Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 73
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    307

    Intense Spider 29 ride report

    Spider 29 ride report:
    Spider 29 prototype #1: This frame was designed with steep angles to eliminate excessive trail found in most 29 designs. The goal was to make the bike handle like a 26” Intense Spider and to reduce 29 wheel flop.

    Setup: Fork Rock Shox Reba Race, Shock Fox RP3, Easton EA70 stem, Easton EC70 seatpost, Easton Monkeybar riser, Shimano XTR disc groupo, Bontrager Race Lite Disc 29, Bontrager Jones XR 2.20 tires.

    Conditions: Dry, mostly hard pack, some loose silt, some sand.

    Initial impression: 4” travel on a 29 feels like 5” or more, handling is good behaves much like a 26” Intense Spider.

    Climbing:
    Steep climbs while seated in a small gear or a big gear out of the saddle the bike would go exactly where you want it to go, no wandering of the front wheel, precise placement was easy to do. Pedaling and position was easy to find and hold. I even did a short steep climb with weight back on the rear of the saddle; the bike did not wander or want to wheelie.

    Handling:
    Bike feels snappy and quick handling, easy to throw around, cornering is precise and the front end control and contact is very good, the bike likes to carve thru a corner, its like the front tire is cutting into the dirt, no front push or slide, effect result of a steep(er) HA

    Descending:
    Feels sure footed precise in line placement. Can easily rail hard corners the bike hooks up no front end push or slide even in somewhat loose conditions. Direction change transitions are neutral and well behaved. Feels like an Intense 5.5 on a fast descent confidence inspiring, point and shoot, feels great at 8/10’s although I have not gone full tilt 10/10’s. Did not descend anything real steep.

    Summation: Bike handling is quick & precise, no surprises, pretty close on the first try, will need time on steep descents to make a more edumacated judgment.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    dirty hippy mountainbiker
    Reputation: wolfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,153
    What's wheel flop? Haven't had that yet. What HT angle? Higher than 71?

    Looks tight. What size is it? hows the toe overlap and DT clearance?

    -M
    Mike Henderson, Dirty Hippy Mountain Biker and part owner of Jet Lites.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    827
    wheel flop? i may not have been riding 29ers as long as most people on this board, but i have yet to experience this. is that due to the gyroscopic effect of the wheels?

    Cloxxki always talks about 29er forks needing more rake. can someone explain the difference between rake and trail to me?

  4. #4
    Bored
    Reputation: bigwheelboy_490's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,983
    Maybe its just me, but I don't want a 29" bike to behave like a 26" bike. I like the stability and carving affect caused by the 29" wheels.

    29 and 26" bikes are different. They ride and perform differently. If you want a 26" bike, buy a 26" bike. If you want the 29" bike, buy a 29" bike. If you want characteristics of both, buy a 96'er (29" front and 26" rear).

    No one in the ski industry is trying to make a GS ski perform like a SL ski, so why do we keep doing this in the bike industry?

    but.. I'm just me.. what do I know.

    But otherwise.. great looking bike. Thanks for making an attempt at the 29" market.
    Last edited by bigwheelboy_490; 11-10-2005 at 11:42 AM. Reason: forgot to add compliment.
    MTBR is serious stuff.
    You never get better until you get out of your comfort zone.

  5. #5
    Cold. Blue. Steel.
    Reputation: OneGearGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,705
    Hot damn!
    That is great news to my ears. Maybe I don't need to wait for the 5.5 in 29" trim. The Spider may be enough bike to really offset my fully rigid SS. You know how it is... you always want what you haven't got. Gears and gobs of travel sound really sweet at this point.
    Keep up the fantastic work (and let us know when you are accepting orders ).
    I will continue selling off my "extra" stuff in anticipation!

    OGG
    Spinning and Grinning...

  6. #6
    Tig
    Tig is offline
    I ride, therefore I am.
    Reputation: Tig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfy
    What's wheel flop? Haven't had that yet.
    I'll take a wild-azz guess at it.
    With a relaxed effective steering angle, the front wheel tendency to flop over at slower speeds. Think of a chopper fork and front wheel for an extreme example. I think you can see it best when you lean your bike up against something where only the seat is resting on it and the handlebar is free to rotate... FLOP!

    OK, those who really know something can step in now.

    On a side note, I like the fact that Intense is stepping into the 29" market. Their 26" Spyder is among the very best FS XC bikes available. I've personally never seen the need for a full sus in a 29", but an excellent builder with a proven design could change my narrow mind!
    __________________

    The early bird gets the worm,
    but the second mouse gets the cheese.

  7. #7
    Nat
    Nat is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,372
    Quote Originally Posted by n10'sGuy
    The goal was to make the bike handle like a 26” Intense Spider...
    I'm not sure that I'd want my bike to handle like a 26"-wheeled bike. I suppose I'll have to test ride the final iteration to see if I like it, but I'd be turned away by marketing claims of "handling like a 26er."

  8. #8
    AOK
    AOK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AOK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,868
    Rear tire clearance looks REALLY tight in that photo. Can we get a closer look?

    I realize this is a prototype - what do you think you can achieve as far as max tire size?

  9. #9
    Cold. Blue. Steel.
    Reputation: OneGearGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Nat
    I'm not sure that I'd want my bike to handle like a 26"-wheeled bike. I suppose I'll have to test ride the final iteration to see if I like it, but I'd be turned away by marketing claims of "handling like a 26er."
    I hear ya', Nat. But, if that translates to posessing the positive traits of a 26" wheel combined with the rolling and cornering and traction and stability of the beloved big wheels, wouldn't that be the ultimate 29er??!

    They are still tweaking, so I have complete faith. After all, if a company who has made some of the most unrivaled mountain bikes to date (and this includes putting more winning downhill sleds under more pro's [M-1], one of the best "all mountain" bikes in the 5.5 and the cross country winning design of the Spider) is embracing the big wheel movement; and they are apparently putting in their due diligence, I am confident we are just a short time away from an incredible 29er. No, I am not on the payroll, but I certainly am a "believer!"

    OGG
    Spinning and Grinning...

  10. #10
    Nat
    Nat is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,372
    Quote Originally Posted by OneGearGuy
    I hear ya', Nat. But, if that translates to posessing the positive traits of a 26" wheel combined with the rolling and cornering and traction and stability of the beloved big wheels, wouldn't that be the ultimate 29er??!

    They are still tweaking, so I have complete faith. After all, if a company who has made some of the most unrivaled mountain bikes to date (and this includes putting more winning downhill sleds under more pro's [M-1], one of the best "all mountain" bikes in the 5.5 and the cross country winning design of the Spider) is embracing the big wheel movement; and they are apparently putting in their due diligence, I am confident we are just a short time away from an incredible 29er. No, I am not on the payroll, but I certainly am a "believer!"

    OGG
    Yep, they should tweak away to get the best handling traits they can achieve. Maybe from a marketing aspect saying it "handles like a 26er" would be a bad idea. A lot of people buy a 29er because it's different from what they had before. If they made a brand new bike and said, "handles just like our old bike!" who'd want that?

  11. #11
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Sometimes I think 29er fanatics are their own worst enemies. Finding fault in nearly every new entry and then wondering why companies are reluctant to join the market. Saying you want more choices then complaining when the choices are different from what is already available or not different enough.

    I think you guys are mis-reading/mis- interpreting "handle like a 26 inch" bike.

    One of the main claims against 29ers is they handle sluggishly, with less agility. Part of the reason for this is the increased amount of trail when using the available forks. Decrease the trail and the agility increases while still benefiting from the inherent stability and traction of the big wheels.

    Bottom line is all bikes do not have to be the same. Different is good! Choice is good!
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  12. #12
    dirty hippy mountainbiker
    Reputation: wolfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,153

    My other bike is also a bike...

    My Vulture handles like my 26er. Where's the mystery? I bet they could make a 26er handle like a 29er. It's a lazy way of describing it. Really the only thing that matters is what it's designed to do. You can optimize either for anything. Sounds like intense is trying to make a fast nimble race FS XC bike with 29 inch wheels. Sounds like they nailed it on the first iteration. Sounds like it's not too hard either. It'll probably be the most expensive production 29er to date.

    -M
    Last edited by wolfy; 11-10-2005 at 12:40 PM. Reason: add
    Mike Henderson, Dirty Hippy Mountain Biker and part owner of Jet Lites.

  13. #13
    Nat
    Nat is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,372
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Sometimes I think 29er fanatics are their own worst enemies. Finding fault in nearly every new entry and then wondering why companies are reluctant to join the market. Saying you want more choices then complaining when the choices are different from what is already available or not different enough.

    I think you guys are mis-reading/mis- interpreting "handle like a 26 inch" bike.

    One of the main claims against 29ers is they handle sluggishly, with less agility. Part of the reason for this is the increased amount of trail when using the available forks. Decrease the trail and the agility increases while still benefiting from the inherent stability and traction of the big wheels.

    Bottom line is all bikes do not have to be the same. Different is good! Choice is good!
    Difference is good, which is why I wouldn't want a 29er to replicate a 26er (because why bother?). I guess they should explain what characteristics they're trying to achieve. When I read "handles like a 26er," I read "twitchy and nervous." I like Wolfy's way of describing it: "fast nimble race FS XC bike with 29 inch wheels." That's nicely descriptive. We'll see how their Marketing department spins it upon release.

    When I buy a new bike I want it to feel different from what I already have, in order to give me a new experience. How boring would it be to buy the same bike over and over and over again?

  14. #14
    Nat
    Nat is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,372
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfy
    Really the only thing that matters is what it's designed to do.
    Definitely. And how f'ng sweet it looks.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: goneskiian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,394
    YOWZA!

    I'm with OGG on this as the Spider was a bike I was seriously considering before learning about 29er's. I think this could be THE bike I'm looking for. A 4 inch. travel, light fast XC race bike.

    I agree with Nat and Wolfy. Don't mention the wheel size in describing the hadling. Go with the "Fast, nimble FS XC race bike."

    When can I order one?

    Cheers!
    -Ian

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    267

    When can I ride one?

    And can I get it in Camo? I'm just happy to see more choices and a company like Intense jumping in to 29er's may put some others over the top to start development. And Thank You n10'sGuy for feeling this forum is important enough to share your develop!ment process!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    64
    Quick handling is the one thing I miss when riding my 29er. Sure, I can lean into the turns a bit more and have adapted my riding style but I would love a quicker handling 29er. Its ludicrous to say 29ers have to handle a certain way, if you don't want a quicker handling bike then don't buy it. I would love to give it a try. How much does a 26" Spider go for anyways?

  18. #18
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,019
    Wild bike, great to have you guys on board.

    What head angle does your 26" Spider get? I seem to remember that the difference trail-wise with 29" can be corrected with just a 1 degree steeper head angle. Or wake up the fork guys and have them spec more offset than on 26" bikes, so toe clearance doesn't have to get so super-tight. If 29"ers have to be as snappy feeling as 26"er, it's really a big guys' thing, as only huge bikes get toe clearance.

    Gotta explain wheel flop to me. Do I have it, and not know it?

  19. #19
    giddy up!
    Reputation: donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,247
    Wow...that thing looks great. If I were in the market for an FS bike that would definitely grab my interest. However, I personally don't like a fast handling "twitchy" race bike. If I were in the market for an FS it would be for 75+ mile rides and that is the last place that I'd want to be on a fast handling bike.

    That being said....I think Intense will sells loads of these. There are TONS of racer types out there that are dreaming of something just like this. Hopefully 29"er spider will make it to market and spur on some of the other manufacturers to turn out some new frames.

    I love the camo.

    B
    www.thepathbikeshop.com

  20. #20
    what a joke
    Reputation: ozlongboarder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,276
    Thanks for the ride report. I really believe that you will sell a boat load of these bikes to the XC racer crew especially if you can keep the final weight down to around 25 lbs.

    Make sure a Exi wolf can fit in the rear in case someone wants to fit some fat tires for an all day epic ride. Make them big enough for the tall guys (XXL) as well.

    The camo paint job is sweet!
    blah blah blah

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Soupboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,044

    I love more options

    I just hope the production version doesn't have that scary rear tire clearance.

    Wheel flop? Nonsense. Slower handling? Nonsense. Sluggishness - yes, but only from a dead stop or while grunting on the SS...to me. Once rolling I notice zero difference.

    Regardless, if I wanted a quick handling 29er race bike I'd by a Racer X or Asylum and put an 80mm Reba on it. Would likely be lighter too.
    Professional Amateur. Disagree? Submit your grievances here.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OrBikbldr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by bigwheelboy_490
    Maybe its just me, but I don't want a 29" bike to behave like a 26" bike. I like the stability and carving affect caused by the 29" wheels.

    29 and 26" bikes are different. They ride and perform differently. If you want a 26" bike, buy a 26" bike. If you want the 29" bike, buy a 29" bike. If you want characteristics of both, buy a 96'er (29" front and 26" rear).

    But otherwise.. great looking bike. Thanks for making an attempt at the 29" market.
    ditto, I like the way fishers and bikes around 71-71.5 degree head angles handle. 72 is almost too steep for me. Guess I just like choppers...

  23. #23
    what a joke
    Reputation: ozlongboarder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,276
    Dont forget the DT/fork crown clearance. It looks like it would hit.
    blah blah blah

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thylacine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,227
    Yep, smack-o goes the downtube.

    I must say it's cool to see the original poster keeping the current standards of bike industry journalism / bike evaluation alive and well.

    D- for the design, D- for the attempt at Guerilla marketing.
    No longer member of the bike industry nor society, so don't hassle me.

  25. #25
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    If the 29er spider sells for what the 26er does ($1750), it would actually be cheaper than an Asylum ($1900)... and a whole lot better looking.

    26 Spider is 71/73.

    D- ? You'd grade a first-generation prototype? Hmm.

    Think what you want. There's nothing suspicious or misleading about posts from a guy who's clearly stating who he's working for. Nice that feedback from the target market (us) may influence future iterations of the design.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OrBikbldr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    Yep, smack-o goes the downtube.

    I must say it's cool to see the original poster keeping the current standards of bike industry journalism / bike evaluation alive and well.

    D- for the design, D- for the attempt at Guerilla marketing.

    I am thinking that they are going to need to order some of those ventana made headset races. THey may have to stack 'em up in pairs to avoid that fork smacking

    On the up side it is really great that 1) they are making an attempt at 29er and 2) they are allowing us a preview.

    that being said, I doubt I will be buying one, best of luck anyway.

    On an edit I should clarify why I won't be buying one...I cant afford it while I am in law school with two kids.
    Last edited by OrBikbldr; 11-10-2005 at 03:17 PM.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    64
    I find it interesting how people on this forum can gripe about tire and fork clearance from a couple of photos taken at a right angle to the bike. Either I am not seeing some photos or there is some wild speculation going on here. Instead of jumping to conclusions why don't we just wait for some more photos and/or the final product before passing judgement?

    As for the D- grades, where do you get off saying that? Its a good thing when we get a look at a prototype, we should offer constructive feedback, not backhanded smack talk. Personally, I see no guerilla marketing going on here.

    This reminds me of a funny Daily Show rebuttal:
    Ed Helms: Jon, do you live near a sports store?
    Jon Stewart: No, why?
    Ed Helms: Cause I just want to know where you get your balls.

  28. #28
    Shamisen Appreciator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902
    I think it's great that the community is getting a look at a prototype, even greater that there's another brand in the industry that's taking a look at 29ers.

    I do feel that the review was a little light, but I look forward to reading the riders thoughts on it again once more time has been spent in the saddle.

    What's up with the negativity Warwick? It's a prototype and fork clearance is one of those issues that should be worked out by the time the frame gets to production. BFD. I seem to remember a certain builder who was practicing some guerilla marketing on the trials boards a few years back. Remind me, what's that aluminum coating process of yours called?
    Sean Chaney :: Owner/Builder :: Vertigo Cycles LLC
    flickr :: www.vertigocycles.com

  29. #29
    graps the nettle
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    481

    flopping around...

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupboy
    I just hope the production version doesn't have that scary rear tire clearance.

    Wheel flop? Nonsense. Slower handling? Nonsense. Sluggishness - yes, but only from a dead stop or while grunting on the SS...to me. Once rolling I notice zero difference.

    Regardless, if I wanted a quick handling 29er race bike I'd by a Racer X or Asylum and put an 80mm Reba on it. Would likely be lighter too.
    really? never noticed wheel flop or slower handling on a 29? how many different bikes have you ridden?

    i'm now on my 5th 29" bike, having been toying with the concept on and off since the days of the bruce gordon rock and road tires, and one of the biggest problems i have (emphasis on "biggest") is the fact that larger wheels tend to flop around in tight going, get deflected by rocks more when hitting them diagonally (i have a hunch it has a lot to do with the fact that they offer a greater target area to deflect), are harder to accelerate and decelerate (why is it that six-inch brake rotors turn blue a whole lot faster on my 29" wheels than they do on 26" ones?), and they exhibit a greater load on suspension components. this is across the board.

    don't get me wrong. i love big wheels. but they have some pretty notable design considerations (i'm taking care not to say "flaws" here) that are intriguing to build around. especially when it comes to things like wheel strength to weight ratio and the effect larger wheels have on bike geometry and suspension componentry.

    meanwhile, it's interesting to see intense playing around in the direction that they have chosen. i applaud seeing someone with their reputation jumping in, even if it is with an approach that many here are voicing dismissal of. celebrate it a little, and cut the guys some slack! if you don't like it, you don't have to buy one. but just bagging on them, based on one photograph no less, well, it comes across as pretty closeminded...

  30. #30
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by AOK
    Rear tire clearance looks REALLY tight in that photo. Can we get a closer look?

    I realize this is a prototype - what do you think you can achieve as far as max tire size?
    26" wheel Spider (as posted by n10'sGuy on the SS board)
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thylacine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,227
    Quote Originally Posted by smudge
    I think it's great that the community is getting a look at a prototype, even greater that there's another brand in the industry that's taking a look at 29ers.

    I do feel that the review was a little light, but I look forward to reading the riders thoughts on it again once more time has been spent in the saddle.

    What's up with the negativity Warwick? It's a prototype and fork clearance is one of those issues that should be worked out by the time the frame gets to production. BFD. I seem to remember a certain builder who was practicing some guerilla marketing on the trials boards a few years back. Remind me, what's that aluminum coating process of yours called?
    Hey, I'm all for Guerilla marketing. Spam is tasty and goes well with Pineapple.

    I know people get excited seeing protos and feeling like they're all warm and fuzzy being 'part of the process', but from one photo you can clearly see that the forks would smack the DT in a crash, the toe overlap is marginal, and I ain't even looking closely.

    We gotta 'keep the bastids honest', right Smudge?
    No longer member of the bike industry nor society, so don't hassle me.

  32. #32
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    ... the toe overlap is marginal, and I ain't even looking closely.
    Looks like a non-issue to me, unless you pedal with your heels over the spindles.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  33. #33
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: 2melow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,635

    Oh Boy...

    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    I know people get excited seeing protos and feeling like they're all warm and fuzzy being 'part of the process', but from one photo you can clearly see that the forks would smack the DT in a crash, the toe overlap is marginal, and I ain't even looking closely.

    Geez...here we go again....
    pro·to·type - An original type, form, or instance serving as a basis or standard for later stages
    Niner Bikes employee. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Niner-...3652275?ref=ts
    Front Range Forum Moderator

  34. #34
    Cold. Blue. Steel.
    Reputation: OneGearGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    Yep, smack-o goes the downtube.

    I must say it's cool to see the original poster keeping the current standards of bike industry journalism / bike evaluation alive and well.

    D- for the design, D- for the attempt at Guerilla marketing.
    Girl #1: "Doesn't Darcy look really pretty in that dress?
    Girl #2: "No. It makes her look fat!"

    Moral of the story: Putting someone else down does not make you look more attractive. It is, in fact, an ugly trait. Thylacine- stop being THAT girl.

    OGG
    Spinning and Grinning...

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeeZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    5,813

    New question here. What

    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    Yep, smack-o goes the downtube.

    I must say it's cool to see the original poster keeping the current standards of bike industry journalism / bike evaluation alive and well.

    D- for the design, D- for the attempt at Guerilla marketing.
    Your comments do not compute.

  36. #36
    try driving your car less
    Reputation: jh_on_the_cape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,103
    dood, that's INTENSE!!

    ha ha! thanks for posting the pic. Looks great. Don't mind all the self-appointed experts here... I would love to take that thing for a LONG spin.

    And if you didnt already know, you have a cool job... good to see that you take advantage of it by dreaming up new stuff.
    Only boring people get bored.

  37. #37
    get down!
    Reputation: appleSSeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,183
    I"m just saying the bigger this forum gets, the more arseholish it gets as well...

    Thylacine probably still hasn't even ridden a 29er, dude has been putting them down from the start

    the bike looks great, if I had the money I'd consider it, always liked the 26ers Intense makes
    Rudy Projects look ridiculous

    visit my blog, BEATS, BIKES & LIFE

  38. #38
    DWF
    DWF is offline
    Non Dual Bliss
    Reputation: DWF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,240
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Sometimes I think 29er fanatics are their own worst enemies. Finding fault in nearly every new entry and then wondering why companies are reluctant to join the market. Saying you want more choices then complaining when the choices are different from what is already available or not different enough.

    I think you guys are mis-reading/mis- interpreting "handle like a 26 inch" bike.

    One of the main claims against 29ers is they handle sluggishly, with less agility. Part of the reason for this is the increased amount of trail when using the available forks. Decrease the trail and the agility increases while still benefiting from the inherent stability and traction of the big wheels.

    Bottom line is all bikes do not have to be the same. Different is good! Choice is good!
    A-freaking-men!!!
    A man must have enemies and places he is not welcome. In the end we are not only defined by our friends but those against us.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: goneskiian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,394
    Just from those 2 photos it doesn't look like the 26" wheeled Spider has any more clearance than the PROTOTYPE 29er.

    There are lots of folks here that need to lighten up a bit and give Intense some credit for even building a prototype. Choices are a good thing folks!

    Don't forget, Intense make tires too. If they're designing a bike maybe they've got some tires in the works as well. Sounds all good to me.

    Cheers!
    -Ian

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thylacine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,227
    Quote Originally Posted by appleSSeed
    I"m just saying the bigger this forum gets, the more arseholish it gets as well...

    Thylacine probably still hasn't even ridden a 29er, dude has been putting them down from the start

    the bike looks great, if I had the money I'd consider it, always liked the 26ers Intense makes
    Actually, I had a Sycip "700c Mountainbike" pre Noughties, and I like bigger wheels. Heck, I like all size wheels just as I like all size bars, stems, cranks, seatposts and....frikken....shoe sizes. Never said otherwise. The inability of some to not be able to take a bit of ribbing or their need to pidgeon-hole people based on some childish "You're either with us or against us" mentality is not my problem.

    Still, Intense makes a good bike - If only they'd fixed the trail issue by maching up some custom dropouts for the fork rather than simply steepen the head angle like we all do.
    You'd think with their resourses they could bang heads with WB and have some real marketable advantage, right? I mean, you gotta sell frames with forks, so it only makes sense to align yourself real tight with a fork OEM.

    And how about doing the downtube a-la Specialised / Lenz to fix the fork crown issue?

    Gee, do I have to do everything around here?
    No longer member of the bike industry nor society, so don't hassle me.

  41. #41
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307
    Quote Originally Posted by goneskiian
    ...Don't forget, Intense make tires too. If they're designing a bike maybe they've got some tires in the works as well...
    To repeat, Intense Cycles sold Intense Tires several years ago. Now totally separate companies.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  42. #42
    wawe member
    Reputation: Black Bart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    Yep, smack-o goes the downtube.

    I must say it's cool to see the original poster keeping the current standards of bike industry journalism / bike evaluation alive and well.

    D- for the design, D- for the attempt at Guerilla marketing.
    And what grade would you give this redheaded stepchild?
    <img src=http://www.thylacinecycles.com/albums/album03/ThylacineProto01.jpg>

  43. #43
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,019
    Tell that rider his bike is too small for him.

    :-)

    B for innovation
    D for drivetrain efficiency and wear
    A for short chainstay/long travel ratio with high pivot
    F for rider/wheelsize ratio

  44. #44
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Thylacine
    If only they'd fixed the trail issue by maching up some custom dropouts for the fork rather than simply steepen the head angle like we all do.
    Custom dropouts? The Reba has cast lowers. And don't you think it's just a little unrealistic to expect a boutique frame builder with three days of work on a prototype to do something that Fisher, in four years and thousands of bikes, hasn't done?

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    491
    Well - presumably you could do some sort of alternate dropout for a WB fork, I don't think the suggestion was restricted to Rock Shox forks. The trail issue is a very definite one for 29" wheels. I quite liked the handling of my Rig with a Reba, though the recent addition of a rigid fork with more rake has made a world of difference to the agility and speed of handling. You can of course reduce trail by steepening the head angle which is what Intense seem to have done. The problem then is that you have toe overlap issues in smaller frame sizes. A better way to reduce trail is a fork with more offset/rake. This is very achievable on a rigid fork, though more difficult on a suspension fork as there are obviously other design constraints at work. However I'm sure if the big manufacturers really put their minds to it they could make it there. I don't think it's going to be long until they see sufficient demand to justify such a step - we've indeed had previous reports that WB have been experimenting with forks of different amounts of offset themselves.

    Wheel flop is something that is apparent on any bike with a lot of trail, even more so if that's accompanied by a relatively slack headangle. I think this is possibly more obvious on 29" wheels because they tend to have more trail generally, and the wheel is heavier so you feel this tendency more readily. As with most steering geometry traits, it's most illustrative to think of an extreme example. Picture a bike with a really slack head angle and a lot of trail. Lean the bike off centre, and the wheel will want to fall, or 'flop', so that it sits on it's lowest point.

    Sam

  46. #46
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,261
    Does Intense still have a 220lb rider weight limit on their frames and what will be the limit on the new frame? I had a Blur at one point and although I'm not fast the bike felt fast.

  47. #47
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Singular
    Well - presumably you could do some sort of alternate dropout for a WB fork, I don't think the suggestion was restricted to Rock Shox forks.
    The proto photo on this thread shows a Reba, and I think it's safe to say that any frame coming to market right now ought to work, as is, with the existing crop of forks (otherwise, we'll end up with everyone griping on here about how they'd love to buy the frame, but they don't want to have to buy a new fork to go with it). If Thylacine is going to start arguing that every new framebuilder ought to customize White Brothers forks specifically for them, then it's kinda hard to take that argument seriously.

    "I give the Spider 29er a D- because it doesn't cure world hunger or protect the Earth from rogue meteors."

  48. #48
    hispanic mechanic
    Reputation: sslos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,392

    Bravo!

    Welcome to the party, guys. Glad there's another builder on board.

    the los
    Whiskey is my yoga.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,300
    First, thanks for trying a 29er, we who believe appreciate it.

    Quote Originally Posted by n10'sGuy
    Spider 29 ride report:
    Spider 29 prototype #1: This frame was designed with steep angles to eliminate excessive trail found in most 29 designs. The goal was to make the bike handle like a 26” Intense Spider and to reduce 29 wheel flop.
    I have a Leviathan with at 100mm Reba. The head angle is probably 70 or less and the super stable handling is very confidence inspiring on steep technical terrain. On the other hand I feel the handling could be crisper on flater tight terrain or climbing but it's a trade off thing and lots of people here seem to really like the Leviathan. On the other hand Lenz's newer 5" travel design, the Bohemoth, does have a steeper head angle at 71 deg. As are others I'm concerned that a 73 degree head angle may loose too much of the positive 29er traits of stability and resistance to 'endoing' but I haven't ridden it so it's just conjecture on my part.
    As a potential customer I'd just request that you make an otherwise identical frame with a 71 degree head angle for your own comparison before finalizing production specs.


    Quote Originally Posted by n10'sGuy
    Initial impression: 4” travel on a 29 feels like 5” or more, handling is good behaves much like a 26” Intense Spider.
    I think you'll find a 4" travel 29" bike may fit the 5.5 market segment more than the Spyder racer segment. With luck and/or good planning maybe it will work for both.
    Last edited by Cloxxki; 11-11-2005 at 07:41 AM. Reason: just some figures
    2 wheels

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeeZee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    5,813

    Diversity

    Quote Originally Posted by Nat
    Difference is good, which is why I wouldn't want a 29er to replicate a 26er (because why bother?). I guess they should explain what characteristics they're trying to achieve. When I read "handles like a 26er," I read "twitchy and nervous." I like Wolfy's way of describing it: "fast nimble race FS XC bike with 29 inch wheels." That's nicely descriptive. We'll see how their Marketing department spins it upon release.

    When I buy a new bike I want it to feel different from what I already have, in order to give me a new experience. How boring would it be to buy the same bike over and over and over again?

    Shiggy an Nat are right. I find it amazing that the 29’er community is embracing this bike with open arms. All of the racer type should be going nuts. Personally I am disappointed because if it was a 5.5….wha-wing! However it makes sense that Intense would offer a CC 29’er first and if sales are good a 5.5 would be next (if there is a fork to match the frame).

    What really surprises me is the amount of posters that drool all over themselves when (insert manufacturer here) introduces another steel HT frame. How boring is that?
    Last edited by DeeZee; 11-11-2005 at 07:19 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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