Bang for the Buck
I am looking to upgrade from my 10-year old Trek/Gary Fischer Rumblefish II and am not sure how far I should go. The 3×8 drivetrain and 10 year old shocks are beat, no dropper, but the bike is still fun to ride. I have only been riding for a couple of years, mostly on trails, but there are a couple of bike parks close to me that I would like to start exploring, as well as ski hill/lift accessed riding (in NW Montana). I am a very strong climber, and don’t plan on racing, so mid-weight/more travel doesn’t scare me for regular trail rides. I got to do a couple of more technical rides with bigger rocks and drops last year and that is definitely the direction I am looking to push my riding. My max budget is ~$2500 but I would prefer to stay closer to $2k. Are there going to be major diferences between the Marin and Norco that should push me more towards one or the other? Initially I was thinking the Norco sight A2 for the better components, but the Marin AT XR seems comparable and $400+ cheaper. All bikes would be size XL (I’m 6’5″ -190 lbs).
by jujunizz
3 Comments
Honestly the marin is a screamin deal in comparison. Good brakes, suspension and drivetrain. I’d do that bike vs the others
The Element isn’t in the same category as the other two. Stiff suspension, made for efficiency. Better for mellow or flatter trails.
The Marin is going to be a total hog. I would go with the other two unless you’re bombing steep trails at a billion mph.
The Sight splits the difference. It’s very easy to ride fast, and natural feeling. Efficiency is OK, not great. It also will be best suited to high speeds and steep trails. Rear end is hard to get feeling right. If you are 100 kg or heavier you might not be able to set it up.
I am biased though, I have two carbon Sights AMA.
I have a rocky mountain altitude alloy 30, it’s an amazing bike. Rocky mountain makes some really good bikes