Best steel ht frame for 140mm forks?

Mark909

Hello i've owned a 2009 Rocky Ridge since well 2009! Great bike but I fancy buying a new frame and transfering most of the components over and blinging up the rest. My forks are 140mm fox float and so i want a frame that will be able to handle that size of fork. I really want to try a steel frame this time since i've never owned one before. I also fancy something a bit lighter and a little less hardcore hardtail if you get what i mean. Any recommendations?? Thanks for your advice! Budget is whatever but prefer around £300 to £400 quid.

specialeyes

Cotic soul. http://www.cotic.co.uk/product/soul 4.4 lbs. More on the whatever side of the budget

delcol

cotic soul
ragley blue pig
one one 456

Pudseyp

So you want a steel frame, that is light but not hardcore ? then why specifically steel ?

If deffo steel I would look at the Stanton Slackline 853....beautiful
[deleted by mod due to malware from bikereviews . com. Please DO NOT embed images from this site]

another would be the Transition Trans AM

styxd

I think a Cotic Soul is just about your only option, especially if you want it to be lighter than your current bike.I cant think of another frame thats steel/as light/can take 140mm forks/is as cheap.

Pudseyp

styxd wrote:

I think a Cotic Soul is just about your only option, especially if you want it to be lighter than your current bike.I cant think of another frame thats steel/as light/can take 140mm forks/is as cheap.

Only option ? there are at least four above that are just as good.

styxd

None really sound like what the OP is looking for though. They're all heavier and more "hardcore"

delcol

that transition is really nice...

Pudseyp

styxd wrote:

None really sound like what the OP is looking for though. They're all heavier and more "hardcore"

At the end of the day it's about balance I don't think 1lb in weight in most cases will make any significant differnce it's about the frame geometery matched to the rider, also asthetics need to be considered...he may hate the look of the Cotic as I do...

bails87

Why steel?

CArbon 456: weighs about 3lbs, will work with 4, 5 or 6 inches of travel, and it's only £300.

Pudseyp

bails87 wrote:

Why steel?

CArbon 456: weighs about 3lbs, will work with 4, 5 or 6 inches of travel, and it's only £300.

Which is a bloody good point !

delcol

Pudseyp wrote:

styxd wrote:

None really sound like what the OP is looking for though. They're all heavier and more "hardcore"

At the end of the day it's about balance I don't think 1lb in weight in most cases will make any significant differnce it's about the frame geometery matched to the rider, also asthetics need to be considered...he may hate the look of the Cotic as I do...

agreed... if 1lb is that much of an issue then take a good turd before you go out, or but a little less water in your camel bak or bottle... geometery makes or breaks a bike, imo....

Pudseyp

delcol wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

styxd wrote:

None really sound like what the OP is looking for though. They're all heavier and more "hardcore"

At the end of the day it's about balance I don't think 1lb in weight in most cases will make any significant differnce it's about the frame geometery matched to the rider, also asthetics need to be considered...he may hate the look of the Cotic as I do...

agreed... if 1lb is that much of an issue then take a good turd before you go out, or but a little less water in your camel bak or bottle... geometery makes or breaks a bike, imo....

I can never get my head around "bike snob weight weenies" at the end of the day it's to me all about feel....I would always buy a bike that felt right rather than worrying about weight...if I can pedal it up a hill brilliant....fitness is the key I have a mate who has a carbon spark which is totally pointless as he likes pies and ale so I can out climb him easy.

styxd

I can never get my head around "bike snob weight weenies" at the end of the day it's to me all about feel....

Thats it, if you want the classic "steel feel" then buy the Soul. The lack of weight is one of the reasons its so comfy. The heavier steel frames feel a bit more dead in comparison.

agreed... if 1lb is that much of an issue then take a good turd before you go out, or but a little less water in your camel bak or bottle...

You could do that and buy a light bike!

delcol

I can never get my head around "bike snob weight weenies" at the end of the day it's to me all about feel....I would always buy a bike that felt right rather than worrying about weight...if I can pedal it up a hill brilliant....fitness is the key I have a mate who has a carbon spark which is totally pointless as he likes pies and ale so I can out climb him easy.

same here,, i would rather have a bike with a slight weight penalty that feels confidence inspiring and i can enjoy the riding especially the teccy downhills,
than end up like this.
http://vimeo.com/32934469 ( bit at 229)

bails87

delcol wrote:

I can never get my head around "bike snob weight weenies" at the end of the day it's to me all about feel....I would always buy a bike that felt right rather than worrying about weight...if I can pedal it up a hill brilliant....fitness is the key I have a mate who has a carbon spark which is totally pointless as he likes pies and ale so I can out climb him easy.

same here,, i would rather have a bike with a slight weight penalty that feels confidence inspiring and i can enjoy the riding especially the teccy downhills,
than end up like this.
http://vimeo.com/32934469 ( bit at 229)

Yeah, but if you can get the same bike, but lighter, e.g normal 456 vs Carbon 456, then why wouldn't you.

Although I know what you're saying, I had a quick spin on a 17lb Whyte XC race bike, and it was horrible, twitchy and fragile feeling. I'm sure for XC racing it's great, but for the kind of riding I do, I'd enjoy it more on my 456 (or even my old, relatively burly Boardman!).

delcol

mr bailis once again you have pee peed on my chips.... :P :P

then if was the case i would go for the carbon one, lighter and stiffer, with good geo..

but on one are one of only a few companies i know that offer the same bike(456) in so many materials steel carbon and ti...

bails87

delcol wrote:

mr bailis once again you have pee peed on my chips.... :P :P

then if was the case i would go for the carbon one, lighter and stiffer, with good geo..

but on one are one of only a few companies i know that offer the same bike(456) in so many materials steel carbon and ti...

Yep, and the OP might not even be interested in the steel 456, so he might not be bothered about the carbon one.

I know what you mean, but I think the C456 solves a lot of problems, good feel, light, cheap, strong.

delcol

it is impressive that a bike with such good calibre can be manufactured and sold so cheap.. and in so many options to..
i would like ti version...

bails87

delcol wrote:

i would like ti version...

Is that the one that's more than double the price and 400g heavier than the carbon?

Mark909

Pudseyp wrote:

So you want a steel frame, that is light but not hardcore ? then why specifically steel ?

If deffo steel I would look at the Stanton Slackline 853....beautiful

another would be the Transition Trans AM

Yes these are more what im looking for! When i say a bit less hardcore I mean a bit less hardcore than my marin. I specify steel as ive always owned aluminium bikes and i've heard steels a bit more springy on the trail. The stanton slackline looks the goods. Thanks for pointing it out to me i've never heard of it before are they quite new? I was thinking about the transition Trans AM but the reviews havnt been particularly flattering.

Im going to have a good think about the on one 456 carbon as well. Does anyone here own/rode one? What are your impressions? I tend to crash so im not sure if the carbon frame will be able to handle impacts well?

delcol

bailis keeps singing there praises for a reason.... he is the very proud owner of one....


oh and mr b yeah it is the one that is 400grams heavier and double the price.. but looks sweet in ti... and they not as common as the carbon ones...

got to say though i was tempted by the carbon 456 but they were out of stock, at the time.. but i got a better deal on the chromag,,,

as for your worries about carbon i think you need to go on you tube and type in taurine vs hammer,, and put your mind at rest..

if the mystical black stuff is good enough to make car f1, and road cars zonda ferrari ect and fighter jets, and high pwered speed boats,, i think it will be ok on a mtb..

bails87

I've got a c456, see "rough" in my sig. It's brilliant, frankly. The carbon is tough too, I've had plenty of rock strikes that have done no damage. Carbon isn't a fragile material.

supersonic

i've heard steels a bit more springy on the trail

This is a complete myth.

delcol

my steel hardtail is way stiffer than my alu hardtail was...

Mark909

supersonic wrote:

i've heard steels a bit more springy on the trail

This is a complete myth.

Thanks you sound like you know what you;re talking about. Whats the difference between steel and aluminium then?

supersonic

Well it may come as a surprise, but if you take a bar of aluminium and steel of the same dimensions, steel is THREE times stiffer, and THREE times heavier!

What is important is how the tubes are fabricated. Oversizing increases stiffness at a higher rate than weight. So how stiff a frame or tube overall is depends on the tube profiles and joining.

The upshot is that steel, titanium, aluminium and carbon all can build into very stiff, ot very flexy frames. Have to tkae each frame on its own merit. One thing for sure is that a steel frame is nearly always heavier though.

maddog 2

just buy a soul

or a bfe

Northwind

Mark909 wrote:

Im going to have a good think about the on one 456 carbon as well. Does anyone here own/rode one? What are your impressions? I tend to crash so im not sure if the carbon frame will be able to handle impacts well?

I like mine... It's not perfect- not a great climber surprisingly, and it rides long (I have no idea if it genuinely is long btw, it just feels it). But nothing to really get upset about. And the pluses are huge- it's a great all rounder, it weighs nowt, it's strong, it has superb feel... Reminds me a lot of my Soul in fact, the handling isn't as sorted but the ride character is very similiar. Lots of compliance (nb- when people don't like this, they call it "flexy", when they like it they call it "compliant" ), superb bump absorbing/groundholding. Seems tough too, I've clattered it off some rocks and trees and there are chips in it but no obvious lasting damage (I reckon blows that cause it catastrophic damage would knacker a metal tube too)

Also flexible- tapered headtube means you can monkey around with the geometry. Mine is 2 degrees slacker than usual so like a Summer Season, except with the ride quality of a Ragley Ti.

Oh. It's really very ugly though. And this is from someone who owns an Ellsworth so trust me- I know ugly

Either the Soul, the C456 or the Ragley Ti is the best hardtail I've ever ridden... Depends what mood I'm in. I think I'd rather have the Ti but then it would cost 3 times as much. I miss my Soul but not that much any more

CraigXXL

I don't know about the best but most fun then this

Pudseyp

CraigXXL wrote:

I don't know about the best but most fun then this

oooooo me likes...