Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Talk about anything.

Moderators: Bearbonesnorm, Taylor, Chew

Post Reply
Tanglefist
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:54 pm

Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Tanglefist »

I'm considering getting an angle changing headset to further slacken my on one 456, because although I love being 15 years behind all the trends, I like the feeling of a slacker head angle.

It'd already relatively slack (66.6 degrees, apparently) with, and it's been fine with a loaded handlebar harness, but will going even further make the steering flop when it's loaded on the bars comical or is it just something you'd get used to?

My guess would be 'it's weird at first but you learn to compensate', but I figured someone here might have real world experience.
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

Wasn't the 456 designed to be slack (in relative terms) while still using a reasonably short fork or was that just the 'summer season' version?

What fork are you using? Offset will play a part in deciding whether it becomes floppy and ponderous as it, combined with rake (angle) will dictate trail and that's really the important bit.
May the bridges you burn light your way
rudedog
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:00 pm
Location: Lothian

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by rudedog »

The 456 summer season and evo were the slacker versions

Think the original 456 had a head angle of 67.5

That would be based on a 120mm fork though
Tanglefist
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:54 pm

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Tanglefist »

Yeah, it's 66.6 degree based on a 130mm fork apparently.

I've got a set of 140mm revelations, not sure what offset they've got but I can measure this evening.
User avatar
Alpinum
Posts: 2603
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:38 pm

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Alpinum »

All my trailbikes have < 65 ° HTA unsagged.

My long travel 29er is just a tad beneath 65 °, but is ridden with loads of sag (rear quite a bit more than front when tested on flat ground), so this number comes down quite a bit.
Short travel 29er is at 63.5 °
Hardtail 29/27.5+ is at 63.3 °

I do bikepacking with all of them and love the feel. I found for some type of riding a 51 mm offset to be better than a eg 44 mm offset. The more aggro, the happier I'm with longer offsets, but it seems to require a more firm hand when cornering and helps if you're a kind of rider who likes to ride turns with some degree of oversteering.
But also riding a winding single track, rushing around trees along a river (flattish terrain) I never have that feeling of "sluggishness" - I guess this is just because I'm more used to such angles than eg >66 °.
Tanglefist wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:13 am it's loaded on the bars comical or is it just something you'd get used to?
Since these are all trail focused bikes, I don't load them with lots of stuff up front in the first place. Riding no handed is dead easy until you lean beyond a certain point - which comes so late it's not of any relevance (for me). My off-road curly bar bike has a 70 ° HTA and is nervous like F from the very beginning, but kind of stays that way when leaned.

My only bikes which get lots of gear up front have 66 ° HTA (everyday/offroad touring bike and my exped fatbike - both rigid) and something around 51 - 53 mm offset and they feel superb when loaded (sometimes well beyond 10 kg with grocieries or expedition gear).

Give it a try - in my experience (multiple back to back testing with original headsets and -1.5 and -2 ° anglesets) most bikes feel better with slacker HTA, also on the uphills (eg. front lifts later on steep climbs) . I've yet to ride one that felt off.

I've been using Works Components and Superstar Slackerizer - they've both worked really well so far. Standard quality bearings used; they hold up well and are dead easy to source.
User avatar
Alpinum
Posts: 2603
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:38 pm

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Alpinum »

Bearbonesnorm wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:52 am Offset will play a part in deciding whether it becomes floppy and ponderous as it, combined with rake (angle) will dictate trail and that's really the important bit.
To put offset numbers and HTA into some (my) perspective on my short travel trail bike;

1st step I went from 66 ° HTA with 51 mm offset to 64 ° HTA with 51 mm offset. Under cornering this felt the most responsive. Sharp and somewhat aggressive.
2nd step I went from the 51 mm offset to a 44 mm offset, which in trail figures, put it nearly where it was with 66 °/51 mm.
3rd step was upping the travel from 130 to 140 mm (and riding stiffer damping), leaning it (static) back by another roughly 0.5 °, but basically that just resulted in being able to ride a tiny little bit more sag whilst keeping the sagged geo near identical.

From the 1st to the 2nd step the steering, when leaned, became somewhat muted. Bike felt slightly more balanced (not saying this is better, just different). Taking the edge of a bike's handling can make it feel less fun I guess... anyways, for the varied terrain I ride with this bike, the latter versions suited me better.
2nd to 3rd step was more about being able to get more support and grip when riding chunky stuff.

Sometimes it's such details which make a dream bike.
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

This perhaps explains the relationship of the numbers quite well.

Image

As an aside ... you'd expect this thing to be awful at low speed and the bars to flop from side to side. However, the 'rockers' that connect the wheel to the forks are designed in a way that corrects the relationship between rake, trail and offset.

Image
May the bridges you burn light your way
Tanglefist
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:54 pm

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Tanglefist »

Bearbonesnorm wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 9:52 am Wasn't the 456 designed to be slack (in relative terms) while still using a reasonably short fork or was that just the 'summer season' version?
Don't think I answered this - I've got the summer season (actually purchased off the BB classifieds years ago, what a great investment). The summer season was supposed to be pretty slack for the time but now seems pretty standard, if downright conservative for a modern trail bike.
User avatar
Jurassic
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:46 am
Location: Helensburgh, Scotland.

Re: Will a slack (~64 degree) headangle render a trail bike needlessly unwieldy as a bikepacking set-up?

Post by Jurassic »

My ti fat bike has a 64° hta (Smokestone Bow Ti LS) and it's not floppy in the steering department at all. I've not ridden it in fat mode with luggage on but it was fine on the alternative 29er wheels that I have for it.
Post Reply