BergForce Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Okay, I'll bite... I want a 26er as a hardtail because I use it as my all mountain machine. It has a 150mm fork on the front, and big ass burly tires front and back coupled with wheels that can tale a pounding from my weit and any obstacles that I don't miss. I also use it to practice jumping and so on. I would not do that on a 29er ht. no way in hell. Can you imagine the geo on a 29er hardtail with 150mm up front? Pus, it's more lively on the 6er, i have a better choice of strong wheels and burly forks, and I have far more fun on it than I would on a 29er ht. tried, tested. No likey. Yes, for boring jeeptrack and dirt roadie style riding, I would get a niner ht. but then again, I wouldn't, because I'd rather get a long travel 29er full susser. Your comment is redundant, Berg Bok. Hahah I also have a 29er dual susser, my 29er hardtail is my race bike to fly up those hills.
Smolly Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Even better, 26 front and 29 back. Then you have comfort on a cheaper HT frame but still have the sharp turning in front And then I would always be riding downhill so I would be faster
BergForce Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 From the Scott Blurb: "Larger wheels cary momentum better than smaller wheels. This means you continue to roll through technical sections without being hung up on objects and slowed down." Or as Brian Lopes would say: Learn to bunny hop! Or learn to continiously bunny hop 5 times per second when riding off-road.
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Or as Brian Lopes would say: Learn to bunny hop! followed by.... BRAAAAAP!
Brian Fantana Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Okay, I'll bite... Pus, it's more lively on the 6er, i have a better choice of strong wheels and burly forks, and I have far more fun on it than I would on a 29er ht. tried, tested. No likey. I agree with your views, but it's uncalled for to use that Jac Parrow language to get your message across.
arendoog Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 (edited) And then I would always be riding downhill so I would be faster I commented on that idea a while back .Seems it is gaining momentum.650b front 29 back makes perfect sense to me .Now to find a frame Edited August 28, 2012 by Blitzer
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Or learn to continiously bunny hop 5 times per second when riding off-road. Just learn to bunny hop further than half a metre!
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 I agree with your views, but it's uncalled for to use that Jac Parrow language to get your message across. Hahaha!!! P(l)us!
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 I commented on that idea a while back .Seems it is gaining momentum.650b front 29 back makes perfect sense to me .Now to find a frame DO I detect a hint of sarcasm there? If not - dumbest idea ever. The front of the bike is where you want the rolling ability & obstacle munching wheel. Exactly the reason that Trek brought the 69er to market. Bump compliance at front, normal size at the back. Also exactly why MX bikes have bigger front wheels than back.
RockCoach Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Just learn to bunny hop further than half a metre! Yep, which he proved when started racing CX and cleared most obstacles they threw at him. I know Lopes' book back to front. On 29ers:"I hear they roll through stuff better, but I have never had a problem rolling through anything". 99.99% of the time I'm faster descending on a long travel 26er and through very rough technical sections but on choppy fast descents a 29er will pick up speed and roll faster though. Still I'd rather be faster dh most of the time. Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 1
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 I know Lopes' bookS back to front. On 29ers: Fixed. Got both of them at home... RockCoach 1
Smolly Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 DO I detect a hint of sarcasm there? If not - dumbest idea ever. The front of the bike is where you want the rolling ability & obstacle munching wheel. Exactly the reason that Trek brought the 69er to market. Bump compliance at front, normal size at the back. Also exactly why MX bikes have bigger front wheels than back.That's why I thought I should try a 650b or 29er rim with my lefty and keep 26 on the back.
Smolly Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 DO I detect a hint of sarcasm there? If not - dumbest idea ever. The front of the bike is where you want the rolling ability & obstacle munching wheel. Exactly the reason that Trek brought the 69er to market. Bump compliance at front, normal size at the back. Also exactly why MX bikes have bigger front wheels than back.That's why I thought I should try a 650b or 29er rim with my lefty and keep 26 on the back.
RockCoach Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Fixed. Got both of them at home... Nice. The biggest problem I have with 29ers is confidence in the strength of the wheels. I'm a large guy and like riding my bikes hard. Even when I was road racing I was an equipment breaker. I have broken a few sets of 26" wheels. That's why I have DH wheels on my trail bike which I ride everywhere. Just in case I accidentally hit that 5 foot drop again.
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Nice. The biggest problem I have with 29ers is confidence in the strength of the wheels. I'm a large guy and like riding my bikes hard. Even when I was road racing I was an equipment breaker. I have broken a few sets of 26" wheels. That's why I have DH wheels on my trail bike which I ride everywhere. Just in case I accidentally hit that 5 foot drop again. Same same, dude.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now