Opinion/Help on first frame purchase?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Cam75
Im looking to purchase my first frame, and Ive got it narrowed down to 2, but Im not sure which I should go with.

Im looking at either a Turner Burner, or a Yeti 575.

I ride a lot or road and trails, and a LOT of climbing. Im really want something light, that climbs well, but can still take some off road abuse.

Which do you guys think I should go with?

Turner Burner at Supergo for less than $1K.
You can climb well with it and the extra $400 won't "weigh you down"
I don't own one, but all the locals who do have nothing but good things to say about it. Most the time they pass me. I catch them only in the parking lots when they are greasing the pivots with their grease guns at the "Zirc" fittings.

Yeti 575 has more travel and a little more weight. Availability is an issue on this frame in many sizes.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Cam75
Im looking to purchase my first frame, and Ive got it narrowed down to 2, but Im not sure which I should go with.

Im looking at either a Turner Burner, or a Yeti 575.

I ride a lot or road and trails, and a LOT of climbing. Im really want something light, that climbs well, but can still take some off road abuse.

Which do you guys think I should go with?

Have you considered a hard tail? I know the full-suspension coolness factor isn't there, but it sounds like a more practical (and lighter) option for your needs.

Those frames aren't even in the same category. The Burner is a XC race frame while the 575 is a long travel trailbike. The Yeti ASR would be a more direct comparison to the Burner while the 5 Spot would be closer to what the 575 is designed for. All of these bikes are kinda overkill for road use though and can definately handle a lot of abuse.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by xc_willy
Have you considered a hard tail? I know the full-suspension coolness factor isn't there, but it sounds like a more practical (and lighter) option for your needs.

My first bike was a Gary Fisher Aquila hardtail, and I couldnt stand the abuse my rear took, thats why im looking FS this time.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Hecubus
Those frames aren't even in the same category. The Burner is a XC race frame while the 575 is a long travel trailbike. The Yeti ASR would be a more direct comparison to the Burner while the 5 Spot would be closer to what the 575 is designed for. All of these bikes are kinda overkill for road use though and can definately handle a lot of abuse.

Hecubus, excuse my newbie lack of knowledge. I was baseing my choices price wise, I didnt realize the differences in the riding style each has. Thanks for the imput. Let me see if I understand.

The Burner is XC- so that means its meant for serious off roading, big jumps/drops, and not a lot of speed?

And do you mean the 575 being a "long travel" bike mean its designed more for speed, and being able to ride long distances?

Again sorry for my lack of knowledge, I appreciate everyones help.

Actually much the opposite. XC usually means a cross country racing bike or similar purpose. When I refer to travel I mean the amount the suspension moves. XC bikes such as the burner and AS-R have short travel suspensions. I think 3.5" for the burner and 3.75" for the AS-R and have suspension designs that maximize pedaling efficiancy so power from your pedal stroke isn't absorbed into the suspension squatting under load.. They are lighter and sacrifice some strength to achieve this light weight. They are not meant for taking any sort of jumps, at least nothing too big. They are meant to be pedaled as fast as possible especially going up. Their geometry is also optimized to steer quicker.
By long travel trail bike I mean a bike that has more suspension travel both front and rear. The 5 Spot has 5" of rear travel and the 575 has 5.75" of rear suspension travel. These bikes are designed a bit stronger and heavier, can handle more abuse and are generally more comfortable and can be ridden more aggressively. They can also handle drops better BUT are not necessarily desinged for such a task. This is a very broad range where bikes can vary drastically. The geometry on these frame is usually set to have slower more predictable steering and high speed stability.

First off, thanks for all the help.

Now Im not sure if all the parts match/fit with the frame. I researched as much as possible (i got nothing done at work today 😄 ). The only one Im not real sure on is the headset, stem, seatpost (post to frame), crankset to frame, and wheels to brakes. Ok, thats alot. I just emailed a shop, but maybe you guys can take alook? Oh yeah, i may still change the frame. I may not go with the Yeti 575. I may still go with the Turner Burner. I still cant decide.

Please take a look. Am I missing anything, or see something that doesnt match/fit?

Race Face Signature Ti Bottom Bracket 113

Shimano XTR M965 Disc Brakes
Front C-Lock Int Std Kit

Shimano XTR M965 Disc Brakes
Rear C-Lock Int Std Kit

Shimano XT M756 Hydraulic Levers

Shimano XT M756 Hydraulic Levers Kit

Shimano XTR M960 9 Speed Cassette
9 Spd 12-34t

Shimano HG93 9 Speed Chain

Race Face Next LP ISIS Crankset
175mm Silver ISIS 74/110 Kit

Shimano XTR M960 Front Derailleur
34.9 TP/BP Kit

Shimano XTR M965 Disc Front Hub
Pewter 32h Kit

Fox Vanilla 2004 Forx RLC

Yeti Carbon Riser Handlebars 1 Inch Black

FSA Orbit Extreme Pro 1 1/8 Inch Headset

Shimano M545 Pedals

Shimano XTR M960 Rear Derailleur GS

Selle Italia Pro Link Gel Flow Flite Saddle

Shimano XTR M952 9spd Shifters

Thomson Elite Seatpost - 330mm 27.2

Ritchey WCS Stem 120 x 6

DT Swiss Revolution Butted Spokes 2.0-1.5mm Black

Alloy Nipples Black 12mm

Mavic XM819 UST 26" Disc Rim 32 Hole Black

Yeti 575

Shimano XTR M965 32 Hole

Maxxis High Roller UST Tire 26 x 2.1

Seems like you're going all out there. If you're spending that much you might as well get a Chris King headset, trust me its worth it. The seatpost for turners is 27.2mm but I'm not sure for yeti. Thomson or Race Face are the best posts to get. Dith the Ti bottom bracket. Its only a couple grams lighter, can be damaged more easily, costs a ton more, and is just a hassle to deal with cause of the corrosive al to Ti interface with the cranks. Get the standard race face XS. For handlebars I would personally choose easton if I were buying carbon. Get the XTR/Dura Ace 7701 chain, not the HG93, its only two dollars more anyway. Good choice on the crankset, I used to own one but I prefer the superior shifting of shimano rings. The wheels are fine. You can also opt for standard wheels, say like a crossmax or a Chris King hub and use a standard 6 bolt rotor. The XTR discs are available in 6 bolt as well so don't think you have to limit your choices to the XTR center lock hubs only. If you will still use ceneter lock you can also pick the XTR or XT wheelset.

Hecubus,

Thanks, you have so helpful. I really appreciate it.

So you would pick the XTR crankset over the RaceFace? I was reading some reviews online, and alot of people were saying the XTR rings turn to "butter" really quick.

Both cranksets are great so thats not such a big issue. Shimano rings will last just as long as anyone else's. Their shifting is unquestionably the smoothest. I had a set of the Race Face cranks but they really don't compare to the shimano cranks. The 960 XTR's are slightly lighter, MUCH easier to install, service, and work on in general. The BB lasts much longer too. One of the drawbacks of ISIS BB's is the spindle is so large the bearings become very small and wear out very fast. Most manufacturers who developed ISIS are now abandoning it including Chris King and now Race Face. Race Face is coming out with an X-Type BB cranks interface very similar to shimano next month.