as always this will be scattered and haphazard....
i am going to make a broad sweeping generalization here:
as long as the bike is set up properly and fits, there is no difference in bikes of similar levels, one bike isn't better than another, it's the rider.
why i say this:
i used to ride a turner 5 spot, loved it, that bike changed my life. i currently ride a trek remedy. i put all my turner parts on the remedy, so it's pretty much the same bike, except the frame. yes, geometry is different, but when it comes right down to it, the frame is almost irrelevant.
i admit, i never wanted a trek, and when i first started riding it, i wasn't too thrilled with it. i think this was more mental than physical. after riding it in sedona, i realized that bike kicked ass. it climbed, it handled techy stuff, it took drops, and it felt surprisingly similar to my turner.
i will be getting a rocky mountain slayer in the next few months. i have lusted after that bike since i first rode it. i will put my parts on the slayer frame, and yes, while the frame geometry will be different i'm not sure i will notice much of a difference.
i know each bike company has it's own geometry and feel, but i'm starting to wonder if, when it comes down to it, it doesn't really matter at all. i adapted to the trek, which i thought i never would. i wonder if, when i get the slayer, it won't be as magical as i remember it.
the more bikes i ride, the more i feel that a bike is parts and tires, and the frame is almost a moot point, and is more about style than actual performance. to a certain point.