Comments on: Defining What Is “Long Travel” For A 29″er http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/ 29er Bike Reviews, Rumors and News Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:20:39 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Amir Hubbard http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-58481 Amir Hubbard Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:20:43 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-58481 that employee is so screwed that employee is so screwed

]]> By: Anonymous http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-55914 Anonymous Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:16:00 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-55914 hi hi

]]> By: Guitar Ted http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38141 Guitar Ted Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:26:59 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38141 JJJ: One word for you: Lunchbox It has everything hat you mentioned and even the trail figure is close to the same. (Actually, the Luncbox's is higher!) You might balk at the price, but if you like big wheels and the Yeti type angles/geo, the Lunchbox has you covered in spades. Bonus: It handles absolutely great, as I have actually ridden one. Otherwise, as I have said, I can see your point. :) JJJ: One word for you: Lunchbox

It has everything hat you mentioned and even the trail figure is close to the same. (Actually, the Luncbox’s is higher!)

You might balk at the price, but if you like big wheels and the Yeti type angles/geo, the Lunchbox has you covered in spades. Bonus: It handles absolutely great, as I have actually ridden one.

Otherwise, as I have said, I can see your point. :)

]]> By: JJJ http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38129 JJJ Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:57:05 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38129 vichercules - I think you might have missed my point. I do want a trailbike - the RIP9 was not enough bike for the conditions I was looking for it to excell in. The point of this post was to show that 4.5 in needs be looked at in combination of the entire bike - the travel, geometry, and wheelsize. Big wheels or not - the RIP and most all 29ers (yes even the sultan) have head angles around 71 and seat tube angles @ 73 or 74. So you see this topic is all about long travel - well -Niner WAS touting the RIP9 as a long travel -do-it-all frame before they announced the WFO thing. I feel the rip is a great XC bike bike - but that's it. I sort of took the 11% rule above and thought a RIP @ 4.5 in would feel like a 5.5 in 26 in bike and that's just not the case at all - as I and others haven mentioned, The angles of the Yeti work really really well for me in the terrain I ride. Its not just the travel - its the way it works with the travel. Even with a WB 130 up front, I was looking for a head angle that was about 2-3 deg slacker for the terrain I ride. My 29er SS by the way has a head angle of just under 69 and a trail of 95. Most would think its a tank and handles bad. I disagree - I like slack bikes. GT - The Yeti may not be shooting any new bullits - but I tell you what - its combination of geometry and travel hit the target more than any other 29er out there right now (for me). So the take home message of my post was that geometry needs to be looked at along with travel to define the optimal purpose of the bike. OK - everyone go ride your bikes now- peace out JJJ vichercules –
I think you might have missed my point. I do want a trailbike – the RIP9 was not enough bike for the conditions I was looking for it to excell in. The point of this post was to show that 4.5 in needs be looked at in combination of the entire bike – the travel, geometry, and wheelsize. Big wheels or not – the RIP and most all 29ers (yes even the sultan) have head angles around 71 and seat tube angles @ 73 or 74. So you see this topic is all about long travel – well -Niner WAS touting the RIP9 as a long travel -do-it-all frame before they announced the WFO thing. I feel the rip is a great XC bike bike – but that’s it.

I sort of took the 11% rule above and thought a RIP @ 4.5 in would feel like a 5.5 in 26 in bike and that’s just not the case at all – as I and others haven mentioned, The angles of the Yeti work really really well for me in the terrain I ride. Its not just the travel – its the way it works with the travel. Even with a WB 130 up front, I was looking for a head angle that was about 2-3 deg slacker for the terrain I ride.

My 29er SS by the way has a head angle of just under 69 and a trail of 95. Most would think its a tank and handles bad. I disagree – I like slack bikes.

GT – The Yeti may not be shooting any new bullits – but I tell you what – its combination of geometry and travel hit the target more than any other 29er out there right now (for me).

So the take home message of my post was that geometry needs to be looked at along with travel to define the optimal purpose of the bike. OK – everyone go ride your bikes now- peace out
JJJ

]]> By: vichercules http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38126 vichercules Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:31:19 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38126 For context, I am not a big fan of long travel bikes or their riders as it seems they are frequently counterproductive when it comes to keeping trails open (see Marin county) If our long travel friends stayed off of multi use trails my bias would shift, but it is tough enough fending off trail closures because of the transgressions of the gasoline set, let alone having our own ranks give fuel to the opposition. That being said, there has been so much conjecture on this site about what can and can't be done with big hoops. Lets be serious, bikes are incredibly nuanced, there are issues of geometry, rider size, tire configuration, frame material, weight, center of gravity blah blah blah, wheel size is one of many variables, just one. I think its importance is frequently overstated, especially on this site. If a 29er has not yet surfaced that rolls with more than 100mm of travel and does it well, consider it an inevitability. JJJ's concerns seem to have little to do with long travel bikes as much as he bought the wrong bike. It seems that he bought a trail bike when he wanted a semi long travel cross country setup. There are a few FS cross country 29ers that might have suited him much better than the RIP 9. A Hei Hei or a Hi FI might have been a good solution, but we and he will never know. But, if he prefers the quick responses of a 26" bike over the momentum of a 29er, who cares? There is more than one way to skin a cat, right? For context, I am not a big fan of long travel bikes or their riders as it seems they are frequently counterproductive when it comes to keeping trails open (see Marin county) If our long travel friends stayed off of multi use trails my bias would shift, but it is tough enough fending off trail closures because of the transgressions of the gasoline set, let alone having our own ranks give fuel to the opposition.

That being said, there has been so much conjecture on this site about what can and can’t be done with big hoops. Lets be serious, bikes are incredibly nuanced, there are issues of geometry, rider size, tire configuration, frame material, weight, center of gravity blah blah blah, wheel size is one of many variables, just one. I think its importance is frequently overstated, especially on this site. If a 29er has not yet surfaced that rolls with more than 100mm of travel and does it well, consider it an inevitability.

JJJ’s concerns seem to have little to do with long travel bikes as much as he bought the wrong bike. It seems that he bought a trail bike when he wanted a semi long travel cross country setup. There are a few FS cross country 29ers that might have suited him much better than the RIP 9. A Hei Hei or a Hi FI might have been a good solution, but we and he will never know. But, if he prefers the quick responses of a 26″ bike over the momentum of a 29er, who cares? There is more than one way to skin a cat, right?

]]> By: Robb Sutton http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38059 Robb Sutton Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:10:02 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38059 I am in the process of building up a rigid 29er. Having already ridden the bike it is being designed off of...I can say that I am really excited about the project. That said... I see no place for a long travel 29er. I ride a 36 lbs 6" bike as my regular ride, and to get a 29er to fit the same bill...the geometry would not work. To get the slack angles required by 6" + bikes, a 29ers wheelbase would have to be so long that it wouldn't be turnable in tight dh situations. In dh/fr, quality travel is a requirement that wheel size can not make up for. You can't tell me that a 5" 29er is going to perform the same as a 6-7" 26er off a 5' drop to flat or higher. Another note... The amount of leverage that will be put on long travel 29er forks will require a much stiffer suspension fork to keep the same ride as a 26er. This, in my eyes, can only be accomplished with wider hub spacing and larger axles. 29ers have their place. I see their positives in short travel xc/am rigs and ht/rigids, but the long travel market is a place for 26" bikes. I am in the process of building up a rigid 29er. Having already ridden the bike it is being designed off of…I can say that I am really excited about the project.

That said…

I see no place for a long travel 29er. I ride a 36 lbs 6″ bike as my regular ride, and to get a 29er to fit the same bill…the geometry would not work. To get the slack angles required by 6″ + bikes, a 29ers wheelbase would have to be so long that it wouldn’t be turnable in tight dh situations. In dh/fr, quality travel is a requirement that wheel size can not make up for. You can’t tell me that a 5″ 29er is going to perform the same as a 6-7″ 26er off a 5′ drop to flat or higher.

Another note…
The amount of leverage that will be put on long travel 29er forks will require a much stiffer suspension fork to keep the same ride as a 26er. This, in my eyes, can only be accomplished with wider hub spacing and larger axles.

29ers have their place. I see their positives in short travel xc/am rigs and ht/rigids, but the long travel market is a place for 26″ bikes.

]]> By: Vandal http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38057 Vandal Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:25:05 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38057 Yo, in my second paragraph, I meant to say "a 6" tall root is still a 6" tall root". That makes a little more sense... Yo,
in my second paragraph, I meant to say “a 6″ tall root is still a 6″ tall root”. That makes a little more sense…

]]> By: Vandal http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38056 Vandal Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:24:49 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38056 Yo, in my second paragraph, I meant to say "a " tall root is still a 6" tall root". That makes a little more sense... Yo,
in my second paragraph, I meant to say “a ” tall root is still a 6″ tall root”. That makes a little more sense…

]]> By: Vandal http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38055 Vandal Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:18:39 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38055 It seems to me that if a 29" wheel is about 11% larger in circumference than a 26" wheel, then the angle of attack on any given size obstacle would be about 11% shallower for a 29" wheel compared to a 26" wheel. We could infer from this that the 29er rolls over an object with 11% less loss of kinetic energy and thus, 11% less suspension travel is required to produce the same riding feel on a rough trail. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 5" tall root is still a 6" tall root. Regardless of wheel size, the axle of that wheel moving horizontally along the ground must still rise up 6" vertically off the ground to get over that root. The size of the wheel simply changes how suddenly or gradually this transition from horizontal to vertical motion takes place. Technically speaking, if we broke this motion down into horizontal and vertical components, the 26" wheel would have a higher peak vertical acceleration than the 29" wheel, forcing the suspension to compress more rapidly, or transferring a greater vertical impact to the rider. Given all this, it makes sense to me that a 26er with 5" of suspension travel will roll over this root about 11% more harshly than a 29er with the same suspension travel but feel about the same as a 29er with 4.5" of suspension travel. (I don't have a scientific calculator on hand to do the trigonometry of all this right now but I think my guesstimations are in the ballpark. Suffice to say that a 29" wheel does not erase the need for suspension.) My conclusion is that the definition of "long travel" for a 29er is 11% shorter than it is for a 26er. The 6.5" Niner WFO would likely feel a lot like a Santa Cruz Nomad (it not slightly more plush), but it definitely would not feel like the 10" Cruz V10. It seems to me that if a 29″ wheel is about 11% larger in circumference than a 26″ wheel, then the angle of attack on any given size obstacle would be about 11% shallower for a 29″ wheel compared to a 26″ wheel. We could infer from this that the 29er rolls over an object with 11% less loss of kinetic energy and thus, 11% less suspension travel is required to produce the same riding feel on a rough trail.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but a 5″ tall root is still a 6″ tall root. Regardless of wheel size, the axle of that wheel moving horizontally along the ground must still rise up 6″ vertically off the ground to get over that root. The size of the wheel simply changes how suddenly or gradually this transition from horizontal to vertical motion takes place. Technically speaking, if we broke this motion down into horizontal and vertical components, the 26″ wheel would have a higher peak vertical acceleration than the 29″ wheel, forcing the suspension to compress more rapidly, or transferring a greater vertical impact to the rider.
Given all this, it makes sense to me that a 26er with 5″ of suspension travel will roll over this root about 11% more harshly than a 29er with the same suspension travel but feel about the same as a 29er with 4.5″ of suspension travel.
(I don’t have a scientific calculator on hand to do the trigonometry of all this right now but I think my guesstimations are in the ballpark. Suffice to say that a 29″ wheel does not erase the need for suspension.)
My conclusion is that the definition of “long travel” for a 29er is 11% shorter than it is for a 26er. The 6.5″ Niner WFO would likely feel a lot like a Santa Cruz Nomad (it not slightly more plush), but it definitely would not feel like the 10″ Cruz V10.

]]> By: Matty http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/comment-page-1/#comment-38052 Matty Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:25:32 +0000 http://twentynineinches.com/2008/04/13/defining-what-is-long-travel-for-a-29er/#comment-38052 ps long travel 29er forks are already out there, you just have to find them and modify them, oh and they are stupid heavy. Any inverted dh fork with 180+mm of travel will work. Hanbrink and Risse forks work great. Take them apart, get the springs shortened up and spacer them out for a 29er wheel and you have a downhill fork meant for a 29er front wheel. ps long travel 29er forks are already out there, you just have to find them and modify them, oh and they are stupid heavy. Any inverted dh fork with 180+mm of travel will work. Hanbrink and Risse forks work great. Take them apart, get the springs shortened up and spacer them out for a 29er wheel and you have a downhill fork meant for a 29er front wheel.

]]>