Hi all,

I am in the process of finalising a custom hardtail frame and the current numbers are looking very similar to what Cotic and a few other brands are advocating (slack HTA, longer reach, even shorter stem, balanced out by steeper STA, longer chainstays).

The reviews all seem to rave about the things you would expect this type of geometry to be good at, but have you noticed any downsides, particularly for XC type rides not always blessed with a ton of tech riding.

I guess I am thinking of things like ability to weight the front wheel on steep out of the saddle climbs, with the front wheel so much further out than I would be used to relative to the bars.

Does the resulting long wheelbase give any issues or is it really a non event that is kept in check by the other parts of the geometry?

I realise the longshot geometry is on a lot of different bikes from Cotic and quite a few other brands do similar things so it is a bit of a vague question, but I am interested to hear how people get on with this type of bike as it is hard to find any downsides in the reviews- great if that is really the case! 🙂

Ta!

I’ve had a Cotic FS for 3 years now, and have even put in a -2 degree headset to make it slacker – but then I ride in the Tweed Valley on steep stuff. Where will you ride the most?

Local riding is quite tame and certainly not the same as my days in South Wales. Much more Stravabimbling and riding to cover ground.

I am assured by the builder that the Solaris Max style geometry is still quite conservative with literally no downsides but I am on the fence coming off goodness knows how many years of XC race bikes.

Obviously the Cotic FS bikes are very different from a shorter travel hardtail but are there particular things you feel are a bit too compromised with this “more modern” (I hate that term) geomtery?

Multiple longshot Cotic owner here, so I’ll try… (Soul MkV and RocketMax MkII)

On the whole it just works. I’m constantly amazed by how nimble a bike as oil-tanker looking as the RocketMax can be if you hustle it and both bikes laugh at stuff that not so many years ago would have been classed as unrideable or “pro-lines”. (I’m just back from a winch’n’plummet session on the Rocket, and it’s unbelievably good on the steep) I think the feeling of nimbleness is to do with the rider being centred in the wheelbase, so not going as short as possible on the back end if the front is really long. (Cy posted something about this a year or 2 back – might be on the Cotic site somewhere).

My only real reservation is with the steep seat angle thing. I deliberately went for the last MkII RMax frame in my size rather than a MkIII, as I preferred the slacker SA, and my Soul is running 140mm forks, so slacker than normal too. If your climbing is grinding up really steep fireroads, steep seatangles are great, and obviously its an irrelevance for descending as the saddle’s down, but I find on pedally rolling trails (particularly if its gently uphill), or a nasty techy trialsy climb, I end up feeling wedged between the saddle and the bars and standing up leaves the saddle still between your legs rather than an inch or 2 further back. Obviously you can climb with the saddle dropped, but that’s rather energy inefficient. Less of an issue if you ride clips, more so if you ride flats. I also find the steep SA stresses my legs differently to other bikes – glutes will be killing me after a hard ride on the Rocket. Its all incremental though – the Soul on other hand, which is still “steepish” is the best tech climbing bike I’ve owned and can get up some truly daft stuff if I’m on it, but it’s just slack enough to suit me. I should also add I spend a fair amount of time on traditional-shaped roadbikes – 73° SA with a full layback post, so that’s how my body adapts. I’m aware there’s an awful lot of riders who disagree with me though.

Wouldn’t go back to shortshot, put it that way…

Have a look here

Solarismax the best one?

140mm forked Solaris max here. It’s brilliant. Climbs up anything, goes down anything.
Not sure what negatives you have by removing the tech element on an xc ride. I’d assume rolling resistance is more of a concern than any geo changes when coming away from the extremes its riding capability.. But Id think that’s build kit specific not geo specific.

What’s led you to the geometry for this custom bike?

About six years ago I spent quite a while working out a hardtail design to replace my old Cotic Soul, which was based around my Banshee Spitfire full-sus with a bit more reach and a slightly steeper seat tube. Before I got around to ordering it (via the late Mark Reilly from the people that build his Ti frame), Bird launched the Zero AM and I realised that with a -2 deg headset and a 130mm fork it would be within fractions of a degree and a few mm everywhere, bar the 10mm shorter chainstays.

So I bought one of those to test the geometry – and I’m still riding it over five years later! Fork is now at 150mm but that’s all that’s changed.

The current Cotic geometry is good and not too extreme but whether it’s ideal for you – that depends on what you want and like!

The steeper STA was another I wasn’t sure about so it is interesting you bring it up @JonEdwards. I can see how it works on the winch/ plummet style riding grinding back up, but shifting further forwards over the BB seems to be compromising a more all around efficient pedaling position to try and get the rider weight more centred (plus deal with STA’s slackening with sag on a FS and giving more room for the rear wheel at full compression on a FS).

I am also a bit unsure if this “more centred rider” approach means less ability to use forwards/ backwards weight shifts for grip/ climbing/ etc. Basically I have this preconception that it lets you ride fast in a straight line like a sack of spuds 😀

What’s led you to the geometry for this custom bike?

Some ideas from the builder more than anything. Current bike is very XC, I love it but I really miss not having a proper SS setup. So SS is the reason for the frame and it is a case of replicating what I know or using this rare (for me) opportunity to make something much more betterer

Obviously the Cotic FS bikes are very different from a shorter travel hardtail but are there particular things you feel are a bit too compromised with this “more modern” (I hate that term) geomtery?

TBH there’s nothing wrong with it, and when I rode my old 456Ti found I was back to worrying about going OTB, even though the 456Ti was advanced for its time.

Although it’s so good, tame trails are a bit meh, which is why I now ride a gravel bike on those 🙂

Great thread @BenP1 I had missed that

I should also say that this frame would probably be run rigid SS most of the time so the advantages of DH bombing from the geometry are going to be quite negated by the lack of bounciness not being able to take advantage of it. I certainly don’t ever see myself with a 140mm fork and am well too Jey for that sort of thing.

I think overall I can see the benefits and I don’t want to miss an opportunity to build something really interesting, but equally I enjoy the XC race bike I have now and don’t really see any downsides except for the lack of proper SS-ability so why change so much? My original idea was a bit more Stanton Sherpa- probably where XC race bikes will get to in a few years

I still think Cotic are far too conservative with their seat tube angles, they’ve lengthened the reach but not made the STA comparatively steeper.

If you get the right geometry then you should be perfectly centred on the bike and weighting the front wheel won’t be an issue. Saddle to bar distance shouldn’t really change from old geometry bikes so it shouldn’t feel any more cramped.

The steeper STA can feel a little weird at first but I don’t see it much different to riding in the drops on a road bike Vs the hoods.

“ I should also say that this frame would probably be run rigid SS most of the time”

In that case I’d be looking at what Jones and Stooge are doing with their frames and forks. Hardtails behave pretty differently to rigid bikes and I’ve yet to see anyone run a Longshot Cotic (or anything that long and slack) as a rigid bike.

I should also say that this frame would probably be run rigid SS most of the time

Seriously, just get a gravel bike.

It doesn’t sound like you’re ready to get a custom frame… experiment by riding some off the shelf frames first, and save yourself the buyers regret of paying for a custom frame to be made that you then don’t get on with, and can’t sell easily.

The long wheelbase makes it more difficult to fit on a roofrack.

I’ve got a Bird Zero29, use it with 130 fork and rigid fork. Is that anywhere near to the geo you are considering?

I have the last version of the Cotic Soul (2018 or 19, Medium frame: chainstay length 428mm, reach 458mm, stem 50mm. Headtube 67). I this was one of the early Longshot frames from Cotic.
My negative experience with the Longshot geometry on the Soul is that it is more difficult to climb standing. I lose traction much easier compared to my Singular Pegasus.
(I prefer to stand when I climb due to a bad back).
I would add that I run tea Cotic with 26×2.75 Dirt Wizard tires front and rear.

For my riding style and local trails, I more often choose my Singular Pegasus for better climbing. My cotic Soul is usually only taken out of the shed when I choose to ride the trails with the most technical and steep downhills. For easier XC riding, I opt out of cotic soul in favor of The Singular pegasus.