Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 134 of 134
  1. #101
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,368
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    Improved geography is probably the best thing for increasing my mtb enjoyment.
    Gotta love spell check!
    RIDE EBIKES - DRINK BEER - REPEAT!

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    221
    So is 3x8 or 3x9 out-dated?
    Cheap parts, cant go wrong!

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    59
    Easily a dozen people in this thread. Feel free to run a search.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    59
    Sure. Depending on the definition of "component"...

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,260
    I agree to some extent, one of the riders on that particular ride though, is an unbelievable rider, one that could does everything really good( also the one who brings up the 27.5 comments mostly). I was shocked when he said that no one he has ever ridden with made that section the first time. Luck, skill or just the right place at the right time maybe?
    EXODUX Jeff

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,888
    Generally speaking the less travel you have the more big wheels help. They help with rollover an help with momentum to keep the bike moving when you hit rocks. Originally the biggest downside of bigger wheels was packaging. This can be big deal for shorter riders and more travel. However in the past 10 years much work has been done to fit 29" wheels to smaller sized bikes and longer travel bike and keep the bikes fun to ride. You can see this trend in DH bikes which have lots of travel, but only now have been getting to the point where some mfg are using 29" wheels. 29" wheels and XC racing have been around for a long time.

    What is interesting is that over the years most of 26" hold outs have moved to 27.5 wheels. The arguments you heard about 26" vs 29" are now being made about 27.5 vs 29. Part this due to availability 27.5 vs 26. Lets face it before 27.5 came out you could get a 26" wheel bikes. No is there any high end 26" bike (not fat bike and not DH bike)? All of these got replaced by 27.5 and some how the world did not end. Yes people still ride 26" bikes, but it much less common.

    Now It will take a long time to erase 27.5 from the market. There some that will not want the bigger wheels, but look for a 27.5 XC bike and they are rare and mostly geared to smaller riders who don't fit well 29" wheels. Once you get past 5'3 or 5'4" most rider can fit ok on short travel XC style 29ers.

    Personally I am 5'7" (maybe 5'8") and have ridden 26, 27.5, 27.5+, 29, and 29+. My current stable of bikes has 27.5 (with 2.6) 5" trail bike, 29 100/100 XC bike, and 29x3.0 rigid SS. I fit fine on all 3 bikes and the most nimble is actually my 29+ rigid. I think is because it is rigid and there is zero suspension dive in the turns. It also has monster truck effect where I can just plow through loose rock, but with no suspension I can't hit the really chunky stuff fast. Overall my fastest bike is my 100/100 XC 29er. That bike turns so well and flys over so much. My least nimble bike is my 27.5 trail bike. It has the longest wheelbase and by far the heaviest. It also can get hung up some rock features the other bikes roll over. However a little more speed tends to eliminate that. I do like it better with 2.6 F/R rather than 2.4/2.35 I used to have on it. That said it is pretty numble in the techy stuff ans generally I like pick my way through stuff than just blast over. All 3 bikes can handle narrow tight twisty trails. My friend has a large 29er Enduro from 2014 and he does complain about making tightswitch backs and hitting fast tight S bend curves. Seems like he cannot get the bike to change direction as quickly as I can with any of my 3 bikes. Personally I think that has little to do with wheel size and more to do with 160mm of travel and the frame size to go with it. Now maybe 160 mm of travel on 27.5 would make it more nimble, but since he spends more time dealing with big chunk the larger diameter tires do well to reduce the impact of momentum stalling OTB causing "catcher" rocks that often crop up on really rocky descents here.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5", XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,518
    Quote Originally Posted by threefire View Post
    Sure. Depending on the definition of "component"...
    Right. So not being able to buy a 27.5" frame to mount on a 27.5" frame is what's keeping companies from building 27.5" frames.

    Makes sense to me!

    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by richde View Post
    Screw physics, that's what you're doing.

    Do race cars use smaller wheels? No. What about mountain bike racing where acceleration is crucial? Nope, that doesn't work either. So you drop that argument.
    You know as much about race cars as physics...
    Niner WFO9, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), Nashbar CXSS (town/workout/gravel)

  9. #109
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,562
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Besides rims, I can't think of a single component that is specific to non-plus 27.5 bikes.

    This has been mentioned as an issue a couple times here; what am I missing?
    Aside from MTBR subforums for wheel-size specific components ( ) I don't see any basis in reality.
    Forks maybe, but I was running 27.5 wheels on 26" Fox forks before 27.5 became a thing.

    Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
    No moss...

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffw-13 View Post
    Forks maybe, but I was running 27.5 wheels on 26" Fox forks before 27.5 became a thing.
    And tires, again. Non-plus 27.5” tire selection will dwindle away as everyone moves to 29/27.5+.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,518
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffw-13 View Post
    Forks maybe, but I was running 27.5 wheels on 26" Fox forks before 27.5 became a thing.

    Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
    Right. And yes, tires too.

    Don't see any reason that non-plus tires couldn't be run on a 'plus' fork either.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Right. And yes, tires too.

    Don't see any reason that non-plus tires couldn't be run on a 'plus' fork either.
    Wouldn’t that be the same as running a non-plus 27.5 tire on a 29er fork? They have the same or similar crown to axle length don’t they? So, ya you could do it, but would jack up the geo.

  13. #113
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Aren't they bringing out 28ers?

    Supposedly a 27.5 x 2.6 is supposed to be around 28 inches high, but none of my 27.5 tires, up to 2.5 inches wide, ever measure over 27.4 inches high. In fact let me check when my 2.6 is coming in the mail! Found it, folded tire bag was behind something next to the front door. Will mount soon. I highly doubt it will be 28 inches high on a 19mm rim.

    If/when I get a 30mm or 35mm wheelset maybe it will grow taller to 28 inches, we'll see.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,549
    I thnk I've given 29ers a fair shake. I've ridden hundreds of kilometers on a bike that is as close as I can imagine to a 29" version of my 26er... same brand and model of tires, wheels, frame, and fork, same tubeless setup.

    And I still don't like the way it rides. I'm not faster. Strava says I'm a bit slower, actually.

    My 26er is now 9+ years old and north of 30,000km, I'm running out of parts for it, and there is no clear path forward.
    The above statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration

  15. #115
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: langster831's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    Conform or be cast out

  16. #116
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    I see what your saying but, wonder what % of mtb sales will need to be non-plus 27.5” for it to still be viable to continue to make components for that size. There is a lot more to keeping the 27.5” wheel size going besides having some mtb manufactures still willing to make that size frame.

    If the % of 27.5” sales drops low enough, will there be enough companies making components to support the fewer 27.5” frames being made? If this happens, what companies will still be making advancements in the 27.5” wheel size for things like forks, wheels and tires? And how much R&D are mtb manufactures really going to put into a frame with a 27.5” wheel size given what these sales trends are showing?

    Seems to me that 27.5” has not been around long, only about 5 years. If sales of that wheel size start to slow down dramatically now, just a few years after it cam out, I don’t think that there will be enough 27.5” specific bikes out in the wild it to be worth it for most companies to keep making components like forks, wheels and tires. And once that starts, then even less people will want to buy a 27.5” frame than now, putting the nail in the coffin even further for the dying wheel size.

    There will ALWAYS be a demand for 'some' wheel that's smaller than 29 inches. A demand from the current/former 26" lovers, from the BMX guys, from kids/teens/smaller riders, and last but not least from the people that just want to have fun on the trail, and not try to be the fastest out there by 5 seconds on some Strava segment.

    Also, I assume you are talking about the major US/Great Britain manufacturers. Bikes are made all over the world in dozens of countries. China is still making brand-new 26" bikes, and they are not all BSO's. The more expensive ones have 10/11 speed gearing, hydraulic brakes, decent air forks, and carbon frames. They would be perfectly fine for the average rider. And China will fill demand forever, don't worry. The US/GB manufacturers do not have a monopoly on the MTB market. I think everyone should understand that just because it's not made in the USA doesn't mean by definition it's a BSO, that's just false. And prejudiced.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  17. #117
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    I'm 66. I ride in the Wasatch with my son, who is 39 years younger than me on trails that start at 6500 feet and top out at 9500 feet. Riding with my son, still, is more fun than I can imagine and I hope to continue into my 70's. But, I need every trick in the book to hang with him - or at least make it interesting for him.

    Also, I ride with my 65 year old "lovely bride" here and in Moab and St. George. While she is slower, riding with her is also incredibly rewarding, and I want to set her up for success. Anything that improves pedalling efficiency for her will make the ride more fun for her and, after being together for over 40 years, will make it more likely that, going into my 70's, she'll be there with me as well.

    Having gear that allows you to ride harder, faster and longer does not decrease the fun level!

    I'm jealous man, I used to live in Utah for 15 years but have not mountain biked it yet. DOH!
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  18. #118
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Wheelspeed View Post
    I just lived through what some of you are speculating. I'm a veteran rider of full-suspension 26ers. Last year I was in the market for a new bike, and felt like I wanted the "spunkiness" of a 27.5er instead of going to a 29er which I figured would be a little slower feeling due to geometry, having more tire, etc.

    Looking for a lightweight trail 27.5er proved difficult. They were all + bikes. Or pretty heavy for serious enduro. And a lot of them seemed to be 27.5" bikes with fat tires put on 29er frames and I didn't want that. I really couldn't find reasonably lightweight, 27.5" full-suspension bikes with a 2.3 or 2.4 tire and about 120mm suspension. The only ones closest to that were like dedicated xc bikes.

    Over the fall and winter I noticed some reviews of 29ers that had the latest geometry and supposedly handled very well. I found one that was pretty light, 2.3 tires, not overly suspended, and bought it. So, 27.5 lost that sale because no one seemed to make a high-quality "normal" trail bike. They were all pushing me to accept a 29er geometry with 27.5" fat tires, or overly built for enduro capability. (Okay, maybe there is one out there, but I mean walking into a bike shop and seeing what's on their floor or being able to demo one... and voicing my displeasure to several bike shop employees, they admitted there wasn't much out there like I was looking for. I guess I was looking for about a 7-year-old mindset 27.5" bike, but with modern 27.5" geometry, 1x11 or 1x12, Boost, 34 forks, etc.)

    I have on an Excel spreadsheet a future 27.5 build, 23-24 lbs total weight for $2200. I may need a more expensive wheelset due to the planned XD driver so that may bump up the price to around $2400-2500 but that's still a very good deal for the weight. PM me if you want to see the individual components & their price/weight.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  19. #119
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by IPA Rider View Post
    "Tired of that 'SUV feeling' of those wagon-wheels lumbering over all in its path? Want something that brings fun back to your biking, with rowdy, dynamic handling that puts an even bigger grin on your face? That is the promise of the new smaller wheel movement that manufacturers are now pursuing. Bike designer Mike Hunt recently told us, 'we hear riders say they like what 29ers bring to the game, in terms of overall speed and roll-over capability, but the same thing that makes those things possible bring with them design constraints, and a ride feel that, while hugely capable, isn't as dynamic as what you can get with a smaller wheeled bike. We are taking a no-holds barred approach to taking advantage of what 27.5" wheels allow, to bring our customers the most fun bikes on the planet.' After a period of strong dominance of the 29 in format, many manufacturers are now turning to 27.5 as the wheel size of the future..."

    I wish I could find the article I read about a year ago, and could post it.

    A bike magazine interviewed a bunch of MTB racers, mostly XC ones, and asked them how many ride 29" for racing, and how many prefer 29" in their spare time. Almost all of them, like 95% said they use 29" for racing, whether they like it or not (I assume someone told them they had to ride one or they'd lose, or they would not get sponsored or some other story).

    They then asked what bike they prefer when they are not racing. At least 35% said they rode 27.5 off the courses, and some still rode their older 26'ers. They said when the racing is over, many of them more than ever wanted/needed to go back to a smaller tire to relax on the trail and just have fun. They need their down time too, so they like a smaller wheel for that. You would think those racers would speak out a lot if 27.5 was really going away.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  20. #120
    Pro Crastinator
    Reputation: .WestCoastHucker.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,330
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    ...many of them more than ever wanted/needed to go back to a smaller tire to relax on the trail and just have fun. They need their down time too, so they like a smaller wheel for that....
    you mean then didn't appreciate gigantic gyroscopes on their bikes? who knew...


  21. #121
    monster member
    Reputation: Wheelspeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    I have on an Excel spreadsheet a future 27.5 build, 23-24 lbs total weight for $2200. I may need a more expensive wheelset due to the planned XD driver so that may bump up the price to around $2400-2500 but that's still a very good deal for the weight. PM me if you want to see the individual components & their price/weight.
    Thank you for that offer of your 27.5" spec sheet, but it's too late. I was looking (casually) for a year for a FS 27.5" bike that was redesigned lately specifically for 27.5" wheels (not a 29er with plus tires to make 27.5" rims "work" with the 29 geometry). There were so few that I eventually gave up and bought a 29er that fit the bill. I was nervous it'd feel sluggish compared to my old 26er that I loved, but decided to try it. I used my last bike for 15 years, I'm 48 so probably won't buy another mtb.

    I think 27.5" is a good size to offer, but hopefully some companies will keep making trail 27.5" bikes with frames made specifically for 27.5" wheels. To me, comparing to the $4500 trail/XC 29er I bought at about 30 lbs, a properly made $4500 27.5er should be like 28 lbs right? With less wheel, you'd think frame tubing could be a little thinner in parts, linkages a little smaller. Even fork companies are getting lame (I think) with making 27.5" bike use 29" forks with spacers. Not an expert but I suspect a lot of 140mm 27.5" forks are the same as 29" forks, but with spacers or something? But a 29er needs longer sliders/sleeves, and the longer axle-to-crown would require extra beef to maintain stiffness, so using the same fork design for both gives 27.5" bikes more meat in the fork than really needed for a given xc/trail/whatever category.

    Some props to Intense who seemed to have some nice 27.5"-specific bikes. Unfortunately I didn't find any dealers within an hour of me so chickened out on ordering one without even riding one around a parking lot. I'm sure others too. I have other hobbies, so honestly didn't commit fully to seeking out the perfect bike. Mostly stopped in at shops every so often and never quite saw MY perfect 27er on the shop floor.

    So I'm one of those guys that caved, (but am happy with my purchase for my situation.)

    But I think the 27.5" fans will be okay... there should always be some ppl who want to hop logs or pop tail-whips off a rock to drive at least a few companies to continue making nice 27.5ers.
    Have fun!

  22. #122
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,368
    Legs and lungs, that’s all that matters if you really want to rip. Been there, done that. Good course though. Now I choose 250w and beer. Slacker? Maybe.
    RIDE EBIKES - DRINK BEER - REPEAT!

  23. #123
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by matt4x4 View Post
    So is 3x8 or 3x9 out-dated?
    Cheap parts, cant go wrong!
    I like 8/9 speeds but there is no point in keeping it 3x up front when 22/36 2x gives plenty of range anyway. You can also put a wider tire in back if you do 1x or 2x. When I had 3x last year I could only put in a 2.35 in back that actually measured 2.25, because a wider tire would hit the front derailleur in the 1st chainring. Now I can do a 2.5 or 2.6 in back, that means no need for a plus bike! Yes, the 8/9 speed parts are cheap, the chains are strong, and if you don't mind the chain falling off once in a while, and taking a few seconds to shift the front a few times an hour, there is nothing wrong at all with 8/9 speed.

    I think the 1x 'revolution' is a trend that caught on, kind of a product of its own momentum, but unless you are doing the real deal with 11-50t or 10-50t, you are robbing yourself of range either on the top and/or bottom end, period. The ironic thing about this is that if 1x was originally designed for downhill bikes, well guess what, unless you have a ride/lift up, you have to pedal UP the hill and that takes range!!! And on flat surfaces, I see these guys, many of them with 30t up front, spinning their 11t cog like crazy just to go 8 mph on the fire road back to the trailhead. No offense but they just look silly with their drivetrain choice. And let's not even get into risking future knee surgery when trying to go up steep stuff on a 1:1 drivetrain ratio, or even 0.8. No thanks, either 4.5 / 5.0 range or no 1x.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  24. #124
    2x is underrated
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    I am holding for 30ers .. That will revolutionize mtn biking forever and leave all other wheel sizes on ash heap of history. Sell your 29ers now while they are still worth something. The 26er and 27.5 already worthless.



    [or until the next big thing]

    I believe that 29 x 3.0 on a 45mm rim measures 30 inches in diameter, or maybe even a bit more. If you use a wide enough rim (or narrow rims), you can get a continuous spectrum of tire diameter ranging all the way from 25 inches to 30 inches. (26 x 1.95 is actually 25 inches high). And then you do 26" progressively wider rims and tires to get to 27 inches, then you do 27.5" progressively wider rims and tires to get to 29 inches, then do 29" progressively wider rims and tires to get over 30 inches.

    This may be why 29 x 2.6 is so popular because it is relatively close to 30 inches on a wide rim width (35-40mm). So there is some seriousness in your joke!

    ALL 25-30 inch tire diameters are there, you just have to mix and match the right tire size/width and rim widths.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  25. #125
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: langster831's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    I like the options, anything 26 or less is fun to do trials/dj/pump track. 27.5 is my fun trail bike full suspension point and shoot bomber, slow climber though. My 29er HT is the real bike if I ever feel like hammering climbs or stealing your KOM's.

    Sure, any of those bikes are interchangeable really and all are capable of doing the same thing, but some are more practical than others.

    I like options, and losing any would be a step in the wrong direction. I'm no trend setter though, not much of a follower though either.

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,888
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    ...I see these guys, many of them with 30t up front, spinning their 11t cog like crazy just to go 8 mph on the fire road back to the trailhead. No offense but they just look silly with their drivetrain choice. And let's not even get into risking future knee surgery when trying to go up steep stuff on a 1:1 drivetrain ratio, or even 0.8. No thanks, either 4.5 / 5.0 range or no 1x.
    Clearly spoken like someone who has never ridden a singlespeed.


    30x11 is a bit low top speed, but entirely manageable if you are not racing. 10-42 cassettes area actually pretty good and in the end work more smoothly than 2x systems. I used to be 3x9 guy and worried about gear range on 1x11, but once I moved to 1x11 I came to realize how good it was. No more being in the wrong chainring. I just move up or down the range and that is all. That said I do have multiple chain rings for my race bike. 28t for lots of climbing and 34t for flats. If I did not race then the 28t would probably good for everything. I can easily spin to 19mph with my 28x10. The 34x10 gets me to 24-25, but limits my ability to climb at 8% for 1 hour with the 34x42.

    Now my singlespeed is 34x19 and that spins out at 17 with 110 rpm cadence, but with standing can go 5 mph. No knees damaged. It does currently run 29x3.0 tires too.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5", XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  27. #127
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: langster831's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    Clearly spoken like someone who has never ridden a singlespeed.


    .
    Kind of makes me feel bad for the guy. He's missing out on a good time

  28. #128
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,169
    It's not the size of the wheels that matter, it's the size of your package.
    By continuing to browse my posts, you agree to accept my use of cookies.

  29. #129
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: langster831's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    It's not the size of the wheels that matter, it's the size of your package.
    UPS charges extra for that

  30. #130
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,169
    Quote Originally Posted by langster831 View Post
    UPS charges extra for that
    I've only had one package shipped in, it was a frame only from Arizona. All my other packages were picked up locally.
    By continuing to browse my posts, you agree to accept my use of cookies.

  31. #131
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: langster831's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    I've only had one package shipped in, it was a frame only from Arizona. All my other packages were picked up locally.
    Vassago?

    26ers are cheaper to ship

  32. #132
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,169
    Quote Originally Posted by langster831 View Post
    Vassago?

    26ers are cheaper to ship
    No, but the guy who sent me the package (Nimble9) is on a Vassago now I believe.
    By continuing to browse my posts, you agree to accept my use of cookies.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,489
    Quote Originally Posted by JoePAz View Post
    Clearly spoken like someone who has never ridden a singlespeed.


    30x11 is a bit low top speed, but entirely manageable if you are not racing. 10-42 cassettes area actually pretty good and in the end work more smoothly than 2x systems. I used to be 3x9 guy and worried about gear range on 1x11, but once I moved to 1x11 I came to realize how good it was. No more being in the wrong chainring. I just move up or down the range and that is all. That said I do have multiple chain rings for my race bike. 28t for lots of climbing and 34t for flats. If I did not race then the 28t would probably good for everything. I can easily spin to 19mph with my 28x10. The 34x10 gets me to 24-25, but limits my ability to climb at 8% for 1 hour with the 34x42.
    I think I topped out at ~23mph on my 30x11. I'm usually coasting above 15.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tealy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    310
    29ers won if we're talking about racing XC, enduro, and downhill. Sure.

    But not for BMX, slope style, or trials. There's also plenty of riders who just prefer smaller, stronger, lighter wheels.
    "You can be clipped in and be boring or ride flats and have a good time." - Sam Hill

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 10-07-2016, 08:19 PM
  2. Neg Rep was a Win-Win
    By dead_dog_canyon in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-21-2011, 11:00 AM
  3. Any 29ers Going Back to 26 All Mountain?
    By ABRider in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 05-22-2007, 08:18 PM

Members who have read this thread: 386

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.