On-One 456 Summer Season owners size guide

snoopsmydogg

Chatting at the weekend about these frames and tried to find something about the sizing but the only reference on the web is on the EVO frame which from what I can find is revised geometry so no a lot of help. All I found about the SS is it has a slack head angle but nothing about the seat angle, bb height etc.

Are there any Summer Season owners on here who can give a guide to sizing? ie height, inside leg, frame size and stem length.

Or can anyone advise if 5'11 with 31 inseam would be too large for a 16" frame for general trail riding with the intention of more aggressive single track riding as skills/confidence grows?

Jimfrandisco

I can't help...but i've been wondering the same thing. Couldn't find any way of following this thread apart from just replying, so hope you don't mind me hitching on!
Jim

paulneenan76

The Summer Season was a slackened version of the 456 and was built as a swap out for trail riding in better weather I believe - hence summer season.

I can't be sure but the latest 456 incarnation, the Evo, could be similar-ish.

With OnOne 456 geo's having a long top tube, I would say the 16" would be fine as a pure trail machine with 140/150mm forks, however, if you want an all day ride, trails, DH,XC etc, the 18" might be more comfortable.

OnOne don't make this frame anymore so why not just go for the 456Evo??

Paul

PS. I'm no expert, and you may find more info over on singletrack world bike forum.

snoopsmydogg

Thank you Paul, I had tried to compare with the Evo but apparently it has different geometry to both the 456 and SS. The head angle is slacker than a 456 but not as slack as the SS the seat angle is steeper and the BB is lower than both iirc.

There seems to be quite a few floating around classifieds and although they hold their money pretty well they are cheaper than buying new.

peter413

Pretty sure the carbon 456 is still the same geometry except the head angle obviously.

rockmonkeysc

I'm 6'1" and I have a medium 456SS. I originally built it as a downhill hardtail which it was fine for but as an XC/trail bike it's too small, I really need a large. The top tube is too short for me and I'm using a 410mm seatpost with a big layback. It's ok on descents but because of the slack seat tube angle it puts my weight too far back with the long seat post for climbing. I have a real problem with the front wheel lifting on climbs.
I think a small frame would be too small for you, a medium should fit ok.

styxd

I'm fairly certain the 456SS geometry was the same as the standard 456, except for the slacker head angle (and longer wheelbase)

Its meant for shorter travel forks (100mm - 120mm). With these fitted, the seat angle shouldnt be particularly slack. If you fit long forks then you'll no doubt have issues.

At your height, you are in between sizes. You could get away with a 16", it'd be fine as a play bike. It depends on your proportions though. If you want a comfortable bike for longer rides, get the 18".

rockmonkeysc

I have U-turn Pikes. Even with the travel wound down to 110mm I have problems with the front lifting. I have only got about 15mm of spacers under the stem.
The 456SS rides loads better (except on climbs) with 140mm travel. It has a really short head tube so a shorter trave fork makes the front end really low.

styxd

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I have U-turn Pikes. Even with the travel wound down to 110mm I have problems with the front lifting. I have only got about 15mm of spacers under the stem.
The 456SS rides loads better (except on climbs) with 140mm travel. It has a really short head tube so a shorter trave fork makes the front end really low.

If you have problems with the front end lifting on climbs with the forks at 110mm then it could be a setup or technique issue. A layback seatpost doesnt help. Shifting ofrward on your saddle does though.

Using long forks to make the front end higher is a silly idea. Just use higher bars or more stem spacers.

rockmonkeysc

The geometry is nicer with the longer forks. It steers much nicer and is much better for more aggressive riding.
I have the layback post to make up for the top tube being too short, I tried a longer stem but it made the steering feel a bit nasty.
I have tried all sorts of set ups and stuck with the best one I found. With the U-turn fork the front end feels nice when descending, not too low but I can drop it when climbing which does help, but not enough. I wouldn't be able to drop the front if I just used spacers or a riser bar.

snoopsmydogg

Thanks for the replies, looking at the 456c sizing a medium may be ok with a short stem (around 50mm).

Next question though, what's the difference between the 456 and inbred?

inbreds used to be restricted to a 100mm fork but can now take up to 120mm and appear to have similar geometry to the 456c. At it's current price it looks like a good deal. Googling brings up the 456 has a fatter top tube to make it tougher but the threads are quite old and relate to the older inbred frame.

Ideally I think a summer season or used Evo is the way but for the price the inbred is tempting.

rockmonkeysc

The inbred is more of an xc bike. Sharper geometry and uses a shorter fork. On-One are very helpful if you phone them up, they will explain differences and help make sure you get the right frame in the right size.

thelonegroover

snoopsmydogg wrote:

Chatting at the weekend about these frames and tried to find something about the sizing but the only reference on the web is on the EVO frame which from what I can find is revised geometry so no a lot of help. All I found about the SS is it has a slack head angle but nothing about the seat angle, bb height etc.

Are there any Summer Season owners on here who can give a guide to sizing? ie height, inside leg, frame size and stem length.

Or can anyone advise if 5'11 with 31 inseam would be too large for a 16" frame for general trail riding with the intention of more aggressive single track riding as skills/confidence grows?

I'm 5'9" with 30 to 31" inside leg. I had a 16" Inbred. I thought this was just right. Sounds like you would need an 18".

paulneenan76

Snoopsmydog - I'm 5ft11 with 32 leg and long-ish arms. Still playing with geo but I have C456 18"frame with a 60mm stem. I run my Revs at 150mm's and its as good at going up as my last (bigger) frame on 100mm forks. The steel 456 is going to be great fun - go for an Evo and you won't be disappointed. The Carbon is great but its more expensive (it sounds like you'd like to stick to a tighter budget) and stock is limited.

Rockmonkey - Not to sound like an arse, but, if you struggle on climbs with the fork at 110mm's then you need to practice, practice, practice your technique - COG, shifting your weight, tucking arms in, move forward on the saddle, and cadence, will improve your climbing dramatically. By sharper geometry, do you mean less slack, more XC orientated.

A guy on Sunday followed me up a steep on a 160mm all round full Suss job - did it alright and it's fair to say he was a tad heavier than me with heavier bike ;D

snoopsmydogg

paulneenan76 wrote:

Snoopsmydog - I'm 5ft11 with 32 leg and long-ish arms. Still playing with geo but I have C456 18"frame with a 60mm stem. I run my Revs at 150mm's and its as good at going up as my last (bigger) frame on 100mm forks. The steel 456 is going to be great fun - go for an Evo and you won't be disappointed. The Carbon is great but its more expensive (it sounds like you'd like to stick to a tighter budget) and stock is limited.

I have looked at the Evo frame and if one came up in the classifieds it would probably get an offer. It may be a blessing in disguise but my current fork setup is 130mm max so I could have a similar head angle on a summer season as the Evo has with 150mm forks. The carbon would be ideal but they are out of range unless a bargain came up.

Setup wise I currently run a large GT Avalanche (roughly 2008 vintage) with a 100mm stem but most of the time feel I would be better using something around 60-80mm. TT on the GT is around 590 so about 20mm less than the 456 hence the feeling a 50mm stem would help.

rockmonkeysc

paulneenan76 wrote:

Rockmonkey - Not to sound like an ars*, but, if you struggle on climbs with the fork at 110mm's then you need to practice, practice, practice your technique - COG, shifting your weight, tucking arms in, move forward on the saddle, and cadence, will improve your climbing dramatically. By sharper geometry, do you mean less slack, more XC orientated.

I actually had less trouble with climbing on my 160/170mm travel Giant Reign X, it weighed a ton but I could get up steep climbs without the front lifting. When I had my Trance (wish I never sold that bike) I used to fly up hills, which is why I'm looking for another 20" Trance X frame now to replace the 18" 456SS.

paulneenan76

snoopsmydogg wrote:

paulneenan76 wrote:

Snoopsmydog - I'm 5ft11 with 32 leg and long-ish arms. Still playing with geo but I have C456 18"frame with a 60mm stem. I run my Revs at 150mm's and its as good at going up as my last (bigger) frame on 100mm forks. The steel 456 is going to be great fun - go for an Evo and you won't be disappointed. The Carbon is great but its more expensive (it sounds like you'd like to stick to a tighter budget) and stock is limited.

I have looked at the Evo frame and if one came up in the classifieds it would probably get an offer. It may be a blessing in disguise but my current fork setup is 130mm max so I could have a similar head angle on a summer season as the Evo has with 150mm forks. The carbon would be ideal but they are out of range unless a bargain came up.

Setup wise I currently run a large GT Avalanche (roughly 2008 vintage) with a 100mm stem but most of the time feel I would be better using something around 60-80mm. TT on the GT is around 590 so about 20mm less than the 456 hence the feeling a 50mm stem would help.

My brother runs a large Aggressor08' - good frames and worth upgrading. He is 6ft 2. And feels its a bit long but the cockpit is standard.

paulneenan76

RockmonkeySC wrote:

paulneenan76 wrote:

Rockmonkey - Not to sound like an ars*, but, if you struggle on climbs with the fork at 110mm's then you need to practice, practice, practice your technique - COG, shifting your weight, tucking arms in, move forward on the saddle, and cadence, will improve your climbing dramatically. By sharper geometry, do you mean less slack, more XC orientated.

I actually had less trouble with climbing on my 160/170mm travel Giant Reign X, it weighed a ton but I could get up steep climbs without the front lifting. When I had my Trance (wish I never sold that bike) I used to fly up hills, which is why I'm looking for another 20" Trance X frame now to replace the 18" 456SS.

Family member has just got a trance 2011x fox 140's etc - picked it up for £700 which seamed reasonable. Thing is he has just rebuilt his Spesh XC with good components bar naff suspension so not sure why he bought it - trance should be better but not massively so. Certainly the Spesh now has full XT. Weird. However the Trance is usually bike of the year so understand your wanting one again

Paul.

rockmonkeysc

That is an odd choice. I demo'd a Specialized FSR XC before buying the Trance and thought the Trance was miles better. Different people like different things I guess.

snoopsmydogg

keeping this thread updated. I had pretty much decided on the summer season (fickle I know but slack angles and colour scheme did it for me) only to discover that decent priced frames have become as rare as hens teeth at the moment. The only frames currently available are close to new prices and the owners seem reluctant to move even though they have been advertised for weeks.

A bit more googling has brought up a lot of happy 2nd generation inbred owners using up to 130mm forks though so that has gone on my list too.

Just hoping it's a worthwhile upgrade over the Avalanche frame.

thelonegroover

Not wanting to denegrade OnOne in any may (I used to have one), but I don't think you could call swapping the Avalanch for an Inbred an upgrade.
A Cotic Soul or Pipedream Sirius or Ragley Piglet might be though.

rockmonkeysc

It may not be lighter but it does have much more aggressive geometry and is a very different ride so I guess it's kind of an upgrade if thats what you want from your bike.
The ones you suggested are very different to the 456SS. The Cotic BFe, Stanton Slackline or Dialed Alpine are more aggressive like the 456SS but lighter and more forgiving frames.

snoopsmydogg

Thelonegroover wrote:

Not wanting to denegrade OnOne in any may (I used to have one), but I don't think you could call swapping the Avalanch for an Inbred an upgrade.
A Cotic Soul or Pipedream Sirius or Ragley Piglet might be though.

Cotic, pipedream and Ragley are all nice frames but difficult to find in budget (sub £100 for M/L size).

It maybe not an upgrade but possibly a more suitable frame for what i do/plan on doing. I don't have the room for more bikes so looking for a frame that I can use for trail days and as skills improve take on bigger things and most likely bigger falls. I have never bought fully into the 'steel is real' thing but at the same time i've never owned a steel mtb so you could say i'm intigued to see what all the fuss is about. Ideally I would like the 456SS as it seems to offer the best compromise - fork travel, geometry, steel and price but they are pretty scarce at the mo.

FS frames were the other option but again budget holds this back.

rockmonkeysc

I will sell mine eventually but my DH bike and racing are eating all my money. The 456SS will do everything you want it to do. Mine has been built up with 160mm forks, Intense downhill wheels and 1x9 transmission and it made a great DH hardtail. It's now built up with 140mm forks and lighter wheels and a 2x9 transmission and it's a great xc/trail/AM bike. It's still a fairly heavy duty, bombproof build but light enough for the uphill bits.

thelonegroover

snoopsmydogg wrote:

Thelonegroover wrote:

Not wanting to denegrade OnOne in any may (I used to have one), but I don't think you could call swapping the Avalanch for an Inbred an upgrade.
A Cotic Soul or Pipedream Sirius or Ragley Piglet might be though.

Cotic, pipedream and Ragley are all nice frames but difficult to find in budget (sub £100 for M/L size).

It maybe not an upgrade but possibly a more suitable frame for what i do/plan on doing. I don't have the room for more bikes so looking for a frame that I can use for trail days and as skills improve take on bigger things and most likely bigger falls. I have never bought fully into the 'steel is real' thing but at the same time i've never owned a steel mtb so you could say i'm intigued to see what all the fuss is about. Ideally I would like the 456SS as it seems to offer the best compromise - fork travel, geometry, steel and price but they are pretty scarce at the mo.

FS frames were the other option but again budget holds this back.

Sorry, didn't realise you were on such a tight budget. Good luck.

snoopsmydogg

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I will sell mine eventually but my DH bike and racing are eating all my money. The 456SS will do everything you want it to do. Mine has been built up with 160mm forks, Intense downhill wheels and 1x9 transmission and it made a great DH hardtail. It's now built up with 140mm forks and lighter wheels and a 2x9 transmission and it's a great xc/trail/AM bike. It's still a fairly heavy duty, bombproof build but light enough for the uphill bits.

Finally decided to call on-one and they have said both are up to the job, the inbred is only recommended up to 120 forks but is still strong enough to take abuse. It was recommended that if I wanted to go for a longer fork then I should be looking at the EVO but I can't see that happening any time soon.

Don't fancy selling up sooner rather than later do you Rockmonkey cash waiting :twisted: :twisted:

rockmonkeysc

I would but I don't have the cash for a replacement frame yet and don't want to be without an xc bike.

paulneenan76

Finally decided to call on-one and they have said both are up to the job, the inbred is only recommended up to 120 forks but is still strong enough to take abuse. It was recommended that if I wanted to go for a longer fork then I should be looking at the EVO but I can't see that happening any time soon.

When I was in the process of building up my C456, someone advised that a sale at OnOne is much like DFS, there's always one just around the corner. So my advice is based on advice given to me - unless you see a bargain in the classifieds, wait for what you want from OnOne, they will drop it to sale price soon enough!

And it's end of financial year soon ;D

bennett_346

Would a 456 Evo work with 160mm forks?

snoopsmydogg

paulneenan76 wrote:

Finally decided to call on-one and they have said both are up to the job, the inbred is only recommended up to 120 forks but is still strong enough to take abuse. It was recommended that if I wanted to go for a longer fork then I should be looking at the EVO but I can't see that happening any time soon.

When I was in the process of building up my C456, someone advised that a sale at OnOne is much like DFS, there's always one just around the corner. So my advice is based on advice given to me - unless you see a bargain in the classifieds, wait for what you want from OnOne, they will drop it to sale price soon enough!

And it's end of financial year soon ;D

Thanks for the heads up. I have been chatting with someone on here about a 2nd gen inbred frame but he needs to see if the rest of the parts will sell which is fair enough really.

bennett_346 wrote:

Would a 456 Evo work with 160mm forks?

Iirc there's a few people that have done it and said it works fine

rockmonkeysc

It probably works but unless your building it purely for DH or freeride I wouldn't recomend it. As an allround bike 140mm seems to work best.