Thoughts and Comments on Trek's 69er- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 36 of 36
  1. #1
    Looking to Start Racing
    Reputation: TREK 4 Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    185

    New question here. Thoughts and Comments on Trek's 69er

    Well I hope that this thread like most of my others doesn't get ignored (I feel so let down )

    Well as some of you know, I converted my 05 Trek 4300 into the glorious SS it now is. I love it. But as awesome as it is, I feel a strong compelling force towards the Trek "69er". Now I haven't heard if it's a for sure going to be a production for this fall, but I sure hope it is. And I am even more hoping that it will have a pink option, as I really want to see if I can pull off a pink bike. I like rare things, so a 29/26 PINK bike, isn't exactly common place. My buddies will all laugh at me, but as they eat dust, I'll be the one laughing.

    Ok, to the actual point of this thread. What are peoples thoughts on this peticular frame idea? Has anyone found any info on it?

    Now, I have seen two different dropouts for this bike. One was the sliding dropouts like Kona uses, and another was a chain-tug version. Personally one of the most appealing aspects was the Sliding dropouts. For my style of riding, a tensor works ok, but I would like to eliminate it without the use of the Eno hub. Also I like the idea of having the bigger front wheel, while still having the normal rear wheel. Every review I read about 29ers seems to point toward the front having 90% of the benefit of the 29er design.


    Comments are very much requested. From "pinks for girls" to "The 69er is a fad", and hopefully alot about "great idea, good design, deffinetly go for it" Any comments please. My posts seem to have like 100+ viewing, and 2 postings.
    Evolve or Die

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    908
    I'm also interested in this bike. It's not a "new" idea but the fact the Trek is going to do this is good for the 29er movement.

    As for the front wheel being 90% important to the 29" advantage, heck, the front wheel is 90% important to any mountain bike, IMO. If Travis Brown is into this bike then I have to believe that there is some merit to it regardless of what dropouts are used.

    What I am REALLY interested in is the pricepoint. What will this bike cost us with the cool Maverick fork????
    There are three kinds of people: those of us that are good at math and those that are not.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 24601's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,128
    I just converted my Trek 4300 too, and I have also been looking at this new Trek option. I think it is a great design. I am saving my pennies now, just in case.

  4. #4
    Master Gardener
    Reputation: Velokid1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,347
    A buddy of mine is old friends with Travis Brown and spoke with him at Iron Horse this year. Travis raves about his 69'er 10x more intensely off-the-record than he does in interviews, even. I'm inclined to open my ears wide when old schoolers like Travis are talking!

  5. #5
    34N 118W
    Reputation: Hollywood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,246
    Quote Originally Posted by TREK 4 Life
    Now, I have seen two different dropouts for this bike. One was the sliding dropouts like Kona uses, and another was a chain-tug version. Personally one of the most appealing aspects was the Sliding dropouts. For my style of riding, a tensor works ok, but I would like to eliminate it without the use of the Eno hub. Also I like the idea of having the bigger front wheel, while still having the normal rear wheel. Every review I read about 29ers seems to point toward the front having 90% of the benefit of the 29er design.
    Comments are very much requested. From "pinks for girls" to "The 69er is a fad", and hopefully alot about "great idea, good design, deffinetly go for it" Any comments please. My posts seem to have like 100+ viewing, and 2 postings.
    here's a couple shots of Travis bike from this year's Sea Otter:
    <img src="https://gallery.mtbr.com/data/mtbr/738/23404369er2.jpg"border=5>

    <img src="https://gallery.mtbr.com/data/mtbr/624/23404369er.jpg"border=5>

    Like VeloKid said, while speaking with Travis he was very impressed with the bike and loved the Mav. fork as well. It didn't let him down on race day either

    hw

    PS - pink is SO '05. It's time to mix it up if you're going to wow this crowd, T4L. Metallic purple to metallic charcoal fade? Bass boat blue? c'mon now....get creative. Or send it to Spectrum and tell them to surprise you.

  6. #6
    Looking to Start Racing
    Reputation: TREK 4 Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    185
    Wow, OMG, do I ever love that bike. I'm abit skeptical of the fork, but if Travis likes it, then golden. But do you think you could use say a Reba 29er?

    As for the colour, well....I still would like it in pink....you know how it is when you get your mind set.

    And I love those drop-outs. They are great.

    Thanks for the info. If anyone else has anything to add, please do.

    Also thanks for the pics, I saw a small pick of that bike and didn't know if it came before or after the pink one. So thanks again.
    Evolve or Die

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 24601's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,128
    Any more specifics on the bike? Will it see production? Any idea of frame material, cost, componetry, etc?

  8. #8
    Looking to Start Racing
    Reputation: TREK 4 Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    185
    Personally I hope it comes in a Frame Only "option". I want to build it myself.

    So far Travis has been using a ZR 9000 frame. But Trek recently made a OCLV version for a "special" trek fan. So it is possible to make it OCLV. But I would want it in the Aluminum.
    Evolve or Die

  9. #9
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,937

    Nice looking bike...

    I'd like to see it with a rigid fork. I think that would make a much more balanced bike. Seems to me like a 29 up front with a suspended fork is a mismatch for the rear end.

    But hey, what do I know.

    Awesome paint job.

    Mike

  10. #10
    Looking to Start Racing
    Reputation: TREK 4 Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    185
    I'm just not cut out for rigid. But hey, all the power to those who do.

    So I am kinda glad it has a sus fork, but I still say I would prefer a Reba 29er.
    Evolve or Die

  11. #11
    just like a speeder-bike
    Reputation: Barkdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    329
    Ok, here's some random comments:

    First of all, I want that bike. Seems like a perfect compromise for those of us not-so-tall types (I'm 5'9'') who feel a little compromised when climbing aboard massive 29'' wheels.

    Second, didn't Trek sorta blatantly copy the Carver "96'er" idea (see http://carverbikes.com)? Or was Trek the first to the game? I don't really care about the 'idea' copying (in fact, more companies should experiment with this!), but assuming Trek was second to this concept after Carver (which could be wrong), copying the name (well, ok, reversing it) makes me feel a little bad for the underdog.

    Third and finally, anybody ridden the Carver version? MBA did a write up a few months ago, if I recall correctly they were very enthused. Trek's version is definitely better-looking... holy cow, it's hot.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miSSionary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,566
    Quote Originally Posted by TREK 4 Life
    Wow, OMG, do I ever love that bike. I'm abit skeptical of the fork, but if Travis likes it, then golden. But do you think you could use say a Reba 29er?

    As for the colour, well....I still would like it in pink....you know how it is when you get your mind set.

    And I love those drop-outs. They are great.

    Thanks for the info. If anyone else has anything to add, please do.

    Also thanks for the pics, I saw a small pick of that bike and didn't know if it came before or after the pink one. So thanks again.
    TREK 4 Life,
    I think it is a great idea and I think Trek took their time making a good ride out of it. Yes, the dropouts look very functional. Pink's cool, go with it if that is what you want. Spectrum does do amazing work (in case you get it and have to paint it as pink may not be an option). Also, I'd truly consider the fork in the pic over the reba, it truly is a much better fork IMHO. Either way, have fun with it.
    Black Sheep...where it'ss at!!
    "I'm not known for my patience. Patience is a polite quality and often appropriate, but it rarely gets things done. Impatience, however, is the hunger for results and intolerance for excuses and delays." LA

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PeanutButterBreath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,565

    96ers

    If you are dubious of the difference between 26" & 29" wheels, a 96er can be a revelation. I have a Ti frame with a Pace fork that I had been riding with 26" wheels front and rear. It occured to me that I could take the front wheel off of my KM and put it on the front end of the Ti bike and still have reasonable angles. Being Ti and CF, it was already a smooth bike for a full rigid set up. But with the 29" front wheel though, you can distinctly feel a delay as the front end glides over rough terrain that the rear end is bumped around by.

    It is definitely a step up from a rigid 26" front end, and while not as smooth as a suspended 26" front end, I personally think the weight savings, steering precision and climbing efficiency give it an edge there too.

    I think the Maverick fork on the front end is kind of overkill for XC racing unless you are dead-set against rigid forks. The Trek 69er with a Pace 29er fork would probably be pretty sweet.

  14. #14
    gls
    gls is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    48
    Back in the day (70's) I rode off road motorcycles. Tons of bikes had a 21" front rim and 18" back. It's not a new idea, at any rate. I sure wish I had a time machine so I could take a nice MTB back and show it to the guys I raced with. It would have blown their minds.

  15. #15
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,659

    29/26 is not a new idea

    Quote Originally Posted by Barkdog
    ...didn't Trek sorta blatantly copy the Carver "96'er" idea (see http://carverbikes.com)? Or was Trek the first to the game? ... holy cow, it's hot.
    I was riding 29-front/26-rear in '03 (BTW I didn't originate the idea back then, either). Although I have since reverted back to 26/26, the 29/26 combo rode well.

    --Sparty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  16. #16
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,937

    Why the switch back?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus
    I was riding 29-front/26-rear in '03 (BTW I didn't originate the idea back then, either). Although I have since reverted back to 26/26, the 29/26 combo rode well.

    --Sparty
    Was the geometry of the bike not set up for it?

    What's the deal?

  17. #17
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J
    Was the geometry of the bike not set up for it?

    What's the deal?
    I rode the 29/26 for a month or two that summer with a rigid (KM) fork. The geometry was fine with the rigid fork but wouldn't have been right with a sus fork. I decided I wanted to go back to my 5" Fox Vanilla fork so that forced me back to the little wheel up front.

    Then my buddy Justin folded his front wheel on his 29er so I sold him my 29er wheel... there went my option to switch back to the big wheel.

    Just about the only disadvantage I can think of for running two different size wheels on the same bike is having to carry two different sized spare tubes. And even then, I s'pose a guy could just carry a 29er tube and not worry about using it with a 26" tire... or could he?

    --Sparty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    151
    I was curious at first, and now I'm fixated on converting my 26" wheel frame, with a 29" wheel up front. I've been reading about how the editor at Dirt Rag and John Constanello have been tweaking with the idea. The only problem is, the more I want a rigid/disc setup in the front, more I want Horz dropouts/ Discs in the back. Thats a lot of work to a 96' (no pun intended) frame with verts and rim brakes. I might just need a new bike...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,023
    Or you could runs UST rims and tires with Stans and forget about carrying tubes. If you only want to carry one size tube, carry a 26" tube. It will stretch to fit a 29" wheel whereas a 29" tube is too big for a 26" wheel and may wrinkle or fold and cause a flat.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,023
    Does anybody know the frame specs, particularly the angles?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miSSionary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,566
    Quote Originally Posted by meloh1
    Or you could runs UST rims and tires with Stans and forget about carrying tubes. If you only want to carry one size tube, carry a 26" tube. It will stretch to fit a 29" wheel whereas a 29" tube is too big for a 26" wheel and may wrinkle or fold and cause a flat.
    You should still carry tubes or patch kits. I keep seeing people in need of help on their 50+ mile epics because they were so sure and proud of their Stans. I don't have anything against stans but if you are riding out in the middle of nowhere you should have the supplies to fix your bike.
    Black Sheep...where it'ss at!!
    "I'm not known for my patience. Patience is a polite quality and often appropriate, but it rarely gets things done. Impatience, however, is the hunger for results and intolerance for excuses and delays." LA

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,023
    There's exceptions to every rule. On the general whole you're pretty safe with Stans.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miSSionary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,566
    Yep, you are pretty safe with Stans...but when you do have a failure it is usually catastrophic. I mean is it really that big of a deal to be prepared and carry the .0001lbs patch kit or an extra tube?? I've just helped too many people telling me Stans is the answer and that they don't need to carry a spare anything, 6 miles later I am giving them tubes...for like $20 each...$5 for the tube...$15 for being unprepared and dogging me for carrying extra weight!!
    Black Sheep...where it'ss at!!
    "I'm not known for my patience. Patience is a polite quality and often appropriate, but it rarely gets things done. Impatience, however, is the hunger for results and intolerance for excuses and delays." LA

  24. #24
    highly visible
    Reputation: GlowBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus
    And even then, I s'pose a guy could just carry a 29er tube and not worry about using it with a 26" tire... or could he?
    Or just carry a 26" tube. They work fine in 29" wheels.
    "People like GloyBoy are deaf. They are partisan, intellectually lazy & usually very angry." -Jaybo

  25. #25
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,017
    In winter 2000/2001 I converted a VooDoo to 29/26 with a rigid fork. Kept geometry perfectly as meant by Joe Murray. I was SO glad when I finally got a fullbred 29"er, the difference a slightly larger wheel makes for actual riding...
    It's a great theory though. Golden compromise, best of both worlds...

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,023
    Patch kits do little good on UST tires that have Stans in them. A tube would be the only sure way. Do you really try and get $20 out of those poor souls? I can see $5 for a tube but and extra $15. Last guy I helped out had to force the $5 on me for the tube.

  27. #27
    MaineMud
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    121

    Carver 96er...

    Quote Originally Posted by Riding for Sanity
    I was curious at first, and now I'm fixated on converting my 26" wheel frame, with a 29" wheel up front. I've been reading about how the editor at Dirt Rag and John Constanello have been tweaking with the idea. The only problem is, the more I want a rigid/disc setup in the front, more I want Horz dropouts/ Discs in the back. Thats a lot of work to a 96' (no pun intended) frame with verts and rim brakes. I might just need a new bike...
    Might be easier to just buy one of our 96er frames... disc and V brake mounts, 3.5 pounds, our own creak-proof eccentric bottom bracket. Designed around a Reba 29, Karate Monkey or Pace RC29. $399.95 and you're there.....

    www.carverbikes.com

    ..just a thought...

    Best

    Davis Carver

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    42
    Had my Carver for about six months now. Very impressed with the handling of the bike, they have the geometry correct in my opinion. Currently set up full rigid, single speed and disk but have run it with a Reba and gears as well. The price for the frame is a true value as well since you get the eccentric shell with the frame.

    Shey Lindner
    Georgia singletrack

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,023
    To answer my own question, Trek says the 69er was built to the same specs as Browns 9.8 hardtail. Head angle on the 9.8 is 70.9 and seat angle is 73.1 for a 19.5 inch frame.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    I have given some thought to going 29er up front on my Inbred. The 440mm rigid fork I have should accomodate a 29 wheel (or am I wrong with this assumption?), but of course I will need disk breaks up front. I would not mind to stick to V-brakes, but then I think would need to go to a 470mm fork built for 29er wheels. That would change the geometry way too much however.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PeanutButterBreath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,565

    Good job!

    A 440mm fork will fit a 29er wheel no problem. If you had a Pace fork with the clamp on brake bosses, you could just move them up.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    151
    That's a good idea, pretty cool coming from "The Man" himself. I just gotta find a purpose for my 10 year old Diamondback frame that I can't let go of...

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by SHEY
    Had my Carver for about six months now. Very impressed with the handling of the bike, they have the geometry correct in my opinion. Currently set up full rigid, single speed and disk but have run it with a Reba and gears as well. The price for the frame is a true value as well since you get the eccentric shell with the frame.

    Shey Lindner
    Georgia singletrack
    Hey Shey,
    What rigid fork are you running? Feel free to PM me if you feel that question is too OT.
    Sorry for going even further OT, but I am really intrigued by the 29/26 idea, and that Carver looks really sweet. Anybody want to buy a Bianchi GUSS frame (17.5") and Reba Team fork?

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    Thanks PeanutButterBreath that is another good option.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeMorris
    Hey Shey,
    What rigid fork are you running? Feel free to PM me if you feel that question is too OT.
    Sorry for going even further OT, but I am really intrigued by the 29/26 idea, and that Carver looks really sweet. Anybody want to buy a Bianchi GUSS frame (17.5") and Reba Team fork?
    Currently running the On-One fork but have tried the Pace as well. Bontrager has a new carbon 29 fork that iv'e had my eye on.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by SHEY
    Currently running the On-One fork but have tried the Pace as well. Bontrager has a new carbon 29 fork that iv'e had my eye on.
    Thanks Shey. I am now thinking of Frankenbiking the GUSS to try the concept out before I spring for a new frame.
    Thanks again.

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.