2010 Cove G-Spot - Shralped by Connor Macleod

This would be a reasonable but not overly exciting option unfortunatly I just dont see it living up to the cove price tag attached.

Also not sure the writer had to go nuts on everything avid… their brakes are populare but I wouldnt say they own the market, and stylo cranks nearly that amazing either.

I might consider this bike …

I see the seatpost size as a VERY minor inconvenience. Funny everybody rants about weight of EVERYTHING but wants to install a telescopic seatpost that WEIGHS A TON compared to a regular post.

Sure it would be nice, but I would bet that for every 1000 of these "types of bikes" sold that are being ridden right now, that "maybe" one owner has put out the $$$$ and is running a telescopic post.

I see this bike ridden UP (seatpost up) and then back DOWN (seatpost down) . Can't see the need for a telescopic on this bike. Its not like its meant to do cross country riding anyway.

Heck people complain about the added 20 grams from using bigger rotors ….. People buy stems that are 5 grams lighter than their counterparts. I can't see them using a seatpost that weighs a whopping POUND or more.

It would be nice to see a standardization from all the manufacturers … but I wouldn't be using a telescopic post anyway.8)

For me its bike geometry, 1.5 inch headtube and rear suspension design that take precedence …. I like this bike (and its not made overseas which is a bonus)

1 in 1000 all-mtn bikes have an adjustable post? where do you live?

i own this bike and im that 1 out of a 1000 that wants a tele. post..

8-)

1 in 1000 all-mtn bikes have an adjustable post? where do you live?

Dude lives in lallaallalal dream land.

I might consider this bike …

I see the seatpost size as a VERY minor inconvenience. Funny everybody rants about weight of EVERYTHING but wants to install a telescopic seatpost that WEIGHS A TON compared to a regular post.

Sure it would be nice, but I would bet that for every 1000 of these "types of bikes" sold that are being ridden right now, that "maybe" one owner has put out the $$$$ and is running a telescopic post.

I see this bike ridden UP (seatpost up) and then back DOWN (seatpost down) . Can't see the need for a telescopic on this bike. Its not like its meant to do cross country riding anyway.

Heck people complain about the added 20 grams from using bigger rotors ….. People buy stems that are 5 grams lighter than their counterparts. I can't see them using a seatpost that weighs a whopping POUND or more.

It would be nice to see a standardization from all the manufacturers … but I wouldn't be using a telescopic post anyway.8)

For me its bike geometry, 1.5 inch headtube and rear suspension design that take precedence …. I like this bike (and its not made overseas which is a bonus)

who's complaining about weight? I ride a 33 pound hustler, and I still want a RAS….clearly you don't see the benefit, that's fine, where I live it has a huge benefit on rolling technical trails, and would like the option…

Guys relax 8)

"wanting" a telescopic post and ACTUALLY owning one are 2 different things. I have seen only ONE so far and it was on a cross country bike. Have yet to see one on a freeride bike .. but I guess in some peoples area there are LOTS of them (or lots of people "wanting" them).

I am not saying it "wouldn't be nice" .. what I am saying is that its not a make or break for a LOT of people. A lot of people want them … very few pay the money and buy them for freeride bikes.

And yes, the weight comment was a generalization … and YES people do buy one product over another because its a few grams lighter. Sad fact but true. Weight weeines are NOT going to buy a telescopic post .. its too heavy … that was my point.

For me .. its not an issue and would not sway my decision.

Guys relax 8)

"wanting" a telescopic post and ACTUALLY owning one are 2 different things. I have seen only ONE so far and it was on a cross country bike. Have yet to see one on a freeride bike .. but I guess in some peoples area there are LOTS of them (or lots of people "wanting" them).

I am not saying it "wouldn't be nice" .. what I am saying is that its not a make or break for a LOT of people. A lot of people want them … very few pay the money and buy them for freeride bikes.

And yes, the weight comment was a generalization … and YES people do buy one product over another because its a few grams lighter. Sad fact but true. Weight weeines are NOT going to buy a telescopic post .. its too heavy … that was my point.

For me .. its not an issue and would not sway my decision.

you should've seen all of them last night at the first stage of the queens, they are not an obscure item and many who didn't have them want them….that's all I'm saying…

edit….and most that didn't have them, like myself, are constrained by lack of reliable choices due to seatpost sizes….

He's kind of right, for this area at least. You gotta remember where you guys are living, and if you realize that, each one of your points is valid.

I would love to try an adjustable post but really I have no need for one at all, especially given the price and weight. I might never use it here because of the lack of tech, but if I was on the shore I probably would use it a lot.

He's kind of right, for this area at least. You gotta remember where you guys are living, and if you realize that, each one of your points is valid.

I would love to try an adjustable post but really I have no need for one at all, especially given the price and weight. I might never use it here because of the lack of tech, but if I was on the shore I probably would use it a lot.

I don't disagree with you at all, wayne….but what I'm saying is that there are plenty of places where these are extremely desirable items, and limiting that aspect by spec'ing a wierd seat tube size, on a new frame design no less, is an odd decision (although yess probably has a huge stock of 30.0 tubesets in stock). It's a high quality frame, at a premium price, and those looking to spec some of the new RAS's will likely look elsewhere. Can you run it without one, yes of course, but many people who do want to will likely look elsewhere as many of the 27.2 options are lacking in travel range and quality.

just to reiterate though, seatpost diameter notwithstanding, this bike is really really fun! climbed fromme on it for a couple of laps and some rolly descending, and also a few shuttle laps on cypress, it handled it all without a complaint and was a snappy, fun handling rig.

IMHO, Cove bikes seldomly fall in the categories they are meant to. They Design their bikes with the Shore in mind so an 'AM' bike acutally becomes a light freerider.

The Hustler was originally billed as an XC bike, but thats not really the case. Its an Awesome trail bike but def meant to be slapped around more than an XC only bike.

I own an STD, for example. A great shore bike, but heavier than most FR bikes. The Geo and wheelbase make more of a FR/DH hybrid.

I'd love to own a G-spot, but I wouldnt take one on any long XC rides. Perfect for Fromme, burke and woodlot tho. But not a true AM bike, imo.

(although yess probably has a huge stock of 30.0 tubesets in stock).

there might be some truth to this. my 4 yr old pdc has a 30.0 seattube. i thought it was weird at the time as well.

Well, you can always shim a tele post - if need be. It's just not a very sexy option. My comment was that when developing a new product, Cove might want to look where the industry is going and try to be in front of that vs. playing catch up.

It's true that if you're just, say, climbing up the road on Fromme and then bombing down, then it's a moot point. On the other hand, if you were racing Ashland, 4 Queens or Downieville or wanted this to be a true AM bike, then the tele posts are a no-brainer.

FYI, we've got two Joplins in our garage right now and my wife and I both own this type of bike….so we're 2 out of a thousand.

Cheers,
EB