[JOwens14]

So not too long ago I picked up a 26'er slot-dropout On-One Inbred. At the time, On-One's website said the frame was designed for a 4 to 5in fork (roughly 100-130mm). So, I have been running a 120mm up front.

Well, they recently redid their website and I saw the latest Inbred description (same frame design as mine) says it's for "100mm MAX."

I know it's a steel frame and whatnot, but should I be concerned?

 

[Mr.P]

Great question. I had the same thought.

CERN (?) testing of frames in Europe is a new failure standard to meet. I believe that One-One changed their fork recommendation to try to fit the standard. But the Inbred did not pass.

So the Inbred did not pass certification, yet riders are riding them very hard without issue. So out of the test lab and in practice, 120mm forks and trail+ riding, the Inbred does quite well.

P

Inbred with 120mm fork (I love this frame!).

 

[JOwens14]

That's what I figured, but I just wanted to hear it from someone else haha. Thanks!

Nice looking rig. I'll post a couple pics of my most recent Inbred build when I wrap it up this weekend.

 

[scottzg]

it's much better handling with a 4" fork anyway. A big fork just makes the front end waggle all over the place.

 

[Mr.P]

it's much better handling with a 4" fork anyway. A big fork just makes the front end waggle all over the place.

Hmmm, I just set travel on my fork down to 90mm for SS racing and it's a nervous ninny now. I'll see how the descents at speed go this afternoon.

P

 

[JOwens14]

Garry at On-One got back to me and said that 100mm is correct, and anything more should only be considered if you're a lighter rider...

Just seems odd to me, their website used to say 4-5" forks, and Unreal Cycles' website STILL says it's ok (their US co-part - read here)

Well, I have a nice 2010 Reba XX set at 120mm and I'm going to leave it cause it rides great.

 

[boomn]

Garry at On-One got back to me and said that 100mm is correct, and anything more should only be considered if you're a lighter rider...

Just seems odd to me, their website used to say 4-5" forks, and Unreal Cycles' website STILL says it's ok (their US co-part - read here)

Well, I have a crazy nice 2010 Reba XX set at 120mm and I'm going to leave it cause it rides great.

as mentioned already, the testing standards were made stricter than they should have been. Good, well-proven bikes (not just from On One) that had been around for years were failing consistently only in the tests, and On Ones way past this appears to have been changing the recommended use for the bike instead of having to redesign the whole thing. That is why their current recommendation is what it is; because they likely can't legally sell them as 5" bikes anymore based on what level of testing they did pass.

If it comes down to this however, your Reba is very easily converted to 100mm with a single internal spacer change

 

[Mr.P]

So the Inbred did very well at 90mm. A bit more nervous on higher speed, rutted turns, but seated climbing was greatly improved. As was spinning in the flats.

P

 

[JOwens14]

Good to know. I used to have the older version of the Inbred (the white one with canti-mounts), and THAT handled awful over 100mm. However, I doubt I'll drop my fork now though. I like the way it handles, and I typically blow through 100mm pretty quickly on the stuff I ride. I'm still waiting on finishing re-building this thing up, but hoping to have some pics soon.

 

[Mr.P]

Good to know. I used to have the older version of the Inbred (the white one with canti-mounts), and THAT handled awful over 100mm. However, I doubt I'll drop my fork now though. I like the way it handles, and I typically blow through 100mm pretty quickly on the stuff I ride. I'm still waiting on finishing re-building this thing up, but hoping to have some pics soon.

Just a quick side note: I had to run my fork harder at 90mm or the ride got scary when it got fast. I turned up full compression.

P

 

[JOwens14]

Finally finished the build (I know the steerer needs to be cut).
On-One Inbred, RS Reba XX, Mavic 819/Hope Pro II

<a href="https://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/?action=view&current=DSC00113.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/DSC00113.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="https://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/?action=view&current=DSC00111.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/DSC00111.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="https://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/?action=view&current=DSC00114.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/DSC00114.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="https://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/?action=view&current=DSC00115.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af323/jjowens14/DSC00115.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

 

[scottzg]

sweet bike, that's the way it should be.

 

[p nut]

JOwens, what size rotor is that in the back? Just picked up a 16" 26er for the wife. I've got 185/160 BB7 rotors, but heard you have to use at least 185 in the back.

BTW, the OnOne site says there is also removable v-brake mounts, too...

 

[JOwens14]

It's a 160mm in the back, and it was a major pain to get on. 180mm would have probably made it easier, though it would be overkill for what I needed. The On-One style of disc-mounts, IMO, is so stupid. Not only is it a pain to get on, but it causes more linear pull on the hub, increasing wheel slip. Looks pretty though

 

[p nut]

Thanks. Any tips for getting mine on? Would rather not have the 185 in the back. Would look rather odd. She's probably not going to brake hard enough to cause any slip anyway. (We'll just be riding around a paved bike trail and neighborhood).

 

[boomn]

It's a 160mm in the back, and it was a major pain to get on. 180mm would have probably made it easier, though it would be overkill for what I needed. The On-One style of disc-mounts, IMO, is so stupid. Not only is it a pain to get on, but it causes more linear pull on the hub, increasing wheel slip. Looks pretty though

according to the designer it was made this way specifically to eliminate axle slipping from brake force. The forces on the hub in this design are actually vertical (therefore perpendicular to the axle slot), whereas in a normal caliper placement the force on the axle can be very close to the same line as the axle slot.

That's the theory at least, and the practical side is zero brake side slipping for me since I got my Inbred even with just QR skewers

 

[boomn]

Thanks. Any tips for getting mine on? Would rather not have the 185 in the back. Would look rather odd. She's probably not going to brake hard enough to cause any slip anyway. (We'll just be riding around a paved bike trail and neighborhood).

haven't had to do it myself, but the two tips I remember are
1) finding a replacement cinch bolt with a flatter head
2) with the caliper in place on the bike, pull the cable tight and mark the spot, then remove the caliper from the mount and tighten down the cable cinch bolt off the bike where you have proper room to use a wrench

 

[JOwens14]

Interesting - I've had nothing but problems with that since I've had mine (had 2 different models, both with the problem). I had my rear hub converted to a thru-bolt and still occasionally get slippage - though I think it may be from hard riding. I never had that problem on all my other horizontal drop'd frames.

regardless, it's an awesome frame, I just readjust it before every ride, not a big deal

 

[flipnidaho]

We have a couple of Inbreds... Running 130mm on one and 150mm on the other with no problems (I actually like the 150mm handing better than the 130mm). We're relatively lightweights though at 140 lbs all geared up...

 

[p nut]

Thanks, boomn. Are you running a bigger rotor?