Do I bite the bullet - HT to FS

jairaj

I don't understand how that rear end works. The rear triangle looks like its almost touching the seat tube yet the shock appears to have plenty travel remaining.

The Rookie

No, but yes it does look a little like the Nicolai XC frame although that is true 4 bar.

That is at full rebound, it has a full 5" of travel (shock currently mounted to the 4" location) the vertical link between the stays misses the seat tube as it's an upside down h and the upper sections pass either side of the seat tube.

Ferrals

Santa Cruz?

The Rookie

No, the SC''s with that travel are the Superlight and Heckler which are simple training arm mounted forward on the downtube similar to the Orange 5.

An extra clue, it's American (brand anyway), and in more ways than one.

russyh

That's my last guess out the window then I thiought Rocky Mountain element. But that's canadian. Come on put us out of our misery!

The Rookie

Litespeed Niota Al (Aluminimum, they also did a Ti version), Litespeed are part of the American Bicycles group (along with Tomac, Ellesworth and Quintana Roo), started off on Ti (there is a connection to Lynskey) but the Aluminium were made in Taiwan (rear dropout has the look of Merida but that's not conclusive), the frame only option retailed at a gob smacking £1K.

russyh

I know litespeed they made some lovely road bike frames. Think they had a bit of an issue with their alloy/composite frames a few years ago so stopped making the alloy road bikes. That will be a really nice frame rookie, looking forward to the build.

The Rookie

I'd heard they stopped doing aluminium as they were starting to struggle to justify the premium price once more competition was coming out of the same Taiwain factories, ironically both Ti and Al had cracking issues with the rear triangle, mine has the later one which was also carried over to the Ti version.

The original shock was the volume adjustable Float with AVA, this has an Enduro float with the travel reduction option which doesn't make any sense on the Niota and also hasn't got propedal, will start the YMB thread tomorrow it's fuller details.

Chunkers1980

Not pretty is it. Although I realise that's at the very bottom of your buying criteria.

The Rookie

I quite like the sort of 'converted hardtail' look myself, but yes, it's not a key buying criteria, it got great reviews for the way it rode when new with favourable comparisons to the SC Superlight and Marin Mount vision (quad link).

jimothy78

First proper ride on a full-susser today - my mate's letting me have a week or two of "try-before-you-buy" with his Cube AMS 130 . It's more bike than I was after, ideally, but the price is so good it's hard to ignore.

Initial impressions are that there may be too many sacrifices for me to really want to make the switch, although I'm going to play round a bit more with riding position (currently too far back) and suspension set-up (wallowy at the back, unresponsive at the front) and give it a couple more tries as soon as time allows.

Angus Young

jimothy78 wrote:

Initial impressions are that there may be too many sacrifices for me to really want to make the switch, although I'm going to play round a bit more with riding position (currently too far back) and suspension set-up (wallowy at the back, unresponsive at the front) and give it a couple more tries as soon as time allows.

You're going to write off the idea of full-suss on the strength of one wallow bike?

jimothy78

Angus Young wrote:

You're going to write off the idea of full-suss on the strength of one wallow bike?

No, not at all,

I wrote:

Initial impressions are that there may be too many sacrifices for me to really want to make the switch

.

I'm not writing off anything, just saying that after this first ride (admittedly with minimal tickering), I wouldn't want to make this bike my main ride (and I don't ride enough that I can justify having an extra bike for that odd trip to bike park wales).

I intend to give it a fair chance, though, with further test rides at both Cwmcarn and BPW to give it more of a chance to shine, but at the end of the day, if I find that the compromise on the local riding that makes up 90% of my on-the-bike time is too great, then I'll either be looking for a more supportive XC-type FS or sticking with my hardtail.

rockmonkeysc

Modern full sus bikes are so efficient now that the sacrifice in pedalling efficiency is virtually non existent. The pros definitely far outweigh the cons. The differences between long and short travel are pretty minimal as well and mainly due to geometry. Even most big 160mm bikes pedal extremely well, they just carry a weight penalty and have geometry better suited to going down than climbing.

twonks

The Rookie wrote:

No no kids, no squabbling......I'll save the pennies, see whats available and take it from there.

I just want to know if 100mm (or what could be described as a 100mm bike regardless of actual travel) will be enough to let me ride harder and longer without my legs going like jelly! (from the downhills, not up!)

Bit late with the reply, but yes is the answer

I ride Cannock nearly every weekend and have a Soul and SC Superlight.

The Soul is good and very whippy but if I'm going out for a couple of laps or a mixture of all the trails which involves around 15 miles of the blue and certain off piste bits, the FS is always more rewarding and relaxing to ride.

At the wrong side of 40 I don't want to be battered around on a hardtail all day, so yes is most certainly the answer to your question.

My SL has 120mm forks and the rear set up quite rigid so it rides a bit like a soft tail. Had a Heckler with 140mm front and back and around the same routes it just felt sloppy. Fast on the downs but not much good anywhere else.

Had a carbon 456 before the Soul and loved that too, but only for two hour rides at most as it was slightly unforgiving.

rockmonkeysc

twonks wrote:

The Soul is good and very whippy

What the hell does that mean? How can a bike be whippy?

twonks

RockmonkeySC wrote:

twonks wrote:

The Soul is good and very whippy

What the hell does that mean? How can a bike be whippy?

Use your imagination. I thought it was quite a suitable term to describe a relatively forgiving frame that allows one to chuck it around a bit without getting rattled to pieces.

The Rookie

I think most people would use the words compliant or forgiving....

Whippy could mean a flexible unstable piece of poo?

twonks

Ok. Fair comment but hopefully you appreciate what I meant.

Have you got the FS yet ?

The Rookie

viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=13007080