Looking at the on one site – the geometry of the inbred and the 456 are very very similar. So, other than frame strength, why shouldn't I run 130mm forks on my inbred?

Slight twist, mine is an older white/geared/DN6 inbred – not the newer frame. Has the geometry changed?

The standard Inbred geometry works well with 130mm forks, my 853 Geared ran Fox Talas before i sold it.

No reason you can't go bigger apart from down-tube stronger on 456

The new one's say 100mm fork, is a 120mm ok on there?

i have 130mm on my inbred and its ace.

The headtubes are the same but the Inbred has a smaller diameter toptube than the 456 to cope with bigger hits (from bigger forks).

I'm happy with 85mm travel on my Inbred, but I mainly run it rigid with a 425mm a-c fork. I guess it depends on your riding style, but I'd find a long fork impossible to steer accurately in tight fast singletrack.

horses for courses, anything less than 120mm and i find it too twitchy..?

I put the older 100-130mm U-Turn Revs on my Inbred 853…100mm for the XC, 130mm for the trails and descents.

I have 120, changed the travel from 100 originally and it's improved the bike no end.

Sounds like im in the market for some new forks then – hell its cheaper that playing out for a LT hardtail and means I can wind it down for something more XC when needed. I'm not heavy, or RAD, so sounds like it'll be ok.

In fact I'm planning the same route as you Nuke (although I'm not 853)

Cheers guys.