Those mudguards, especially the Moto style front one really don't do the bike any favours in the looks department
Can you even see your front wheel when riding?

IMO the latest Crud rear and front downtube ones look the best (As in least worst) and then stick a RRP fork mudguard to stop the front spray

"Forks Might Be Getting Some Ive Got specialized Stuntjumper "
If you do put a 160mm Fox 36 on it you'll void your (lifetime?) warranty on the frame

Most upto date:

Now with normal rise stem back on and with higher rise bars (and the saddle put back to its normal 'bolt-not-let-it-slip-back' position)

I prefer these pictures of it though:

Fair enough. You could wear some thicker socks or extra socks just in case they rub?
The sole is only stiff from the cleat backwards, its supposed to flexible forward of the cleat

As well as being more expensive, white parts are (mostly/often?) heavier due to the white layer. Some are a lot heavier than you might think

Any reason?
I didn't have any problems riding mine from new

If you saved it, then you might have more than £50 each time you desperatly wanted to buy something, like a whole new bike?

"A 2.1 Advantage is considerably higher volume than a 2.1 Crossmark"
Really? I thought they're pretty close (but not comparing on the same rims). The lower tread makes the crossmark smaller overall though

It was a mkI nomad. I'm only guessing it wouldn't fit, based on it not having one. They could have been trying to slacken it off a touch even when a 2.4" might have fitted

"that is what heavy bikes are for they don't brake"
Apart from meta 55s do break ..

I just haven't got round to buying one. If I was to buy one I'd buy the specialized one because it has XC type venting on the back of it. £100ish has put me off so far

Having only ever took a 5" FS (shod with 2.5" tyres) and knowing I'd be riding some uphills has something to do with it though

2.25" Advantages (Ardents, Crossmarks) are bigger than 2.35" High Rollers, Larsen TTs (Minions, Ignitors, Swampthings), they're the same wort of size as 2.5" High Rollers (& Minions). The tyre carcass I reckon is a bit bigger than the carcass/air volume of a 2.5" HR/Minion, just that the chunkier tread on a 2.5" HR/Minion makes them about the same overall volume (width & height)

2.25" Advantages really need pretty wide rims to get the most out of them though, they've a pretty round shape (the side tread isn't massively tall), so at higher pressures where they roll better, they don't corner that well. At lower pressures where they corner and grip reasonably well they roll really quite slow due to the width of them, and not having fully ramped tread
Mavic XM719s (19mm internal, 24mm external) aren't really wide enough for eg

Whereas 2.35" Maxxis will run normal XC tubes fine, I've found the extra size of the 2.25" Advantages really makes the tubes have to stretch to make them fill out the tyre and they'll pinchflat quite easily, I was running 50/60psi before getting some Maxxis 1.2mm FR (300g) tubes. They actually fill the tyre without having to stretch loads, so I can run them with sensible pressures now

I saw a shop built SC nomad with a 2.4" advantage once, it really was huge, quite snug with the fork brace on the RS lyrik fork. It had a 2.25" on the back so I assume the 2.4" just wouldn't fit

I love them for straightline fast rocky stuff, the big volume is great

"Shame there are no facilities at the trailhesd
..
Penmachno village is losing out big time due to lack of above"

Hmm? Surely if there were a cafe/bike shop/showers/etc etc, there would be no need for anyone to stop in Penmachno village?

Penmachno is great becacause it has no facilities, like Cli-mach X
Cafe? Theres a pub in Penmachno village
Toilets? Take a dump before you leave home/campsite/B&B, pee in the bushes (out of sight of other people)
Showers? Can you not wait until you get home/your campsite/B&B? Or are you really that sweaty?
Bike shop? Theres one just down the road in Betws-y-coed, they hire bikes too
£7 car parking? You can donate that much if you wish
Black runs? Ride it faster, its pretty narrow, it gets more difficult (and more fun)
Blue runs? Ride is a bit slower

Okay there some oversights there, but a lack of facilites shouldn't detract from somewhere to ride your bike

Apart from a bried mention of Sarn Helen and snowdon, I can't believe (well maybe I can) only marked trail centre runs have been mentioned in a thread about North Wales
Theres so much more

Assuming they came on a complete bike, they're likely to have been built my a machine, not by a person and tend to not have been tensioned as well (as evenly).
Get a bike shop to straighten them up properly (if they're pretty terrible from new you might/ought to be able to get the shop you bought the bike from to sort them out as they're not right)

Generally it would seem you can get away with not servicing rockshox more than fox. Though it would seem from the Fox forks failures concnesus thread that it you use a Mucoff type bike cleaner that will kill the stantion coating regardless

You'll not go (too far) wrong with a Rockshox Reba SL. Perhaps not as reliable as an old marzocchi but much lighter weight (of the pre '08 forks avoid '07 XC700SLs)

"You mean with or without the chain stay breaking;)?"
They already put that down to some medium frames missing a spacer in between the frame and a bearing, meaning everything was skewed and under way more load than they should have been didn't they?

I've seen/read about many more commencal meta 55s breaking than hemlocks anyhow

"Corsair Marque"
Aren't they stupidly heavy (way more so than commmencals), like 10lbs for the frame?

"It is light for a real mtb (you can ride it down mountains"
That may be, but what other 140mm travel (QR dropout, non piggiback air shocked) FS frames are heavier?

Hmm maybe, though not having that safety net will make you learn much quicker ..

Oh come on, I was merely suprised at one line on a councils website constituted law. I didn't mean to come across as questioning you personally (not sure this is reading properly either), so sorry If I did

Surely (one of) the point(s) of SPDs is the extra pedal security. If you're unclipping in the most techincal situations (where its needed most) then you'd be better off with some grippy flat pedals in this instance?
Just my opinion

"meta 5.5 is very very capable bike too… Light "
Light?
The frame weight is about 7.5lbs (for a 140mm QR dropout frame, known to have a problem with cracking)?

A Kona Abra Cadabra looks pretty versatile (or the magic link coilair version)

" new ones are much lighter "
They're still 568g and cost £45+ wheres M520s are 380g and can be got for as little as £18 (inc. cleats)

"also make great DH'er spds for better riders. Basically you are entering a technical section and dont want to be clipped in with one foot- you can rest your foot on the plastic cage"
That sounds like you haven't actually 'learnt' to use SPDs properly?

It depends on whether you use 'racer style' stiff soled shoes or not, if you do then you really shouldn't need a cage, if not (depending on the stiffness of the more casual/hiking style shoe as to whether a cage type pedal would help support your foot a bit better. (I use my spesh tahoes on M520s without any problems. The sole is perhaps stiffer than some, but still flexy compared to experts or sports)

Those pedals are the same price on Merlins 'real' website too (inc. postage) as well btw

Surly do a 3.7" ..

I think you mean tyres

If your 2.35" is a maxxis, (and your friends is also maxxis) then its worth bearing in mind that both of those maxxis sizes come up pretty small. Other manufacturers 2.1" tyres can be as big or bigger (though most aren't) and even maxxis' 2.25" size is probably just bigger (but only just) than their 2.5" size (due to the tyres the different sizes are available on)
Its to do with maxxis making much bigger tyre sizes for newer treads for the same quoted sizes. [Old = 1.9", 2.1", 2.35", 2.5", 2.7", 3". New = 2.0", 2.1", 2.25", 2.4", 2.6"]

Mildert 07-present?
As in Van Mildert College – Durham Uni?

If my jumping to conclusions is correct, then why aren't you in the uni MTB club (yet are on STW)? If wrong, then ignore me

"down the beast, up hagg farm, turn round and come back down hagg farm, then up pooks secret permissive bridleway"

(As pook hinted at above) you'd better going down the beast, head up the valley following the water channel, up rowlee farm, down hagg farm, down the valley on the south side of the reservior, then up the permissive bridleway (ie all used on a ride in early december), then either down to the roman road and down into the back of hope, or down hope brink into aston. Going through hope then across to aston should use much quieter roads (rather than the more main road into bradwell for much longer)

"kenda nevegals 2.35 found them 2 grippy/sticky on the tarmac"

Which ones? StickE (50a) or DTC? (50a edges, 60a middle) It'll make a fair bit of difference

You could try the 2.1" DTC versions? Seem very well behaved pretty much everywhere, could be a touch faster though (as everything could)

2.35" (60a) High Rollers (even the folding ones) sound like they'd be a bit too slow for what you're after

fair enough, (re bylaws)

Just had a look on streetmap. The 25k map shows it as a footpath and a permissive bridleway (for the main drag up .. )

As in, is there anything other than that line on a council website, something that shows it in law rather than just that. It strikes me as odd that the council just decide the law?

Is that backed up by anything? Or is it said anywhere else?
How about carry a bike? or pull it along? (rather than push)
Do you have a link to where that came from?

You're allowed a mobility scooter along a public footpath? How do they get over stiles?

You're running Conti speed king tyres with 160mm 20mmBT forks?

"its a footpath i think"
If you match them up on an aerial photograph against an OS map (for on bikemap, gmap pedometer, etc) they don't really match up
The V graphics book uses it as part of some routes

Even if it is/was you* can still push your bike up it so it wouldn't make much difference ..

*not you specifically

Thats only 203mm and hayes 9" (I assume 229mm?) isn't it, theres no 152 or 178mm (6 and 7") I don't think, or is there?

Who does 182mm discs?

Hope do 183mm as well, or are they one and the same, and one of us wrong?

Why are there: 140, 145, 160, 164, 165, 170, 180, 183, 185, 190, 200, 203, 205, 210, 220, 9"(I assume 229mm) 230mm?
There must be more, I know only of those

"Ideally I'd like to stick a set of Fox 36 Talas forks on whichever frame I decide on, but both appear to have been designed around a 140mm fork,"

36 Talas' @ 130mm will have a A-C height of 515mm, the same as a Fox 32 140mm QR15. Both should 'work' with a 36 Talas set at 130mm
(RS Pike/Revelation(20mm*) @ 140mm = 518mm)(Magura Thor @ 140mm = 520mm)(Fox 32 QR @ 140mm = 511mm)(*'09 RVL 140mm QR = 521mm)

" i coulnt help notice how harsh the back end was over rough rooty stuff and it put me of"
What diameter seatpost did it have? 31.6mm (no shim). Although you'd have the annoyance of a shim, you could stick a 27.2mm (carbon for more flex?) seatpost in with a shim to improve sat down comfort? Or do you mean harshness through the pedals?

With a 140mm (fox) fork the HAs for Tracers and Hecklers are both 69 degrees

Is it worth spending £120 more on a heckler over a hemlock?
Hemlock is a four bar, posted, seat QR + RP23 Boost Valve for that (I believe a heckler has a float R as standard). HA is about 1deg slacker though, if that would put you off?

A pace RC405 is £1250 I think, VPP, same HA as heckler, although a touch less rear travel

"Whats the beast?"
'the beast' is a shortened version of 'the beast of hope cross' as its the hardest of the descents from hope X I think

" back up beast"
Erm, would it not be better/easier etc to go along the reservior edge (SE) for a bit and up the straightish fireroad and up toward win hill (but once out the trees turn right down toward the roman road rather than climb toward win hill – ie the same as on the december hagg fm/beast/gores fm/derwent edge ride)

"despite being supposedly one of the worst forks in history"
I think the '09 ones were supposed to be fine, they were upgrading '08 ones to '09 internals when the '08 ones failed. Its the ATA system (I think) thats the problem, hence why '07 XC700s suffered too

"does the geo suit it too?"
maybe a DH race (though it wouldn't win), perhaps the mega, or I imagine it'd work well at the Kielder/Ae Avalanche type races, but not an XC race

It may have a 3.7lb frame weight but as far as I know its designed around a 130-150mm travel fork with a 67.5 degree (sagged*) head angle, 50-70mm stems and 700mm+ bars

*140mm fork, 40mm sagged (from ragleys site) thats around 66 degrees unsagged

Its a little far from a 71/73deg 100mm 2-3lb XC race HT frame

Go down a frame size (or 2) if possible on a ragley Ti?

The tyres look too weedy, and the grey doesn't suit it
Gripshifters?
Saddle is a angled a touch far back (if you're going to ride it with the saddle up at pedalling height)
Brake levers look to be angled a long way aroung the bars, personally I can't get on with them like that, especially when trying to keep weight a bit further back for steeper stuff
Otherwise, its good

"as above but aluminium for errr racing "
What racing exaclty?

You can run a 1×9 derraileur setup on a newer L/H, but not completely normally

You need a hone or the previous saint mech and hub (either or each) where the mech bolts onto the hub axle. I suspect you don't have these though

Payage motorways are 130 (~82mph) non payage 110 (~68mph), and the A roads 90 (~56mph) out of towns. If you aren't right up against the payage speed limit (or over it) then it won't make as bigger difference going on the A roads