My first decent bike was an inbred, stock bulked from on one. I rode this bike for years, not particularly quickly and I crashed a lot!

Recently test rode a niner – absolute revalation in how stable it is and how quick I can ride stuff that I would really struggle on before. I can ride with no hands, lift the back wheel under braking, all sorts that would have had me on the floor previously.

I am fond of the inbred and would like to keep it as a spare bike but want to make handle a bit more to my tastes of possible.

Is the inbred inherently less stable or can I change forks etc to make it handle more nicely?

What Niner did you test? The Inbred’s an XC bike.

Inbreds are just cheap frames, nothing particularly good about them, you can get much better, as you have discovered. I had a 456, couldn’t believe how wallowy it felt trying to get it to turn, the materials and quality is just too cheap to give the required stability.

Was the cockpit set up differently, Wider bars/shorter stem etc.. this would make the like fell test bike fell more stable.

How old is the inbred and how is it set up? I have a version 2 and it’s solid as a rock (and weighing close to a rock), it’s probably in the set-up and the combo of forks/stem/bars you have…

the materials and quality is just too cheap to give the required stability.

Um. Rubbish, sorry – it’s 4130 or similar, perfectly good steel and actually probably stiffer than thinner fancier steels.

I’d guess it’s more to do with geometry (xc bike with livelier steering), different forks, stem or bars.

Nothing inherently wrong with an Inbred but are you comparing an apple with a banana? Set up which inspires confidence will make you ride better every time.

bencooper +1

I’ve always thought an inbred as having pretty sorted geometry. I thought they were best with a 100mm fork, or rigid equivalent. Just a nice xc set-up and fast n’fun everywhere.

And as above – make sure the cockpit, tyres etc are similar or its not apples with apples.

I don’t think the Inbred is a particularly unstable bike. The geo on the Niner probably just suited you better. Not everyone likes the same things

Um. Rubbish, sorry – it’s 4130 or similar, perfectly good steel and actually probably stiffer than thinner fancier steels.

Yet the results a far from stiff, must be poor welding and production then. They are cheap for a reason, and not just the direct sales. They are a low quality frame where shortcuts have been taken to keep the price down.

It was the worse frame I have owned by a long way, unfortunately most will just blindly recommend what they own rather than give a realistic appraisal of it’s qualities. And of course Brant markets on these forums rather well.

Yet the results a far from stiff, must be poor welding and production then.

translation: “i know nothing about welding” – poor welds* break, it’s that simple.

(*especially highly stressed single bead tig welds)

the geometry is a little old-school, steepish head angles can be a little nervous, but wide-bars and a longish ‘reach’ do a lot to calm it down…

My 456 was one of the most stable and solid bikes I’ve ever ridden. It was just the solid back end that made me change. No other reason. The quality of the frame was excellent and the geometry spot on for general riding. Stick a u-turn fork on and it will cope with anything. What tyres did you run? Probably a bigger factor than anything else.

Maybe the 26″ wheels are making the trail come alive and it takes an instant dislike to your wheel size and then makes you crash?

I had a 456, couldn’t believe how wallowy it felt trying to get it to turn, the materials and quality is just too cheap to give the required stability

they may well be made out of cheapo tubing granted but how does that cause stability issues? Tube flex may do but you’re going to get that with skinny steel tubes. If the frame has been wielded wonky then I guess that may cause an issue but again not down to cheap materials, that’s QC.

I had an inbred and didn’t notice any problems with stability, you’ve switched to a big wheeler so could be all sorts of differences. Bigger wheels normally = heavier so more gyroscopic effect, does the weight (rim/tyre) being further out cause more gyro aswell? <Edit> just realised you didn’t actually say whether your inbred was 26 or 29.

Inbreds aren’t perfect, heavy and cheap paint but for the money who cares about that stuff, with a 100mm stem and not very wide risers I thought the geometry was spot of for me. I battered the hell out of mine over several years and it’s still in the shed on standby incase I want to build it up again. Replaced it with a c456, again not perfect but for the money pretty good.

I’ve got a 29er Inbred setup as a rigid, never had any issues with it. Found it is be a rock solid build, much more stable than my last hard tail anyway. I’m guessing as you’ve been riding yours for quite a while though, it’s probably a 26″ one that you’ve got.

My best guess is it’s probably the larger wheels of the Niner that you’re noticing. They will role noticeably faster, and will feel more stable particularly in a straight line. Of course the trade-off is they’re not quite so nimble.

A mate recently found his 456 was transformed by changing tyres. he could’nt believe the difference it made as he’s had On-Ones for years amongst other frames.

Clive what fork are you actually running on your inbred?
Got a 100mm’s on mine and it handles just fine, I’d suggest if you have a 80mm’s or rigid (On-one have done lots of build kit configs), it will be improved by throwing on a set of 100mm. Not sure what to suggest if you already run 100mm’s…

‘I crashed a lot!’

Maybe you twisted something in one of these crashes? A very slight misalignment of the bars/forks would be my guess.

Basically OP you’ve found out that modern lightwieght 29er is a much better bike, than a clapped out old On-One that is stuck in the 90’s geometry wise and the 30’s material wise.

I can’t see any point in trying to make an Inbred ride like a Niner, it won’t. If you do want to still keep it, then best bet is to turn it into a pub/town bike.

P.S. Despite what people might say on here, Inbred’s were never decent bikes.

nothing particularly good about them, you can get much better, as you have discovered. I had a 456, couldn’t believe how wallowy it felt trying to get it to turn, the materials and quality is just too cheap to give the required stability.

Twaddle.

Yet the results a far from stiff, must be poor welding and production then. They are cheap for a reason, and not just the direct sales. They are a low quality frame where shortcuts have been taken to keep the price down

The shortcut is they’re mass-produced in the Far East from relatively cheap materials – and there’s nothing wrong with that at all, build quality and QC is as good or better than anything you’d get from a UK manufacturer (if you could even find one).

If the welding was poor, the welds would break. TIG welding is pretty unforgiving that way.

P.S. Despite what people might say on here, Inbred’s were never decent bikes.

I’ve still got my very early Ti Inbred – it’s lovely. But I like the long, fast geometry, not a fan of the modern short-stem, wide-bars riding position.

I’ve had 2 inbreds, one bog standard and one 853, probably of different vintages though.

The 853 I ran with Fox F100 forks and found it a bit odd. To me the steering felt pretty slow and took an age to get used to. My other one I ran rigid, with 450mm a-c forks, felt spot on.

there was about a 4 year gap between them, I’d ridden lots of bikes in between, so maybe I’d got used to riding that sort of frame, maybe..dunno.

both felt quick off the go, couldn’t say if one was more comfy than the other.

My Scandal 29er is nice though.

A few interesting comments.

I tested a SIR9 and ended up getting the AIR, so stuck with XC biased bikes, the inbred has nobbly nicks on it, Ralph’s on the new bike.

I don’t mind having a heavy spare bike, but I want one I am happy to lend out to mates or my partner. I used to find the bars really fidgety, full with fleegle bars so not at all narrow.

Rockshocks tora on the inbred, maybe a longer pair of forks would increase the head angle and calm things down a bit.

I *think* (and cy or brant or others may disagree) that tyres (pressure, compound and tread) , wheels, connection between wheels n forks n frame, stems and bars all have a greater effect on handling and ‘feel’ of a bike than some fancy tubing flexing.
I don’t think frames flex (in a boingy steel way) or otherwise as much as we think.
I do think that the relationship between feet, bars and front wheel position seems to be really important.
I would suggest that the different niner vs on one feeling is there, but I would look at all sorts before singling out the frame as the reason.

I don’t think frames flex (in a boingy steel way) or otherwise as much as we think.

Emm “Hello!”

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73inseR2zwI[/video]

That’s just seated pedalling. Now imagine what it does when you corner, bike leaned over with your weight driving through the pedals.

matt_outandabout – Member

I don’t think frames flex (in a boingy steel way) or otherwise as much as we think.

Certainly Inbreds don’t, despite all the steel-is-real stuff people choose to believe, the steel On Ones are pretty stiff. Hard not to be with that much metal in them.

If you’re running an older On-One rigid fork, they were only 420mm A-C which lowers the front end a little and steepens the head angle. I quite like that, but others might not and going for a slightly longer rigid fork, or one of these new-fangled suspension forks, it’ll slacken the front end a little and make things less twitchy.

Dang and blast!

There I was, all pleased with myself for bagging a cheap Inbred frame on eBay to build up for winter, enjoying how much fun it is to ride, loving the responsiveness on the tarmac hill climb to get to the moor, marvelling at its ‘spray it down and put it away’ low maintenance – and now – thanks to this thread – I discover my bike is actually a pile crud.

I’ll go bin it immediately and spend some proper money on a proper bike.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

That video is laughable! comparing flex in a carbon road frame with an ancient steel BSO with pressed dropouts which probably cost less than a ton new! Bet if you did that with the OP’s inbred and niner, the niner would flex more.

bigger wheels give more stability. better brakes more stopping power/modulation.

i’d put your instability on the Inbred partly down to either of those two, but mostly because you are not being particulariy good at riding it.

I found the 456 a little nervous when rigid with a 440 A-c fork. With a 29r front wheel in the same fork much better. Probably down to a mix of wheel size (rotating mass and contact patch) and the slight slackening of the angles.

The 456 is stiff enough for me to enjoy. It is certainly not noodly like suggested above.

I swapped my Inbred for a SIR.9 & the Niner is in a different league. It flexes more, but that’s a plus to me. The Niner reminds me of an early Cotic Soul on a 120mm fork. You can feel the frame flexing, & the ride is like a short travel FS.
The Inbred (29er) frame was 2lbs heavier than the Niner. The Niner has a very distinctive feel to it that I think you’ll either gel with or you’ll move on. They aren’t for everyone but there isn’t another bike I’d swap my SIR.9 for.