Hardtail or Full Suspension?
 

I can't decide... I was looking towards the Kikapu and the Dawg for FS but I saw the Caldera and it looks a a pretty sweet Hardtail. I'm plannign to ride them on XC trails and take them off some small jumps. Could someone please lay out for me the disadvatges and adavantages of Hardtail and Full Suspension? Also which one would you reccomend?
Thanks

I don't really know. A little help here please.

XC trails and some sweet jumps - if you're not climbi9ng big hills - SS hardtail 4 teh win. Also, there's a gazillion threads started on this exact topic already, so search...

I think if you're in the dawg price range for a FS, you could do alot better than the caldara for a HT.

I personally dont like the Konas all that much. You get less for your dollar with them i think.

If you have the money I would go with the FS. Just a nicer ride.

my opinion, a sweet free ride hard tail unless you have access to ski mountain type places

At the same price a hardtail will offer better components, and less weight. For xc riding a hardtail will be your best bet. I include small jumps and drops (3-5 feet), and downhill sections in the "xc" category, unlike some riders. To me, xc = pretty much anything you might find. It is certainly a good place to start if you are new to the sport.

Hardtails are lighter.

And fs can be more fun.
My RX is also the best climbing bike I've ever owned. For 99% of trails, I'm sold on FS. However, I wouldn't sacrafice componetry, I don't think I'd go FS with less than an XT (maybe LX with a good shock and fork) kit.
Also, an FS bike is a much harder thing to buy than a hardtail. I'd want to ride an FS bike before I bought it. Each design reacts to riding style and terrain.
A hardtail is more about geometry, while an FS is engineering and much harder to screw up.