Hi!
I want a new hardtail that’ll take a 160mm tapered fork, but it needs to have a long old top-tube. i’m 6ft2 and want to run it with a short stem, but i need a lot of reach.
i also don’t really want a long seat tube….

anyone got any ideas?

ON One 456 Carbon is what you’re after. Great frame and a perfect match to your description. Someone’s about to recommend you a BFe, as they always do, but they’re wrong.

HTH.

Fancy a blue pig x?
Brant says its fine for 160 and it’s certainly long and low.
I have a used 18″ with maxle and both dropouts (qr and 142×12)

paulrockliffe – Member
ON One 456 Carbon is what you’re after. Great frame and a perfect match to your description. Someone’s about to recommend you a BFe, as they always do, but they’re wrong

Correct, they are wrong.

Here’s what you want right here. Rides great with a big fork. If the Carbon 456 is anything like my Summer season it will take 160, but works better with less.

A Ragley is what you want, everything else is all wrong with a big fork

If only you weren’t looking for a tapered head tube..
I’ve just put my Ragley Ti up for sale (large 20″) suitable for 160’s. :o(

Ragley Ti (large 20″)

I guess it’d make him an expensive garden gate, if nothing else.

Kingdom Foia?

I just ride bikes that fit my friend..(my girlfriend only buys bikes she likes the colour or looks of too so don’t feel bad!)
I think he said a 17 was too small because of his body shape so makes sense to me..
That would be a posh gate though! The front triangle of a ti frame as your garden gate. (I can’t discount but I have what you need :-))

He definitely said

i also don’t really want a long seat tube….

I’d have it though, they look great.

Fair point but he is 6’2 same as me. He can run an 18 but you will be running a whole load of seatpost if your actually pedalling it.
I sacrifice a little aesthetics for some piece of mind..(usually :-)) more seat tube or more seatpost; 2 extra inches of seat post in your seat tube sounds better to me (just my opinion)
But he’s looking for a tapered so no drama anyway.

I can’t help but think that Euro‘s bagger looks ace. It’d look even better with a set of raw carbon wiser’s on it mind.

That Ragley looks mank as the frame only picture on CRC but built up, that is very nice indeed. …

I really like my Ragley Troof 8)

I’m 6ft and this is the 17″.

Fair point but he is 6’2 same as me. He can run an 18 but you will be running a whole load of seatpost if your actually pedalling it.

The last thing I’d care about when using 160mm forks on a hardtail is how high I could get the saddle. 160mm forked hardtails are for downhill only.

160mm forked hardtails are for downhill only.

Nope. My Troof is my xc bike… frame weighs less than a Soul, fork weighs less than a Pike… hustle’s along the trail just fine, and when your at the doonhall you can unleash the Beast 😈

Sounds shit 😈

Mr Taylforth, You are talking nonsense! A Ragley Ti ‘a downhill only frame’ utter nonsense.. (in my opinion of course :0)

Messiah: I don’t reckon someone 6’2 would ride that 17 around with that 5 inch droppper in the down position :wink:; it would have to be in the max position or very near to cope with long trail rides (just my experience of trying to run a smaller frame for trail riding). And you should see those droppers flex when they are maxed… 😯

It all depends on what the OP wants.. I was assuming he wanted a trail bike but he might be happy with a hardcore downhill or play bike in which case he can ride a 16 if he wants to. If he wants a trail bike for all types of riding then I wouldn’t skimp on the seat tube.. (just my meaningless opinions.)

Check out the Genesis Alpitude, it’s rated for a 160 fork and comes in 3 different sizes.

If he wants a trail bike for all types of riding then I wouldn’t skimp on the seat tube.. (just my meaningless opinions.)

I wouldnt run 160mm forks either.

Then this thread obviously ain’t for you. 😀

I guess not.

But on the flip side, I think its time for you to bow out.

Downhill riding with a 20″ seat tube? The 1980’s has been and gone old man! 😀

Thanks for the advice.
Let me repeat ‘a Ragley Ti is definately not a downhill frame’.

Old and wise my friend. 🙂

I wasn’t saying the OP at 6’2″ should ride a 17″… I was saying that at 6′ I ride a 17″… Which I did for indicative sizing awareness to help the OP make an informed decision.

Sheesh 🙄

PS. I had an Mmmbop with Revs before the Troof, it was nice but I didn’t like the fork flex and I eventually broke them. The 160mm 36’s and the Troof are my xc bike for a reason.

Re Ragleys- I ran my Mmmbop for a little while with 160 Lyriks. It wasn’t very good. I wouldn’t say it was downhill only though- I’d just say it wasn’t very good, it worked better for downhill with the forks wound down.

I’m assuming you already have the 160mm forks- if so, I’d recommend you shorten ’em.

I really like the looks of the Ragley troof and bagger, but do they pedal well, i prefer the downhill, but i don’t want to push up hills..

As Northwind says, my Mmmbop was best at 130-140mm. The fork being 160mm travel is not a problem as long as the frame is designed to work with it, a frame which can take a long fork but rides like poop with one is another kettle of fish… 😉

I thought the picture was a bit misleading.. you may be 6′ and you might ride a 17 but you definately don’t ride xc/trail with that dropper down there.
That’s why I mentioned it.. wasn’t having a go.
Just trying to help the OP make an informed decision as you put it 😉

XC… Post slightly higher due to spd’s.

i should’ve been a bit more specific i suppose…. i’m thinking of building up a cheap, burly dh-style hardtail for dicking about on… so when i said i don’t want a long seat-tube, this was because i don’t want to use it for xc or general trail riding…
i does need to be a long top-tube though. i ride an xl remedy (21.5″).
i don’t think a frame exists with the geometry i’m after though…

if you wan a HT to dick about on why the hell do you want 160mm forks?

most suitable HT frames are HEAVY. fur shits and giggles get a lighter more manouverable bike.

I had a DMR EXalt it was nice but was considerably less fun than my revell 450r. it felt more like a big bike than a fun ripper.

for woodsy razzing, jumps, drops, etc that revell was properly fun.

most suitable HT frames are HEAVY. fur shits and giggles get a lighter more manouverable bike.

This is probably the most sensible answer yet.

if you wan a HT to dick about on why the hell do you want 160mm forks?

I have a 160mm fork knocking around and I fancied trying it on a burly hardtail.

thanks for all your comments. end.

I would say a DB Alpine. My frinds always refer to mine as the longest bike in the world, and my Mk1 is plenty low enough.