I've seen the back to back comparisons of the Soda and the Ti 456 which seem to imply that the ti 456 is more of a trail bike and the Soda is a bit more xc race oriented, however has anyone compared a soul to the ti 456? On paper it looks like the geometry with 130mm forks on both would be pretty similar and the soul is only a pound or so heavier than the ti 456, but it's less than half the price.....
I think both would make fine trail bikes. I've never thought of the cotic as being an xc race bike, certainly not compared to old skool racers such as a Klein or S-works HT.
The Ti 456 is good value if you consider that its built by Lynskey. If you want to get a feel for what its like, I think the WMB review was pretty spot on - it feels fairly stiff at low speed, but start hitting rocky/rooty stuff at speed and its an absolute peach. I fitted mine with a Ti seatpost and ended up with a HT that was comfortable enough for all day epics and just as capable on the rocky/rooty stuff as my FS. In fact, I liked it so much that I sold my Klein and Stumpy FSR Pro soon after with no regrets ever since.
beauty of the Ti456 is it can be built up big and strong. 140mm Fox 32 forks are spot on.
i run 2.4" tyres on mine - wide bars and a 50mm/70mm stem. and it absolutely flies - loves rock and drops.
incredibly direct steering too. simply brilliant tbh 🙂
[img] http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yvt4qe&outx=0&quality=70&noresize=1 [/img]
Beautiful.
The verge of your grass that is.
the 456 is a burly bike. It really feels stable, solid and planted to the ground especially at high speed. Ive never ridden a Soul but I doubt it would give the same amount of stability.
Yeah, it's probably a bit of a silly question, I've just seen a few pics of souls built up big and strong with pikes and even single ring chain devices ( [url= http://dirtmag.co.uk/blogs/staff-blogs/update-on-the-cotic-soul ]DIRT[/url] ) and wondered whether there was really enough difference to merit the extra cost of the 456?
The Soul isn't built by Lynskey and it isn't made of titanium... surely that's difference enough before you've even ridden any of them ?
Sounds like an odd comparison. If you are looking to find a "bargain" ti 456 I expect you won't...the 100% price difference is there for a reaaon.
I don't think it's an odd comparison at all; two frames, similar geometries, can be built up identically, similar intended use, it's just the steel one is less than half the price of the ti one and I'm struggling to believe it's worth paying the extra.
I'm not looking for a bargain ti 456 (although if someone wants to flog me a s/h one cheap then I certainly wouldn't complain).
Would it be worth saving up the extra cash for the ti 456 or would a soul, to all intents and purposes, fulfill exactly the same role and be largely indistinguishable when ridden?
We clearly need someone who has ridden both bikes to give an opinion. All I know is that when I get on my 456 Im reminded how beautiful and lovely it is to ride. Smooooooothnessss.
Iquote]Would it be worth saving up the extra cash for the ti 456 or would a soul, to all intents and purposes, fulfill exactly the same role and be largely indistinguishable when ridden?
I guess my point is that if that were the case there would be no market for the ti 456.
It's like comparing 2 good wines - one at £5 and one at £10.
Oh I think plenty of people would buy the ti 456 even if it rode identically to the soul, purely because it was more expensive, made of ti and marginally lighter. Whether those three attributes make any perceptible difference in the 'real' world is another matter.....
Well I have a Ti456 and in the past I've had a Soul and a Soda (and a steel 456 for that matter). The Ti456 is definitely stiffer than a Soda but then I also thought the Soul was stiffer than a Soda. But the Ti456 is lighter than a Soul. The 456 fits me better than the Soda did but they're both nice frames. I also think the Cotics are more suited to slightly shorter travel forks than the 456. Ti is probably not worth the extra £ over steel unless you plan to keep the frame for life. But then that didn't stop me buying Ti!
My ti 456 weighs in at around 24lbs. It is really nice to have a burly bike which also fairly light, makes it quite lively at times and come climbing up hills it sails up like the wind is behind it. The faster it goes the livlier it gets. And Ti is stiffer than steel but still offers enough flex for cushioning. Steel does have that 'bendy' kind of feel sometimes, the lateral stiffness on the ti 456 is like nothing else. It even beats my alu maxlight xc pro.
...but of course I would say all these things 'cause I paid over a grand for my frame 🙂
I do have a steel frame too, an 853 Rock Lobster and whilst it is much fun to ride it doesn't offer the same sort of stability that that the 456 does, it has a totally different feel... a flexy kind of feel. I can't speak for the Soul though, sorry.
I've just seen a few pics of Souls built up big and strong with Pikes
I think there's a warranty issue with forks >130mm on the Soul. Maybe a BFe would be a better Cotic to consider if you want a long fork on it.
I think most people with pikes on their souls are running them wound down to 120 or 130 mm.
I think there's a warranty issue with forks >130mm on the Soul.
And more importantly a head-tube-snapping-off-and-landing-on-your-face issue 😯
Ti is stiffer than steel
Really?! Is a Soda stiffer than a Soul?
I don't think it's an odd comparison at all; two frames, similar geometries, can be built up identically, similar intended use, it's just the steel one is less than half the price of the ti one and I'm struggling to believe it's worth paying the extra.
erm, if thats the question, then why not look at getting a steel 456? comparing a Ti456 with a soul is like comparing apples and onions, in the same way that comparing a Soda with a steel 456 would be pretty pointless
I think most people with pikes on their souls are running them wound down to 120 or 130 mm.
Makes no difference to the warranty side of things (and quite possibly the 'snap-crash-dentistry' side of things either)...
I remember Cy (on here I think) saying the issue with Pikes was not just the length but their stiffness which (even when wound down) passes more stress forces onto the head tube.
Doesn't seem to bother many people.... [url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cotic-soul-with-a-pike ]Souls with pikes[/url]
From my experience the Ti456 is nice but becomes an on-two, which is not so nice - not sure how you could build up a sturdy build to 24lb, mine was closer to 30 - could've saved a lot of weight but at the expense of durability.
So it's your choice - if you want the front wheel to fall off, but a cotic, if you want the back wheel to fall off, buy a Ti456. Simple.
Phil,
Whereabouts did your ti456 fail?
I own a ti456, owned a steel 456 and have ridden the soul, in comparison the soul felt a bit more flexy and slower but that could have been down to the difference in build kit. The ti456 feels a bit more smooth at speed than both, I think the soul would be my choice after the ti and before the steel 456 if that makes sense.
phil
I'm guessing you got the frame warrantied and then sold it and now slag them off? Anyone else had this experience?
As for the front ends falling off Cotic's has that actually ever happened more than the once that was highlighted last week?
The longer fork you put on the front the more leverage you have if you have a front end impact that doesn't compress the forks. Like a wall or into a ditch. Ripping the front end off in those circumstances wouldn't be suprising for any bike.
To answer the main question I'd get a Cotic as they fit me better than On Ones plus I like to run hardtails at 100mm or a little more.
In no way would I see it as a "race bike" although anything built light with the right legs will be fast.
As a matter of interest will On One be continuing to produce the Ti456 for the forseeable future now that Brant's moving on?
My understanding is that 2-4 early Ti456 have failed at the disc mount plate to frame junction. Lifetime warranty replaced them all, mines an early one and I am still trying to ride it hard enough to make me worry. 😯
[i]not sure how you could build up a sturdy build to 24lb[/i]
As i only weigh just 9st most bike parts feel sturdy to me... 🙂
lots of money on lightweight components helped to keep the weight down.
I think there's a warranty issue with forks >130mm on the Soul.
And more importantly a head-tube-snapping-off-and-landing-on-your-face issue
as opposed to a drop-out-snapping-off and landing on your back issue with the Lynsky? 😉
I remember Cy (on here I think) saying the issue with Pikes was not just the length but their stiffness which (even when wound down) passes more stress forces onto the head tube.
Maybe he did say that, but it makes no sense to me that a designer would predicate his frame's strength round an expected amount of flex in a component which ideally should have none.
Wally - spot on. tomlevell, nearly!
I don't mean to slag them off - they're a nice ride. Makes sense that a 9st guy could get his build a bit less burly than mine without worries!
Given the choice of what I had happen (didn't, luckily, result in a fall) and having the head tube come off, I know which I'd choose.
I think the lighter weight (even with the kit I put on mine) did make it ride better. The only things I would've changed were the rear tyre clearance (not that great) and the cost (which is still pretty good value for what it is), plus I would've liked one of the ones that didn't break 🙂
Maybe he did say that, but it makes no sense to me that a designer would predicate his frame's strength round an expected amount of flex in a component which ideally should have none.
As far as I can remember Cy was saying that if you thought your riding warranted a Pike you should be buying a BFe.