[Closed] Cotic Solaris unsagged geometry?

info@cotic.co.uk

Just worked it out for you, this is XL with 130mm (541 A2C) unsagged:

Head angle = 64.4
Seat angle = 72.4
Wheelbase = 1268
ETT = 696
BB drop = 47
Reach = 499
Stack = 633

For 140mm take another 0.4 deg off the angles, reduce the BB drop by 3mm, add 4mm to the wheelbase and take 5mm off the reach.

That's great thanks CGG!

Is that seat angle correct?

Seems awfully slack.

“Is that seat angle correct?

Seems awfully slack.”

It’s the Cotic way, though they’re getting steeper. It’s not as slack as it sounds though because it’s an actual seat angle, the seat tube is straight and there’s no offset at the BB. I think my 140mm Soul’s seat angle was just under 70 deg static!

Unsagged geom is irrelevant for hardtails really… that fork WILL sag when you’re on the bike, with no corresponding sag at the back… why look at the angles with no one on the bike?

I hadn't noticed how slack the seatpost angle was before I bought my Solaris but when I recycled post and seat from another bike, the seat was pointing heavenward and took considerable adjustment to make useable

Unsagged geom is irrelevant for hardtails really… that fork WILL sag when you’re on the bike, with no corresponding sag at the back… why look at the angles with no one on the bike?
Like-for-like comparison, takes rider weight, spring-weight/air-pressures etc out of the equation.
No sure what the OP is doing, if he want to know the actual geometry with him on then I take your point, if he wants to find something x-dgrees steeper/slacker whatever than he has now without going and sitting on it then this is the best way

 

Still cant get these quotes working

kelvin

Unsagged geom is irrelevant for hardtails really… that fork WILL sag when you’re on the bike, with no corresponding sag at the back… why look at the angles with no one on the bike?

Which is fair enough, when comparing to a full sus bike, but comparing to other hardtails, it makes the Cotics seem steep at the front unless you read the small print.

Might be a good idea to allow people to toggle that on the site, so they can see both versions.

FOG

I hadn’t noticed how slack the seatpost angle was before I bought my Solari

Yeah, had my heart set on one but having serious second thoughts now having looked closer at that.

The other thing about hardtails is that they don't sag back into their rear travel on climbs like a full suspension frame does. So they don't need such an accentuated forward seat angle to compensate.

So they don’t need such an accentuated forward seat angle to compensate.

True enough.

And you were giving the UK steep seat angles on hardtails so long before everyone else. Did you manage to get photos of a Compo still is use?

Might be a good idea to allow people to toggle that on the site, so they can see both versions.

We had that. It was so confusing for 90% of people. You could also suggest that other manufactures show sagged geom for hardtails to give a reasonable idea of how they ride compared to other bikes (including full suss bikes).

We had that. It was so confusing for 90% of people. You could also suggest that other manufactures show sagged geom for hardtails to give a reasonable idea of how they ride compared to other bikes (including full suss bikes).

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I guess. I find it tricky when comparing various frames, but can appreciate not everyone is a nerd with their new frame spreadsheet.

I've asked this before... But which similar hardtail are you thinking of that is radically steeper? Pole Travail, Pipedream Moxie.. what else?

I’ve got the latest Solaris Large frame. I worried about the SA panic on forums before buying.

Couldn’t give a monkeys now I’ve got it set up right.

If anything, when the seats half dropped it’s to far forward to pedal comfortably.

Miles, vary etc

Pole travail = 74
Solaris max = 75.5

nudge the seat forward ?

Ps, I’m running 130 pikes and don’t think running 140 on it would be good as an all rounder bike

I’m on an xl, 140mm fork. I have never once considered the SA a problem- seated cruising/climbing is efficient and feels mechanically right, and the rest of the time the seat is dropped out the way and irrelevant. It’s a fantastic bike, haven’t ridden the fs since I got it. Plus, Cotic will take it back if you don’t like it.

One added benefit of the Solaris’ slack seat angle is that the bike retains a rather beautiful side profile, unlike other modern frames with steeper SAs. 🙂

You can achieve a pretty frame and a steeper ST but the ST must be curved. A curved ST would offer the possibility of a shorter chainstays as well. Bonus.

Maybe Cotic could then offer a version with sliding drop outs?

One can definitely appreciate that Cotic actually put some thought on their hardtail numbers. Most brands simply copy past their hardtail unsagged numbers from some unsagged FS, which is either dumb, lazy or disingenuous.

My hardtail has a more fashionable steeper seat tube angle (74 deg static) but I’m not convinced it’s better. It needs that steep angle to climb steep hills seated without pulling wheelies because the chainstays are very short (420mm). But if it had longer chainstays like a Solaris it could have a less steep seat angle and still climb as well.

Having the seat angle less steep makes for a better pedalling position on flatter ground and gives a better flow between seated and standing positions on more flowy undulating singletrack. And with the long wheelbases due to the long reach and slack head angles, longer chainstays make for more balanced cornering, easier drifting when there’s limited grip on flat corners or loose dirt.

There’s also the matter of how much further the angles change on a full-sus when it’s pointed uphill - look down at your shock and see how much deeper than sag it’s sitting when you’re climbing.

All these points are well made, but if the OP has some specific questions, then fire away. Personally I like 'slightly' steeper seat angles than a few years ago, but for longer rides and steadier climbs I still like the option to sit back off my wrists and spin. Not every climb is a super steep nadge tech fest!

Cheers,

Cy @ Cotic

I agree with chiefgg, the longer chainstays are a bonus for climbing. I've slid the seat forward on my Max to help though, as mentioned in the excellent Singletrack test.... which sold it to me! Maybe there's a market for an adjustable seat clamp - so you can test seat tube angle theories?

I think it's fair to say one size doesn't fit all!

My new hardtail has a 77° seat tube angle, it does feel a little weird at first pedalling on the flat but on steep climbs it is a complete game changer. I mostly ride at Woburn where climbs are short and steep but I can imagine it wouldn't be so nice on an XC spin.

Worth also noting that I'm 6'5" so I have a very high saddle which pushes my weight further over the rear wheel, I can imagine someone shorter wouldn't need such a steep STA.

Interesting... maybe you wouldn't mind telling us what it is? Or is it a custom?

I personally think that TT length is an important consideration... and the Solaris is long enough in that department to be comfortable riding all day long. A more 'specialist' frame might prioritise SA at the expense of TT.

My new bike is a custom Marino, previous hardtail was a MK2 Cotic BFe.

I did look at the Solaris Max but was unsure that the much longer reach with the relatively slack STA would be too stretched when seated. My Marino feels perfect when seated so I think the Cotic would have felt too long for me seated (even though the reach figures are comparable).

I'm not sure what difference it would have made to my centre of gravity between the bikes based on the STA and saddle height.

I don't know about the Cotic, but

Pole travail = 74

Is incorrect. The Pole Taival is 75.5 degrees seat angle.

Seems about right for me. My former Last Fastforward had the same cockpit length, but a 73.8 degree head angle and I always had to shift my weight forward to pin the front wheel. My entire centre of balance is shunted about 25 mm forward on the Taival relative to the Last, and seems to put me in a more intuitive place so that the front is better weighted all the time. A steeper seat tube is a part of what makes that work, as well as a longer front centre, which allows the bars to come higher, lowering the pressure one's hands but maintaining the weight distribution so the front can still be pinned.

I'd be looking to replace a Fast Forward also, and would prefer a steeper SA than what I have, as well as more reach.

The Pace 529 is listed as 76 and seems a very similar frame to the Solaris. I've had two Cotics in the past, though, always found the product and service great, less sure about Pace.

I've been trying to get my head around the steep seat tube angle thing for a while now.

If you have a bike with a 72 degree sta and move to a bike with a 75, in order to keep the same position over the pedals (kops, e.g.) you have to move the seat back. At which point haven't you just put the thsaddke exactly where it would be if your 75 degree seat tube was 72?

So as long as saddles can be moved back and forth, isn't seat tube angle pretty irrelevant?

So as long as saddles can be moved back and forth, isn’t seat tube angle pretty irrelevant?

Within tolerance yes, but the further you go back the more rearward your weight bias and the more crap a long bikes front grip will be.

I don't place much credence in KOPS tbh. Its all pretty arbitrary.

KOPS

I had the Fastforward for (I think) about 20 months. It was my first full commitment jump into Nu-skool geo. I found it a bit sluggish on the Tight stuff and slapping into multiple turns and put it down to existing dogma about LLS geometry, but after a while I realised that it wasn't forward biased far enough in the 'at rest' JRA position to take advantage of that slack fork without proactively front loading a low front end, which becomes tiring.

I started looking for another HT that took the basics from the Fastforward and improved rear compliance, forward weight bias via longer reach and steeper seat tube had a taller reach and a smaller seat tube. Those sliding dropouts were nothing but a pain in the ass to.

I still had to make compromises. The Taival still has an unnecessarily tall seat tube and max tyre clearance is 2.4 at best, but at the time I ordered in Feb 19 is the best combination of factors around.

It's absolutely a superior frame to the Fastforward too.

Better compliance, snappier in the tight stuff, better technical climbing grip. Pretty colour.

@Scienceofficer

Pretty colour

Priorities 😉

I don’t place much credence in KOPS tbh. Its all pretty arbitrary

Fair enough. I was just using kops as shorthand for saying hip position relative to pedal, knee bend when crankarms horizontal etc. Unless you also change those when you change to a steeper or slacker sta, you'll end up back in the same place. You'd only need to move your saddle about 1.5cm on a 19" frame to move it a couple of degrees relative to the BB.

Maybe the answer is your position does change but remains comfortable due to the geo changes.

It rather defeats the purpose of geometry changes if you end up moving yourself back to the same place

I’m on an xl, 140mm fork. I have never once considered the SA a problem- seated cruising/climbing is efficient and feels mechanically right, and the rest of the time the seat is dropped out the way and irrelevant. It’s a fantastic bike, haven’t ridden the fs since I got it. Plus, Cotic will take it back if you don’t like it.

Plus 1 on this im on the same set up. I think I run maybe 1 more stem space on my solaris than I do on my 27.5 Rocket. But I have never noticed problem with the SA when on the Solairs no matter how long or short the ride is. My only issues with the solaris is no one told the solaris its a HT the thing can smash through anything.

Maybe the answer is your position does NOT change but remains comfortable due to the geo changes

FTFY

This. You effectively shunt forward wholesale in the same/similar position But you still need the bars and forK Infront of you.

What I’ve always thought about Cotic and there relatively slack seat angles is that they were among the first to advocate long chain stays at a time when everyone wanted short chain stays.

ehay I’m getting at is that I’d trust their decisions on geometry