|
|
Post by Hafrenz on Jul 15, 2003 15:15:38 GMT 10
Do you guys think the frame in this image is suitable for trials? I have the 16" version with a stiff fork. Please tell me what do u think of it as skilled riders. If it was made for dual-slalom amd massive jumps, I think it will be good for trials. www.csekert.hu/magellane_2003_3.html |
|
|
|
Post by sherro on Jul 15, 2003 19:17:36 GMT 10
r u sure u dont mean 26" cause thats not 16"  |
|
|
|
Post by alex markwart on Jul 15, 2003 19:52:32 GMT 10
thats not really very good gor trials at all im afraid. sherro he doesnt mean 16" wheels he means frame size. i would consider getting a raceline rhino OR the bike i have jsut fallen in love with, an Echo Pure, very cheap for a great frame, check out www.austrialshop.com. alex |
|
|
|
Post by Hafrenz on Jul 15, 2003 20:14:21 GMT 10
Why do you think it's not good for trials? It has about 1.8 kilogrames and it is very stiff. Do you think it might brake or what? I've seen lots of people using dual/jump frames for trials.
P.S.: i own such a frame, i can't buy another one.
|
|
|
|
Post by alex markwart on Jul 15, 2003 20:34:59 GMT 10
ok then, it is usuable for trials, not great but definatly good enough to learn on, if you can put a bashring and a good rear brake on that really locks or jsut use tar in the meantime, it will be quite acceptable while you learn, it will allow you to see if you really like trials enough to buy a trials specific bike, it jsut that bike will be harder to do manouvers on that a trials specific one, thats call but it does look fine to learn on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Craprock on Jul 16, 2003 7:45:49 GMT 10
i think the only bad things about using that frame for trials is that it wasnt designed for trials, and the geometry is centered around a big suspension fork, so it will feel quite different to a trials bike and moves will probably be harder to learn and do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seb LG on Jul 16, 2003 11:30:02 GMT 10
i leaned a little bit of trials on my 2003 norco bigfoot . it was hard! thats with the whole suspension fork and everything though . i think i will be easier with a rigid fork, descent brakes and short cage dereilleur . u definately need a bashring aswell . i got a kona one on my bigfoot so i still had the middle ring . that worked fina and i still had a higher gear advantage .
|
|
|
|
Post by charlie on Jul 16, 2003 12:16:42 GMT 10
the general geometry of the frame is going to make it very hard to do trials on it. the seat tube is just too long, which means that the top tube and therefore standover height is also way to high. i tried to learn trials on my kona, but it's just too hard/heavy... get a rhino stock (thats what i did and i havent looked back!)
charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by Hafrenz on Jul 16, 2003 17:48:47 GMT 10
I said i only own the frame from that image. For trials i've bought a non-suspension fork.
The bike has about 12 kg (26.5 lbs) and I can backhop with ease for 4-5 times. Is it true that with a longer chainstay you can pull bigger gaps than with a short chainstay?
|
|
|
|
Post by charlie on Jul 17, 2003 12:32:46 GMT 10
longer chainstays mean that the bike will feel like it is 'dragging' behind you when hopping. this is because the weight is further from the centre of the bike. koxx have fairly short stays and i think this is why they feel lighter than the other bikes. not sure if they help u gap further, i think thats mainly technique.
also, were not having a go at you or your bike, it just so happens that everyone who rides trials in canberra (with the proud exception of rowan) rides a trials specific bike. it's just easier, you get more control, they're generally lighter, and this all adds up to more fun.
chill
charlie
|
|
