MrMister111 said:wow thanks a lot for that. I just ordered the Diamondback. I preferred the sus and disc brake on the Diamond compared to the subway
just been into Halfords and after much deciding, on what I want it for went for Diamondback
I wanted front sus, I wanted at least 1 disc brake, preferred the overall "package" of the diamondback to the subway (although I know everyone saying overall is a better bike)
surely the Diamondback is better than the apollo's?
Well, you pays your money.............if you're happy with the bike then that's all that matters.
I think the overwhelming consensus is that both the Diamondback and the Apollo's are not worth the effort. The Subway may not look as flash as either of the above but will probably outperform both in the long run. Suspension and disc brakes on cheaper bikes are a gimmick to sell them but do not offer any advantages over that of a similarly priced hard-tailed bike with conventional brakes IMO.
If you want to take the kids out and go for the occasional ride, I suspect it won't make any difference what you have tbh. If you pose the question on this site, which has a core of enthusiasts and keen regular cyclists then the answer was always going to be 'spend as much as you afford' if cycling was likely to be a regular thing. For the type of cycling you will be doing it won't matter. And if you do decide to cycle regularly, you will be looking for a second bike within the next 12 months anyway. Enjoy.