wompwomp

I've seen lots of variations of "smaller rear wheel bikes," mainly of the 24x26" or 20x24" type. I was curious as to if anyone around had tooled around with a 29'er front with a 26" in the back?
I'm tempted to steal my friend's 29'er wheel and throw it on the front of my rigid 1x8 hardtail just to see how it changes the handling.

Landspeed7

Steal it and find out, what kind of brakes do you have?

DonValley

I bought a Kona Kula Deluxe this summer that was set up with a Kelly Rigid fork and a 29er front wheel. It road very well. The fork kept the geometry similar to the stock setup. I wanted a stock Kula though, so converted it back to a Fox 100 RLT with a new 26 inch rim. The setup is for sale if anyone might be interested. . (Velocity rim, Shimano Hub. Nice shape tire, Kelly fork with disc mounts).

CaptMatt15

Trek has a 29 front/26 rear bike commin out this year, a single speed with a double crown Maverick fork on it, the guy developing it for them (forgot his name) seems to be really enthused about it

Avidmtnbkr

Its actually called the 69er https://www2.trekbikes.com/bikes/bike...d=1048600&f=17

Funny name, couldnt imagine why they came up with this name. But i guess its a combo of 26 and 29 or twenty six nine er... without the twenty.

a2psyklnut

Carver Bikes has this setup, they call theirs the 96er. https://www.carverbikes.com/

dminor 

I personally think 29/26 is the wave of the future - especially for DH. It would be the bike equivalent of the M/C 21/18 combo, for all of the same reasons it became the standard 20 years ago.

I'm thinking about experimenting with a 29 front on my inverted fork in the off-season to see how I like it.

wompwomp

The carver looks wild, for a thousand bucks out the door, but the 69 looks a little bit steep for what i personally am looking for (something cheaper and less dual-crown perhaps?).

After looking around and seeing some of the various permutations and combinations of 26/29, I think I might try and find a fisher genesis or 29'er used to try this experiment out on.
Any other possible suggestions for frame types that this might work well with? I know a lot of norco's have 24/26 stuff built in, but I'm not really looking that way right now.

NormanF

I'm using a classic Gary Fisher Aquila frame for the conversion. I'd have to keep the fork length the same so to avoid changing the geometry too much and that means using a front disc brake - the Bontrager Switchblade is perfect for this conversion. I suspect any 90s hardtail with classic geometry will make a great 69er. Then you'd have an in-between bike to ride when you want to ride with something different off-road. Let's face it; few people like boring 26" hardtails these days.

scrublover

Meh. Even trying it with just about the perfect 26" frame to try it with (coming from a tall fork, so it would'nt whack my geo out from what i was used to) I really disliked it. Granted, I think it would have been better had things been steepened up more than by only a degree. IF you are careful about what frame you try it on, and what fork you use, it may work out for you. Me, I really, really didn't like the way the larger wheel handled up front.

https://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=282720

Cheque the rest of the 29er forum over there; lots of good info, if you're truly curious. I'm sticking with 26" for my riding. The experience owuld have likely been different on a full 29er or more built from the ground up, designed for it 69er/96er.

Dannihilator

From the little that I tested a 29er, I have to say I did not like it all. The bike felt too large to me, on the mountain I like my bikes a bit on the smaller side of things. The 69er thing you'll either like or dislike with a passion. Don't like that either, it looks really goofy to me, but then I also think the 26/24 setup is stupid.

NormanF

It could be the frame size. If you not over 6 tall, that limits your frame choices. If you're under 5'4" - forget about it. A 29er can't be designed for a very short rider without compromising frame geometry and ride qualities. Such riders are better off with a pure 26". As for different width tire setups all I can say is give it a try. I usually love trying out new things. Time will tell if I've made an expensive mistake.

NormanF

Too much slack perhaps. Its not the same as a 26" or a 29" - theoretically you're getting both the benefits and the drawbacks of both. But some people find the reality doesn't meet the theory so do give it a ride first to see if it lives up to your expectations.

scrublover

Exactly. I addressed that in my post; my bike normally has about a 69 degree head angle. I ended up with about a degree steeper head angle than I normally run. A shorter 29er fork may have worked better, but then things would have been way steeper than my tastes run. The next ride, with my bike's original setup back in place felt muuuuuch nicer to me.

I concluded it just isn't for me. To get the slack angles and the handling I prefer for where and how I like to ride, that ends up really messing with the 29er front handling. The benefits to the larger wheel size don't outweigh the geometry/handling changes for me. Sure, could give custom a go, but I'm not going to gamble on the money paid out for that to potentially still end upw ith a bike I don't like.

Plus, I very intensely disliked the loss of stiffness with the larger, floppier wheel, and non-20mm fork.

To those interested, there is only one way to see if you like it. Try it out and see.

willtsmith_nwi

In general 29er conversions are not a good idea. 29ers handle better with steeper head tube angles than on a 26er. So you start with a slack head and make it even slacker by jacking up the front end.

Check out the Redline Monocoque or the Raeligh XXIX for a good/inexpensive introduction to the 29er world.

scrublover

Yep, even steepening up my frame a degree when I tried a 29er front, it still felt bad. Another degree or two of steepness may have made it feel better, but then the rest of the bike would be even goofier.

Meh, I'm sticking with what works for me.

fubar5

I run 69er on my Monocog. I've been comparing it to 26er for awhile now, switching between the two. I honestly like the 69er setup the most, even though the geometry isn't specific to a 29er wheel in the front. It is good at slower twisty stuff, and also faster on downhill sections. Overall it seems to be faster than both the full 29ers I've tested, and 26ers. Don't really know why this is so, but me and the local shop monkey have settled on the 69er setup.

trek1

Maybe for downhill type riding but it just seems goofy for XC trail riding

fubar5

Why?

scrublover

Um, it's more the other way around. The bigger wheels don't seem to do as well for bigtime DH kinda stuff. Less stiffness to the wheels, lack of DH tire offerings for 29", and not as much in the way of decent 20mm axle 29" forks. That's all stuff that is changing, and it's not to say that you can't ride DH stuff on a 29er, but with the available stuff, a 26" DH ride is going ot be better.

General trail/XC stuff is where all the 29er zealots feel the wheels do better.

The LT

there was an article in the most recent dirt rag abotu converting your 26" into a 29" front with a ridgid fork

Flak

Fad. It'll go the way of the 26/24 combo.

trek1

I wouldn't ride it on the trail if I couldn't navigate as well with the bigger front wheel, It would just be strange. I don't see it improving my trail time and possibly making it worse.

scrublover

Clue: some people ride for things other than time. Further hint: that does not mean they don't like speed/going fast.

fubar5

Right on!