I am thinking of getting a few custom built XCL’s, lower and slacker than standard, which seems to be the way things are moving, but was wondering what you guys would want from a general 5″ trail bike, not an all day bike, just something to go and ride for a few hours, trail centres etc

What’s your thoughts?

um, 68ish HA, 73ish SA – like my blur 4x really?

Steepen HA with a winddown fork for climbing / flat singletrack

65deg HA
64deg SA
12.6″ BB
16.7″ CS
22.5″ TT
16″ seat-tube
43.75″ WB

Thanks!

oh, and ISCG05 mounts

+1 on acjim’s angles…pretty ideal I reckon. Nice low TT, maybe something like 13.5″ BB. I’d want those angles based on a 140mm fork, 150+ is still overkill for most stuff imho.

GW – that’s one slack mutha!

I s’pose, but it’s the Goemetry I ride on my own short travel bike and IMO there is a distinct lack of nice slack short travel bikes out there. I know quite a few DHers who would like a slacker/lower trail bike. it’s not so long ago that just over 5″ was enough for DH WC riders and the geometry I’m using is still fairly steep for a WC bike. but then, IMO 5″ is too much travel for most trail centres.

Indeed, not quite “trail” bike geometry there GW 😉

Would your ass not be well behind the rear axle when climbing in the saddle? I’d be interested to try it on the dh.

My preference would be for at least an adjustable/wind down fork for climbing, leading to changing angles. Much like my Enduro!

Also, what about two point shock mountings, to allow for a change in the angles again, making it nice and flexible? Head angle of 67/67.9 and a seat angle of 71.9/72.8 is what I have at the moment, and it seems perfect as a trail centre/five hour hoon around the hills kind of bike.

thats veryyyyyyyyyyyyyy low, 12.6″ BB? Add in 50mm of sag and your looking at just over 10″, cranks are 7″, add on half an inch for pedals and that means that even on a smooth trail your looking at grinding he pedals on any pebbles over 2.5″ tall!

Id settle for………

14″ BB (unweighted)
40mm of very linear travel, then a bit of progression upto 80mm, then 40mm super ramping up (like whytes/marins?) so it sits nicely at its sag point, sits about 2″ lower in the corners but still has somethign left to give over drops.

67deg HA, i dont want a chopper!

23.5″ TT

70deg seat angle (i want to pedal this thing)

16.5″ chainstay.

Bolt through rear end

No idea how they’d interact in practice, but if i were designing a bike its where i’d start. I suspect the ramp up may need tweeking to stop the rider being thrown forewards like the old V10’s.

Ohh, and an electronic lockout 🙂 one little push switch to swap from plush to firm at both ends.

CaptainFlashheart – Member
….. what about two point shock mountings, to allow for a change in the angles again, making it nice and flexible? Head angle of 67/67.9 and a seat angle of 71.9/72.8 is what I have at the moment, and it seems perfect as a trail centre/five hour hoon around the hills kind of bike.

Umm the C’dale Prophet?
What I need it a QR for the prophet to make the change easier….

behind the rear axle? nah, not even close.

with a 800mm seatpost it possibly would be 8)

What exactly is “TRAIL” geometry then? isn’t the quickest tool round any “trail” still an XC race hardtail?
if you want to have fun, why compromise geometry just for the un-fun part (climbing) 😉

68ish at the front, 72ish at the back, adjustable rear travel say 100 – 140 in a few steps, around 14″ BB so you don’t go smacking pedals everywhere and a longish top tube, but shorter back end.

thats veryyyyyyyyyyyyyy low, 12.6″ BB? Add in 50mm of sag and your looking at just over 10″, cranks are 7″, add on half an inch for pedals and that means that even on a smooth trail your looking at grinding he pedals on any pebbles over 2.5″ tall

you’re talking bollox mate! I rarely hit my pedals and mainly ride it down DH tracks. on my DH bike (13.6″ BB and 8″ travel) however, I often destroy pedals – do the badly thought out arithmetic 😛

Im with GW on this apart from I would steepen up the seat tube a little.

I would also have the bike designed for fork travel between 120mm and 160mm so you can fit Reba maxles if your smooth or want light weight all the way through to Lyriks/36s for hard core drum ‘n bass trail hooning.

I would also only want about 100mm of rear travel too.

There are not enough short travel slack fun bikes out there. I quite like the idea of putting a shorter shock on my Pitch to slacken her off and see what its like. Rather than doing the normal and putting longer forks on it.

GW’s geometry looks not bad as a mini DH bike. I’d want an extra inch on the toptube, about a 67 degree head angle and a 71 or 72 degree seat angle for more uphills though….

Pretty much like my Kona howler’s ended up, seeing as it’s now got 150mm forks on it.

I_Ache,

That was something the Yanks seemed to be heading towards.

On my current ride if I drop the travel @ the back the BB gets lower and the bike gets slacker, might give it ago, it’ll do summit like 12mm at a time.

surely theres a sensible limit even for DH bikes where sensible goes out the window?

whatever an orange st4 with pikes at 120 comes out at.

My Blur 4X has a 12.6″ BB height, albeit that is measured on a 100mm fork, rather than 120mm or 140mm as I normally ride it.

I wouldn’t change the geometry of my 4X at all tbh.

as per my 05 Nic Helius FR, similar geo here

http://www.nicolai.net/manuals/tech_sheet/Helius_FR_09.pdf

GW’s numbers look ok. Maybe add an inch to the ST length, and steepen it up slightly perhaps a 66.5 head angle but a seat tube thats a fair bit steeper so I could get a decent saddle height without sitting over the back wheel so much.

I had one of those 03 specialized SX’s, that was a proper smart bike in the slack setting. Really low BB and slack head angle. I’d propably go for something with maybe 4/4.5 inchs of travel rather than 5.

Steve give it a go. The way I figure it is that a shorter travel back end will be more flicky. I dont need 150mm 90% of the time. I could even wind down the pikes to match it.

This whole concept of short rear mid front travel is something I would love to play around with. I think something like a small stumpy or fuel ex with some Pikes on the front would be great to ride as even the small sizes would still have a decent TT length. Trundles off to try and find info about an Orange sub 3.

why the low TT and slack ST? Surely contradictorary?

Low TT helps if your stood up, slack ST implies your going to be sat down? And limits suspension/tyre clearance?

Then again ive learnt to ride with my seat up and a 18″ frame, not being able to grip the frame with my knees just feels wierd now! And 18″ is the perfect size for bending your knee round the TT in fast corners.

The low TT on my BMX helps as it tends to get bailed a lot more than the propper bikes, but unless your pulling can-cans, tailwips and tabletops, whats the point in a low TT?

Some good feedback and idea’s, i know Chumba have been working on a revised link for the XCL (see below) which will change the HA to 66.5 and lower the BB by 1/4″ from 13.5″, pretty simple really.

The only issue i can see with a slacker HA is surely you must have to ride the front end more aggressively to keep from washing out? Fine if thats your style i suppose.

Do you only ride stood up on certain bikes and sat down on certain bikes?

I ride stood up and sat down on all my bikes.

Si, I think that the fashion for slacker front ends has to go hand in hand with the one for wide bars. The wide bars pull your weight forwards, meaning that you do ride in a more aggressive, weighting the front tyre, manner.

Just off the top of my head…

Top Tube Length………..23.0”
Standover Hgt………….28.0”
Head Tube Length………..4.33”
Head Tube Angle (Steep)…70.5º
Head Tube Angle (Slack)…69.5º
Seat Tube Angle (Steep)…69º
Seat Tube Angle (Slack)…68º
BB Height (High)……….13.23”
BB Height (Low)………..12.76”
Wheelbase……………..42.95”
Chainstay Length……….16.7”

On paper at least the angles of an Orange Blood look close to spot on, although I’d want it to be optimised for a 140mm fork with a 67 degree head angle.

My ideal would be –

66.5-67 HA
69-70 SA
13.3 BB
22.8 TT
16.8 CS
43.5 WB
17″ ST

The seat tube may need to be a bit steeper to counter the short stays,I’m 6.2″ btw if that makes any difference…

On a side note I don’t suppose either of the two Blur 4x owners on this thread would be interested in selling me your frame?

someone up there makes an interesting point, do you want fun or speed?

I’d say the fastest bike arroudn any trail center would be the giant anthem, felt attrocious over the jumps, but my gosh did it fly! Did an entire lap of cannock and must have overtaken just about every type of bike in existance.

My hardtail may be more fun, but realisticaly i’m sure the anthem is faster.

as an ex- blur 4x owner id agree with those above who really rate it as a trail bike. the long wheelbase, low bb and slack head angle really make it fun pretty much anywhere and amazingly capable when things get nasty.

my only changes if speccing custom would be to lengthen the top tube a bit as it gets too cramped when you have to use the seat at a pedalling height and it wouldnt hurt to have a bit more cockpit room on the downs either, get a maxle rear end and iscg05 mounts, and lastly not use vpp! maybe the 2nd gen is better but i think for a bike like the 4x a good 4 bar or even better a single pivot would be ace.

some little brand should just steal the 4x geo and stick their own back end on it, id buy one again!

schrickvr6 – Afraid not. A couple of have come up for sale on the classifieds in the last 6 months though

slowrider – I find the top tube length OK (despite being 6’3″) but I have to agree to having concerns about the VPP – without Pro-Pedal it bobs (with corresponding chain growth) disconcertingly in the granny ring. What did you replace the 4X with, out of interest?

Oh, and one of the reasons it works so well is because it doesn’t have too much rear travel (115mm)

David – my 4.5″ travel SX (02?, long) with pikes at 140mm and in the slack setting sits at:

65deg HA
63.5deg SA
12.6″ BB
16.75″ CS
23″ eff TT
18″ seat-tube
43.75″ WB

it’s way faster than my Sunday DH until it gets properly rough, and even then, it’s the forks that let it down.

Si – You’re right, slacker head angles only work well if you ride agressively.. if mincing about sat down on a 6″ travel bike is your bag then pick a No out a hat coz TBH any old H/A will do 😕

jfeb, an orange 5 with maxle rear end and talas 36’s.

I thought this thread was about GPS (geo-positioning) so I never opened it until today when I find it full of obscure abbreviations and numbers that mean nothing to me 🙁

Simon I am with you on that…

Mine looks like this for coming down..

and this for along up and down..

would be very interested in a go on an Orange Blood.

No-one’s mentioned rear axle path here….

All these numbers are pretty irrelevant without talking about this…

No-one’s mentioned rear axle path here….

be honest, that was an intentional troll innit ?