Joined
·
8 Posts
So I am in the market for my first FS bike. I have it narrowed down to a Stumpjumper 29 St and a Norco Fluid FS 3. What would you say is the biggest differences? I will be riding in the PNW. So lots of roots, rocks and clay.
New bike.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Joined
·
8 Posts
So what kind of life should one expect from that shock. By weak what do you mean?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
8 Posts
I looked at those. But they are going to be out of my price range. That's why I narrowed it down to those two.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
8 Posts
I take that back. I might be able to get into a Kona Satori for about the same price.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
6,534 Posts
For all intents and purposes both are pretty much the same component wise. Fork is going to be week point because both are low level forks with single adjustment air spring. But aside from that you get pretty nice bikes from both.
At the $2000 range (max budget from what it looks like) you are going to be looking at entry level bikes from just about every brand. What that means is you are going to have base level components, lots of house brand stuff, and other such things. Doesn't mean you can't get a nice bike, just will have more compromises.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Stumpy have a proprietary rear shock? If something happens in the future to the rear shock this would limit your options, if true. Past that, go throw a leg over both and schedule a demo for both. You may find that you like one better than the other.
At the $2000 range (max budget from what it looks like) you are going to be looking at entry level bikes from just about every brand. What that means is you are going to have base level components, lots of house brand stuff, and other such things. Doesn't mean you can't get a nice bike, just will have more compromises.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Stumpy have a proprietary rear shock? If something happens in the future to the rear shock this would limit your options, if true. Past that, go throw a leg over both and schedule a demo for both. You may find that you like one better than the other.
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
I don't think I would go short travel for the PNW. For what it's worth, the Stumpjumper Comp alloy is a good bike for the money and would serve you well IMO, but ~ $3K.
Joined
·
227 Posts
I agree, I bought my Comp ST about a month ago and it's my first FS bike. I couldn't be happier with it and have not found one thing I don't like about it so far.
Joined
·
8 Posts
I will be doing 90% of my riding at Capital Forest. Do you know the area?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
No but when you say rocks, roots, and PNW, short travel isn't the first thing that comes to mind. What is the riding like?
Joined
·
8 Posts
Nothing to extreme down hill. I guess when I say rocks. It's like rocks for parts of the trail. Nothing like a actual rock garden. Unless you go to a park.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Joined
·
8 Posts
These are taken off a trail app and these are others photos. But gives you a idea of the type of riding.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
Looks like you could go either way, but LT would be a lot more capable over the big root sections. If you aren't launching off stuff ST would be fine. But given the minimal weight difference and same cost, I would go LT in your situation. I'm on the LT Stumpjumper comp alloy coming off of a shorter travel 29er (HiFi pro) and am really enjoying the LT even on trails that aren't overly technical except places here and there (which looks similar to what you are riding). When I bought my SJ the shop told me it was the ST, but I realized later it wasn't. I wouldn't want the ST after riding the LT. Just my 2 cents.
Joined
·
8 Posts
Thank you! I know this subject is probably beaten to death. But this is why I join the forum. So much experience and knowledge.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Join the discussion
