Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
  1. #1
    Front Range Cyclist
    Reputation: juansevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    922

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?

    Most 29er frames should fit the 650b+ tires if they're a hardtail, but curious who's got 650b+ tires crammed in their 29er full suspension frame...which frame and if you got pics of the clearance (or lack there of) pleas post.

    Thanks in Advance!
    In the immortal words of Socrates..."I drank what?"

    Facebook.com/monstercrosser
    Twitter: @monstercrosser

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: time229er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    910
    ok, I'll bite..."Why would you want to...?"
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    2014 Nail Trail 29er

  3. #3
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: 2melow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,596
    Quote Originally Posted by juansevo View Post
    Most 29er frames should fit the 650b+ tires if they're a hardtail, but curious who's got 650b+ tires crammed in their 29er full suspension frame...
    Played around with WTB Trailblazers on my JET9 RDO, sorry don't have pics but I took measurements:

    28.34 inches or 72cm tall on a 24.6mm wide rim.

    By comparison, the Geax Goma 29 x 2.4 previously on the bike measured 29.72 inches or 75.5cm on same 24.6mm wide rim.

    So the WTB Trailblazer 650B+ is 1.37 inches or 3.5cm shorter than a Geax Goma 2.4" tire on the same 24.6mm rim. Tire clearance was just fine, they are not super big/wide tires and should fit most FS frames just fine. Bottom bracket height is lowered quite a bit, which may be good/bad depending on your situation.
    Niner Bikes employee. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Niner-...3652275?ref=ts
    Front Range Forum Moderator

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,829
    I posted in the other threads, (yes, plural), on this topic.

    650b+ fits with room to spare on an alloy Tallboy1. Pics of said clearance is posted on other threads.
    Last edited by 06HokieMTB; 12-24-2014 at 09:35 PM.
    '14 Bronson C
    '12 Tallboy A (for sale)
    '13 DB Mason 29er/650b+
    '13 SC Juliana 650b'd (wife's)

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,459
    Quote Originally Posted by time229er View Post
    ok, I'll bite..."Why would you want to...?"
    Exactly. What's the point in doing that OP?
    Last edited by Max24; 22 Hours Ago at 05:47 PM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,477

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?

    Quote Originally Posted by Max24 View Post
    Exactly. What's the point in doing that OP?
    To ride on big semi fat tires maybe? Why not?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    326
    But based on the measurements the 650+ tires are not as big or fat as the geax tire. You'd be better off just running a real 29er tire
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    If I told you I saw a unicorn ****ing a leprechaun trail side, you'd probably be suspicious.

  8. #8
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,061

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?

    He didn't provide any width measurements....


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Front Range Cyclist
    Reputation: juansevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    922
    Really? Well, for you newbie types here is the "why":

    -Smaller wheel=Stronger/lighter wheel.
    -Rolls fast & better traction.
    -Great in snow
    -Killer in sand

    I've got the Panaracer Fat-B-Nimble's on a Santa Cruz Bantam right now on Blunt 35's (Dually 45's on their way). It's been fun to seek out sand on this setup. Been doing some big snow rides the last few days. 2+ hour rides following fat bike guys no issue. One ride was with a few guys on standard 29er (2.35" wide tires) and I had more control/traction.

    But I do like to race from time to time. So having a bike I can throw a light 29er wheelset with race tires on is great when I want to do that. But for most of my riding I don't see leaving behind 650b+ anytime soon. It's just fun and they roll quite fast.
    In the immortal words of Socrates..."I drank what?"

    Facebook.com/monstercrosser
    Twitter: @monstercrosser

  10. #10
    Front Range Cyclist
    Reputation: juansevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    922
    Not really. Still have a weaker wheel. I'm 6'2" & 230lbs, with the exception of carbon wheels I just don't like the flex in the 29er wheels out there. Plus the win is the larger volume of the tire and the wider rim.

    Another thing worth noting is the Goma weighs in at over 1000 grams. The sample tires I have are around 800 grams. Plus higher volume which is key.
    In the immortal words of Socrates..."I drank what?"

    Facebook.com/monstercrosser
    Twitter: @monstercrosser

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by 2melow View Post
    So the WTB Trailblazer 650B+ is 1.37 inches or 3.5cm shorter than a Geax Goma 2.4" tire on the same 24.6mm rim.
    I also got this result. The Conti TK 2.4 is very similar in size to the Goma.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    915
    Now, I'll give you that there's a shorter radius between the rim and hub, but you're talking about adding 300g between the fatter tire (~200g) and the fatter rim to support it (~100G), and you're still going to tell me that they're going to accelerate faster than a regular 29er tire on a healthy width rim? Not a chance. Fat tires like these simply aren't needed on full suspension unless you're riding in sand or snow, which I'll bite- this is a novel way of getting some added traction if those are the conditions that you ride on.

    Still, I can't help but feel like this is the ultimate "master of none" bike. Heavier than regular tires, less traction than fatbike tires, smaller diameter than 29er tires, just as awkward to steer as 29er wheels, some added cushion but not as much as real fat tires...every time I see somebody mention these things, and their lack of compatibility with so many frames, I just keep saying "why bother?"

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by juansevo View Post
    -Smaller wheel=Stronger/lighter wheel.
    But with a heavier, smaller diameter tire.

    Quote Originally Posted by juansevo View Post
    -Rolls fast & better traction.
    -Great in snow
    -Killer in sand
    I see no evidence that the TB is better than a Goma 2.4 in these areas and the TB is heavier. If you aren't talking TB then I don't see how you can justify the claim that "Most 29er frames should fit the 650b+".

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by juansevo View Post
    Plus the win is the larger volume of the tire and the wider rim.
    A TB isn't larger in volume than a Goma 2.4 29er and you can use a wider rim on either.

    Quote Originally Posted by juansevo View Post
    Another thing worth noting is the Goma weighs in at over 1000 grams. The sample tires I have are around 800 grams. Plus higher volume which is key.
    Only the TNT Goma is and it is dual ply. The regular Goma is 900g. The sample tires you have are what? Higher volume is key to what?

    It sound like you started out with the answer and are working your way backward to the justification. 650B casings much larger than the Goma will not fit in many 29er frames. 650B casings the same size, like the TB, are not higher volume and are a liability in frames not intended for their diameter. 650B+ is not a functional drop-in replacement in 29er frames, the diameter difference is too great. A 26+ is a much better drop-in replacement in 650B frames as their size is closer.

  15. #15
    4 Niners
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,062
    Just think 26,27,29 and you will get the size relationship.

    Tapatalk upgrade sucks. Be sure to rate this bloatware so they fix it!
    Full rigid SS, Hardtail SS, Hardtail Geared, Full Suspension Geared.

  16. #16
    JCL
    JCL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by sandwich View Post
    Now, I'll give you that there's a shorter radius between the rim and hub, but you're talking about adding 300g between the fatter tire (~200g) and the fatter rim to support it (~100G), and you're still going to tell me that they're going to accelerate faster than a regular 29er tire on a healthy width rim? Not a chance. Fat tires like these simply aren't needed on full suspension unless you're riding in sand or snow, which I'll bite- this is a novel way of getting some added traction if those are the conditions that you ride on.

    Still, I can't help but feel like this is the ultimate "master of none" bike. Heavier than regular tires, less traction than fatbike tires, smaller diameter than 29er tires, just as awkward to steer as 29er wheels, some added cushion but not as much as real fat tires...every time I see somebody mention these things, and their lack of compatibility with so many frames, I just keep saying "why bother?"
    I see the way you look at it and this is my way.

    Little weight increase over 29".
    Stronger wheels than 29".
    Lower rolling resistance than 650b.
    Much more grip and lower pressure potential than both.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    69
    Trailblazer has close to the same volume as a Goma but not as spread out over the longer circumference so the 2.8's have more float

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by fewg8 View Post
    Trailblazer has close to the same volume as a Goma but not as spread out over the longer circumference so the 2.8's have more float
    The internal cross-sectional area of a TrailBlazer is 5-6% greater than a Goma on an i45 rim with a height just 2.7% greater. Unlikely that even meets the threshold of JND and is meaningless compared to the radical difference in tread pattern. Float doesn't matter for the surfaces these tires are intended anyway. They aren't snow tires.

    It's not a 2.8 tire either. WTB rates it at 67mm or 2.6" on a 50mm rim. Using the same standard as conventional MTB tires it's a 2.5" tire. People try really hard to make this tire look good. It's a large, hybrid-tread tire marketed dishonestly by WTB. It is not a + tire.

    You don't ride volume, you ride a tire. If the TB were truly larger it would have a tread pattern wider than a Goma. It doesn't.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?-screen-shot-2015-01-03-7.23.19-am.png  

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?-goma1.jpg  


  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    69
    My butt says that float does matter. Haha. I agree with your #'s, but I like the tire. I have them mounted on blunt 35's and they measure around 2.6. IMO they are more comfortable than the 29x2.35 ikons On blunt 35's I was previously running. BTW I ride mostly smooth singletrack so the tread pattern works for me. I'll also try to refrain from identifying them by the size printed on the sidewall since that gives you such a conniption. Haha

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by fewg8 View Post
    My butt says that float does matter. Haha. I agree with your #'s, but I like the tire. I have them mounted on blunt 35's and they measure around 2.6.
    If your butt is the measuring device then I'd say "float" isn't the term you are looking for. Others use "float" to refer to something very different.

    It's not clear that a TB allows lower pressures than a Goma. I've read reports of similarly low pressures on both but I'd get rim strikes at those pressures. A 5% increase in casing height doesn't allow a 50% decrease in tire pressure for me. Others on MTBR seem to "disagree".

    Suspension works a whole lot better for that problem anyway.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,477

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?

    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj View Post
    The internal cross-sectional area of a TrailBlazer is 5-6% greater than a Goma on an i45 rim with a height just 2.7% greater. Unlikely that even meets the threshold of JND and is meaningless compared to the radical difference in tread pattern. Float doesn't matter for the surfaces these tires are intended anyway. They aren't snow tires.

    It's not a 2.8 tire either. WTB rates it at 67mm or 2.6" on a 50mm rim. Using the same standard as conventional MTB tires it's a 2.5" tire. People try really hard to make this tire look good. It's a large, hybrid-tread tire marketed dishonestly by WTB. It is not a + tire.

    You don't ride volume, you ride a tire. If the TB were truly larger it would have a tread pattern wider than a Goma. It doesn't.
    Are they both aired up in that last image? The 29er looks fatter and taller.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,499
    So far, this thread has degenerated into the typical pi$$y internet debate about the merits -- or not -- of the + idea.

    It would be nice to know who is doing this successfully on which frames, which I believe was the original question.

    Just saying!
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    Are they both aired up in that last image? The 29er looks fatter and taller.
    They are both at about 40 psi if I recall correctly.

    In this image the TB is on a 9mm narrower rim. I have since obtained identical rims in the two wheel sizes for better comparisons. The TB is actually slightly wider and taller than the Goma but only by about 1.6mm in each dimension. The difference is less significant than the tread patterns. The Goma is also lighter despite its larger diameter and more aggressive tread.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,477

    650b+ on your 29er frame: Who's doing this on a 29er FS Frame?

    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    So far, this thread has degenerated into the typical pi$$y internet debate about the merits -- or not -- of the + idea.

    It would be nice to know who is doing this successfully on which frames, which I believe was the original question.

    Just saying!
    Looks like if it's shorter and skinnier than it fits everything. I like the information actually - I want to know if it's worth it to buy these and wheels or if its just hype.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    Looks like if it's shorter and skinnier than it fits everything.
    Exactly right. Many, many 29ers have chain stays that DON'T flare out immediately behind the BB so the whole premise that the smaller wheel allows for a wider tire is bogus to begin with. The TrailBlazer is a fraud.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 01-26-2015, 06:32 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-22-2014, 12:28 AM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-06-2014, 01:04 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-29-2011, 11:58 AM
  5. 650b wheels on a 29er frame
    By Nate3510 in forum 27.5
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-28-2011, 05:03 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •