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.

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

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.

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

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?

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.

"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

wrote:
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.

29" bikes are not, in fact, actually slower.

As with any bike, it all boils down to geometry. One could make a 29er
that is an absolute tank. Or, as is the case with my Karate Monkey, you
could dial in one to be a singletrack machine. In very tight, twisty
singletrack, the Karate Monkey is one of the better carvers I've been
on. Quite nearly rivaling my Merlin XLM in grin inducing,
hang-it-all-out, carve-a-liscious handling joy.

But I've only been riding mine since Feb. so what do I know...

A

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

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