Well………..we figure it wouldn’t hurt to at least try!

Thinking Out Loud About Tire Design For 29″ers.

Tires. The one component of a bicycle that connects you to the trail. Pretty important stuff. It can be argued that no other component on your bike has as big an effect on performance and ride quality as tires do. Obviously it also is one of the biggest necessities to accomplish building a 29″er- the right sized tire and in the right width.

Bontrager introduced tire designs that are “29″er specific” in 2008.

Originally, having any tire available in a 2 inch width that would fit a 700c/ISO 622 rim was cause for joy. However; as time went on, and new designs proliferated in 29″er sizes, questions about how 29 inch tires are designed arose. Do 29 inch tires necessitate a specific design separate from 26 inch designs? Bontrager seems to think so. In 2008 they announced that the entire 29 inch tire line up would be redesigned in the future to reflect a 29″er specific design philosophy. Tires designed from the drawing board to enhance a 29 inch wheels specific traits and strengths. Several of these models are now available. Does this design philosophy make a difference? Well, it is possible, as for example, we gave the 29-3 Bontrager tires a nod in our Top Ten list from last year. Or was that just a lucky coincidence?

Some would argue that what 29″er riders really need are not specific tread designs, but things that 26″er riders have enjoyed for years. That being wider, more aggressive tires, or faster, lighter race tires, and probably even more importantly, tires that feature technologies not seen in 29″er tires. UST, (which has been tried by the way), rubber durometers outside of the norm, bead treatments, side wall reinforcements, and the like top this list of “wants” by 29″er riders. Basically, more choices that reflect what the 26″er market has.

Some would argue that 29″er tires need more high end technologies in their construction, like this 29 inch WTB Dissent has.

Thinking Out Loud Now…… Do 29″er tire companies need to design specific treads for their 29 inch diameter tires, or do they need to make more high end construction techniques available? Shouldn’t we really be asking for both? Perhaps it might be a better idea just to focus on having most tires be made tubeless ready? What do you, the 29″er riders out there think?

Okay readers. Have at it in the comments section. But keep these ground rules in mind: #1: Comments must stay on topic. #2: Play nice! Overly negative, aggressive, slanderous, and rude comments will be deleted. Okay? Have fun!

This is an important point to understand concerning 29″ers. I felt it was a serious enough subject that I conducted my own fork offset/axle to crown tests in 2008. It is a subject which has far reaching impact and still confuses riders up to the present day. (Editor’s Note: Due to a technical problem with Twenty Nine Inches picture host that we used in 2008, the images for the ” An Experiment In Front End Geometry” posts were all lost, but the text and data are still there for reference.)

This will be a brief look at where 29″ers were in 2006 and what the changes since then have wrought in terms of geometry, forks, and what we know about 29″ers handling in 2010. First off, we need to draw a baseline, circa 2006, so we can see what was being done then to accomplish the goals of big wheeled bike designers.

The first generation Reba used the old 26″er offset standard which limited what designers could do with 29″er handling.

Humans are a paradoxical species. We are at once extremely adaptable creatures, yet we often fall into distinct patterns which we like to maintain. Creatures of habit that can get used to changes. Weird isn’t it? Well, the 29″er front end geometry story has elements of both these human traits running through it, oddly enough.

When the 29″er came about it was understood from the start that a bigger diameter wheel was going to change the “trail figure” for the bicycle, which is of paramount importance in terms of handling. (See this page for a brief explanation of the term “trail” for bicycles as it applies to front end handling.) Because a larger diameter wheel causes the trail figure to grow, if all else remains the same, designers knew that a 29″er would automatically handle in a more stable/slow manner. Some designers embraced this while others felt it was a hindrance to big wheels and wanted the 29″er to handle like their old 26 inch wheeled bikes. Here was where the rub came for the latter group. Suspension fork crowns were “locked in” at about 38mm of offset.

While it is true that a rigid fork can be made to any specification desired rather easily, the suspension fork crown requires very expensive tooling to manufacture, so making offset changes isn’t something that is done easily or cheaply. Gary Fisher Bikes managed to have the early Marzocchi forks made with a 43mm offset, but even with head angles set at 72 degrees, (a full degree steeper than most 26 inch XC rigs), there was still criticism of the handling for its “sluggishness” and the Marzocchi fork wasn’t well received besides. In lieu of this, designers started playing with head angles instead, to achieve similar results to what a longer offset would achieve.

Salsa Cycles first generation Mamasita rigs had a steeper head angle to quicken up the handling using a 38mm offset fork.

A great example of this would be the first edition of Salsa Cycles Mamasita which used a very steep head angle to realize a lower trail figure but still could use the first generation Reba fork with its 38mm offset. Intense Cycles also did something similar with their Spyder 29″er which featured a 73mm head angle! While these bikes and others had a quick, nimble handling feel, the steeper head angle wasn’t optimal for a couple of reasons. First,it placed the suspension fork legs at an angle that made bump forces want to bend the fork backwards more rather than compress the telescoping parts together. Secondly, it made making anything under a size medium a huge compromise due to potential for toe overlap. The head angle trick worked, but at a cost that many designers were unwilling to make.

This was at a time when detractors of the 29 inch wheel were saying that 29″ers were not good for riders under 5′7″, (many still say this), that 29″ers were slow and ponderous, and that 29″ers would never be able to handle like a 26 inch bike. And you know what? They were all right about that back then. However; something happened that blew the doors off of conventional wisdom regarding 29″ers.

Back in 2006, I was invited by then Twenty Nine Inches head honch, Tim Grahl, to come out to Interbike and help with the 29″er coverage. That is a completely different tale, but I bring it up because of a chance meeting I had the first day in Las Vegas I was there. Tim spotted Gary Fisher in a local Vegas mall we were in and he tracked him down. We soon were chatting over a cuppa joe when Gary said the following: “Soon we will all be able to tune our rides.” What he then revealed to us was that there were plans afoot to change the offset of suspension crowns. To where exactly the offset would end up at wasn’t revealed then, but now the whole story can be told.

Gary Fisher obviously understood the criticisms of 29″ers and that is certainly shown by his early experiment with Marzocchi. This time there was a whole lot more research going on into the front end geometry of a 29″er. After all the numbers had been crunched by engineers, Fisher had several forks made as test mules and sent them out all across the United States to different test riders that worked for Trek. Six different offsets were tried by each rider. Word is that the decision on which was best was nearly unanimous. Travis Brown, the Mountain Bike Hall of Fame member and long time Trek R&D rider told me that when he tested the forks and found out what the offset was on the one he liked best, it was a big surprise to him. 51mm of offset! Well, as we all know, this became Fisher Bikes G2 Geometry’s focal point on the 29″er side. (26″ers got their own increased offset G2 crowns)

Now Fisher had to convince someone to forge new crowns to match his new offsets. Fisher managed to partner with Fox, getting Trek to front all the money for the tooling for the fork crowns that Fox needed to make the longer offset. This brought Fox Shox into the 29″er game, and so made even more of an impact. Because Fox only made the crowns to 44mm offset, and gained the remaning 7mm by using different lowers, they could use the same crowns for other companies and aftermarket 29″er forks.

It should also be mentioned that the suspension fork offset changes made since 2006 have been influenced by a couple of rigid forks. The first was Brant Richards’ On One Superlight steel fork which came out with a 47mm offset. This was a full two years before the Fox fork. Redline’s Monocog 29″er also was important as it mimicked the same geometry and was a wildly popular bike in North America. Because these two bikes were well received and well liked for their snappier handling, it was becoming obvious to those who were paying attention then that suspension fork offsets needed a change for 29 inch wheels. Fortunately, the market got big enough to make the investment into new crown forgings something that made sense to the major fork manufacturers.

What works and doesn’t with 29″ers? Well, this bike has a 51mm offset/74 degree head angle. It rides quick, but not out of the range of most riders.

29 inch fork geometry has now evolved to the point that 29″er handling has overcome many of the early complaints about a 29″ers handling traits. It also has allowed for a way to make smaller sizes work to the point now where we see even smaller women racers aboard 29″ers and winning. These bikes handle as well or better than 26 inch wheeled bikes with no toe overlap. However; more challenges have arisen with 29 inch forks. They have a longer “lever” than a 26 inch fork, so designers have been making specific lowers for the 29 inch forks in some cases. Tapered steer tube forks have also been employed to strengthen the critical crown race area of 29 inch suspension forks. Through axles were also employed to stiffen the wheel/fork interface and to more effectively remove independent fork leg movement from the equation.

Finally, getting back to Gary Fishers “tune our rides” idea, we now can choose different offsets and different head angles to find what makes us as individuals happy. Will a 51mm offset G2 fork work on a “non-G2″ bike? How about a Fox 44mm offset fork on a G2 Fisher 29″er frame? The answer is: A definite maybe. If there was one thing I took away from my own experiences on messing around with several different forks on one bike, it was this: That the 29″er wheel has a much wider range of possibilities when it comes to geometry than what would be workable with 26 inch wheels. Added to that is our own innate adaptability. Put a rider on a G2 frame with a 44mm offset fork, and after a few rides that rider will be going as fast or faster than they were on the same bike with a 51mm fork offset. I am not saying that the rider in question will prefer that, but I am saying that rider could adapt to it, and quickly.

The Opposite End Of The Spectrum: Even with a trail figure well over a 100mm, this Lenz handles quite nicely.

Of course, that begs the question: “Does any of this really matter?” The answer, I feel, is definitely yes. For everyone of us, that answer will be a different combination that sparks our feelings when we are riding our favorite trails. The beauty of all of this is not only does it matter for each one of us, but also that we actually can tune our rides. A thing that wasn’t really possible not too long ago with any front suspended mountain bike of any wheel size.

My conclusion is that although you can see this as a Pandora’s Box, which has caused no small amount of confusion in the mountain biking circles, it also has been a boon to mountain bikers. Especially those who ride big wheeled mountain bikes where the choices are many for dialing in a specific ride quality and handling feel by simply swapping out forks. (Something road cyclists have been doing for years, by the way.) My feeling is that “now” is the pinnacle of this “tunability”, as I am sure certain market forces will ferret out the fringes and choices will become fewer in a move to “standardize” 29″er geometry. The times will change, but for now “tuning your ride” is definitely a possibility. My opinion is that it is a good thing.

What I am setting out to do is give a brief historical back round, not an exhaustive treatise on the origins of 29 inch wheels. That said, some of you may learn a thing or two.

The origins of the modern 29″er have similar roots to the 26 inch wheeled mountain bikes of the 70’s and 80’s. (Image courtesy of Fisher Bikes)

The Roots: Of course, many know that the modern day 29″er was spawned by the production of the first 2 inch wide 622 ISO knobby tire by Wilderness Trail Bikes called the Nanoraptor in 1999. However, it isn’t widely known that WTB also was heavily involved in the design aspects of early 29″er frames as well. Of course, it makes sense when you think about it. WTB had a fat, large diameter tire that didn’t fit any frames that were in production in 1999, so making the whole thing work was somewhat important, as long as they were going to the trouble of making a tire. Mark Slate and Steve Potts worked hard on 29″ers and were instrumental in coming up with some of the earliest ideas about what would make a good 29″er . Working with Gary Fisher and utilizing his ideas, they enabled Fisher Bikes to be the first production 29″er on the market only two years down the road. Thus the 29″er had a similar connection to the early days of mountain biking, with some of the same people involved.

Of course, early mountain bike pioneers were not limited to Northern California, and neither were early 29″er pioneers. Colorado was the earliest hotbed of 29″er activity then, and that centered around the Crested Butte area. Small custom manufacturers like Willits Bikes run by 29″er evangelist Wes Williams, Moots, and then with others spreading from there. The 29″er began to gain some fans in the early part of the 2000’s, but it was still a small movement. There wasn’t a suspension fork, rims were borrowed from touring bikes, and most 29″ers were still one off custom bikes for the trend setters.

Now the movement may have dithered along for several years and petered out because of the lack of industry support, but things were happening behind the scenes that changed the course of 29″ers. Most of that credit goes to Fisher Bikes. Some of the Crested Butte gang also gets credit for convincing White Brothers to do a CX-1 in 2001.

Fisher pushed big wheels for racing from the very beginning. (Image courtesy of Fisher bikes)

The Lean Years: In the early to mid-2000’s things were not moving along too well. Sure, Surly did the Karate Monkey, bringing the 29″er within the reach of many more cyclists, but beyond that, these years were marked by folks obsessing over the lack of rims and tires. There were lots of rumors swirling about who would be the next company to jump in with a 29″er, but the reality was that for many, the 29′er was on life support. Then something remarkable happened in 2005 that began the turnaround in fortunes for 29″er riders. Gary Fisher convinced Rock Shox to work up a 29 inch compatible version of the Reba. After that, it seemed as if a dam had cracked, sprouted a big leak, and then in about 2007, things really let loose. The rest of the story is well known to most 29″er aficionados.

Materials technology and a decade of refinement have brought us to the present time where a 29″er’s performance rivals that of a 26″ers. (Image courtesy of Niner Bikes)

Moving Right Along Now: That’s a too brief historical look at where we have been and lots more folks and companies had a hand in it all. (There just isn’t space here) That said, it bears looking at because the 29 inch wheel is poised, I believe, to make further inroads in the mountain bike world. Racing is going to change the 29″er landscape, (it already has begun to do so), and new developments in longer travel, down hill oriented parts and frames has already taken 29 inch wheels to places that only a few short years ago people said they would never go to.

Well, here’s to “never” and beyond!

What will happen is anybody’s guess, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the big wheels really take a hold in Europe. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see someone other than a Fisher Bikes rider win a World Cup race on a 29″er in 2010. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see a 29″er compete in a World Cup Down hill event somewhere in the next two years. By the time another ten years pass, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if 29″ers are seen as being “just a mountain bike”. Will 26″ers become obsolete? That isn’t at all what I think. The two sizes will just co-exist without any further drama.

When and if this all happens, it may be helpful to remember that it almost didn’t happen. But I am sure glad it did.

It is interesting to note that a whole category of products is available for you to pursue your “habit” too. Whole companies are based upon this “conversion” of non-tubeless product to tubeless uses. This isn’t anything new. It goes way back into the mid-nineties as far as the roots of the techniques we use today are concerned. What is new is how this technology and 29″er tires and rims have changed the game for not only users of this “dark art”, but for the tire and rim manufacturers as well.

First off, it needs to be explained why one would do such a conversion in the first place. The desire for tubeless tires can be traced to racing. Racers were looking to rid themselves of more rotational mass and in the process of converting the standard folding bead tires of the day, they also discovered an advantage in traction and lower rolling resistance. Sealants were developed from latex that allowed the porous sidewalls to stop leaking air and also helped with punctures. It wasn’t long before other riders were adapting this technique for their own trail bikes. Things were progressing at such a rate that Mavic and several tire manufacturers stepped up and developed the first commercially available tubeless rim/tire systems dubbed “UST” leading at least one popular magazine of the day to write that “tubes were dead”.

Well, tubes are still in wide use to this day, but tubeless advantages were well known and tubeless systems were readily available for 26″ers at the advent of the modern 29″er in 1999. Early adopters wanted tubeless tires on their big wheels too, but of course, there were no UST systems available, and no tubeless conversions yet for 29 inch tires. That didn’t stop riders from trying though, of course. What resulted was a string of failures mostly due to the different physics at work with 29 inch wheels. Tires were made with segmented beads, or beads that were up to 26″er strength standards, but used tubeless in a 29″er size, were too weak. These tires were failing left and right. Even using some early 29″er tires and rims with tubes was causing intermittent failures. Riders blamed loose fitting tires, or undersized rims, but it is also worth pointing out that this was all new territory for manufacturers and new methods for making 29 inch product was obviously necessary.

Several things have happened since those earlier times. There are dedicated tire/rim systems for tubeless out now in 29″er sizes with a decent amount of selections that satisfy most riders. However; there still are several tire and rim manufacturers that have not publicly stated they are selling products that are tubeless compatible, or are saying so in a very subtle way. This leaves riders with a situation that is ambiguous and the lack of manufacturers leadership in terms of what does and doesn’t work is troubling to many riders.

The result is that today a rider opting for a tubeless system may go with a complete system, or in many cases, a choice between competing systems components mixed together, and finally may end up with doing their own conversions on components not specifically designed or approved for tubeless uses. How does one know what works and what doesn’t? That is a good question that raises debates on forums, trail heads, and in bicycle shops all across the world. Trial and error still reigns supreme in the area of finding out what will be reliable as a tubeless tire set up for 29″ers.

This writer has experienced several intermittent sidewall failures in converted tubeless tires.

While this is not an ideal situation for 29″er trail riders, it is interesting to note that the rate of failures has decreased from the earlier days. I recall one tire manufacturer’s employee telling me that they were taking their entire line of 29″er tires, converting them to tubeless, (using a “ghetto system” popular then), and hearing several explosions from the room where the work was being done. The results were one extremely latex soaked employee and a total redesign of the tire line up for 29″er sizes. Interestingly, this company still does not offer tubeless ready 29″er tires. That said, we also do not hear about failures running these particular tires anymore either.

So, the question is are tires and rims being designed with possible tubeless conversion “abuse” in mind? Maybe. It is obvious that manufacturers that do not produce tubeless ready products are making modifications to older models or designing new product that, if not done with tubeless conversions in mind, are certainly making it easier for riders to convert these products. That said, failures still occur. Sidewalls in tires meant for tubes have extra stress placed on them when run tubeless and may fail. Rims not designed for tubeless conversions may still allow tires to pop off the bead seat. Combinations of tires and rims designed for tubeless use may not be compatible with each other, causing more troubles.

2010 is bringing more tubeless compatible rims and tires to riders. Hopefully a “standard” will be reached at some point which will allow riders the peace of mind that the tire and rim they have chosen is a compatible pairing. Perhaps a time will come when all 29″er tires are tubeless ready out of the box. Maybe all rims will come with sealed inner rim walls or recommended rim strips to make tubeless set ups less experimental. Until that time, converting to tubeless tires on a 29″er can still be fraught with peril.

Expect to see the Gary Fisher/Subaru Team campaigning the Superfly 100 on the World Cup Circuit in 2010.

Technological Advancements Overcome Disadvantages: First it might be a good idea to ponder how we got to this point at all. It wasn’t all that long ago that any serious racer in the Pro ranks would have laughed you out of the room if you suggested that a 29″er would someday be ridden to a podium placing in a World Cup event. Yet, that has happened now. How could this be? Twenty nine inch wheels are too heavy, sluggish, and the geometry is all wrong in comparison to 26 inch bikes. The wheels are flexy, the frames are unweildy, not suitable for the twists and turns of a race course. So they said.

The short answer is that technology was brought to bear upon the core components of 29 inch wheeled bicycles. Forks finally reflect the geometry necessary to give 29″ers better handling and created a way for designers to fit smaller people in the process. Frames were tweaked to reflect this with better head angles. Frames received tapered head tubes which stiffened the main triangles to match the rigidity found in racing 26″ers. In conjunction with this, carbon fiber has been employed to make 29″er frame weights rival and surpass those of many 26 inch wheeled race bikes. Wheel weights have come down dramatically while stiffness has increased by leaps and bounds.

But one can argue, and rightly so, that the same things can be applied to 26″ers, and the gap is still the same from 29″ers. Well, while 26″ers still enjoy an overall weight advantage, the gap between the 29″er and 26″er has been narrowed significantly. But that is not all………

The Trump Card: The reason I believe we will start seeing a growing tide of twenty nine inch riding Pro racers is because of the big wheels advantages which now far outweigh the weight penalties and especially so since flex issues have been mitigated through advanced technologies. What Pro wouldn’t want a wheel that rolls over stuff better and is more stable in rough, down hill sections? What Pro wouldn’t want the better tractability of 29 inch tires, and the momentum saving characteristics of the bigger hoops shod with fat rubber? Obviously, concerns with weight and flex were holding big time riders back from trying the wheel size, but with the 2010 season nearly here, and with the bikes available to sponsored Pro riders now, will it be long before seeing a big wheeled XC rig is just no big deal? I don’t think that day is far off.

When The Tide Turns: My belief is that the tide will really begin to turn when we start seeing the stalwart European 26 inch riding Pros dabbling their feet in the deep waters of 29″ers. When these riders see that their American counterparts are bringing it every weekend at the World Cup level, I think the “wheels” will start turning in their collective minds and even European based brands will be seen whisking prototype big wheelers around the pits. Think that idea is far fetched?

Having any 29″ers in World Cup at all was far fetched only a short time ago.

So will 2010 be a breakout year for 29″ers in Pro racing, or a bust year? My feeling is that we will certainly see American based 29″er adopters racing big wheels. Gary Fisher/Subaru, Specialized, and Niner Bikes being no-brainers there. But I do not think we will see any huge swing in 29″er use this year. However; if 29″ers continue to show up on podiums in World Cup and other Pro level races in 2010, I say watch out for 2011! Racers want the edge, the technological advantages, and whatever “mojo” the winners seem to be relying on for themselves. You can bet that it won’t take long for racers to be seen at least dabbling in big wheels in the future if 2010 proves to be another good year for 29″ers in racing.

If the 29″er doesn’t show so well this year at the races, well I don’t think it will break the bank. Certainly there will be those that say the wheel size isn’t suited for Pro level racing, and minds will be tougher to convince otherwise, but my feeling is that 29″ers are here for the long run. I don’t see the big wheelers being abandoned by the folks that have embraced them at the top levels yet. It would take more than one year of poor results.

So neither boom nor bust for 29″ers in the racing scene for 2010. But I can assure you a lot of eyes will be upon those that are campaigning the big wheels in 2010.

Votes were counted by me and my decision is final. That said, let’s get on with this………….

Number 3: The Gary Fisher Bikes Superfly 100: Well, in terms of complete bicycles this one ran away with the voting. No other complete bike mentioned by readers came close. The Superfly 100 was a mid-season introduction that not only took Jeremy Horgan-Kobelski to two National Championships, but it also became a much coveted rig late in 2009 by weight-weenies and 29″er enthusiasts alike. For this full suspension rig to rival the weights of their 26 inch brothers is amazing. That this bike is such a stunning improvement over the previous HiFi platform is even more amazing. Add to this that the frame is made in the U.S.A. of OCLV carbon and it is icing on a pretty tasty, very fast cake. The Gary Fisher Superfly 100 grabs #3 on the Reader’s Choice list for 2009.

Number 2: Niner Bikes Carbon Fork: The long awaited carbon fork from Niner Bikes hit the trail in 2009 to rave reviews from most riders. (Pictured above is a prototype from 2008 Interbike) With its technology borrowed from road bikes the continuous carbon fiber strands dictated the final, striking shape of the fork. Of course it is a durable unit, but it also undercuts all other carbon fiber forks for 29″ers in weight as well. Added to this is the more mainstream fork geometry adapted for this fork, which was a departure from what Niner Bikes had previously used, and you can see why this fork was such a hit with Twenty Nine Inches readership. The Niner Carbon Fork- Number 2 on the Reader’s Choice list for 2009.

Number 1: Bontrager 29-3 Tires: These tires were a surprise contender for #1 and just eeked out the Niner Carbon fork in the voting. These tires, as I stated in my pick for them in the Top Ten List, are really two separate tire models being marketed under the same model name. So maybe it is a bit unfair, but there it is. The readers have spoken and they have deemed the Bontrager 29-3 tires as the Number 1 29″er related product of 2009.

Congratulations to the three winners in the voting. They are all certainly fantastic 29″er related products that only a mere three years ago were unimaginable to have in riders hands now. Thanks to all the riders and manufacturers that have pushed the envelope of 29″er technology this far. Here’s hoping for more in 2010! Finally, thank you readers for voting and especially for reading Twenty Nine Inches. Here is to a New Year full of big wheel riding and big time smiles!

That said, let’s get on with this……

Number 2: Rock Shox Reba Team with Maxle Lite 20mm Through Axle: In 2007 we were hearing rumblings that the classic Reba fork for 29 inch wheels was going to get a make-over. That was finally confirmed early in 2008 when we layed eyes on the new Reba for the first time. Finally, SRAM announced at Sea Otter that year that the new Reba would be in riders hands by late June. That got pushed back, and pushed back, and finally in late 2008 Twenty Nine Inches received a 120mm travel Reba Team with a Maxle Lite 20mm through axle to test.

Why It Made The List: The original Reba for 29″ers was an instant classic. For a time it was the benchmark in 29″er forks which all others were shooting for. Instead of resting on their laurels, SRAM/Rock Shox came out with something to keep them in the game concerning 29″er forks. Not only that, but they introduced the easiest to use, lightest 20mm through axle for 29″ers out there. Still using the excellent, smooth Motion Control damper, the fork was otherwise totally improved over the original Reba.

My Two Cents: The Rock Shox Reba Team is one of those products I see as a highwater mark in the development of the modern 29″er. It made having a front suspender on a 29″er a legitimate, performance enhancing component on the same playing field as its 26 inch brethren were on. No longer were twenty nine inch riders going to have to “put up with” something less than what 26″er riders were getting with front suspension devices. Nope! The Reba Team is stiff laterally, tracks straight with zero flex induced wheel deflection, and has a very competitive weight for a longer fork. The Maxle Lite is brilliant. Light, easy to use, and stiffens the front end noticeably. I said when I first used it that it would kill the traditional QR. I still believe that. The Motion Control damper, (a BlackBox unit on the Team fork) was smooth and easy to set up. Travel was great. A bit of a ramp up at the very end, but generally smooth and linear feeling. The air springs held air really well and the day to day living with this component was a breeze. Moving to a modern offset for 29″ers with this model was also greatly appreciated.

Sure, there are other nice 29″er forks out there, but Rock Shox was the first widely available through axle fork with the easy to use Maxle Lite for 29″ers, and was light, stiff, and had a 46mm off set which brought the company into the forefront of 29″er forks once again. The Rock Shox Reba Team with the Maxle Lite 20mm was a game changer for many riders and it is why I made it #2 on 2009’s Top Ten list.

What will grab the coveted #1 spot on the Top Ten list for 2009? Stop by tomorrow to find out!

That said, let’s get on with this……

Number 3: Milwaukee Bicycle Company 29″er: Last fall, in 2008, I was contacted by Ben’s Cycle, a bicycle shop out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin with an on-line shop that does really well in fixed gear, urban hipster rides. Well, their in-house brand, Milwaukee Bicycle Company, also makes a 29″er steel hard tail and they wanted Twenty Nine Inches to look into it. So we did. All winter long and into the spring, the Milwaukee frame was ridden until it was time for the final review in May.

Why It Made The List: The Milwaukee Bicycle Company 29″er is steel. And for a tig welded steel 29″er, this frame rides with a spring and comfort that other materials just can’t quite match. The long-ish geometry was stable and forgiving, making the Milwaukee rig a bike you forgot about so you could just have some fun. The sliding drop outs were trouble free and operated as I expected when making a cog change. It was a very fun, comfortable, predictable, and great performing frame. One that I was happy to pull from the stable and ride every time I had the chance to.

My Two Cents: Well, what can I say other than this frame was a good time. A really good time. The frame didn’t have total stiffness laterally, but it wasn’t flexy to the point of distraction, or even enough to fret about. It had compliance that rivaled titanium, yet more snap, more spring. Folks wax poetic about fine steel frames, and I suppose that is where I am headed. If you ever had a steel frame you thought was awesome, you already know what I mean. The Milwaukee 29″er was just a great bike to have underneath you on a trail ride. This one was set up as a single speed, which I liked as a single speed. It did single speeding well. You could race it, but in my mind, this was the bike to get to just go ride on without any specific purpose other than to have fun mountain biking. And if a bicycle can inspire you to just ride, to have fun, then I would submit that the Milwaukee Bicycle Company 29″er is that bike. It ranks #3 on the 2009 Top Ten list.

That said, let’s get on with this

Number 4: Misfit Psycles diSSent Frame and Fork: In January Twenty Nine Inches took delivery of a Misfit Psycles diSSent and also a matching flat black aluminum diSSent fork. After attempting to do a budget build, the frame and fork was then ridden a bit by myself, then passed off to Captain Bob, then back to me again. In the meantime, Grannygear built and rode a diSSent up for a time and wrote up his findings on it. This was the most extensively tested 29″er product on the site this year.

Why It Made The List: The diSSent is a purpose built single speed rig, (but it can be run geared by using full length housing runs), and is purposeful in look as well. A bent top tube provides plenty of clearance, and frame gusseting provides a strong front end with little flex. The sliders were trouble free, and the ride quality was better than you might expect for a budget priced aluminum frame. The fork, which is also constructed out of aluminum, was marvelously light, compliant, and laterally stiff, beating some carbon forks at their own game.

My Two Cents: It is hard to argue with the simplicity and purposefulness of the diSSent frame. It just plain works. It rides better than “old school” aluminum, but it is a stiff frame and some folks will want to run a suspension fork out of the box. I liked the trouble free sliders, but wished for a bit more adjustment there, as the they didn’t accommodate a change in cogs without a half link. The fork, which is light, was really a nice ride for a rigid fork and tracked well in corners and on off camber trails. For the price of entry here, the value is high for single speeding freaks. Given that the diSSent outperforms a lot of single speed frames costing far more, this is an amazing bit of 29″er fun. If the sliders would have had a bit more adjustment, the diSSent would be rated higher on this list, but as it is it grabs the #4 spot on 2009’s Top Ten List.

The top three choices are coming up! Stay tuned!

Don’t forget to add your pick for the 2009 Reader’s Choice Award! See the post here to vote

That said, let’s get on with this

Number 5: Bontrager 29-3 tires: Back in 2008, Bontrager let it be known that the 29″er tire line up was going to be overhauled. Promising new, 29″er specific designs, Bontrager set out to give wagon wheelers their own designs for their rigs. One of the first designs to come out was the 29-3. Introduced just before Sea Otter, the design is a front/rear specific tire system with each tire being so radically different from each other, they are often paired as front/front, rear/rear on bikes.

Why They Made The List: The 29-3 tires really have to be judged as two separate tire models. Since that is how they are being used, for the most part, even on Gary Fisher 2010 bikes. So, taken as that, these tires offer two things that Bontrager didn’t have in the line and are also offered in the excellent TLR models which works flawlessly as a tubeless system with Bontrager wheels. The “front” 29-3 is an excellent, high volume, all around trail tire while the “rear” 29-3 is a fast, grippy racing tread.

My Two Cents: The Bontrager tire designers snuck one over on us by developing two models of tires and selling them under the same model name. Well, all the better for 29″er riders in the end. The “rear” 29-3 is not a very big tire, (nominally a 1.85″ by my measure) and it isn’t going to wow anybody on everyday trail rides, but taken as a race tire, it shines pretty well. The tread pattern grips beyond what you would believe for such a skinny little devil and of course, in the TLR format it sets up tubeless really well. The “front” 29-3 is a killer all around tire that excels in lateral grip and has a tallish profile, not unlike the Continental Race King. I liked the way it cornered and braking traction was excellent. Of course, I ran the tires as a system, which was the way I was introduced to them, but in reality, they are better paired as I am describing here. Due to that bit of confusion, the 29-3 tires are a bit frustrating at times for folks at shops and for riders buying them. Bontrager needs to split these into two different named models, which would be best for everyone. That said, they are excellent tires for two different types of riding and grab #5 on 2009’s Top Ten list.

Stay tuned for #4 on the Top Ten 29″er Products Of ‘09 list.

Don’t forget to add your pick for the 2009 Reader’s Choice Award! See the post here to vote.