looking at this frame for my wife, what's the wheelbase and bottom bracket height of the 14" and 16" frame?
I've never ridden a 456, but from what I've read here and in reviews, my educated guess is that, compared to the Inbred, the 456 works better with the longer travel forks, is faster and more stable on the downhills, but is slower and requires more body English to steer on tight twisty trails. I don't know how it climbs, but its a hardtail, so it must be pretty darn efficient. My guess is it would be a fine all around mountain bike for long days in the saddle. But the Inbred is too (God bless steel frames). Again, the performance of either frame is going to depend in large part on the fork you choose to put on it, so you’re mileage may vary.hey Boland, thanks for the info.
See, I am choosing between 456 and Inbred. I have a hardcore XC bike, the GT Zaskar expert and it sucks for decents, i mean its horrible, but it climbs as if it has a motor inside and on smooth singletrack it kills anything. So I want to compromise and make myself a more trail/AM friendly hardtail that is faster and more stable on the DH but not full out DH/AM hardtail. My riding style is, I never take the same route back, even if i am lost i find a new route home and go for 50 km+ rides when i have the time so I ride variable terrain. Is the geometry of the Inbred to close to the Zaskar? HA is 71 for Zaskar and 70 for Ibred with 100 mm fork. while SA is 73 for both frames.
would the 456 slack HA compromise a lot for long day tours or would it be fine except that it would not be as efficient on uphill? I know a lot of these things are subjective but I am willing to sacrifice a specialist for a good all-rounder.
ok, long post, hopefully your boss wont catch you at work while trying to finish reading this post