Worth paying the extra for a Ragley Blue Pig Frame?

Since buying an On One Inbred I’ve hardly ridden my Full Suss bike and have decided to sell the frame and replace with a hardcore hardtail for the big days out and steep stuff.

I’m on a limited budget so was going to go for the new 456 EVO for £200 (If I could even afford that) but I got in from my cycle today to find a check for £238 from Scottish power in my post (nice).

Are there any other nice slack head angle frames for around £250 out there?

Thanks.

Do they differ much?

Same idiot designed both.

Only difference really is that you can fit a wider variety of dropper posts to the Ragley. If that bothers you, like.

did that idiot remember similar numbers each time?!

You get post on a Sunday 😯

Ha ha what a muppet! From what I’ve read the Ragley frame is possibly a bit lighter and more supple in the seat stays. Is this the case Brant?

You get post on a Sunday

No, I’m lazy and only check it every other day or something. Unless I’m waiting for a bit of bike in which case I’m out there waiting for the postie!

I would think the Ragley is slightly more compliant but that’s due to different top tube profile than seat stays. Though the seat stays on the OnOne are lighter and tapered.
OnOne has a touch lower BB but otherwise quite similar. Less steep seat angle on larger models as I added a few mm to the chainstays on the large sizes to tame the front end on steep climbs.

Are there any other nice slack head angle frames for around £250 out there?

NS Surge. Thinking I might buy one instead of spending money on new forks for my full sus.

i love my pig and wouldn’t change it. Maybe for the ti over brants fireplace 😉

Stick an extra £50 in and get a BFe. So much nicer than a 456 IME not tried a EVO or a blue pig but I love my BFe after hating my 456 with a similar build.

Brant- Thanks for the info. I’m leaning towards the Ragley now as the steeper seat angle and higher BB would suit my kind of riding better plus I like the frame design and you get stickers. It would be the 20″ frame that I’d need.

tom- Thanks for that looks like a nice bike too. How heavy is the Surge frame do you know?

I Ache- I’ve tried a Cotic and just didn’t get on with it that much for some reason.

You’ll see a huge difference between a 20in Blue Pig and a Mk1 456. The seating position is completely different. And actually, it’s pretty different compared to most other frames on the market.
And yes. Stickers 🙂

Fair enough, you seem like you have quite a good idea what works for you. Without wanting to state the obvious try to get a ride on a couple and see how they feel.

I think maybe the Cotic Soul I tried just wasn’t set up that well for me although I did try a few things with the set up. I must say it was a really nice plush, fun, springy ride but the steering didn’t feel very accurate or the front end very planted. I certainly wouldn’t rule out a Cotic though and it would be fun to try one of the newer designs like the Bfe.

Sounds like you might have had some poor forks on it. I find my BFe does exactly what I want it to do and while the front is a little flexy in the real rough stuff I can 100% put that down to the forks. If your anywhere near north Birmingham you are welcome to have a go on mine. Probably a bit small for you as its a medium.

brant – Member
I would think the Ragley is slightly more compliant but that’s due to different top tube profile than seat stays. Though the seat stays on the OnOne are lighter and tapered.
OnOne has a touch lower BB but otherwise quite similar. Less steep seat angle on larger models as I added a few mm to the chainstays on the large sizes to tame the front end on steep climbs.

Hi Brant – your comment regarding compliance and top tube design is interesting as I often see it said and repeated that compliance of a frame is related to the design of the rear triangle. Is this something particular to your designs or is true across all mountain bike frame designs?

Hi Brant – your comment regarding compliance and top tube design is interesting as I often see it said and repeated that compliance of a frame is related to the design of the rear triangle. Is this something particular to your designs or is true across all mountain bike frame designs?

I’ve always noticed, throughout history, that triangles are an essentially quite rigid structure.

Maybe that’s just me though.

The reason that’s repeated is that most people don’t really understand how a bike works.

Though admittedly I’ve found out lots of things by doing things wrong 🙂

Cheers Brant – one of the great things about STW is that you can get your questions answered by the guy who actually designed your bike 😀

Have Ragley sorted their QC issues yet? If not I’d steer well clear.

Add the bit extra and get the blue pig x, I have and it’s very nice , way more so than my 456.

I’ve always noticed, throughout history, that triangles are an essentially quite rigid structure.

True of the main triangle too, which the “more compliant” top tube is part of.

True of the main triangle too, which the “more compliant” top tube is part of.

I apologise johnners. I over simplified.

The rear triangle is subject to a point load at one corner, resisted by the other sides.
That’s not at all how the front “triangle” works, which isn’t really a triangle anyway. Indeed the whole frame is actually a truss.

The “compliance” of the main triangle comes about by the fork exerting a bending load about the top of the down tube, which causes the top tube to bend downwards as the wheels splay apart. It’s the wheels splaying apart that gives the feeling of compliance in a bike.

If the front end was triangulated correctly, with a tube going say, from the front hub to the bottom bracket, to “tie in” the front wheel, then it would be a solid triangulated structure. But it wouldn’t go round corners very well.

Thanks for taking the trouble to explain, still not sure I get it though!

I drew some pictures

http://www.shedfire.com/2012/04/02/frame-flex/

wow, learn something new everyday…always thought it was the rear that made my 456 harsh, makes sense tho, with the downtube as a toptube and such

Have Ragley sorted their QC issues yet? If not I’d steer well clear.

What’s a ‘QC Issue’ and how bad is it?

OK I figured it out ‘Quality Control’ duh.

Thanks Brant – Your drawing has made me realise there’s a market for a bike painted to look like strings of sausages. Ta.

Have Ragley sorted their QC issues yet?

Whilst not wanting to create a stir, the alleged QC ‘issues’ bandied across forums are something that genuinely put me off buying a Ragley…but I’m still looking for a frame…so I’d be interested in the answer to that question too.

No QC issues with my Troof… it’s an awesome frame and it build up really easily.

messiah – Member

When and where did you buy your frame if I may ask?

@butcher – some specific problems with one batch (of Piglet’s) is what I heard. Have to say I looked at them and bought a BFe partly on QC rumours and partly as I decided on more “traditional” geometry. As I’ve posted before lots of happy Pig and Piglet owners out there.

Not alleged issues with my mate’s Bluepigs. First one’s (Mk 1)seat tube was the wrong size leading to damaged parts. Took a year for a warrenty replacement to come (Mk 2)and when it did the head tube was out of shape and wouldn’t take a headset. That one went back and he bought my old Orange.

Hi GiantJaunt. I bought the Troof from CRC, it was on offer and before I realised what had happened I had to start grovelling to the wife. Been worth it though. I’d rather have gone through an LBS but I had an Mmmbop before so knew what size I wanted etc.

brant – what’s the difference between a Blue Pig and Blue Pig X in terms of how they feel on the trail. Is the geometry the same, and is one lighter/more comfy than the other? Plus, would a 160mm fork work out ok – I know it’s not the optimum recommended length. Ta.

blue pig x feels lighter and more responsive due to less cash in your wallet.