Mountain Biking - Which would be the better frame to keep?
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
Can I ask you guys for advice on what would be best to do?
I've got a Kona Cindercone frame which is brand new and a Hardrock comp which is 2 months old and like new. Should I keep the Hardrock and over time upgrade the equipment or move the equipment from the Hardrock to the Kona and then upgrade the Kona over time.I've got a mate who is into road racing and has the tools, he would help me transfer the forks etc on to the Kona frame and said it's no big problem and my brother needs a new frame. He says he'd be happy with either.
So which frame is best to keep for the long term?
Personally, the Kona would be a better frame in the long run.
But thats just me, like i said in the other "which frame?" thread kicking around at the moment.
03-09-08, 09:10 AM
So the Kona is only a frame, and the Hardrock is a full bike?
You might have issues transferring some of the parts, depending on if the fork's steerer tube is long enough, front derailleur clamp size is the same, seatpost diameter, etc...
The Cinder Cone is a slightly higher end bike, so the frame ought to be somewhat lighter...but if one fits you better, go with that one...
Yea the koan is just a frame and the hardrock is a full bike.
I was thinking that the kona was the better frame. Both fit me spot on but I would need to change the seat post and front derailleur for sure, the steerer tube is ok.
The original plan was to build the kona frame up but my partner had a fit when she started to hear the cost of the stuff I was looking at.
So I bought my mates nearly new Hardrock for a bargin price and I thought I'd stay with the Hardrock and give the Kona frame to my bro.
But I will still end up having to upgrade the Hardrock as it's not as good as I'd like. So if I swap the components over to the Kona now and use it, I can carry on with the upgrading the Kona slowly.
So the Kona is a better long term bet than the Hardrock frame?.
03-09-08, 08:13 PM
Looks like the Kona has butted tubing, which should mean it's lighter. Other than that...they're both AL frames... The Hardrock's geometry might be more "relaxed" than the Kona's...you'd have to check the gemetry chart for each to compare. Do both have rear disk brake tabs? In case you're intending to switch over to disc eventually...
Yea both have disc mounts. I think that the Konas coming out as a better frame from what people are saying, thanks.
03-10-08, 11:06 AM
Konas have the reputation for being "overbuilt" on some of their models.
03-10-08, 12:07 PM
What type of riding are you intending on doing? I suppose with a slightly more relaxed geometry, the Hardrock could be a little more versatile. But, while the Cindercone is basically one of Kona's XC frames, it still has a more relaxed geometry than an XC frame designed for racing.
I ride an '05 Cindercone and have been happy with it. Though, the frames got a little burlier in 2006, so assuming yours is a 2006 frame (or later), I can't really comment on how it would ride.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.