Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

plus size for touring? 27.5 vs 29plus

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

plus size for touring? 27.5 vs 29plus

Old 12-16-15, 02:17 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
chrisx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 924
Liked 9 Times in 9 Posts
plus size for touring? 27.5 vs 29plus

They are selling 2.8 and 3 inch tires now. Anybody tried both? How are they for touring.
chrisx is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 02:20 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 5,721

Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,

Liked 111 Times in 66 Posts
Pedaling paved or bikepacking dirt and singletrack? I'm planning on using my Karate Monkey this summer for some paved and dirt road touring. Using 29 x 2.3 Geax tattoo slicks.
Leebo is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 03:40 PM
  #3  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 43,598

Bikes: 8

Liked 1,360 Times in 866 Posts
Asked Google about an Australian fat bike tour out into the bush "canning stock road by bike" done Years ago..
I have these pictures of some fat bike touring rides and riders ..

https://doingthemiles.files.wordpres...e-fat-bike.jpg


https://www.google.com/search?q=cann...w=1808&bih=959

Last edited by fietsbob; 12-16-15 at 03:45 PM.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 04:22 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
mdilthey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,923

Bikes: Nature Boy 853 Disc, Pugsley SS

Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 6 Posts
Love it. 2.4" in the back, 3.0" in the front. Doing a lot of extended rides on a mix of pavement/off-road conditions with lots of climbing.



I built this bike specifically for dirt touring, hence the simplified drivetrain (I'm young, SS isn't for everyone, gears are fine too) and the Jones bars. The geometry is dead-on for me because I am a tall dude at 6ft. I do not think my girlfriend would enjoy 29+ wheels because she's only 5'7". We are looking into 27.5+ for her.

There isn't a significant increase in rolling resistance with the Vee Trax Fatty. The tire profile is very round, so at 17-20 psi the center tread rolls very fast on pavement. I alternate my skinny-tired Soma Double Cross and this bike and don't feel slow and sluggish. The Maxxis Ardent in the back is also a quick one.

Certain tires, like the Surly Knard, are decent rolling. Others with huge knobs, like the Maxxis Chronicle, may be a lot more of a pain to push. I like where the Vee Trax Fatty sits, it is a very high-quality tire.
mdilthey is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 06:32 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
chrisx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 924
Liked 9 Times in 9 Posts
The 27.5+ and 29+ size tires and bikes are new. Maybe everyone has not seen them yet. They are smalles than a fat bike and bigger than a mountain bike. 3 inches wide or there abouts.

I have been wanting a new bike for a while now, and am glad I waited. The new 148 mm rear hub should make a stronger wheel. All that extra air should add some cushion, and traction.

I would like to hear from some people who have tried both 27.5+ and 29+. What about full suspension and + size?

Last edited by chrisx; 12-16-15 at 06:36 PM.
chrisx is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 08:05 PM
  #6  
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,805

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Liked 7,746 Times in 4,306 Posts
Originally Posted by mdilthey
Love it. 2.4" in the back, 3.0" in the front. Doing a lot of extended rides on a mix of pavement/off-road conditions with lots of climbing.
What is the reason for larger in front? I've seen a bunch of rigid frame and hardtail bikes withal fatter rear tire.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 10:43 PM
  #7  
canis lupus familiaris
 
rex615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,254

Bikes: En plus one

Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by mstateglfr
What is the reason for larger in front? I've seen a bunch of rigid frame and hardtail bikes withal fatter rear tire.
Usually because the frame won't clear the big rear tire, whereas the front fork can be changed to allow a bigger front tire.
rex615 is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 10:58 PM
  #8  
George Krpan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westlake Village, California
Posts: 1,708
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by chrisx
The 27.5+ and 29+ size tires and bikes are new. Maybe everyone has not seen them yet. They are smalles than a fat bike and bigger than a mountain bike. 3 inches wide or there abouts.

I have been wanting a new bike for a while now, and am glad I waited. The new 148 mm rear hub should make a stronger wheel. All that extra air should add some cushion, and traction.

I would like to hear from some people who have tried both 27.5+ and 29+. What about full suspension and + size?
I have a 29+, love it. I didn't buy a 27.5+ because I think taller is better.

A friend with the same bike as mine has run 1.95" tires without a problem.

I would use a 29+ for dirt touring.
GeoKrpan is offline  
Old 12-16-15, 11:43 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
mdilthey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,923

Bikes: Nature Boy 853 Disc, Pugsley SS

Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by mstateglfr
What is the reason for larger in front? I've seen a bunch of rigid frame and hardtail bikes withal fatter rear tire.
On my bike, first and foremost it's about clearance. Front tire measures as a 2.8, rear tire is just slightly wider than a 2.4 (wide rim).

Also, though, a slightly wider tire in the front is good because of traction. If your rear tire skids out, you'll probably be fine. If your front tire skids out, you're almost certainly going to crash.

I don't think anyone is using wider tires in the rear anymore.
mdilthey is offline  
Old 12-17-15, 07:20 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,912

Bikes: Several

Liked 776 Times in 572 Posts
Originally Posted by mdilthey
On my bike, first and foremost it's about clearance. Front tire measures as a 2.8, rear tire is just slightly wider than a 2.4 (wide rim).

Also, though, a slightly wider tire in the front is good because of traction. If your rear tire skids out, you'll probably be fine. If your front tire skids out, you're almost certainly going to crash.
That and also for a rigid frame on rough surfaces a bit more cushion can be nice. Back when I was racing mountain bike and dinosaurs roamed the earth, most racers that I knew used a slightly fatter tire on the front even where clearance wasn't an issue.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 12-17-15, 08:14 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Posts: 7,579

Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana

Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by chrisx
... What about full suspension and + size?
IMHO full suspension is great for down hill racing, but that's about it. The combination of the two should, in theory, provide the most cushioned ride possible.

Originally Posted by mstateglfr
What is the reason for larger in front? I've seen a bunch of rigid frame and hardtail bikes withal fatter rear tire.
Back in the rigid mountain bike days there was a handful of riders who preferred a wider and lower pressure tire on the front for better control. I didn't subscribe to the practice, and perhaps I should have, but a 2" tire worked well enough for me.

Brad
bradtx is offline  
Old 12-17-15, 09:01 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
saddlesores's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Thailand..........Nakhon Nowhere
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: inferior steel....and....noodly aluminium

Liked 344 Times in 231 Posts
Originally Posted by mdilthey
I don't think anyone is using wider tires in the rear anymore.
when carrying a load on the rear, i sometimes like a 1.95 rear
with a 1.75 front.

oh, crud. i'm doing that wrong, too?
saddlesores is offline  
Old 12-17-15, 09:10 AM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 5,721

Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,

Liked 111 Times in 66 Posts
Vee rubber makes the speedster in 29 x2.8. Very much a slick/ knurled rubber sort of tire.
Leebo is offline  
Old 12-17-15, 09:12 AM
  #14  
Seņor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Liked 294 Times in 217 Posts
Wider on the rear makes more sense on road and touring bikes IMO. For off road riding, a fatter tire in front seems to follow the same logic of installing suspension on the front of a rigid frame. I swapped my susp. fork for a rigid fork and now run a 2.5" tire fron 2.1" tire rear. I am not going to win any world cup XC races on it, but I can ride almost anywhere the FS bikes do.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sprocketss
Touring
53
10-28-15 03:59 PM
katiemac
Touring
62
02-01-15 10:57 AM
DeadGrandpa
Touring
61
10-25-14 05:37 PM
Sharpshin
Touring
15
11-20-13 02:35 PM
big50_1
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
10
02-06-11 09:32 PM

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.