Should I buy an On-One?

[barry2017]

The thing that annoys me about them is the fact that they try to convince everyone they're some little company in Doncaster (everything built in Brant's shed etc) but they've got the same business model as every other "mainstream" bike company.
Of course, they aren't bad bikes at all (mine didn't fit well, but it wasn't a bad bike) and this is fair enough, but still it's annoying.

 

[spacehopper]

Brant doesnt work for On-one anymore.

http://www.shedfire.com/

 

[mtbfix]

Crickey! I turn away for 12 hours and we start gossiping. I realised that a lumped tubed hack will be good for bolting kiddy trailers and child seats to in the years to come. Still not made a decision mind...

 

[Russell]

I can't believe the turns this thread has taken. Some of the comments are positively libelous!

I raced an Orange Prestige BITD ('93) and I ride a steel Kona ('90 Cinder cone) daily these days, I've owned an Explosif ('96) and a Fire Mountain ('91) and I currently own (amongst others) an On-One Inbred so I think I'm pretty well qualified to cover the points raised here.

You could buy a brand new On-One Inbred with a warranty, great mud clearance, well thought out cable routing and the versatility of disc and rim brake mounts for £185. Or you could scan the classifieds here and get a 17yr old Orange Prestige, with no warranty, potentially rust worm in places and poor mud clearance for £140, thats just £45 less. Unless people 'get real' about retro pricing and if you want a 'rider' then its got to be the Inbred, no question.

As for ride... the Inbred is different. I run mine rigid and whilst it did take a few changes of stem/bar combination to find a position that suited me, now I have it dialled, I'm sure I'm faster on it downhill than on my hardtail.

Now if you want a real bargain hack... buy a second hand Inbred, all the benefits (apart from the warranty) but probably only £75-£100 for a really nice one.

 

[spacehopper]

totally agree with you on the bar/stem combo russell!

ended up with a 60mm stem on mine

and they are incredibly stable downhill..

 

[barry2017]

I can't believe the turns this thread has taken. Some of the comments are positively libelous!

I had one, and didn't get on with it. They aren't as well made as a lot of secondhand frames either, and I don't see why you should buy a new, average frame when there's lots of better quality secondhand ones that do everything the Inbred does for less. Who has said anything libellous, Russell?

I sold my Mtrax for £20 including postage, a headset and half a tin of hammerite. Having looked at Jimmy unpainted I can say he had no corrosion and was very, very well made; I'd trust him to the ends of the earth, I'd never sell anything I didn't trust. Seeing a frame unpainted is the only way to really tell how well made it is, which you almost never see with a new frame.

If Jimmy was a bit smaller, would I have rather had him over another Inbred? Any day, I know him intimately.

 

[Russell]

I can't believe the turns this thread has taken. Some of the comments are positively libelous!

I had one, and didn't get on with it. They aren't as well made as a lot of secondhand frames either, and I don't see why you should buy a new, average frame when there's lots of better quality secondhand ones that do everything the Inbred does for less. Who has said anything libellous, Russell?

>>sigh<<

He appeared to treat her with contempt and a total lack of respect. He also appeared to be actively working to destroy her business, almost like he felt threatened by her independence.

 

[perry]

does libelous now mean informed opinion ?

 

[Russell]

Sheesh, is this really necessary or helpful to the poor OP who just wants informed views on a bike??

OK... why whats been said is a problem.

Defamation is all about reputation, and in particular about statements which damage others' reputations. The English courts have not settled upon a single test for determining whether a statement is defamatory. Examples of the formulations used to define a "defamatory imputation" include:

an imputation which is likely to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking people;
an imputation which injures a person's reputation by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule;
an imputation which tends to make a person be shunned or avoided.
A statement that a person is an adulterer, a gold-digger or a drunkard may be defamatory, as may an allegation of corruption, racism, disease, insanity or insolvency.

And why it needs to be reigned in on this site...

A defamatory statement is not actionable unless it is published. Unfortunately for webmasters, when libel lawyers say "published", they mean communicated to one person (not including the person defamed). You can libel someone by writing about them on a personal blog, providing at least one person accesses the defamatory material.

And why, out of respect for this site and for John (the Guv) we should avoid such comments.

Website hosts may be liable for defamatory material created by someone else but which they host.

So, whilst I appreciate that a couple of you seem to be in the mood for a row, can we keep on topic please and try to keep the personal comments regarding Brants love life/business practises to a minimum.

Thanks

 

[perry]

well i personally am grateful i now know what somebody behind a company is possibly like . i think its very important that you know the people who are providing the stuff you buy are of sound conviction