Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Does anyone have a Maccatuskil? It seems like it could be a great base to an XC bike on for the money, however as with all Planet-x/On-One bikes, it's hard to find independent reviews to cut though the marketing spin.

This would be a xc bike, with the aim of building a lighter bike than I could if I went full-sus at this price point. I have a 'parts bin' of a Fox F29 RL fork (100 or 120mm), a OneUp USA/XT 1x10 drive train and some Stans Crest 29er rims on decent hubs.

FROOMAC_P1.jpg

On-One Maccatuskil Carbon 29er Frame | On - One
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
I'm interested too. I have a lurcher and never really got on well with the short top tube and high standover geometry .
Interested to know if the M has a longer top tube for lower standover, on paper it doesn't seem to offer much improvement .
Reviews of the lurcher complained it was a harsh ride . Is the M more compliant and forgiving ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
834 Posts
anybody ridden one yet.

i have a lurcher and love the bike for what it is. super light gravel grinder bike that i also take on the trails quite often. i have the rigid fork also. i also had a bunch of extra parts laying around and needed a frame to put then on. my winter beater bike build turned out much better than i thought.

if i dont find a new full susp bike by the end of september i am going to be racing a 50 miler on it which does have me a little nervous. the bike will be fine but my kidneys are going to take a beating.

i am jealous of the thru axle. i have qr front and rear. thru axle in the rear with a thru axle rigid fork would be dope.

imo the bike looks exactly like a lurcher with a new name. i cant seem to find the old lurcher geo chart but i bet they are the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I have one, and I am racing my second season on it.
I had a Lucher for 3 years and upgraded the frame to a Maccatuskil. And it is really an upgrade!
Geometry is much better, frame is lighter and more forgiving. My local training track has a lot of sharp corners around trees and stuff. With the Lurcher it was hard work to get it around. The Macca does the job way better!

Once you ride the Maccatuskil you will notice how lazy the Lurcher really is. The rear triangle of the Lurcher is so hard it will kick you out of the saddle on every bump. No such thing on the Macca
 

·
aka: SpeedyChix
Joined
·
303 Posts
update...nm, their shipping is crazy; the Chinese stuff on eBay is half...

Tim / What's the widest tire that would fit the rear of it? I've seen 2.3 and 2.8. Wold like ability to fit a 2.6-2.8 Rocket Ron. Thanks!


I have one, and I am racing my second season on it.
I had a Lucher for 3 years and upgraded the frame to a Maccatuskil. And it is really an upgrade!
Geometry is much better, frame is lighter and more forgiving. My local training track has a lot of sharp corners around trees and stuff. With the Lurcher it was hard work to get it around. The Macca does the job way better!

Once you ride the Maccatuskil you will notice how lazy the Lurcher really is. The rear triangle of the Lurcher is so hard it will kick you out of the saddle on every bump. No such thing on the Macca
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Building a bike from a new Maccatuskil frame just now, so far seems to be a nice frame for the money (wasn't expensive).

Spec so far includes;
Hope XC 29er wheels
RoRon / RaRalph reds 2.23 front and back
Hope XC brakes with braided hoses
Hope rotors
Eagle GXP 12 speed
Raceface carbon flat bars
Raceface turbine stem
Rockshox SID forks with remote
Fizik Gobo seat

Thinking about a dropper to finish it off.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top