Mountain Biking - How do old components compare to new ones?
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.
I'm trying to get my first real bike. We're looking at older bikes mostly, like from around 2001 to get a better bang for the $... and I'm wondering how 9 year old components compare to current day ones. For example, how does a SR XCT or RST Gila T8 fork compare to a 9 year old Rockshock Judy?
I'm not specifically asking about those two models but in general with all components, suspensions, shifters, all that... Another example, is a recent shimano Deore better then a 9 year old Deore XT ?
03-22-09, 09:46 PM
Trigger shifters Deore and up are surprisingly adequate, deraillers and such are all solid considering the concept remains the same, cassettes and chains are almost the same. The only thing I'd be weary about are the forks. All of the old Rock Shox judy and Indy forks I've come across work pretty well, Rst and Sr Suntour forks dont seem to work as well in the first place, and the suck outright a few years down the line.
In general, forks have come a "long" way in the past 9 years. The forks of yesterday compared to today, is like comparing a Yugo to a Corvette. But as the last poster stated, other stuff has not advanced as much, with the exception of high end trigger shifters. What do you mean though about getting your first real bike? If you now have a Wally World special, even if its a 2009. A 1999 real bike would still be a better bike with its older components, if the bike is in good shape.
How do old components compare to new ones?
They are more wrinkled and fart alot.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.