Which bike/fork and why?

[billflat12]

If you want bragging rights on climbs & just like powering uphill then a super-light XC / HT makes sense , yes penalty is you have to pick your line more carefully down the extreme stuff ,
Otherwise any AM / FS beast ( A lightweight compromise over heavyweight big hitters ) will still get you up, but will pass your doctor in unfamiliar surroundings going down because your line is less important, + your not perched over the bars like an xc racer.. Its all down to the style of riding you prefer i,m afraid ,
Good bike fit & basic technique is important for confidence , dirt magazine do a good dvd called
MTB Fundementels see:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=fundamentals mtb
& watch the downhill pro,s.at work


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v3K5x9jQSs


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqYgAX6D43Q

 

[lulubel]

Here are a few steel HT alternatives;

On One Inbred - cheap and cheerful, designed for 120mm travel forks, short top tube will fit nicely, not a financial disaster if I hate it.

Surly Troll (2012) - not so cheap, designed for 100mm forks but people are putting 120mm on them (which will slacken the head angle nicely), will make a good heavy tourer if I hate it as a MTB, will make a good heavy tourer if I love it as a MTB (all I have to do is swap the forks for the standard rigid ones), BUT they're really difficult to get hold of right now. (I do know that using a longer fork than the manufacturer recommends can risk damaging the frame, but this is a Surly - they're designed to be bodged and abused.)

Cotic Soul - expensive, top tube on the smallest size is about 30mm longer than I'm comfortable with (but I could get 25mm of that back by using a straight rather than layback seatpost, which will put the saddle nicely forward for the climbs and won't matter on the descents because I won't be sat on it), flexible as to fork travel, Cubist's description of the ride in this post sounds like it could be exactly what I'm looking for.

There's also the Dialled Bikes Alpine, but that's only £100 less than the Cotic Soul, without having any of the flexibility advantages of the Surly Troll (ie. won't double up as a heavy tourer), so if I wanted to save myself £100 over the Cotic, it would make more sense to get the Surly.

Choices, choices .....

(Actually, it's quite unnerving having so much choice because when I bought the Crosscheck, it was just a case of finding something that would fit me.)

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Were it me.... I'd go cheap and cheerful and if the bug bites swap the components onto a better frame later.

but then for someone starting out I'd probably recommend something utterly mundane and unexotic, some model or other of Spesh 'hopper, or simlar, whatever is popular in the local market,. simply for ease of resale, if you hate it. Got a decathlon locally?

 

[RecordAceFromNew]

Here are a few steel HT alternatives;

On One Inbred - cheap and cheerful, designed for 120mm travel forks, short top tube will fit nicely, not a financial disaster if I hate it.

Surly Troll (2012) - not so cheap, designed for 100mm forks but people are putting 120mm on them (which will slacken the head angle nicely), will make a good heavy tourer if I hate it as a MTB, will make a good heavy tourer if I love it as a MTB (all I have to do is swap the forks for the standard rigid ones), BUT they're really difficult to get hold of right now. (I do know that using a longer fork than the manufacturer recommends can risk damaging the frame, but this is a Surly - they're designed to be bodged and abused.)

Cotic Soul - expensive, top tube on the smallest size is about 30mm longer than I'm comfortable with (but I could get 25mm of that back by using a straight rather than layback seatpost, which will put the saddle nicely forward for the climbs and won't matter on the descents because I won't be sat on it), flexible as to fork travel, Cubist's description of the ride in this post sounds like it could be exactly what I'm looking for.

There's also the Dialled Bikes Alpine, but that's only £100 less than the Cotic Soul, without having any of the flexibility advantages of the Surly Troll (ie. won't double up as a heavy tourer), so if I wanted to save myself £100 over the Cotic, it would make more sense to get the Surly.

Choices, choices .....

(Actually, it's quite unnerving having so much choice because when I bought the Crosscheck, it was just a case of finding something that would fit me.)

Strange. Are you sure these choices are light (I am assuming the current contemplation is driven by the Dr.'s suggestion) for the money? Not only are steel mtb frames (albeit a grand material for bike frame imho) generally not light, building a bike from a new frame (and presumably new components) up is certainly an expensive way of doing things, so it is unlikely to get you the lightest bike for the money.

The simple, general fact, is that a decent full sus XC frame with rear shock weighs about 2.6kg, which is ~1kg more than a comparable light alloy HT frame. Since all the other gubbins are/can be the same the notional 1kg is the only weight difference. In terms of price again all else being equal the difference is ~£400 for decent kits. This is why, e.g., if you look at Decathlon's line-up of FS you see some low quality offerings at £400 and under, and the next step up is closer to £1000. This is also why you won't see a Spesh FS much under £1000. Of course in fire sales you can do better, occasionally.

IME most steel HT frames are not much lighter than decent FS frames including rear shock.

It seems to me your Dr.'s advice is a fashion statement, given none of the 1kg is rotational mass, and is under 2% of the weight you will be lugging around, and given for the money we are talking about in this thread you should have no problem getting a decent FS with rear lockout - which offers optionality. In the recent Olympic men's XC race probably some 90% of the field was on HT, but it was won by a FS. The point though is they were all ridden by riders who ARE experts - I am not saying a FS is always quicker, I am however saying it is not obvious that HTs are always quicker, and I am also saying it is most likely that FS are quicker in non-expert hands because nobody only rides uphill. If technologies improving traction is unhelpful because of the weight we would all still be going/racing up and down hills on rigid bikes!

Regarding fashion I presume you don't mind creating your own - else you would not be looking at steel HTs.

The price difference, on the other hand, is of course real.

Hence there is logic in playing it safe. It is probably fairly safe and easy to simply swap out the forks and tyres of your existing HT (if it fits you well) with some decent, lighter kits. Obviously where you stop depends on your risk capital, but a pair of SID/Reba and some folding Rocket Rons would certainly make a noticeable difference I expect. Being top level kits, they will also be no detriment on any future bike.

 

[lulubel]

Were it me.... I'd go cheap and cheerful and if the bug bites swap the components onto a better frame later.

but then for someone starting out I'd probably recommend something utterly mundane and unexotic, some model or other of Spesh 'hopper, or simlar, whatever is popular in the local market,. simply for ease of resale, if you hate it. Got a decathlon locally?

I do have a Decathlon locally, but I've already got something utterly mundane and unexotic, and despite the fact that it was extremely cheap and it's falling apart, I love riding it. I'm well past the point of wondering whether I'm going to like MTBing or not. I'm already going out on the trails at least twice a week, and the only thing that stops me going more often is that my legs aren't strong enough to handle it yet. (Actually, I haven't been up the mountains at all this week because I've had some fluey bug and haven't had any strength at all, and it's so frustrating.)

So, I think I am ready to spend more money. I'm just not exactly sure what to spend it on.

Hence there is logic in playing it safe. It is probably fairly safe and easy to simply swap out the forks and tyres of your existing HT (if it fits you well) with some decent, lighter kits. Obviously where you stop depends on your risk capital, but a pair of SID/Reba and some folding Rocket Rons would certainly make a noticeable difference I expect. Being top level kits, they will also be no detriment on any future bike.

Last part first!

I had thought of that - it was my original plan because the frame fits me nicely and I wanted to keep it - but closer investigation revealed that the frame is very unlikely to take tyres wider than the 1.95 that are on it at the moment, 2.1 possibly, but definitely nothing wider. If I put something like Rebas on it, I also need a new front wheel because the current fork is rim brakes only. And then I'll need a disc brake for the front ... and a new lever for it, I think. The chain and cassette (7-sp) are knackered (not a big deal, I can replace those). So, it starts to get more expensive, and some of the things I'm having to buy won't get reused if I replace the frame.

I ruled it out a while back because it doesn't make financial sense.

Strange. Are you sure these choices are light (I am assuming the current contemplation is driven by the Dr.'s suggestion) for the money? Not only are steel mtb frames (albeit a grand material for bike frame imho) generally not light, building a bike from a new frame (and presumably new components) up is certainly an expensive way of doing things, so it is unlikely to get you the lightest bike for the money.

Regarding fashion I presume you don't mind creating your own - else you would not be looking at steel HTs.

The Cotic Soul is 4.4lb in medium. I'd be getting an extra small. My Surly Crosscheck is heavier than that. The others are heavier, I agree, but when I quoted my doctor's advice, that didn't mean I was going to follow it to the letter. I like steel. The Crosscheck has a softness to the ride that I'd never experienced before, even on a road bike with carbon forks.

Fashion doesn't interest me in the slightest. I mix with roadies on super-light frames with 20mm tyres, and I ride a steel cross bike with road wheels and 25mm tyres (which I'm looking to replace with cross wheels and 35mm tyres to further absorb the bumps). I also use flat pedals and wear sandals.

IME most steel HT frames are not much lighter than decent FS frames including rear shock.

I agree. They're probably not. But I started to move away from full suss once I realised I didn't need it for "medical" reasons, and there was no real need for it on the descents either. That would make it a lot of money to pay for a "toy" that I didn't actually need to play the games I wanted to play. And a toy that would never have any practical purpose if it wasn't being a toy. A HT is much more practical.

 

[lulubel]

I should probably also have added that this will very likely be the only chance I get to buy a MTB. We don't have a great deal of money to spend on things that we don't really need, and I can't see that situation changing any time in the foreseeable future. So, this compensation payment is the only money I'm going to have, which is why I want to get it right. I can't buy a bike to get more experience on "for now", and expect to replace it in a year or two's time.

But I also need to make a decision fairly quickly, before the money gradually gets spent on other things (which is already starting to happen).

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I also use flat pedals and wear sandals.

I'm not talking to you any more. About anything.

 

[Cubist]

Wow, your thinking has led us round a merry route Lulubel!

As an outsider I think you have considered several options and are using heart and head to get you to a conclusion. If we all did absolutely sensible we'd all be riding Rockriders.

I am guessing at your personality and outlook, but you've given us plenty of clues. So here is my best guess. You have an eye for quality, and now have the means to treat yourself. You are independent and individual and don't want mainstream, and more to the point you want your new bike to reflect your personality, and who could blame you?

You have some criteria that you have spent a lot of time researching, and they show some quality research. You know that the best way to tick every box is to self build, but you need to seek out real bargains to compete with the big boys. That said, the best if not only way to project your personality onto a bike is to individually select and fit every component.

A Cotic Soul is an amazing choice. Go onto Singletrackworld.com and search for threads. Owners gush more about that frame than any other. I bought one on those recommendations alone, and have not been disappointed.

It ticks a helluva lot of your boxes, and will be quite a talking point in Spain. I reckon it will enhance your confidence on the trails, and it's only about half a kilo more than a racy alloy frame. That's no payback at all for the added comfort on rough terrain.

Build it with carbon bars, XT kit and some decent wheels you'll get an xs well under 11kg. My medium came up at 11 with SLX.

I liked you thinking around fs xc bikes, especially as I see a lot of women riders on them here, but the Soul says much more about you.

 

[lulubel]

I'm not talking to you any more. About anything.

They're not flipflops. They're proper sport sandals, if that helps

A Cotic Soul is an amazing choice. Go onto Singletrackworld.com and search for threads. Owners gush more about that frame than any other. I bought one on those recommendations alone, and have not been disappointed.

It ticks a helluva lot of your boxes, and will be quite a talking point in Spain. I reckon it will enhance your confidence on the trails, and it's only about half a kilo more than a racy alloy frame. That's no payback at all for the added comfort on rough terrain.

Build it with carbon bars, XT kit and some decent wheels you'll get an xs well under 11kg. My medium came up at 11 with SLX.

I liked you thinking around fs xc bikes, especially as I see a lot of women riders on them here, but the Soul says much more about you.

Now, you see, I was almost ready to say, "Oh, &%($ it!" and stick a pin in my list of options, and you come back with this.

What drew me to the Cotic Soul was your review of it, followed by KernowLad saying much the same thing:

That back end is SO much more planted and feels almost like it has a bit of rear suspension, it climbs very well, it's nimble,

I could get a Radon HT for €1,000. with Reba forks, Mavic wheels and mostly XT drivetrain (and a frame colour that would be a long way from my first choice, but that isn't really relevant), and it would be a decent bike, and I'm sure I'd have fun on it. Or I could spend quite a bit more on a Cotic Soul with nice kit, and everything I've read tells me I'd love it.

I originally looked at it from your post in Zenroad's thread about the On One 456 Evo, which is where I expanded my knowledge of steel frames, and I rejected it because of the long top tube, and that's the part that still worries me a bit. The bike I'm riding at the moment (my OH's) has a 530mm top tube, a 75mm stem, and I'm feeling like I'd quite like to put a shorter stem on it. The XS Soul has a 560mm top tube, so it's 30mm longer again. Is there leeway to use a straight seatpost (the one I'm using has 25mm setback) and a 40mm(ish) stem? That would make the saddle-bars distance about right, but I'm not sure about the saddle-cranks position. I cheerfully said in my earlier post that it would move me into a good forward position for climbing, but would the length of the top tube make it difficult to keep my weight centred over the pedals because I was having to position myself too far forward to reach the bars comfortably on descents?

I've also been looking for potential donor bikes that could provide most of the parts for a Soul build. I notice the geometry they show on their site is with a 100mm fork sagged 25mm. What does "sagged" mean? That's something I keep seeing and don't understand.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

It's how you set up a front fork. You set the 'sag'. So 100mm nominal travel you want the preload to be such that 25% (25mm) disappears through 'sag' when you sit on the bike in your full riding clobber complete with full camelbak, helmet, and body armour. The amount of sag, and travel of a fork, determines the actual head tube angle, which is of course constantly changing as you ride along, rather than the notional head tube angle so does have an effect on handling, though I've never been such a sensitive soul that I could detect it. In Cotic's example they've built the frame to ride best with 75mm of actual travel on the trail, though the forks may well extend their full travel at times when they have little or no load.

 

[lulubel]

I see. So, in that example, they'll bottom out under 4 times your body (plus stuff) weight.

I take it that, the harder you're riding (downhill), the less sag you want because the bike will be landing harder. If you ride downhill like a wuss, you can get away with lots of sag!

And the sag is determined by the air pressure.

Is that all correct?

 

[lulubel]

Also, I THINK the Soul (although it has a tapered head tube) would accept a fork with a 1 1/8" steerer. Is that correct?

If it is, I'm wondering if this would make a suitable donor bike.

I know the fork it comes with is only 100mm of travel, but I'm sure I could live with that. The frame of the donor bike would be too big for me, but would probably fit my OH when she decides she does want to come MTBing after all, at which point the 100mm Rebas could go back on it, and I could get some 120mm ones. I could also sell it to her on the basis that, "I'm saving €300 by buying this bike instead of the €1,000 one, which leaves me some spare money to spend on the frame I want," - the frame being paid for on my credit card and being of unmentioned price!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I see. So, in that example, they'll bottom out under 4 times your body (plus stuff) weight.

I take it that, the harder you're riding (downhill), the less sag you want because the bike will be landing harder. If you ride downhill like a wuss, you can get away with lots of sag!

And the sag is determined by the air pressure.

Is that all correct?

Sag is determined by air pressure yes. But I don't advocate you change sag depending on how fast you intend to descend. Other may feel otherwise. If you are going to go downhill fast you want more absolute travel, typically an XC bike has 15-20% sag, trail bikes 20-30%, and a downhill bike 25-35%. To reduce the sag you increase the air pressure (and vice versa) so you are making the spring stiffer (or softer to increase sag) Different spring rates affect how the fork reacts to different hits and that is a taste thing.....

Bottoming forks out out under compression depends on the 'spring rate'. Air isn't a linear spring. So the force required to make the spring compress a given distance should increase the more the spring is compressed. Useful glossary here

How much sag you want/need, and what your compression damping settings (both low speed and speed), and your rebound damping setting all sit neatly in the category called 'depends' or 'this is an art not a science'.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

watch out to be certain the steerer tube on any donor bike is not only the right diameter/type but also of a length which is appropriate to the headtube size of the recipient bike or more expense and hassle will await you.

 

[MacB]

Interesting thread and I'm learning, I've been down a similar route but am still very much at the novice level. The big difference for me is I've had the chance to try a few bikes, HT and FS 26" and 29er. My pedigree so far is using a fully rigid Karate Monkey but a lot of my 'tests' on other bikes have involved swapping with mates, so I've had the chance to ride the same bits in direct comparison. Interestingly some of the guys I thought were pretty good turn out to be not so hot when you put them on a fully rigid. While others I've just decided that they'd wipe my clock on anything bar a kiddies trike, and even that might be close.

Though a KM does cover all of my current needs I'm an indulgent sort but I'm also fairly brutal about my future potential. I was always slowest downhill when I was a kid and that hasn't changed so I have to accept that I'm never going to find the courage(or stupidity) to match what some others do. So I factor in what I do, and like, best which happens to be trails and climbing. The FS I've tried were nice but didn't really improve my downhill speed as I was already going as fast as I was comfortable with.

Anyway, being indulgent I ordered a custom frame, mainly to cater to my preferred hub gear needs and to allow for touring potential. From the test rides, and my ridiculously large spreadsheets of geometry, my custom build has ended up closest in design to a Cotic Solaris. I even specced the ability to go up to a 120mm fork though the frame is really optimised for 80-100mm....that's my just in case attitude.

The frame arrives this week and all the shiny bits are waiting for it, good job really as I have lost my first two KMs to my sons and had to sell No 3 to fund this. My only serious error is in forks, not the squishy ones I have waiting but the nice Salsa rigid ones. I had them on one of the KMs and trimmed the steerer without really thinking it through, as in just measuring the KM headtube to be sure. I'd downloaded latest KM geometry and it had about a 120mm HT whereas the model I had was still on the older 95mm HT. So I now have a nearly new set of Salsa rigid steel forks that won't work on my new frame. I know I'm hoping not to need them but they were part of my 'security blanket' in case I didn't get on with or had problems with the squishies