Looking through the dark murky past on here I came across this pic


69er by sallyh1357

I'm rather taken with this and am pretty tempted to convert my 853 Inbred as I am 29er curious but far too attached to my bike to get rid of it and get a new frame. Few questions -

It uses 26er forks with a 29er wheel which makes sense as you don't want the length of the 29er fork however I thought 29er forks also had more offset or trail generally? Why is that? And does it actually make any apprecable difference?

Any chance of toe overlap? I don't have big feet and ride spds so I am thinking it shouldn't be an issue. Actually is this part of the reason 29ers have more offset?

Would it be massively better than just using a 26x2.4 front tyre which is what I did most of last year on rigid forks?

Hi Restless, I loved my 69er. The larger wheel makes a big difference to ride comfort over rough stuff, the larger volume tyre allows lower tyre pressures to be run, I had no problem with toe overlap, the frame I had was designed to take a 100mm travel fork-with the 69er set up the handling was spot on. Lastly, if you want to try before you buy I can lend you my spare front wheel, tyre and tube for a wee while.

That there Scandal belongs to SallyH.

A 26" frame converted to 69er using a 26" fork tends to feel very stable, like a slack 26" wheeled bike. Big front wheel rolls over stuff nicely. I don't recall ever hearing anyone say that they don't like how the things feel ... once they've ridden one.

Don't get hung up on trail and offset. Much of what you read is wrong anyway ... the press spout on about 'a fork having so much trail blah blah' ... what they mean is 'a fork having so much offset'. Offset is a figure you can measure straight from a fork, trail requires a complete bike and the figure will alter with changes in head angle, suspension settings, shock length and of course fork offset. Trail's a linier measurement taken the ground not from a specific bike part.*



She doesn't seem to have any overlap issues

*Almost bordering on rant for a minute, sorry ... it's just that they don't half get on my tits. Like those idiots off Top Gear who say 'ooh this has got X number of torques'. Torques isn't a bloody unit you nobs, you mean this thing produces X ft/lb or X N/m of torque.

"like a slack 26" wheeled bike"

that sounds good
I've heard a few complaints of flippyfloppyness?

Yeah I mean offset. I uderstand offset and rake but my brain melted when I tried to understand trail :?

440mm forks (wheel would definately fit) or 425 (would keep the geometry more the same but not sure if a decent sized ie. 29x2.25 maxxis would fit)?

i've obsessed over this before

s8tannorm wrote:
*Almost bordering on rant for a minute, sorry ... it's just that they don't half get on my tits. Like those idiots off Top Gear who say 'ooh this has got X number of torques'. Torques isn't a bloody unit you nobs, you mean this thing produces X ft/lb or X N/m of torque.

[pedant] Actually torque is Force x Distance, not Force / Distance. Therefore it's measured in N.m or Nm, as opposed to N/m which is a unit load [/pedant]


Back to the topic, I've never ridden 29er or 69er before, love to hear how you find it. Must give it a go sometime, but at the moment I have far too many 26inch wheeled bits and pieces to warrant any kind of conversion yet

[pedant] Actually torque is Force x Distance, not Force / Distance. Therefore it's measured in N.m or Nm, as opposed to N/m which is a unit load [/pedant]

Zippy does that mean my ft/lb should also be ft.lb?

s8tannorm wrote:

[pedant] Actually torque is Force x Distance, not Force / Distance. Therefore it's measured in N.m or Nm, as opposed to N/m which is a unit load [/pedant]

Zippy does that mean my ft/lb should also be ft.lb?

Being of the metric generation*

*One that associates my height in ft and inches, but measures stuff in mm, and does my bike rides in miles, but elevation in metres....

Without looking it up, torque in lb.ft or ft/lbs or whatever it's meant to be, confuses me slightly, as ft is a distance like metres, but lbs is a mass like the gram, and Newtons is a force (mass x gravity). So I'd have to do some maths or a little bit of delving to give you an answer on that one. I'm intrigued now, so I might report back

--------------------------
Scrap that, here's a couple of wikipedia pages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_metre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-foot_(torque)

So you're answer is yes, ft.lb or lb.ft (doesn't matter which way round you multiply it, so you could say torque in mN if you wanted, it wouldn't be incorrect, just unconventional).

--------------
Don't blame me for being pedantic - my day job is a Civil Engineer..it's kinda ingrained in me :?

*One that associates my height in ft and inches, but measures stuff in mm, and does my bike rides in miles, but elevation in metres....

That's exactly the mix I go for!

I also weigh individual bike parts in g but overall bike weight in lbs. The 70s were a confusing time to grow up.

restlessnative wrote:

*One that associates my height in ft and inches, but measures stuff in mm, and does my bike rides in miles, but elevation in metres....

That's exactly the mix I go for!

I also weigh individual bike parts in g but overall bike weight in lbs. The 70s were a confusing time to grow up.

Thank god I am not alone!

I'll measure the same thing in metric and imperial ... cutting a board as an example 36" x 900mm

Fork travel is in mm but rear shock travel is in inches.
Frame seat tube length is in inches but TT length is in mm.

Maybe it is an age thing ... when I'm coaching I have to work in both as some people have no idea what height a 3' drop is

Oi, you two!

That was dangerously close to some STW-style posting. Leave it out :x

Back to the original post I am thinking a tinbred, carbon forks, in 69, with an Alfine 11.

It sounds crazy, but it might just work

here's what my 1x9 69er looked like:



i only rode with the steel forks once or twice before swapping them out for some carbon on-one forks.

i got rid of it quite quickly but only because i liked it so much i immediately sourced a full 29er (and needed to sell this one to fund that bike purchase) and haven't looked back.....

Zippy wrote: but lbs is a mass like the gram,

lb is a mass or or a force, different units - same symbol. if I recall. Same as any other force I guess its the force of a 1lb mass due to gravity. 1lb(f) = 1lb(m) x G

Sometimes (when being pedantic I expect) you get a little m or a little f after the unit to clarify.

Should have had a different symbol I reckon.



I go back in the corner now...

FLV wrote:

Zippy wrote: but lbs is a mass like the gram,

lb is a mass or or a force, different units - same symbol. if I recall. Same as any other force I guess its the force of a 1lb mass due to gravity. 1lb(f) = 1lb(m) x G

Sometimes (when being pedantic I expect) you get a little m or a little f after the unit to clarify.

Should have had a different symbol I reckon.



I go back in the corner now...

Ah, that all makes sense now.

There's a reason why I stick to Si units

Everything is relative..................... when we know what to then we will have cracked it .

still can't decide...might get drunk then see if it's any clearer

not sure if it's just a waste of money and I am inevitably gonna end up with a 29er anyway so might as well just put the money to that

restlessnative wrote:still can't decide...might get drunk then see if it's any clearer

not sure if it's just a waste of money and I am inevitably gonna end up with a 29er anyway so might as well just put the money to that

Are you buying a built up 29er or doing a spot of DIY? If the latter then if you go full-wagon reuse the wheel & fork.

Are you buying a built up 29er or doing a spot of DIY? If the latter then if you go full-wagon reuse the wheel & fork.

Only the wheel ... 69er'll need 26" forks

My mate was using 29er forks on his 26" inbred and my On-One carbon forks are marketed as suitable for both..... just flip the stem and/or ditch the risers.

Right so I've put my rigid on one steels back on and borrowed a wheel off a friend in the next village.



Initial riding around the village test it felt good, not weird at all. I even tried some adolescent riding down the steps in the school playground. Needs a proper ride now. Front end has ended up just slightly lower than the sagged 120-130 sus forks.

I think it looks quite cool

Looks good to me, 8-)

Now with 'matching' wheels, much nicer

Looking very nice Restless, have you managed a big ride yet?

Cheers. Got quite a few rides on the borrowed wheel and was happy. Have just been out today for the first proper ride on my own wheel :) Such a big difference with the big wheel.