Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Diamondback Trace - 2013 vs 2012

    I am about to buy my first bike. I will be riding mostly road but with some off-road, mostly flat paths.

    I've been searching for a while and have decided on the Diamondback Trace.

    The 2013 model has disk brakes and is $450.
    The 2012 model does not have disk brakes and can be had for $370 on clearance.


    Is it worth it to get the disk brakes or should I go for the older model without them and save $80?


    p.s. I am 6'2" and 190 lbs. An online calculator told me that I should get the 22" frame. Does that sound good?


    EDIT: I could also just spend $320 on a Diamondback Response and use all the money I'm saving to get some road tires. Would that be worthwhile?
    Last edited by ryanb22; 01-19-13 at 10:54 PM.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator no1mad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NE OK
    My Bikes
    '06 Kona Smoke
    Posts
    8,061
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Get the 2012 Trace. The front der was downgraded for 2013, and disc brakes are overkill- unless you're riding in wet/muddy/sloppy conditions regularly IMO.

    22" sounds about right. I'm 6' and ride on a 22" frame that is a bit too big for me- it was NOS and 30% off when I bought back in '08

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by no1mad View Post
    Get the 2012 Trace. The front der was downgraded for 2013, and disc brakes are overkill- unless you're riding in wet/muddy/sloppy conditions regularly IMO.

    22" sounds about right. I'm 6' and ride on a 22" frame that is a bit too big for me- it was NOS and 30% off when I bought back in '08
    Thanks! Why not the Response Sport 2012 and swap the tires? Does it have a wider rim or something? It's a lot cheaper, and I could have a bike for on-road and trails.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator no1mad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NE OK
    My Bikes
    '06 Kona Smoke
    Posts
    8,061
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For your stated purpose of mostly road w/ some off road, the Trace is the better choice.

    The Response is a pure mtb. You could swap out the tires, which will eat into the perceived savings. It's also geared lower, which is perfectly fine for crawling up a muddy trail, but given time you'll find the gearing lacking for road use.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    disc guy here. I was also told some negs about disc. Better stopping all around. Lot of old school guys here.
    also ridged fork will allow different width tires. slick for road / knobby for off. 28 mm to 32 road / 38mm to 45mm off/maybe larger.
    Plus suspension forks in your price range are suppose to be crap.

  6. #6
    Senior Member catonec's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    burlington VT.
    Posts
    2,319
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    2010 Kestrel RT900SL, 800k carbon, chorus/record, speedplay, zonda
    1997 Trek ZX6000, 6061w/manitou spyder, xt/xtr, time atac

Posting Permissions

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