It came as a surprise to us that the folks at Scott Sports - one of the industry's more conservative, race-oriented think tanks - would launch one of the first elite-level trail bikes to be designed around high-volume, plus-width tires. Scott's motivation to build the Genius LT 700 Plus was to blend the wall-climbing traction and mistake-proof technical steering of plus with the attributes of a modern, slack-geometry all-mountain trailbike chassis and, as PB's Paul Aston reported in his First Ride feature from Scott Camp this year, the Genius LT 700 Plus manages to hit the mark in all of those categories. Details:• Purpose: All-mountain trail bike
• Frame: Carbon front section; aluminum suspension
• Boost hub spacing, 110mm F, 148mm R
• Wheel Travel: 160mm, front and rear
• 27.5" plus-sized wheel design
• Adjustable frame geometry via a reversible "chip"
• Low-mount Twinloc remote controls fork and shock simultaneously
• 160mm Fox Float 36 FIT4 Kashima fork
• Scott/Fox EVOL Nude shock: remote Open, Traction, and Locked modes
• SRAM X01 eleven-speed drivetrain, 30t chainring
• Shimano XTR brakes, rotors - 180mm R, 203mm F
• Syncros TR1.5 wheels with 40mm aluminum rims
• RockShox Reverb Stealth seatpost, 150mm.
• Sizes: small, medium, large, and X-large
• Weight: 27.8 pounds/12.64kg (actual, medium size)
• MSRP: $7999 USD
• Contact:
Scott Sports Meet the Genius LT 700 Tuned PlusScott's Genius range is targeted at the advanced all-mountain and trail rider crowd, and is divided into "700" models, which have 27.5-inch wheels and "900" models, which use 29-inch wheels. LT stands for "long-travel" and in the case of the LT 700 Plus, that means 160 millimeters on both ends of the bike. To create the top-range LT 700 Plus "Tuned" chassis, Scott borrowed the high-modulus carbon fiber front section of the 900, then mated that with an all-new Boost-width swingarm and suspension. The wider, 148-millimeter Boost hub format helps frame designers reshuffle all the rear suspension bits to make room for 27.5-inch tires as wide as three inches, while only adding three millimeters to the chainstay length. Scott's intention is to maintain the handling qualities of its conventional wheeled Genius bikes, which is a good thing.
Scott's Twinloc cable-remote simultaneously controls both the "Nude" Fox Float EVOL shock and the 36 Float FIT4 fork.Damping control is all Fox, with a remote-actuated 36 fork and a Scott-developed Float "Nude" shock. Both fork and shock can be switched simultaneously from "Locked," to "Traction," or "Open" modes using Scott's Twinloc lever which now sits underneath the handlebar and below the dropper post control on the left side of the handlebar. Scott mixes two favorite PB staples: a SRAM X01 drivetrain, with Shimano XTR brakes to take care of business, and fills out the rest of the bike with Syncros wheels and cockpit items. The end result is a wicked looking 160-millimeter-travel trail bike that weighs in at only 27.8 pounds (12.6kg) and retails for $7999 USD.
Why Plus 27.5?When plus-sized wheels and tires first appeared on
Surlys, casual observers pawned the concept off as little more than "fat-bike lite," but a handful of visionaries, including some heavy hitters like WTB, Trek, Specialized and Scott, embraced the mid-size floatation format as a chance to reinvent the basic mountain bike.
Presently, plus tires are sold in 26, 27.5 and 29-inch sizes, and while some are still debating over the optimum rim width, wheel size and tire diameter for plus bikes (Trek is banking on 29-inch plus wheels, while Scott and Specialized are embracing 27.5-inch wheels), all signs say that 27.5-inch wheels with rims near 40-millimeters wide and tires ranging up to three inches will be the eventual winner, and for good reasons:
Scott advertises that 27.5 Plus adds 21-percent more grip to the superior roll-over of a 29er, while giving the rider a substantial measure of comfort and control. Depending upon the choice of tire, the overall diameter of 27.5 Plus is less than a half inch (10mm) of a 29er wheel, so a plus 27.5 bike can share the 29er's proven fork offsets and frame geometry - and its wheels as well. Interchangeability aside, wide, low-pressure tires require wide rims for lateral support, and 27.5 plus seems to strike the best compromise between optimizing traction, roll-over and cornering stability while minimizing the rotating mass of the wheels (reportedly, the 700's plus wheels and tires add up to a half pound more than conventional 29er wheelset with 2.3" tires).
The penalty for all that goodness, says Scott, is only a five-watt drag disadvantage over conventional wheels and tires. The 27.5 plus format's interchangeability with 29er wheels means that Scott owners who buy into plus and later discover they can't live with that five watt penalty can opt out - but we doubt many will.
| The penalty for all that goodness, says Scott, is only a five-watt drag disadvantage over conventional wheels and tires. |
Plus GeometryAdjustable numbers: Frame numbers can be adjusted by a half a degree using a two-way "chip" on the rocker link that drives the shock. Reversing the chip toggles the head angle between 66.3 and 65.8 degrees, lowers the bottom bracket by five millimeters and alters the bike's reach by four millimeters. The LT 700 Plus's seat angle is intentionally steep (74.0 or 74.5 degrees) to better position the rider for steep climbing and to create more reach without an excessively long top tube.
Short chainstays: Conventional 27.5-inch-wheel Genius 700 chainstays measure 445 millimeters. The chainstays of the Genius LT 700 Plus are only slightly longer, at 448 millimeters, so the difference in weight transfer while climbing or cornering should be negligible between the two models - no small feat, considering the additional girth and height of 2.8-inch tires mounted to 40-millimeter inside-width rims.
SuspensionScott's "Tuned" suspension is about as straight up as suspension gets: a single-pivot swingarm that hinges about 80 millimeters above the bottom bracket center that drives the shock through a top-tube-mounted rocker linkage. Scott cleverly positions the seatstay pivot so near to the rear axle that it (we suspect) causes the LT 700's rear suspension to emulate some of the uncoupled braking qualities of a concentric axle pivot like Trek's ABP and Dave Weagle's Split Pivot. As mentioned, the LT 700 Plus uses a welded-aluminum rear end, but we are sure that, should the Plus genre take root, future LT 700's will soon sport a carbon rear suspension, just like their conventional-wheeled siblings.
Nude shock upgrades: Fox makes the LT 700's Nude shock (which probably stands for Never Underestimate Deranged Engineers) based upon its Factory Float Kashima platform, and this year the dual-travel damper get the EVOL air spring system, which doubles the throw of its negative spring and produces a seamless transition from its initial travel, through the mid-stroke. Commanded by Scott's Twinloc lever, the middle "Traction" option reduces the shock stroke by 38 percent while dramatically increasing its spring rate. From the rider's perspective, pedaling feels much more firm, and the rear of the bike rides noticeably higher. Fox set the blow-off threshold conservatively low for the shock's lock-out option, presumably to protect its internals, because many LT 700 owners will be accidentally smashing features with their Twinloc levers in Locked mode. As a result, the suspension feels firm, but never immobile when "locked" and there is always a small degree of suspension movement under power.
Fox 36 fork: The beating that the RockShox Pike delivered to Fox over its CTD fork range, may take a while for customers to forget, but most who have time on them say that Fox's new 34 and 36 forks are better this year than anything RockShox has in its arsenal. Scott's choice to go with a Fox Factory 36 Kashima fork on the LT 700 was a good risk - it's stiff, lightweight, and the new FIT4 internals deliver smooth action from top to bottom with precision ride-height adjustment available from the black low-speed compression dial above the remote damping control.
Improved TwinlocLook no further than the 700 Plus's Twinloc lever to see how deeply Scott's racing heritage overlaps its all-mountain range. Twinloc offers three suspension options: "Open" with full travel for both fork and shock; "Traction" mode, which improves pedaling efficiency by reducing the rear suspension travel to 100 millimeters and increasing the shock's spring rate, while simultaneously boosting the fork's low-speed compression damping; and "Lockout" mode which, in the case of the LT, increases low-speed compression to the degree that both the fork and shock feel locked out, while still allowing the suspension to react to big hits on the trail.
As mentioned, Twinloc has been moved below the handlebar (named the "Downside Remote"), which is hugely better than up top, where the dual-lever apparatus, with its splay of cables, clamps and hardware was unnatural to manipulate and offensive to the eyes. Of course that means the remote button for the RockShox dropper post must be located on top of the handlebar, but in action, the new configuration is worlds better.
Smart BuildEight thousand dollars is outside most bike buyers' definition of an affordable trail bike, but Scott shamelessly broke the $10,000 barrier for mountain bikes a long time ago. Considering that the Genius LT 700 Tuned is Scott's most elite plus bike, their product managers showed some restraint when they fleshed out its parts. No-doubt, choosing a second-tier SRAM X01 transmission and relying upon Syncros (owned by Scott Sports) to fill out the running gear and cockpit items saved enough cash to foot the bill for its carbon front section and Kashima-coated Fox factory suspension bits. The soul of the LT 700 Plus literally revolves around its wheels, where Scott chose the best performing tire of the moment: Schwalbe's 2.8-inch Nobby Nic EVO, and then mounted them to ultra-wide rims so they could handle lateral cornering stress without rolling or tucking. In short, Scott spent its cash-roll on the right components.
Components:
Specifications
|
Release Date
|
2016 |
|
Price
|
$7999 |
|
Travel |
160mm/100mm (R), 160mm (F) |
|
Rear Shock |
Fox Factory/Nude dual-travel, Float EVOL Kashima |
|
Fork |
Fox Factory 36 Kashima FIT4 160mm, remote control |
|
Headset |
Syncros |
|
Cassette |
SRAM X01 10 x 42 |
|
Crankarms |
SRAM X01 carbon |
|
Chainguide |
Scott DM top guide |
|
Bottom Bracket |
SRAM GXP press fit |
|
Pedals |
NA |
|
Rear Derailleur |
SRAM X01 |
|
Chain |
SRAM 11 speed |
|
Front Derailleur |
None |
|
Shifter Pods |
SRAM X01 |
|
Handlebar |
Syncros AM1.0 Carbon 10mm Rise / 35mm 9° / 760mm |
|
Stem |
Syncros aluminum, 50mm, 35mm clamp |
|
Grips |
Syncros lock-on |
|
Brakes |
Shimano XTR 9020, 180mm (R), 203mm (F) ICE rotors |
|
Wheelset |
Syncros TR1 Plus tubless |
|
Hubs |
Syncros TR1 by DT Swiss |
|
Spokes |
DT Swiss Aero Comp |
|
Rim |
Syncros TR1.5 Plus, 40mm ID, aluminum |
|
Tires |
Schwalbe 2.80" Nobby Nic EVO (F/R) |
|
Seat |
Syncros, carbon rails |
|
Seatpost |
RockShox Reverb Stealth, 150mm travel |
|
| In spite of my skepticism, it proved to be one of the more enjoyable trailbikes I have ridden in the Pacific Northwest. |
Scott's Long-travel, plus-wheeled Genius was easy to make friends with. It rolled with remarkable efficiency over the fist-sized gravel that carpeted many of the trail access roads. Hook-and-loop grip and predictable steering. Its steering is sure and predictable feel is only slightly heavier than an all-mountain 29er sporting 2.3-inch tires. And, like that AM 29er, the Genius Plus lags for the first one and a half pedal strokes when accelerating from nearly a dead stop. Beyond those minor negatives, the Genius LT 700 Tuned Plus (to use its proper name), is hard to fault. In spite of my skepticism, it proved to be one of the more enjoyable trailbikes I have ridden in the Pacific Northwest.
Setup notes: Two of us were riding plus bikes during our Squamish, BC, test sessions and we learned quickly that tire pressure trumped everything when it came to setting up our suspension. Too much pressure and the tires would feel bouncy over rooted and rocky sections as speeds increased. Too soft and the bike would lose its planted feel in the turns and tires would feel grabby under hard braking. Neither of those attributes play well with suspension tuning, so initially, I pumped both tires to Schwalbe's recommended one-BAR (approximately 14.5 psi) starting pressure before getting serious with the fork and shock.
Two rides later, I learned that the Scott did its best in a technical (and most often, very wet) forest environment with the front tire at 12 psi, the rear at 14psi and the suspension set almost exactly as I would tune a conventional-wheeled 160-millimeter all-mountain bike: 20-percent sag in the fork, 30-percent for the shock, with the fork's low-speed compression about one third of the way in. The only deviation that was specific to plus sized tires was that a faster low-speed rebound tune seemed to stabilize the voluminous tires when they were being pounded into successive roots or rocks.
Pedaling: Those who have been pushing an all-mountain/enduro bike around the mountains, shod with aggressive, 2.3-inch (or larger) tires, will either ignore or fail to notice the small drag penalty of the LT 700's 2.8-inch Schwalbe tires. The tires look huge, the growl on paved surfaces, and certainly give the impression that they would be energy suckers, but they roll on hard pack with surprising efficiency. I put some good mileage in on paved highways and gravel logging roads, and after one or two rides, the only time I became acutely aware that I was on a plus bike, was when the rubber hit the dirt and the fun began. In their natural environment, the big Schwalbes roll faster than 29ers when the trail surface is rough or irregular and they maintain momentum like nobody's business.
The Genius LT 700 is lightweight when compared to any elite machine in the 160-millimeter class, so it has no problems punching up steep climbing pitches. Add the grip afforded by its monster knobbies and the nimble Scott pretty much invalidates any excuses for not topping a technical climb. Low-pressure, pliable tires wrap themselves around roots and catch multiple edges in rocky situations, so climbing traction is almost always assured - which reduces the climber's workload to pedaling and steering.
Energy Management: The chassis has a reasonably long reach and a steep seat angle, which make the transition from seated, to out-of-the-saddle pedaling an effortless movement. Riders who spend a good deal of time standing on the pedals will discover quickly that the Twinloc remote lever is an essential component of the Scott Genius LT experience. Pedaling forces will always activate the rear suspension to some degree, so the Genius rider quickly learns to manage pedaling firmness with the Twinloc remote control. I often locked out the suspension for logging roads, relying upon the big tires to smooth out the chatter. On trail, I almost always climbed in "Traction" mode, although I found that the Scott pedaled firmly enough in "open" mode to ignore the Twinloc lever altogether for long periods and enjoy the flow.
| The Genius LT 700 Plus turns in and sets up for corners more quickly than a 29er with a similar head angle. |
Turning and steering: Plus 27.5-inch wheels are within a finger's width of the diameter of a 29er's, and the Genius Plus shares the same front section, fork offset and most of the numbers of its 29er cousin - so it should come as no surprise that the Genius plus gets around the bends like a 29er. That said, the Genius 700 Plus turns in and sets up for corners more quickly than a 29er with a similar head angle, bars and stem. I attribute this to the possibility that the tire is riding farther down on its side blocks and thus turns a tighter arc at the same lean angles. However the science may work, when leaned over, the Plus bike carves a tighter apex than an equivalent 29er and about the same as that of a 27.5 bike.
Steering feels slightly heavy in tight, techy situations, because the front wheel is heavier than most, and also because there is more grip available. You can often feel the tire grinding into the trail surface when sawing back and forth on the handlebar. A soft, wide contact patch up front makes it possible to feed in a lot of front brake while descending steeps, and the added control is almost laughable. Once I learned to trust the grip, I could handily steer around and between nasty roots and rocks while dropping down chutes that would have most likely been brakes-off, straight-line, Hail Mary descents on my go-to trail bike.
| A soft, wide contact patch up front makes it possible to feed in a lot of front brake while descending steeps, and the added control is almost laughable. |
Tire stability: When the concept first debuted, plus-width tires were most often mounted to all-mountain width rims with internal widths that measured 28 to 24 millimeters. Not surprising, that combination produced a hailstorm of complaints from hard-core riders that flexible plus tires rolled over on the rims when pressed hard in corners. Scott's pairing of its 40-millimeter ID Syncros TR1.5 rims with Schwalbe's slightly smaller 2.8-inch tire casings seems to have put those issues to rest. I experienced the opposite - surprising stability and very predictable cornering,
as did PB reviewer Paul Aston at Scott's Plus launch.
Technical riding: The Genius LT 700 Plus thrives in a technical singletrack environment like Squamish offers, where its oversized knobbies, well-balanced chassis and ample suspension travel work together to take some of the edge off of the terrain and, in most cases, reduce the difficulty of features, natural or manmade. Its 65.8-degree head angle (we left the suspension chip in the slack and low position) is super stable when paired with the predictable steering of its plus-sized wheels. The bottom bracket is acceptably low, but not so much so that I was re-sculpting my aluminum pedals through the rock gardens.
Braking is impressive on wet roots and loam, especially if the rear tire's air pressure is reduced to around 12 psi. There is always the greased one that sends the tail end into a wild swap, but if you drop your heels and feed in a handful of rear brake, the rear end will find traction somewhere, often with a popping sound as the tire deforms around a root and then snaps free. Down steep rock rolls, there is a massive amount of stopping available from the font brake, but less than expected from the rear wheel, which requires more delicate modulation than a conventional-wheeled bike does. My opinion is that the narrower tire concentrates pressure on a smaller contact patch, which creates more grip than spreading that same pressure over more tread blocks and the plus tire's larger contact patch.
Minuses of Plus
Plus also has its disadvantages. First and worst is when the time comes to push those oversized tires through sticky mud. You'll be praying for skinny tires after you realize how every tread block on those Schwalbe Nobby Nics acts like a suction cup. Two miles of climbing in goo was lesson enough to either choose a better route or a different bike, rather than plod through the pudding on my plus bike again. There is a reason why DH mud spikes are relatively narrow racing tires.
| You'll be praying for skinny tires after you realize how every tread block on those Schwalbe Nobby Nics acts like a suction cup. |
High speed corners define the dividing line between Plus and Enduro. Plus's confidence-building super-grip and steering work wonders in the deep woods when speeds are low and features are high, but with speeds and cornering forces pushed near the limits, the awesomely predictable grip of the LT 700's Schwalbe plus tires fade away and the once-confident rider is left to deal with an ambiguous drift. When push comes to shove in a high-G corner, there is no substitute for a stiff tire casing and a reinforced row of edging blocks.
| Climbing traction is almost always assured - which reduces the climber's workload to pedaling and steering. |
Technical ReportFox suspension: Scott's Twinloc remote system makes Fox a partner in the Genius' suspension, so it was serendipitous that Fox rolled out its best-ever trailbike suspension concurrently with the introduction of Scott's long-travel plus bikes. Once set up, the 36 factory FIT4 fork and Float EVOL shock quietly pumped out miles of silky smooth suspension action and spot-on ride height support. Welcome back.
Lucky engineering Patching a carbon front section from Scott's Genius 29er onto a newly designed plus-sized aluminum rear section seems more like a sci-fi plot than a recipe for a winning trailbike, but it worked. The Genius 700 Tuned Plus is one of the rare bikes that almost any rider can hop on and shred from the first pedal stroke.
Twinloc Downside remote: I would much rather ride a trailbike that did not require lever, nor my attention to optimize its suspension for climbing and descending. I'd rather opt for a battery powered system, like Lapierre's E.i. suspension before I'd embrace cable-operated forks and shocks. That said, Twinloc is key to the versatility of the Scott Genius - and it has proven to be both reliable and effective.
Tubeless dilemma: Inner tubes for three-inch plus tires are heavy, so to manage weight, plus tires must be tubeless. Which means that damage too great for latex sealant to repair is "game over" and that angry customers will be faced with having to throw away otherwise fresh tires - or figuring out a way to repair the holes. Tire and accessory makers need to get on this one, fast.
Pinkbike's Take: | Scott's decision to place plus at the most elite level in its trailbike range is a shout-out that the plus-wheel format is valid at all levels - especially for hard core bike-handlers. While it is true that an accomplished rider aboard a good all-mountain trailbike could replicate the handling and performance qualities of the Genius LT 700 Plus, it is equally true that adding plus-sized wheels and tires to that same trailbike would make it more enjoyable to ride, and in many cases, more capable for taking on the kind of trails that fill most rider's bucket lists. Scott knows this because that's exactly what they did. In the course of two weeks, I rode the Genius LT 700 Plus on a variety of trails from blue to black - on hero dirt, rooty loam, granite slabs, black ice and new-fallen snow. I hit a lot of unfamiliar features and it always felt as if the LT 700 had my back when I committed to something new. "Capable, easy to ride, and confidence inspiring" - What's not to like about that? - RC |
Visit the review gallery for full-sized and additional images.
MENTIONS: @SCOTT-Sports,
@schwalbe, @foxracingshox,
Anyway, very curious and excited to try one of these sometime.
For people who don't have the money, the choice is easy between a good full sus 27 and a bad full sus 27.5. Same as choosing between a good hardtail and a bad full sus.
You are correct. I think due to rolling resistance and the fact that a lot of Pro riders prefer heavy drifting this type of bike won't be making it to the podium.
But it could revive the hard tail market.
and also, why does it matter so much? I climb for the descents. I will walk my bike to the top if the down is that good.
These bikes are for noobs, I guess its good for the sport and selling bikes tho...
Down side? most of this model will be sold-out before they'll hit the show rooms! If you'll find one in your size, take it.
Anyone who's lucky/fortunate to buy any bike in this range is...well...damn LUCKY.
You suspect wrong. Its a single pivot and will suffer all the normal brake jack issues whether the seatstay pivot is 1mm from the rear axle, or on the moon. The caliper is attached to the chainstay, so it really makes no difference what you do with the seatstay.
Seriously PB, you should know better than spouting total bollocks like this. It just confuses people
Kinda like how "alloy" is taken to mean "aluminium" while infact any bike made out of metal is an alloy bike...unless it is actually made of pure iron, or infact pure aluminium...
However, saying "brake jack aint so bad" and "this bike has a clever system to avoid brake jack" are two very different things...
The logic is simple: If a concentric pivot can uncouple braking, then shouldn't a pivot location only one millimeter off-center do the same? And if that is true, which it should be, then there should be a defined range about the axle where some decoupling takes place.
It's worth considering, that's why I put that paragraph in there.
A well trained xc non pro puts out about 300
Olympic TT guys put out a peak of 700 or so
(Very rough numbers)
5w is chump change
Sounds like it would take away 5% of my power.
"Scott cleverly positions the seatstay pivot so near to the rear axle that it (we suspect) causes the LT 700's rear suspension to emulate some of the uncoupled braking qualities of a concentric axle pivot like Trek's ABP and Dave Weagle's Split Pivot."
On the Scott, the brake is mounted to the chainstay and the position of the pivot has no effect on the braking forces. This is a well written article but Cunningham should learn the physics of bicycle suspension before he makes comments that are false.
Damn I love this bike.
You sir appear to have a brain. Congratulations!
For your amusement:
flowmountainbike.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Pyga-140-First-Bite-8.jpg
Some bike manufacturers will get this and eventually everything will be compatible!
So plus bikes are clearely for crawling through technical stuff or for beginners who want a confidence inspiring ride.
"The persuader attempts to convince the respondent to comply by making a large request that the respondent will most likely turn down, much like a metaphorical slamming of a door in the persuader's face. The respondent is then more likely to agree to a second, more reasonable request, compared to the same reasonable request made in isolation."
It is no coincidence they first introduced fat bikes, and only later plus size. Same as how they first introduced 29ers, and only later 27.5". None of these would have been so successful as they are now without the door-in-the-face marketing technique.
It's not like the big companies like spesh and trek first introduced the fatbike, 27.5 wheel or 29/27+ wheel, they jumped onto it after the concept emerged and gained traction.
In the case of + sized wheels, it's not unreasonable for someone to think of a compromise between a fatbike and normal bike and bring forth that idea, like it's not unreasonable for someone to think of a wheel size, between 29 and 26.
And consider that a fatbike and 29er wheel isn't unreasonable at all, they both have their respective strengths and demographic
For example if 29ers wouldnt have been promoted / excisted, people would probably dislike the idea of switching to bigger wheels (27.5"), same way as how many people disliked the idea of 29ers. But once they introduced the size that many people consider overkill (29"), it is much easier to sell a reasonable version (27,5"), which would else have gotten the same overkill status as 29".
Same with plus size bikes: people have a much more positive view about them after they have seen the overkill version of them (fat bikes).
It's not a conspiracy, it is a social marketing technique that is being used pretty much everywhere around you. If you want to buy a new tv, the first one they'll show you is the biggest, so after that the other ones (which would normally seem too big and expensive for you) now suddenly don't seem as big and as expensive, as you compare them to the biggest ones. Same goes with cars, phones, and pretty much everything. Often the biggest or most expensive version of a product is purely introduced so the sales of the model underneath (which they originally planned to be their main seller anyways) will sell more; as people tend to prefer a reasonable option and not the most extreme option.
The cycling industry used this technique aswell: we look at plus sized tyres and at 27.5" wheels as reasonable options. Why? Because they confronted us with the overkill version first instead.
If this wouldn't have happened we would dislike 3.0" wide tyres just as much as we disliked 3.0" Gazaloddis three years ago.
In any case, I see this as very much an incidental thing. 29er wheels exist because they're much better at 26 for rollover and keeping speed, fatbikes exist because regular bikes can't ride sand or snow. I highly doubt these concepts were introduced solely to introduce down the long run for an in-between technology, rather, I believe these were introduced to do a job that the predominant technology couldn't.
As such, it may seem like manufacturers are using this technique, but I see it as a natural progression of the industry. 27.5 may not have existed without 29ers first and +bikes may not have existed without the fatbike, but both were developed to reach a 'best of both worlds' result out of the standard and the specialized.
With the examples you've given, I don't think it even applies here. It applies more to, for example, Shimano's XTR Di2 compared to the new XT.
Fatbikes and 27.5+, on the other hand, are good at their own respective thing. Fatbikes are considered overkill because they are inherently very specific, 27.5+ less so because it's inherently more suitable for the average trail rider. Neither eclipse each other in terms of prestige or hierarchy to make another look more reasonable, unlike XT v XTR.
So why do we accept 27.5+? Is it because it seems much more reasonable compared to a fatbike, or because it offers performance/fun gains for the average trail rider? Do we see it as acceptable, only when, compared to a fatbike, or rather just in general? Is it as accepted as you think it is? you tell me, but I don't even consider fatbikes when looking at this
Try living in a country with snow.
Gary Fisher was playing with 29'ers nearly a decade ago. Surly, Salsa and Jones have been building wide tire bikes for nearly as long. Many of the changes are happening now because of technology breakthroughs (particularly carbon to keep weight down while strength high) and decreasing rates of improvement in other areas of bike technology. This allows mainstream manufacturers to adopt them and move towards new standards. The order of 29 to 27.5 and fat to plus is coincidental.
650b was a consumer-lead trend. Don't believe me? Go and read through Derby's posts on MTBR Ibis forums from years ago, as an example. There were various people ghetto converting their 26" bikes to 650b.
It is not a coincidence that 650b turned up after 29". If anything it was the industry's strong hyping of 29" which people rejected but made some evaluate the possibility for incremental improvements to the 26" platform without such distinct bus-like handling of 29".
Similarly as ratedgg13 notes, fat and fat plus have been around for quite a long time, with Surley leading the development of plus.. hardly a linchpin in MTB corporata. But as some aspects of MTB matures, we start to look at other areas.. it is natural evolution.
To my mind I am very open to plus bikes. I ride for fun, not to win races. I don't care if I don't see a plus bike in EWS. More likely to care if I see Sam Reynolds, Wilkins, Brendog, Rat and others bumming about the woods on one in their off season, which more or less equates to my year-round, minus the big air. By all accounts they are quite fun, though there's still some doubt for me about whether they can be pushed or can really only be ridden to 8/10ths.
Remember when they discovered air force ones? the snuggie? Kanye West? Off road recumbents?
Take your pick! Mtbr don't lie! Shit is fire!
It just makes sense for rim manufacturers to make one rim size that will fit all situations, and have the tire manufacturers design a given tire for a given situation. I honestly don't think they intended it, especially since 99% of their bikes are 29ers, but I think Trek coming out with Boost (making +bikes possible) put the nail in the coffin of 29ers.
As to waki's complain about the availability... 650B was a USA (and to a lesser extent Canadian) driven consumer demand at a time many europeans were still resisting adopting 29ers. But the day after Nino won his first world cup on a 650B, the demand amongst europeans skyrocketted. Kirk Pacenti literally SOLD out of his entire tire and rim inventory by middle of the week and it all went to europe. As to geometry and what not... that's his opinion... which doesn't count for anything outside his own buying habits.
So again: it is 2011, you have a dude on Kirk Pacentis hardtail with shitty Manitou fork, neomoto tyres and you put it against a Santa Cruz Tallboy Carbon with Fox 32 Float RLC, RocketRon/ NobbyNic tyres on carbon rims, and you have a bloody nerve to tell me that this bike has any qualities?! That there is a SANE man saying that his bike is better because it has 650B wheels?! Then you try to tell me that there was an army of people who salivated on Kirk Pacentis bikes because they had the innovatory 650B wheels, and look away from: Nomad, Tracer, Spark 29, Cube Stereo, Epic 29, Stumpjumpers, Reign (I can make this list as long as you want). I do not want to meet any of your clientelle on a group ride. You are good in excell sheet and Sheldon Brown, and this is where it ends.
BTW I just bought a 650B bike. For none of the pseudo-scientific facts nor Nino Schurters race resulats that dorks, losers and product developers mention. And please stop mentioning racers and their bias since their mechanics could quickly tell you that front line men have little clue on what they are riding and guys like Schurter or Barel are very rare equipment specialists among the flock. Go around World Cup pits and ask racers what pressures... make it easier: ask them what model of tyre they are riding, make a list of answers. Then come back and tell me that they would love 650B but they have sponsor obligations or lack of particular bikes in the line, so they are forced to ride 29ers
In any case, nice write-up. Seems like a decent bike. Probably not for me.
Excellent point!
These "plus" bikes seem like the same thing. You clearly have benefits to fat tires (and draw backs) and you have a related growth in fat bike popularity. But I'm skeptical of these plus size bikes, with tires that are wide, but only marginally wider than the widest tires a normal bike can fit. Is it really much of a change that we need a whole new line of bikes?
I mean the end of RC review sounds great. ""Capable, easy to ride, and confidence inspiring". But thats something you can say about a whole shitload of other trail bikes that already exist without a new, marginally bigger tire size.
Seeing how the MTB industry is constantly coming up with new "innovations" like this + thing to find new customers has me hoping that a similar path isn't just around the corner. I love the current generation of bikes since around 2010 or so when thru axles and great brakes became the norm, not to mention all the other good ideas that have stayed since then- dropper posts, short stems and wide bars for example.
Please, please MTB industry, just keep it going. Spend more on promoting the sport to new riders and less on selling current MTBers crap they don't need. Lobby congress for more trails that are MTB specific and upkeep on the ones we already have. More pump tracks and bikeparks too. This will get you all the customers you'll ever need. Work on getting the kids outside again and off their smartphones, they are the future for the industry, not an $8000 bike for Dentists that will ride 3X a year.
Put Slopestyle bikes in the stores and promote your current riders to these kids. There are 20 bike shops in my area and I haven't seen a Slopebike for sale in a store in years, and only wish they were around when I was young. Get MTB as an activity in all schools for the kids that don't like playing with sticks and balls. Hire passionate people to do these jobs and you will have a sport that is here to stay.
I'm skeptical about this, RC. What 29ers? All of them? The ones you rode last week? It's especially confusing when you later say this, "Plus 27.5-inch wheels are within a finger's width of the diameter of a 29er's". So, it's a heavier, slightly wider and slightly smaller diameter 29er tire that has a claimed 5W drag over "conventional wheels and tires" (which is again an undefined comparison). So, how does this bike "roll faster than 29ers"?
TEMPLE
33.media.tumblr.com/bf94f5e356560a5be0790b2cf9043ea2/tumblr_inline_nym8nkEsTb1r87g1h_500.gif
This is an insult to Split Pivot, ABP, and your own intelligence.
How much did Scott pay for this ad???
One explanation for mtb slicks to be slower than road tyres, is that road tyres go up to 300 tpi, which means super flexible tyres. Where as mtb slicks (also designed for road usage) are usually only around 60-120 tpi, so not nearly as flexible.
As both my frame and fork fit 27.5 aswell (i ride 26" now) I hope to find someone with a similar wheel set as mine and with the same tyres. If I manage to find that I want to do a short XC lap, timed with strava, switching wheels back and forth in between every lap, to see if there would be any improvement on my time with 27,5", as the cycling industry claims.
I think plus is still in the developing stages. To optimize it, rim and tire makers will have to get together and integrate those two components. Potentially, plus could morph into a re-design of the basic mountain bike for riders who fit between XC racing and Enduro. Odder things have happened.
Presently, if you rode a good plus bike, you may be surprised at how efficiently they roll - faster in many situations than a conventional bike in any wheel size.
The inclusion of the negatives associated with the tire format is welcome, and the negatives were well compared to the very positive aspects of the tire size. I like the fact that the full picture is being written about!
I've seen a few fellow riders try some 27+ hardtails where I live in central PA and really enjoying them. However most of our riding is very slow, and very technical, with very few fast descents, which seems to fit the bill for this style of bike and tire.
Nice to hear about the somewhat mushy performance at high speeds (which makes sense), sounds like these kinds of bikes will be good east coast trailbikes, but probably not the greatest for parts of the west.
IMO it would be cool AND MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE to compare the exactly same bike whith 29er wheels and compare speeds on downhill tracks and compare watts on all sorts of terrain (flat, technical trail, mud, climbing on rough stuff). And do this whith various riders. This would actually clarify and justify if you actually need another standard of tyres, hubs, rims, forks or not. It's much better to proof that it is better or not then just say that it FEELS better or worse. The first time I rode my 29er I also felt slugish but then I found out that I am faster, my feelings were wrong.
Also, Scott has the LT + in Alloy frame for about half of the $8000 price tag, but if you already own an Enduro 29, I reccomend the plussed out"
also, wide rims and higher volume tires wheels are indeed a thing, doing it with 35mm OD / 30mm ID carbon wheels with maxxis minions DHRII / DHF and the benefits are for real on my 29'er trail bike so that part no doubt is a good thing.
I'm thinking of trying to slap a pair of them on my Santa Cruz 5010, which already has Derby's 40mm wide AM rims with Conti Mountain King 2.4's on it. Not sure they're gonna fit tho!
"High speed corners define the dividing line between Plus and Enduro. Plus's confidence-building super-grip and steering work wonders in the deep woods when speeds are low and features are high, but with speeds and cornering forces pushed near the limits, the awesomely predictable grip of the LT 700's Schwalbe plus tires fade away and the once-confident rider is left to deal with an ambiguous drift. When push comes to shove in a high-G corner, there is no substitute for a stiff tire casing and a reinforced row of edging blocks. "
If I'm simply one of the hoard however, then if it doesn't allow one to travel faster down his/her favorite DH run-which at least here in BEEEE-U-TEE-FULL Southern Kalifornistan contain(s) MANY high-speed corners(that also contain sketchy grip, and loose and exposed rocks, but rarely any mud), then it's useless as far as I can tell.
BRING BACK THE 26!
Seriously, some of you people can't believe a bike can cost so much these days? I'm not saying it's great that bikes have sky rocketed in price but to be shocked and surprised at the price is ridiculous onto itself. Where have you people been living? Under a rock?
Sorry, but most bike companies charge a boat load for their top of the line bikes. I don't like it any more than a lot you but it doesn't surprise me at all. It's to be expected.
veetireco.com/product/trax-fatty
veetireco.com/product/speedster-5
Not the best, I know, but its something, and the trax-fatty has potential as a decent option for a fast and "light" dry hardpack conditions tire and for mid summer loose dust.
Surly also has a new 26+ sort of touring tire, but its only a 2.5 and its essentially a slick. Could fit the bill if thats what your after though.
Maxxis appears to be showing signs of tooling up some 26+ options, so I have faith!
They have their "trail" Shorty's listed as being offered in 26x2.5 in a WT exo casing, which is pretty exciting! Hopefully we'll see some 2.7WT's with exo and DD casings come down the pike in a their MTB line, and maybe even some of their DH tires.
www.maxxis.com/catalog/tire-492-121-shorty
surlybikes.com/parts/tires/knard_26x3
bicycle.kendatire.com/en-us/find-a-tire/bicycle/downhillgravity/nevegal-pro
1450-1500 and more grams is getting pretttty high up there though for trail bike purposes, but could have a place for me maybe. haha. I'm ok with 1000~1250 grams though, as that is right in line with what I am used to riding with. The problem with the wire beaded 27tpi dirt wizards is they are still about 1200 grams, but just way too soft and delicate. The kevlar 120 tpi ones are a little over 800 grams, but the sidewalls and cap are Incredibly thin. If Surly they did a 60tpi, kevlar bead, tubeless ready, and some more substantial protection under the cap/sidewall/and bead area, and a better rubber compound!!? Then the Dirt wizards could be a fantastic tire. They do set up tubeless without a problem as-is now though, so don't let that concern you too much.
The DW 27 tpi is supposed to be a little more durable than the 120, but wish it were folding as the wire bead is wasted weight... runs about 1100g. Measures true to spec. Enjoy this tire a lot on the rear for AM/XC, though have yet to test on the front.
I also have a minion 2.7 I use for the rear. On a Dually (38mm internal) rim, only measures at 62mm casing/tread which is slightly less than 2.5". Nice tire, but not a 2.7, not even a "plus" tire really but still an awesome tire. Past minion models are criminally undersized. The new models seem up to spec being 8mm wider which is a big difference.
Purchased a Vee Trax Fatty recently, and it is also criminally undersized on the tread. It has a + casing with a standard tread. Which is nice... but not ideal as you get none of the wide tread benefits. It measures at a 70mm (2.75") casing and 62mm (2.44") tread. Come on, how DARE they call that a 3.0 tire. Nice volume, really light (~800g) and should still perform well on XC duties, but not what I had hoped for.
As for the Duro Leopards... these things are fantastic. 26" exclusive, although HEAVY at ~1800g, but I run a 20t - 36t granny gear, so I can punch these up quite steep and loose climbs in short bursts no problem. Where they really shine is the downhill, so I use them mostly for hike-a-biking. Great tread pattern. I did custom sipes on one of them which has increased the traction MUCH further still. These allow me to ride insanely steep big mountain technical lines I never thought possible with most other tires. Able to run down to 5psi on the front (30mm internal rim,160lb rider weight), and this thing is solid as hell. No noticeable casing roll on fast corners or bottoming out on big sharp hits. So stiff, and confidence inspiring.
There's a few more options out there such as the Knard, and the Vee Rival. Trying to get a hold of the Rival (Claimed 69mm / 2.7" ) which looks to have a very aggressive and nice downhill tread, but not available anywhere yet and only shown on the Vee Thailand website. Talked to Vee america and he told me he was ordering some in that should be available this month!
I have high hopes more options will come around! The market seems like it's just too large to ignore, and 26+ would be a nice option for converting "standard" 650b frames as well.
Wow that's exactly what I did recently! Currently slowly collecting all the parts for my Instigator 2.0 frame, but built the wheels up first to take advantage of them on my Nomad. Not using the rabbit hole rims though. Might build those later on with some slx hubs or something. Also got the Trax Fattys and was a bit disappointed with them as well. Very rounded and the sidewalls are pronounced past the tread a bit too much for either end of the nomad. Has promise for a lighter duty, fast rolling XC type tire for the instigator though, so I plan on trying that on the rear, and an 120 dirt wizard on the front, for dry/loose/dusty mid summer conditions.
Congrats! It's a totally sick frame, with enough clearance to fit even a 650+ tire in the rear. Though the BB would likely be too high with that. It juuuuust barely fits a 26 x 4.0 tire on a narrow rim. I'm hoping to try a Panaracer Fat B Nimble at some point. Spec'd at 26 x 4.0 but apparently only measures 3.5 on an 80mm rim and so should fit with plenty of snow/mud clearance on the 'Gator!
Rabbit holes seem pretty sick, nice rims. I laced mine up to some bikehubstore hubs, check 'em out, great value and super easy tool-less axle conversions.
Indeed pretty lame about the VTF tread width... looks like you'd be riding on the sidewalls on a heavily leaned corner... though maybe the low pressures will counter-act that. Definitely not a gnar-riding tire.
Pink = 29er
Blue = 27.5
Yellow = 26"
The Green Goose = 27.5+
fzerocentral.org/viewtopic.php?p=13071
Also, why does it say the BB offset or height don't change?
1. Right idea, wrong implementation.
2. "Plus" does not exist.
Point 1:
We're told 650b wheels roll vastly better than 26", yet the difference between 26" and 650b is the same as between 650b+ and 29", which we're being told is trivial, allowing bikes to be "dual fit". I do believe this difference is minor, which also means I believe 26" and 650b have nearly identical performance. This should not be surprising, as they differ by less than 4%.
The real difference is in tire volume. If we assume the ideal range in which a tire can conform to the trail is from the unloaded position to about 1 cm from the rim, a Plus tire gains about 40% more useful range of vertical deflection. Ten times the improvement in rollover gained from diameter.
If only there were two wheel sizes that allowed perfectly matched outside diameters when used with Plus or Narrow tires. Instead of normalizing the rim diameter and allowing the outside diameter - the part that touches the ground and determines the handling - to vary, we should normalize the outside diameter, as is done with other wheeled vehicles.
Conveniently, 26" Plus and 650b Narrow are a perfect match, allowing for stiff, nimble wheels, short chainstays, better suspension kinematics, and true dual-fit.
Point 2:
The current standard width of trail/AM/Enduro tires is approaching 60 mm, which is 20% larger than the 50 mm norm of several years ago. "Plus" tires are 20% larger than the current standard. Our current tires are just the natural evolution of tire size that reflects the new riding style, made possible by general improvement in equipment. This evolution was halted for years by a lack of wide rims to support our larger tires, but the new crop of wide rims is putting evolution back on track. 70+ mm tires are just the next step in this evolution.
We didn't feel a need to give a new name to the current tires and we don't need a new name for the next generation. "Plus" does not exist.
Not like so many other "normal width" Schwalbe's already have crappy unsupported knobs that squirm then fold over and then rip off, nor do they have damage prone paper thin casings!
The terms "Ambiguous drift, damage prone, packs mud in heavy gloop" all remind me of so many different tires, and none of them are "plus size". Gotta look at many of these tires as a starting point, as they are essentially brand new.
And at the end of the day, its Just another tire size.
A fantastic new tire size option that will work on many bikes and many wheels people already own, but will allow for broadening the conditions the same bike can excel in. Not every tire works in Every condition, and these are no different.
I almost think one of the things to reference when looking at these tires, is thinking of them more as tuning to an ideal pressure. Ever ridden in conditions where you were trying to get away with running lower pressure in you tires to suite the terrain, but you couldn't because they became too squirmy or you immediately started pinging your rims off of everything? Ever ridden terrain or conditions where you immediately knew you needed to go up in pressure from your "normal" range? This is kind of where I see these fitting in. Giving you another brush to work with, rather than throwing all your other ones away, which appears to be how these are being perceived at the moment.
You know that many of the rampage guys run 2.7's? Cam Zink included. At least for that steep, fast, loose, chunky unpredictable terrain. Cause sometime float, contact patch, and increased sidewall height and compliance is a good thing. Even for aggressive as humanly f'ing possible riding. It's all dependent on the tire itself. Not Just the width.
But. Reused 29er front? 67.5deg HA? That lockout system? A 170mm trailbike?
Big bag of nope from me.