[Closed] Ragley FS Prototype

Quite nice in a 'normal' sort of way....

[img] [/img]

Top tube looks rubbish IMHO

Whats with the extra brace on the DS seat/chain stay?

looks like a pace

maybe this will clear things up

http://www.singletrackworld.com/2011/03/new-ragley-prototype-revealed/

The article says its a mechanical prototype, the tube profiles will change on the finished article.

Holy lack of standover 😯

Whats a mechanical prototype, checking teh suspension works?

Don't say FS is the new niche! Where's the suffering in that.

Mechanical prototype means build a cross between a Mondraker, Trance, Cotic amongst others and see who whinges about patents after you release a pic or two.......

duntstick - Member
Mechanical prototype means build a cross between a Mondraker, Trance, Cotic amongst others and see who whinges about patents after you release a pic or two.......

😀

Is it just me that hates the ragley website ?

Too "designed" for my liking; all this half-shown info. I'm sure it's supposed to have me wetting my pants in anticipation but, frankly, it just makes me suspicious of the product.

It's OK - I'm ready with the birch twigs

jeepers, i hope that's not the finished article

I can't believe that the valves are lined up so badly with the tyre logos. Shocking really.

Old style cranks also

It would be a good name for the range that................The Ragley FFS, The Ragley WTF, etc..... ;0)

Only joshing, I like really.

hopefully the production bikes will look great, coz that thing is plain fugly, makes a 5 looks great LOL

Don't say FS is the new niche! Where's the suffering in that.

it has no pedals so there will still be suffering involved as you have to scoot it along

Old style cranks also

Teehee... have the old XT's on both bikes; several years old and numerous BB's and rings - but they still do the job!

I hope it is only a "mechanical" prototype, steep, no standover with a confused look thrown in,....just looks like many other FSers but not half as nice. But then again it does have that charming industrial, no nonsence look about it.
hmmmmm

Holy lack of standover

no standover

More standover than without the TT bend 🙂
Has it occured to you that the one pictured might be quite a big frame?
🙂

99% of prototypes are a medium size frame 18/19 inch.
I must agree with most people on this topic, that bike is HORRID, no thought at all has gone into building that, looks cheap, box standard design, i just hope there will be great changes to the mass produced version! but then again why make something to test if everything will be changed for manufacture, i can see Ragley building what will probably be almost identical to this awefull prototype.
Lets put it this way there are far nicer looking bikes out there, 2012 could be the end to Ragley, i am led to believe they have massive problems this year with some models and im sure they will have next year if they are going down this line of building bikes that look like this.

Massive problems? Such as?

such as people not understanding what mechanical prototype means. oh and a large dose of inter rumour and speculation

mountainman123 - Member
99% of prototypes are a medium size frame 18/19 inch.
I must agree with most people on this topic, that bike is HORRID, no thought at all has gone into building that, looks cheap, box standard design, i just hope there will be great changes to the mass produced version! but then again why make something to test if everything will be changed for manufacture, i can see Ragley building what will probably be almost identical to this awefull prototype.
Lets put it this way there are far nicer looking bikes out there, 2012 could be the end to Ragley, i am led to believe they have massive problems this year with some models and im sure they will have next year if they are going down this line of building bikes that look like this.

POSTED 2 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

you ok fella? early start?

Massive problems? Such as?

Our steel frames have been delayed. I think that's all. I can't think of anything else. Massive problem? Hm.. It's been quite annoying, but thats it really.

Steel frames are a different factory, different agent. They're also staying for at least a year, to ALLOW us to concentrate on this FS project with a completely different team. If the steel frames had been early, I'd probably have been tempted to do another revision to them - which might well have impacted on the FS stuff. so in a way it was quite good.

ps: top tube will change for production, geometry too. rear dropout, other stuff too.

We might throw some graphic ideas up today, if @Mattmagic decides to. He put that pic up yesterday when I was sat talking to Ben @ Recycle and wiping dog shit off the rocker link. Dirty Ben.

I don't like the font on the graphics.

Bike looks good though.

I don't like the font on the graphics.

Here's the original shot without graphics 'shopped on.

http://shedfire.posterous.com/private/exsteJEvkq

Our steel frames have been delayed. I think that's all. I can't think of anything else. Massive problem? Hm.. It's been quite annoying, but thats it really.

so, hardly massive or a problem, just annoying

mountainman123 a competitor or disgruntled customer?

Just a a big gob I think RD...... 🙂

Aren't those chainstay links -Lapierre- style to strengthen/stiffen rear triangle? Still remember few problems with Fuel EX in that area.

i quite like the look of the prototype.

as for standover, Brant is about 8ft tall, i'm guessing he's got plenty.

if you're a bit shorter, get a smaller frame... surely?

i'm very, very keen to try the 29er. and it sounds like i've got time to save up. perfect.

I think its interesting that these days people's opinions of a bike are based on how it looks, not how it rides. Looks like a bike to me, in fact I quite like the way it looks, but I own a trance, which isn't very 'niche'.

Lower link on the rear end?

Hidden by the chainrings.

Looks quite nice to me and I'm intrigued by the suspension travel concept too. Then what do I know I didn't even know those cranks were now classed as old lol

Oh and who needs stand over when your stood on the pedals 😉

I think its interesting that these days people's opinions of a bike are based on how it looks, not how it rides. Looks like a bike to me, in fact I quite like the way it looks, but I own a trance, which isn't very 'niche'.

That's what I was thinking, apart from owning a Trance...

I've just bought some 'new' cranks like those, seem to do the job ie. propell the bike in a forward motion when I pedal!

anyone who buys a trance for looks also buys rose tinted Oakleys too surely?

I'll take one as is thanks Brant. Especially if you call it the FFS.
Covered in mud, who cares what it looks like as long as it works.

Sorry, if I'm shelling out £1200 on a frame, I want it to look alright.

But all that doesn't matter as its only a proto...

mountainman123 = ragleyrider (that idiot from the other week?)

Stuff that's staying the same for production:-

http://shedfire.posterous.com/stuff-thats-probably-staying-the-same-for-pro

(I like the top tube, reminds me of Sim's old Slopestyle)

Bits that are staying the same look good to me.
It will be interesting how/if you manage to fit the appearance in with the rest of the range.
As long as it looks better than the Pace FS range it should do well!

Family resemblance to this would make sense...

[img] [/img]

... and make it rather sexy 😉

Re the FS; No offence but is that a rebranded Be One or Da Bomb? 8)