Interbike 2009 - More Interesting Bits From The Dirt Demo

 Exactly, people want 29's because they tame the trail and make it easier... since when did we all become roadies??? Darkstar makes a great point, lets use 32", then it will be 36" and then the bike biz will convince you that the dangerous trail is out to get you and you must have 40" wheels or else. One less 29er.

 it's not the industy forcing new product on consumers and telling you it's better. it is a niche market that companies recognize and are supplying those who want that type of bike the opportunity to ride one. I fail to understand why that bothers you. It really has no effect on your life what so ever, If you dont like 29 then ride a 26. the 29er riders wont care either way.

 Larger hubs would make them just as strong as 26" wheels. Something like a chub hub could work.

 Re KS Shock: An Aluminum spring seems like a really bad idea. No matter how low the ratio of stress to yield strength, aluminum fails due to cycling much faster than steel. If you want light weight do a Ti spring...

 o man thats a sweet BOTTLEROCKET...o wait... cool commencal i guess

 Douchebag.... thats probably what they said when companies started bringing out bikes with suspension... Well unfair! i dont think so! reckon its called progression!!

 That's easily the most retarded thing I've read all day. So you're telling me that if you have a wheel 3" larger than the conventional size, you have the same advantage as someone who has a wheel 6" SMALLER than conventional size? What advantage is that?

 I personally hate the 29er craze because it's old technology that became obsolete with the invention of suspension forks and shocks and with how well designed suspension links and setups are now a days I would much rather ride a race tuned 5" travel XC bike than a bigger heavier(bigger wheels, frame, fork, tires. etc.) 100mm travel 29er that isn't as easy to throw around and control.
that's my view on the topic, not just a pointless rant.

 29ers are not old technology. There were no 700C wheeled mountain bikes with fat knobby tires prior to suspension forks / frames appearing on mountain bikes. I think you're mistaking the original hybrids that had 700x41-47mm tires (so 1.6 to 1.8" widths) offered by specialized, bianchi, gt, diamondback and rocky mountain among others that first appeared around 1990-91. They proved successful by pro-xc racers on some courses (like the original catcus cup race). Unfortunetly by that time suspension frames and forks already existed. If you mean big wheels in general being older then yes, but then suspension frames/forks are equally old (a century ago thing). As to the heavier/bigger... by this point in time, the difference in weight between a race tuned 29er and a race tuned 26er is minor. Mere ounces in many cases. They're faster/better in just about all areas than 26ers except acceleration and turning radius. For DH in particular the advantages would be enormous in the time lost as the wheels are less affected by ruts/roots/rocks and you'd lose less speed on your runs through all rough spots on the track. On XC races they're already proving superior, they've had senior mens and women's US national XC titles won on them (by a husband/wife duo no less), and they're very popular among 24hour endurance racers. And they routinely beat 26ers. Its a good thing the euros are resisting them otherwise they'd be even more dominating on the world cup races than they already are right now.

Where I ride, there's lots of tight singletrack and rocks and roots. I spent most of this summer riding bigger wheels (either a 650B or a 29er) to the extent than my 26" FS trail bikes got maybe two or three rides. I used my road bike alone more than I used several of my 26ers combined.

 For DH you may see a few advantges but there are also some major disadvantges. Higher center of gravity making it harder to initiate turns, this is where time is lost or made on many courses. Less tire choice at the moment, and probably wouldn't change for a while. wheels are weaker. and the biggest issue is the mere lack of travel. for a lot of courses 7" is not enough you can get by but it beats you up. 29ers may work for XC but DH racing is a whole different ball game, it's a 2 to 5 minute pure sprint. I personally don't think we're going to see them on the WC circuit anytime soon.

 Them KS products look promising! ALUMINUM SPRING??? Holy $#IT!!!!!

I love the Foes HT!!!

 Exactly! Either they don't hire engineers there, or those they hired failed Mechanics of Materials...

 i dont see how they can put out a coil that is gonna fail prematurely. obviously it has undergone a lot of testing. before this coil Ti was the only other option for a lighter spring and is more expensive by a factor of 10 so props to KS for trying to innovate!

 Seriously, I thought it was a Transition Bottlerocket until I saw the Commencal logo. Weird.

 not to offend anybodys comparitive skills but to me the absolut SX looks a lot more like the older style covert, especially since it is a 6" bike. transition redesigned the covert for this year and im guessing they are contracting the old style to commencal

 Err...I personally don't see the similarity to any covert, as the shock on coverts is attached to the downtube, whereas on Bottlerockets and the Absolut SX its attached to the top tube. Take I look at this random guy's Bottlerocket:

www.pinkbike.com/photo/3890159

It looks sooo much like the Commencal to me...

 I agree. i also dont see the functionality of the singlespeed. i mean who the hell would run ss on a 6" bike

 Yeah, it's a bottlecowan!

 no the chase was only last year, the kona had the cowan sense at lest 2007

 the bottom bracket pivot has been around for maybe 10 years now , cant think of the name of the company i'm thinking of

 Cove's hooker was another early one, and i'd be surprised if they were the first

 I know Cove bikes had a concentric pivot on there G-spots- that was back in 99-2000 - it did not work well

 The comment "The SX has similar lines to some other short travel FS machines out there, but adds a new element to the mix with a concentric bottom bracket pivot making it super simple to run it gear or single speed." is in reference to the easy to make connection between the SX and other bikes such as the Transition Bottle Rocket or Double, among others. What I meant to say was that the design of the bike has some similarities to other designs, although one difference is the concentric BB pivot, not to say that the concentric BB pivot is new to bikes at all. Sorry guys, should have been more clear.

Just for reference, there first place I saw a concentric BB pivot would have to be on the original Rotec DH bike. I think that was in the late '90's or early 2000. Could have been around much earlier than that even.

 I meant wasn't the cowan the first ss bike with a concentric BB pivot?

 Cove and Rotec got there first. However Rotec uses a Lawwill link, so it had chain growth (or shrinkage maybe). The G-Spot had zero chain growth, so some people set them up with Rohloffs. The downside is that both of these bikes pedal like trampolines.

 Ok you're ALL wrong. Concentric BB pivots go back a century on suspension bicycles. But the first modern bike brand to offer it with mountain bikes was Wheeler out of germany in 1992. They had a titanium full suspension frame with a 4-bar walking beam linkage with the main lower pivot concentric to the BB shell. Lenz has been using them for years, Kona used them for years (both began in the mid-90s, but after Wheeler and other brands had used them). Hell Supergo (mail-order chain, bought out by Performance) had their first Access full-suspension frames using them and those appeared in ads ran in the bike magazines around 1993.

 Always ready to learn. I stand corrected. Shouldn't you be baiting nino right now though? Haha.

 absolute sx is lussssh! bet its loads lighter than its contemporary bottlerocket

 How are they making you give them your money? Just don't buy it. Ta-da! And without change the industry would have never advanced. It would have stagnated and died.

 I am sceptical thats it. If you know engineering side of things explain please.I am not giving companies my money without evidence and reasonable justification.

 Sorry if I came across as abrasive there man. Here is a link with the biggest pros/cons of a 29er bike: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/29er_%28bicycle%29#Advantages

There are more pros and cons to the issue, but those are the key points.

The biggest downsides to this are increased weight and rotating mass which makes being able to flick the bike in the air harder. Also since the spokes are longer and the wheel is bigger the strength of the wheels decreases. Though this can be dealt with by using something like a chub hub. I'm a tall big guy and I use a 29er for XC races and really like it more than my old 26" bike. I haven't had a chance to really try a full on DH 29er bike yet. I think 29er bikes in the DH world will only be suitable for certain types of tracks, or for bigger guys. I could easily see riders switching between 26 and 29 bikes throughout a race season for different tracks.

 26" wheels are slower than 29". 29" roll over everything better than 26 too. though a 650B would be way more practical fro a DH rig. you just sound ignorant...rant...

 MX, have you ridden a 29er or a Lenz?

 Or instead of "ridiculing" and "torturing" your friends you could stop being an idiot and not throw a tantrum over what your friends ride. And it's clear you don't know what you're talking about since you think a 26" wheel is faster than a 29" wheel.

 What sides are there to hear? You make it sound like if they choose a 29er then they're never going to buy a 26 inch bike. And why would buying a bike they want be wasting their money? They're buying it because they feel it would suit them better. You're just being an arrogant snob about this.

 No, opinions are fine. But half of what you've said isn't an opinion. You're trying to state facts and your telling people to not buy a 29er and to not let their friends buy one, and if they do they should become violent with their friends. That kind of crap isn't an opinion. And if you think it is you don't understand the concept of an opinion.

 My opinion is that you only read half of what was posted and decided you could fake the rest and take a weak shot. I'll tell people whatever it is I want them to hear.

 Sure thing kiddo.