Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 67
  1. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fire_strom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by gfs69 View Post
    Nic 2.25
    Good shot. I have more clearance on a Lg 2011 frame with a N Nic 2.35" (on a Stan's Arch). 2.35" is excessive for the bike but the inability to run the 2.25 seems a shame.
    Scott

  2. #27
    Rider and Wrench
    Reputation: knottshore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,427
    This info is great, though disappointing- I was planning on purchasing a 2012 429 as I have missed my 2010 that I sold a while back (zero issues with multiple 2.25 tires and room for more on flows)-

    Has anyone had any issues with a RRalph on a Flow?

    Looks like I may need to look elsewhere- hopefully it is not left as "proper tire clearance for the category", what does this mean? I respect Chris for posting but after looking at some used 2012 429's and seeing the crazy amount of tire rub on a few it left me wondering...
    I Just wish I could ride more!


  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: YamiRider1316's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    263
    Ugh i was pretty sold on the 429 for my next bike but these tire clearence issues are giving me second thoughts. Daaangit. We do get a fair amount of muck around here especially during the winter season and it would seem even with a tire that clears itll still be prone to clogging easy. Anybody wanna ease my piece of mind?

  4. #29
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    I just put a Nobby Nic on the rear of my 12 with a few mm of clearance. I personally feel that an alloy short link bike from any manufacturer does not make for a good mud bike. My first gen 429 had plenty of clearance, but all the nooks and crannies would collect mud. My old carbon Tallboy and Scalpel cleared mud much better.

  5. #30
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    Knottshore, i too returned to a 429 after selling my first. BTW, a RaRa will fit. The tire clearance issue is just a marketing ploy to get me to upgrade to a carbon version. I say NO to Pivot's crooked plot.

  6. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fire_strom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    I just put a Nobby Nic on the rear of my 12 with a few mm of clearance. I personally feel that an alloy short link bike from any manufacturer does not make for a good mud bike. My first gen 429 had plenty of clearance, but all the nooks and crannies would collect mud. My old carbon Tallboy and Scalpel cleared mud much better.
    2.25 or 2.35? Probably 2.25.
    G

  7. #32
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    2.25. I have a 2.35 on the front of my SS. No way a tire that large will fit.

  8. #33
    Rider and Wrench
    Reputation: knottshore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    I just put a Nobby Nic on the rear of my 12 with a few mm of clearance. I personally feel that an alloy short link bike from any manufacturer does not make for a good mud bike. My first gen 429 had plenty of clearance, but all the nooks and crannies would collect mud. My old carbon Tallboy and Scalpel cleared mud much better.
    Thanks for the info on the 2.25 RR tire fit- on another note you went from a first gen 429 to a Tallboy & Scalpel (29?) and now back to a 2012 429... any comments on the comparisons? I have not thought about going to Carbon at this point but...
    I Just wish I could ride more!


  9. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fire_strom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    211
    +1.

  10. #35
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    My TB cracked twice, however SC has good CS. The seat tube on my Scalpel ovalized. Cannondale CS is not so good, but my LBS is outstanding. The TB was too active for me in mid stroke. The Scalpel had to be run with a lot of rebound. The Scalpel's headset, pivots and BB seem to require a little more maintenance. The Scalpel might be stiffer than the 429 - shocking! The 429's suspension is perfect yet I must say I could easily live with the other two bikes but I always worried about frame failure. The only carbon frame I would consider is a 429c. Why? I suspect it has been engineered to handle South Mtn chunk,day in, day out, with a larger than average cyclist or a "hammer". I feel many bikes are designed to cover up to the 85th percentile. Obviously pure conjecture on my part.

  11. #36
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    update - my NN grew and now rubs when climbing steeps. I'm thinking of trying a MKII or Moto, but I don't want to spend the money and I had quality issues with both manufacturers. I would like to have a TNT Gato 2.1. I value security over weight in the winter.

  12. #37
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Oh no! I have just put a large deposit on a 2013 alloy frame and have just learnt of this issue.
    Any update on this tyre list for the 2013 model?

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2
    Just recently purchased a 2013 aluminum frame....Rode a 2011 frame for almost 3 years and it had great tire clearance and I loved the bike, boy I should of done my homework first though. I called Pivot today and after playing dumb, suggesting I ride a different tire and finally being told that there was no issue with tire clearance I was actually told that tire clearance had actually increased over previous models! Not only did the rep play me as a fool he told me there was no guarantee that I could get my money back. I asked "what would be the reason why?" and he wouldn't give me an answer. Chris if that was indeed you earlier on this post I just want you to know that you shouldn't lie to customers, nor play them as fools especially when they are dropping $2000+ dollars on bike frames. Its bad business, the proper thing to do would fix the cross brace issue.

  14. #39
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by jqr100 View Post
    Just recently purchased a 2013 aluminum frame....Rode a 2011 frame for almost 3 years and it had great tire clearance and I loved the bike, boy I should of done my homework first though. I called Pivot today and after playing dumb, suggesting I ride a different tire and finally being told that there was no issue with tire clearance I was actually told that tire clearance had actually increased over previous models! Not only did the rep play me as a fool he told me there was no guarantee that I could get my money back. I asked "what would be the reason why?" and he wouldn't give me an answer. Chris if that was indeed you earlier on this post I just want you to know that you shouldn't lie to customers, nor play them as fools especially when they are dropping $2000+ dollars on bike frames. Its bad business, the proper thing to do would fix the cross brace issue.
    Further to my post above my fears have been confirmed.
    I have also bought the 2013 frame without doing my homework and knowing about this issue.
    Here are some pics of the clearance with racing ralph's on cobalt's.
    I measure it at 5mm.

    Clarifying Mach 429 Tire Clearance - from Chris Cocalis-p2260396.jpg

    Clarifying Mach 429 Tire Clearance - from Chris Cocalis-p2260398.jpg

    Summer here in Aus and this isn't a problem ATM but this will seriously affect my tyre choices in the winter months.
    I can understnd the requirement for a stiff rear triangle bit it doesn't look like much of a modification would be needed to generate alot more clearance.
    This design will effectively make this bike completely unsuitable for UK riding which is a fair chunk of the market to ignore IMO.

    This is my second Pivot and I am still impressed with how great this bike rides otherwise. Such a shame.

  15. #40
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756

    Clarifying Mach 429 Tire Clearance - from Chris Cocalis

    May I suggest the MK II. It does provide adequate clearance in wet conditions, has excellent traction and doesn't penalize one too much on hard pack.

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    632
    maxxis ardent is available in 2.25 and 2.4. 2.35 maxxis ardent doesn't exist.

  17. #42
    Palealerider
    Reputation: Chefbigdaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2
    I have a 2013 MAch 429 that came with a 29x2.2 Slant Six on the back. After 1 ride it had already rubbed off the anodizing. I switched to a 2.0 and solved the problem. I ride in So-Cal where I don't have to worry about mud much. but if you ride in the muck even the 2.0 does not give you too much room to spare. I love the bike but it is unfortunate about the clearance, or lack thereof.

  18. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: freebiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    632
    That's unfortunate. I wonder if the 429 "c" is in the same predicament?

  19. #44
    Palealerider
    Reputation: Chefbigdaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2
    I rode the carbon as well. I seemed to not have that issue. The geometry is different around. I wanted to buy the carbon bit didn't have the extra $$$

  20. #45
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    MKII Protection failed at the bead. I have become used to many tires surviving the occasional rim strike. My MKII and X-King are not that tough. At higher pressures it feels like I'm running a tube. I suspect Schwalbe is more expensive because of better construction. I tried a worn Captain 2.2 but it packs up more than the MKII and has less clearance. I'm am not happy. Winter/trail tires are either high volume 2.2 or above or skinny mud tires. I think a replacement triangle at cost should be considered for those who do not live in the southwest. I have a Crossmark LUST on order. If there is decent clearance and knob height, I will take a blade to it. I may try a Ground Control if the 2.1 has less volume than a NN 2.25.

  21. #46
    Rider down under
    Reputation: Hugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    I think a replacement triangle at cost should be considered for those who do not live in the southwest. I have a Crossmark LUST on order.
    hehe! You were such a strong defender of the limited tyre options and have now come full circle.
    FWIW I'm getting along just fine with my racing ralphs in the 13 frame but I'm glad I don't have to consider proper winter riding.
    Given that this is the 3rd generation of this frame and this problem has been identified since the first, I think this is pretty poor form.

  22. #47
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756
    You got me. I love the bike, and Pivot has provided good customer service to me in the past. I hate to seem like I'm throwing them under the bus, but until the Gato TNT 2.1 comes out, I'm stuck, literally in clay mud. The Geax TNT tires "ride big" because of the stiff sidewalls. In the summer my RR is great. Looking at your pictures, you may have a little more clearance than I do. Hopefully I will receive some feedback regarding the volume of the GC. If the 429 was a mediocre performer, the solution would be easy. Even resale, as another has mentioned, has probably been affected by these posts.

  23. #48
    Arrrghhh!!!
    Reputation: insighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    234
    I opted to go with an older frame even though it is used-- I love Pivot's design but the smaller clearance just won't work in the Northeast US. Maybe they'll eventually listen, especially since the carbon version has gobs of clearance. In the meantime I plan to enjoy the older version. For those who like the more typical volume tires, glad the frame is working-- I prefer something bigger.
    The great use of life is to spend it for something that will outlast it.
    William James

  24. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
    You got me. I love the bike, and Pivot has provided good customer service to me in the past. I hate to seem like I'm throwing them under the bus, but until the Gato TNT 2.1 comes out, I'm stuck, literally in clay mud. The Geax TNT tires "ride big" because of the stiff sidewalls. In the summer my RR is great. Looking at your pictures, you may have a little more clearance than I do. Hopefully I will receive some feedback regarding the volume of the GC. If the 429 was a mediocre performer, the solution would be easy. Even resale, as another has mentioned, has probably been affected by these posts.
    I'm with you - LOVE the Geax tires and ran their 2.2 AKA in the back, but if there was even humidity in the air the thing would clog then rub. Running a Continental out back now. It's OK, but it's not high volume, stiff sidewall dream that the Geax tires are.

    Really will a Gato TNT be coming out in 2.1???

  25. #50
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,756

    Clarifying Mach 429 Tire Clearance - from Chris Cocalis


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 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
  •