[imabeast7]

I did a brief search didnt find what i was looking for. So sorry if im asking something already answered. Is there a guide on here that list good vs bad parts/quality for each diff component of a mtb? If not someone should make one and make it a sticky.
ie. Forks list whats ok/decent vs what is good/great.

 

[mack_turtle]

Oh man, that would be a HUGE list and it would change every week. You will have better luck researching each type of component in isolation.

 

[Battery]

There really isn't a "good vs bad" parts list out there. I wouldn't look at bike parts as good or bad. Rather they should be reviewed based on what they are designed to do. Shimano and SRAM use a tier system for their parts groups.

Entry level parts were meant for dabbling in the sport at a lesser cost. You may find these parts on many lower priced bikes on the market and riders typically use them for dual purpose such as dirt and street. The parts work well for light duty such as dirt paths and street. If you use entry level parts on more difficult trails, they may continue to function properly but you also increase the chance of breaking them seeing they weren't designed for more difficult trail conditions.

Most of us end up in the enthusiast or "trail" tier category when it comes to parts and mountain bikes. Some bikes come mixed with trail and entry level parts mixed together to lower costs.

Individual bike components may be a different story. Professional reviews may give a rear derailleur top marks for being great but user reviews may say otherwise. I like to read all reviews and look for reported trends regarding parts I'm interested in buying. Do riders report that a specific part wears out after 100 miles? Perhaps 10 reviewers report that the Di2 battery drains after 30 minutes. Just some little things I consider when looking up parts or group sets.

 

[phlegm]

That's a handy table Battery, but to mack's point above, it is already out of date: no Eagle AXS listed.

 

[Harold]

I did a brief search didnt find what i was looking for. So sorry if im asking something already answered. Is there a guide on here that list good vs bad parts/quality for each diff component of a mtb? If not someone should make one and make it a sticky.
ie. Forks list whats ok/decent vs what is good/great.

No such thing. This site tried a user reviews section that worked passably (but still missed out on a lot of products) for awhile, but is a hot mess now. The best you'll get is looking at reviews of products, both "pro" reviews (stuff like mag reviews) that are often excessively glowing, as well as user reviews (which can contain useful info, but also a lot of trash on the opposite side of the spectrum because of unreasonable expectations or ineptitude).

And yeah, the market changes almost constantly. A particular fork might be great, until the company releases a new damper, which sucks until they replace it with something improved (which has happened more than once). Or a more common scenario is that a given part works well for some people, but less well for others. But we don't have enough information to figure out WHY.

 

[Harold]

That's a handy table Battery, but to mack's point above, it is already out of date: no Eagle AXS listed.

also no Shimano 12spd (XTR, XT, and SLX now).

 

[Battery]

That's a handy table Battery, but to mack's point above, it is already out of date: no Eagle AXS listed.

also no Shimano 12spd (XTR, XT, and SLX now).

Yep, it's just an example of tiered components to illustrate my point. Most people in this forum may not consider buying a Shimano 12spd or AXS anyways

I probably should have just noted that the chart was an example rather than mention it was out of date lol!

 

[Sparticus]

Just get a new bike.

 

[tweeder82o]

Just get a new bike.

it'd be funnier if you linked it to his other thread regarding getting a new bike

But OP, I am assuming that's why you here with this post, because you are shopping for a new bike and you want make sure that for the money you are getting decent components.

if we take the chart above as a reference and the drt 1.3 and 2.2 for example: the 1.3 would fall in the "entry" tier, and "2.2" falls in the "enthusiast" tier.

and their prices reflect their tiers. but do keep in mind that components are replaceable, the geometry cannot be changed.

 

[phlegm]

Yep, it's just an example of tiered components to illustrate my point. Most people in this forum may not consider buying a Shimano 12spd or AXS anyways

I probably should have just noted that the chart was an example rather than mention it was out of date lol!

Ha, don't get me wrong - that table is actually pretty useful, as it is really hard to keep track of the component levels.

That said, I can't imagine putting one together for anything else, i.e. suspension. Suntour alone would have a long list.

 

[str8edgMTBMXer]

years ago when I was getting back into it, and shopping for bikes/parts, I just made up my own spreadsheets of stuff I was shopping (I am a spreadsheet nerd)...mostly as a quick guide for what things were made of, cost etc for when I was in the store...just made it a Google Drive thing that I could access on my phone

the fun, for me, was in the research of products...I learned a lot about the industry, how parts are used...how NOT to use parts...I learned what a lot of the terminology meant...learned about the evolution of parts through the ages...which also gave me an insight into the evolution of the sport as well

but it was not a "Best/worst" list...thought I did learn that a 150mm travel fork is the "worst" for bikepacking, and that a rigid fork is not "The best" for downhill. I also learned about the materials and construction, and what was the "Worts" or "best" application of that. I feel like there are more absolutes in that area...meaning that everyone can probably agree that hi-tensile steel is the worst for anything involving jumps/drops etc...and that skinny tires are the worst for sand/snow...

I still update many of the sheets as I am now shopping for upgrades to the bike...

 

[imabeast7]

Diff question so figured separate thread. But sure. Thats understandable. Can you provide a link etc to a guide for bike geometry?

 

[Harold]

Can you provide a link etc to a guide for bike geometry?

there's not really a single comprehensive guide for that, either. and what you'll find is going to be heavily colored by opinion from the writer's perspective (which may not be anything like what you want, and which you may not be informed about).

It's one of those things that's just too complicated. what it comes down to is that you have to just ride the bikes you're interested in. that's not always possible, so sometimes you have to find something that's as close as you can get that you CAN try.

And if you don't have the experience to know, your options are to take a risk and buy it unridden, or to pass on it in favor of something you CAN try out first.

 

[imabeast7]

True but theres got to be a general guide like if you like to go fast and rough look for a frame with x angle or less etc.? No?

 

[str8edgMTBMXer]

for geometry, I think, knowing the bigger picture of what geometry does for a riding situation is more important. I learned this as well in my initial research. I was also looking for some definitive chart, but began to realize that the bigger picture was more important. Knowing things like what the head tube angle does to the ride, or chain stay length (etc) does is - for me - quicker working knowledge.

If you google bike geometry guide, many articles/charts will come up with this info.

Hell, in the past 5-7 years, "acceptable" or "the right" geometry has changed 2-3 times...

 

[Harold]

True but theres got to be a general guide like if you like to go fast and rough look for a frame with x angle or less etc.? No?

nope.

it's all a moving target so what applies in 2019 is different from what applied in 2005. It depends on the terrain you ride, how you like to ride it, and a multitude of other factors. and furthermore, bike geometry is a package deal. head tube angle doesn't exist on its own, because a whole bunch of other aspects of the bikes are a little different, too. chainstay length, seat tube angle, and so on and so forth. they all play a role in how the bike feels, and they're all related to each other at least tangentially.

 

[mack_turtle]

Diff question so figured separate thread. But sure. Thats understandable. Can you provide a link etc to a guide for bike geometry?

Geometry for which bike? Nearly every bike manufacturer has the geo listed for each model. A single page comparing them all would be YUUUUUUUGE.

 

[mack_turtle]

I appreciate your desire to learn, but have you tried looking any of this stuff up before asking the forum? In the time it takes one of us to write an explanation for you, you could have read half a dozen better explanations that were already there. Let me Google that for you.

A quick Google search for "mountain bike geometry" gave me tons of illustrated articles and even videos to view. Instead of asking the forum to explain it to you, please read one of the dozens of recent, well-written and illustrated articles on the topic.

Once you have a basic grasp on those ideas, the forum could answer more specific questions about specific bikes and such for you. Asking the forum general questions about big broad topics like this is a waste of your time, and delays your purchase of a bike for you to ride!

Same goes for "mountain bike component hierarchy."

 

[tweeder82o]

True but theres got to be a general guide like if you like to go fast and rough look for a frame with x angle or less etc.? No?

I was thinking more in terms of fit, as you mentioned in the other thread that you are having a hard time getting a fit due to the nature of your body shape.

there could be two bikes with similar geometry, marketed towards the same type of riding style, but one might have a better geometry for your arms and legs.

 

[Battery]

Ha, don't get me wrong - that table is actually pretty useful, as it is really hard to keep track of the component levels.

That said, I can't imagine putting one together for anything else, i.e. suspension. Suntour alone would have a long list.

I can't imagine a tiered fork list either! That would be quite interesting and very subjective too.