You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Looks rather nice, doubtless the name will be something down right daft but colour me interested. (looks like rack mounts on the rear?)
Obviously brant isn't allowed to play (feel free to add any actual detail you wish though) but what daft name do you think it'll end up with at launch?
I'd rather like "space monkey"
BullTrout
SpamBadger
(I'm tempted to suggest "trouser beast" but that seems mean)
Got a link to the frame anyone please?
Gnotpoon.
Obviously, because it seems to be a tangible thing rather than a rendering.
Thanks stompy. Nice looking frame that.
Gaspipegads outta do it.
"Bootzipper", equally silly name of their new 27. 5 rigid bike.
Poontang
BoatAnchor
It does look relevant to my interests that, if it were being sold by someone else.
, if it were being sold by someone else.
I can think of at least one company that will sell you one and you can be sure you'll not get one [s] made by px[/s]
Gnotpoon.
Obviously, because it seems to be a tangible thing rather than a rendering.
That is actually genius.
No idea but is this where all the Sick! Bikes have ended up? Are On-One container ship pirates?
BoatAnchor
Bow Tanker
Wotal Tanker?
I think it looks pretty good...not much else on the market at the price point at which on one will most likely knock them out at.
Good angles, looks to have plenty of mounts and will no doubt be strong and utilitarian, maybe a little heavy but great for those who can't afford a new Cotic or an over priced Stanton..... Or for a n+1.
Hopefully some decent, non to loud, colours....
Hopefully some decent, non to loud colours
The finish in the photo looks lovely imo. Doubtless won't make sale like that though.
External cable and hose runs? Tick.
The finish in the photo looks lovely imo. Doubtless won’t make sale like that though
Agree, a matt clear coat on that and I'd have one.... Don't mind if it tarnishes under either, quite like the ratty look.
Bullheart
🙁
External cable and hose runs? Tick
By the looks of it, possibly not only external, but full length outers too.
On the down side the forks I'd just about convinced my self to sell will fit that perfectly.
jonba, that would be superb!
Brant, any plans for a similar frame in aluminium in raw for those that want something lighter? Thanks
#tally whacker
My forum username is based on a comment someone once made about my on-One The Gimp in about 2000, and as this bike has basically nothing to do with The Gimp (I.e. the Gimp was a jump bike) I don’t think it should have the name of Gimp at all.
But I’m nostalgic like that.
I think the name needs to be a northern Double Entendre like their best names are. Reet Ard was one of my favourites.
dangeourbrain
Subscriber
The finish in the photo looks lovely imo. Doubtless won’t make sale like that though.
They've done the raw before with the Summer Season
Image url reckons it's called scandal......?? I guess recycling is always to be applauded. Or brant is taking the piss.
Looks nice though. I always loved my 456 despite being gas pipe so am intrigued to see if this is a 29 incarnation.
They’ve done the raw before with the Summer Season
And my 45650b. Which I miss. So I'm quite excited about this.
Brant, any plans for a similar frame in aluminium in raw for those that want something lighter? Thanks
This looks like it might fit the bill. Assume this is the new Scandal?
https://www.instagram.com/shedfire/p/Bt-uK5ilTUV/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=12gl6jxi47ucf
They’ve done the raw before with the Summer Season
That would be bad, short of a way off brand price the only thing likely to prevent me handing over my hard earned cash is a gopping colour scheme
The orudne
EnoNo
NettleWeapon
StickPoker
The Backstop
Maybot
The Tang Pipe
This looks like it might fit the bill. Assume this is the new Scandal?
https://www.instagram.com/shedfire/p/Bt-uK5ilTUV/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=12gl6jxi47ucf
/blockquote>yes
Image url reckons it’s called scandal……?? I guess recycling is always to be applauded. Or brant is taking the piss.
Working title is "steel scandal" as essentially it was off the same geometry as the scandal, but in steel with a straight seat tube.
It's not going to be called the scandal. Maybe the scandal isn't even going to be called the scandal currently.
all a moveable feast. It's been quite fun finding how tied to model names people are, how much people identify by model names.
so this might be a 555, it's not a 456, moybe it's an inbred 29. maybe it's not.
When are they being realeased Brant? Any indications on price yet? Would love a slightly more modern inbred
essentially it was off the same geometry as the scandal,
Wasn't the scandal quite head down arse up racey?
Brant, any plans for a similar frame in aluminium in raw for those that want something lighter? Thanks
This might fit the bill, not got the same tyre clearance but broadly similar
http://ragleybikes.com/products/big-al-29-frame-2019/
Wasn’t the scandal quite head down arse up racey?
The new scandal that I redid recently.
When are they being realeased Brant? Any indications on price yet? Would love a slightly more modern inbred
£150 for the alu Scandal frame (or whatever it ends up being called) apparently ...
Although I think this looks ok, it's made of chro mo 4130. Isn't that as likely to be as heavy and strong as pig iron?
Call me a snob but I like my steel frames to be of Reynolds tubing, like my Stanton Sherpa (Reynolds 853).
Ragley XL 19 inch? Seems small. Hoping the new Scandals will be 21 inch again for us big uns 😁
Although I think this looks ok, it’s made of chro mo 4130. Isn’t that as likely to be as heavy and strong as pig iron?
Call me a snob but I like my steel frames to be of Reynolds tubing, like my Stanton Sherpa (Reynolds 853).
Yes and no.... The old Inbreds were 'pig iron' and rode excellently for what they were. My Swift isn't anything special tubing wise but rides better than most other frames I have tried.
Tubing isn't everything, there are multiple other factors... you are being snob, 853 sounds nice but I doubt you could tell the difference between that, 631 or 4130 over multiple frames.
Plus your Sherpa will be 3 or 4 times the price... It is in a different league.
Ragley XL 19 inch
Blame dropper posts (or the fact that people want to size up bikes for moar reach these days.)
It'll need a 170 post with a fair bit showing below the collar on that but, that said, that's exactly what I run on my XL following which is a 20" seat tube and that's awesome.
Hi Brant,
Any ideas on availability of these new bikes and is £150 for a frame still the aim?
And are you doing the alliminium in raw and XL?
Thanks
It should be called the Steel Yerkash
Although I think this looks ok, it’s made of chro mo 4130. Isn’t that as likely to be as heavy and strong as pig iron?
Call me a snob but I like my steel frames to be of Reynolds tubing, like my Stanton Sherpa (Reynolds 853).
Is that for the reynolds sticker or the pixie dust?
Reynolds 520/525 - 4130 (or comparable enough that you can make one tubeset that meets both spec's and then decide if you want to pay reynolds for the stickers)
Reynolds 725 - heat treated 4130
(853 is heat treated 631, which isn't 4130)
I like heavy/cheap On-One frames,
a) I don't care how battered thy get
b) They just seem to survive
c) Assuming usual On-One pricing it'll be two days of 121 coaching or a week somewhere sunny cheaper, which will make anyone faster than saving a few hundred grammes.
I've always been an On-One fan, because as an Engineer I appreciate that good designs cost no more than bad ones to build all else being equal. So on one can make frames from 4130 that are almost as good as anything from Cotic, Stanton, Chromag, etc made of higher end Reynolds/Tange/Columbus tubesets, for 1/3 the price (or less once they end up in the pricing roulette machine). And be considerably better than some badly designed bikes made from those tubesets! There's also a potential advantage in that you can specify a custom 4130 tubeset, rather than be limited to off the shelf options from a tubing brand. Which comes back to good design costing (relatively) nothing, get your custom tubeset right and you've made the bike better but not any more expensive to manufacture.
If you have 4130 in a decent design and double butted it’ll still make a decent enough frame without being wildly heavy. I had a Gary Fisher many moons ago that was out of 4130 - dB for the main frame but maybe plain gauge at the back. It wasn’t a top end frame, just a decent mid range one. I had a lot of fun on that bike.
Will On-One be getting in any similarly bargainous matching forks? X-Fusion Trace/Mcqueen?
Any ideas on availability of these new bikes and is £150 for a frame still the aim?
And are you doing the alliminium in raw and XL?
Alloy will be £150ish maybe. Perhaps a bit more. Depends on the dollar.
Steel about £100 more.
XL yes. 495 sagged reach on that.
almost as good as anything from Cotic, Stanton, Chromag, etc
None of which are bad bikes or is that the insinuation?
If you expect variable quality and absolutely piss poor customer service?, then yes you are correct.
Fortunately some brands need to cover the costs of providing decent service, the product isn't just the thing that arrives in the box.
damascus
Member
Ragley XL 19 inch? Seems small.
You have to be pretty enormous for a 19 inch seattube not to work with a 400mm post. Especially now that seat tube angles aren't all so slack that a long post puts you almost behind the rear axle.
And it's definitely looking to be balanced out by reach- old On Ones used to get taller but not much longer as you went up in sizes, if yo ulook at say the 456 Evo the small (14 inch! extra small?) had 385mm and the 20 inch had a mighty 420mm (all unsagged). So I reckon you'll get a better fitting bike all round.
(the reach seems crazy today, but the out of proportion sizes were daft even back them)
None of which are bad bikes or is that the insinuation?
Well yes that was exactly my point. The tube set and weight make probably the least impact on the frame. Even down to stuff like dropouts, on ones used to have really cheap looking plate dropouts, but they were probably lower cost with no detriment on how it rode.
If you expect variable quality and absolutely piss poor customer service?, then yes you are correct.
Fortunately some brands need to cover the costs of providing decent service, the product isn’t just the thing that arrives in the box.
Ive only ever had two problems with them. Both were solved as quickly as could reasonably be expected. A tyre that snapped the bead and was replaced there and then. A headset that wouldn't stay tight which turned out to be the stem. And they sent a set of knuckleballs FOC by way of apology for taking a couple of weeks to get to the bottom of the problem.
But then I actually phoned them up and called into the shop rather than expecting immediate answers to e-mails and going nuclear on Twitter if the customer services firstborn wasnt sacrificed to appease me by the end of lunch break.
What I obviously should have done is bring it up on every on one thread for 10 years untill Brant refunded me for something I'd already sold.
Had I not just bought a Tarn I’d have one of them (alloy or steel).
Meh at the boost. If it were non boost and in that range I'd buy one just for the nay Sayers to mock
Non boost is surely niche now weeksy? As someone with two bikes not boost even I'd say that it needs to be boost to be selling at number
Reckon? Didn't think I was that detached from it, but neither of mine are boost, I simply don't get the boost thing, I kinda hoped that was still a fad that may or may not continue
I don't get it either. I read the benefits etc but think its largely pointless. But you only have to look at new bikes to see nearly all are boost. Other than lower end models or those with swap dropouts.
Cotic - only the bfe but guess that's around having ability to upgrade from 26/650b older parts
Stanton - swapouts so both
Airdrop - boost
Bird - all boost except oldest model hardtail. Assume that'll change soon
Ragley - all boost
Nukeproof - all boost
I agree, it's probably better but is it by enough to make it worth the bother? Especially on hardtails where there's less stiffness benefit. Last achieved the same thing by offsetting the rear triangle to a boost chainline but keeping a 135 hub spacing.
I suppose a lot of people don't have drawers full of old hubs though and I'd guess that boost will be like oversized handlebars soon enough (ubiquitous). And maybe like handlebars in 10 years time travel will suddenly go up by another 100mm to finally make use of the extra stiffness!
If it is boost then surely the dropouts and axle must add quite a lot tot he cost?
Boost is just total, total horseshit. The supposed stiffness benefit won't exist with most wheelsets, the clearance/chainline for 3.0s wasn't actually needed (my standard 29er Remedy can take a 3.0, only just mind but it would only have taken a minor rear triangle tweak to get good clearance) and anyway suddenly 3.0 was uncool and it was all about the 2.6s anyway.
(if more spoke triangulation was so desperately needed, why were (and are) so many hubs built with flanges that don't maximise it? Straightpull's still cool but so many straightpull hubs are suboptimal for triangulation. And that'd be bad, if it were something worth worrying about which it's bloody not.)
But we had one of those mysterious industry wide changes that we don't get much say in, and everyone really has to follow it because now 142 and 135 are "obsolete" despite doing the job exactly as well.
The boost chainline probably does make it easier to stiffen up the triangle from the front with more metal arround the yoke. But again they could have sold us that with just offsetting the hub.
Still, it's no huge deal, ebay is full of £6 kits to space hubs out, although they look horribly easy to loose trailside.
Repurposed Gate
I like bikes with changeable rear dropouts for single speed, 142 or boost but I can't see that happening on a frame that's aiming to be £150.
I think with the money you have saved on the frame you have change to buy a hope pro 4 rear boost hub and sell your 142 hub or buy the booatinator kit.
Brant, is this a new Scandal or something else?
Any ideas when it's available ? Thanks
It says at the bottom of that page.
Bootzipper 29
Double Butted Chromoly
29in wheels
420-480mm reach
381-510mm seat tube.
Coming Summer 2019.
Imagine a Ragley TD1 with sensible walking shoes on.
Like the look of that, and the general purpose aim behind the frame. What's the rear dropout going to be? Non-boost?
Ta
the general purpose aim behind the frame.
🤔
It's for riding around on.
As it's rigid only, it's going to be non boost 29 I think.
Though I'm not 100% on that yet.
Imagine a Ragley TD1 with sensible walking shoes on.
Hmmmmm...
Does anyone do a 440mm fork with anythingcage mounts?
Hmmmmm…
Does anyone do a 440mm fork with anythingcage mounts?
I'm glad you asked that Mike. We'll be doing one. It's just I'm not sure whether to make it boost or not.
let me think this outloud.
We can make it boost at the back and people can boostinate 142s to fit.
We make a boost fork for it, and then people can run our fork and our wheels.
Or we don't boost it, and nothing really changes.
Unless it becomes very hard to buy boost wheels.
hmmm
When is the slack steel 29er likely to be available?
When is the slack steel 29er likely to be available?
I thought someone had ordered it three weeks ago, so it's going to take 3 weeks longer than I thought now.
A few months yet.
Brant, Brant, Brant
Def. not boost in either the frame or forks for the Bootzipper 29er. Sure loads of people have a spare set of non boost wheels hanging around - I no I do. Esp. if boost doesnt get you any more tyre clearance in this case. Plus you'll always be able to get non-boost hubs in 142mm as its now the road 'standard'
I think the frame needs another set of bottle cages down by the bottom bracket for bikepacking
Loved my TD1 - 475mm reach on a large would be awesome and bring it up to date!! And as its wearing sensible shoes and nice long headtube to increase the stack with the shorter forks
Clearance for 2.4/2.5 would be lovely
I think the frame needs another set of bottle cages down by the bottom bracket for bikepacking
It's got them.
Clearance for 2.4/2.5 would be lovely
It has
Def. not boost in either the frame or forks for the Bootzipper 29er. Sure loads of people have a spare set of non boost wheels hanging around – I no I do. Esp. if boost doesnt get you any more tyre clearance in this case. Plus you’ll always be able to get non-boost hubs in 142mm as its now the road ‘standard’
Dunno. We're doing a 650/700c one too. That's definitely 142. It's just that I want to build bikes, and for that, maybe 148 is better. Hmm.
Will decide tomorrow.
Sounding better and better Brant 👍
Just make it nice and long with a decent stack. As 440mm is short and were all quite a bit older than when we rode the original TD1?🤣
Zingy thin wall steel so it sings like the old version
Although I think this looks ok, it’s made of chro mo 4130. Isn’t that as likely to be as heavy and strong as pig iron?
Call me a snob but I like my steel frames to be of Reynolds tubing, like my Stanton Sherpa (Reynolds 853).
4130 is the same density as pig Iron and 853. But 4130 is stronger than Pig Iron but less strong than 4130
Using stronger steel for the same tube cross sections makes the bike lighter and more flexible. Using the same tube thickness it weighs the same and has the same stiffnees but is stronger in say a crash
I think we can assume that this is 4130 will be cheaper than Stanton Sherpa
PS they could charge £5 more and put a Reynolds 520 sticker on it, would that hel?
Dagnam that Bootzipper looks noice.
Brant, please go wild with the colours - don't listen to these charlatans with their love of dark blue or dark green, or, tut, black.
Still got my bright pink Inbred SS. Pink FTW.
RAL 6022 Olive drab for the win
It’s just that I want to build bikes, and for that, maybe 148 is better. Hmm.
Can you expand on that thought a little?
I think we can assume that this is 4130 will be cheaper than Stanton Sherpa
It would be interesting to know how much difference there is in the raw material price. You can pay almost anything you want for a 520/525/725/631/823 frame from different manufacturers to the point I'm convinced it can't account for the bulk of the difference in rrp. Maybe as a marketing thing but not simply material costs.
Can you expand on that thought a little?
Need to buy wheel sets.
Brant, please go wild with the colours – don’t listen to these charlatans with their love of dark blue or dark green, or, tut, black
Nah, no colour..... Put me down for a slack 29er frame in Raw, just a subtle clearcoat..... Not all of us like shiny bling bikes.