A while ago I bought a s/h 20″ On-One 456 Carbon, built as a spare trail bike using the 26″ parts from my cracked 19.5″ El Guapo from some years ago
Both size large, I’m on the upper height range

Despite my research (inc. many a recommendation from the forum archive here) I must not have done enough as I’ve found it to be the one of the worst climbing bikes I’ve ever ridden and not much better on anything rough or steep and techy descending either.
Rearward weight bias, short stays, little weight on the front wheel, stiff frame not helping

Trying to get used to it every so often isn’t working
Though rated upto 160mm forks, is it only for strength and not for handling?
Is the 1 degree headset just making the trail measurement even more wandery?
Is the stem too short to get any weight over the front?

Are they just a bit ‘quirky’/a dogs dinner or is it worth persisting with shorter forks, stems and conventional headsets etc ?

<script async src=”//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js” charset=”utf-8″></script>

I don’t recall many complaints about the handling when they were new, so it might just be a question of what you’ve become accustomed to.

The 456 meant 4“, 5“ or 6“ forks (100 to 150mm) so 160mm seems a bit on the long side and that may be at the root of the problem.

They ride much better with a shorter fork and longer stem to get your weight further forward.

Looking at the pic – your centre of gravity is going to be in line with or behind the BB, so no wonder its going to climb like a dog. BB above the axle line and an inch plus of stem spacers just to push you further back won’t help either.

Shorten the fork – maybe 130mm?, longer slammed stem. Might not descend as well, but should definitely climb better.

If I’m honest, the whole thing looks very short and tall, like its actually a size too small for you? How tall are you?

Just looking at that photo tells you how wrong it is. The fork is way too long, bottom bracket raised up too much and generally just looks like it is falling backwards.

If may have been ‘designed’ for 4, 5 or 6 but was that maybe just a bit of post design selling BS.

Put a shorter fork and longer stem on it and it will handle fine. Might not feel fine if you are into modern geometry and riding style though.

Fork looks a bit long and if it’s been made 1 degree slacker with the headset that’s not gonna help.

A mate of mine rode one for years all over the place (he’s still got it) and I don’t remember any complaints about a wandering front end and poor at climbing.
I think he had a 140mm Revelation on it.

Worked best with 120mm forks on IMO.

You can see in that pic just how cocked back the seat angle is (photo angle might exaggerate it, but it’s still very slack).

Also, what else have you been riding to compare against? I preferred the ride of my Giant Anthem 29er to the 456, let alone the capabilities of e.g. an On One Scandal 29er (latest version).

I had one with 140mm forks on and if it was steep it would wander a little, however it wasn’t anywhere near as bad as you’re suggesting.

Don’t forget, geometry has moved on and with 29″ wheels, and probably 27.5″ wheels a large frame still sits more between the wheels rather than propped on top like a 26″ frame does. It wasn’t designed as a LLS sled, but it was a capable all rounder.

Longer stem would be a starting point as it was designed back when 90+mm stems were perfectly normal, and if it’s easy enough, bin the angleset headset on it.

bet it pulls sik wheelies 😀

Like above, put shorter forks on it, maybe flatter bars and a longer stem and set up it like a bike form 10 years (or whenever it was made) and it’ll be far better, probably almost like it was designed to be.

6’2″, main bike is now a Canyon Spectral 650 (2018-2021) so not on trend modern geometry but much better than large 26″ bikes (sanderson life, el guapo, spesh stumpjumper) of old.
The sanderson I’ve been riding from time to time the same trails as a spare bike (with a 120mm ’03 marzocchi MX) but despite its slack seat tube and high BB, it rides far better everywhere than the on-one
I wasn’t expecting miracles (nor has it set me back a lot) but its a lot worse than I was expecting both looks and ride wise

I must have missed the geometry chart originally, I’ve found one since and I can’t ever remember seeing a seat angle quoted in the 60’s of degrees

“bet it pulls sik wheelies”
Turning the bike upside down to take rear wheel out, it tries to topple forward ..

I have a 130mm recon, longer stems with mostly higher bars* and conventional albeit external headset I can try when I get round to it

*it currently has my only 35mm clamp 15mm rise bar/50mm stem combo

If may have been ‘designed’ for 4, 5 or 6 but was that maybe just a bit of post design selling BS.

From On-one? Surely not. 😂😂

I had (and still have hanging up) a 456Ti 20″ from the same era.

In their day, they were great frames and built into great bikes – but their day was over a decade ago…

Mine worked best with 120-140 forks and you look as proportioned as I am, so long legs do mean the saddle is well back.

I have the same bike, as a winter bike, really. I too have 160mm forks and as soon as it gets steep, it is a real sod to keep the front wheel on the ground.

I have ridden it like that for 4 years but mainly because a) it’s a spare bike so I don’t really want to fork out (😃) for replacement forks and b)I find it descends really well.

I do live in the south east though, so long steep climbs aren’t really an issue, plus I tend to stay low with it during the winter anyway.

EDIT: I do have a longer stem than you, which probably helps a little bit.
If you decide you can’t get on with it at some point, let me know, as I had problems with the seat tube on mine (probably because of my weight over the back 🤔), so I could do with replacing the frame.

I liked mine (apart from the shite build quality and the warranty lies). It wasn’t a good climber but it was a good descender. Mine was medium, with a 140mm fork and an angleset to slacken it out, it was pretty much a carbon summer season. I definitely wouldn’t have added more fork- 130mm might have been better.

The angleset was a fantastic addition- it made the climbing a little worse, but that didn’t really hurt it, it went from “not very good” to “slightly more not very good” but the overall feel was still “not very good” so it didn’t change much. But it helped a ton on the descents. If I went back to it today I guarantee I’d want it to be about 4 inches longer though! IIRC the large didn’t get much longer so that’d count against it.

Replaced it with a Ragley Ti which was just better at everything, all the time, a magnificent bike. But no wonder, the 26er 456 was an absolute antique.

Think it was your forum posts that helped sell it to me, though taper long fork capable 26 frames aren’t common s/h
I passed on a Ragley pig X on account of being pickup only, I’m thinking I maybe could have trekked to London to get it if it’d be anything as good as your Ti going by that 🤔

That does look like it would ride like crap.

I’d put a 120m fork on it with a -2° Headset and a longer stem, all of which have already been said.

You can’t make old skool geo bikes feel like new skool geo bikes, they just dont have the reach.

<script async src=”//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js” charset=”utf-8″></script>" alt="" title="" class="bbcode-image" />

Hopefully might go a bit better now