I have the medium and have liked it pretty well so far. First 29er.

I’ve changed to a longer stem and flipped it over for lower bars…might change to a flat bar too. I had to swap out the seatpost (to something that has some setback) and ram the seat all the way back to get proper knee/pedaling position. Felt like I was sitting on top of the bars and I’m not doing any triathlons on this thing. Lost a pound with a change of tires. Wheels are built pretty well but are tanks.

I really like riding this thing. It really rolls different than my 26’s. I’m sure that’s typical of all 29ers. It just needs a ’sportier’ feel.

Some things my feeble head thinks could change with 2nd gen: slacker seat tube angle AND a setback seatpost. Higher BB! Lower handlebar positioning.

And if my wheels were flexing as much as I am seeing the frame flex, the bike would almost be unrideable. Flex in the wheels is a totally different animal than BB flex.

George Krpan: Yes you are correct, but did you check the fork offset and figure out the trail number? That will ultimately tell you more than the head angle alone will.

Also, the fork sag will steepen that figure by a bit, and it’s when you’re riding it that the head angle really matters.

How can you tell the flex is happening in the frame and not in the wheels? Assuming the frame held the hub perfectly stiff with regard to the bottom bracket, it seems possible that the extra spoke length involved in a larger wheel would contribute to observed sideways deflection of the rim/tire relative to the stays. Does this make sense?

I know throwing my 29er into fast curves, or hitting something that puts a large lateral load on the rims, it definitely feels flexy… and with the overbuilt swingarm & linkage on a Monk, I’m reasonably certain it isn’t the frame. Maybe I’m just trying to explain that and see a little bit of it in your last paragraph.