weight?
Like Rodie said, negligible. The plus size tires don't really disrupt the design of the stays. A bend somewhere else or some slight clearancing is all it takes.
THere's a reason why hardtail frame makers mostly have plated or relaborately designed yokes on the driveside chainstay. Clearance is tight there!
you have always been able to fit 3.0 in surly frames. this whole plus sized thing is far from new.
Just a speculative fiction. No cause for alarm.
Can you put plus size 26" wheels and tires on the 1x1? Are there plus size 26" rims and tires? Might be a fun urban assault vehicle.
Wrong. Always.
so I lied, they claim 2.75 but what's .25 between tire manufactures
Just a speculative fiction. No cause for alarm.
I couldn't imagine running a 29x2.5 DHF on the back of a hardtail. I guess there is people out there that want to and do!
Increased rear axle width is the only downside I can think of…
Makes sense to give people the option like SC has done with a 29 or 27.5+ bike build.
Aren't 2.4 Ardents the same casing as 2.5 Minion? It's just the side knobs that boost the width a bit?
I like a chunky tyre in the back of a hardtail.
Like Rodie said, negligible. The plus size tires don't really disrupt the design of the stays. A bend somewhere else or some slight clearancing is all it takes.
THere's a reason why hardtail frame makers mostly have plated or relaborately designed yokes on the driveside chainstay. Clearance is tight there!
I'm sure these bikes will be fun and awesome but no way if you add "negligible" frame weight to tire to rims to wider bb to hubs etc… something has to give. no such thing as no compromise.
I'm sure these bikes will be fun and awesome but no way if you add "negligible" frame weight to tire to rims to wider bb to hubs etc… something has to give. no such thing as no compromise.
I think you're talking about the whole plus bike as a system, I agree there are compromises for sure.
I and kperas are talking about designing and building 27.5+ compatibility into a 29 frame. Gives you the option of running light and fast or heavy and grippy, with no weight penalty to the frame itself. And really no drawbacks other than the cost of a new frame that is 'compatible'
It saddens me that my chromag is old school 135qr rear end. Not that I have any use for 27.5+. But I want to at least be able to come into a thread like this and flex my wiener.
Oh, if it will help you with your enhancement issues……I offer $200 and a lightly ridden BB, all in for your Stylus frame.
New frame (warranty). There have been a few geometry tweaks and minor improvements for 2016. Will be picking up a shorter stem as a result. Too bad the rear tire clearance wasn't increased ever so slightly and it now has a tapered head tube. The Explosif is a great trail bike and a blast to ride.
how tall are you? would a small fit you better??
how tall are you? would a small fit you better??
should a 5'10" rider really be on a small frame? That being said I have looked at the numbers and pondered. I'll definitely have more to say in the full review about this, it's weird though to easily min out the reach and still be at ones limit, and I wouldn't say my body type is too far off average for a typical medium frame.
should a 5'10" rider really be on a small frame? That being said I have looked at the numbers and pondered. I'll definitely have more to say in the full review about this, it's weird though to easily min out the reach and still be at ones limit, and I wouldn't say my body type is too far off average for a typical medium frame.
I'm interested I your opinion. I'm 5'9" and normally would fit a med. But looking at the numbers and your set up and many other riders, I'd think I'd go small. or maybe I'm just old school… I'd love to try one.
should a 5'10" rider really be on a small frame? That being said I have looked at the numbers and pondered. I'll definitely have more to say in the full review about this, it's weird though to easily min out the reach and still be at ones limit, and I wouldn't say my body type is too far off average for a typical medium frame.
With that TT and reach, i would still go medium and run a 50-55mm stem. The wandering front end comment on the PB review would be solved simply by running a smaller frame and longer stem.
With that TT and reach, i would still go medium and run a 50-55mm stem. The wandering front end comment on the PB review would be solved simply by running a smaller frame and longer stem.
small frame is 5cm shorter seat tube too, though…not sure how much room there is on the post to run that much extension…
Forum jump:
