pogonation Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 Hi, I'm just wondering what differences there are between short and long frames. i.e are long frames better at sidehopping than shorter frames. I would just like to know the difference in qualities and handling, etc, because I am looking at monty's for a future bike but am unsure of what short bikes are good at? Could anyone help please? :- :S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
streetjibs Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 this will spiral into the biggest post ever... :S" (IMO) It doesnt really make that much difference as far as helping with moves. Eventually you will get used to whatever u ride. I think that its whatever suits you, such as if you prefer the feel of a long bike then good. For me personally i love a nice short bike. Also keep this in mind... The now well known Neil Tunnicliffe used to ride a brisa (short!) and a pashley before that (also short) and yes he did go big on them too. So the argument that some people think big moves are only possible on long bikes is bollox. I agree that it might help with them... Thats as much as im willing to say... I know this is going to be a long topic with lots of conflicting posts. My advice... go out ride some peoples bikes and find what suits you best :- :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 The now well known Neil Tunnicliffe used to ride a brisa (short!) and a pashley before that (also short) and yes he did go big on them too. So the argument that some people think big moves are only possible on long bikes is bollox. I agree that it might help with them... ← Whilst I agree with what you're saying, in the time of Brisas and Pashleys, there were no "long" bikes around. In fact I think Brisas were quite long by the standards of the day, although I'm not sure on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT! Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 I think stay length and codpit (sp?) length is more important now. My t-lite feel the same as a python copy, but a t-pro feels completly differen't, even though it has the same WB. It's just what suits really. You see the cleanbikes crew doing the same stuff as people who ride zoos (CLS sam wheeler etc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaRtZ Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 CLS used to ride a monty :S (in the "tango.mpeg" video) He sidehops pretty high in that to be fair I think there is a difference but it changes for every person i.e. Person A performs best on a short mod while Person B performs best on a long stock Im going to try the Zona and see if I become better, but its just as possible Ill be even worse than I am now :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 long bikes have more balance standing still, seem to float more than hop up objects, can only ride pure trials on them, with thier big, squishy tyres. short bikes are easier to roll around and up walls, more of a flow to the ride of the bike. much more manageable (quicker to get to where you need it) when riding a section. personally i like short bikes, as their not as serious to ride (can only ride trials on a long, low and silver one) ive had a koxx 1060 and it rode nicely, but slowly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Motivator Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 I can gap, up and bunnyhop on my 1020, 1050 and 1085. I can do all these things just as far, as high and as well it's just whether it's easier or not. The shorter the bike, the spinier it is. The longer the bike is, the easier it is to control. This doesn't mean to say you can't spin long bikes or control short bikes, it's mainly just down to personal preference. Sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burton Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 Look at Benito Ros. He rode a Monty. Look at CLS. He rode a Monty. Both of them are really good riders. 1 is sick at comp and rode the Monty really well, coming in top rankings. And CLS rode it doing big gaps, step-downs etc. They have both moved onto longer bikes and have only improved. I think longer bikes will help any rider, so long as they are in proportion to them. i.e a 4ft guy riding a Vinco. It just wouldnt help them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarshRider Posted September 11, 2005 Report Share Posted September 11, 2005 Also keep this in mind... The now well known Neil Tunnicliffe used to ride a brisa (short!) and a pashley before that (also short) and yes he did go big on them too. So the argument that some people think big moves are only possible on long bikes is bollox. I agree that it might help with them... ← think tim steadman to! he a f**king great rider on a pashley on street or natty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted September 12, 2005 Report Share Posted September 12, 2005 never owned a looong bike but the difference i can see is a short one will bunnyhop and spin and roll (and probs be smoother) eaisier and a looong will swap and tap easier. I would say mid sized 1060-70 is the Ultimate frame for someone who rides bit old school...... but it seems that all the crazy kids are going long these days !!! when in rome - buy whichever bike feels nicest to you after youve begged stolen and borrowed goes on other peoples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.