Low-slung FS 29ers?
As I continue to get older, and my back/body doesn't seem to be recovering from bumpy rides on my HT as quickly anymore, I'm considering a move to a full sus 29er.
Since I do not need the FS to necessarily navigate over large trail features, I'm thinking I'd prefer one with a bottom bracket height (with a 100mm fork) less than 13". I don't like riding up to high on the bike, and as I said, the purpose of the FS in this case is easing the pains on my body and NOT to clear big chunky stuff. My riding is SE USA, so roots and rocks, but no drops per say.
Anyone have any ideas?
i don't know what the measurement to the ground but i have this bike and it totally feels like you are in the bike and not on top
Salsa Cycles | Bikes | Spearfish
Thought about a Thudbuster?
If you run lower volume tires, you can get a sub 13" BB height on a quite a few 29"er FS frames.
Originally Posted by LBIkid
Also depends on your weight and how much sag you run in your suspension. I also wouldn't say that bottom bracket height - per se - makes or breaks how high or low one rides on a 29"er. Some frames certainly have a much more "in the bike and low feel" than others depending on the design, fit and the set up.
Salsa Spearfish is where I would start based on your quest of keeping it below 13# and the 80mm of rear travel on that bike. The Giant Anthem X comes to mind next. My JET 9 rides a bit higher than 13" with the rear 80mm of travel paired with a 100m fork - unless I am using 2.0 or less volume tires. Then it can drop below. Even though you mentioned a 100m fork, the JET is also designed to run very well with an 80mm fork (or alter the spacers to get whatever you want - 85, 90, 95mm) to keep the BB height lower.
All 3 are great bikes and sound like they would or could take care of your stated goals.
The new Scott Spark would be my other suggestion to at least take a look at. It has an adjustable BB height (1/4" of adjustment). It's more of a race bike, but with the front fork travel options and rear shock options - it does look interesting.
There are probably more, but those come immediately to mind.
I empathize with the back/body recovery issues - especially at my age of 51.
The 14 warmest years have all occurred in the 16 years since 1997.
If your looking for HT weight and low BB consider a Cannondale Scalpel.
My Stumpjumpers had low BB also.
I too prefer bikes with lower BB.
When comparing BB heights of rigid vs. FS bikes, keep in mind that FS bikes sag a bit. Roughly speaking, a 4" travel FS bike with a 13" BB set at 25% sag, will effectively have a 12" BB when you sit on it. Hit some chunk and the bottom bracket drops lower as the suspension compresses.
I ride a Trek HiFi 29 with a 12.6" BB. It works great most of the time, but I get more pedal strikes than I'd like. I've owned or tested FS 29ers with BBs from about 12.5 to 13.5. In my experience, 13.5 is great with regards to pedal strikes but you feel noticeably high in the saddle. About 13" hits the sweet spot in my book.
Everyone's sweet spot is different but there's some food for thought.
Anthem x. Not sure of the height but I have pedal strikes like a mofo since I switched frames.
Small ring in front makes it easier. Small ring in back makes it harder. That blows my mind.
In my experience, almost all 29ers have a low bottom bracket. Check out the trek options. My fiance rides one and it's very low. Too low for the rocky desert in fact.
Another vote for Spearfish. I LOVE this bike.
I came over to it from a hardtail for the same reasons you described.
The Titus Rockstar is a pedal banger
Originally Posted by LBIkid
The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common
Salsa Spearfish 1 - I just measured my med. Sf1. The bb is just a touch over 12.75 w out sag.
Last edited by 1-bar; 01-01-2013 at 09:13 AM.
C-DALE FLASH 29 Carbon 2 (19.6 lbs)