MTB, anyone riding a 29er?

[dieselcruiserhead]

Thinking of making the plunge.. I'm 6'5 with long legs so I figured it might fit well as well and roll over a lot more... I'm saving my pennies to finally move up to a higher end bike for my "trail bike," I have my eyes on a Turner Sultan... http://www.turnerbikes.com/2007/sultan.html That or a Ventana El Rey which are very similar bikes...

Or might do a 5" 26er bike, on the fence and really thinking hard about it. Rode hard last night and kept thinking how nice it must be to roll over more of this stuff... Going to demo a 29er single speed later the week (SS is the only thing in town that is 29er that I can use, but am psyched to try a trail SS too). My townie geared s-works hard tail is a SS but again I ride in town only...

Riding is typcial southwest. Around here in the mountains mostly dry, rocky, rutty, etc.. But varies as much as the terrain does here in Utah (a lot!)... Some moisture though particularly in the fall right now. Then want to go down and be able to tackle Moab and Fruita and Gooseberry and some of the great southwest Colorado/Utah rides... So this is why I'm thinking ideally looking for something borderline AM that I will ride XC.

I what I like about the 29er designs is they have geometry more like a XC bike that I ride, they have a more efficient 4" design but with the larger 29er wheels, feels and handles like a 5" supposedly, and has more XC type geometry but can behave like an all mountain... Supposedly the Turner has this more dialed than the Ventana in this case, for some reason the Turner is more AM feeling and suspension of the Ventana is stiffer and more XC like.. Supposedly the Turner feels deep and 5"-like which is what I like...

For the other higher end 29ers there is Lenz, Niner, and Specialized has a 29er stumpjumper coming out too (with oddly Ventana-like angles)... Not too interested in the specialized (even though that is what I ride, I have two acually) because of hte price versus the boutique brand Ventana and Turner bikes... These are also super laterally stiff in their designs which I like a lot too. And light of course..

Thoughts and/or comments?

 

[DaveInDenver]

I personally didn't care for it, but I'm sort of weird shape and I get tire rubbing on my shoes. A friend of mine that did the White Rim last month with me rides a Salsa Dos Niner and another friend of mine who is doing 24hrs of Moab this weekend with me rides a Lenzsport Leviathan. They both love theirs. I can see benefits and downsides, so maybe I'll give another chance now that the technology has come a ways further. Personally I think this Pacenti 650b wheel has merit. This is a 27.5" wheel that gains most of the rolling and traction benefits of the 29" with the better handling of a 26" wheel. Dirt Rag the past couple of issues has been talking more about the 29" and 650b stuff.

SS... I ride a 26" SS (a 1998 Rhygin, I've been on a SS for a while now) and to make it useful here I run 34x21 gearing and a front shock. The gearing, yeah my knees hurt otherwise. But they are a ton of fun, but I've never been able to fully commit as my only bike. Maybe I'm not soul enough or whatever, but I like my dual squishy (I ride a Blur LT mostly).

 

[Christophe Noel]

I've been on a 29er single speed for about a year now. Absolutely love it. There are some 29er myths that need correction:

Myth: 29ers don't work on technical trails.
Truth: They actually work great on technical trails. As long as you can keep even modest forward motion, the wheels want to roll over everything. On techy climbs, that front wheel seems to want to hold a line really well and resists deflecting off every obstical.

Myth: 29ers are for fast fire roads
Truth: 29ers maximize even slow speed momentum. They work great on tight, twisty, technical single track as long as you maintain at least a walking pace. Their advantage is almost LESS on fire roads.

Myth: 29ers accellerate slowly and descellerate rapidly in part due to the additional weight.
Truth: Bunk. Lab studies have proven that the small added weight in rotational components isn't a big deal since bicycle accellerations are so small. i.e. 2mph to 7mph and not 0-60mph. Those big wheels will reach speed as quickly as 26" wheels given the same wattage input.

Myth: 29ers handle like dump trucks
Truth: They can handle great, but you have to be VERY careful which 29er you get. The tail end on many 29ers gets long and you end up clipping your rear wheel mid/inner turn. Short stays are critical on a 29er to keep the handling tight. Most full sus 29ers get a little long in the tail so that does make for a truckish handling bike. Not many people make a tight rear end on a full sus 29er.

Myth: 29ers have less traction
Truth: The inverse is true. The larger diameter actually increases the footprint of the tire by 8%, primarily in length which gives 29ers fantastic traction. You feel that on hard pressed turns and as the rear wheel hooks up.

Myth: 29ers are for big guys
Truth: Several guys I ride with are sub 5'10" and rock out on 29ers.

Myth: 29ers put the rider too high
Truth: That's just BS spawn by people who don't understand frame building 101. The BB height can be as high or low as a 26" wheeled bike.

29ers are awesome. I've been racing XC for 20 years and 29ers make for fantastic rides. One thing to mention - 29ers love momentum, even at 2mph. As such, a single speed in a 29er format is a thing of beauty. The one gear forces you to maintain proper riding finesse and to hold momentum. Those wheels love that.

Drawbacks: Sure, with all things there are compromises. If you like big drops, huge hits and frequently need to launch over large logs, rocks or old ladies, those wheels do feel pretty earth bound sometimes. The slightly longer wheel base makes the front wheel a little heavy. I wouldn't take on Vancouver trails with a 29er, but for fast, technical single track.....29ers rock.

I love mine. I'll never go back to 26" hoops. Just think of 28" tires on a Jeep vs 33" tires. Bigger wheels just roll over stuff better.

Now this is my opinion - Best inventions for cycling during my 22 years of racing: Clipless pedals, suspension forks, carbon fiber road wheels, 29 inch mountain wheels.

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Cool

I am also intrigued by the 27.5 thing too and think it has a lot of merit too... Can't wait to get out and try it. Once this is bought/built my Stumpy will become the SS, probably a lot like yours, suspension forked but probably a little faster gearing as I ride a lot of uphill in the middle ring anyway.. Knees hurt too but I have 37" of inseam to push

 

[Pokey]

The main issue i found with the 29er tires is the wheel strength. at 220+lbs- you really need to build a stout tire to not flex under hard corners,etc.

I ended up using some velocity rims which are very strong vertically--but still flexed horizontally quite a bit unless you went to monster straight guage spokes. mavic also makes a beefy tandem 29er rim that i tried which was somewhat better--but again very heavy and sluggish for an xc bike.

The nice thing about the 29er is rollover and the ability to lower your tire pressure due to the larger volumes.......it makes hooking up in corners real nice for us bigger guys.

The other nicety is that Fox is now going to be making a 29er fork (one of the main reasons i held off initially).

If you are tough on wheels---the 29er will have to be built like a tank compared to a 26" rim. If you try to build them light--they just flex alot and thats even trying to use the DT Blades which can be laced suuuuper tight and stiff.

Im personally waiting for the front hubs to go wider--(ala 130 spacing.) before entering the 29er market. But that will take some time as forks must change to0. with the wider spacing---the flex can be limited enough to equal the strength of a 26" wheel.....but fork companies wont be doing that anytime soon.

 

[Pokey]

also- just looked at the Turner specs----waaay too long a chainstay and the wheelbase on the xxl is crazy long. That wont be great in any kind of techy tight stuff. By comparison-the patron and el ray are both much shorter in wheelbase---but at 6'5--unless your torso is on the short-side--they might not be long enough in the tt.

 

[Pokey]

If you do much climbing or like techy climbing--you owe it to yourself to try out the Mavericks. They outclimb anything and are very smooth over the chop due to the wheel path. I think the newest 5" comes in a xl size as well but i havent checked out specs. (my girlfriend has the 1st gen. 5" called the 7.5- i think the new ones are Durance and Matic.)

I think you hit the nail on the head in terms of "what and where you ride" which shoudl probably dictate which way to look.

What kind of elevation gain do you typically get in a ride? how bout elev descent? Big drops-3' plus frequent?seldom? Do you like to pick thru techy chop and finesse or build up a ton of speed-point and blast thru with lots of momentum?

 

[Skylinerider]

As tall as you are a 29er may be exactly what your looking for, but as others have brought up, the 29" wheels weigh more, and have to be built much more stout to resist bending. You won't get as much travel out of a fork designed for 29" wheels, and you will have to make adjustments in how you ride on tight single track to accomodate those bigger wheels, but just being aware of where your wheels are, and turn a little sooner is really all it takes.

Oh, and I REALLY wish I had the funds for a Maverick Durance.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Flounder touches on some of the points that I think are important when considering a 29er bike.

First, it needs to be pointed out that a 700c or 29er wheel is no more designed from the ground up for the purpose than was the 26" itself. The original mountain bikes picked 26" wheels because they happen to have old Schwinn clunkers laying around, just like 29er MTB guys used that size because they had road and CX bike rims to start with. Actually even the 650b wheel size is based on a touring wheel often found in Europe. My point here is that both the 26" and 29er wheel size were picked for convenience primarily over any one benefit.

So the upsides on a 29er are momentum and contact patch. The downsides are weight and frame geometry. Everything is compromise. Ride a few, see if you like it and go with it should it work. But try to block out the desire to be different just like everyone else. My experiences with a 29er don't indicate that it will be a benefit to me, others feel different. I think a hardtail makes a lot of sense built around a 29er wheel, so if I won the lottery I would definitely replace my 10 year old SS with a 29er SS. But, in the realm of FS, when you get into the 3" or 4" full suspension my conclusion is that frame geometry and how I fit on the bike become less good. I like my Blur LT, which is a ~5" bike, but it's too tall and long for some trails (I don't huck, I do everything possible to stay firmly planted on terra firma). But I saved for a few years back in 2003 to get and so I'm in for the long haul. None-the-less, a 4", 29er bike would suffer from many of the same problems. This is why I'm VERY interested in these 650b bikes in a 3~4" XC configuration.

Do some MTBR searches, there's LOTS and LOTS of threads about 26 vs 29 wheels. There is also a whole lot of hype and misinformation. The fact is that a 29" wheel will always be heavier than an equivalent 26" wheel. This dictates that it will also accelerate slower and be less agile. That is just kinematics. But it will also track straighter and roll over more stuff easier. There is nothing magical about any of this, it's what works for you. Our trails here in the Front Range have lots of switchbacks and sometimes I'm at the limit getting around them. I have no problem on a 17.5" Rhygin hardtail with a 40.5" wheelbase, 80mm Manitou Black Super Air, 72/73 head/seat angles, 16.5" stays. My Blur LT is a large and with the Fox Vanilla 140mm it's got about a 43.5" wheelbase, 70/73 head/seat angles, 17.25" stays and it's sometimes like steering a cargo ship around switchbacks. A 29er is not going to have significantly less wheelbase and will have long chainstays. A slightly steeper head angle would help and certainly the Blur LT w/ a 5.5" fork is not gonna to be a super sketchy handling bike. My point here is that adding a 29" wheel to the mix would only make it less agile on switchbacks. On a fire road or hitting things straight on, definitely a benefit to a 29er. Traction, another upside. But don't forget that traction increases means rolling resistance is also going up, this is important for slugs like me. ;-)

Also don't forget that just like changing wheel sizes on your truck going from a 26" wheel to a 29" will require a gear change. If you are running a typical drivetrain, say 175mm cranks, 22/32/44 chainrings, a 11-34 cassette, you have a range of about 17 to 104 gear inches on a 26" wheel. Just switching to a 29" wheel without messing with the drivetrain your gearing changes to a low of 19 to a high of 116 gear inches. So what, right? Well now your granny on the 29" bike is like riding in at least second gear (or maybe third depending on the cassette). It would be like using a 30 tooth rear/22 tooth front low on a 26" bike. So part of the reason 29" bike seem faster is because all of your gearing goes up. If you are a super athlete like Flounder, pushing the higher gears is probably trivial. Me, just a working stiff trying to fit in ride when I can, I felt it. On a singlespeed this is less of an issue because it's easy to get a gearing that works, you stand a lot and (at least me) walk plenty. Doesn't hurt that my SS weighs about 8 pounds less than the Blur... But on a geared bike you are limited to a 34 tooth cassette, although you might be able to do a 20 tooth front granny. Just something to think about.

 

[Christophe Noel]

This might be the most civil, calm headed discussion on 29ers I've ever seen on the web. Weird. Usually, by the 3rd post someone is using profanity. It often gets into a circle talking excersize.

I've been building my own wheels since the 80s. I find it pretty easy to build sturdy wheels. I mean heck, I used to race match sprints and the flying kilo on the velodrome. Those were the same sized wheels and they took on HUGE power with little flex. There are some great 29er rims out there. I'm actually really impressed with the cheapie Bontrager wheels I picked up last spring. I'm a big rider for an elite racer at 168lbs but my wheels don't flex enough to be noticed.

Dave is dead on about the agility factor. That big front wheel seems a little sluggish in slow, rapid turning situations. That's one of the things I like about it. You pick a line and she holds it. If you're a long stem rider, the big front wheel effect is even worse. Switchbacks can be a little tricky.

Wheel weight is a wierdy. There are dozens of studies out there now disproving the notion that "heavier" bike wheels accellerate slowly and that rotational weight is more critical than static weight. The overall theory is sound, but when tested on bicycles the reality is, heavy wheels don't really retard accellerations too much, if at all. Many of us in the road race circles are switching to big, fat aero wheels that weigh as much as 700 grams heavier than our "light" wheels with no accelleration penalties....physically. Mentally, my head wants to think heavy bike wheels are slow. This has to do with the fact a heavy wheel and a light wheel are only seperated by a few hundred grams. We're talking a few hundred grams under a bike/rider combo that often tips 100,000 grams. Bicycle accellerations are mild, even in velodrome or road racing, but certainly in mountain biking. The wattage output of a rider in the world of machines is teeny. Now, if this were a drag bike going from 0-100mph, this would all be different.

Weight in general still counts with regard to watts vs weight on climbs. But heck....I'll save the weight weenie stuff for the road. Even there, 1 less pound on a 60 minute climb usually only saves a rider 22 seconds at a given wattage. As for rotational weight, the addition of 300 grams in the rim/tire is a proven non-issue. In a 29er the advantage is increased traction. On a road wheel it's usually increased aerodynamics. So, any minor (if any) accelleration penalties are offset by other gains.

This is a long way of saying the bike specific physics behind heavier 29er wheels is a moot point. I will agree they are less agile or maybe more stable, but slower? Not according to Boston University and the Cycling Academy of Switzerland and a host of others.

If you test ride a 29er, keep in mind they feel totally bizarre for a few days. They do take getting used to. I don't give much credo to those who say, "I rode my buddies for a few miles and hated it." Like any bike change it takes time to adjust to.

 

[Christophe Noel]

One other drawback. Dropping my front wheel off large drops is for some reason less comforting on my 29er. Could be just the fit of my particular 29er, but I can't scoot back far enough over the rear wheel to feel like I get that big wheel way out in front of me on big drops.

The fork travel is also unimpressive, but that doesn't bother me too much. I was actually getting annoyed with the 100+ mm of travel on my Fuel.

 

[ccrider]

Yeah, Flounder summed it all up with the 29er myths.
Anybody want to purchase a WTB Phoenix, full XTR hardtail so I can get myself another 29er as I will likely not ride a 26 inch wheel bike again !

 

[Christophe Noel]

I should probably admit to everyone that last fall I was a DIE HARD full suspension advocate and loved, loved, loved each and every gear I had. I thought 29" wheels were just stupid. Period.

A year later, I'm neglecting the other 4 mountain bikes I have and spending 6 hours a week on my SS 29er hard tail. But....it gets worse....most of the time I leave my fork locked. I still like a sus fork, but I can even understand why some dudes ride static.

We ride pretty often with guys on multi geared full sus 26" rigs. Just two nights ago my other SS29er bud and I went out with three guys on Blurs, Fuels and Yeti full sus rigs. We beat them going up. We stayed with them going down. We even stopped to repair a tweaked derailleur.

One thing I really love about 29er single speeds is how graceful they are on sweeping single track and how quiet they are. Just the sound of tires. No chain slapping around feeling clunky. I love it.

And to be even more of an odd ball....I ride a 34x24 on my 29er with a ROTOR RING ovalized ring (NOT LIKE BIO-PACE) which translates to about a 34x21 on a 26" bike. I climb everything I do with my Fuel or other geared bikes. No walking.

Okay....I'll stop now. I love my 29er but absolutely understand why some prefer other set ups.

 

[bigreen505]

It's funny, I never really understood what the noise was about, 29ers seem to make sense to me, though I have never ridden one. I want a FS 29er for my next ride.

Dave, good point on the gearing, I never considered that. Can you get a 20t front chain ring? I'm not that strong and my current low gear is 22x32 and it is definitely not enough considering I can just about run my bike as a single speed in that gear and I'm always wishing for lower (old 8-speed stuff).

Are the Trek 69er's out yet (29 in front, 26 in back). Seems a little nuts to me, but I will wait until I ride it to pass judgment.

You might consider reading Lennard Zinn's article on 29ers and if you are tall, you might consider a custom frame from him.

 

[bigreen505]

And to be even more of an odd ball....I ride a 34x24 on my 29er with a ROTOR RING ovalized ring (NOT LIKE BIO-PACE) which translates to about a 34x21 on a 26" bike.

Quick hijack -- how do you like the rotor rings? I've been considering a set for the road bike for a while.