Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

What's the worst mountain bike you've owned?

32K views 82 replies 65 participants last post by  Built4Speed 
#1 ·
Just curious on what was the worst bike you've ever ridden in terms of ride,finish and components? For me,it was a 1990 Raleigh Technium Heat.It had cool looking bonded aluminum frame but wow,what a harsh ride! :rolleyes:
 
#3 ·
Interestingly enough my vote goes for Raleigh as well. From the same era as the Technium series, a '91 Tangent. Welded double butted Tange MTB tubing, somewhat low bottom bracket and a short head tube. All the harshness of an alu. bike plus the weight. That bike was always throwing me down and jumping on me. Broke my collar bone once and a couple of ribs in another occasion. Still have it tho', sentimental I guess (or just mental).
 
#4 ·
I can't say I have ever owned a bad mt. bike. I guess the least appealing was my 88 rockhopper but it was the business in it's day. And interestingly enough it is still being ridden, which is more than I can say for my cannondale sm1000 which broke under the guy i sold it too less than 6 months after the sale.
 
#5 · (Edited)
Schwinn Project Underground

Their limited production carbon with ti lug frame. That had to be the worst frame failure % wise ever. Every one I saw with my own eyes broke. A buddy of mine broke 1 of them and I broke 3 and a local shop had a broken one sitting around for a while. Just plain dangerous!

My second vote would go to any bonded Trek frame...carbon or aluminum...very prone to seperating (and cracking in the carbon version). They were refered to as disposable frames in my area; ride once then toss.
 
#6 ·
wha???

DKFIX said:
I have an early 90s Trek 7000 frame that's bonded aluminum. There's not much give in those things is there?
yes actually there is quite a bit of "give" in those things, at least compared to fat tube welded aluminum frames like Klein, Cannondale, etc. The bonded treck's tubes are nowhere near as fat as many, and I feel the resulting ride is much more forgiving for it. I have one now, a first generation bonded treck, sitting in the garage. it's my "winter" geared mtb and I ride it a lot this time of the year. I think the ride is pretty good. It ain't my Merlin, but it's pretty good.
 
#7 ·
never owned a bad one

I had the luxury of extensive test rides so I only purchased the ones that I really liked.
Among the ones that I rode that really stood out as sucking majorly:
The first treck f/s, with the stack of donuts suspension.
The treck Y bike URT. So noisy heads would turn hundreds of yards away to see what's coming.
The Schwinn/Buell pullshock early f/s. I think Glen Adams won like bronze on it one year racing dh. Maybe good for that, but as for pedaling the thing uphill (back then it was billed as an allaround MTB not a dh bike) well, you pretty much couldn't. Rode it home thru the hills, drove it back in the car because I couldn't face trying to climb with it a second time.
Wolf Creek Titanium hardtail: Now, I ride Ti hardtails, so I'm not expecting the world's most rigid frame. The resilience of ti is a big part of why I prefer it. But this Wolf Creek was so flexy through the top tube that I felt like I couldn't control where it was going. I walked down the narrow exposed part of the CO Trail here where it parallels Junction Creek because I was afraid of riding off the cliffside. Only time I ever walked that section. That pretty much says it all.
ABM beryllium: So harsh riding it felt like an oaken door with pedals. The ti fork had blades as thick as my wrist, I'm sure that had a lot to do with it. Pretty light, however.
I know there were lots more that I wouldn't own for free, let alone pay money for, but those are the ones that come to mind at the moment.
 
#8 · (Edited)
bulC said:
yes actually there is quite a bit of "give" in those things, at least compared to fat tube welded aluminum frames like Klein, Cannondale, etc. The bonded treck's tubes are nowhere near as fat as many, and I feel the resulting ride is much more forgiving for it. I have one now, a first generation bonded treck, sitting in the garage. it's my "winter" geared mtb and I ride it a lot this time of the year. I think the ride is pretty good. It ain't my Merlin, but it's pretty good.
Well I've owned a few rigid bikes and this one is a killer. Doesn't mean I don't like it. As far as simple street riding it's great! Ok maybe it's not that bad! :rolleyes:
 
#10 ·
bulC said:
yes actually there is quite a bit of "give" in those things, at least compared to fat tube welded aluminum frames like Klein, Cannondale, etc. The bonded treck's tubes are nowhere near as fat as many, and I feel the resulting ride is much more forgiving for it. I have one now, a first generation bonded treck, sitting in the garage. it's my "winter" geared mtb and I ride it a lot this time of the year. I think the ride is pretty good. It ain't my Merlin, but it's pretty good.
Not to mention the geometry was designed by WTB. WTB used them as their team bike in 87.
 
#11 ·
mcmahon

sponsored my mcmahon for a little while. at the time they were not building hardtails so they agreed to make some for the team that year. all the angles were off. it was built my freehand with no jig. the tubes were visibly off and it rode like crap. it always felt like i was dragging something. i always feel like i'm dragging somthing with aluminum bikes but it was worse with that piece.
 
#12 ·
Shayne said:
Bonded AL frames are for the most part far less rigid and more forgiving.
There's no comparison between a Klein Attitude/Adroit and a bonded Trek frame.
I don't think it's the lugs, but the tube size that matters. Early Vitus AL road bikes were not popular because they were too flexy. AL got it's fame as a rigid material only after Klein and Cannondale made monster size tubes. Skinny AL is super flexy.
 
#13 ·
Fillet-brazed said:
Not to mention the geometry was designed by WTB. WTB used them as their team bike in 87.
That's exactly why I got one of them in 87. That and I wanted to try alu but couldn't convince myself that welded alu was a good idea, unless it was a cunningham. What a radical change in geometry. I had been riding 18" frames and figured that's what I should get again, never did feel to comfy with the long TT. Seemed like some long chainstays as well, either that or 87 was about the end of the long stay era. Didn't make me quit riding though, spent a few years on it.

I went through a long period of not being totally happy with my rides. After enjoying being on a timberwolf then a team comp, and then switching to a fat chance, I was never comfortable with fast descents on the fat. It took me more than a decade after that to finally start feeling like I've gotten a grasp on what works for me geometry wise, and to make some inroads financially to afford to figure it out. Leaving the bike industry and hiding in the jungle all that time probably didn't help much either.:p
 
#14 · (Edited)
easy: trek 8700 composite carbon aLuminum. finish was a beautiful dark red and nude carbon. components were lovely DX, nice matrix rims w/ steel eyelets, turbo saddle and fork was the tange ultralite.
but the ride was dull, powerless and detached from the trail, ground asphalt, anything.. i felt like i had a flat rear tire all the time.
couldn't be happier when i pedaled a steel biike again.
 
#16 ·
had two....

trek 7000 from maybe 90. bonded alum, dx parts. i don't care what the guys above said, it rode like a brick. ride, parts, geometry, were all awful. had a trek road bike back then that was equally as bad. absolutely the crappiest ride ever.

the other was a nevil devil. not because it rode really bad, but because it was so poorly welded up. everything was out of alignment. rode ok, as long as you didn't care to go fast, cause than it had a tendency to swap ends on you.
 
#17 ·
1st Year Gary Fisher.....

Joshua. Peeee Yeeeeew!
With that sweet Rock Shox :rolleyes: rear shock & an Indy XC 80 up front....
-That thing was like riding a Nautilus rowing machine uphill. :p
 
#18 ·
Fillet-brazed said:
Not to mention the geometry was designed by WTB. WTB used them as their team bike in 87.
- C'MON Fb!!!
Of the Trillion bikes you've owned, there has to be some stinkers in there.
How about the Hanebrink ATV tired machine that you pedaled up the 'chitty one??? :D
 
#19 ·
olds_cool said:
trek 7000 from maybe 90. bonded alum, dx parts. i don't care what the guys above said, it rode like a brick. ride, parts, geometry, were all awful. had a trek road bike back then that was equally as bad. absolutely the crappiest ride ever.

the other was a nevil devil. not because it rode really bad, but because it was so poorly welded up. everything was out of alignment. rode ok, as long as you didn't care to go fast, cause than it had a tendency to swap ends on you.
They did actually change a bit from 87 to 90, not sure what exactly but I did notice there is a difference in the seat stays. I happen to have a 1990 8500 as well in my garage right now... The geometry could have been completely redone by then as well for all I know. I'll have to check it out. I wouldnt be surprised if they went to the very popular 71/73 that started about that time.
 
#20 ·
Bianchi Super G

That dual suspension bike had the worst torsional flex in the front end of any bike I've ridden. It always made steering a handfull. No fun! Second on my list is my old Klein Attitude. I never could get it to shift the rear derailluer correctly because of the partial internal routing of the cable. But it was also WAY too harsh in the rear end for me! I always likened it to riding a bucking bronc. Beautiful bike- just way uncomfortable!
 
#21 ·
DMFT said:
- C'MON Fb!!!
Of the Trillion bikes you've owned, there has to be some stinkers in there.
How about the Hanebrink ATV tired machine that you pedaled up the 'chitty one??? :D
Ohh, thanks for the painful memories. That was a uh unique ride. I took it on one ride after that up the beach and she was back on the market! Not too fun. Now if I had to battle snow around here, that would be a different story!
 
#25 ·
Worst bike design ever: Trek Y-bike/Fisher Joshua (same thing more or less). I never owned one, but I've worked on a lot of them and they all suck, period.

As for the worst I've ever actually owned, I'd have to say the Litespeed Tsali I got as a team bike in 2000. It was their top of the line soft tail, which was a great idea in theory, but it just didn't work for me. I always thought I had a flat :p . However, the REAL reason I couldn't stand that bike was the geometry. I swear it was impossible to climb on that thing without doing a wheelie all the way up the hill. I had the stem as low as it would go and flipped upside down, and I still couldn't get enough weight on the front end to track straight. Litespeed had the same problem on their larger sized road bikes too, I'm convinced that all of their designers were 5 feet tall (or just stupid).
 
#26 ·
yeah

-Anomie- said:
Worst bike design ever: Trek Y-bike/Fisher Joshua (same thing more or less). I never owned one, but I've worked on a lot of them and they all suck, period.

As for the worst I've ever actually owned, I'd have to say the Litespeed Tsali I got as a team bike in 2000. It was their top of the line soft tail, which was a great idea in theory, but it just didn't work for me. I always thought I had a flat :p . However, the REAL reason I couldn't stand that bike was the geometry. I swear it was impossible to climb on that thing without doing a wheelie all the way up the hill. I had the stem as low as it would go and flipped upside down, and I still couldn't get enough weight on the front end to track straight. Litespeed had the same problem on their larger sized road bikes too, I'm convinced that all of their designers were 5 feet tall (or just stupid).[/QUOTE

Litespeed hardtails at least in my M size had fairly slack 72.5 degree seat tube angles. Sounds like a small difference from the 73 degree de facto standard, or the 74 degrees I prefer, but the end result is, at least for me, I need a seatpost with zero setback to get the saddle far enough forward for good seated climbing. Otherwise, if you climb seated, it's tough to keep the front end down and in control on the real steep stuff. A post with no setback, with the saddle far forward, and a stem long enough to compensate for the reduced reach, make my Obed right.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top