Which one has better components?

[PH]

i'm to heavy for a bike with the normal fork

Sorry, but I don't think that's the case. I can't see how it could be. there are plenty of large people riding rigid forks, it isn't a part of a bike likely to give trouble. Where did you get that impression from?

[Mattyfez]

i'm to heavy for a bike with the normal fork

What sort of riding do you intend to do, tarmac, hard surfaces, unkept loose stoney bridalways, etc? and what's bodyweight and height?

If it's mostly road or hard packed gravel, then you probably want a bike with no suspension. You'll get a better bike for your money.

If you really want full suspension, something like the calibre boss nut or boardman pro fs are good, but they are closer to a grand than £300. And full suspension won't do you any favours climbing hills if they are not covered in loose rubble and tree roots.

[mercalia]

well if you are too heavy for a "normal" fork I would have thought then that would be heavy+++ for a cheap suspension fork

I dont have suspension fork and I weigh... alot...too much. If you are worrying about comfort then you need to think about fattish tyres ( not knobblies ) 1.75" say as I use.

[Threevok]

Being heavy isn't really a problem with a suspension fork, as long it is coil sprung.
Rider weight only becomes a problem with air-sprung forks - and the cheaper you go, the more likely problems occur

As for Halfords bikes- both the Boardman and Voodoo range are good, although not as good value as they used to be.
Their cheaper models of these are no better than the GT you listed - and the bottom brackets on the lower-end Boardmans are prone to problems.

Higher-end Carrera bikes are good, but not as good value anymore either

I wouldn't touch Diamondback with a barge-pole, sorry.

CRC have a black Friday sale on at the moment, - worth looking at them too - plus you get cashback if you're with Quidco

[karlt]

i'm to heavy for a bike with the normal fork

Nonsense. Suspension forks were only invented a few years ago and people of all shapes and sizes rode bikes before then.

[karlt]

Boy #1 has the Decathlon bike, or one very like it, and finds the suspension works fine. I'm not quite sure where the belief that a fork "worth having" costs more than that bike comes from, but it reminds me a little of being told by some musicians that there are no playable guitars below £300, which is odd, because I get very good results from mine costing around half that. You might notice the difference if you were very talented and recording some very technical pieces. Similarly, if you're looking at competing in an international downhill MTB race, you might notice the difference between a fork costing several hundred and one costing a normal amount, but I'm willing to bet 90% of riders wouldn't.

[Threevok]

Boy #1 has the Decathlon bike, or one very like it, and finds the suspension works fine. I'm not quite sure where the belief that a fork "worth having" costs more than that bike comes from, but it reminds me a little of being told by some musicians that there are no playable guitars below £300, which is odd, because I get very good results from mine costing around half that. You might notice the difference if you were very talented and recording some very technical pieces. Similarly, if you're looking at competing in an international downhill MTB race, you might notice the difference between a fork costing several hundred and one costing a normal amount, but I'm willing to bet 90% of riders wouldn't.

I agree to a point - but having owned bikes with Zoom and Mozo forks, and having them seize in the cold - or leak oil everywhere in the summer - you really need a half decent fork to be worth the extra weight, over a rigid fork.

Suntour forks used to be just as bad - although some of their range now isn't that bad and on a par (if not better in some cases) than the lower-end Rockshox offerings

[Mattyfez]

Suntour forks used to be just as bad - although some of their range now isn't that bad and on a par (if not better in some cases) than the lower-end Rockshox offerings

Yeah the lower end Suntour (xct, xcm, xcr) are just that, low end, the suntour raidon is well thought of and is the next model up.

I origeonaly had an xcm on a carrera and it was ok-ish, but I found the spring was too heavy so the fork took a bit of force to get moving, and the lack of rebound damping made it feel pogo-stick like when it eventualy did get moving.

I upgraded it to a suntour epixon which is one model above the raidon and the difference is very apparent in weight (think it's about 1.7kg as the lowers are magnesium alloy) and performance, it's so much smoother - the epixon is an air spring rather than coil spring.
Although this is a £230 fork, at about the same level as the Rocksox gold TK solo air.

[PH]

Boy #1 has the Decathlon bike, or one very like it, and finds the suspension works fine.

I'd prefer an example of more than one before drawing any conclusions. The bike racks at work are full of cheapish MTBs with suspension forks (In the summer anyway) I know several of the riders do have problems with them and the LBS basically tells them they aren’t economically serviceable. I'm sure there are others who have no issues. Problems I’ve been asked about include – seizing, bottoming out and sticking, I don’t have the answer.
Even if there were some good cheap suspension forks and you were able to identify them, I’d still expect a bike at the same price point that had cheaper to produce rigid forks to have had the saving spent elsewhere. When on a budget, less often is more.

[Mattyfez]

I'd agree with that generally.. but we digress.
We still don't know how heavy an tall the guy is, and most importantly the kind of terrain he will spend most if his time on.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
My 96 Carrera is still going strong, this is the bike I covered most of Dartmoor on with camping gear, that's off road paths, track, railway tracks etc.

[freiston]

I'd agree with that generally.. but we digress.
We still don't know how heavy an tall the guy is, and most importantly the kind of terrain he will spend most if his time on.

Yup! All the replies are meaningless without the answers to the above (except the refutation that cheap front suspension forks will cope better than rigid forks with a heavy rider - that is just not true. Also, as someone said earlier, suspension forks are relatively new and bicycles have coped with very heavy riders many years before suspension forks were invented).

Given the other thread started by the OP, he/she seems to be convinced that they need suspension but has offered no indication that this is the case - has offered no indication of what is required of the bike or of the punishment it will receive - has just asked for ratings of linked bikes without context - but there is a theme that the bike must have suspension and must be very cheap. I am sceptical of this - cheap suspension is an oxymoron - it is either (relatively) expensive or it is not achievable with due functionality. Even a heavy rider will not require suspension for all but seriously bumpy off-road use. The bikes that we have been asked to offer opinion on are all, in my humble opinion, not really fit for the purpose to which they are designed/marketed - the components are simply too cheap to deliver the performance that that type of bike is designed for.

The Ridgeback linked in an earlier reply looks to be a decent bike that would cope with all but rough off-road riding. I'm not the OP and I don't really know what he/she requires - but none of us do. I f it were me, and I was on the heavy side and looking for a decent all-round bike at about the £250-£300 price range, I would be looking, more or less at the sort of bike offered here (link) - I have linked Evans because they are a high street retailer with branches throughout the country with a lot wider range than Halfords. I would then shortlist according to what I really required/desired - gearing, mudguard capability, wheel size, riding style (e.g. upright or 'aggressive') etc.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Anyone got an idea on what sort of grease you use on most cheap end forks.
I must have at least 12 different sus forks at the moment some good some bad, the poor seize in the cold (feels like it), have some full stanchion downhill type that are pretty good but most suffer from no movement on small bumps, (stiction) perhaps a flexi stem and sus forks might work as they would compliment each other.

I know Fexi Stems are out of fashion but I toured all Dartmoor has to offer (off road) with camp kit and the flexi stem was good.
I only tried sus forks a few years ago, unless they are super responsive with progressive dynamic action fixed fork with shock absorbing tyres are a good bet.

P.S. £300 is a grey area look well for last years bargains.

[Threevok]

Anyone got an idea on what sort of grease you use on most cheap end forks.

Anything you like - it will make little difference.

This is best for all though - http://www.juicelubes.co.uk/fork-juice.html

I must have at least 12 different sus forks at the moment some good some bad, the poor seize in the cold (feels like it),

These are probably forks with elastomer dampening. Elastomers suffer from stiffness in the cold and only work well(ish) in warmer conditions.

have some full stanchion downhill type that are pretty good but most suffer from no movement on small bumps, (stiction).

You need a fork that has micro-adjustment for compression and rebound. You really need higher end forks that cover this - like the RCT3 on the PIKE and SID, or FOX equivalents

I have SID solo air RCT3s on my single speed and they are superb and soaking up little bumps

[tykeboy2003]

Weight is also a good indicator of quality, as mentioned above. Lighter = better.

I would argue with that. It depends what sort of bike it is, a touring bike would benefit form having a steel frame (and thus be heavier) in order to be more durable and capable of carrying luggage etc.

On the subject of weight. Whilst I agree that you really don't want to be lugging huge weight about, just remember that by far the biggest weight you're lugging about is yourself. I'm about 12 stone (76kg) and my touring bike is about 30lbs (13kg) so the bike only represents 15% of the weight I'm pulling and even if you halved the weight of the bike, you'd only reduce the total weigh by 7%. Insignificant unless you're an elite athlete.