Forum menu
sorry 😳
talked myself out of it.....
If they had reviewed the ti456 alongside the Ragley then people would be saying (rightly) that Brant was getting too much love from his pals at ST.
But I see Clink's point that a few words in passing on the comparison might have been interesting.
I suppose the mag might be aimed more at general readers than obsessives like TLR though.
I suppose the mag might be aimed more at general readers than obsessives like TLR though.
TLR is in denial.
No, i think i'm saying it's an all day technical riding bike. Light as can be and great at steep climbs and steep downs and jumps. It'll be ok at trail centres but you'd be kidding yourself if you think you need something like this anywhere outside of the black sections, the vast majority of trail centres would be just as much fun on my scandal with 100-120mm forks. Depends what you ride.
Disclaimer: I've only skim read the article sat on the library this morning.
But... I found each of the reviews sort of under-whelming. They seemed neutral to the point of being flat. I'm not keen on reviews full of hyperbole either but these just seemed a bit too far the other way. Interesting conclusion that the best all-rounder was the Whyte but you might as well buy the Alu one.
I'll read it properly tonight.
but you'd be kidding yourself if you think you need something like this anywhere outside of the black sections
Doesn't stop sales of huge numbers of "skilz compensatorz" OMG111
(double post)
Can you stop the pissing comp and get back on topic. Some people obviously aren't as skillfull as you two. Have you done the red at Glentress on your 100mm travel Scandal? It's definately more fun on a "skill compensator".
So the geometry on the ragley is somewhere between the 456 and the 456 summer season?
sort of in denial but not really.
my Hummer broke and so did my heart at the time.
the Ti456 took it's place and is more adaptable and more suited to the Van32's.
it's a proper nutter tool with awesome singletrack handling.
obsessive, me........yes......that's why the cable routing and semi-finished finish don't appeal to me, although the slacker HA does. i wish it had ISCG as that may have swung it for me....although the routing.......
My last time at GT was on a Nomad - 6.5" essential on the red 😀
Sorry man, no p**sing comp. Am not a particularly good rider just think trail centres are mostly pants. If people want full sussers for trail centres that's fine, they make everything more comfortable. But not sure that a slacker head angle on a hardtail gives any advantage at all in that environment, you're still getting bumped around just with unneeded slower steering
Slacker head angle means you can ride over the front more (without inducing a too steep head angle) and get less bashed about by the hardtail rear end.
Sorry - too much coffee! Thought we were about to head down the "I ride the Fort william DH track on my rigid singlespped 29er and it's easy" route again.
I love hardtails but a 6" travel full suss is fun.
So, Ragley Ti or 456 for general mountain biking?
i'll stick some 36's on mine to slacken the angles - will i void the warranty @ 160mm 😛
So the geometry on the ragley is somewhere between the 456 and the 456 summer season?
The HEAD ANGLE on the Ragley is somewhere between those two.
The seat angle's steeper than both though. Chainstays shorter. Top tube different. BB Lower.
hugo - either - both brilliant 😀
i'll stick some 36's on mine to slacken the angles - will i void the warranty @ 160mm
Podge might be along with feedback on warranty. However fitting a long fork to artificially give a slack headangle gives 2 problems.
1. Seat angle is kicked back (problem for seated climbing)
2. top tube is "shortened" due to front end higher.
3. BB raised.
4. When the forks bottomed out, whatever length your fork, the head angle is the same.
5. When you counter in the sag with a 160mm fork, you end up about the same as a 140 fork anyhow, unless you run 'em hard.
Putting (too) long forks on a bike will raise the BB and may impare the handling significantly. I'd rather ride a 130mm forked bike with low BB than a 160mm forked bike with a high BB (full-sus or hardtail) 🙂
run em softer, increase sag and faster rebound.
drop them to 130mm for climbing (TALAS)...
podge - warranty ?
or simply keep what i've got as it's brilliant (fast show style).......
i think that's your best bet 🙂
Tlr i didnt like the 36's on mine much better with the 32 vans!
gamo - agreed - went out tonight for a quick thrash on the 5.1D's and Big Betty's ............ 😈 😈 😈
brilliant !
[url= http://www.ragleybikes.com/2009/07/review-of-ragley-ti-in-mbuk/ ]Here's what MBUK thought[/url]. http://www.ragleybikes.com/2009/07/review-of-ragley-ti-in-mbuk/
Only a 9! You're slipping Richards.
what did the whyte get
Looks like a 9 from the image on Brant's site (although hard to tell)
Seems like it's not a bike produced with across the spectrum ride appeal in mind (which would mean a mediocre). Good work (& somewhat brave too)!
Now if only it was available in the big wheels I'd be clamoring for it myself
The bike looks brilliant in that MBUK picture. 😀 It's interesting just how different it looks compared to my RC305. A hugely different setof ideas about design going on there.
Now if only it was available in the big wheels I'd be clamoring for it myself
I'm working on a big wheel version - just tried that one with a 29er front wheel but hated it. More to do.
Are you thinking of a big wheel version in all three materials? Because that would be very cool...
i do like the ti 456 frame,and have thought about p/xing my frame towards one.but as it is mail order to get an on one,i cannot do that!!!
mmmmmmmm........read the review.
my consensus (for my local riding) is the Ti456 is better than my Hummer , and the Hummer is better than the Ragley from what's specific to me in the review.....
stops me wondering anyway 😀
TLR - it's a new hummer btw. And the Ragley appears to be the best at going uphill, and going downhill. And equal anything else on singletrack. It's odd.
2009 hummer has same geom as my 2006 one..........
new hummer has same geom as my 2006 one (doesn;t it) ?
Seeing as it's a new manfacturer, a new chainstay design, seems a lot more XC (it has seat tube bottle bosses), I'm not sure they kept the geometry the same (for a 2010 model, no change in 4yrs?)
not pretty cable guides? oh dear
tell me more............?
who builds them now ?
1st sandvik, then litespeed, who for 2010 ?
not pretty cable guides? oh dear
Ginger Shen is gutted.
I think they're lovely.
ashah - lynskey build hummers now too.......LOL....
exactly the same geom as my 2006 btw.......
http://covebike.com/bikes/hummer.html
viva le Ti456 imo 😀
it's enough to make me look for an alternative frame. 🙄
viva le Ti456 imo
thank goodness we've got that sorted.
possibly not - just found out that Gravity Sports has a new account with Hotlines !!!!
brant - Member5. When you counter in the sag with a 160mm fork, you end up about the same as a 140 fork anyhow, unless you run 'em hard.
Are you saying that there's little difference between the two, hence negating your earlier points?
And why the current trend to argue "all forks are the same length compressed" How much time do you spend delicately steering with your forks fully compressed?
I did kind of rumble things a bit with that last point didn't I 🙂
Though the chopped back climbing thing still is valid, as you have less weight up front.