NRS vs VT- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: NRS vs VT

  1. #1

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19

    New question here. NRS vs VT

    Hey Guys I'm Kinda Confused, and I hope you can offer me some insight......
    I'm buying a new GIANT next year, well I could buy a Trek, Rocky MTN, Norco, but It's 90% sure a Giant.

    I ride mainly cross country right now upon a 40+ pound,Full sus, $350 Norco. It came stock with shimana 7spd, gearing. Being my first bike, and not really knowing jack about mountain biking, it seemed like a good bet. I now have caught the bug, and am Looking at either the NRS or the VT. I have ridden the VT, and it's plush, and exactly what I wish my current bike was. However, I have done some racing, XC only, and the trail I most commonly do is XC. So naturally you would assume the NRS would be the best fit. But, b/c I haven't really ridden one for any long period of time, I would like your imput on both t he NRS, and VT. I like to do some minor jumping IE, below 3 feet, and i understand the NRS wouldn't really be up for much more than 1-2 footers. Basically, if you could only have 1 of these bikes what would you guys pick.??????

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FuelFan90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    234
    i haven't ridden a vt so i can't really comment on it's pedaling abilities. it sounds like you need a little heavier duty xc bike or lighter trail type. you could look at the kona kikapus and i've heard good things about rocky mountain's race/trail bike. i think either of those would fit the riding you want to do. but it sounds like you might get into heavier duty stuff once you get a quality bike, so i think you should look at something reasonably strong.

  3. #3
    [paste title here]
    Reputation: mtnbikerdude87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    515
    I have never ridden a VT but I own a 03 Giant NRS 2 and it is mainly a XC oriented bike. It climbs great on uphills but going downhill it has a "hardtail-ish" feeling. The reason is because of the design, it creates brake jacking whenever I apply the brakes so the suspension is not very active gowing down. If you wanted to do some jumps then look else where. Ive done small jumps on this bike butI dont feel very confident because Im afraid its gonna break. Small jumps are fine if you do them once and a while. Basically this bike was meant to do XC only, and I agree with the previous poster, try the Kona, they are a lot nicer . I demoed a 04 Kona Dawg and loved the way it handled, buts thats another story...... Anyway good luck on your decision.

    Heres my NRS....


    -mtnbikerdude87
    Keep Pedaling

  4. #4
    Rollin' a fatty Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,860
    I agree on that the NRS is a XC racing rig and that it's not designed for hucking. I'm a VT owner and have never ridden a NRS but have ridden a Trek Fuel, the Fuel desing is "similar" to the NRS in terms of the "semi active" suspension. The VT is fully active, this means that the suspension is always working and the "bob" is expected while climbing.

    The best thing about the VT is the Swinger shock, the SPV platform is almost bob free making the bike good at climbing and great going down. The VT is raceable but will require some $$$ to lighten it up so if you plan to race most of the time get the NRS, if what you want is to do trail riding and some hucking get the VT. The VT is the bike to have if you can only afford one bike.



    The bike has a cross countrish setup and weights about 30lbs.
    Last edited by DiRt DeViL; 01-07-2004 at 05:41 PM.

  5. #5
    VEGAN ATHLETE Racing
    Reputation: vuduvgn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,149
    I have a 2003 NRS I built up from a frame. 4" Z1 X-fly on the front. I race it XC. I have beat the hell out of the bike. Ridden it harder than it's xc heritage was designed for. Fast technical, drops, steps, etc. Drops up to about 3 feet. It has worked great for that. I've never bottomed it out. The VT is much more squishy than the NRS. Depends if you want a more stable ride for pedaling or a squishy ride for dropping. I like my NRS and can imagine having a bigger travel bike for some of the stuff I do, but have never been limited by my NRS's ability. I wouldn't dare ride North Shore style drops with it.... that's what singlespeed hardtails are for

  6. #6

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42
    [QUOTE=voodoovegan]I have a 2003 NRS I .... Fast technical, drops, steps, etc. Drops up to about 3 feet. It has worked great for that. I've never bottomed it out. .... I like my NRS and can imagine having a bigger travel bike for some of the stuff I do, but have never been limited by my NRS's ability. ....QUOTE]

    How big are you? I have ordered a 2004 NRS 1 and am pretty excited. I weigh 185 and do some pretty aggressive XC. I live in Ontario, Canada however where "Bigh Drops" are not really in the cards. 3-4 feet are about as big as it gets.

    Any idea how the NRS will suck up stuff like that for a guy my size.

    O - BTW i called Manitou to find out what was up with the reverse arches cracking off the Skarebs and they said that there was an issue in the 2003 that they have reworked for 2004!

  7. #7
    R.I.P. DogFriend
    Reputation: jeffj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,880
    I have ridden them both and here is my take IMHO:

    Trailriding – VT

    Mostly trailriding with an occasional race here and there – VT

    Mostly (somewhat) serious racing with an occasional trailride here and there – NRS

    Race more for the fun of it and are not that concerned if you finish a little slower than you would with the most efficient type race bike and comfort is King - VT

    Racing and training with results in mind – NRS

    The ride of the NRS is harsh in comparison with the VT, but a more efficient climber. That’s not to say the VT is bad at climbing because it’s not. But I will say that I didn’t “enjoy” the NRS when things got rough.

    I am more of a trailrider and the VT made me smile where the NRS didn’t. If I was more of a racer, the NRS would probably make me smile more than the VT would.

  8. #8

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by polaris009
    Hey Guys I'm Kinda Confused, and I hope you can offer me some insight......
    I'm buying a new GIANT next year, well I could buy a Trek, Rocky MTN, Norco, but It's 90% sure a Giant.

    I ride mainly cross country right now upon a 40+ pound,Full sus, $350 Norco. It came stock with shimana 7spd, gearing. Being my first bike, and not really knowing jack about mountain biking, it seemed like a good bet. I now have caught the bug, and am Looking at either the NRS or the VT. I have ridden the VT, and it's plush, and exactly what I wish my current bike was. However, I have done some racing, XC only, and the trail I most commonly do is XC. So naturally you would assume the NRS would be the best fit. But, b/c I haven't really ridden one for any long period of time, I would like your imput on both t he NRS, and VT. I like to do some minor jumping IE, below 3 feet, and i understand the NRS wouldn't really be up for much more than 1-2 footers. Basically, if you could only have 1 of these bikes what would you guys pick.??????
    Howdy-
    Owning both a VT and an NRS, I'll see if I can help you out. While the NRS is more the "XC Race" type bike, we've made some changes to the suspension to make it more plush on the smaller stuff. Tweaked linkage and a new shock really make the bike ride much nicer than the NRS of past years. I'm riding an '04 NRS Carbon, and could really see this as my only MTB.
    The VT was designed to meet the needs of the trail riders out there, a bit more travel, and it's designed to be more active, which does mean a little more pedal feedback. This can be dialed in by the SPV rear shock. As for weight, you can get a VT down pretty far, my '03 L sized bike down to just under 28lbs, nothing super-scary light on there either.
    Honestly, I could see the VT as my only bike as well. I don't race, I'm more the "go out and enjoy the ride" rather than race to the top of the climb kinda guy.
    Anyway, hope this helped a little, let me know if you have any more questions!

    Cheers,

    [email protected]

  9. #9

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected]
    Howdy-
    As for weight, you can get a VT down pretty far, my '03 L sized bike down to just under 28lbs, nothing super-scary light on there either.
    [email protected]
    hey [email protected], what is your VT's bike spec that allowed you to get the weight down to 28lbs? thanks

  10. #10

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. VT
    hey [email protected], what is your VT's bike spec that allowed you to get the weight down to 28lbs? thanks
    Let's see:
    Frame: '03 VT, Large
    Fork: '02 Psylo SL (the Gold air-sprung version)
    Stem: Easton EA-70 (older, heavier hinge-style)
    Bar: Easton MonkeyLite carbon
    Brakes: Shimano XT Disc
    Levers: SRAM X.0 twist
    Wheels: Mavic CrossMax Disc (older, heavier black versions)
    Tires: Michelin Hot-S 2.2" non-tubeless
    Cranks/BB: Shimano XT (3-piece version, '03 model)
    Front Der: XTR
    Rear Der: X.O mid-cage
    Post: Titec AL-235
    Saddle: WTB Stealth V, ti rails
    Grips: WTB Technical Trail
    Cassette: Shimano XT 11-32
    Pedals: Crank Brothers EggBeaters

    This has the heavier Swinger 4-way rear shock, the 3-way is probably 1/3 lb lighter too!
    Weighed on a digital scale here @ work.
    Cheers,

    [email protected]

  11. #11

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    139
    nice spec james, thnx for the list, i'll keep that list in mind as i build up my own vt,

  12. #12

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    150
    JeffJ is right on. I owned a NRS 1 for 2 years and am now on a VT 1. If you pump up the swinger to XC, then it almost acts like an NRS.

  13. #13
    Rollin' a fatty Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,860

    We the people ... Your specs are very similar to mine

    Frame: '03 VT 2, Small (Team Blue)
    Fork: '02 Psylo SL
    Stem: RaceFace Deus
    Bar: Easton MonkeyLite SL carbon riser
    Brakes: Shimano XT Disc w DiaComp rotors
    Shifters: Shimano XT
    Wheels: Mavic CrossMax Disc (older version)
    Tires: Kenda KlimaxLite 1.9 UST
    Cranks/BB: Shimano XT ('02 model)
    Front Der: XTR
    Rear Der: XTR
    Post: Salsa Shaft
    Saddle: Selle Italia ProLink Gel
    Grips: ODI Rogue
    Cassette: Shimano XT 12-34
    Pedals: Shimano 515
    Chain: SRAM PC-99 Hollowpin

    I know that there's room for some improvement, let me know any recommendations.

    James, could you get some Giant stickers for me?

  14. #14

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    139

    pedals

    hey nice specs man, what do you guys think of the psylo? i'm thinking of getting manitou's new minute line for my vt. you guys have any good platform pedal recommendations for me? would adding straps to platform pedals be a good idea? i havn't really tried the whole clipless deal before, a little scared that i'll be stuckl clipped into my bike if i fall or something haha

  15. #15
    Rollin' a fatty Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,860

    I've thinking about that for a while and ...

    after researching I'm almost convinced that the best fork for me will be the Fox Vanilla. I currently own a Psylo and works well but it's time to put it to pasture. I've been considering the Minute 1, Fox Vanilla and Psylo SL. I like how the Psylo behaves but isn't stiff enough, have had very bad luck with Manitou forks in the past and after posting a question here and discussing with various bike gurus came to the conclusion that the Vanilla is the best bet.

    Pedals, forgot the pedals. I don't use platform pedals but if I did I would have the Times or CrankBros, both have excellent mud clearance, cost about the same but the CrankBros are more easy to get in 'n out of them.

  16. #16

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    139
    hey thanks for the advice man, i'll look into those pedals. do you guys know if the hayes hfx-9 brakes are the same b/w the 6 inch version and the 8 inch version? like can you just switch the rotors?

  17. #17

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    150
    I am running the Minute 1 fork and I got some Egg Beaters for the holidays. I have found that the forks are very stiff, responsive, and easy to set up. I have set them at 130 travel and have not changed that for 2 months. I was out for a night ride 2 nights ago and rode most of the night with moonlight to save my battery. I could only do that becuase I knew that the Minute 1 would soak up anything in my path, and so a little suprise would not upend me.

    I recently switched from Time's to the Egg Beaters based on reviews and the fact that the Times are always mucked up with mud and debris. The Egg Beaters are fantastic. Easy in and out. Very comfortable and they feel very sturdy. The fact that they look very cool is a nice side benefit.

  18. #18
    Rollin' a fatty Moderator
    Reputation: DiRt DeViL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. VT
    hey thanks for the advice man, i'll look into those pedals. do you guys know if the hayes hfx-9 brakes are the same b/w the 6 inch version and the 8 inch version? like can you just switch the rotors?
    Not a Hayes user but almost sure that for running 8" rotors you'll need somekind of spacer in the caliper to make up the room for the bigger rotor. Post this question on the "Brake Time" forum, there're a lot of knowledgeable guys that can get you a definite answer.

  19. #19

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. VT
    hey thanks for the advice man, i'll look into those pedals. do you guys know if the hayes hfx-9 brakes are the same b/w the 6 inch version and the 8 inch version? like can you just switch the rotors?
    You need different adaptors to run the 8" rotors, <b>however</b>, unless you have a 20mm thru-axle front fork, I do not recommend running an 8" rotor in the front. It would be overkill in the rear, too, and I'm not 100% sure that the frame has clearance for the 8" rotor.
    Basically, the brakes are going to lose much of their modulation with the 8" rotors, they're perfect for the added weight and speed of DH bikes, but trail bikes just don't have the traction (8" travel, huge tires, etc) to make use of the added power.

    [email protected]

  20. #20

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    150
    I have been running the 6 in Hayes and they are more than enought. I don't think you really need the 8 in unless you are a serious downhiller.

  21. #21

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    139
    sweet, have you guys ever noticed if you like take the brake off the rotor when your removing the wheel or something, sometimes it seems like the two little metal clamps inside the brake get too closed or something and its hard to put the brake back onto the rotor? like i hafta kind of force it on and it kinda almost grinds as i force it back onto the rotor :S, and then after the brake doesn't really seem to work that well for a little but after a little while the brake is back to normal after and works normally. have you guys experianced this? i havn't really used hydraulic disc's before and this is my first experiance with them.

  22. #22

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    150
    There is nothing strange about it. If you touch the brake levers with the brakes out, this will happen. All you need to do is remove the brake pads, and gently work the pistons back to flush with the housing using a flathead screwdriver. Just be careful not to press the center rod as you don't want to bend it.

    At some point you will also want to bleed the brake system. You will need to get a Hayes Bleed kit to do this. It is easy once you know what you are doing.

    'dawg

  23. #23

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    352

    ... and if we just ... I love my NRS

    I love my 04 NRS SWEET, I would go for the NRS i love mine!!

    -Sam
    Attached Images Attached Images

  24. #24

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42

    NRS1 Weight

    Quote Originally Posted by NRSDude
    I love my 04 NRS SWEET, I would go for the NRS i love mine!!

    -Sam

    Sam,
    Nice work on the build!!
    I have ordered an 04 NRS1 and am wondering if you could give me an approx weight on your bike?

    Thanks

  25. #25

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    579

    Staying off the brakes on the downhills.

    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikerdude87
    The reason is because of the design, it creates brake jacking whenever I apply the brakes so the suspension is not very active gowing down. -mtnbikerdude87
    Seeing as the front brake is way more important...especially downhill, have you tried laying off the back completely?

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.