Interesting review, but what of the 'benchmark' ti 456??? Surely a missed opportunity comparing Ragley/456?? (or am I missing something…?)

Haven't seen it Clink – give us a 30ssecond review of the review

well ?

lol

The Ti456 is a 10.

So the Ragley Ti is an 11.

Although the Ragley needs an ISCG and better rack mounts.

ISCG and better rack mounts.

freecore shopping?
🙂

"Ragley are mainly about 'The Nadge'"

"Ragley are mainly about 'The Nadge'"

I knew yorkshire folk spoke funny but ffs, it's a whole new language!

nadge, braap ….

"Ragley are mainly about 'The Nadge'"

I know it makes no sense, but I'm hearing the Gaslight Anthem song "Miles Davis and the Cool" at that point. 🙂

Haven't seen it Clink – give us a 30ssecond review of the review

well ?

lol

Sorry if I'm missing something here?! 🙁
I would seem obvious (to me) to review the ti 456 when reviewing modern ti hardtails and a tad starnge that it was omitted. I'm tired and probably reading too much into nothing.

It's not just you Clink – I read the review this afternoon and I too think it's odd that the Ti456 wasn't included

Saxon. Very lol 🙂 but… Stryper, in a good way?!!

me too. In fact it's starting to piss me off that nobody seems to admit to the existence of 'benchmarks' whether they're real or perceived.

Not necessarily reviewing it, or saying 'a' is better than 'b', but it's a frame that's had a huge amount hung on it, what with WMB's and the_lecht_rock's reviews, and a few words about how Brant's newer designs compare might have been useful to a lot of people.

Same with the likes of the Orange 5- to a huge number of people this is the benchmark UK trail bike, and it might be more worthwhile writing a sentence or two about how another trail bike compares to that, than assigning an uninformative 'personsa' to a bike.

A bit confused this post, but I'm sure people get my drift!

The medium Lynskey would also have given a better comparison. The large would be a gate to me at 6', but the angles sound about right.

a few words about how Brant's newer designs compare

Do you presume I'm getting worse at things? 😉

it sounds more like folks just want a googlefight

Do you presume I'm getting worse at things?

Obviously it would be better for my bank balance if you were.

The medium Lynskey would also have given a better comparison. The large would be a gate to me at 6', but the angles sound about right.

So yes, you'd need a medium.

But surely the ride is the same as reported? Ben is taller than you.

I thought the Bionicon review was very good

I thought the Bionicon review was very good

I was dissapointed it didn't mention goats.

I am dead proud about what Dave, Me, the rest of the team at Planet X/On-one and Lynskey achieved with the Ti 456. I really think it restarted the hardcore Ti hardtail, and without which the Ragley Ti (perhaps even Ragley itself) wouldn't exist.

I fail to see what a comparison against another bike adds unless the reader has ridden said bike. Orange 5 as a benchmark? Give me a break.

perpetuation of myths druidh!

And means folk can just perceive bikes on a 1-10 scale…which is just about all certain magazines do!

Orange 5 as a benchmark? Give me a break.

On what grounds?

Largely praised, seldom criticised.
Benchmark does not necessarily imply best in class anyway.

perpetuation of myths druidh!

And means folk can just perceive bikes on a 1-10 scale…which is just about all certain magazines do!

Twaddle. There's no need for that. Just a bit of 'this bike/frame/component seems to do this a bit better/differntly/worse than that bike/frame/component which we tested last month/year rather than sticking them in isolation. Hardly a 1-10 scale is it.

The medium Lynskey would also have given a better comparison. The large would be a gate to me at 6', but the angles sound about right.

So yes, you'd need a medium.

But surely the ride is the same as reported? Ben is taller than you

But is the rest of the "test squad" taller than me? Only real neg in the review is about standover and seatpost dropping which would be taken care of by a 17". I'm guessing the ETTL is like 23.5" on the medium of both bikes which is about right for me.

All this is arithmetic anyway … yer mmmBop is more on my horizon.

swayndo – the Ti456 takes care of standover nicely……………. 😀
and the Ti456's ultra short HT gives incredible steering input, especially mated to a 0 deg thomson 50mm stem on 711mm bars 😯

Do you presume I'm getting worse at things?

IMHO it's not about whether the ti456 is "better" or "worse" than the Ragley, it's about how it differs. Surely anyone in the market for a hardcore ti hardtail is likely to have the ti456 on their short list by virtue of it's extremely competitive price and glowing reviews, the question then is how does the Ragley differ in comparison, how would I choose between the two. I agree it's an obvious comparison to do and frustrating that it wasn't in the review.

As a ti456 owner(well chuffed still!) it would have been good to see it in the mix but it also have meant 3 brant designed lynskey built frames!

Twaddle. There's no need for that

If a bike is included in a test as a benchmark, i.e. presumably having been tested before, then it gives the perception that it is the best bike in the market. Tends to be done when bikes are rated out of 10 IME. If it's done in the manner you suggest then fine, I don't think I've seen that very often though.

the Ti456's ultra short HT gives incredible steering input

How does a short head tube effect steering input? Surely it's the stiffness of the front end?

stiffness is there as a result of it being incredibly short @ 105mm……
also means you're closer to the axle to really pin it through the bars / front end 😈

Sorry but I think you've been sucked in there. TT/DT are closer together which negates any benefit of the shorter HT

eh?! A smaller triangle is a stronger triangle cynic, all things being equal.

Unless I've read that wrong, you're wrong.
😉

eh?! A smaller triangle is a stronger triangle cynic, all things being equal.

Thats true if you're point loading the triangle.

Which isn't what a fork is doing to the head tube.

also means you're closer to the axle to really pin it through the bars / front end

Well, yes, if you run no spacers and a flat stem.

I really don't believe that the physical length of the head tube has a great effect on it, compared to overall stance (ie: headtube, headset, stem, spacers, bar etc).

IMHO it's not about whether the ti456 is "better" or "worse" than the Ragley, it's about how it differs.

I think the STW test gave a quite clear indication of how the Ragley Ti rides. Other tests of the Ti 456 gave clear indications too. I think from comparing the tests, you can see how the frames compare, and where each of them is "positioned" in terms of ride.

Each of the STW reviews could be read in isolation and conclusions drawn about the frames. Much better than plotting against some arbitary benchmark (even if I designed it).

eh?! A smaller triangle is a stronger triangle cynic, all things being equal.

Even if it is…we're talking about stiffness are we not?

i don't think there's much between them, other than a slacker HA (not noticeable dependant on sag setting) and the Ti456 has better standover and different chainstays, seatstay design, etc.
tyre clearance is the same (i get 2.4" NN's in mine) and the finish is different.

same DT technology and the Ti456 has much nicer cable routing imo.

it's basically a Ti456 for Ragley….. n'est ce pas ?

I think from comparing the tests, you can see how the frames compare, and where each of them is "positioned" in terms of ride.

Fair enough, I'm never sure though about how to compare reviews from different reviewers in different publications, much easier to compare two reviews by the same people. Different reviewers can have very different preferences/agendas.

Won't a slacker head angle improve fork compliance by reducing sideways loading of the bushes, thus reducing binding?

Is this a 'substantive' factor over just a few degrees?

officer – doubt 1 deg or so will make any difference !!!!!

don't think there's much between them, other than a slacker HA (not noticeable dependant on sag setting)

not quite sure what you mean here?

tyre clearance is the same (i get 2.4" NN's in mine) and the finish is different.

tyre clearance is not the same. Ragley has bigger tyre clearance and chainring clearance due to use of "meccano".

456 = better standover – yes, I guess so, but I didn't consider it an issue on this one – the 456 Ti had a curved top tube to allow identical geometry with steel models. See also chainstay length and head tube length.

the Ti456 has much nicer cable routing imo.

I really do like the new bolt on guides 🙂