29er Comes 7th at Downieville

[enduramil]

Well, it would appear that properly set up one could build up a 29er tough enough.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=432956

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=4673637#post4673637

[Smoke]

Downieville isn't exactly the Shore.

Or even downhill.

[Oldfart]

Maybe he would done better on a 26er. How tough a course can it be if he did well on a hardtail? Not to belittle the guy. 7th and 9th is awesome. But It ain't the bike, it's the rider.

[kperras]

Its funny cause the shore is exactly the place where 29ers would have a big advantage as far as XC and AM are concerned(for the appropriate sized rider of course).

[walleater]

Its funny cause the shore is exactly the place where 29ers would have a big advantage as far as XC and AM are concerned(for the appropriate sized rider of course).

If the wheels were still round when you got to the bottom.....It's all XC.

[Smoke]

[Unclear on the concept of The Shore]Its funny cause the shore is exactly the place where 29ers would have a big advantage as far as XC and AM are concerned(for the appropriate sized rider of course).[/Unclear on the concept of The Shore]

[Oldfart]

Its funny cause the shore is exactly the place where 29ers would have a big advantage as far as XC and AM are concerned(for the appropriate sized rider of course).

I have never ridden a 700c mountainbike but from what I have read, their weakness is tight twisty technical stuff. They do not accelerate as well as a smaller wheel and corner different. So I would think that a 700c wheeled bike would not be optimal for the Shore.

What I find humerous is how 700c proponents seem to suggest that bog wheels are as good as suspension. Sure buddy. I believe you. No question that bigger wheels will roll over junk better, but it is not a replacement for suspension.

[J0SH]

I love to have a 29er just to rip around on and say "hey, I got a 29er" but I wouldn't want it as my main trail bike.

[kperras]

Oh I'm quite clear on the concept of the shore, thanks. I'm just saying that bigger hoops roll over stuff easier. They're not a replacement for suspension, just an add-on. And for those that argue with statements of poor acceleration, that's all nilly willy crap that racers in california spew out. The effects are small and barely noticeable.

The biggest things with these bikes is sizing. If you fit 26" wheels, then stick with it. Why do kids ride 16", 20" and 24" wheel sizes? Same reason why people who are over 6' can ride 29ers just the same as the rest of us on 26 wheels.

[SEKTER13]

Why do kids ride 16", 20" and 24" wheel sizes?

I still ride 20" wheels... :(

[Oldfart]

Oh I'm quite clear on the concept of the shore, thanks. I'm just saying that bigger hoops roll over stuff easier. They're not a replacement for suspension, just an add-on. And for those that argue with statements of poor acceleration, that's all nilly willy crap that racers in california spew out. The effects are small and barely noticeable.

The biggest things with these bikes is sizing. If you fit 26" wheels, then stick with it. Why do kids ride 16", 20" and 24" wheel sizes? Same reason why people who are over 6' can ride 29ers just the same as the rest of us on 26 wheels.


Oh yeah, no question bigger wheels are probably better for tall riders. Not me at 5'5" or less. I'm old and decreasing. Some folks might the difference in acceleration negligable but I don't. I almost always go for the lightest tire and rims that I think will hold up. I will sacrifice durability for climbing ability. And climbing from a physics calculation standpoint is constant acceleration even though your speed is constant.

[sprinter]

It's not the size of your wheel but how you use it. :D

[walleater]

Seeing that Oak Bay Cycles are in their words part of the '29er revolution', maybe some peoples comments need to be taken with a pinch of salt ;)

I don't get the argument over tall riders needing larger wheel sizes. Tall people ride BMXs fine, and a mountain bike will roll along the ground in the same way whether there is a 4' midget or a 7' giant sat on it. Bigger wheels might suit taller riders aesthetically but if you are riding gnarly trails then a taller rider is even more likely to bend big skinny wheels than a 'normal' person. I've only looked at a couple of 29ers up close and both had buckled wheels, and neither rider was a North Shore God.

Maybe Sun Ringle will release a 48 spoke 29" Doubletrack. That'd be perfect for the North Shore Niche Freaks ;)

[SammyJ]

People used to ride 24" wheels on the back, right?

Now everyone laughs at themselves for trying it.

Maybe in 10 years everyone will be on 29'ers and laughing at 26" wheels.

[mattj]

Maybe in 10 years everyone will be on 29'ers and laughing at 26" wheels.

No.

24" wheels came and went while the vast majority of mountain bikers rolled on dual 26"ers. 29" wheels will follow.

Anyone remember those Barracuda bikes that tried this crap like 15 years ago?


-m

[Wayne P]

On a similar note in regards to sizing, Tony Pejril (6'5" ex-DH racer) always insisted on using medium bikes. He said because generally courses are designed by smaller riders on smaller bikes, thus larger bikes were too awkward on most DH race courses. Plus, bigger bikes are harder to turn and change direction. I never really thought about that before but I could see the validity of it, even if it is only for psychological reasons.

I suppose the same could be applied to 29'ers on certain race courses or trails.

[enduramil]

On a similar note in regards to sizing, Tony Pejril (6'5" ex-DH racer) always insisted on using medium bikes. He said because generally courses are designed by smaller riders on smaller bikes, thus larger bikes were too awkward on most DH race courses. Plus, bigger bikes are harder to turn and change direction. I never really thought about that before but I could see the validity of it, even if it is only for psychological reasons.

I suppose the same could be applied to 29'ers on certain race courses or trails.

Wayne, good point.

From personal experience based on riding in BC then moving here. One has to add terrain into the equation. Personally Ontario singletrack is not as challenging as BC singletrack. It tends to be more swwoping turns type riding.

First started riding my 26er here then invested in a 29er in May. The trails are more challenging for me on a 29er.

So, one would ultimately have to try one and decide for themselves if it will work in their type of terrain.

[enduramil]

I have never ridden a 700c mountainbike but from what I have read, their weakness is tight twisty technical stuff. They do not accelerate as well as a smaller wheel and corner different. So I would think that a 700c wheeled bike would not be optimal for the Shore.

What I find humerous is how 700c proponents seem to suggest that bog wheels are as good as suspension. Sure buddy. I believe you. No question that bigger wheels will roll over junk better, but it is not a replacement for suspension.

No, a don't believe a 29er for the shore would be the best tool selection.

Riding a complete rigid 29er I can state that the wheels in no capacity reduce trail shock. It's how you use your body, think back to less then 2" of suspension days.

[Smoke]

Oh I'm quite clear on the concept of the shore, thanks. I'm just saying that bigger hoops roll over stuff easier.

Taco salad rolls pretty slow.

[menehune]

29ers enrage me.

i ride every bike out of our shop each morning to our outdoor displays, but refuse to saddle up the niner.

hell, i don't even like touching the things.

or talking to people about them.

shit, i don't even know why i'm in this thread.

[enduramil]

Taco salad rolls pretty slow.

Hmm, Taco's.

But seriously, at the end of the day who cares what bike is used. What really matters is getting people out on bikes and riding trails.