Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Mountain Biking Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Check out this forum to discuss the latest tips, tricks, gear and equipment in the world of mountain biking.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-02-07, 05:02 PM   #1
RobD
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Kona Caldera vs. Kula

Hi all,

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?

Any input would be greatly appreciated.


The specs. for each bike are here:

http://www.konaworld.com/bikes/2k7/KULA/index.html
http://www.konaworld.com/bikes/2k7/CALDERA/index.html
RobD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-07, 08:28 PM   #2
junkyard
Fourth Degree Legend
 
junkyard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: American Gardens Building
Bikes: 2005 Kona Cinder Cone & 2010 Cannondale SuperSix
Posts: 3,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
junkyard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-07, 09:08 PM   #3
taylor p
Senior Member
 
taylor p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brainerd MN
Bikes:
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i think the caldera is made to take more abuse (wheight more) than the kula not to say that the kula wont
taylor p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-07, 10:15 PM   #4
The Flying M
Bike Addict
 
The Flying M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: LA/OC
Bikes: Kona Kula Primo 2007
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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
The Flying M is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:44 PM.