interesting discussion. although I have a question in response to mcoine's comment.

"There was someone on here that posted that their alivio rear derailleur took like 15 seconds to shift one gear, and they thought that was normal. When you ride a bike that is, well, "entry level", you get used to things like 15 second shifts. So maybe you just don't realize the difference. Does the shift still occur in the alivio, yes, but to me that is not something I would tolerate because I have been riding bikes that shift in 1 second or less. The frustration involved with cheap bikes takes some of the fun out of the experience for me. If you like your trek 4300, good for you, keep buying them. I don't think that you would be making the same comments however if someone were to give you a $3000 bike."

My question is - what was your first mountain bike when you entered the sport? did it shift in 1 or less than one second?

when you were looking for a bike to start in the sport - would you drop $3000 for faster shifting (1 second vs 15 seconds)?

Just curious but is 15 seconds even indicative of normal performance from an alivio? I had a Huffy that only took a couple seconds to shift. I'd really hope an "actual mountain bike part" would shift at least as fast as my Huffy did...

$120 shoes are usually better quality than $50 shoes but they won't make you run faster. Remember, its the man on the cranks, not the cranks under the man.

First, when I bought a mountain bike for the first time, I was not new to biking. I started bmx racing in '83, I bought a new bianchi road bike in '87 for $800. I bought a trek 830 used in '92 I think, for maybe $200. It was a piece of crap. I don't remember how it shifted, but I am a decent mechanic, so probably ok.
Second, I am not reccomending to anyone to drop $3000 on a first mtn bike, I just said:

"entry level" I would define as a bike that would allow you to enter the sport on a recreational level

the original post asked "what is an entry level bike?"

Like I said before, if you like your bike, keep riding it. I like mine and so I keep riding it, and I shouldn't have to justify the money I spent. I have been active in biking for over 20 years, why would I want an entry level bike?

More barnyard waste. (I am positive this would be ok with sydney) mcoine, for being around bikes as much as you say, it seem like you really in the dark. When an Alivio derailleur doesn't shift correctly, that is because it is an Alivio? WHat about when an XT derailleur doesn't shift correctly, what causes that.

I am not going to flame mcoine, but to anyone who is interested in the truth here now or in the future...I have used several derailleurs over the course of all my miles. I too, used to have derailleur envy and the first time i would have a bike shift improperly, i would just assume it was because it was cheaper.

Over the course of time i discovered this couldn't be farther from the truth. Alivio derailleurs work great. In fact a well adjusted Alivio derailleur is far superior to a poorly adjusted XTR. I presently have XT and LX on my two mountain bikes. I have Tiagra on my road bike.

I've also had Alivio and Acera. When adjusted correctly, i can't tell one ounce of difference in the way they shift. NOTE: WHEN ADJUSTED CORRECTLY. I don't shift with my XT now and say, "wow, this is so much better." It isn't. Any current derailleur will shift fine if you set it up right.

Of course their are quality differences in between upper and lower end derailleurs but they are small. And they make no detectable difference in shifting if you ask me. For what it's worth, i've shifted a few thousand times so i probably know.

I expect my LX and XT derailleurs will last longer. I hope they do because they cost more. But not once have i ever noticed that they shifted better, than Alivio or Acera when all adjustments were proper.

sorry, those questions were not meant to offend you, I asked them to understand your position and background. your opinion certainly reflects your experience.

nobody needs to justify their spending onr their hobby or passion, specially if we are nor directly affected by it. but we should be clear about were we stand. Cause where we stand and how transparent we are about our philosophy definitely affects what we say and how we interpret each other in a forum like this.

wow! that was probably one of the most lucid description I have read in a long time. very insightful and helpful for a rider like I am. I apprecaite learning from experienced riders' comments. thanks

I love that line.

I think its all a matter of how well you want something to "do the job".

I have a pair of expensive oakleys. I also have a pair of cheap $10 sunnies. Both block the sun, both stay on my face, both have lasted a long time. That said, the oakleys feel much nicer, and the lenses block the sun better and provide better clarity than the cheap pair. Sure the cheap pair work, but not nearly as well as the oakleys.

Bicycle related example? Suntour and Marz forks. Thats a component on your bike where price does have a very large impact.

For the most part I agree that if tuned properly most equipment will function as intended. But the real truth is that low-end components never will or are they even expected to function like C Record or Dura Ace parts.

A non-indexed Suntour system while light and bombproof just won’t shift as fast as an XT system no matter how well you tune it. Partly in that you need to focus more attention to shift a non indexed system.
Non-profiled cogs shift louder and slower than smooth surfaced profiled shift aligned cassettes. And low-end rings will not shift under load no matter how perfectly they are adjusted.

On the road, a one second shift is acceptable to some I suppose, but on the trail a sub one-second double shift (rings and cog) is often required, and being able to make that shift under load often can make the difference between cleaning a section and dabbing.

I can think of no new entry level mountain bikes with Suntour friction shifting. Also can't think of any with cheap cassettes. Most bikes have quality cassettes regardless of cost. In a nutshell, I can't think of any entry level bike shop bike from this century that you have described.

I think that most people here understood that the examples I used were from the two opposite ends of the technology spectrum and that I am speaking in general terms. If you can’t tell the difference between how a Sram, R970, and a Shimano, HG37 Freewheel shifts then for you your points are all valid.

I guess I didn't know this thread was about comparing OLD entry level bikes with NEW entry level bikes. I just assumed that we were comparing NEW entry level bikes, because generally that is what is available for purchase.

Tell me the fork on the Giant Rincon works even close to as well as the fork on the Giant XTC3. Price does get you better gear that performs better. Sure you can take the Rincon out and it will work...but it wont perform even close to as well as the XTC.

Its a matter of what you're willing to settle for.

Bikes don't perform, the riders do - the bike is the tool/media or whatever you want to call it. Difference in gear is not really noticed unless there are world class athletes trying to shave seconds. You can't make up for being a middle of the pack rider by buying up in the product line. Odds are you will still be middle of the pack.

My experiences are:

Jump Man shoes don't let you play like Jordan. I've watched guys with Jordans get cut from teams that I was captain of. (with my Converse)

Burris optics don't make you a sniper. I have hunted with guys that missed stationary deer with their $2000 setup only to watch an old man clean up for them with a surplus open sighted Mauser.

Mustangs don't make you a race car driver. I have seen people wreck sports cars in curves that old pick ups sail through.

and finally sex won't make you a porn star. I have been doing it my whole life and never made a dime!!!!



Good riders are familiar with their equipment, can read the trail, and manuever and shift accordingly. All this comes with practice. I could buy any bike I wanted, but I chose one that fit me and started riding alot. It wasn't the most expensive (no where near it) and I upgrade as I see fit, but this doesn't make it wrong. Too many people throw money at deficits instead of trying to erase them with hard work.

great remarks! finally we are going somewhere. as some people have mentioned, pricier bikes will probably feel better than a cheaper bike. but, what do you really need to start in the sport.

the question is not about which will feel better, the question is whats the threshold that will get you started. what is the threshold for a entry-level/starter/biginner bike?