Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - 29" MTB for a Clyde

Do any Clydes here ride a 29" MTB ? I'm about 6'2 and I was wondering if the bigger bike would feel better riding ? I'm a recreational cyclist - just trails and neighborhood rides. I noticed that most 29er's have a front suspension fork and 32 spoke wheels. Is there a 29er built for a Clydes weight with a stiff fork and 36 spoke wheels ? I currently have a 21" frame Specialized Hardrock and I think I may need a slightly bigger (taller ?) bike ?

I test rode a 21" frame 29 Hardrock...

LOVED IT!

it is the most comfortable bike I have ever been on...

(I'm 6'6" and 265lbs)... I would actually own one but my Dr. put the stops to my riding for the time being (shoulder injury)...

go test ride one... just take the appropriate amount of $$$ with you :D

I went 29er this year and I have had the best riding year ever. I am 51yo and 255#. I ride a GT Peace Multi. It is a full rigid. I beat the livin hell out of it with no problems so far. (1300 miles since Feb.)

Some will tell ya that you need the suspension. If you are a hardcore trail rider or serious downhill in technical stuff then maybe, but being a Clyde, the gain in power transfer with the rigid is well worth having to use the knees and elbows for the bumps.

Do it and you will be very happy you did. I overkilled today and rode 30 miles, with 12 miles of that being single and double track. All good.

Kind of depends on what terrain you're riding as to whether or not a 29er is any better, but for the vast majority of my regular trail riding and racing, my Kona Unit 2-9 has proven to be at least as fast and more fun than my trusty Kona Hoss.

It's got a rigid fork, but as soon as I've got the cash to do, I'm dumping it for a suspension fork with a lockout. I just can't handle the high speed descents on rough terrain with the rigid fork, I end up having to back off some.

The wheels on this are proving incredibly tough- 32 spoke on CR18 rims. Without any kind of suspension, this bike takes some hard, hard hits- not to mention the stress of me mashing up climbs in the single gear, but they just keep trucking right along.

After the fork, I'm thinking an internally geared hub might be pretty cool on this bike.

I went 29er this year and am having a blast. I bought a Gary Fisher X-Caliber with a Fox front suspension fork with lockout. This is my second mountain bike, and I do love it. I am riding a lot more single track since I bought it, and my only complaint is the sharp turns in the switchbacks can sometimes be tougher with the bigger wheels. Otherwise, I can highly recommend it. There's a lot of good ones out now, either hardtail or full suspension. Specialized makes several nice models at all price ranges. Somebody told me Gary Fisher is making only 29'ers for 2010, but I haven't confirmed that.

What are the pro's and cons of 29" vs 26"?

All a 29er is just a hybrid with knobby tires. Same rim size.

All a 29er is just a hybrid with knobby tires. Same rim size.

Uh, no. 29'er mountain bikes are a completely different geometry than hybrids, and the geometry even varies substantially among manufacturers of 29ers. The wheels on my hybrid are 27", not 29" as you suggest, and many of the 29" tires are much wider and higher volume than the 27's. 29ers are available as full suspension, hardtail or rigid.

I'm no expert on mountain bikes, but I've spent considerable time on both 26" and 29" MTB's, and I notice quite a bit of difference between them. One of the primary advantages of the 29er is the larger wheel diameter gives more rolling momentum, thus making it easier to roll over obstacles and also easier to keep speed once you're going. The downside to that same feature is that it takes more to get going from a stop. I also find the bigger wheels more difficult to turn in tight spots, and you may find your toes dragging on the front wheel when turning, although using clipless pedals solved this problem for me.

For my intermediate level MTB riding, I'm staying with my 29er. The frame geometry fits me better. I find that I sit "in" the bike instead of "on" the bike, and it just feels better than my 26" bike. If I were just riding bike paths and fire roads, I'd probably go with a hybrid with bigger tires.

Uh, no. 29'er mountain bikes are a completely different geometry than hybrids, and the geometry even varies substantially among manufacturers of 29ers. The wheels on my hybrid are 27", not 29" as you suggest, and many of the 29" tires are much wider and higher volume than the 27's. 29ers are available as full suspension, hardtail or rigid.

I agree with all above. On my 26" Giant Ranier, If I so much as tip my head back while going up a steep, the front comes off the ground (no matter the settings). With the GT 29, have to try to pop the front and even then, almost nothing on the steepest climb. I am running fat sticky 2.35" tires. This ain't no hybrid. I also do not think a standard hybrid or comfort bike could stand the silly crap that I dish out to this bike.

What are the pro's and cons of 29" vs 26"?

Pros:

more ground clearance, easier to roll over things, larger frame size for us clydes

Cons:

less turning radius, some what limited tire selection compared to 26", "new" designs probably means lots of odd geometries as people try to find what is the best...

I just read that a 29" wheel is the exact same diameter as a 700c... that opens up alot of possibilities for a slick tired wheels set for urban duty...

when all settles down with my shoulder I will be obtaining one... Kona make some nice 29ers... as does NINER...

Uh, no. 29'er mountain bikes are a completely different geometry than hybrids, and the geometry even varies substantially among manufacturers of 29ers. The wheels on my hybrid are 27", not 29" as you suggest, and many of the 29" tires are much wider and higher volume than the 27's. 29ers are available as full suspension, hardtail or rigid.

I'm no expert on mountain bikes, but I've spent considerable time on both 26" and 29" MTB's, and I notice quite a bit of difference between them. One of the primary advantages of the 29er is the larger wheel diameter gives more rolling momentum, thus making it easier to roll over obstacles and also easier to keep speed once you're going. The downside to that same feature is that it takes more to get going from a stop. I also find the bigger wheels more difficult to turn in tight spots, and you may find your toes dragging on the front wheel when turning, although using clipless pedals solved this problem for me.

For my intermediate level MTB riding, I'm staying with my 29er. The frame geometry fits me better. I find that I sit "in" the bike instead of "on" the bike, and it just feels better than my 26" bike. If I were just riding bike paths and fire roads, I'd probably go with a hybrid with bigger tires.

Check the ERTO, both are 622mm.

I have a Giant touring bike with a 29'er suspension fork on it and the tires are WTB 700c x 35 Cross Wolf that works quite well on fire roads. The 700c cyclocross tires are measured to a 28" size diameter and the thing I notice is that it is a little harder to climb up steep ascending trails, but I'm ok with it because I figure when I do ride my 26'er it will be easier. But as it has been said riding down hill the taller tires eat up the bumps quite nicely and the tire size rachet up to speed quite more swiftly, which makes it one fun ride to experience. So if you aren't riding steep hills then you won't have any problems with a 29'er, but if you do be okay with the extra effort that it will take to spin up a hill. That's my 2 cents.

I just read that a 29" wheel is the exact same diameter as a 700c... that opens up alot of possibilities for a slick tired wheels set for urban duty...

The ERTO-ISO diameter is 622 either way. Trying to mount a 2.1" wide tire on a road wheel... or a 23mm road tire on a 29er rim is not going to work, mind you.

Also, just because I think it's an interesting point to make, if you were to measure the diameter of the wheel, including tire, you'd find that a narrow road tire on a 700c rim and a wide mountain bike tire on a 26" rim are within a few cm.

I'm about 330 lbs and 6'2", I'm wondering if the 32 spoke rims on a 29 and the front suspension fork would hold up to my weight ?

sure I started riding at 300 with an older suspension for on a 32 spoke Trek 850 singletrack...

like Nike says... "JUST DO IT!"

I'm about 330 lbs and 6'2", I'm wondering if the 32 spoke rims on a 29 and the front suspension fork would hold up to my weight ?

There's a great suspension fork for a Clyde, the Tora Solo Air 318. Cheaper forks have coil springs, they don't make a spring for riders over 200lbs. You can pump an air shock up to handle your weight. The Tora also has steel upper tubes instead of aluminum, that's key for a 300+ lbs rider.

The 32 spoke wheels aren't the issue as much as the rim, no substitute for 600gm, eyelet'ed rims with 36 spokes. Most bikes will not come with wheels that are going to stand up to 330lb rider. High end bikes are sold on the basis of overall weight, rims, tires and tubes are the cheapest way to lower weight. Plan on buying new wheels, Bicycle Wheel Warehouse has some great deals on clyde worthy wheels.

One negative for clydes riding 29ers is the wheels are never going to be as strong as a 26" wheel. Also there are really cheap 26" all-mountain wheels available from several venders, 29" wheels, not as many choices, usually higher priced.

I bought a Marin Alpine Trail last August and enjoy it quite a bit, if your in real technical stuff it is a little slower to respond than a 26" bike but you get used to it. Mine is very smooth and easy on you over rough terrain. I would ask to ride one for an hour or try to rent one to make sure. I'm 6' and 235lbs and ride a 19" frame, no problems in over a year of riding.