Anyone compared a 456 and a Prince Albert?

Home Forum Bike Forum Anyone compared a 456 and a Prince Albert?

Viewing 24 posts - 1 through 24 (of 24 total)
  • Anyone compared a 456 and a Prince Albert?
  • heihei
    Member

    Almost – I have a Ti 456 and a mate has a Prince Albert and I’ve ridden both back to back over a short stretch of trail. Both were set up with Pikes and similar finishing kit (big bars, short stems etc) and were 16″ and med respectively (i.e. v similar sizes).
    In angles and riding position etc there is little to separate them from a practical perspective, although I’ve not studied them on paper. The On-One felt quicker and more alive, but I think this is primarily down to frame material rather than design. I suspect the steel frames would be v difficult to separate. Paint finish on the PA looks great esp in metallic purple, which may put it ahead of the 456 in looks-terms!
    In smiles / £, both seem very difficult to beat, as based on the quick spin of the PA and longer on the Ti 456, the frames are a hoot to ride. Both of us also own 5-Spots, which are struggling to get a look-in at the moment!!!

    carlphillips
    Member

    i will be as of this week, currently have/had a 16″ 456 for around a year, now have a med PA waiting to be finished in the garage, i can let you know if you mail me next week.

    Premier Icon gra
    Subscriber

    Has anyone compared the On One 456 with the Dialled Bikes Prince Albert? I know there are lots of owners of both on this forum, who sing the praises of both these bikes on previous posts, (and some who have kindly contributed to my own questions) but I am really interested in if anyone has compared the two bikes?

    rs
    Member

    why did you decide to change or feel the need for both very similar bikes? Not that you need a reason when it comes to new bikes, just interested if there is a reason behind it.

    IMO the 16″ 456 does not compare to a medium (17.5″) PA i.e. it’s comparing a “small” sized frame with a “medium” one.

    Have had both an 18″ 456 and 17″ PA (I think – it was a mk1 with the dinky tube think mk2 is 17.5″). I didn’t really ride the 456 much as it was built up for a mate and this and the PA were fairly separate in terms of time. I’ve also owned and ridden a 16″ 456 Slacker / Summer Season / whatever, recently.

    18″ 456 felt a bit gate like and hence I got the 16″ Slacker. Generally stable and a nice ride. I really liked the Slacker but it’s got a way slacker HA so not a good comparison to the PA. PA rode great, despite being quite solid / heavy. Felt good on the climbs although needed to shuffle forward onto the saddle’s nose to keep the front down. Doubt you’d hae to so much if on the 456 but can’t say defintively. Mike made quite a big thing of the relatively short chainstays and think the 456’s are longer. PA was really good with 125 or longer forks, wouldn’t bother with anythign shorter.

    Incoherent ramblings.

    If I was getting another it’d be a PA, not an equivalent sized 456.

    Having had a ti456 which I replaced with a PA (due to imminent redundancy) Yes the inbred builds into a superb bike and everything you have probably read about it is true. However having bought a PA second hand at 90 quid I can definelty say the 456 is not ten times better than it. I have to say the PA is as capable in most situations and the only time I really miss it is on long technical climbs where the weight saving of about 2.5lbs does help- though I keep telling myself that fitness will soon overcome this. Unless you have money burning a huge hole the PA really is a cracking frame.

    mk1fan
    Member

    There’s nowt between them in terms of physical performance.

    PA, however, is better finished (paint) and has better cable routing (imoho). A comment I made before on here that prompted a reponse from Brant. Although I note that new 456’s have revised cable routing copying that of the PA.

    I’d go PA simply because of the better finish and the small (again imoho) price different warrant sit.

    My resprayed Inbred is loverly though.

    I had a medium PA. The frame weight 5.6lbs. I now have a 16″ 456 that weighs 5.06lbs. I’d suggest any weight differences are almost entirely down to build. the 456 has longer chainstays. so that the centre of gravity on ups is a bit more amenable to climbing, apparently, according to Brants blurb.

    I’ve found if you have the legs, its pretty much happy to go up anything. It sometimes out-climbs my 5spot, which at first I had a hard time believing, so theres something in the rationale I’d guess.

    Hadge
    Member

    My 456 Summer Season is on it’s way right now and I can’t wait build it up – god knows what with yet though. I hope all the hype on the forum about them is true – the angles seem all spot on for how I like a bike so fingers crossed 😀

    Premier Icon gra
    Subscriber

    Thanks for the replies guys. Scienceofficer, what was the size difference like between the 16″ 456 and the medium PA? I’ve looked at the figures amd I’m just over 5’8 and was leaning towards the small PA for chuckability, but not certain yet…

    Si
    Member

    Yep deffinately go for a small with a 410mm post. Im 5ft9 and ride a small so it can be thrown around a lot more. Simply great.

    As Si says, I’d go small. I’m 6ft I run the inbred (16″) with a 410 post.

    carlphillips
    Member

    i got the PA just cos it was cheap and i fancied a change (and im always swapping frames etc) the 456 stays in the garage though and will get built up with spares as i do love it lots.
    im 5’10” and got the med, im hoping its ok for wheels off the ground stuff. putting headset on in a bit so will build it up tonight and give it the round the block test.

    Premier Icon brant
    Subscriber

    Although I note that new 456’s have revised cable routing copying that of the PA.

    Quite right. It is well known that PA’s were the first frames to ever have cables running under the top tube.

    😕

    mk1fan
    Member

    Funny how it was changed after you dismissed it as being irrelvant to your customers. It’s an improvement to the frame. The paint finish is still shocking though.

    There’s nowt between them in terms of physical performance.

    I don’t agree. Whilst they’re both just bikes and there can be a lot of crap writen plus anyone individual might notice or appreciate differences I think they ride differently. Some might like one more than the other. In my (limited of a 456, lots on a PA) experience I preferred the PA.

    Sizing: 5’10” and rode a medium PA, 16″ Slacker, 18″ 456. Got the 16″ slacker because the 456 felt too “big”. If you were shorter than me I’d go for the smaller size.

    mk1fan
    Member

    I appreciate that personal preference comes in to it and what you stated above is a sizing issue not a performance one. That doesn’t make the PA better than a 456 it just makes it better for you.

    In a similar vein it could be argued that the 456 is better because it can take up to a 150mm fork whereas a PA can’t.

    I was wanting to highlight something that rarely gets considered when people ask about frames on here and that’s the quality of the finish and the ergonomics of the frames.

    In overall summary there is nowt between them in physical performance. They are both very good handling, steel trail bikes. In reality the OP will be happy with the ride of either (correctly sized) frame. However, the 456’s finish tends to look tired or used very quickly whereas the PA’s doesn’t.

    Again, if it were my money, I’d be going for a PA because of the high quality of finish and better cable routing.

    HTTP404
    Member

    I’ve owned both the original 456 and the original PA. In 16in and 15.5in respectively. The PA was so long ago it would be difficult to comment on the nuances. What did niggle me with the PA was the head tube felt a too high. Which raised the front end too high for my favored riding position. The geometry has since changed and this was probably a trait of the smaller size.

    I settled on the 456. Gripe being the thread through hose guides which means a rear brake bleed.

    But I have neither now.

    HTTP404 – Member
    The PA was so long ago it would be difficult to comment on the nuances. What did niggle me with the PA was the head tube felt a too high.

    The geometry has since changed and this was probably a trait of the smaller size.

    This was indeed a trait of the small and medium frames for the first batch of 100 frames, but the head tubes have been shorter on the small and medium frames from the second batch onwards.

    I appreciate that personal preference comes in to it and what you stated above is a sizing issue not a performance one. That doesn’t make the PA better than a 456 it just makes it better for you.

    No, it wasn’t a sizing issue. I rode the same approximate size of each of the frames, which is what I’m comparing. I just mentioned the Slacker as it’s a 456 derivative but being so slack is better (IMO) in a smaller, more chuckable size.

    What I disagree with is that you say:

    there is nowt between them in physical performance

    Which I think is just plain wrong. They are different frames with different handling feels (going back to chainstay length for example) and consequently ride differently because of it. I agree they’re both good but different.

    Which one is for you, me or more particularly the OP is personal preference but this preference will largely (IMO) be because they are physcially different, certainly in the ride respect.

    As for the “aesthetics and ergonomics” I’m never bothered about the paint when I’m riding 😉

    Premier Icon gra
    Subscriber

    fatmutha, did you manage to get the bike build up and get out for a test ride then?

    carlphillips
    Member

    yes got back from its maiden ride this afternoon, well i can definitely (and unfortunately) say i much prefer the 456,
    when i ride the 456 it makes me wanna boost off stuff and chuck it around, im sorry to say the PA did not, im not sure why it just doesn’t suit me, and after one ride i will be putting it up on the classifieds here.
    all my friends loved the ride but i did not, the TT felt too high and when climbing the front end was very light and hard work on steep bits where i manage ok on the 456.
    i can’t put my finger on it, maybe i should’ve gone for the small PA, but hey ho never mind eh..!
    so if anyone wants a med PA in orange its up for grabs, also have revs for sale also now!!!

    carlphillips
    Member

    oh yeah Gra i would definitely go for the small if i were you.

    Premier Icon gra
    Subscriber

    Thanks for the info fatmutha. That’s really useful, if I do go for the PA it will be the small.

Viewing 24 posts - 1 through 24 (of 24 total)

The topic ‘Anyone compared a 456 and a Prince Albert?’ is closed to new replies.