On the steep tech cimbs at Stainburn when I first rode it there was a disconcerting flip-flop sensation. However, this became less noticeable and no issue after I’d ridden it a bit more. I guess you inherently adjust to it. Fitting it with forks that you can wind down for climbs would probably be a good idea.

It’s cheap / good value and fun. I ran it with Pikes at 140, although I believe it’s built to run anything between 100 to 150 I wonder if 110 might be a teeny bit short. Probably fine.

Have a Slacker, never laid an arse cheek on a BFe.

Slacker is a cheap/good value frame with plain gauge tubes and super slack head angle. If you go for a double+bash and run a bigger double ring (say 34 or 36t) then the chainstay clearance (with the intended 50mm spacing on the cranks) is fag paper tight. Not a massivey big deal but has lead to a few jammed chain problems. Price of being able to run big tyres I guess. Apparently you can “squeeze”/deform/crush the chainstay so clearance is better.

The tubes are regular old DN6 / 4130 cromoly equivalents (I think :-S

Personally went for 16″ at 5’10” and found it good. Bit short for climbing / general riding but manageable. Really good with the saddle out the way or when doing tech stuff where you’re moving around more on the bike.

Thought the BFe was (unkindly?) referred to as a Soul with more meat on it. Glancing at their site the HA is much steeper than a Slacker. 853 tubing as well by the looks of it. Oh, and 3 or 4 times the price.

Saucer+meths+pads+match = good chance of recovering them. Has worked for me previously with DOT on pads.

Cut hose with anything handy, have used snips, cable cutters and stanley knife.

Always have done them upside down. Still get oil out of both ends.

A PUSH upgrade is probably on the cards as with new fork prices going a little crazy I don;t think I’m going to make a swap to Coil 454s (unless someone readin is in the market to sell me some?).

Hey ho. They aren’t shit by any means but I’m finding them a right bugger.

Mine have been the biggest PITA fork I’ve ever owned. If I was buying again I would forego the small weight saving and get coils.

Been back twice for repair under warranty. A pain to balance the +/- chambers, foreever loosing oil out the valves.

This may just be my experience.

Love another set of cheaper Pikes I have on another bike.

It is cheap though.

Architects are awful.

They play at masterplanning and layouts and then leave all the problems and actual “making it work” to people who actually know what they’re doing i.e. proper engineers.

IMO

;-)

Aye up Andy :waves:

I appreciate that personal preference comes in to it and what you stated above is a sizing issue not a performance one. That doesn’t make the PA better than a 456 it just makes it better for you.

No, it wasn’t a sizing issue. I rode the same approximate size of each of the frames, which is what I’m comparing. I just mentioned the Slacker as it’s a 456 derivative but being so slack is better (IMO) in a smaller, more chuckable size.

What I disagree with is that you say:

there is nowt between them in physical performance

Which I think is just plain wrong. They are different frames with different handling feels (going back to chainstay length for example) and consequently ride differently because of it. I agree they’re both good but different.

Which one is for you, me or more particularly the OP is personal preference but this preference will largely (IMO) be because they are physcially different, certainly in the ride respect.

As for the “aesthetics and ergonomics” I’m never bothered about the paint when I’m riding ;-)

There’s nowt between them in terms of physical performance.

I don’t agree. Whilst they’re both just bikes and there can be a lot of crap writen plus anyone individual might notice or appreciate differences I think they ride differently. Some might like one more than the other. In my (limited of a 456, lots on a PA) experience I preferred the PA.

Sizing: 5’10” and rode a medium PA, 16″ Slacker, 18″ 456. Got the 16″ slacker because the 456 felt too “big”. If you were shorter than me I’d go for the smaller size.

IMO the 16″ 456 does not compare to a medium (17.5″) PA i.e. it’s comparing a “small” sized frame with a “medium” one.

Have had both an 18″ 456 and 17″ PA (I think – it was a mk1 with the dinky tube think mk2 is 17.5″). I didn’t really ride the 456 much as it was built up for a mate and this and the PA were fairly separate in terms of time. I’ve also owned and ridden a 16″ 456 Slacker / Summer Season / whatever, recently.

18″ 456 felt a bit gate like and hence I got the 16″ Slacker. Generally stable and a nice ride. I really liked the Slacker but it’s got a way slacker HA so not a good comparison to the PA. PA rode great, despite being quite solid / heavy. Felt good on the climbs although needed to shuffle forward onto the saddle’s nose to keep the front down. Doubt you’d hae to so much if on the 456 but can’t say defintively. Mike made quite a big thing of the relatively short chainstays and think the 456’s are longer. PA was really good with 125 or longer forks, wouldn’t bother with anythign shorter.

Incoherent ramblings.

If I was getting another it’d be a PA, not an equivalent sized 456.

I don’t remember them having a menu system last time I called. Always got a person and though Sales Dept were often busy always got a prompt call back and/or email to update me.

Did you actually ring them?

Always been good for me.

If I haven’t got a response to an email I usually ring. Old skool I know but it seems to work ;-)

It was cut to exactly the same length as the steerer on the old forks.

Unless the new headset has exactly the same stack height then that might not be as sure-fired as you imagine.

I imagine 2mm clearance would be enough but just for the hell of it whack on an extra spacer and see. Some top caps have bevelled edges / lips on the inside that can foul the steerer as you preload. Bit of a longshot I accept but at least it would rule out one possibility.

Is anything else loose that you’re mistaking for play in the headset? E.g. loose caliper bolt.

The newest gen. Ipod Shuffle does playlists (assume that’s the one the OP meant at £70).

I got one on a whim. Then read teh ilounge review whilst waiting for it to be delivered and they slated it.

Got it, have used it a few times and personally I think it’s cracking. I Ijust wanted something small and cheaper that if I mangled wouldn’t be quite so bad as trashing my Classic.

Latest gen. Shuffle is just 3 buttons on the right earpiece for volume and skip etc. Talks to you too, bit odd. Teeny tint size as well.

Not sure it’s worth £70 for the price the older ones are going for but way better than I thought it would be from the review. Reviews eh, they’re not just bollocks in the MTB press ;-)

Might be interested depending on price, condition, caliper fitting etc. Email timsellors[at]googlemail[dot]com

We work with FE quite a bit (SingletrAction – I’m the daft sod currently holding the dubious honour of “Chairman”). We have not entered into any sort of agreement akin to the one you mention, for any of the places that we “work” i.e. Dalby, Wharncliffe, Stainburn etc. That’s to the best of my knowledge (stuff might have happened before me but I doubt it). Also, whilst I know volunteers at Dalby and Wharncliffe use forest roads, we don’t at Stainburn.

However, FE is far from consistent across its areas so that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have been asked. More likley that either you have someone “zealous” or we have people that aren’t ;-)

I’m not legal but I deal with a bit of this sort of stuff at work. If you want proper advice ask a solicitor for some pro bono (good luck ;-) I’d make the following comments:

(c) looks like a clause for contractors, I’d ask them to remove it. In all reality what can the odd personal vehicle do in terms of damage compared to a forest road?

(d) I wouldn’t sign up to anything of the sort if it were me. I have seen a few instances on certain sites where they bang out a badly drafted and inappropriate document (e.g. a commercial operator’s contract for a bunch of volunteers doing trail building) and say “sign it”. I have invariably advised people not to. I won’t sign up to anything that puts personal liability on me and have no authority to do so on behalf of any of the members. You’re on their site, should be aware of their rules and agree to abide by them, just like their employees. That way you’re following appropriate procedures and other than that I think it’s unreasonable to place such burdens on voluntary groups. Especially when we’re helping them to reach their own goals (which are luckily similar to some of our own).

(j) Doesn’t seem so bad so would roll with it.

Like I said above, getting these things is usually because someone has got (possibly) the wrong end of the stick and has used the wrong tool (the person sending it out probably doesn’t grasp the legal or financial implications – it’s probably the last one they used in a vaguely similar situation, or that they got when they asked a colleague for one).

FC are supposed to have an MoU with IMBA (or has that expired?) and pointing the person at that, explaining the implications of complying with their clauses (cash, time, hassle for little / no appreciable benefit etc) and why it’s inappropriate to constrain volunteers giving freely of their time to help themselves and other people enjoy the forest for recreational use might persuade them to drop / amend.

Then again, it might not.

You might be able to get constructuve advice from Ian Warby at CTC or from IMBA (I’ve talked to Kieran Foster quite a lot). NB: quite a lot of the IMBA peeps are FC employees etc so there *might* be issues for them (although Kie is not).

Hope that helps. If you want to get in touch and discuss further feel free (timsellors[at]googlemail[dot]com). You guys sent me the OGB manual so it’s all good back scratching ;-)

The ilounge site is great for tips on this sort of thing.

I bought some online software they recommended and pressed the button saying “would you like to download your ipod to itunes”.

Job done.

Funk knows what it was though, it’s on the PC at home.

Salsa QR seeat collar (30mm dia), old Raceface XY post. Absolutley fine, no slippage.

I think the usual response to this sort of question is “use a coke can shim”.

Edit: although Hope now do a 30mm QR seat clamp (new shape / design).

Like said above, I don’t think it’ll work.

The levers appear to be Euro set up (front brake on RHS).

The rear fitting for a brake (on a DB Alpine) is IS. You would need an IS to Post converter or IS to IS step up spacer (so the caliper is in right position for diameter of disc).

It might be that SLX is post mount fitting on the caliper. However, “3 Shimano Mount Adaptor Rear Post to IS 180mm” ought to be Rear IS to Post, 180mm diameter.

I think….

In hindsight – mleh!

Stu – interested if you get a source for McLeods, will email you.

Brash stays green for a while (depending on tree type) and then browns / looses bulk and is much easier to handle. I’d give it a while (if you have that luxury). At Stainburn FE came back in and mounded a lot of it up then set slow burning pyres to get rid. Sort of succesful.

Ground underneath is often trashed and more importantly the drainage is usually knackered. Water will route down vehicle tracks and just generally does what water does. Worth carefully looking at to decide whether to reclaim or relocate.

I’d take the opportunity to do both and make the most of the land now that you have to do lots of work to recover trails, rather than following the pre-existing lines (unless they were already the best).

Scruff – the prob with that Macleod is the bolt on the bottom. It’ll either come loose, get spanged up ot make tamping / shaping harder with that lump in the centre of the plate. McLeods are good but my two favourite tools are proably Chillington Style hoes (or azadas – http://www.get-digging.co.uk/tools.htm) and long handled (fibre glass) shovels (swan necks / bull nose)http://www.toolstation.com/shop/Hand+Tools/Landscaping+Tools/Fibreglass+Handle+Round+Point+Shovel+48+Straight+Handle/d10/sd2669/p44025

A McLeod will be pretty poor for clearing the brash itself (although I suspect you meant for digging the trail beneath once brash cleared). Brashing hooks (especially long handled ones) are better but TBH it’s just a PITA job. Plus sharp tools = less fingers, sooner or later ;-)

Common or garden pruning saws are excellent for getting through green wood fast. Chainsaws on FE land, without the proper tickets, are a one way trip to falling out with the Forest Manager IME.

We’ve got the same sort of job ahead of us at Norwood / Stainburn. We’ve improved the line that we will “reclaim” to make the most of the opportunity. It’s not hard and fast though, different sites, levels of disturbance, etc etc mean the solution is likely to be unique to you. Not least will be the number of volunteers / their productivity.

Gil at http://www.thecycleshed.co.uk/tshirts.html does ours for SingletrAction (he’s the former Chairman / Dalby geek and does us a good deal ;-).

The quality is excellent given most of us use them to dig and ride in and I’ve yet to wear one out. He’s a top bloke as well.

Cheers

emails to: timsellors[at]googlemail.com

Ta

Yes, just had that confirmed (not through CRC). I thought if it was OEM it was supposed to be stated (or did I just miss it?) Hey ho, buy cheap buy twice – heavy weight, aftermarket spring here I come ;-)

Kona WahWahs

Quite possibly, but unless Fox still supply forks with spare springs then it’s a moot point.

That was me you talked to. Nice to meet you. I have a habit of wandering through the woods with tools, more often a slasher and/or pruning saw. No wonder some people don’t talk to me ;-)

Glad to hear you had such a good session, sounds like you were getting it. As I said, come back soon for a second go and more of it will “drop into place”. So much is just about a positive state of mind and staying relaxed.

The drop / roll on the Descent Line is easier (IMO) than the Slab on the Boulder Trail. Rolls veery smoothly and little chance of an OTB. Still, we each have our personnal trail demons ;-)

Glad you liked the climbs as well. Good rides should have both IMO :-)

Mark: it’s not how big it is but how you use it ;-) If you can pedal the “big” bike up then kudos. TBH there’s plenty of “not big” bikes get pushed up too. Mleh, I know you get my drift ;-)

Forestry operations trashed Norwood (the “other” side). They had previously designated the trails over there as “informal”, hey ho. We have permission to reclaim them. This will probably involve a fair bit of re-alignment to improve matters.

As for timescale it’s very hard to say. Originally the trails were simply pre-existing stuff and some brashed lines, maybe a tiny bit of organic was swept off. There was a bit of re-routing and some limited sections got re-built/reclaimed after phases of felling that occured during the last couple of years. This got us to where we were before the most recent felling phase (and there’s one more still to come).

Depending on how we reclaim it might work to simply clear our intended route of brash. This might give enough for people to ride almost immediately. TBH this is unlikely as felling works are incredibly hard on the ground as it is and knacker whatever ad hoc drainage existed before hand. You can but hope ……..

Then the long slow process of building (to whatever standard we agree with FE) can begin. First though we have to finish the Extension to the Descent Line.

In short, there might be something rideable in 6 months time (ever the optimist ;-) In reality it’ll probably be a year unless something special happens.

Having spent far too much time in the woods (and not enough of it riding) I’ve seen folks ride it on almost every and anything. As some half-arsed roadie once said, it’s not about the bike (which given my own “collection” is a bit rich ;-)

There’s an awful lot of folk up there nowadays on “big” bikes which, IMO, is a bit of a waste. The trails work as a series of loops (double black / Boulder trail, red loop, red out/Descent Line/double black climb, cheeky/secret Aldo’s line/double black climb). You can do any of these (and other) combinations and as many times as you like / can keep turningthe cranks. Big bikes (or thir riders ;-) can’t do the “up” bit, which just seems like you’re only getting the most out of half the trail.

Whatever though, better out riding on whatever you’ve got than not :-)

All are welcome at Dig Days (first Sunday of the month, check out http://www.singletraction.org.uk) if you ever fancy putting a bit back in. Certainly over the next two months extra bodies would be great to crack on with the Descent Line Extension.

TFT usually include notes on the back of the invoice. The one’s with my Pushed RP23 said it might be sqelchy at times and it is. Doesn’t seem to be to any detriment though.

Cheers for the advice folks.

Mike YGM.

Will bodge in the meantime.

Feel happy to know I’ve not proved myself a complete numpty (this time ;-)

No. Meant the standard “car park test” i.e. get bike out of car, stick wheels in, bounce suspension in car park e.g. checking rebound speed. But ride it and it feels great / totally different. Believe it’s because the damping is speed sensitive (but now I’m just repeating stuff off the Pinkbike review ;-).

Anyhoo, Propedal still works on RP23 when it’s Pushed so wouldn’t have though it’d make any difference to your commute.

Dunno, doubt it though. Pretty sure TFT do Push upgrade on top of everything they do at a service. If / when I get my Pikes seviced I’ll probably get them Pushed as well.

Push Upgrade feels weird (and TBH a bit sh1t) in the car park. Totally different when you’re riding. Not going to rush to do it though, just when it fits in and is economical.

I bought last years RP23 (i.e. not the one with bigger air sleeve) off TFT and got it Pushed.

I really like the ride. Not having ridden the shock before it was Pushed I can’t say if it has made a significant difference. As the price is pretty low when adding at point of sale I’d do it. No good reason other than reading general comments about Pushed kit.

Ha.

We raffled a 456 Summer Season to renewals last year.

This year is even better, new and renewing members will get:

A lovely letter telling them about some of the stuff that’s been going on.
A copy of Hope’s 20 year anniversary booklet (with section on the club / Stainburn)
A membership card (discounts galore in shops throughout Yorkshire).
Stickers (everyone loves stickers!)
The chance to win not just once but many times from a generous sponsor’s mystery gifts (more to be revealed one day ;-)

Not really trying to be competitive, honest ;-)

Membership is a bit dearer though (£15). But we still haven’t sorted out membership on line :-(

http://www.singletraction.org.uk

I do like those place mats though!

Typical response from a PF

and you’re just a big gob who rides.

LOL

But you’re assuming he rides ;-)

Rudeboy’s post is the definition of a prissy **** IMO.

If the cap fits ……

LOL!

Very apt description ;-)

CTC:

http://www.clearthattrail.org.uk/

CTC have forms / links on their website to report obstructions – usually to RoW officers in local authority.

Diesel – EA and/or environmental health dept (or whatever **** title they’ve decided on now) at local authority.

At a guess.