Powered by Outside

08 norco shore 1 or 09 kona stinky deluxe...which is a better deal?

PB Forum :: Freeride & Slopestyle
08 norco shore 1 or 09 kona stinky deluxe...which is a better deal?
Author Message
flag merkel
Posted: Nov 22, 2008 at 19:55 Quote
and here is some actual reasoning:

Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.konaworld.com/09bikes/small/T2K9_STINKYDELUXE.jpgUnsecure image, only https images allowed: http://photos.nsmb.com/files/2/7/2/8/1/shore1.jpg
If you are a douche bag and all you want is a nice looking ride, then for the first time (and I can't believe I'm saying this), in 2009 the stinky actually looks nice. Still, the Shore looks a lot nicer.

But lets look deeper. I'll take a look at the highest quality Stinky (Deluxe) and Shore (Three).
With the Stinky, you're looking at an MSRP of 4 grand. The Shore is only $3000.

It is just about common knowledge that Norco rear suspension is absolutely fantastic, simple, and pretty much just works. I think that with Norco's system, you want something with more travel. the suspension is extremely plush, it absorbs everything, and it's got near no problems. The whole bike with a great beefy build is 41 pounds. It's not that heavy.

It is well known that Kona's 4-bar suspension can be flexy, faulty, and uncomfortable.

Kona quality is simply not comparable to Norco. The shore is more affordable, beefier, better, easier.
flag teuton612
Posted: Nov 22, 2008 at 19:58 Quote
what are you going to be using it for
flag merkel
Posted: Nov 22, 2008 at 20:00 Quote
teuton612 wrote:
what are you going to be using it for
the rediculosu thing about this thread is it is just a debate, and nobody is buying either. the first post said "which do you think is better?" or seomthing like that. this is just a discussion on which is better all around i suppose.
flag prudent
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 11:32 Quote
Shore in my opinion, they ride well and a good solid bike Smile
Just don't ride them up hills hehe Pimp
flag s-alex
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 18:18 Quote
merkel wrote:
and here is some actual reasoning:

Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.konaworld.com/09bikes/small/T2K9_STINKYDELUXE.jpgUnsecure image, only https images allowed: http://photos.nsmb.com/files/2/7/2/8/1/shore1.jpg
If you are a douche bag and all you want is a nice looking ride, then for the first time (and I can't believe I'm saying this), in 2009 the stinky actually looks nice. Still, the Shore looks a lot nicer.

But lets look deeper. I'll take a look at the highest quality Stinky (Deluxe) and Shore (Three).
With the Stinky, you're looking at an MSRP of 4 grand. The Shore is only $3000.

It is just about common knowledge that Norco rear suspension is absolutely fantastic, simple, and pretty much just works. I think that with Norco's system, you want something with more travel. the suspension is extremely plush, it absorbs everything, and it's got near no problems. The whole bike with a great beefy build is 41 pounds. It's not that heavy.

It is well known that Kona's 4-bar suspension can be flexy, faulty, and uncomfortable.

Kona quality is simply not comparable to Norco. The shore is more affordable, beefier, better, easier.
well said
flag ajax-ripper
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 20:58 Quote
exept you weir comparing the high end stinky to the low end shore. shore 1 is the good one.
flag RecklessInsanity
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 21:03 Quote
Merkel i couldn't have said it better. I'd take the Shore over the Stinky.
flag
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 21:09 Quote
nnorrcoo wrote:
merkel wrote:
and here is some actual reasoning:

Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.konaworld.com/09bikes/small/T2K9_STINKYDELUXE.jpgUnsecure image, only https images allowed: http://photos.nsmb.com/files/2/7/2/8/1/shore1.jpg
If you are a douche bag and all you want is a nice looking ride, then for the first time (and I can't believe I'm saying this), in 2009 the stinky actually looks nice. Still, the Shore looks a lot nicer.

But lets look deeper. I'll take a look at the highest quality Stinky (Deluxe) and Shore (Three).
With the Stinky, you're looking at an MSRP of 4 grand. The Shore is only $3000.

It is just about common knowledge that Norco rear suspension is absolutely fantastic, simple, and pretty much just works. I think that with Norco's system, you want something with more travel. the suspension is extremely plush, it absorbs everything, and it's got near no problems. The whole bike with a great beefy build is 41 pounds. It's not that heavy.

It is well known that Kona's 4-bar suspension can be flexy, faulty, and uncomfortable.

Kona quality is simply not comparable to Norco. The shore is more affordable, beefier, better, easier.
well said

I agree, Kona is a respectable company, but their long travel fullys are not that great. The Norco suspension design pedals very well. Have you actually ridden a stinky? it bobs like nuts. Now if you live in Whistler or you ride trails where you NEVER pedal, the stinky would work fine. But I'm pretty sure the general consensus (and I agree) is that the Norco is a better bike.
flag ajax-ripper
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 21:10 Quote
RecklessInsanity wrote:
Merkel i couldn't have said it better. I'd take the Shore over the Stinky.
i souldnt. The stinky deluz is almost 1 grand cheaper then a shore 1. The delux looks better has a floating brake to deal with the brake jack issue and weighs less..
flag yo13bo
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 23:17 Quote
ok, my username applies to this discussion, norco uses a similar design to specialized fsr, norco calls it vps, (Very Plush Suspension)
flag demonbiker48
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 at 23:19 Quote
obviously most ppl like the norco but im goina have to agree to disagree and just like the kona more but thats my opinion so...
flag AirForceOne
Posted: Nov 24, 2008 at 0:23 Quote
Norco; lovin the hot green, looks sweet.
flag s-alex
Posted: Nov 24, 2008 at 6:41 Quote
ajax-ripper wrote:
RecklessInsanity wrote:
Merkel i couldn't have said it better. I'd take the Shore over the Stinky.
i souldnt. The stinky deluz is almost 1 grand cheaper then a shore 1. The delux looks better has a floating brake to deal with the brake jack issue and weighs less..
well the norcos dont the dope system, because they dont have the brake jack,
flag david-hill
Posted: Nov 24, 2008 at 7:05 Quote
Norco-not-kona wrote:
Kona has a bad rep for being junk but the new shores are probably bigger junk they just look nice and seem lighter. Still go for the shore though, kona's are crap.

Lol yeah we can tell you think that from you username.

But ide say...


Well i havent really got an opinion, because i ride Kona but never ridden norco, unlike most of the kona hating douches on here, who have never ridden one in thier life.

Sorry cant give an opinion man, i tihnk they both look mint though.
flag JokerMachine
Posted: Nov 24, 2008 at 7:07 Quote
ajax-ripper wrote:
The delux looks better has a floating brake to deal with the brake jack issue and weighs less..

Looks are opinion, and the brake jack is only an issue on the Kona, so only the Kona needs a way to deal with it.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.011736
Mobile Version of Website