the NOT SO official 27.5+ thread.
- Thread starter jdog
- Start date
Steve Vai
Endurance Guy: Tolerates most of us.
Not at all. The VeeTire seems to have a pretty stiff sidewall so I'd imagine something like a FatBNimble wouldn't work at that pressure.
Steve Vai
Endurance Guy: Tolerates most of us.
Just under 18 pounds. With Fat B Nimbles my fat bike will weigh less than my road bike.
skyrokz
Well-Known Member
Dude! @jimvreeland did all the work for me.... hehe, my bike has residency in his shop and is there more then at my house. Matter fact he will be building up another set of wide carbon plus rims in a few weeks for my ibis conversion, he just doesn't know it yet 🙂
So Larry and I had 1.5 hrs on the pony rustler yesterday. We both went in with an open mind. We both loved it. Traction for miles. More nimble and faster rolling than a fat bike. I felt like I was on a dirt bike. Jumping everything. Such a hoot. This bike as a whole surprised me. It is the same exact frame and fork as the horsethief 29, so just knowing that you can do so much with one frame is pretty neat. [/ATTACH]
Last edited:
Larry had not ridden a dual sus bike since he owned a Giant NRS. This was a huge eye opener for him. I think that it is pretty clear that most new 29ers will end up 27.5+ capability going forward. We both agreed that the guide brakes rule. I could own this bike happily
While I see your view for sure, I was thinking more that standard 27.5 makes even less sense after riding 27.5+. I was already thinking how I would love this wheel size on the DH bike.
I don't think 29 is likely to fade with anyone in Lycra pinning a number to their bike. It is still faster in my view, albeit way less controlled via traction loss comparably.
As a side note, we also rode the buck saw carbon. (26 fat dual sus) and it made no sense to me personally. I noticed little traction gains over 27.5+ but in my eyes it just felt slower and excessive.
My current feeling on true fat is that it is best to go really fat if you do. I also stumble with the wide bb and noodley Bluto fork. Both are deal breakers for me. My knees were killing me from the noticeably wider Stance. Larry however needs a wider stance and he loved the wide be.
At any rate it is a very tough time to choose a wheel size platform. It is however hard to argue the increased versatility of any bike that works with 2 sizes.
Last edited:
I agree completely for my personal use, but things may look a little different through the eyes of someone @ 5-3"
This part. When 29ers first came on the scene the response was, "How come all the races are still being won on 26ers?" Well that ended, and the 29er stepped into the spot it's in now. When 27.5+ bikes start winning races then it will be a discussion. Until then, the 29er isn't dead yet.
Steve Vai
Endurance Guy: Tolerates most of us.
I just tested 27.5+ VS 26x4 and didn't notice enough difference between the 2 to warrant having 2 wheelsets. My HED wheels are lighter than my 52mm carbon 27.5+ wheels with I9s. The I9s are lighter than the DT hubs in my HED wheels as well. Tires are a pound lighter but I felt the bike was slower without the traction a 4" tire gives. But to be fair, you guys are coming from a 29er where 27.5+ gives traction gains and I'm coming from fat where 27.5+ is a traction loss. I'm also riding a 20-pound bike. And have been blessed with an engine that has no issues pushing a fatty to the limits.
rick81721
Lothar
This is awesome. Can't wait to get the Horsethief
I don't think 29er is dead and the race scene will make it survive since the point is to finish first despite the bike feel good. Most likely the industry will try and eliminate normal size tires (anything under 2.4) and a few years from now come back around to normal size tires. I can see 27.5+ surviving all of this and fat bikes going out of style when people realize that they are stupid for just normal trail riding. @jimvreeland is the exception here because he is at a different level.
Wait, you mean they churn product to generate sales. GET RIGHT OUT!
Jim also has an inside track on $10-$12k bikes that most people are not willing to spend the money on. This was a conversation that Vic and I had after the race Sunday. All the beginner racers that used to be doing cat 2 and cat 3 races in the MTB scene have moved to cross. The entry level costs of the 2 disciplines are worlds apart. You can buy a $750 bike and if you have the engine/skills you can compete in a cross race. If you buy a $750 bike and bring it to a MTB race you may die. The entry level cost for racing a MTB is like $3000 at least, if not higher.
Magic
Formerly 1sh0t1b33r
I can see 4" fat bikes going away, at least the frames, but 5" capable frames will surely stick around if only because of the snow capability. People that want to ride in every condition on the planet will still likely buy this over a 27.5+.
The way I see it is that 29" will stay because racing. I doubt the industry will just drop anything under 2.4" because of the same reason, racing, until they develop tires that roll as fast or faster than a 1.9-2.2" with the additional traction and weigh as much as it's narrower counterpart. Maybe there are already tires that fit the bill, but probably cost a ton.
27.5+ will be the new entry level, all-mountain, and do everything bike. More traction and easier to ride, but not as heavy as a fatbike (excluding Jim's 19lber). Similar roll out to a 29er so it still gets over stuff as well as a 29er. The replacement fatbike for those that don't ride at all when it's cold.
The Kalmyk
Well-Known Member
I will continue to ride my 29er and see where this goes. I could ride. 27.5plus but not full suspension.
In our area, the thought of riding a fat bike all year for potential a few good snow rides a year makes no sense in my book.