New posts

Dreaming of an aggressive 29er for the North Shore and PNW

Jan. 27, 2017, 7:13 a.m.
Posts: 803
Joined: Jan. 31, 2005

For anyone who's currently on an aggressive 29er, did you come from a 27.5? Do you prefer the 29er? Currently on a 26 still but wondering whether to go to a 29er aggressive trail or a 27.5 trail bike. Mostly riding the shore.

Not me. I switched from a 2011 Enduro to an alloy 2013 Enduro 29er. In 2012 (when I switched) there were only a couple of 27.5 bikes around. I did some test rides and liked it but it wasn't huge difference, not one worth switching to a bike that like wouldn't fit as well as my 2011. I rode that E29 into the ground and replaced it with an Evil Wreckoning.

I think for anyone over 6'2" the 29er is the obvious choice, it feels more proportional in the bigger sizes. I won't be going back to smaller wheels. The big wheels offer a noticeably different ride - definitely get out for some test rides and see for yourself.

There's nothing better than an Orangina after cheating death with Digger.

Jan. 27, 2017, 7:38 a.m.
Posts: 15019
Joined: April 5, 2007

The Slash 9.9RSL I demoed at Crankworx was oh so nice. Should've tried the larger size too

I don't even know what 27.5 is ¯\(ツ)/¯

Why slag free swag?:rolleyes:

ummm, as your doctor i recommend against riding with a scaphoid fracture.

Jan. 27, 2017, 9:09 a.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Not me. I switched from a 2011 Enduro to an alloy 2013 Enduro 29er. In 2012 (when I switched) there were only a couple of 27.5 bikes around. I did some test rides and liked it but it wasn't huge difference, not one worth switching to a bike that like wouldn't fit as well as my 2011. I rode that E29 into the ground and replaced it with an Evil Wreckoning.

I think for anyone over 6'2" the 29er is the obvious choice, it feels more proportional in the bigger sizes. I won't be going back to smaller wheels. The big wheels offer a noticeably different ride - definitely get out for some test rides and see for yourself.

I also switched from a 26 inch AM bike to an E29 - initially I did test rides on both 27.5 bikes and the E29, the 27.5 bikes didn't really feel much different than my 26 inch bike, whereas the E29 the difference was very noticeable (in a good way).

Craw - how do you compare the Wreckoning to the E29? Glad you made the switch? I still love my 2015 E29 and have no intentions of getting rid of it anytime soon but just curious to know if there are other 29ers out there that are even better than the E29?

Jan. 27, 2017, 9:16 a.m.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sept. 5, 2012

when my time comes I will be jumping from 26" straight to 29" , slowly collecting parts and letting some more 29" models hit the floors and get some reviews posted before I decide .

#northsidetrailbuilders

Jan. 27, 2017, 3:57 p.m.
Posts: 1045
Joined: May 30, 2004

Wow… thanks Donald Trump… when has 73.7 been considered "grossly slack "? (Rhetorical question)

It is grossly slack when you actually put the saddle up to pedalling position and it is 70 degrees. The 73.7 is the effective seat tube angle when the saddle rails are in line with the top of the headtube. The actual angle is very slack likely in the mid 60 deg range so when you raise the saddle the esta is slacker as you go up.

For an XL the esta is basically when the saddle is dropped almost all the way down. Enough with the geometry lesson though - when you don't get it I guess you don't get it.

Jan. 27, 2017, 4:17 p.m.
Posts: 803
Joined: Jan. 31, 2005

Craw - how do you compare the Wreckoning to the E29? Glad you made the switch? I still love my 2015 E29 and have no intentions of getting rid of it anytime soon but just curious to know if there are other 29ers out there that are even better than the E29?

Still stoked. The Evil doesn't do any of the bad single pivot things I expected it to do. It climbs well, descends well. Zero drivetrain or brake interference that I can tell. It's also pretty much the biggest bike in its class. I won't be switching out any time soon.

In hindsight the E29 felt like an amped-up trail bike that seemed better at lower speeds and traversing. The Wreckoning struggles a bit in those situations but is a better technical climber and definitely more forgiving when gnar and speed ramp up. I didn't understand 'square-edged hits' before now. The E29 would hang up on stuff all the time, so I'd either back off or hunt and peck. The Wreck seems to accelerate through those spots - but I have to hit them hard and fast, drive the bike all the time, be more fearless and fast. The E29 didn't reward that extra effort the same way.

I'm itching to try a current generation VPP bike to compare, having not ridden one in like 10 years.

There's nothing better than an Orangina after cheating death with Digger.

Jan. 27, 2017, 7:16 p.m.
Posts: 967
Joined: Feb. 28, 2014

Still stoked. The Evil doesn't do any of the bad single pivot things I expected it to do. It climbs well, descends well. Zero drivetrain or brake interference that I can tell.

That's because unlike what the internet says, single pivots work well.

Jan. 27, 2017, 7:50 p.m.
Posts: 31
Joined: Jan. 14, 2016

It is grossly slack when you actually put the saddle up to pedalling position and it is 70 degrees. The 73.7 is the effective seat tube angle when the saddle rails are in line with the top of the headtube. The actual angle is very slack likely in the mid 60 deg range so when you raise the saddle the esta is slacker as you go up.

For an XL the esta is basically when the saddle is dropped almost all the way down. Enough with the geometry lesson though - when you don't get it I guess you don't get it.

I had this issue with a Norco Shinobi. The frame was a bit on the small side, and when I extended the seat post my weight was almost completely over the back wheel. That being said, I always thought the issue was with the length of the frame and not the STA itself. Is it possible that the new longer top tubes offset this issue?

Jan. 27, 2017, 7:57 p.m.
Posts: 15019
Joined: April 5, 2007

I feel for the taller cats trying to make ESTA frames work. The one thing I found when I switched from a Nomad 1.5 to a '11 Range was how much better it climbed. And that included going from 2x9 (32-??/11-32) to 1x10 (32/11-36)

I'm unsure why more people aren't throwing dueces to the bike industry and ordering Nicolai or Pole frames?

Why slag free swag?:rolleyes:

ummm, as your doctor i recommend against riding with a scaphoid fracture.

Jan. 27, 2017, 9:11 p.m.
Posts: 1172
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

alright alright alright…. tall lanky dude here, (presumed eye rolling amongst the inmates- why do the freaky tall guys hijack threads as if we give a shit about their bike geometry wankery?….)
can't say enough positive things about my 2 Transition bikes, but hey, their geometry is hardly any different than the rest these days. many of the usual bikes are within mm's of each other now.
put a straight edge running through the center of the bb, up through the middle of the seat post head (KS, no offset). yes it was eyeballed closely. using a Wixey digital angle finder, i get about 75.2° (fuck i love that -shift alt 8 gets the degrees symbol, hehe) with the saddle waaaaaay up there. 37" inseam boys, my seat is goofy looking high when i'm fully extended for the climbs. and it's an interrupted seat tube. anyhow, it works well for me and the Wixey don't lie. reasonably comfortable and efficient climbers these new trannys. steep seat tubes on an xl frame, i don't see the problem.

Jan. 28, 2017, 1:23 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Sept. 30, 2006

It is grossly slack when you actually put the saddle up to pedalling position and it is 70 degrees. The 73.7 is the effective seat tube angle when the saddle rails are in line with the top of the headtube. The actual angle is very slack likely in the mid 60 deg range so when you raise the saddle the esta is slacker as you go up.

For an XL the esta is basically when the saddle is dropped almost all the way down. Enough with the geometry lesson though - when you don't get it I guess you don't get it.

WRONG! the stated ESTA is the point at which the angle created from the middle of the BB dissects the midline of the actual seattube angle at the point parallel to the middle of the centre of the top of the headtube… the seat rails have no affect on the measurement of this angle… But when you don't get it, I guess you don't get it!

Also, it's trigonometry not just geometry: some basic math can give you an estimate providing a couple assumptions. Main assumption is that the diagram provided by Norco is a good approximation of an XL frame (big if because who knows what size it's based on)

I'll do some rudamentary math below for a 37" inseam that jbv quoted… feel free to use my math and figure out your value based on your own seat height measurement (remember again, assumptions are being made)

ESTA is at the stack height… 620mm
ST is 510mm
37" inseam = 939.8mm = ~940mm (I'll make a few other approximations)
crankarm length 175mm
estimated extended length at seat provided shoe + pedal is 15mm thick (this value is likely higher for most) = 940 - 175 - 15 = 750mm

root of (TTH-Reach)^2 + S^2 = root(182^2 + 620^2) = ~646mm at ESTA

750 - 646 = 104mm of post extending past ESTA height.

This is where assumption of diagram being accurate to a XL frame sizing come in:

ESTA appears to be inline with edge of ST, ST is probably 34.9mm thick (assumption #2)… lets assume over the ESTA height minus ST height that the post moves rearward half the distance of the ST thickness (Aft) = 17.45mm over a length 136mm (ESTA height minus ST)

So extended height minus ST = 750 - 520 = 230 = Visible post (VP)

VP divided by actual length of post at ESTA multiplied by Aft measurement = distance behind ESTA line at the top of the seat in the middle of the actual line created by the seattube

230/136 x 17.45mm = 29.5mm

So if you had a 37" inseam… the seat would sit 3cm behind the ESTA line… Depending on your saddle position, you should easily be able to make up 1.5-2+cm forward on the rails.

I can't see how this could put you at a ST in the mid 60 degrees… unless you have a mid 40" inseam…

Even if the Aft measurement was another 5mm longer it would put you at ~38mm behind the ESTA line. 10mm would be 46.4mm

Again, you can always decrease these values by moving the saddle forward on the seatrails.

I'm just wondering if anyone has had a chance to ride a 2017 29er Sight yet? All the speculating at number crunching won't serve any good until someone is ACTUALLY RIDING THE BIKE…

Jan. 29, 2017, 1:14 a.m.
Posts: 828
Joined: June 29, 2006

I also have really long legs and don't like slack seattube angles or slack effective seattube angles.

Problem with full suspension bikes is, they sag away when climbing. That's what I can feel on many bikes at least. Especially as you increase the lever (with long legs or short chainstays or both). A not super steep SA becomes a pretty slack SA once you're trying to climb something and don't ride a super firm shock.

Debonair increases this tendency with its funny sag point neg/pos equalization on many frames.

Shorter riders don't seem to have this problem as much, as well as low leverage rate bikes or coil shocks.

Static geometry or unsagged geometry doesn't tell the whole story for climbing, I think.

And there's more. There also is such a thing as a too steep SA, my knees start to hurt at a certain point of saddle position (too far forward relative to the BB).

And if you've got a steep effective SA but a slack actual SA (bend somewhere and upper SA part real slack) the saddle goes to a bad position when you lower it a lot (dropper post..)

I find it harder to direct the bike with my thighs when the saddle is too far forward.

I've hear rumors of Specialized's new dropper, which is said to rotate the saddle back a bit in the lowest position to remedy that. Which would make sense, if you look at the seattube configuration of the Enduro.

All of this is a lot of fussing though, a non setback dropper with good fore aft adjustment range goes a long way. 2-3cm of saddle adjustment for aft amount to a couple of degrees of SA angle.

Setback droppers on large frames are however insane.

Jan. 29, 2017, 8 a.m.
Posts: 1485
Joined: Nov. 8, 2003

/\Yes.
I've found sizing up a good solution too, as long as the bigger frame still has more than ample standover clearance. Less seat tube exposed makes a surprisingly large difference in setback.

https://nsmba.ca/product-category/memberships/

Jan. 29, 2017, 8:37 a.m.
Posts: 1090
Joined: Feb. 5, 2011

Still stoked. The Evil doesn't do any of the bad single pivot things I expected it to do. It climbs well, descends well. Zero drivetrain or brake interference that I can tell. It's also pretty much the biggest bike in its class. I won't be switching out any time soon.

In hindsight the E29 felt like an amped-up trail bike that seemed better at lower speeds and traversing. The Wreckoning struggles a bit in those situations but is a better technical climber and definitely more forgiving when gnar and speed ramp up. I didn't understand 'square-edged hits' before now. The E29 would hang up on stuff all the time, so I'd either back off or hunt and peck. The Wreck seems to accelerate through those spots - but I have to hit them hard and fast, drive the bike all the time, be more fearless and fast. The E29 didn't reward that extra effort the same way.

I'm itching to try a current generation VPP bike to compare, having not ridden one in like 10 years.

I'd be curious to try out a 2017 E29 since they made them significantly slacker than the previous ones. I just got an offset bushing installed on my 2015 E29 and although the difference is subtle, it's definitely noticeable and I like how the bike rides with the slightly slacker head angle. It only brought the HA down from 67.5 to 67, but I can feel the difference. Would be curious to try out the 2017 where it goes all the way down to 66. That being said, one of the reason I like the E29 so much is that it is basically an XC and a DH bike all in one, and I wouldn't want to sacrifice too much of the XC trail bike abilities. There are tons of bikes out there that are good at descending but also having the XC/climbing abilities is the challenging part - and I think that's what the E29 does so well. But based on what you are saying above it sounds like the Evil would be a good option for all of this.

Jan. 30, 2017, 9:53 a.m.
Posts: 3801
Joined: April 13, 2003

you can have a good climbing bike that has a slack h/a… but you need to have longer stays and a steep seat tube.

:canada:

Forum jump: