UKC

Just had newly aquired Ghost full suss stolen. Only had ridden it a few times after years on a hard tail. Whilst blown away by down hill performance weight of bike was a bit of an issue I enjoy long rides with the bumpy bits as a bonus. Have read that a hard tail 29er would be much lighter with the larger wheels giving equivelant of 100mm travel on the rear. Just wondering what peoples thoughts are. Insurance hopefully coughing up 1500.

In reply to paul fleuriot:

Ouch!

I've a Cotic Solaris which is a hardtail 29er though a little bit pricier than £1500. Brilliant fun Don't know about 29er wheels being equivalent to 100mm travel, it's definitely a bit rougher in that department than my full suss, but it's a slightly different riding style.

The Solaris comes in at just over 12Kg trail weight - I didn't go mad with super-light components as I'm not the lightest rider around though it is a 1x10 drivetrain. Also the super-light components tend not to be the most durable so you end up replacing them more regularly.

It certainly doesn't feel like a 12Kg bike and TBH to get the weight down significantly, i.e. to the 10Kg mark I'd probably have to spend another grand - easier and cheaper to keep off the cakes!

Do they hand you the cash then? With my insurance they passed it onto a company who choose the nearest bike to the one I already had.

In reply to paul fleuriot:

A 29er hardtail is the most versatile bike you can buy IMHO. Whether it's the equivalent of 100mm rear travel is another matter - I wouldn't know as my FS is also a 29er !

And that's the problem - if I want to do anything that might involve technical downhill, I use the FS as it's more fun. Even on long rides (50 miles +). Even though it means I wasting energy.

But if I was only allowed one bike (shudder) it would be the 29er hardtail - I know I can still get down most things I'd want to, but can also use it for commuting, touring etc.

Anyone watch the commonwealth games xc? I think the men used 29er hardtails.

In reply to andreas:

Wouldn't be surprised if most of the women did too - Emily Batty certainly does. But it looked very easy terrain.

In reply to paul fleuriot: after riding a 26 hard tail for years I swapped to a 29 full Suss 120mm travel. It's hard to convey how much this bike makes u smile, it's just unstoppable, flattens out terrain, causes less fatigue and just makes u crank it up even more. Yes it weighs a bit more than my hard tail but it does not feel heavier plus I can beat my best times on my favourite tracks without trying.

Awesome, happy to ride this bike anywhere.

HTH Davey

In reply to paul fleuriot: fully agree - i recently got a 29 and i simply don't want to ride my 26 now. Not sure what it's worth in sus travel tho'.

I have not tried a 27,5

In reply to Mountain Llama:

Same experience here too

(29er full sus XC)

In reply to paul fleuriot:

Also just had my 6 week old hard tail stolen at the weekend....home insurance wont pay out due to their shifty policy wording saying there has to have been 'forcible and violent entry and exit'....which basically means nothing in my home is covered unless a theif kicks the door in. If they're clever enough to pick the lock then I'm not covered. Angry doesn't begin to cover it!

Had a 26" hardtail but now thinking of going up to a 29er.

In reply to paul fleuriot:

I have a full-sussed carbon 29er and its brilliant! Yesterday I put a deposit down for a carbon hard tail 29er for racing and non-technical trail riding. I am tall (198cm) and the larger wheels fit me perfectly, they also roll over obstacles much more smoothly than standard 26'' wheels which may be where the 100mm of travel comparison comes from. If you are a bit shorter in height then you may find a 27.5er to be a good bet. Either way bigger wheels are the way forward.

In reply to paul fleuriot:

Moved from a lifetime of riding 26" to 29" about 2 years ago. Initially bought a Trek hardtail as I didn't know if I would like the size change, then to a Giant full sus a few months ago. Almost everything is better with bigger wheels, and it's faster and easier to handle over pretty much all terrain.

I wouldn't say that an extra 3" of wheel is the equivalent of 4" of rear suspension travel, however a 29" hardtail will deal with much more than a 26" hardtail.

If you want to be really picky then it is slightly more awkward on very narrow, twisty, rocky, uphill technical sections. But to be honest this is the type of stuff you would be better off getting off and walking.

Cezza

In reply to paul fleuriot:
i prefer 28" (700c

In reply to paul fleuriot:

We recently rented a 29" at Grizedale forest and I asked the bloke what he thought of them as I always ride a 26" full sus. He said they are great for XC and not too harsh stuff, but he said the wheels are weaker and they have trouble with a lot of damaged wheels when people go on the more extreme downhill stuff.

After riding one I wasn't convinced, it felt a little harder to steer, though that might be not being used to it, but I also felt like I was on a penny farthing!!

He recommended the 27.5" wheels as a compromise / best of both worlds solution.

In reply to paul fleuriot:

The genral consensus from the mountain bike marketing folks is:

29" is good for XC or if you are very large. It apparently smoothes out some of the small bumps.

26" is old fashioned an rubbish for everything; you will die if you ride it.

650B is the holy grail and will make your 5x faster down everything.

I'm on 26" and don't feel the need to change, no matter what the sponcered pros say.

In reply to aldo56:


is 650A hip?

In reply to malk:

If you have to ask....

In reply to aldo56:




Rubbish, Everyone knows the speed factor is 4.25x.

Some people come on here spouting...