Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,470 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

Following motorcycle off road tech all bikes have bigger front wheels and smaller rear!

Will we see the 69er finally be the norm?

I have 26er, 29er, 69er and they all have good and bad traits but the 69er is in the miiddle and gives me the feeling of an easier bike to ride in most situations.

In another question on a 69er do you feel the rear tire should be wider than the front?

opinions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
650-9er?

I have an Ala Carte built up as a 69er. I was running 2.1 maxxis tires front and rear and the bike felt a bit awkward yet until I threw on a 2.55 Weirwolf light tire. Running the bigger tire in the back steepens the geometry back up and gives you a bigger contact patch for better traction. I'm digging it a bit more but I'm actually going to run a 650B on the rear as soon as I get my new XT hub in for my Blunt rim. I'm going to keep my 29" front wheel but I want to see if maybe the B will steepen the bike up enough again to warrant the big wheel up front. I'll post a ride report and pics as soon as I have the bike built up with the 650B in the rear. What would you call that? A 650-9er?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
madnessmoose said:
I have an Ala Carte built up as a 69er. I was running 2.1 maxxis tires front and rear and the bike felt a bit awkward yet until I threw on a 2.55 Weirwolf light tire. Running the bigger tire in the back steepens the geometry back up and gives you a bigger contact patch for better traction. I'm digging it a bit more but I'm actually going to run a 650B on the rear as soon as I get my new XT hub in for my Blunt rim. I'm going to keep my 29" front wheel but I want to see if maybe the B will steepen the bike up enough again to warrant the big wheel up front. I'll post a ride report and pics as soon as I have the bike built up with the 650B in the rear. What would you call that? A 650-9er?
I'd call it a B9er fewer key strokes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,598 Posts
madnessmoose said:
I have an Ala Carte built up as a 69er. I was running 2.1 maxxis tires front and rear and the bike felt a bit awkward yet until I threw on a 2.55 Weirwolf light tire. Running the bigger tire in the back steepens the geometry back up and gives you a bigger contact patch for better traction. I'm digging it a bit more but I'm actually going to run a 650B on the rear as soon as I get my new XT hub in for my Blunt rim. I'm going to keep my 29" front wheel but I want to see if maybe the B will steepen the bike up enough again to warrant the big wheel up front. I'll post a ride report and pics as soon as I have the bike built up with the 650B in the rear. What would you call that? A 650-9er?
I'd call it a Carver Bumblebee! :thumbsup: :D







 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,598 Posts
HEre's another example. More on the FR hardtail/slack variety:



Note, the driveway goes uphill a little and post photo I adjusted the saddle angle. She's a tad slack, but sorta fun in a way.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,227 Posts
NEPMTBA, this is an interesting thought. I've also gotten hot-and-heavy into this whole wheel size deal after experiencing our shop's 69'er ML8 and our 650B experiments. As I've said before, I'm one of those riders who doesn't do well with a full 29'er. Though I totally realize the benefit of a full 29'er in many situations with riders who can power them decently, there are riders in many terrain situations who aren't suited to them...regardless of the claims of some avid 29'er devotees.

There are also some real differences in the equipment and riding preferences between riders. There are some riders who are minimalists who like hardtails, rigids, short travel, single speeds, etc. Others like me, may prefer long travel, big hit bikes for their pleasure. There's nothing wrong with either venue. That ML8 I mentioned above was hoot to ride. I was impressed by the big front wheel and had no real pedal power issues when paired with the 26" rear. In the end, however, I missed the 6+ inch fork travel. I even swapped between the Maverick DUC32 29'er setup and a Van 36 with 26" wheel setup and actually preferred the 26" setup. I don't care how much David Copperfield froths at the mouth about the absolute superiority of the 29'er concept over everything else, the combination of a long travel fork and a 26" wheel makes a big difference as it pertains to roll-over ability and quality.

While I was in this quandry of 69'er vs. full 26'er, along came the 650B. After putzing with it for awhile, it seems to be the ideal setup for my needs. You still get long travel along with the tallest possible wheel/tire setup. I'm also coming to the opinion that you can have the 650B on both ends of a given bike without the acceleration issues that "I" experienced with a full 29'er.

The basis for my long-winded expose here?...there is no silver bullet. With three major choices in wheel/tire size being available now, there are a good number of options open to riders. Since it's obvious that not all riders use the same type of bike, ride the same type of terrain, ride that terrain in exactly the same way, or prefer the same setups, these three choices and the varying combinations of each can provide just about everyone with something that fits their needs and preference.

NEPMTBA, back to your dirt motor reference about wheel size. I'm a long time dirt motor guy, been riding dirt motors since the early 70's. I still ride and even have a 2-week dirt motor trip set up for Colorado next month. Dirt motor design has also constantly pursued the tall wheel/tire concept over the years. The limiting factor, just like with bicycles, has been the balance of long travel, wheel/tire size, and clearance. With an engine, spinning up taller wheels isn't as big an issue. Dirt motors traditionally have 21" front wheels and 18" rear wheels...with some 17" and 19" rear versions thrown in also. They even experimented with a 23" front wheel in the late 70's or early 80's, but the size was too extreme for optimum fork and geometry performance. Dirt motor manufacturers learned long ago that for their intended use long travel with as tall a tire as reasonable was the best pursuit. There is a direct correlation to bicycles here. Bicycles that are designed for high speed, technical, and very rough terrain mimic dirt motors more than any other bicycle. Maybe this is why I like bikes like the Nomad, Bullit, etc...dirt motor roots run deep...LOL! Regardless, bicycles must make compromises in design and setup to fit the rider's use and preference needs. The one major difference is that the rider is the measly engine, and with that limited power, weight, gearing, and efficiency are more critical. Wheel size comes into play here even though it's relatively clear to me that the biggest wheel/tire setup that one can use will probably provide the best performance...but...it must be balanced with the suspension, geometry, and pedalability to achieve what the rider is trying to accomplish.

There are other technical issues involved in referring to dirt motor wheel size and bicycles that could probably fill a book...critical rear wheel strength when being driven by a 50hp engine being just one of them. One thing is clear to me, however. Using the tallest wheel/tire setup is almost always a benefit when it's a size that can be used with the travel level desired by the rider, can be pedaled efficiently by the rider, is not so big as to be a hinderance in certain terrain or other conditions as it affects handling, and is strong enough to stand up to the abuse for which it's being used. With three definite sizes available now, I would think that anyone can find the balance they need/want by using one of these formats or any combinations thereof. And unless a person is just trying to fly in the face of physics to be different, these options should provide unique possibilities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,598 Posts
jayoutside said:
what frame is that? Looks way fun!
The gold (raw) frame is a Soul Cycles Titan. I bought it a couple of years ago on closeout from Soul and was pleasantly surprised to find out a Neomoto fits in the back. :thumbsup:
 

·
mnt bike laws of physics
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
Very well said TNC!

I would like to add that a persons height is going to play a factor in which size of rear wheel to use - especially is you like to climb steep stuff. Being tall myself, I am finding that a longer chainstay(which comes with bigger rear wheels) helps me to climb steeper loose stuff that a shorther chainstay bike. Also at slow speeds, the bigger wheel helps roll over obstacles when the suspension is not being activated by an impact...or if you don't have rear suspension.

Like TNC said, you should go with as big a wheel as you can accomidate that meets your suspension/geometry/strength/etc. needs.

For me, I rather have a bigger wheel in the front and less suspension - that suits my riding style the best. In the rear, there are not near as many advantages to having a large hoop except the one I mentioned above. At higher speeds I prefer a 26"(or 650b wheel) and just go with a grippy tread and have more suspension. A 29" UST tire would weigh very much and I need a quality tire in the rear to resist sidewall cuts/pinch flats etc. Because of its mass, it would be a bear to roll a 29" UST tire, even with the amount of power my legs offer. The front can go lighter because of less threat of cuts or pinches so a 29" tire is way more appealing...and the rollover benifits are much more noticed.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,227 Posts
Yogi, I gotta agree with you on the integrity of the front and rear tire issue. Especially since getting my Nomad 2.5 years ago, my riding in harsh terrain actually improved...as far as speed and technical riding. I began eating the same rear tires I had success with on other bikes I owned. I just about had to go to UST tires for the rear for trouble-free tubeless performance. The fronts have had almost no issues as far as punctures, tears, and rock pokes are concerned, regardless of the tires I've used. There's nothing wrong with the rear of the Nomad. It has clearly allowed me to be more aggressive, pick gnarlier lines, and go faster in rough terrain...hence the higher level of abuse on the rear tire.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,470 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
TNC:

Yes well put!

And as you know I am from the 1970s old school Moto group. I remember back in the day when everyone was running 18 inch rears I think it was Mitch Payton who slipped a 17 inch rear on Billy Grossi's Husky and swore he had faster lap times! By the way I still have 5 new Dunlops in stock at the shop from the Honda experiment with 20 inch wheel/tires for 4 strokes!... YIKES! :crazy:I do need (2) 23 inch wheel/tire combos for a few old school Honda vintage rides we are working on now! Sorry carried away off topic... :arf:

We still see the younger kids bikes motos in 2 sizes for taller kids. 17/19 and 16/18 wheel sizes. So that shows that the same motor used in both bikes is not a factor in frame/wheel a size vs person size!

I was never trying to compare Moto to bicycle yet just the varied concepts we all share now with 3 wheel sizes available in bicycles provide limitless possibilities.:thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
That's the bike I think I want, but . ..

Can you put a 29 in the back too? It looks like there is a lot of clearance. Does Carver monkey around with the geometry between 69er, 29er, Killer B and Bumble B or are they mostly interchangeable with different wheel combinations?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,598 Posts
gthcarolina said:
Can you put a 29 in the back too? It looks like there is a lot of clearance. Does Carver monkey around with the geometry between 69er, 29er, Killer B and Bumble B or are they mostly interchangeable with different wheel combinations?
Funny you should ask.

My prototype Bumblebee does have room for a 29er in back. You just have to pick the right tire or you'll get front derailleur rub issues. With the 29er in back it steepens up things and turns the bike into a more XC race type of bike vs the 650b/29er set up.



Although with Carver Titanium frames - you could work with Davis Carver to set up geometry how you see fit with very little or possibly no upcharge (just maybe a little bit longer wait time).

Cheers,

Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
So tell me, why did you choose 650 in back?

Do you think it has real advantages over the 29? There is a lot of theoretical discussion on these boards but it looks like you are really putting that bike through its paces.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top