http://www.shedfire.com/2011/08/09/entirely-predictable-first-shedfire-product-for-on-one/

Somehow managed to look ok.

Steel blue pig = sold well
Alu mmmbop = sold not so well
Carbon?

At least it shouldn’t be too overweight.

Also – they’ve turned that around a bit fast haven’t they!

Eh?

It’s a C456 is it not? What am I missing, becasue I see nothing new at all. 😐

becasue I see nothing new at all

angles at my guess.

Angles?
Whoop-de-flippin’-do.

New product? Yeah. Righto.

The link shows 65.7 and 72.8.
It would be easy to assume that these are head and seat angles.

If you’re going to change one thing on a bike which radically changes it’s handling, I would say angles would be top of my list.

If you’re going to change things to make the bike better how about getting rid of the extra redundant cable guides on the seatstay and then increasing the stupidly and needlessly short headtube length by 10mm so Rockshox tapered steerer forks actually fit properly?

Or is that too logical?

I guess that faffing with angles is more important than fixing actual faults…..

Somebody got out of bed the wrong side this morning.

I think it’s pretty interesting, but fixing the crappy decals would have been top of my list.

brant – How about a carbon all-mountain FS with angles like the Mega? And the same price preferably.

Somebody got out of bed the wrong side this morning.

his bike is now outdated – give the man a break. 🙂

Somebody got out of bed the wrong side this morning.

Got a C456? Had to deal with these faults like you had to deal with the faults on the 853 Inbred before it?

It’s all cool and intersting faffing with angles for sure, but how about fixing known faults before that? Wild idea I know…..

(If it’s already been done, then thanks very much. Where’s my replacement frame?)

Isn’t that just an angleset they’ve put in a 456c?

Or is it an OvalSet(tm)

c456 summer season, no?

Oh – dood_doof – have a missed an obvious explanation?

How would they steepen the seat angle – maybe the calculations on the page mean take a C456 and make the angles thus and that will be a new frame.

It’s the existing Works Components “angleset” in a standard C456. On-one were calling it a shedfire product on Facebook initially but it’s just a rebrand. Only reason I got my C456 was that I knew the Works kit was an option, as I like a slack bike- though so far I’m resisting.

AlexSimon, slackening off the front end lowers the BB and steepens the seat-tube, assuming the same fork.

I noticed the zero stack lower cup and wondered if they had done that.

+1 for being miffed about the short head tube. I got sent an external upper headset cup which I haven’t fitted yet as it looks ugly and my headset is red so doesnt match at all!

The extra cable guides on the seat stay are for people who run the alternative brake position using a different swap out. But yes, I’d prefer a frame without it and let those people just use cable ties. They also need to sort out the front cable guides which are in the wrong places.

I’ve got to be honest, but I’ve bought my last On-One I think. Unless they buck their ideas up they’ve lost me, sorry.
I’ve got 2 O-O bikes that are great to ride, but the lack of thought that goes into the detail and the obvious lack of testing on both my frames has caused me big problems.
And this pisses me of becasue I love both bikes.
And it pisses me off even more becasue it’s just REALLY SIMPLE stuff that needs fixing.
This obsession they have with silly-short head tubes and huge amounts of mud room is compromising the frames in other areas. I remember fitting the chainst on my new 853 Inbred, a standard XT HT2, and immediately noticing the lack of chainring clearence that ultimately cost me a broken chainstay (The 853s are nearly all dogged by chainsuck) There was exactly the width of a HT2 BB spacer between big ring and chainstay, so what’s that 2-2.5mm???? Bonkers.
I had a new chainstay put in by Argos, and I told them to put a straighter one in. I reckon I lost 2-4mm of mud room and gained half as much again on chainring clearence. This solved it. On One’s answer was to ‘adjust’ the chainstay with a hammer. Not redesign the next batch of frames. No. Too bloody obvious that.

Then the C456. Why-oh-why does it need a head tube that short? AND then an integrated top race? It’s bloody stupid. The first person who found his forks didn’t fit was advised to send them back, which he did. I’d already cut the steerer…… Yes, give them their due, I was sent some thicker crown races to effectively lengthen the head tube, and more recently an external top race for the headset (Which looks iffy to me, hence I’ve not fitted it, but that’s by the by)

Then, to cap it all, Brant returns and instead of getting his head round fixing as KNOWN PROBLEM he’s messing about with angles!!! God give me stength, man!!!

I think I know why: (Please correct me if I’m wrong here) it’s a lot cheaper to faff with angles than to redesign the frame to accomodate a sensible head tube length, which would probably need new moulds for the frame…..and it’s soemthing quick and easy to tweet about….. Close to the mark there, am I??

The devil is in the detail, Brant.

Nothing remarkable going on here really, hence the “entirely predictable” tag. This is a WorksComponent 2deg slacker headset installed in a carbon 456 frame.

I wanted a slacker C456 frame and thanks to the headset configuration, it was very simple to talk to those lovely chaps at works performance about making us a headset that has shallow/internal lower cup, angle adjusted to slacken the front end.

By moving to an internal lower cup you can “double lower” the front – firstly as the headset moves inside the head tube (which drops the front end down steepening the seat angle) and also slacking the forks back 2degs lowers the front down too.

So we get a steeper seat angle, slacker head angle, lower front end, lower BB. All good.

We’re just experimenting with different slacknesses, different head angles, and yes – those angles listed are the static angles read off Jon’s bike with my iPhone.

We’ll be putting in a big order to workscomponents so we can offer them from stock.

PP – I was told Adrian/Stevo had shipped you a new “taller top cup” to fix your headset issues? If that’s not the case, I need to get one shipped out to you if you’d like one.

PP – I was told Adrian/Stevo had shipped you a new “taller top cup” to fix your headset issues? If that’s not the case, I need to get one shipped out to you if you’d like one.

Brant, yes as mentioned above I have it, thanks. I’ve not fitted it for a couple of reasons: The thicker crown race cured the problem and I’m fine with that, and on inspection I think the top cover plate on the new race doesn’t fit the bearing very well. It slides back and forth a bit inside the bearing. I’ve got this nasty feeling that I’ll spend an hour fitting it and the plate will still slide around a bit in use, like a loose headset….. I might easily be wrong but I’m working on the ‘if it aint broke don’t fix it’ principal right now! 🙂
Plus the original top race looks a lot neater.

Brant, you design some great bikes, honestly you do, but you gotta sort some of these details out becasue it’s infuriating!

The C456 is my main bike and it’s brilliant, it’s in the back of the car right now. And my 853 Inbred is a keeper. I’ve spent too much on that frame to ever sell it on now, but I just can’t see me buying another On One with all this faffing around I’ve had to do….

I think I know why: (Please correct me if I’m wrong here) it’s a lot cheaper to faff with angles than to redesign the frame to accomodate a sensible head tube length, which would probably need new moulds for the frame…..and it’s soemthing quick and easy to tweet about….. Close to the mark there, am I??

The devil is in the detail, Brant.

Certainly yes – redesigning the frame would need new molds, would lead to disheartened current purchasers when really – REALLY there isn’t a HUGE problem that can’t be fixed with some new componentry/componentry recommendations.

The headset standard used (50mm lower, 44mm upper) allows a huge proliferation of fork sizes, angle adjust options, which once the designer has got a grasp of allows 1.5in, tapered, standard, angle adjusted standard, slacker, steeper, normal – loads of option there.

Making the Smoothie Mixer headset a true mix and match system will allow people to choose the headset they want to make the bike do what they want, so we don’t have to curse/bless everyone with Hebden Bridge ready geometry.

I’m in no rush to retool the carbon frames when a new headset line can make them even better than the amazing bargain they are all ready.

All mountain tough 3.3lb full carbon frames for £399? It’s crazy pricing man.

142/Maxle Swapouts coming soon too!

Exciting new news!
This time, CrapFire (part of BranflakeCo), have combined years of expertise to bring you the OnTwo 45678. The new name represents what fork travel is designed to fit the frame and coincidentally the amount of hours you’ll spend trying to build the damn thing once you’ve finished with the hammer, file, touch up paint, punch, vice, and pliers.
CrapFire have combined the many, many minutes of design time they have put in since the first Retardbred to bring you all the “unique” features you know and love from the company.
So the headtube this time will be way too short AND oval – yes, BOTH in the same design! This feature ensures that ANY forks and headsets are GUARANTEED not to fit.
The paint has been re-formulated to fall off in HALF the time of previous models, a much needed improvement as peoples eyes start to bleed at the horrific colours and decals if you have the paint on too long.
Now there will be DOUBLE the amount of unnecessary cable guides, including mounts for 11 bottles, low rider front and normal rear rack mounts, dynamo mounts front and back, 2 pump pegs and rod brake mounts.
In another unique development the chainstays have been designed to jam the chain on BOTH sides so the stays snap at the same time. We’re not sure how CrapFire have managed this but it’s a trifle compared to the mystery of how they’ve managed to build up a huge fan base of fawning idiots with the crap they push out of the door.
And of course you’ll be fully satisfied with your purchase as all the above features are “normal” for a cheap frame at £300 and you’ll live with them no problem. None of the competitors have these “features” despite selling at the same price.
And when it comes to pass your bike on after you have tired of all the above “features”, don’t worry, CrapFire will be along to comment on your frame to make sure any buyer will get it for a pittance.

Brant, yeah, I totally agree about the headset and all the options available, It’s one thing that attracted me to the frame in the first place

I’m in no rush to retool the carbon frames when a new headset line can make them even better than the amazing bargain they are all ready

But when you do, can we have 5-10mm on the headtube please? Pretty please? 🙂

Either that or get Rockshox to reduce the length of their tapers!

Did Brant touch you in a special place rodob? Show me on the dolly.

Brant, you design some great bikes, honestly you do, but you gotta sort some of these details out becasue it’s infuriating!

The C456 was nothing to do with me. Steve’s thicker lower crown race solution is a bogus fix as it lifts/slackens in the wrong way. The taller top cup is better as it maintains geometry. Remember – slackening is fine if you want to slacken, but slackening by adding length to a fork is wrong as it lifts the bike/kicks the seat angle back, lifts the BB etc.

But now I’m back, I’m looking at this 3.3lb hard tail and thinking… wow. £399? That’s nuts. And with a new headset line, a set of bolt through swap outs. That’s perfectly contemporary and adjustable to many customers uses, whether they live in Hebden Bridge or not.

And with a new headset line

Is the new top race I have been sent part of that? I’m guessing with a different top cap it’ll take a straight 1.5in steerer??

The C456 was nothing to do with me

No, but now you’re back at O-O, well, keep a mental note eh? “Watch the length of the headtubes!”

whether they live in Hebden Bridge or not

I rode in Hebden Bridge earlier this year. I can confirm that the 456 felt exactly the same there as it did in the South Downs, The Quantocks, The Peak District, in Bristol, and around Farnborough. IMO you don’t need a Blue Pig to ride Blue Pig….. 😉
(Although I reckon my Pitch would have been OK)

just thinking, if you slacken at the top or do it at the bottom, not only do you change the effective a-c but surely the wheelbase changes between the two methods too! 🙂

I’m sat wondering whether I need to slacken out my 456C, which I love and will ride tonight BTW……… I remember that to remove the existing On-One headset I have to put it in a vice and use the frame as a lever to twist it off because there isn’t any clearance between the aluminium insert in the frame and the internal edge of the headset, so you can’t drift it out.

I can’t help thinking if I were to fit that internal headset, I’d never get it out again?

PeterPoddy – Member

Then, to cap it all, Brant returns and instead of getting his head round fixing as KNOWN PROBLEM he’s messing about with angles!!! God give me stength, man!!!

Try and keep some perspective… It took me all of 5 minutes and 2 emails to Works to find out exactly what they could do for the C456. If I decide to go ahead with it, it’ll take me 15 minutes to fit the headset. This is a wee bit easier than redesigning a frame.

Have to say, it’s nice to see Works getting some attention for their kit, after all the press and interwebz fawning over the Cane Creek Angleset- a product that does the same job, less well, for more than twice as much money. Dirt dedicated half a page to blabbing on about the proposed CC 1 1/8th steerer headset, which will “save your old bike”, but Works already make one! Absolute nonsense.

But when you do, can we have 5-10mm on the headtube please? Pretty please?

It would seem foolish not to.

I remember that to remove the existing On-One headset I have to put it in a vice and use the frame as a lever to twist it off because there isn’t any clearance between the aluminium insert in the frame and the internal edge of the headset, so you can’t drift it out.

Yeah – I heard about that one 🙁

it’s nice to see Works getting some attention for their kit, after all the press and interwebz fawning over the Cane Creek Angleset- a product that does the same job, less well, for more than twice as much money. Dirt dedicated half a page to blabbing on about the proposed CC 1 1/8th steerer headset, which will “save your old bike”, but Works already make one! Absolute nonsense.

The Works stuff is class and I hope we can bring it to a wider audience. Cane Creek headsets are brilliant as a one size fits many solution, but I wasn’t enamoured with the creaky gimbals on mine (which I admit went away when I tightened things up a lot).

We will be holding stock of these so it’s a bit less of a black art to get the right one. ZS, EC, my head hurt…

It took me all of 5 minutes and 2 emails to Works to find out exactly what they could do for the C456

The Works stuff is class and I hope we can bring it to a wider audience

Who/what are The Works? Sorry, I’ve never heard of them until this thread.

http://www.workscomponents.co.uk/index.asp

So they just make angle adjusting headsets then? Or is there more? I don’t see anything there to fit my 456 and cure the taper/headtube problem…..

So they just make angle adjusting headsets then? Or is there more? I don’t see anything there to fit my 456 and cure the taper/headtube problem…..

I am sure they could make you a correctly fitting “external” top cup!

Ready to ride cycles cannock

This is interesting. I am building up a Kona Caldera which already has a fairly slack head angle of 68.5 on a 100mm fork, speaking to other owners they’ve put 120mm forks on theirs and found the bike to be ‘fine’ and enjoyed the slacker head angle this creates but as Brant pointed out this shifts weight rearward and can make the bike a pig to use up hill.

Quite interested to see any reports on these headsets from owners, if they’re as good as Brant reckons then i’ll not be needing new forks and shall just plump for an additional couple of degrees slackness courtesy of Workscomponents.

Deviant, I’ve had one in my Hemlock for quite a while… It’s a nice bit of kit, tidily machined, nothing showy. Good quality anodising. It’s basically an adaptor which you fit in the same way as a headset, and then a Cane Creek IS3 headset fitted into that. You can use other headsets of course, but the Cane Creek bearings are high quality and not expensive.

Fitting’s a wee bit more complex than a normal headset as it needs to be pretty exact. I found my headset press didn’t work well with them, because of the offset position it wanted to pull them into the frame squint, and often they’d rotate slightly too. So I rubber malletted it, which worked out perfectly.

But it gets a big thumbs up from me. British made too if you care about that.

http://www.workscomponents.co.uk/index.asp

Rick there = good customer service. Quick/helpful and a fast refund (unused item) when my frame plans changed.

wills works do one for the ftm carbon?

my eyes