<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fat Bike 29&#8243;er Wheel Set: On Test</title>
	<atom:link href="http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test</link>
	<description>29er Bike Reviews, Rumors and News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 00:08:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Guitar Ted</title>
		<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/#comment-77511</link>
		<dc:creator>Guitar Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twentynineinches.com/?p=16209#comment-77511</guid>
		<description>@Elvis: It is a sticky wicket. You have a hub at 135mm and to make up for that other 35mm you might be able to do something, (on the brake side, obviously. The chain line needs to remain so the drive side can not be modified much, if at all), so that messes with a brake mount, and then things kind of get beyond reasonable. 

Not saying something couldn&#039;t be pulled off, but at this point, going with a Pugsley, or a Chain Reactions frame with the 135mm rear spacing starts to make a whole lot more sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Elvis: It is a sticky wicket. You have a hub at 135mm and to make up for that other 35mm you might be able to do something, (on the brake side, obviously. The chain line needs to remain so the drive side can not be modified much, if at all), so that messes with a brake mount, and then things kind of get beyond reasonable. </p>
<p>Not saying something couldn&#8217;t be pulled off, but at this point, going with a Pugsley, or a Chain Reactions frame with the 135mm rear spacing starts to make a whole lot more sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elvis</title>
		<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/#comment-77510</link>
		<dc:creator>Elvis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:22:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twentynineinches.com/?p=16209#comment-77510</guid>
		<description>@ GT - would a combination of the Salsa 170mm to 135mm adaptor and a longer axle/skewer allow a Rohloff/Alfine/etc to work?

OR do I need to get a special one-off Alternator LH dropout made with the offset built into the machining to allow for it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ GT &#8211; would a combination of the Salsa 170mm to 135mm adaptor and a longer axle/skewer allow a Rohloff/Alfine/etc to work?</p>
<p>OR do I need to get a special one-off Alternator LH dropout made with the offset built into the machining to allow for it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guitar Ted</title>
		<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/#comment-77492</link>
		<dc:creator>Guitar Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 03:09:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twentynineinches.com/?p=16209#comment-77492</guid>
		<description>@Peter Mac:  Not at this time. The 170mm spacing is the limiting factor here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Peter Mac:  Not at this time. The 170mm spacing is the limiting factor here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sevo</title>
		<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/#comment-77491</link>
		<dc:creator>Sevo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2012 21:37:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twentynineinches.com/?p=16209#comment-77491</guid>
		<description>Excited to see what you think. The ability to even do a rear &quot;summer&quot; wheel on a fat bike is the very reason I&#039;m selling my 135mm rear bike to go to a 170  just flat out makes sense</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excited to see what you think. The ability to even do a rear &#8220;summer&#8221; wheel on a fat bike is the very reason I&#8217;m selling my 135mm rear bike to go to a 170  just flat out makes sense</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter mac</title>
		<link>http://twentynineinches.com/2012/04/11/fat-bike-29er-wheel-set-on-test/#comment-77483</link>
		<dc:creator>peter mac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2012 09:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twentynineinches.com/?p=16209#comment-77483</guid>
		<description>Dear GT,

ah silly question perhaps, but is it possible to fit a Rohloff Speedhub to the rear end of the Salas, or any other Fatty frame for that matter...???
Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear GT,</p>
<p>ah silly question perhaps, but is it possible to fit a Rohloff Speedhub to the rear end of the Salas, or any other Fatty frame for that matter&#8230;???<br />
Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
