Veldt 32" gravel bike

[guidodg]

I am smitten...

https://www.chirubikes.com/en/kit-cadre/vagus-copie/

 

 

 

[openmind]

Cmon, those wheels are just wrong, looks like a supermarket kids bike. 
But with some proper wheels I would share your infatuation. 

Edited March 22 by openmind

[guidodg]

yup, I agree on the wheels and the coloured groupset…. pretty garish

but that frame 😍

[DieselnDust]

that a lot of extra drag right there

[nathrix]

I would buy one if I was a tall oke

[guidodg]

no need to be a tall rider..it will suit most riders from 174cm up

there is a lot of resistance towards 32" bikes now...exactly the same as it was towards 29ers...keep an open mind 

[DieselnDust]

5 minutes ago, guidodg said:

no need to be a tall rider..it will suit most riders from 174cm up

there is a lot of resistance towards 32" bikes now...exactly the same as it was towards 29ers...keep an open mind 

no

[ChrisF]

2 minutes ago, guidodg said:

no need to be a tall rider..it will suit most riders from 174cm up

there is a lot of resistance towards 32" bikes now...exactly the same as it was towards 29ers...keep an open mind 

At 175 I enjoy my 27,5" more than a 29".

 

Sure, the 29"Scott Spark was a perfect fit for me.... with a slightly shorter dropper post.

 

Okay, a dropper post is not a biggie for a gravel bike, though I have consideted adding one to mine.

 

26 to 29 made sense, for some 90% of riders.  Still a good couple of shorter hubbers on 26" bikes.

 

29 to 32 ..... a no brainer for my 205cm buddy.

 

At 175 .... no thank you, just too many numbers dont add up. (Again, from a MTB perspective) .... as a gravel bike .... I would need a good long test ride to figure it out .... unless it gets stupidly long, just imagine the pedal/shoe interferance when doing switchbacks (already an issue with my large shoe size)

 

Marketing is one thing .... one most untrustworthy thing.  Living with a bike is a whole different thing ....

[Mamil]

Can't wait for all the specials on 29ers 

[Furbz]

1 hour ago, guidodg said:

no need to be a tall rider..it will suit most riders from 174cm up

there is a lot of resistance towards 32" bikes now...exactly the same as it was towards 29ers...keep an open mind 

Well that’s rude - I’m 171cm 😜

maybe a 30.5 inch?

Edited March 22 by Furbz

[SwissVan]

1 hour ago, guidodg said:

no need to be a tall rider..it will suit most riders from 174cm up

there is a lot of resistance towards 32" bikes now...exactly the same as it was towards 29ers...keep an open mind 

Yeah, why don’t they just go straight to 2036 and 36 inch wheels

Oh wait, that’s 10 years of in between bike sales between then and now that would be lost.

[Mook]

9 hours ago, SwissVan said:

Yeah, why don’t they just go straight to 2036 and 36 inch wheels

Oh wait, that’s 10 years of in between bike sales between then and now that would be lost.

Naah .......... the 2036 Cape Epic will be won by a single speed carbon penny farthing ☝️

[117]

Um, I think the rules will dictate the max allowed sizes pretty soon. 

But, for those of us that ride fuel powered bikes, we ride mullets anyway. I recon the maxed out sizes for pedal power will stop at a 29 rear, and a 32 front. (The geometry of the drive train on the 32 rear just doesn't look the part)

['Kaze Pete]

I present to you the latest, greatest, newest, baddest 36" rear wheeled dual-suspension penny farthing - a bold fusion of future engineering and cycling history, where cutting-edge trail capability meets Victorian-era audacity.

Edited March 23 by 'Kaze Pete

[Dexter-morgan]

The industry wants your MONEY!, 10 years from now they will promote, 40inch wheels because they will be 15 sec FASTER on 10k time trial route