Just a gnarbobber for hucking around on here

Chapeau 😉

Might be a stiff link in the chain when it was joined

If you take the wheel to most any LBS they should be able to sort you out the right sized spoke/nipple. Swapping is easy to do yourself 😉

The point I think for the OP is you can have a steep/slack hardtail bike and go uphill and down hill. The belter looks mental btw

And yet in Europe, E-bikes are everywhere. All the shops have huge amounts for sale, at an expo at an event most of the bikes on the stands were e-bikes, and this was a XCM event. While this seems to be a huge issue causing angst in the Uk and US, Europe seems to have just got on with it.

And that’s exactly why we are out of the EU

This is interesting as it goes to show how flexible geometry can be on MTB/HTs

Thanks, @chiefgrooveguru, you did a far better job than me!

Simplifying it hugely, steep seat and slack head angles seem to work well on steel hardtails! Hope you get the bike you want 😉 Speak to BTR but, I reckon that long travel slack hardtails are great fun and work well flat and uphill, as siad – speak to BTR as it seems you want it more for downs anyway

Ive not ridden one but, in comparison, my frame (Meta HT CrMo) is similar in geometry, very similar angles at 65 HA and 73 seat, so slacker seat, similar head on mine. The 75 seat on the BTR is similar to a track bike so should be pretty full on for pedal stroke. The head angles are just .5 degree out compared to mine so not much 65 versus 64.5 on BTR, I have a Pike 160 on mine, it rides up hill very well, and is very pointable over undulating single track. Its hard to imagine a seismic handling difference. I use mine both on DH tracks and weekend longer rides and its is fine. Obviously all this depends on personal taste!

Looks a rad bike!

Edit: What size travel forks do they suggest?

Nope, 27.5 is ideal I reckon. Glad some (Orange) are making 26 as I have 3 kids and 27.5 will be a handful until they hit over 5′ 8 I reckon

It reads like a crappy US themed restaurant menu, its not an elegant frame to look at IMHO

Yeah but, what happens if you ride a trail, shockwhiz tells you to adjust everything and then you go somewhere else with different terrain, then you change again, and again, and again

Buy it now or be known a coward forever, that new stem could save your life, free imprisoned children and help you ride like a God, Thomson needs your money to feed his famly

Id say double check everything. If there is no physical damage visible to the cassette, or links in the chain (doubtful given the symptoms), it could be something really daft. Are the components standard or have you swapped anything? It might be an indexing issue caused by you being on the bike and pedaling, check everything for damage and the hanger is not banged. Check chain alignment too

Just keep changing your shit bikes until you aren’t a shit rider anymore, swapping shit always ends up with being a faster/gnarlier/tech/enduro hucker anyway

i don’t think you did think. The top end ratio spread on a compact is pretty much identical to a conventional double, you gain bottom end though. If you *need* the 53×11 you either need to learn to pedal or tap up Dave Brailsford and show his boys how to do it. If you aren’t a pro you don’t *need* pros gears. I prefered them when i was racing (euro pro) And still have them on some of my bikes (old team stuff.) I doubt I’d use them now. I can’t put down the same power i used to.

I was just stating my preferences, to be fair, compacts didnt exist so consider me a grumpy old man. The OP would get fitter IMHO with the gearing I used. Feel free to fire away, its just my thoughts, the OP might think it interesting even if you dont. I will say I’m quite proud of my pedalling, learn some manners young man!

I won a TT last night with a compact – against people pushing 400W. If you constantly run out of gears on a 50/11, then contact a few pro teams.

I think what matters is riding the bike hard a lot, and resting a lot. (that is somewhat simplified )

Congratulations for the win!
I dont agree with riding hard a lot until you have a steady base, but if you are a tester, that’s your mantra!

I prefer the gearing from 53 x 11, personal choice. Using a 39 inner offers better spinning on normal riding in my mind (I used to race/train with a 42 inner, 39 in the mountains). Time trials the inner gear is not so relevant IMHO. The main thing I suppose is what you are comfortable with.

Power to weight does matter. Regards the other blokes, if you didnt see it it didnt happen!

Focus on time spent in the saddle (accepting kids) so instead of looking at speed/distance, look at cadence (RPM), you should be able to replicate this to be the same both on bike and your trainer. Do this for a few months, dont even worry about hills, just focus on spinning. Spend as long as you can spinning along at the same cadence, same gear, high cadence as possible. Concentrate on lifting the pedals not pushing and pedalling circles etc. Honestly do this for about 3-4 months, 4-5 times per week. Also, get a traditional set of chainrings, 53 x 39 and a decent casette, 11 x 25. Just my 2 cents but it matters I think. The modern chainsets are really very ‘toury’.

You are exactly the same height as Eric Zabel and he won Milan San Remo loads 🙂

On steel, you dont land jumps but touch down 🙄

thats crap – you’ve totally missed the point of that post buckster… if a 200gbp whole bike can have the frame seatpost correct why the f can planet X not get it right on a frame costing 200gbp?

totally inacceptable. OP demand a seatpost to fit (get them to send a few if needs be) at their cost.

Because the margins are too low to be bothered to check on every frame the tolerances etc. It is shit, I agree.

Nonsense.
Planet X ‘designed’ the frame, specced the tubes, found a supplier, decided on a price point. They should be able to supply a ‘fit for purpose’ frame for that price that meets their own spec.

If they can’t, then they shouldn’t be selling the frame for that price.
The tube ID isn’t even close in most of the pictures I have seen. It’s like the wrong tube has been used.

We use a lot of tubing at work for gas flow/water cooling circuits & they are always spot on. Making tubes is an established process & it shouldn’t be that difficult for them to get tubes in the right size.

It would be interesting to know how they specced the tube; maybe they were sloppy on their tolerances on the drawings & the supplier is now holding them to that.
If you say, I want 5000 of these made to this tolerance & your tolerances aren’t adequate, then you can’t really complain when stuff starts coming in ‘to spec’ but not fit for purpose. Which is maybe the position they are in?

I could accept the ‘built to a low price’ argument if the paint was perhaps a bit thin, or the BB hadn’t been faced.
But the seat tube diameter is of critical importance to a working bike frame & should be correct.

Hang on, its not nonsense, I agree with you, my points was to say that the cost of this frame to build is low, the sale price is low ergo the margin is low, too low to support long term warranty etc. Its quite obvious that if the tube is the correct ID then the seat tube would fit! It appears it does not which suggests to me lax QC in Asia and no desire to check these things as product appears in the UK, otherwise, this frame would have been rejected on entry and returned to the manufacturer, surely?

Its a subjective subject! I think that steel has more ‘feel’ to an aluminium hardtail. I think they are a blast to ride and somehow more alive than aluminium. The weight penalty is not noticeable to me and at speed, the handling far outshines lighter weight aluminium.

Got exactly the same problem with my Commencal, I was told end of this month for the tool from silverfish.
I hope they get plenty in stock!

TRS or the ‘own brand’ Ride Alpha jobby

I’m not buying the what do you expect for the money comments.

You can buy a complete bike for the price of a London road frame. The seat post would be in a hole of the correct size.

That’s exactly my point, a frame retailing around £200 will have been made at a far lower cost. That lower cost will mean lower tolerances and, a lower margin product.

This is quite good fun; https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.atlogis.sovietmaps.free. Not sure if its on IOS

OP, if you can be bothered, it might be interesting to measure the inside dia of the seat tube and outside dia at the top of the tube and then also measure the outside dia of the tube at the bottom where it meets the BB shell, it looks in the pictures to be a standard tube so these (outside)should be the same. If the tube is greater than 31.6 inside dia at the top – hence the seat post not fitting – and the outside dia matches top and bottom, then, the tube is the wrong size and is possibly why the weld is poor too. Hope that makes sense!

I reckon they must have tried to make at least some of them 31.6 but for the cost, the tolerances might be a tad wild. if you look at the seat tube it appears in pictures to be a straightforward tube which means a 31.6 seat post ‘should’ fit, unless the manufacturing tolerances are shocking in which case not

If you go on their website, the warranty and returns for overseas is pretty clear. Whether they back it up and in what time frame who knows. Regards the quality, what do you seriously expect for the price? Build it up best as you can and enjoy it for what its worth

Politicians lied, Americans accused of spying and news broadcasters bobbing along to the tune of the paymaster, whatever next.

You forgot the Evans MTB Orienteering events in the 90s too, and family picnics on bikes (can be competitive)

What are XCO and XCE?

I only opened the thread to find out, none the wiser.

XCE= Eliminator and
XCO= Orangutan I think

All aluminium just now. Except the trials bike, I’ve no idea what that’s made of but that’s OK because I never ride it.

😆

Sword is a great answer, imagine if you could open champagne whilst at the same time shortening your stem, happy days.

Knee problems on road bikes are often (not always) caused by shoe/cleat/knee alignment. Essentially, when you pedal, your knee must be at a natural angle. i.e. as it would be if walking/running naturally. Often, folk cleat their shoes to the bike in a less natural manner (pointing forwards), then when spinning circa 80-120 times per minute, your knee goes tits up as its ground at angles it is not used too. E.g. my right foot on my road bike points out away from my bike and my left foot points just left of center, its how I walk and then cycles too.

The way to see what angle your feet should be at when riding is to sit on a kitchen surface with your legs dangling naturally, then look down and mentally note how your feet ‘hang’, then set up the cleats on your shoes to reflect this. Then when you pedal, your knees and feet will stay in a natural angle whatever the cadence.

If your feet are not hanging naturally, you will stress and strain knees, sometimes this brings out injuries which are actually not related to cycling.

Hope this helps, apologies if you are sucking eggs and knew this. 🙁

ahhhh, lucky lads, enjoy the ride, this weekend I shall be heading up all 250mts of Chiltern Hills and then hitting a bike park, cherish being where you are!

Monster, have fun!

So who is adding this up, silly poll

98 Scott Endorphin

Half the battle is your head, your brain will give up first, find a gear you can spin with, chill out and switch off and enjoy the ride, good luck

US cycling was involved in doping for years prior to Armstrong. He was just the icing on the cake. It was so obvious he was a cheat, his associations, his performance and his attitude.