Look at the way the head impacts the ground in this video. Classic MTB spill:

The head impact was enough to knock my vision out of kilter for at least 10 mins

Woah. You went to A&E to get checked out right?

TJ, do you actually wear a helmet, and if so, what is it?

The rest of the class: this is not an excuse to post up numerous hilarious pictures of inappropriate headwear…

😯 very curious

What sort of industry is the company involved in? Are you a product designer, a graphic designer, illustrator, CAD artist or CGI artist? Easier to give advice if we know the general area you're involved in.

I've never worn a helmet for high speed crashes ( where those rotational forces might start to play a part), but for this type of low speed impact. My worst crashes have been at less than 10mph and resulted in ( on different occasions) a fractured pelvis, a fractured shoulder and fractured ribs. These low speed smack-downs are where helmets really come into play.

I'm also really interested in the fact that the extra coverage at the back of the head touted by mtb helmets isn't just a fashion affection after all…

SLX are very good indeed. Surprisingly powerful set of anchors and better than my similarly aged Hopes that's for sure. Not as pretty though 😉

I'd second the bar-end option. I find it very restrictive to keep my hands in one position for a ride. Not for everyone though. Another good choice are the spongey Ritchey WCS grips. Great for ironing out vibrations and cushioning wrist pressure.

Have a look at your saddle too. If it's a bit nose down you'll certainly feel it on your wrists.

The great thing is that its still both

That's the thing isn't it? I've got a colleague who says his grandfather would ride from Galashiles to the outskirts of Edinburgh and back on a regular basis for work reasons. A big journey on a heavy bike. I doubt it was little more than transport to him either.

What flicks the switch I wonder?

😥 I just threw up in my mouth. Thanks for that.

Interesting question…

I used to cycle in London and that was a bit of a cult thing: racing other riders between lights, cutting up drivers. But really that was just 'fun' transport.

Then I used a bike to ride over the hills to my nearest pool, swim 60 lengths and cycle back. A round trip of 10 miles five days a week. That was all about getting to the pool, certainly not the ride (jeans, shirt, no hemet!).

Years later, when the fitness of my twenties started to fade, I dug out the same old bike (horrid rigid thing) and rode up into the same hills. Within a month I was out every night and loving it. So much so that I bought my first premium steel front suss hardtail. That was as close to a religious experience as I've had.

I still can't explain the shift from seeing the bike as mere transport to regarding it as an almost mystical pleasure…weird!

Genius. Like an animated Genesis album cover!

Yeah, those hairy Celts really need the enlightened guiding hand of her Majesty's London Government. Besides, those horn-helmeted yobs in the Dane Law will be getting ideas too if things aren't brought to heel…

😕

Yeah, I'm 'interpreting' chainsuck as the chain slipping off the small ring and becoming jammed between it and the frame. That would certainly 'suck' Actual chainsuck is the chain becoming stuck on the ring and wrapping around it. Only experienced it once in heavy mud. .

I knew I could rely on this forum 😆

Still laughing!

Posting a picture of the bike would be a good start.

spaghetti below-the-knees

lol! 😆 God Almighty…

Here's one I claim to have invented when I was 11:

Q: What did the undertaker die of? A: Coughin' (coffin…geddit?)

You can have that one Keith. Knock yourself out.

you could try calling On-One on this number 01709 38 66 66. They'll answer your question. Or email them. They do get back in touch. Besides, you've got to their site to have a look at that white carbon 456…God it's lovely! And that Ti 456…wow.

Anyway, distracted. Here are the images:

The top image shows the clearance being around 1cm. Certainly enough to keep fear of chain suck at bay. The second image shows the surface of the chainstay after cleaning. No scores or scratching at all.

Thing is though, with the Carbon 456 coming in at a slightly lighter weight than the ScandAL, I'd be tempted to go for that instead. Looks like a true do-it-all frame.

I'll get one up here today. Check back at 1400ish 😉

I'm running XT 26/36/48t. Brilliant setup on the ScandAL and no concerns over any ring clearance.

Materials are prone to sudden shortages due to conflicting products ( the new carbon airliner is a good example) and these shortages are reflected in the prices. Global production has been heavily scaled back over the last three on a lot of items and now that demand has picked up, production shortages are affecting prices. But that's not all that's pushing prices up. There's a cult of upgrade in MTB, and I've been as guilty as everyone else in the past. Look at the magazines: it's all about seasonal products and fashion. That's fine up to a point, but it's finally resulted in companies charging close to a grand for a bike. And we don't even blink. It's mad.

Nice bike though…

Nuts. He's hoping the Design Museum'll buy it. Fat chance, and that's a pity because a display cabinet is the only safe place for that death trap.

Yeah, should say that my tough coat MBs never chain-sucked either on both bikes. Might be worth dropping an email to On-one, Ragley or Cy at Cotic. See what they think. All offer great frames. Personally speaking I'd build the drive system around the frame rather than the other way around.

20 years ago I dreamed of the perfect job and now, if I went back and told myself what I'd end up doing, I'd say I have the best job in the world for me..

If only I'd known the cost…*shivers* 😯

Mind you I did know someone who got paid to comb angora rabbits for a living. Aww.

Could be the two ring set up. I ran Duo's on an Explosif years back and the chain clearance was scary. Changed to a ScandAL and found the clearance to be a bit better. Changed to a three ring XT setup and I've got maybe 1 to 1.5 cm clearance now. More than enough and I've never had chain suck. Much better solution than the Duo's too. I'm pretty sure that Brant designed the bike with XT in mind. I'm sure he'll chip in if that isn't the case!

And you're right about being concerned with hammer-based user solutions to clearance issues! Resist that urge 😉

Ahem…

Actually I was talking about the system as a whole rather than just crank arms obviously 😳

But even then, even then…yeah. SLX or Deore.

*heads to cloak room*

🙄

Y'know, you're right? You've convinced me. I don't know what I was thinking. SLX is the one to go for.

Really? Honestly? You can't tell the difference between an XT specced bike and an SLX one? Really?

Interesting…

Awww. I look forward to patting him when I meet him on my local Black…

😈

In a conversation with on-one sales the other day I was told that for the main batch of both carbon frames arriving in September, there'll be painted options, as well as options for custom paint jobs. Sounds great.

Very tempted by the 456 but it's hard to see the Whippet being better than the ScandAL. Such a good bike.

Very amusing! Up there with Michael Howard getting that interview-colonic from Paxo.

Snow must be rubbing his hands at the thought of this Administration 😆

Wasn't too impressed with SLX initially (after years of Hopes), but having spent a year on them I wouldn't go back. Very impressive.

Check out the legend that is Sheldon Brown for the full arguments

Ah Sheldon. I owe him a lot too!

Dr DomRob: You're borderline I think. If you're in doubt, go for the shorter ones and pick up the phone to Merlin. They're friendly people.

It's hard to source 160mm mtb cranks, but getting as close to your size is worthwhile. XT and XTR come in 165mm. Sadly SLX only comes in 170mm upwards.

http://www.merlincycles.co.uk/mountain-bike-chainsets/shimano-xt-770-chainset.html

Here's yet another link to more bike sizing. Geared slightly towards MTBing this time.

http://www.myra-simon.com/bike/mtb-advice4.html

I'm sure I heard someone say that Kylie's 'I should be so lucky' kept the right pace 😯

Depends on the ratio selected. I tackled savage stuff on a daily basis several years ago on a Middleburn Duo. I didn't miss the three rings as the range covered everything I needed. The only downside was the chainline for the frame I was using at the time.

Put simply, shorter crank lenghts give less leverage over rough terrain, but you'll gain in your ability to spin the gears more efficiently on climbs. Importantly, the shorter length will also put less strain on your knee joints.

It's worth looking into pedalling/crank length theory if only to learn how to protect your body in the long term.

edit:

I should mention cadence, by which I mean the number of turns the pedal makes in a minute. It's a grey area for off-road riding but I try to maintain a steady 70 rpms (revolutions per minute). I say 'try', because it's rarelly possible! The act of trying to maintain that target RPM means that I make good use of the gears while lessen the strain on my legs and maintaining a comparativly high speed. The one thing you don't want to do is heave on the pedals as low speed. People out there will proudly tell you that they never use the 'granny' ring, as if it's some sign of weakness to use the bike efficiently. Try to ignore these people! During every ride I'll use the entire range of gears, and the rare occassion that I'm overtake on a climb, the other person is always using the same technique. Above all, it's good for your knees.

im just 5ft small with about a 27 inside leg

You sound like a candidate for new cranks! I'd say that 170mm were far too long for you. Part of it is spinning, but the other part is long term wear and tear on cartilage and tendon. That can't be repaired easily, if ever.

Have you tried the plumb line test? Sit on the bike (supported by a wall) with your pedals level and drop a plumb line down from your forward knee. The plumb line should drop through the centre of the pedal axis. If it does, then you've got less to worry about. If not, then you're certailny straining things. Saddle and stem position can help of course, but only up to a point.

I'm the same height (bit taller) and use 170mm after a knee injury a few years ago. Shorter cranks means it's easier to spin at higher cadences without putting so much strain on the knee joint. Obviously this is more relevant to road cycling, and the theory for longer off-road cranks is that rough terrain benefits from the extra leverage, but ideally you should get the correct length of crank for your size and personal needs. Try not to let money dictate the choice with something like this.

A quick Google will give you all the information you need on the subject.