Differences between Epic models
 

Some background quickly. I'm on a racing team sponsored by Specialized that primarily does mountain bike races, but I'm a roadie. I hadn't touched a mountain bike for years and had never raced one before yesterday. I own an old heavy Trek hardtail, but borrowed a teammate's Gary Fisher Sugar for the race, and had a fun time, and did much better than I thought I would. Now I think I want to get more into mountain biking, and I'm at the bottom of the learning curve. All the component levels, etc. are foreign to me.

I'll get a Specialized, that's pretty much a foregone conclusion. I'm almost certain I want an Epic, from everything I've learned so far they seem to be the best fit for the XC racing around here, and that's what many teammates have and are recommending. So, my main question is really about the differences between the models. Do they get much lighter as they go up the line? Do the carbon frames have a better feel than the aluminium ones? The expert carbon is about the same price as the alu marathon, so is going to the carbon frame a reasonable tradeoff for the lower components, or would I be better off with the higher components? Is the frame the same on the marathon carbon and expert carbon, and it's just the components that are different?

As a roadie, I tend to be a weight weenie, and spent a lot of time, energy and money optimizing the weight of my Tarmac to be under 14 pounds. I have a feeling I'll end up doing the same within reason with the Epic, so I figure I should start out with a reasonable component mix, but if there is anything in particular I can replace to shave weight, would I be better starting with a frameset or a lower component mix?

Sorry, lots of questions, just trying to get up to speed on this crazy mountain biking stuff.

I'd do the Aluminum Marathon for the higher end parts and for the frame being a bit more forgiving in the case that you crash.

I don't know how much I'm willing to spend yet, or how much they will cost me, and I won't be purchasing until next year. I'm familar with the benefits of a carbon road frame, but what are the benefits in a mountain frame? just weight? Also people seem to think carbon road frames are fragile but I've seen many nasty accidents in races and very few broken frames. Personally I've had both a carbon frame and an alu frame hit by cars but only the alu frame was damaged! How typical is it for carbon mountain frames to be damaged in crashes, or just from general abuse?

Epics have a more inactive suspension system than a normal FS bike. It's like a cross between a hardtail and a dual boinger. I think you should go one way or another. Reap the full benifits of FS or lose the weight.

I see them spec'd identical, the carbon frame is $5100.00 the aluminum is $4400.00?
That said, I ride a carbon hardtail and an aluminum Epic. Carbon frames give the same advantages on a trail bike that they do on a road bike. Stiffer and better ride qualities than aluminum. The jury is still trying to decide the durability issue. On a full squishy you probably don't notice the ride as much as a hardtail.

PS. Profail, The Epic is only more inactive if the owner sets it up that way.

Here's how the components break down, roughly, comparing Shimano road to Shimano Mountain to SRAM mountain:

Dura Ace - XTR - X.0
Ultegra - XT - X.9
105 - LX - X.7
Tiagra - Deore - X.5

Though I imagine you won't be looking at anything below LX/ X.7. Different people have different prfeerences, of course, and different groups have been updated mor eor less recently, but those are some rough equivalencies.

Ok, thanks guys. The bike I raced on was a Gary Fisher Sugar 1. Would that be similar to an Epic or more like the Stumpjumper, as far as suspension and ride, not components? I fiddled around with the rear suspension adjustments and had the compression set up fairly firm and with fast rebound.

http://www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/...02-sugar-1.jpg

I test rode an Epic after the race and although I didn't really make use of the suspension, the bike sure felt and looked nice :)

http://www.photoscene.com/kimandsteve/images/3029.jpg

The stumpjumper fsr is a longer travel trail bike. One of the confusing aspects of Specialized's lineup is that the hardtail stumpjumpers are their race oriented hardtails, but their race oriented full suspension bikes are not the Stumpjumpers, but the Epics. I frequently scratch my head at that one.

The sugar, like the Epic, is very race oriented, which seems to be what you want. The stumpjumper FSR is perfectly raceable, but that's not it's main purpose. If you think racing will be a secondary priority and you also want to do some more "aggressive" fun riding, the stumpjumper would be a good choice.

Racing will be the main priority. But its good to get the confirmation that the Sugar is more similar to the Epic than the Stumpjumper. I felt pretty comfortable on that.

I have SRAM Red on my Tarmac :D

Fixed.

In all seriousness though, I want SRAM to either release a 10 speed mountain group, or make a 9 speed version of that cassette.