Jump to content

New Products From Onza


BikeDotStuffAtOnzaDotCom

Recommended Posts

Do not keep the head angle as 71.5! I'm begging you.

72 or better still 72.5, it will make or brake this frame...

Onza always run slack headangles (N) esspecially on their mods which is why they run those ridiculous looking long forks >_< it seems that everyone knows except onza, that a steeper headangle is the way forward for progressively improved backwheel control, specifically when your making adjustment by tilting the bars for stablity or pivoting control. Both mod frames look very desirable which is a major plus for onza's previous designs (Y) Edited by Rusevelt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ice and Limey 20".

UK arrival December the 1st 2008

Ice RRP £289.99

Limey 20" RRP £349.99

(Sorry about the gash pics, This is all they have sent me.)

Will the ice have a disc mount when it hits the shops?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New kit is looking ace Joe best of luck with it. P.S. I'm so jelous of them dropouts on the limey 1.6 grrrr

Thanks Pat, Yeah the drop outs have been quite a success.

Will the ice have a disc mount when it hits the shops?

Nope, Sorry to all you disc fans.

Does the limey have bashmounts?

They all have bash mounts, The bash plates that fit are the XTP and echo lite style ones.

Oh and regards to the slack head angle comment, We have made the forks shorter on the 2009 models and for the angle them selves we never really have and complaints from our riders. Although the Limey 1.6 will have a 72 head angle.

The paint jobs have delayed the release of these frames but its always best to take your time on some thing special.

Cheers

Joe

Edited by Mike Poyzer @ Onza
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, Sorry to all you disc fans.

I don't get it. So many people are using rear discs these days. About a quarter of mod riders wouldn't even consider buying that frame just because they won't be able to use a disc brake. I can't see why every single mod frame designed these day doesn't have a rear disc mount.

Edited by JT!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it. So many people are using rear discs these days. About a quarter of mod riders wouldn't even consider buying that frame just because they won't be able to use a disc brake. I can't see why every single mod frame designed these day doesn't have a rear disc mount.

It was designed with a certain rider in mind, Using HS33 on the rear there was no need for a disc mount which would only add 60-70 grams. Maybe yes...it may affect sales of the frame but I don't think we will struggle to sell them all. After going to Italy this year for the UCI Worlds I hardly saw any DD's being rode. Which makes me think at the high end comp level (which the Ice is designed for) it would make sense to save the weight rather then please the DD boys. Its only 1 frame though, the rest will or do have rear disc mounts. Although one of our riders recently had to go from rear disc to HS33 due testing a frame and now prefers it with a maggie.

Sorry JT, I'll have one made for you if you really want one, ha ha. If the demand is there then Ill have the next batch made with the mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just doesn't make sense not to put it on, all it will do is send potential customers elsewhere.

If anyone is really that arsed about weight that they will grind off the disc mount to save it, then they'll grind it off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was designed with a certain rider in mind, Using HS33 on the rear there was no need for a disc mount which would only add 60-70 grams. Maybe yes...it may affect sales of the frame but I don't think we will struggle to sell them all. After going to Italy this year for the UCI Worlds I hardly saw any DD's being rode. Which makes me think at the high end comp level (which the Ice is designed for) it would make sense to save the weight rather then please the DD boys. Its only 1 frame though, the rest will or do have rear disc mounts. Although one of our riders recently had to go from rear disc to HS33 due testing a frame and now prefers it with a maggie.

Sorry JT, I'll have one made for you if you really want one, ha ha. If the demand is there then Ill have the next batch made with the mount.

so honestly most mod riders didn't have double disk? i find that hard to believe, most of the comp scene is split between to makes monty and koxx and with monty you have no option at the moment but to ride double disk, and most big boys on the koxx side, ride with double disk such as benito and carlos, ino that trialtech rider doesn't but thats only one rider. you say you won't struggle to sell them but i wouldnt be so confident in it with the amount of mod frames on the market. Youve really kicked yourself in the foot as it doesn't matter if the frame was designed for a top rider or the world riders scene as thats not who will be buying it, the general public will, very few will be sold to top uci/biu riders compared to the normal public. Plus if the weight was a big issue the rider would just chop the disk mount off anyway and grind back the bash mounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was designed with a certain rider in mind, Using HS33 on the rear there was no need for a disc mount which would only add 60-70 grams. Maybe yes...it may affect sales of the frame but I don't think we will struggle to sell them all. After going to Italy this year for the UCI Worlds I hardly saw any DD's being rode. Which makes me think at the high end comp level (which the Ice is designed for) it would make sense to save the weight rather then please the DD boys. Its only 1 frame though, the rest will or do have rear disc mounts. Although one of our riders recently had to go from rear disc to HS33 due testing a frame and now prefers it with a maggie.

Sorry JT, I'll have one made for you if you really want one, ha ha. If the demand is there then Ill have the next batch made with the mount.

I'm not really talking about me personally, i just can't understand why frame designers don't add a disc mount. Like you said the weight is pretty much nothing. And if it was a problem, there could easily be two frames, disc and maggie.

I'm not running around demanding a disc mount to be on all frames, just wondering why people are still making frames without them. No one is ever going to not buy a frame because it has a disc mount on it.

You will sell all the frames, but you'll sell more if you easily open it to the disc market.

:)

Edited by JT!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you looking to reduce the weight of the Limey 1.6 back down to the 1600g region to keep competitive with other brands in the same kind leight weight frame market.

Originally it was 1680g was it? And it's now 1800g+.

I think it'd be worth trying to shave the weight back down to the original weight somehow, as most of the new frames coming out from other brands are around that weight and if that's what people are going for, 200g is a fair whack if your trying to get a lightweight bike.

I know areas of the frame have been improved which is where the weight has been added, but I think there's areas to reduce a lot of that weight. The built in booster looks a bit over the top especially as the frame has the "wings" strengthening the seat stays/brake area. It looks a good 10mm thick but I can't see the underside.

Also have you had any trouble with the Skull headtube, as that would be great on the Limey.

Maybe I'm just nit picking and looking for a new frame that's really lightweight ;). Just looked back on the frame and wondered what the plans are for it really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the inserts in the headtube all about? To stop the headtube flaring? I've only ever seen a flared headtube on frames where there was knock in the headset bearings.

Surely it would make more sense just to make the headtube itself thicker? It'd add less weight than steel insert things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the inserts in the headtube all about? To stop the headtube flaring? I've only ever seen a flared headtube on frames where there was knock in the headset bearings.

Surely it would make more sense just to make the headtube itself thicker? It'd add less weight than steel insert things.

Headtube flaring is pritty common especially with riders doing hooks, it might not be so seeable if you usually buy newish frames or new ones but frames a year plus you can tell the difference when fitting a headset. Personally i think a steel insert is a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new stainless steel rings are very thin and light (section is barely 2 mm square). They weigh only 4 or 5 grams each. Head tube flaring is a problem particularly where big hooks are involved or if headsets are ridden loose, and to add thickness to the tube adds considerable weight and does not stop the problem. Alloy has a much lower tensile strength than stainless steel and it is the sideways tensile pulling of the molecular structure which causes it to expand and flare. The s/s external rings virtually eliminate this with very minimal weight gain (approx. 4 - 6 grams per frame) . Please note, these are not the much larger S/S rings which were on the Limey and which were heavier. They were our first attempt at stopping the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious Mike, but is there any chance you'd be able to release a few stainless headtube rings separately for sale, given the demand? I mean, they won't be expensive to produce but those with slightly flared headtubes or those worried about flaring could use them? If it took a bit of excessive reaming to clear a space in the headtube, and bond it in.

How exactly are these steel rings fitted in the Onza headtubes? Slightly wider internal bore for the aluminium headtube, and the steel ring pushed in with epoxy resin around it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really possible- the rings Onza use fit over the head tube, where the tube has been turned down to a smaller diameter to accept the steel ring. I assume they just use an interference fit, possibly heating the steel ring first to allow it to fit over the alloy tube easier.

You can see it on the Ice frame:

ice.jpg

Wouldn't be easy to retrofit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on your frame you could make some external rings to fit and fit them with some heat, you would need to strip your headtube down to bare metal and probably face and ream your headtube after it was done. Not worth the effort for a finished frame, far easier to build them during production :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...