[Bigwheel]

There is no doubt that high volume tires and wider rims are getting attention right now. However the problem is that in order to get with the program you pretty much have to invest in a whole new bike which quite frankly is expensive. But there is a solution that is coming out courtesy of the good folks at WTB that will cut the cost of admission because all you will need is a wheelset and tires. Still $$ I know but not nearly as much.

The + size, while not considered fat by the true believers in that realm, still provides a good amount of volume and makes at least a good 3 season tire. But quite frankly if you ride packed trails in the winter it should be fine then also. The overall diameter of the TrailBlazer 2.8 mounted to a 40mm rim is a skosh under 29"es and basically the same diameter as the "tire" that started it all, the 52/47 WTB Nanoraptor. Because of this there is no change in the bikes geometry so using it in the front only is an option that many will probably do. The Trailblazer should provide very similar ride characteristics to 29+ and weigh less too.

The Krampus 29+ is undoubtedly popular and since its inception has gotten the + concept off to a good start. But as previously mentioned in order to experience it you have to sign up for a whole new frame, fork and a wheel set to boot. Ka ching. So by combining the right sized tire and using the smaller diameter 650b rim + sizing can be adapted to many existing 29" frames and forks, most importantly the suspension ones that the 29+ market is lacking.

WTB is bringing a 40mm wide rim along with the tire but due to the wider rim trend in general there are other options available in alu and carbon in the 650b format so getting a set of wheels together should not be a problem.

I say bring it on!

 

[dRjOn]

here here! any idea when these tyres will be available? this tyre is going straight on the back of my Jones when i can get hold of it! ...

 

[jonshonda]

As a clyde, I will gladly take the widest rims and tires that I have clearance for. Doesn't mean they need to be super aggressive tires, just want something with a decent tread that is large.

 

[Bigwheel]

here here! any idea when these tyres will be available? this tyre is going straight on the back of my Jones when i can get hold of it! ...

No idea, but not soon enough!

 

[bikeny]

You just spent a bunch of money for me, thanks a lot!

I've been riding my Knard 3.0 equipped Gnarverster and having a blast. The only problem is I have no interest in riding my perfectly good Black Sheep singlespeed with 'skinny' 29x2.4 tires anymore!

I think a set of Derby 27.5 40mm rims and the above tires would put the fun back in that bike.

I need them now!

Please!

 

[martin_uk]

I'm joining this queue too. I want to see details, measurements, delivery dates

 

[Slow Danger]

You just spent a bunch of money for me, thanks a lot!

I've been riding my Knard 3.0 equipped Gnarverster and having a blast. The only problem is I have no interest in riding my perfectly good Black Sheep singlespeed with 'skinny' 29x2.4 tires anymore!

I think a set of Derby 27.5 40mm rims and the above tires would put the fun back in that bike.

I need them now!

Please!

You could always send me your Blacksheep. I'll pay the shipping.

 

[bikeny]

You could always send me your Blacksheep. I'll pay the shipping.

Sure, no problem. Shipping is going to be REALLY expensive though!

 

[senor_mikey]

yea, I ran right out and measured my custom Matthews 29er. Only tight spot would be rear seat stays where I get 77 mm. If they come in around 68 mm wide I'd be ecstatic.

I figure with 35 mm Blunts they would be slightly smaller too.

mike

 

[rockcrusher]

There is no doubt that high volume tires and wider rims are getting attention right now. However the problem is that in order to get with the program you pretty much have to invest in a whole new bike which quite frankly is expensive. But there is a solution that is coming out courtesy of the good folks at WTB that will cut the cost of admission because all you will need is a wheelset and tires. Still $$ I know but not nearly as much.

The + size, while not considered fat by the true believers in that realm, still provides a good amount of volume and makes at least a good 3 season tire. But quite frankly if you ride packed trails in the winter it should be fine then also. The overall diameter of the TrailBlazer 2.8 mounted to a 40mm rim is a skosh under 29"es and basically the same diameter as the "tire" that started it all, the 52/47 WTB Nanoraptor. Because of this there is no change in the bikes geometry so using it in the front only is an option that many will probably do. The Trailblazer should provide very similar ride characteristics to 29+ and weigh less too.

The Krampus 29+ is undoubtedly popular and since its inception has gotten the + concept off to a good start. But as previously mentioned in order to experience it you have to sign up for a whole new frame, fork and a wheel set to boot. Ka ching. So by combining the right sized tire and using the smaller diameter 650b rim + sizing can be adapted to many existing 29" frames and forks, most importantly the suspension ones that the 29+ market is lacking.

WTB is bringing a 40mm wide rim along with the tire but due to the wider rim trend in general there are other options available in alu and carbon in the 650b format so getting a set of wheels together should not be a problem.

I say bring it on!

View attachment 887468

I saw this too and was intrigued. Thinking that it would fit well in the back of my Jones for some fat cush and weight loss as well as an option for the front as a half half fat when I didn't want to run full fat but then I realized I would need a set of 29er wheels, a set of 27.5 wheels and one fat 26er wheel just so I could swap around wheels for varying terrains and needs and then I was like "dammit my jones will take a 29+ tire too so one more front wheel".

What's a guy to do?

 

[Slow Danger]

What's a guy to do?

Wait for Jones to make a bike that fits fat wheels/29+ in the back as well. One platform. Every bike.

 

[rockcrusher]

Wait for Jones to make a bike that fits fat wheels/29+ in the back as well. One platform. Every bike.

don't tease me like that!

 

[Bigwheel]

If they come in around 68 mm wide I'd be ecstatic.
mike

No promises but it should be close.

 

[Bigwheel]

I saw this too and was intrigued. Thinking that it would fit well in the back of my Jones for some fat cush and weight loss as well as an option for the front as a half half fat when I didn't want to run full fat but then I realized I would need a set of 29er wheels, a set of 27.5 wheels and one fat 26er wheel just so I could swap around wheels for varying terrains and needs and then I was like "dammit my jones will take a 29+ tire too so one more front wheel".

What's a guy to do?

You must already have the 29" wheels and the 26" so all you need is a set of 650b's. Forget the 29+ as it will have minimal advantage over the b+, unless you want to jack your front end up an inch that is. Otherwise all the other wheel combo's should maintain the geometry you bike was designed with.

If you go with a new bike that is able to do fat in the back all your existing rear wheels will become obsolete due to wider spacing and chances are the front fork will also be wider, you will have to sell the wheels and your existing frame and that just sounds like a waste of time and money when stand alone fatbikes are so easy to get these days.

But unless you ride in really deep snow or sand alot the b+ may be all you need. At this time the + market is the least developed and opening up the possibilities via a tire like the TB is apt to fuel the fire as it allows for a greater number of people to get a feel for it for a lowish entry fee. Making your existing bike dual purpose without tweaking its geometry is a bonus.

The bottom line is that it is pretty easy to swap out wheels for your terrain needs and I personally never see a true one bike frame platform that does everything well enough to get by ever existing.

 

[senor_mikey]

The bottom line is that it is pretty easy to swap out wheels for your terrain needs and I personally never see a true one bike frame platform that does everything well enough to get by ever existing.

This whole 27.5+ thing sounds so right. You can run your skinnier 29 wheels for racing, if you want, and switch to some 27.5+ wheels for fun.

This happens all the time in the road bike world. Swap in some longer reach brakes and add some 40mm 650B wheels and boom, perfect dirt road bike.
With discs it's even easier.

mike

 

[Slow Danger]

The bottom line is that it is pretty easy to swap out wheels for your terrain needs and I personally never see a true one bike frame platform that does everything well enough to get by ever existing.

I understand that including every single possible wheel size available to mountain bikes may be a bit, uh, over-entusiastic when it comes to a single frame. But am I missing something when a 26 inch fat tire, a 27.5+ tire, and a 29er tire have nearly the same outer diameter, and adding 29+ on the front--or both front and rear--shouldn't do anything to change the geometry too dramatically? I don't know that dropping from 27.5+ down to 27.5 would drop the bb enough to cause serious problems. And the new 1X systems will solve the chain stay length issues to a degree. I think the only outlier is using a 26 inch skinny tire, right? I get that wider bb's will change Q factor, which bugs some people. However, I don't understand why the "one bike platform" is out of the question.

I'm not trying to make an argument here. I don't know enough about frame design/geometry to understand all the ways subtle changes affect handling. I'm just seeking clarification.

 

[dRjOn]

fwiw: i have a jones that i have ridden with 26x4 (nate) front with 29 (x2.2) rear, 29 rear and 29+ front, 650bx2.3 rear and nate front and of course 29 fr and rear (2.0->2.5 maxxis DHF) there IS a little shiftng fore and aft. the 29+ is significantly bigger diameter than a 29 and the nate is smaller than a standard 29 by enough to be noticeable. my favourite combo so far is the 29x2.2 rear 29x2.5 front, but i also really like the knard up front in 29+….if it were a better tread, id keep it on.

im keen to try the 27.5x2.8 rear with both nate front and 29+ front (as it sounds like 27.5x2.8 is a hair smaller diameter than 29x2.2)

if maxis get the chronicle out soon, all the better!…

the jones easily accommodates a slight slackening without any bad handling quirks. it doesnt like the 29 rear 26x4 front quite so much and 26x5 front is a chunk heavier…


the trick in some ways is not so much bb height, for me at least it is the shift in steering geo you get with the slackening/steepening of head angle. it really isnt much, but you can tell. though you'd probably get used to it.

i think 27.5x2.8 will end up being extremely close in diameter to a 26x4 - that would balance the bike out nicely... nate on the front will be nice to try….those things grip like nothing else i have ridden…and with the 2.8 rear it would be a rock and root munching machine for sure…

 

[rockcrusher]

fwiw: i have a jones that i have ridden with 26x4 (nate) front with 29 (x2.2) rear, 29 rear and 29+ front, 650bx2.3 rear and nate front and of course 29 fr and rear (2.0->2.5 maxxis DHF) there IS a little shiftng fore and aft. the 29+ is significantly bigger diameter than a 29 and the nate is smaller than a standard 29 by enough to be noticeable. my favourite combo so far is the 29x2.2 rear 29x2.5 front, but i also really like the knard up front in 29+….if it were a better tread, id keep it on.

im keen to try the 27.5x2.8 rear with both nate front and 29+ front (as it sounds like 27.5x2.8 is a hair smaller diameter than 29x2.2)

if maxis get the chronicle out soon, all the better!…

the jones easily accommodates a slight slackening without any bad handling quirks. it doesnt like the 29 rear 26x4 front quite so much and 26x5 front is a chunk heavier…

the trick in some ways is not so much bb height, for me at least it is the shift in steering geo you get with the slackening/steepening of head angle. it really isnt much, but you can tell. though you'd probably get used to it.

i think 27.5x2.8 will end up being extremely close in diameter to a 26x4 - that would balance the bike out nicely... nate on the front will be nice to try….those things grip like nothing else i have ridden…and with the 2.8 rear it would be a rock and root munching machine for sure…

Good to hear! I am really excited about trying a 27+ in the rear of my jones to complement the 26.4 nate. It would be the perfect mix for my terrain not that the 29er rear is a bad solution, just occasionally, especially once i hit a fast section I can touch the bead on a hard impact with a sharp rock ledge of which my trails are primarily composed of.

I have never lacked for grip out back, just the extra wouldn't be bad for descending traction and my god it would corner even better than it does all ready.

I too notice the minute difference between the Nate and a comparable 29x2.4 tire. Not sure if it is the contact patch difference or slight height differences but the 29 front wheel feels much less stable on fast corners and I have to modify my body position slightly to get more weight over the front. Again this could be my reaction to the infinite grip of the nate compared to the just good grip of the 29er tire. Still I think a 2.8 all around would be really interesting.

I would most certainly be interested in a bike that could run the gamut of wheel sizes, as I have little interest in suspension, tire choice is my means of tailoring my ride for certain trails and terrains. A fat jones diamond combined with my jones truss fork would be the perfect solution. Just wish he would get around to making it. With 27+ it isn't like you would even need a 29+ capable frame, just leave it for the fork and get me a rear spacing I can get a 26x4" in.

 

[Slow Danger]

I've ridden the Jones in 29, 29+, and Fat front. The dramatic--word choice relative--difference in handling for me comes with the 29+. Skittery, fast steering. If I rode more buff trails, at long distances, I'd like it more. With the newer fat rims coming at much lower weights, I'm starting to get tempted to sell my 29+ and my 26 inch fat wheel and build up the lightest possible fat front I can afford. But all three front versions has its charms.

27.5+ sounds great for the rear, but I think I'll wait until there are more tire choices this time around, at least until we get real-world reports on this WTB tire…and real-world widths. I jumped on the 29+ pretty early, and thankfully, there appear to be around 3 more tires coming out. But that's still only 4 tires total to choose from.

 

[Slow Danger]

BTW, Vee Tires is making a 27.5x3.25 tire. Apparently, there are some companies wanting to build a platform around it. I don't know that a 3.25 tire would fit in the rear of any existing 29ers, but for maybe the 29+ bikes.