Stanton Slackline build thread.

PB Forum :: All Mountain, Enduro & Cross-Country
Stanton Slackline build thread.
  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag jamesrbrown
Posted: Sep 8, 2016 at 8:27 Quote
I've just ordered a medium Slackline frame in red, going to take my time building it over a couple months, so thought I would share and get some opinions/ advise as I go.


The idea is to build a pretty light (for a steel HT), aggressive XC bike. I have a 140mm trail bike and DH rig, so this will be my nippy ''light weight'' XC bike. A downhiller's XC bike if you like.

So far the only parts I have for it are a set of Easton Heaven wheels, which I was going to put on my Mondraker, but ended up deciding not to.

At the moment, I'm leaning towards just sticking with a 120mm fork. I used to have a Ti 456, with travel adjust forks. In 140mm it descended beautifully, but I absolutely loved the snappy handling when in 120mm. I only really set the forks to 140mm for pretty meaty descents (or push up DH).

I could get another travel adjust fork, but it seems like quite a bit of extra weight for something I don't view as 100% necessary. If I stick 120mm I can go with a Boss Dizzy, which is very light!

I could get a 140mm Dizzy, but then I would lose the shorter, steeper, snappier handling which I do want. I want to differentiate this from my long travel full sus bike as much as possible.


If your thinking why dont I just go carbon or ally for a light weight shorter travel build, I still want it to be aggressive at heart, and steel was at the top of my list.
flag yoltwice
Posted: Sep 8, 2016 at 22:34 Quote
Alloy should not be an option for a trail bike you spend a lot of time on, imho.

Is this your first step frame build?

I really like a good steel bike or carbon for the way the behave, and this isn't the weight wheenies forum anyway.

A heavy bike doesn't have to feel heavy, so I get your pick.

Did you also look at the Sherpa from Stanton?

Some forks have the option to change/reduce travel when bought with the most amount of travel, so maybe you should look into that. It's easy to reduce the travel on, let's say a pike, later if you find that 140 is too much. The pike goes both ways as I recall. Not sure about fox or Boss
flag jase111171
Posted: Sep 8, 2016 at 23:44 Quote
FabianJ wrote:
Alloy should not be an option for a trail bike you spend a lot of time on, imho.

Is this your first step frame build?

I really like a good steel bike or carbon for the way the behave, and this isn't the weight wheenies forum anyway.

A heavy bike doesn't have to feel heavy, so I get your pick.

Did you also look at the Sherpa from Stanton?

Some forks have the option to change/reduce travel when bought with the most amount of travel, so maybe you should look into that. It's easy to reduce the travel on, let's say a pike, later if you find that 140 is too much. The pike goes both ways as I recall. Not sure about fox or Boss
can you justify your reason for not using alloy for a trail bike you send a lot of time on?Seems a very odd statement.
flag Losvar
Posted: Sep 8, 2016 at 23:58 Quote
Probably because the ride is really harsh on an alu hardtail.
There's also the fact that you will hit material fatigue much earlier on alu than on carbon, ti or steel.

On a full suspension this is irrelevant though.
flag jase111171
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 0:09 Quote
Good point,can't believe the bike industry has got it wrong for so many years.
flag jamesrbrown
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 1:37 Quote
FabianJ wrote:

Is this your first step frame build?

A heavy bike doesn't have to feel heavy, so I get your pick.

Did you also look at the Sherpa from Stanton?


No I've built loads of bikes up from a frame. Carbon On One 456, didn't like how stiff it was, changed it to a Ti 456. Intense M9. Lapierre Froggy before that, probably others too.

I did consider the Sherpa, but given I've already got a 650b wheelset, and the Sherpa is 29 or 27.5+, I've stuck with the slackline. I do want it to be kinda light and almost XCish, but that's not to say I dont want it to be rowdy and aggressive at the same time.

I like the fast change of direction for twisty single track at high speed given with 120mm travel and not too slack a HA. Just don't know if I want to add half a pound in weight by getting a travel adjust fork.
flag BurlyIron26
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 5:03 Quote
Jamesb15uk wrote:
FabianJ wrote:

Is this your first step frame build?

A heavy bike doesn't have to feel heavy, so I get your pick.

Did you also look at the Sherpa from Stanton?


No I've built loads of bikes up from a frame. Carbon On One 456, didn't like how stiff it was, changed it to a Ti 456. Intense M9. Lapierre Froggy before that, probably others too.

I did consider the Sherpa, but given I've already got a 650b wheelset, and the Sherpa is 29 or 27.5+, I've stuck with the slackline. I do want it to be kinda light and almost XCish, but that's not to say I dont want it to be rowdy and aggressive at the same time.

I like the fast change of direction for twisty single track at high speed given with 120mm travel and not too slack a HA. Just don't know if I want to add half a pound in weight by getting a travel adjust fork.
like someone else once pointed out, unless we are all small light build, its probably more important losing some of our own body weight rather than a few pounds on our bikes, crikey I'm 27kg overweight now, my 12.5kg bike 14kg fully loaded is less of a concern to me, but again each to our ownBook
flag DimitrisCSD
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 5:34 Quote
Why not fixed 130mm travel? Best of both worlds!
flag jase111171
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 7:46 Quote
It's a crime to put short travel forks on a Slackline.
flag yoltwice
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 8:30 Quote
jase111171 wrote:
FabianJ wrote:
Alloy should not be an option for a trail bike you spend a lot of time on, imho.

Is this your first step frame build?

I really like a good steel bike or carbon for the way the behave, and this isn't the weight wheenies forum anyway.

A heavy bike doesn't have to feel heavy, so I get your pick.

Did you also look at the Sherpa from Stanton?

Some forks have the option to change/reduce travel when bought with the most amount of travel, so maybe you should look into that. It's easy to reduce the travel on, let's say a pike, later if you find that 140 is too much. The pike goes both ways as I recall. Not sure about fox or Boss
can you justify your reason for not using alloy for a trail bike you send a lot of time on?Seems a very odd statement.

Just my own personal preference, I do find most alloy bikes uncomfortable to ride. I have never broken an alloy or a steel bike, which I can't say for carbon. Most alloy frames are designed to maximise the product lifetime, by adding a bit material then needed, so you should theoretically be on the safe side when buying an alloy frame. Please don't make this the main subject of this forum discussion.
flag jamesrbrown
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 15:03 Quote
DimitrisCSD wrote:
Why not fixed 130mm travel? Best of both worlds!

That is a tempting potential.

jase111171 wrote:
It's a crime to put short travel forks on a Slackline.

Well it is marketed at 100-140mm. If you want propper 160mm really you should be looking at a Switchback. I fully understand these bikes are in their element with longer travel.. But I have other steeds for those purposes. Im essentially trying to make a cross country bike, that I can ride like a d*ck head. Standard low travel frames ain't gonna be aggressive enough for how I ride. You don't HAVE to have long travel to be aggresive (ahem 4x), sure it slows you down on more technical descents, but it can hold you back in flatter, tighter single track which is a lot of UK trail riding.

BurlyIron26 wrote:
its probably more important losing some of our own body weight rather than a few pounds on our bikes, :

Well of course it's important to be in shape, but that's kinda flawed logic. A tennis racket probably weighs less than your hand, yet there is a world of difference between a heavy and light one when it comes to playing. Same goes for bikes when it comes to changing direction fast, agility in the air, acceleration and of course climbing. It's always easier to manipulate your own body than external equipment. If your a fat sh*t to start with, then yeah don't spend loads on light kit.
flag StevieJB
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 15:59 Quote
What's wrong with your 456ti I have one and love it. I came from steel to it and steel rides like it but with a weight penalty. Seems a backwards step.
flag WasabiJim
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 19:38 Quote
after a degree of confusion i went back to the Stanton site and see that the new slackline with 27.5 wheels is slightly more XC than the switchback Book

I was in the same situation and now have the switchback with 140mm fork. it is a super capable and playful build. And as Dan said it would, my 150mm full sus'er collects a lot of dust these days.

i take it by XC you really mean light and responsive not so much a race machine for eating up the miles while you get your lycra high seat fix...

i don't think 120 or 140 is going to make all that much difference - your style of riding and the frame's DNA is always going to get agro. so be careful of 2 things - 1) it will get costly to support that habit and keep it XC light and robust , and 2) you will end up with a capability and character overlap with your other bikes. So I would really focus on how you want the riding experience to differ to the other bikes. as far as light and capable goes what does the 20mm diff matter?

You mentioned you have wheels already? the frame is rated to hi-vo 27.5, I would be tempted to go that way
flag WasabiJim
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 19:39 Quote
my stanton build in the end

new HT build
flag jamesrbrown
Posted: Sep 9, 2016 at 21:26 Quote
WasabiJim wrote:

i take it by XC you really mean light and responsive not so much a race machine for eating up the miles while you get your lycra high seat fix...

i don't think 120 or 140 is going to make all that much difference - your style of riding and the frame's DNA is always going to get agro. so be careful of 2 things - 1) it will get costly to support that habit and keep it XC light and robust , and 2) you will end up with a capability and character overlap with your other bikes. So I would really focus on how you want the riding experience to differ to the other bikes. as far as light and capable goes what does the 20mm diff matter?

You mentioned you have wheels already? the frame is rated to hi-vo 27.5, I would be tempted to go that way

By XC what I mean is the lighter end of trail/AM. Not a race bike by any means, but just that I care about going fast up and down on this bike, and will use it for fitness.

That character overlap is exactly why Im leaning towards a lighter build.

Personally I don't buy into the 27.5+ thing yet. Seems like they puncture too easy. And my rims are too narrow for it anyway.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.010394
Mobile Version of Website