Old 05-08-04, 10:59 PM
  #12  
seely
The Rabbi
 
seely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,123
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by JasBike
I was thinking that myself.


I have a year 2000 Rockhopper Pro. Heavy use, paint scratches, fork ready to give in, chainstays slapped to all high hell, mud stains, rocks embedded here and there.. I doubt I could get more than ~400 for it.


So that'd put me at 1300 dollars. I love the frame so I figured I'd be best off going with just upgrading the current one unless you all suggest strongly otherwise.
If you get a brand new 2004 Stumpjumper for $1100 retail, its a 24lbs bike with pedals (v-brakes), the Comp with v-brakes is $1630 retail with LX/XT/XTR and a sick light pair of Mavic 225's. The Rockhopper is a heavy frame, and if you really want to save weight, the fork alone will blow most of your budget and you still won't have a very light bike.

Frame weight on a Stumpjumper is 3.x lbs, and you are getting a Fox fork, lightweight wheelset (seperate looking at $500 for the fork and $200+ for the wheelset), LX/XT shifters, LX/XT/XTR derailleurs, etc. For $1,000 your Rockhopper can't be upgraded to that level and it will still be heavier...

I had the same dilemma about 6months ago and after much deliberation ordered the Stumpjumper Comp and it rides better than I could have imagined. I *thought* I liked my old bike but this just blows it away in every aspect.
seely is offline