Was it a cull de sac in bike design? does anyone make them anymore, anyone got one? I’m interested in hearing opinions on these as it seemed like a good idea at the time, well it did to me..

I saw a pic of a 656er recently… so the concept isn’t dead.

Most people i know who had the Trek 69ers loved them

Carved bikes still make a 69er. I’m in search of a Trek 15″ 69er SS if anyone happens upon one…….

I know someone with one of these:
http://carverbikes.com/frames/original-96er/

Haven’t seen her out on it much lately though. She has a carbon 29er now.

I’ve got one. I did the HTR550 on it. It started of live as a 26er and also has clearance to be run as full on 29er, but that would be to big for me.

What happened to 69er bikes?

I think people realised they looked crap.

Designers tried harder and made neat chainstay thingies to shorten back ends with ring and tyre clearance.
Also some brands came up with new ways of measuring chainstay length to pretend things were shorter than they are.

they looked crap.

The view of a 69er is always a butt crap 😯

Carver and Trek were the only ones to really try

I run a Carver as SS, it’s a good design. The trek root beer’s always looked good

26 at the back with a fat tyre at the front is surely the next asymmetric wheel combo to become high fashion

I had the original SS trek 69er and absolutely loved it. Wish I still had it. Probably the fastest I ever was on a bike!

I’ve had a Trek 69er SS for about four years. Absolutely love it. Probably my favourite bike ever.

Can’t say I understand the logic of the design, but its the riding that counts and that makes perfect sense.

I honestly think its a thing of beauty so I’m hardly bothered with the haters.

I have one you don’t. I’m happy.

I too have an original Trek 69er SS. It’s currently laid up with a broken adjuster clamp on the DUC forks, I’m still undecided whether to track down a spare clamp or go rigid and half fat on the front 8)

Logic of design? My understanding (and indeed my experience) is that the 29 front gives the advantage of rolling into (through) things while the 26 rear gives the acceleration and gearing of the smaller wheel.

Original Trek ss was about my favourite bike ever as well. That said the Stooge with knard front gives it a run for its money.
29ers have evolved allot.

Logic of design? My understanding (and indeed my experience) is that the 29 front gives the advantage of rolling into (through) things while the 26 rear gives the acceleration and gearing of the smaller wheel.

That was how I took it. I had a Carver 96er and loved it’ish. The EBB was a constant issue. It never got sorted, even with Carver upgrades so it went

When you accelerate, both wheels have to accelerate. It doesn’t matter if it’s the driven wheel or not.

Cove did the stiffee 69 er
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/silverfish-gets-excited-by-69-stiffees/03921

Simply stunning!

Wasn’t the Cove because there were only 69??

I have a Trek 69er SS frame, loved it when it was built up but prefer my Jones more since I’ve gone 29er with all my bikes.

My Travis Brown frame got nicked. I still wonder who bought a single speed, rigid forked bike with odd wheels “down the pub”

I have a Carver 96er and love it. I have had lots of other bikes but always pull this one out of the shed first. The EBB was a problem to start with but was fixed. (The shell had deformed when manufactured. Had it bored out and a sleeve made for the original ebb and never had a problem since. ) It is set up rigid ss and rides really well. The front wheel does roll over stuff well and the short rear end makes it turn on a sixpence. 🙂

I’m running 26 on the back and 24 on the front, bit this is mainly to help the headangle a little.

Logic of design? My understanding (and indeed my experience) is that the 29 front gives the advantage of rolling into (through) things while the 26 rear gives the acceleration and gearing of the smaller wheel

Yes I’ve heard that too. Doesn’t make much sense to me.As Brant says both wheels have to accelerate. The front wheel rolling over the stuff was a foretaste of 29er wonderment.

I’ve always thought bike design was part science,part engineering and part alchemy.

This bike just works.Probably down to good old luck.

I had a 69er Inbred for a while. It was good but I liked the big wheel up front so much that I swapped it for a 29er Inbred.

[u]W A N T[/i][/u]

My old one below. Now on a 29er tho

didn’t they suffer from rolling away backwards down the hill when parked on flat ground?

Yes, the Trek ones came with a little plastic chock but noone ever knew what it was for.

Is it possible they all went to niche reassignment class and came back as fat bikes?

I’m just about to pop my spare Jones Unicrown fork on my son’s 26″ inbred. A-C is 435mm with 55mm offset. Got a spare 29″ Flow/Fatback wheel to pop in – should work nicely.

Been trying to sell the fork/wheel combo but it appears to be a bit too niche!

I thought about 69-er-ing my Kona Five-0 when its bombers died, measured it all up, knew what kinda travel I needed to keep the jometry, but then hit the Unassailable Wall of Unnecessary Standards (or “UWUS”, pronounced “you wuss”). Being not that into the technical side of bikes I couldn’t find a combination of more than two thirds of the bits (and the bits of the bits) I needed that would fit. 🙁

Oh, the logic of it – the front wheel will have a harder time rolling things than the rear due to being pushed rather than pulled over obstacles, so the front wheel ‘needs’ to roll better.

Thats interesting Klumpy because i was thinking about doing the same with my currently unloved, unridden Boardman thats sat in the shed. Thinking of popping some 120mm 29er Raidon forks onto it with 29″ wheel just to see how it rides. Currently has 150mm/26″ Sektors on.

Thats interesting Klumpy because i was thinking about doing the same with my currently unloved, unridden Boardman thats sat in the shed. Thinking of popping some 120mm 29er Raidon forks onto it with 29″ wheel just to see how it rides. Currently has 150mm/26″ Sektors on.

It was the 69er that inspired the 29er. People noticed that the 29 inch front wheel always arrived first so was obviously faster than the 26 inch rear. But in this configuration you need to make sure you have a quite hefty frame as the front wheel will be so much faster it will be constantly trying to rip the front off. Hence a move to 29 at both ends meaning not having to build that strength in.

I’m just about to pop my spare Jones Unicrown fork on my son’s 26″ inbred. A-C is 435mm with 55mm offset. Got a spare 29″ Flow/Fatback wheel to pop in – should work nicely.

Been trying to sell the fork/wheel combo but it appears to be a bit too niche!

I put a Hummingbird fork on my Handjob with a 29er Arch EX, really liked the 29er rollover ability, but it raised the BB too much and was a bit flip floppy. May try a 650b Flow EX next, but not too sure that i’ll reap as many rewards for the outlay.

I had a 46er back in the day (mk1 Spesh Big Hit). That was crap too.

I’ve got a small carver 96er frame going for cheap if someone wants to have a play around. I’m 5’7 and I find it too small as I like to stretch out. 80-100 sus fork.

29″ rolls over stuff
26″ makes it turn on a dime (like mentioned earlier) as the back end comes around faster. I don’t agree on the extra acceleration bit though.

It is quite fun.

Friend of mine had one of those 46er BigHits back in the day – we used to affectionately call it the Penny Farthing 😉

Pointed downwards there was no stopping it! I must have a pic of it somewhere…

Loved my old XTC 69er. In reality though only did this as I wanted a 29er.