New frame.
 

hi, im thinking about getting myself a new frame in a couple of months but cant decide what to buy.
i will have roughly £1000 to spend. I ride lots of trails, all mountain, light freeride. i weight about 75 kg, 170cm ish tall and the frame will have to be able to take 140 mm travel. if i decide on a fully, i dont want lots of rear end travel, just a bit more relaxed on the rocks etc. i also like to do a little bit of jumping/street, nothing serious.

im not sure if i should go with a fully, or get a really good hartail.

so far i have seen these that im interested in

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...540/TRN080.jpg

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...s540/10601.jpg

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m...s540/22322.jpg

has anyone got any suggestions?

Depends on what you call "light freeride". If you're gonna abuse it, the Preston is probably perfect.
If you're going to just do a few drops and jumps here and there, then the Covert would be a more efficient ride with better geometery for trail riding.

http://transitionbikes.com/2007/imag..._WebLarge2.jpg
http://transitionbikes.com/2007/imag...t_WebLarge.jpg

cheers, im not a hucker by any means, more agressive trail riding, so the covert looks pretty good from where im sitting. will the covert be farely heavy? you see im used to a kona shred frame which is pretty light, but its been beaten to an inch of its life.

To quote from Transition's site about the Covert:

"If you are worried about weight but love to ride trails aggressively, the Covert gives you the best of both worlds without the weight penalty. The low slung frame and stiff rear end makes the bike snap around corners with the greatest of ease. The 5.5” of travel is plush enough for any rough trails and occasional jumps you come accross but also allows the bike to pedal with the best of XC crowd." (emphasis mine)

Sounds like what you're looking for. For the record, head tube angle on the Covert is 68½; Preston is 67½. Frame weight on the Covert is 6.7 lbs. (Preston is 7.8 lbs.) If you like it snappier the Covert is the one. If you like slacker, look more at the Preston.

BTW: yes, everyone should get a fully ;)

I don't ride agressive, but that Preston just does for me!

The first pic he posted is of a Double, not a Covert. And at his height, I would consider the Double a viable option for the type of riding he describes.

I know, but I guess I consider the Double more of a 'suspension jumper' or four-cross rig more than an all-'round trail-rider.

i love the look of the double and covert, its just i have been used to a small kona shred frame for the past year or so, so looking at the sizes of the two, the double looks about the same, compared to the covert which looks farely large. however my only problem with getting the double is will it be fine with 140mm travel?

That's a good question. It may be just what the bike needs to make it more "trailable," but then again, it may completely destroy all the handling characteristics that make the Double such a fun bike.

If you're really attached to the fork and want to play it safe, the Covert is probably your best bet.

so the cowan DS is in the same situation with 140mm travel then? i think its only designed for 100?

Based on my riding impressions only, the Cowan has a super steep head angle - it might be slightly more forgiving for a taller fork. That said, unless you want to go singlespeed, I would avoid it due to the concentric BB pivot and its tendency for pedal bob.

have you looked at soul cycles fs bike?
http://www.ridesoul.com/matador.html

it looks pretty good, and the description sounds alright aswell, just i dont know anything about the brand, what they are compared too?

just been looking around, and i found the yeti 4x frame. looks a reasonable amount of travel and im sure it will handle 140mm. do you think it would be alright used as a trail bike aswell?

one problem with this statement is that you said you don't want a lot or rear end travel, in most cases bikes have equal travel front or rear within a couple mm.

but is it nessesary to have this? 140 in back and front. i frequently use the u-turn on the pike and have it at about 100mm for mucking about doing some mild street, now i know thats going to be impossible with 140mm rear travel. thats why the transition double and cowan ds look good for me.

its not necessary, according to smashy it is more important for the two different travels(front and rear) to be equal when you are actually sitting on the bike, and by the way the evil sovreign is not full suspension

yeah i know. im really undecided right now, whether to stick with hardtails which i know or move onto a fully. all i know is i really need to move up from a kona shred frame, its really flexy now.

i love my hardtail and unless i was going to do only downhill i would i think about getting a full susp, but i would probably build myself a hardtail with 170mm of travel.