Jones Plus Long Term Review

Words Omar Bhimji
Photos Kaz Yamamura
Date Jun 3, 2016

Mountain bikes are better than ever: every company seems to sell a killer 5-6” trail shredder, with refined geometry and well thought-out spec at multiple price points. Mountain bikes are boring: over the past 24 months, the entire industry seems to have embraced the Doa of long, low and slack; a score of companies offer essentially identical platforms, sometimes indistinguishable visually but for the font of their decals.

JonesFullyRigidPlus_NSMB_KazYamamura-12

Whatever you may think of the Jones Plus, you’re not mistaking it for any other bike.

The market is glutted with a lot of great bikes that are all pretty similar – though given the rate of change the industry has experienced in the last five years, it’s perhaps not a bad place for mountain biking to be. This homogeneity begs a question, however: if everyone is doing things the same way, how do we know they’re doing it right; where’s the next spurt in innovation going to come from, the evolutionary surge that makes mountain bikes even better – more capable, more fun! – if we’re all riding, and happy with, more or less the same bike?

I don’t think the Jones Plus bike is the answer – and Jeff Jones certainly didn’t design it to save the mountain biking industry from resting on its laurels. To hear him tell it, the Plus is the bike he’s been working on and thinking about for years – since 2009 at least – only to have the industry finally reach the point where it became possible for a small company to bring it to production. But in designing the Plus, Jeff threw out virtually every sacred cow in mountain biking; a glance at the first look article will illustrate why Jeff doesn’t need to trot out the tired “built from the ground up” bromide for his origin story of the Plus. So, in a way, how it performed on the Shore – still arguably the toughest mountain bike testing ground going – should give us a bit of insight into whether the current industry consensus in mountain bike design is as unassailable as it seems.

I’ve been itching to get one of Jeff’s bikes out to our neck of the woods for years, figuring it would either flame out spectacularly, or blow my mind. Which was it to be? Let’s find out!

I’ve been itching to get one of Jeff’s bikes out to our neck of the woods for years, figuring it would either flame out spectacularly, or blow my mind. Which was it to be? Let’s find out!

On my first ride with the Plus, the comfort that Jeff trumpets as a primary characteristic of his bikes struck me immediately. To the untrained eye the Plus could easily be mistaken for an oversized, space-age beach cruiser, and the body position it put me in was reminiscent of the same: my weight biased over the feet, with my upper body much more centered and relaxed than I would generally expect it to be on a modern mountain bike.

The Plus and I got off to an awkward start, though in retrospect that may have been a result of my decision to take her out on solo rides so I could be alone with the bike and my thoughts. A lot of mountain biking is habit, instinct and muscle memory, and I found myself constantly in my head, unable to find any comfort or flow. I approached steep and technical sections tentatively, constantly expecting to find the limits of the Plus and end up in the weeds. I found myself oversteering into corners and tensing up when the trail got off camber, unwilling to trust the bike in challenging terrain.

Rolling into chunder without an inch of suspension to back you up isn’t the most intuitive move.

Rolling into chunder without an inch of suspension to back you up isn’t the most intuitive move.

Fate intervened and got things on track, however: with my personal bikes out of commission, I swallowed my reservations and showed up for a group ride on the Shore with the Plus, feeling like I’d brought a knife to a gunfight. The pace was relentless and when it came to choosing trails, no accommodation was made for my unconventional bike. I was forced to push myself not to get dropped – and to my surprise and delight, the Plus not only allowed me to keep up, but proved to be both incredibly capable and a blast to ride on the edge.

The secret, it seemed, was to stop thinking so much and trying so hard, and just ride. The centered riding position the Plus put me in ended up not only being quite comfortable, but also the ideal position from which to pilot the bike. Steep climb or descent? Just point and shoot. Hard or tight corner? Lean the bike over and let ‘er roll. Throwing my weight around in an exaggerated fashion in order to exert my authority over the bike, as I was accustomed to doing on traditional mountain bikes, proved unnecessary – if anything it had the opposite effect, causing the Plus to feel unbalanced and squirrely. I learned to stay relaxed and centered inside the bike, and was rewarded with both comfort and control in spades.

Ride Jah Bike!

Ride Jah Bike!

Sound boring? If you’ve ever pinballed through technical terrain at speed without suspension damping you’ll know the answer to that. Despite its balloon tires and comfortable ride, the Plus never let me forget I was on a rigid bike; trail chatter was nicely muted, but feedback from the terrain was immediate, almost intimate. I was keenly aware of every deflection, every hard corner, every g-out on the trail. Yet the effect wasn’t jarring or discombobulating; once I acclimatized to it, the Plus was uncannily capable of being ridden hard, and inspiring confidence, in challenging terrain without the mitigating influence of suspension.

The Plus was an absolute pleasure to ride uphill.

It is not time or opportunity that determines intimacy — it is disposition alone.

So: comfort, control, confidence, and fun. I kept looking for the downside, the “yeah, but” – the compromise my brain told me had to be built in to the Plus to allow it to ride as well as it did. Trying to catch the bike out, to find its fatal flaw, became almost an obsession.

The big 29+ wheels were always going to provide some advantages when climbing, smoothing over small- and medium-sized roots and trail chatter and maintaining momentum in technical terrain. I expected those same big wheels to be a liability when it came to acceleration and putting down power, but my concerns proved unfounded: with tubeless tires and carbon rims, the wheelset on my test bike was lighter and spritelier than any Plus sized rollers seemingly had a right to be; any additional resistance they presented to spinning up was more than offset by their willingness to roll up, over and through anything they encountered.

A long, rigid bike seemingly tailor made for classic Shore conditions.

The Plus was an absolute pleasure to ride uphill.

Similarly, while the Plus’ short reach and slack seat tube angle presented a comfortable position for cruising, I worried that it would be a liability on steep climbs. But the bike was as capable on steep and punchy sections as it was comfortable spinning up a fire road. The Plus’ combination of low front end, long chainstays and short reach made grunting up severe grades while keeping the front wheel planted a non-issue; as long as I kept pedalling and picking lines, the bike would rumble up virtually anything in its path.

And when it came to picking those lines, whether climbing or descending, the Plus proved incredibly capable, even in tight, twisting terrain. With its mammoth tires and mile-long wheelbase, I had anticipated that such conditions would be the bike’s undoing. But the Plus was un-phased, even by hairpin turns that seemed too narrow for its length to fit through: the front end steered lightly, almost telepathically, and the back end never seemed to get hung up or off-line. I’ll chalk the bike’s quick handling demeanour up to its front forks’ extreme offset and resulting low trail number, though I’m at a loss to explain how the back end managed to consistently pass through the eye of the needle. Somehow, its unorthodox geometry numbers front-and-rear balanced out to make the Plus perfectly at home in the awkward, tight confines of the Shore’s classic trails.

A long, rigid bike seemingly tailor made for classic Shore conditions.

Naturally, the Plus was a blast on fun, flowy and fast trails too. Tire roll was palpable under hard cornering forces, but with a bit of additional air pressure and a slightly modified approach it became all but a non-issue. In the spirit of journalistic rigour, I took the Plus on four back-to-back laps of Bobsled, the Shore’s preeminent flow trail. By the last run I was comfortably doubling everything in sight, and initiating every turn early: once pushed past its tires’ modest side knobs, the Plus would drift comfortably on a 3” wide contact patch until we hit the outside edge of the berm, at which point the centre lugs would catch and we’d be back in business. This technique, while fun, wasn’t the fastest way through banked turns. The Plus made up time in flat corners though, finding purchase where a skinny tired steed would skitter or slide and turning an otherwise annoying trail feature into a grin-inducing good time.

Whether they’re tight and awkward, or loose and flat, the Plus loves corners.

Whether they’re tight and awkward, or loose and flat, the Plus loves corners.

Steep, technical descents were another terrain-type on which I unexpectedly found the Plus to shine, though this trait was easier to parse. The bike’s light front end, long wheel base and giant wheels helped it roll smoothly through holes and over uneven terrain, while its static geometry – a product of both its lack of suspension and the incredible fore-aft rigidity of the truss fork – kept it feeling stable. The one technical feature that proved to be Plus’ kryptonite was large square edged obstacles: where a suspended rear wheel would have smoothed things out by getting up and out of the way, the Plus’ long, rigid chainstays would cause it to buck and pitch discomfortingly.

Dem ‘stays doe

Dem ‘stays doe

Similarly, while the bike’s excellent balance and massive wheels made short work of slow tech and the occasional high-speed impact, I occasionally came into a prolonged rough patch too hot only to be reminded that the Plus was packing exactly 0mm of suspension. That intimate connection to the trail I referenced earlier came at a price: once it started throwing punches too fast for my arms and legs to absorb, there wasn’t much left to shield me from impact. Because it had no suspension to dampen terrain feedback, the Plus did a great job helping me stay aware of how close we were to the edge – though it also encouraged and helped me to push that edge more than a rigid bike seemingly has any right to. The lesson: stay away from bike parks and Enduro races – but you didn’t need me to tell you that, right?

The Plus is more than happy to take the occasional hit -- but it never lets you forget you’re riding a rigid bike.

The Plus is more than happy to take the occasional hit — but it never lets you forget you’re riding a rigid bike.

I covered the spec of the Plus in my first look article, and won’t say too much more about it here. After a few months with the bike, I’m inclined to trust Jeff’s assertion that the bike’s major components – the frame, fork, wheels, and bars especially – form part of an integrated design and should be considered as pieces of the whole rather than individually. The one piece that bears mentioning though is the odd-looking Jones H-bar: the position of the controls made for an even narrower cockpit than its 710mm width would suggest, and proved to be the perfect position from which to rally the Jones through tech and turns. I never once found myself wishing for a wider bar or more leverage – but I did find myself unexpectedly finishing rides without any hand-pain or fatigue.

Like the Plus itself, the H-bar proved perfectly suited for riding technical trail. I had assumed it would be the first thing I swapped out to make the bike more Shore-worthy, but I never felt the need or inclination to do so.

Like the Plus itself, the H-bar proved perfectly suited for riding technical trail. I had assumed it would be the first thing I swapped out to make the bike more Shore-worthy, but I never felt the need or inclination to do so.

The last traditional question of every bike review is always the same: who is this bike for? A thorough consideration of any bike should bring the phenotype of its ideal prospective rider to the reviewer’s – and the reader’s – mind’s eye.

By virtue of both its versatility and iconoclasm, the Plus is a challenge to pin down. To dismiss it as the ideal bike for the eccentric, based on the unorthodoxy of either its appearance or its intent, is to pander to the lazy tribalism that suffuses much of modern cycling culture. But those same traits will cause it to draw significant sideeye from most cyclists, making the Plus a tough sell – conceptually if not commercially – in an industry that thrives on dividing and defining its consumers.

When men speak ill of thee, ride so as nobody may believe them.

When men speak ill of thee, ride so as nobody may believe them.

If you are a cyclist, not a racist, and either can only have one bike or are interested in exploring that lifestyle conceit, I can’t think of a better bike for you. That’s admittedly a pretty small club – but it’s one the Plus is uniquely suited to expand by dint of the incredible range of places and disciplines in which it excels.

Beyond this, however, I think every cyclist with an interest in expanding his or her understanding and appreciation of the bicycle and its potential should throw a leg over Jeff’s newest creation.
I expected that riding the Jones Plus on the Shore would expose the limitations of either the bike, or my understanding and imagination; after a few solid months with the bike, I can confidently say that it was my mind that proved wanting.

So, what if anything does the Plus have to tell us about the evolution of the mountain bike? I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this over the past few months, but to be honest the bike raised more questions than it answered. There are aspects of the Plus I still can’t quite wrap my mind around: how nimbly it handled and rode, despite its epic wheelbase, for example; or how well it climbed in spite of its slack seat tube angle. And then there’s a strong point raised by another reviewer for this site: perhaps the Plus impressed because it was fully optimized as a rigid mountain bike, and none of its systems or concepts would translate to traditional mountain bike design.

It’s not what you look at that matters; it’s what you see.

It’s not what you look at that matters; it’s what you see.

At the very least, the Plus’ surprisingly capable and fun ride proves that there’s more than one way to skin a cat, suggesting that the current state of homogeneity in the market is a plateau in the evolution of mountain bike design rather than its apotheosis. In particular, I think the bike’s increased fork-offset, long chainstays, and the interplay between the two, may be of interest to designers looking to increase stability and, rather than at the expense of, playfulness. The Plus is a reminder that every healthy industry needs deep- and free-thinkers like Jeff – people who zig when everyone else is following the road to zag – especially when they design such fine bikes.

For more on Jones – click here…


Is the Jones Plus crazy enough to work for you?

Comments

mateusz-emeschajmer
0
Mateusz Emeschajmer  - Oct. 27, 2016, 2:18 p.m.

Hey Omar, great review. I have a question regarding the crankset. As far as I know the NEXT SL is a Press Fit bb, with a 30mm spindle. Was it fitted using an eccentric bottom bracket into the frame that you tested?

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - Oct. 28, 2016, 2:34 a.m.

thanks mateusz. and you are correct: as covered in the first look article () all jones bikes feature eccentric bb's

Reply

mateusz-emeschajmer
0
Mateusz Emeschajmer  - Oct. 28, 2016, 2:53 a.m.

Cool! So the stock eccentric bottom bracket unit accepts press fit inserts and 30mm spindle? On Jones website it looks more like a Bushnell, and as far as I know it only accepts 24mm (extrenal thread bb bearings). There is an eccentric bb unit from Beer Components that accepts 30mm spindle. I am a bit surprised / confused to see the Next SL on Plus' bb. So, could you please tell me which eccentric bb unit was used on that bike (and what is the dimension of the spindle of that crankset)? Thanks!

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - Oct. 28, 2016, 3:07 a.m.

haha, sorry couldn't tell you. i never took the cranks off or looked at it that closely. i would give jeff a call and ask him yourself

mateusz-emeschajmer
0
Mateusz Emeschajmer  - Oct. 28, 2016, 3:15 a.m.

I will send Jeff a message, then. Thanks!

diego
0
Diego  - June 3, 2016, 6:29 p.m.

Such an excelent first look article. I really enjoied reading it. Keep on testing non-conventional bikes. Thanks Omar!

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - June 3, 2016, 4:30 p.m.

Very interesting and entertaining review Omar. Worthy of a couple of read- throughs for sure.

I have a couple of curiosities (expanding on: "perhaps… none of its systems or concepts would translate to traditional mountain bike design"). Has riding the Jones influenced how you set up your own bikes in any way (switching to higher rise bars and shorter stems? Looking at forks with more offset?)?

If you were purchasing a new bike, whether it be a more 'traditional' hardtail replacement for your Chromag or one of those "killer-but-boring" 5″-6″ travel dual-fs bikes, how - if at all - would the Jones influence your purchasing decision? Would you look for a bike with longer stays combined with a slacker seat-angle?

Thanks,

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 3, 2016, 11:35 p.m.

thanks drew, glad you enjoyed it

re. your questions

  • the jones has given me some ideas. but it more exposed some of the gaps and laziness in my thinking than gave me real clarity or new certainties. i haven't translated any of its ideas on to my own bikes (though i did pick up a set of knock-off h-bars for my commuter) because i think a lot of the odd features of the jones work in concert, rather than individually, to achieve their positive impact on the bike's ride. i know you're a fan of throwing interesting ideas and tweaks at the proverbial wall… i guess i don't have that kind of inclination, which is why i doubly appreciated getting a chance to ride the jones

  • in terms of the jones influencing a future purchase, see my cop-out above. my sense from riding the jones, and this was reinforced from my conversations with jeff, was that specific elements of the bike's handling and ride couldn't be traced to specific individuals features, like its long chainstays or slack seat tube angle. it honestly does seem like jeff started with a blank slate and just kept building new frames and trying tweaking things until he found the right mix - he's not married to specific design elements: for example, his regular Jones bike has really short chainstays, while the Plus has really long ones - and he's not really able to articulate in technical terms why his bikes ride the way they do (nor is he seemingly inclined to try), but his description of how they ride is bang on

so, i don't think its as simple as looking for characteristics of the Plus in other bikes. and i think anyone who was looking to tap into the Jones Plus' secret sauce in designing a suspension mountain bike would have to go pretty far down the rabbit hole…

but i for one would be pretty interested in seeing the results!

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - June 4, 2016, 6:59 a.m.

Thanks Omar,

It does seem to be a very unique combination of someone who obviously thinks a lot - and deeply - about the bikes he is making and then, at least to some extent, combines that thought process with a bit of an infinite-number-of- monkeys-on-an-infinite-number-of-welding-tables approach just in how different the geometries of his various bikes end up.

etbarbaric
0
etbarbaric  - June 3, 2016, 3:07 p.m.

Awesome review Omar! I have anticipated your article for a while and I think you are spot on. I've had my Jones Plus just at a year now. When I first built it up and stood it next to my other bikes, I had the same "what the hell?" moment, and wondered if I had made a huge mistake. In reality, the Plus has become my everyday bike, and it gets most of its use on the rocky/sandy/hilly deserts of southern New Mexico. I can climb better and descend better on this bike than on anything I've ever ridden. And its upright position is just massively comfortable. Kudos to Jeff for questioning the status quo!

Reply

kperras
0
Kenneth Perras  - June 3, 2016, 10:31 a.m.

I'd be interested in seeing the weight distribution values when in the seated and standing position. Could explain a lot about how the bike rides.

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 3, 2016, 11:10 a.m.

can lyle figure that out in his fancy shmancy modeling program? i picked his brain a bit but would love to get some more technical insights into what i experienced

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 3, 2016, 9:10 a.m.

thanks for the kind words all

here are some links that were left out of the article

first look at the jones:

seb kemp on racism:

jeff jones on the development of the plus:

Reply

diego
0
Diego  - June 5, 2016, 2:11 p.m.

Omar, I have some questions… How tall are you? What frame size where you testing? How does the stem lenght affect the handling of these bikes? How do I choose the right frame for me? Should I forget about traditional geometry and use Jones page Height/Size recomendations? What happens if I go the route large frame short stem with these bikes? In my case I could be choosing a 24″ or 25″ frame since I am 6′ tall. Thanks in advance!

Reply

etbarbaric
0
etbarbaric  - June 5, 2016, 8:09 p.m.

You're right that it could go either way at your height. You might give Jeff Jones a call. Best case, find one to try if you can. Jeff is around 6 foot, I believe, and he prefers a 24. I have a friend who is maybe 6'1″, and he absolutely loves his 25-incher. The 25 has an absolutely huge triangle, which is great if bikepacking and a frame bag is in the cards. Cass Gilbert is a similar height. He recently reviewed a 25-inch version. I'm 5'9″, and the 24 fits me great. Here is Cass' excellent review, with some good back-and-forth in the comments section.

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 5, 2016, 11:25 p.m.

i'm 6'2″ and tested the larger (25″) of the two frame sizes. i don't know how much swapping the step will affect handling, because i didn't experiment with different lengths. i'd be inclined to think it would have less on an impact than it might on a more traditional bike

when we were initially setting up the review, jeff thought that even at my height i could go either way. the 25″ is more stable, according to jeff, which is good for both technical and long-distance riding. he suggested the 24″ would be more maneuverable, but i definitely didn't find the 25″ to be lacking in that department

my second thought would be that at 6′, if you can swing the standover, go with the 25″ frame. but my first thought would be talk to jeff: give him a call, tell him what you want the bike for and see what he says

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 5, 2016, 11:27 p.m.

thanks for linking to cass' review. i held off reading it until i'd finished mine, as i didn't want to be influenced. but i agree, it's excellent

etbarbaric
0
etbarbaric  - June 6, 2016, 8:05 p.m.

Shorter stems are definitely recommended for the Jones Loop H-bars (which are not the bars Omar had on this test bike). With the Jones Loop bars, the shorter stem (and the very slack HTA) pulls the bars back and up and gives you access to all of the wonderful hand positions. This is one of those situations where you want to fight the urge to go with that long/low stem you ride on all your other bikes… 🙂 Disclaimer: I've not ridden the bars used in this review, so I can't speak to those.

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 6, 2016, 9:23 p.m.

all of jeff's bars have the same dimensions - the only difference between them is whether they have a loop, or none, or some part of it - so from a handling perspective they'll all work identically with a stem of a given length

jonathan-harris
0
Jonathan Harris  - June 3, 2016, 9 a.m.

Great read Omar.

Reply

brad-sedola
0
Brad Sedola  - June 3, 2016, 8:51 a.m.

Been looking forward to this review for a while. Very similar to what I've been hearing about the Surly Krampus. Recently been having way more fun on my fat hardtail with similar geometry as that Jones than I've had with my 5″ trailbike in years. More fun, more miles, more smiles!

Reply

andy-eunson
0
Andy Eunson  - June 3, 2016, 7:58 a.m.

I've been thinking recently that this short chain stay steep seat tube angle trend is dumb. Much more so for longer legged riders. This Jones review seems to validate that part of my thinking. When new 29er riders would say that they felt in the bike as opposed to on the bike I think that was a wheelbase affect. 29ers climb better because they are longer. I see that Norco has some new bikes where the chain stays increase in length with the frame size. Makes sense to me.

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 3, 2016, 11:41 a.m.

great overview of norco's gravity tune concept here:

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - June 7, 2016, 8:06 a.m.

As some 29ers have gotten shorter CS I've been reading the user reports from people that made the switch and I have yet to read one out of dozens of experiences where the rider wanted longer CS vs. shorter.

I'm personally not a fan of the long/low/steep STA geo thing that's fashionable these days, but I would select a shorter CS bike over a longer one given they both met my needs in other respects.

I think we also need to keep in mind that what is good for a rigid bike is not necessarily good for a FS bike. A long WB rigid bike benefits from passive suspension and a less jarring ride with the rear wheel further back from the saddle. A FS bike doesn't need that since it solves the same problem with suspension.

Reply

craw
0
Cr4w  - June 3, 2016, 7:28 a.m.

You had me at iconoclasm.

Reply

boomforeal
0
boomforeal  - June 3, 2016, 11:36 a.m.

guess i buried the hook - that's like 90% of the way through the review!

Reply

0
Perry Schebel  - June 3, 2016, 6:36 a.m.

i like that this bike exists. and: nice work, Omar!

Reply

jt
0
JT  - June 3, 2016, 6:30 a.m.

Brilliantly written. Epitomizes why I come to this site. There simply aren't many places that suspend held beliefs in reviews to benefit the reader/consumer, and Omar, you nailed it.

Reply

aaron-k-mattix
0
Aaron K. Mattix  - June 3, 2016, 6:01 a.m.

I had a chance to take a quick spin on an early Ritchey (Everest?) a friend had restored, and was similarly amazed at how well a fully rigid bike could ride. The geometry looked antique & outdated until I actually rode the bike; it was a revelation in how comfortable, intuitive, and responsive a rigid bike could be. The monster-trucking capabilities of modern squishy bikes are amazing, but is seems there is an equally amazing parallel universe of capability in bikes designed without suspension. As suspension has become more sorted, geometry has become the focal point of development. Perhaps geometry is the wormhole that makes this parallel universe accessible once more?

Reply

Please log in to leave a comment.