I'm just starting to get into mountain biking and am looking to buy my first bike (I've just been borrowing friends bikes up to this point).
I'm looking for a hard tail Cross Country/Back Country bike that'll last me many years.
I've shopped around and the 2 bikes that I've like the best are the Kona Caldera ($1049) and Kona Kula ($1349). The Kula has better parts, but I just wanna know if its worth the extra 300.
The biggest difference that I can see between these bikes is the fork, the Kula has a better fork with Rebound control. Is rebound control a big issue? Is it something that a beginner or intermediate rider would use or is it more of an expert thing?
I believe the step up from the Caldera to the Kula also provides you with a different frame. Up to the Caldera, most of the hard tails in that line are the same frame with differing levels of components. As I recall, though, the Kula provides you with a lighter frame plus better components. As far as if it's worth it... if you can afford the extra $300, yes it is worth it. If you cannot, then the Caldera is a nice bike as well.
Originally Posted by dminor
The caveat with a strap-on, of course, is you will have to get creative with a couple of lock cables and an anchor point
Kula for sure. Better components + lighter frame = more reliable + quicker climing = more fun. Plus, you could race that frame if you feel like it after a while. But I have a Kula Primo so I'm biased =P