Forum menu
aren't all bikes handbuilt? i'd be surprised if there's a robotic production line for them anywhere..
Hora is the opposite end of the size spectrum to me but I went for a new 725 small Dialled PA over a small Soul. This was after much borrowing of a friends pre CEN Soul (and also a new P7 and this was to replace an InBred running 130 forks) Either of these options seems to be everything you want.
To me the price difference wasn't justified at the time and since buying the PA I've not at all wished I'd spent the extra with Cy.
Certainly in the smaller size I prefer the PA's slightly shorter feel - just feels slightly more jumpy compared to the ground hugging missile feel of the Soul. The Soul looks nicer (the dropouts in particular), will be a smidge lighter and possibly a smidge more compliant at the rear (though that's really hard to tell).
I don't think Mike was going to sell Hora any more frames, due to him (Hora) being a dick.
Fathomer, thanks but I'm t'up north 🙂
Tasso. I'm by no means a good rider but I will ride most stuff. I didn't get on with the PA at all, similar with the Alpine but I really really got on with a medium Chameleon and a 16" 456. The killer is the beating the rear of the Chameleon gave my back over longer riders. Took days to recover from feeling tired as well 🙁
I don't think Mike was going to sell Hora any more frames, due to him (Hora) being a dick.
RichC you are doing what Elfin used to do; following someone around posting drivel and personal attacks that are tedious and tiring. If you need help or counselling I could look up some numbers for you.
Not so, there's a lot of light steel bikes out there, enigma ego st is very light.Light = not steel
I know there are light steel bikes, but 3.5lb still nowhere near as light as XC frames made from other materials and how does strength/weight/stiffness compare?
Oh well, if you should be down this way at any point the offer stands!
RichC you are doing what Elfin used to do; following someone around posting drivel and personal attacks that are tedious and tiring. If you need help or counselling I could look up some numbers for you.
Yeah, yeah, you sold the new frame yet? or are you waiting for it to arrive this time?
Custom Build Burls
I like these threads, as soon as they start I list / predict 2 posters and their recommendations and see if / how long they take to pop up.
Not quite 2 pages on this one.
Progressive Si you make it too easy : )
I don't think Hora's a dick. He's just a very confused and unusual boy when it comes to bikes.
Anyhow, he's tried the Prince Albert and Alpine and they weren't for him, so it's not a question of me not selling him anything, I have nothing for him to buy.
Stab in the dark here, is Chocolatefoot still alive?
couldn't you just ride a chamelion but run the tyre pressure 2psi lower? that'll take out far more trail impacts than any give in the frame..
http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html
Lower pressure bigger tyres definitely reduce impacts better than any frame compliance can. However frame compliance (or damped suspension) removes high frequency low amplitude trail buzz in a way that tyre compliance doesn't.
I already run lower psi's- probably around 30-35psi max and snakebite very rarely. I've always done this.
Yes I see where you are coming from to a degree. However ontop of psi differences there is aslo a degree of flex etc etc built into a rear triangle or over-built to eliminate that is also a factor?
Note the question mark (Ie. Im unsure and seeking more info).
marin rocky ridge. like a chameleon but a bit more give. despite not wanting to like it (cos its a marin) i got on really well with it.
I have no idea whether my opinion is worth anything or not in view of my recent indecisive short-term test piloting 😆 but Hora, take a look at the discounted Kona Fivo O frames on CRC.
Due to unforeseen circumstances (no really - an unfortunate warranty-related issue with my 3 week old Commencal 😥 ) I've had to take advantage of CRCs cheap Kona frames and built up a [url= http://s1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa441/mamadirt/Tiny%20Kona%20Fivo-O/ ]tiny Five O[/url] as a stopgap bike . . . but just when you think you've tried everything and know exactly what the next build will ride like even before it's built, the little Five O has turned all that completely on its head.
It's light (OK so my build weighs 28lbs but I haven't had a bike that light in years), super-low, confidence-inspiring b/b height even with 140mm forks, and what has surprised me the most for an alu frame - it's really really comfy. I have no idea whether that's down to the long rear end (17" 😯 ) or the bolt-on dropouts but I've a feeling that even when my f/s bike's sorted I may find this one difficult to part with. Mine is the 2008 model (only 14"ers left now) but I think that they still have stock of the 2009 and 2010 models in bigger sizes. Gotta be worth a try at those prices I reckon.
30-35 psi isn't super-low - try tubeless with 25psi and see how you get on.
Personally, I'd be inclined to try and get a demo on a Slackline (it's only 1 extra pound, you'll be fine pedalling it round all day) and maybe a C456.
I had a hardtail debacle at the start of the year:
- had a medium Chameleon - beautiful frame, but far too stiff
- swapped out for a medium Soul - again, really nice, but realised I just didn't enjoy riding hardtails as much as full sus.
- replaced the Soul and my 5.5 with a Tazer set to 3.5". Perfect - no more hardtails for me 🙂
EDIT: ^^^ mamadirt, you've bought another new one?!? Did you ever sell that Intense BMX? 😳
Mamadirt....I also got a cheap Kona frame from CRC, a Caldera. It's aluminium but I'm gobsmacked at how comfortable it is, accepted wisdom says it should be a harsh ride but with narrow 27.2mm seat tubing and gorgeous slender seat stays and chain stays it is great fun to ride. Not a fashionable brand at the moment but they still seem to have 'it' when it comes to hardtail geometry.
couldn't you just ride a chamelion but run the tyre pressure 2psi lower? that'll take out far more trail impacts than any give in the frame..
+1
Lower pressure bigger tyres definitely reduce impacts better than any frame compliance can. However frame compliance (or damped suspension) removes high frequency low amplitude trail buzz in a way that tyre compliance doesn't.
Care to back that up? I'm not convinced as there is so little difference in damping between metals i.e. they are all useless. I'd hazard a guess that aluminium is actually marginally better at damping than steel on a purely material basis.
Yes Sam, the BMX sold. Contrary to popular belief I do really have just the one bike - it's just that normally they don't stay long 😳 . Tazers do indeed rock!
I'm a long-term Kona fan, Deviant, so it would've been rude not to take advantage of those prices. I ran a little Roast (and later a Chute) as a do-it-all bike several years ago (before I got into all this frame-swapping malarky) but I have to say that the Five-O is a waaay more compliant ride.
Kinesi XC130 - as light as a carbon 456 and its Ally and cheaper too.
Sweet ride, Im loving mine, if your in Leeds pop in and try it
+1 for what GW said earlier.
Brought an aluminium mmmbop frame as a stop gap / experiment a while ago when they were going stupid cheap. Had a bit of a shaky start but it's now the bike I ride the most and really enjoy.
Whippy - Not too sure what that means. Run it mostly with forks at 120 which steepens it up a bit from quoted figures and lowers the BB. Feels good to me.
Light - the frame is under 4 pounds. Got what for me is a sensible trail build and without trying to be light the the bike is around 25 pounds. Could easily lose a pound or two off that though by splashing a bit of cash.
Comfy - Didn't feel that comfy coming off an FS, but once I stopped being lazy and started riding it properly it felt great.
springy = down to the rider, a stiffer rear end will actually be more "springy" with the input of a decent rider
not solid rear = MTFU (choose good lines, go faster, get off the brake and use your legs to absorb rough terrain and you won't feel so beat up)
He speaks the truth. It's more effort to ride but very rewarding when I get it right (which admittedly is still not as often as I'd like!) It can however be quite punishing if I get it wrong.
I can see that it wouldn't be everyones cup of tea but I'm loving it.
Still have one of the first Cotics running with a 120mm fork (max I feel as otherwise seat angle too slack), great bike but not as fast over any form of lumpy trails especially when pedaling, as my short travel (85mm) FS (same forks similar angles)
OP, if you want comfy and capable, I'd get something with good geometry and 120mm forks that are as stiff as poss (bolted, and tapered ideally), some stiff wheels with wide rims + big UST tyres and a frame that's compact and fits well. A ti post would finish it off nicely and make more difference than the frame to seated comfort. There's loads of options in steel. Bigger forks make what you're after a bit tricky -
However frame compliance (or damped suspension) removes high frequency low amplitude trail buzz in a way that tyre compliance doesn't.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that either, from the pov that 'frame compliance' is mostly twisting flex and seatpost flex. That flex comes from low frequency / hiher amplitude stuff, ie cornering hard over roots, slightly off-center landings etc. It adds comfort. It can add, as well as reduce control. When you really stress a frame vertically - ie use the fork as a lever - there's movement, but not a lot and it takes a lot of force to do it. Small fast bumps are reduced by the bike as a system, no one part is fully responsible. Most of it goes into fork and tyres, some into seatpost and a tiny amount in frame flex.
Comfy frame = flexy frame in general. No bad thing, but 'vertical compliance' has to be one of the most waffled-on subjects imo. Steel frames usually flex more than Al frames, in every direction. They twist a lot more than they move vertically - they're triangles afterall. imo that twist is not a good thing if you want to get the best out of a long fork and you ride hard, it's nice to a point and then the rear can't follow the front and stay on line and you realise FS is a better bet.. never mind all the pitch and dive that LT HTs have. They're fun, but only to a point.
catvet - Member
Still have one of the first Cotics running with a 120mm fork (max I feel as otherwise seat angle too slack)
Seat angle? Unless it is already on the limit, just slide your saddle forwards
I had a similar thread a short while back, now enjoying my Sanderson Life.
I'm a complete numpty when it comes to angles and geometry and a totally unskilled rider, so probably not the best to be recommending frames. Having said that, I really like my Pipedream Sirius for general riding around on and off road. I ride mine rigid but it'll handle 90-130mm forks.
Weight's a funny thing and if 5 1/2 pounds is considered heavy, then the Sirius isn't a lightweight for an 853 frame (although it feels fine to me). I think that the quoted weight is around 5 1/2 for a large (19.5") frame, but there's a slightly lighter Scion that comes with standard, rather than sliding, dropouts.
I like this quote from Sheldon:
Short chainstays give a harsh ride for the same reason that you bounce more in the back of a bus than in the middle...if you're right on top of the wheel, all of the jolt goes straight up.
I had not considered that.
FWIW, my Alu Boardman HT is really not desperately stiff. It's the frame design, not just the metal that does this
SV I'd be interested to hear your view on Soul v Life.
Mark, track someone down who bought a Curtis on a whim and see if they want to part with it. Think its a different tubeset to the Freeride (which sounds like you might want) but had a spin around the street and lanes near me tonight on the S1 and whippy/springy is one thing the comes to mind! Lovely little thing it is...
Loads of niche suggestions here, but how about a steel framed Genesis Latitude/Altitude/ Alpitude? Reynolds 853 tubing rides just as well on these bikes as it does with other badges on it and often at a better price.
Orange P7
Orange P7
Light, nippy and springy.
You've recommended a bike that does none of them.
Not sure if this has been mentioned but I considered this before deciding on a slackline for myself
A 2012 decade versa II
I've been thinking about the psi argument etc and thought why build a hardtail in steel at all for trail use etc if you build the rear triangle stiff? This is aimed at a couple of the manufacturers/steel frames that I've owned.
I gather much of the vertical movement at the rear axle comes from the top tube bending and the rear triange essentially pivoting around the bottom bracket, not from the rear triangle flex. Regarding buzz, I suspect it ties in with the resonant frequencies of the frame, which are a function of mass and compliance - steel frames are more likely to have usefully low resonant frequencies which absorb the buzz frequencies. The lower mass and compliance of aluminium frames shifts the resonance much higher.
I observed this switching everything from a Boardman HT to a Soul - the Boardman isn't a stiff frame but the Soul damped trail buzz so much better you can run the tyres about 40% harder before it loses the compliance edge - and with the harder tyres it rolls and pumps better.
@ OP Rock Lobster of any interest to you?
@ Deviant and Mamadirt - nice to see some other owners of modern Kona HT's about. (I have a steel Kona Blink btw)
Looking at the Kona range- little confusing. Is there anything light in there that you could cheekily lift the travel +20mm?
SV I'd be interested to hear your view on Soul v Life.
Haven't had a Soul before but just changed from a steel 456 and before that an 853 Inbred and two ordinary ones before that.
The Sanderson is much more XC than any of the On-Ones IMO (I have the Revs at 110mm) and for 'normal' trails a whole lot faster than the 456. It climbs very well and is quite light for a steel frame (4 odd pounds). Lovely finish on the frame too.
I gather much of the vertical movement at the rear axle comes from the top tube bending and the rear triange essentially pivoting around the bottom bracket, not from the rear triangle flex
I don't think this could happen with a traditional front triangle. There would have to be a *hell* of a lot of force to bend a big top tube using compression forces (ie - the force from the seat stays pushes directly into the end of the top tube). If you had a curvey top tube, this might be possible, which I think is the philosophy behind a jones frame
[img] 
[/img]
the whole thing looks like its designed for the rear triangle to pivot as you suggest, pulling the seattube in and the top tube down
but I think Jones welds the seat stays/brace to the seat tube which rather defeats the object?
Why not leave the seat stays just to pivot from the head tube?
You seem to go through a lot of bikes Mr Hora. What exactly are you looking for? The easiest to ride bike in the world? The most fun? Most efficient? Something else? Ridden some good bikes in the past but just didn't 'get on' with them? Probably easier to change bikes than to change how you ride. Probably more fun too.
I've been thinking about the psi argument etc and thought why build a hardtail in steel at all for trail use etc if you build the rear triangle stiff? This is aimed at a couple of the manufacturers/steel frames that I've owned.
This lecture by Cy from Cotic explains some of the materials usage choices. Quite an interesting watch.
[url= http://thisisheffield.co.uk/2011/cotic-lectures-cy-turner-from-cotic-on-bike-design/ ]http://thisisheffield.co.uk/2011/cotic-lectures-cy-turner-from-cotic-on-bike-design/[/url]