Originally posted by KevinST4
I appreciate the comments so far. To put a different spin on things, in my price range should I be looking at a hardtail instead? When I first started shopping I was set on a hardtail, but the sales guy at the LBS told me I would be better served with a f/s bike. I was looking at a Rockhopper Comp and he showed me the f/s version which had all the same components as the hardtail for $250 more. Seemed like a good deal. After doing some more research it seems that most people have the opinion that unless you spend $1250 or more you should stay away from full suspension. Does this still hold true for the 2003 models? I was told the '03 Rockhopper FSR XC is comparable to the '02 Stumpjumper FSR. Is this analysis correct?
Kevin
I am a big believer in only buying good fs. However if you won't be rough on it and only ride pretty basic xc trails they should hold up. I wouldn't do drops, downhill or even aggro xc on a 1000$ fs. I am 1000% sure it would break and wouold end up costing more than its worth.
I am also a ht fan so generally I will always recommend (especially beginners) someone to get a hardtail. Discover what type of riding you like and how rough you will be and then you will be better served when you want to get a fs in the future (if you ever need one)