Morning all.

I’m looking at new bike options and quite like the look of the Whyte T129 and T130.

My current full suss bike is a 160mm travel 26″ wheel bike. Nicely specced and works but I’ve always found it a bit on the small side and the suspension linkage is far too complicated and the bushes seem to wear really quickly.

So of the two Whytes, I’m struggling to choose between 29″ wheels with 120mm travel (the T129), or 27.5 wheels with 130mm travel (the T130). I can see pros and cons to each.

I already have a rigid 29er SS and a hardtail 27.5 so familiar with both wheel sizes. I like both. No major preference. The new bike would be for general “trail” usage but mainly for areas that are a bit more lumpy. Certainly for trail centre usage and occasional trips abroad (Spain, Morocco, Alps etc).

Anyone have any opinions on these two bikes or more general opinions about the choice of the two wheel sizes for the intended usage?

Cheers

DB 🙂

I’ve got a T129 (Works) and I love it. My previous bike was an Orange 5 26″. It feels much lighter (it isn’t) and ‘snappier’. It also seems very well made and finished. The XT brakes and transmission are faultless, too. I can honestly say that I haven’t noticed any downside to having a 29er. If had to find a fault with the T129 it would be the forks (Fox 32 CTD) – they are a tad harsh on the small stuff. I sold the Reverb straight away to save a bit of weight. Can’t say I’ve ever felt the need.

At the moment I’m thinking either one is a good choice. Either would be good but they would both be a bit different to each other.

My current 26″ 160mm is probably more suspension than I generally need although sometimes nice to have the option.

Tough call as I’ve only ever ridden 26″ full suss.

At the moment I’m probably leaning more towards the T130 but not for any logical reason. Maybe it’s jut because it’s closer to what I currently know in terms of wheel size.

Try to get demos? I’d certainly like a go on a T-129 too.

Hmm should I stop reading this and go ride the T-129 demo bike I have then? 😳

The T-129 is on my list (obviously) but I ‘like’ and am concentrating on the 29er wheel size. For a pure trailsy/fun bike I think I’d be looking at the T-130 and T-150’s but seemingly you can’t go too wrong with a Whyte ATM.

The thread I started, Whyte G150 or Orange 5 might be of interest, I ended up with a T-130 Works which I love! HTH

Look what arrived 5 minutes ago…

Being built up as I speak!

Can’t wait… 😛

Incidentally, have spent a bit of time on both (though not much, and soon to be a lot more on a T-130). The T-129 is the most capable trail bike you will ride. It’s a demon, it absolutely destroys bumpy trails in a way only a bike with much more suspension travel should do, and as it’s relatively light and it has 29er wheels, it’s incredibly quick XC too. It’s a Strava slayer basically! On one ride, I ended up getting into a lot more trouble on the T-129 than I would have done on my own bike.

The T-130 I can’t fully comment on yet, but it instantly felt more of a fun bike when I had a brief go on one. The T-129 if I can criticise it at all, feels like it has been designed to go as quick as possible everywhere, but possibly isn’t as much fun as something that’s a little more wayward. The T-130 was the easiest full sus I’ve wheelied/manualled in a very long time anyway, so I’m hoping this bodes well as I’m now going to be riding one for the next few months!

Oooooo that looks exciting mboy.

I’m leaning towards a T130 Works SCR. Going to have a look at one on Thursday but probably wont be able to test ride. I want to check out sizing as much as anything as at 5’10” I’m right at the top of the size guide for medium or right at the bottom of the large range.

If it feels good it may be coming home with me.

I was leaning towards the T129 but it is a bit heavy. Found a carbon camber evo with 1/3 off so the same price so gone with that instead, by going up a size I get a very similar geometry.

mboy where where you yesterday in my T129 Works vs M109CS debate!

@dbukdbuk I’m 5′ 10″ with a 32″ inside leg, very average body shape and the medium fits really well. I might swap out the 70mm stem for a 60mm stem to see if it makes a noticeable difference but I’m not expecting it to make a radical difference. HTH

Thanks leftyboy. Same measurements as me so quite probably a medium will be right for me too. Hopefully I can try medium and large to confirm though. Bought my last full suss unseen from the web and guessed the sizing. Never been quite happy with it as it’s just a bit too small even with a longer stem. That one (Kona Abra Cadabra), will be up for sale when I get the new one.

I want to check out sizing as much as anything as at 5’10” I’m right at the top of the size guide for medium or right at the bottom of the large range.

I’d put a lot of money on you being a medium… Unless you’re very strangely proportioned, the large will feel too big. If you’re anywhere near me, this is officially a demo bike, and you’re more than welcome to try it out.

I was leaning towards the T129 but it is a bit heavy. Found a carbon camber evo with 1/3 off so the same price so gone with that instead, by going up a size I get a very similar geometry.

The T-129 rides a lot lighter than it is. Cliched I know, but try one first, don’t write it off cos of its weight. Similarly, every Spesh FSR I’ve ever ridden has felt slow and heavy to ride by comparison, even though the dead weight might actually be quite light.

found a carbon camber evo with 1/3 off so the same price so gone with that instead, by going up a size I get a very similar geometry.

Eh? Steeper head angle (steeper again this year?), longer (huge!) chainstays, almost exactly the same then. So much so they were giving it away in a sale.. you don’t tend to see an Whytes going like that 😉
if your happy, fair enuff

I’ve test ridden a T129S (2014)and a T130 Works.

The T129S was fun, but I only tried it in quite tame trails. While it flowed beautifully and was absurdly fast, I knew within minutes that it wasn’t the bike for me. The bigger wheels tended to ‘fall’ into turns more, really making themselves’ obvious. There was just something about the way the 29er wheels cornered that I couldn’t gel with. Furthermore, it was just generally a bit sluggish compared to a smaller wheeled bike. I really wanted to love it, (and did admire it), but was left a bit underwhelmed.

Demoed the T130 more recently. Even just at Ashton Court it was incredible. Very playful, poppy and agile, but still felt confident and planted, railing corners beautifully. Looks great too. Bear in mind that the components, which made up that T130 works were significantly better than the T129s I tried previously. Also tried a G150, but decided after much deliberation that it had too much travel/weight/slackness for 80% of my riding. T130 should prove a superb all-rounder. Just awaiting delivery of my T130 works now…

N.B. I’m 5’10” and demoed a medium in the T129, T130 and G150. The latter was a big bike, simply cannot imagine going for a Large. T130 felt great in a medium, again can’t really imagine going much bigger. And same with T129. It may be that bikes are more than the sum of their angles on paper. i.e. Santa Cruz almost invariably gets commented on as coming up small for size, yet Whyte tend to be the opposite. On paper the T130 is quite compact with a fairly average top tube length, but in reality it felt balanced for my 5’10” height.

dvowles – would you summise then that the T129 felt to you more of a endurance / distance bike and the T130 more of a trail centre/ weekend bike?

I think they’re both capable trail bikes and there is a lot of crossover. But yeah, they err towards one side of the spectrum respectively, as you have outlined.

The above said, the new t129 works scr looks incredible.

mboy where where you yesterday in my T129 Works vs M109CS debate!

Ooops, missed that one!

would you summise then that the T129 felt to you more of a endurance / distance bike and the T130 more of a trail centre/ weekend bike?

They’re both more of a trail centre/weekend thrash bike IMO. They’re aimed at exactly the same thing, just different riders. The only real difference being the wheel size, but the T-130 feels more fun (this is highly subjective by the way), and the T-129 feels more planted. The T-129 actually, as someone else stated, can feel a bit slow and sluggish. I can assure you it is anything but sluggish (get on one, if you don’t beat your Strava times almost everywhere I’d be surprised!), it’s just that inherently 29ers feel sluggish to most people compared to a smaller wheel size. FWIW, the T-129 feels like a short travel DH bike when you get it up to speed, it’s so ridiculously capable that you have to remind yourself occasionally to slow down a bit!

Just thought I’d share, here’s my T130s with new Vigilante on the front!

I love the way the T129 rides… but, and it is a big one for a large lad like myself, it struggles with anything bigger than a 2.2″ tyre in the back. So the big Ardents are right out, infact a Nobby Nic is getting very, very tight.

That said, I have some Bontrager 29-3s in at the moment and they are working really nicely.

Does the SCR version have more space at the back?

Does the 29er have any more room at the chain stay bridge to fit a prper tyre and not just that skiny useless Maxxis Icon? I was all over the Whyte until I saw that and it just died for me then.

Not sure but wouldn’t be surprised if it does. However, it does come shod with a decent maxxis ardent race anyway, unlikely you’d need anymore for a rear tyre.

Std T-129 doesn’t look any wider at the back, even with the WTB Nineline 2.0″ that’s now fitted, the SCR comes with Maxxis Crossmark 2.1″ (no idea if there’s extra room due to the symmetrical chainstays)

I have tried a couple of options on my 2014 129s the std wheel and WTB tyre combo is ok, I swapped to a set of Easton Havens which are have a wider rim,+5mm I think, and tried a couple of tyres, a Specialized Purgatory 2-3 is very tight with about 5mm clearance running tubeless, I am currently running a 2.25 Nobby Nic which is narrower, I am finding it better, it rolls fast and seems grippy on my local trails in N Lancs.
Richard

Thanks Richard. I’m running a 2.25 Nobby Nic on the back on my Solaris and can’t imagine wanting any more on the back of a 29er. I guess if you subscribe to the idea that short chainstays are the holy grail for good handling on a 29er it makes sense to go as short as you can. If you can live with a 2.2 rather than a 2.4 on the back I guess that could buy you 5mm less chainstay.

I’ve got the WTB Bronson 2.2 on the back of my T129 at the mo – seems to have enough clearance, & is beefy enough.
T129 is a very rapid bike, no question. Quick down most stuff I point it down, you have to reign it in a bit if anything. Feels fine with both wheels off the ground. Just lacks a bit of flick. Touch heavy to be competitive uphill though (or is that just me..)

Would love a go on the T130 to see if there is much difference in the overall feel.

Does the SCR version have more space at the back?

Justed looked at a Marks demo T-130 (rather lovely) but basically from what I saw the SCR doesn’t have any more clearance, compared to a STD T-129 or if there is it’s marginal. The linkage looks a lot more substantial, again compared to the T-129, as I’ve not seen a std T-130

Just been to have a look at a T130 Works SCR as I wanted to try a medium and large as I’m right on the crossover between the two according to their size guide.

At first I thought it was definitely going to be the medium but I kept switching between the two (just riding around the car park), and started to like the large more. It just felt a bit more roomy with more space to move around when out of the saddle.

So the large came home with me 🙂 I may put a shorter stem on it though as the standard 70mm is on the long side and not particularly attractive. Standard grips will have to go too. Way to skinny.

Tyre wise I’ve used Ardents before and quite like them. I’d have preferred a standard Ardent front and rear rather than the Ardent Race on the rear but I’ll see how I get on with it before changing. For that size of tyre there is a reasonable amount of clearance. You could run a slightly bigger tyre ok but the Ardent is fairly large volume anyway so it looks ok to me space wise. Depends how big a tyre you want to run I guess.

I’m off to Spain for a week riding in the hills in a week so will be able to put it through it’s paces properly then.

Hmm this is concerning re sizing. Did you feel like you could have gone with either size, or was medium noticibly too small?

AT 5’10” I’m right on the cross over of the two sizes. I decided I preferred a bit more length (fnar fnar), which fits in with the two other bikes I bought this year. If you’re a similar size I’d say try the two options and see what works best for you. I’ve now changed the stem from 70mm to 50mm on the large frame and it feels pretty much spot on for me. It’s all highly subjective though……

I’ve now changed the stem from 70mm to 50mm on the large frame and it feels pretty much spot on for me.

You do realise the Large has a 15mm longer Top Tube length than the Medium, and you’ve just put a 20mm shorter stem on to get it to “feel right”…

Not judging (whatever feels right to the individual is fine), but just so you know right…

What’s your inside leg length incidentally? I’ve found that sizing up the medium is fine, but the large would be too long for me with the standard Reverb. On the large, even with the Reverb as far in the frame as it would go, the saddle height would still be too high for me when the Reverb is extended…

Justed looked at a Marks demo T-130 (rather lovely) but basically from what I saw the SCR doesn’t have any more clearance, compared to a STD T-129 or if there is it’s marginal. The linkage looks a lot more substantial, again compared to the T-129, as I’ve not seen a std T-130

It’s marginal, but there is a tiny bit more clearance.

Mboy – Yeah, I know. I prefer that extra bit of length In the top tube rather than in the stem. As you say, personal preference. I also find the standard stem pretty ugly but that’s also a personal thing.

Trying different stem lengths on my T129s anyone got a std 60mm stem that they have going spare following a swap out?
Thanks
Richard

I put a 45mm stem on my T129 (large) and am really happy with the result.

I own a t130 works and have ridden a t129 2014 model.

T130 scr, exceptionally stiff, nimble, poppy, 650b+130mm rear feels easily as capable as my previous 26″ 150mm bikes.

T129 very Fast DH and everywhere in between. a little less nimble that T130 is the compromise and not as stiff (but SCR would resolve that).

the only reason I didn’t go for T130 was I’m only 5ft 6 and felt a little swamped by 29er wheels, wanted something more jumpy and actually didn’t want to go at the sort of speeds T129 was capable of.

Nice one Arbie. Mine is being built up for Tuesday, can’t wait. re sizing Arbie, how did the small feel for you, if you tried it? Could you have gone either way? Really concerned the medium I’m going for at 5’10” is gonna be too small. Or rather, that it won’t fit the “ideal” of longer front centre/short stem of a large. I test rode medium and it felt fine, but of course sizing and fit issues often come out in the wash after a lot more time on the bike.