Results 1 to 37 of 37
  1. #1
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,063

    Trek 69er(3x9), new ride review

    I had the pleasure this weekend of bringing home a virgin white 69er. I wanted to share my first impressions.

    Background: my main ride has been a 4-5" dually trailbike, 29lbs avg., for the past 12 years, with one season (99') on an SC chameleon, and the first part of this year on a haro mary SS 29.
    I've also got bmx roots, and some DH riding/racing experience, mostly Plattekill around Y2K.

    The Mary was a fun bike, but not everywhere. It excelled on smooth groomed trails, but not so much on my local rocky eastern PA trails. It liked to stay on the ground and roll over things and punished me when I tried to get airborne. I found I liked some aspects of the 29er, but it didn't fit my riding style of more playful jumping around and riding the woods aggressively. So, I sold the Mary back in late summer and I've been looking for some alternative to my fully ever since. Considered SSers of all types, rode a Niner, almost got an OnOne Inbred, rode some Kona 29ers, Redline, etc. Nothing clicked.

    Then I see this Trek hanging in the LBS, take it out for a test ride, and I'm in love, ok lust maybe. One semi-impulsive purchase later, it's on its way home with me.

    At 5'11", I could have gone either way 17.5 or 19.5.
    Once the dealer swapped the seatpost for one with some setback, I chose the 17.5", even if it's a bit shorter tt than what I'm used to, it makes the bike really agile and flickable, but still very stable with the 29 front.

    The Ride: This is one FUN bike. It's light, 25.2 lbs w/o pedals. And it's fast. much faster than the my squishy bike, much faster than the Mary. Part of that is the stock tires too, they roll fast, but give up some traction on my soft winter trails with slick logs and roots.
    The thing squirts when you push the pedals! It's aluminum frame is not bad on rocky trails, better than I expected anyway.
    The component spec is excellent stock. I guess that trek is able to spec out such a bike this well by having the frames made in Taiwan. Oh well, we are the new china
    I am very happy with the bike and I only had one issue. Cruising on the road to the trailhead, the freehub wanted to keep creeping forward while coasting causing the chain to get very limp and hang down over the chainstay. I don't know if this was happening today because the temp was 0 C. or the grease on the pauls is new and thick or both. but I didn't have a problem on the trail at lower speeds.

    Anyway, I think this one's a keeper.


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flat Ark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,646
    Congratulations The bike looks great, especially with the white Fox up front.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AZTtripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    542
    Sweet Ride

    Welcome to the 6-9r revolution!

    I must admit Trek is really putting together some nice looking bikes and I must say I like this one better than the root beer SS. The Fox fork is all that you need with a 29er wheel the Maverick is overkill IMO.
    Singin' I love hike a bike!!!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    466
    Thanks for posting the pics. I'm actually considering getting one this week for myself. The only thing that is really bothering me is that the Trek website and all the previous release photos show the bike with an XT crank. However, if you look at the spec sheet on the website it does show a Deore crank which is what you have. Not sure if this is important to you but it really is bothering me. Sorry, hope I didn't bring you down off of your new bike high. Enjoy!!

  5. #5
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    AZ, I'm curious about the "overkill" comment on the DUC32. I'm fairly new to the 29'er wheel setup deal which is why I'm asking. Do you feel it's overkill on this particular Trek because it's a hardtail or some other reason? I rode with a guy recently who was on the rootbeer/DUC32 version, and I was quite impressed how it did in technical terrain. I've also recently ridden a 69'er ML8/DUC32 that was pretty darned cool. The fork only weighs about 4lbs., so it doesn't seem to be much of a weight issue. It's a very low axle-to-crown height too which lends to easy 29'er conversion. Are there other issues that you guys have seen with this fork for a 29'er setup that are strong negatives? Just curious as it's the main fork on my list for a potential 69'er setup.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AZTtripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    542
    TNC

    I don’t see that there is anything wrong with the shock per say just that when I think SS I think simplicity. A lot of 29r SS are rigid I just up graded from a rigid 29r fork to a Reba on my Kona Exlosif 6-9r. While the rigid fork was good for a lot of things it is nice to have some cush. The Duc 32 looks sweet just to high tech for a SS.

    But hay to each his own if you like the Duc you should get one.
    Singin' I love hike a bike!!!

  7. #7
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,063
    Quote Originally Posted by palmermtb
    Thanks for posting the pics. I'm actually considering getting one this week for myself. The only thing that is really bothering me is that the Trek website and all the previous release photos show the bike with an XT crank. However, if you look at the spec sheet on the website it does show a Deore crank which is what you have. Not sure if this is important to you but it really is bothering me. Sorry, hope I didn't bring you down off of your new bike high. Enjoy!!

    I have 06' XT cranks on my full sus. bike, and the cranks on the 69er are not exactly the same, but close. These deore cranks use the same external bearings, b.b., and spindle setup as the XT's. The arms are a little different in that they don't have the hollowtech feature in them, as they are externally relieved on the backside of the arms. They still feel very stiff, and I don't plan on doing big jumps on the bike, so they will be just fine I'm sure.
    The rest of the spec is so nice, the XT shadow rear der. shifts sooo nice, along with the new dual-release rapid fire shifters.

    The freehub seems to be not as sticky after a few rides now, and I realized that the rear rim is tubeless ready.

    My only minor gripe is the placement of the rear der. housing guide on the seat stay. It sticks out a bit to the side and I catch the heal of my shoe on it sometimes. I think they should have put it underneath and out of the way, like they did with the disc guide on the other side.

    I've ridden the bike everyday the past 4 days, and I'm jazzed. It's a little rocket ship compared to what I'm used to riding. I'm still getting used to bunny hopping it over logs and stuff, the front end it a little different and harder to get up, but the back end is so flickable and light, it pops right up easily. I have to get used to this and adjust the way I hop logs.

  8. #8
    Master of the Obvious
    Reputation: Angus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    498
    I have pulled the trigger on a large 69er 3x9 hoping to have it by the end of the week....
    Check out my Blog!
    Yes ! I am posting on my Blog again! come visit!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    That sure does look like a sexy and fast bike.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    466
    OK, I'm over the whole XT crank thing. The boss, err the wife, says I can pull the trigger right after the tax refund comes back. Yesssss.............TurboTax here I come. Keep us posted on the ride reports. I think this bike is going to be a huge seller for Trek.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    324
    I've been on mine for a few weeks and a couple of hundred miles. I was disapointed with the lack of XT cranks as well, but I put my old set of XT's on and I was happy. This bike rocks! With a few changes it weighs in at 24.2. I put FSA190 bars on, set it up 1X9, an XT cassette, XT cranks, 520 pedals, XT brakes, 160 front rotor and set it up tubeless with tape not the rim strip. It hops logs with the greatest of ease, my first big log I almost endo-ed from lifting the rear to far (Was used to my Rush). Yesterday I finally got it out on some decent rocky technical stuff, with some pretty challenging rock gardens. I will say I was most impressed. I had one of my cleanest and smoothest runs there ever, I was stoked! This is the cool part, it handles as well as my race hardtail on the tight technical stuff and climbs as well when the fork is locked, and blasts the baby heads and boulder fields better than my Rush. I am thinking of dumping the Rush and getting the 69er Fuel for endurance races and the hardtail 69er for XC races.
    Mike

  12. #12
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,063

    update

    So after a month of owning the bike, and about 10 rides of 2 to 3 hours, I've finally found the sweet spot on this bike....and it's much different than what and how I was used to riding.

    I've just figured out how to really ride it on the rocky/tech/dh's.

    The key to this bike it to get your weight front and really lean on the front wheel. I've been used to riding a 4-5" travel full-sus. bike, and I had been trained to lean back and use the rear wheel travel, and that just doesn't fly with an aluminum hardtail. With the 69er, It's better to keep the weight off the back wheel, instead keep the rear end light and flickable- which it is with the short stays. Use that big front wheel and fox fork for all it's worth and it is a much better ride. I almost have to ride it entirely focused on the front wheel on a fast rocky trail.

    Climbing is great... keep body weight centered and romp. That front end just rolls on over everything and the back end is so light and snappy I just un-weight it to rollover stuff or hop it up over. But on the rocky stuff...move up (over the front) and move out.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    324
    I am really enjoying this bike too. So much that it will be my primary race bike for 2008.

    I've added a few more goodies and have the bike down to 23#. I-9 wheelset on the way and that should drop it a bit more. I didn't think I would notice the engagement of the standard hub, but after spending a year on I-9's, I was quick to notice the lack of instant engagement. I guess I just can't live with out it know.

    Ride on.
    Mike

  14. #14
    locked - time out
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    816
    This bike was 25.2lbs stock, w/o pedals?

    Damn. I was considering getting an 8000, but after seeing one of these (in a 19.5...far too big to consider testing it out), I'm thinking I like the 69er 3x9 a bit more. I like the 69er concept, and the paint, to be honest, makes this bike a hell of a lot more attractive than the '08 8000.

  15. #15
    Ground Pounder
    Reputation: MrHappyMedium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    310
    Why the sale of the 69er? I'm thinking about buying one (L) from the LBS and any feedback may help.

    I'm trying to decide if I want to save my money, go with a Trek 69er 3x9, Cannondale 29er, or a Fisher Rig/Xcal. I like the idea of the 69er; big where you need it most. Plus, the 100mm travel calls out to me a bit more than the 80mm on the rest of the bikes.
    My bicycle gets more dirt than your 4x4.

  16. #16
    Mac & Jacks African Amber
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    103

    Feedback (limited application)

    Quote Originally Posted by MrHappyMedium
    Why the sale of the 69er? I'm thinking about buying one (L) from the LBS and any feedback may help.
    I've owned the HT version in a 21.5" frame now for two weeks. I like the bike very much. What type of "biker" am I? At 6'4", 255+ lbs and "just" a fitness rider, with one year of owning and riding a Felt NINE Pro 29er (which I also love) for comparison, this is what I think:

    The '08's Hydroformed tubing used in the frame is strong and light. I love the 69er format. The front end does tend to pull up easier than a 29er design. The bike is quicker in acceleration, "more nimble" as others have also stated. In other words, I concur with most of the positive comments voiced about the 69er format bikes.

    I wish that the bike could be purchased with an upgrade option to all XT drive train components, all though the XT RD works very smooth. I replaced the OEM bar with a 50mm riser with 711mm width and installed platform pedals and Oury/ODI lock-on grips.

    Anyway, I read a lot of bike opinions and the size of rider/frame and type of rider (accomplsihed, racer, or general fitness - like me) usually is not mentioned. My opinions are based upon my specifics (obviously). I never do 3 hour rides, I am not that fit nor would my butt/balls take that abuse. I grew-up riding wonderful "single track" along the Buffalo Buyou in Houston. My first MT Bike (before they were invented) was a Schwinn Typhoon, with 2-speed Bendix coaster brake hub and homemade "MX" handle bars, stripped of superfalous fenders and chain guard. All said, (are you still with me) this is the most fun bike with the most versatility I have ridden.

    I got a great deal from a nearby bike shop. She's a fun ride and a welcomed addition to my stable. I wish it had an XT crank and FD. For XC the Felt 29er is still my preference, but on tight trails and forest stuff this is the bike to be on. Oh, the Fox F29 fork is great.

    I also think that the frame is a little long. The 21.5" was still the correct size for me but, I believe the sizes are on the "larger/longer" size in comparison the my '07 GF Rig or my Felt. BTW the GF Rig is the posession of my 19-YO son now.

    I hope this does not sound like... " I bought this bike so it must be the best thing out there. " $1869 MSRP $1099 Cost to dealer; I bought somewhere inbetween. For me, the price I paid out-the-door was a very good value for the product (your negotiating results may vary). I'm happy. I would recommend the time necessary to evaluate this bike before buying anything. I bought without a trial ride but ordered one because of my belief in the overall concept of the 69er. For me, I was right. It is the best of both worlds.

    I am also known for providing "too much information". Gleen what you can. Good Luck.
    Last edited by LongviewTx; 03-04-2008 at 05:11 PM.
    My Current Rides:
    '09 Trek 69er SS '08 Trek 69er 3x9 HT
    Clydesdale Certified @ 6' 4", 258 lbs.

  17. #17
    Ground Pounder
    Reputation: MrHappyMedium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    310
    Great feedback Longview. I was wondering if the front end would wander on steeps. I guess that's the tradeoff for the quick spin up and reduced weight of the 26in rear wheel and the 100mm fork. I'm a recreational rider as well. I'll 'race', but always use quotes when referring to it.

    Another concern of mine is the ability to attach a trailer to the bike. I have a 6mo old and I'm counting down the days before I can tow him around. I'm not sure the 29ers will have enough clearance for the trailer. Here's hoping the LBSs have the bikes in stock that I can take a spin on...
    My bicycle gets more dirt than your 4x4.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by moonraker
    So after a month of owning the bike, and about 10 rides of 2 to 3 hours, I've finally found the sweet spot on this bike....and it's much different than what and how I was used to riding.

    I've just figured out how to really ride it on the rocky/tech/dh's.

    The key to this bike it to get your weight front and really lean on the front wheel. I've been used to riding a 4-5" travel full-sus. bike, and I had been trained to lean back and use the rear wheel travel, and that just doesn't fly with an aluminum hardtail. With the 69er, It's better to keep the weight off the back wheel, instead keep the rear end light and flickable- which it is with the short stays. Use that big front wheel and fox fork for all it's worth and it is a much better ride. I almost have to ride it entirely focused on the front wheel on a fast rocky trail.

    Climbing is great... keep body weight centered and romp. That front end just rolls on over everything and the back end is so light and snappy I just un-weight it to rollover stuff or hop it up over. But on the rocky stuff...move up (over the front) and move out.
    I'd like your thoughts on a couple technics for riding techy trails. I ride a 29er and have found that some of the major advantages in the terrain that I ride have everything to do with the back wheel size and contact patch. For example I have found that traction on loose or muddy material to be far superior to the 26er rear wheel -- the muddier and/or the steeper the more the advantage to the 29er wheel. Likewise I have found that traction over wet roots and rocks is superior - again the steeper and more technical the climbing the more superior the 29er seems. Lastly, the larger rear wheel also seems to roll over -- read get over -- logs, rocks etc., particularly those with a sharp leading edge much better than the smaller wheel, again the steeper the terrain - going up, as in ledges or large roots - the better the large wheel seems to gain traction.

    It seems you have worked out or are working out solutions or techniques to make the smaller back wheel work well. Please review those riding experiences as it relates to the above situations - if you care to... I am considering adding this bike to my stable while I wait for some reasonable weight 650b wheelsets to show up so that I can tryout that concept as well.

    Thanks... Dave
    "To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the best product of civilization"... Bertrand Russell

  19. #19
    Master of the Obvious
    Reputation: Angus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by MrHappyMedium
    Great feedback Longview. I was wondering if the front end would wander on steeps. I guess that's the tradeoff for the quick spin up and reduced weight of the 26in rear wheel and the 100mm fork. I'm a recreational rider as well. I'll 'race', but always use quotes when referring to it.

    Another concern of mine is the ability to attach a trailer to the bike. I have a 6mo old and I'm counting down the days before I can tow him around. I'm not sure the 29ers will have enough clearance for the trailer. Here's hoping the LBSs have the bikes in stock that I can take a spin on...
    The front wheel doesn't wander on me at all and I have had a few runs down a rocky descent that is a little quick and steep.

    as for pulling a trailer I don't understand your clearance issue
    a trailer that connects with a skewer adapter will work fine, the trailers that connect to the chain stay don't work well with bikes with disc brakes, wheel size does not affect either of them..
    Check out my Blog!
    Yes ! I am posting on my Blog again! come visit!

  20. #20
    Shortcutting Hikabiker
    Reputation: Acme54321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,151
    Quote Originally Posted by moonraker
    Anyway, I think this one's a keeper.
    I guess not. LOL. Why are you selling it?

  21. #21
    Ground Pounder
    Reputation: MrHappyMedium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by Angus
    The front wheel doesn't wander on me at all and I have had a few runs down a rocky descent that is a little quick and steep.

    as for pulling a trailer I don't understand your clearance issue
    a trailer that connects with a skewer adapter will work fine, the trailers that connect to the chain stay don't work well with bikes with disc brakes, wheel size does not affect either of them..
    I'm concerned with it pulling up/wandering when climbing steeps. I'm guessing a 29er would be better here, but at the cost of a weight penalty on the rest of the ride as well as steeper gearing.

    The trailer concern was a reference to a 29er. I'm not sure there's enough clearance on the trailers I'm looking at (Burley solo and Chariot Cougar) for the big wheel in back. This would be one of the advantages of the 26in in back for me - almost a guaranteed fit.
    My bicycle gets more dirt than your 4x4.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by Acme54321
    I guess not. LOL. Why are you selling it?
    EXACTLY!! And sort of the end point to my earlier query as to this bikes steep, sloppy, technical climbing ability as compared to those specific 29er strong points. I would be willing to bet that a 29er and probably a 27.5er romps all over a 69er uphill and down... at least from my experience and imho!!! I see nothing in a 69er concept that is going to improve the ability of a 26er rear wheel to clear objects as well as a larger wheel without physical assistance from the rider -- especially up steep and/or technical climbs. AND the rear wheel is what gets "stuck" or doesn't clear the object 99.9% of the time -- then maybe "fall down go boom"!

    Cheers...Dave
    "To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the best product of civilization"... Bertrand Russell

  23. #23
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Acme54321
    I guess not. LOL. Why are you selling it?
    I do really like the bike a lot. Only reason I want to sell it is I bought it on sort of impulse after a short test ride, and we're already way over our head in credit card debt, and my wife just got a DUI which is going to cost us a lot too. Plus I already have another mtn bike - full suspension bike to ride.

  24. #24
    my church is the woods
    Reputation: moonraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Rubicon
    EXACTLY!! And sort of the end point to my earlier query as to this bikes steep, sloppy, technical climbing ability as compared to those specific 29er strong points. I would be willing to bet that a 29er and probably a 27.5er romps all over a 69er uphill and down... at least from my experience and imho!!! I see nothing in a 69er concept that is going to improve the ability of a 26er rear wheel to clear objects as well as a larger wheel without physical assistance from the rider -- especially up steep and/or technical climbs. AND the rear wheel is what gets "stuck" or doesn't clear the object 99.9% of the time -- then maybe "fall down go boom"!

    Cheers...Dave

    reply to some of your points: I have owned a 29er Haro Mary and so I can comment on the comparison to that. The 29er did have better traction on sloppy climbs, (tires were a factor too, the exiwolf are far superior to the bontragers). In fact, the Mary felt more like a john deer tractor in that it would just roll over everything without slipping ever. However, it was much tougher and required more torque to keep the wheel rotating. I also felt more "down in" that bike, probably because the b.b. was lower than the hubs. The 29er also didn't like to ever leave the ground, it was a steamroller over the little stuff that I like to catch air off of.
    By comparison, the 69er is way more flickable and therefore more fun to me. Instead of trying to just roll over every rock ledge, it's so easy to hop up the rear and hit the gas to accelerate. You do remember on the DH's that your still on an aluminum 26" hardtail, but shifting weight a bit more forward (than what I was used to) helps a lot there.

    Is it better or worse than a plain old 26er? it's different...and certainly a lot of fun.
    Is is better or worse than a 29er? depends on your riding style and places you ride. I find it better because I like like hopping and popping over trail obstacles. It's certainly fast, it would make a great race bike for smoother courses, but it doesn't have that race bike - bars 4" lower than the seat - feel to it.
    I can wheelie or manual it like a 26er, but dive down steep stuff without fear of going over the bars because of the big front wheel. So, IMO, it's the best of both worlds.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    324
    I got quite a few miles on mine, and just finished it's first race this weekend, a 5hr enduro.

    I don't notice any of the problems mentioned with climbing. I like the light front end and actually think it's a plus. It is so easy to loft up and over the roots and waterbars. I always felt that if I could get the front wheel over something the back just always seems to follow.

    I demoed some 29ers and they just felt slow to spin up and not very flickable. The 69er spins up just like a 26 and is very flickable. I love to screw around, hop things and try and get over logs that are way to big, but I still try. I am often caught going out of my way to launch a rock or hop a log. I'd say I have a playfull nature and this bike is playfull.

    Does it work for me and my style of riding? Yep.
    Mike

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    466

    I LOVE my 69er!!!!!!!!!

    I completely agree with WindWalker, I can't say enough about my 3x9 69er. I hate to say it but I have more fun on it than my RIP9. It's like a BMX bike on steroids. You can flick it rail it, climb it, you name it. It does it all so well. My firend even made a comment the other day that he's never seen anybody rail some of the turns like I have lately. I told him the 69er is the key. The best explanation would be to say that it is a fast a a 26er with more steering traction than you could ever need.

    I actually put a setback Thomson on mine. No issues with the light front end that people speak about. None whatsoever. In fact, I attribute the bikes success to it's forward biased balance. That's what makes the bike so flickable. I think everybody should have one.

    I recently put a Weirwolf LT 2.55 on the rear to help take some of the edge off the rocky trails around here in Phoenix. I've go to say that this tire is awesome. It makes the bike feel like it's a softail and it has gobs of traction. The only drawback is the weight. I can definitely feel the extra weight but it's worth it to me. I think its in the 800 gram range.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bogmonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    451

    Waiting for the snow to melt!!

    I am going crazy just waiting for the snow to melt to get out on the trails and try this baby out!! I have been on 29ers for 3 years, rig, ventana ss, ventana fs, vassago ss, haro mary ss. I ride tight Mn singletrack lots of tight uphill turns with no momentum to be carried up the hill. I think the smaller rear wheel is going to be the ticket for fast acceleration out of tight corners and up hills. 99% of the trails i ride are smooth with scattered rocks and roots. I will posting a full ride report in about a month, I HOPE!!!!!


    BOG...

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by moonraker
    reply to some of your points: I have owned a 29er Haro Mary and so I can comment on the comparison to that. The 29er did have better traction on sloppy climbs, (tires were a factor too, the exiwolf are far superior to the bontragers). In fact, the Mary felt more like a john deer tractor in that it would just roll over everything without slipping ever. However, it was much tougher and required more torque to keep the wheel rotating. I also felt more "down in" that bike, probably because the b.b. was lower than the hubs. The 29er also didn't like to ever leave the ground, it was a steamroller over the little stuff that I like to catch air off of.
    By comparison, the 69er is way more flickable and therefore more fun to me. Instead of trying to just roll over every rock ledge, it's so easy to hop up the rear and hit the gas to accelerate. You do remember on the DH's that your still on an aluminum 26" hardtail, but shifting weight a bit more forward (than what I was used to) helps a lot there.

    Is it better or worse than a plain old 26er? it's different...and certainly a lot of fun.
    Is is better or worse than a 29er? depends on your riding style and places you ride. I find it better because I like like hopping and popping over trail obstacles. It's certainly fast, it would make a great race bike for smoother courses, but it doesn't have that race bike - bars 4" lower than the seat - feel to it.
    I can wheelie or manual it like a 26er, but dive down steep stuff without fear of going over the bars because of the big front wheel. So, IMO, it's the best of both worlds.
    Well the 29er certainly is not "flickable" ... at least not what I would envision that term to mean. However, I have found no problem with getting the front wheel up and over any obstacle that I am able to get any of my bikes front wheels over -- I may need to gear down one gear, but I can handle that. I find no problem with bunny hopping the 29er or catching air off of small to medium obstacles -- although I must admit that the bike does seem to sometimes ask me by way of wheel and frame feedback "why I did that?" when it wasn't necessary... LOL!. I certainly would agree that the 69er would be much more stable and controllable(sp?) down steeps than a 26er ... and probably similar to a 29er until you got to anything that the larger rear wheel would help you over or down. I think that the 69er is an interesting experiment ... everyone is a bit different ... and I hope that it works well for those that spring for the concept.

    Cheers... Dave
    "To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the best product of civilization"... Bertrand Russell

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Rubicon
    I think that the 69er is an interesting experiment ... everyone is a bit different ... and I hope that it works well for those that spring for the concept.

    Cheers... Dave
    IMO, the 69er experiment is over. The 69er platform has been proven to work and it works incredibly well.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    794
    I test road both the trek 69er 3X9 model and a gary fisher Rig this past week.

    I am almost 300 lbs and like to throw bikes around.

    I know comparing a single speed 29er to a 69er geared is like apples to oranges, but just riding some easy terrain and curb hopping I preferred the 69er. I felt like I could toss the bike around easily, and the front wheel is so easy to pop up in the air if you want to to go over roots, rocks, curbs, etc.

    The rig felt awesome and would be awesome if you are on single track with very few hills or a race situation. Once you get the rig rolling that sucker flies, but I still think for my riding style I prefer the 69er. I guess I should have road the 69er single speed, but my wallet can't handle such a purchase, with med school loans and all haha.


    Test ride both and see for yourself. I still like the idea of a 29er and 26er rim on a bike. Best of both worlds does say it all.

    Still haven't made up my mind on which bike to buy a 29er or 69er but I will ride a few more 29er's and decide in June.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bogmonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    451

    Best of both....

    I am in the process of having a white Ind. eno rear wheel built for ss duty, and have gears for tougher rides. Loving this thing for screwing around on!!!! wheelies and bunny hops seem so easy!!

    Bog

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by palmermtb
    IMO, the 69er experiment is over. The 69er platform has been proven to work and it works incredibly well.
    It pleases me that you are pleased with your "platform" selection.

    Cheers... Dave
    "To be able to fill leisure intelligently is the best product of civilization"... Bertrand Russell

  33. #33
    Ground Pounder
    Reputation: MrHappyMedium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    310
    To those who will be attending the Sea Otter and are on the edge about 29er vs 69er I have news. I emailed Trek and they'll have Fisher 29ers and Trek 69ers at Sea Otter. The 69ers will be their FS Top Fuels and the 29ers will be hardtails though. All said, not a bad way to decide for yourself. I plan on taking each out to trail 47 and having some steep climbing fun.

    Also, thanks for the constructive input from others about the bike. It's really helped.
    My bicycle gets more dirt than your 4x4.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,713
    When I attended a Trek Demo in November or December, the North East Demo van had both hardtail and Top Fuel 69ers, as well as Paragons and Hi-fi 29ers. I like the Top Fuel 69er the best of the 3 bikes I rode (Fuel EX 9.5 and Paragon). The trails were rocky and not well suited to a hardtail, not to mention the Paragon was one size too small for me. The 29 inch front wheel was very nice.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    447

    Hey moonraker...

    Hi, I just PM'd you about the bike if you've still got.

    thanks

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4

    96er for the masses

    Who needs suspension? Get a Carver SS with EBB, make it a 2ner if you ride hills, and live happy. 22 lbs w/o pedals
    Attached Images Attached Images

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bogmonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    451

    Getting some time in

    Trails are finally drying out here in MN, got a few good rides in on the bike, one pretty technical trail included.I am coming off 3 years of 29ers- ss rigid, geared rigid and front suspended and FS so i have some comparison. This bike is FUN handles everything as well as any of my 29ers even technical climbs, thats where i was worried about the rear stalling on me, but i motored up everything.
    Going to wisconsin next week for work and some riding, then to KC for some more work and riding, should be a good shakedown.

    bog.....




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.