Orange 5 vs Cotic Rocket

We’ve got two more Calver demos coming up on 15th September and 13th October if you want to come and see what I’m talking about. Drop us an email if you want to come for a spin.

Hi
For what its worth I have ridden both.

Whilst I found the 5 to be a very capable bike in that it climbs well and descends fantastically it simply didnt inspire me-certainly not enough to make me buy one. I got off it and it would never have bothered me if I had never ridden it again.

A mate of mine bought one cos he demo’d one and loved it-horses for courses. However he rarely rides it now and I believe if he had the chance would swap the frame for a Rocket and swap the kit over.

Me and the same mate demoed the Rocket at the Dales Centre in Reeth when they were doing the rounds and I was very sceptical about the whole “pop” thing but what I would say is that I didnt set it up particularly well and found that it bobbed dramatically on smooth stuff and I had to engage propedal to counter it. This is something that I never did on a DW Turner/Anthem/ etc but when it went onto rougher terrain the traction was fantastic to the point that I cleared the climb up Fremmy Edge in middle ring which I had never got close to doing before. This on a 31lb(ish) bike.

When we started the descent on the other side and I stood up on the pedals the suuspension seemed to stiffen (it didnt feel like a 150mm travel bike) and it did seem to “pop” off stuff rather than just roll over it. But it was still using all of its travel.
I suppose it depends what you want but we both loved it to the point where I bought one.

Its been built up with kit off other bikes but I feel that I have gone to far with a Fox36 160mm travel fork on it, in that it now weighs about 33lb and has lost some of its “sprightlyness” so I am going to put a Fox32 Kashima 150 fork on it to see what thats like.

The shock (Kashima RP23)that it came with is different to that on the demo bike (older Float RP23)but it still pedals well but with less bob. On some moorland singletrack recently it struck me that it pedalled as well as my Turner Flux.

Bear in mind that I am no expert evaluator where bikes are concerned but I have ridden (and bought) lots and I like this better than the lot of them.

I may well change my mind (as I do) but think I will be keeping this for some time

Cheers
Steve

cy – Member

@timc – My Rocket is 30.5lbs with pedals, 3 x 9 gearings, Fox 34’s, Reverb and 2.5″ tyres. It’s not that heavy, is it?

Five frame is 6.8lbs – Rocket is a shade heavier, but it’s a longer travel bike.

I tried a 5 a couple of weeks ago. Hugely capable. Extremely well sorted. Left me cold. Probably because I’m not brave enough to go fast enough to make it exciting if that makes sense.

I’m going to try a rocket in a couple of weeks. What I want is something like my ST4 but a bit more alp-esque capable. My ST4 weighs about 30lb with a dropper post so I’m quite happy if a M rocket comes up the same.

cy – Member

@timc – My Rocket is 30.5lbs with pedals, 3 x 9 gearings, Fox 34’s, Reverb and 2.5″ tyres. It’s not that heavy, is it?

No, its not that heavy, I,m simply asking, would a lighter material not have helped achieve that goal, It wasnt a comparrison to the Orange 5 in any way.

fatgit – Member
horses for courses

Here is the answer… 😆

@ timc – The reason for the steel on the Rocket is that during the development it become pretty obvious that there was going to be hardly anything in it weight-wise between aluminium and steel for the level of durability I wanted. That and the seat tube was much stiffer than the aluminium equivalent, so I could tie the suspension on properly.

The only way you’d shave significant weight off the Rocket and keep the durability is using carbon. 7.5lb 150mm frames aren’t that uncommon regardless of material. SB-66, Covert, Butcher all in that ballpark.

I suppose I got my 5 after demoing one and without trying anything else. However that was because I had enjoyed the demo rides I’d had on a 5 and I really couldn’t find demo rides in my size (20+”/XL) on any of the other bikes I was interested in at the time.

I replaced my 5 a couple of years ago but at least that time I was able to try out a number of bikes.

My conclusion from this is that it’s nice when bike shops and bike manufacturers don’t ignore people who aren’t of average height when it comes to their demo fleets…

roverpig – Member

OK, so you want the bike to “pop” of things more than most long travel bikes. You could just ride a bike with less travel of course (which would also be lighter), but I guess you still want the travel for the big hits (e.g. when you cock something up). But can’t you just increase the pressure in the suspension of any long(ish) travel bike to get the same effect?

Not really, because then it’ll stop working properly for the rest of the time- you’ll end up with overstiff suspension, sit high in the travel, lose compliance and not use the travel effectively. I mean, I suppose it’s an option if you want to bodge a characteristic into an existing frame, but it’s a bad one.

I’m not sure about the pop thing, it’s why I want to try one… I love the Hemlock’s total lack of pop. It’ll fly if I tell it to, but the rest of the time it’s just glued to the ground, much like my Herb. Suits me well. But I could be proved wrong 😉

OK, I guess I’ll have to concede that there is more to suspension design than just pumping it up a bit more 🙂 The problem is that, much as I admire people who try to push the envelope of what’s possible with bike design, I’m naturally a cynical fellow and tend to believe that virtually everything is just marketing BS unless proved otherwise. Guess I’ll just have to test some of these bikes out sometime and make my own mind up. Still, interesting to read the comments in the meantime.

Cheers,

Andy

cy – Member

@ timc – The reason for the steel on the Rocket is that during the development it become pretty obvious that there was going to be hardly anything in it weight-wise between aluminium and steel for the level of durability I wanted. That and the seat tube was much stiffer than the aluminium equivalent, so I could tie the suspension on properly.

The only way you’d shave significant weight off the Rocket and keep the durability is using carbon. 7.5lb 150mm frames aren’t that uncommon regardless of material. SB-66, Covert, Butcher all in that ballpark.

Makes sense, thanks for reply, it was a genuine question btw, not having a ‘pop’ at steel bikes!

out of interest where are the demo’s?

roverpig – Member

OK, I guess I’ll have to concede that there is more to suspension design than just pumping it up a bit more The problem is that, much as I admire people who try to push the envelope of what’s possible with bike design, I’m naturally a cynical fellow and tend to believe that virtually everything is just marketing BS unless proved otherwise. Guess I’ll just have to test some of these bikes out sometime and make my own mind up. Still, interesting to read the comments in the meantime.

you dont have to understand it to enjoy it though, make the efforts to demo, its worth it imo. i rode x8 bike before i bought mine, glad i did in hindsight

Demos are from our warehouse in Calver, Derbyshire. We take you on a guided 75-90min ride on our local loop. Come up and make a weekend of it?

OT, Cy, what is the difference in ride quality between the BFE and Soul?

Oh dear. You see, that’s why you shouldn’t go on ebay after a few drinks. I don’t need a new bike, my Trance is ideal for the sort of riding I do, but it would appear that I’ve bought an Orange 5 frame !!

The seller mentioned tat it was bought in 2008, but it has a straight top tube, so ‘m guessing that it’s a 2006 model. So, what to do with it.

I could just stick it back on ebay. I’m bound to make a loss as I paid too much, but I can just chalk that up to experience. However, since I’ve got it I guess I could source a few parts and build it up as a winter bike. Save all those little bearings on the Trance from getting trashed.

So, anybody know what fork I should stick on this (for general, natural, trail riding around Scottish hills in the winter)?

I guess I’m gong to have to get my head around all the “standards” for headsets, bottom brackets and brake mounts that seem to have multiplied alarmingly since last I built a bike.

Cheers,

Andy

Had a 5 and found it a bit vague in the handling department on the climbs and I always felt a but perched on top of it. Replaced it with a 575 which is a total weapon by comparison, much, much more balanced bike.

I prefer the soul though 😳

Would live a go on a Rocket to compare; if the front end is as confidence inspiring as the soul, then I’m up for one.

You really need to try both don’t you? Only my advice is to try the Rocket 1st cos if you try a 5 1st you won’t bother with anything else. Thats what happened to me anyway.

I tried one & didn’t like it – thought the front end was vague on climbs & it was uninvolving on the downs.

Would like to try a rocket sometime but am in no rush.

What I’d really like is someone that makes a 140mm front & 80 or 100mm rear just to take the sting out.

^ Google “GT Sanction”

What I’d really like is someone that makes a 140mm front & 80 or 100mm rear just to take the sting out.

Yeah, I’ve often thought that. Sort of half way between a hardtail and proper full sus, without being all racey and boring.

Options include:
DMR Bolt
Old SC Blur 4x
Commencal Meta 4x
(All of those apparently a bit small for longer rides though)
I saw a review a while ago of a GT trail bike that was something around 100mm rear travel designed for a 150mm fork. Can’t find it now though.

Around this time, there was a lot of buzz surrounding the SC Blur TRc, which was sort of in that vein (albeit with less difference in travel between front and rear). A sort all-day bike with thrashable geometry that allows longer forks compared to the rear travel, and rear sus that makes you ride properly instead of flattening the trail, allowing you to play about a bit more.

Long story short, I ended up buying a Yeti ASR-5 which I think has exactly these features – it’s probably more ‘playful’ than the TRc, too. I’ve not ridden a Blur TRc but I’ve ridden the LTc which felt a bit dead to me. Anyway, I’m very happy with the Yeti. It seems to be a fast bike that encourages hooliganism but is ready to climb very quickly as necessary.

EDIT: The GT I was on about: http://ride.io/reviews/gt-distortion-20-first-look/

The problem with the dmr bolt etc… in my opinion is they’re too much playbike, my 140 hardtail is a pa which is ideal for a bit of play but fine as an all day ride.

Haven’t checked the gt sanction.

What I’d really like is someone that makes a 140mm front & 80 or 100mm rear just to take the sting out.

I thought that was the point of the progressive rear suspension on the Rocket – to have the feel of a low slung slack mismatched travel bike, but with the extra travel still there for when you’d hit the bump stops on a shorter travel rear. It’s not like you’d save any significant weight by making it shorter travel as it’s built strong.

Ragley were supposed to be bringing out the 10-4 last year with 140mm front/100mm rear travel, which looked & sounded great (I was looking for essentially like my MmmBop but with some give in the back end at the time). Then Brant left and Ragley pretty much went AWOL ever since (not sure if that’s connected or not). Last I heard was that the release date had been delayed til next year for ‘further testing’.

In the mean time, I gave up waiting…and got a Five…and I love it 🙂

If you ride tech stuff get a 5, if you like trail centers go for the Cotic.

If you ride tech stuff get a 5, if you like trail centers go for the Cotic.

Out of interest what makes you come to that conclusion?

What I want is something like my ST4 but a bit more alp-esque capable

That would be a commencal Meta 55 or AM.
I still don’t get the POP thing. I have no problem whatsoever to bunny hop my bike or to use any rock around to propel it airborne. Surely it’s down to the rider more than the bike?

mr stu, nothing at all, just wanted to add even more mindless rubbish to this thread.

PrinceJohn – Member

What I’d really like is someone that makes a 140mm front & 80 or 100mm rear just to take the sting out.

Thing is, once you’ve gone to the hassle of adding a shock and pivots and such, it’s probably just as easy and light to have more travel.

I like the concept, though- my Hemlock’s 160/120 and works a charm. It used to have the wrong shock in the rear which reduced it to a lower, slacker, 100mm rear travel bike, but switching it up to 120mm didn’t bring much downside.

Sage words 🙂

Basically a tough sus bike doesn’t get any lighter by being 100mm travel. As mentioned, all the pivots need to be there and be stiff and strong. You’ll save the weight of the shorter shock.

I have wondered about this though. I’ve got a shock mount made up for a Rocket which would fit a 38mm stroke shock, so you’d get a little over 100mm travel. With a 140mm fork it’d be 67HA, 73.5SA, 13″ BB. A lighter sharper than the 150mm Rocket once on board as it wouldn’t sag as much. Haven’t done anything with it as I keep talking myself out of it. Seems some of you guys would still be interested in this kind of thing? It’d be no lighter than a Rocket, literally the same frame with a different shock.

Definitely interested in feedback, as it’d be an easy thing to do a short run of because our shock mounts are bolted and bonded.

I’d certainly be interested in trying out a short travel rocket. Certainly can’t say I’d be bothered by the fact it doesn’t weigh any less really for that kind of a bike we’re all looking for it being strong enough after all

A lighter sharper than the 150mm Rocket once on board as it wouldn’t sag as much.

that would defeat the purpose imo. I would want something just as slack (or slacker) when sagged and the same sagged bb height (or lower, so lower static bb height).

From what you’re saying you’d effectively be jacking up, what I assume is, you ideal design. Seems a bit daft

It sounds alright but as above, I’d imagine you’d ideally want to go slacker with your head angle to compensate for less sag. Maybe you could incorporate the equivalent of slack shock eye bushes into whatever adaptor thing you’re talking about?

I like the idea of the bike, but I reckon I’m just fantasising. I like the idea, but I suspect that all other things being equal, I’d still probably choose the bike with the most travel. Not desperately concerned re: weight though – if it’s just a mountain bike for riding all day / hacking about on, then +/- 1-2 lbs is A-OK with me.

I always liked the idea of a a shorter travel rear and a longer fork. I regret not buying a Hemlock so a mis-matched Rocket sounds like fun. I’m not an engineer so I leave all that stuff to others but in my head it could suit my riding.

legend – Member

that would defeat the purpose imo. I would want something just as slack (or slacker) when sagged and the same sagged bb height (or lower, so lower static bb height).

Stick a shorter shock into a longer travel bike- it’ll be as though it sits into the travel all the time. Course, that’ll cost you ground clearance, and might have unwanted effects on the suspension rates depending on the design.

yup, so the suspension layout would need tweaked to compensate but was figuring that Cy would be able to pick that up himself

I’m still trying to persuade Cy to man up and bring his demo days south…… 😉

I want to try a Rocket and a Solaris. Actually, better that he doesn’t probably….!!

I’d go for the 5,if only because Cotic’s are generally ridden by knob’eds………..

Deleted, not worth bothering to comment… 😉

I’ll put it right for you..

I’d go for the Cotic, if only because 5’s are generally ridden by knob’eds………

Thats better!

I am wondering if Cy would lend me a rocket fram in 17.5 for 3 month so I can test it properly. Specially since it’s suppose to be “very durable” I wonder if the bike is up to survive the “RACE”…

The Rocket`s video is way funnier than Orange 5 one…

juan – Member

Specially since it’s suppose to be “very durable” I wonder if the bike is up to survive the “RACE”…

He was confident enough to enter it into the no fuss endurance dh this year. Though, otoh he never showed up 😉 Breaks bikes and riders like they’re made of matchwood, that.