The toe overlap looks ridiculousÂ
There's mention of toe overlap in the write up - the frame's only available in L & XL, although I suppose that larger riders have larger feet.
Presumably someone will, at some point, test one. Regardless I think it's a very pretty (if prohibitively expensive) thing.
The toe overlap looks ridiculousÂ
I think toe overlap get's massively overhyped.
Several of my road bikes have toe overlap, including the fixed gear ones where you can't just coast your way out of the problem. And it's just not a problem 99.9% of the time. The only times it's ever (nearly) tripped me up is when you come to a stop and let go of the bars and then kick the mudguard off trying to clip back in wihthout straightening them first. Even on a CX type switchback corner you just don't turn the bars that far when actually riding. Â
& now we're jumping up a size already?
I hate to break it to you, but 2006 (When the original Swift was launched) was 20 years ago. Â
29ers are now as old, as Wham! splitting up is to 29er's!
Same from me that the 32" Aspens are under 800g - very light for such a big tyre. The Vittoria Peyote 32 x 2.4 is also really light. The 30mm rims on the 32" I rode were only around 650g I think, the wheels could have been lighter than my 29er with 2.4 EXOs or 2.6 T7 tyres. They'll have been spinning slower for a given speed too so all that would have been a big part of why they felt much less clumsy than expected. Plus the fast rolling feel of a light casing.Â
I think that's why so many people wrote off 29ers, and eventually bought one (or several). The initial reaction to seeing the spec sheet for the wheels is that 2kg wheelsets and 1kg+ tyres will be awful. but for a given speed they're spinning proportionally slower. So they don't follow the mantra of rotating weight counting double.
going 36 does take some bigger geometry changes particularly around fork offset to make them handle properly.
That's the thing though, I'd probably try a 32" bike because over the last 20 years bikes have grown around 29" wheels and evolved to the point where 29er's aren't just built with slammed chain stays for all disciplines and sizes. So you can keep current geometry norms and just drop the BB / shorten the headtube (or remove spacers, go back to a flat bar, etc).
36" might work out even better, but like when 29ers were just trying to ape the skittishness of 26" bikes of the time, there needs to be a bit more evolution to see if there's actually a benefit to them.
I can't wait for all the teeny tiny pro XC women to be forced to ride these and have weird components like 'super slammed stems' and 'reverse seatposts' and the like!
DrP
There's mention of toe overlap in the write up - the frame's only available in L & XL, although I suppose that larger riders have larger feet.
I have a 32" drop bar bike here, no overlap at all on size L (I'm 6ft, size 45s). Enough room that there could be a M with a decent drop in reach. 32" bikes have longer stays which should go with a longer FC to keep things in balance.Â
I think toe overlap get's massively overhyped.
I won't have it on an off-road bike and tbh I'd want to avoid it on any bike that I ride up steep hills at low speed. EN4210 limits the gap between pedal and tyre anyway so it's been designed out via the standards (or, you should avoid it since that's the intent of the standards). But flat pedals let you move around enough that it can still happen on some bikes.Â
So they don't follow the mantra of rotating weight counting double.
A classic .. I don't know where that bad science gem came from, club roadies maybe. Maybe we just move that front wheel about twice as much as most parts of the bike so we notice it more.Â
I had a (very brief) go on the 32" Ti Singular at Bespoked - it was on the stand with Rory Hitchins rather than Sam Alison but I've known Rory for decades and he allowed me to have a quick spin on it. As I'm fairly tall, it fitted me fine and felt relatively normal but I literally just rode it a few metres and a couple of turns rather than a proper ride.
I spoke to Sam (who's about my height as well) and he's been riding that 32" pictured above quite extensively, he seems to really like it for improved comfort and rolling.
The coolest part of the bike I tried was an amazing limited edition SRAM groupset, all in silver.
There's mention of toe overlap in the write up - the frame's only available in L & XL, although I suppose that larger riders have larger feet.
I have a 32" drop bar bike here, no overlap at all on size L (I'm 6ft, size 45s). Enough room that there could be a M with a decent drop in reach. 32" bikes have longer stays which should go with a longer FC to keep things in balance.Â
I think toe overlap get's massively overhyped.
I won't have it on an off-road bike and tbh I'd want to avoid it on any bike that I ride up steep hills at low speed. EN4210 limits the gap between pedal and tyre anyway so it's been designed out via the standards (or, you should avoid it since that's the intent of the standards). But flat pedals let you move around enough that it can still happen on some bikes.Â
So they don't follow the mantra of rotating weight counting double.
A classic .. I don't know where that bad science gem came from, club roadies maybe. Maybe we just move that front wheel about twice as much as most parts of the bike so we notice it more.Â
Who made the 32" bike please Jameso??Â
Who made the 32" bike please Jameso??Â
It's a Genesis sample, I think it was on here in the IceBike coverage.Â
RE toe overlap, the Singular will have a shorter rear end than this sample has so it's probably shorter at the front too. No bad thing - I like short and long wheelbase bikes.
