[Closed] Orange Four

You probably would notice a 7mm difference in BB height. Whether you'd prefer it though is a different matter. Each to their own, but that 323mm is static and is pretty low.

You could just run a longer fork of course, but that will slacken the angles a bit.

I bought the 5 as my anthem wasn't up to the abuse id give it on local trails..or doing stupid jumps..I'd often check the frame for cracks after some jumps.
The 5 is more than enough bike for my local trails and doesn't get ridden to its limits..

Don't underestimate the benefits of less travel and steeper angles. Quicker steering, might help with those big fangled wheels.

Well considering my bike for local riding was a 160/140mm Spitfire (about 65 deg HA with sag) and I've gone to a Zero AM hardtail with 130mm forks but a 64.3 deg static head angle (about 66 deg with sag) I know I like really slack bikes, however much travel they have!

shorter travel trail bike

http://www.bansheebikes.com/bikes/spitfire/

sorted and cheaper

Awesome bike but it sits more between the Five and the Alpine in attitude (and geometry and travel).

After reading some earlier comments re 330mm v 323mm bb height..surely 7mm can't be noticed in the handling?

7mm is quite a lot in BB height terms. The aforementioned Spitfire has adjustable geometry giving you +/-6mm BB height and the three positions are quite obviously different in character.

mikewsmith - Member
I bought the 5 as my anthem wasn't up to the abuse id give it on local trails..or doing stupid jumps..I'd often check the frame for cracks after some jumps.
The 5 is more than enough bike for my local trails and doesn't get ridden to its limits..

[b]Did you ever find any?[/b]

The only crack I ever found on my anthem was the crack up my ass 😀

There's a fair few anthems that cracked where the top tube meets the seat post tube..

My 5 was more bike than I needed, Anthem SX suits me well, I guess the 4 would suit me too, but as I said in earlier post, its half as much money again compared to an Anthem, for similar spec....

I like it. Would complement my Alpine 160 better than a Five as less overlap. Maybe with a Works headset to slacken out the head angle a degree or 2.

Zero Cool... my thoughts exactly. The 2016 Five shifted almost a bit too close to the Alpine. I have a 26 inch 2014 Alpine and a 2nd hand 2013 Five. A quick check of the old v new geo charts and my old Five is uncannily similar to the new Four (with a touch extra rear bounce). If you can afford two bikes they'll compliment each other brilliantly. If you can only have one to do it all get the Five but wait for Boost hubs to be added since it'll add some rear tyre clearance.

Choice is good and they all have their place.

Yeah and I can see it being bought by a few people (probably southerners) who've convinced themselves they might as well have a 160mm enduro bike - but then realised it's not exactly sprightly.

Looks like a good choice for my old local trails in Herts or the Surrey Hills.

So many people obssesed by weight.

The truth is, many people buy "bigger" bikes because they are strong enough, and have fun geometry, not because they really want/need the extra travel (especially rear travel).

Shorter travel bikes are often over looked BECAUSE they are light, and have head down XC numbers.

So, shorter travel bikes, built to take abuse and last, and with proper geometry, have their place, for sure.

Personally… I still love stiff, short rear travel, long forked bikes. And there aren't many. Because of the weightweenies.

Personally… I still love stiff, short rear travel, long forked bikes. And there aren't many. Because of the weightweenies.

still can't see where the extra £1k is...

[url= https://www.orangebikes.co.uk/bikes/four-pro ]4 pro with dropper[/url]

[url= http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-gb/bikes/model/anthem.27.5.sx.2/25018/90549/ ]anthem sx[/url]

where the extra £1k is...

The thousand pound difference comes in the difference between a massive multinational company that can mass build frames and buy in parts for peanuts and a small UK owned company that hand build frames (I know machines bend the metal) and probably have to pay more for the bits that hang off them.

Whether you want to pay a thousand pounds more is up to you, but we all know Orange full bikes are not worth the money. Buy a frame only and build yourself, still cost more than the Giant but at least you've got what [i]you[/i] want.

iainc - why would you expect Orange to suddenly start being competitive on price with Giant with this bike?

you must be aware they've charged hefty prices for all their full builds for years?

cha****ng - I don't, I bought a new 5 in 2008 🙂 which I sold in 2012.

Beginning of last year I was hankering after a short travel FS and would have been interested in the 4, as it looks ideal for my requirements. I looked at 5010's and some others and bought an Anthem at half the price 🙂

I guess it's just a bit like the Emperor's new clothes...

EDIT - I have always liked Orange, that's why I bought one before

If this is a single pivot ST4 replacement, bring it on.

Looks like the SC Superlignt I've owned for 5 years

^^^^ 🙂

There's a fair few anthems that cracked where the top tube meets the seat post tube..

Caused by heffers not running enough seatpost, don't think that counts as gnar related crackage.

I loved my Anthem, it was when it kinda felt like it was dying every time I landed a drop that made me think it maybe wasn't suited for my needs (that and the XC angles not being ideally suited to steep).

Seems odd that they taken the Fives geometry, which is widely accepted as it's best feature, and messed about with key elements - especially jacking up the BB on a bike that'll run less sag.

It has a lower BB than the Five, even considering the extra sag on the latter.

Seems a simlar idea to the orange blood they did a few years ago, 66HA, 160mm up front with 127mm rear, great bike!

chiefgrooveguru - Member

It has a lower BB than the Five, even considering the extra sag on the latter.

Win in that case, must've mis-read the comments above

goby - Seems a simlar idea to the orange blood they did a few years ago, 66HA, 160mm up front with 127mm rear, great bike!

Except this is steeper and shorter

I cant see why Orange don't produce a few "out there" bikes, their low volume, locally built model suits this perfectly.

They could knock out a few 2016 revision bloods and test the water but instead they just produce tweaked Fives and wonder why they dont sell.

oh a 2016, blood would be even more fun!! Great idea! 🙂

goby - oh a 2016, blood would be even more fun!! Great idea!

As I said earlier in the thread, if this had the angles of the Alpine it'd be far more interesting. Not better or worse just more interesting.

Given how quick they have launched and then dropped the Blood, St4 1 & 2, Gyro and Five 29 as well as stopping production of the DH models for a year or so, I cant see a short production run of something a little quirky shouldn't be too hard for them.

I wonder what the added cost of a short production/more bespoke model would be given they're not cheap to start with? Might not be [i]that[/i] much but I don't know what extra complexity it would introduce to the production line/processes.

Ask Brant 😉

I will happily eat my hat if Orange price their frames on what they cost + x% profit and not on what the market will accept.

As with the frames listed earlier, they are doing short production runs, they just maybe weren't expecting them to be.

thepodge - Member
I will happily eat my hat if Orange price their frames on what they cost + x% profit and not on what the market will accept.

I will happily eat my hat if Orange price their frames on what they cost + x% profit and not on what the market will accept.

See any other manufacturer...

No company in their right mind unless they are some kind of sports direct stack them high / sell them cheap set-up should be working to cost + x% = selling price.

If cost + is too high, they'll never sell
If cost + is too low, you're missing out on revenue

Given that you seem to be the only person upset because it doesn't have a 'revolutionary' geometry I'd suggest they don't produce what you want as you'd be the only person to buy it. What is a 'revolutionary' geometry anyway? There is a point where longer, lower and slacker becomes no fun. Maybe that point has been reached?

^

geometron

I'm not upset, just disappointed, the press release suggested to me something more interesting and I'm not the only one, there are a couple of others on this thread that seem to think this could have been a better bike.

Geometron, Airdrop, Starling, Pole and Zumbi are just a few off the top of my head, all producing genuine interesting designs. I hoped Orange were about to add themselves to this list.

I just think it sits really neatly in their range of 27.5 full-sus bikes - Four, Five, Alpine, gaining 20mm travel and losing 1 deg off the head angle and gaining a bit of BB height and chainstay length as you go burlier. If you want it to be slacker just change the headset (as I would but that's my personal preference).

Looks like a 5 with bits hollowed out to save weight (and add more flexibility?)...

what the market will accept.

Do you know what that figure is?

Orange probably do.

Not all companies are aiming to grow as much as possible. A lot of small companies are set up because someone likes designing bikes, and wants to do it for a living. Supply is limited, they can only make so many frames, so if your entire output is being sold why not increase the price? Surely you'd be mad not to?

I think the geometry looks pretty sorted personally.

I'd need to size up as I have short legs, but most people would probably fit well on their "normal" size.

Interested to see the new Segment geo, but I expect you'll be bitterly disappointed again podge.

😉

chakaping - Interested to see the new Segment geo, but I expect you'll be bitterly disappointed again podge.

The info given to the press seems to only list its now boost and b+ compatible. I'm not holding my breath for anything more.

looks longer too

molgrips - Member

Supply is limited, they can only make so many frames, so if your entire output is being sold why not increase the price? Surely you'd be mad not to?

Aye- Orange are bang on their capacity and apparently expansion would be very expensive because of the frankly ridiculous way they make bikes and the hardware they use (which makes sense if you already have a sheet metal business and the spare capacity). So their business model is to make all the bikes they can then sell them for as much as possible, and they're [i]very [/i]good at that. Not much gets discounted, certainly not much stock is stuck on shelves.

So given that whenever they make a bike that's not a Five, they make one less Five, there's only so many reasons... Promote the brand and keep a broad appeal, spread risk a bit, help keep things creative in the design team and factory, maybe sell it for more (apparently the DH bikes have the highest margins). Probably others but they're very sharp, they're doing it for a reason.

DickBarton - Member
Looks like a 5 with bits hollowed out to save weight (and add more flexibility?)..

So like an Alpine then?

It doesnt interest me but what is slightly interesting is the use of boost rear end on this and the segment. Probably will see it on the next Alpine too which is probably the one i'll get next.

I like the look of the bike, wasn't sure of the design on the rear triangle at first, I appreciate it is to save weight but the more I look at it the more I like it..

In fact I like it so much I'm ordering one. Was going to go for a Five but the Four makes more sense for the riding I'll do up here in Ecosse. Orange are stating end of the month for delivery, I do agree that the bikes look over priced with the competition but the option to personalise with wheels, paint, hub, bottom bracket and headset colours is great. Plus they just work, I had a Five about 6 years ago and an ST4 about 4 years ago both of which were great bikes.

I looked at Giant, Trek, Transition, Whyte, Specialized, Bird and Kona to name a few but I kept coming back to Orange, I did have a look at the Airdrop aswell but I don't need 150mm travel.

I just came here really to see if anyone decided to be big enough to admit they were being morons regarding the weight of it, what with it being lighter and all just like they asked for.

Waaaaaah it looks like other Orange bikes . . . . Waaaaah they need to be better priced . . . .

Bore off. Santa Cruz, Ibis Giant, lets be honest basically all manufacturers have their bikes looking stupidly similar. And if the price is a problem for you, don't buy it. Not hard is it. Or go and make your own Orange from the exact same materials sourced yourself and let everyone know how that goes.

You probably wouldn't put it on an Audi A4, I think an A3 or even A1 would be more appropriate. You know, just to be commensurate with your status, better tone down the flouro too.

No company in their right mind unless they are some kind of sports direct stack them high / sell them cheap set-up should be working to cost + x% = selling price.

If cost + is too high, they'll never sell
If cost + is too low, you're missing out on revenue

I disagree - cost plus is a perfectly fine way of working as long as you know your costs. The + element is infinitely variable and can be tuned to the market conditions. All our bikes are priced on a cost + model. Its more sophisticated than a single margin though, as it accounts for things like lead times, credit lines, likelihood of covering the costs of warranty replacements, probable currency variations.... ultimately its just a big fancy cost plus spreadsheet though.

I just came here really to see if anyone decided to be big enough to admit they were being morons regarding the weight of it, what with it being lighter and all just like they asked for.

When built up, our first bikes were coming in at around 27.5lbs (Yes, we said a weight!).

Bore off. Santa Cruz, Ibis Giant, lets be honest basically all manufacturers have their bikes looking stupidly similar.

It looks like the perfect razzing bike to me.
Not sure it will look that good in a trail centre car park though so I may have to get a Bronson.

I can confirm that the 27.5 lbs (or 12.5 kg) is pretty accurate for a Four RS full alloy build because I had the shop weigh their demo that had just been built up - no pedals. Feels long and slack when sat on it for a 68HA. It was a Large.

Sticking carbon bars / cranks / rims on it would make it REALLY light. XC light but Trail shreddy.

I'd like to ride one at a Demo. I think they'll sell really well and be good for people who have an older Five that's coming to end of life. If you have anything more recent it's cheaper to buy yourself those expensive Carbon Cranks, Rims and Bars and transform what you've already got for a lot less.

Don't see where the Five fits in between the Four and the already super awesome Alpine. I'm sure they'll update both Five and Alpine with the new alloy process and boost hubs soon.

You're officially not allowed to park in the lower car park at Llandegla unless you have a Santa Cruz. Then you'll see them pushing up the climb. Ok maybe a bit unfair but it has seemed like that sometimes. I guess they're very popular bikes.

Sticking carbon bars / cranks / rims on it would make it [s]REALLY light. XC light but Trail shreddy[/s] about half a pound lighter and cost a thousand pounds more.FTFY

I did it to my 2014 Alpine. Saved 1kg and it rides much better. I am quite sensitive to the weight of a bike as I'm not that heavy and a bike that weighs more than 30 lbs (13.6kg) isn't fun for me. It cost around £700 done in stages. Totally worth it. I had one of the last 2014 Alpines in the 26 inch sell off.

Admittedly 650b wheels do cost more than 26 inch so £1000 is about right for the equivalent and I guess it'd be around 500g saved due to starting with better spec than the Alpine had back in 2014. The cranks were extremely heavy.

The Four RS is not to be sniffed at for a pretty bomb proof 12.5kg bike without pedals that's all alloy.

As I said earlier I think the Four would be great for people with older geo bikes as it would be much better handling. If you've already got something that has decent geo and travel from 140-160 and haven't done many upgrades it's worth considering some bling upgrades especially wheels as it can totally transform the ride.

Fitness upgrades are not to be ignored either.

It's easy to forget we're talking about bikes that are starting at £2800 and £3700 in RS spec. Made in the UK is definitely important to me though and I'll support that. Orange are definitely innovating with the new Alloy process and I definitely hope to replace my Orange with another Orange when the time does come.

Mine has been totally reliable. It just wants to be ridden again at the end of the day. Totally dependable.

I was turned off looking at Orange bikes when I started riding in 2013 due to the "Five Bar Gate, Bob, Squat, Jack issues, etc" (it's all bollox IMO now) and eventually decided to try one on a paid demo. I was blown away by the handling and fun factor. I've been a fan ever since that first ride on a 2014 650b Five. I rode the Alpine 2014 26 the same day and it felt like a bike I could progress my riding on and do everything from trail to DH. It has certainly delivered the smiles.

Does this mean my 2009 Orange Blood is now cool again? Yay!

I've never heard of or seen an Orange Blood until now! But with geo like [url= https://www.orangebikes.co.uk/archive/2009/blood_frame/ ]this [Orange Archive][/url] I'd say absolutely ahead of it's time so, yeah. Awesome 🙂 She's a keeper.

How's it ride?

The Orange Blood was always cool.

The Blood looks like a 2014 Nukeproof Mega TR frame. Amazing. Just needs a tapered head tube and a wider diameter seat tube.

Wow. I know so little about previous generation bikes. Love it.

How far back do we have to go before Orange's geo is considered "old" by today's standards then?

The Five is pretty ok in 2009 too looking at the Archive.

Orange... just take my money.

[quote=gelert ]The Blood looks like a 2014 Nukeproof Mega TR frame. Amazing. Just needs a tapered head tube and a wider diameter seat tube.
Wow. I know so little about previous generation bikes. Love it.

try the ST4 mk2...

So.. should I buy the Four or not?
You lot told me the Five was way too much bike for my North Downs/South Downs mincing - but now it seems the Four is pointless?
Do I need to wait for the Three?

So confused. FWIW, I think the Four looks ace. And if it rides similarly to the T-130 then I reckon it makes a great alternative option. If you have deeper pockets.

Yes buy the Four if you're in the market for that kind of bike. I'm sure it'll be awesome and extremely capable. It looks so nice in the flesh.

Yes buy the Four if you're in the market for that kind of bike. I'm sure it'll be awesome and extremely capable. It looks so nice in the flesh.

Had a look at one side by side with a 5 & a 160 today, 4 somehow looks lighter & more playfully somehow

We had a demo in at our local place, i didnt get chance to see it but chap who rode it said it was a blast, but let down by lack of mud room on rear, and could get a bigger tyre really than the 2.25 it had on it, shame 🙁

[quote=goby ]We had a demo in at our local place, i didnt get chance to see it but chap who rode it said it was a blast, but let down by lack of mud room on rear, and could get a bigger tyre really than the 2.25 it had on it, shame

rockin bikes?

Na bikegoo

You know about the Orange Sub3, right?

No I don't, never heard of a Sub3! I had a rigid Raleigh Nitro as a teen then didn't ride for over 15 years so it's all new to me and I love it.

Bought a £600 Halfords HT in July 2013 at 32. It had so many issues, I got my money back.

Got a 2013 £1200 Ghost ASX 5500 full sus and loved it until it's 69HA and huge 20 inch seat tube kept making it difficult to move about when I added a Reverb (which added an inch to it).

Bought an 2014 Alpine 160 RS 17 inch because it was "too much bike" so I could have no excuses and know 100% the bike could do whatever it was I came to then eventually sold the Ghost and picked up a 2nd hand 2013 Five S 140mm as an XC/AM and mid-week training and winter bike. The Five takes the load off the 30 hour Fox suspension service intervals on the Alpine and it was too cheap not to get it.

I like the Alpine more than the Five but the Five is very very capable - it's not as good at technical climbs as the Alpine though, I find. The Alpine doesn't loop out like the Five can. I don't shy away from much with the Five if that's the bike I'm on that day.

I've generally set the Five up a bit more XC/Trail Centre than the Alpine which stays Enduro Race / Uplift Day ready. Llangollen DH is an Alpine day but I have no doubt the Five would make it down too (might try when it's dry!)

For a time I would have said I'd keep the Five if I could only have one bike but I've changed my mind recently and I'd keep the Alpine without a shadow of a doubt.

I race occasional XC on the Five (came 3rd last month at Welsh MTB XC in Fun cat) and Enduro on the Alpine (Welsh Enduro Series - mid pack Masters on Sunday).

Inexperience is my problem. Having loads of fun learning new stuff all the time and getting better (hopefully).

The four will be massively strong with only 130mm of travel and 35mm Pikes on the front, I like it but then weight had never bothered me.....i ride a 30lb HT most of the time and it's a blast, 'poppy' 'snappy' and and others cliches nobody on here has a clue about but trots out anyway.

I'd buy one, but the standard 5 looks too tempting for the uplift days I do.

Long live Orange, I must be one of the few who like the design, I like the British element however racist that may make me....i just wish they'd bring the price down but I suppose that's what frame only is for?