Is it better to upgrade the components on my 10 yr old frame, orbuy a new bike?

Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well used 10
yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain, and me
considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year, I was
thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek 6700 or
similar.

However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a few
pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether it is
better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the money on
selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I could upgrade to
Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX 27-speed (from STX / Deore
21-speed), and even add front suspension, and still have a couple of
hundred $$ left in my pocket.

Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with pretty
average components.

Any advice / thoughts welcome...

"Paul" wrote in message
...
| Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well used 10
| yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain, and me
| considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year, I was
| thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek 6700 or
| similar.
|
| However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a few
| pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether it is
| better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the money on
| selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I could upgrade to
| Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX 27-speed (from STX / Deore
| 21-speed), and even add front suspension, and still have a couple of
| hundred $$ left in my pocket.
|
| Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with pretty
| average components.

My MTB is a 1994 Rockhopper Comp FS (full XT upgrade.) Every time I see the
"next new thing" I go out and ride it and re-discover just how perfectly
dialed it is for me. When the frame does finally wear out, I'll miss having
a triple butted full chromoly bike.

The only drawback is I'm restricted to 80mm travel on the fork. That's
perfectly fine for me, as I'm using a 97 Manitou SX Ti (76mm travel). As
for the rest of the DT, go for it if the frame is good enough for your
needs.

One rule of thumb we mention to our customers - if it costs more than half
the price of a new bike, really think hard about what you're doing.


---
__o
_`\(,_ Cycling is life,
(_)/ (_) all the rest, just details.
The Nelson Paradigm =^o.o^=
http://intergalax.com
http://intbike.com
_______
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.682 / Virus Database: 444 - Release Date: 5/11/2004

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years?

Without a doubt YES! You gotta tra a FS bike. Trust me on this.

"loomer" wrote:

Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years?

Without a doubt YES! You gotta tra a FS bike. Trust me on this.

It is like night and day, hehe. Suspension forks were totally new beasties
when I was riding my first MTB (and undoubtedly much cruder than today), and
aluminium frames were expensive. I'm amazed at what's happened since then!

"Paul" wrote in message
...
Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well used 10
yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain, and me
considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year, I was
thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek 6700 or
similar.

However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a few
pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether it is
better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the money on
selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I could upgrade to
Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX 27-speed (from STX / Deore
21-speed), and even add front suspension, and still have a couple of
hundred $$ left in my pocket.

Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with pretty
average components.

Any advice / thoughts welcome...

I was faced with the same decision you are. I have a '94 Schwinn Moab SS
that has seen better days. I couldn't bring myself to put that much money
into it so I bought a new bike. Shop around and see what you like.

I'm starting to err towards your line of thinking.

I tried out a Rockhopper Comp Disc today, and don't get me wrong - it was
good. But whilst the frame is certainly very good, many of the
components on the bike are fairly average. I already have a frame that is
pretty good (it might be ten years old, but it was a brilliant frame for
the money when I bought it), so why don't I just build on that. The
advantage of this route is that I can pick best of breed components in
price brackets I'm interested in, e.g. get a good front fork, and
groupset. Then at a later date I can upgrade the wheels / cockpit, and I
should have a bike that is better than the Rockhopper Comp. If my frame
gives up the ghost in a few years, I could just buy a new frame and
transfer my hand-picked components on to it...

I may be in danger of spending more than half the value of a new bike, but
there is some logic there, I think!



On Fri, 21 May 2004 21:00:26 -0400, The Nelson Paradigm
wrote:

"Paul" wrote in message
...
| Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well used 10
| yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain, and me
| considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year, I was
| thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek 6700 or
| similar.
|
| However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a few
| pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether it is
| better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the money on
| selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I could upgrade to
| Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX 27-speed (from STX / Deore
| 21-speed), and even add front suspension, and still have a couple of
| hundred $$ left in my pocket.
|
| Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with pretty
| average components.

My MTB is a 1994 Rockhopper Comp FS (full XT upgrade.) Every time I see
the
"next new thing" I go out and ride it and re-discover just how perfectly
dialed it is for me. When the frame does finally wear out, I'll miss
having
a triple butted full chromoly bike.

The only drawback is I'm restricted to 80mm travel on the fork. That's
perfectly fine for me, as I'm using a 97 Manitou SX Ti (76mm travel). As
for the rest of the DT, go for it if the frame is good enough for your
needs.

One rule of thumb we mention to our customers - if it costs more than
half
the price of a new bike, really think hard about what you're doing.


---
__o
_`\(,_ Cycling is life,
(_)/ (_) all the rest, just details.
The Nelson Paradigm =^o.o^=
http://intergalax.com
http://intbike.com
_______
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.682 / Virus Database: 444 - Release Date: 5/11/2004

Paul wrote in message m...

However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a few
pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether it is
better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the money on
selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I could upgrade to
Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX 27-speed (from STX / Deore
21-speed), and even add front suspension, and still have a couple of
hundred $$ left in my pocket.

Some considerations on your upgrades:
Brakes - Shimano uses the "parallel push (tm)" mechanism on most of
their "V-Brakes (tm)". Some versions were infamous for incurable
squealing. Boring "Linear Pull" brakes from Avid or SRAM are
mechanically simpler and quieter, in my experience.

Drivetrain - adding speeds will require a new rear wheel along with
all the other shiny bits. Maybe a crankset too for 27 speed.

Front shock - If your bike has a 1" headset your shock selection will
be quite limited.

I did a complete XT 27 speed upgrade to my wife's '94 Bianchi Osprey
in 2000. Even with a "former employee" discount for the XT kit and a
clearance priced 1" Marzocchi Z2, we certainly topped the 50% of new
rule. But she's really sensitive to fit issues, so starting with a
known comfortable frame made it worthwhile. So, if you love the frame,
brakes and drivetrain may be in order. Front shock requires more info,
and may send you off for something new.

Dave Dowler

Paul wrote in message news:opr8g56cxcxd4gh3@tarfax...
I'm starting to err towards your line of thinking.

I tried out a Rockhopper Comp Disc today, and don't get me wrong - it was
good. But whilst the frame is certainly very good, many of the
components on the bike are fairly average. I already have a frame that is
pretty good (it might be ten years old, but it was a brilliant frame for
the money when I bought it), so why don't I just build on that. The
advantage of this route is that I can pick best of breed components in
price brackets I'm interested in, e.g. get a good front fork, and
groupset. Then at a later date I can upgrade the wheels / cockpit, and I
should have a bike that is better than the Rockhopper Comp. If my frame
gives up the ghost in a few years, I could just buy a new frame and
transfer my hand-picked components on to it...

I may be in danger of spending more than half the value of a new bike, but
there is some logic there, I think!

I can help you out with a fork that doesn't have some huge amount of
travel. Too much travel will upset your geometry.

I was gonna eBay it, but I'd rather help out somebody who took the
same path I did. Yes, I spent more money than I would have otherwise,
but I acquired a load of components that I liked, and eventually
transferred to a new frame. To get the bike I wanted, in the spec
that I wanted, I would have had to custom-order the stuff at a premium
anyway.

If you are interested in a 1999 Marzocchi Z2 BAM, 2.5 inches of
travel, coil and oil, replaceable steer tube (with both diameters of
tube) original owner's manual, give me a shout. You could get a
quality fork for a decent price, and I could keep away from the hassle
of eBay, PayPal, etc.

Use this e-mail: rfjonesy *at* hotmail *dot* com.
--
Jonesy

Paul wrote in newspr8g56cxcxd4gh3@tarfax:


I'm starting to err towards your line of thinking.

I tried out a Rockhopper Comp Disc today, and don't get me wrong - it
was good. But whilst the frame is certainly very good, many of the
components on the bike are fairly average. I already have a frame
that is pretty good (it might be ten years old, but it was a
brilliant frame for the money when I bought it), so why don't I just
build on that. The advantage of this route is that I can pick best
of breed components in price brackets I'm interested in, e.g. get a
good front fork, and groupset. Then at a later date I can upgrade
the wheels / cockpit, and I should have a bike that is better than
the Rockhopper Comp. If my frame gives up the ghost in a few years,
I could just buy a new frame and transfer my hand-picked components
on to it...

I may be in danger of spending more than half the value of a new bike,
but there is some logic there, I think!



On Fri, 21 May 2004 21:00:26 -0400, The Nelson Paradigm
wrote:

"Paul" wrote in message
...
| Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well
| used 10 yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain,
| and me considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year,
| I was thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek
| 6700 or similar.
|
| However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a
| few pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether
| it is better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the
| money on selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I
| could upgrade to Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX
| 27-speed (from STX / Deore 21-speed), and even add front
| suspension, and still have a couple of hundred $$ left in my
| pocket.
|
| Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with
| pretty average components.

My MTB is a 1994 Rockhopper Comp FS (full XT upgrade.) Every time I
see the
"next new thing" I go out and ride it and re-discover just how
perfectly dialed it is for me. When the frame does finally wear out,
I'll miss having
a triple butted full chromoly bike.

The only drawback is I'm restricted to 80mm travel on the fork.
That's perfectly fine for me, as I'm using a 97 Manitou SX Ti (76mm
travel). As for the rest of the DT, go for it if the frame is good
enough for your needs.

One rule of thumb we mention to our customers - if it costs more than
half
the price of a new bike, really think hard about what you're doing.


---
__o
_`\(,_ Cycling is life,
(_)/ (_) all the rest, just details.
The Nelson Paradigm =^o.o^=
http://intergalax.com
http://intbike.com
_______
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.682 / Virus Database: 444 - Release Date: 5/11/2004




In my opinion, you should buy a new bike. You might save some money by
simply upgrading the components one at a time but there are some drawbacks
to that approach.

1. MTB frames do take a lot of abuse, and have a finite lifespan. I know
it depends on your style of riding and the number of hours on the frame,
but 10 years is old for a frame. Inspect it for any serious dents or signs
of stress fractures. If any exist, it is not really safe to keep riding
that frame.

2. Although it would initially cost more to buy a new bike than to replace
parts one at a time, you will ultimately spend less on parts that come
packaged on a prebuilt bike.

3. Technology has changed a huge amount in 10 years. Even hardtail
geometries have changed as riding styles have changed. Many
'recreational' bikes built 10 years ago had a racing type geometry that may
or may not suit your riding style these days.

4. Further to point #3, full suspension bikes are so much nicer these
days, and there are an increasing number that are priced reasonably well.
Whether FS suits you is a choice you need to make, but I for one am very
glad I decided to buy FS instead of another hardtail.

5. Don't be too beguiled by the names stuck on components... I think it
is worth buying a new bike with LX components rather than sticking XTR or
even XT on your existing frame. Although others will likely disagree, I
don't think the upgrade from LX to XTR is worth a fraction of the money
spent in the process. XT or XTR might look sexier and function a very
slight bit better than LX, but in the end, LX is a solid, functional,
affordable group of components. Also, I have many friends running XTR with
the dirtiest, oldest cables and their bikes shift like poo. A well
maintained LX drivetrain would kick ass on their setups. The same applies
to SRAM or what ever other manufacturers I can think of. I have been lured
into spending too much on new components (wheels, forks, tyres, and drive
train stuff) and despite all the cool reviews, I have not noticed a
tremendous improvement in my riding ability. Having said that, I did
notice a big difference changing from a 10 year old hardtail to my RM ETSX
frame.

6. Components break off and need to be replaced. Living on Vancouver
Island, I have decided that the frame and fork is where the money should be
spent and components are essentially disposable and as such should be a
compromise between high cost, sex appeal, and function.

So, if any of what I just stated makes sense to you, or seems to apply to
your particular situation, then strongly consider a new bike.

If you really cannot afford one, patch up your current bike, and save until
you can afford a new bike. The longer you wait, the better the bike you'll
get for a given price.

Ride many bikes before you purchase. Some brands offer excellent
components with solid frames for reasonable prices (ie Giant, Norco).
Others have such expensive frames that in order to make them somewhat
affordable, they run less expensive components on their 'low end' bikes -
which, as I have already proposed, work very well too.

Hope that helps a bit.

Thanks to everyone who was kind enough to reply. After swaying one way,
and then the other, I finally decided to buy a whole new bike. For what
it's worth, here are my main reasons (in no particular order):

1. I was concerned adding front suspension to my old bike would upset
the geometry. I may well have ended up needing a new stem / bars too, all
extra cost.

2. I was concerned that other components on the bike may be getting near
the end of their life too e.g. rims. I'd be annoyed if after buying a new
drivechain and suspension, I then had to replace the rims a few months
later.

3. With a new bike, future upgrades / repairs will be simpler as it is
using modern standards.

4. I get the general benefits of the advances in technology over the
past ten years, on all aspects of the bike.

5. I bike that's given ten years of pleasure has done well, and I don't
object to investing in a new bike if I think it's going to last that long
too.

6. Buying a whole new bike is simply more fun!


If anyone's interested, I opted for a Gary Fisher Hoo Koo E Koo. It was
comparable to the Specialized Rockhopper Comp and the Trek 6700, but is
somewhat cheaper. I was initially a little unsure about the 'Genesis'
frame geometry, so it was a gamble, but as others had promised, a couple
of technical rides in and I'm a convert. It inspires confidence on steep
downhills and climbs well. The bike has above average componentry for the
price bracket, and most importantly a quality frame. I must say the paint
chips very easily, but such cosmetic things aren't as important as the
ride...




On Tue, 25 May 2004 00:10:17 GMT, Neil wrote:

Paul wrote in newspr8g56cxcxd4gh3@tarfax:


I'm starting to err towards your line of thinking.

I tried out a Rockhopper Comp Disc today, and don't get me wrong - it
was good. But whilst the frame is certainly very good, many of the
components on the bike are fairly average. I already have a frame
that is pretty good (it might be ten years old, but it was a
brilliant frame for the money when I bought it), so why don't I just
build on that. The advantage of this route is that I can pick best
of breed components in price brackets I'm interested in, e.g. get a
good front fork, and groupset. Then at a later date I can upgrade
the wheels / cockpit, and I should have a bike that is better than
the Rockhopper Comp. If my frame gives up the ghost in a few years,
I could just buy a new frame and transfer my hand-picked components
on to it...

I may be in danger of spending more than half the value of a new bike,
but there is some logic there, I think!



On Fri, 21 May 2004 21:00:26 -0400, The Nelson Paradigm
wrote:

"Paul" wrote in message
...
| Have MTB's improved much over the past ten years? With my well
| used 10 yr old Trek 930 hardtail needing a whole new drivechain,
| and me considering entering a entry-level race sometime this year,
| I was thinking it about time to replace the whole bike with a Trek
| 6700 or similar.
|
| However I was shocked to see that this year's 6700 appears to be a
| few pounds heavier than my old 930! This makes me wonder whether
| it is better to keep my 10 year old Cromoly frame and spend the
| money on selectively upgrading the components on it instead. I
| could upgrade to Deore V-brakes (from cantilevers), and to LX
| 27-speed (from STX / Deore 21-speed), and even add front
| suspension, and still have a couple of hundred $$ left in my
| pocket.
|
| Or I could buy the Trek 6700, which is a very good frame, with
| pretty average components.

My MTB is a 1994 Rockhopper Comp FS (full XT upgrade.) Every time I
see the
"next new thing" I go out and ride it and re-discover just how
perfectly dialed it is for me. When the frame does finally wear out,
I'll miss having
a triple butted full chromoly bike.

The only drawback is I'm restricted to 80mm travel on the fork.
That's perfectly fine for me, as I'm using a 97 Manitou SX Ti (76mm
travel). As for the rest of the DT, go for it if the frame is good
enough for your needs.

One rule of thumb we mention to our customers - if it costs more than
half
the price of a new bike, really think hard about what you're doing.


---
__o
_`\(,_ Cycling is life,
(_)/ (_) all the rest, just details.
The Nelson Paradigm =^o.o^=
http://intergalax.com
http://intbike.com
_______
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.682 / Virus Database: 444 - Release Date: 5/11/2004




In my opinion, you should buy a new bike. You might save some money by
simply upgrading the components one at a time but there are some
drawbacks
to that approach.

1. MTB frames do take a lot of abuse, and have a finite lifespan. I
know
it depends on your style of riding and the number of hours on the frame,
but 10 years is old for a frame. Inspect it for any serious dents or
signs
of stress fractures. If any exist, it is not really safe to keep riding
that frame.

2. Although it would initially cost more to buy a new bike than to
replace
parts one at a time, you will ultimately spend less on parts that come
packaged on a prebuilt bike.

3. Technology has changed a huge amount in 10 years. Even hardtail
geometries have changed as riding styles have changed. Many
'recreational' bikes built 10 years ago had a racing type geometry that
may
or may not suit your riding style these days.

4. Further to point #3, full suspension bikes are so much nicer these
days, and there are an increasing number that are priced reasonably well.
Whether FS suits you is a choice you need to make, but I for one am very
glad I decided to buy FS instead of another hardtail.

5. Don't be too beguiled by the names stuck on components... I think it
is worth buying a new bike with LX components rather than sticking XTR or
even XT on your existing frame. Although others will likely disagree, I
don't think the upgrade from LX to XTR is worth a fraction of the money
spent in the process. XT or XTR might look sexier and function a very
slight bit better than LX, but in the end, LX is a solid, functional,
affordable group of components. Also, I have many friends running XTR
with
the dirtiest, oldest cables and their bikes shift like poo. A well
maintained LX drivetrain would kick ass on their setups. The same
applies
to SRAM or what ever other manufacturers I can think of. I have been
lured
into spending too much on new components (wheels, forks, tyres, and drive
train stuff) and despite all the cool reviews, I have not noticed a
tremendous improvement in my riding ability. Having said that, I did
notice a big difference changing from a 10 year old hardtail to my RM
ETSX
frame.

6. Components break off and need to be replaced. Living on Vancouver
Island, I have decided that the frame and fork is where the money should
be
spent and components are essentially disposable and as such should be a
compromise between high cost, sex appeal, and function.

So, if any of what I just stated makes sense to you, or seems to apply to
your particular situation, then strongly consider a new bike.

If you really cannot afford one, patch up your current bike, and save
until
you can afford a new bike. The longer you wait, the better the bike
you'll
get for a given price.

Ride many bikes before you purchase. Some brands offer excellent
components with solid frames for reasonable prices (ie Giant, Norco).
Others have such expensive frames that in order to make them somewhat
affordable, they run less expensive components on their 'low end' bikes -
which, as I have already proposed, work very well too.

Hope that helps a bit.