Faq: Is This A Good First Bike?

[rupintart]

This question comes up fairly often. And I somewhat relate it to buying a car. Can a novice driver ONLY drive a shitty Civic, or can he drive a Ferrari? Answer is, he can drive the Ferrari. He is 10000% capable of learing how to drive in the Ferrari just as well as the Civic as it's all new and foreign. He may not "appreciate the differences", but that's not the topic at hand, and that wasn't what was asked. The questions you ask yourself after, well, they don't really relate to biking/trials, so we'll stop it there.

People first starting out are always asking "Is this bike good? What about this one? What would you recommend?"

More often than not, people will point you towards something a bit more burly and "abusable" (like the whole civic analogy). Fact is, along with burly, comes weight. Tossing around a 30lb bike is not going to be as fun, nor as easy as it is to toss around a 22lb bike.

Now a days, a "run of the mill" stock complete comes in somewhere around 22-24lbs, and the mods come in somewhere around the 20-22lb range. Obviously, lighter = more expensive. But many of the completes available today, will not come with the uber lightweight stuff unless specifically noted or intended. i.e. Tarty has "lightweight builds". Be advised though, usually the lightweight stuff isn't necessarily more delicate per say, but it's not designed to be as durable under the same circumstances in the hand of an unsmooth rider. i.e. It can take 10ft drops to flat no problem. But not under somebody who just hucks off of it. That's where the lightweight stuff comes into play. They're durable enough, just not for somebody that's ALWAYS landing really heavy, or unsmoothly.

They typical question: "Is this a good first bike?" And they link to something like:

or for you prospective stock riders:

OK, first off, the first thing most people will tell you is:

1. "That bike is too expensive for a beginner to learn on."

2. "Why don't you get something with more neutral geometry?"

3. "There are better bikes for you to learn on such as _____."

#1 Who the hell are they to decide what's too expensive to learn on? If you have the cash to be able to afford a higher end bike, get it. Period. Don't let anybody tell you it's too $$$ for a beginner or whatever. If you can afford to start off on the best equipment, do it.

#2 When starting out, it is ALL new and foreign. Higher BB (or whatever else) may be niche, or whatever reason they give you, but it being all new, it's all going to be the same to you learning curve wise. It won't hinder or help you one way or the other. In essence, the learning curve is the same.

#3 Are those neutral or older bikes really better for a beginner? OK, so it's burlier and cheaper. On the flip side, you have a heavier bike that has geometry more designed around stability on two wheels and/or not necessarily what's best for anything else. And in the end, it becomes a bike much harder to toss around comparatively. Again, it goes back to #1, if you can afford the light and/or better stuff, why not? Most of todays completes are built around the compromise of durability and weight anyways as most people who buy completes are usually either

A. First time riders

or

B. somebody who wants the compromise of light vs. strong guesswork done for them.

So DON'T hesitate to get the higher end bike IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT. Rest assured all of the parts in those completes are more than adequate for a beginner or pro. Again, the guesswork is taken out. Most people start out on lower end stuff mainly because of cost. I would say that's 95% of the reasoning behind choosing a bike to start out on. The other 5% usually being scared to try the higher end stuff in fear of it collapsing under them. The bike is fine. As stated, most of the "uber lightweight" stuff is noted as such and I feel, for the most part, is pretty self explanatory. And a point most people overlook or not even consider is that along with more skill, smooth-ness, and technique, comes the demand for the part to hold up under them. No pro or experienced person would put something under them that jeopardizes their safety, regardless of the weight.

In the end, there really ISN'T a "Is this a good first bike for a beginner?". It all usually comes down to price point of what you can afford. And if you've noticed when looking around, all the cheaper stuff usually has the neutral geometry anyways. The big misconception about high end/expensive completes is that they're "reserved for experienced riders". No, they're for ANYBODY. If you were experienced, more often than not chances are you'd build your bike from scratch or from parts of your last bike. It just happens that the more experienced riders are the ones who spend more money.

Anybody feel free to expound on anything mentioned here. I think I covered most everything.

Edited March 15, 2010 by rupintart

[Mikey-uk]

Somthing to look out for though is that some people link a bike for e.g. £250 that is absolutly terrible, this is where people should help out.

"For that cost that bike is not worth it" rather than "That bike is too heavy you won't like it".

[chris4stars]

***STICKY!!!***

Im not sure how relevant an explanation of geometries is in a thread like this, it was definately something that baffled me (and still does to be honest!). As a newcomer to this site and trials in general, seeing so many questions asking for angles/bb height etc did seem to make bike choice pretty complicated.

It seems like this factor is hugely important for alot of people, and could perhaps overwhelm and confuse other newcomers when considering buying a new bike. It would have been for me if the inspired didnt exist and i had to consider such things! that is, if anyone feels a small explanation on this area and the pros/cons of various geometries could help out the thread....

I think it would be pretty helpful to point out to new members in this situation that this site may be the best way to meet other trials riders. I wouldnt be surprised if 90% of known riders were either on this site, or associated with a member on this site. Finding local riders and actually getting a chance to ride a few different bikes could prove more beneficial than reading anything on here or elsewhere! It seems to be a pretty friendly nationwide community, and everyone im sure would be more than happy to help you (whoevers reading this) out

[gage-mann]

its only wants to be light if you start of at a young age such as 5-6 years old because of strenght and so on too practise the main balancing but as you grow you'd get a bigger bike but if your used to a light bike yeh i think you'd get a lighter bike again when you've grown but like when most people start they usally get a cheap bike thats oki like a monty 219 alp or magura, onza comps, blades or maybe something cheap as like the old onza tv but as you'd learn on something like that you'd want to upgrade it as your skills become better such as when you learn to gap and say you've got standard vee pads or hs33 pads your going ot go looking for advice and thats probs how people end up on here because of tips and wikis to just help you out as you learn.

But starting off on a light bike will give you more abillity to learn things easyier but i'd think it'd be better to learn on something a bit clumbsy/heavy and then upgrading it as parts break or to make the bike feel better after reading about topics on here such as handle bar and stem recomondations and upgrading to a stronger chain then a free wheel with more engagments not like from an acs to an echo sl just something like a tensile 60 click and just basically keep getting better parts once they break or get worse soo you can keep progressing till you end up with a full spec koxx or monty but as i said at the begining if you start off at a young age like adam morewood because his already starting comps and things he will just get a lighter bike again when he needs a bigger frame than his monty because of him always using a light weight bike and also the fact that in comps you dont want a heavy bike to lug around do you.

My mate went straht from a normal monty 219 magura to a whole new gu le with a rear chris king and i said why did you get that back hub cause its got that much more than the standard free wheel he had on his monty like if it was me i would of got a profile and also saved money if anyone gets what imean its not me just being jelous or out its just why have a ck with 72 eps from a free wheel with like 36 eps the only better thing for him now is a 108ep ffw instead of it being a 72ep ck hub from a 48ep profile, not like its really important but it makes your power get to the rear wheel quicker meh you should get the point of what i've said

EDIT: dont know where to put any full stops sorry

Edited March 15, 2010 by gage-mann

[chris4stars]

my god...i had to give up, please add a few full stops (more than 2!) and some spacing between paragraphs!

cheers its better than it was anyway

Edited March 15, 2010 by chris4stars

[gage-mann]

my god...i had to give up, please add a few full stops (more than 2!) and some spacing between paragraphs!

sorry i did'nt go into my english class much when i went to school haha i'll edit it a bit now though

[rupintart]

As far as explaining geometry goes, here's a pretty quick rundown for stocks:

wheelbase: 1030mm-1100mm.

shorter = easier to bunnyhop and spin

longer = easier to tap, gap

head tube angle: 71-74degrees.

slacker (71) = better for taps, gaps to front, shortens overall reach

steeper (74) = easier to pivot on front, lengthens overall reach, steers/handles better at low speeds compared to a slack HA

generally a shorter wheelbase frame will have a steep HA, and a longer frame will have it more slack

chainstay length: 377mm-390mm.

shorter chainstays = easier to balance on the rear wheel in a static position, harder to keep balance point for manuals, harder to bunnyhop, less stable on two wheels, less power for gaps.

longer chainstays = less stable when standing on rear wheel, more stable on two wheels, more power for gaps

bottom bracket height: 0 or lower, all the way up to +60

higher = more stable when standing on back wheel, less stable on two wheels

lower = more stable on two wheels but less stable standing on rear wheel

But I think that when it comes to pure trials bikes, there really isn't a "genre" of trials that a beginner would know about. i.e. if they got an Aurem or an Alkali they should know, neither of those are meant at all for streety riding. So in the end, it goes right back to not knowing the differences in geometry. Unless of course that is, you WANT to get a frame that is streety like the Switch, Fourplay etc. At that point I think it warrants mentioning what the various geometry does for you in that regard, but as far as riding flat out pure trials, the differences are negligible for a 1st timer.

[ogre]

But I think that when it comes to pure trials bikes, there really isn't a "genre" of trials that a beginner would know about. i.e. if they got an Aurem or an Alkali they should know, neither of those are meant at all for streety riding. So in the end, it goes right back to not knowing the differences in geometry. Unless of course that is, you WANT to get a frame that is streety like the Switch, Fourplay etc. At that point I think it warrants mentioning what the various geometry does for you in that regard, but as far as riding flat out pure trials, the differences are negligible for a 1st timer.

when you say streety riding what do you mean? riding street to most trials riders is riding pure trials on everyday stuff, alkali/aurem would be ace for that. i think you get more out of a bike if you work your way up to riding a high spec build.

[chris4stars]

thanks rupin, i found that very helpful

i can see the argument for an against buying a better bike first (or vice versa and building up). i personally went down the route of getting a high end spec and pretty much as good a setup you can get without getting ridiculous. the bike rides very well and im safe in the knowledge that it can withstand a decent amount of abuse (aswell as just the nice feeling of having a nice bike!)

a few other points i personally feel would be useful for a beginner to know when starting out and getting a new bike:

1. the brakes! especially starting off...the need to have confidence in your brake is imperative. as soon as youre comfortable that your rear wheel (or front) wont slip, your riding will progress huge amounts. aftermarket pads are a must, a good grind (in my opinion) and even an aftermarket lever (again in my opinion if using the hs33). its well worth budgeting this into your new build if you can afford it.

2. the heads up that unlike other bikes you may buy, the frame and parts are disposable (this took a few weeks for me!). it looks great new out the box, unscratched and shiney...but its unrealistic for a beginner to keep it that way (and progress) your cranks and bashring will soon look war torn...the frame will get scratches/dents and in time perhaps break. im not saying that you shouldnt care about your bike, but the sooner you loose the worry behind perhaps breaking it, the quicker you'll progress and more importantly, the more enjoyable riding will be.

3. with reguards to 2....with this being the case, keep in mind your budget and what you can realistically afford as and when things do break.

Edited March 16, 2010 by chris4stars

[JT!]

Lets look at four examples. ($ = pound, need to sort that out)

Guy buys an Onza for $400, quits after 4 months. Sells bike on here for $180. Loss of $280.

Guy buys an Onza for $400, rides for 6 months and either sells it to buy a top spec bike, or upgrades and sells the old parts. Loss of $280 (compared to if he'd have bought that top spec bike to begin with)

Guy buys the Rockman for $1200, quits after 4 months. Sells for $600 (if he's lucky). Loss of $600.

Guy buys the Rockman for $1200, doesn't quit and doesn't need to upgrade for a long time. Saves $280.

As you can see from that, buying a cheap bike first is the safer option, you can go right out and buy a top spec bike but the risk to reward ratio is terrible, plus wasting $280 isn't a big deal when you think about how much you spend upgraded or on a new bike, but $600 is a lot to waste to end up with nothing out of it.

Also, to add to that, a new rider isn't really going to get anything more out of a top spec bike compared to a decent budget bike for a few months or maybe even a year depending on how they progress.

I guess if you either really have a lot of money so that wasting $600 isn't a big deal, or you are 100% sure that you're going to ride trials and get pretty good at it. Then fair enough go and splash out on a 4 figure bike. But seeing either of these things in a new member is very rare hence people suggesting a beginner / budget bike.

Why should we not?

However, I agree with the point that (cost aside) top spec bikes are just as good to learn on, if not better. But the different really shouldn't be an issue. With regards to weight, again, new riders aren't going to be held back by the weight of their bike but their technique, a lighter bike is merely a luxury. Also I don't think anyone has ever said or assumed that top spec bikes are more likely to break, or less 'burley' as you put it. Budget bikes sacrifice lightness and strength to make beginer bikes as cheap as possible. If you're out buying a top spec you're paying for strength and low weight, fair enough they're in different ratios when looking at a top spec monty compared with a top spec zoo but even the monty will be much more durable than any budget bike.

[rupintart]

When I say streety riding, I'm talking about spins, manuals, etc. Ala, Danny Mac, Ryan Leech, Akrigg, etc. I was talking about how that kind of bike should be completely separate category as a "trials" bike. Let it be known you can ride street on a mod, pure trials on a street, bike, but lets not be pissing over details and be serious, you buy a streety bike like a Manifesto, Reset, or Fourplay etc. for streety riding, and then there's everything else. As far as this faq is concerned, we're talking about "everything else" i.e. the pure trials bikes.

The points chris4stars brought up is right. The sooner you stop worrying about the aesthetics of the bike, and ride it like it was intended to be or like you stole it, you'll progress much faster. Leave the pretty looking bikes to those that don't ride, or those that are sponsored. Lets face it, you don't keep a monster truck out of the dirt.

Also your brakes. Most aftermarket completes will come with decent "aftermarket pads". A grind is the most important thing. If you're unsure about it, get the people who are selling you your bike to do it. So that when it gets to you, you can see what a real grind looks like. Not some pictures, or how somebody says it should be on a forum. It's always easier to see what somebody is talking about if it's in front of you. And you can see that you really can press harder than you think to get a good grind. If it's dual disc, honestly, the stock pads are good enough.

As to what JT! was pointing out, it's always going to be safer to buy lower end to start out. but most beginners will find that they always either quit, or have that lingering thought that "if the bike was a bit more aggressive, this would be a little easier". It's a fact that when starting out, the curiosity always gets to you of "how much does the bike help..." Heck, I have a couple years under my belt and am SHOCKED at how much the newer bikes help outwhen I throw a leg over them. So yeah, the bike does help, why not leave out those opportunities for excuses if you can avoid it. Again, this comes down to what you can afford.

But chances are if you're coming into the sport and you were coming off a regular MTB, you're biting the bullet to buy a pure trials bike, why not get the best you can? You probably will stick with it for a year or so. Like he said, if you stick with it, you end up saving money. You saved yourself the cost of a whole new bike and/or the cost of upgrading parts on the existing bike, not just $280. In the end, it is infact cheaper. Much cheaper actually. Just a bigger bite to start with.

i.e. you buy a crappy starter bike for $400. You stick with it a year, you end up buying a $1200 bike. So you in total spent $1600 to buy a $1200 bike on a something you knew you'd likely stick with anyways and will have to sell your old bike. It all comes back to what you can afford at the time. There's nothing wrong with buying a starter bike. Nothing at all, I just feel the line gets blurred more often that not, and this thread should really clear it up, as well as other questions the noobies have.

[fletch]

Hello, as someone who has been completely out of the scene for years, I've no idea about the bikes around at the moment. Can anyone recomend some frames which are quite long. I used to ride a Kona which has quite a long top tube, and i don't really want a trials bike which feels too short. Cheers, Fletch.

[JT!]

As to what JT! was pointing out, it's always going to be safer to buy lower end to start out. but most beginners will find that they always either quit, or have that lingering thought that "if the bike was a bit more aggressive, this would be a little easier". It's a fact that when starting out, the curiosity always gets to you of "how much does the bike help..." Heck, I have a couple years under my belt and am SHOCKED at how much the newer bikes help outwhen I throw a leg over them. So yeah, the bike does help, why not leave out those opportunities for excuses if you can avoid it. Again, this comes down to what you can afford.

I agree with what you're saying about wondering how better of a rider you'd be with a better bike, I'd bet there's no one on this forum that's thought that at some point, but that's just the way it is, it's no reason to justify risking money on a better bike. For someone who's been riding 2 years, yes a better bike will feel much better, but for someone who's been riding two months it really isn't going to make that much of a difference when they're learning to hop up a few stairs or over a crate. Besides the quality of beginners bikes is outstanding these days and with a quick pad change you've got a bike that should see you well over a year. I feel what you're promoting is the importance of having a top spec bike.

But chances are if you're coming into the sport and you were coming off a regular MTB, you're biting the bullet to buy a pure trials bike, why not get the best you can? You probably will stick with it for a year or so. Like he said, if you stick with it, you end up saving money. You saved yourself the cost of a whole new bike and/or the cost of upgrading parts on the existing bike, not just $280. In the end, it is infact cheaper. Much cheaper actually. Just a bigger bite to start with.

i.e. you buy a crappy starter bike for $400. You stick with it a year, you end up buying a $1200 bike. So you in total spent $1600 to buy a $1200 bike on a something you knew you'd likely stick with anyways and will have to sell your old bike. It all comes back to what you can afford at the time. There's nothing wrong with buying a starter bike. Nothing at all, I just feel the line gets blurred more often that not, and this thread should really clear it up, as well as other questions the noobies have.

You say it's much cheaper in the long run to buy a top spec bike, and you say it's not just a couple of hundred pounds, yet on your example that's what you demonstrate. you buy a bike for 400 pounds, then one year later you buy a bike for 1200 pounds, it is not 1600 pounds for a 1200 bike as you'll sell the old bike and make some money back. What's 200 pounds 'wasted' when you've just bought a bike for six times as much as that? It's really nothing relatively speaking. Plus, that way you have been given time to experience what bike you'd like to upgrade to. You go out and buy a rockman as a first bike then you realize after riding it for a year or so that you don't like the BB been that high, frame that long / short, or maybe you want to switch to a different wheel sise, something like that wouldn't be as much of an issue with buying a budget bike to begin with as it would more likely than not be upgraded anyway.

I'll reiterate again, I agree if you have the money to waste then by all means go for a top spec bike. But I can't see why anyone would push a top spec bike on someone who's just starting.

Edited March 17, 2010 by JT!

[irishman]

Hi all

I've been out of riding for a while now - used to ride BSX until my local track got shutdown

I've recently started a job in London and keen to get myself a trials bike as the city seems like a pretty big playground and also be a good way to meet similar minded people

I see there are quite a few peeps organising rides and stuff in here so should be able to find some people to ride with and learn from which is always an encouragment

I'm looking at getting something second-hand probably, as it'll be cheaper, but i'll also consider a new bike

as most people have said, entry level bikes are pretty impressive regarding spec

I have no idea what i'm after ie. 20" 24" 26" not to mention geometry/brakes/bars

are there any particularily good bike shops around London where i can try a few models out?

keeping an eye on a few bikes on ebay

mainly Onza as its one of the few brands i know

anything else i should look out for?

thanks for the help peeps

[chris4stars]

hi there irishman...

im not sure about shops in your area that stock trials bikes...at a guess, 90% of all new trials related gear is bought from tartybikes online?! thats perhaps another point to mention within this thread to the new guys.I know that all of the local bike shops (bar an obvious one) in edinburgh are not that informed on trials products, and none of them stock the bikes

aswell as the above, it does also have some pretty nifty video guides that could help with what you are looking for with some basic pros and cons for all the bike sizes. it'll also give you a good idea about the major trials ranges available.

also...check out some of the videos posted on here! you may find yourself drawn towards a particular style?

as for trying out the bikes to try and figure out what youd like, as mentioned, why not just meet up with the london riders on here!? doesnt matter if you have a bike yet....im sure they'll be happy to help

[rupintart]

JT, it's not about "pusinh somebody on a top spec bike" It's about getting the best for what you can AFFORD. Working at a shop, how many times have you seen a new road rider come in and say "I dunno if I'll like this, so I'll just get a low end model". They get the $800 low end road bike, then 3 months later come back in and want a 105 equipped bike, then a year later come back and buy the $4500 bike. They can afford it, why not make it a point that it's cheaper in the long run to buy high(er) end than keep upgrading and upgrading? In the end, they've spent less money, less headache, and less "I wonder if the higher end stuff is worth it". not to mention all the other nonsense roadies buy, like the higher end pedals and shoes, etc. That $800 bike turned out to be $1200 after accessories. And then, they spend $1500 on a new upgraded bike. Then finally, they buy the high end stuff, and since they have this highend bike, they all of sudden don't want the low end shoes and pedals. At that point, they have NOTHING from the first bike and have bought new everything.

Either way looking at it, when you sell a used bike, you're going to take a loss. Higher end bikes hold their value a little better, especially if not ridden that much. And in the case of a beginner learning, if they have a high(er) end bike and there's no scratches on it, well, somebody is going to get a dece deal, and that person will likely have no problem selling a higher spec'd bike than a cheaper model.

I'm not saying "go out and buy top spec!". I'm saying, buy the most bike for what YOUR BUDGET ALLOWS. If your budget allows you to spend $1500 on a complete, don't go and buy some low end complete because you're unsure if you'll like trials, or you're thinking the geometry is too aggressive for a beginner. The higher spec bike gives you more room to grow, and all the skills are new, so it's not going to be that much (if any) harder, unless you've never been on a bike before. And like all bicycles, it's ALWAYS cheaper to buy a higher end complete, than it is to buy a lower end bike, and upgrade it to spec.

[Ollied]

#1 Who the hell are they to decide what's too expensive to learn on? If you have the cash to be able to afford a higher end bike, get it. Period. Don't let anybody tell you it's too $$$ for a beginner or whatever. If you can afford to start off on the best equipment, do it.

http://koxx.fr/index.php?lg=en_EN&sec=trial&pg=news&id=HDDB4589685607dfb

CAUTION:

K-ALONE must be handled with caution. It should be regarded as the ultimate “no compromise” weapon. It will not tolerate unnecessary shocks and badly timed riding. Equipment manufactured from his revolutionary material is intended for use by Elite competition and professional riders.

So what you said up there was irrelevant towards the koxx.

[JT!]

JT, it's not about "pusinh somebody on a top spec bike" It's about getting the best for what you can AFFORD. Working at a shop, how many times have you seen a new road rider come in and say "I dunno if I'll like this, so I'll just get a low end model". They get the $800 low end road bike, then 3 months later come back in and want a 105 equipped bike, then a year later come back and buy the $4500 bike. They can afford it, why not make it a point that it's cheaper in the long run to buy high(er) end than keep upgrading and upgrading? In the end, they've spent less money, less headache, and less "I wonder if the higher end stuff is worth it". not to mention all the other nonsense roadies buy, like the higher end pedals and shoes, etc. That $800 bike turned out to be $1200 after accessories. And then, they spend $1500 on a new upgraded bike. Then finally, they buy the high end stuff, and since they have this highend bike, they all of sudden don't want the low end shoes and pedals. At that point, they have NOTHING from the first bike and have bought new everything.

Seems like we're going round in circles with the same argument here, I can either re-type everything I've said or we can just agree to disagree. I guess it doesn't really help that we haven't really defined what a 'budget' or what someone can actually 'afford'.

You can't compare some guy buying a roadbike to trials, it takes months to learn he trials basics, but everyone knows how to ride a bike. I get the point you're trying to make with it though, I just disagree with it.

Either way looking at it, when you sell a used bike, you're going to take a loss. Higher end bikes hold their value a little better, especially if not ridden that much. And in the case of a beginner learning, if they have a high(er) end bike and there's no scratches on it, well, somebody is going to get a dece deal, and that person will likely have no problem selling a higher spec'd bike than a cheaper model.

Higher bike may hold their value a little better, but buying a more expensive bike and selling it compared to doing the same with a cheap bike, it's true that you're probably going to get a higher % back but you'll be out a lot more money.

I'm not saying "go out and buy top spec!". I'm saying, buy the most bike for what YOUR BUDGET ALLOWS. If your budget allows you to spend $1500 on a complete, don't go and buy some low end complete because you're unsure if you'll like trials, or you're thinking the geometry is too aggressive for a beginner. The higher spec bike gives you more room to grow, and all the skills are new, so it's not going to be that much (if any) harder, unless you've never been on a bike before. And like all bicycles, it's ALWAYS cheaper to buy a higher end complete, than it is to buy a lower end bike, and upgrade it to spec.

Again we haven't really discussed the word 'budget' much and what it means personally, if someone posts up saying I want to get into trials and buy a mod, I have a budget of 1300 pounds, I'd still suggest an onza for 500 pounds-ish even though he can afford a top spec bike, wasting money is still wasting money. If he turns around and says, well i just came into 100k etc etc then fair enough all the best to you.

I never said the geo of a top spec bike would be 'too aggressive'. (I don't know if you're referring to me, or just stating that in general). I actually said it doesn't really matter.

I agree it is cheaper to buy a top spec bike complete, but when you've just started you don't know if you want double disc or a maggie, high bb or low bb, mod or stock etc etc.

[irishman]

hey

i think i'm gonna get myself a 20"

to be honest, looking to spend £150-200 (second hand) which i know isn't a lot but should get me up and runnning and give me enough of a taste to decide which direction to go in the future

ONZA T PRO (2009)

ONZA RIP TRIALS BIKE 20"2009 MODEL

ONZA BIRD

i'll also keep an eye on the forum here for anything

how important is it to have a set of HS33s, as i notice the RIP only comes with v-brakes

can you get away with upgrading pads and grinding the rim?

chris4stars - cheers for the heads-up on TartyBikes.co.uk

[irishman]

guys

just seend this in the For Sale forum:

ONZA RIP

think its just what i'm after to get me started

comments?

[chris4stars]

I think youre right

bikes from 100 - 200 really arent going to loose much value if after riding you decide its not for you...worst case scenario - you re-sell it on here and make a very small loss (£50 at most?!)

you could almost see that money as how much youd spend to hire out a bike for that time!

in my opinion, the only time where a a sale like that wouldnt be worth while is when the bike itself its close to giving up altogether and becoming worthless OR if the bike is that bad, it could potentially put you off trials. the latter should become clearer in time as you get to know the market

[JT!]

guys

just seend this in the For Sale forum:

ONZA RIP

think its just what i'm after to get me started

comments?

You really can't go wrong with that.

[irishman]

just have to wait for him to contact me

hopefully i can pick it up tomorrow as i'm my parents house in oxfordshire this weekend

fingers crossed

[Ash-Kennard]

orrrrrrrrr, you could buy a top spec second hand bike for that same price as a starter bike...

winner

[rupintart]

http://koxx.fr/index.php?lg=en_EN&sec=trial&pg=news&id=HDDB4589685607dfb

So what you said up there was irrelevant towards the koxx.

That's the biggest load of shit I've ever heard. So you're telling me the forces of somebody tapping up a 5 foot wall is less than the forces of a sloppy 2 foot pedal gap? Or a huge gap to front is less forceful than somebody landing really hard on the rear? No, maybe the only time that could hold water is when you're learning how to tap, and you're just ramming the shit out of your bike into the wall. And there's the obvious exeption of you just being larger than the average bear. But that holds true to ANY frame or manufacturer in ANY sport.

Otherwise, the forces the pros or anybody that can achieve a decent amount of inches is going to be putting far more stress on a frame than somebody just learning how to get up a 1 foot wall. That's just a nice marketing way of saying "our shit is light, if it breaks it's because of that fact and/or it's your fault for not being smooth"

P.S. that was directed at Koxx, not at you ollied.

Edited March 22, 2010 by rupintart