For Hugh, my 29/26- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 29 of 29
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sideways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    174

    For Hugh, my 29/26

    I first tried 29/26 two years ago.
    It was on my old Spooky Pitboss, was also my first non-bmx singlespeed.
    That bike ended up a little too slack, and didn't have quick enough "turn in" qualities. However, it did prove the concept enough to me to know that I could have a fully rigid bike that didn't bludgeon my hands and wrists. I also earned 5th place at the first ever Pisgah Death March with the only single speed team to compete.

    Move forward to this late summer. Deciding to give up street riding on my mountain bike, the super stiff rigid fork and 24" rear wheel came off, and the 29" motoraptor and 26" cross-country went on. This is now the fastest rolling mountain bike I have ever ridden.

    Why 29/26? Simple.
    Front wheel is what takes the hits and therefore its size dictates smoothness.
    Rear wheel size is what dictates minimum chainstay length and therefore jumpability.
    I wanted a smooth rolling jumpable bike, so the problem presented the solution.


    My bike:
    Attached Images Attached Images
    • File Type: jpg XC.jpg (94.9 KB, 1032 views)

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Can you eleborate more on the geometry of the frame to allow you to run that set up without it feeling whacked out and also tell a little bit more about how the bike rides/feels with this set up.


    Does the 26" in the rear allow the bike to accelerate a little quicker than say a dual 29" wheeled bike?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Looks like someone else is onto this idea as well - from the Bikeman.com site:



    https://www.bikeman.com/carverbikes/96er.htm

    Geared in this photo, but it says it comes with an eccentric bottom bracket standard.

    Has anyone ever heard of Carver bikes before - or is this a Bikeman in house brand kind of thing?

  4. #4
    Cold. Blue. Steel.
    Reputation: OneGearGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,709
    Marshall
    is that a new frame or a new paintjob on your Endless?
    that is a good looking setup. are you using a KM fork?
    thanks man- i need to come in to see you at BioWheels one of these days. are you still wrenching over there?
    Adam, #2, that is
    Spinning and Grinning...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,041
    sideways: that is COOL!

    i'd love to take that for a spin around some singeltrack.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    425
    Interesting concept. This was also discussed by Michael Browne in his Dirt Rag brainfart "The Beast of the Burgh":

    http://www.dirtragmag.com/web/brainfart.php?ID=119

  7. #7
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,017
    I've done such conversions over the past 3 years as well, it's fun. My commuter is still 28x2.0 front, 26x1.95 rear. Hoovercraft like front, rock hard rear.

    Intriguing how people associate 26" with short chainstays, and it being better. All 26" bikes could easily have 410mm chainstay like a road bike, but for some reason always end up between 420-440mm. 29" Bikes are typically 445-450mm. "Big" deal, I still get around tight corners just fine, my shoulders are more of a limiting factor to turning circle than chainstay length.

    If some people need a "transition" bike, that's totally cool to me :-)
    Klok - XC - Skate - Ski

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Cloxxki
    I've done such conversions over the past 3 years as well, it's fun. My commuter is still 28x2.0 front, 26x1.95 rear. Hoovercraft like front, rock hard rear.

    Intriguing how people associate 26" with short chainstays, and it being better. All 26" bikes could easily have 410mm chainstay like a road bike, but for some reason always end up between 420-440mm. 29" Bikes are typically 445-450mm. "Big" deal, I still get around tight corners just fine, my shoulders are more of a limiting factor to turning circle than chainstay length.

    If some people need a "transition" bike, that's totally cool to me :-)
    You say transition bike, but why? What does the 29er in the rear do that is better than using a 26" tire in the rear? Could you elaborate?

  9. #9
    I speak for the trees
    Reputation: lorax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    You say transition bike, but why? What does the 29er in the rear do that is better than using a 26" tire in the rear? Could you elaborate?
    Just like the front, it rolls over things better.

  10. #10
    I'm feeling dirty, you?
    Reputation: jonowee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    855
    sideways, did you say 24" rear and 29" front?

    Got a pic?
    There's a strange grin that I have waiting to see that 29/24 bike, wonder how the weight distribution worked out on the downhills?
    I guess the HT angle would be good for high speed because that looks like a DJ bike, so the jacked up front would calm down the angle.

    Wow that's a long seatpost.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Quote Originally Posted by lorax
    Just like the front, it rolls over things better.
    Is that the only pro though? I would think it more important for the front to be 29, but not as important on the rear of the bike.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gatman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    578
    It looks interesting to me!! I would like to take it for a ride!

  13. #13
    Where's Toto?
    Reputation: endure26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,188
    Look at motocross/enduro off road motorcycles --- front rim is always 2-6 inches bigger in diameter than the rear.

    Smaller diameter rear wheel reduces weight and increases ability to get it to speed. Allows shorter chainstays. Larger front rolls over obstacles and reduces approach angle. Remember when C-dale did the 26/24 Beast? I'd like to demo a frame that was actually made to work as a 29x26 - could have some potential.

  14. #14
    Medium?
    Reputation: Fast Eddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,723
    Quote Originally Posted by lorax
    Just like the front, it rolls over things better.
    Pfffftf...

  15. #15
    giddy up!
    Reputation: donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,247
    Man, that carver bike is a [email protected] shame.

    B
    www.thepathbikeshop.com

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    what do you mean donkey?? the frame is designed to be run geared or single speed with modular dropouts and an ebb.

  17. #17
    giddy up!
    Reputation: donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    what do you mean donkey?? the frame is designed to be run geared or single speed with modular dropouts and an ebb.
    I'm just not real fond of the look of said bike.....it's hideous.

    I'm also not really into the dual wheel size idea. All the benefits of a 29 inch wheel hold true for the rear just as the front. No reason to mix the two unless you're doing a conversion sort of a thing like the original poster did.

    By the way, that spooky is sweet....just awesome. I'd ride that thing in a heartbeat, even if the wheels don't match:-)

    Just opinions, that's all:-)

    B
    www.thepathbikeshop.com

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Quote Originally Posted by donkey
    I'm just not real fond of the look of said bike.....it's hideous.

    I'm also not really into the dual wheel size idea. All the benefits of a 29 inch wheel hold true for the rear just as the front. No reason to mix the two unless you're doing a conversion sort of a thing like the original poster did.

    By the way, that spooky is sweet....just awesome. I'd ride that thing in a heartbeat, even if the wheels don't match:-)

    Just opinions, that's all:-)

    B
    I see.....gotcha.

    That bike is an Endless Lifetime.....usually they are built up 24/26 or 24/24. Not sure if Marshall's bike (co-owner I believe) is custom to run a 26" wheel in the rear on not, or whether he just squeezed a 26er in there.

  19. #19
    Cold. Blue. Steel.
    Reputation: OneGearGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,709

    26"

    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    I see.....gotcha.

    That bike is an Endless Lifetime.....usually they are built up 24/26 or 24/24. Not sure if Marshall's bike (co-owner I believe) is custom to run a 26" wheel in the rear on not, or whether he just squeezed a 26er in there.
    Endless are built around 26" wheels, but with horizontal drops and lots of space for different wheel combos. Marshall and Adam (owners of Endless) both ride 26x29 with rigid forks and SS. you can certainly get a 24" wheel in there (but i wouldn't combine it with a 29er up front).

    the other benefit to a 29" wheel in the rear (besides rolling over stuff, as mentioned above) is TRACTION. veddy, veddy important for us SSers! i think a bike with dual 29" wheels holds momentum better as well...
    Spinning and Grinning...

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    Quote Originally Posted by OneGearGuy
    Endless are built around 26" wheels, but with horizontal drops and lots of space for different wheel combos. Marshall and Adam (owners of Endless) both ride 26x29 with rigid forks and SS. you can certainly get a 24" wheel in there (but i wouldn't combine it with a 29er up front).

    the other benefit to a 29" wheel in the rear (besides rolling over stuff, as mentioned above) is TRACTION. veddy, veddy important for us SSers! i think a bike with dual 29" wheels holds momentum better as well...
    Good point on the traction comment, but I'm still pretty certain that Lifetimes were designed for 24" wheels in the rear.

    It's right in their spec's sheet on this page: http://www.endlessbikes.com/lifetime.html

  21. #21
    bicyclist
    Reputation: fish man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    Looks like someone else is onto this idea as well - from the Bikeman.com site:



    https://www.bikeman.com/carverbikes/96er.htm

    Geared in this photo, but it says it comes with an eccentric bottom bracket standard.

    Has anyone ever heard of Carver bikes before - or is this a Bikeman in house brand kind of thing?
    that bike look hilarious. i never noticed how much bigger a 29" actually was. i believe Gary Fisher made himself a bike like that for reasons explained many times throughout this thread, i think i heard him talk about in an interview i saw somewhere...
    People who really know what happened aren't talking. And the people who don't have a clue, you can't shut them up.
    Tom Waits

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sideways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    174
    Having been on a 26/24 for over four years...I've grown accustomed to the bigger front wheel concept.
    I've even come to the conclusion that it's just the right way to build a mountain bike.

    Simply put, front and rear wheels serve two differant purposes.
    The front has far more to do with rolling over things smoothly than the rear does.
    I could elaborate, but riding experiance alone should expose this fact.
    The rear wheel always needs to be stronger than the front.
    While being a matter of preferance, it's generally safe to say that a slight ammount of oversteer is better than a plowing front end.
    A smaller diameter wheel is both much stronger, and for a given tire width has a smaller contact patch area to yeild a sharper traction response.


    If you simply want to stay grounded and stable, a stretch limo dual 29er can guarantee that.
    If its catching air and raising hell unholy, 26/24 is the clear machine.
    However, for rides longer than a 2hr - sprint, but less than a 12+hr epic, I beleive a 29/26 is the definitive way to go.
    And if you are like me, that's what defines the typical mountain bike ride.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    188
    What fork is that? looks like either non-suspension corrected 29 or a corrected 26.

    Thanks

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sideways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by KaiMana
    What fork is that? looks like either non-suspension corrected 29 or a corrected 26.

    Thanks
    Its a surly instigator. Its really short, so the tall wheel doesn't mess my angles up.
    I'm wanting something a little stronger and american made quality.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: firefox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by OneGearGuy
    the other benefit to a 29" wheel in the rear (besides rolling over stuff, as mentioned above) is TRACTION. veddy, veddy important for us SSers!
    Yeah, because my 26" wheels are constantly losing traction... In fact, I bet a search of the forums would bring up countless examples of this phenomenon.

    (ff)

  26. #26
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,017
    The traction thing is true, and for most needs to be witnessed to be believed. Blasting up an ultra-slippery snot climb in the '04 Willingen Marathon in Germany will always stay with me. Dozens or rahter hundreds of fellow bikers trying to push their bikes up, and me just flying past, with a violently slipping, but holding rear WTB Nanoraptor. I had a short night and bad breakbad before that, so it was all I accomplished that day, I was glad to impress in some way at least. I never rode MX, but it must feel a bit like my experience then.

    What goes for climbing also goes for braking. If the rear can take up more before it skids, you can suffice with less front, or use it to just brake later.
    As 29" tires improve voer the coming years, I can see how it at one point will be hard to find a 96er that doesn't oversteer.

    Oh, with a larger rear wheel, you climb steeper with the front wheel more firmly to the ground/wall you're climbing. Scientifically right, but only believed when tried. 29"ers are harder to wheelie or endo. Try a 20" bike to test that, and wear good padding.
    Klok - XC - Skate - Ski

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: VT Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by endure26
    Look at motocross/enduro off road motorcycles --- front rim is always 2-6 inches bigger in diameter than the rear.

    Smaller diameter rear wheel reduces weight and increases ability to get it to speed. Allows shorter chainstays. Larger front rolls over obstacles and reduces approach angle. Remember when C-dale did the 26/24 Beast? I'd like to demo a frame that was actually made to work as a 29x26 - could have some potential.
    I think 29/26 would make more sense on a full suspension bike. It seems like there is more benefit having a 29" front wheel than there is having a 29" rear wheel, and you have to make too many frame design compromises to get 4" of travel with a 29" rear wheel. If I had the money, I'd love to test this idea out with a custom Racer-X.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sideways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    174
    Oh damn....the title was supposed to be "for shiggy"....I'm dislexic and looked way off from where shiggy asked to see my 29/26er.

    Oops.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: firefox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by Cloxxki
    The traction thing is true, and for most needs to be witnessed to be believed. Blasting up an ultra-slippery snot climb in the '04 Willingen Marathon in Germany will always stay with me. Dozens or rahter hundreds of fellow bikers trying to push their bikes up, and me just flying past, with a violently slipping, but holding rear WTB Nanoraptor.
    Maybe *you* are a much better rider than the droves of people running/walking their bikes.

    Not to argue, but what you can do as a strong and skilled rider is so much more important than the difference in traction (acceleration, momentum, rollover, etc.) between a 26" wheel vs. a 29" wheel. You, as a rider, can make up for these minute differences (if they do truly exist and don't already cancel each other out). This, in my humble opinion, is the one thing that separates most riders. How many times do you see a sh!tty rider on a pimped out bike... likewise, how many times do you see a skilled rider on an average bike?

    (ff)

Similar Threads

  1. Tail Dragger 29/26
    By imtb in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-26-2004, 12:01 AM

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.