Thinking about getting this bike but apparently Bulls models

Atleast this one has pedals, an idiot bought one without pedales the other week.

500 new liberated euro bucks, sure you can do better than that. damn!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7vWDJEwZZY

>>974111
I'm thinking 125?

>>974110
Most nicer bikes are sold without pedals since people buy the pedals they like that fit their shoes.

Op. Really think about where you are going to use this bike. Do you really need front suspension? Most people don't and it makes the bike preform far worse on pavement.
Almost no one needs rear suspension unless you are doing serious downhill shit. One of my all time favorite mountain bikes was a merrel 29er. No suspension.

>>974134
>Do you really need front suspension? Most people don't and it makes the bike preform far worse on pavement.
i'm not disputing, because i don't know about stuff like this, but why? a motorcycle without front suspension would be ass. is it just a matter of speed?

>>974134
>>974143
With the newest model you can lock the front suspension if you want to. Pretty cool feature imo that I haven't seen before checkin new bikes out last week.

Yeah I want to ride downhill but nothing insane. Also for suspension if I hit a root or smth I didn't see it'd be cool if I don't end up with the handlebars in my face.

>>974143
A motorcycle that never went faster than 20mph and was mainly used on hard gravel or clay trails would be just fine without front suspension. In fact dont most of those 80k "chopper" style bikes just rely on flexing bars?

When u need to get up and go you shift your weight forward. Front suspension dampens your exertion during this. It is why no road bikes have it.

>>974157
Thats what your arms are for. But hey if you really plan on doing 1k elevation change trails aand running over lots of roots then yea. You probably do want front suspension. I would still pass on the rear. The only people who really need rear suspension on a pedaled bike are the morons riding down ski trails.

But most people who just want to ride around the county park don't need suspension at all.

>>974157
>you can lock the front suspension if you want to.
Is it a remote lock out? As much as I like being able to turn the suspension on and off as I please, remote is a nice upgrade and wish I had it when you find yourself locking/unlocking it frequently.

>>974108

go to /n/ and find the bike buying general

at this price point it's a waste to buy new.

also , you really probably don't need front suspension.

get a nice 90s rigid and put some money towards nice tires and a good saddle.

>>974214
>get a nice 90s
Personally after owning a modern bike with all the bells and whistles I couldn't go back to some old tech.

Disk brakes are a god send; I can stop when it's raining, or when I'm on the trails and covered in mud.

He also posted a 27.5" which is nice than the 26", there are sections of trail that my old 26 can barely hold is ground but my 27.5 jumps right in and asks for more.

A locking fork is a damn fine addition as well.

Personally I'd try to find some of last year's model on clearance then you can get something nicer than what you are looking to spend. I got a $1200 bike for $790 just by trolling clearance sections.

>>974236

I'm totaly with you on the benefits on modern tech but I think op dosen't really know all that much about bikes and will probably fall victim to some half assed marketing.

If he really intends to ride trails then he should buy a used proper trail mountainbike , but it'll set him back those 500 easiliy for a used bike.

if he want's to go exploring and commuting I think a 90s rigid is a fine choice.

...that said I run a x9 group on mine, disc brakes with a custom adapter in the back, a carbon fork and and discs in the front a sick nope wheelset.
so it's not really in the spirit of a true 90s rigid.

>>974236
>Personally after owning a modern bike with all the bells and whistles I couldn't go back to some old tech.
It's nice when it works but wait til your brifters wear out (it's when, not if) and it costs $300 to replace everything instead of $20. Or your carbon spokes explode and you don't have a chase car with a new bike on top. Also, as >>975093 points out, a lot of it is marketing BS and the gains if they exist only really matter if you're a pro racer and your paycheck depends on being a few seconds faster over the duration of a stage race.

Late '80 and '90s stuff works 90% as well and is a LOT cheaper to run and easier to repair. I don't race anymore so I don't give a fuck about that 10% and I don't want parts I can't fix myself.