Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Mountain Biking Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Check out this forum to discuss the latest tips, tricks, gear and equipment in the world of mountain biking.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-24-09, 01:02 AM   #1
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Rigid 69r hardtail or

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.

Last edited by yellowjeep; 05-24-09 at 01:45 AM.
yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 09:30 PM   #2
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Man, I thought at least Ed would chime in on this one
yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 09:40 PM   #3
martinus
Senior Member
 
martinus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

.
.
.
martinus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 09:50 PM   #4
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 09:58 PM   #5
mzeffex 
Senior Member
 
mzeffex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Bikes: A Tarmac, a TCR, a Tipo Uno, a Grand Prix Luxe, an Anthem, a Norcross, a Claud Butler, and an SLM 2.0
Posts: 9,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What is a 69er? A bike with a bigger front wheel?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjones28 View Post
Are they talking about spectators feeding the cyclists? You know, like don't feed the bears?
mzeffex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 10:04 PM   #6
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Indeed.

yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 10:18 PM   #7
mzeffex 
Senior Member
 
mzeffex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Bikes: A Tarmac, a TCR, a Tipo Uno, a Grand Prix Luxe, an Anthem, a Norcross, a Claud Butler, and an SLM 2.0
Posts: 9,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh, hmm, what, 29 front 26 back? And the purpose this serves is...?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjones28 View Post
Are they talking about spectators feeding the cyclists? You know, like don't feed the bears?
mzeffex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 10:31 PM   #8
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Badassness mostly.
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.
yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-09, 10:53 PM   #9
mzeffex 
Senior Member
 
mzeffex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Bikes: A Tarmac, a TCR, a Tipo Uno, a Grand Prix Luxe, an Anthem, a Norcross, a Claud Butler, and an SLM 2.0
Posts: 9,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjones28 View Post
Are they talking about spectators feeding the cyclists? You know, like don't feed the bears?
mzeffex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-09, 08:13 AM   #10
martinus
Senior Member
 
martinus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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 $

.
.
.

Last edited by martinus; 05-25-09 at 08:16 AM.
martinus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-09, 09:58 AM   #11
ed 
.
 
ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Summit of Lee
Bikes: Hecklah
Posts: 10,934
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowjeep View Post
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.
ed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-09, 10:00 AM   #12
ed 
.
 
ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Summit of Lee
Bikes: Hecklah
Posts: 10,934
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
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'.
ed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-09, 10:28 PM   #13
yellowjeep
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
yellowjeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lawrence
Bikes:
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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?
yellowjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:43 PM.