Trek 69er- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 82 of 82

Thread: Trek 69er

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KeepItSimpleSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    268

    Trek 69er

    Has anyone ridden this bike yet? How's it ride? I love the maverick fork, but does the front end seem heavy with a 29" wheel on a SS?

    It sure does look sweet though!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    272
    As far as I know not out yet... but we shall see! We're getting one in.. looks really cool! Smaller sizes get the SC maverick fork, larger sizes get the DC maverick fork.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,583
    Should be out in January, quick question though, did Trek put the price up in the USA even pre-launch? They have over here it was going to be 1299 and now its going to be a whopping 1500!!!

  4. #4
    (Ali)
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Just J
    did Trek put the price up in the USA even pre-launch?
    The US Trek site says MSRP $1650 less a penny :-p

    http://www2.trekbikes.com/bikes/bike.php?f=17

    Ali

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FrontRanger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,469
    So are the small sizes going to be cheaper?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    266
    that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    151

    Re

    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!
    Travis Brown doesn't think so, he's the one that asked Trek to build it. And now he kicks everyone's butt at the SS Races with this bike.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    mboeder: that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!

    What exactly is so "stupid" about it?
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Espresso's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    52

    Thinking of getting this 69er

    Playing around with the idea of getting Trek's 69er, makes sense to me ( the 69er aspect), My first reaction was Fugly! but I kept looking back.
    I will convert my 1FG to a commuter rig, (a more child trailer friendly bike).
    If you plan on using a regular fork mount rack with Treks 69er, then you will need an adapter for the Maverick fork ($50)

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    40
    While it may be expensive, at least you have the option of not buying it. TREK aren't even releasing it here in Australia. We just have to make do with odd, but expensive, SPOT, ON ONE and (rare) GUNNAR frames.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dangomushi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    49
    I gotta say,
    I'm eyeballing that thing pretty hard, and with my bonus coming in January..................
    Here's hoping my wife won't notice another bike.

  12. #12
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,017
    If the bike would have been equipped to accept a 29" rear wheel for those that prefer that, it would have been a huge seller. As is, the bike can't even be raced in most of the races I take part in. Perhaps with a 7" fork and 26" front wheel...

  13. #13
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: rattmobbins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by FrontRanger
    So are the small sizes going to be cheaper?
    The 15.5" is the only size that comes with the SC, and I would think it would be a tad cheaper. Not sure though.

    Anyone have an idea of what a 17.5" will weigh? That thing looks cooler and cooler the more I see it!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyclodan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!
    Hmm why is it that the "69er/96er/reverse mullet" bike elicits such strong negative reactions from people who have most likely never thrown a leg over one?
    On another forum a mention of a 69er garnered the response that it doesn't make sense.
    "Why would you only want half the benefits of a 29er?"
    Well couldn't one ask why ride a hardtail, you know, only half the benefit of suspension?
    Here's the closing line from a recent review of a custom 26/29 bike in a certain bike mag...
    "all this 29" stability and smoothness, but without losing the snappy, quick get-up-and-go climbing bite of a 26" bike".
    Personally I think the Trek bike looks BADA$$. I want one!

  15. #15
    Only 525,600 minutes/year
    Reputation: mcoco01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    28
    Yeah, I was interested in one of those and the guys at the local shop said they're going to be really limited edition so almost impossibe to get, especially in my size. But a few of them rode it up in Wisc at Trek and they said it was sweet. About 21lbs and rode great.

  16. #16
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: rattmobbins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    209
    21 lbs???

    Wow, that is CRAZY light!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rocpyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    355
    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!

    Looks like it needs a nosejob or something.
    Last edited by rocpyro; 11-12-2006 at 01:38 AM.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bicyclelist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    465
    I WANT ONE! or five

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: erol/frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    488
    Thinking of doing something similar to my Chameleon... The concept sounds very intruiging in theory. Finding a 29"-fork is the easy part, but parting with my 26" Gazza 3.0 will be hard. Maybe if we all mail the Finns and demand a 29" Gazza 3.0 they`ll custommold a few for us...?
    Last edited by erol/frost; 11-12-2006 at 04:29 AM.
    WTB: Ritchey Plexus
    DiNotte 200 lights

    automobiliana.blogspot.se

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    214

    my 69er

    Just done this to my Rumble - 100mm 29er Rebas, Bontrager Race Light front wheel, Jones tyre. The angles are quite slack, but I like it like that.


  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    155

    Check this out....

    Siren 55'r baby!
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=234253
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by onegearqueer; 11-12-2006 at 11:29 AM. Reason: ad pic

  22. #22
    mtbnj.com
    Reputation: walter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    414
    This isn't really that new of a concept, Carver bikes has been doing it for a while, but since its Trek, it will get alot more attention.

    walter
    You guys live or plan on coming to New Jersey, check out mtbnj.com

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyclodan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    111
    BTW that $1649.00 price tag turns out to be for the frame and fork only. Complete bikes will be well in excess of 2 grand. And yes probably very limited numbers. I'm bummed as I was hoping to get an employee puchase and it doesn't look like there will be any available to EP.

  24. #24
    you go ahead
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by robkhoo
    Just done this to my Rumble - 100mm 29er Rebas, Bontrager Race Light front wheel, Jones tyre. The angles are quite slack, but I like it like that.

    Do you ride xc with that bike?

    looks sweet

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 24601's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by cyclodan
    BTW that $1649.00 price tag turns out to be for the frame and fork only. Complete bikes will be well in excess of 2 grand. And yes probably very limited numbers. I'm bummed as I was hoping to get an employee puchase and it doesn't look like there will be any available to EP.
    You sure about that? The site shows nothing fo the sort. Shows the complete bike at that price with all the components listed.
    "Kurt is up in heaven now."

    RIP Vonnegut

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBearings
    Do you ride xc with that bike?

    looks sweet

    Yup, XC all the way for me. It's not as heavy as it looks, 25lb or so, and it certainly isn't likely to break soon.

  27. #27
    R I D E S T E E L
    Reputation: one1spede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    646
    Looks like it would be unstable. As it sits, the BB is actually higher than the rear hub. Well, if it works, then enjoy!

  28. #28
    R I D E S T E E L
    Reputation: one1spede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    646
    I'll admit this looks strange. I have no problem with the general concept. Ride what you like. But it looks like the geo needs to be tightened up. The chainstays look really long, and a 69 degree head angle? Looks like this is make for riding fire roads and such.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by one1spede
    Looks like it would be unstable. As it sits, the BB is actually higher than the rear hub. Well, if it works, then enjoy!

    The BB is actually a bit below the axle, the chainstays are slightly dropped, and run to a point below the axle. Doesn't feel particularly high off of the ground. Any unstability is generally down to me.

  30. #30
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    doesn't anyone remember the beast of the east?

    dumb bike. you have to have two types of tubes with you, two different spare rims on hand, plus the 29" front wheel makes it really suck for riders under 6' tall.

    the question is, why? when they could have built a solid 26" single bike that they lack in their lineup. does trek have to screw up every dirt bike they make?

  31. #31
    R I D E S T E E L
    Reputation: one1spede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    646
    Cool, I'm glad it works for you. Sounds like you're enjoying it, which is all that matters.

  32. #32
    velocipede technician
    Reputation: hollister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,874
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    doesn't anyone remember the beast of the east?

    dumb bike. you have to have two types of tubes with you, two different spare rims on hand, plus the 29" front wheel makes it really suck for riders under 6' tall.

    the question is, why? when they could have built a solid 26" single bike that they lack in their lineup. does trek have to screw up every dirt bike they make?
    i remember

    it was actually pretty cool, for its intended purpose.

    why you allways bashing everything dude?
    looking for 20-21" P team

  33. #33
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by hollister
    why you allways bashing everything dude?
    ...because most of the product development on the stuff that works has been done, so now all we can worry about the color it comes in. The "wild and zany" new stuff is usually rehashed crap that can originally be seen in Sharp's Bicycles and Tricycles originaly publish in 1896. in over a hundred years the fittest has survived.

    we will really only see suble evolutionary changes as matirial technologies allow expensive or previously impossible designs to be made affordable for the bicycle market. from what i see, most of the market cannot do math well enough or understand design well enough to make decisions that arn't anything more than religous in nature. take the fisher suger as an example; i wonder why all those seat stays kept snapping? or why race face hollow tech II bb's freeze solid? simple explainations exist, but are rarely discussed.

    we did the Beast of the East. it didn't survive because the problems it solved were either non-existant or created more than it solved.

  34. #34
    conjoinicorned
    Reputation: ferday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,525
    we will really only see suble evolutionary changes as matirial technologies allow expensive or previously impossible designs to be made affordable for the bicycle market. blah blah...
    too bad there's no substance behind your eloquance.

    simple explainations exist, but are rarely discussed
    ok, put it simply for us. i'm 5'6", my 29er fits fine...explain please.
    what would rainbow unicorn do?

  35. #35
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by ferday
    ok, put it simply for us. i'm 5'6", my 29er fits fine...explain please.
    do you understand what comprimises were made to the frame geometry to prevent catastrophic TCO? or did they just keep a dangerous TCO to make the bike handle correctly?

  36. #36
    you go ahead
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by robkhoo
    Yup, XC all the way for me. It's not as heavy as it looks, 25lb or so, and it certainly isn't likely to break soon.


    nice bike
    Last edited by RustyBearings; 12-30-2006 at 10:59 PM.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndrewTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,949
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    do you understand what comprimises were made to the frame geometry to prevent catastrophic TCO? or did they just keep a dangerous TCO to make the bike handle correctly?
    TCO = ???????
    I ..... need ..... DIRT!!!!!

    ... and cookies. :D

  38. #38
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTO
    TCO = ???????
    TOE CLIP OVERLAP. It is an old term that framebuilders use to describe the relationship between the front wheel and the foot of the rider. while it can be somewhat bad on some performance bikes, it gets really bad when a 29" wheel is put on an MTB. this can be desasterous in slow speed technicle or hard turning where the foot and wheel crash together.

    i just wrote a detailed explaination of my case on my wiki: https://www.pvdwiki.com/index.php?title=29_Inch_MTBs

    here is the graphic that i use to explain myself:

  39. #39
    MaineMud
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    121

    Beast of the east...

    I had one. Pretty cool bike. 26" front and back with a wicked high bottom bracket. Not so hot downhill at speed (ouch) but great for hopping around and your pedals NEVER hit.

    26" tubes work great in 29" tires.....

    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    doesn't anyone remember the beast of the east?

    dumb bike. you have to have two types of tubes with you, two different spare rims on hand, plus the 29" front wheel makes it really suck for riders under 6' tall.

    the question is, why? when they could have built a solid 26" single bike that they lack in their lineup. does trek have to screw up every dirt bike they make?

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    214
    Just measured my bb height - 13 inches. Bombs downhill quite nicely, thanks very much.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    590
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    TOE CLIP OVERLAP. It is an old term that framebuilders use to describe the relationship between the front wheel and the foot of the rider. while it can be somewhat bad on some performance bikes, it gets really bad when a 29" wheel is put on an MTB. this can be desasterous in slow speed technicle or hard turning where the foot and wheel crash together.

    i just wrote a detailed explaination of my case on my wiki: https://www.pvdwiki.com/index.php?title=29_Inch_MTBs

    here is the graphic that i use to explain myself:

    You, are an idiot!
    Have you ever ridden a 29er or did you just put a 29" wheel on your kiddy bike and found it did not work, so the is no way anyone under 6' or who has toes could possibly ride a 29er!
    There are so many assumptions wrong with your echa sketch I will not bother further.
    Idiot!

  42. #42
    Bored
    Reputation: bigwheelboy_490's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,982
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    TOE CLIP OVERLAP. It is an old term that framebuilders use to describe the relationship between the front wheel and the foot of the rider. while it can be somewhat bad on some performance bikes, it gets really bad when a 29" wheel is put on an MTB. this can be desasterous in slow speed technicle or hard turning where the foot and wheel crash together.

    i just wrote a detailed explaination of my case on my wiki: https://www.pvdwiki.com/index.php?title=29_Inch_MTBs

    here is the graphic that i use to explain myself:
    Looking at your diagram, I guess small road riders using 700C wheels are ineffective, so really, unless someone is over 6", they should be using a 650C road bike?

    Everyone likes different things. Yes, you may give up a bit on CERTAIN aspects of fit when riding a 29'er, but you also gain some benefits too. Riders on 26" may get a fit benefit, but loose performace in other areas.

    Ride your bike and be nice to strippers. They could be giving you your next lap dance.
    MTBR is serious stuff.
    You never get better until you get out of your comfort zone.

  43. #43
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    awsome!

    give a proof and people that have no understanding of it make corrections.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndrewTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    3,949
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    TOE CLIP OVERLAP. It is an old term that framebuilders use to describe the relationship between the front wheel and the foot of the rider. while it can be somewhat bad on some performance bikes, it gets really bad when a 29" wheel is put on an MTB. this can be desasterous in slow speed technicle or hard turning where the foot and wheel crash together.

    i just wrote a detailed explaination of my case on my wiki: https://www.pvdwiki.com/index.php?title=29_Inch_MTBs

    here is the graphic that i use to explain myself:
    Ah, I get it now. I actually heard the ol' TCO in effect from a fellow rider a few days ago ..... totally freaked me out because it's been years snce i've heard the sound of a tire rubbing against a shoe.

    Thanks for the explanation, Peter.
    I ..... need ..... DIRT!!!!!

    ... and cookies. :D

  45. #45
    29er Geek
    Reputation: tozovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by mboeder
    that is the stupidest bike ive ever seen!
    ...and you are an ignoramus... "most stupid" is the correct way to put it. In using poor grammar you debase your own opinion.

    Ass.

    I'm only really pointing this out because I disagree with your opinion. You gave me some ammo and I used it. Thanks.
    unityhandbuilt

  46. #46
    29er Geek
    Reputation: tozovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,529
    Have a nice day.
    unityhandbuilt

  47. #47
    RIDE TO LIVE
    Reputation: LIV2RYD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    464
    How would a guy who is 5' 5" tall factor into this equation? I ride a 96er with a 16" frame and have no issues with toe overlap......

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 24601's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,128
    See, that is the huge hole in pvd's theory. His picture is just a picture. I could draw one up too that shows your left cheek will impact the handlebar on 30 degree turns made on Tuesdays. Without a real world, bike to bike comparison, the diagram is useless. The 69er is based on the 9.8, I believe. Lets see an overlap of equal sizes of both bikes, or equal size of any two bikes based on each other, and see if anything makes a difference. And then, if it does, lets see whether that difference matters at all.

    pvd, you blow a lot of smoke, but that is all we are seeing. Hubris wrapped up in conjecture.
    "Kurt is up in heaven now."

    RIP Vonnegut

  49. #49
    MaineMud
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    121

    Beast of the east....

    You still have an original "Beast of the East"? Rigid Pepproni aluminum fork???

    If you ever get bored with it.......let me know!




    Quote Originally Posted by robkhoo
    Just measured my bb height - 13 inches. Bombs downhill quite nicely, thanks very much.

  50. #50
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by 24601
    See, that is the huge hole in pvd's theory. His picture is just a picture. I could draw one up too that shows your left cheek will impact the handlebar on 30 degree turns made on Tuesdays. Without a real world, bike to bike comparison, the diagram is useless. The 69er is based on the 9.8, I believe. Lets see an overlap of equal sizes of both bikes, or equal size of any two bikes based on each other, and see if anything makes a difference. And then, if it does, lets see whether that difference matters at all.

    pvd, you blow a lot of smoke, but that is all we are seeing. Hubris wrapped up in conjecture.

    I would love it if you could present your arguement as i have. undoubtedly, you have the understanding, skill, and vocabulary to pull it off.

    I have made my argument and presented evidence. if you could show me specifically where i am wrong and why (using math, diagrams, dynamics theory) , i think that you would be helping everyone out.

    why not just start with a discussion of what 'trail' is, then go from there?

  51. #51
    conjoinicorned
    Reputation: ferday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,525
    have made my argument and presented evidence. if you could show me specifically where i am wrong and why (using math, diagrams, dynamics theory) , i think that you would be helping everyone out.
    oh geez, let me guess another engineer who feels his education qualifies him over everyone else in the world.

    29er have been solving the trail and toe overlap problems with fork offset, and the suspension travel thing is bogus (see 29er forum, 130mm forks and 130mm rear travel is now available). and this, from your own wiki...
    note that the 29" frame will handle like a truck compared to the 26" version
    handle like a truck eh...sounds like a lot of math, diagrams, and dynamics theory to me....
    what would rainbow unicorn do?

  52. #52
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by ferday
    29er have been solving the trail and toe overlap problems with fork offset..
    really?

    did you check your facts?

    Rockshox Reba, both forks use 39mm offset:

    http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/...8763-010_C.pdf

    http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/...9182-010_C.pdf

    Rockshox Tora, both forks use 39mm offset:

    http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/...0058-010_A.pdf

    http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/...1524-000_A.pdf

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: serious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,269
    pvd,

    What exactly is you point? You act as if the front-center distance is sacred. It is not. According to you a large bike, with a longer front-center would be inadequate, yet that is what a large person has to ride. With 29ers, the average front-center may have to increase a little and the offset may have to increase a little. Big freaking deal.

    Your diagrams are pointless. We know the old argument, yet there are plenty of 29ers that handle just fine. They may not be desired by all racers for one reason or another, but to think that 29ers are not a feasible alternative is ridiculous.

    The only valid reservation about 29ers (IMHO) has to do with the increased effort required to rotate a larger wheel. And you can always gear down to compensate.
    My rides:
    Lynskey Ti Pro29 SS
    RM Suzi Q 90 RSL
    KHS Team 29
    S-Works Roubaix
    KHS CX 550 cyclocross

  54. #54
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    So lemmie get this straight...

    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    I would love it if you could present your arguement as i have. undoubtedly, you have the understanding, skill, and vocabulary to pull it off.

    I have made my argument and presented evidence. if you could show me specifically where i am wrong and why (using math, diagrams, dynamics theory) , i think that you would be helping everyone out.

    why not just start with a discussion of what 'trail' is, then go from there?
    are you saying this TCO is true for all 29ers, or just the 69er (which is funny, because the 9 should be in the front. I guess Trek liked having 69 in their model names. Sex sells, I guess). I don't know why this is unique to the 69er vs a front and rear 29er.

    In that case, that means you came into a 29er forum telling us that we are all a bunch of pinheads, and we are all going to die in some horrible accident on the trail because of our defective or poorly designed bikes.

    You go to church and yell out 'there is no God! You're all a bunch of sheep!' ?

    If anybody has a 29er, they are fully aware of any issues you think they may or may not have. The TCO issue is not that big a deal. It does exist on some bikes, but any competent rider can deal with it, if the front end of the bike is so short it's an issue in the first place.

    Look, you go on riding your 26" bike, and we'll ride our 29ers, and just STFU as we roll past you. I mean 'we' figurtively, of couse. I don't have a 29er in my stable yet, but that will change in the next month. I've ridden them, and love them so far.

  55. #55
    large member
    Reputation: mud'n'sweat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    doesn't anyone remember the beast of the east?

    dumb bike. you have to have two types of tubes with you, two different spare rims on hand, plus the 29" front wheel makes it really suck for riders under 6' tall.

    the question is, why? when they could have built a solid 26" single bike that they lack in their lineup. does trek have to screw up every dirt bike they make?
    wow, you are incredibly uninformed!

  56. #56
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot
    In that case, that means you came into a 29er forum telling us that we are all a bunch of pinheads...
    this is not a 29 inch MTB forum. this is a singlespeed forum.

  57. #57
    large member
    Reputation: mud'n'sweat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    awsome!

    give a proof and people that have no understanding of it make corrections.
    If you are replying to my response, you haven't provided an ounce proof. Toe overlap has nothing to do with a persons height. FYI- you can use a 26" tube in a 29er wheel.

    Again, you are seriously misinformed.

  58. #58
    pvd
    pvd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Quote Originally Posted by mud'n'sweat
    If you are replying to my response, you haven't provided an ounce proof.
    Ha, ha, ha!

    why don't you give it a try? it's easy to act like a moron. why not prove you're the real thing?

  59. #59
    large member
    Reputation: mud'n'sweat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Ha, ha, ha!

    why don't you give it a try? it's easy to act like a moron. why not prove you're the real thing?
    You may want to consult your nearest english grammar book. I have no clue what you are trying to say.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vecsus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,811
    quit feeding the gimp. It's obvious that a regular poster has created a new forum account just to get people riled up. why play into his hand?
    Vecsus

    HTFU or STFU

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5
    pvd...indeed maybe the TOC stuff has some validity...but your diagram is still screwed...if you add a larger front wheel (same frame)...the rake should increase...

  62. #62
    Catholic MTBR
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by tozovr
    ...and you are an ignoramus... "most stupid" is the correct way to put it. In using poor grammar you debase your own opinion.

    Ass.

    I'm only really pointing this out because I disagree with your opinion. You gave me some ammo and I used it. Thanks.
    "Stupidest" is the proper superlative form of "stupid." Be careful when calling someone ignorant.
    Main Ride: Vassago Jabberwocky w/ODIS rigid fork. Rigid, SS, 29er.
    "Be not afraid." -Pope John Paul II

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by pisket
    The US Trek site says MSRP $1650 less a penny :-p

    http://www2.trekbikes.com/bikes/bike.php?f=17

    Ali
    Trek just uped the price to $2400
    "Never shall innocent blood be shed. Yet the blood of the wicked shall flow like a river. The three shall spread their blackened wings and be the vengeful striking hammer of god."

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1

    Trek pulled a fast one.

    I had a 69er on back order up until i had the Shop in town call to check to see if the Shipping date was still around the end of January. Not to my surprise they did push the date back until the end of March. Not only that they jacked the price up alot. It was going to see for $1650.00. That is no longer the retail price. That is close to what a shops cost is now. The retail price will be close to $3000.00. So i said screw Trek and ordered something else. They didn't even call shops that had the bike on back order to let them know that the price went up. So they could inform the consumers that the bike almost double in price. Once again SCREW trek!!!!!!!!.

  65. #65
    29er Geek
    Reputation: tozovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,529
    unityhandbuilt

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    95
    Are there any updates on this bike? Please post pics if you have received yours. Or is the bike still scheduled for release in March? I'm really considering this bike, I hope the price doesn't go up again...

    P.S. Anyone know if you can buy just the frame?

    peAce,
    Devin

  67. #67
    Exclusively Single
    Reputation: long hazy daze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    673
    shorter people have shorter feet....

  68. #68
    Exclusively Single
    Reputation: long hazy daze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    673
    .....

  69. #69
    Single Speed
    Reputation: fatad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    117

    No Toe Overlap for me


    I have no problems with toe overlap on my homebrew 29/26. BB is high and I like it. Head angle is 69.5degrees and it works for me in xc. It zips downhill and climbs well. It fits me and weighs in about 23lb.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by BicyclePhD
    Trek just uped the price to $2400
    It kind of defeats the purpose of a single speed to spend that much money. I love the idea but I cannot warrant spending $1300 or 2400 on a single speed. Perhaps I should get a job at Trek dealer to reap the benefits.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    210
    Besides all this toe overlab thing, wich would really suck me on slow technical terrain, ( a bunch of 29er geos proofs, that it is solveable) why does trek build their beautiful 69er with a wheelbase as long as a roadtrain?

    Is travis brown hammering at a speed of 30mph all the time?

  72. #72
    29er Geek
    Reputation: tozovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by CollegeCatholic
    "Stupidest" is the proper superlative form of "stupid." Be careful when calling someone ignorant.
    you are incorrect.
    Adjectives which have three or more syllables, such as intelligent, beautiful, difficult, do not take -est. To form the superlative for adjectives with three syllables you must use "most": the most intelligent, the most beautiful, the most difficult.

    But what about adjectives with two syllables? If the word ends in 'y' such as happy, dirty etc, then the adjective takes the -est form. For example, "I am the happiest man in the world!" If the adjective with two syllables does not end in 'y', the superlative takes the "most ..." form. For example, stupid, then we must say: "That is the most stupid question I have ever heard!"
    unityhandbuilt

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    95
    Do you guys even ride bikes? This forum is starting to scare me...bleh*

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: metrotuned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,814
    Get laid, it will help with your bickering and pointing fingers and disqualifying and "I'm right, you're wrong" general *****-ass attitudes. Now go out and get some. In otherwise, get on and ride, dammit.
    Creative Producer, Will of the Sun, Platform Pedal Shootout 1M+ views WoS

  75. #75
    29er Geek
    Reputation: tozovr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,529
    I'm sorry, was I wrong?
    unityhandbuilt

  76. #76
    ali'i hua
    Reputation: SlowSSer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,793
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    ...you have to have two types of tubes with you...

    um, no you dont- the usage of 26" tubes in 29" wheels has been discussed frequently over on the 29er bored. actually, it works pretty good!

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by mcoco01
    Yeah, I was interested in one of those and the guys at the local shop said they're going to be really limited edition so almost impossibe to get, especially in my size. But a few of them rode it up in Wisc at Trek and they said it was sweet. About 21lbs and rode great.

    Anymore updates???

    Are we sure that it's only 21 lbs? That's crazy light, but would be great if it is!

    Haven't seen one in any of the dozen or so Trek Dealers here???

  78. #78
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by MrAnderson
    It kind of defeats the purpose of a single speed to spend that much money.
    huh????? what exactly do you mean by that?
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  79. #79
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    the carver 96'er frame has been around for some time AND comes in ti.

    http://www.carverbikes.com/

    hard tail msrp:
    400 for a painted frame.
    450 for ball burnished frame
    1000 for ti frame built in china
    1900 for ti frame built in us.

    squishy msrp:
    1000 painted
    1100 ball burnished

    either hang the stuff you already have on it, or for $2400.00 you could spec it WAY nicer than the factory trek 69'er.

    for example, for the price of the stock trek you could build a carver hardtail with a king/stans wheelset, king headset, carbon bars/seatpost, reba race fork, white bros or bontrager ss cranks, and juicy 7 brakes.

    you can also just stick a 29er wheel in most any 26" disc rigid fork and it will work fine.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  80. #80
    Trying a little
    Reputation: dusthuffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,781
    worst. thread. ever.

    I never apologize. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I am.

  81. #81
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dusthuffer
    worst. thread. ever.
    lol... i see you havent read through very many here
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    51

    Price Check

    The Trek 69er is $1,649.99 at my local Trek Dealer.

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.