[Closed] On One carbon raised stay +tyre prototype

Now where have we seen that before...

[img] http://s7d4.scene7.com/is/image/TrekBicycleProducts/Asset_324086?wid=1440&hei=1080&fit=fit,1&fmt=png-alpha&qlt=30,1&op_usm=0,0,0,0&iccEmbed=0 [/img]

Massive stache rip-off

[url= http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/T800-Full-Carbon-Matt-650B-27-5ER-Plus-Mountain-Bike-Frame-17-MTB-Bicycle-Frame-/171925830374?hash=item280793fae6 ]Similar?[/url]
Apart from the cockslot.

cockslot

Is that not just a reflective sticker on the top tube?

I think you're right - phone screen not that good to view on, and I was going to trademark cockslot.

I bet it is a gopping colour and iffy graphics, delivered 6months after promised, with no spare mech hangers available and half the price at launch.....

It does look somewhat similar in many ways....

So they're prototyping something that someone else has already built?

Groundbreaking.

Am I the only one who saw this

[IMG] [/IMG] and instantly thought of this?

[IMG] [/IMG] 🙂

nope. not the only one.

Phew, I was feeling a bit old!

Having just bought a Trek Stache, I'm looking at that and thinking a few things:

A) It's a Stache rip-off
B) Given the above, have they really got the hang of what the Stache is and how that's achieved?

The Stache, like its distant Alpinestars grandparent, has a super short back end. That's part of what the raised stay is about and partly enabled by the Boost 148 rear end. In short, it's designed as a package to work together.
The back end on the On One looks too long to me. The Stache is a super short and lively plaything. It not a traditional 29er in any way I recognise..... Is like the Mk1 Stache, a hardcore hardtail if you like, great fun and hugely capable. I'm thinking OO might have missed the boat a bit....

It's a Stache rip-off

Is the one of those bikes not 29+ and the other 650B+ though...

that alpinestars is to avoid chainsuck. a whole frame engineered to avoid chainsuck but made weaker and heavier and flexier in the process. that's all we had back then. simple times.

[b][u]eddie11[/u][/b] - [u]Member[/u]

that alpinestars is to avoid chainsuck. a whole frame engineered to avoid chainsuck but made weaker and heavier and flexier in the process. that's all we had back then. simple times.

Let's not forget the most important bit though, it looked cooler than a polar bear's paw!*

*To a teenager in the early 90s

at alpinestars is to avoid chainsuck. a whole frame engineered to avoid chainsuck heavier

Incorrect. It was designed like that to shorten the back end. Raising the stays removes metal from between the rings and tyre to enable that. Shortening the back end was touted as a way of making a bike climb better.
It also improves mud room

Perhaps they just bought one of these off ebay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/171649410034

[img] [/img]

"Incorrect. It was designed like that to shorten the back end. Raising the stays removes metal from between the rings and tyre to enable that. Shortening the back end was touted as a way of making a bike climb better.
It also improves mud room"

Too true - I rode an Alpinestars BITD and recently too, and also owned recently a Rocky Mountain Experience which had a similar design and they were the best climbing bikes I ever rode. Still kicking myself for selling the Rocky.

head tube junction is different. Possibly from the same supplier but then again maybe not as they are very quick and knocking up new tooling over in China.

The frame is similar but I would still think it has tweaks that are unique to their requests. There is a lot going on inside a carbon frame to make it how it is that is not visible from the outside.

I like the idea of a Stache in carbon at a good price but unfortunately I don't think this is it. As others have said, the back end looks way longer. And of course it's B+

E-stay 29ers definitely allow very short back ends and almost any tyre you fancy. One I made earlier (that will actually adjust another 10mm shorter than this)......

[img] [/img]

This thread is all about how short a back end should be while the Mojo / Nicolai thread is all about how long the back end should be.

This thread is all about how short a back end should be while the Mojo / Nicolai thread is all about how long the back end should be.

One dimension does not dictate how the bike rides - it is the whole package and how it relates to the rider size / rider position / application etc.

Unfortunately the polarised Mojo man forgets that different people use mtbs for different applications 🙂

Planet X have a write up of new Tomac bikes in the pipeline

http://www.on-one.co.uk/news/products/q/date/2015/09/25/what-s-new-and-coming-next-from-tomac

This very good looking Lone Mesa

[img] [/img]

and a gravel type thingy Montezuma

[img] [/img]

Oh, and this Venge copy

[img] [/img]

mmm, 650+ testing this weekend, carbon or Hadza? I wonder which i'll take.

@sq225917 - I'm more interested in the carbon - so that

I'll ask tomorrow, I need to throw a leg over something new.

There is a lot going on inside a carbon frame to make it how it is that is not visible from the outside.

Yeah. Lots. With these cheap ones it's mainly bits of old newspaper and sweepings off the workshop floor.....

Define cheap. There are plenty of 'cheap' (relatively) Chinese carbon frames that are well built and up to the job. There are no doubt others that aren't and include the anecdotal newspaper, etc. Price doesn't particularly seem to be the differentiator IME - it's more that some brands are building a good reputation and having few issues (ie just like any non-China direct manufacturer) while others are dodgy. Fakes are a good way to identify the crap ones usually but equally stick to the known, cheap China direct brands (Miracle, Hong Fu, Deng Fu, carbonzone, etc) and you'll be fine.

And it's not like 'proper' bike companies never produce crap that fails.

Oh, and this Venge copy

I wonder if Cav would still choose ^^^that^^^ over the new Venge 😛

thepodge - Member

This thread is all about how short a back end should be while the Mojo / Nicolai thread is all about how long the back end should be.

I think both threads are about how different bikes should be different.

I wonder if Cav would still choose ^^^that^^^ over the new Venge

depends if they paid him enough

Define cheap. There are plenty of 'cheap' (relatively) Chinese carbon frames that are well built and up to the job

plenty of catalogue frames being badged up as other things as well, Planet-X are not the only ones to do this

Considering he's signed for Qubeca he may well be riding a Cervelo

Sq456545 - that red fat/plus prototype with the twin seat stays only welded to the top tube not the seat tube - what happened to that? Any ride reports?

View this post on Instagram

Incoming?

Let's hope the seat tubes aren't oval-shaped & dimensioned according to the "clown's pocket" tolerancing standard!!

I know it's just the angle of the photo but the nds crank looks mighty close to the chainstay. Does look interesting though...

Is it a [s]prototype[/s] Mk1 from On-One? In which case I would avoid until we find out what problem there is with seatpost fit/no mech hangers/tyre or crank clearance first, and the price to drop by 93.7% when the [s]prototype testers[/s] early customers all discover it.

Looks very similar to that Shand bike that everybody complained out, I'm sure OnOne will be undercutting Shands pricing if it is the same Chinese 'catalogue' frame.

I know it's just the angle of the photo but the nds crank looks mighty close to the chainstay.

is 10 months the longest thread resurrection ever?

is 10 months the longest thread resurrection ever?

[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/sick-of-the-incessant-snow-updates ]I suspect not.[/url]

Rik - Member

Looks very similar to that Shand bike that everybody complained out, I'm sure OnOne will be undercutting Shands pricing if it is the same Chinese 'catalogue' frame.

Bingo. Or should I say Rango. (what a stupid name)