Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

41 - 60 of 1501 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
708 Posts
Nice. Maybe next year they will allow it to cover all 3 sizes 26, 27.5 and 29. But by then the new 28.125" tire will be all the rage so you will still be missing the one everyone wants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
I believe the settings are supposed to be very incremental, to be "future-proof".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
I would say I'm mildly interested.
- If the bike is designed to run on 26x5 tires, then 27.5x4 (same tire diameter) would roll faster without compromising frame geometry in case 29x3 isn't enough traction/float/etc…
- Want a faster rolling 27.5x4? You don't have to use 80mm rims, they would work fine on 50mm rims, which there are an abundance of on the market. I've used 26x4 on 50mm rims, they are still very capable if traction is needed (I used them down to 7 psi).
- There are not many fast rolling 26x4.8 tires on the market (back to the bikes built around 26x5 tires, frame geo), tons of 26x4 tires though!
- I'm really interested in the 907 full suspenion bike (prototype at the moment) that can fit 26x4.8 on 100mm rims. This option would work well without effecting geometry (27.5x50mm rim and 4” tires is what I would run), I'm not interested in 29x3. Why am I particularly interested in this bike? I already have a 65mm Nextie/I9 wheelset built for my Blackborow that would fit this bike.

What I don't like about it is there is only one tire available in 27.5x4… If there were as many tires available in size as there are for 26x4, I would have had a wheelset built for my Blackborow. As of this time I am not interested in 27.5x4 for lack of tire selection, but I see the benefits as I stated above.

To each his own...
 

·
.44
Joined
·
1,248 Posts
I'll admit I am intrigued. After having tried 29+, I'd rather stick to fat. 4" would be great for summer time riding, but it does lower the BB a bit for a bike measured for 26x5". This would enable running slightly lighter 4" tires during the summer without the BB height drop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
628 Posts
Stand over is stand over - regardless of wheel size. Do you honestly think top tubes are 3" higher than they were back in the day of the 26" bike?
With many small fat bike frames having stand overs of 30+ inches....yes I do. Used to be small frames had stand overs of 27 inches with 26 inch tires. Look at a small fat boy, it has a stand over of 757mm....thats 30.25 inches !....here a link to prove it.

Specialized Bicycle Components
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
That's a frame design problem, not a wheel size issue. Look at the Nimble 9 or Ventana El Gordo, or Norco Bigfoot and see if you can figure this out. Specialized is just being stupid with their top tubes/seat tubes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Yep, they'll all slowly come around I think - or if they know what's good for them they will anyway.
Dropping the top tube and using a gusset to get stand over is a no-brainer. I think Specialized is just being stubborn and not wanting to look like they're copying Trek or other makers, but really there's no other solution. The stand over on the Fat Boys is ridiculous - I couldn't get my wife sized property to one.
 

·
Lord Thunderbottom
Joined
·
913 Posts
I'm going to weigh in here, at first I had the same WTF mentality as most of the responses here

Last night I rode a farley 8 back to back with my blackborow on the same super rooty climb, I'm so used to climbing with the blackborow that the slightly smaller wheel diameter seemed to hang up more, it felt like a lot more work and I was almost stalled twice

It was not a traction issue, zero wheel slip on either bikes, picked the same line up the roots as always

I'm committed to riding fat all year round now, my 29ers see very little trail time and I'm pretty sure the farley 9 is the trail bike that will replace my FS29er

I've tried 29+ and 27.5+ different tires in both sizes and they give up too much traction and cush for my tastes, 27.5x4 retains the tire diameter that I'm now used to riding and is sure to shed some weight and a little tire flex as well, I think it's a good option for summer fatties, 26x5 will always be king of ungroomed snow, this new size will only be marginally better than 26x4 in snow

Assuming you're a tall enough rider to be comfortable with the size, I'm 6'2" these larger diameters feel natural to me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Yeah, I can see that - and I'm on board in theory.
What I need though is 2 things. I need a 65mm rim to maximize weight savings and give me a round tire profile...and I need more tire options. Give me those 2 things and that will be my second wheel set for the Farley 7.

I don't think mounting those 4" tires on the available 50mm 27.5 rims would work out so well.
If someone has direct experience that says differently, I'm all ears.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Where are you getting 50mm rims? Do you mean second wheelset? The bike are coming stock with 75or 83mm rims.. Well the Wampas are 83mm I presume the jackalopes are similar to the 26ers which have 75 internal
Stock rims are 80mm on the 7 (which is what I ordered) and yes I'm talking about a second wheel set.
 

·
Lord Thunderbottom
Joined
·
913 Posts
I don't think mounting those 4" tires on the available 50mm 27.5 rims would work out so well.
If someone has direct experience that says differently, I'm all ears.
Quite a few folks I ride with are running 4" tires on 47-50mm rims, surly rabbit holes or schlick northpaws, one of them even ran dillinger 5's on the neon trials rim last season, never burped or anything when I was riding with him, I can't speak to ride quality on that big of a size difference, for summer riding the schlick 47's with 3.8 knards was pretty nice, surprisingly not too much tire squirm at about 8-10psi
 
41 - 60 of 1501 Posts
Top