Forum menu
Im a big bloke (obviously if i have an XL).
The seatube on the 2004 bikes was thicker than the 2003 bikes and not machined down IIRC and there were a few other changes that I noticed that generally beefed a few bits up.
Oh and mine is still going strong a my main bike.
Looks like jhw has left the building, shame!
Armed with new knoledge, maybe he's gone to see if a '02-'04 enduro will actually ride down steps?
I got it in the end and finished building it up today. It'll get it's first proper ride tomorrow to test it out. It's a large to replace my medium marin but with a 50 rather than 70mm stem overall length to bars is basically the same.
To all the people commenting about hardtails I already have a 456SS to use when the mood takes me. I tried a few before it and this one stays. I like my bikes slack and low hence the ss is the perfect one for me.
the stresses on a frame aren't necessarily dependant on the number of times you ride the bike.
But the number of rides surely is a pretty key part of it. I chose the "20 times a year" figure more to indicate - "[i]a bike that has been ridden regularly, not kept stuffed in a shed[/i]". My point was (is) that older design Specialized Enduros ridden regularly will be reaching the end of their shelf life in the next few years. I don't think it's normal to keep mountain bikes longer than ten years or so, if you're riding a couple of times a month. Is it?
I've no doubt that new new bike is stronger and more capable downhill.
That's all I'm trying to say. The reason I even got into the differences between it and the old design was that someone posted an ad for an old design bike, on a thread discussing the new design, without any warning that the two are completely different. In this context that could be misleading, so I wanted to flag it. If the ad had been in the classifieds I'd have kept my nose out, caveat emptor, but as it was on the discussion forum I thought some clarification was needed.
where the did you get 5lb weight difference from?
My old Enduro was 28lbs, my new one is upwards of 32, so that's approx 5lbs.
Nb the "almost a grand more" quote is based on the RRP of the most basic 2002 Enduro - £1,299 - as against that of the most basic new Enduro - £1,999.
Define "standard"
"Built to the same standard" to me means ability to take impacts and resist fatigue, and in this respect I think the new versions are better.
Regarding "patronising" - it wasn't me that added the "jhw talking shite" link at the top of this thread. I don't have a degree in engineering or a job involving knowledge of metal fatigue (mercifully) but I've owned both bikes (the old version for a while now) and thought that would be sufficient to post some views...
The fact is if the OP forked out the £800 asked on the old version expecting roughly equivalent performance to the new version he'd be disappointed!
Regarding "patronising" - it wasn't me that added the "jhw talking shite" link at the top of this thread.
Not sure if thats aimed at me, but i can assure you I didnt put that.
However I would agree the newer ones certainly dont have a rep for breaking like the moncoque models did. Although the changes I mentioned to the last your of the monocoques seemed to have resolved the issues previous ones suffered from.
I still think thats more down to general inflation than up specc'ingNb the "almost a grand more" quote is based on the RRP of the most basic 2002 Enduro - £1,299 - as against that of the most basic new Enduro - £1,999.
If any one is interested there was a medium 2009 Enduro expert in steels at Newcastle for 2k in their sale. Seemed a bit of a bargain to me.
Im in no way affiliated with this shop btw.
Regarding "patronising" - it wasn't me that added the "jhw talking shite" link at the top of this thread.
Me neither. Although I disagreed with your assertion and took issue with the context of your argument I wouldn't tag a post in such a way unless it was deliberate trolling, which your post certainly wasn't.
"Built to the same standard" to me means ability to take impacts and resist fatigue, and in this respect I think the new versions are better.
In this respect, newer bikes are almost certainly stronger as a consequence of being designed with more travel. 05-09 bikes were designed with dual crown forks in mind (the 150mm 2005 model was warrantied for dual crowns IIRC), but then 2005 bikes had failures around the chainstay too. Arguably, the build quality of 2007-09 bikes could be criticised because of reliability issues stemming from build - which would also question the assertion "built to a better standard", in the context of assembly and design quality.
That's all I'm trying to say. The reason I even got into the differences between it and the old design was that someone posted an ad for an old design bike, on a thread discussing the new design
But the thread is titled "Talk to me about specialized enduros", no?
Some of us are really fond of our older model Enduros for good reasons, personally I like the aesthetics a great deal and found 5" of travel spot on for the riding I do.
That doesn't detract from the fact that I really, really like the new model (2010) bike a lot. I haven't ridden it but would love to do so, mainly because it's a Specialized Enduro, which to me evokes the best compromise between both worlds of AM and XC, the same is true today as it was in 2004.