Big, meaty rubber and high tech casing designs are finally making an appearance in 29 inch sizes.

It seems as if lots of riders are looking for something that isn’t available. A “mythical tire” that doesn’t exist, or something that is similar to what we have but is lacking in some critical area. While there are well over two dozen different tires that a big wheeler can choose from, what combination of traits is missing? What features are lacking? What is it that big wheel riders are looking for? Finally, do we really need it?

Here are some areas that I have seen talked about along with some of my observations……..

What the tires says on the sidewall is a big thorn in a lot of riders sides.

Truth In Sizing: This is probably the biggest burr under a lot of folks saddles. The inconsistencies in sizing have befuddled many a rider. Tires that are “measuring up” to what they claim are few and far between. Or- you have to wait until they are done stretching to get a width that matches the hot patch. Why can’t we get tires that measure what manufacturers say they should? Well, there are many reasons. One thing is for certain, it isn’t going to change much in the near term. 29 inch mountain bike tires are still a pretty new territory for many manufacturers. Getting zeroed in on size targets will most likely be better in the future. Still, the idea that all 29″er tires will someday measure what manufacturers claim to within a close enough tolerance to satisfy a majority of riders might be a bar that is set too high.

Tubeless/UST Tires: The other thing I see complained about a lot is why aren’t there more 29 inch tubeless and UST standard tires? Why are there different systems? Why can’t it be like 26 inch choices? Well, there are several reasons for this. First of all, even amongst manufacturers that offer 26 inch tubeless products, there isn’t a consensus in how tubelessness is achieved, and some manufacturers don’t believe it is the best for bicycles, (Although they may not admit this publicly). Add to this that making a 29 inch tire bead that will sustain the forces exerted on it by using it tubeless are very different than they are for 26 inch tires and you might see that a whole new set of design parameters must be employed here. That costs money, and the market for 29 inch tires isn’t anywhere in the same zip code as it is for 26 inch product.

Bontrager’s Tubeless Ready System tires and rims are one of the few tried and true tubeless systems for 29″ers available.

That we have tires that work tubeless for 29″ers now is pretty amazing. The debate continues though as to how to achieve this. With users being able to match up tires to varying degrees of quality in 700c rims and think that they can all be converted to tubeless use safely and reliably puts a red flag up in a tire manufacturers head. So some have gone with the integrated system approach, (Bontrager, Hutchinson/Geax with UST rims) and some have gone with a “wink and nod” approach to tubeless usage. Not really being forthright about whether their tires should be used tubeless, and not really advocating a rim/tubeless system. Now on the rim side of things it appears as though several manufacturers are going with what I am referring to as the “Stan’s Default” tubeless system, marketing their 2010 rims as tubeless compatible for 29″ers with a Stan’s strip. That’s great, but conveniently, tires are left out of the discussion.

Yes there are some tubeless systems that include recommended rims and tires. As for the rest claiming tubelessness, until tire manufacturers and rim manufacturers have tested and recommended combinations to riders as being “safe and reliable” it will be a sort of “latex roulette” that riders will have to play out for themselves in terms of what will work tubeless for wagon wheelers.

Sidewall/Casing Technology: Until 2009, 29″er tires were pretty low tech affairs in comparison to the same models in 26 inch sizes. Again, owing to the minuscule size of the 29 inch market compared to 26 inch product, this wasn’t really all that surprising. Still, riders complained bitterly about ripping sidewalls open as if they were riding balloons in a land full of knives. Now we are starting to see some new designs and model upgrades to a few tires that offer some sidewall protection. Bontrager’s “AR” casing, Schwalbe’s “Snake Skin”, and WTB’s “Inner Peace”/”Super Duty” casing technologies are some examples here. This, of course, all comes at the expense of weight. However; this is an encouraging sign for choices in 29″er tires, and perhaps an indication that big wheels are gaining more ground in the marketplace compared to 26 inch wheels, at least in America.

Speaking Of Weight… This is an area where the desires of 29″er riders and the realities of physics seem to be leading divergent paths in many cases. On one hand, riders are asking for bigger, more voluminous casings with big knobs, they still want to be able to run them tubeless and have sidewalls that won’t wilt at the sight of a jagged rock. Yet when the tires that come out with any sort of casing technologies added and have a decent knob size, they are panned for being too heavy. The tires everyone seems to reference in these discussions of width and volume fail miserably on the tubeless reliability scale or the toughness scale. Sometimes both. And we haven’t even entered into tread pattern and knob size discussions. I’m sure tire manufacturers are left a bit confused by this, as the “magic elixir” that will allow them to make this mythical tire still eludes their grasp. If someone ever does solve that riddle, rest assured that they will own a big slice of the 29″er pie in tire sales. (I won’t be holding my breath for that one, however.)

Is It Really Necessary?: Then the question should be asked- do we really need a bigger, wider, lighter, tubeless tire? When you go back to the first true 29″er tire- the Nanoraptor- and consider how much can be done with that one tread pattern, with tubes inside, one has to wonder just what all the fuss is about. Now I am not saying we shouldn’t have the choices we have, but we have a lot of really good choices. Just about any sort of riding one can do on big wheels has an excellent choice in tires that will work for that riding style and terrain. Sure- we can dream up new desires and voice opinions on what would be nice to see. That said, I think a bit of reality would be well advised for those that are looking for something in a 29″er tire they don’t find in the ones they are using. There are limitations.

Now I invite you to comment on what you would like to see in tires for 29″ers in the future. Be realistic. Be nice! ( I will delete non-constructive comments at my discretion) Tire manufacturing/marketing guys are reading this, so let ‘em know what ya’all think out there!

Is the Intense 2951 prototype the next step in 29″er development that will ultimately affect all 29″ers?

Why 29 DH? Maybe the question should be asked, “Why do a 29″er DH rig?” It is a legitimate question, but whether you fall on one side of the fence or the other on the 29″er DH thing, what really matters is how this will all ultimately affect 29″ers over all. Make no mistake, this DH thing will change the 29″er landscape, no matter if it gets accepted or not. To make the leap to big hit, gravity driven wagon wheeling, components are being developed, and are already in place, that will affect how everyday trail riders on 29″ers will ride in the future. It will affect what they ride on. It will affect the performance of 29 inch wheels, forks, and frames. In my opinion, it will refine the 29 inch wheeled bikes in a good way.

You may not agree that a 29 inch wheeled bike will make a good, serious, race winning down hill bike, but there is no doubt that much is to be learned from the experiments on those big wheeled gravity sleds. Down hill racing, and the technology to do it well, will lead to technologies and ideas for those big wheelers that can be trickled down to full suspension rigs, tires, and forks that trail riders will use in the future on 29″ers.

And of course, the whole 29″er DH thing might just work out after all. Time will tell, and very soon, it would seem.

29″er custom bike sales don’t figure in to the totals at all.

Now, a company that specializes in “specialty retail market intelligence, consumer research, and relationship marketing solutions” called Leisure Trends Group has been tracking sales in the supply channel of bicycles to the retail outlets. This information is available now, not only to retailers, but has been reported in BRAIN in it’s latest issue. BRAIN writes, “One question on everyone’s mind at Interbike was how the 29-inch mountain segment is performing at retail.” That is something a lot of the riders of big wheelers have wondered as well.

Why does that matter? Well, to some it signifies whether or not certain advancements in 29″ers are justified or not. Things like long travel 29″ers, UST tire selection, and more suspension fork choices. The theory is that if the numbers show a big chunk of mountain bike sales are big wheels, then the companies that are into making parts for 29″ers and the companies that are into making complete 29″ers should “up the ante” and give the riders what they are demanding.

So, what do the numbers from this companies research show? Apparently, a panel of 232 U.S. retailers were monitored and the findings were that of all mountain bike sales in the specialty retailer segment, 4% of those units were 29″ers. That’s right folks. 4%. Now, that’s for every mountain bike from the lowest price point to the highest. Of course, we all know that finding a 29″er under a grand is not all that common, so let’s take another look. If we chop off the lower end, below $800.00, the numbers are looking like this: 19% of the market is 29″ers and in this range, if we take only front suspended hard tails, 29″ers are 47% of that pie.

So what? Well, this doesn’t tell us 29″er freaks anything we really already didn’t know. For one thing, viable, readily available “big brand” full suspension bikes in wagon wheeler format are still pretty new. (Fisher FS 29″ers not withstanding) Speaking of Fisher, their own numbers indicate that the 29″er format really didn’t pick up a ton of steam for them until 2007, only two years ago. So it shouldn’t be a shock as to why certain segments are not showing up yet in this one particular companies survey.

Then there is the survey itself, which consisted of what is reported as “232 U.S. retailers”. The National Bicycle Dealers Association reports that there are approximately “4300 specialty retailers selling bicycles” One has to wonder then if the 232 retailers sampled are a representative field of retailers that even sell 29″ers. Obviously the chance for the sales figures of 29″ers to “slip through the cracks” of this survey are rather high.

The manufacturers seem to have a different idea on the numbers. While out at the Interbike Outdooor Demo, it was easy to see that several companies had invested thousands of dollars of research and development into bringing some pretty impressive 29 inch wheeled product to market. Hardly a move one would suspect if the numbers of 29″ers sold are as meager as the survey suggests they are. Especially in the full suspension market. My guess is that this first glimpse into what the numbers of 29″er sales are is just a vague, foggy one.

Finally, I would suggest that if what I am observing has any veracity, then I would say that there is nothing much to this survey. My feeling looking around is that the future of 29″ers looks pretty bright, no matter what the number crunching wonks may say.

There has been some loud clamoring for bigger travel 29ers lately, and in some cases, the response has been the development of five, six, and even seven inch travel bikes, the Dissent and Kodiak tires from WTB, and wider and stronger rims like the Salsa offerings including the Gordo. At the other end is the huge following of riders who have found 29ers to be the perfect platform to enjoy a rigid approach to off road by eschewing any suspension at all besides knees, elbows, and aired down tubeless tires.

I am no luddite, so if you want to ride a big travel 29er and you can talk some builder into making one, then buy it and go ride happy. But, as with 26” bikes which seem to have settled on 5” of travel as the point of balance for that wheel size, and as frame and suspension technology has been refined to the point we have today, 5” of travel could be argued as being the ‘sweet spot’ for 26ers. Even if manufacturers are able to produce a 6” travel bike that is as light and pedals as well as last years 5” version, the issue gets to be that very few average Joe riders need 6” of travel. There are exceptions, so don’t get all innerweb vicious here. I know that some parts of the globe are rough and tumble or you just love to huck off of whatever is in your way. But most riders in most parts of the nation on most trails that are not made from boards nailed to tree stumps ending in 8’ drops are well served by a 5” travel bike in a 26” wheel. They still climb well, all things considered, they are fairly light, and they are not too costly. It works. It is a bike that you can take nearly anywhere and it will get the job done.

We found this Santa Cruz Tall Boy to be a representative example of “The Sweet Spot”.

So it is with 29ers. I have said it before and I will say it again. One of the best things about 29ers is that they do more with less, not more with more. Look at all the hardtail and rigid riders flocking to the big wheels, in fact, many are new converts who would not be caught dead on a rigid 26” bike. I would not ride a hardtail 26” bike. Go even further and take away the suspension fork and on small wheels it is a beat down of epic proportions. The big wheels make it fun again. So, if there is a sweet spot for 26ers, is there one for 29ers? I think there is.

So where is it? I am making a case that 4” is that sweet spot. Depending on the way the bike is set up or tuned, you can have a Superfly 100 or a Big Mama. That is quite a range of bike performance and feel going on there. Recently I have found myself drawn to thoughts of a 120mm fork on a 120mm rear suspension 29er. But recent rides on the Tall Boy and the Epic Marathon 29er (not quite 100mm of travel, but close), along with time on the Rumblefish and the GT Sensor 29ers on that same day, got me to thinking that I likely will not go that direction. A 4” 29er can still climb well and be decently light. The 4” Lenz Leviathan is a standout frame for its weight vs. performance. The new carbon stuff is even lighter. A 100mm fork is still a fighting weight and, with a 15mm or 20mm axle, is stiff enough for trail work.

It has been said that 29”wheels are worth 1” of travel compared to a 26er, so that would make a 4” 29er the equivalent of a 5” travel 26er. I think that is somewhat true, the exception being true drops and jumps where the diameter of the wheel cannot save you any grief. But for stoking down a trail, over and around things, the big wheel does feel very capable with 100mm of travel. If I could have one bike and it was an FS, I would point my wallet at the 4” mark. I could go to Moab with that bike and have a good time. I could race a 24hr on it. I could easily run with my buddies on their 5” 26ers.

If I rode like some of the Rocky Mountain “long travel ambassadors“, I would choose otherwise, but that is no different then making that same decision for a 26er. It does depend on where you live and what you ride and getting the right tool for the job. But in this Editor’s opinion, the tool for the average everyman 29er rider looking for full suspension is very well served by 100mm/4” of travel. And bikes in this range are getting very good indeed. If, in a few years, 29ers evolve to the point where 120mm or 5” is no more of a penalty to overall performance than 4” is now, I may re-think that a bit. Until then, there are some amazing bikes out there that will give you a great riding experience with relatively little suspension. Don’t get caught up in the more is better mindset. Sometimes more is just that…more.

Four inches of FS travel and 29” wheels; in the words of Ralph Kramden, “How sweet it is!”

grannygear

With the spec that Shimano’s 12-36T cassette is getting on 29″ers these days, there is a lot of chatter about gearing for the big wheeled bikes again. Not that there hasn’t been any discussion of this, it goes all the way back to the dawn of the modern 29″er. However; now that the gearing choices have been more equalized, the chatter hasn’t been all praises. Here are my thoughts on the matter…………

The Gary Fisher Rumblefish I is one of many 2010 29″ers that will be spec’ed with the Shimano 12-36T cassette.

Why The Low, Low Gears?: These 12-36 cassettes and previous to that, any talk of 20T granny gears, got a lot of folks wondering why? Couldn’t you just get stronger, lose some weight, or walk faster than that low a gear? Well, maybe the answer to that is yes, but maybe it is something different. I used to adhere to the “walking is faster” train of thought, but after talking to some high mountain riders and bikepackers, I suddenly saw where the really low gear made sense. Then there is personal pride in conquering an obstacle without setting a foot down, or in old school parlance, “without dabbing”. This is an old badge of pride that you either get or don’t, but I can certainly respect those who want to do it all on two wheels if possible. Maybe one could get more fit than they are, or maybe “life is getting in the way” of that goal and low gears allow that person to more fully enjoy their riding. Who is to say that is wrong? I say, if it makes you want to ride your bike more- go for it!

Is it a marketing ploy to play on the 29″er thing?: The whole thing is cooked up just to sell more product to whining 29′er freaks, eh? There will always be conspiracy theorists, but really, this goes far beyond 29″ers. Back in the early 90’s you could buy all sorts of gizmos to reduce gearing to wall scaling ratios. And that was on 26″ers! Maybe the desire for low, low gears isn’t as tied to the wheel size as we might think. Is it psychological then? Maybe it is, but so what? If it gives that person an edge to do more than they would have without it, no big deal. And although it may come as a surprise to some, Shimano and possibly others to follow are in business to make money. If they feel there is a viable market for a product they can sell to make money, why shouldn’t they? If that is a marketing ploy, then I’m all for it.

Exercise Your Options- Or Not: So what of this 12-36T cassette?, (or any other gizmo for mountain biking, for that matter) Bottom line: It is another option. A viable option, one that you can vote for with your dollar, or not. If it doesn’t make sense to a particular person on any level, than no one is going to force you to get on board with it. Even if you buy a 2010 rig with one of these cassettes on it, you are getting it at a below wholesale price, and you should be able to take off the offensive bit and replace it, while selling the 12-36T to cover your “upgrade” piece. That sort of thing happens all the time with mountain bikes.

Choices Are Good: In the end it is just another choice that gives the 29 inch wheeling mountain biker another tool to use. Maybe you want a killer range on a 1X9 set up, or you want a great 2X9 set up that will allow you to stay in the big ring more. Maybe you are a rock crawlin’ high alpine rider with a bent towards bikepacking. These and other uses are a great place to think strongly about a 12-36T cassette, or different choices for crank gearing. It’s just another choice to help some of us get around off road, and that’s all good.

Guitar Ted

Let’s take a quick look at the contenders for the tensioning job and point out some pros and cons.

A stainless steel faced track end.

Track Ends: Track ends, or horizontal drop outs, are the oldest method of tensioning a chain for a single speed drive train on a bicycle. It is extremely effective and extremely simple. Most commonly used on bicycles built to be ridden in velodromes, or “tracks”, the track end got its name from this use, but now you see this type of drop out in wide use today on fixed gear bikes and some mountain bikes. Track ends require the use of bolt on axles for the most part.

Pros: As stated, these are simple. There really isn’t much you can do wrong here, unless you get the wheel bolted in crooked. The track end is mechanically sound, and speaking of sound, it is silent in use. They are durable too, and with no moving parts to get lost or futz with, these seem to be the perfect solution to tensioning a single speed bike, unless………..

Cons: Well, unless you are running disc brakes, have trouble with slipping the axle forward, and if you want to have the versatility of running gears. Disc brakes are really the biggest problem here. (Karate Monkey owners all say “Amen!”) When you change gearing on a disc braked single speed with track ends, you also have to adjust the rear brake caliper. This also may or may not come into play while removing a wheel, where some issues may arise with getting your rotor to clear the caliper. Sometimes loosening the rear caliper is necessary. Another con is having to use a chain tug, which is necessary if you are getting axle slip. This adds complexity to what is supposed to be dead simple. Not a deal breaker, but also not great. Finally, running geared will require some sort of additional piece on your drop out to accommodate a derailluer, or if the frame is like a Karate Monkey, and has a integral derailluer hangar on the drop out, you may need to use a special “plug” to keep the axle from moving from the ideal position in the track end. More futzing! Not to mention the fact that you probably will need to carry a wrench to remove the wheel anyway.

Eccentric bottom brackets come in many variations. Here is a split shell type.

Eccentric Bottom Brackets: No, we’re not discussing bottom brackets with odd behaviors, this refers to an insert in an oversize shell with an offset threaded aluminum hole that you thread a traditional bottom bracket into. This then can be rotated, and effectively “swings” the bottom bracket in an arc that can be used to tension a chain. The method of securing the aluminum insert into the over sized shell that is part of the frame varies. Some use an internal expanding wedge, like a Bushnell eccentric bottom bracket. Some use a “grub screw”, or pinch bolt that essentially pushes the eccentric into the frame from one side. Then there are split shell eccentrics which, as the name implies, have a split outer shell that is fitted with threaded bolts that pinch down upon the aluminum insert, preventing unwanted eccentric rotation. All use a traditional vertical drop out in the back that allows for easy wheel removal and the use of quick releases.

Pros: Eccentric bottom brackets allow for the use of a traditional drop out in the rear of the bike which means you can use a traditional quick release instead of a bolt on axle. No chain tensioners, no messing with disc brakes, and if the drop out has a derailluer hanger, conversion to a geared set up is a breeze. So, why isn’t this the best method?

Cons: Eccentric…creak…bottom brackets can….creak!…be noisey, which can be rectified, but usually requires a tear down of the bottom bracket assembly. Not easy. Sometimes they are prone to seizing up, which can be really annoying, and the opposite, slipping, is also an issue. Some eccentrics, especially the pinch bolt type, can cause a frames EBB shell to ovalize, thus ruining the frame. Not to mention that in general, frames are heavier with an eccentric bottom bracket.

Sliding drop outs, like the one shown here, have been widely used as a chain tensioning solution for single speeders.

Sliding Drop Outs: As the name implies, these drop outs move, or “slide” in a slot to achieve tension on a chain. Like the eccentric bottom bracket, sliders allow for the use of a quick release. There are several versions of sliding drop outs in use, but in principle, they are all basically the same.

Pros: Sliding drop outs can be set up to have the brake mount be part of the slider. This makes for trouble free wheel removal. Of course, a quick release can be used, and adding a slider with a derailluer hangar is usually an option. So why aren’t sliders the way to go?

Cons: Sliding drop outs can slip, making your chain tension go slack, and can cause you to throw a chain. Not only that, but on bikes with tight tire clearances, a slipping drop out can cause contact with the tire and frames chain stay. Getting a slider to stay tight requires extra washers sometimes, and getting enough tension on the slider bolts without stripping out threads or rounding out bolt heads can be tricky with some designs. Sliders look clunky to some, with the bolts and modular pieces breaking up the lines of a traditional seat stay/drop out/ chain stay look. Some designs are cantilevered out from the junction of the seat and chain stay to the point that breakage of the frame is a concern.

Conclusions: While each style of single speed chain tensioning mentioned here is popular, not one can be agreed upon, and each has its detractors and fans. All are in use on 29″ers. I have used all three extensively and in several variations. I have experienced problems with all three, and have had great success with all three on separate bikes. In my opinion, I like the EBB or slider best because I can use a quick release. Of those two, I like the way an EBB system looks the best, but I have ridden creaky EBB’s that drive me nuts, so that isn’t always a great way to go. That said, in my opinion, my choice for the best chain tensioning device is the split shell eccentric bottom bracket. I do like several sliding systems, and the new style that will be coming on the 2010 Superfly SS is very intriguing. That said, I’ll be happily single speeding on about any of these styles of chain tensioning devises on any given day! They are all great when they work, and besides, I like bicycles!

The Rumblefish: Okay, let’s take a look at the spec on the Rumblefish and the geometry chart for it afterwards.

The Rumblefish II starts out with a Bontrager Rhythm Elite wheel set shod with 29-3 tires. The fork is the Fox F120 FIT RLC 29, 120mm travel, 15QR, and G2 of course. The rear damper is a custom tuned Fox Float RP23 with the exclusive DRCV canister. Featuring a boost valve and a three position Pro Pedal switch. The drive train is all XT with a direct mount front derailluer. Things get whoa-ed up with a set of Avid Elixir R model brakes.

The Rumblefish I goes with a set of Duster rims laced to a front “Bontrager” 15QR specific hub and a Shimano M529 rear hub. All this topped off with the 29-3 tires again. The front fork goes to a F120 RL 29, 15QR, G2 offset. The rear damper is a custom tuned Fox RP2 with the DRCV canister again featuring a two position Pro Pedal switch. The drive train is mostly SLX with a M542 crank and is all stopped by Avid Elixir 5 brakes.

Both models feature the same 6011 aluminum frame with the E2 tapered steerer compatible head tubes, ABP braking pivot, and hydroformed tubing. Both models also receive the new Shimano 12-36T cassette as well.

Geometry is as follows for head tube and seat tube angles with trail figures.*
Static: Head Angle-70 degrees, Seat Tube Angle- 72.6, Trail- 80mm
Sagged: Head Angle-69.1 degrees, Seat Tube Angle-71.7 degrees, Trail-86.3mm

*Note: Fisher gives figures for each size. I averaged out the numbers from Small to XXL.

The HiFi Line: Okay, now let’s compare to the HiFi line up…

The HiFi line consists of three models again, the HiFi Pro, HiFi Deluxe, and the HiFi Plus. All three share the same frame with a 6011 hydroformed main frame and stays, E2 tapered steerer compatible head tubes, and ABP braking pivot. The HiFi gets a traditional 11-34T cassette and 100mm travel forks.

HiFi Pro:Wheels similar to the Rumblefish II shod with XDX tires. The fork is a Fox F100 FIT RL 29 with G2 offset and E2 tapered steer tube. The rear damper is also a Fox- the RP23 with a three position Pro Pedal. The drivetrain and brakes are similar to the Rumblefish II.

HiFi Deluxe: Wheels again are similar to the Rumblefish I shod with XDX tires, The fork is a Fox F100 RL 29 with the E2 steerer and G2 offset. The rear suspension gets the Fox RP2 with the two position Pro Pedal switch. The drivetrain and brakes are again similar to the Rumblefish I.

HiFi Plus: Wheels go to Shimano 525 hubs on SSR rims shod with XDX tires. The fork is a Fox F100 RL29 with a standard 1 1/8th steer tube. The rear damper is the same as the Deluxe model. Drive train highlights are a mix of SRAM X-5 and X-7 with a SLX direct mount front mech.

Here’s your geometry for the HiFi line.*

Static: Head Angle-71 degrees, Seat Tube Angle-73.6 degrees, Trail-73.5mm
Sagged: Head Angle-70.1 degrees, Seat Tube Angle-72.7 degrees, Trail-80mm

*Note: Fisher gives figures for each size. I averaged out the numbers from Small to XXL. Also, the same figures for the HiFi are given for the Superfly 100.

Conclusions: Curiously, it would seem that the HiFi and Rumblefish lines are only separated by the front fork travel. Perusing the Fisher 2010 catalog, it is hard to find any spec on travel for the rear suspension of the Superfly 100, HiFi, or Rumblefish. (Or the 26 inch wheeled Roscoe, for that matter.) I had to resort to the official dealer book to find that the rating for the Rumblefish is 110mm rear travel and the HiFi is 100mm.

Is the full suspension line then really just a mix of “HiFi Lite” and “HiFi Heavy Duty”? The Fisher company line is that the Rumblefish is the “long travel” 29″er in the line up. Obviously the front fork lives up to the billing, and affects the geometry in a way that fits the category to some degree, but what about that rear travel? Of course, looking at numbers and geometry charts is one thing, riding is something completely different.

The HiFi and Rumblefish do have some impressive features, like the sub-18 inch chain stays, the tight wheel bases, and major improvements in the swing arm area. All very welcome things. In conjunction with the new front triangle, I am hopeful that Fisher has made the frame to be stiffer laterally and torsionally than the previous HiFi efforts. The ABP brake pivot and E2 head tubes will definitely point things in that direction, (and I felt the old HiFi had a very stout front triangle.)

Now if the Rumblefish can somehow make an additional 10mm of travel feel like an extra 20, then we’ll really have something here. Time will tell.

Racers like National Champion Jeremy Horgan-Kobelski have readily accepted carbon fiber frames as being an advantage. (photo from JHK’s Twitter pics)

Carbon fiber mountain bikes are nothing new, frames made from carbon fiber were showing up in the late 80’s. The technological breakthroughs in manufacturing and design have pushed the black fabric and resin concoction to the forefront of cutting edge bicycle design. Along the way barriers have been broken in weight and strength, but have the barriers been pushed back too far? This and the processes that are engaged to produce the material leave the average trail rider scratching their heads in wonderment. What frame or component is going to last and what one isn’t? Even though tougher testing standards have been implemented by the European Union and others in the bicycle industry, the question still remains a concern for many riders.

So why all the carbon 29″ers? Well, it is technologically the best material for the job, for one thing. It can be tuned to be stiff, compliant, light, and still remain strong. Many of these attributes play well into what makes a big wheeler a better bicycle as well. Torsional frame stiffness will be much improved along with the handling aspects that in the early production 29″ers was lacking, especially when compared to 26 inch wheeled bicycles. The carbon fiber 29″er has now made racing and winning at top levels of competition a reality. For racing, it might become the only frame material choice that makes sense for 29″ers.

Companies like Santa Cruz believe that carbon fiber is the way to go for trail bikes of both wheel sizes. Here is the upcoming 29″er Tall Boy. (from Santa Cruz’s blog)

On the other hand, will carbon fiber become a viable choice for the trail/all mountain/or free ride categories of 29″ers? Now 29″ers can be made to perform like their 26 inch predecessors both in weight and lateral stiffness, it is a possibility. As mentioned, testing standards are more stringent than ever. It is possible that used in the context that the frames are designed for, riders could expect that the bikes will hold up underneath them and deliver performance that was only wishful thinking for 29″ers just five years ago.

Rumor has it that Team Niner Ergon rider DeJay Birtch will be riding this frame at the Leadville 100.

Then one has to wonder how much these carbon frames will cost. If rumors are to be believed, most of these in complete bike form are going to be in the $4500-$8000 price range. In these economic times, the question is whether the market will support the new technological marvels. Time will tell, but the timing would appear to be a bit off in terms of where we are at with the economy. Keep in mind though that many of these projects were in the works long before the trouble hit late last year. Niner Bikes says they were working on their new Carbon Air 9 for the last 12 months, as an example.

Since performance promises to be a marked improvement, and if riders get a taste of the new benchmarks being set, it may be that a way will be found to subsidize riders desire for the best big wheeler money can buy. Carbon fiber is a labor intensive material to produce into a bicycle frame and unless technology can be used to replace the hand labor necessary, carbon fiber will not likely come down in price much if at all.

Is carbon fiber going to be the top tier material for all 29″ers then? Will the market forsake the other metal frame choices in favor of this man made wonder material? Not likely. The expense and riders mistrust of carbon will assure a market for other materials far into the future. That said, carbon fiber will be the material a lot of companies use to push the performance limits of 29″ers. However; some manufacturers have not given up on making metallic 29″ers to perform at high levels. Titanium and aluminum will still have their places, and perhaps even steel frames will still be tweaked further than we have yet seen. Twenty Nine Inches has learned that possible advances in aluminum forming technologies may one day rival carbon fiber for weight and strength. That is hopefully going to be a less expensive alternative as well, but we will have to wait and see.

So for now is carbon fiber the pinnacle of technology for 29″ers, the material that will vault 29″ers into the fore as the wheel of choice, or is it just an expensive exercise in technological wizardry that will never really be an influence on the average trail riding public? The answers are not clear cut, but suffice it to say that carbon fiber is going to be a big deal with big wheeled bikes in 2010.

While Giant made the new XTC-1 29″er rims tubeless compatible with a Stan’s rim strip, the tires mounted stock are not rated for tubeless use.

Why Not Go Tubeless From The Start? : The modern mountain bike rider is pretty information savvy. Tubeless benefits and performance are pretty well known and accepted by more and more mountain bikers everyday. To my mind it makes absolutely no sense to not have your product be ready to go tubeless out of the gate these days. Why not enhance the value and appeal of your wheels and tires by offering this as an option? Yes, tubes should be supported, and I still use tubes in many applications today, but if you are a serious mountain biker, you probably will be more tempted to buy a product that supports tubeless use than one that doesn’t.

I certainly can also see why manufacturers won’t be too thrilled with doing this. The technology to develop your own system, or get UST certification is expensive and time consuming. That said, a non-tubeless rim or tire is quickly being viewed as being “off the back” by mountain bikers. I agree that tubeless tires and rims that are reliable, easy to use and live with, and reasonably priced are the future of 29″er tires and rims.

Information Please: While this series of articles is hopefully shining a little light on this subject, it is by no means an exhaustive study of all products on the market and which are compatible with each other. Getting everybody on the same page might be asking too much, but would it be unthinkable for a rim manufacturer, lets say, to recommend tires for use as tubeless on their product? (Stan’s does this already). Or how about a tire manufacturer giving us some idea of how their product works tubeless on other tubeless designed rims? The conversation is pretty one sided on this score and the user group is the only one making any real noise here. I think that is a shame. The UST standard should be either opened to all manufacturers, or another system equivalent to it, so as it is with BB30 bottom brackets, users can all be assured that “this” tire can go on “that” rim without being a living, riding guinea pig. Oh yeah, and let’s not forget about sealants in this conversation either.

More Choices: With an “open standard” we could all expect more choices. That would be a good thing, since the way things are now, a tire manufacturer, let’s say, doesn’t have a clue what tubeless system the end user will try to match their product up with. Yes, as I suggested, they could test on all available systems, but as we march forward, and more rim manufacturers start offering tubeless compatible rims, this situation will need to be settled. With everyone on the same page as far as a standard, the tire and rim manufacturers would be encouraged to make product that supported tubeless use. The way things are currently, the manufacturers are not going to know which way to go in this regard, unless a UST standard becomes the accepted way to do things. (As it is for the most part with 26 inch wheels and tires)

The Bottom Line: In the end, how ever things shake out, we as mountain bikers ask only a few things: That the tires be reliable, the rim/tire interface be safe, and that the tires, sealants, and rims be compatible with each other and easy to use. If this starts to become a reality, the days of tubeless tires and rims for 29″ers will finally become like that of the 26 inch world.

What is going on here and how will it affect the average trail rider in the future? Let’s take a look at some of these things that I believe the best 29″ers on the planet will have as standard items moving forward.

Tapered Steer Tubes and Through Axle Forks: It is already happening, but I am certain that these two design features will totally take over the serious trail rider segment for wagon wheelers within the next two years. Yes- quick release forks will soon become a thing of the past, and tapered steer tubes will become commonplace, especially on 29″ers. Why? Why mess with years of tradition for this perceived benefit? Is it really that big of a deal that quick releases and standard 1 1/8th steer tube forks have to go the way of the dinosaur?

Yes.

I have ridden several of these bikes and with the combination of the tapered steer tube and through axle fork, 29″er handling is transformed to surgical precision. No longer will vague, flexy handling be accepted once riders start feeling the benefits of these two features that will become indispensable. In fact, I will go so far as to say that what we are riding now will be seen as laughable in perspective to how future 29″ers will handle with tapered steer tube technology and through axle forks. Oh yeah, and don’t forget the rear end of your bike either. Quick releases will be rare in the back end as well. The way through axles tighten up the handling of any 29″er is amazing, and at the very least, systems like DT Swiss’ ratcheting skewers will dethrone traditional quick releases in short order on 29″ers.

Wheel Technology: The difference in wheels for 29″ers today versus three years ago is already astounding, but here’s the kicker: Carbon fiber hoops will become the must have rim for 29″ers. These rims are super pricey, but I fully expect that marketing competition, and new manufacturing techniques will send prices downwards to the point that these hoops will become the single biggest performance enhancing upgrade that any 29″er freak will desire and be able to attain within reason. Carbon fiber sounds scary at first, but these new hoops will prove out to be longer lasting and lower maintenance than aluminum rims are today. Not to mention that they will lower rotational mass and increase lateral rigidity to the point that anything less will become undesirable in the realm of 29″ers. Perhaps only the wider, burlier trail/AM/Free ride type hoops will be aluminum in the future, but XC/trail riders will be gravitating towards the carbon fiber hoops in big numbers in the future. The ride and performance benefits are just too good to be ignored.

Tubeless Tire and Rim Technology: The tires and rims on your future 29″er will all be tubeless ready out of the box. Already I am aware of several rim/complete wheel manufacturers that are going to introduce tubeless ready wheels in their 2010 line ups. I fully expect that tire manufacturers for 29″ers will also gravitate more and more to tubeless ready tires exclusively. The demand for tubeless tires, rims, and the knowledge to do the tubeless conversions by riders is getting the attention of manufacturers and this will become a standard feature on your future 29″er. It won’t be long and the thought of anyone introducing a rim that requires a tube or a tire that requires a tube will be thought to be an odd thing for a wagon wheeler.

Drive Train Changes: The future 29″er rider can also expect to see some dramatic changes in the drive train of their 29 inch wheeled bicycle. Gone will be the days when you had to worry about gear ratios that matched 26 inch wheeled bikes. The Shimano 12-36T cassette is already trickling out, SRAM’s new XX system will have a 10 speed option with a 36T low gear, and others are following suit. Several two chain ring or Hammerschmidt type front set ups will appear with new gear combinations which will eliminate the need for a triple ring crank. New front derailluer designs are already making 29″er clearances better which will allow for shorter chain stay bikes to be developed. Hub designs are changing to allow for the higher torque loads of 29″er set ups and all of this will supplant the current 29″er set ups within a short time. All things which will increase performance and level the playing field for 29 inch wheeled bikes soon.

These are the main technological differences that have vaulted top level race rigs into the limelight as respectable, viable choices for certain courses by pro level athletes. Expect this sort of technology to become standard equipment on finer big wheelers everywhere in short order!