Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: 369'r?

  1. #1
    Gabe.....
    Reputation: Smokebikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,182

    369'r?

    Or is it 36x29? Don't know, but we are calling it the "Spliff"............
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "Roll your own..........." http://smokebikes.com/

  2. #2
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,061
    Spliff .. nice name.....looks a bit like a dragster too. dragon' smokebikes

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    107
    Completely Freakin Ridiculous! Did you make that rim?

    Hows it ride?

  4. #4
    Don't Stop Spinnin'!
    Reputation: ReD_tomato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    659
    looks sweet! so, whats the review?
    ~every end is a new beginning...

  5. #5
    Gabe.....
    Reputation: Smokebikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,182

    Ride report.......

    Well the snow has melted and the trails and gravel are starting to dry out so Alex (my kid and QC consultant) and I rolled out the beast for test ride #1. First impressions were great, the bike feels "normal" and within a few minutes I forgot that I had a 36" wheel in the back.........note: I have been riding fixed and single speed for a while now so gears are sort of a novelty lately, but it sure was nice to have them for climbing. The front of the bike guided the bike easily and the back wheel effortlessly rolled over roots and rocks....it felt like I had a shock in the back. When I got it on the gravel road is where things started to get really scary.......the bike is FAST and once it gets going you can feel the inertia pushing you......at times it felt like the the bike was going to take off as I could hear the strange hum of the wheel as it broke through the air......that is when I had to throttle down and wuss out.......the last thing I want to do is have a huge wheel hit me in the nether region as I prepare to plow the gravel with my head, so I really don't know how fast I can push this bike but it's faster than anything I've pedaled on dirt to date. More to follow as we push this thing and attempt to create a rift in time.
    "Roll your own..........." http://smokebikes.com/

  6. #6
    bi-winning
    Reputation: rkj__'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,108
    looks funny, sounds fun
    When under pressure, your level of performance will sink to your level of preparation.

  7. #7
    That Unicycle Guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    354
    To make the bike completely ridiculous (ridiculously awesome) I would be tempted to run an endomorph in the front, that way both tires would have lots of float. Who knows it might turn out to be a sweet combo.

  8. #8
    I wasn't Kung Fu fighting
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    152

    I'm not generally negative

    for the sake of being negative, and I really appreciate the irreverent and light hearted way Smoke goes about their business... but damn, is that an ugly bike. Not in the good, interesting, off beat ugly way; but just poorly conceived, and semi-functional ugly way.
    Everyone has the right to be stupid, but you are abusing the priveledge.

  9. #9
    Hud
    Hud is offline
    Singletrack minded
    Reputation: Hud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,948
    I think David Copperfield is after one of these, is it for sale?
    The twenty-nine inch wheel.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    449
    novel idea, and not likely the first or last to ever think it's worth trying.

    if it were mine, i would have laced that 36 rim to a front hub instead. there's at least 75 years of reasons why offroad bikes of both the push and motorized persuasion like an equal or larger sized front wheel better than the other way around.

  11. #11
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,582
    Quote Originally Posted by onespeedpaul
    novel idea, and not likely the first or last to ever think it's worth trying.

    if it were mine, i would have laced that 36 rim to a front hub instead. there's at least 75 years of reasons why offroad bikes of both the push and motorized persuasion like an equal or larger sized front wheel better than the other way around.
    I think the issue with putting it in the front would be some serious foot-wheel interference.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    449
    if you're going to as much trouble to fit the wheel as the OP has, making the bike a bit longer or whatever else would not be that much of a stretch.

    and they're not available anymore, but 'Coker Tire' company make a 36 (front and rear) cruiser (and relatively cheap, ~$500 shipped), unfortunately they now only make a 36 unicycle.....

  13. #13
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,582
    Quote Originally Posted by onespeedpaul
    if you're going to as much trouble to fit the wheel as the OP has, making the bike a bit longer or whatever else would not be that much of a stretch.

    and they're not available anymore, but 'Coker Tire' company make a 36 (front and rear) cruiser (and relatively cheap, ~$500 shipped), unfortunately they now only make a 36 unicycle.....
    The thing that seems tricky to me about a 36" front wheel for an actual mtb is that considering a 29" wheel just squeaks by with toe overlap clearance, the front axle of a 36" wheel would have to move forward about 3-1/2" relative to the bb. That requires some pretty major compromises in geometry. Stupid long tt, stupid slack head angle, stupid amount of rake, or some combo of the three. Probably not a big deal on a cruzer, but an a mtb, that's a different story. With the 36" rear wheel you are just adding cs length.

    Not saying the 36" front can't ever be worked out, but it's not nearly as simple as you are making it sound. Heck, it took several years and lots of companies working on it to figure out the sweet spot for the front end of 29ers. One step at a time.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    449
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta
    The thing that seems tricky to me about a 36" front wheel for an actual mtb is that considering a 29" wheel just squeaks by with toe overlap clearance, the front axle of a 36" wheel would have to move forward about 3-1/2" relative to the bb. That requires some pretty major compromises in geometry. Stupid long tt, stupid slack head angle, stupid amount of rake, or some combo of the three. Probably not a big deal on a cruzer, but an a mtb, that's a different story. With the 36" rear wheel you are just adding cs length.

    Not saying the 36" front can't ever be worked out, but it's not nearly as simple as you are making it sound. Heck, it took several years and lots of companies working on it to figure out the sweet spot for the front end of 29ers. One step at a time.
    29ers are all about compromises, you say they just squeak by with front tire toe clearance, and sure they do, for people under roughly 5'8" or so...you should know as well as anyone else that there's no such thing as one way that's best for everybody, and the OP has certainly proved it.

    and just wanted to throw out that there's a bit more compromise there than meets the eye besides just the chainstay being longer as you say.

    anyways, i was and still do stick to my original statement: "if it were mine".....

  15. #15
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,582
    Quote Originally Posted by onespeedpaul
    and just wanted to throw out that there's a bit more compromise there than meets the eye besides just the chainstay being longer as you say.
    .
    Yeah, I would not want to drop my butt behind the saddle on steep descent

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Hud
    I think David Copperfield is after one of these

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thadthetroll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    864

    Your opinion

    Quote Originally Posted by bykegnurd
    for the sake of being negative, and I really appreciate the irreverent and light hearted way Smoke goes about their business... but damn, is that an ugly bike. Not in the good, interesting, off beat ugly way; but just poorly conceived, and semi-functional ugly way.
    I bet you thought i was going to start flaming but no,it is all just about fun.
    We took this ill-conceived,ugly beast on a real trail ride the other nite and it was way fun.
    The big wheel rolls over everything and the front end rides"normal".
    You do not really notice the rear wheel as you may think. We did some super twisty fast
    sections and it was a hoot.
    Everyone we came across plus the 6 folks in our group kept wanting to ride it in all it`s un-interesting way and were all grins and a bit amazed at how it really works..
    So...we feel we built a very good,succesful,smokily conceived,irreverant,pretty and very functional, fast fun machine which is why we build our bikes.
    We like to have fun with the "bubbas"....that`s it

  18. #18
    Don't Stop Spinnin'!
    Reputation: ReD_tomato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    659
    Any reason for that color scheme?

    If you follow that old Coral/Milk snake riddle, I'd be worried with that rear tire...
    ~every end is a new beginning...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikekayakhike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    176
    Good to see you guys got "dun" with that thing...

    What was it like on the downhills?

  20. #20
    Gabe.....
    Reputation: Smokebikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,182
    We took it out for a local night ride here around Asheville (Bent Creek)........so the "Downhill" is a matter of perspective and opinion but it sure did give me way more nerve than I usually have. The "shortish" wheel-base (45"....not bad for a 36"/29" wheel combo and no toe overlap) with the effective top tube length of 20.25" gave it some decent mountain bike manners when I came to carving tight single track......as far as descending (Lower Sidehill) it was fast, fast, fast......I had no reservations for grabbing as much air as I could on every jump that I found..........the biggest concern was to NOT tuck behind the saddle......for fear of possible castration. All in all we are pleased with the way this abomination on two wheels turned out.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "Roll your own..........." http://smokebikes.com/

  21. #21
    tiny rider
    Reputation: cartographer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by thadthetroll
    I bet you thought i was going to start flaming but no,it is all just about fun.
    We took this ill-conceived,ugly beast on a real trail ride the other nite and it was way fun.
    The big wheel rolls over everything and the front end rides"normal".
    You do not really notice the rear wheel as you may think. We did some super twisty fast
    sections and it was a hoot.
    That, to me is what those 36" wheels are all about!

    I'm glad you got that monster rolling [even if you need to upsize the front ].

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta
    The thing that seems tricky to me about a 36" front wheel for an actual mtb is that considering a 29" wheel just squeaks by with toe overlap clearance, the front axle of a 36" wheel would have to move forward about 3-1/2" relative to the bb. That requires some pretty major compromises in geometry. Stupid long tt, stupid slack head angle, stupid amount of rake, or some combo of the three. Probably not a big deal on a cruzer, but an a mtb, that's a different story. With the 36" rear wheel you are just adding cs length.

    Not saying the 36" front can't ever be worked out, but it's not nearly as simple as you are making it sound. Heck, it took several years and lots of companies working on it to figure out the sweet spot for the front end of 29ers. One step at a time.

    You could run 36"/36" by using a longer TT and a reverse stem. Heck...I usually run a 50-60mm stem anyways, so subtracting 3.5" from that...I'd just have to get a 30-40mm stem and put it on facing backward. May even give you a similar steering "feel". I think it could be do'able. You may have to slacken it out a hair, but I prefer that anyway.

  23. #23
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,582
    Reverse stem. Yeah, OK. Try that on your current bike and tell me how that steers. Something about swinging by bars to the left to go right sounds a bit odd, but that 's just me.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.