Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    36

    Roscoe vs. HiFi vs. Rumblefish vs. HiFi 29

    The search feature hasn't been working too well lately. I am considering looking for a full suspension bike. I would most likely keep an eye open for a used frame and build up the bike. I currently primarily use my X-cal with 29er wheels. Gary Fisher had both 26er and 29er full suspension bikes. Has anybody been able to compare the two directly?

    Because I like my X-caliber, I was discussing full suspension bikes with my LBS. They won't be getting anything from Trek until late fall. The gentleman I was speaking to thought the 26er full suspension bike were more versatile. He especially commented about it being easier to maneuver over the rougher terrain when the speeds go down. This goes against the general theory of taller tires rolling over stuff easier. He personally had FS 26er and FS 29er bikes, so I believe he was just giving his honest opinion.

    I am interested in others opinions on this subject.

    Thanks,
    Glenn

  2. #2
    Put this bandit hat on.
    Reputation: Tonuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21
    I can't say much for the difference between a 29er fs and 26 fs. I have a fisher 26 hardtail and a hifi 29. I find 29 wheels do roll over obstacles easier and carry speed better overall.
    I can't comment on riding a 26 FS on rough terrain, but I see what you mean - I can't see a 26 FS being any smoother than a 29er FS over rough terrain. I can see it if what he meant was that the 26 was easier to maneuver AROUND rough terrain. One thing I've found is that the bigger front wheel definitely become a bit harder to maneuver in tight terrain at low speeds. Obviously this is because on tight low speed turns (in wooded, rooty or rocky sections) you need a bit more clearance in front of you to be able to turn your wheel. It's something that took a bit of getting used to for me. Perhaps this is what the LBS guy meant.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tinshield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,084
    A lot of the advice given in these shops is horrible. I'm in New England and we have some of the tightest trails around and a huge 29er following. If 29ers were that much harder to maneuver no one would have them. Any small difference in turning quickness is more than made up for in stability and traction in rough trails.
    JRA Cycles
    My Trek HiFi
    NEMBA Racing
    SNEMBA
    I love learning new things in my pajamas.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonuck
    I can't say much for the difference between a 29er fs and 26 fs. I have a fisher 26 hardtail and a hifi 29. I find 29 wheels do roll over obstacles easier and carry speed better overall.
    I can't comment on riding a 26 FS on rough terrain, but I see what you mean - I can't see a 26 FS being any smoother than a 29er FS over rough terrain. I can see it if what he meant was that the 26 was easier to maneuver AROUND rough terrain. One thing I've found is that the bigger front wheel definitely become a bit harder to maneuver in tight terrain at low speeds. Obviously this is because on tight low speed turns (in wooded, rooty or rocky sections) you need a bit more clearance in front of you to be able to turn your wheel. It's something that took a bit of getting used to for me. Perhaps this is what the LBS guy meant.
    His comments were directed towards low speeds going up hills. At low speeds pedaling up hill, he felt more apt to catch the front tire on a root with a 29er. On a 26er, he could accelerate enough to lift the tire over the root. I guess it depends on how much you slow down going up hill on a 29er vs. the 26er.

    I appreciate your input on the maneuverability on the trails with a 29er.

    Thanks,
    Glenn

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinshield
    A lot of the advice given in these shops is horrible. I'm in New England and we have some of the tightest trails around and a huge 29er following. If 29ers were that much harder to maneuver no one would have them. Any small difference in turning quickness is more than made up for in stability and traction in rough trails.
    That is a good point of reference.

    Thanks,
    Glenn

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tinshield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by tbear1
    His comments were directed towards low speeds going up hills. At low speeds pedaling up hill, he felt more apt to catch the front tire on a root with a 29er. On a 26er, he could accelerate enough to lift the tire over the root. I guess it depends on how much you slow down going up hill on a 29er vs. the 26er.

    I appreciate your input on the maneuverability on the trails with a 29er.

    Thanks,
    Glenn
    I really don't understand these types of comments. Hogwash.
    JRA Cycles
    My Trek HiFi
    NEMBA Racing
    SNEMBA
    I love learning new things in my pajamas.

  7. #7
    I hate bikes.
    Reputation: Captain AmerrickA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    195
    Roscoe. hands down.
    Buffalo Creek sucks, stay in Denver next week.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mountaindavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    221
    On slow rough terrain, the Roscoe will start way quicker--so when you are going really slow through a rock garden and your wheel falls between two rocks it seems easier to get going on the 26er by far--as does tight twists. On the 29er, you have to hammer the legs more in slow rolling gardens in order to keep more 'mo or get even more light in the front end and quicker (hasn't worked out too well for me due mainly to my slow ass reaction times). All that being said, I would go for what I did, the HiFi/Rumblefish--after a couple months of ownership, I can't friggin wait till the next time I take it out, especially the downhill. During the turns, I am learning so much everyday that soon I won't even miss that. But the downhills...ohhhhh
    Last edited by mountaindavis; 10-04-2010 at 10:49 PM.

  9. #9
    Trying not to kill myself
    Reputation: gabe23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by mountaindavis
    All that being said, I would go for what I did, the HiFi/Rumblefish--after a couple months of ownership, I can't friggin wait till the next time I take it out, especially the downhill. During the turns, I am learning so much everyday that soon I won't even miss that. But the downhills...ohhhhh
    Amen, brother. I'm still breaking in my HiFi, but I'm already taking downhills faster than I ever did on my buddy's 26" Trek Fuel. The momentum of the big wheels gives a whole new world of confidence at higher speeds. I don't see much dropoff on the uphills, either, though I'm mainly riding more roots than rocks. You have to manage your momentum a little better on climbs with the 29er, but all the other advantages still get me through the trail much faster than on a 26".

Posting Permissions

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