On-one singlespeed chainring will work with a 9speed chain. As will a Thorn one from SJS for a little less money

A bashring and an Ngear jump stop will be cheaper than a 'chaindevice' though
Theres an FSA one on CRC for £16 and I thought jump stops were about £10? (I don't know?)
The mrp/e13 front mech style 'chain devices' are about £40. Rohloff does something similar for £40-50

"my (mud) tyres"
Which are what?

"all that compound stuff is quite confusing"
70a – hardest – longest lasting, least grippy, fastest rolling
62a (eXception- a bit grippier, bit slower, bit less life, bit more pricey
60a (Maxxpro) – medium grip, medium rolling, medium life, medium price (less than 62a – though no tyre is available in 62a and 60a in the same size)
42a (Supertacky) – really grippy, slow rolling, short life, a bit pricier, a bit heavier
40a (Slow Reazey) – super grippy, even slower, even shorter life, even more pricey

"x1 ply and x2 ply"
x1 ply could be broken down further
(x1) Single ply are wire bead
Folding bead (techincally 1 ply, but maxxis don't call them that)

With for eg a High Roller or Minion, folding is about 150g lighter per tyre than wire bead, but only available in 2.35" (ignoring the differently treaded High Roller XC 2.1"/1.9") and in Maxxpro 60a
Folding ones do seem a bit less puncture resistant that wire bead though
You could add 100g in inner tube (eg Maxxis Freeride ~300g) in instead and have way more puncture resistance over a 150g heavier wire tyre and normal tube

2.1"/2.35"/2.5" comments I'm assuming are relating to 'old tread' Maxxis (Minion/High Roller/Ignitor/Larsen TT/Swampthing/Medusa etc..)
2.1"/2.25"/(2.4"/2.6") 'new tread' Maxxis (Crossmark/Advantage/Ardent) use a much bigger carcass. A 2.25"new is as big as a 2.5"old, a 2.35"old isn't that much bigger than a 2.1"new

"super tacky, 60a"
eh?

I really liked my 2.1" Kenda Nevegal DTC(50a sides/60a middle) folding tyres in the lakes, couldn't seem to make them misbehave down for eg Walna scar or the borrowdale loop, though it was mostly dry last time I was there
They are a little thin, but a thicker tube in the back keeps them in check

2.35" 60a HRs can feel too 'tall treaded' sometimes, on harder surfaces where they can't dig in, they don't have that much rubber in contact with the ground, but generally very good. Shame they're a little pricey (folding), heavy for the actual volume, only available in single compounds and slightly too hard 60a and too soft to roll ok 42a

I've used 2.25" Advantage 60a's in the lakes too, the loose sharp slate of borrodale/whinlatter cut them up pretty badly after just one daytrip
They are pretty slow (on the road) compared to high rollers or nevegals too, I put it down to being that much bigger and having less ramped tread
Being that much bigger they'll push the BB height up some more. In tighter/cornering situations they can feel noticably harder to get to handle as well. Awesome on flat out rocky stuff though (provided you use big enough tubes in them, normal tubes really have stretch to inflate big enough, becoming much thinner

I think 2.35" 60a Minion foldings might be next to try, at least on the front

"No 69ers yet?
wonder why
…
The green Inbred is a 69"

As are the 2 carvers?

You've left off Avid Elixirs?

"not sure they are compatible with X0 shifters?"
I think they are if you use a special matchmaker plate, one special for hope brakes I beleive? Not sure if its a SRAM or hope part though

XTR's don't have the servo-wave lever, XT and SLX do

Whats actually the problem with the juicy's?

"2.35 tyres fit on XC717 rims, looking at running them tubeless or should I stick with 2.25s "

Bear in mind a Maxxis 2.25" is a lot bigger than a Maxxis 2.35", as big as a 2.5"
Its because older tread Maxxis (High Roller/Minion/Ignitor/Larsen TT/Swampthing/Medusa etc.. use much smaller carcasses than newer treads (Crossmark/Advantage/Ardent)
A new tread 2.1" is only a little smaller than an old tread 2.35"

Mavic does say max of 2.1" (eg XM719 is 2.3") but Maxxis do come up pretty small. A 2.1" Kenda Nevegal is only slightly smaller than a 2.35" High Roller, and I find both run okay on a rear XC717 disc, though I wouldn't want to run any bigger
A 2.35" High Roller has a much flatter shape than for eg a Nevegal and much taller/beefy side tread, so even on a narrower rim they should behave quite well

I've run a 2.25" Advantage and a 2.5" High Roller on a rear XC717 disc before (acting as a spare wheel) and both required a lot of pressure to reduce the increased pinchflats and general stability of a fat tyre on a narrow rim, especially noticable under 'heavy' cornering and landing drops (the angle the tyre meets the rim was getting 'extreme')

I believe this is the opening section

Merlin do 10 for £20 (posted) or 5 for £12. They've always been thick(ish) raliegh ones when I've ordered some

I thought 456s had particularly long chainstays though to aid climbing, so a layback might not be as much of an issue as it could be on a bike with 'normal' length chainstays?

Coming from an XC background I imagine you'll appriciate 'in the saddle' pedalling with the saddle tilted backwards at all just feels wrong

As above, its better like that for out the saddle descending. You'll have to decide whats the best compromise, or use a seatpost where changing the saddle angle mid ride is straightforward ..
(eg USE, bontrager, crank brothers, hope?)

I believe the QR (9mm open dropout) ones are 491mm, the QR15 (bolt thru) are 495mm
I'm not within easy reach of measuring them (QR). Measuring with a tape measure you'll only be within 5 or 10mm as you'll not be able to account for the dropouts being forward of the crown (when stood vertically)

It probably is

I know that doesn't sound right (written), but with bars (significantly) lower I find the front end too low, especially when I don't want to drop the saddle all the way down (okay so when the saddle is right out the way, lower bars are better, properly weighting the front wheel)
Looking at the pic again, the bars might not be as low as I thought, maybe just try sticking the stem to the top of the spacer stack might be worth a try

I can see I'm not going to get anywhere with any counterarguing here though ..

"i've lengthened the stem to a rf 90mm (from easton 60mm"
Its designed around a 50-70mm stem (I think)
If its cramped, it may be that you needed a longer frame? You could try a seatpost with more layback and some wider bars to drag you a bit further forward

"swapped it in the first place cos it felt like i was gonna go over the bars"

From your picture it looks like your bars are too low (A proper side-on picture would help as to just how low). Long stem, low position will work (on a more XC bike), but short and low feels really arkward IMO
(Personally) for more aggro riding it doesn't feel exaclty right unless my bars are about level with my saddle at proper pedalling height (yes, I prefer it like this even with the saddle down, especially when its only slighlty down)

You'll want wider bars if you're going to raise them too, so they 'feel' like they've the same amount of 'leverage' up high
Try some 50mm+ rise bars? and/or a slightly longer stem with significant rise maybe?

A decent side-on pic would help a lot (ie where you can see how much lower the grips are than the saddle at pedalling height)

"Why is there no standard test to measure the sideways deflection and stiffness of a wheel?"

Probably because it depends on how evenly tnesioned (and to what tension) the spokes are? Given that a new wheel will have to sort of 'bed in' a little and as such go out of true from new, the results would be all over the place. Take into account no two hand trued wheels would be the same, and its unlikely two factory built wheels would be exactly the same you couldn't surely come any reliable enough results to make any sort of comparison? (or something along the lines of what I've typed)

Its nothing like a BMX
Its much more like a too tall Dirt Jump/4X/Street Bike
Wind the works down, put the seatpost down (you're not supposed to sit on the saddle), and get the stem lower (and ideally shorter)

I'm pretty sure theres no parking where the map link goes to? Do you mean the one round the corner nearer to the bridge across the resevior (ie to the east)?

I'll not be making this. I have plans elsewhere tomorrow
(For some reason I had it in my head this was Sunday? Just me being thick)
Hope the rides a good one

The BB drop (below wheel axles) looks way too low with the fox van 125. It looks acceptable with the E150, similar to the pic of the production Miii

define rideable?

I did it in march last year and it was alright. Especially after the snow, I'd give it a good while yet ..

IF I come, dependant on whether I can sort transport and how much snow is pedicted to be there, I'll probably bring my (Black/faun) Stumpjumper FSR

"42a super tacky on the front and I can't see anybody struggling for grip with one of those"
No, but they may well be struggling for speed on anything where pedalling is involved

60a 2.35" HRs are okay, and suprisingly good on smooth stuff. I assume its the ramps. I find at this time of year the the width, depth and chunkiness digs into the slop and while they mostly grip quite well (the ramps will slip out under pedalling though) they're just very draggy

If you don't want to resort to the all out stickiness of a 42a supertacky high roller/minion/swampthing, you could try a Kenda Nevegal or Blue Groove in the StickE compound (I believe is 50a)? A 2.1" Nevegal is a touch narrower than a 2.35" HR, a Blue Groove (a little chunkier, a touch narrower again)

As much as I hope the snow will be gone, I somehow doubt it somewhat, especially the b.way skirting mam tor, it's like it was never there ..

So many 'premium' brand hardtails in this thread

Right, my collection of cheap tat (fugly) hardtails:
If only I could include the FS to raise the (low) standard

Still thinking of swapping the frame for narrow tubed steel something

A 'play' bike. Frame bought with 72% off, most* bits were lying around going spare
*except grips and BB. Since bought new stem and bars
And yes, I know the colour scheme is far from pretty

Bought secondhand for commuting with steps/curbs in mind with 80psi narrow slicks. Now does occasional lighter/shorter offroad rides
Thinking of respraying, though don't know whether I'd be better off putting money toward a nice steel frame instead
Currently undergoing 'transformation' to 1×7. Can't decide whether to use a 7spd gripshifter lying about, or an 8spd trigger shifter and bodging it

What is your first bike? I presume not a medium travel FS or you wouldn't be interested in a SJer or 5. Both are good bikes, it jsut depends what state they are in being secondhand

EDIT: I think I've misread what you wrote? Is the (hybrid) hardtail your first bike, as in order of purchase rather than main/primary and other/secondary
When someones first bike translates as their main bike, I think you've been on here too long ..

Fox, DT Swiss and Marzocchi use QR15 on 120-150mm forks (20mm on 160mm+ (except DT))
Rocshox, Manitou, etc only use 'QR20' for bolt-thry

Yes you can get QR15 lowers for fox, though I think they have to be 2007 onwards (32mm stantions)? Pre 2007 I think are 30mm stantions

Something like just over £100 + the service to take them apart/put back together/top up oil etc ..

I hope the crack wasn't anything to do with sticking a 160mm fork on the front of the etsx! ie around the head tube. Though its been exchanged on warranty now, so I don't suppose that matters?

Despite Giant offering framesets cheaper than most other high end manufacturers, you could get one cheaper by buying a low end bike with the same frame and sell all the parts on unused?

"looks sexy like mine"
Aside from it being a bike, I'm so sure that the bar ends, middleburn? cranks, mudguards, wierd looking old saddle don't ruin it ..

I like the blue. The bits look to suit it pretty well. The stem appears really long at first glance, but I'm not sure it really is? Is it about 110/105mm?

Did they give you a slayer frame, or did you ask for one?
I thought the ETSX's replacement was the altitude?

Also, was that build on the ETSX? It all looks very beefy to go onto one?
Well maybe not, Its the fork that looks like a Wotan (that I suspect may be a Thor?) thats beefing up the look of it#

Looks good

S.I.M.O.N. stands for something, though I can't remember what

Lets see:
I know its only a prototype, but theres a few potential issues I can see

The computer/screen bit isn't particularly secure (removable by hand with no catches). Someone could pinch it? It could fall out as the bike is carried/rattled up a chairlift? leaving you with a locked damping valve

In a crash you could smash the screen off/smash the touchscreen/cut the cable(s), leaving you with a locked damping valve

The battery could run out, leaving you with a locked damping valve

That screen is very prominent, with a decent rear wheel spin out or slipping off a pedal, your groin could well impact into it ..

How will you tune the settings of lockout, XC, AM, FR, DH etc .. to your exact preference? Do you need to plug it into a computer?

If you're spending eg £900*(+) on a high end fork with rebound, compression, high and low speed damping adjustments, are you most likely going to be pretty 'into' biking taking a big interest in how the fork works? and be willing to read the manual and learn how the settings affect how the fork works? Rather than just labelling it as confusing?

*eg a Fox with hi and low speed damping (RC2) is about that isn't it?

The travel mode thing just appears to ETA with an electronic switch? No big deal?

A touchscreen? I thought they didn't work if you are wearing gloves? Or you hand has mud on, or the touchscreen has mud on ..

I like the electronic 'brain' idea though, using acclerometers it should be more sensitive, react quicker than specialized's hydraulic brain system

My V Graphics book says its 3100ft (946m) elevation?

Click on forum help in the top banner somewhere on the right
Image posting is near the bottom

Do you mean the peak (district)?

Sorry, couldn't resist the picky correction

"But a tarmac/stony climb covered in 4 foot show drifts (as it was last year) is a push"
Sorry, I just assumed that if it was unridable, it must have been due to a very sloppy surface, completely forgetting about the possibility of a snow drift

"I'll still be pushing up the road mind you"
Tut tut
Thats a middle ring climb that one ..

Fox 32 150mm (QR15 only) = 525mm
Fox 32 140mm (QR15) = 515mm
Fox 32 140mm (QR) = 511mm

Or so I thought?

I don't think that the rail design is fundamentally flawed when riding in very cold weather, just that the number of failures (at least documented on here, last winter there were lots) would indicate that that particular implentation of the design isn't quite right?

Is yours still in warranty? Its not fit for purpose, you should be able to get your money back, though I'm not sure if you have let them fix/replace it a number of times first? (if not within a certain short period whereby you essentially refuse the contract of sale, rather than simply ask to be refunded)
I'm no expert on this though so don't go quoting anything

lol at argyle

"go downhill without being attached to the bike (beginner in the Alps, definitely don't want to be strapped in!)"
Why not?
So you want to use SPDs without learning to use them?

"that's why I want to be able to remove them at the top of the mountain… "
I think it'd be quicker to swap between SPD and flat pedals when nobody makes QR toeclips. You'll be caryring an allen key anyway I presume. Flat pedals will probably take less space than a set of toe clips in a bag

"technical terrain the flats will be faster indeirectly"
Not if you were properly used to SPDs?

Basically I reckon you be best to try to learn to get used to SPDs if you aren't prepared to use flats all the time

"Climbing up Coldwell Clough "
I presumed/hoped we'd be going down the muddy/drainage ditched side of coldwell clough and up the tarmac/stony side (ie down Jacobs Ladder also (and rushop edge, roych clough, mount famine .. ie down the good bits, not up them (except for oaken clough)))

I thought folding bead tyres were kevlar?

The full Kinder Scout Circuit out of the V Graphics book is about 15miles and over 1000metres ascent I beleive

If you wanted to cut a little off without really loosing anything, other than a sloppy (especially so after snow melt (Assuming it melts in time)) slog of a climb, you can ditch the hollins X/mam tor bit out and just climb up the road from barber booth to mam tor. I've done this the last couple of times
As for the wet grassy/peaty 'bridleway' bit across rushop edge, you could always 'misinterpret' the not so clear footpath/bridleway sign just as you make it to the ridge and take the much better ridgeline path across rushop edge

Cavedale is far better than pindale imo, though theres one bit off the main track in pindale, a sort of steep chute than drops into the main track, after the wide open bit thats fun

"in the Alps the only people not having brake issues "
Was there some kind of comprehensive survey undertaken I've missed?

Merlin have (or had) some Avid Codes for £190 front and rear, 203/203. Okay a tad heavy, arguably not needed for UK use though