A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Mountain Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

29ers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 27th 03, 03:45 PM
Mike DeMicco
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.

Ads
  #2  
Old September 27th 03, 04:54 PM
Ryan Cousineau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

In article ,
Mike DeMicco wrote:

Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.


Well, they're heavier and weaker, but they roll over obstacles better.
The answer? Depends on the course.

Sorry,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
  #3  
Old September 27th 03, 05:36 PM
Scott G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.




My brother bought a 29er a few months ago. he loves it. he also 'seems'
faster....he can certainly make rooty climbs better that i can (back wheel
stays planted better). parts, tubes, etc are hard to come by, however. i'm
going to wait to see if it outlives the hype.


  #4  
Old September 27th 03, 07:54 PM
ClydesdaleMTB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers



Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article ,
Mike DeMicco wrote:


Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.


Well, they're heavier


Really?


and weaker,


And what independent data do you base this presumption upon?

--
John G.
http://www.shavings.net/survival.htm

  #5  
Old September 27th 03, 09:04 PM
Dave W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:54:01 -0400, ClydesdaleMTB
wrote:



Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article ,
Mike DeMicco wrote:


Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.


Well, they're heavier


Really?


and weaker,


And what independent data do you base this presumption upon?



Sorry to interject here, John. But how the hell are ya?
  #6  
Old September 27th 03, 09:23 PM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

Mike DeMicco wrote in message .1.4...
Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you faster?
I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.


29" bikes are actually slower, especially in tigher single track
situations. They are good for conquering trail obstacles and mud
riding though. I test rode a GF at a mtb festival this spring and was
pretty dissapointed with its performance. It was amazing to me that
GF offered some of his more popular hard tails for 2003 exclusively in
the 29" format.
  #7  
Old September 27th 03, 09:35 PM
Pete
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers


"ClydesdaleMTB" wrote

Well, they're heavier


Really?


Larger + same materials = more weight



and weaker,


And what independent data do you base this presumption upon?


Larger + same materials and construction = less strong.

The actual measured diff might not be much, but extrapolate it up and down.
Would a 50" wheel be heavier, and taco easier than a 10"?

Pete


  #9  
Old September 28th 03, 04:52 AM
Anthony Sloan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers



Pete wrote:
"ClydesdaleMTB" wrote


Well, they're heavier


Really?



Larger + same materials = more weight



and weaker,


And what independent data do you base this presumption upon?



Larger + same materials and construction = less strong.

The actual measured diff might not be much, but extrapolate it up and down.
Would a 50" wheel be heavier, and taco easier than a 10"?

Pete



This is why wheels should be built to purpose.

I have a set of 29" whells built up for fully rigid singlespeeding. I
have every confidence in them.

Now if they were machine laced OEM crap, then yup. I'd be skeered to
ride em.

A

  #10  
Old September 28th 03, 01:53 PM
Tom Purvis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 29ers

wrote:
Mike DeMicco wrote:
Is this all marketing hype, or will 29" wheels actually make you
faster? I'm interested in A-B comparisions over a timed course.


29" bikes are actually slower, especially in tigher single track
situations. They are good for conquering trail obstacles and mud
riding though. I test rode a GF at a mtb festival this spring and was
pretty dissapointed with its performance. It was amazing to me that
GF offered some of his more popular hard tails for 2003 exclusively in
the 29" format.


I've ridden a couple different big-wheel bikes, and I ride with people
who think they are absolutely better. I don't own one, unless my Bianchi
cyclocross bike counts, but I'd set up a Karate Monkey tomorrow if I had
a thousand dollars my wife didn't know about.

Did you ride the GF 292/293 (the fully based on the Sugar)?. I've ridden
one of those, and I wouldn't call it typical of the 29" bikes that are
really leading the trend. The trend was created by hardtails and rigid
bikes. A 29-er can be set up to do tighter switchbacks and twisty stuff
well. It's a question of frame design. On some the good ones I've ridden,
I didn't really notice that the wheels were bigger than the ones on my
Moots until I rolled through some rocky stuff.

The contact patch is automatically bigger, and it's more oblong than a
similar width 26" tire. The bikes corner very reliably in messy conditions,
and when they take a drop-off the motion is less dramatic. The advocates
I know either rode 26 bikes for years before switching, or have both and
switch back and forth. They say that bigger wheels make having suspension
(especially long-travel) less of a requirement.

It helps if you are physically large enough to need a medium-large or
larger frame. I know a couple 29 riders who are fairly small guys, and
at least one of them has some toe overlap (wheel can hit shoe toe if
crank arm is facing straight forward and wheel is turned).

As for the GF 292, that bike is a tanker. Both because it's a fully and
because of those big wheels. I rode it (among other places) down a nasty
rutted babyhead and loose gravel slope. It was freakishly solid. I didn't
like climbing with the big mama, but on the descent it was too damn easy.
Fist-sized rocks didn't even make it move. But full suspension is kind
of a waste on a 29 IMO. Belt and suspenders.

If you really want to know what a big wheel bike is like, try riding
the '02 GF Procalibre 29 or (better) a Surly Karate Monkey. If all you
ride is smooth and buff, you probably won't get it.
--
Tom Purvis -
http://www.arkansasvalley.net/tpurvis/
Salida, CO
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.