Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Canadian Rockies
    Posts
    1,085

    Interesting opinion piece on plus size

    650b Fattie Plus, 2nineus , just a little fat. Whatever you wanna call it.

    Is narrower the new Fat? Interesting read for bike dorks.

    http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/ar...-doomed-48551/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by jetski View Post
    650b Fattie Plus, 2nineus , just a little fat. Whatever you wanna call it.

    Is narrower the new Fat? Interesting read for bike dorks.

    http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/ar...-doomed-48551/
    Huh. You know what would be brilliant? If they cut the wheel diameter down by one inch, and cut the tire width by like.....a half inch.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    Huh. You know what would be brilliant? If they cut the wheel diameter down by one inch, and cut the tire width by like.....a half inch.
    Already done. New Rocky Mountain Slayer runs 26 x 1.9 to 3.0".

    I guess news travels slow when you're busy cunting up TGR with Drumpf slurping threads.
    Last edited by reckless toboggan; 11-10-2016 at 09:02 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banff
    Posts
    22,228
    intersting read. like most things, the pendulum swings from one extreme to the other, and settles in the middle


    (we had skinny 65mm skis. we ALL need 130mm skis, Oh wait, 100mm does it all)


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by mntlion View Post
    (we had skinny 65mm skis. we ALL need 130mm skis, Oh wait, 116mm does it all)
    FIFY
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the situation strikes me as WAY too much drama at this point

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    Huh. You know what would be brilliant? If they cut the wheel diameter down by one inch...
    Yeah! I see where you're going. 26.5! I can totally get behind that.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central VT
    Posts
    4,808
    The article seems to be splitting hairs and nitpicking when it comes to tire width. Just keep making frames that can fit up to 29 x 2.5 or up to 27.5 x 2.8 and let riders choose their wheel/tire size.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Treading Water
    Posts
    6,714
    1. The industry needs to stop calling everything a "Standard". Fuck off. You're experimenting with wider rims and bigger tires. Cool, have fun with it. You're LITERALLY not reinventing the wheel.

    2. It's not a new idea that consumers love the idea of a two faced bike. I know virtually zero people who regularly change their adjustable suspension (outside of Empty Beer navel gazers). But I know a ton of people who obsess over these bikes. The reality: people can't commit to a new trend. They like the idea of owning a bike that's got a more aggressive geometry than their previous bike. But it scares them so they buy a bike that'll let them "take a step back" if they end up feeling too radical. Adjustable geometry is for pussies. Same reason the new bikes are so popular. If 27.5+ ends up feeling a little more ghey than you anticipated, you quietly go back to 29" and slip back into spandex.

    3. I linked to the other article about 27.5+ being faster than 29" 2.3 tires. Fascinating and certainly counterintuitive. At the end of the day though, weight and especially durability will win the day. Nobody likes a bike that is fast and smooth for the first 2 miles and then plagues you with flat tires the rest of the day.

    4. I like mtnlion's ski analogy. Because at the end of the day they ALL work just fine for 90% of what you want to do. Go to a bike park and look around. You'll invariably see a half dozen guys on 6-10 year old DH bikes absolutely slaying the shit out of things. And there you are with everything modern, color matched cables, $1200 i9 wheelset, carbon cockpit and a bike weighing barely more than a hardtail. And you're just bumbling around like everyone else. Yet, you're still having fun too.
    However many are in a shit ton.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by sethschmautz View Post
    Yeah! I see where you're going. 26.5! I can totally get behind that.
    That would be sick. They need to come up with a name for the slightly less wide tire too....hum. How about:


    MINI 26.5+


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by jm2e View Post
    3. I linked to the other article about 27.5+ being faster than 29" 2.3 tires. Fascinating and certainly counterintuitive. At the end of the day though, weight and especially durability will win the day. Nobody likes a bike that is fast and smooth for the first 2 miles and then plagues you with flat tires the rest of the day.
    That article is stupid. There's no climbing. There's damn good reason people aren't riding your average plus bike in XC races.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    That would be sick. They need to come up with a name for the slightly less wide tire too....hum. How about:


    MINI 26.5+

    I like it!! :-)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banff
    Posts
    22,228
    and we STILL are waiting for the new enduro/plus pedal thread size.


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    NorCal coast
    Posts
    1,971
    Heh, I was just telling a friend last week that I think Plus is overkill/a waste, and that I will deliberately avoid it on my next bike. I have WT Minions on 31.8mm internal LB rims, and while I love the grip, I don't want to drag more rubber uphill than that.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Andeh View Post
    Heh, I was just telling a friend last week that I think Plus is overkill/a waste, and that I will deliberately avoid it on my next bike. I have WT Minions on 31.8mm internal LB rims, and while I love the grip, I don't want to drag more rubber uphill than that.
    NIce! Wish I could justify the carbon rims but the new gen alloy rims are getting too good. Think I'm going to build up some Hadley's on Stan's Arch MK3's for next year, and try some of the new fast rolling 26x2.30 maxxis offerings like the aggressor, tomahawk and minion SS, mixed with DHF in the front occasionally.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a genuine ol' fashioned authentic steam powered aereoplane
    Posts
    16,869
    Running 2.5 wide trail DHF/DHR right now on 35mm internal. Seems to be the perfect balance of grip, weight, and beefiness.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Treading Water
    Posts
    6,714
    What bike you put that on? The carbon Warden?
    However many are in a shit ton.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by jm2e View Post

    4. I like mtnlion's ski analogy. Because at the end of the day they ALL work just fine for 90% of what you want to do. Go to a bike park and look around. You'll invariably see a half dozen guys on 6-10 year old DH bikes absolutely slaying the shit out of things. And there you are with everything modern, color matched cables, $1200 i9 wheelset, carbon cockpit and a bike weighing barely more than a hardtail. And you're just bumbling around like everyone else. Yet, you're still having fun too.
    Great post right here.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a genuine ol' fashioned authentic steam powered aereoplane
    Posts
    16,869
    Quote Originally Posted by jm2e View Post
    What bike you put that on? The carbon Warden?
    Yup. 2.5 DHF up front and 2.4 DHR II in the back. I raced today and finished in 5th!

    Dirt was really nice so it's wasn't the best test conditions, but I was so stoked on the tires. There is a reason that these have become the "standard/go-to" tread patterns. The grip in the turns was fantastic and braking was phenomenal. There were a few sections of hang your ass off as far as possible to not go over the bars with slippery turns at the bottom and numerous times I was so happy that the DHR was back there. I was running 20 PSI front and rear and didn't feel any need to adjust all day.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    538
    I wanna know more about the C warden, pm me or reply, thanks-

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,872
    Different people notice different things. I feel wheel flex and it bugs me. When I am hammering on my 26" tires I notice it and when I use a softer side wall tire I feel it rolling.

    Guys keep trying to sell me on bigger rims and I keep coming back to this. At 200#, maybe I put more on them than most of you? I certainly am not the fastest up or down, and I am older than a lot of you, so maybe it's from the time when a 1.5 was big and a 1.7 was huge.

    For me, part of the appeal of the advent of suspension was it allows me to run tire pressure where I don't feel that annoying flex or roll.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    On a genuine ol' fashioned authentic steam powered aereoplane
    Posts
    16,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    Different people notice different things. I feel wheel flex and it bugs me. When I am hammering on my 26" tires I notice it and when I use a softer side wall tire I feel it rolling.

    Guys keep trying to sell me on bigger rims and I keep coming back to this. At 200#, maybe I put more on them than most of you? I certainly am not the fastest up or down, and I am older than a lot of you, so maybe it's from the time when a 1.5 was big and a 1.7 was huge.

    For me, part of the appeal of the advent of suspension was it allows me to run tire pressure where I don't feel that annoying flex or roll.
    Carbon wheels.

    Since switching to carbon wheels I haven't been able to feel any wheel flex at all.

    I'm only about 175# on the bike with my gear on.


    Still, wide stiff wheels + semi fat tires is as much as a breakthrough for my riding as when I first went tubeless or used a dropper post.

    It's immediately like, "Why haven't I been doing this forever?!?!?" after 3 minutes of riding.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Southeast New York
    Posts
    11,827
    Since I went to 90mm wide rims I don't feel any wheel flex anymore.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Treading Water
    Posts
    6,714
    20psi on a 2 1/2" tire out back is the crazeh! My wife is 125lbs kitted up and she goes to 22psi on the back tire with a 30mm rim. Do you really think the 2.3" DHRII is a lot bigger volume than the 2.4" DHRII WT?
    However many are in a shit ton.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    8,389
    The guy drinks Hefeweizen...he doesn't know shit

    My DHF and DHR 2.3 seem really phat and grippy compared to my old bike. Everyone I know on a plus bike now says they won't go back anytime soon. I'm intrigued to make the switch to a 2.8, but a lower bb has me contemplating.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    31,085
    My daughter in law whom I would call an intermediate rider tested a Cannondale "Bad Habit" with the 27.5 x 3.0 and ordered one

    apparently the big tires made it easier for her ( a person with less skills) to ride single track with rocks & roots
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •