trek liquid vs. fuel - NEWBIE

Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?
(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)

"Garrett" wrote in message
...
Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?
(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)

Why not just pour gas on the NG ;-)

Dan V

Garrett wrote:
Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80
or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's
website and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems
that the Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?
(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)

mtbr reviews needs to be taken with a BIG grain of salt. Try other search
modes, Treks have had serious chain suck issues in the past, among other
issues.


penny s

Dan V says:

Why not just pour gas on the NG ;-)

Says one with experience ;-)

Glad to see you survived Frances, Dan. Is it as bad down there as us Yankees
are being told?

Steve

Garrett wrote in message ...
Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?

No.

(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

Marketing hype.

Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)

Do yourself a favor. Buy a hardtail and learn to ride before delving
into the horrific world of low budget full suspension bikes.

JD

So is anybody actually going to answer the question?

In reverse order, because it makes sense to me ...

Garrett wrote in message ...
(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

A little history may be in order here. Once upon a time, there were
only (road)bikes. Then mountain bikes evolved. Since then the species
has further diversified ... a rough grouping follows
- cross country: off-road trail riding with a race emphasis. most race
courses are not as technical as some of the more difficult trails tend
to be (pulls head in to avoid singeing flames so these bikes tend to
be light weight (may even be hard tail, see olympic races, many world
cup races) and limited travel (in the 80mm, 3 inch range), climbing is
where many races are won/lost:- since climing is inherently slower,
more time is spent climbing than descending and a performance
advantage here will result in a bigger lead than can be made on the
shorter (time wise) descents
- all mountain: off-road trail riding with more emphasis on
versatility and comfort on rougher trails. longer suspension travel
(100-125mm, 4-5inches) both ends. this means that they usually weigh a
little more than cross-country bikes
- freeride, aka black diamond: more emphasis on downhill performance,
although uphill riding may be necessary to get to where the fun is.
bikes are designed to be strong enough to handle jumps and drops.
travel is often in the 200-225mm, 8-9 inch range. inherently heavier
than either above.
- downhill: purpose built downhill race bikes. emphasis is heavily
(pun intended) towards downhill performance. since they don't tend to
be riden uphill, there are not many concessions to uphill performance.
- others: includes dirt jumpers, singlespeeds etc

These groups do not mean that a bike can't be used for other purposes,
just that their designs are not optimised for other things. For
example a BMX bike has been riden quite successfully in a 24hr race,
and there was a guy riding a heavy downhill bike in our local
cross-country race series (he was cheered for every lap/race he
finished)

as for the other question ...
Garrett wrote in message ...
Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?

that's impossible to answer for somebody else, sorry
some extra information that might help you to come to a decision you
will be happy with for a long time

"pas" wrote in message ...
mtbr reviews needs to be taken with a BIG grain of salt. Try other search
modes, Treks have had serious chain suck issues in the past, among other
issues.

I agree with Penny about mtbr. It is a useful source for information,
but too many of the reviews give 5 chillis to something that the
reviewer has had for only a week. I wouldn't make a purchase decision
based solely on mtbr reviews.

important factors include
- anticipated use (see above)
- rider size
- rider weight
- rider skills/experience
- bike fit: rough guess at frame size = (0.65 x inseam length) + 10cm
do a google search on "mountain bike frame sizing"
also see sheldon brown http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html
and keith bontrager http://www.sheldonbrown.com/kops.html amoung
others


other sources of information
www.mountainbike.com
www.mbaction.com
mountain bike action magazine recently had a review of the trek fuel
(don't remember which number in the series
the ask rc section of the website also has good info

the trek fuel series are cross country race bikes.
the liquids are all mountain. I have an 03 liquid 20. since then the
series has expanded and diversified. the original series 10/20/30 were
all variable geometry. in 04 the series was changed to 10/25/30/55.
the 10 & 30 are variable geometry, but the 25/55 have stable platform
suspension systems. the 05 series will include a 65, with more
freeride style components.

stable platform suspension designs are supposed to minimise/eliminate
suspension bob while pedaling, while still allowing suspension to work
over bumps.
there are several different approaches, used by different
manufacturers
- virtual pivot point: use frame design, so that chain tension tends
to counteract rear suspension movment, eg Intense VPP, Rocky Mountain
ETSX series
- pneumatic valving: filters out inputs at pedalling frequency, faster
inputs compress suspension, eg Manitou spv forks and shocks,
Curnutt/Romic
- inertia valving: small mass in shock opens valve when shock moved up
from below (bump in ground), but stays closed when suspension
compressed from above (pedalling) eg Fox Teralogic systems

summary
- decide what kind of riding you want to do
- decide how much money you are willing to spend
- have an idea what size frame you are going to need
- come up with a short list of bikes to try
- go visit your local bike shops and see what they have
- try to ride a demo, on the kind of trail you will be riding

remember a great price doesn't equal a great deal unless you end up
with a bike that suits you and what you want to do

hope this helps

Ian M

JD wrote:
Garrett wrote in message ...

Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel 80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?


No.


(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?


Marketing hype.


Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)


Do yourself a favor. Buy a hardtail and learn to ride before delving
into the horrific world of low budget full suspension bikes.

JD

Excuse me? Buy a hardtail? On top of the 3 I already own (the first
since 1992)? I guess it takes four to learn. Wow. Thanks for the advice.

JD wrote:
Garrett wrote in message
...
Hi all. I am considering a '04 Trek Liquid 10 or a '04 Trek Fuel
80 or
90. I have a few parts already to upgrade. I looked at Trek's
website
and upon inspecting features and reviews at MTBR.com it seems that
the
Liquid is better but I am wondering two things:

(1) is the price increase worth it?

No.

(2) what is all-mountain vs. Cross Country (from Trek's site)?

Marketing hype.

Thanks,
Garrett (newbie)

Do yourself a favor. Buy a hardtail and learn to ride before delving
into the horrific world of low budget full suspension bikes.

JD


This is not bad advice. Don't fall into the trap of buying the cheapest
model in a series, thinking that you will upgrade components later.
This is possible, but almost never a cost effective way to go.
Following JD's advice will not cost you an arm and a leg, and if you
find you really like riding, you will have a great commuter bike when
you take the plunge and upgrade(?) to something else.
I forgot to mention in my previous post, assuming that you have friends
who ride, ask their advice about which LBS to go to .They are not all
interchangeable in terms of quality: advice, after sales service etc.
The best will give great advice, even if that means you go elsewhere to
buy. The worst will sell you what they have/want to get rid of, even if
it's unsuitable, doesn't fit.

Ian M

You might have mentioned this earlier. Calling yourself a newbie ...

You might have mentioned this earlier. Calling yourself a newbie ...