And as for climbing, forget the ‘slack bikes don’t climb’ myth that has been repeated for so long it’s become ‘truth’. It’s not.

It’s got a lot more to do with the ST angle than HT, along with reach.

Even with the bonkers fork, the ST angle on this is 74 unsagged. Honestly the best climbing bike I’ve ever ridden, no need to perch on the saddle nose.
Just grab those lovely barends, point uphill and spin away. Magic.

And yes Epi, it is already SS 🙂

Bar-ends for climbing. When climbing (especially long, hard, steep climbs) it helps control, weight-shifting and leverage a lot with wrists rotated so thumbs are pointed up rather than in. Why do so many cyclists hate bar-ends so much? Is it purely a fashion thing?

Thanks for the pointers on how to use bar ends, I had no idea.
They are unecessary on a modern mtb with wider bars.

Each to their own though of course.

They are unecessary on a modern mtb

So are droppers, disc brakes, quality damping – they are all good though.

That looks like a long accident/recovery thread waiting to happen.

Quite like it… not far off my Last FF. Not having the bar ends or stem though.

If I wanted pretty I’d have bought a Ti bride not a Ti bike.

Thats one of the funniest things i’ve read on here in a long time. 😀

The fork is now a more sensible 135mm and the slackset out.

Be good to see a side on pic in “normal” guise too for comparison.

Post up pictures when the cracks develop please 😀

If I wanted pretty I’d have bought a Ti bride not a Ti bike

😆 😆 😆

Ignore ’em – I bloody love it – slack HA check, leopard seat check – looks a shedload of fun! Enjoy!!

A few years back a mate, who at the time was sponsored by the big S as a R&D test rider, was ordering frames with 62? / 63? sagged head angles and ETT dimensions that were longer on his medium frames than on the XL frames. He was told by the “designers” that the market wasn’t ready for anything like that because of preconceptions.

Now a few years have passed and long, low and slack is on trend. Give it a few more years and sub 60? head angles will be the emperor’s new clothes.

A few years back a mate, who at the time was sponsored by the big S as a R&D test rider, was ordering frames with 62? / 63? sagged head angles and ETT dimensions that were longer on his medium frames than on the XL frames. He was told by the “designers” that the market wasn’t ready for anything like that because of preconceptions.

That doesn’t surprise me at all.

What really got me thinking was comments by Phil on the Mojo Geometron thread. Basically, slacking things off makes the steering feel slower, until the point is reached where flop factor takes over and counteracts this – making the steering speed up again.

I was keen to test the theory, it turns out it’s true.
It felt odd for the first few turns, but very quickly became normal.

Mad in a good way!
Enjoy the new ride bud. 🙂

Wondered if Waltly, cheers for the info

Really good to deal with Andy.
I’m also waiting for a truss fork from XACD.

There’s quite a contrast between dealing with Amy at Waltly and Porter at XACD. 😯

Yeah, heard that. Been thinking of a Ti Fargo for a while and seeing Salsas $2.5k price tag on the 2018 moddel makes me think going direct the only way will be viable!

Now looking positively normal with a 135mm fork, no slackset and a 62 HA.

[/url]

A few weld pics, we all love a good Ti weld pic 🙂

[img]https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4175/33747558233_9e93b0c5c0_z.jpg[/img][url=https://flic.kr/p/Tqa4ji]
[url=https://flic.kr/p/TnisJs]

[url=https://flic.kr/p/UA84Kh]

[url=https://flic.kr/p/TnirbN]

And of course, my furry Gusset
[url=https://flic.kr/p/UA87Qq]

Noice.

How long did you go on the reach and the chainstays? How tall are you?

450 reach.

I like a short chainstay but went 445 on this to keep it more balanced with the long front.

I’m 5’10, with shortish legs and a longish back.

Love the bike, love the Ti bride comeback even more. Fair play, fella.

Wheelbase around 1250mm ish?

Count me in the like it a lot camp. I think the plus tyres probably made more sense for a hardtail than a full sus. With 450 reach and 62 degree HA it’s actually not too extreme numbers wise.

I’m glad to see more and more people experimenting with geometry and travel!

Would fit me nicely. I think I’m coming to the same conclusion on longer chainstays balancing frames with a longer reach and slack front. For going fast and for climbing especially.

I don’t get the negativity here, looks great to me (apart from the bar ends, obvs).

Yeah, I make wheelbase about 1260.

Was going to give it a slagging but it looks great in the second pic and the welds look superb.
I’ve got a Singular Swift that I’d love in Ti – might need to look into these guys.
Enjoy!

If it wasn’t for the seatstay/toptube junction I’d love that. Good effort!

bedmaker – Member

And as for climbing, forget the ‘slack bikes don’t climb’ myth that has been repeated for so long it’s become ‘truth’. It’s not.

Yup, I used to buy it too but my Ragley Ti (slack for the day, fairly standard now) is still the best technical climber I’ve ever ridden, it was phenomenal. I have a proper XC bike and it’s better for just rolling up easy climbs but for anything else it’s nothing like as good.

Thanks for the pointers on how to use bar ends, I had no idea.
They are unecessary on a modern mtb with wider bars.

Each to their own though of course.

Oooh, patronising sarcasm. And with blunt force. Thanks for the tickle

But seriously, how do wide bars replace bar ends? Wrist rotation? I was asking a real question! How do they ‘suck’?

This thread is great, crazy bike, arguments about barends, great comebacks about ti-brides it has it all.

I like how it looks a good deal more in the second set of pictures – it freaked me out when first posted.

Its hard not to love a bike with that saddle on it though 😀

But seriously, how do wide bars replace bar ends?

[trying to be helpful] If you’re doing push-ups, it is mechanically easier (up to a point of course) to dip lower with your hands planted wider apart – your body comes down towards the floor between your arms more freely. With a wide bar, you can shift weight forward by pushing your elbows down and bringing your chest towards the bar without your shoulders collapsing and rolling forwards. If you keep tension across your upper body, you’re actually in quite a strong position and it’s easy to get there. Don’t know. Something like that?

^thnks BigDummy. Though I still think that’s an explanation/of sorts of one virtue of wide-bars vs narrow bars, rather than anything to do with bar-ends?

… (cont’d)

The best description I’ve read that explains a basic advantage of their use (I can’t describe it nearly so well) is this from Bike forums

Barends turn your wrist so that your thumb is pointed up, this means that your radius and ulna are oriented so that the biceps muscle in your arm has greater mechanical advantage than it does when in the palm-down standard riding position.

For me it’s not just the extra leverage and added comfort. but the ability to hoist chest forward without straining wrists, so to give even more pedal-torque from body-weight, while simultaneously driving the back wheel into the surface. I mean on seriously steep stuff. I know that they (bar-ends) can ruin the nice lines of a blke aesthetically, and in that maybe that sucks if you’re that way inclined, but I’ve yet to try any bars without ends that that get me up a hill as efficiently and comfortably as with them. Same with push-ups, some prefer push-up bars, some not. The choice of positioning push-up bars wide or narrower is a different discussion than the choice of push-up bars vs none? Of course, YMMV – as with push-up bars (see below). I like options and I like simple lines. When I’ve chosen not to fit bar-ends on MTB bars I’m aware that it’s simply because I prefer the look of the bike without them, not because I’m gaining a mechanical advantage/increasing my options by not fitting them.

I believe barends can also engage your lower back more effectively, for when you do need to put a bit more power down.

Nice bike btw 😀

Have to agree on the saddle tho. Any bike looks good in those 🙂

Northwind – Member
If it wasn’t for the seatstay/toptube junction I’d love that. Good effort!

Reminds me of one of my fave bikes of all time, Rocky Mtn Ti-bolt.

Really, really like that. I’d have something similar, with slightly shorter stays, if finances allowed. The best technical climber I’ve had was a Ragley Mmmbop that I put a -2* angleset in (static headangle became 63*, with a 140mm fork, according to a phone app). Could just have done with being a touch longer in reach.

Mmmmmmmm Ti welds…..

looks nice to me, more so in the second set of photos.

Bar ends are great IMO.

Peter approves of your saddle

First big test yesterday, Torridon big loop in glorious conditions. Full Coire Lair and Annat descents.
The bike was ace, and I didn’t die in a hail of Ti splinters.

The MRP fork is remarkable, it is so nicely damped and soaks up everything with little fuss. I tweaked it a bit but ended up with the Ramp fully off, just a couple of clicks of rebound and low speed compression about a third of the way on. The air spring pressure is also way less than recommended in the book but I never bottomed it out.
I now have it set at 150mm travel, where it will now remain.

[/url]

I decided to bow to pressure about the barends and have now replaced the cockpit with something a bit more moto 🙂

[img]https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4176/34588055466_7e761c33a2_k.jpg[/img][url=https://flic.kr/p/UGqPRU]2017-05-13_01-03-26[/url]

Nice one John…just wait for Porters forks…then you’ll have a proper bike…none of this suspension nonsense!

Time to tickle the full Ti frame itch me thinks…

Jesus christ bring the bar ends back!
Bars aside, I likes it and I bet it’s a riot to ride.
Does the clock work?

Ooh, never really considered chinese titanium but those prices are almost palletable compared to american and others frames.

Where can I get the stringfellow saddle though….

Taped on cables?