Sorry if I have missed a reply but just a bump for the Stooge owners to ask if any of you have ridden or owned a Solaris and how would they compare?

My Solaris is my first 29er and I really like it but there is just something about the Stooge that looks like its a lot of fun to me !

unfortunately I’m in the wrong part of the country to make a test ride easily accessible.

Cheers for any reply’s 😀

very early days yet, but i’m working on a fork and bars at the moment

Decent width (like 740mm) very swept (like Jones) that don’t cost a millionty pounds please!

Decent width (like 740mm) very swept (like Jones) that don’t cost a millionty pounds please!

you got it.

be a little while, but not so long.

re Ti frame, working on the drawings now.

Will the bars be a 45deg sweep? Hope so!!!

you got it.

Tremendous!

Finally some proper wide bars with big sweep??? Cool.

Will the new frames be 29+ front and back?

Will the new frames be 29+ front and back?

i’m toying with it, but in a way i prefer shorter stays and lighter rear wheels/tyres. I’m thinking more 29+ front, 650+ rear to keep it handling the way it does now. I worked hard to make the Stooge handle like it does and feel that something could well be lost, but then again, that’s what the steel Stooge is for, why not add something into the mix.

The Stooge was motivated by not being able to find the frame i wanted to ride on the market (at a good price, at least). It’s the same with the bars, i’ve found my own hole and need to fill it. Everything is either wrong width/sweep/rise or a combination of the three, there are some great bars but i just want something a little more ‘right’ for the Stooge.

That’s a very Jones-like approach. Love it.

Some interesting reports coming through re 650+, particularly that it seems to be noticeably smaller in diameter than something like a 2.4 ardent on a dually. If that is the case then would a bike designed with 650+ rear and 29+ front be really weird given the front end will be so much higher than the rear?

Another person interested in your bars.

Care to share more thoughts re the fork you mentioned? Wider to take fat or stiffer like a truss?

would a bike designed with 650+ rear and 29+ front be really weird given the front end will be so much higher than the rear?

Surely that depends on the frame geometry?

I love the sound of the bars. Please can they be shiny silver? 😀

My Stooge continues to amaze me. Riding rigid always meant a certain amount of compromise for me before in terms of downhill speed and caution on technical stuff. The Stooge, especially with a 29+ front, is as capable and confidence-inspiring as many bikes with front (and rear) suspension. I’m hitting jumps and gnarly stuff that I’d have thought twice about on previous rigid bikes.

Surely that depends on the frame geometry?

Yes, ignore me. I was thinking of the clearance to the crown on my Jones and thinking the fork couldn’t be any shorter so it would have to be a mini headtube to stop it being like a chopper but the stooge is different re fork length.

The tread on the Trailblazer is quite narrow 60mm, with the casing at 70 mm, heavy 948g – can’t say I really like the look of it. Does look big though!

thread here orums.mtbr.com/29er-components/what-29-27-5-a-909580-6.html#post11149810

No ride reports yet!

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-components/what-29-27-5-a-909580-6.html#post11149810

Frame has arrived and really is very lovely. Hopefully get it built tonight.
This is my first frame with an eccentric bb. What torque for pinch bolts?

glad it got there all okay. Not very tight for the bolts – 4nm, which without a torque wrench, is not much more than hand tight. Don’t crank it, all that will happen is that the BB shell will flex.

Enjoy the build.

The more I’ve ridden mine, the less I think 29+ rear end would be a good idea. Would be very interested to try 650+ rear though.
Trialling some bargain American Classic wide lightning wheels on mine (32mm wide). Very light, but still holds the tyres in reasonable shape.

Don’t know about 29+ in the rear, I would have been happy if my 2.35 Ikon fitted.

Just put an ikon 2.35 in the back of mine on a blunt P35, it just fits. Hope it doesn’t get muddy.

While it would be good to have had more rear tyre clearance I’m becoming tempted to try a narrower rear as the rear of the bike seems so comfortable. Heard good things about Ardent Races on wide rims so interested in trying one of those.

Anyone else struggling to stop the seatpost slipping?

Thomson seatpost fine here (and same post slipped all the time in my old Jones).

Used a Thompson and now a Kent ERiksen ti. All good

Used a Thompson and now a Kent ERiksen ti. All good

Jealous. Setback or straight? I fancy one but worry setback is too much (compared to Thomson).

Yeah, it’s KE’s layback Sweetpost.

Used it on two bikes now and have been happy

It seems to suit the Stooge well

I love the sound of the bars. Please can they be shiny silver?

Yep +1 for those bars and polished please Mr Stooge.

I’m liking my On One OG’s but they need to be wider…. And polished yeah deffo polished. Polished would be good..

Whilst we’re making bars requests, black or white for me pleases 🙂
American Classic wide lightenings + Knard tubeless is a mission.

^^ That looks lovely!

Interested to understand why people want to fit fatter tyres in the rear. I’m using a Smorgasbord, which fits with plenty of clearance and provides all the grip I need (ie it’s good for climbing and slides through corners like it should). I don’t feel the need for more squish at the rear but is that what people are after?

Interested to understand why people want to fit fatter tyres in the rear. I’m using a Smorgasbord, which fits with plenty of clearance and provides all the grip I need (ie it’s good for climbing and slides through corners like it should). I don’t feel the need for more squish at the rear but is that what people are after?

No matter what tyre clearance you spec, people always want to go up one.

I just wanted to be able to run my current rear tyre, the 2.35 ikon with a bit of clearance. It’s not like I’m moaning that I can’t fit a 3″ tyre in there.

Fair enough. Just (genuinely) interested 🙂

Guitar hero, what rim are you using? I run a dually 45mm with a 2.5 rear tyre with no probs, a friend runs regular rims with 2.4 Ardents, again no problems. I’m assuming the Ikon is a big 2.35.

When i designed the frame it was around a regular 29er tyre up to about 2.3, the tyre also had to fit within the confines of the top tube/rear stay. Unfortunately there seem to be a few tyres that don’t fit, but a lot that do. I will look at widening this slightly on the next run, however the tooling costs for the top tubes were very expensive. I love the way the bike rides with a regular rear tyre, especially on long haul Welsh mountain rides, but it IS a shame some don’t make the squeeze.

I have a fair few miles on my Stooge and I am running a knard on front and an OO Smogasboard/flow ex on the rear with plenty room.I feel that a 29+ on the rear would not be that benificial to bike as its so comfy and nimble as it is.

This bike is just super fun.

Just got a custom gold PDW Bird water bottle holder 😆

@ jonestown

Regarding 29+ vs 650B + in the back of any new Stooge design;

I am lucky to have both Stooge and Krampus now to compare. If you set up Krampus (large=63cm tt) with sufficient high front ( 2″ spacers plus rizer) and set-back seatpost (keep your weight back) it is very playfull bike with light front end, even with that longer chainstay. Having a 3″ Knard in the back surely makes a big difference in both comfort and grip. Rolling resistance of a 1bar Knard is probably even less than a 2.4 nobby tire at 1.8bar. Grip on loose surface is superior by far (but offcourse not as good as 3.8 fatbike tires)

So it does make sense to use a wider rim/tire combo, but the availability of 27.5 wide rims and tires is very limited (close to zero ?) I would suggest to stay with 29+ in the back to give owners the opportunity to switch between 2.4 and 3″ in the back, move toward sliding drop-outs to adapt chainstay and skip exentric BB for a new design. You will have all the benefits of the original Stooge geo plus the extra opportunity to go semi or full 29+ with upcoming availability of new rims (f.e. Notubes) and 29+ tires.

Just my thoughts.

^^^ Plus a fat fork 😉

…then I’d be even more tempted than I already am!

^
All that would make it a different bike IMO. It works brilliantly as it is – I think, other than a few tweaks (ti 😀 ), it should stay as it is. If you want a 29+ bike that would be a different model.

Here ya go .. for 650+ comparisons. 1 fits an average 29er rear, the other won’t. The smaller tyre (Trailblazer) has a tread width a little narrower than an Ardent 2.4.

I agree; Stooge 29+ is a different model…..but regarding costs/business it could replace the “original” and get more people buying. Changing towards a two-size Stooge 2.0 concept probably sells more than keep Stooge 1.0 running next to a new one-size Stooge 29+ .
Titanium…great…..but how many people want to buy a high cost 29er frameset vs a full 29+ ?

Just my thoughts, I am not a marketeer.

Just my thoughts, I am not a marketeer.

Nor am I. Going to a 29+ only though would compromise the performance of the current model. Likely to be heavier, longer chainstays.

Not everybody wants 29+ ….