On-one 456?? whats this guy on about?

[haggis]

Wouldn't normally post a modern machine but its late, its been a long day and i stumbled across this bike and would someone care to explain what he's implying? is this a prototype 456? made by a taiwan company? his username is mronwon, he has pictures on a flickr site where he's called brantrichards. whats the script here? :?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Titanium-Mountain ... 500wt_1182

 

[SantasLoneCruzer]

http://www.bikemagic.com/news/article/mps/uan/6788

Explains all. Didn't Brant Richards used to be in MBUK back in the days?

 

[gump]

tis quite funny!

Brant selling a proto ti on-one, obviously cant use on-one now. Yes, its Zak Tempest.

Mronwon is he.

 

[Skeelsie]

Seller comes across as a bell cheese.

Transparency in an auction is a must.

 

[Charlieboy28]

is the top tube meant to sag, or is it just my eyes??

 

[john]

tis quite funny!

Brant selling a proto ti on-one, obviously cant use on-one now. Yes, its Zak Tempest.

Mronwon is he.

Not any more...

Think he's registered here so perhaps he could explain more (or not).

As Gump says clearly an on-one 456 proto. He's not part of on one anymore so probably wants rid.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Probably why On-One are now going to make Carbon Fibre and Alu 456/29ers bikes :roll:

 

[Anthony]

It's perhaps because few mtb designers have any academic qualification in either design or engineering that a lot of mtb design seems to be a process of trial and error. So you'd think that if a prototype design wasn't proceeded with through to production, it doesn't exactly constitute a ringing endorsement of the design concept.

I guess the justification for selling it rather than scrapping it is:

a. you should never throw titanium away
b. the fame of its designer
c. you never know, somebody might think it's good even if Brant Richards doesn't

 

[Coleman]

I've got a ti 456 - its probably the best thing I ever bought, except for beer.

Very amusing e-bay listing - the drop outs and how they are joined to the stays look different to mine on this one, also I read somewhere that the prototype ti 456's had the gear and rear brake cables/hose routed on the top of the top tube, this one has them underneath so could be later, maybe pre ragley - it'll be the bollox though whatever - someone will get a bargin.

 

[DM]

It's definitely Brant. Saw it oday on Shedfire:
http://www.shedfire.com/2009/11/28/ti-frame-on-ebay/

It's perhaps because few mtb designers have any academic qualification in either design or engineering that a lot of mtb design seems to be a process of trial and error. So you'd think that if a prototype design wasn't proceeded with through to production, it doesn't exactly constitute a ringing endorsement of the design concept.

Er, I think that's more than a little unfair.
Re. academic engineering qualifications: Brant would be the well-qualified exception to that rule.

He is also VERY transparent about his prototyping process.
By the time he's done the CAD / had the prototypes tested to destruction and certified / thrashed the pants off the early versions, any changes made before the production versions are usually just minor improvements or simply stuff he wanted to try but ended up not liking.

I don't own any of his bikes, BTW, but that's only because I'm a retro grouch.
The guy definitely knows what he's doing.