Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I went to Keystone over the weekend and thought I would demo a FS bike to see how it really compared with my old Trek 970 w/ front suspension. I was originally going to try a Fuel 80, but after looking at the stock brakes (Deore V-Brakes) and how mushy they felt, I decided to try the Liquid (Hayes Disc). I was impressed with the comfort level I felt coming down the hill, however I did not really try much climbing. The Liquid 10 did feel heavy so I can only assume the climbing would become teadious after awhile. This has been my general impression of a 5" travel bike, however, after reading some reviews, it looks like the Liquid 55 weighs in around 26-27 lbs.
Well this opens the door to a whole new set of bikes. I originally have had my eye on a SC Blur, but if I can get more travel and still keep the weight down, I would consider the Liquid bike. One of my questions, how does this Liquid bike climb? Is there any significant bob? The only difference I can really tell between the Liquid 55 and 30 are the front and rear shocks. Anything else that I'm missing and any other general recommendations?
I'm 5'11", 185 lbs
I like singletrack, technical along with some climbing. Downhill is fun but not my major objective. Usually max of about 4' drops.
Thanks!
 

·
occupation : Foole
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
Jeff in CO said:
... however, after reading some reviews, it looks like the Liquid 55 weighs in around 26-27 lbs.
!
Ummm, take the reviews with a "grain (...no, make that many grains) of salt" ...
unless you've personally verified this weight claim yourself, I'd be suspect of the figures.
My Fuel 90 weighs in around 26, and I find it hard to believe (although I may, of course, be wrong) that ANY Liquid could come close to that weight and still be "durable" (meaning, sure, you can build up many bikes to be as light as possible, but at what cost ??? an "all-mountain bike" should not be built up light, unless one doesn't want/need a true "all mountain bike"). Dunno.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
The difference is mainly the shocks....
The 55 is a SPV bike.
The 30 has the TALAS style suspension travel.

55= no bob when pedaling, non adjustable suspension travel.
30= 3-5" adjustable travel, but it does bob when pedaling.

Trek explains it pretty well on their site. Look at the 'features' bar below the bike on the page and select Liquid Suspension Design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
I have very little if any bobing on the climbs while seated on my Liquid 25. My lbs weighed stock 2004 Fuel 90disc and a stock 2004 Liquid 25 at within 1 pound of each other. Fuel at 29.6 and the Liquid at 30.4. The Liquid has lighter components, in this case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
Wow, that is a heavy Fuel!!!

My medium Liquid 20 weighs in at 30.5 pounds. If I took the tubes out, I may get it to 30!

I notice the extra weight, but with the wider tires, the increased traction is worth it...

Anyone had any luck running the stock IRC Trailbears tubeless??? I've tried, and even using Stans sealant, can't get them to stay sealed!

bricklin69 said:
I have very little if any bobing on the climbs while seated on my Liquid 25. My lbs weighed stock 2004 Fuel 90disc and a stock 2004 Liquid 25 at within 1 pound of each other. Fuel at 29.6 and the Liquid at 30.4. The Liquid has lighter components, in this case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
bricklin69 said:
[tread drift] I checked out the 2004 Fuel 90 non-disc 18.5 at the local LBS today and it scales in at 28.5 pounds.[/thread drift]
That is the same weight I got when I weighed the 90...

I own a Liquid 20 and the bob is pronounced when standing on a climb. Otherwise, it's fairly efficient. My advice is this..... GET THE SANTA CRUZ!!! (sorry liquid fans) Build quality is far superior. I rode my buddies BLUR after the fact and boy do I regret not waiting. :( After only a couple rides, all the joints/pivots on my subframe were squeaking. I took it to the dealership and they said this was normal. TREK probably saved a little on weight with the light-duty bearings. I don't believe this bike to be "All Mountain" as TREK claims. More of an "All Mountain except jumps and drops" type of bike. I do a little Freeriding on my Liquid and to be brutally honest, I don't think it could take much more. 4 foot drops max. I've had my Liquid for about 2yrs now and satisfied overall, but IMHO- there are better bikes for the money and the SC is one of them. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
One of my buddies has a Blur... and it is a SWEET ride... of course, it was also over $1000 more than a Liquid and doesn't have the nicer components that the Liquid has.

My Liquid squeaked a little too, I just took it apart and cleaned out the bushings and its fine now. I wish it had pivot bearings, and didn't have the carbon chainstays... but it was hard to beat for the price.

The Blur has already cracked the frame once, so far the Liquid is still all intact. Time will tell though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
funboarder1971 said:
One of my buddies has a Blur... and it is a SWEET ride... of course, it was also over $1000 more than a Liquid and doesn't have the nicer components that the Liquid has.

My Liquid squeaked a little too, I just took it apart and cleaned out the bushings and its fine now. I wish it had pivot bearings, and didn't have the carbon chainstays... but it was hard to beat for the price.

The Blur has already cracked the frame once, so far the Liquid is still all intact. Time will tell though...
Liquid 30-$2899
Liquid 55-$2999
Blur Duke XC-$2699
Blur SID Team-$2957
Blur SID Team w/Lockout-$3038
Blur Marathon SL-$2990

A bike comparably outfitted is very comparable in price. For $1000 more you get a considerably lighter weapon. The great thing about SC is that they will taylor the bike to your exact desires, so the price range can be wherever. The examples above are from the SC website and are not representative of what you might find at your local bike shop. As far as the frame cracking on the Blur---I doubt that's a frequent occurance. I've done my research, talked to my local mechanic, and actually ridden my buddies bike. SC is known for their rock-solid performers. The store where I purchased my TREK is also a Santa Cruz dealer. They have a nationally recognized mechanic and have factory sponsored racers. Not one of them will endorse TREK Liquid's over Santa Cruz Blur's. What they did tell me was, "the Liquid is a good bike, but the Blur is a great bike." I personally like the material of the Liquids frame (Z9000), but hate the flexing, light duty, sub-frame. On smooth down hills, the Trek is point and go. It corners well due to the high BB. If you're used to XC hard tails or short-travel FS, you're going to be frustrated on climbs. The Blur is a no-bob design. Climbs better overall than any FS I've ever ridden, to include the Specialized Epic. It really doesn't need a rear lockout, where as the Liquid does and therefore facilitated the need for TREK to put the 55 together. It's all about what is important to you!! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Interesting...

to hear from Liquid guys that still recommend the Blur over theirs. I do know that the Liquid and the Blur are not exactly in the same class but the Liquid 55 with the SPV got my attention. More suspension travel with "no bob" sounded nice. I'll still go and test ride the Blur this weekend and then see if there is a Liquid 55 anywhere, but realistically, I ride more XC than downhill. Going to a ski resort is a very rare occasion for me (this was the second time in my whole life). I appreciate you all being so honest. This will be my first FS bike as I am currently on an old Trek 970. The reason for my interest in the Trek Liquid is because I've had great performance with my 970. It was a little punishing going down Keystone, however it's still very fun riding up hills and technical trails.

I did try the Specialized Brain FS bike and I preferred the Fuel over it. After trying the Blur, I liked that over the Fuel.

I do like the idea of customizing my components. I use the Xray SRAM shifters now and I really like the fact of changing all the gears at once. I also like the fine tuning I can do with the front Derail. I would prefer the Sram shifter and X.0 Derailler over Shimano's trigger shifter.
Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
I have roughly $1500 into my Liquid 20. With the upgrades I've done, its essentially its a 30 without the Fox fork. The Liquid is a great bike, in fact one is on eBay for about $800 right now... The Liquid is heavier than the Blur as well, but I think a lot of the weight is in the tires. The Liquid comes with a larger, meatier tire than a Blur. Tire clearance on a Blur is rather limited, but you can still fit a fat 2.1 or a skinny 2.3 back there.

I agree the Liquid is a good bike, and the Blur is a great bike. If you're willing to dump the extra money into a Blur... go for it! Get the 5th element shock and have an excellent bike! Plus a lot of people ooooh and aaaaah over the Blur.... maybe if I take the TREK decals off my Liquid I might get the same response.... maybe!

I also don't care for the flexy carbon seatstays of the rear triangle either, but its designed to do that and TREK's warranty policy is excellent!!!

Its like comparing a Camaro SS to a Corvette.

StickyLiquid said:
No prob, Jeff! Can't wait to hear about your new ride! Let us know when you get it! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I agree with one of the others that I hardly have any noticeable bob in the rear end of my Liquid 20. you have to make sure to dial down the front and rear shocks to climb well on tricky uphills. also, the 20 still had the Psylo front forks which I don't think any of the newer models have. The Psylo came with pretty soft springs unless you weigh 140 lbs. so trying to stand while climbing the front end bobs all over but I still don't get much in the rear. easy fix though getting some stiffer springs better suited to your weight. I think the SPV shock is ok for that bike, but I love the flexibility the Talas affords with being able to change the geometry of the bike for the conditions. Set it down and you feel like your on a Fuel, then let it out and you get the cushy ride and longer wheel base for the downhills. that's my take anyway. good luck, LR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
the Blur is a sweet bike too. one other thing I thought of today while riding is that the Liquid 20, which a lot of us seem to have, was last made for '03 and it has the standard Talas rear shock versus the '04 which on the models that have it, have the Talas with ProPedal. the ProPedal is kinda like SPV in aiming to eliminate bob so I'm sure the new models ride even nicer. later, LR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I have ridden a GT I-Drive for the past 6 years. Yep, really early frame with no provision for disc brakes. I built the bike with XT level components. Last week I finished an '04 Liquid 30 frame using high end parts--King hubs, headset, Thompson post and stem, Race Face Turbine crank and bars, Hayes discs, XTR shifters and derailleurs, Mavic 317's and Panaracers and a Marzocchi Marathon. The ride clocked in at a portly 30lbs. This afternoon will be my first ride other than around the neighborhood. Can't wait:)
 

·
mauna ona liquid
Joined
·
116 Posts
VFR1 said:
I have ridden a GT I-Drive for the past 6 years. Yep, really early frame with no provision for disc brakes. I built the bike with XT level components. Last week I finished an '04 Liquid 30 frame using high end parts--King hubs, headset, Thompson post and stem, Race Face Turbine crank and bars, Hayes discs, XTR shifters and derailleurs, Mavic 317's and Panaracers and a Marzocchi Marathon. The ride clocked in at a portly 30lbs. This afternoon will be my first ride other than around the neighborhood. Can't wait:)
How do you like the Liquid? What did you use for the rear shock?
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top