Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3

    I'm buying my first specialized bike today!

    I feel lame for even posting this because almost every topic is about carbon stumps or endos or epics, etc etc, but whatever dude!

    I used to ride a lot when I was younger for getting around, and go on some trails on the weekends (grew up in marin). I've never owned a bike with shocks, but always wanted one

    Now that I'm a post-college working man, I want to ride to work a couple days a week as well as riding local trails and eventually working up to Tam, which I did once on my old hardtail in high school.

    So I'm buying a rockhopper disc today, I put a $300 downpayment on it already. I want to get a bike that's nice, but I don't want it to be extravigant. I want to ride around, rock and roll, and if I really dig the bike stuff, I'll buy a new one later that I'll really be able to appreciate. So I'm all set to buy the bike today (when I get off work), but I was having second thoughts about the type of rockhopper.

    All bikes I'm looking at are 2008. Is the rockhopper pro (wth the recon fork and hydro breaks) more cost effective than getting the rockhopper disc and upgrading the fork and derailleurs later? I can afford both, but the pro seems to have components I won't be able to appreciate yet, in the sense that I won't be going crazy on the bike to begin with. However, if the hydro breaks, rockshocks and rear derailleurs are really that much better than what the standard disc has, maybe I'll do it..

    This post kinda got longer than I expected, but any thoughts, anyone?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,746
    whats the price difference between a rockhopper and a stumpjumper hardtail? thats a sweet sweet bike and definately worth upgrading, as for the rockhopper if you want the better parts its cheaper to buy the whole bike rather than upgrading later

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3
    The stump is 1450, the rockhopper pro is 1200, the rockhopper disc (what I originally wanted to get is 700).

    I think I'm just going to stick with the rock disc, though. I don't want to buy a great bike right off the bat. If I get something really nice, I want to be able to really appreciate it and understand the higher cost/better components, etc.

    It's just kinda hard because bikes are cool and flashy and fun and I've got the American consumer mindset so I keep thinking "maybe I should just get a better one.." but screw it, I'll stick with the basic until I really start riding harder (although I want the bike to last ~4 - 5 years)

    unless the rockhopper pro is just that much better than standard rockhopper disc

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,746
    you wont feel much of a difference between the 2 rockhoppers but if you go for the pro you may as well go the 250 extra because then your into a night and day difference between the rockhopper and stumpjumper HT, youll have a 24 pound bike with an excellent fox fork that goes like the wind, and that is without a single upgrade, if you go for the rockhopper youll probably upgrade down the line and youll end up spending the same money anyway, perhaps even more!!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    89
    I personally would have spent the extra money on getting the Stumpjumper HT. When I started biking a few years ago I bought a Rockhopper and rode it over the summer. After a few months I already wanted something better.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnegan
    The stump is 1450, the rockhopper pro is 1200, the rockhopper disc (what I originally wanted to get is 700).

    I think I'm just going to stick with the rock disc, though. I don't want to buy a great bike right off the bat. If I get something really nice, I want to be able to really appreciate it and understand the higher cost/better components, etc.

    It's just kinda hard because bikes are cool and flashy and fun and I've got the American consumer mindset so I keep thinking "maybe I should just get a better one.." but screw it, I'll stick with the basic until I really start riding harder (although I want the bike to last ~4 - 5 years)

    unless the rockhopper pro is just that much better than standard rockhopper disc
    I tried to do the exact same thing three years ago. I needed full suspension for a bad back (over weight and out of shape) and decided on the FSR-XC base model. It was $800 and I convinced myself it was all that I would ever need. After talking to the bike shop and demo'ing a few rides, my budget quickly shot up to $1500. I had to decide between the Fisher Cake and the Stumpjumper 120. I chose the Cake and absolutely loved it. The components and frame were far superior to the FSR-XC. A year later and my riding had progressed to the point where the Cake was not the right bike for me anymore. This time I walked into the bike shop with no budget at all. I sold the Cake but only spent $1900 on the new bike (base model 06 Stumpjumper). I didn't see any reason to go for the more expensive Stumpys. The frames were essentially the same but other models had better components.

    Since then, I have put on a new crankset, a new shock, a new handlebar, a new stem, a new seat, a new seatpost, a new chain, new pedals, new tires, a new front derailleur, and a new bash ring.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arctic303's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    342
    I had the same choice of Rockhoppers a few months ago and ended up paying a bit more to get the SJ HT. Like you, I probably don't fully appreciate the components having gone from low end (Hardrock) striaght to high end, but I've saved myself money in the long run right?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnegan
    The stump is 1450, the rockhopper pro is 1200, the rockhopper disc (what I originally wanted to get is 700).

    I think I'm just going to stick with the rock disc, though. I don't want to buy a great bike right off the bat. If I get something really nice, I want to be able to really appreciate it and understand the higher cost/better components, etc.

    It's just kinda hard because bikes are cool and flashy and fun and I've got the American consumer mindset so I keep thinking "maybe I should just get a better one.." but screw it, I'll stick with the basic until I really start riding harder (although I want the bike to last ~4 - 5 years)

    unless the rockhopper pro is just that much better than standard rockhopper disc
    I tried to do the exact same thing three years ago. I needed full suspension for a bad back (over weight and out of shape) and decided on the FSR-XC base model. It was $800 and I convinced myself it was all that I would ever need. After talking to the bike shop and demo'ing a few rides, my budget quickly shot up to $1500. I had to decide between the Fisher Cake and the Stumpjumper 120. I chose the Cake and absolutely loved it. The components and frame were far superior to the FSR-XC. A year later and my riding had progressed to the point where the Cake was not the right bike for me anymore. This time I walked into the bike shop with no budget at all. I sold the Cake but only spent $1900 on the new bike (base model 06 Stumpjumper). I didn't see any reason to go for the more expensive Stumpys. The frames were essentially the same but other models had better components.

    Since then, I have put on a new crankset, a new shock, a new handlebar, a new stem, a new seat, a new seatpost, a new chain, new pedals, new tires, a new front derailleur, and a new bash ring.

Posting Permissions

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