Looking at getting a 29er replacement for my lovely Cotic Soul 26er. The usual suspects…Solaris, Sherpa, Shan GT, Tarn..

Why? ‘Cos they (hopefully) have that lovely forgiving steel feel. My last ally hardtail was a Merlin Malt3, yonks ago. It was brutal.

Am I blinkering myself not looking at carbon and aluminium? Never tried a modern trail geometry bike with 2.4″ tyres made from these materials…

Yes you’re being blinkered.

You may however be right, and more than anything, the bike you want will always ride better than the superior bike you don’t.

Nothing forgiving about the post-CEN steel frames, but I still had a Solaris, now a Ritchey P29er. It’s all down to personal preference.

I like steel but yeah, you’re stressing too much. Wheels, tyres and saddle have more to do with how comfortable a bike is, compared with the vertical compliance of 2 triangles made of steel tube welded together.

I feel the extra smoothness of the 27.5 wheels cancels out any loss of frame compliance with my Zero AM vs my old Soul 26.

My Pinnacle iroko (aluminium) is far more forgiving than the steel 45650b it replaced (admittedly a cheap steel frame).

Steel wont feel like the Kona hardtails I had in the 1990’s but they can be quite forgiving.

May not be relevant in this thread but I had a steel road bike (Kona Honky Tonk) that definitely was compliant. Not “zingy” like the old steel frames, but noticeably less harsh than my aluminium road bike I had. But I guess on the road with 25mm tyres it makes more difference.

‘Cos they (hopefully) have that lovely forgiving steel feel

I have a steel hardtail, I have no idea what this ‘forgiving feel’ stuff is all about. It’s still bumpy on bumpy bits of trail.

Big wheels though, they are a huge improvement on bumpy trails.

Back in the day we had 1.9″ tyres with 45psi in them; we had noodly thin tubes on our steel bikes and big thick ones on our alu bikes. Nowadays we have 2.4″ tubeless tyres with 20psi, that more than drowns out any movement in the frame.

Yep, that’s all sort of what I was wondering. A pair of Panaracer 2.1″ with 40psi on an old school ally frame is a bit different to my current 2.35″ tubeless set up…
It’s maybe time to look at some lighter weight options.

The above mentioned hard tail has bling carbon forks, XTR (albeit old), and light kit apart from the wheels. It weighs 26lbs. I used to have a full sus weighing 21.5lbs. Light it ain’t.

Nothing forgiving about the post-CEN steel frames

It’s all relative IMO.

My Solaris mk2 is way more forgiving than the triple butted alu frame it replaced, especially when you get it up to speed and the magic smoothing effect happens.

I’ve pretty much always had steel hardtails until my current bike. Said bike is way more forgiving and comfier than any of the steel bikes I’ve owned. Then again it’s a Stache, so the tractor tyres at 12-15 psi are probably the reason.

I like the springy feeling you get on a steel bike, e.g. on my Sherpa.

But I also like my aluminium CX bike, and my carbon road bike. They’re just different.

I will let you know…

I too have had three steel hard tails (Al Carter, Orange Clockwork and Sanderson Breath). The Sanderson is a proper springy ride when you get upto speed, however it’s also 27.2 seatpost and a cushy 2.3 rear tyre…

My only aluminium hardtail was a Niner EMD on narrow tourer rims and 2.1 Velociraptor’s. It buzzed my feet on rocky Peak District descents… 🙁

Next week I’m back on Alu with the new bike however….we shall see.

I guess there’s a lot of variables involved. I bought an aly mtb a few years back, before that I hadn’t ridden since my late teens, it was a rigid steel frame.

Now with front suspension, wider rims and bigger volume tyres it’s very difficult to compare in a fair way.

If I had to say what’s improved the most I think it would have to be tyres. Better construction /compounds and bigger volume compared to the mtb tyres of my youth, which from my coloured recollection were thin, rock hard rubber with unnecessarily rock hard knobs.

The seatstays on my cannondale flash alloy flex in quite an alarming manner but then they are flattened in profile and designed to do that, can’t see it lasting years and years but I wanted a lightish rigid 29er so built accordingly.

I think you’re stressing a smidge OP, just buy what you fancy.

I wanted* a do-it-all steel frame to replace my 26″ Soul recently so I bought a BFe 275 in the sale/clearout and I’m not disappointed. I like the extra stiffness (pffft!) of the BFe over the Soul though and that little bit of extra length and (perceived?) slackness in the front (quiet at the back) of the 275 over the 26 is smashing. I’ve got 26+ tyres in it so there’s still a little bit of squishyness.

* just because I prefer the look of steel over ally. It was nearly a Stanton but, bugger me, how much? 😯

For me, personally, I notice the difference in seat post diameter in terms of ride comfort.

My Solaris is a 31.6mm and while slightly more comfy, there isn’t much in it compared to my son’s Alu HT with a 27.2mm post.

My real comfy bike is my KM Ops which also has a 27.2mm post.

You’ve missed Ti off that list. Scratched that itch, and it was very nice, but how much was in my mind… not certain. The Tripster works in Ti, as it covers a lot of jobs and feels premium on all of them (even whn it isn’t ‘best’)

Currently on a carbon 29er – 2.4 tyres made the most difference as it’s really comfy and the seatpost is 30.something. However thats comfort which isn’t the same as the spring and pop I got out of a skinny Duster, which still rates as one of my favourite bikes.

Looking at getting a 29er replacement for my lovely Cotic Soul 26er.

why?

To me steel is a better material because it’s tougher.

I treat my bikes badly, they get ridden in the mud, the chainstays get worn away by heel rub, the top tubes get dented by just about everything, as does the underside of the downtube, they get jumped, commuted on, and generally have a hard life.

I like that steel will pretty much last until I break it in a crash, it’s unlikely to just crack due to old age. I also like that I can just drop it off at the powdercoaters and have it back as good as new for less than the cost of a set of (not so)invisi-frame stickers.

Does it ride better than aluminium though, it’s certainly not as flexy as it used to be pre-CEN, but it’s still different. There’s something nice about landing a jump off line and feeling the whole bike give a little then spring back into shape without fuss, rather than the relative unyielding stiffness of some other frames. I do appreciate a brutally stiff aluminum frame too, for different reasons (they make even the unfittest weekend warrior feel like a riding god powering up a rooty climb).

And no, it’s not the same as adding 0.xx” to your rear tyre, it feels different. Even my Fatty (very stiff aluminium 4″ tyres) doesn’t have the same zing as my El-Mariachi (Steel + 2.0″ -> 2.4″ depending on my mood).

Looking at getting a 29er replacement for my lovely Cotic Soul 26er.
why?

Big wheels have made a massive improvement on the rocky trails round here. Not always marketing bolx, although there is plenty of it about.

I’ve had a few different frames over the last few years, including Cotic Soul, Dialled PA, Cotic BFe and now ride a Stanton Slackline. Of these the most comfortable was the Soul, when it had 27.2 seat tube; it’s probably the one frame I ever regret selling. I went to a BFe as I wanted something burly and to be honest it was a little harsh in comparison, though unsure if this was the move away from 853 steel or the larger seat tube diameter (most likely a combination of both). Going back to a 853 frame recently, I’m inclined to say the Stanton ‘feel’ is more akin to the Soul than the BFe, even though it’s a fairly tough frame. For this I’d always prefer 853 framed hardtails.

Perhaps it’s all just in the mind, who knows, but out of those you list above I dare say they’re all great frames, each well made with the larger rubber will be FUN (which is what’s important, right?!)

get one of the new Marin Pine Mountains!

I have a Solaris, which is still bumpy on bumpy stuff, I have access to a carbon XC whippet bike too, and the big difference is, that is brutally harsh, on pretty much everything.

The Cotic just feels a bit softer, which is what I wanted, as I ride it 20 miles to work each way, off road, so don’t want to be battered to death.

“29 wheels make rockier trails easier and smoother”.

This has always seemed most bizarre to me, we seek out rocky trails to enjoy the rockiness and the bumps ! I prefer to ride the SH on my BFe as the trails feel bumpier and more challenging than on my Covert which just allows me to “smash” everything.

OP just get another Soul in 275 or if you really want a change the Solaris (I am fully signed up Cotic fan). I demoed one briefly back-to-back with the 275+ and 29 wheels and itvwas a lot of fun, two bikes in one possibilities.

This has always seemed most bizarre to me, we seek out rocky trails to enjoy the rockiness and the bumps !

How are bumps enjoyable?

There’s a difference between technical difficulty and simpyl being strewn with rocks. I can point to a specific trail that is simply a massive uphill pile of big rocks. Not really fun or technical. Likewise there are steep tricky climbs with steps and so on, or just with no rocks at all, that are a challenge.

There’s good challenges and there’s annoying things.

With the big wheels, I challenge myself to get the KOM on this one trail. It’s hard but a good challenge. With small wheels, it’s just much harder and less satisfying.

skinny tubes. mmmmmmmmm.

I do love my Solaris. And it’s tough. I kept snapping Alu!

I had the same thought recently when considering replacing my BFe. The Aeris Zero AM looked like exactly what I wanted…..but it wasn’t steel.

Real doesn’t rhyme with aluminium 🙁

Frame material did use to make a big difference. Much less relevant now with the right tyres/geo/wheels etc…IME anyway.

Good point about frames snapping. I’ve got through 7 snapped full-suss frames before getting my Soul.;-)

Lol, cos hemlocks never snapped!
Inbred 853, ripped off the head tube.
Orange p7, cracked chainstay.
Genesis alpitude, cracked seattube.
Chameleon. Dropped a mattock on the top tube in the garage, rides great, easily as comfy as any of the others, and about 1 or 1.5lbs lighter.
Steel is real, any benefits other than asthetics are largely imagined, IMHO.

I love my Solaris and Soul275. I miss my Mk2 Soul. I think the 27.2 seat tube did have s lot to do with the feel, but it was a more springy, playful frame.

The 275 and Solaris are both way stronger and feel much more planted though, without being harsh, so it’s not all bad. A Solaris that felt like a Mk2 Soul would be ideal, but probably unsellable.

There’s more than metal and geometry to worry about.

I snapped the chainstay on my 26″ Cotic Soul (MkII) and replaced it with a Pipedream Scion. Geometry and metal (853) were identical – and I swapped everything straight across.
The Scion handled like it was dead in comparison to the Soul – the chainstays were beefier on the Scion and there was no zing on the trail.

I got the Soul welded (£40!) and life is good again.

Previous to the Soul I had a Sanderson Life – lovely zingy ride but I ripped open the mech hanger too many times. Before that I had a Airborne Lancaster (Ti) – lovely zingy ride but I cracked the dropout. Before that I had a Gary Fisher Big Sur (Al) – bit boring – and a Dawes somethingorother (boxes Al) which was as harsh as.

I have also had three Inbreds – the singlespeed feels harsh compared to the geared bikes, probably due to the overbuilt wheel.

I’ve got similar but with carbon, just because I’ve loved my Carbon 456 and obsessed about a carbon hard tail to replace it as it’s getting to the point where a stuff is wearing out and I could go 650b upgrade. But still want to stick with carbon, just because. Light and agile, but tough essentially. While ally or even steel might be just as fine (and plenty of ally set ups are coming out with similar weight to what I’ve got mine at).

Then again I could still continue the c456. Just I’m getting into wheel size mismatch now with my bikes, some 26, some 650b. And 650s are generally longer wheel base and slacker bikes, which I do find a lot more fun.

I bought a Stooge frame and built it up single speed to ride locally and to keep my 26″ Soul for trail centres and bike packing.

I love it, as much as I love my Soul which is a lot.

I’m biased where steel is concerned though as all 4 of my bikes are steel including my road bike.

I own five mountain bikes, 2 carbon 29er’s, 2 steel 29er’s and the good old alu Stumpy. All are hardtails.

The carbon frames are a Niner Air 9 RDO, the older one with QR rear and a Stumpy with thru axle. For comfort the Niner wins easily, it’s way more compliant than any of the others, steel included. I’m not sure if the thru axle contributes to the stiffness of the Stump, I suspect it partly does.

The carbon stumpy is the stiffest by a long way, it’s got a rigid Niner fork as well just to add to the joy. Brilliant fun though and very different ride to the Niner. I’ve used it bikepacking, day rides, racing, it’s just good fun.

The steel frames are rigid Niner Sir9 that I run singlespeed and Jones with a truss fork. The SIR9 is a nice ride but it’s not as comfy as the Air9. It’s my muddy winter ride.

The Jones is now my bikepacking ride. The short top tube and high front end give a very different, much more all day comfort.

The alu Stumpy was my race bike, it’s head down arse up but not as harsh as the carbon 29er version.

I used to own a Solaris but sold it. Handling wise it wasn’t a patch on the SIR9 but this was with a 100mm fork, I think it needed a 120.

If I had to sell everything and just have one bike it would be a Ti Jones with Ti truss fork, failing that I’d keep the steel one over the rest.

In short, it’s not the frame material it’s whats been done with it that affects how a bike rides.

As above, it’s about design and construction not material.

But! It’s still indicative. If you want to make a soft/springy hardtail, you’re not generally going to do it in aluminium- partly because it’s harder, partly because people will assume alu is stiff. Carbon can be anything it wants to be so manufacturers tend to tell you. Steel can be very varied but manufacturers tend not to tell you, because they want you to sell youself the idea that Steel Is Real and that their 6lbs of scaff pipe will be flexible. (weight is a decent indicator though, with steel). My BFe and Soul rode very differently despite identical geometry, the BFe just lacked what made the Soul so awesome. Even ti can be fairly stiff (my Soda was a noodle, my Ragley was stiffer than I wanted but still way softer than my alu ragley)

Given any though to plus tyres? I didn’t like em but a lot of people really rate it for hardtails. Tyre squish isn’t the same as frame squish but it could do what you want.

You may however be right, and more than anything, the bike you want will always ride better than the superior bike you don’t.

Totally disagree with that so many times i bought the bike i pictured my self riding and not the bike i needed for my riding only to be disappointed and get the “buyers remorse” that would lead to the whole cycle(pun intended) happening again.

Don’t be persuaded by others objectively analyse your own needs and not the hype.

PolisherMan – Member
Looking at getting a 29er replacement for my lovely Cotic Soul 26er. The usual suspects…Solaris, Sherpa, Shan GT, Tarn

Myself(got two PP frames, Shan and Oka) and every other Production Privee frame owner I’ve spoken to agrees that they are among the most ‘comfortable’ hardtail frames they’ve ever owned.

A lot of folks like to say it’s imagined. I’m fine with that.