Mountain Biking - Rigid 69r hardtail or
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
05-24-09, 01:02 AM
Edit: Just realized I get wordy late at night. Sorry about that. Also I don't remember where I was going with the or in the title.
I'm kinda trying to decide what to do with my Forge. It really is a good bike and I am happy with it for the most part. I don't like the Manitou Black that I have for it because it is way undersprung for my fat ass. ATM it is still stock but with a ridiculous set of BBB Freebars. Its like 2.5 inches of stem rise and another 2.5 of rise on the bars so pretty damn high. Its fun like that but now I feel like there is to much overlap between the Forge and the Shadow.
I am thinking about doing a 69r SS coversion. From what I gather, since the bike is designed with a fork with an A-C of 454mm so I would need I need a rigid fork with an A-C of about 425mm to keep things the geo about the same. Does this sound right? What is the minimum A-C to clear a 29in tire? Just want to know so I can think about how steep (or not) I want to go. I am also thinking a no rise stem and flat bars are the way to go with this to keep the front low.
05-24-09, 09:30 PM
Man, I thought at least Ed would chime in on this one
05-24-09, 09:40 PM
Have you test riden a 69-er ?
Some people have issues with the rear wheel... it kinda stops you, when the small wheel needs to climb the same obsticle the larger one had no problem with. ( that, or it bounces up. )
Based on that ^^^ . I would go with the FS, if you must get a 69-er.
05-24-09, 09:50 PM
Hmmm, the vast majority of the 69rs I have seen are hardtails. Not discounting your comment just saying this is the first I have heard of that issue.
I have a tank of a hardtail with a 140mm fork and that soaks up everything I have encountered (I am in KS remember so take this for what is worth) and I have never had an issue with the rear end hanging up.
05-24-09, 09:58 PM
What is a 69er? A bike with a bigger front wheel?
05-24-09, 10:04 PM
05-24-09, 10:18 PM
Oh, hmm, what, 29 front 26 back? And the purpose this serves is...?
05-24-09, 10:31 PM
But really its basically touted as having the benefits of both bikes. The ease of rolling of a 29 and the acceleration of a 26.
I just want it for something different.
05-24-09, 10:53 PM
The acceleration of a 26.. this reminds me of earlier today (well yesterday I guess) when two friends on foot and I decided to race. Me on my road bike. Thinking I would no doubt defeat them in a matter of seconds.. well.. I was wrong. It was a like 100 foot sprint.. and I wasn't going full speed haha. They won. On foot. Against a bike. If a longer distance, sure, I could catch up and win no problem, but the acceleration was rather unfortunate.
05-25-09, 08:13 AM
Thats why I said, some people ... :) One friend of mine had a used one for sale, almost got it, since it looks so cool. ( IMO would be a bad arse desigh for all the hard core DH riders, but i dont think it has made it there yet. ) Then another friend suggested me, to see if I still like it, after a test ride.
To me, its very dif. to judge an obsticle with the front wheel that just rolls right over everthing... the rear def. "hangs-up" & almost stops you dead... I even tried going faster, but then it bounces up and wants to buck you over the bars ...
Not that, I'm some expert or anything. Just my .02 $
Man, I thought at least Ed would chime in on this one
Hehehe...I've been outta town ;)
I sure am enjoying the rigid SS, man. It's a nice change from the norm. When I get on my front-suspended Komodo, I feel so comfortable like I can use every piece of trail to get some air or shred something. It accelerates pretty well for a 27# front-suspended bike and feels good.
When I hop on the rigid SS it's like a different kind of "cool". It still feels aggressive because the taller fork and slacker geo than when it had a Mag21...but it's so freakin' light (22.25#) and laterally rigid...Smallblock 8's are super fast, and I can feel each micro-knob buzzing by on hardpack/pavement b/c there's absolutely no suspension whatsoever...it's def. a different kind of "cool".
I love riding the rigid ss until I throw a leg over the Komodo. Then I'm like "how could I ride anything else?" Then I love riding the Komodo like madd until I throw a leg over the rigid SS. Same type of thing. It's like two totally different sports. You'll take out your Sette and shred some bumpy gnar for a while, decide you want a change of scenery on the same trail, then hop on the rigid 69'er and it's totally new. Get bored with that, and hop back on the 55r and bash some roots.
I'm not sure what the minimum A2C is gonna be for a 29'er, but if that don't work...build a 26r / 650b front setup.
You used to be limited by tires for the 650b, but you can get a 650b Kenda Nevegal now. Build up a 650b Stans ZTR or Velocity Blunt on your hub of choice, and you should be rockin'.
05-27-09, 10:28 PM
Cross post from empty beer (credit scrub.)
According to the Complete Axle to Crown Lengths Library the 80mm Dart1 that came on my Forge has an A-C of 454. The Tange Prestige 29er fork is 440 A-C, (the add copy for this fork found here says its suspension corrected, but at 440 maybe they mean corrected for a 26in?). If 29r tire adds 38.1mm to the height of the front end and the fork is 14mm shorter than stock this puts me at just under a 1 inch increase in height. Again according to the A-C library that will slacken my HT angle buy about 1.25 degrees.
Now for the actual questions, do my calculations seem correct and does this seem acceptable? Would a fork with an A-C of 420 work better by keeping every thing with in a quarter of a degree if so will a 420 fork limit tire options?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.