Why is the Norco Shore "more diverse"?

[Ducati]

Looking at picking up either a Norco Shore or a Norco A-line. I was speaking to the Norco ppl at the Outdoor show and I was told that the Shore is a better all round bike, but looking at there specs I can't really see why.

The differences between the bikes are:
shore 2 Aline
FORK Marzocchi 66 VF Marzocchi 888VF2 8" Travel
RIMS Alex Supra N Sun MTX
STEM Truvativ Hussefelt 31.8 Marzocchi 888 clamp-on stem
FRONT SHIFTER Sram X-7 3spd None
WEIGHT 45.75lbs 47.5 lbs

Yes the fork/stem and the lack of front gearing are obvious differences. The aline is definately more tuned to the downhill part of the ride. But is the shore really any more diverse? Both are over 45 lbs with the aline only weighing 2 lbs more. In comparing price, the aline is less than $300 more.

My question is, is there a big difference in riding the two? Do any of you, (that have riden both) have an advice on which is the better purchase? I would really like a bike that I can ride up fromme, and I'm will sacrific some of the suspension to do so. I just don't want to effect the ride down if there isn't really a benifit.

Thanks in advance

[corey@nsmb.com]

Did you compare geometry?

The A-Line will be more slack and better suited to downhilling.

The Shore will be steeper in the head angle and seat tube angle. Both of these items will make it handle a little more snappy and climb more comfortably. The Shore will also have a higher bb, which will give you more clearance over obstacles and better pedalling ability when climbing technical terrain. The A-Line will be lower, more suited towards downhill.

If I was buying a bike to ride things like Fromme, the Shore would be my pick over the A-Line.

If I was buying a bike to do shuttles and ride lift accessed all summer, I'd take the A-Line.

[Bridges!!!]

pedalling up ability = more diverse.
xups and barspins (with proper setup) = more diverse.

no 45+lb bike will be fun to ride up fromme, but ya the shore is more diverse.

[NSTP]

The only thing that i don't see making much sense is the differences of single crown forks, and a noticibley smaller tubed frame, reduced this way to appear lighter...but it's not really a lighter bike comparatively.

[corey@nsmb.com]

The only thing that i don't see making much sense is the differences of single crown forks, and a noticibley smaller tubed frame, reduced this way to appear lighter...but it's not really a lighter bike comparatively.

The single crown fork saves a bit of weight, and gives a better turning radius. Smaller tubed frame saves a bit of weight.

Comparatively, it is just over 2 pounds lighter. You say it isn't really a lighter bike comparatively, but it is. If it was 2 pounds under 45 you guys would be going on about how light it is. 2 pounds is 2 pounds. For most of us, we don't really care. For some of us, 2 pounds is a considerable difference. I think a good way to put that into perspective is to think about how much metal you would need to file off a frame to get 2 pounds of metal shavings. That quantifies the amount of material that you need to shed to drop two pounds in a pretty impressive visual.

There is always a trade off to lighter bikes...Generally speaking, the lighter you go, the more parts you will break and the less life you will enjoy out of the frame. There is a fine line to get long term durability and reliability at a reasonable weight.

[Farmer]

it can be pedaled up easyer because of having a front derailleur, and the single crown fork makes doing sertain tricks possible, I didn't check the geometry but I'd bet its also different

[FreaK]

Looking at picking up either a Norco Shore or a Norco A-line. I was speaking to the Norco ppl at the Outdoor show and I was told that the Shore is a better all round bike, but looking at there specs I can't really see why.

The differences between the bikes are:
shore 2 Aline
FORK Marzocchi 66 VF Marzocchi 888VF2 8" Travel
RIMS Alex Supra N Sun MTX
STEM Truvativ Hussefelt 31.8 Marzocchi 888 clamp-on stem
FRONT SHIFTER Sram X-7 3spd None
WEIGHT 45.75lbs 47.5 lbs

Yes the fork/stem and the lack of front gearing are obvious differences. The aline is definately more tuned to the downhill part of the ride. But is the shore really any more diverse? Both are over 45 lbs with the aline only weighing 2 lbs more. In comparing price, the aline is less than $300 more.

My question is, is there a big difference in riding the two? Do any of you, (that have riden both) have an advice on which is the better purchase? I would really like a bike that I can ride up fromme, and I'm will sacrific some of the suspension to do so. I just don't want to effect the ride down if there isn't really a benifit.

Thanks in advance

it seems to me the shop was thinking "lighter, has a granny gear, and less travel= more manouverable=can be used for more varied stuff"

[FreaK]

There is always a trade off to lighter bikes...Generally speaking, the lighter you go, the more parts you will break and the less life you will enjoy out of the frame. There is a fine line to get long term durability and reliability at a reasonable weight.

the counter to that is trials and street riders going for an optimal weight were they can place the bike better and still have enough strength to the parts. toughness is not dirrectly correlated to mass.

[smoochy]

strangely, toughness is also not directly correlated to material strength.

aluminum is the weakest of the structural materials, and only by virtue of its shapes (ie: large diameter tubes) can one get a sufficiently strong frame.

but all other things being equal, more mass will tend towards more strength. it's more a question of how strong does it need to be and where do you want to apply that strength. this is the real triumph of design.

[NSTP]

The single crown fork saves a bit of weight, and gives a better turning radius. Smaller tubed frame saves a bit of weight.

Comparatively, it is just over 2 pounds lighter. You say it isn't really a lighter bike comparatively, but it is. If it was 2 pounds under 45 you guys would be going on about how light it is. 2 pounds is 2 pounds. For most of us, we don't really care. For some of us, 2 pounds is a considerable difference. I think a good way to put that into perspective is to think about how much metal you would need to file off a frame to get 2 pounds of metal shavings. That quantifies the amount of material that you need to shed to drop two pounds in a pretty impressive visual.

There is always a trade off to lighter bikes...Generally speaking, the lighter you go, the more parts you will break and the less life you will enjoy out of the frame. There is a fine line to get long term durability and reliability at a reasonable weight.

Of that 2 and a bit pounds, approximately 1.5 of that is saved in the fork, the differnce of material is obvious, so that may leave 3/4 of a pound difference in the frame, when you also see a consiterable difference in the look of a frame, which must mean that the tubes are much thicker. I just that with more engineering a 7.5" travel bike with a single crown fork, for instance a yeti ASX, would be a lighter bike, and lighter adding to the versatility of the bike. Also, lighter in compared to what will parts/bikes break easier? A sun double track will be stronger than a rhyno lite, but there is also a big weight difference, and a better engineered shape. WIth more attention going into the advancement of materials and enigeering of parts, and frames lighter weight without less strength can be achieved. For instance a Sram XO rear derailleur is much stronger than that of a Sram X7, but much lighter.

[Tom]

Granny ring = "more diverse"

[H@gg@rd]

Looking at picking up either a Norco Shore or a Norco A-line. I was speaking to the Norco ppl at the Outdoor show and I was told that the Shore is a better all round bike, but looking at there specs I can't really see why.



Yes the fork/stem and the lack of front gearing are obvious differences. The aline is definately more tuned to the downhill part of the ride. .

My question is, is there a big difference in riding the two?

The '06 A-Line frame is the '05 Team Race frame with a different rear shock. Keep that in mind when you are considering the geometry

[Neo]

just weak marketing mumbo jumbo.

[Jimmy-James]

I don't know if i'm the only one, but to me most norcos feel like a big fat pig between my legs. I've taken a few shuttles on friends norcos, and thought it was because they were older. But i demo'd some at the outdoor show and thought they felt big and cumbersome, maybe its just me...

[morley]

There is always a trade off to lighter bikes...Generally speaking, the lighter you go, the more parts you will break and the less life you will enjoy out of the frame. There is a fine line to get long term durability and reliability at a reasonable weight.
I think a more appropriate statement is light, cheap, strong. Now pick two.


You can get long term reliability and light weight at a price... you just have to
pay for it. Chris king, and Thomson components are prefect examples.


Having a light bike also creates huge performance benefits, it's just depends on the riders skill level if those benefits can be realized. Although some riders who aren't so smooth may begin to question the structural integrity of a product.