# angleset, wait for new frame, or neither?



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Let’s say you have a bike that was designed in that awkward phase between the modern and old geometry eras. The reach and stack are compact enough that you need a relatively long stem, and the headtube angle and reach are conservative enough that the resulting front-center is still quite short by modern standards.

Putting an angle-adjusting headset—assuming one can be made to fit on this bike—rakes out the fork by a degree or two and the F-C by an inch or so. It really doesn’t change much else. The long stem has to stay and the front/rear wheelbase bias goes from changes by about 1%. Is that really going to be a noticeable change worth the experiment, or is the rider in question better served by waiting for the opportunity to get a different bike/frame to experience something markedly different?


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

mack_turtle said:


> Let’s say you have a bike that was designed in that awkward phase between the modern and old geometry eras. The reach and stack are compact enough that you need a relatively long stem, and the headtube and reach are conservative enough that the resulting front-center is still quite short by modern standards.
> 
> 
> Putting an angle-adjusting headset—assuming one can be made to fit on this bike—rakes out the fork by a degree or two and the F-C by an inch or so. It really doesn’t change much. The long stem has to stay and the front/rear wheelbase bias goes from changes by about 1%. Is that really going to be a noticeable change worth the experiment, or is the rider in quest better served by waiting for the opportunity to get a different bike/frame to experience something markedly different?


My first thought is wait for the whole package (new frame/ bike). This obviously makes the most sense geo-wise. but on the other hand the angle adjust headset is a relatively inexpensive experiment that can always be reversed. So if you itching for some experimentation go for it. This line of thinking may also be influenced by budget/ time needed to save for a new bike and how much/ soon you want to try something new.


----------



## theprodigalcyclist (11 mo ago)

I've been struggling with the very same decision. I have a 2019 Trek Procaliber 9.7, the last year before they started to go with modern geo. One of my concerns is that because I have long legs, I ride an XL frame with the seat jacked up, and I switched to riser bars so my saddle to bar drop is quite as extreme. I believe installing an angle adjusting headset to shallow out the HA, would now lower the front end again.
Any thoughts on this?


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

theprodigalcyclist said:


> I believe installing an angle adjusting headset to shallow out the HA, would now lower the front end again.
> Any thoughts on this?


I know of two calculators that will give you an idea, but I don't know how accurate they are:


geometryCalc










Bike Geometry Calculator - MAD SCIENTIST MTB


A mountain bike geometry calculator for mullet bikes, fork changes, anglesets, etc. Visually compare multiple bikes. Calculate your bike's RAD.



madscientistmtb.com





I've played with a few calculators like this and the consensus is that a -2° headset on my bike would lower the front end by 5mm. That's not very much, so I would not worry about it.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

Personally, I would get a different frame. You really want the slacker head angle *along with* a steeper seat angle and longer reach. Those three things worth in concert to make modern bikes ride as well as they do. Having only one of the three by itself will probably make your bike ride worse.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

bad mechanic said:


> Those three things worth in concert to make modern bikes ride as well as they do. Having only one of the three by itself will probably make your bike ride worse.


yeah, that's probably the case. I might end up with a bike that is too much of a mongrel to appreciate half-measures of change.

however, I still hesitate to buy a new bike that has those features. EVERYTHING I have come to understand tells me that the longer, lower, and slacker a bike gets, the _worse_ it becomes at handling trails like my local terrain: tight, narrow, chunky, with lots of ledgy uphills. sometimes I wonder if the Karate Monkey is somehow accidentally perfectly suited for my terrain after all, and I just bought it because it was the cheapest thing I could get my hands on at the time.

no one "demos" hardtails, and it would take a few rides to determine if something different would suit my riding style and terrain.


----------



## SSsteel4life (Jul 1, 2016)

Hopefully within another year Surly will update there KM or Krampus geo some. Not to current modern standards, but just enough to get what we want! 

I know you prefer steel, but some of the recent aluminum bikes have really improved. The specialized Fuse M4 frame GEO is modernish not going extreme LLS. Also you can just get the frame only and switch all your parts.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> yeah, that's probably the case. I might end up with a bike that is too much of a mongrel to appreciate half-measures of change.
> 
> however, I still hesitate to buy a new bike that has those features. EVERYTHING I have come to understand tells me that the longer, lower, and slacker a bike gets, the _worse_ it becomes at handling trails like my local terrain: tight, narrow, chunky, with lots of ledgy uphills. sometimes I wonder if the Karate Monkey is somehow accidentally perfectly suited for my terrain after all, and I just bought it because it was the cheapest thing I could get my hands on at the time.
> 
> no one "demos" hardtails, and it would take a few rides to determine if something different would suit my riding style and terrain.


Personally, I would prefer modern geometry on a trail like that. The question is, have you *actually* *tried *a longer/lower/slacker bike on your trails?

Talk to other riders in your area and see if you can try one of their bikes.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

bad mechanic said:


> Personally, I would prefer modern geometry on a trail like that. The question is, have you *actually* *tried *a longer/lower/slacker bike on your trails?
> 
> Talk to other riders in your area and see if you can try one of their bikes.


I'm asking around now. I shall report back.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

The only part that concerns me would be "lower" with your described riding. Chunky, ledgy uphills are annoying with a lower BB. Longer / slacker hasn't been a concern given the rest of the bike is balanced.

Pay attention to Rear center / chainstay length. Shorter means or agile and you can get around chunky stuff. Longer is more stability at speed. I had a 435mm chainstay / 477mm reach bike and it felt large on my local trails. My next bike was 415 chainstays and 470mm reach. It gets around much much easier.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

yeah, not sold on the Low part. pedal strikes aside, I don't need everything about the bike working to keep me "in the bike" because there are so few places where that helps my riding.

I've been tracking rear-center/front center balance on some bikes. my bottom bracket is closer to the center of the wheelbase than a lot of bikes on the market, mostly because the front is so short. I could get it to feel a little more front-heavy by pushing the rear wheel back to the ends of the dropouts, but ... [thinking out loud] that would make the front end feel "heavy," as in, more difficult to loft the front wheel. pushing the front wheel out more, within reason, should make the bike longer and more stable in some ways, it won't make the bike feel glued to the ground.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

bikepacking.com said:


> While climbing, the big tires, long front end, and 66° headtube angle gave it a tendency to venture off course if I wasn’t fully invested in controlling it, and the sheer length of the bike isn’t ideal for tight, awkward switchbacks or navigating slow-speed technical climbs.











Esker Japhy Review: Next-Gen Steel Hardtail


Released as a 29” alternative to the incredibly versatile Hayduke, the Esker Japhy is a chromoly steel hardtail with 29+ tires, a 120mm travel fork, and three value-packed builds to choose from. We’ve been testing the mid-range Japhy J2 for the last few months to find out what it’s capable of...




bikepacking.com





Until Inget a chance to ride a bike in this category, I have to say that this is the kind of handling would make me want to chuck the bike off a bridge into Barton Creek. That would negatively impact the resale value, though.


----------



## Funoutside (Jul 17, 2019)

Something like the Marin Team Marin could be to your liking.


----------



## bad mechanic (Jun 21, 2006)

mack_turtle said:


> Until Inget a chance to ride a bike in this category, I have to say that this is the kind of handling would make me want to chuck the bike off a bridge into Barton Creek. That would negatively impact the resale value, though.


My experience has been the opposite. The longer reach and steeper seat tube keeps the front wheel planted and makes it much easier to climb steeper sections. On climbs where I've had to balance rear wheel traction with the front wheel lifting, modern geometry allows me to just power up it. The slacker head angle allows the bike to handle chunk better. I have to steer more deliberately, but it's harder for the trail to throw off the steering, and that's a compromise I feel is well worth it. 

Downhill modern geometry is loads better, but I don't think anyone is disputing that.

Like I said, instead of reading about it, go try it for yourself instead.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I am not sure what you brands you are looking at (or your price point). But, I would use the NMW Hummingbird geometry as "the standard" to measure everything else against. Hummingbird — Neuhaus Metalworks

For the riding you describe that bike would be perfect. I have ridden Nick's (the one on the website) and it's excellent. Mine is coming in a few weeks.

I have a hardtail that takes a 140-160mm fork (the one in my profile pic). That would not be my choice for what you describe. It descends really well (but also has a 64 degree HA) and is a little lazier climber. But, it is so confidence inspiring on the downs). My experience has been that 120-130mm is the sweet spot for all-around hardtails.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

bad mechanic said:


> The longer reach and steeper seat tube keeps the front wheel planted and makes it much easier to climb steeper sections. On climbs where I've had to balance rear wheel traction with the front wheel lifting, modern geometry allows me to just power up it.
> 
> Like I said, instead of reading about it, go try it for yourself instead.


detail that might be relevant: when you sit and climb like that, what gear are you using? I always assume that this riding technique also implies shifting to a super low gear. I ride singlespeed exclusively, so sitting down and pedaling any sort of elevation is not an option—and I wouldn't have it any other way. seat tube angle is nearly irrelevant when you don't sit for 50% of your ride.

However, I've been inching my saddle forward lately. The STA on my bike is super slack, probably to make up for the short reach on these older style bikes. there's no getting around that. something more balanced with more room up front might help.

I started a whole thread about this a while ago, and "try if yourself" is not an option. I've been asking around and I can't find anything useful to try. test-riding hardtails is just not a thing. I always regret asking this sort of question because it's basically impossible to answer.



cassieno said:


> I am not sure what you brands you are looking at (or your price point). But, I would use the NMW Hummingbird geometry as "the standard" to measure everything else against. Hummingbird — Neuhaus Metalworks


Thank you, but I'm not looking for frame recommendations. I have a short list that I can afford and have characteristics that I think might work. the Hummingbird looks like something that would suit me, but that's way outside of what I could justify spending. I'll see what's out there that's similar.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

I put a -1 deg WC headset in my 2013 OG Krampus and it rides great. 1 deg is not a huge change so it won't wreck anything. OTOH it won't change anything for the better a lot either.


----------



## DBAD (Aug 28, 2008)

I agree with you on the seat tube for SS. It only helps with seated climbing. Go for the angleset, cheap,easy, and noticeable.


----------

