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

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/orange-bikes-launches-two-new-29ers-2017.html#cid1609636

another aggressive 29er now available , decent looking bike , but lacks a water bottle mount

I'm a heavy guy who likes to plow through / over stuff (I love to fly down Ned's on Seymour at full throttle) but don't want to sacrifice too much playfulness or the ability to ride slower / tighter North Shore tech like Ladies Only or Upper Oil Can on Fromme as well.

Anyone have any of these bikes or other suggestions? Opinions? Speculation?

Is Trek a dirty word? 65.1 HT /_

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

Thanks for repeating what I wrote. Take your time next time.

Trigonometry is a subset of geometry in case you missed that in grade school. You need the geometry to be able to calculate the ESTA at any height. The actual seat tube angle is most certainly in the 60's but you fail to comprehend again (hint - the actual seat tube angle can physically be measured on the frame). You need this because your assumption are bunk. An error in assumption of geometry even a mm will throw off your calculations by a bunch so guessing at it is useless.

Nowhere in your calcs did you even get to the ESTA for someone with a 37" inseam. The ESTA at a certain saddle height is the only key # to know.

So can peeps of average height manage a wagonwheeler on the shore?
I mean, can peeps w/shorter legs get weight far enough back on the steeps w/o ripping their package off?
And what about switchbacks?
I am curious YT………..

So can peeps of average height manage a wagonwheeler on the shore?
I mean, can peeps w/shorter legs get weight far enough back on the steeps w/o ripping their package off?
And what about switchbacks?
I am curious YT………..

I'm maybe 5'10" and have a medium Jeffsy. I did a quick ride around the demo centre on a large and with the seatpost totally slammed I still couldn't reach the pedals.

The medium feels great on the steep techie shore stuff. Very similar to my buddy's Evil Following.

JM might have more demos in Squamish.

So can peeps of average height manage a wagonwheeler on the shore?
I mean, can peeps w/shorter legs get weight far enough back on the steeps w/o ripping their package off?
And what about switchbacks?
I am curious YT………..

Only if you're the gnarest of the gnar. ;)

So can peeps of average height manage a wagonwheeler on the shore?
I mean, can peeps w/shorter legs get weight far enough back on the steeps w/o ripping their package off?
And what about switchbacks?
I am curious YT………..

you can rent one for the day , if you purchase they deduct the rental cost . I looked into it last fall before I wrecked my shoulder .

I'm maybe 5'10" and have a medium Jeffsy. I did a quick ride around the demo centre on a large and with the seatpost totally slammed I still couldn't reach the pedals.

The medium feels great on the steep techie shore stuff. Very similar to my buddy's Evil Following.

JM might have more demos in Squamish.

how long is your inseam ? I am 1/2" taller and the large felt way more comfortable than the medium did . I have a 32" inseam and my current bike is a medium and the large YT felt similar .

Thanks, 5'8" 31" inseam puts me on a med.

how long is your inseam ? I am 1/2" taller and the large felt way more comfortable than the medium did . I have a 32" inseam and my current bike is a medium and the large YT felt similar .

31 inch inseam and I'm 5'9.5". I guess that you just ride what feels right. :)

So can peeps of average height manage a wagonwheeler on the shore?
I mean, can peeps w/shorter legs get weight far enough back on the steeps w/o ripping their package off?
And what about switchbacks?
I am curious YT………..

Out of curiosity, how do you (or anyone else) see 29" wheels improving your riding on the shore? Are there specific trails/sections that you can reference? Coming from trials, I don't really ride the same way as most people and often wish that there were modern 26" options for a more agile/playful feel. It makes me wonder what 'normal' mtbers want out of their bikes.

Big wheels roll over chunder better but take more skill to maneuver through the tight stuff amiright?

I see 29 as maybe being smoother/faster for trails I ride 'cause I generally don't seek out the sphincter tightening super steep tech stuff.

Out of curiosity, how do you (or anyone else) see 29" wheels improving your riding on the shore? Are there specific trails/sections that you can reference? Coming from trials, I don't really ride the same way as most people and often wish that there were modern 26" options for a more agile/playful feel. It makes me wonder what 'normal' mtbers want out of their bikes.

i'm finding they're better (for me) pretty much everywhere on the shore. our trails are fairly root infested, and these (unsurprisingly) roll over all that chunky stuff appreciably better. i do buzz the rear tire on occasion on steep rolls, but also find that you don't need to hang off the back as much, as the front wheel is less likely to hang up. if our trails were buff, i'd see no need for the big wheels, but they're great in the chunk.

Out of curiosity, how do you (or anyone else) see 29" wheels improving your riding on the shore? Are there specific trails/sections that you can reference? Coming from trials, I don't really ride the same way as most people and often wish that there were modern 26" options for a more agile/playful feel. It makes me wonder what 'normal' mtbers want out of their bikes.

my guess is most trail riders don't have a trials or bmx specific background and therefore like some of the benefits of new gen big wheelers. and maybe the enduroification speed seeking race orientation of said modern trail rider? improved strava times?