that setup was the brakes and the fact the Tora fork only had rebound adjustment and no lockout. I think for the most part these lower end forks all do about the same think. Which means you get what you pay for. That said I will say I'm amazed at what you can buy now days for $500., Heck just a few years ago the same bike would cost a $1,000.

    It's also the end of the year, so the best deals come out around this time. With this economy, i'm sure all companies are slashing prices as much as they can.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tailwaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    837
    I'd agree a XC. I noted the clipless and really didn't want them to begin with so they are of no value to me. Eventually I'll move him into clipless but prefer the egg beater style.

    Fork wise as always I read both good and bad on both. I think as long as your using them for the intended use they should be fine. I will tell you coming from riding a $700 bike with a Marzochi Pro fork to a F/S with a Fox fork there's a huge difference. Then again my Fork cost more than this entire bike so there better be a noticeable difference.

    Allin all I'm pretty excited to get the bike in to build it up. Always loved the looks of the GT's.

    As for prices I was half tempted to hold to see if this poor economy doesn't yield yet some better deals?? But figured I was pretty please where I ended up.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    216
    I'd agree, 10% off the $499 is a good deal.

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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