26er FS "v&quo...
 

[Closed] 26er FS "v" 29er HT

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I’ve not ridden the Turner Flux (100m travel FS) 26er for quite a while, maybe not since September time, and since then have been riding the Ti29er HT.
Today I took out the 26er, and boy, was it odd! The front end felt a wee bit sketchy and a little too responsive, but that’s to expected I guess.

On the 29er, you get nothing from her unless you have momentum, meaning you need to be riding in a proactive way, plenty of out-of-the-saddle bits, such as at the top of climbs, cresting rises, hillocks, and just getting her back up to speed after braking, corners, deep mud and the like. You also get up again for much of the descents and any trail debris that might otherwise unseat you (or at least give your backside a bit of a battering).

You ride the 26er like this and it simply means nothing! It’s like the bike shrugs its proverbial shoulders and is unsure why you’ve just put in such effort that subsequently drains away.
The 26FS needs you to be seated and just pedal. Subsequently I actually found it a harder ride as you pick up more trail chatter at the front (even though the 2x bikes have Fox forks set up by the same technician) and I remained seated over the rocks and horse hoof imprints and all the other trail detritus.

With the 29er, you have bigger volume tyres and so it’s quite cushioning, and along with the titanium frame (the 26er is aluminium) it’s a lot smoother than you perhaps realise, until you ride another bike. I’m going to ride the 26er more to get accustomed to her again, but I already miss that personal interaction I get with the trail, the bike and the whole riding process.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:42 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

sorry a bit confused 😕

so which do you prefer ??


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:46 pm
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

And the point of this post is.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:46 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Well done.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:49 pm
 ton
Posts: 24258
Full Member
 

singlespeedstu - Member
And the point of this post is.

that you should have a 29r and a 26r............. 8)


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:49 pm
Posts: 10194
Full Member
 

I think he's trying to justify being 29er freak boy with logic rather than just admitting it to himself that HE JUST WANTS TO GET NOTICED


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

why isnt a 69er full suspension bike out yet?, just to totally confuse us all....


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:52 pm
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

Actualy you are making a good point of putting folks off buying a 29er.

Keep up the good work.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 9:53 pm
Posts: 301
Full Member
 

What you need is a full sus 29er 🙂


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

My ten year old and I were discussing why it's hard to balance on a stationary bike but stays upright when you're moving along. Stationary bikes on trains were discussed, as were wind tunnels and we came to the conclusion it must be the gyroscopic effect of the wheels? For anyone still with me, the thought then occurred that 29'ers must be inherently more unstable? Fire-road bikes you might say? Not really suitable for the rough stuff. 😛


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:13 pm
 ton
Posts: 24258
Full Member
 

tinribz......................you are teaching your son boolax.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:16 pm
Posts: 10194
Full Member
 

Some who propose the gyroscope theory, also explain that the advanced skill of making fast turns on a bicycle involves a technique they call countersteer. In fact, a bicycle cannot be ridden without countersteer, commonly called balance, and it is this balance that is used to keep the bicycle upright, just as one does while walking, running, ice skating or roller skating. To say that the gyroscopic forces of rotating wheels keep the bicycle upright, ignores that roller skates are operated the same way and have so little gyroscopic moment that one cannot detect it. On ice skates the argument fails entirely. Besides, a bicycle can be ridden at less than three miles per hour, at which speeds there is no effective gyroscopic reaction


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:19 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

make the wheels lighter and you will turn quicker

its not the size 😉


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

countersteer, commonly called balance,

Have you been drinking?
It would be useful if you knew what counter steering involved as it only works at speed.
At low speeds you tend to pull on the bars rather than push them away (counter steering).
Why this is now known as balance I am unsure.

Is your intimate knowledge of physics also translated into your indepth knowledge of gyroscopic forces? Or is it the wine talking?

Please explain.


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:24 pm
Posts: 2182
Free Member
 


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:28 pm
Posts: 10194
Full Member
 

Ti29 - just copied form the late great sheldon brown, argue with a dead man who knew his bikes! me I'm just a numpty who rides like a mincer so what do I know 😀


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:32 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

In a track stand you can balance.
You pull on the bars. You push on the bars.
It's not conter steering.

Counter steering works only with some speed, and by pushing on the inside bar, the bike will natrually drop into the corner. The more you push, the more she drops into the corner.

Take any motorcycle advanced / race classes & it's something that comes up in the probably first module. It's fundamental to getting a bike turned as quickly as possible in any given corner.

I don't need someone from the grave to tell me this is balance when clearly it's not.

PS. What happened to the magazine article?


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:42 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Calm down! I thought I was doing quite well off-the cuff.

[url=

inertia[/url]


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 10:47 pm
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

Op why not wide tyres on the fs?


 
Posted : 02/04/2010 11:23 pm
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

You need to MTFU, get rid of the kiddy bike and have a pure, manly 29er range of 'steeds' in your 'stable'. You're a man now - ditch your youth bike.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 6:51 am
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

Having not ridden one but having ridden bikes with different size wheels I can see that 29ers may well roll better but can only imagine that when doing anything other than straights or mellow corners it would become hard sketchy work.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:16 am
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

Bushwacked - not true. I am far more confident and stable on either of my 29er bikes than any of my 26 bikes. The Turner Sultan is so capable it instills the confidence that it'll be my failing and not the bike every time.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:20 am
 ton
Posts: 24258
Full Member
 

tootall, do you look like a cicus freak on it..............i do on mine 😆


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:26 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Tyres:
29er Bonty 2.0 mud front. Bonty ACX 2.2 Rear.
26er 2.3 Verticals (left over from a 2hrs Xmas snow playing where they gripped incredably well).

The 29er I find is not one for getting air. The 26er is great around somewhere like Penmachno or the bottom part of the Red route at Glentress where I get (and encourage) loads of (small) air all 'round the course. And something like on Snowdon, the 26er makes more sense.
There are times whern 26ers work very well.

For local day-to-day riding (locally) though, the 26er isn't nearly as involving nor as entertaining. I suspect the 29er is far quicker & more stable on the descents too - I'll only know more when the rest of the local posse come out riding & I put this theory to the test (they're not super-rocky or technical hereabouts).


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:27 am
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

I should have said '26ers I used to own'. Now only got the Sultan, the Scandal and a hybrid commute bike.

Ti - having a FS with the big wheels makes you feel far more comfortable off the HT bike. I'll not go back to 26 unless I want something that feels too small!


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:41 am
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

Ahhh,that explains it then - Vert tyres are sh!te,get some propper tyres for you 26" fs.....


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:41 am
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

With the 29er, you have bigger volume tyres and so it’s quite cushioning

Tyres:
29er Bonty 2.0 mud front. Bonty ACX 2.2 Rear.
26er 2.3 Verticals (left over from a 2hrs Xmas snow playing where they gripped incredably well).

eh?.

I suspect the 29er is far quicker & more stable on the descents too -

you ain't riding the fs properly if do.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:55 am
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

Tootall - what sort of riding are you doing? (plus I think your name gives away that you might be about 7ft in which case bigger wheels probably feel like a 26" bike does on me 😉 )


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:57 am
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

Ti29er.

You realy are doing a good job of putting folks off.

Carry on.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 8:55 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Single speed. What's your beef?
You've deemd it appropriate to comment here three times, each one less constructive than the last.
Have you nothing better to do?


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 9:29 am
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

My post are almost as pointless as your constant banging on about 29ers being the greatest thing in the world.

Well they're not.

They're just another bike.

If you're trying to encourage other folks to give one a try you're not doing a very good job of it.

oh and the fact you say that 29er are crap at jumping shows more about your riding skills than anything else.
Either that or you think all 29ers are barge like. Well guess what on-one aren't the only people that make wagon wheel bikes.

Some companies make quick handling responsive 29er that are great in the air.

Some folks have been riding 29" for a long time but don't feel the need to try and ram it down everyones throat...


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 9:43 am
Posts: 22
Free Member
 

Love is in the air.... Get a room boys lol


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 9:55 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Stu.
You've very negative.
Have you anything positive to say at all?

There is a general rule of thumb, one you evidently don't know about, and that's if you have nothing good to say about someone or something, then don't comment.

If not, why not pop back to BM, where you'll be amongst likeminded mostly negative men? You seem out of your depth here.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 9:57 am
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

WTF's BM?

no don't bother telling me as I won't be able to read it from my bike* out in the woods....

*wheel size unimportant.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 10:27 am
Posts: 3814
Full Member
 

Some folks have been riding SS for a long time but don't feel the need to try and ram it down everyones throat... 😉


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 11:03 am
Posts: 188
Free Member
 

All this seems to really miss the important issue; that big wheels on big bikes look great, but big wheels on little bikes don't. As such, as a short arse I'll stick with 26inch wheels and keep enjoying my current very engaging bike, and leave 29er's for the taller chaps. For me, it's the the choice of do I want boring arguement's that involve science and individuals own perceptions of how bikes ride, or do I want to look like a child that has stolen a grown ups bike. Ride what you want, for whatever reason you want, it's simple.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 11:16 am
Posts: 513
Free Member
 

ssstu i like the cut of your gib 🙂


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 11:36 am
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

[u]Ride what you want, for whatever reason you want, it's simple.[/u]

I do and I am a short arse also but my fave bike at the moment seems to be a 29er and ss no less 😮


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 11:44 am
Posts: 188
Free Member
 

Great, that's the spirit!


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 12:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

big wheels on big bikes look great, but big wheels on little bikes don't.

It's not an important issue at all.
One reason being that the designers don't simply put larger wheels into small bikes - they wouldn't normally fit for one!

No one's arguing otherwise, as I say, the 26er is the bike of choice some of the time, so we can let Stu work out some of his anger issues on the trail as his conclusions are inaccurate. If he was in any way accurate I'd not own a 26er!

What I was doing in the original post however, was giving a personal account from the cockpit of having ridden the 29er almost exclusively for the past 6 months and then riding a 26er for the first time yesterday and my thoughts on the transition, back-to-back. Nothing more. It is saddening that Stu added, for whatever reason, his spite, venom & inaccurate conclusions to the post, feeling his negative comments are in any way useful or constructive to my observations. All he does in 2 out of 3 comments is repeat himself.

So, back on track please, it is, afterall, a holiday!


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 12:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I had a rigid 29er SS a while back and it was one of the best bikes for getting air that I have ever ridden.

Lots of feeback and very stable.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 2:16 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Would you consider doing a 24hr on a 29er were one available form your sponsors?
I know Twinkly Dave loves his and he was a very early convert over to larger wheels.

I try & keep mine on the ground - maybe the wheel base is longer, or the trail or rake; either way it feels not at all "right" being airborne on my particular bike. But as Stu says, it's because I can't ride very well, & he knows me so well.
That last leap coming up the bank on the 3rd Merida Brass Monkey was about the only place it felt OK!


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 2:27 pm
Posts: 97
Free Member
 

I was quite interested in this thread as i own a Turner Flux and also owned a 29er SS a few months ago (but have now sold it)

I didn't really get on with 29" wheels as the bike didn't feel as responsive compared to my 26" hardtail....and also SS isn't really my thing either as was always struggling to keep up with my mates on the flat tarmac bits inbetween trails (live in the midlands).

Anyway whatever floats your boat i really wanted to love 29ers as I think they look really cool, but they just weren't for me.

Edit:

My 26" hardtail feels like it could be riden anywhere, whereas the 29" Rigid SS just didn't seem as versatile.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 3:24 pm
Posts: 6253
Free Member
 

ti29er sorry to hi jack thread, you got mail ref xtr pedals - sorry didnt know if you received email! Cheers


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 3:31 pm
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

Waves to the humourless teatotal Ti 29er after a nice ride* and then a couple of beers in the pub.

*On a bike with wheels.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 5:16 pm
Posts: 513
Free Member
 

wish i could ride on any size wheels at min stu im still off ;-( went to edinburgh cycles today spent too much on stuff to ss the crosscheck and fix my forks but split my foot open again in the process . balls ;-(


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 5:49 pm
 ton
Posts: 24258
Full Member
 

mick, get well soon........... 😆


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 5:51 pm
Posts: 17771
Full Member
 

You'll be right again soon Mick.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 5:52 pm
Posts: 513
Free Member
 

aye , cheers chaps 😉


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 5:52 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Would you consider doing a 24hr on a 29er were one available form your sponsors?

Nope. Worked well as a rigid SS, but wouldn't suit me as a race bike.


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 6:11 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Diz.
No email yet.
I think I might be having some problems with the ntl account.
try tim at t-f-p dot com

Frankers: I've been locking out the Fox forks by about 80% of late to good effect. It's the trails around here as they're not technical. And trying to change gears as little as possible - in the anticiption of a rigid SS!


 
Posted : 03/04/2010 7:28 pm