There's a photo of the new Orange Four on the [url= https://www.instagram.com/factory_jackson/ ]Factory Jackson Instagram [/url] feed. Might interest a few 🙂
I would.
Interesting!
Not sure I really see the point 😕
More details required.
Very interesting.. Launch date? £3700 is a fair whack for a "from" price though.
Meh.
I suppose it's like a five/bronson, four/solo. As long as it's light enough it makes sense to me
chestrockwell - Member
Not sure I really see the point
Ditto
They continually try and do shorter travel bikes but they are no lighter than the longer travel versions.So people just go I'll have the longer travel one (thereby totally missing the point) and they don't sell and get dropped fairly quickly.
See also 5010 vs Bronson etc
That ^
The whole point of a shorter travel bike is that it should be lighter.
Is it so people who had a Five donkey years ago can buy a new one as the travel has increased? 😕
One less drawer?
Is it so people who had a Five donkey years ago can buy a new one as the travel has increased?
Ooosshh! Kick me in the nuts why dontcha??
The weight thing is exactly why I don't get it. If I'm buying a bike with decent travel I don't worry too much about how heavy it is but if I'm going short travel then the bike's in a different category where weight is important IMO.
scotroutes - MemberThe whole point of a shorter travel bike is that it should be lighter.
Weeelll not just that. Like, if you buy a short travel hard hitting bike like Transition do, it still needs big wheels, tyres etc and you still fit a Pike so the weight ends up pretty similiar to a longer travel bike. But it rides pretty differently. This is basically going to be for people who like the whole Orange deal but want a bit less bike. Same as the old Superlight/Heckler deal I suppose
I wouldn't buy one, Oranges get better the bigger they are but it's another stab at the ST4 market. Or maybe more like the Segment, which has all the same criticisms of the Five 29 but still has a place imo.
Looks RAD. I hope they've trimmed the chainstays down (compared to the Five's)
scotroutes - Member
The whole point of a shorter travel bike is that it should be lighter.
Worng
Am I missing something? How do we know it's not lighter?
Didn't Five originally refer to the weight of the frame, rather than the travel?
Am I missing something? How do we know it's not lighter?
Exactly, haters gonna hate and all that. I think it looks great.
I might get one. in a few of years when I can afford a second hand frame.
Bucko - MemberAm I missing something? How do we know it's not lighter?
It's probably not going to be much different- the folded sheet construction doesn't really lend itself to clever weight loss, the front triangle looks very similiar and the rear though shaped differently has the same job to do really... Nothing gamechanging I reckon
Well I think it looks nicer than the 5 (not overly difficult mind) and agree with Northwind, it's not just the weight, but the way it rides.
Interesting! I can definitely see a place for one of these in the fleet if it comes in at the right wheight. I liked the look of the SC bantam, but it was just as heavy as the heckler!
I wonder if the weight will be a usp, as Orange don't usually like to talk about such things....
[quote=roverpig ]Didn't Five originally refer to the weight of the frame, rather than the travel?
Five tons?
[img] 
[/img]
The weight of a bike shouldn't correlate with the amount of travel it has but with its ability to survive impacts, both potentially disastrous single hits or less massive hits causing fatigue failure. Assuming the suspension is similarly designed, the less travel the bike has, the greater the loads on it, so any reduction in fork/shock weight will be cancelled out by extra metal in the frame. There's also the matter of fork A-C length and leverage on the head tube so longer forks need more reinforcement around there. Shorter travel bikes are usually lighter because they're built less strong.
This Orange looks fun!
roverpig - Member
Didn't Five originally refer to the weight of the frame, rather than the travel?
It was the "sub-5" at first as it apparently weighed less than 5lbs for the frame and had 5" of travel (iirc). Not sure what components they took off when weighing it mind you!
Didn't Five originally refer to the weight of the frame, rather than the travel?
Think so, in the Sub 5 and Sub 3 days.
As for the weight thing, I'm sure it will be lighter but I doubt it'll be light enough, as others have said. Why get one over a 5 unless it's significantly lighter? Time will tell though.
Shorter travel bikes ride different, they're more efficient to pump, more efficient to pedal if designed with similar anti-squat and more snappy but harsher in their responses. It's not necessarily about the weight.
I noticed the current Five has now returned to 140mm as the default fork travel, so this is only 10mm less up front and 20mm less at the back. I wonder how the Four's geometry compares?
The whole point of a shorter travel bike is that it should be lighter.
Glad nobody told Kona this before they made the Process 111.
I hate orange as much as the next man, but I'd be interested in having a razz on one of those! Weight isn't important on shorter travel bikes these days, it's how they feel. My foxy weighs 28lbs and is a beast on technical terrain, yet take it down something less technical or tighter and it suddenly feels a bit cumbersome and it feels like I'm lugging round a 160mm fork and bottomless feeling back end for little reason. There's more shorter travel bikes with aggressive geometry showing up, T-130, Scout, 5010 to name but a few. Sure they might not be lighter than a longer travel bike these days, but in certain instances they can make more sense.
If it had the angles of an Alpine and 29 wheels it might be interesting
Surely being light isn't the point?
To praphrase, "it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog". Taking a 4" travel bike down the same trails at the same speed as a 5" travel bike is going to put more stress if anything on it, so it needs to be just as strong.
The point of shorter travel is that it rides a little differently, doesn't wolow about as much, pedals better, pumps better, etc.
Prefer the look of the five, not keen on that chainstay. Looks better than an Alpine still though mind.
If it had the angles of an Alpine and 29 wheels it might be interesting
Heard chat about "new bikes" from Orange, perhaps an updated Segment is also in the pipeline.
chakaping - Heard chat about "new bikes" from Orange, perhaps an updated Segment is also in the pipeline.
Might I suggest they:
take 1.5 inch off the seat tube
take 2.5 off the head angle
add 15mm to the rear travel
add 20mm to the front travel
If they keep the rest the same and I'd be interested when I win the lottery.
Edit:
So they've just added simple buzz word features. Disappointing but not surprising
I'll reserve judgement 'til I see the geometry chart, but it does sound more like you're after a new Five29 !
chakaping - I'll reserve judgement 'til I see the geometry chart, but it does sound more like you're after a new Five29 !
Or I could buy 2 x Starling frames
I dare you.
Does he do 29ers though?
chakaping - I dare you.Does he do 29ers though?
If I could afford I would. I've thought of asking him if he'll do me one but as much as I'd like a new bike, I'm not sure the cost to benefit ratio is currently in my favour.
I quite liked the idea of this..until I saw the Boost hub spacing rendering my new wheels out of date already.
Orange have put a weight on it they say 27.5lbs and shorter chainstays with 184mm shock.
Short travel is not just about saving weight. 🙄
Ok,I know it's much more about me than the bike.
But the Segment. A 29er, boost, that also takes plus size tyres on 650b. Sorry, 27.5".
Can't keep up with it all anymore.
Like I said, it's just me I'm sure.
